Michael Bérubé - American Airspace

Indoctrinate U.

The Blogger Who Is No Longer Nice has thrown down the gauntlet. First he quotes the Philadelphia Inquirer’s story about the recent “liberal bias” hearings at Temple University:

Show trial fizzles out:

Yesterday’s hearing on academic freedom at Pennsylvania’s public universities was hyped by conservative activists as a “historic moment,” in which school administrators would finally be “called to account” in front of state legislators for allowing student “indoctrination and abuse” by leftist professors.

But the hearing at Temple University did not live up to that billing.

A professor scheduled to testify about alleged rampant liberal bias at Temple canceled. The sole student to appear before the legislative committee acknowledged he had never filed a formal grievance.

And Temple president David Adamany testified that in fact no student had made an official classroom bias complaint in at least five years, despite well-developed policies and procedures for doing so. . . .

Rep. Dan Surra (D., Elk) called the hearings a “colossal waste of time and taxpayer money.”

Yep, sounds about right to me. But check out what No More Mister Nice Blog has to say about this:

So much for the big victory Davey Horowitz declared last summer when the Pennsylvania House passed the resolution calling for the hearings. Incidentally, maybe I’m missing something here, but it appears that the Horowitz/Front Page Magazine crowd’s entire case with regard to Temple is based on one course. If the Liberal International is really hell-bent on brainwashing the next generation of America’s youth, shouldn’t we be working harder than that?

Well, you’re right, Steve, my man, we should be working harder. I’m sorry I’ve dropped the ball on liberal indoctrination at Penn State; I have to confess that I was too busy last semester to attend to this. I’ll see what I can do about getting the Lenin-Trotsky-Stalin Studies undergraduate minor in the humanities approved by the Faculty Senate without further delay. That way the kids will have to take six indoctrination courses. Bwah hah hah hah hah.

But seriously, folks, indoctrinatin’ is hard work. It’s hard! And you know how professors hate hard work.

Still, the mere fact that students are not rising up en masse to complain about liberal indoctrination doesn’t mean it ain’t happening. In fact, if you think about it hard enough, it’s probably very good evidence that it is happening! From the Chronicle of Higher Education (sub required, sorry):

Rep. Dan B. Frankel, a Democrat who is a member of the Board of Trustees of the University of Pittsburgh, reminded Ms. Neal [president of the American Council of Trustees and Alumni] that the issue of potential political discrimination at state universities had received a considerable amount of publicity since the committee’s previous hearing three months ago. He said he might have expected students to come forward with complaints, but none have done so. “It seems to me we may be overblowing this problem,” he said. “I don’t have streams of people coming to me.”

“Let’s not put the burden on the student,” Ms. Neal countered. “Let’s put the burden on the institutions.”

When asked to elaborate on this remark, Ms. Neal said, “I’m simply saying that if there are only a tiny handful of complaints from students, then colleges should bear the burden of explaining why more students aren’t coming forward to say what we all know is true. That’s the way the system should work.

“In fact, the very paucity of complaints is the best evidence we’ve yet seen for the argument that conservative students are intimidated into silence,” Ms. Neal continued. “Despite our years-long national campaign to get conservative students to expose their liberal professors’ schemes of indoctrination, we’ve come up with next to nothing. And nothing could testify more eloquently to the pervasiveness of campus conservatives’ persecution than this next to nothing.”*

In a related development, David Horowitz has had to issue two retractions of stories he has told repeatedly in his campaign against liberal campuses.

But while Horowitz was declaring the hearings “a great victory” for his cause, he lost some powerful stories. For example, Horowitz has said several times that a biology professor at Pennsylvania State University used a class session just before the 2004 election to show the Michael Moore documentary Fahrenheit 9/11, but he acknowledged Tuesday that he didn’t have any proof that this took place.

In a phone interview, Horowitz said that he had heard about the alleged incident from a legislative staffer and that there was no evidence to back up the claim. He added, however, that “everybody who is familiar with universities knows that there is a widespread practice of professors venting about foreign policy even when their classes aren’t about foreign policy” and that the lack of evidence on Penn State doesn’t mean there isn’t a problem.

“These are nit picking, irrelevant attacks,” he said.

“As Ms. Neal said,” Horowitz added, “we already know what is true. Whether or not it actually happened is irrelevant. You don’t need evidence for things you already know are true. That’s just nit picking. Everybody knows that.

“And the fact that no Penn State biology professor assigned Fahrenheit 9/11 is a great victory for my cause.”*

Even if these examples aren’t correct, he said, they represent the reality of academic life. “Is there anybody out there who will say that professors don’t attack Bush in biology classrooms?” he said. Horowitz characterized the debate over his retractions as a diversionary tactic by his critics.

“Retractions are irrelevant to the truth. They’re a diversion,” Horowitz insisted, pointing to his now-famous headline about yet another academic urban legend he’s been circulating for years, the story of the poor student who was given an F for refusing to write an essay on why George Bush is a war criminal: “Some of Our Facts Were Wrong; Our Point Was Right.”

“Facts don’t do what I want them to,” Horowitz said while donning an outlandishly oversized white jacket. “Facts just twist the truth around. . . . Facts are nothing on the face of things.”*

* I have to admit, in the interest of fairness and balance, that I made up these quotes. I mean, c’mon, it’s not as if these people would really say anything this foolish.

