Live Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing

[jaaron]

I'm sure Roseanne thinks the same thing after her apology.

Guess, I'm a bit dense, but I don't get what you're saying?

 

[the_mother_thing]

Um, that study was put in motion and funded at a right wing think tank by someone who- I'm not joking, was angry that Barry Mills (the bowling president at the time) talked during his backswing. There's quite a bit out there on it - it's a joke.

FTR - I’ve chunked a golf ball at my own father for talking during my back swing. There are some lines you just do NOT cross.

And don’t get me started on expressing concern over who is funding things in the political realm. I sincerely doubt all of the people who sat on busses to make the trek to DC yesterday and today to protest Kav’s pending nomination paid for those bus tickets themselves.

 

[lovedogs]

All snark aside, I want to talk about this myth of the "liberal indoctrinating professor". I'm a professor at a university who is also a liberal. However, that almost never comes up at work and certainly never in classes I teach. Why? Because 1. My courses have nothing to do with politics, and 2. My opinions are irrelevant to my teaching. I teach about facts, theories (science-based), and encourage students to form their own opinions based on the information presented.

More than once I have refused to share my own beliefs on a sensitive issue because I don't want anyone to get the impression that I want them to think "exactly like I do". Any good professor would feel the same. It's not about any one of us, its about educating students to think for themselves and exposing them to facts and science. I don't peddle in "alternative facts" and am honest about debunked myths (like 'vaccines cause autism', which has been proven false over and over), but also am careful to explain WHY people believe these myths, and the context and history of them.

That's why the idea that liberals are "brainwashing" students is so offensive to me. Because for those of us who actually care about our jobs, it couldn't be further from the truth.

 

[partgypsy]

mother thing, I don't think that there is some conspiracy for academia to spread "extreme leftist views who are spreading their hateful vile in an attempt to indoctrinate students across college campuses - in and out of their classrooms." However, that is DEFINITELY a conspiracy that right wing media and think tanks are spreading, and they spend ALOT of money on this. Not to disagree, that there are kooks in every profession who say stupid stuff. But it's the kooks who are liberal professors who yeah, it gets spread.
It seems like you believe a lot of conspiracies including the one that protestors are paid for it or are actors. Please, just check out factcheck.org or Snopes before repeating claims that you have heard but may have no basis.

Why do I think these right wing organizations spread this? Because for them, a populace that is not educated, that is not exposed to many ideas, and not educated with the ability to read and think critically, are more easily manipulated. Some people want to spread disinformation, such as through media sites, or Facebook, or even random anonymous posts on message boards, and they are not taught to question it as long as it agrees with their preconceived notions. I see a number of people who post right wing credos and criticisms, who have VERY poor critical thinking skills. I'm talking about stuff that someone taking a journalism 101 class would learn. That is troubling to me.

The number one thing a liberal arts education does, is teach one to think critically. For some, that is very dangerous. Almost as dangerous as an independent and free press.

 

[redwood66]

All snark aside, I want to talk about this myth of the "liberal indoctrinating professor". I'm a professor at a university who is also a liberal. However, that almost never comes up at work and certainly never in classes I teach. Why? Because 1. My courses have nothing to do with politics, and 2. My opinions are irrelevant to my teaching. I teach about facts, theories (science-based), and encourage students to form their own opinions based on the information presented.

More than once I have refused to share my own beliefs on a sensitive issue because I don't want anyone to get the impression that I want them to think "exactly like I do". Any good professor would feel the same. It's not about any one of us, its about educating students to think for themselves and exposing them to facts and science. I don't peddle in "alternative facts" and am honest about debunked myths (like 'vaccines cause autism', which has been proven false over and over), but also am careful to explain WHY people believe these myths, and the context and history of them.

That's why the idea that liberals are "brainwashing" students is so offensive to me. Because for those of us who actually care about our jobs, it couldn't be further from the truth.

I am very glad to read this.

 

[the_mother_thing]

All snark aside, I want to talk about this myth of the "liberal indoctrinating professor". I'm a professor at a university who is also a liberal. However, that almost never comes up at work and certainly never in classes I teach. Why? Because 1. My courses have nothing to do with politics, and 2. My opinions are irrelevant to my teaching. I teach about facts, theories (science-based), and encourage students to form their own opinions based on the information presented.

