Learn the difference between fact, fiction (Article from SU professor that needs FReeping)

I read an editorial in today's local newspaper that has me absolutely livid. It's from a Syracuse University professor - a preofessor of political philosphy no less - and it ticked me off enough that I had to write back to him and respond, especially after reading his last paragraph I also responded to SU's alumnist society as well as to the Dean.

"I was utterly discouraged by Suzanne Fields' Nov. 8 column. I am, presumably, one of the liberals that she rails against.

If she would just stand back and look at herself in the mirror, she would find that the way she writes is the mirror image of the worst that is written by the most extreme and angry of the liberals that she denounces.

In her account, there is no objectivity in their analysis; alas, the same is true of her own remarks and arguments. The right is unquestionably right, and the liberals are unquestionably and utterly wrong. No mention of the lies propagated by the Swift Boat people; only a condemnation of the Rather report.

No mention of the extraordinary bias of Fox News and many other conservative commentators; just a dismissal of those who took the other side. I would suppose that the Times Union is one of the offenders.

I compliment you, then, for publishing her diatribe. She has no insight at all into the complex matter of different conceptions of moral values that have and will continue to be maintained in our society.

On her account, the conservatives have a lock on "the values of common sense that underwrite traditions that have undergirded Judeo-Christian moral codes for centuries." Since my own area of specialty is moral theory, I find this claim on her part particularly ridiculous and offensive.

Again, does she really think that the position a (bare!) majority took on Nov. 2 defines the political culture of our time? Does she really think that a very small plurality is a "ringing vote" for the Bush position? Does she really think that a small majority of people believing that there is a clear connection between Iraq and bin Laden, and that there were WMDs in Iraq, testifies to the "vast reservoir of American common sense," rather than to a disturbing and tragic ignorance on their part?

Perhaps she should return to school and learn something about how to appraise evidence and sort out truth from falsehood. My classes are open -- but only to those with open minds.

Here is my response that I emailed this morning to the Professor and cc'd the Alumnist Foundation and the Chancellor:

Dear Mr. McClennen:

After reading your Letter to the Editor this morning, I find myself a litle bit stunned to say the least. I find it disturbing that you ended your letter with, an I quote: "Perhaps she [Suzaane Fields] should return to school and learn something about how to appraise evidence ans sort out the truth from falsehood. My classes are open - but only to those with an open mind."

Reread that quote - those are your words. Do you really mean that? Your classes are open, but only to those with an open mind???? If that is so, then you would barred from attending your own class as it is clear from your lengthy article (and from the snippets of articles you have on the internet) that your mind is closed to any political philosophy or discourse other than your own. You have become blind to the hatred from the left, and this hatred - from both sides - has the potential to tear our nation apart.

I am not blind to this, and many other voters are not blind either. You may be surprised to hear this, being that most academic elites such as yourself probably don't mingle much with us "common folks," but one of the reasons for which Bush won with a plurality of the vote and by a margin of over a 3.7 million is that many who voted were simply TIRED of the crap that was being slung back and forth, and in the final assessment in the voting booth, they decided to vote for the more credible and grounded of the two candidates. I realize that this scenario must be sending shockwaves through you right now, but here in the "grass roots" of upstate NY - yes, upstate NY - this is how it happened. Just imagine what it was like elsewhere...

By the way, you mentioned that the public is "ignorant" in thinking that Iraq possessed WMD and in thinking that Bin Laden was tied to Iraq. FACT: WMD had and USED WMD's. FACT: Every single intelligence agency in the world, including France and Germany, stated that Iraq had WMD. FACT: A Bin Laden lieutenant setup shop in Iraq several years BEFORE the war even started, and this same lieutenant is now the leader of the insurgency. FACT: There have been no successful attacks in the US since 9/11. Let me ask you this: Being that you seem to be versed on our nation's intelligence assets, if Iraq had used WMD on us or sold them to any terrorist group, would you be screaming that this administration then failed to act?

See, in the end result, your mind is actually the one that is closed. You condemn this administration no matter the circumstance or outcome. Us "grass roots folks" see and understand this. Would you have also condemned FDR for Operation Market Garden or for our allegiance with the Russians?

If you wish to conduct more successful classes for your students, may I suggest that you take some of your own advice and have an open mind as well. Otherwise, all you are really doing is tailoring your political philosophy classes to those who agree with you while simultaneously alienating those who disagree with you (or at least see other possibilities). That, my friend, is the true tragedy. Is that what the educational process is all about? I sincerely hope not.

Signed,

Name...

An SU alumnist...

I graduated from SU a few years ago. The place is absolutely swarming with liberals. If I remember correctly, Nader received more votes than Bush at the on-campus polling areas in the 2000 election. Every one of my professors either oozed liberal stench, or were apolitical - probably out of fear of retribution (my coach was a hard-core republican though!) And the activist students were the worst, they would harass you and make an example of you if they disagreed with your politics. An whenever they raised a fit about something, the administration would always put together a task force to address their concerns, instead of telling them to shut the hell up. There's also a very high concentration of Jews here, and you think common sense would prevail with them, but no.

Every few months I get another request for money, but I'll be damned if I give one cent to them until I see some changes made.

No mention of the lies propagated by the Swift Boat people;

The good professor argues from definition - he defines the claims of the SBVT as being lies just as "objective journalists" do. Saves the hard work of actually debating Paul O'Neil, when he is testifying from firsthand experience and is referring to facts which have been open public knowledge since 1971.

only a condemnation of the Rather report.

Now why would anyone condemn a report which was based on nothing more than transparent forgeries?

No mention of the extraordinary bias of Fox News and many other conservative commentators; just a dismissal of those who took the other side.

Since you are an expert on moral reasoning, professor, perhaps you would like to explain why you think that journalism should be objective. Wouldn't being "objective" imply being wise? And if we are required to accept claims of wisdom, are we not then placed in the position of children listening to their minders rather than being intelligent adults?
Perhaps thinking adults decline to be patronized in that way, professor - and if so, attempting to define away their objections will not carry the day at the voting booth. In which case your main hope would be vote fraud. Typical Democrat.

The media as well as the university elite are in the process of writing our history as we speak.

As long as they keep saying things like "the Swift Boat Vets have been thoroughly debunked" and "the Swifties are proven liars" over and over again, they belive it will become a fact.

That way, years from now, they will be able to put a paragraph in the history books that looks like this:

"During the highly contested 2004 election, a Republican backed 527 group called the Swift Boat Veterans for the Truth tried to discredit the Highly Decorated war Hero, Senator John Kerry who was running for President under the Democratic ticket. They were thoroughly discredited."

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.