After Crossfire and Hardball Tonight, is There Any Question Remaining? The Media is the Real Enemy.

Excuse me .. with a teaching degree you could open your own school .. or train parents to teach their own children. Might be much more rewarding .. and lucrative!

My husband got a PhD in education hoping to do this very thing, but he passed away late last year before he could get it off the ground. I think it's a great idea!

We're up against a LOT here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1190967/posts

Hey there! Some of us are in for the long haul. We pulled our sons out of Gov't Schools in 2000, and that was the best decision we ever made. We now have 7 children (so far) that we intend to homeschool, and they are already aware of the way the media "shapes" the issues of the day. We no longer have have TV or cable, though, so they are really pretty insulated from the BS.

This is just a heads up to let you know that this angle is being worked BUT we need bigger numbers! Our kids will be the next generation of conservative warriors, money alone can't cut it.

Textbooks? We don't need no stinkin' textbooks!

You need to encourage your crew to grow up to be educators or jounalists with their own news service. LOL!! - H.N.S reporting.

I'm so sorry to hear about your husband. Does he have teacher friends who might want to help you put your husband's idea into action ..?? You could name the school after him .. what a legacy!

" How about we force newspapers and television networks (not to mention Universities) to hire conservatives NOW?"

How do you do that?

I think what he was saying is similar to what I said:

All in all O'Neill got in some very good points all the while Christine looked like an a$$ for being so biased and rude.

O'Neill won that one regardless.

" I used to work in radio and I've seen the textbooks used in journalism studies. They are some of the worst, most biased pieces of garbage ever written, and are treated as gospel. No one gets anywhere in journalism or the universities without toeing a Stalinist line."

And therein lies the target. Can you post the primary schools of journalism?

If a grassroots effort is to succeed, it must the address the root of the problem, and that is the liberal bias being taught in journalism schools. The first step would be to procure and review their textbooks, curriculum, and the professors' lectures/assignments and personal political leanings.

With written and witnessed proof in hand of leftist bias, maybe the next step would be to mount a campaign against one institution at a time.

And Clinton was elected twice, even after soliciting BJ's in the oval office from a 21 year old intern

Lewinsky didn't break until after the 1996 election.

Reagan got in when John Anderson split the dem vote

If every Anderson voter had voted for Carter instead, Reagan would have won by 2.7MM votes.

Bush1 lost re-election with the constant "It's the economy Stupid" and "He lied about raising taxes" drumbeat from the media.

I believe that Perot siphoned off enough Bush votes to unseat Bush. Kentucky, Missouri, Ohio and Georgia were lost to Bush thanks to Perot.

For regular business', make it least offensive alternative ($$), for education, make them adopt the Academic Bill of Rights and then sue them when they don't comply.

"But clearly, GOVERNMENT SCHOOLS ARE RUINING OUR CHILDREN'S MINDS."

You may want to check out Freedom Foundation of Valley Forge, a national organization trying to counter the above.

One institution at a time...focus our energies on a single target that we can bite off and chew. Put a few notches in your belt and just the sight of you walking into their corporate or admin offices will have them peeing in their shoes.

"...Lists of lies from pols,..."

Check out Accuracy in Media (www.aim.org) and
Fair & Accuracy in Reporting (www.fair.org)

Academic Bill of Rights

I. The Mission of the University.
The central purposes of a University are the pursuit of truth, the discovery of new knowledge through scholarship and research, the study and reasoned criticism of intellectual and cultural traditions, the teaching and general development of students to help them become creative individuals and productive citizens of a pluralistic democracy, and the transmission of knowledge and learning to a society at large. Free inquiry and free speech within the academic community are indispensable to the achievement of these goals. The freedom to teach and to learn depend upon the creation of appropriate conditions and opportunities on the campus as a whole as well as in the classrooms and lecture halls. These purposes reflect the values -- pluralism, diversity, opportunity, critical intelligence, openness and fairness -- that are the cornerstones of American society.

