Another Moonbat Bombs: Teachers Should Teach, Not Indoctrinate
I have heard this discussed on the radio today. Mary Katherine Ham picked up on this, and so did Michelle Malkin. Below is the transcript of this teacher's--and I use the word very loosely in this man's respect--uneducated, Leftist rant.
(Note: This is not the entire transcription. Michelle Malkin is still transcribing this entire piece. It is twenty minutes long!)
Bennish: [tape begins with class already underway. Bennish completing an unintelligble statement about Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez.] Why do we have troops in Colombia fighting in their civil war for over 30 years. Most Americans don't even know this. For over 30 years, America has had soldiers fighting in Colombia in a civil war. Why are we fumigating coca crops in Bolivia and Peru if we're not trying to control other parts of the world. Who buys cocaine? Not Bolivians. Not Peruvians. Americans! Ok. Why are we destroying the farmers' lives when we're the ones that consume that good.
Can you imagine? What is the world's number one single cause of death by a drug? What drug is responsible for the most deaths in the world? Cigarettes! Who is the world's largest producer of cigarettes and tobacco? The United States!
What part of our country grows all our tobacco? Anyone know what states in particular? Mostly what's called North Carolina. Alright. That's where all the cigarette capitals are. That's where a lot of them are located from. Now if we have the right to fly to Bolivia or Peru and drop chemical weapons on top of farmers' fields because we're afraid they might be growing coca and that could be turned into cocaine and sold to us, well then don't the Peruvians and the Iranians and the Chinese have the right to invade America and drop chemical weapons over North Carolina to destroy the tobacco plants that are killing millions and millions of people in their countries every year and causing them billions of dollars in health care costs?
Make sure you get these definitions down.
Capitalism: If you don't understand the economic system of capitalism, you don't understand the world in which we live. Ok. Economic system in which all or most of the means of production, etc., are owned privately and operated in a somewhat competitive environment for the purpose of producing PROFIT! Of course, you can shorten these definitions down. Make sure you get the gist of it. Do you see how when, you know, when you're looking at this definition, where does it say anything about capitalism is an economic system that will provide everyone in the world with the basic needs that they need? Is that a part of this system? Do you see how this economic system is at odds with humanity? At odds with caring and compassion? It's at odds with human rights.
Anytime you have a system that is designed to procure profit, when profit is the bottom motive -- money -- that means money is going to become more important potentially than what? Safety, human lives, etc.
Why did we invade Iraq?! How do we know that the invasion of Iraq for weapons of mass destruction-- even if weapons had been found, how would you have known, how could you prove--that that was not a real reason for us to go there.
There are dozens upon dozens of countries that have weapons of mass destruction. Iraq is one of dozens. There are plenty of countries that are controlled by dictators, where people have no freedom, where they have weapons of mass destruction and they could be potentially threatening to America. We're not invading any of those countries!
0345.
[Pause.]
I'll give you guys another minute or two to get some of these [definitions] down. I agree with Joey. Try to condense these a little bit. I took these straight out of the dictionary.
Anyone in here watch any of Mr. Bush's [State of the Union] speech last night? I'm gonna talk a little about some of things he had to say.
0452
...One of things that I'll bring up now, since some of you are still writing, is, you know, Condoleezza Rice said this the other day and George Bush reiterated it last night. And the implication was that the solution to the violence in the Middle East is democratization. And the implication through his language was that democracies don't go to war. Democracies aren't violent. Democracies won't want weapons of mass destruction. This is called blind, naive faith in democracy!
0530.
Who is probably the single most violent nation on planet Earth?!
Unidentified brainwashed student interjects: We are.
The United States of America! And we're a democracy. Quote-unquote.
Who has the most weapons of mass destruction in the world? The United States.
Who's continuing to develop new weapons of mass destruction as we speak?!The United States.
So, why does Mr. Bush think that other countries that are democracies won't wanna be like us? Why does he think they'll just wanna be at peace with each other?! What makes him think that when the Palestinians get their own state that they won't wanna preemptively invade Israel to eliminate a potential threat to their security just like we supposedly did in Iraq?! Do you see the dangerous precedent that we have set by illegally invading another country and violating their sovereignty in the name of protecting us against a potential future--sorry--attack? [Unintelligible.]
0625.
Why doesn't Mexico invade Guatemala? Maybe they're scared of being attacked. Ok. Why doesn't North Korea invade South Korea?! They might be afraid of being attacked. Or maybe Iran and North Korea and Saudi Arabia and what else did he add to the list last night - and Zimbabwe - maybe they're all gonna team up and try and invade us because they're afraid we might invade them. I mean, where does this cycle of violence end? You know?