Post-Atrios update: but all the quotes in the indented paragraphs are real. Anne Neal insisting that the burden of proof in accusations of bias should lie with the institutions—real. Horowitz insisting that the debunking of his urban legends is “irrelevant”—also real. You can look them up on the Internets!

Posted by on 01/11 at 04:39 PM

Facts are getting the best of them?

Posted by on 01/11 at 06:59 PM
Remember: absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Posted by on 01/11 at 07:08 PM
He starts a conversation… he can’t even finish it.

Posted by julia on 01/11 at 07:36 PM
* I have to admit, in the interest of fairness and balance, that I made up these quotes. I mean, c’mon, it’s not as if these people would really say anything this foolish.

Let’s not put the burden on them to actually say these things. Their very failure to say them is the best evidence we’ve yet seen that this is what they want to say.

Posted by Violet Socks on 01/11 at 07:38 PM
Yikes! Who can imagine David Horowitz providing us with quotes from the Talking Heads, arguably a purveyor of the liberal ideology rails against? His paranoia often leaves me crosseyed (perplexed and annoyed as well), but it certainly does not leave me painless. If the esteemed Mr. Horowitz begins to habitually refer to bands that promote liberalism he may have to begin an investigation into his own inveterate liberal tendencies. This leaves of with a question to answer. Is David Horowitz really part of the liberal conspiracy rapidly overtaking this country? I believe he is, and I think we should immediately commence public hearings to get to the root of this problem. He seems to be waffling on the issues here, trying to provide us with covert messages to inform us of his actual sympathies. If we cannot trust David Horowitz to provide us with the truth, can we trust anyone? I weep for the future.

Michael, please tell us you have the courage to insist on full inquiry by the Pennsylvania House investigating this newly discovered bias on the part of Horowitz. It is the least they can do!

And, yes, I have finally delurked!

Posted by on 01/11 at 07:42 PM
I guess DH needs something to change our minds. ‘Cause I wouldn’t live like that if he paid me.

Posted by on 01/11 at 07:51 PM
Remember: absence of absence is not evidence of evidence. I’d say that’s self-evident.

But I do agree with Ms. Neal. Clearly, the burden of proof is on the accused. Or on those who haven’t actually been accused, but could hypothetically be accused. Or on those who accuse themselves by refusing to accuse.

Wait, what was my point? Oh, right. Could I have a job, Ms. Neal? And Galadriel was, like, totally a National Socialist.

Posted by on 01/11 at 08:03 PM
Galadriel was, like, totally a National Socialist.

Oh, mother of Aragorn, don’t be bringing that argument into this thread, now.

Update: David has now contacted me about this post. “We got computer, we’re tapping phone lines, I know that that is allowed,” he said. “Try to be careful, don’t take no chances, you better watch what you say.” When I accused him of supporting the radical right’s theory of supreme executive privilege, he said something incoherent about life during wartime.

Posted by Michael on 01/11 at 08:34 PM
I am confused by how i am supposed to participate in this conspiracy of the left to take control of all things in our culture. DeLay thinks we conspired with prosecutors in Texas and with GOP congressional staffers; Bush thinks we are conspiring to damage the morale of the troops by creating unfair criticisms of his policies; Alito and his Senate handlers claim we are conspiring to create an atmosphere of accountability that does not account for the benefit of hypocrisy as a useful judicial strategy. And now we are asked to step up our efforts in conspiring to take complete control of universities. It is all too much.

I am going to take a break and conspire and relax in Basel at the conference celebrating the 100th birthday of Albert Hoffman. I hope one of you can have my next conspiracy assignment ready when i return. I would prefer to work in undermining the welfare of the very very rich who are moving their capital assets offshore please??

Posted by on 01/11 at 08:36 PM
"We dress like students, we dress like housewives, or in a suit and a tie.”

Posted by Violet Socks on 01/11 at 08:39 PM
“We dress like students, we dress like housewives, or in a suit and a tie.”

That was what Horowitz said at the end of his conversation with Michael, just to clarify. It came through loud and clear on the wiretap.

Posted by Violet Socks on 01/11 at 08:41 PM
The worst part about your made-up quotes is that I didn’t even blink when I read them. Horowitz has said such ridiculous things over the years that they seemed to be perfectly accurate quotes.

I guess this is another example of the new word coined by Stephen Colbert’s jokewriters: “truthiness.”

Posted by sfmike on 01/11 at 09:22 PM
Just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they’re not out to get you. I wear a purple bowtie on the days that I’m spying for David Bowie, and a blue one of the days that I’m spying for Michael Jackson.

Is David Horowitz really contacting you? That’s pretty funny. At least yu know he reads your blog now.

Who is David Horowitz, btw? Is he a professor or something? How did he get so powerful, and who is running these hearings at various universities?

Posted by on 01/11 at 10:07 PM
Oh, mother of Aragorn, don’t be bringing that argument into this thread, now.

Oh, Grendel’s mother on a stick, Professor Berube. Gilraen has a name, and I’ll thank you to use it. We’re not talking about some ranger’s cheap floozy, you know. Her husband was shot in the eye with an arrow. A leftist academic arrow. I for one hope that Mr. Horowitz devotes more time in the future to rooting out orcish influence in our nation’s universities. Much more time.

