The Divided State does raise some important questions, but they surely are not the ones the film intended.
I recently had a chance to see the documentary, The Divided State, which I thought, perhaps more than any other film, reflects the political left’s method of dealing with their adversaries. The practice amounts to propping up a straw man and setting him on fire. Many conservatives are personally familiar with this approach after discovering that, unbeknownst to them, their desire for decreased taxation or a privatized Post Office is a result of their latent religious fundamentalism, homophobia, and hatred for all living things.
In this documentary, the action stems from Michael Moore’s planned visit to Utah before the 2004 election. He was invited there by the student council of Utah Valley State, and the local Mormons who attempt to prevent him from speaking are the plot’s straw men. Rather than do the logical thing, which would be to let Moore gibber, and then dissect his positions via rebuttal, they attempt to censor him. Their stance was unquestionably wrong; however, despite the fact that Mormons are often politically conservative, their act of intolerance has far more in common with the tactics of the left than those of the right.
Ironically, it is the improperly named “liberals” who embody repression and restriction in our nation today. The movements of radical feminism, socialism, and multiculturalism have — with the aide of their enforcer, political correctness — diminished our pride, created a war between the sexes, wrongly distorted history, undermined the value of public education, and shamed us into financing a federal government big and powerful enough to take away our every need or aspiration.
Excellent examples of illiberal liberalism can be found on our college campuses everyday. Here, the professors of Utah Valley State uniformly support Moore’s views and passionately depict this fabulously rich and thriving millionaire as a modern day Lenny Bruce. Their self-righteous stances and emotations are vigorously recorded by the camera, yet their conformity merely serves to highlight the hold the political left has upon higher education. A politicized professorate is a worthless professorate. The current dispensation instructs young men and women that they live in a patriarchal apartheid state even though their instructors’ state-financed existence indicates just how wildly tolerant our country actually is. Only in our universities is social justice, the notion of citizens keeping what they earn, revamped into being an act of governmental policy favoring one group of citizens over another. There, the solution to every problem is more government spending and government’s increased grip upon the economy.
An important question to ask here is why are there so many “liberal” professors? The answer is simple; they refuse to hire anyone who thinks differently from them. They can tolerate no disagreement or diversity on campus. If they did, none of their positions would be tenable. America is only a racist and sexist state when one refuses to examine anywhere else. As far as human beings go, we, as a people, are the most generous and kind on the planet. Yet, political correctness instructs that every white person has the heart of Bull Connor and that every man lords over women as if he were the Sultan of Brunei. These lies, rather than racism, are the true beliefs institutionalized in the system. Political correctness is the height of anti-intellectualism and is an excellent illustration of why a college education has little more value today than helping one to procure a job. Our professors, supposedly great lovers of the masses, impoverish and bankrupt those they know best, students, as tuition costs irrationally escalate each year.
As it turned out, the locals had little to fear from the Fabricator in Chief’s visit. Moore’s performance was completely devoid of substance. He is nothing more than an emotion merchant. All he offered was chants, repetition, and clichés. This generous man attacked Republicans continuously, but did say that he would forgive them (specifically, for their poor treatment of minorities) in exchange for a vote for John Kerry in November. Of course, there is no truth in his assertion that the right treats minorities badly. When juxtaposed with the left, the right is a wellspring of equality and opportunity. Currently, as in the past, illiberals are obsessed with race. This is not surprising given the roots of the Democratic Party, which was the party of slavery, the party of Jim Crow, and now the party of affirmative action. The only alteration is that now they keep whites and Asians down instead of blacks.
Sean Hannity visited the town before Moore in the hopes that he would be an antidote. He gave a speech in which he too ridiculed his opponents, but there was a vital difference between Hannity and Moore, as Hannity allowed his enemies to speak. He took questions from the audience, who turned out to be the same “engaged” professors interviewed previously. They hogged the microphone, and, rather than ask anything, gave diatribes concerning George W. Bush. It was also amusing to note that the far left protested both celebrities, as two members of the Green Party had to be removed for aggressively heckling the emotor behind Fahrenheit 911.
The Divided State does raise some important questions, but they surely are not the ones the film intended.
If Michael Moore uses cliches it is because Republicans and Conservatives
it is because they have become cliches.
Patrick,
Your comment is a cliche. How about engaging the debate and answering perhaps one of the author’s points? Please, oh please, give us something that shows you thought about your position and are prepared to allow others to scrutinize it.
Someone may even (gasp!) disagree with you. That does not make them idiots, fools, homophobes, bigots, or even cliches. Really. I’ll say it again: People who disagree with you are not idiots. You do not need to call them names, denigrate them, or attack them. All you need to do is make an intelligent point and thoughtfully consider the responses you receive.