II. Academic Freedom
1. The Concept . Academic freedom and intellectual diversity are values indispensable to the American university. From its first formulation in the General Report of the Committee on Academic Freedom and Tenure of the American Association of University Professors, the concept of academic freedom has been premised on the idea that human knowledge is a never-ending pursuit of the truth, that there is no humanly accessible truth that is not in principle open to challenge, and that no party or intellectual faction has a monopoly on wisdom.

_ftn1Therefore, academic freedom is most likely to thrive in an environment of intellectual diversity that protects and fosters independence of thought and speech. In the words of the General Report, it is vital to protect “as the first condition of progress, [a] complete and unlimited freedom to pursue inquiry and publish its results.”
Because free inquiry and its fruits are crucial to the democratic enterprise itself, academic freedom is a national value as well. In a historic 1967 decision ( Keyishian v. Board of Regents of the University of the State of New York ) the Supreme Court of the United States overturned a New York State loyalty provision for teachers with these words: “Our Nation is deeply committed to safeguarding academic freedom, [a] transcendent value to all of us and not merely to the teachers concerned.” In Sweezy v. New Hampshire, (1957) the Court observed that the “essentiality of freedom in the community of American universities [was] almost self-evident.”

2. The Practice . Academic freedom consists in protecting the intellectual independence of professors, researchers and students in the pursuit of knowledge and the expression of ideas from interference by legislators or authorities within the institution itself. This means that no political, ideological or religious orthodoxy will be imposed on professors and researchers through the hiring or tenure or termination process, or through any other administrative means by the academic institution. Nor shall legislatures impose any such orthodoxy through their control of the university budget.

This protection includes students. From the first statement on academic freedom, it has been recognized that intellectual independence means the protection of students – as well as faculty – from the imposition of any orthodoxy of a political, religious or ideological nature. The 1915 General Report admonished faculty to avoid “taking unfair advantage of the student’s immaturity by indoctrinating him with the teacher’s own opinions before the student has had an opportunity fairly to examine other opinions upon the matters in question, and before he has sufficient knowledge and ripeness of judgment to be entitled to form any definitive opinion of his own.” In 1967, the AAUP’s Joint Statement on Rights and Freedoms of Students reinforced and amplified this injunction by affirming the inseparability of “the freedom to teach and freedom to learn.” In the words of the report, “Students should be free to take reasoned exception to the data or views offered in any course of study and to reserve judgment about matters of opinion.”

Therefore, to secure the intellectual independence of faculty and students and to protect the principle of intellectual diversity, the following principles and procedures shall be observed.

These principles fully apply only to public universities and to private universities that present themselves as bound by the canons of academic freedom. Private institutions choosing to restrict academic freedom on the basis of creed have an obligation to be as explicit as is possible about the scope and nature of these restrictions.
1. All faculty shall be hired, fired, promoted and granted tenure on the basis of their competence and appropriate knowledge in the field of their expertise and, in the humanities, the social sciences, and the arts, with a view toward fostering a plurality of methodologies and perspectives. No faculty shall be hired or fired or denied promotion or tenure on the basis of his or her political or religious beliefs.

2. No faculty member will be excluded from tenure, search and hiring committees on the basis of their political or religious beliefs.

3. Students will be graded solely on the basis of their reasoned answers and appropriate knowledge of the subjects and disciplines they study, not on the basis of their political or religious beliefs.

4. Curricula and reading lists in the humanities and social sciences should reflect the uncertainty and unsettled character of all human knowledge in these areas by providing students with dissenting sources and viewpoints where appropriate. While teachers are and should be free to pursue their own findings and perspectives in presenting their views, they should consider and make their students aware of other viewpoints. Academic disciplines should welcome a diversity of approaches to unsettled questions.

5. Exposing students to the spectrum of significant scholarly viewpoints on the subjects examined in their courses is a major responsibility of faculty. Faculty will not use their courses for the purpose of political, ideological, religious or anti-religious indoctrination.

6. Selection of speakers, allocation of funds for speakers programs and other student activities will observe the principles of academic freedom and promote intellectual pluralism.

7. An environment conducive to the civil exchange of ideas being an essential component of a free university, the obstruction of invited campus speakers, destruction of campus literature or other effort to obstruct this exchange will not be tolerated.