Posted by on 01/11 at 10:27 PM
This is funny:

“Horowitz has said several times that a biology professor at Pennsylvania State University used a class session just before the 2004 election to show the Michael Moore documentary Fahrenheit 9/11, but he acknowledged Tuesday that he didn’t have any proof that this took place.”

Now, check out what George Will writes in the Jan 16 issue of Newsweek:

“Brooklyn College, where a professor of education required her class on Language Literacy in Secondary Education to watch ‘Fahrenheit 9/11’ before the 2004 election...”

I also heard that liberal professors are murdering conservative students by forcing them to eat Pop Rocks and drink soda.

Also, there is no Keyser Soze.

Posted by on 01/11 at 10:53 PM
NYUS: Here’s an intro to DH from five years ago, when he was a little more restrained than he is now.

You also might want to poke around Michael’s older entries, and such links as the Inside Higher Ed piece, to get a feel for what DH is like. Or take a look at his most recent books via Amazon.

Republican state legislators are convening these hearings, by and large.

Posted by on 01/11 at 11:01 PM
You, sir, are a Trotskyist running dog, mentioning that revisionist traitor in the same breath as the sainted Valdimir Il’ich and his heir Iosif Vissarionovich (who, it may be admitted sotto voce, may have certain imperfections). Or are you a Trotskyite nutcase? In any case, there is no room for you in conspiracy. Your kind’s turn will be right after the Horowitzes when the Revolution comes!

Posted by on 01/11 at 11:10 PM
Oh gimme a break, Invigilator. I have no intention of telling students that Lenin, Trotsky, and Stalin are all of a piece. On the contrary, I use my own Lenin-Trotsky-Stalin introductory course as a way of teaching the conflicts. You say you want intellectual diversity? We’ll give you intellectual diversity with an ice pick, comrade.

Posted by Michael on 01/11 at 11:22 PM
Well, I gave part of the correspondence course for “how to be a liberal… I guess...” with my introduction to Western culture with my blog entries of here, here and here… thus rendering me the only blog I know of with a full exegisis of The Communist Manifesto.

While the rest of you are talking about the weather, some of us are ~~plotting to undermine the bourgeoisie and establish the dictatorship of the proletariat...~~ advancing the cause in our own way.

Posted by the talking dog on 01/11 at 11:31 PM
One of the many problems with Horowitz is that he changed his hairstyle so many times that he doesn’t what he looks like.

Posted by on 01/11 at 11:59 PM
But what should I see in my latest issue of the “Penn Stater” alumni magazine but a long, uncritical article about Horowitz and the purge of conservatives. The only vaguely comments in the whole article that contested Horowitz’ version of events were from some crazy coot with a funny (French?) name.

And this was one issue after publishing a hagiography of Santorum, who has about as much claim to a Pennsylvania citizenship as I do.

I tell you, I leave town, and the place goes to hell.

Posted by on 01/12 at 12:25 AM
Thanks Josh,

I think I ran into Horowitz’s blog by accident a few days ago. It had this interesting stuff about how the MLA spends its time outting tranvestite authors and “decoding invisible racisms.”

I’m not sure if that was Horowitz’s blog or someone else’s interpretation of what Horowitz says about the MLA, but it seemed pretty goofy. I can certainly imagine MLA delegates *doing* that stuff now that I know they pass resolutions on Iraq and Somalia. But just because this is how the MLA spends its time over the holidays, it does not mean that professors go home from such rendez-vous and brainwash their students.

Most of my lefty professors usually manage to keep their political axes, ice-picks, and popsicle sticks out of the classroom. Still, I’ve seen some nasty “PC” behaviors outside of class that made me very uncomfortable. It would be hard to address those incidents here, and they were always initiated by students and not professors. But sometimes professors pick up the ball and take things to a new level.

I think there is pressure at universities to “tow the party line” on issues like ‘diversity’ but not to understand what that term means in all its complexity. Some students are not ready for all the forms of ‘diversity’ that college has to offer: it freaks them out, and they need time to adjust without feeling shamed or pressured. They come from smalltowns, or they grew up in New Jersey, where there are no gay people. And to expect them to be fine and dandy with gay people is not realistic; but when they make ‘insensitive’ remarks, other people flip out. You see what I’m saying? The same could be said for racism, sexism, class, or other forms of diversity: it takes some students a long time to understand their roles in these relationships, and we have to be more patient.

Posted by on 01/12 at 01:00 AM
Take a look at these hands. You don’t have to mention it. I’m a government man.

Posted by on 01/12 at 02:43 AM
How come there are no Conservative Arts Degrees?

If Liberal Arts is defined as learning a little bit about everything, the logical opposite would infer that one learns a lot about nothing.

Posted by on 01/12 at 03:19 AM
So what about Delay suing Houston media if they rule absolutely true ads that he accepted million dollar bribes from commie tycoons? Where does this fit into DH’s weltanschaung?

