I’m livid. Too livid to form an intelligent rant, but I feel the need to rant nonetheless.
This woman can’t see her tunatwat from a hole in the well manicured weed free ground she walks on.
Coming from a Liberal Arts backround and a school system that was against banning books maybe I’m closer to knowing about “Lies My Teacher Told Me”, the phenomenon of going off to college and having all my college professors begin the arduous task of reteaching me and my fellow students what really happened in American history…cause they sure as hell didn’t teach me the truth in elementary, junior high or high school.
This pus spewing scab of a woman has the audacity to stamp her most definitly not bought at Payless shoes and point fingers at the educated for teaching the truth.
Is she that deluded?
She was also nice enough to include names…nice little blacklist you got there honey. She’s got a Phd in British history…mebbe she should brush up on her American.
And why is that not a valid criticism? Why is it suddenly “McCarthyism” to “name names”? Why is it automatically terrible to point out examples of what one considers to be negative behavior?
When the “negative behavior” consists primarily of individual comments, taken wholly out of context, in order to smear the speakers with claims for statements they never really made.
It is called lying.
Actually, the appropriate way to combat “bad” comments is to challenge them in the fora from which they originated and engage them in rational discourse. It is “automatically bad” to create lists of people to be hated, while providing no context in which to judge their behavior. This list is very reminiscent of the remarks of Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, except that it now includes real names of people who may suffer for the rash behavior of Cheney’s group.
Besides which, it is not a crime to say, perhaps, “America deserves it, America is to blame, blah blah blah.”
Tasteless and inappropriate yes. But not illegal.
Same with communists under McCarthy.
Lynne Cheney-doesn’t she still insist her daughter isn’t a lesbian, despite all evidence to the contrary? (Including the fact that her own daughter says so?)
The professors said they “felt blacklisted.” But, they weren’t blacklisted. All that happened was that a group of people disagreed with them and criticized their statements. Apparently their idea of free speech is that nobody is allowed to disagree with them. Well, Lynn Chaney has free speech rights, too!
I’m no historian, but how does **Mogwei22 **know that the version taught in college is correct? And how can s/he be so certain which version is the more accurate as to call someone who believes a different version “scab” and “deluded.” None of us was there when the events took place. All we can do is believe one version or another.
And look at the whining:
Give me a break! Under McCarthyism, people were fired and prevented from getting jobs in schools or Hollywood, etc. Under Stalin, people were imprisoned in the Gulag or even executed. All that happened to these Professors is that some people disputed their POV and criticized it. Big Fucking Deal!
What a bunch or over-dramatizing, egotistical, immature, self-centered ninnies!
Neither the professors nor I said anything about Lynne Chaney not having the right to speak freely. I just happen to disagree with what she said and her methods of saying it…my right to free speech.
I have to believe something don’t I? If you look back through American Literature you can piece together a very different history than was presented to me and many people I know. It’s been there all along…a lot of it just never makes it to the text books…I’m not saying the text books or my teachers lied outright…I just think they kept a lot from us…kind of the same thing as lying…but a bit shadier.
I don’t like this woman’s views and will call her a scab and deluded as loud and long as I want to…again…the free speech thing.
Cheney’s blacklisting technique may not be as obvious as McCarthyism…but I have to think that some parents, donors,students,conservative groups etc… upon learning that their children are being taught by people who can admit that maybe America has a big hand in its own undoing,
will take arms and start a big todo…just a thought…this professors could be quietly forced to resign or keep their mouths shut in the future…they’ll basically be punished for not following the rest of the lemmings…could happen…could not.
Again with the free speech thing…if you can do…why can’t I?
“Could”, huh? Well, first off, the parents are entitled to make a big “todo”, are they not? Free speech and all? If they don’t like what the teachers are saying, they are entitled to speak up? Right?
