Need Help Dealing With Liberal Professor (1 Viewer)

[FreeThinker]

Before one of the mods goes moving this to another section please note this directly relates to Iraq.

In my western humanities course right now I have (as usual) an insanly liberal professor. About every other sentence he mentions that WMD were never found in Iraq and that Bush is an unethical man and that he lied blah blah blah.

The woman next to me has a son in Iraq and she just about starts crying every time he goes in to how Bush is wasting American lives. I'm getting really sick of holding my tongue so I would like some help from some fellow conservatives on the best way to respond, and how the argument will go.

I know hes trying to bait out the conservatives in his class by saying all this inflamitory stuff so I want to be well prepaired for the argument hes going to give me.

I'm thinking to start with a few of these:

"All the best intelligence in the world said that he still had WMD, and Saddam didn't give the weapons inspectors any chance to disprove that. He repeatedly violated UN sanctions be restricting their access and sometimes expelling them altogether."

or

"Saddam violated numerous (how many?) UN sanctions but the security council refused to take action due to three nation's financial interest in Iraq and the oil for food program. Without unilateral action nothing would have been done."

or

"We found the WMD. He was hiding in a spider hole."

or

"Are you saying it's a bad thing that a man as evil as Saddam was taken out of power?"

I don't know. Fellow conservatives please give me a few more arguments as well as what you think his responses to those statements will be. I want to be well prepaired to debate this guy and make him look like the douche he is in front of his class.

 

[tecoyah]

In my western humanities course right now I have (as usual) an insanly liberal professor. About every other sentence he mentions that WMD were never found in Iraq and that Bush is an unethical man and that he lied blah blah blah.

As far as the WMD's....dont debate him....he has far more ammunition than you do. Focus on the ethics of the president, and challenge him to "Prove" there were lies....not inaccuracies, but Lies. I am not a conservative, but do like a good debate, and the number one thing to remember in taking up a debate....is to already know you have the Data to back you up.Number two is to take advantage of your opponents weaknesses.

 

[cnredd]

You're going the wrong route...

What you should be saying is, "Please keep your personal commentaries to your personal conversations, and stop using this class to push your individual agenda down the throats of those who are paying your salary."

 

[FreeThinker]

You're going the wrong route...

What you should be saying is, "Please keep your personal commentaries to your personal conversations, and stop using this class to push your individual agenda down the throats of those who are paying your salary."

I can't stop him from spouting off at the mouth, and there is no way the college is going to back a student over a professor that has been there for 10 years.

Eventually I'm going to end up debating him. Help me out here with some good arguments.

Also tekoya ty for the advice. I'm going to try to steer him away from the WMD issue as much as I can but that is the point he keeps mentioning. I need a good retort for that when he keeps comming back to it.

 

[Engimo]

I can't stop him from spouting off at the mouth, and there is no way the college is going to back a student over a professor that has been there for 10 years.

Eventually I'm going to end up debating him. Help me out here with some good arguments.

Also tekoya ty for the advice. I'm going to try to steer him away from the WMD issue as much as I can but that is the point he keeps mentioning. I need a good retort for that when he keeps comming back to it.

There really isn't a good retort, though. All of the suggestions that you mentioned above are really straw man attacks on his argument.

"All the best intelligence in the world said that he still had WMD, and Saddam didn't give the weapons inspectors any chance to disprove that. He repeatedly violated UN sanctions be restricting their access and sometimes expelling them altogether."

The intelligence was weak, at best, and the administration overstated its reliability and suppressed evidence that showed that Saddam did not have WMDs.

"Saddam violated numerous (how many?) UN sanctions but the security council refused to take action due to three nation's financial interest in Iraq and the oil for food program. Without unilateral action nothing would have been done."

So, on one hand, we allow for the fact that a U.N. Resolution is valid and is something that should be enforced, but on the other we entirely disregard the fact that it is supposed to be the U.N. itself enforcing these resolutions. Why is the U.N. a legitimate body when it comes to making resolutions, but not when it comes to enforcing them? We can't pick and choose on the viability of the institution.

