Perfect Storm
So what do you do when several anomalies strike your blog at the same time creating unmitigated havoc? Well...
So here's the scoop. For some unknown reason, my Project 2996 tribute article to Neil Shastri (dated 9/9/06) has been getting pounded in recent days by "visitors" with links to porn sites. No less than 25 in the last (2) days alone. Don't ask me why. It's an old article. They're almost certainly being auto-generated. So why they're directed to this article is beyond me. But it was getting annoying having to go in and delete all those bogus comments.
Secondly, a certain Ms. Judy Bennington-Dykes, who teaches English Composition (of all things) at the University of West Florida, directed her students to come visit my humble blog strictly for the purposes of antagonizing me (or so it would seem). According to one "Kelly L" whose comment I really appreciated...
The reason you are seeing so many anti-war comments is because Ms. Benny has many more anti-war students this year (trust me, I know) and you were a suggested pro-war blog for all the anti-war students. (Isn't it great to be popular?) All the pro-war students are off somewhere posting on the anti-war blogs.
Thanks Kelly. It would have been nice if Ms. Benny had given me some kind of warning herself before she turned loose the "dogs of anti-war". So, it seems then that "Ms. Benny" is a real "MIXER", eh? She sends her "anti-war" students to "pro-war" blogs, and conversely, she sends "pro-war" students to "anti-war" blogs. Just to stir things up I guess. Gee, well thanks Ms. Benny... NOT!
[EDITOR'S NOTE: By the way, I don't consider myself "pro-war". I am not in favor of war for the sake of war. I consider myself to be anti-terror, anti-mass murderer, anti-totalitarian, anti-Islamofascist, pro-democracy, pro-security, and pro-American.]
I didn't mind it so much at first. So what if a few anti-war protesters register their disagreements at my blog. No big deal. No problem. But then it started to get REALLY boring. I kept hearing the same thing over and over again, like these kids are some kind of automatons... "The U.S. is not the world's police. Iraq is not our responsibility. It's not our problem. Leave it to the Iraqis. Leave it to the UN"... ad nauseum. If you don't believe me, read through some of the comments at my article "26 Reasons For Staying In Iraq". After a while, it gets mind-numbing (no reflection on "Mind-Numbed Kid").
Then, the vulgarities started. And that was the last straw. It's bad enough to have 50 some liberal students telling me how they disagree with me. It's another to have them throwing cuss words around.
So, what's a fella to do...? Well, I turned on Comment Moderation of course. Sorry about that folks. I know it's a real pain in the neck, but (as they say)... this too shall pass. Hopefully the sunshine will return when the storm has passed.
And if you're really up for a "treat", consider Ms. Benny's curriculum for English Composition...
TAKE-HOME WRITING ASSIGNMENT #1 -- In not less than 250 words, write about why you agree or disagree with the following statement: America is the greatest country in the world.
TAKE-HOME WRITING ASSIGNMENT #2 -- In not less than 250 words, write about why you agree or disagree with the following statement: Sadam Hussein was complicit in planning and/or financing 911, and he manufactured and hid weapons of mass destruction; therefore, the Iraq War was an essential action of combating the War on Terror.
TAKE-HOME WRITING ASSIGNMENT #3 -- In not less than 250 words, write about why you agree or disagree with the following statement: It is no longer disputed that there were no weapons of mass destruction, so was the Iraq War based on an assumption? If not, then explain why, and cite at least two (2) quotes from the alternate source (other than the NOW program) that informs your claim.
TAKE-HOME WRITING ASSIGNMENT #4 -- In not less than 250 words, write [about] why the reasons the Bush Administration has given as justification for the Iraq War are valid or not valid to you. If you believe the reasons the American public has been given for the war are valid, then cite at least two (2) quotes from the alternate source (other than "16 Words") that informs your claim.
TAKE-HOME WRITING ASSIGNMENT #5 -- You need to really put some time into this writing assignment, as this one is crucial to developing the seeds of your Annotated Bibliography and your Academic Research Paper. I want you to write an argument that is either for or against the Iraq War.
Interestingly enough, according to Kelly L...
Ms. Benny is definitely anti-war, and isn't afraid to show it...
