Dear readers:
President Obama has just delivered his State of the Union Address. Below are my real-time observations (whose significance for posterity—especially my disquisition on trail mix—is undeniable).
But prior to all of that let me observe that this was the most education-saturated presidential address I have ever heard. Colleagues, for better or for worse, this one was for us:
***
8:45 “So, Jacques, what’s the over/under on tonight’s ‘Scripture bombs’?”
That’s the question reporters sometimes used to ask me before a major address by a president or a presidential candidate back in 2008.
Let me explain. A “Scripture bomb” is my term for the citation, whether explicit or covert, whether verbatim or glossed, of words from the Bible by a politician during a speech.
Going into tonight’s State of the Union I will give my standard prediction: the over/under is 3 biblical citations (unless the speaker is Mike Huckabee, George W. Bush, or Joseph Lieberman circa 2000 then the number rises to 5).
So here we go:
9:06 The President is introduced. Shaking a lot of hands. Commanders in Chief really can’t be germophobes, can they? If I were president I would have my bodyman ready with the hand sanitizer. Or maybe he (or she) would just carry around an IV pole and the stuff would be directly funneled into my blood stream.
9:10 Not entirely appropriate, but our President really is a handsome man. He looks great tonight. Love that tie.
9:14 President Obama is addressing the Tuscon tragedy. Speaking of “common hopes and common dreams” and the importance not of sitting “together tonight, but working together tomorrow.”
9:15 An old Obamian theme—it’s not about Blue States or Red States it’s about the United States! The President is doubling down on bipartisanship. I am the Celine of the State of the Unions.
9:19: The specter of China’s progress is raised. I am sensing in my own wanderings a national inferiority complex as regards this country.
9:20 We have the best colleges and universities in the world, says the president. Somewhat disappointed that he didn’t point to Georgetown specifically, but I will let that one go.
9:22 There is a good cadence to this speech. Obama is in the groove. “Imagination,” “innovation,” “education,” “Google,” “Facebook.” These are the code words.
9:23 What we have here is a very business-friendly address. Emphasis on education should make education types very happy.
9:24 Our “Sputnick Moment” says Obama. The term “research and development” is used. Something that leads to jobs.
9:25 We need to reinvent ourselves, he exclaims. This speech is awash in references to Science and Technology. There are sectors of the American research university that are sure to love this SOU.
And Big Oil gets boarded by graceful skater, Left winger Obama!
9:26 I am ready to call it: This was the “education speech.” I can’t recall more references to science and education and school in a recent State of the Union.
He could have delivered this to the faculty of M.I.T.—would have been feted like a hero and permitted to strap on the faculty’s new experimental jet pack.
9:30 “Race to the Top” is the new paradigm, replacing “No Child Left Behind.” Schools, schools, schools.
9:32 Now we are pivoting to teachers. Again, new teachers for science, technology, and math. Would it kill the guy to mention sociology and literature in there as well? (Place smilin’ emoticon here).
9:33 Higher education? I didn’t see that coming. Community colleges no less. This is awesome! The most higher education relevant SOU in recent memory.
9:36 I started my career teaching at a community college and I can’t begin to describe how important they are to the future of this country—that’s me speaking, btw, not the president. He started teaching at the University of Chicago, if I am not mistaken.
9:37 Refracting immigration policy through his emphasis on education. Very intelligent. Education was the omphalos here. All of his policy initiatives have been correlated with education.
9:40 High-speed rail! Yes! Why the hell does it take three hours to high-speed from DC to NY? Don’t get me wrong I like the ACELA, but it’s more like the low-speed, high-speed train.
Ever taken a high-speed train in France? Enough said. NY to DC in 90 minutes or bust. I am on a hunger strike until we get that done. Will self-immolate on the quad too if necessary.
9:43 Also, might the president address the snack situation on the ACELA? For me pretzels and trail mix are the only viable alternatives. The staff is always nice, though. I really bonded with the conductors when I was commuting from NY to DC every week.
