So Help Me God

Today is the anniversary of the inauguration of George Washington as our first president. It has been two hundred and seventeen years since that event and folks are still attempting to find out what really happened.

What’s the big deal? Why does it matter? Well, for some folks it’s a matter of four little words…’so help me God’.

In a past post, I lamented that I often run across educators who innocently buy into historical myths either by accident or ignorance. At the end of that particular post involving George Washington I listed additional information and labeled the list “non-myths” (at least until proven otherwise).

A drop-in reader, Cassandra, emailed me with an observation from the other side of the fence. She said, “Please help students realize that the burden of proof is upon those who are making the statement, and not the other way around.” I agree…especially if we don’t want to continue teaching history myths. However, as a teacher in the classroom every day I cannot investigate every single piece of historical information to make sure there are primary sources to back it up. Sometimes we just have to trust the researcher, the textbook authors, and the teacher resource creator. However, as a classroom teacher I do have a responsibility to strive to remain current in my subject matter and not simply teach the text.

There is still quite a debate regarding George Washington and the words that he has been reported to have added to the end of his oath of office-----‘so help me God’. According to my e-mailer many different researchers have not been able to locate a bona fide primary resource to verify George Washington uttered the words “SHMG”.

My e-mailer urges me to have my students write or e-mail the Library of Congress and have the library provide us with information regarding the primary sources used to determine the notion that George Washington uttered the words in question.

This might prove to be an interesting activity. As an educator I want to make sure that I teach truths and provide as many possibilities to examine primary sources. So…I’m planning on crafting an inquiry to the Library of Congress. I doubt I involve my current group of students because other academic demands are taking up much of our time. I also feel that much of this information in its original form is too complex for nine year olds. I would much rather get my hands on the sources and put them in a more presentable form so that they can comprehend what they are looking at.

Here’s a except from Cassandra’s email to me:

On January 20, 2001 the Washington Post carried an article with the title, "Thundering On The Metroliner With George Washington's Inaugural Bible." The article explained how the same Bible that had been used at George Washington's Presidential Inauguration of April, 30 1789 was being transported from New York City to Washington D.C. for use at President-elect George W. Bush's Inauguration.

The article also described how after the Bible had "arrived on the balcony [of Federal Hall], Washington ... repeated the oath of office 'in a loud, firm voice,' [and] according to one account. 'He then added, 'So help me God,' and bent forward to kiss the Bible.'"The article continued, "[New York State Chancellor Robert R.] Livingston shouted, 'Long live George Washington, president of the United States!' and everyone went nuts. (Whether Washington actually added "So help me God" to the oath is not supported by any eyewitness accounts, according to Philander D. Chase, editor of the Papers of George Washington project at the University of Virginia. 'He may have said those words,' Chase said. After the swearing-in, Washington went inside to read his -- and the new country's -- first inaugural address in the Senate chamber."

Nobody onboard the Metroliner, at that moment, said, "Hold on, stop the train!" They should have, because Philander D. Chase had just made an historic statement that flat out challenged what educators and historians over the last 145 years have come to presume as a matter of fact.

The "account" alluded to by Philander Chase is attributed to the well-known author, Washington Irving, which never came to light until 1854. The main problem with Washington Irving's report is that Irving was six years old at the time of the inauguration, and when the inaugural scene is described it is just as if a ubiquitous author was narrating the story while standing on the second-story balcony of Federal Hall, when we know he wasn't.

Since the time of its first telling, Washington Irving's polished version of how George Washington supposedly added the words, "so help me God" to his oath of office has been repeated over and over again. It was revitalized during the 1889 Centennial Commemoration of George Washington's Inauguration, and then again in 1957 it was most notably repeated by the Nobel Prize winning historian, Douglas Southall Freeman.

Trying to overcome the idea that George Washington added the words, "So help me God," to his constitutionally prescribed presidential oath is going to require an abundant level of patience. However, if the reader takes the opportunity to visit the new Donald W. Reynolds Museum and Education Center the Mount Vernon Estate and Gardens, which is planned to open on Oct. 27, 2006, with its life-size diorama vignette showing a re-enactment of George Washington taking his presidential oath, then the visitor will be able to experience a firsthand account of George Washington taking his Inaugural Oath of Office. This way, one person at a time, we might be able to de-"mythize" at least one moment of history.

Yours truly,
Cassandra

So here’s your turn to weigh in if you have any pertinent information. I’d love to hear from you, and as soon as I get a response from the Library of Congress I will post away….so help me God!

Ambinnished!

The purpose of my title is simple. In 1987, Judge Robert Bork was nominated by Ronald Reagan for the Supreme Court. His nomination was soundly defeated by the Senate in a well organized process that media and legal types today describe as being “borked”.

I see a new term on the horizon for educators based on the Sean Allen-Jay Bennish debacle. Educators, watch out! You could get “ambinnished” at any time. You probably already have been----you just don’t know it…yet.

The gap is widening everyday between those who are tech savvy and those who aren’t. Every type of device today records audio and video images, takes pictures, emails instantly and brings the meaning of ‘it’s a small, small world’ into much tighter focus.

Even though I teach at the elementary level I’ve had students record me, I’ve had pictures taken of me with and without my knowledge, and I’ve been recorded by parents at conferences with and without my knowledge. Accept it. ‘1984’ is here and it isn’t going away anytime soon.

