SwBratcher's Posts

A rebellion is brewing over President Obama's planned address to public school students, to be aired live nationwide on September 8. There is apparently a federally recommended accompanying lesson plan for students throughout the country. Some are even advocating that parents have their children call in sick that day.

Of course, we can expect the usual accusations of hypocrisy: Would have the Republicans objected had Bush done this? Would the Democrats have been so favorable toward it had it been Bush who took this unprecedented move into the nation's classrooms?

But the real issue here transcends partisanship. First, there is the question of public schools. Many parents object to the schools being used to advance liberal statist propaganda, but advancing the cause of the government has always been a major function of government schooling.

Then there is the fundamental question of the presidency. The office was meant to be fairly humble, created under the Constitution as the chief magistrate and presiding officer with a short list on enumerated duties, most important the faithful execution of the nation's laws. Today, however, people look to the presidency as an extension of themselves and the national soul. And so has it become so important to people which president is in power, what his cultural background is, who his associates are, what his political biases are. But the president was never meant to have such awesome power. A much more humble office would not garner such anger and worship, for it would matter much less who occupied the office.

This is the latest development in the glorification of the president and the nationalization of American children through the increasingly federalized school system. We saw it under Bush, with No Child Left Behind and the erroneous willingness of Americans to call him "our commander in chief"—as opposed to the commander in chief of the Armed Forces. It is only getting worse today.

Obama's scheduled address should be resented, and opposed, but our understanding must run deeper than a mere opposition to the man who holds the office, lest we never restrain the presidency with Article II of the Constitution.