One of our previous posters today sent the Real Sporer into some background research on recent stories about liberal bias in education.
I started with today’s Des Moines Register story about a lunatic that “teaches” geography at DMACC. Apparently one James Hufferd has founded a group in Des Moines that is dedicated to proving 9.11 was an inside job designed to give W a pretext to invade Iraq. Apparently Mr. Hufferd distributes literature promoting this lunatic theory to the 18-20 year olds who predominantly populate his classes. I feel less value for my children’s education at DMACC. After reading the article, however, I have two far greater concerns.
First, Hufferd is clearly depicted as a hero, and quite possibly a mainstream if not conservative hero. Even the one source who was critical of Hufferd’s lunatic theory described Hefferd and those who are dedicated to uncovering the truth about 9.11 as having “their hearts” in “the right place”.
No, their hearts are not in the right place. Unlike the JFK, Waco and Ruby Ridge conspiracy theories, none of which should ever have received the imprimatur of academic approval, this nonsense involves degrading public morale in the moral righteousness of our war against Islamic terrorism and its fascist benefactors. No credible expert was sited in the article regarding the events of 9.11 or the simple engineering facts that easily refute the premises of the conspiracy theories. Even the need for such expert testimony assumes that one has already accepted the premise that George W. Bush would murder thousands of Americans to set in motion a war against Iraq, so that he could amuse himself through the death of young Americans. Remember, traitors in every generation proclaim a patriotic motive and argues that it is they whose actions help their country. How did Abe Lincoln deal with the Hufferd's of the world?
Second, the article discloses the further depth of the leftist hatred of the President. The only other critics cited in the article believe that Hufferd is right but not focusing on other reasons to impeach the President. Hufferd is viewed as excessively conservative to this faction of the Democrat party. These people are undoubtedly among the 20% of the Democrat voters who want to see the United States defeated in Iraq.
I began thinking of some other recent academic issues in the Des Moines area. First in mind is Iowa State’s recent employment as University Provost of Elizabeth Hoffman who, in her previous position ratified Ward Churchill’s description of the 9.11 victims as “little Eichmann’s” who deserved what they got. I wonder if academic freedom would protect the teaching of some other, less intellecutally chic? For example, does anyone think that any major university would protect the rights of a professor David Duke who opined every black lynching victim deserved it in his class room presentation? Of course not!
The university that employed the maker of either statement is not obligated to “employ” teachers who engage in academic misconduct. Use of an academic forum to spew any deviation of mentality as if it were valid-because no one present can actually refute the professor now can they-is precisely the kind of academic misconduct for which teachers of any kind can be fired. Churchill has a right to say whatever he wants; he does not have the right to a job furnished by the taxpayers of the country he hates. A private school that isn’t taking tax dollars is certainly free to employ guys like Churchill and Hufferd, just like they‘re free to hire academic proponents of institutional racism and segregation.
My mind then drifted back to DM Roosevelt’s administration attempting to censor pro-life T-shirts (‘cause God knows we wouldn’t want liberal girls to think abortion was a “bad” thing, would we). Although survey's show about half of Americans are pro-life the Roosevelt Administration thought pro-life T-shirts are dangerously provocative.
I started with today’s Des Moines Register story about a lunatic that “teaches” geography at DMACC. Apparently one James Hufferd has founded a group in Des Moines that is dedicated to proving 9.11 was an inside job designed to give W a pretext to invade Iraq. Apparently Mr. Hufferd distributes literature promoting this lunatic theory to the 18-20 year olds who predominantly populate his classes. I feel less value for my children’s education at DMACC. After reading the article, however, I have two far greater concerns.
First, Hufferd is clearly depicted as a hero, and quite possibly a mainstream if not conservative hero. Even the one source who was critical of Hufferd’s lunatic theory described Hefferd and those who are dedicated to uncovering the truth about 9.11 as having “their hearts” in “the right place”.
No, their hearts are not in the right place. Unlike the JFK, Waco and Ruby Ridge conspiracy theories, none of which should ever have received the imprimatur of academic approval, this nonsense involves degrading public morale in the moral righteousness of our war against Islamic terrorism and its fascist benefactors. No credible expert was sited in the article regarding the events of 9.11 or the simple engineering facts that easily refute the premises of the conspiracy theories. Even the need for such expert testimony assumes that one has already accepted the premise that George W. Bush would murder thousands of Americans to set in motion a war against Iraq, so that he could amuse himself through the death of young Americans. Remember, traitors in every generation proclaim a patriotic motive and argues that it is they whose actions help their country. How did Abe Lincoln deal with the Hufferd's of the world?
Second, the article discloses the further depth of the leftist hatred of the President. The only other critics cited in the article believe that Hufferd is right but not focusing on other reasons to impeach the President. Hufferd is viewed as excessively conservative to this faction of the Democrat party. These people are undoubtedly among the 20% of the Democrat voters who want to see the United States defeated in Iraq.