Posted by on 01/12 at 04:09 AM
word is “run” not “rule”

Posted by on 01/12 at 04:10 AM
Liberal indoctrination keeping the conservatives quiet at colleges and universities is bad, but it is nothing compared to the indoctrination liberal employees are forced to undergo at conservative workplaces. Conservative employers like Wal-Mart routinely brainwash their workers, getting into their minds so deeply they find themselves chanting meditation-like to the gods of capitalism at the beggining of every day.

The fact that no proof exists that the indoctrination is a Satanic plot to turn America into a heathen land of sin and debauchery is proof-positive that that has been their unholy plan from the start. I say that every Wal-Mart that is a manager or above (and managers of any other company whose employees will not freely admit to being brainwashed) should be taken to a secret prison in the Czech Republic and (not quite) tortured until they admit to doing what we all know they are doing.

And as for anyone who tries to refute my unassailable logic? Well, they’re in on it too. Don’t trust the traitorous vermin! This is America. I’m the patriot. They just want the terrorists to win. Q.E.D.

Posted by on 01/12 at 04:27 AM
NYU? The one on Washington Square? That one?

You’re thinking perhaps that having the inappropriateness of racist or homophobic language pointed out to these hapless out-of-town waifs is going to be less gentle than letting them discover it for themselves on the streets of Manhattan?

I mean, leaving aside the fact that teh gay and wimmen and dusky students are paying well into the five figures and maybe shouldn’t have to put up with that kind of crap as the additional price of getting an education?

Posted by julia on 01/12 at 06:35 AM
During the height of the child abuse witch hunts in the 80’s, I saw the author of a book on “recovered memory” say, in response to a question about all those fathers and teachers who vehemently denied such terrible accusations, “Denial is the first sign of guilt.” She literally didn’t bat an eyelash saying this, and sat there for several seconds in unblinking, silent madness to let this insight sink in.

Posted by on 01/12 at 07:28 AM
Some gems from FrontpageMag.com

http://www.frontpagemag.com/articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=273

Quote:
“WHITE WOMEN ARE THE MOST BEAUTIFUL (caps in original), desirable creatures on earth, judging from the way dark men crave them.”

“The white woman is the prize. To a dark man, marriage to a white woman is the ultimate sign of “equality” in the West. These days the white woman is expected to humble herself before the darkie, or at least to explore her own sexual excitement through him.”

“Its Judeo-Christian religion allowed the European Caucasian race to advance above all other people; but the darker races now encroach through integration and intermarriage, in the name of equality and diversity.”

Posted by on 01/12 at 07:38 AM
Julia,

Every time I see your posts, I cringe. You’re exactly the PC witch-hunt-type of student that I’m talking about. And you don’t even have a point.

“Gay, wimmen, and dusky students?” Sorry man, but where the heck did YOU grow up?

Posted by on 01/12 at 09:15 AM
a long, long time ago, little one.

Before I got to NYU, as a matter of fact.

Sorry you weren’t as lucky.

Posted by julia on 01/12 at 10:00 AM
Oh man… I hope you’re not a TA! All I’m saying is that we should try to be more tolerant of those who have a harder time learning how to adapt to college life. You act like patience is something to be avoided. What kind of teacher would take that position?

I’ve seen situations at school that could have been better handled. But it’s students like yourself (sad clowns of what they think professors want) that seem to make this sort of communication more difficult.

I have to go play with my dusky wimmin friends now, so I don’t have time to continue our conversation. But I hope you see my point that you win more friends with honey than with acid. You can teach people to respect diversity by being understanding of them when they initially fail.

Posted by on 01/12 at 10:26 AM
At a Mennonite Church conference in 1976 I had the priveledge of attending a meeting with a young Argentinian woman who had been involved in the kind of “service learning” course that FrontPage Mag article writer is so upset about.

Unfortunately for her the local version of the Horowitz crowd was in power at the time; she, her professor and all his students were arrested. She was tortured for three weeks before her status as the American born daughter of an American citizen was communicated to her torturers, who complained bitterly in her presence about the weakness of the Americans, who wouldn’t let them do their important work when it involved a Yankee...one has to wonder what became of her teacher and classmates.

Think it can’t happen here?

Posted by on 01/12 at 10:30 AM
Methinks Crazy Davey has been digging into his old Windowpane stash leftover fron his liberal days…

Posted by on 01/12 at 10:56 AM
but when they make ‘insensitive’ remarks, other people flip out. You see what I’m saying?

Yes, what you’re saying is that students have to realize that “in real life,” people are going to flip out when they make casually racist, sexist, or anti-gay remarks. Better to learn this in college rather than in the workplace.

Posted by on 01/12 at 11:00 AM
Hi Constantine,

That’s not quite what I’m saying, though I see your point about casual remarks that hurt others. What I’m talking about are people who don’t realize they might be offending others. There was a speaker who came to school once and said, “Wow, I see a lot of brown people in the audience.” To me, this seemed like a statement of fact: there WERE a lot of brown-skinned people in the audience. But some people (white students like Julia, no doubt) got mad at this person and told her that if she ever said anything like that again, she would not be invited back to NYU.

I think that’s nuts. Would it be better if this speaker had said, “Wow, there are a lot of dusky people in the audience?” Or would if be better if she did not mention the color of anyone’s skin, since she did not say, “Wow, there are a lot of white people in the audience?” I think probably the latter option would have been best.

