Discover the matrix reloaded
When last we heard from David Horowitz, he was still sputtering with incoherent rage at the drubbing administered to him and his enterprise by the readers of this humble but precision-tuned blog. “Stalinist bullies making fun of me gorphnox fleggh hack hack hack,” Horowitz pointed out. “In league with Islamofascist shlaffnak bleacchoch spizzle fleck.” For, not content with having demonstrated that Horowitz is a sorry old fraud who makes stuff up and then complains that he isn’t given the intellectual respect he considers his birthright, the readers of this blog—and, yes, many, many other fine bloggers as well—set out over the past four days to cast their votes in his silly “online poll” and elect me “America’s Worstest Ever Professor.”
This enterprise had not one but two goals. The first, of course, was to elect me “America’s Worstest Ever Professor.” The second, and yet even more important, was to demonstrate that FrontPage.com’s online poll was just as shoddy and half-assed as everything else David Horowitz does. I mean, it’s the year 2006, folks, and they still had no idea how to prevent people from bombarding an online poll with tens of thousands of votes per hour from one IP address.
So Thursday and Friday of last week were much fun for Horowitz mockers everywhere, as this lively thread suggests. By Thursday night, Sadly, No! reader Ron Mexico could chortle, “Hah! That poll is well and truly freeped.” He was right, of course, but the freepin’ fun went on right through the weekend, and by Sunday night the tally stood as follows:
Michael Berube, Penn State University: 233238
John Bellamy Foster, University of Oregon, Eugene: 106393
Norman Finkelstein, De Paul University: 50852
Eric Foner, Columbia University: 40323
Noam Chomsky, Massachusetts Institute of Technology: 32756
Gregory Dawes, North Carolina State University: 14448
Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick, City University of New York: 13332
Jose Angel Gutierrez, University of Texas, Arlington: 13225
Bell Hooks, City University of New York: 12693
Gayle Rubin, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor: 12191
Todd Gitlin, Columbia University: 12131
Timothy Shortell, Brooklyn College: 11380
Jerry Lembcke , Holy Cross College: 11154
Ward Churchill, University of Colorado: 8470
Sam Richards, Penn State University: 5340
Alison Jaggar, University of Colorado, Boulder: 3743
Those were the top sixteen. They were followed in turn by nine more professors in quadruple digits:
Angela Davis, University of California, Santa Cruz: 3536
Robert Jensen, University of Texas, Austin: 3259
Melissa Gilbert, Temple University: 3174
Howard Zinn, Boston University: 2079
Juan Cole, University of Michigan: 2075
Sasan Fayazmanesh, Cal State University, Fresno: 1698
Larry Estrada, Western Washington University: 1313
Victor Navasky, Columbia University: 1059
Gil Anidjar, Columbia University: 1049
Now, I didn’t get these figures from a snapshot; I wish I had. I got them from a Google cache of Sunday night’s tally—a cache that has since disappeared. And if anyone out there does have a snapshot, you can confirm the following Amazing Facts: on Monday, the numbers underwent a seismic shift. The redoubtable Noam Chomsky rocketed out of fifth place into second, picking up almost 150,000 votes in one day, and Greg Dawes shot from last place into fourth, thanks to the heroic efforts of one single voter. Foner fell to sixth. There was even some speculation that Chomsky would overtake me at the 300,000 mark. . . .
Was I worried about losing my lead? Not really. All along, I thought this poll was simply the Dangerous Professors’ Regular Season, and that next month the top sixteen would square off for Dangerous Professors’ Playoffs. March Madness, baby! There’s nothing like it! So I was more worried about who the sixteenth seed would be. As you can see, there was a significant dropoff from Jerry Lembcke in the 12 spot (with 11,154 votes) down to Alison Jaggar at 16 (with 3,743), with three other professors within plausible striking distance ("on the bubble,” as we say in the business). I actually don’t match up well against Jaggar, Davis, or Jensen, and I feared becoming the first number one seed Dangerous Professor ever to lose to a sixteen. Imagine the shame! Outpolling Jaggar or Jensen by a factor of one hundred and then bowing out in the opening round. If you’re a San Jose Sharks fan, you know it can be done: the bottom-seeded Sharks knocked off first-seed Detroit in 1993-94 and first-seed St. Louis in 1999-2000, both times in seven games. Could a Dangerous Professor from Santa Cruz pull off a similar upset in 2006?
Well, just as things were getting interesting, the doughty crew of the U.S.S. Horowitz put the kabosh on the whole party, wiping the slate clean yesterday at about 2 pm Pacific. Many readers have urged me to lobby for a whole new round of ballot-stuffing, and rumor has it that one enterprising soul has even posted a revised ballot-stuffing script somewhere in this thread, though I cannot verify this personally. But in all honesty, I can’t find it in myself to ask anyone to go back to FrontPage yet again. Once (or, in some cases, ten or twenty thousand times) was more than enough. Quite apart from all the “New Video Shows Hillary Killed Vincent Foster with her Bare Hands” lunacy to which innocent readers are exposed when they show up to vote, there’s the simple fact that FrontPage is, aesthetically speaking, the single ugliest website on the entire Internets. I mean, what’s with the soggy brown-and-yellow motif, anyway? Were all the attractive color schemes taken by the time the FrontPage people learned how to do web design? Or did Horowitz himself say, “listen, boys, I think we need to come up with a look that says rot and decay”?
But after FrontPage wiped out those stunning vote totals (about 750,000 votes in all), two funny things happened. First, Horowitz and Company learned that FrontPage does not actually get 200,000 readers a day, as the previous numbers might have led them to believe. As of 2 pm eastern time today, in fact, they’ve only received about two thousand votes in all.
Second, two-thirds of those new votes are for me!
Michael Berube, Penn State University: 1386
Noam Chomsky, Massachusetts Institute of Technology: 55
Ward Churchill, University of Colorado: 53
Howard Zinn, Boston University: 19
Juan Cole, University of Michigan: 18
Cornel West, Princeton: 13
David Barash, University of Washington: 13
Nicholas De Genova, Columbia University: 12
Norman Finkelstein, De Paul University: 12
Peter Kirstein, Saint Xavier University: 12
Sami al-Arian, University of South Florida: 11
Joseph Massad, Columbia University: 10
I’d be flattered by this, but frankly, folks, I’m beginning to think that we’re Horowitz’s only readers in the whole world.
(It’s good to see that they’re still listing individual professors under the heading “School” and their institutions under “Professor.” And they’re still spelling Berkeley “Berkelyl.” Plus ça change!)
And yet, and yet: that doesn’t mean that it’s not worth the effort to point out just what kind of intellectual impostor David Horowitz really is. (Here comes the serious part of today’s post!)
In today’s Daily Collegian, published right here at Penn State, there’s an article about Horowitz’s book. For that article, a Collegian staffer contacted the Sorry Old Fraud himself, and here’s what he told her:
Horowitz said his process for fact checking involves researching the topic, publishing it and then printing corrections if errors are pointed out. He added that no errors have been pointed out in the book.