9:41 Back to tax inequality. Big oil earlier, now corporations. Not a losing issue I would say. Wait, he said “lower the tax rate on corporations”—I was too busy thinking about the trail mix.
9:44 The government is here to protect you from being exploited—insurance industry, food industry, those all need to be regulated. Government isn’t always bad, you see.
9:45 Now on to the health-care debate. We have moved away from education as the touchstone of the address but it was great while it lasted. “Let’s fix what needs fixing and let’s move forward.” Got that, House Republicans?
9:48 Freezing domestic spending for the next five years. Military spending is being cut. “But let’s make sure we are not doing it [the cuts] on the backs of our most vulnerable citizens.” Glenn Beck has taken note of that one, I assure you.
Up! Back to education and innovation. Again, refracting everything, save health care, through education.
9:51 This is where it might be more illuminating to have an economist doing the blogging. No tax cuts for wealthiest 2 percent of Americans—wait didn’t we agree to just the opposite in the lame duck session?
9:52 Simplify the tax code is the proposal. Mike Huckabee, for purposes of comparison, suggested putting a “Going Out of Business” sign on the door of the IRS in 2008.
9:52 Salmon. A crowd-pleaser. How government agencies regulate salmon. Salt-water, fresh-water, it’s all good to me.
9:53 “Rebuilding the people’s faith in the institution of government” via a Web site. Transparency always a good thing, I guess. Will veto a bill with earmarks. Is the president eating the Tea Party’s lunch (cue to a video of Clinton’s 1995 SOU)?
9:57 The foreign policy component of the address has begun. Sort of surprised this was not addressed earlier.
“American Muslims are a part of our American family.” First clear faith-based reference. This arose in a discussion of Al Qaeda. Seems like those who work for the Faith and Values Industrial Complex (like me) may have less work in 2012. A good thing, if you ask me.
10:01 First mention of Iran and North Korea. Axis of Evil no longer headlines at the SOU.
10:02 Reference to Southern Sudan. Now Tunisia. Bush-like assumption that everyone out there wants Democracy as well. Is that so?
I once had a student, from Pakistan who told me that in his way of seeing things theocracy was preferable to democracy. I always think about that and have noticed similar sentiments among traditionalists in Judaism and Christianity and Hinduism as well.
10:03 Ah! An unambiguous nod to our gay soldiers. Good for the President. And in return let the ROTC’s back on campus—again with the campus! This is The Chronicle’s SOU.
10:09 Roll call: Henderson, Hernandez, Cohen, working class, non-working class, students, roofers, Biden and Boehner—we’re all Americans here!
10:10 And now in a tip o’ the hat to Ronald Reagan, we get to learn about a great American: Brandon Fisher, who saved lives in the Chilean mining disaster.
10:13 Obama mentions college again. I am ready to dub this: The Higher Education State of the Union. Wait didn’t I do that already?
10:14 Oy! I think I heard a partial Scripture Bomb but missed it while writing about college and consuming trail mix.
Compared to the Bush-era SOU’s the absence of references to faith and Scripture here is notable.
My hasty tally reveals the president came in “under”: Obama spoke, generically, of America as “a light to the world” (invoking Isaiah 51:4). Perhaps his reference to “a better place beyond the horizon” is an allusion to Luke 14:10. So at 1.5 Scripture Bombs it seems that the president mostly avoided the Bible today.
Some have argued that the Democrats are less focused on F and V issues going forward into 2012. It’s too early to tell, but this address does lend some credence to that hypothesis.
14 Responses to Live Blogging President Obama’s State of the Union Address
wbgleason - January 26, 2011 at 9:24 am
Jacques,
We’ve got a right wing squawkradio host here in Minny who also runs a blog calle: “A shot in the dark.” Kid, not.
Last night he had a bout of tweeting diarrhea during the SOTU address.