But since she did make the comment as an invited guest, I think the student organizers should have left it alone and said nothing. Or they should have said something to her in private. This guest speaker was kind of “brown” herself, if you want to know about her own race. I think she was Italian or Spanish or Portugeuse. She meant her comment as a compliment, but the PC police jumped on her and made us all feel awkward.

Posted by on 01/12 at 11:11 AM
A blog-post begging to be made:

From FrontpageMag.com

http://www.frontpagemag.com/articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=273

“WHITE WOMEN ARE THE MOST BEAUTIFUL, desirable creatures on earth, judging from the way dark men crave them.” (caps in original)

“The white woman is the prize. To a dark man, marriage to a white woman is the ultimate sign of “equality” in the West. These days the white woman is expected to humble herself before the darkie, or at least to explore her own sexual excitement through him.”

“Its Judeo-Christian religion allowed the European Caucasian race to advance above all other people; but the darker races now encroach through integration and intermarriage, in the name of equality and diversity.”

Posted by on 01/12 at 11:16 AM
Dammit man, don’t do that! Upon reading those quotes, I was just brimming with intellectual indignation and my next blog post started writing itself. I quickly realized that they seemed a little too good to be true, and then finally saw the disclaimer at the bottom. I hadn’t had my coffee yet and asterisks don’t show up too well with early-morning blurry eyes.
No fun.

On a related note, I just wanted to let everyone know that the liberal indoctrination of the accounting profession is pacing itself well, with none of the hangups and disruptions our university comrades have been suffering. Those stupid SOB’s don’t suspect a thing! We should be well on our way to a worker’s revolt in no time.

Keep distracting them with the university plots, and we’ll get making headway in the professions; and we’ll destroy this country yet.

Posted by Doctor Biobrain on 01/12 at 11:17 AM
Clearly the dangers of inserting unttributed Talking Heads lyrics into GOP quotes in a blog post are here on display for all to look on and be appallled.

But no one has mentioned the one authentic case of such an unlikely combo of GOP and T-Heads. It’s also one of my favorite examples of the micro-genre, Bizarre Choices for Campaign Theme Songs. I refer of course to Lamar Alexander’s choice of “Once in a Lifetime” as his signature song in his failed presidential bid. I guess he thought “Same as it ever was” was kind of a nifty line for a plaid-shirt wearin conservative like himself. But you have to wonder what he thought the rest of the lyrics were saying.

“You may find yourself living in a shotgun shack.” That’s for goddam sure, but it’s kinda weird to offer it as a sort of campaign promise. Just too honest for his own good I guess.

“You may say to yourself, ‘My God! What have I done!’” Indeed you may.

Posted by on 01/12 at 11:28 AM
So, why exactly can’t I criticize Bush’s foreign policy in my class when we do turn to topics of war and peace? As long as I don’t derogate the students in the class by criticizing Bush supporters, or Republicans in general? Besides running the risk of becoming grist for the right-wing mill. I’m wondering if we want to take the position that “no one does it” or “there is nothing wrong with doing it”?

Posted by on 01/12 at 11:39 AM
Or as DH might say: “I see the laws made in Washington, D.C. I think of the ones I consider my favorites. I think of the people that are working for me.”

Posted by on 01/12 at 11:42 AM
"I mean, c’mon, it’s not as if these people would really say anything this foolish.”

Actually, we already know they would—and do. All the freaking time. So it’s perfectly OK to make up quotes and attribute them to Comrade Dave. Since we already know Horowitz believes those things, the burden shouldn’t be on Berube to prove he said them out loud. Even if he didn’t, they accurately represent the reality of Horowitz’s intellectual life. And to suggest otherwise is simply a nitpicking, irrelevant attack.

P.S. I’m encouraged by Dr. Biobrain’s report of the world revolution’s progress in the accounting industry. Unfortunately, things aren’t going so well in the financial services industry. I’ve tried talking my boss into putting the Grundisse on the required reading list instead of “The Stock Traders Bible,” but so far no luck. However, I’m still plugging away with the worker criticism/self-criticism sessions, and hope to have more progress to report at the next cell meeting.

Posted by on 01/12 at 11:48 AM
I think these conservatives ought to be grateful that they aren’t being subjected to the sort of oppression employed at my alma mater during the Bush 1 administration.

Then again, perhaps what’s really needed is for these poor souls is to have their campus offices saturated with quarts of patchouli, like in the bad old days. Better for ya than Aqua Velva, anyway.

Posted by on 01/12 at 12:12 PM
gee, why would you hope that?

You don’t by any chance think you’ve said anything rude or stupid, do you?

Gosh. It must be really unsettling to get that sinking feeling that you’ve shot off your mouth and offended someone out of carelessness or ignorance and you’re going to have to live with the consequences.

I was under the impression that you were going to haul your privileged careerist ass to class now? (gee, you’re right, this is fun! What was I thinking?)

Posted by julia on 01/12 at 12:25 PM
Man, I am too late. All (?) the good Talking Heads quotes are used up. I could post a comment telling Michael to stop making sense but that would be kind of lame at this point. Wouldn’t it?

ps: I hate people when they’re not polite.

