Since President Bush's victory in November, Democratic voters have indulged themselves in the belief that their party is simply more educated than their right-wing counterparts. Comments such as "ignorant" and "Jesus freaks" directed toward Middle America seem to give liberals some comfort in their defeat. Even I must admit that most polls indicate that Democrats tend to be more educated, especially in the Northeastern blue states (where liberalism is kept alive). Besides the fact that liberals feel like this somehow makes them superior, they are completely ignoring statistics about how liberal the professors in these universities are.
In this it is my belief that most people who associate voting with education levels did not formulate their opinions based on a degree, but rather on the personal agendas taught by radical professors. While the essence of teaching is inherently in the best interest of the student, there appears to be an increasing number of educators entering the profession with the hopes of creating cult-like followings using young vulnerable minds.
One case became public in February 2003 at the University of South Florida. Teaching your personal beliefs is one thing, but when professor Sami Al-Arian was arrested for plotting to set up a terrorist cell within the university, it became dangerous. Can you imagine the slanted curriculum this guy was teaching?
Without question, Al-Arian's students left school with an altered view of the United States. Situations such as this extreme one greatly alter the way a weak-minded college graduate will vote. I believe a great deal of blame should fall on the University of South Florida for failing to conduct background checks on professors, especially in today's day and age.
Then we have the increasingly controversial case of Ward Churchill. For those of you not familiar with Mr. Churchill, who resembles a drag queen with tooth decay, in 2001 he wrote an essay in which he made the claim with regards to 9/11 that "America has earned it." Even ignoring his commentary on our president or the Holocaust, he furthered those previous comments when he spoke of those killed in 9/11: "They were civilians of a sort. But innocent? Gimme a break." He would go on to compare these New York businessmen to Nazi Adolf Eichmann.
Even though his ramblings resemble the lunatic who holds up signs on Massachusetts Avenue every day, he is, for the time being, a professor at the University of Colorado. The fact that students had to bear witness to his nonsense is bad enough, but until a few weeks ago he had been scheduled to speak at Hamilton College. Death threats from right-wing radicals prompted a cancellation of the event that liberal professors there had been very excited about.
The University of Colorado is under fire from the state to let Churchill go, but the American Civil Liberties Union has come to his rescue. While liberal journalists have bashed "moderate" Bill O'Reilly for publicizing the issue, it baffles me that anyone would lower him- or herself to defend him.
We conservatives have some justice in the works, however. There is a current proposal in Ohio to create an academic bill of rights from which professors would not be allowed to present opinions as facts and could not penalize students whose opinions differed from their own. While essentially the same bill failed in California and, ironically, in Ward Churchill's own Colorado, we are looking at a serious contender here.
It is no exaggeration to state that there is an excess of once moderate students who, after four years of brainwashing, take a sharp left-hand political turn. It is somewhat refreshing to see that this blatant funneling system for liberals has finally been noticed.
The bill is sponsored by Sen. Larry Mumper (R-Ohio) but was actually started by a D.C.-based network of students known as Students for Academic Freedom. The conservative founder David Horowitz explained in an Associated Press article from Saturday that political affiliation is not the issue: "They can be a good professor, liberal or conservative, provided they pursue an educational mission and not a political agenda."
This seems like an ideal method for monitoring quality education, yet Democrats and professors alike are resisting. Sen. Teresa Fedor (D-Ohio) called the bill a "21st Century witch-hunt and book burning." Well, Teresa, as long as you're the one calling liberal professors witches, we should do lunch.
I believe there is something to be said for students who will abuse this issue in classes they struggle with. On the other hand, nobody can deny that the bill makes valid points about pursuing a more level playing field in schools. I believe the greatest threat to this bill is that Democrats will be unable to meet their quota of future followers who spent four or more years listening to propaganda.
Now, it would be unfair of me to associate all professors with the likes of Churchill or Al-Arian. They are just lunatics in a powerful position. The problem is that if there are more educators out there who are teaching in similar beliefs, something must be done.
There are plenty of self-proclaimed liberals out there who give the rest of the group a bad name. Those are the individuals who outright despise the United States. They are all over and thrive particularly at schools such as our own American University. Perhaps liberals themselves should look into weeding this out so that they can bring respectability back to the Democratic party.