If you cannot do that, it says more about you than it does about those with whom you disagree.
“Why does Michael Moore warrant such attention?” I’m not speaking of this article specifically. I mean ANY attention.
He is a ‘documentary’ film-maker who has been proven to have fabricated parts of his ‘documentaries’ and is also a proven hypocrit (the man who rails on and on about the evils of capitalism seems to have a stock portfolio most of us would envy).
Nonetheless, he is not a lawmaker or a policymaker. He is a film-maker! Why is his every move so important? I assume it must be through some perceived influence of his films, but really, what reasonable people take this man or his films seriously? And if they do, why?
Rich,
In all kindness let me respond. I do not use the term “cliché” in a derisory fashion. I have met few idiots, less fools, some who never understood homosexuality and a couple dozen bigots. Disagreement I can live with. It is the stones that grind against you that might make a difference, and I anticipate that. In past posts I have been called an Islamofascist, traitor, fool, hackneyed liberal, but hope springs eternal.
The point of the divided states is to illustrate that the states are divided. The point is not so much that the Mormons blocked free speech but that they needed to do so to protect their followers. To use the statement a privatized Post Office is the equivalent of a hatred for all living things, well at least I never said that. Intolerance has permeated both left than those on the right.
Now wait a minute, “liberals” have embodied repression and restriction in our nation today?
A radical feminist is a radical feminist, a socialist is a socialist, and multiculturalism which doesn’t exist here, is responsible for a war between the sexes, wrongly distorted history, undermined the value of public education, and shamed us into financing a federal government big and powerful enough to take away our every need or aspiration? I think the crime here is lumping together liberals as a boogieman to be whipped. Really, talk about your “Straw man! ”
Attack Moore as a rich hyprocrite but leave Rumsfelt and Cheney as lucky folks who fell into wealth. You might be surprised how much of Moore’s wealth is given away, but don’t focus on that. This myth that the left is ruining your kids in university is old and tired. Face it Hugh Hefner is the biggest capitalist around and has more influence on campus that Betty Fridian, but don’t let that get in the way of a leftist conspiracy. I agree with the author in one regard, the cost of education is ridiculous, as I see it education should be free. A politicized professorate is a worthless professorate unless it’s politicized to the right to quote fox. When you reduce the government to nothing but cronyism you get what you ask for. The total ruination of New Orleans is staring you in the face. Liberals don’ t see the solution to every problem as more government spending but doing the right thing in a disaster. That’s what you pay taxes for. Is that not the Christian response in a time of need? Of course if there is no truth in his assertion that the right treats minorities fairly then why won’t they vote for the G.O.P?. As of Friday George fell below 30% which puts him in pretty rare company. The “liberals” did not put him there. The difference between Moore and Hannerty is Moore is the one who goes to church to pray for a change in the hearts of those who see nothing but darkness as an answer to the future. A nation undivided indeed! So Rich I leave you with the words that no one is as blind as those who refuse to see.
In all kindness,
Patrick
” Liberals don’ t see the solution to every problem as more government spending but doing the right thing in a disaster.”
Patrick, the New Orleans mayor left hundreds of buses to be flooded instead of using them to evacuate people, and Senator Blanco waited 3 days before requesting help from federal authotities even though she had been advised by federal authorities to act sooner than that…and that is the short list of what those two
” compassionate” liberals did wrong.
Is that what you call ” liberals doing the right thing in a disaster”?
The whole broohaha over Michael Moore speaking at UVSC was never about censoring him, but about whether or not a proven liar and exploitation artist should be paid an exorbinent speaking fee from student-body funds. This was something a large percentage of the student-body objected to. Sean Hannity waived his speaking fee for the opportunity to provide an alternative viewpoint. Mormonism never entered into the equation at all. The truth is that except for a handful of people at the college, nobody in Utah really paid much attention at all.
Lets be realistic about the flood. The mayor should have been prepared. Much better prepared. But Fema is supposed to take the lead in this situation or do we pay them for some other thing beside emergency response? But when you put a guy good at horse shows in charge well maybe if a big horse ranch was flooded he might of excelled. The real problem was that it took seven days to get anything going. The mayor’s job is to run the city. The senator’s to run the state. I would believe the head of Fema is supposed to respond to emergencies. “Brownie you’re doing a heck of a job ” doesn’t cut it. Or is sitting around collecting hefty
salaries for doing nothing a conserative method of operation?
“But Fema is supposed to take the lead in this situation or do we pay them for some other thing beside emergency response? ”
(Is this a statement or a question?)