Hmmm. That got me thinking. Which position on the war do you think the "suck-ups" will take? But according to Kelly...
you don't have to agree with her to get a good grade. We had this discussion in class because of the many misunderstandings. I am a pro-war student... I've been getting A's now due to the fact that I got rid of the stupid mistakes that made my argument weaker, not because I changed my standpoint. I wouldn't have, even if it meant my grade.
Way to go Kelly! Stand up for what you believe in. And good luck. Keep up the hard work and best wishes for your success in college and in life.
Oh, and thanks everybody for "Viewing"...
UPDATE: Things seem to have settled down so Comment Moderation has been turned off as of November 7th at 7:10 PM.
posted by Hawkeye® -- Monday, November 05, 2007
25 Comments
25 Comments:
The fact of the matter is that you can't seem to fathom a teacher being thoughtful enough to express her own opinions and still let those that disagree express theirs. To truly understand how to argue in the public forum is an asset to a student and a citizen in the United States. Many don't know how to strengthen their argument and end up leaving holes. The truth is that if you had a solid argument for staying in Iraq and backed it up with data no one would be able to argue with you. Attacks and obscenities are immature whether you are pro-war or anti-war and so, I do not justify the responses that were as such. Let me tell you that a student found your blog not Ms Benny. After finding your blog, seeing as pro-war blogs are in the minority, the student passed the information on to Ms. Benny in order to help other students. For people like Kelly, who are pro-war, this class is an important tool to keep the right-wing conservative voice heard with eloquence and intelligence. Without people learning how to effectively argue and thus being heard and trusted, the pro-war conservatives are a dying breed. Take this from someone who believes all voices should be heard and NOT with any slander!
Amanda, Oh!,
You said... "The fact of the matter is that you can't seem to fathom a teacher being thoughtful enough to express her own opinions and still let those that disagree express theirs." And you're correct Amanda... it's a rarity. Far too often do I hear of blatant liberal propaganda being passed off as education in the classroom. In fact, you might want to check out THIS. [By the way, the generic teacher you speak of could be a "her" or a "him"].
"The truth is that if you had a solid argument for staying in Iraq and backed it up with data no one would be able to argue with you." And now you're WRONG Amanda... because if someone wants to argue, they will do so even in the face of facts. People who want to argue will not face facts. And I laid out facts. I cited sources from the Internet... and your friends still argued... in the face of facts. I have plenty of solid arguments for staying in Iraq but there are a lot of people who close their eyes and ears to the truth, because they don't LIKE the truth.
By the way, I'm impressed that you seem to have a lock on "The fact of the matter..." and "The truth..." Good for you. Just keep telling people that, and maybe someday it will come true.
"pro-war conservatives are a dying breed"... Oh really? I guess you don't get out very much do you? Or, do you just happen to think that because you are young and "coming up" in the world, that everybody who doesn't agree with you is "a dying breed"? If you want a list of conservative web sites that are very much "ALIVE", I will be happy to provide one.
Oh, and thank you for your kind words... I'm glad to "keep the right-wing conservative voice heard with eloquence and intelligence".
I use the other method...only registered commenters need apply.
And the fact of the matter, A.K.A. truth? The human race is a dying breed; we are all born to die. It is in our "three score and ten" (give or take) that we learn, live and love...
It's interesting that admitted liberal school teachers feel it's alright to regale their students with their personal ideology in the classroom. If traditional/conservative teachers were as heavy-handed as many liberal teachers are, their jobs would be imperiled.
My son Josh is presently attending the U of I as a junior and in his communications and sociology class his professors are virulent leftists. They feel its their social obligation to force their personal propaganda down the throats of their students in the name of "progressivism". Of course these classes have become little more than re-education camps. Just a warning to Ms. Benny's students if they plan on a "higher education".
Despite how noble these teachers and professors believe their personal agenda to be, it's the height of unprofessionalism to so thoroughly demonize conservatives (their daily anti-conservative, hate-Bush harangues as so rabid it borders on the comical) and to be such "anti-authoritarians". And the irony is these teachers/professors end up creating their own "establishment", a leftist neo-orthodoxy of thought as it were.
And if as many teachers and professors claim, students are suppose to question authority then I would say the most noble effort is to question the teacher/professor 24/7 and make them back up their statements with independent documentation which doesn't resort to the typical left-wing "scholarship" that is poisoning our schools. I would encourage all the students in Ms. Benny's class to use the Internet to find alternative sources of information and historical documentation which is often ignored by those liberal "scholars" invariably cited by liberal educators.