8. Knowledge advances when individual scholars are left free to reach their own conclusions about which methods, facts, and theories have been validated by research. Academic institutions and professional societies formed to advance knowledge within an area of research, maintain the integrity of the research process, and organize the professional lives of related researchers serve as indispensable venues within which scholars circulate research findings and debate their interpretation. To perform these functions adequately, academic institutions and professional societies should maintain a posture of organizational neutrality with respect to the substantive disagreements that divide researchers on questions within, or outside, their fields of inquiry.

The Student Bill of Rights

I. The Mission of the University.
The central purposes of a University are the pursuit of truth, the discovery of new knowledge through scholarship and research, the study and reasoned criticism of intellectual and cultural traditions, the teaching and general development of students to help them become creative individuals and productive citizens of a pluralistic democracy, and the transmission of knowledge and learning to a society at large. Free inquiry and free speech within the academic community are indispensable to the achievement of these goals. The freedom to teach and to learn depend upon the creation of appropriate conditions and opportunities on the campus as a whole as well as in the classrooms and lecture halls. These purposes reflect the values -- pluralism, diversity, opportunity, critical intelligence, openness and fairness -- that are the cornerstones of American society.

II. Academic Freedom
1. The Concept. Academic freedom and intellectual diversity are values indispensable to the American university. From its first formulation in the General Report of the Committee on Academic Freedom and Tenure of the American Association of University Professors, the concept of academic freedom has been premised on the idea that human knowledge is a never-ending pursuit of the truth, that there is no humanly accessible truth that is not in principle open to challenge, and that no party or intellectual faction has a monopoly on wisdom. Therefore, academic freedom is most likely to thrive in an environment of intellectual diversity that protects and fosters independence of thought and speech. In the words of the General Report, it is vital to protect “as the first condition of progress, [a] complete and unlimited freedom to pursue inquiry and publish its results.”

Because free inquiry and its fruits are crucial to the democratic enterprise itself, academic freedom is a national value as well. In a historic 1967 decision (Keyishian v. Board of Regents of the University of the State of New York ) the Supreme Court of the United States overturned a New York State loyalty provision for teachers with these words: “Our Nation is deeply committed to safeguarding academic freedom, [a] transcendent value to all of us and not merely to the teachers concerned.” In Sweezy v. New Hampshire, (1957) the Court observed that the “essentiality of freedom in the community of American universities [was] almost self-evident.”

2. The Practice. Academic freedom consists in protecting the intellectual independence of professors, researchers and students in the pursuit of knowledge and the expression of ideas from interference by legislators or authorities within the institution itself. This means that no political, ideological or religious orthodoxy will be imposed on professors, researchers and students through the hiring or tenure or termination process, or through the grading system or through the control of the classroom or any other administrative means. Nor shall legislatures impose any such orthodoxy through their control of the university budget.

From its very first statement on academic freedom, the university community has recognized the vulnerability of students in particular to political and ideological abuses of the university as an institution. The 1915 General Report admonished faculty to avoid “taking unfair advantage of the student’s immaturity by indoctrinating him with the teacher’s own opinions before the student has had an opportunity fairly to examine other opinions upon the matters in question, and before he has sufficient knowledge and ripeness of judgment to be entitled to form any definitive opinion of his own.”

In The 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure, the American Association of University Professors declared: “Teachers are entitled to freedom in the classroom in discussing their subject, but they should be careful not to introduce into their teaching controversial matter which has no relation to their subject.” In a 1970 clarification and re-endorsement of this principle, the AAUP said: “The intent of this statement is not to discourage what is ‘controversial.’ Controversy is at the heart of the free academic inquiry, which the entire statement is designed to foster. The passage serves to underscore the need for teachers to avoid persistently intruding material which has no relation to their subject.” (“1970 Interpretative Comments,” endorsed by the 56th annual association meeting as association policy.)
In 1967, the AAUP’s Joint Statement on Rights and Freedoms of Students affirmed the inseparability of “the freedom to teach and freedom to learn.” In the words of the report, “Students should be free to take reasoned exception to the data or views offered in any course of study and to reserve judgment about matters of opinion.”