This is just another straw man argument. FEMA is explicitly *not* a first-responder agency. It is not their responsibility to rush in an seize control from the state and local authorities. I know this because I’ve worked in an emergency communications center for 18 years and have had a lot of contact with FEMA.
Pres. Bush urged the Democrat governor of Louisiana to declare a state of emergency ahead of time, so that FEMA could legally move in. She waited several days to give him an answer — after the storm had passed through.
Democrat Mayor Nagin, after considerable fuss was raised over his refusal to use the school buses to transport people out of the city, stated essentially that school buses were not good enough, and the federal government should have sent in charter buses. I’ll bet the people who were left trapped in the ruins of New Orleans by Nagin’s stupidity would have thought that the school buses were good enough.
Hey there patty-boy, quite the “liberal flanking maneuver” you pulled there!!!
Step 1- Use thoughtless one liner to insult conservatives and defend your beloved propaganda master, Mikey Moore (you probably cut and pasted it).
Step 2 – Get ripped all to hell by a well reasoned reply.
Step 3 – Start bitching incoherently about scattered things and then, OF COURSE morph this into a Katrina debate
Wait, what… Katrina?!? How did we end up discussing this?? (that was the flank my friends)
A large portion of this article was about hyper-liberal academia; this is a discussion that NO liberal wants to engage in. They all know that it is true. I am currently in law school with ONE full time faculty member who is a registered Republican. This is not an argument that liberals can win and not an issue that they want to draw any attention to.
So, now we are suddenly talking about Katrina, with a reference to poll numbers, (created for liberals, by liberals), and a one liner that patty thinks that education should be free, of course liberals think that people should get EVERYTHING fore free. Not talking about profs…
Jimmy J., then had a fantastic and well informed rebuttal… so Jimmy, be prepared to be called a racist… this is how the liberal “argument” goes.
So Mr. Patty, get back on topic (because you got caught) and tell me why it is OK to have such a drastically skewed faculty, an abuse of the tenure system, political grandstanding passed off as “educating”… not about: wire tapping, Katrina, hunting accidents, ect. Are you a college prof who just combs the internet for these discussions, derailing them ASAP so that you and your other quasi-communist “educators” stay out of the spotlight? Oops, my internal monologue slipped out again. Justify higher education to us Patty, head-on, not the flank.
Hey there patty-boy, quite the “liberal flanking maneuver” you pulled there!!!
Step 1- Use thoughtless one liner to insult conservatives and defend your beloved propaganda master, Mikey Moore (you probably cut and pasted it).
Step 2 – Get ripped all to pieces by a well reasoned reply.
Step 3 – Start b**ching incoherently about scattered things and then, OF COURSE morph this into a Katrina debate
Wait, what… Katrina?!? How did we end up discussing this?? (that was the flank my friends)
A large portion of this article was about hyper-liberal academia; this is a discussion that NO liberal wants to engage in. They all know that it is true. I am currently in law school with ONE full time faculty member who is a registered Republican. This is not an argument that liberals can win and not an issue that they want to draw any attention to.
So, now we are suddenly talking about Katrina, with a reference to poll numbers, (created for liberals, by liberals), and a one liner that patty thinks that education should be free, of course liberals think that people should get EVERYTHING fore free. Not talking about profs…
Jimmy J., then had a fantastic and well informed rebuttal… so Jimmy, be prepared to be called a racist… this is how the liberal “argument” goes.
So Mr. Patty, get back on topic (because you got caught) and tell me why it is OK to have such a drastically skewed faculty, an abuse of the tenure system, political grandstanding passed off as “educating”… not about: wire tapping, Katrina, hunting accidents, ect. Are you a college prof who just combs the internet for these discussions, derailing them ASAP so that you and your other quasi-communist “educators” stay out of the spotlight? (Oops, my internal monologue slipped out again.) Justify higher education to us Patty, head-on, not the flank.
Patrick,
It would be easier to discuss things with you if you didn’t simply arrange a bunch of left wing talking points into paragraphs.
This tiring litany of yours contains dozens of disjointed statements, no supporting facts, and not one argument or point of debate.
Andy B., your analysis of Patrick’s diatribe is brilliant, cogent, and devastating. Go, man!