To me that is real "critical thinking", making the teacher validate their sources or at least reveal the ideology of the authors of the material they cite. One often finds, as I did, these "scholars" have a long history of being left-wing revisionists or at least committed to the cause of undermining traditional western civilization. And it's a pretty sure bet they're virulent anti-capitalists ... just like the Nazis and Communists.
Often, behind the fig leaf of "diversity of thought", we do see conservative students being allowed to freely voice their opinions in the classroom - yip, yip, yahoo - but invariably the more conservative/traditional students are the ones being challenged by the teacher while the comments and opinions of liberal students are rarely challenged or amended. And remember, these liberal teachers always have the last word ... or haven't you noticed? And I would like to hear from a Ms. Benny student the last time she offered pointed criticisms of any liberal icon past or present or criticisms of the shortcomings of the liberal ideology itself. I bet it isn't happening ... and this in a classroom of inquiry!
Now maybe Ms. Benny is an exception, or maybe her more liberal students who are enamored with her ideology are providing cover for her here, I don't know, but I do know liberals and radical leftists have few qualms about espousing their liberal agenda in the classroom, having personally experienced this nearly thirty-five years ago in the history department of a major Texas university. The scourge of liberal secular humanism was raising its head even then!
BTW, notice how it's always "pro-war" conservatives or "right-wing" conservatives? I consider myself an independent, a little L libertarian, and have been appalled by the faux altruism of people on the liberal side of the aisle who complain about "name calling", "personal attacks", and "obscenities". Conservatives (who actually represent old school liberal principles which founded this country - our unalienable rights being a gift of God, the right to private ownership, the right to defend oneself with a weapon of their choice, freedom of religion, limited government, etc.) are always identified by these "open-minded" liberals as "pro-war", "right-wing", "neo-cons", blah, blah, blah. These people are clearly living in ivory towers and often don't see their own biases because as "progressives" they've blinded themselves to the prospect that they may actually be closed-minded bigots themselves. They've become mesmerized with their own clever rhetoric which papers over their intolerance and ideologically-based ignorance.
One can forgive conservatives for being opinionated and dogmatic because even liberals admit its conservatives' nature to be so, but for "enlightened" liberals who claim to be "open-minded", "tolerant", and having a willingness to "respect all opinions", so what's their excuse for their subtle ad hominem attacks and anti-conservative strawman arguments? I see no "respect" or "tolerance" there because liberals always have to have the last word when debating conservatives.
It's precisely that kind of hypocrisy which galls me to no end. At least conservatives are honest about making value judgments, and judgments they are, but liberals are loath to admit they are engaging in such judgments themselves. In the real world there is a certain exclusivity to liberal's "inclusiveness", is there not? Another hypocrisy that is uniquely liberal.
Camo & Hank,
Thanks for your comments.
Hawkeye, don't you find it strange that those on the other side of the aisle who have long mocked the concept of universal truth or the concept of right versus wrong now are the most dogmatic people about how they've found THE TRUTH (or another conspiracy theory) or how wrong conservatives are and how Bush is Hitler and pure evil?
In a sense the radical left has become the very thing they've long hated ... a people who claim to have a corner on the truth and everyone else is wrong. Of course they dress their statements up with faux studies and questionable scholarship to create their "truthiness".
You would think on the basis of their own enlightenment they wouldn't ever engage in such I'm-right-you're-wrong rhetoric, but finally the chickens have come home to roost and now in the crucible of the conflict in which this nation finds itself, we are witnessing the mask being stripped off these "progressives" and see them as being little more than budding Stalinists, biding their time until they can monopolize our system of government through their smoke-screen of obfuscation, waiting for the perfect time to railroad their legislation through a Democrat-controlled government thus subjugating the entire country to their destructive socialist way of thinking.
And there is no "thinking" more egregious than how the "progressive" liberals have begun to define their compassion through the pocketbooks of others. Simply put, liberals have become very adept at spending other people's money on their pet social programs. What better way to burnish ones image and to buy future votes than to rob from Peter to give to Paul, Mary, Pedro, Takisha etc? What a racket! An entire political party has discovered it can buy itself voters-for-life by putting them on the government dole - all in the name of compassion! And that's precisely why the federal government should never be in the business of charity. That's why when Jesus was asked how the 5000 should be fed He said, "You feed them" and not, "Get Caesar to feed them."
