School forcing me to buy NY Times, what should I do? [vanity]

[sdk7x7]

I am currently a high school student at a public HS in New York State. This year (I'll be a senior), one of the requirements for my AP Gov't and Politics course is to pay a small student subscription fee for the NY Times. As a long-time reader of the Times, as well as a reader of TimesWatch.org and Coulter's SLANDER, I have recognized (and been disgusted by) the paper's clear liberal agenda.

The question is, what should I do? I am considering proposing to get USA Today or WSJ instead, but the former is not a great journalistic paper and the latter focuses more on financial issues than the news. The Wash Times would be a great option, but they don't offer daily delivery outside the DC area.

Any suggestions?

[SteveH]

I like posts 55, 56, and 89.

My experience in college has been that liberal teachers will fall into a sullen, non-verbal sulk mode when they have been boxed into a corner with logic. They don't like it and they view it generally as a challenge to their authority-- you will generally get a lower grade as a result if you are vocal in your skepticism of the liberal mindset.

I found when dealing with HS teacher types as an adult that they absolutely fear records of what they actually required and did in the class. If you want to survive academically, I think you will need to keep as much record as you can.

Remind them that it is [probably] in their charter that they have to refrain from supporting politics in their classes, and that whether or not they like it, the NYT is viewed as biased by many Americans, and they should always be open to accepting alternative sources of news and viewpoints. However, instead of suggesting that they come up with the alternative viewpoints, you need only ask them to give the alternative viewpoints equal time in class. Then-- you supply the alternative articles. If they don't copy them, either you commit to supplying copies (expensive) or else request that they provide you enough in-class time to stand and read the alternative articles that you supply. You want to attack their positions in public view only, with as hard a punch as possible. If you only put your views in written assignments and turn them in, expecting praise for your logic, you'll get steamrolled.

Taking a contrarian attitude in class is probably not recommended for most. I would make an exception, however, for those who are contemplating becoming a lawyer... Good luck...

[SteveH]

For one class in law school we were given the choice of NYT or Wall Street Journal. Many of us just subscribed to both.

Gosh, there's an idea for a constructive suggestion you can make to the school. Along with it, try telling them that getting the news from a single viewpoint can only hinder open discussion of ideas, while news from multiple viewpoints gives the opportunity to hone critical thinking and debating skills (which is among their goals too, right?)

[Paleo Conservative]

I would lean towards getting the paper, but supplementing the BS found there with alternative news sources. Use those sources to compare and contrast what the NY Slimes says while pointing out obvious and egregious bias on the paper's part at every opportunity. If nothing else, you will hone your disernment for bias and drive your teacher nuts at the same time.

Why pay for a subscription at all? You can read all the articles free off their website. All you have to do is use an email address for your identification, and it could be just some throw away address on hotmail that you don't use for anything else.

[Concentrate]

My best suggestion is to pick and choose among the NYPost editorial articles. Pick several good ones, copy them at your own expense (it will cost you no more than two dollars), and then pass them out to your classmates in class, just before the bell rings. There is no law against it, and your teacher will go bizzonkers. Do it regularly.

What could be more fun?

Trust me on this one.

You can't lose with the Daniel Pipes articles. And Michelle Malkine is sure to have your teacher a coronary.

Have fun!

[Concentrate]

August 20, 2003 -- THE first strategy employed by Iraqi dead- enders and their terror- tourist allies failed miserably: They attacked U.S. forces head-on - and paid a bitter price.
With their comrades killed, wounded or captured, their leaders apprehended (another one yesterday), their bases of support whittled away and U.S. resolve only hardened, our enemies have turned to a new, desperate strategy.

Over the past several days, the Iraqi hardliners and their terrorist allies attacked an oil pipeline and a water main. Yesterday, a terrorist drove a truck bomb into the U.N. headquarters in Baghdad, killing dozens and wounding more than 100 people.

Our enemies' initial "Mogadishu Strategy" - based on the faulty notion that if you kill Americans they pack up and go home - was a disaster for them. Our response devastated their already-crippled organization. Now, with reduced capabilities and decayed leadership, they've turned to attacking soft targets. It's the best they can do.

It's ugly. But it's an indicator of their weakness, not of strength.