Well done Andy! You seem to be a hero… I’ll consider it a light shredding rather than a devastating repartee. Lets move into your talking points. You seem distraught that faculty are not all registered Republicans. Is this your criteria to teach? You never mentioned how many were registered Democrats? Did you research that? Or is it you think Democrats should not be allowed in law school at all? Why are Democrats teachers? Perhaps I should say Liberals since I doubt all teachers are Democrats. Republicans don’t want to teach because there’s no money in it? I don’t know why the skew. I don’t understand the reference to tenure. You would remove tenure if possible? From everyone? Would that not jeopardize freedom of speech? Political grandstanding? Give Conservatives a forum and they run with it! Fox news is kind of a university for conservatives is it not? A large number go there to be educated it seems. I am definitely not a college prof. Seems to me you’re doing the combing. I would say by coming to this post I’m not avoiding the spotlight. The name calling about communists well, if it makes you feel good then have at it. You ask me to justify higher education? By this do you mean you despise higher education? I really don’t see why any rational human being should have to justify higher education. Responding to a few other points, I’ll play devils advocate. The Mayor of New Orleans is stupid. The governor clueless. Fema did the right thing by carefully considering the proper response. The democrats caused the flood because of environmental groups requesting bird sanctuaries or some other such thing. If only there had been more Republicans in positions of power it would have all been better and we could all hold hands and sing uplifting songs. Everyone out there feel better now? Didn’t think so. But don’t feel bad Andy, you have a few people on your team out there!
Rich, I’m disapointed in you! Such blood sport.
OK Patty, I am going to do my best to reply to you (rant) response. However, because there are somewhere in the neighborhood of 15 question marks in your “paragraph”, I may not get to everything.
Your first barrage of question marks seemed to be directed at my personal experience in law school… I am at a Tier-2 (aka top 100) law school in the Midwest. The make-up of our faculty has been described to me (by profs and deans) as having a single Republican and 2 faculty members who have some tendencies to the right. I listened to one of these “right leaning” faculty members make a case (for nearly 2 hours) in a Business Associations class that stockholders should have profits (dividends) drastically cut after their initial investment is recouped and these funds should then be diverted to the workers. So that should give you an idea of where I am coming from.
As far as my “research” into the faculty at my university (which you have been so quick to criticize) it has involved inquiries to the dean, assistant dean, numerous faculty members, and spending 2 years sitting in classrooms paying tens of thousands of dollars to hear liberal rants. It has also involved observing the “baiting” of conservative students so profs can attempt to verbally dis-member them in front of an audience. When the “right-minded” students make good points and get a leg up, “professor power” is used to manipulate fact patters (or just manipulate the facts of real world discussions) to their advantage or they end all discussion and take a cheap shot or 2 at the student. I know conservative students who have had grades manipulated (lowered) because of their opposing views that they expressed during the semester, and liberal (tenured) professors admitting to this. Mind you, this is a violation of university policy AND of “anonymous grading” that the system is based upon. This is my “research” (of course, nothing happens to tenured prof)
“Republicans don’t want to teach because there’s no money in it” – your words patty. The new tenure track prof (usually mid 20s to early 30s) is clearing 80K here, that is much more than the starting salaries for law grads here in the Midwest. All tenured profs are making 6 figures, quite the hefty sum with the low cost of living in this area.
Why the reference to tenure you ask?? Well…
“Tenure originated in the middle-ages as a means to attract academics of stature. In the late 19th century, university professors complained of a lack of intellectual freedom and frequent dismissals within a system of mostly private colleges; and secured promises of tenure in their contracts as a means of academic self-protection. They argued that intellectual freedom and, thereby, the quality of education suffered in the absence of tenure. By the early 20th century, tenure had become a common practice available to highly rated professors in order to maintain the prestige of a college and served the mutual interest of both professors and administrations. However, this did not mean tenure was regularly or automatically granted to every professor who remained a fixed time within his contract. Tenure had to be earned as recognition of superior contribution, and was bestowed by meeting a combination of contractual obligations and merit. By 1940, tenure had become even more common place and the original intent had so blurred that any professor surviving the fixed period achieved tenure” from “Teacher Tenuritis” by Robert Stapler
My problem is that tenure has morphed from something granted to the most highly sought after and accomplished professors to its present form. For professors to “survive the fixed period” they must survive the current faculty members… I described them at the beginning of this. Liberal faculty is none too welcoming to those of differing mindsets and does not allow them to gain tenure. For an example of this see…
http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2006/politics-gender-and-race-lawrence-summers-and-the-death-of-academic-discourse/
Now patty… if you read this you will scream ANDY, YOU IDIOT, THIS IS ABOUT A UNIVERSITY ADMINISTRATOR, NOT A PROF!! and Patty, that is exactly why it is applicable. Presidents and Deans of universities work on a contractual basis… not a tenure basis. They must have contracts renewed and can actually be fired, just like NON-TENURE professors. So if liberal profs (that fill universities) can run the President of Harvard out of town… what do you suppose they can do to a non-tenured prof with “evil” conservative views??? A prof who needs them (tenured liberals) to allow the untenured prof to become tenured!! (you see the vicious circle there patty?)