Oops! Turns out that this is a bad time to be peddling that particular line. Because just yesterday, the New York Sun, that well-known liberal Stalinist rag, pointed out that Horowitz’s entry on Eric Foner has, uh, errors:
A professor of American history, Eric Foner, whom Mr. Horowitz describes as an “apologist for American Communism,” said in an e-mail, “Mr. Horowitz’s ‘chapter’ on me is full of errors, beginning with the long quote with which he opens, which was written by someone else, not me. This is a fair example of the reliability of his work. But to get into a debate about Horowitz is a waste of time, and accords his attacks a legitimacy they do not deserve.”
Mr. Horowitz attributes to Mr. Foner a statement by the late author and journalist, Paul Foot, from a collection of responses to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.
Now it’s time for a fun guessing game! How do you think David Horowitz responded to this article in the New York Sun? (You may choose more than one.)
(a) by denouncing the New York Sun as a well-known liberal Stalinist rag;
(b) by screaming, “gorphnox fleggh hack hack hack in league with Islamofascist shlaffnak bleacchoch spizzle fleck”;
(c) by taking stock of what he has become, undergoing a profound crisis of conscience, and re-joining the Black Panther Party;
(d) by apologizing to Professor Foner, to all fifteen readers of FrontPage, and to Oprah Winfrey;
(e) by blaming his staff for the mistake;
(f) by trying to claim that Professor Foner, in pointing out the error, did something dishonest.
If you guessed (e) and (f), congratulations! You Are Right.
the 101 profiles were the work of thirty researchers. In these circumstances, juxtaposing a quote—which is clearly what happened—is not too difficult a possibility to imagine. The Foner quote and the Foot quote appeared in sequence on a page in the London Review of Books which was referenced in The Professors, and during the many revisions of the manuscript that’s how the error was made.
Hmmm, wait a second. Let me figure this out.
You Passed 8th Grade Math
Congratulations, you got 10/10 correct!
Cool! I passed eighth-grade math. OK, let’s see now. Thirty researchers, 101 profiles: that’s approximately 3.367 profiles per “reseacher.” Only 3.367 profiles per “researcher.” And they couldn’t spot a bonehead mistake like attributing the wrong text to the wrong person? Holy Jesús Arrabal, people, was this book slapped together overnight?
Now, let’s take a brief moment to note that Eric Foner’s remarks, in that London Review of Books symposium, were perfectly sane. In fact, his last two paragraphs (scrolling required) are looking better and better with time:
It is amazing how cavalierly some members of the Administration as well as the media talk about ‘unleashing’ the FBI and CIA and curtailing American liberties in the fight against terrorism. A former director of the FBI called for Americans to embrace Burke’s idea of ‘ordered liberty’ and abandon our obsession with individual rights—the very principles that supposedly set us apart from evil-doers in the outside world.
One remarkable result of the crisis has been the Bush Administration’s sudden transformation from isolationists to internationalists. An Administration that for months disdained world opinion on issues like global warming, missile defence, and global arms sales now finds itself trying to construct an international coalition. Already, newspapers are reporting that our European allies are unenthusiastic about the prospect of an open-ended war against the Islamic world. Americans reluctant to embark on an armed ‘crusade’ to rid the world of evil are now relying on our allies to impose some restraint on the White House.
OK, so that’s Eric Foner, Dangerous Leftist who Pisses Off David Horowitz by Saying Perfectly Reasonable Things. But never mind sane people like him. Let’s return to the insane. Here’s Horowitz, one last time:
I think a fair minded reader will agree that the actual Foner quote provides an even stronger support for the claim I make about Foner in the text, than the Foot quote which was erroneously substituted for it. (That it was my intention to cite the authentic quote will be evident to anyone familiar with my book Unholy Alliance where it is cited as Foner’s reaction to 9/11.) In other words, the error in my book is an inconsequential one and does not affect the accuracy of its portrait of Professor Foner. Readers can judge themselves whether this is a reason for dismissing my work as Foner advises. And they can judge his honesty by the same measure.
Shorter David Horowitz: It was my intention to cite the authentic quote. The profiles were the work of thirty researchers. In those circumstances, juxtaposing a quote is not too difficult a possibility to imagine. The error is an inconsequential one. Therefore, Eric Foner is dishonest.
It’s really amazing, isn’t it? Every time you think Horowitz can’t do or say anything more self-undermining, he outdoes himself. Every single damn time.
The really funny/sad thing is that Horowitz isn’t just any old wingnut. He’s a wingnut who wants to be a college professor. He truly believes that the academy hasn’t given him his due as a “historian.” He wants the faculty to invite him to campus, at $5000 a pop. He wants his books to be taken seriously and reviewed respectfully. But it’s as if he can’t help himself—he just keeps pulling stunts like this, and every time he’s called on them, he counterattacks, whining all the while about the mean and nasty liberals who are “smearing” him.
And so David Horowitz does not get to lead the glamorous life of a Dangerous Professor. He has to settle for being a rich Scaife-funded wingnut who goes around blaming “liberal bias” for the fact that UC - Berkeley’s journalism school chose Orville Schell as their dean over a “qualified conservative” candidate . . . a candidate who just happens to be Michael Savage. Yep, that’s David Horowitz, Wannabe Serious Intellectual Historian, spitting on decent people like Eric Foner and carrying water for lunatics like Michael Savage. We do like to have our fun here on this intermittently snarky and saccharine blog, I know, but we have to acknowledge that there’s some real pathos here, too.
OK! Enough acknowledgement of pathos. I’ll be back tomorrow with news of some kind.
Hey, I got you up to 1507, but Juan Cole is closing in fast!Posted by on 02/28 at 04:17 PM
I told Cole about the contest last week and now he has an ad on this very site, in addition to apparently stuffing the ballot box.
This has gone out of hand…Posted by Gavin M. on 02/28 at 04:21 PM
If the forces of God can do it twice for W, then we evildoers can do twice for Michael!Posted by on 02/28 at 04:24 PM
I told Cole about the contest last week and now he has an ad on this very site, in addition to apparently stuffing the ballot box.
But that’s not even remotely fair! Like it’s not bad enough that my one lonely blogad today says that it’s Juan’s World and we’re just living in it.
All right, now it’s personal. You want your informed comment? I got your informed comment right here.Posted by Michael on 02/28 at 04:29 PM
If you win, will they ring the Victory Bell at Beaver Stadium?
WE ARE!!! PENN STATE!!!Posted by Gene Bromberg on 02/28 at 04:54 PM
Incredibly, frontpagemag.com just published a new story about the totalitarian regime that is Penn State without alluding EVEN ONCE to America’s Evilest Professor:Posted by on 02/28 at 05:01 PM
I confess. The Juan Cole ballot box stuffage was me. Someone needed to light a fire under you people. I did it only for the good of my country.
...the whole town’s waitin’ just to hear me yell
I got 24 minutes to go.Posted by on 02/28 at 05:11 PM
Long time lurker, first time poster here. I can more than tolerate a thoughtful conservative here and there and even a few not-so-thoughtful ones but Horowitz and Savage and others of their ilk just stretch my patience beyond the pale.
Keep up the great blog, Michael. Whenever I wonder how you produce so much on this site I remind myself of the time we invited you to give a brown bag for the Higher Education Student Association at Penn State and the frenetic pace of your talk. And if you can write half as fast as you can talk I’m sure these posts take all of a minute or two to write.