Needless to say, his take was a little different than yours.
It always amazes me how two people can watch the same talk and take away such different messages.
My best. Bill
trendisnotdestiny - January 26, 2011 at 10:22 am
“It always amazes me how two people can watch the same talk and take away such different messages.”
Welcome to American politics! Demographics, Demographics, and vague language aimed at new Demographics……….
theart - May 21, 2012 at 11:30 am
I don’t know if I would call it synergy, but I can see a basis for the correlation. It’s hard to become an athletic powerhouse without strong and consistent alumni involvement, and it’s hard to build a large base of alums with money to throw around without strong academics. Synergy would suggest that academics to benefit from athletics to a similar degree.
yellow1 - May 21, 2012 at 3:23 pm
I think it is important to note that many of the schools named specifically above have athletic departments that do not operate in the red. I think many people in Academics find this frustrating for two reasons: First, these schools have managed to maintain alumni donorship to the point that football or men’s basketball can keep an entire athletic department afloat financially. Second, the very fact that the athletics have bloated coffers in this era of increasing tuition and decreasing funding for the academic side of the house drives some nuts.
The problem is that there are only a few dozen institutions like this. The rest drain precious funds because sports has come to dominate the marketing of college in general.
jthelin - May 21, 2012 at 3:34 pm
Well, it may be true that SEC universities do not hire PhDs from the Ivy League (a “lesser” conference). But is that because the Ivy League is a lesser conference, or perhaps, because the Ivy PhDs go elsewhere? Perhaps in some case of conference correlations of faculty hiring, lesser is more?
John Thelin
University of Kentucky (an SEC member university)
lslerner - May 21, 2012 at 3:45 pm
Most top football schools “hire” players with considerable “scholarships,” who have very different profiles from those of the genuine scholars who attend. Their graduation rate is abysmal, partly because their preparation is in football and not academics, partly because of the time and energy they expend in football, and partly because their ambition is to become professional football players, not lawyers or doctors or scientists or English teachers.
Robert Hutchins had it right. Some years after he had closed down the University of Chicago’s Big Ten football program, some reporters asked him if he planned ever to reinstate football. He replied, “If I ever do, I’ll buy the Chicago Bears.”
Socratease2 - May 21, 2012 at 5:31 pm
Well, you can put hire in quotes or not, doesn’t change fact that students are not being paid to play. If you look at the amount of room and board money left after the tuition is paid for through scholarship, then thse athletes are some of the poorest paid employees in America.
Leaving that aside, you can say that FB student-athlete graduation rates are abysmal and that’s fine but these “abysmal” athlete rates are usually much higher than for the general student population. And if you compare rates for black athletes and black non-athletes on campus, athletes graduate with even a larger positive gap. So overall, grad rates must be “super-abysmal” for non-athletes. You do understand that at many universities, overall student graduation rates usually fall between 40-60%, most FB grad rates are much higher. Don’t have to believe me, just go check out the comparative statistics before labeling/stereotyping.
mich8718 - May 21, 2012 at 6:45 pm
The longer I think about the place of athletics in academia and the more I research the
topic the more complex the issues seem to be. One way I have come to simplify
the situation is to admit to the fact that, as Mr. Bissinger notes, college
athletics is a tiered system. For state universities the place on the athletic tier and the place on the academic tier are often very compatible and often comes down to money.
So, as an initial way to consider the place of college athletics and football in particular is to follow the money and see where it comes from and where it goes. Consider the admittedly few financially successful schools. Let’s take just two from the Big Ten for example – Michigan and Ohio State. Both have self-sustaining athletic programs driven primarily by revenues associated with football and men’s basketball. Michigan sponsors 13 men’s sports and 14 women’s sports. Ohio State sponsors 17 men’s sports and 18 women’s sports. Clearly proceeds from two sports are enabling a large number of students to attend each university who might otherwise not have the opportunity or interest and perhaps the case can be made that this contributes to the academic reputation of the institution. By this criterion there is little defense for the decision that has been made by the University of Maryland.