Posted by on 01/12 at 12:54 PM
let me get this straight… hypothetically (we know this regardless of the facts) biology professors come out against Bush. So sayeth the all-knowing one. So what if they did? Bush stands counter to their entire livelihood. If Bush had his way we’d be studying the Bob Jones U. science cirricula, where “Cuz God done told us” is the d) selection and it’s ALWAYS RIGHT.

All scientists should be agin Bush. He’s against them.

Posted by on 01/12 at 01:04 PM
"But I do agree with Ms. Neal. Clearly, the burden of proof is on the accused.” by MDS, #7

Correction; under the rule of law, the burden is on the accuser.

Posted by on 01/12 at 01:27 PM
Hi Julia

Well, you can’t be an NYU student because you’d know we don’t have classes till next week. And I think you’re way too rude to be a professor. So maybe you’re at NYU for some sort of special observation or something?

I hope you get better. I make one simple comment about being kinder to insensitive people, and now I have a careerist ass? What does that even mean??

Maybe you and Horowitz should date? you make about as much sense as he does.

Posted by on 01/12 at 01:27 PM
Absolutely hilarious!!!
This is what amazes me about modern America socio-politcal discussions. That obvious lunatics like these are granted full audience at the highest levels to spout their deranged rantings. I guese that is to be expected given that many of those in the highest levels of affairs right now are cut from the same materials.

I FIND IT INCERSDIBLE.

Posted by on 01/12 at 01:37 PM
Mmmm ... peanut butter.

The right’s twisted logic has exhausted me. I can’t think straight anymore. The absence of evidence proves something happened? I’d love to see that argument fly in the courtroom. Of course, when Alito gets confirmed, who knows what kind of theater of the absurd our courts will turn into. Too bad Johnny Cochran isn’t still alive.

And it’s nice to see Billmon back in action, both here and over at Whiskey Bar. He has been sorely missed these past few weeks.

Posted by on 01/12 at 02:07 PM
Maybe you and Horowitz should date? you make about as much sense as he does.

Thanks for doing your best to elevate the discourse.

NYUS, so how would you suggest that we mean-ol’ NYers should best coddle the rubes from these hypothetical towns that don’t have gay people* until they get up to speed, sensitivity- and decency-wise? Is your point only that these young adults don’t know any better, so we should treat them like we treat toddlers and very carefully explain to them etc.?

Now, it seems to me that the problem here isn’t the content of the disagreement but rather the tone, and that tone is one that young people put one whenever they feel aggreived. Why? Because they’re young and apt to fly off the handle.

* Verbum sap.: Those towns where I wouldn’t live if you paid me** certainly do have gay people. It’s just that those people probably aren’t out. As for “New Jersey” not having gay people...er.

--
** All the good TH quotes taken? Balderdash.

Posted by on 01/12 at 02:13 PM
This is from CJR.org,

“Horowitz recently attended the White House Hanukkah party; here’s his account of his moment in the presidential presence:

I hadn’t been at an event with the President (who is looking slim and trim) in four years and didn’t know if he would recognize me. But the minute he saw me in the line he called out “Horowitz” with a big smile on his face, then embraced me in a bear hug. In the moment I had his ear I said, “Thank you for taking all those arrows for the rest of us.” Graciously, he said, “You take more than I do,” which I don’t and said so. Then as I was walking away he called out, “Don’t let them get to you.” I called back, “Don’t you either,” and he replied in a strong voice. “I won’t.” “

Two manly men standing fast in a time of (culture) war.

Posted by on 01/12 at 02:15 PM
Only the true messiah denies his divinity!

Posted by tb on 01/12 at 02:17 PM
Howdy Karl the Idiot,

Great name, dude. I never said NYers are mean. NYers on the street would probably forgive a dumb college kid for calling them “dusky” because they wouldn’t know what the hell you’re talking about. “Dusky” is an outdated racial slur, as in: “The dusky Indians had little hope of becoming civilized, despite our best efforts.” But some people think it’s hip to be a retrograde racist now…

As for gay people in New Jersey, I was of course joking. I know your name suggests you would not get such a joke, but I had higher hopes for you. But if you still don’t get it, then tell me this: have you ever seen even one gay person on The Sopranos? Wouldn’t Tony Soprano have one or two gay friends or “wimmin” friends if there are gays and lesbians in Jersey?

Posted by on 01/12 at 02:27 PM
Monty and James—I was just thinking about “Don’t Worry About the Government” when I saw the report of that effusive Bush-Horowitz bear hug via Eric Alterman. Which leads me to believe there might be one more good TH line available--

Some civil servants are just like my loved ones
They work so hard and they try to be strong

Posted by Michael on 01/12 at 02:51 PM
Wait, is the Horowitz/Bush dialogue quoted by James fictional, too? It has to be! It’s too good to be real.

Posted by Orange on 01/12 at 04:05 PM
The comment form says I should submit the word I see below. The word is “ideas.” It is in lower case.

I guess Michael is telling me “don’t get any big ideas?” Hey! That’s prior restraint on free speech!

Posted by david ross mcirvine on 01/13 at 03:58 AM
Message to those liberals who think that life is but a joke:
This ain’t no party, this ain’t no disco, this ain’t no foolin’ around

Posted by on 01/13 at 05:02 AM
David-- The Captcha function (which I turned on the other day because of the dogged persistence of comment spam) asked me to submit the word “stalin” for comment 56. I am really truly not making this up.