Now, please excuse me, I need to go vote for Michael “Berube” (can’t he at least give one “é”?) as worst professor-of-all-time.Posted by Christian Anderson on 02/28 at 05:18 PM
While watching the D’ho spectacle unfold on Inside Higher Ed over the last couple of days, I think I finally figured this whole Horowitz thing out. In a simpler, before-internet age, he’s the sort of character who would have been a “lone pamphleteer.” The habitual letters-to-editor writer who whould have rubbed shoulders with Lee Harvey Oswald as he moved from the John Birch society to the latest Trotskyite sect (and back again), never quite finding the group who would recognize his brilliance and let him run the show.
Today, of course, such operators, can hustle up a little Scaife money, set up a website, appear on FOX, and get their phamphlets discussed by people who should know better. So that explains D’ho (at least to me). But what of you? I’m sure it all must be great fun, but I don’t see the point of giving this guy the play that you do. You are only feeding his complex, giving him the energy to continue on. How about a moratorium among all the 100 most dangerous on any response to D’ho? Ignore him and he will go away. Keep engaging his brand of nonsense and you will convince even more - see the sunday NYT last week - that where there is smoke, there is fire. Enough already with this guy. Please.Posted by on 02/28 at 05:32 PM
Ah Michael, looks like you have a commanding lead again. At least for the next little while. I must admit I’m a little nostalgic for the old days (like, last weekend), when it seemed like a two-man race between you and that Bellamy Foster chap from the University of Oregon, Eugene. Shades of the ‘95 Rose Bowl.
(OT: Who the hell calls it the University or Oregon, Eugene? It’s not like there are other UofO campuses.)
I do feel bad for poor Mr. Horowitz. He does seem to feel awfully put upon. You read something like this:
We can have sympathy for these pathetic individuals who are so unable to articulate their ideas and so incapable of presenting a rational opposition to ours that they feel compelled to resort to Internet violence to try to stop us.
and you get the impression that he genuinely thinks he’s being attacked. Internet violence? Is he serious? I’m sure some other professors’ supporters were stuffing the box too, but can he really rule out ballot stuffing from genuine worst professor haters? Aren’t those the people he’s trying to egg on?
Maybe “Internet violence” is another of his typos, and he’s actually complaining about “Internet violins”. Or is that a distinction without a difference?Posted by Marita on 02/28 at 05:42 PM
I still think the critical media studies crowd wuz robbed.
McChesney and Jensen are way way evil.Posted by on 02/28 at 05:49 PM
I was laughing so hard about “ . . . spizzle fleck” that I only got 9 out of 10 on the 8th grade math test.
Not surprisingly, the word below is “able.”Posted by on 02/28 at 06:03 PM
Are you sure that wasn’t reader Roger Mexico?Posted by Tyrone Slothrop on 02/28 at 06:13 PM
pathos schmathos… what i want to know is why this humble yet not-so-secretly-hockey-obsessed blog failed 100% of the time to comment on any of the games of the spectaularicious olympic hockey tournament, which featured, among other things, flame-outs by teams U.S. and Canada, and one of the most emotionally charged gold medal games since 1980. most dangerous perfessor?! pfft… most dangerously negligent maybe…Posted by on 02/28 at 06:21 PM
Here comes the serious part of today’s post!
Damn, I was bracing for that, because, seriously, the snark before you went all Pointy Headed Intellectual on us was Grade A snark, really prime stuff.
While I can see the point of post number 9, number 9, number 9, num.... by Jake, I think the fact that Michael keeps the rock that Ho-witz and his ilk like to hide under lifted is more important.Posted by on 02/28 at 06:22 PM
Thirty researchers, 101 profiles: that’s approximately 3.367 profiles per “reseacher.” Only 3.367 profiles per “researcher.”
Come now, come now. Surely those researchers put in untold hours winnowing the vast production of the American academy down to a mere 101 professors.Posted by Tyrone Slothrop on 02/28 at 06:24 PM
Most profs have to beg for teaching assistants, nevermind research assistants, and Horowitz has 30 researchers working for him? Shlaffnak bleacchoch spizzle fleck!!!
And in other sad news, the fact that I got 10/10 on the 8th grade math quiz was a real confidence booster for me this afternoon.Posted by on 02/28 at 06:43 PM
Jake, I hear you. Just wait for tomorrow’s post! It will offer release and respite, I promise. In the meantime, and kinda in my defense, I’m not the one who’s booking Horowitz onto Fox and MSNBC. Really, I’m not.
And greggy, I plead guilty. I dearly wanted to watch that spectaularicious olympic hockey tournament, particularly those final two games, but NBC won’t run hockey in prime time (because it doesn’t allow them to run four minutes of commercials every five minutes), and I couldn’t tune in at any other time. Gotta learn TiVo by 2010, clearly.Posted by Michael on 02/28 at 07:18 PM
OK, I just checked the brown-and-yellow site, and my lead is something like 22,000 to Juan Cole’s 1500, and Ward Churchill’s in third with 58. Now, that’s just silly. Please vote for somebody other than me already! There are many fine scholars on that list, and they need love too.Posted by Michael on 02/28 at 07:21 PM
Michael, just like you to prounce on a perfectly reasonable juxtaposition. I mean, if you left-wing academics think you can kill The Professors by focusing fire exclusively on this target (blatant factual errors), you should think again.
BTW, someone needs to write a Barthesian S/Z-style structural critique that places Horowitz’s two rhetorical masterpieces side-by-side: “Correction. And what it reveals about Professor Foner” vs. “Some Of Our Facts Were Wrong; Our Point Was Right.” Wouldn’t this finally give him the academic credibility he longs for? I would pay for THAT.Posted by on 02/28 at 07:28 PM
Now, I didn’t get these figures from a snapshot; I wish I had. I got them from a Google cache of Sunday night’s tally—a cache that has since disappeared. And if anyone out there does have a snapshot, you can confirm the following Amazing Facts: on Monday, the numbers underwent a seismic shift.
I have saved a cached version of the page from 12:28 pm Monday. I can’t post a table here, but the top 20 was:
1)Michael Berube (Penn State University) 266532
2)Noam Chomsky (MIT) 143392
3)John Bellamy Foster (UOEugene) 106405
4)Gregory Dawes (NCSU) 51464
5)Norman Finkelstein (De Paul University) 50872
6)Eric Foner (Columbia University) 48737
7)Ward Churchill (University of Colorado) 20261
8)Sam Richards (Penn State University) 18010
9)Todd Gitlin (Columbia University) 14950
10)Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick (CUoNY) 13346
11)Jose Angel Gutierrez (UTArlington) 13237
12)Bell Hooks (CUoNY) 12706
13)Gayle Rubin (UMAnn Arbor) 12205
14)Timothy Shortell (Brooklyn College) 11393
15)Jerry Lembcke (Holy Cross College) 11167
16)Alison Jaggar (UCBoulder) 3755
17)Angela Davis (UCSanta Cruz) 3547
18)Robert Jensen (UTAustin) 3274
19)Melissa Gilbert (Temple University) 3185
20)Howard Zinn (Boston University) 2100
I actually don’t match up well against Jaggar, Davis, or Jensen, and I feared becoming the first number one seed Dangerous Professor ever to lose to a sixteen.