Charity should begin at home and stay in the local community. Government charity is a very dangerous and corrosive concept which will soon destroy this constitutional republic - to the delight of many leftists and liberals I'm sure.
Hank,
Good comments. Yes, the many double standards held among liberals is simply unbelievable...
-We cannot put criminals to death because that would be murder... but it's OK to slaughter millions of yet unborn children because that is not murder, but choice.
-Women must have the right to choose... but parents don't have the right to get vouchers so they can choose where to send their kids to school.
-We must be tolerant of other religions and cultures... but we have no tolerance for Christians and Jews or Republicans and Conservatives.
-We cannot have a moment of silence in school because that is tantamount to prayer... yet, we must provide prayer rooms and foot washing facilities for Muslims.
-We must be charitable and insure that the poor and downtrodden are cared for... but don't take my money, get it from those rich guys.
-We must all be prepared to reduce our carbon footprint for the good of the planet... Excuse me while I board my private plane for a return trip to my mansion which consumes 100 times the average amount of household energy.
-We must protect our soldiers who volunteered for military service from seeing combat, and we must stop spending money on the war in Iraq... because we need that money for Homeland Security, so we can defend ourselves here on our own soil.
-It was wrong to go into Iraq... Saddam Hussein was really no threat. In fact... he was a nice guy who only killed a couple of million people, invaded his neighbors, created an environmental crisis by setting the oil wells on fire, had & used WMDs.
-There were no WMDs in Iraq... those 500+ shells with still viable chemical weapons?... they were old so they don't count. Those illegal long-range missiles?... they don't count either. That 500 tons of uranium they found?... doesn't count. That 1.8 tons of uranium enriched enough to make fuel rods for a nuclear reactor?... doesn't count. Plans for a centrifuge?... doesn't count.
-Bush is worse than Hitler... but Hugo Chavez is a nice guy - he only closes newspapers that disagree with him. Ahmadinejad is a nice guy too - he only wants to wipe Israel off the map. Putin is a nice guy too - he only knocks off his political enemies.
-The oil companies are making too much money, so we must impose a windfall profits tax... but we demand low gasoline prices!
-We want alternative forms of energy like bio-fuels... but we don't like the high price of food when farmers sell all their crops to bio-fuel manufacturers.
-We want energy independence... but don't drill in ANWR, or off the coast of my state.
-We want clean energy with low CO2 emissions... but we don't want nuclear power.
I could go on, but you get the picture.
/rant off
Hey guys,
I have enjoyed reading your banter on my comment... I have had my own ideology for some time now, long before I decided to take this class. Your right, I am up and coming, but I am also an older student that is very much aware of her surroundings and the problems in the world like the belief that right and wrong is a universal truth. You are sadly mistaken. The idea of right and wrong might be common among many different cultures, but what they believe to be right and wrong are not. Do you think our (and I use that term loosely) beliefs, ethics, and morals are the one right way? That is an elitist attitude which got us in to this war in the first place! Lets try to learn from our mistakes as a country, not to mention others' mistakes as well. Like a doctor or a nurse needs classes to stay up to date...you might consider taking a few Anthropology courses. It would benefit you greatly. Oh, by the way you must have misunderstood the kind words of eloquence and intelligence, they were for Kelly! You will be happy to know that I will no longer be viewing this blog due to the fact it is useless to try to make you see a side other than your own. Lets try to be objective gentlemen!
Hawkeye®,
Take it as a compliment! You must be effective or they wouldn't bother...
Amanda, Oh!,
I'm sorry if we offended you. Please don't be angry with us. Be angry with Ms. Benny... she's the one who decided to throw you into the "lion's den" with the likes of us "mean old conservatives".
You are correct. Clearly there are different cultures and belief systems in the world. We recognize that. Not all people believe the same thing... that's pretty obvious. It doesn't take an anthropology course to know that. Besides... I've had sociology courses, and psychology courses, and honors history courses. Why, I'm even a trained counselor for a crisis helpline.