This is akin to the U.S. unilaterally going in to France and giving someone a ticket for jaywalking.

"We found the WMD. He was hiding in a spider hole."

Yeah, we get the point - Saddam was a bad guy. But was that the pretense under which we were led to war? No, the main reasons given to us were actual nuclear/biological/chemical WMDs and Saddam supporting Al-Qaeda - both of which are bunk.

"Are you saying it's a bad thing that a man as evil as Saddam was taken out of power?"

No, and I doubt that your professor is. The ends, though, do not always justify the means. Sure, it's great that Saddam isn't in power any more, but at what cost did his overthrow come? If the result is increased religious terrorism, divisiveness in the middle east, and if the whole decision to go was based on poor intelligence, it might not have been worth it.

If you're bothered by this guy, just ask him to keep his personal views outside of the classroom, or debate him on something other than WMDs.

 

[ProudAmerican]

feel free to use any of the following quotes to combat the "Bush Lied" nonsense.
--------------------------------

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." -- From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998

"This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer- range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." -- From a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos among others

"Whereas Iraq has consistently breached its cease-fire agreement between Iraq and the United States, entered into on March 3, 1991, by failing to dismantle its weapons of mass destruction program, and refusing to permit monitoring and verification by United Nations inspections; Whereas Iraq has developed weapons of mass destruction, including chemical and biological capabilities, and has made positive progress toward developing nuclear weapons capabilities" -- From a joint resolution submitted by Tom Harkin and Arlen Specter on July 18, 2002

"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed." -- Madeline Albright, 1998

"(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he has 10 times since 1983" -- National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998

"Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement." -- Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability." -- Robert Byrd, October 2002

"There's no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat... Yes, he has chemical and biological weapons. He's had those for a long time. But the United States right now is on a very much different defensive posture than we were before September 11th of 2001... He is, as far as we know, actively pursuing nuclear capabilities, though he doesn't have nuclear warheads yet. If he were to acquire nuclear weapons, I think our friends in the region would face greatly increased risks as would we." -- Wesley Clark on September 26, 2002

"What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad's regime did use such weapons in the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think that, over the past four years, in the absence of international inspectors, this country has continued armament programs." -- Jacques Chirac, October 16, 2002

"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton in 1998

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security." -- Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002

"I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out." -- Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003

"Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people." -- Tom Daschle in 1998

-------------------------------------------------

Looks to me like this lie was started all the way back in 1998, before Bush took office. So if there was a lie, it was started during a liberal administration.

IMO, everyone got it wrong due to bad intel.

IMO, its intelectually dishonest to try and make the case that the liberals made an honest mistake, while the neocons intentionally lied to the world.

thats just stupid!!!

 

[KCConservative]

Before one of the mods goes moving this to another section please note this directly relates to Iraq.

In my western humanities course right now I have (as usual) an insanly liberal professor. About every other sentence he mentions that WMD were never found in Iraq and that Bush is an unethical man and that he lied blah blah blah.

The woman next to me has a son in Iraq and she just about starts crying every time he goes in to how Bush is wasting American lives. I'm getting really sick of holding my tongue so I would like some help from some fellow conservatives on the best way to respond, and how the argument will go.

I know hes trying to bait out the conservatives in his class by saying all this inflamitory stuff so I want to be well prepaired for the argument hes going to give me.

I'm thinking to start with a few of these:

"All the best intelligence in the world said that he still had WMD, and Saddam didn't give the weapons inspectors any chance to disprove that. He repeatedly violated UN sanctions be restricting their access and sometimes expelling them altogether."

or

"Saddam violated numerous (how many?) UN sanctions but the security council refused to take action due to three nation's financial interest in Iraq and the oil for food program. Without unilateral action nothing would have been done."

or

"We found the WMD. He was hiding in a spider hole."

or

"Are you saying it's a bad thing that a man as evil as Saddam was taken out of power?"

I don't know. Fellow conservatives please give me a few more arguments as well as what you think his responses to those statements will be. I want to be well prepaired to debate this guy and make him look like the douche he is in front of his class.