Hrmm. Well, Friday night it rained and rained and rained. Furious thunderbolts and 5-minute long rumbles of thunder shook the foundations. And water leaked into the phone lines. So my connect speed dropped to 4800 from 52k and thus for most of Saturday, I was unable to assist voters to the poll. Sunday FP was hanging and throwing MS SQL errors. Luckily, Sunday night and Monday I was able to
register a few more15000 additional voters to the polls to support Sam Richards per your request. Alas, my dream of a Berube-Hooks-Richards-Gilbert-Guterriez-Sedgwick-Jensen-Rubin-Davis-Jaggar ticket was not meant to be as I was rudely interrupted after assisting Richards but before assisting Davis-Jensen-Gilbert.
I imagine they wiped the DB of votes because the file had been corrupted by the appearance of so many voters. Sort of a repeat of Ohio ‘04 and Florida 2000. And I was going to go for Berube: beloved by 2,750,000 voters! 1% of all Americans!
I have the file if you need/want it.
[’175,000 and ready to go on ticking!’]Posted by on 02/28 at 07:57 PM
I think that(I Wanna Be A) Professor Horowitz’s exclamation of “shlaffnak bleacchoch spizzle fleck” was a tribute to the late Darren McGavin who immortalized the phrase in A CHRISTMAS STORY.
I believe IWBA Professor Horowitz looks to the late Mr. McGavin as a role model, particularly as McGavin as Carl Kolchak, the Night Stalker. Kolchack/Horowitz uncovers unearthly evil every week, only to have his “evidence” ignored or explained away as people close their eyes to the horror that surrounds them.
If I’m right, we’ll see IWBA Professor Horowitz wearing Kolchak-style straw hat in coming public appearances.Posted by on 02/28 at 08:42 PM
Earlier, I was protesting the votes for Gitlin. But now I’m chugging away with some illustrationary vote-rigging for him. Why? Well, besides Columbia pride, I gotta say that this will be far more entertaining if Ward Churchill and Ron Kanega get buried in the dust while the squishy harmless left-liberal types like Gitlin and, no offense, you Michael, take the top positions. Now my request has changed - please please no one vote for anyone who deserves it by any sane standard. Chomsky, Zinn, and the others of their ilk included.Posted by on 02/28 at 08:44 PM
<style straw hat in coming public appearances.</i>
Except of course, Kolchak rocks, whereas Ztiworoh Divad is merely vaguely awful. Like Jimmy Kimmel.
OTOH, does not Juan Cole here look almost exactly like the President (Peter Sellers) in Dr. Strangelove?
The vile software of the “capitalist” imperialist landlord class seems to have stopped registering votes. Oh, well.
[’plant’]Posted by on 02/28 at 08:49 PM
Haha go go Gitlin! Already to second.
School Professor Votes
Michael BerubePenn State University21994
Todd GitlinColumbia University2045
Juan ColeUniversity of Michigan1504
Ward Churchill University of Colorado58Posted by on 02/28 at 08:51 PM
1) 7/10. I didn’t know what a “mode” was or a ^.
2) Cornell West came out of nowhere to place 6th in the second heat. Are there random drug tests in this contest?Posted by on 02/28 at 08:58 PM
What I find interesting is that no one teaching at an HBCU was listed. Surely places like Howard, Morehouse, Dillard, Clark Atlanta, Spelman… where black history is taught, and African and Afrocentric perspectives actually are close to normative, should be among D.Ho’s aversions.Posted by Fragano Ledgister on 02/28 at 09:09 PM
"[T]his will be far more entertaining if Ward Churchill and Ron Kanega get buried in the dust while the squishy harmless left-liberal types like Gitlin and, no offense, you Michael, take the top positions.”
Not altogether tactful.
I was really bummed out that nobody from my college, the University of Chicago, made Horowitz’s list...Then I remembered that the U. of C. faculty is intensely reactionary. Even the cult studs on the faculty have no use for any kind of left-wing politics.Posted by on 02/28 at 09:14 PM
Someone really defanged Bellamy Foster in the last 48 hours or so. He used to be a lot more dangerous.Posted by djw on 02/28 at 09:18 PM
Squishy harmless left-liberal types like Gitlin and, no offense, you Michael
No offense taken, Kalkin! I’m well aware of my place on the post-9/11 American left. Though I know that many people still haven’t forgiven Todd for The Twilight of Common Dreams, so let me put it this way: if Michael Walzer were on this list (and he should be), I’d ask everyone to vote a Walzer-Bérubé ticket. And I completely agree that Snark and Humor will be well served if innocuous Wellstone Democrats like me take the medal stand while the Ward Churchills and Nicholas De Genovas have to stand and watch. We’ll even salute the flag during the medal ceremony! That should induce a semiotic crisis of some kind.
But then, this is also why Horowitz’s attack on Foner is so utterly ludicrous. Quite apart from the fact that Horowitz, in taking on Foner, is punching way above his intellectual weight, there’s the fact that Foner is so damn sensible all the time. Go Eric go! It was thrilling to see him get as high as third place in the first go-round.
And vachon, that ^ almost threw me. I think you can call do-over on that one.Posted by Michael on 02/28 at 09:38 PM
I did better in the 8th grade math 8/10 then I did in 8th grade math. But they call 80% A+, grade inflation. Don’t let our students see this. DH taking on Professor Foner is another sign of grade inflation. DH, you are out of his league. I was waiting for DH to attack Eric’s uncle who edited a book on (guess what) the Black Panthers and Eric’s nephew, Jake for co-starring in that gay cowboy movie.
For Horowitz to be taken seriously, he has to debase the rest of our culture, just like his hero, Junior.Posted by on 02/28 at 09:51 PM
Horowitz and his investigative team will extend their analysis of Foner’s dishonesty in their next book:
David Horowitz et All Thirty Researchers, Misconstruction: David Horowitz’s Unending Obfuscation, 1963-2006Posted by JDC on 02/28 at 10:20 PM
I was waiting for DH to attack Eric’s uncle who edited a book on (guess what) the Black Panthers
Philip Foner hasn’t been overlooked - he has his very own Discover the Network(s) profile, in which he’s referred to as both a “reputed plagiarist” and a “repeated plagiarist”. It even has a link to Eric’s DTN profile (for the all-important guilt by familial association). Eric’s profile is no longer on the site (the link goes to a blank page), since the Horowitzian response to criticism that all of the profiles in his book were just retreads from his website was to deny it… and then remove the profiles from his website.Posted by Marita on 02/28 at 10:35 PM
Can we bollox the thing so it counts backwards and move everyone into negative territory?Posted by Eli Rabett on 02/28 at 10:48 PM
I only got 8/10 on the 8th grade maths. But then I have confessed my mathematical illiteracy elsewhere.
Yes, taking Dawes from last to fourth was a fine hour (actually, a fine day or two) for me.Posted by Jon on 02/28 at 11:03 PM
Well I had fun. And I only cast one vote. I suspect that a lot of mouth breathers on the Right linked through to Berube and were amazed at what they saw. Hockey? The Hanson brothers? What the hell? Where was Osama bin Laden?
A certain part of the Right, who were riding pretty damn high when Bush was clocking numbers in the 80’s and then the 70’s (and the 60’s, the 50’s, the 40’s and now the 30’s) are beginning to wake up to the fact that we are not laughing with them we are laughing at them and we have the power to move these kind of Freeper polls at will. And don’t really need some individual voting 100,000 times. Near as I can tell lots and lots of people who rarely or never visited this site (put me in rare, I followed links but never bookmarked) heard about this and not only cast a vote for Michael but came back for a read. And were moved.