This whole "do as I say, not as I do" thing. That doesn't work. What was so important about President Bush's speech last night--and it doesn't matter if it was President Clinton still it would just as important) is that it's not just a speech to America. But who? The whole world! It's very obvious that if you listen to his language, if you listen to his body language, and if you paid attention to what he was saying, he wasn't always just talking to us. He was talking to the whole planet. Addressing the whole planet!
He started off his speech talking about how America should be the country that dominates the world. That we have been blessed essentially by God to have the most civilized, most advanced, best system and that it is our duty as Americans to use the military to go out into the world and make the whole world like us.
0759.
Sounds a lot like the things that Adolf Hitler use to say.
We're the only ones who are right. Everyone else is backwards. And it's our job to conquer the world and make sure they live just like we want them to.
Now, I'm not saying that Bush and Hitler are exactly the same. Obviously, they are not. Ok. But there are some eerie similarities to the tones that they use. Very, very "ethnocentric." We're right. You're all wrong.
I just keep waiting. You know, at some point I think America and Mexico might go to war again. You know. Anytime Mexico plays the USA in a soccer match. What can be heard chanting all game long?
0841
Do all Mexicans dislike the United States? No. Do all Americans dislike Mexico? No. But there's a lot of resentment--not just in Mexico, but across the whole world--towards America right now.
We told--Condoleezza Rice said--that now that Hamas got elected to lead the Palestianians that they have to renounce their desire to eliminate Israel. And then Condoleezza Rice also went on to say that you can't be for peace and support armed struggle at the same time. You can't do that. Either you're for peace or war. But you can't be for both.
What is the problem with her saying this? That's the same thing we say. That is exactly the same thing this current administration says. We're gonna make the world safe by invading and killing and making war. So, if we can be for peace and for war, well, why can't the Palestinians be for peace and for war?!
0950.
*Student Sean Allen, who is taping Bennish's rant, speaks up:*
Allen: Isn't there a difference of, of, having Hamas being like, we wanna attack Israelis because they're Israelis, and having us say we want to attack people who are known terrorists? Isn't there a difference between saying we're going to attack innocents and we're going to attack people who are not innocent?
1007
Bennish: I think that's a good point. But you have to remember who's doing the defining of a terrorist. And what is a terrorist?
Allen: Well, when people attack us on our own soil and are actually attempting to take American lives and want to take American lives, whereas, Israelies in this situation, aren't saying we want to blow up Palestine...
Bennish: How did Israel and the modern Israeli state even come into existence in the first place?
Allen: We gave it to them.
Bennish: Sort of. Why? After the Israel-Zionist movement conducted what? Terrorist acts. They assassinated the British prime minster in Palestine. They blew up buildings. They stole military equipment. Assassinated hundreds of people. Car bombings, you name it. That's how the modern state of Israel was made. Was through violence and terrorism. Eventually we did allow them to have the land. Why? Not because we really care, but because we wanted a strategic ally. We saw a way to us to get a hook into the Middle East.
If we create a modern nation of Israel, then, and we make them dependent on us for military aid and financial aid, then we can control a part of the Middle East. We will have a country in the Middle East that will be indebted to us.
Allen: But is it ok to say it's just to attack Israel? If it's ok to attack known terrorists, it's ok to attack Israel?
Bennish: If you were Palestinians, who are the real terrorists? The Israelis, who fire missiles that they purchased from the United States government into Palestinian neighborhoods and refugees and maybe kill a terrorist, but also kill innocent women and children. And when you shoot a missile into Pakistan to quote-unquote kill a known terrorist, and we just killed 75 people that have nothing to do with al Qaeda, as far as they're concerned, we're the terrorists. We've attacked them on their soil with the intention of killing their innocent people.
Allen: But we did not have the intention of killing innocent people. We had the intention of killing an al Qaeda terrorist.
Bennish: Do you know that?
Allen: So, you're saying the United States has the intention to kill innocent people?
The Rocky Mountain News is reporting that Mr. Bennish, the teacher on the rant, has been placed on leave.
An Overland High School geography teacher was put on leave Wednesday while Cherry Creek Schools investigates whether he violated district policy that requires balanced viewpoints in the classroom.
Jay Bennish, who teaches 10th grade world geography, is being investigated for making biased, anti-President Bush comments in class during a discussion of the State of the Union speech last month.
"These are serious allegations and we're very concerned about it," said Tustin Amole, spokeswoman for Cherry Creek Schools. "This does not reflect the type of teaching that we want to see in Cherry Creek school district."
Bennish could not be reached for comment Wednesday night.
On Feb. 1, Bennish, who has been at Overland High School since the fall of 2000, had a discussion in his class about the State of the Union address.
Sean Allen, a student in the class, taped the discussion, in which Bennish made a number of unfavorable comments about Bush that upset Allen's father.
"He said that some people may compare (Bush) to Hitler," Amole said.