If you haven’t read a transcript of the tape do so now here from Michelle Malkin’s blog In my opinion Mr. Bennish comes off extremely pompous and seems to enjoy the fact that he has a captive audience. He begins with a roll call of conspiracies the U.S. is committing in other countries around the world while students take down prepared notes that are probably necessary for the unit. He refers to the definition of capitalism which from the tape appears to be textbook generated and then adds the following personal comment

“…when you’re looking at this definition, where does it say anything about capitalism in an economic system that will provide everyone in the world with the basic needs that they need? Is that a part of this system? Do you see how this economic system is at odds with humanity? At odds with comparing and compassion? It’s at odds with human rights.”

I hope Mr. Bennish knows it is not the job of an economic system to provide for citizens. I'm hoping that this is just another inept way he is attempting to elicit comments. It is the citizen’s job to use the economic system to provide for themselves. John Smith had the right idea at Jamestown. “Those who don’t work, don’t eat.” Instead of providing his personal opinions here he could have provide students with a two-columned chart or Venn diagram and let them list compare socialism and capitalism. At one point Bennish tells students to condense the definitions if they need to and to remember he “took them straight out of the book.” Huh? Which parts? the part about profit or the part about providing basic needs?

Another section of the “lecture” has gotten a lot of press. Bennish comments on the President’s recent State of the Union address by stating,

“He started off his speech talking about how America should be the country that dominates the world. That we have been blessed essentially by God to have the most civilized, most advanced, best system and that it is our duty as Americans to use the military to go out in the world and make the whole world like us. Sounds a lot like the things that Adolph Hitler used to say.
We’re the only ones who are right. Everyone else is backwards. And it’s 0ur job to conquer the world and make sure they live just like we want them to. Now, I’m not saying that Bush and Hitler are exactly the same. Obviously, they are not. Ok. But there are some eerie similarities to the tones that they use. Very, very “ethnocentric”. We’re right. You’re all wrong.

In his State of the Union address, Bush does not get down to the nitty-gritty of foreign policy until his fourth paragraph. See the transcript of Mr. Bush’s speech here. He actually started off the speech remembering the passing of Coretta Scott King and her sacrifice and commitment to equal rights across the world.

I’m sorry. I reread the entire speech. I don’t see anything that can compare to Hitler except for Binnish’s own rant. It sounds shrill and one-sided. Wouldn’t a more appropriate way to motivate the students have been to insert a discussion here about colonialism/imperialism and talk above the beginnings of our foreign policy with the presidency of Theodore Roosevelt and his “big stick” and “Great White Fleet.”

Another section has Bennish asking, “Who is probably the single-most violent
nation on planet earth?” Students mindlessly respond, “We are.” It would seem that they have answered this question before.

Listen up…I am all for academic freedom. We are given a set curriculum with guidelines and boundaries that we are contracted to stay within. What we do within those boundaries is the creative side of teaching. I want to give Bennish the benefit of the doubt. We all know from our yearly evaluations that one twenty minute block of time is simply that…taken out of context it can misinterpreted in so many different ways but delving deeper into the actual transcript Bennish isn’t using academic freedom. He is indoctrinating. What really worries me is even at 15 most students don’t have enough knowledge of the real world to participate in an open discussion that Bennish is attempting to elicit. I would be worried if he was my team member or if he was my child’s teacher.

One of the aspects of this whole story that has really bothered me is that everyone that has ranted or commented on the situation says, “Well this doesn’t sound like geography class to me. We looked at maps and learned about the countries of the world.” True. My tenth grade geography class was presented in the same manner. I remember a litany of worksheets we had to complete while the teacher sat behind her desk and dared us to approach her.

Here’s what I found on the Colorado Education Deparment’s website under standards. There is a whole section for Geography which details the standards and elements for each grade level area. See the standards/objectives here. There is a two to three page explanation at the beginning of the standards and one statement jumped off the page at me. It said, “Geography has to do with asking questions and solving problems.” One of the standards for grades 9-12 states, “[students will be involved in] analyzing how different points of view and self interest play a role in conflict over territory and resources.” Hmmmm….based on that one standard I can understand why Bennish would be lecturing on some of the topics he was discussing. It would be proper to bring up our need for oil, the need of Middle East to sell their oil, and how supply and demand can lead to conflicts in the past, present and future. I understand based on the standards why he asking students to record vocabulary words such as capitalism. I can understand why he asks students if they listened to the President’s State of the Union address. It fits with the standards/requirements that Colorado has set forth. I can even understand how he would attempt to bait students with inflammatory comments to encourage debate. The standards clearly show that geography today is not mimeographed worksheets and teachers who hide behind their desks. However, the lecture/rant that Bennish delivers is extremely one-sided. He should present both sides and then allow for discussion.

Another thing that bothers me was Bennish’s attorney. Instead of going directly to the standards/objectives to defend his client he kept saying over and over “Well; the syllabus said this. The syllabus said that.” He added, “Parents knew what they were getting into. They had to sign the syllabus.” You know, it doesn’t matter what the syllabus says. I can type up anything on a syllabus You can read the syllabus for yourself here. Most of the syllabus seems in line to me including his description of the course and expected activities based on the Colorado standards. However, many people have commented that Bennish’s tone through the syllabus is overbearing, pompous, and makes him out to be as one person stated, “…quite a little despot.”

As I stated before ‘1984’ is here. Big Brother is watching one way or the other. So…where does academic responsibility end and academic freedom begin?