I am not sure why lightning striked on Berube, perhaps because the humanity that infuses this site outweighs some of the overt anger that imposes a lot of the rest of our world (and which I share in full measure) and so made Horowitz look even more like an ass than normal. Which is pretty damn difficult.
Humiliating Horowitz is its own mitzvah. Driving your own SiteMeter count to new heights? Priceless.
Wingnuts awake!! Next target James Wolcott! Because he slips the knife in so deftly you won’t even know you are bleeding until the Left Blogosphere is laughing hysterically at your expense. As you lie bleeding on the floor.
Berube is only our first shot. Horowitz is way past his stale date.Posted by on 02/28 at 11:13 PM
I’ve voted early and often on your behalf, Michael. But don’t worry: I’m voting for bell hooks, Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick, Cornel West, Amiri Baraka, and Angela Davis, too.
And you’re so right about FrontPage: that site offends aesthetic, as well as rational, sense.Posted by Ancrene Wiseass on 02/28 at 11:13 PM
We’re beating you, Michael. I wasn’t expecting this… where is everyone?Posted by on 02/28 at 11:23 PM
now i feel bad that i didn’t vote.
anyway, i just wanted to say, hey, and tell you that this post made my day. i tend to engage idiots/frauds on my blog all the time, and it drives my husband crazy. what do you bother, he asks. i can’t help it! it’s just too much fun.
anyway, thanks. and keep on keeping on. i hope to someday be half as terrible and dangerous a professor as you are.Posted by ted on 02/28 at 11:27 PM
Well, I voted 4 times for Vinay Lal. My favorite underdog candidate.
I’m working on a project to feed Horowitz and his disciples (the Bruin professors kid and “Dean” Chris Flickinger) the names of some truly reprehensible professors --- all of whom are characters in fiction. I baited Horowitz with the character knowns as “Orshee” in Richard Russo’s “Straight Man,” and got an email back from him with a request for more info.
Anyone else want to play? I’m thinking Professor Leonora Stern from A.S. Byatt’s “Possession” might be a fun one to offer.
How about people from Jane Smiley’s “Moo?”Posted by on 02/28 at 11:39 PM
Kalkin, turn off the bot.
HAL: I can tell from the tone of your voice, Dave, that you’re upset. Why don’t you take a stress pill and get some rest?
BOWMAN: Hal, I’m in command of this ship. I order you to release the manual hibernation control.
HAL: I’m sorry, Dave, but in accordance with sub-routine C1532/4, quote, When the crew are dead or incapacitated, the computer must assume control, unquote. I must, therefore, override your authority now since you are not in any condition to intelligently exercise it.
BOWMAN: Hal, unless you follow my instructions, I shall be forced to disconnect you.Posted by on 02/28 at 11:47 PM
How about Professor Pnin? Or every single character from every single David Lodge novel?Posted by ted on 02/28 at 11:52 PM
joe somebody - is that a threat? Are you going to hunt me down and “disconnect” me if I fail to comply?
I actually did turn off my bot - no need to make Horowitz reset the vote count when we’re winning, after all - but I’m not alone in my Gitlin-pushing, so it won’t stop the climb.Posted by on 02/28 at 11:54 PM
Kalkin, that was a joke, not a threat. Also, in response to #42, you definitely need to tip Horowitz to Dangerous Professor Charles Kinbote.Posted by on 03/01 at 12:00 AM
I think Horowitz’s credibility would have been better served if he had blamed it on Rita Skeeter’s Quick Quotes Quill rather than poor researchers. But I guess taking responsibility is anathema to his crowd.Posted by on 03/01 at 12:04 AM
Also Dangerous Professor James Dixon.Posted by on 03/01 at 12:05 AM
Kalkin, joe’s right. If his citation of 2001 had been a threat, it would have taken the form of “I’m sorry, Dave, this conversation can serve no purpose any more. Goodbye.”
Just saying. Now, close those bot bay doors!Posted by Michael on 03/01 at 12:07 AM
Let me put a Victorianist vote in for Rhoda Broughton’s Professor Forth.Posted by Miriam on 03/01 at 12:23 AM
What of professor Jack Gladney, a professor of Hitler Studies that does not German to add to Horowitz’s list of bad imaginary professors?Posted by on 03/01 at 12:34 AM
Way to beat that bitch, Chomsky, and edging out Angela Davis is just plain awesome. You go, Michael, and don’t worry about saccharine in your Jamie posts. I hate saccharine, and they’re not.Posted by sfmike on 03/01 at 12:34 AM
Horowitz needs to be alerted to Dangerous Professor C. Donald Dibble (from Allison Lurie’s The War Between the Tates).
Come to think of it, Dibble was based on University of Chicago professor Allan Bloom, a Reagan administration house intellectual, although Lurie portrayed him during his unhappy years at Cornell in the ‘60s. I took a class from Bloom at U. of C. long years ago and found him to be a very pleasant man, with a surprising tolerance for loudmouthed ignorami like me.Posted by on 03/01 at 12:36 AM
My vote definitely goes to Fictitious Dangerous Professor Ezekiel Farragut. Just think of all the juicy bullet points he could provide…Posted by Marita on 03/01 at 12:48 AM
Professor Causabon from Middlemarch. Imagine the power of having the key to all mythology! What if that fell into the wrong hands?Posted by on 03/01 at 01:00 AM
"Kalkin, that was a joke, not a threat.”
Well, I was assuming that if it was the latter, it was also the former.Posted by on 03/01 at 01:10 AM
Boy, there sure are a lot of candidates for America’s most dangerous fictional professor! Here are ten more:
1) Miles Dyson. Dyson designs the computer chip that ends up in SkyNet, which leads to robots wiping out all life on Earth in the Terminator movies.
2) Coleman Silk. Racially dishonest, self-important, but admittedly badly treated Classics professor from Philip Roth’s The Human Stain.
3) Ted Swensen. Pathetic writing instructor, hounded out of his job for sleeping with a student in Francine Prose’s Blue Angel.
4) John. Pathetic professor hounded by a sexual harrassment charge in David Mamet’s Oleanna.
5) Dr. Carl Hill. Evil medical professor who tries to take credit for Dr. Herbert West’s attempts to bring the dead back to life in Re-Animator, but ends up as a reanimated severed head. (In fact a case could probably be made for the entire faculty of Miskatonic U.)
6) Dean Vernon Wormer. Presumably once professor of something, he’s now determined to expel the lovable ruffians of Delta, i.e. Animal, House, thus possibly exposing them to the Vietnam-era draft.
7) Emilio Lizardo. His experiments led to an invasion of lectroids from the 8th dimension in The Adventures of Buckaroo Bonzai.
8) Charles Rankin. Turns out his real name’s is Franz Kindler and he’s a Nazi, in Orson Welles’s The Stranger.
9) Donald Blake. Accidental exposure to the blood of a coelocanth turns him into a rampaging caveman in Monster on Campus.