Yes, different people believe that different things are right and wrong. For example, Christians believe in non-violence (i.e., "turning the other cheek"). Jews believe in social justice (i.e., "an eye for eye, and a tooth for a tooth"). Islamofascists believe in jihad (i.e., "kill the infidels"). We are keenly aware of such differences, and they only reinforce our resolve to protect ourselves and point out such cultural differences to others.
You said, I must have misunderstood that the kind words of "eloquence and intelligence" were meant for Kelly and not for me. (Hee-hee!) I knew that. I was just teasing you. (:D)
You said, "You will be happy to know that I will no longer be viewing this blog due to the fact it is useless to try to make you see a side other than your own"... No, that's not true. I will NOT be happy at all if you leave - especially if you go away angry. I would like to think that the "View" brings a mix of information, opinion, and even a few laughs (I occasionally do a satire piece) to my few but cherished readers.
Besides, are you suggesting that you will only go to blogs where you can convince the blog author to change their opinions to match yours? That's kind of selfish isn't it? I mean... it is my blog. Should I change my views for everyone that comes by?
OK. Do what you want. If you insist on not coming back then I will just have to close up shop and shut down the whole blog... (Just kidding).
Feel free to come or go as you choose. I'll still be here spouting my stupid stuff. You've been a good sport Amanda Oh! And... God Bless.
Now I understand why I could not post under the firemen article.
I am sorry I hit your comment section 5,243 times.
I am also sorry I have little time today to offer an answer to the Amanda debate because I sure could rattle on about getting my journalism degree in the seat of liberalism--California.
Hawkeye and Hank,
You say that the college curriculum is filled with liberal professors who are forcing their political agenda on students - prove it! How can you say that is is a nationwide problem? BTW, Ms. Benny is one of the best teachers I have had. Not because I share the same political views, but because I have learned a great deal on constructive debate. Please get off your high horses and stop judging people you don't know.
BTW, I find it disturbing that you would post Ms. Benny's personal information (i.e. home address and phone number). You know damn well that there are messed up people on the internet blogasphere. That was extremely vindictive of you.
Stephen B.,
You say that the college curriculum is filled with liberal professors who are forcing their political agenda on students - prove it! How can you say that is is a nationwide problem?
Well, it's not only in colleges, but in high schools and K-12 as well. Prove it? OK. Go HERE, and...
HERE, and...
HERE, and...
HERE, and...
HERE, and...
HERE, and...
HERE, and...
HERE.
Stephen B.,
I forgot this one, which if you scroll down says specifically that this is a nationwide problem.
Anonymous,
BTW, I find it disturbing that you would post Ms. Benny's personal information (i.e. home address and phone number). You know damn well that there are messed up people on the internet blogasphere. That was extremely vindictive of you.
I wasn't trying be vindictive at all. I was simply trying to show my readers that this was indeed a real person, at a real university. There was no animosity at all on my part.
BTW, she came to my blog site and posted a rant against me saying that "The assumption that Hawkeye makes is that Iraqis are... stupid", which was in fact an assumption on her part (and an incorrect one at that). She said my statements were "imbued with imperialist jingoism that Iraqis are worth less than Amerians [sic]". She then cites an article as purportedly "the most recent Iraq death toll from the Washington Post", which was in fact a year old and contained data which has been thoroughly debunked.
Ms. Benny's rant on my blog contained a link to her profile which had a link to her blog. My logical assumption was that she was not afraid to reveal herself, otherwise she would have logged in as "Anonymous", or as "Benny" without the link to her profile.
Ms. Benny then directed all of her anti-war students to my blog (presumably to post anti-war comments), and without the courtesy of warning me.
If anyone is at fault here, it's Ms. Benny. You might suggest to her that I was offended: first by her rant, then by using her students as a proletarian army of thugs to bash her perceived bourgeoisie.
Finally, Ms. Benny's personal information is also public information. It's on the web. She has two choices: a) Post anonymously, or b) Don't post at all.
ohh look, another war hawk, neo con fool, complaining about academia.
If yer can't be smart enough to get into the field, might as well complain about it eh!?
so what is it neo-cons, there must be some vast left-wing conspiracy against conservatives entering academia? Who's stopping all you well reasoned (cough cough), cuckoos from strutting your stuff?
