Okay, good. :)
My view of tolerance (I don't know to what extent it is shared by "the left") is that a society should be as tolerant as possible. When I see a society refuse to accept any self-criticism, that worries me. Then I say that society is intolerant.
America is not perfect, never has been, never will be. I have never claimed that and, to my knowledge, no notable rightist pundit, nor any US Government official has claimed that. However, when I see and hear people calling America a racist, fascist, nazi, etc. etc. state, THAT is when my temper rises. For all its imperfections, we are the one nation that has tried more than any other, to rectify its shortcomings. Slavery, the biggest blot on our past, is still practiced in areas of Africa today (although try getting Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton to admit this.) America offers more freedom, more opportunity, more of EVERYTHING except maybe welfare benefits than any other country. And still there are those who, rather than say, get involved in charity work and actually DO something, burn flags or fall back on the old racist, fascist, etc. names.
I fear that the flag mania expressed here is a way of deflecting legitimate criticism of the direction of U.S. society, and as such it is a form of unacceptable intolerance. My belief is that anyone can display a flag on their private property, but that the classroom is a space that should be free of flags so that we can be free to be critical.
Oh come now, Prof. You're a big boy. Tell your students to feel free to voice any opinions they wish, regardless of whether or not there's a flag in your classroom. And I haven't read about anyone suggesting that respect or saluting or what-have-you be mandatory, are they? If you simply want to ignore the flag, do it. Tell the students to do so if they wish. Tell them that if they want to bring some other small flag, like a UN flag or hell, the flag of France, to bring it and put in on their desk during class.
By "justice" I mean a set of abstract principles by which desisions are handed out evenly. If I see that someone goes to jail without trial (as is the case with suspected "terrorists") but that suspected corporate criminaly like Ken Lay get off free, I say that there is injustice.
As do I. Although I don't believe that either Lay or Sam Waksal or Martha Stewart or any of those other white-collar crooks have gotten off scot-free. And what about good old O.J. Simpson? DNA evidence placed him at the scene of the murder...yet what was the biggest controversy of the trial? Whether or not Mark Fuhrman had ever used the word "nigger." Were all those suggesting that evidence was planted by the LAPD racists? Try and suggest to many liberals that OJ was indeed guilty, and you'll be made to feel like David Duke at a Black Panther meeting.
But, for instance, at least 30% of the U.S. population was opposed to the war in Iraq, yet only 1-3% of the discourse on television during the war was made available to anti-war viewpoints. And those viewpoints were visciously attacked.
Now Prof, where do you get that 1-3% figure? From a reputable source, I hope. I saw pro-war vierpoints being ridiculed, as well.
In the case of Bush, he promised to help New York City rebuild after the terrorist attacks, but then only delivered 55% of what he promised. He also failed to deliver full funding for his "Leave no child behind" program. I would say that failure to live up to one's social commitments shows a lack of compassion.
Dig your civics text out, Prof. ;) The Congress does the spending, not the President. Bill Clinton promised 100,000 new cops on the streets. Didn't happen. Lyndon Johnson spent many billions of dollars trying to end poverty. That didn't happen. Compassion is not measured by how much of other peoples money you spend. That's my opinion, anyway. As for the NCLB act, I have never seen any rationale for federal involvement in education, anyway. It's as if no child was educated in the country prior to the creation of the Dept. of Education, which only came about in the late 70s and was, by their own admission, simply a payoff for the NEA's endorsement of Jimmy carter (the first time the union had ever made a Presidential endorsement.)
My. Burke said that nearly all Palestinians may need to be eliminated before there can be peace in the Middle East. I take calls for genocide as a sign of racism. His homophobia is apparent to me whenever I hear his show.
If he said this, and again, I have no way of confirming it, I would condemn it strongly. But does it differ from this statement:
In his New York Press column, leftist writer Alexander Cockburn suggested "dropping a tactical nuclear weapon on the Cuban section of Miami." Alas, he lamented, that "would require the sort of political courage sadly lacking in Washington these days." Now get that...a liberal writer calling for the murder of every Cuban in Miami. Racist? And some more examples of that oh-so-liberal "civil discourse"...