And if the teachers are “quietly forced to resign”, take it up with the people who “quietly forced” them to resign. If the reasons for “forcing” them to resign are unsound, then that is an injustice, and should be fought. But all we are talking (so far) about free speech, not about anyone being forced to resign.
yosemitebabe I agree, I do feel that parents etc… have the right to make a “todo”. I was just pointing out that these type of things could happen because of the remarks Cheney made.
I also didnt’ say that anyone was forced to resign for speaking out…just saying it COULD happen.
It would be greatly appreciated if you’d point out some instances of that happening.
And who the heck ever said that it WAS illegal? No-friggin’-body. It was pointed out that such comments were - as you freely admit - tasteless and inappropriate. So how the heck does that smack of “McCarthyism”?
Question: tomnbebb, when you list Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson, would that constitute “naming names”?
Speaking personally, I’m happy to criticize both of them and certainly hope that my criticism leads to their suffering a loss of power and prestige. Am I behaving immorally
Sure naming Robertson and Falwell is naming names. However, I am citing (by inference) a specific action that they took in public and for which they have been chastised by no less than President Bush. This differs from providing a “list of bad people” with spurious quotes out of context and calling for their general condemnation.
The attack on the Wesleyan president was particularly stupid and hateful. There was a reproduction of the original letter (that has since disappeared from an expired site) that showed that Bennet is probably more patriotic than the goons lodging the calumny against him, but they grabbed one phrase out of one sentence and added him to the list of “unAmerican” people.
Do y’all (Mogwai and tom~ aside) honestly not see how Lynne Cheney’s comments could be really disturbing and offensive, especially coming as they do from the wife of the Vice-President? Wow.
Which comments are you referring to? I read the link twice and don’t see any comments by her.
Considering how much power the Veep has, the Veep’s wife is hardly threatening.
This isn’t McCarthyism, as claimed by the ‘victims’. It’s one person or group expressing their free speech to denounce another group or individual. I didn’t see any cries for boycotting or calling for anyone’s head. Cries of McCarthyism is just a way to avoid a dialogue.
Would these professors be as sympathetic to a student who claimed that global warming was a hoax or that affirmative action is wrong?
Freedom of speech doesn’t guarantee or warrant respect. It means you won’t be jailed for saying what you believe. It doesn’t mean we have to listen, agree, or subsidize it.
I found the OP a bit shrill, (sorry, Mogwei22), but I was disturbed by the approach of some of the Cheney-related group. In general, I figure that folks can throw invective wherever they wish. The two serious problems I had were:
The apparent lie used to smear Bennet of Wesleyan;
The whole “we’re better Americans than you are” schtick that shows up in so much of this type of attack. This latter is not an attempt to argue the points; it is a method of silencing people by wrapping oneself in the flag and claiming that any disagreement is unpatriotic. That is dishonest on too many levels.
I doubt that any of the “liberal educators” have jobs that are in danger (at least not at this moment, given the current nature of college politics). However, I cannot think of any historical attacks based on “patriotism” that have led to a defense of the rights of U.S. citizens–abuse is the more likely outcome.
I hope that this is a shrill minority that will be ignored by the country at large. However, in a war situation, there is historical precedent for this sort of mindless hatred to spin into just the sort of thing that Mogwei22 fears has already begun.
Why are you assuming that these are “spurious quotes out of context”?
As to the sinister-sounding “naming names” issue: from what I can tell, the purpose of the report was not to call for action against, or condemnation of, any specific people. Rather, it was to paint a general picture of academia as being lacking in patriotism and prone to blame America. The names and quotes were evidence, which is usually highly thought of in these parts. Had the report not named names, I suspect that many of those so appalled at naming names would have been on the opposite side of the fence, calling for actual evidence of such attitudes in academia.
Because the first two I ran down were taken out of context and I extrapolated.
Exactly. They ran out and got a bunch of names “to paint a general picture” that is probably no more accurate than any other smear campaign. Had the People For The American Way used Falwell and Robertson to claim that all of Religous America was “generally” a factory for hate mongering, I would have the same condemnation of their methods and motives.