You are worried about freedom of speech in universities, this does not exist at this point… try making a pro-life or a traditional marriage argument in a Constitutional Law class (I have, and got to experience hate on an all new level).
You are worried about grandstanding? It is already happening daily and it is all championing of the liberal ideal.
You don’t like Fox… big surprise… and you equate it to a “university for conservatives”. Do you pay tens of thousands of dollars a year to watch Fox? If you watch Fox for 3 years can you become an attorney? Can you choose to watch another (liberal) media outlet to become an attorney? — no, no, and no. Universities are very expensive, these schools are the only means to the desired end (to become and attorney in my case), and because academia is so liberal there is not much choice in the matter. So, uhhh, great point there about fox (note sarcasm).
The communist name calling, yah, it is fun, it makes me feel better, and more conservatives should do it… the far left is more prevalent in this country than the vast majority of Americans know, we should raise awareness levels.
Do I hate higher education?? Well that is just a brilliant question there patty. I enjoy education, always have. I really enjoy the law and my study of it. Do I enjoy the “super-left” makeup of faculty, no… but that is not enough for me to have developed a boiling hatred for “higher education” on a whole.
FINALLY – you do not see “why a rational human being should have to justify higher education?” Well above are the issues that I have with higher education and the tenure system, can you justify this system????
Finally, in response to you Katrina comments… THIS IS A DISCUSSION ABOUT HIGHER EDUCATION, SO STOP STEERING IT TOWARDS KATRINA. (or anything else with you “liberal flanking maneuvers”)
I look forward to your reply Patty, except that your posts take on a very “Joe Christmas” stream of consciousness form that is nearly unreadable. Is this because you liberals are only good for chants and one-liners as opposed to thoughtful discussions of issues? Isn’t it too bad that the “shouting one liner at conservative over and over“ approach only “works” face to face and has appeared to backfire stupendously on you here….
The number one threat to liberals is the real world, that is why so many of them choose to hide in America’s universities. (there is my one liner patty, it is even on topic) till next time…
Andy
You seem to have trouble with my rambling as you put it. You refer to my writings as rants or disjointed unreadable babble.
You refer to your ideas as concise rational thought that just leaves me in tatters. Well you think like a lawyer all right. Here’s the rub Andy.
Your ranting far more than I am. And complaining. And whining. You pay a considerable sum of money to attend a school. you seem to dislike intensely. I’m sure somewhere you could find a Republican School that would suit your tastes. There must be a few. If you don’t like the product , don’t buy it. If you study law you will have to practice law not just Republican law. You seem to feel that no liberal should be allowed to educate or be educated. The last vote was split 50/50 so pretending we’re not out there is self defeating. I’m sorry that you don’t like all the liberals that surround you but you know what? As you replied to me, get used to it Andy because that’s the real world. To tell you the truth you seem to be the one in an ivory tower here. That your profs hold ideas about business that offends you Andy is something you will find hard to bear because there is a vast amount of things about the world you are going to find distasteful. Nearly all of it some days it seems.
The baiting and dismembering you find so unfair is something you seem to enjoy here so I guess your learning. And you state cases where grade are fixed and teachers are bad. Just wait till you actually hit the real world. I got some news for you. You’re not going to like it.
The only problem you seem to have with tenure is you don’t like when they don’t choose your friends. It’s a big vicious circle? Big deal. Wait to you get out of school. People will fill your days with tons of mind numbing crap constantly. And you think it’s vicious there? Just wait.
I have made pro life arguments to far tougher crowds. Same with marriage. I didn’t get hate. Just people calling me the same stuff I get here. So it really doesn’t bother me much anymore. Life goes on
The point I was trying to make about Grandstanding is this. You are grandstanding here as well. Call it what you want, same thing.
There is something we agree on. The vast majority of Americans need far more awareness about a great many things and not just the left wing conspiracy you allude to. You also say you don’t have a boiling hate on for higher education. Perhaps not but you got something going on. Don’t ask me to justify your profs and the system. Ask them. Systems like this will be there when I’m long gone. Just as infuriating and unfair now or a hundred years from now. Justify why you attend something you so dislike. I will admit I don’t know what this “Joe Christmas thing is you refer to. If you feel that I’ve backfired stupendously why do you look forward to my reply? I will reiterate, I do not teach, go to or in any other way have contact with universities but I will cede to you a point. Liberals need a place to hide from the real world because what you have going on out there is frightening indeed.