Demoralized by constant defeats, our enemies have become alarmed by the quickening pace of reconstruction. Consequently, we will see more attacks on infrastructure, on international aid workers and on Iraqis laboring to rebuild their country.

We'll also see al Qaeda and other terrorist groups become the senior partners among our enemies, as Ba'athist numbers and capabilities dwindle. There is more innocent blood to come.



Yet the bombing of the U.N. headquarters at the Canal Hotel was a self-defeating act. Even if it frightens the U.N. off (and it just might accomplish the opposite) the attack reminds the world yet again of the savagery of radical Islamic terrorists and the brutality of those whom we deposed in Baghdad.

Like 9/11, the Canal Hotel attack, though impressive at the moment, will prove another disaster for the terrorists.

Our enemies are frantically trying to prove to the people of Iraq and the world that they remain powerful and viable. But they aren't powerful or viable: They're reduced to a faltering program of assassinations, blowing up aid workers and infrastructure attacks that will alienate the people of Iraq. Any support they gain through such actions will be negligible, while the anger they have rekindled can only harm their cause.

Our enemies hope to make Iraq ungovernable. Yet, contrary to the images on TV, the country is making swifter progress than we had any right to expect:

* It was our Kurdish allies who captured Iraq's former vice president, Taha Yassin Ramadan, and turned him over to us yesterday.

* For all his rhetoric about raising an army of believers, Moqtada Sadr, a hate-filled Shi'a mullah greedy for power, is afraid to attempt anything of consequence. Senior Shi'a clerics despise him, while the people of the Shi'a heartland distrust him.

* Even the Sunni-Arab center of Iraq has become less restive than it was a month ago.

The signs for the dead-enders are all bad. They had to do something dramatic.

And if the remaining Ba'athists are despondent, the traveling terrorists of al Qaeda are outraged that the Iraqi people have failed to rise up against the infidels. It's likely that a non-Iraqi drove that truck into the Canal Hotel.

Why attack the United Nations? Other than the ease with which it could be struck? Several reasons.

First, the U.N. dealt a blow to the hardliners when the Security Council recently recognized the legitimacy of Iraq's Governing Council. Second, the Ba'athists will never forgive the U.N. for its support, no matter how lukewarm, for sanctions and weapons inspections in the past - or for failing to restrain coalition forces last March.

And for al Qaeda and associated terrorists, the United Nations is a Western-dominated tool of Christians and Zionists - despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. We are not facing reasonable men. They have a deep and furious need to hate.

The attack on the U.N. headquarters also was an effort to undercut reconstruction efforts. Our enemies hope that, by attacking aid workers, they can prevent other international agencies from coming to Iraq, that they can drive a wedge between the coalition and the Johnny-come-latelies nudging their way into reconstruction programs.

This will be a moment of truth for the United Nations. America and its partners have demonstrated that we will not be deterred by bloodstained bullies. Will the U.N. honor its dead by showing some backbone? Or will it flee Baghdad, handing the terrorists a real, if minor, victory? If the United Nations discredits itself by running away, it will hasten its long decline. If it takes a stand against terror and goes right back to work in Iraq, it may regain a good bit of its faded luster.

The truck bomb didn't simply attack the U.N. - it struck at the U.N.'s idea of itself. The lesson the U.N. must take away is that no one can be neutral in the struggle with evil.

Within our own country, every potential Howard Dean voter will declare that the U.N. headquarters bombing proves, for all time, that our occupation has failed, can never succeed, should never have been tried, and, anyway, that we're all bad people for disturbing poor, innocent dictators. Then they'll trot out the nonsense that, since Iraq has become a magnet for international terrorists, we've failed on that count, too.

On the contrary. We've taken the War Against Terror to our enemies. It's far better to draw the terrorists out of their holes in the Middle East, where we don't have to read them their rights, than to wait for them to show up in Manhattan again.

In Iraq, we can just kill the bastards. And we're doing it with gusto.

Yes, the Canal Hotel attack proves that terrorists are rushing to Iraq like moths to a hurricane lamp. But when that happens, the lamp wins, not the moths.

Retired Army intelligence officer Ralph Peters' next book is "Beyond Baghdad: Postmodern War and Peace."