More than once I have refused to share my own beliefs on a sensitive issue because I don't want anyone to get the impression that I want them to think "exactly like I do". Any good professor would feel the same. It's not about any one of us, its about educating students to think for themselves and exposing them to facts and science. I don't peddle in "alternative facts" and am honest about debunked myths (like 'vaccines cause autism', which has been proven false over and over), but also am careful to explain WHY people believe these myths, and the context and history of them.

That's why the idea that liberals are "brainwashing" students is so offensive to me. Because for those of us who actually care about our jobs, it couldn't be further from the truth.

From your description and taking you at your word, I would not lump you into the group of professors indoctrinating students, and kudos to you. But just because you don’t, doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen.

 

[lovedogs]

I am very glad to read this.

It's easy to "go off" on an anonymous forum or say dumb stuff on Twitter, but I (and I hope others) would never ever talk like that to impressionable students. Because that's not teachinf, it's ranting. I don't come on here as a professor or psychologist, I come on here as a bling addict who is pissed off about our current political climate I think most of what gets posted here (especially in hot button threads) would never be said aloud at work, regardless of the profession.

 

[the_mother_thing]

It's easy to "go off" on an anonymous forum or say dumb stuff on Twitter, but I (and I hope others) would never ever talk like that to impressionable students. Because that's not teachinf, it's ranting. I don't come on here as a professor or psychologist, I come on here as a bling addict who is pissed off about our current political climate I think most of what gets posted here (especially in hot button threads) would never be said aloud at work, regardless of the profession.

And I would agree. Many people work for employers who have a code of ethics that not only applies to them in the workplace, but outside the workplace as well. What bothers me about that is partly that it could be viewed as a sort of potential ‘overreach’ by an employer about someone’s choice in off-duty activities, but moreso I find it troubling that people need additional ‘structure’ to guide them to act ethically in the first place.

I’ll admit that I do feel impassioned about my positions on certain things. And yes, I do still stand by what I said about the women who confronted Flake in the elevator (and that’s because I’ve been had my life directly & imminently threatened in a similar manner and it’s a fight/flight reaction, and I’d own responsibility for my actions accordingly). But I would NEVER call for someone’s death or physical mutilation simply because we disagree politically. That is a sick mind, IMO, that has no business teaching anyone anything.

I think a more constructive & effective approach to this entire situation regarding encouraging women to be believed, heard, etc. would be to work together to help victims bring their actual perpetrator to justice vs. holding an entire gender (and further discriminating them on the base of their race) responsible for the actions of a handful. That’s what turns me off from much of the ‘me too’ movement ... the repeated blanket statements made that 1) all women should be believed (we’re just as capable of lying as men - fact); and 2) all men are evil. THAT is the epitome of divisiveness, and it only serves to toss fuel on the fire while ignoring the simple & obvious need to call the Fire Department.

 

[Ellen]

I know that people whose minds are made up won't read, but this was written by someone who has worked with Kavanaugh, who before the testimony was supportive of his confirmation.

From the standard jury instruction: ‘If a witness is shown knowingly to have testified falsely about any material matter, you have a right to distrust such witness’ other testimony and you may reject all the testimony of that witness.’”
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/10/why-i-wouldnt-confirm-brett-kavanaugh/571936/

This was a really good article, thanks for posting pg. Thoughtful and balanced. This is the very end of the article. Well said.

"We are in a political environment in which there are no rules, no norms anymore to violate. There is only power, and the individual judgments of individual senators—facing whatever political pressures they face, calculating political gain however they do it, and consulting their consciences to the extent they have them.

As much as I admire Kavanaugh, my conscience would not permit me to vote for him."

After reading this, I wanted to be fair and read the article from American Thinker that the_mother_thing posted. I had only read the second sentence when I had to stop. This is what it said.

"Blumenthal was referring to Judge Brett Kavanaugh, who hasn’t lied about anything, as far as anyone has been able to tell."