Check this out:
http://www.academia.org/index.html

 

[Kelzie]

Where in the world do you go to school? My profs are anal to the point of retentiveness to not let their political bias show. A prof literally wouldn't tell me if trade sanctions had ever worked because she said it would reveal a political bias.

 

[KCConservative]

Where in the world do you go to school? My profs are anal to the point of retentiveness to not let their political bias show. A prof literally wouldn't tell me if trade sanctions had ever worked because she said it would reveal a political bias.

Then you haven't been informed about what's happening in our colleges and universities. Do an experiement. Type these words into a search engine and see what comes up.

liberal
bias
colleges
universities
campus
conservative
retribution
consequence

 

[Kelzie]

Then you haven't been informed about what's happening in our colleges and universities. Do an experiement. Type these words into a search engine and see what comes up.

liberal
bias
colleges
universities
campus
conservative
retribution
consequence

I'm informed, thanks, and I don't appreciate your condenscending tone. I didn't say he was wrong. I didn't say it doesn't happen. I recounted what happens in my college, in the classes I've had. Do you have an issue with that?

 

[KCConservative]

I'm informed, thanks, and I don't appreciate your condenscending tone. I didn't say he was wrong. I didn't say it doesn't happen. I recounted what happens in my college, in the classes I've had. Do you have an issue with that?

condescending? I think this kitchen may be a little too hot for you, kelzie. There was nothing condescending in my post. And how you heard my tone is a real mystery.

 

[Kelzie]

condescending? I think this kitchen may be a little too hot for you, kelzie. There was nothing condescending in my post. And how you heard my tone is a real mystery.

Oh my bad. I must have missed the friendly overtones in "then you haven't been informed". :roll: You're always condescending to liberals. It was a safe bet.

 

[akyron]

Oh my bad. I must have missed the friendly overtones in "then you haven't been informed". :roll: You're always condescending to liberals. It was a safe bet.

I saw a Vegan on TV yesterday. Sarah from "Surviving Nugent" on VH1.
She was a real animal activist. Do you think she may be representative of Vegans to a degree?

Personally she struck me as a bit oversensitive on the show.

 

[Kelzie]

I saw a Vegan on TV yesterday. Sarah from "Surviving Nugent" on VH1.
She was a real animal activist. Do you think she may be representative of Vegans to a degree?

Personally she struck me as a bit oversensitive on the show.

I dunno. I've never met another vegan. But I've heard scary stories. Were you trying to insinuate something? :lol:

 

[DeeJayH]

You're going the wrong route...

What you should be saying is, "Please keep your personal commentaries to your personal conversations, and stop using this class to push your individual agenda down the throats of those who are paying your salary."

:applaud I would go one step further

I would tape this liberal yahoo and than send the tape to Sean Hannity for a publicly verbal Flogging

 

[Kelzie]

:applaud I would go one step further

I would tape this liberal yahoo and than send the tape to Sean Hannity for a publicly verbal Flogging

I would go to the dean and say the teacher's liberal agenda is getting in the way of his assigned teaching and upsetting some of the students. But, you know. That or Sean Hannity.

 

[akyron]

I dunno. I've never met another vegan. But I've heard scary stories. Were you trying to insinuate something? :lol:

No. I never met a vegan either. I was thinking vegans had meetings or something to get vegan info.

 

[Kelzie]

No. I never met a vegan either. I was thinking vegans had meetings or something to get vegan info.

I belonged to a vegan forum for about 30 seconds. Those people are nuts I tell ya. I was questioning, just questioning mind you, why an ethical egg was impossible and I got 50 wacko vegans posting every three seconds that I was going to hell. Or something like that.

 

[DeeJayH]

I belonged to a vegan forum for about 30 seconds. Those people are nuts I tell ya. I was questioning, just questioning mind you, why an ethical egg was impossible and I got 50 wacko vegans posting every three seconds that I was going to hell. Or something like that.

they are nuts due to a lack of animal protein in their diet, excluding protein slurpee's of course :doh

since you are new and improved, does that mean you are a meat eater again?