I began thinking of some other recent academic issues in the Des Moines area. First in mind is Iowa State’s recent employment as University Provost of Elizabeth Hoffman who, in her previous position ratified Ward Churchill’s description of the 9.11 victims as “little Eichmann’s” who deserved what they got. I wonder if academic freedom would protect the teaching of some other, less intellecutally chic? For example, does anyone think that any major university would protect the rights of a professor David Duke who opined every black lynching victim deserved it in his class room presentation? Of course not!
The university that employed the maker of either statement is not obligated to “employ” teachers who engage in academic misconduct. Use of an academic forum to spew any deviation of mentality as if it were valid-because no one present can actually refute the professor now can they-is precisely the kind of academic misconduct for which teachers of any kind can be fired. Churchill has a right to say whatever he wants; he does not have the right to a job furnished by the taxpayers of the country he hates. A private school that isn’t taking tax dollars is certainly free to employ guys like Churchill and Hufferd, just like they‘re free to hire academic proponents of institutional racism and segregation.
My mind then drifted back to DM Roosevelt’s administration attempting to censor pro-life T-shirts (‘cause God knows we wouldn’t want liberal girls to think abortion was a “bad” thing, would we). Although survey's show about half of Americans are pro-life the Roosevelt Administration thought pro-life T-shirts are dangerously provocative.
These stories of liberal bias in the schools are far too numerous to be mere coincidence. Feel free to share your stories of academic bias. Remember it was Joseph Goebbels who said: “today the children, tomorrow the world” Think about the next time you vote or don’t in a school board election.
12 comments:
When you toss in the embarrassment of the U of I anti-diversity policy with respect to history professors, you really have to hang your head in shame as to what has become of Iowa - Best Education in the Nation.
They've destroyed it here too folks. It's not just the East Coast and West Coast thing anymore.
Was Joe working for the Kerry campaign in the summer of 2003 when he penned his NY Times op-ed? The Boston Globe said so, and Joe admitted as much on NBC News, but that factoid eluded Ms. Plame and her publisher.
Trouble In Paradise - apparently, Valerie forgot to mention to Old Joe that she had written a memo promoting him for the trip; when the Senate Intel report panned Wilson in July 2004 he was furious and felt (somewhat understandably) that the memo undercut his claim that his wife had no involvement in his Niger trip.
Oops!
hmmm... how does she explains her leave of absence in June 2004, and if Joe was never affiliated with the Kerry campaign in her telling, how does he somehow become unaffiliated?
http://www.thenation.com/docprint.mhtml?i=20071105&s=baker_federman
from the November 5, 2007 issue
In the Clintons' pursuit of power, there is no such thing as a strange bedfellow.
One recently exposed inamorata was Norman Hsu, the mysterious businessman from Hong Kong who brought in $850,000 to Hillary Clinton's campaign before being unmasked as a fugitive.
Her campaign dismissed Hsu as someone who'd slipped through the cracks of an otherwise unimpeachable system for vetting donors, and perhaps he was.
The same cannot be said for the notorious financier Alan Quasha, whose involvement with Clinton is at least as substantial--and still under wraps.
Quack Klein is so good, he already won the election in an off year see his website: http://klein4change.in2006.us
That bitch is just that good.
because, it's as funny as Quack Klein on a ballot anywhere...
I was running the half-marathon in DM on Sunday. In Waterworks Park there was a young lady holding a sign "9/11 was an inside job." - That was pretty strange. As much as I dislike W, Cheney & co, I did not get any extra energy from the sign.
The problem, as with Waco and Ruby Ridge in the prior administration but particularly when a Republican is the target, so much of the media and political elite give these lunatics implicit, or at times (howard dean floating the theory) explicit credibility.
It would be nice for a big D candidate, like Hillary who has herself been a victim of this nonsense, to call these people out and smack 'em in the head.
Still waiting on Iowa Liberal...
In case anyone still reads this particular twaddle, I, Dr. James Hufferd, DMACC instructor and founder of 91 Truth of Central Iowa, would like to add my own comment. First, I am appalled by the apparent barnyard and priapism-level mentalities of the abysmal sluggards who seem to be the readers of this dullard's blog, since they have posted the comments. Talk about unfit for educational use!! Second, I'd like to inform y'all that the orchestration and carrying out of the 9/11 crimes not by Bush, the mere figurehead and titular leader of the treasonous group, but by neocon moles controlling all of the principal agencies involved, is essentially CERTAIN and PROVEN by OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE of various kinds. So, until you have summonsed the courage and decency of viewing films such as LOOSE CHANGE and a number of others likewise readily and cheaply available on the Internets, in order to absorb the prosecution's case and evidence, you are UNFIT to take any part in the jury of citizens judging the case, SO, SHUT YOUR BLOODY GOBS until such time as you HAVE confronted the evidence, with an open mind if you can find one! And, no, I don't pass out propaganda to my students.
As a recent 30 year old Master's level student in a DMACC class taught by Dr. Hufferd, let me say his politics NEVER entered the classroom. While doing a search on his work I came upon your site. You should really stop name calling...even though it is your right as an American as it is his to protest...
Post a Comment