Professors are hired to teach all students, not just students who share their political, religious and philosophical beliefs. It is essential therefore, that professors and lecturers not force their opinions about philosophy, politics and other contestable issues on students in the classroom and in all academic environments.

This is a cardinal principle of academic freedom laid down by the American Association of University Professors.
In an academic environment professors are in a unique position of authority vis-à-vis their students. The use of academic incentives and disincentives to advance a partisan or sectarian view creates an environment of indoctrination which is unprofessional and contrary to the educational mission. It is a violation of students’ academic freedom. The creation of closed, political fiefdoms in colleges, programs or departments, is the opposite of academic freedom, and does not deserve public subsidy or private educational support.

Therefore, to ensure the integrity of the educational process and to protect the principle of intellectual diversity, the following principles and procedures shall be observed. These principles fully apply only to public universities and to private universities that present themselves as bound by the canons of academic freedom.

Private institutions choosing to restrict academic freedom on the basis of creed have an obligation to be as explicit as is possible about the scope and nature of these restrictions.

1. Students will be graded solely on the basis of their reasoned answers and appropriate knowledge of the subjects and disciplines they study, not on the basis of their political or religious beliefs.

2. Curricula and reading lists in the humanities and social sciences should reflect the uncertainty and unsettled character of all human knowledge in these areas by providing students with dissenting sources and viewpoints where appropriate. While teachers are and should be free to pursue their own findings and perspectives in presenting their views, they should consider and make their students aware of other viewpoints. Academic disciplines should welcome a diversity of approaches to unsettled questions.

3. Exposing students to the spectrum of significant scholarly viewpoints on the subjects examined in their courses is a major responsibility of faculty. Faculty will not use their courses for the purpose of political, ideological, religious or anti-religious indoctrination.

4. Selection of speakers, allocation of funds for speakers programs and other student activities will observe the principles of academic freedom and promote intellectual pluralism.

5. An environment conducive to the civil exchange of ideas being an essential component of a free university, the obstruction of invited campus speakers, destruction of campus literature or other effort to obstruct this exchange will not be tolerated.

6. Knowledge advances when individual scholars are left free to reach their own conclusions about which methods, facts, and theories have been validated by research. Academic institutions and professional societies formed to advance knowledge within an area of research, maintain the integrity of the research process, and organize the professional lives of related researchers serve as indispensable venues within which scholars circulate research findings and debate their interpretation. To perform these functions adequately, academic institutions and professional societies should maintain a posture of organizational neutrality with respect to the substantive disagreements that divide researchers on questions within, or outside, their fields of inquiry.

No, Bob: media is just a commercial enterprise selling a product. The enemy is we ourselves, an increasingly G-dless, unpatriotic and dumbed-down culture. We met the enemy and it's us.

This is all nice and quixotic, but you would be more effective telling us that we should attend churches and synagogues more often.

What's the current status of the Academic Bill of Rights?

As for your idea of "focus" and mine of "one institution at a time", you are influential with FRN, make it so. Think it's time FRN and FR participants take one issue on at a time? Forget the cruises; forget the FRivas; forget the SBVforT (who have plenty of support); forget the election; forget the street demonstations; forget the NMAT..."focus" all your resources on either the media bias or the liberal teachings in our education system.

This is the big picture message of your article...so take the lead. Do what I asked of Humidstan (sp) above, for a start. Look for the organizations who are already fighting either fight and support them. As you say, "Don't re-invent the wheel". Find the most effective orgs/persons/media and build the coalitions. But "focus" and direct all your efforts into one or the other root problems you posted here.

God bless you, Marie! I remember you well - from the March for Justice in 1998 when you brought your newborn (#3??) to the FR open house!

Seems like 100 years ago sometimes. But maybe that's just because of mileage, LOL!

Keep up the good work with homeschooling. Your prediction about the next generation is right on the mark. I'm now working on my grandchildren!

BOOKMARKED. And THANKS!

>>you would be more effective telling us that we should attend churches and synagogues more often.<<

I agree.... **PROVIDED** we attend NON-National Council of Church member churches!!