 

[Kelzie]

they are nuts due to a lack of animal protein in their diet, excluding protein slurpee's of course :doh

since you are new and improved, does that mean you are a meat eater again?

Well that wouldn't be improved, now would it.

And I get plenty of protein. Thanks for worrying about me though. :2wave:

 

[KCConservative]

Oh my bad. I must have missed the friendly overtones in "then you haven't been informed". :roll: You're always condescending to liberals. It was a safe bet.

Go back and read post #9, Kelzie. There was nothing condescending. Until I learned of the liberal bias on campus, I hadn't "been informed"of it either. I think you misunderstood.

 

[VTA]

I can't stop him from spouting off at the mouth, and there is no way the college is going to back a student over a professor that has been there for 10 years.

Eventually I'm going to end up debating him. Help me out here with some good arguments.

Also tekoya ty for the advice. I'm going to try to steer him away from the WMD issue as much as I can but that is the point he keeps mentioning. I need a good retort for that when he keeps comming back to it.

Really you can. After all you pay to be there, as does the woman he's insensitively insulting. If his political agenda is causing people to drop out of his class, that's not going to do the college any good.


Or, simply ask him when was the last time the Pentagon briefed him on matters of National Security. When he says never, you should remind him that without empirical evidence, he runs the risk of looking like a jackass, when history tells the true story of this war and it's reason for happening. Because as of now, we have nothing more than biased spin from two sides and our own emotional wants.

 

[Kelzie]

Go back and read post #9, Kelzie. There was nothing condescending. Until I learned of the liberal bias on campus, I hadn't "been informed"of it either. I think you misunderstood.

Your previous posts color your current ones. For instance, if I told TOT he was a genius, he would presume I was being sarcastic, because I'm always a bitch to him (I'd mean it with love of course). I have never seen you say a nice word to a liberal. Anything you post is read in that light. "You're not informed" is condescending when it comes from someone who constantly is.

 

[FreeThinker]

I would go to the dean and say the teacher's liberal agenda is getting in the way of his assigned teaching and upsetting some of the students. But, you know. That or Sean Hannity.

I dunno, what if the chair of the department I talk to is liberal as well? Colleges almost always have a strong liberal bias, and I would hate to be on the **** list of the people that hold my academic future in their hands.

I'm nervous to confront this guy, but I know if I'm not prepaired I'm just going to end up getting super pissed off about it and blurting something stupid out. I want to be ready when the time comes.

Also thanks to the conservs on the thread giving me some good arguments. I didn't know hillary clinton was so verbal in her anti-saddam opinion, especially as late as 2002.

Thanks to the liberals also for throwing me some counter arguments. This will be easier if I know how to counter his response before he even says it.

When the day comes I'll be sure to let everyone know how the debate went and how the class responded. If I can dig up a digital tape recorder I'll save and upload it.

 

[Kelzie]

I dunno, what if the chair of the department I talk to is liberal as well? Colleges almost always have a strong liberal bias, and I would hate to be on the **** list of the people that hold my academic future in their hands.

I'm nervous to confront this guy, but I know if I'm not prepaired I'm just going to end up getting super pissed off about it and blurting something stupid out. I want to be ready when the time comes.

Also thanks to the conservs on the thread giving me some good arguments. I didn't know hillary clinton was so verbal in her anti-saddam opinion, especially as late as 2002.

Thanks to the liberals also for throwing me some counter arguments. This will be easier if I know how to counter his response before he even says it.

When the day comes I'll be sure to let everyone know how the debate went and how the class responded. If I can dig up a digital tape recorder I'll save and upload it.

See, that's the great thing about going to the dean. He's not going to take time out of his schedule to make your life miserable if he doesn't believe you and you manage to tick him off. If he does believe you, he's certainly going to take care of a teacher who can't control his bias. Now, if you make your prof mad....that can get ugly. My geography teacher and I got into it in front of the class and the only reason I got an A is I told him I'd go to the dean with my test scores if I got anything else. Still wasn't a pleasant semester. I'm telling you, the dean is the way to go.