10)Zora of Tiburon. Not, technically speaking, an American. Experimented with the body chemistry of the tribes of Tiburon. Brought back as part of a philosophical experiment by rock creatures on Excalbia, to battle along side Genghis Kahn, Col. Green, and Kahless the Klingon against Abraham Lincoln, Surak, Kirk, and Spock in “The Savage Curtain” (Episode 77 of the original Star Trek).Posted by on 03/01 at 01:20 AM
#55--awesome! Who could forget Dangerous Professor Dave “The Breast” Kepesh or Dangerous Professor Rath, lusting after Lola Lola (as played by an exceptionally Deutsch-looking Marlene Dietrich)?
I could play this game all night, but sadly I have to work in the morning.Posted by on 03/01 at 01:32 AM
I suspect a quick look through a few issues of Spider-Man would turn up some pretty dangerous professors. Curt Connors (The Lizard) and Otto Octavius (Dr. Octopus) spring immediately to mind.Posted by on 03/01 at 01:40 AM
(That it was my intention to cite the authentic quote will be evident to anyone familiar with my book Unholy Alliance where it is cited as Foner’s reaction to 9/11.)
Now let me get this straight:
“Horowitz” used the right quote before he used the wrong quote.
So in addition to exposing himself as a Frenchified flip-flopper - by his own construction we either have:
a) Lack of familiarity with his own prior book. ... but, gosh that doesn’t work since he is the one who pointed out the prior quote so he must be familiar, but then .... oh it’s just too recursively confusing, like something out of Quine ....
Which leaves us with:
b) More evidence that he doesn’t bother to read this crap even once before it is published.
“Yields a nitwit when appended to its quotation”, yields a nitwit when appended to its quotation.Posted by on 03/01 at 01:53 AM
More evidence that he doesn’t bother to read this crap even once before it is published.
Why act so surprised, JP? Important folks like Horowitz can hire other people to read this crap before it’s published.
Horowitz has more important things to do, like appearing on Scarborough Country and monitoring reader reviews of his book on Amazon.com.
Really, it’s enough that the books have a general Horowitzian feel about them. The actual work of the master is unnecessary, especially since the details don’t count. Perhaps it’s simplest to think of Horowitz as the Thomas Kinkade of McCarthyism.Posted by on 03/01 at 02:04 AM
Lots of good entries for Most Dangerous Fictional Professor. But with all due respect, folks, none of them comes anywhere close to Dr. Baltar, of both Battlestar Galactica series’. Even Noam Chomsky would think twice before selling out the entire human race for a small bit of personal gain.Posted by on 03/01 at 02:35 AM
Methinks that Horowitz just needs to “right size” his professorial ambitions.
For instance the University of Lawsonomy would probably work out. And since the great Lawson himself is dead lo these 50 years they are probably long overdue to get someone with a similarly grounded self-image.
Judge for yourself.
“His [Lawson usually writes of himself in third person] mind responds to every question and the problems that stagger the so-called wise men are as kindergarten stuff to him.”
The publishers of Lawson’s book, “Manlife,” have this to say about him: “In comparison to Lawson’s Law of Penetrability and Zig-Zag-and-Swirl movement, Newton’s law of gravitation is but a primer lesson, and the lessons of Copernicus and Galileo are but infinitesimal grains of knowledge.” (Note: Manlife was published by Lawson.)
Quotes are from Martin Gardner’s estimable Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science.Posted by on 03/01 at 03:20 AM
I think the world should be alerted to the potent cyber-radicalism of Professor G.E.B. Kivistik, myself.Posted by Dominic Fox on 03/01 at 04:25 AM
...there’s the simple fact that FrontPage is, aesthetically speaking, the single ugliest website on the entire Internets.
Now, now, no one over at FrontPage has called your website “ugly.” It may not be asthetically pleasing, but that does not necessarily mean it’s ugly. This is a complex issue. The intention was to have a colorful, asthetically pleasing site, with flash and other super-neato stuff to grab the eye. Unfortunately, the fourteen staffers assigned to the task of designing the site read the wrong pages of an outdated manual, and a couple of them have trouble with color blindness.
So, you might want to think twice before you go accusing David of ugliness. Everyone makes visual mistakes now and then; it doesn’t mean they’re ugly.
captcha word: brownPosted by on 03/01 at 06:37 AM
- Posted by on 03/01 at 06:45 AM
"(snip)Americans reluctant to embark on an armed ‘crusade’ to rid the world of evil are now relying on our allies to impose some restraint on the White House.”
Michael, thanks for relaying this Eric Foner quote. It’s fantastic. Yeah, count me among the many Americans who, while protesting in 2003 against the impending invasion of Iraq, knew that our only real hope for sanity was if our allies, esp. our European allies, banded together and just told BushCo, “No. Sorry, but that crazy plan just ain’t gonna happen.”
Sadly, I think my fantasy of the world standing up to us when we do crazy-ass shit is even more far-fetched my fantasies that feature me with my favorite Hollywoood Hunks and Professional Sports Dudes.Posted by on 03/01 at 07:27 AM
Checking in from the office at 5am Rocky Mountain time for my one hour of work before this tenured radical heads home. Thanks for urging some love for us no-names on the list, Michael. It sucks languishing at the bottom of the vote count! Looking forward to the follow-up post addressing Jake’s concern. The “Colorado 5” are wondering how to respond to DH and handle other fall-out from his long history of agitations in this state--like the bill now percolating through the legislature that would make it way easier to fire tenured professors. And try to get a tape of that Sweden-Finland game. Lundqvist was fabulous. And I trust everyone noticed that the Rangers are bringing home a ton of individual medals…Posted by Dean Saitta on 03/01 at 08:27 AM
Have we forgotten the mostest evilist professor ever, Irwin Corey:Posted by DintyWMoore on 03/01 at 08:33 AM
The World’s Foremost Authority! How could we have forgotten? Well played, DintyWMoore, well played!Posted by on 03/01 at 09:42 AM
Sorry to not join in the snark, but the “thirty researchers” bit really annoys me. I sometimes do this kind of “research” (i.e., librarianship) for environmental groups and the like. Thirty researchers is unheard of. Then again, Horowitz’ $300K salary is unheard of as well, so I suppose that I shouldn’t be surprised. But with approximately 10-15 times more researchers than a sane, well-funded organization would assign to this project, that’s the best that Horowitz can do? I’ve joked before about “Horowitz” being a sort of loosely organized communal entity, but maybe it’s really true. Perhaps like one of those hydras that can be turned inside out and still continue to function, “Horowitz“‘s very primitiveness is an asset that immunizes the creature from any dislocation due to confrontation with unpleasant facts or mistakes.Posted by on 03/01 at 10:43 AM
Thanks for the fictional professors. You guys are awesome!!!!
My other candidates are characters from James Hynes’ “The Lecturers’ Tale” and Professor Talc from “Confederacy of Dunces.”
I just know that we ‘ll have enough to keep David busy.Posted by on 03/01 at 10:53 AM
You can’t forget the dangerous AND sniveling Prof. Jerry Hathaway from Real Genius, played masterfully by William Atherton, in one of his trilogy of great 80’s sniveling film villian performances (the others being that sniveling EPA jerk in Ghostbusters, or that sniveling sleazy reporter in Die Hard). If Val Kilmer and those other meddling kid-nerds hadn’t stopped Dr. Atherton, by making his house overflow with popcorn, that death ray would have been in the hands of the military! How can Horowitz say there are no dangerous wingnuts in academia?Posted by on 03/01 at 11:36 AM
Perhaps it’s simplest to think of Horowitz as the Thomas Kinkade of McCarthyism.