This observation does lead to the proposition that the work of a few men is generating
big bucks for the schools and supporting other athletes and that those men are being exploited. For the sake of argument I reject that position. Not only are hose men getting access to a valuable education but, and I’ve not seen this discussed, they are getting specialized training and a chance to develop physical skills that will enable them, if they are talented enough to make a living playing the sport. This is not nearly as true for basketball as it is for football, but does anyone really believe that Tim Tebow was physically ready to play pro ball when he came out of Nease High School? I saw him play his senior year – even superman needed some development and U of Florida provided that chance in a high caliber physical facility under the tutelage of skilled trainers and coaches.
However, I question the model for universities at the next level both in terms of the reputations for athletics and academics . Let’s consider the University of Central Florida. In terms of student enrollment it is one of the 3 largest universities in the country and it seems to want its athletic program to fit in with schools like Texas and Ohio State. In 2010 44% of its operating income for athletics came from student fees with an additional 6% coming from the university and from FY 2005-2006 through FY 2009-2010 the UCF athletic program received yearly direct support from the state of between $345,000 and $600,000. Despite these subsidies the athletic program had a cumulative deficit of $2.9 million dollars when operating revenues are compared to operating expenses. UCF supports 6 men’s sports and 8 women’s sports. As we move to a lower tier then it seems that the opportunities for student athletes also diminish although students are being called on to bear more of the cost of the program and in the case of UCF state funds that could otherwise go to the academic budget are being spent on athletics. If anything I think that this hurts the academic reputation of this type of school.
4206dinty - May 21, 2012 at 6:48 pm
However, studnet – athletes etc have tutors,tutors and others to help them & the regalr student doe not get that help!
Socratease2 - May 21, 2012 at 7:04 pm
That is not entirely true. It is true that student-athletes have access to academic staff, advisors and tutors that help them manage their time and help them with readings, paper drafts, etc. However, non-athletes have access to a different pool of departmental and general tutoring services that student-athletes don’t because of their travel and practice schedules. When you take into account the academic negatives associated with sport (missed class for travel, no time in afternoon to meet faculty or TAs, lack of energy after practice) and add in the fact that a certain percentage of these student-athletes have far lower academic indexes than general student body, I don’t think the academic support provided does much more than level the academic playing field. Even 3.7 gpa pre-med student-athletes struggle because of the burdens of their sport. Student-athlete grad rates (with excpetion of men’s basketball) are impressive despite this academic support.
yellow1 - May 22, 2012 at 6:58 am
Every student where I went to college as an undergrad (University of Alabama) had access to free tutoring. Yes, it was first come, first served, but it was available and free. Yes, there were dorms for athletes, but there were for the rest of us. The difference was that I could work in addition to any funding, for as much as I could get paid, for as many hours a week as I wanted. Yes, college football has become a machine of sorts to stock NFL teams. These athletes usually play at least three years, go to school year round now, enroll early, etc. etc. Many have already graduated and/or are in grad school as they use up their eligibility.
wolf359 - May 22, 2012 at 5:24 pm
I presumed that the piece’s author is in the witness protection program and so showing his face wasn’t an option.
fairday - May 23, 2012 at 3:18 pm
I am on Pinterest and when I saw the photo of the foot, I pinned it and noted the title of the foot photo from Flickr was “Relaxing” which matches the title of the article on “Not Squandering the Summer”
dejenie - May 24, 2012 at 2:36 pm
Why it always sounds and looks like eat dog eat world when it comes to employment. When I read postings on such matters here in chronicle, I feel like reading tips, actions and strategies of survival in a very hostile and no care world of employers and those who need to get employment in their schools or companies. The people who work in search committees look like people who do not have such experiences of some one who look-fore a place of work to support his/her family and make a stable life after a long and hard work of a graduate studies.