Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Um, Ward L. Churchill is a douchebag any way you cut it.

Hes exactly why the right can call you guys the "Looney Left".

Everybody has the right to their opinions, mind you.

But you don't get to propogandize students. Thats what libs don't get.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Very true, it works both ways.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Kwicko:
Um, Rush Limbaugh is a douchebag any way you cut it.

He's exactly why the left can call you guys Right-Wing-Whackos".

Everybody has the right to their opinions, mind you.

But you don't get to propagandize listeners. That's what conservatives don't get.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
Prove to us all he 'indoctrinated' anyone.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by rue:
Ward Churchill came to public attention due to an attempted e-lynching by the right-wing. All because he wrote something they disagreed with. And when they couldn't make that excuse stick because it's supposed to be a free country, they dug and fabricated and hounded until they hung him in public opinion.


That's you too, Rap. No matter how you try to excuse yourself, YOU are that vile.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Jongsstraw:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Very true, it works both ways.

---

It's NOT very true, and it does not work both ways, not at all. Ward Churchill was a state employee, his salary & benefits paid by the good citizens of Colorado. His job was to educate young men and women, not indoctrinate and expose them to his own political beliefs, although sometimes there's a fine line between the two. Limbaugh is just a radio show entertainer, and he's paid by a private business enterprise. You have a choice to listen to him or not. I can't assume the same for all the students in his class. Parents of the students in his class also had a choice to let their kids sit in his class or not. Responsible ones, that is.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by RIPWash:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Jongsstraw:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Very true, it works both ways.

---

It's NOT very true, and it does not work both ways, not at all. Ward Churchill was a state employee, his salary & benefits paid by the good citizens of Colorado. His job was to educate young men and women, not indoctrinate and expose them to his own political beliefs, although sometimes there's a fine line between the two. Limbaugh is just a radio show entertainer, and he's paid by a private business enterprise. You have a choice to listen to him or not. I can't assume the same for all the students in his class. Parents of the students in his class also had a choice to let their kids sit in his class or not. Responsible ones, that is.

---

I agree with JS here. The main difference is that students take certain classes because they need them to move on toward the other required classes for their selected degrees. If a teacher like Churchill is tenured and knows he can get away with pretty much anything he wants, he'll use that to spout his own views upon his students. In some cases, the students have no choice to sit in the class and listen. If they don't that teacher could very well fail them and they can't move on. He's got them in a position to listen to what he says and in some cases force them to agree with him if they want to pass his class. Can I prove it? No. But stories swirl around about this kind of thing all the time. Like it or not, Rue, kids that age are still trying to find themselves and some will latch on to anything, they'll believe anything if they're not presented with both sides of the argument and make an informed decision on their own. Do you honestly think Churchill presented both sides of the story? I don't. Not for one second. So THAT, in essence is indoctrination. And those that don't know any better, the ones whose parents only care about grades, will sit there and take it all in and not mention it to anyone.

I am in WHOLEHEARTED agreement that Rush, O'Reiley, Beck and Hannity, though reviled by some, spout their own opinions. They are paid by people to do so in order to make themselves more money. The difference is that people can get up and leave, turn them off and ignore them completely. Isn't that what people are told if certain entertainment shows offend them? When cuss words are thrown about on TV, the violence is particularly bloody, or whatever? "If you don't like it, turn the channel or turn it off." But what I hear, and it's been said a-plenty on this forum, is that the CONSERVATIVE hosts need to be silenced. They they indoctrinate. They're ruining America. But say that about someone like Churchill or even Bill Maher or Al Franken and "he's just stating his opinion" and "he's not doing any harm."

Zoe: "Get it running again."
Mal: "Yeah"
Zoe: "So not running now"
Mal: "Not so much"
- Out of Gas

---