David Horowitz, Painter of Darkness?Posted by Tyrone Slothrop on 03/01 at 11:52 AM
How about the dangerous Dr. Kurtz (ably played by Adrienne Barbeau) in CANNIBAL WOMEN IN THE AVOCADO JUNGLE OF DEATH? She was leading “an ancient commune of feminists, so radical, so militant, so left of center they… they eat their men.”
But not like that.Posted by on 03/01 at 11:53 AM
Ooo! Ooo! What about William Atherton as Dr. Noah Faulkner in Bio Dome? He counts as a professor, right?
Anybody who could be that un-fun is evil personified.Posted by on 03/01 at 12:30 PM
Let’s be sure to turn in Peter Mickelson from John Gardner’s Mickelson’s Ghosts. And Law Professor Ed Meese and Prof. Henry Kissinger from .... what the hell was the name of that ghoulish piece of fiction?Posted by on 03/01 at 01:31 PM
How about throwing Professor Humbert Humbert into the network? Or more dangerous yet, Dr. Strangelove?
Or the mostest dangerous of all . . . the dreaded Professor Plum.Posted by on 03/01 at 01:40 PM
HEY! Nobody mentioned yet the most evil professor ever: Professor Moriarty!
The first supervillian in literary history! And he actually managed to KILL Sherlock Holmes! (if only for a few years) What else can you ask for?
There are many good examples in the Harry Potter saga as well… Quirrell, Umbridge, and (it seems) Snape. But what I can better picture is Horowitz protesting against Professor Lupin and claiming for his resignation. Werewolves, after all, are almost as dangerous as liberals for innocent students.Posted by Alejandro on 03/01 at 02:07 PM
Seems that Gitlin got to 36k, Michael to 33k, the rest is waaaaay below and the poll is closed.
I would say that the results are correct. If you like Ward Churchill, probably you were a lost cause to begin with. Gitlin and Berube, with their charming manner, teaching awards (Gitlin) etc. are perfectly positioned to beguile our youth. They SEEM reasonable....
By the way, does Horowitz offer more than the minimum wage to his assistants?Posted by on 03/01 at 02:33 PM
Hey, has someone already mentioned Dr. Moreau? The only thing more dangerous than a leftist elitist professor is a leftist elitist professor devoted to creating *animal-human hybrids* (shudder). He only wanted to create a race without malice, Mr. Horowitz. Is that so wrong?
Then again, I don’t want to bring upon myself the wrath of Firenze.Posted by on 03/01 at 02:48 PM
And Law Professor Ed Meese and Prof. Henry Kissinger from .... what the hell was the name of that ghoulish piece of fiction?
I think you’re thinking of two different novels, Chris—The Final Report of the Attorney General’s Commission on Pornography and The Pentagon Papers.Posted by on 03/01 at 02:48 PM
The poll is not closed. Delete your cookies and try again…
captcha: carriedPosted by Dominic Fox on 03/01 at 02:49 PM
What about Dr. Hillel in Meyrink’s The Golem. That easily makes the top five because of the hermaphroditic element.Posted by on 03/01 at 02:50 PM
OK, you all can let up now. Michael’s ahead of Gitlin, all’s right with the world. . . .Posted by on 03/01 at 02:59 PM
Ooh, ooh, and we can’t forget Dr. Manhattan. He hated America so much he let it be destroyed by a nuclear Holocaust and moved to MARS. Dude.Posted by on 03/01 at 03:02 PM
Michael Savage has an advanced degree? How did the evil, liberal professoriate let him pass through without indoctrinating him? Damn it, people, I pay taxes for a properly indoctrinated intelligentsia, and all I get is some lousy radio hate-monger? I’m starting my own list of dangerous professors. #1: Guy who let Michael Savage pass Freshman comp.
Captcha: himself. That’s kinda cute.Posted by Heo Cwaeth on 03/01 at 03:27 PM
Michael is ahead, but by less than 2k so please vote for him.
I am afraid of erasing cookies, so I used another browser, and all one has to do is to refuse new cookies.Posted by on 03/01 at 04:08 PM
Could a Dangerous Professor from Santa Cruz pull off a similar upset in 2006?
Not without Igor Larionov…Posted by Nell on 03/01 at 05:14 PM
Here’s the fun part- if you take David Horowitz’s career at face value. He started as a left-wing professor in the 1960’s at a time when left-wing professors were apparently discriminated against by the orthodox conservative academics. Then he turned to conservative academic, and somehow, at that moment, conservative professors were discriminated against by the commie-loving lefty professors. Man, talk about bad luck, because it couldn’t be that Horowitz is a dumb hack.Posted by Raznor on 03/01 at 06:34 PM
Ooh, ooh-- I’d suggest Dr. Faustus (in either his Marlowe or Goethe incarnation)? He’s fiendishly smart, hungry for knowledge and power, and willing to consort with demons to get what he wants. What’s not to love?
Does anyone know his first name?
captcha: boardPosted by on 03/01 at 07:49 PM
Dr. Johann FaustusPosted by Heo Cwaeth on 03/01 at 08:04 PM
Wasn’t Fu Manchu a “Dr.?”Posted by Linkmeister on 03/01 at 08:55 PM
The worst professor is obviously Doctor Doom.
I mean, do I have to spell it out?Posted by gzombie on 03/01 at 11:36 PM
Ooh, ooh, ooh. You all missed the most dangerous fictional professor ever. Particularly with the release of C.S. Lewis’s Narnia series in film form.
You want some hard theology and some very interesting conflation of Christianity with Roman/Greek theology with the Athurian myth series you need to read C.S. Lewis’s “Out of the Silent Planet” series. “Out of the Silent Planet” sets the stage to understanding that the “Other” is not the enemy. “Perelandra” recasts the Adam and Eve story on Venus (complete with evil Professor Weston who travels there on a space ship only to be confronted by Christ figure Professor Ransom who endures a wound that will not heal). The culminate volume in the triolgy starts as a realistic novel of an idealistic scientist signing onto what turns to be a sinister attempt to corrupt the whole world in the interest of Satan. And pretty much ends with the most insane and moving moments in fiction.
We have a trilogy which opens with a straightforward expedition to Mars, Heinleinike if anything, then continues with a Sturgeonlite trip to Venus, and then continues with a PD James return to earth and all written two decades or more decades before those genius writers even put pen to paper.
To return to the point Weston is proved over the course of the trilogy to be literally Satan and Ransom (well that name doesn’t have undercurrents, now does it?) to be literally Christ and it is all supremely compelling and well written all at the same time.
Narnia is for kids, but not just kids. The Out of the Silent Planet trilogy is challenging to the Christian or non-Christian alike. And then you can move on to the Screwtape Letters. C.S. Lewis laid down a serious marker in the 30’s. And a serious reading of the Lord of the Rings and supporting materials (Simarillion and other words) shows that Tolkein did the same thing.