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/10/the_three_lies_of_christine_blasey_ford.html

I couldn't read anymore. The article lost me right there, sadly. I wanted to read the whole thing, and give it just as much thought as I did pg's article. But when you start out an article about a man who has been caught in countless lies by the whole national audience (televised confirmation hearings), called out by friends to said lying (both in print and on TV news), and has perjured himself in court, when the evidence is so overwhelming that to refute it is senseless, and then say the man hasn't lied "as far as anyone has been able to tell"? Please.

the_mother_thing, I think it's admirable for anyone to stand up for their beliefs, especially when they are overwhelmingly in the minority. (I truly can appreciate that position!) But posting something like this is not helping your case, and I say this genuinely wanting to help. This doesn't help, it hurts....

 

[the_mother_thing]

the_mother_thing, I think it's admirable for anyone to stand up for their beliefs, especially when they are overwhelmingly in the minority. (I truly can appreciate that position!) But posting something like this is not helping your case, and I say this genuinely wanting to help. This doesn't help, it hurts....

I’m not clear on what you’re referencing that you feel doesn’t ‘help my case’. Can you quote that message so I know what you’re responding to please?

 

[Ellen]

I’m not clear on what you’re referencing that you feel doesn’t ‘help my case’. Can you quote that message so I know what you’re responding to please?

I can't find it now (believe me I looked). But it really doesn't matter if we don't have the actual post. You posted an article by American Thinker (which I linked up above in my post) about how Blasey Ford was lying. Ok, I was totally willing to read it and consider whatever evidence the article put forth. But two sentences in, it was saying the man who has lied repeatedly and has been caught by the whole world, hasn't lied that anybody can tell.

Do you not see how the article can then not be taken seriously? How that hurts your argument/position?

 

[Arkteia]

He wasn’t presiding over a case on Thursday; he was defending HIMSELF - big difference! YUGE!

This is one more thing that frustrates me about this ‘environment’ - it’s perfectly okay for Ford to show emotion, fear, cry, etc., and no one dare call her hysterical, emotional, etc. Kavanaugh is defending himself, his integrity, his name, his family, his life, etc. against some pretty horrific accusations. If he sat there all emotionless, calm, cool & collected, I’d wonder WTF was wrong with him to not be so upset about his reputation and family being drug through the mud and the threats to all of them.

But no, because he’s a man he’s not allowed to or supposed to show emotion.

The double standards just continue ...

This is not the double standard. I'll tell you what is double standard. A woman tells me, "I was date raped, twice, and never reported, because who would have been believed, me or my attackers?"

I asked her, "and if you had the courage to tell your dad, and your dad went to the bar where this guy was drinking, and beat the cr@p out of him for raping (your dad's) daughter, who would people in the bar side with?" She said, "with my father".

There is double standard in the way the society views the accusations from a man and a woman.

But maybe if the double standard exists, we should train our men to intervene more, drop this "fratentity mentality". If someone stopped Kavanaugh 30 years ago, or if his college male mates raised concerns, perhaps he would not grow into a judge?

We need to work with our sons. Our husbands or fathers can be only educated, but not changed.

 

[jaaron]

FTR - I’ve chunked a golf ball at my own father for talking during my back swing. There are some lines you just do NOT cross.

And don’t get me started on expressing concern over who is funding things in the political realm. I sincerely doubt all of the people who sat on busses to make the trek to DC yesterday and today to protest Kav’s pending nomination paid for those bus tickets themselves.

Um, I don't really know anything about the organisation of the protests (although I'm not sure how much it cost the Federalist Society to put together that 'Women for Kavanaugh' bus). But if you can't see the difference between that kind of organising and a super rich guy literally paying a think tank to write a report saying exactly what he wanted it to and disseminating it as an indictment of higher education, there's not much I can do to help you.

In the service of full disclosure, one of my kids went to Bowdoin and it was en extremely well-rounded rigorous education with a heavy emphasis on critical thinking and stepping outside your comfort zone. They are well-known for their government, public policy and econ majors and those departments are hardly bastions of left-wing thinking.

 

[partgypsy]

I don't think it's a good sign when a political party starts demonizing educators, journalists, intellectuals, artists. There is one party, and their President who wants us to feel those people are somehow our enemies, dangerous, a threat. We have been down this road before, and it never ends well (Stalin, Nazi Germany, Pol Pot in Cambodia, the Taliban). I am reading I am Malala right now, and, yes we do not learn from history apparently. The Taliban attacked moderates, blew up professors, killed both Christian aid workers and journalists. They blew up schools.