Posted by on 01/13 at 08:21 AM
Now I finally realize what ‘Road to Nowhere’ was really about: Discover the Networks!

Well we know where we’re goin’
But we don’t know where we’ve been
And we know what we’re knowin’
But we can’t say what we’ve seen
And we’re not little children
And we know what we want
And the future is certain
Give us time to work it out

We’re on a road to nowhere, Come on inside
Takin’ that ride to nowhere, We’ll take that ride

It all makes sense now…

Posted by on 01/13 at 10:26 AM
Curses on Atrios! I spent 10 minutes waiting to read this post yesterday, and his link clogged up the internets, and I had to give up and read Susie Madrak for relief.
The post is (as most days) worth the wait, however. Why should DH start making sense now?

Posted by on 01/13 at 10:42 AM
then tell me this: have you ever seen even one gay person on The Sopranos?

??

Posted by on 01/13 at 11:09 AM
Well come on: HAVE you seen one?

Bon Jovi doesn’t have any songs about gay people in New Jersey, either. (Unless you count the lyrics someone misheard to LIVING ON A PRAYER; they thought the part that goes, “Hey, hey we’re half way there,” actually went, “Hey, hey I’m not really gay.” http://www.amiright.com/artists/jonbonjovi.shtml

TH on the entertaining weirdness of the people who populate Michael Berube’s blog:

“And you dreamed it all
And this is your story
Do you know who you are?
You’re the dream operator.”

Posted by on 01/13 at 11:30 AM
Okay, the “there are no gay people in New Jersey"/Sopranos/Bon Jovi thread has got to die. WTF? Utterly pointless.

Posted by Orange on 01/13 at 11:40 AM
So Tony Soprano is representative of New Jersey? I can think of a lot of North jersey Italian-Americans who would revert to stereotype, complete with baseball bats and crowbars, if they could find the little piss-ant who started this.
And anyway, isn’t it obvious that AJ’s gay?

Posted by on 01/13 at 12:14 PM
C.J Colucci,

I am very sorry if I offended you or anyone else from New Jersey, or any Italian-Americans. Please don’t come after me with baseball bats. I promise to shut up after this.

But you have such a great point about AJ! I never thought about him like that before.

http://www.hbo.com/sopranos/cast/character/anthony_soprano.shtml

Posted by on 01/13 at 12:32 PM
When asked to elaborate on this remark, Ms. Neal said, “I’m simply saying that if there are only a tiny handful of complaints from students, then colleges should bear the burden of explaining why more students aren’t coming forward to say what we all know is true. That’s the way the system should work.

Comments like this remind of the line in The Ciderhouse Rules where a member of the board for the orphanage accuses the good doctor (played by Michael Caine in the film) of being a non-practicing homosexual. In other words, whaa?

Posted by Phyllis on 01/13 at 12:39 PM
totally off topic--and not so much really:
“I hope you see my point that you win more friends with honey than with acid. “

Here it is “Friday the 13th”, and i am surrounded by friends and associates, wise academics, researchers, scholars, and so forth all of whom believe that the acid is a far better tool of conscious change than honey.

Posted by on 01/13 at 01:01 PM
Don’t do acid; stick with honey, it;s better for you. Here’s what TH has to say about DRUGS:

And all I see is little dots
Some are smeared and some are spots
Feels like a murder but that’s alright
Somebody said there’s too much light
Pull down the shade and it’s alright
It’ll be over in a minute or two.

I’m charged up...don’t put me down
Don’t feel like talking...don’t mess around
I feel mean...i feel o.k.
I’m charged up...electricity

Posted by on 01/13 at 01:09 PM
Question: How often are men advised to opt for honey rather than acid/vinegar to win friends/catch flies? In this thread, it was the presumably female Julia who received this advice. Have any of you men ever been so chastised?

Posted by Orange on 01/13 at 01:16 PM
"But I hope you see my point that you win more friends with honey than with acid. You can teach people to respect diversity by being understanding of them when they initially fail.”

I didn’t chastize Julia personally, though I feel that advice about being nicer might be especially useful to her. I was talking about the university as a wider place--where people who are corrected for their political faux-pas might appreciate some consideration and respect, rather than being treated like crude idiots.

And how do you know I’m not a woman?

Posted by on 01/13 at 01:30 PM
Have any of you men ever been so chastised?

Nope. What men get accused of is “elitism” or “arrogance,” e.g., I downloaded a British documentary/polemic against religion and watched its host, Oxford Don and scientist Richard Dawkins, get accused of just this by some nutjob preacher for his “arrogance” in response to the preacher’s certainty that scientists believe that humans evolved “by accident.”

The point is that these men are breaking from the pack and betraying their fellows, whereas women who are told to “be sweet” are being told to know their place.

NYU Student: Try visiting Lambertville New Jersey.

I still don’t get it: can you describe how your “be nice to rubes” policy would work?

Posted by on 01/13 at 01:36 PM
It’s irrelevant whether the honey advice to a woman comes from a man or a woman—what matters is whether it’s mainly women who are advised to “make nice.”