Back to: Post Opinion | Editorials | Oped Columnists | Letters | Home

---

NEW YORK POST is a registered trademark of NYP Holdings, Inc. NYPOST.COM, NYPOSTONLINE.COM, and NEWYORKPOST.COM
are trademarks of NYP Holdings, Inc. Copyright 2003 NYP Holdings, Inc. All rights reserved.


Print this out 20 times and deliver it to your classmates just before class. You have the right under the 1st amandment. It's called free speech. Don't get into arguements with it about it. It will drive you teacher bonkers. Trust me. Do it day after day, but only if you want to see the idiot go crazy.

[HiTech RedNeck]

Sign up then privately cancel. For assignments, go read it in the library.

[HiTech RedNeck]

I don't believe a public school can "force" anyone to buy anything as biased as the Slime. Even better, take the school district to court over this.

Hey this rag can't be any worse than "Roger's Two Daddies [unmentionable] Each Other." :-)

Seriously, it sounds like they are asking for this in order to keep the students from mobbing the library's single copy. The Web version would be an alternative. Actually, the NYT may lose money on the student subscription rate.

[lentulusgracchus]

You could also resort to a useful journalism resource such as lying in ponds, which analyzes (and separates, per their own profession) both ideological content and actual partisanship.

[xdem]

you might simply go to your teacher

I did the same thing in a college course. Both the papers I did received A grades. There was no other required coursework. My final grade was a "C."

Why? Because the professor claimed I had not received approval to use alternative, and non-liberal, source material. Yet I had received such permission.

Non-liberals are on the low-end of the power curve in education. Unless you know something or someone it's better to stay in the closet. But remember the oppression.

About the only way to win thse cases is to threaten massive publicity, and be able to back it up.

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

Consider this to be opposition research. Some freepers check out the NYT daily and God bless them. Hopefully, an internet purchase could be allowed. If you whine about 'tree killing', your teacher might buckle. Then you can compare NYT with another paper you agree with.

[Capitalism2003]

I think they may have a free 30 day trial on their website...all the same articles as you find in print. That should get you through the class.

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

"...This year (I'll be a senior), one of the requirements for my AP Gov't and Politics course..."

If you continue political education, you are walking into the lion's den. We need some young freepers to get political education. Ultimately, you might need to pretend to be a liberal. Just as Joshua sent spies into Jericho, you might need to infiltrate the college cesspool in its worst places. Keep a journal on it. Coded to make it sound as though you think liberal bias is kool. Most liberal political types are snoopy enough to peek in your diary. Later, you could make a book out of it. And pray silently every night that God shield your soul.

[ATOMIC_PUNK]

Just print out a couple of articles from FREEREPUBLIC complete with comments and tell him/her that this is the best source of news and veiws thats available !

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

"While you're at it, send emails to all the talkshows and tell them what's happening."

Talk radio hosts are flooded with things like this. Educational bias is so massive, causing conservative students to get into so much trouble, there isn't time to notice it all.

[TN4Liberty]

Pick your battles. If you ask for an alternate paper, you cannot discuss the same articles the others are discussing. That will likely make the class more difficult, if not impossible for you.

Your familiarity with other sources may make for more interesting critiques of any NYT articles. Refusal to read the Times causes you to appear closed minded. I think taking the paper and using history and other sources to validate your skepticism is a far more pursuasive approach.

[mhking]

You're probably not going to like this idea, but I'd say go ahead, and roll with it. It won't be pleasant on one hand, but on the other, with a bit of work, you'll be able to discern between the truth and the spin.

If you want to challenge the teacher, you'll be better equipped to do so. If you want to remain under the radar (my best advice for you - don't make the waves that may make the road between you and college admission bumpy, if you know what I mean), then you can do so - effectively.

[Rebelbase]

"Try being homeschooled and giving hell to your teacher! That's not a good plan..."

Ha!

[Cathryn Crawford]

Are you coming down here in October?

[Pagey]

If I was you ( mind you, I wouldn't go back to my high school even if God paid me, but I digress) I'd buy the required paper and regularly visit http://www.OpinionJournal.com also, which is the Online Version of the Wall Street Journal.It's Free and there are numerous links to great articles everyday. And Remember, "Don't let the bastards get you down". ;')

[profmike23]

I was alluding to the OU-UT game at the Cotton Bowl in Dallas every October.

It's a big deal here.