 

[redwood66]

I have to push back on some of this @partgypsy because it is well known that the Weimar republic used the educational system to further the views of the Nazi party and condition the youth to think in the prescribed way. Hitler said in Mein Kampf - “Whoever has the youth has the future.” Jewish professors were fired to eliminate any opposition. Similar control of education also existed in the other atrocities you mention.

 

[partgypsy]

There is not really enough space to give detailed history of what happened in Stalinist Russia, Nazi Germany, Cambodia, and also Afganistan/Pakistan. Yes! You are entirely correct that some in mainstream Germany supported and voiced the ideology of Fascist Germany, believing they were the true patriots (cough cough) But in all of these cases, there was a strain of anti-intellectualism, of thought independent from the political system, the distrust and suppression of free speech and independent media, and that even legal protests and criticisms were not tolerated. Trump spends more time attacking the media, the free press, and protestors, than he does on actual adversaries of the US such as Russia, China, and also North Vietnam. This has gotten us to the point where the POTUS tweets conspiracy theories like protestors are paid actors that others then take up and amplify. You may not see this as an erosion of democratic values and a free society, but it is.
Dissent is OK. Even protestors yelling. It is a sign of a healthy democracy.

College professors, scientists have always had the right to voice their own thoughts, publish articles, books, etc outside from government approval. Boards such as the American Board Association are able to act independently without having to have their statements rubber stamped by the government before release. You should distrust ANY government who tells you to believe only them, and ignore everything else.

 

[redwood66]

There is not really enough space to give detailed history of what happened in Stalinist Russia, Nazi Germany, Cambodia, and also Afganistan/Pakistan. Yes! You are entirely correct that some in mainstream Germany supported and voiced the ideology of Fascist Germany, believing they were the true patriots (cough cough) But in all of these cases, there was a strain of anti-intellectualism, the distrust and suppression of free speech and independent media, and that even legal protests and criticisms were not tolerated. Trump spends more time attacking the media, the free press, and protestors, than he does on actual adversaries of the US such as Russia, China, and also North Vietnam. This has gotten us to the point where the POTUS tweets conspiracy theories like protestors are paid actors that others then take up and amplify. You may not see this as an erosion of democratic values, and a free society, but it is.
Dissent is OK. Even protestors yelling. It is a sign of a healthy democracy.

Yes but I was talking about the education system and your mention of demonizing it in history. No dissent or opposing views were allowed in the education of young people in Nazi Germany, likewise in China or Stalinist Russia. I was not talking about Trump. Fascism does not allow dissent which is why people push back against not being allowed to speak or hold conservative views in universities, or be denigrated for holding them. No one is stopping any protests in the US unless it gets out of hand or illegal actions are taken.

 

[partgypsy]

I'm sorry, I simply disagree with your analogy, comparing what happened in Nazi Germany, where beliefs dissenting from the State, are not tolerated as in any way shape or form, is what is happening to conservative voices. Those conservative voices are supported by the State. Conservative think tanks get millions of dollars in mostly anonymous donations to fund and spread these views. Not in any way shape or form to what was happening to Jewish or dissenting academics in Nazi Germany. Here's a tip: you can't be oppressed, if you are on the same side of those in power. To cry "victim" in that case, is a red herring.

 

[redwood66]

I'm sorry, I simply disagree with your analogy, comparing what happened in Nazi Germany, where beliefs dissenting from the State, are not tolerated as in any way shape or form, is what is happening to conservative voices. Those conservative voices are supported by the State. Conservative think tanks get millions of dollars in mostly anonymous donations to fund and spread these views. Not in any way shape or form to what was happening to Jewish or dissenting academics in Nazi Germany.

You are the one who brought up Nazi Germany as an example of demonizing academics. My point is that is not what happened, academia was used to further the ideology. Liberal think tanks get millions as well but what does that have to do with the discussion?

How are conservative voices supported by the State? The pushback from conservatives has been happening long before Trump ever showed up.

 

[partgypsy]

Let me correct. They are supported by those in power. The 1%. At this time they are also ideologically on the same side of those politically in power, and who have been consolidating power for the past couple decades, culminating in Trump and co. They receive monies from the same group of people.

https://www.insidephilanthropy.com/...most-influential-philanthropist-really-thinks