I have some painful news for yah all, and don't tell yer mothers about it, cause she might spank me, aight? There's a reason why you all aren't academics. Some of you can't even put two and two together and comprehend one simple fact. IRAQ IS MESS CREATED GREEDY WAR HAWKS - NO WMDS IN IRAQ. if you can't understand this concept, how are you all going to stand through a dissertation? Ohh and the tooth fairy doesn't exist either.
p.s - please accept my best attempt to dumb down the language here. Didn't wanna have to lose enough you in all that "academic talk".
George,
Thank you for doing a good job. Your rant does INDEED sound quite dumb.
Hawkeye,
Those links don't prove anything. First of all, 2 of the links were to the same site, and one link didn't work. So basically you have 6 links, and all they are is conservative propaganda. Universities are naturally liberal, because they open students' minds up to many different view points. If collegeges had a conservative agenda, students would only think one way, and there would be christian teachings, which violates separation of church and state. Yes, some teachers openly express their liberal political views, but so what? THIS IS COLLEGE. We are all adults, and we all make up our own minds. That is the great thing about freedom of speech. It is not like the students are forced to agree. I guess you would like to censor universities now, huh? Plus, I am sure you could find just as many articles on professors pushing their conservative agenda on students as well. But you chose to just look at one side. Typical neo-con thinking.
Stephen B,
You said, "Those links don't prove anything"...
OK. Then what WOULD prove something to you? All I need to know is the standard by which you will accept facts. The facts are there. Apparently you don't like them in the format which I presented them.
All I need to know then, is in what format would you like them? For example: Will facts that are presented in a scientific study be acceptable to you? Or do you want to see the results of a poll? Or are you one of those people who simply refuse to believe anything unless it comes from the mouth of an avowed liberal?
Awaiting your reply O wise sage.
P.S.-- And don't kid yourself Stephen. You are MORE one-sided than you accuse me of being. If you rejected those links because you think they are "conservative propaganda", then you are only fooling yourself. To be fair and balanced you need to hear both sides of the story. But apparently you don't believe in "diversity". Apparently you don't believe in "tolerance". Apparently you only listen to left-wing neo-lib propaganda. That's OK. Just admit it.
P.P.S.-- I challenge you to "find just as many articles on professors pushing their conservative agenda on students". I made a claim. It's your responsibility to counter my claims if you disagree with them. Besides... I bet you can't do it. Know why? Because academia is swamped with liberals. Maybe you've heard that old saying: "People who can't make it in the real world teach."
It is like I said before, Hawkeye: THIS IS COLLEGE. We are all adults, and we all make up our own minds. That is the great thing about freedom of speech. It is not like the students are forced to agree with the professor's opinions. So what is some teachers only talk about one point of view. It is not like we are little kids being brainwashed to believe one thing or another. We are young adults who are capable of critical thinking and deductive reasoning. We CAN decide on our own if we accept the teacher's beliefs or not.
Stephen B,
I used to be an "adult" once... now I'm just an old fart. Best wishes on your journey through life as you mature from "adulthood" to "fartitude". (:D)
Hankmeister,
Your argument is strong, but I disagree with your idea that propaganda is being forced down throats of students. Have you ever thought that it might actually just be the facts; that your afraid to accept. Ones assumption would be that propaganda is the real facts.
Champ,
Why would one's assumption be that "propaganda is the real facts".
From Wikipedia:
"Propaganda is a form of communication that is aimed at influencing the attitude of a community toward some cause or position.
As opposed to impartially providing information, propaganda, in its most basic sense, presents information primarily to influence an audience. Propaganda often presents facts selectively (thus possibly lying by omission) to encourage a particular synthesis, or uses loaded messages to produce an emotional rather than rational response to the information presented. The desired result is a change of the attitude toward the subject in the target audience to further a political agenda."
If school teachers or college professors present material in such a way that it affects the emotions of a student rather than stimulating a rational analysis of the subject at hand, then the outcome is propaganda. Any discussion of war must necessarily include the topics of death and destruction. But graphic photos or passionate descriptions of specific events tend toward the emotional category and should be avoided. War is bad. People die. Destruction happens. If you focus on it too much, you are not being rational.
Hawkeye,
Maybe thats how some teachers just teach. There showing their students how to construct a argument. Its not propaganda.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home