Gay activist Dan Savage boasted on Salon.com of his efforts to infect Gary Bauer with flu. When readers appalled by this germ warfare complained, Salon's editor groused that "America has become really humourless about these things."
A sickening TV spot sponsored by the NAACP showed a pickup truck dragging a chain and accused then-Gov.Bush of having "killed" James Byrd "all over again" when he opposed a change in the Texas hate crimes law.
I find it very, very ironic that you can do any kind of search on the net and find barely a peep from those tolerant and loving liberals about these sickening statements. As for homophobia, you are begging the question. Saying "it's apparent to me" harkens back to the old definition of obscenity..."I may not be able to define it, but I know it when I see it." If someone says they do not wish to have open homosexuals serve in the military, or teach young children, or whatever, that is their opinion. Will you tolerate it, or defend their right to say and/or believe it?
I think that the opposition to flags in classrooms is a sign that the opponents are insecure, legitimately so. They are worried about their future.
At risk of losing my seat at the local Algonquin round table, let me say, "Oh, gimme a f'n break!" These aren't third-graders. They're young men and women. Capable of serving in the military, holding a job, having a realtionship, etc. Are you telling me that these people are legitimately scared of an American flag? How about giving them a dose of reality...tell them life isn't fair, and there will be times in life when someone says something or does something that you don't like. Get over it. That's the way the world works. If they can't handle a flag in the classroom, tell them they won't be able to function out in the real world.
My reference to ROCK as Brown Shirts may be a bit extreme.
I'd leave off the "may."
Still, they brought Ann Coutler to campus.
Heavens to betsy. Imagine that. Do these kids think this is a free-speech zone or something? Don't they realize that Muffy Running Bear Abu-Jimal, who changed her name to express solidarity with the oppressed peoples of the world, might have nightmares for weeks afterwards? ;)
Ann Coulter has said that liberals should be killed, and has called for killing and converting Moslems (as a new kind of "crusade"). She has also tried to paint Joe McCarthy, one of the worst demagogues in American history, as a hero. Does she scare me? Yes she does. Could a group of people following Coulter's words carry out mass hate crimes the way the Brown Shirts did? Of course. Who's sure it would never happen here?
Yes, she did. Nina Totenburg (of NPR) said she hoped Clarence Thomas's wife fed him lots of eggs and butter and he died early, like many black men of heart disease. Could some nitwit try to assassinate Clarence Thomas because of her words? Sure. But not likely. And not likely that Ann's words would move anyone else to do anything of the sort, either. Especially since she said those words well a year ago and nothing of the sort has happened. You're really reaching here, Prof. Remember campaign 1992, where black rapper/goofball Sister Souljah was quoted as saying, "If black people kill black people every day, why not have a week and kill white people?" Clinton, to his credit, repudiated this. But I just can't seem to recall many others on the left doing so. As for McCarthy, as a demagogue, he had nothing on James Carville. Go READ TREASON and then you can tell me what you think. And as for Ann herself, if one lone conservative pundit scares you, then you need to just stay in your home for the rest of your life. There's many, many scarier people out here in the real world. :)
I am not attempting to silence anyone's views. And if a conservative faculty group decided to form, they should feel alright to do so.
Hmm, good to know. Are there any conservative faculty members?
One more group I'd like to get your opinion on...MECHa. The Latino/Hispanic/Whatever-the-hell-word-you-wanna-use organization. Thier official motto is "For those inside the race, everything. For those outside the race, nothing." Try and find a more truly racist credo. Yet this group has chapters on over 80 college campuses, including UCF, for all I know. If such a group tried to form at UCF, would you support it, or oppose it?
One more thing...thank you for not using the words "chilling effect" with me. Nothing sets me off more. One of my favorite ironies is the image of Tim Robbins in front of the National Press Club, on national TV, with a hundred or so reporters writing down his every word, lamenting the fact that the Bush administration won't let him get his opinions out. ;) Truly one of the most embarassing moments in history for liberals, yet they didn't even realize it. Heh. Cheers.