I am not aware of any ‘trilogy’ ever which took such different tacks in each of its three books. “Out of the Silent Planet” is a simple visit to a foreign planet and meet the strange people novel. “Perelandra” is a deep metaphor of the attempt of Satan to seduce Venus’s version of Adam and Eve with Professor Ransom’s attempts to combat Professor’s Weston’s attempts to play the biblical snake resulting in him becoming in effect Venus’s ever wounded Christ. And “That Hideous Strength” explaining the final conflict between Christ and Satan using Merlin as the intermediary using the style of the realistic detective novel of the English thirties as a model before things just spill out of control into some weird directions indeed just makes you shake your head in amazement. But it is pretty good damn cool.
This went on way too long. But you can reject every tiny bit of C.S. Lewis’s thought, but the fact remains that he was a brilliant writer. As a pure writer of what can be dismissed as science fiction I can only put up Theodore Sturgeon and Ray Bradbury. We can come up with better storytellers (Gibson and Butler anybody?)but as pure writers of “WOW” that don’t rely on aliens or things blowing up we can pretty much fall back on “Dandelion Wine”. Who knew that Douglas getting new sneakers would be magical? And didn’t take him anywhere except around town?Posted by on 03/02 at 12:18 AM
Hee hee, check this out: http://dangerousprofessors.net/
Apparently Horowitz’s Dangerous Professors book is so good that it’s capable of writing its own blog. Or maybe it’s the 30 unnamed research assistants doing the writing? Or perhaps a 1000 monkeys typing?Posted by Dr. Virago on 03/02 at 02:10 AM
Re: #94: It’s aslo a good place to read excellent critiques of The Professors. For example, this one by Robert McChesney, “David Horowitz and the Attack on Independent Thought.”Posted by on 03/02 at 10:43 AM
Three cheers to Bob McChesney for that one. Thanks for the link, John!Posted by Michael on 03/02 at 11:25 AM
No need to thank me, Michael, I’ve already congratulated myself! A pre-emptive self-congratulation, if you will.Posted by on 03/02 at 11:32 AM
“Stalinist bullies making fun of me gorphnox fleggh hack hack hack,” Horowitz pointed out. “In league with Islamofascist shlaffnak bleacchoch spizzle fleck.”
Great transcription. BTW, Gitlin the Commie Nihilist Islamo-Pig is sneaking up on you in the poll.Posted by Steve J. on 03/09 at 02:15 AM
Michael Savage has an advanced degree?
Nutritional ethnomedicine in Fiji / Michael A Weiner 1978 English Book : Thesis/dissertation/manuscript iii, 185 leaves : map ; 28 cm. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 181-185)./ Dissertation: Thesis (Ph. D. in Nutritional Ethnomedicine)--University of California, Berkeley, June 1978.Posted by Steve J. on 03/09 at 02:38 AM
I think the brown and yellow motif is supposed to represent how Horowitz shits out his material and then pisses himself when mistakes are uncovered.Posted by Brando on 03/09 at 03:55 PM
In Horowitz’s defense, it wasn’t his idea to cancel the first poll. I told him to do it. He liked the idea of crowning you Worstest Professor, but I explained to him that the poll was a farce. Had you not reneged on our agreement, I wouldn’t have needed to use such a drastic measure; so you have no one to blame but yourself. To be honest, I had only asked him to remove my one vote; but he explained that his web guy hadn’t taken that class yet and wouldn’t be able to remove just the one. I had even offered to vote once for every other candidate; thus effectively canceling out my vote for you, but he was afraid that would skew the poll results (always the stickler for accuracy, Horowitz is).
Needless to say, I’ll just wait until after you add me to your blogroll before I cast my vote in this new competition. And just so you know, I’m currently in negotiations with Chomsky, so you better be quick about it. I’m not sure if he even has a blogroll to add me to, but his name is more easily pronounceable and doesn’t require special characters to spell; and that definitely counts in his favor. Plus, I think he’s American, so he’s got that going for him too. But outside some vague anti-war position, I’m not exactly sure who Noam Chomsky is; so I’m still giving you first dibs on my vote. Don’t blow it.Posted by Doctor Biobrain on 03/10 at 02:52 AM
Y r lsng yr tm prfssr.
Th hnt gnst th scrmng rrgnt lt lfts hs bgn nd y r th gm.Posted by on 03/10 at 07:53 AM
you are so pathetic, you even change the comments posted in your blog !
The hunt is open, Professors, and you are the game. Watch your back.
Whereas I threaten people in their blog’s comment section! That is the very opposite of pathetic!Posted by on 03/11 at 09:08 PM
Cool, drzz! “The Most Dangerous Game” is one of my favorite short stories. Is Horowitz supposed to be General Zaroff or Ivan, though?Posted by Heo Cwaeth on 03/12 at 12:09 AM
RE: The Book “101 Professors” by Horowitz and his activity
It is an excellent book, very important and very critical of American academy, which is profoundly anti-American, anti-Semitic, and deeply corrupt by Arab donations. I hope and sure that this step is first in revision of American academic tenure policies, which are bad roots of academic irresponsibility. America shall rights to control academic behavior.
For many years, Middle East departments of American universities, including Columbia, have provided intentionally fake and fraudulent education on Middle East problem and history to American students. Using American taxpayers money as well as a financial support from Arab fascist organizations, poor educated and ignorant professors, Rashid Khalidi, Director of the Middle East Institute (advisor to PLO, a fascist and terrorist organization with Hitler’s Nazi roots, ties and ideology, which killed a number of Americans), Hamid Dabashi, Department Chairman, and Joseph Massad, assistant professor in the Department of Middle East and Asian Languages and Cultures, made the Columbia University, used to be respectable and world class school, a national center for promoting Arab fascism, anti-Americanism, and anti-Semitism on American soil. There are very important historic facts, which show ideological roots of these “professors”. In 1920s when Palestine was under Britain control, Arab cleric Haj Amin al Husseini, Mufti of Jerusalem, organized, with help and protection from British colonial government, several murderous and genocidal attacks on Palestinian Jews. In 1941, Haj Amin al Husseini went to Germany and met Hitler. They made an Agreement on extermination of Palestinian Jews. Cleric Haj Amin was a founder of PLO and Fatah and after he died, Arafat, who was from his tribe, replaced him as a Fatah commander. Rashid Khalidi was an advisor to PLO and Arafat. As Francisco Gil-White, Assistant Professor of Psychology, University of Pennsylvania, wrote: “the PLO traces its roots to Hitler’s Final Solution: Hajj Amin al Husseini, who was one of the leading architects, if not the leading architect, of Hitler’s Final Solution (despite being less well-known than Adolf Eichman), is also the man who mentored Yasser Arafat, the leader of the PLO.” There is a direct link between Khalidi and Hitler’s ideology, which perfectly explains his anti-Semitism and anti-Americanism. Khalidi, Dabashi, and Massad use so called “freedom of speech” principle and Columbia administration support, specifically, the president, Lee Bollinger, as an umbrella for their hater education. Freedom of speech does not mean freedom of fascism in the US and must be accompanied by responsibility and accountability. They are a “fifth column” of Global Arab fascism in the US, whose goal is distraction of the American society and the country from the inside. Based on the Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure, as well as for security of our country and entire western civilization, they must be removed from teaching positions and deported from the Country.Posted by on 03/12 at 08:06 PM
I appreciate David Horowitz thoughts. Thanks for the link. It entertains me a lot.Posted by tips on how to revise on 02/26 at 05:49 PM