Also, though this remains completely irrelevant, I have a gay acquaintance who lives in NJ, and I rather doubt he’s the only one. I am utterly missing the point of saying NJ doesn’t have GLBT folks just because they’re not depicted in certain NJ-based pop culture.

Posted by Orange on 01/13 at 01:57 PM
So if someone is in fact acting like a crude idiot on campus we should not treat them like a crude idiot but like a little lost lamb who has yet to see the way.

How progressively condescending!

Posted by on 01/13 at 02:57 PM
Okay: I’ve already said a couple of times that I was JOKING about there not being any gay people in New Jersey. Now I’m going to say it again: I fully admit that there are probably MANY GLBT people in Jersey, and in every smalltown, white-picket-fence town in the whole U.S.A.

As for peoples’ observations that women are expected to “play nice” rather than be overtly aggressive or obnoxious, I agree. That’s part of what I like about blogging: people don’t assume I’m a girl, and so I can be as much of a rude jerk as the men on the blog. But as we have seen, women can also be pretty rude and hostile. I think this is partly the medium: you say stuff online that you would be way too embarrassed to say to people in person.

On my “Be nice to rubes” policy: If someone says something that offends you, you can politely say, “Look, you probably didn’t mean to hurt my feelings when you made that remark about fags, but I happen to be gay and it bothered me.” Or you can say: “Remember when you called me ‘perky’ earlier today? WI didn’t want to say anything at the time, but I found that a little sexist. Could you please not call me that anymore?” People will probably be embarrassed when you point those things out in a nice way, but it’s unlikely they will do it again. Unless they are true jerks, in which case it is okay to be rude.

Posted by on 01/13 at 03:17 PM
NYU Student, Man what a MORON! I’m shocked at NYU for even accepting you!

Posted by on 01/13 at 04:06 PM
Last one who contributes to this “how to deal with offense” thread loses. Don’t let it be you!

Oh, and don’t forget this blog’s policy regarding certain common epithets.

Posted by Michael on 01/13 at 04:18 PM
This is what I mean about politeness. I would be so much more inclined to respect your opinion if you said something substantial. Calling me a moron doesn’t say anything specific; could you at least explain *why* you think I’m a moron?

I think I have some good ideas that people just don’t seem to appreciate. I am simply too far ahead of my time.

Posted by on 01/13 at 04:26 PM
Oh, and don’t forget this blog’s policy regarding certain common epithets.

Oh. Right. I suppose I had better start scrambling for a new moniker.*

* Cavaet lector: extremely dull rationale for standard epithet begins now. I once called out someone as a racist on a thread on the basis of some comments the person has left elsewhere. But I had the wrong man. So the “Idiot” thing got self-added, both to remind me to watch my j’accuse moments more carefully and, as it turns out, to separate my online friends from my enemies: friends call me “Karl”; enemies invariably make a scurrilous reference along the lines of our friend up there who wrote “I know your name suggests you would not get such a joke.” I’d love an epithet that’s similarly useful, but I suppose that’s my job.

Posted by on 01/13 at 07:02 PM
Okay, okay, 96 Tears isn’t a Talking Heads song. But it could have been, except for maybe the lyrics.
```
Uh-ninety-six tears    cry cry cry
C'mon baby, let me hear you cry now, all night long
Uh-ninety-six tears!  Yeah!  C'mon now
Uh-ninety-six tears!

[fade]
```
Posted by on 01/13 at 09:14 PM
Upon hearing of Ann Neal’s argument, my father pointed out that it’s analogous to Ernie’s proof of the efficacy of keeping a banana in his ear. But the folks at TU are, understandably, scrambling to refute it nonetheless. There’s plenty of evidence that a) Students are not afraid to complain and b) When offered an opportunity to complain anonymously, students very rarely claim that they were not free to express their views in the classroom.

Posted by on 01/13 at 10:06 PM
Here is South Carolina we don’t need Horowitz to out the “liberals,” we have the Speaker of the SC House of Reps to do it, see: this.

Posted by Ann Bartow on 01/14 at 01:59 PM
King’s Lead Hat!

Posted by on 01/14 at 05:23 PM
To be fair, in my days as a Cultural Anthropology student, I did notice a pretty stark leftward lean in my profs. One explained the term ‘oxymoron’ by first stating that it did not refer to President Ronnie hyperventilating. On the other hand, discussion was civil and polite, and at least one prof let Orthodox Marxists (the bane of his student days at Berkeley) have it harder than Ronbo & Co.
The only times I myself had a problem was when I stood up for the sciences as being a bit more than ‘privileged discouse’ a la Sokol’s parody, and even then the arguments were enjoyable rather than intimidating.
Lefties end up in the social sciences and humanities, where they wear corduroy, read a lot and don’t make much money. Righties end up in Engineering, business, economics and a few in history, where for the most part they can make money. Film at 11.
At the same time, intimidation of students over political differences is not something I’ve ever encountered or even heard of until this recent nonsense from Horowitz et al.

Posted by on 01/19 at 11:05 AM

Next entry: Open letter on the NYU strike

Previous entry: The view from West 4th Street

<< Back to main

Indoctrinate U.

About Michael Bérubé

Monthly Archives

Most recent entries

Syndicate