The school district did not learn about Bennish's lecture until last Wednesday, when it received an e-mail about it from an out-of-state person who had seen an online column on it written by Walter Williams on www.townhall.com, Amole said. That same day, Allen's father also called the principal of Overland High School to complain about the teacher, and the complaint was forwarded to the district, which began its investigation.
"After listening to the tape, it's evident the comments in the class were inappropriate," Amole said. "There were not adequate opportunities for opposing points of view."
Here is the link to Mr. Williams' initial column on the subject.
I am incensed at this incident. As a college student, I have already dealt with one overt, liberal professor. But, as I pointed out in the title, teachers are supposed to teach, not indoctrinate. This is indoctrination at it's worst. This man truly feels that President Bush is nearly equal to Hitler. He believes the United States is the most evil, destructive nation on the face of the earth. And he equates Israel to the terrorist animals that have tried to destroy that nation.
Above, Mr. Bennish makes the incorrect assertion that democracies are more violent than any other form of government. That is not true. Democracies, like the United States, respond to threats. They do not invade to occupy and conquer, like the Soviets did during the Cold War and like Hitler did during World War II. Our invasion of Iraq was justified on a few levels. First, as has been pointed out now with more and more evidence coming out, Saddam Hussein did have WMDs, and those weapons were moved out of the country. He brutalized and terrorized over 25 million people in Iraq. He flaunted seventeen UN resolutions to comply with the 1991 cease-fire, and disarm. He continued his work on WMDs even while the IAEA and UNSCOM searched his country for them. He stole millions of dollars from the Oil-for-Food program; continuing the suffering of his people.
Saddams' crimes are a laundry list of offenses against his people and the world.
Democracies do not go to war with other democracies. True democracies can negotiate their problems. Was Germany a democracy in 1939 when they bolted over the border into Poland? Was North Korea a democracy when it invaded South Korea? What about Vietnam? What about the former Eastern Bloc countries that fell to Soviet Communism? These were not democracies waging war on another one; these were totalitarian dictatorships bent on conquering a neighbor.
Later (though not transcribed yet; I heard this) Mr. Bennish states that what occurred on 9/11 was virtually acceptable. All the targets, in his opinion, were "military targets." The CIA had offices in the World Trade Center, therefore it was a "military target." The white House, the Pentagon, and the Capitol building were all "military targets," according to Mr. Bennish. This is a false assertion on his part. The WTC complex was a civilian target; it was an economic center within a metropolis. (We are not Saddam Hussein; we do not put military bases in civilian area, per se.) Likewise, the three buildings he rattled off in DC are also not military targets. We have a civilian government, not a military governorship. One could make a feeble argument for the Pentagon to be a military target, but it does not wash, and it is due mostly to the amount of civilians that work within the complex.
A military target is considered, under the rules of war, a threat to opposing troops. None of these places even come close to the definition. As a matter of fact, they are precisely the contrary.
This teacher did not need to be put on leave. He is clearly on the tape saying these things, and what he is stating is anything but geography. The comments, while supported by the freedom of speech, does not give this man the right to pervert his trust and responsibility as an educator, and launch into an anti-American rant. Because he abused his position, he should be fired. There is no place in a high school for this sort of garbage. We know that the colleges are infested with those on the Left; many of them being sixties radicals that decided to enter teaching to sway a whole new generation to their way of thinking. But high school is the last step for many young men and women before entering the "real world." They need the knowledge and the skills to excel in society. This sort of "education" is not going to help them in the real world. Teachers like this only ensure that when these kids hit the "real world," the wake-up call they will receive will hit them with the force of a Mack truck.
And this story comes on the heels of this story yesterday. And we wonder what is wrong with the children of this nation.
The answer is the system that is educating them because it is not education. It is indoctrination, and it is high time that it stopped. To Hell with tenure, and to Hell with the teacher's union. Get these knuckleheads out of the classroom, and get the people in there that will actually teach kids.
Bunny ;)
I have heard this discussed on the radio today. Mary Katherine Ham picked up on this, and so did Michelle Malkin. Below is the transcript of this teacher's--and I use the word very loosely in this man's respect--uneducated, Leftist rant.
(Note: This is not the entire transcription. Michelle Malkin is still transcribing this entire piece. It is twenty minutes long!)
Bennish: [tape begins with class already underway. Bennish completing an unintelligble statement about Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez.] Why do we have troops in Colombia fighting in their civil war for over 30 years. Most Americans don't even know this. For over 30 years, America has had soldiers fighting in Colombia in a civil war. Why are we fumigating coca crops in Bolivia and Peru if we're not trying to control other parts of the world. Who buys cocaine? Not Bolivians. Not Peruvians. Americans! Ok. Why are we destroying the farmers' lives when we're the ones that consume that good.
Can you imagine? What is the world's number one single cause of death by a drug? What drug is responsible for the most deaths in the world? Cigarettes! Who is the world's largest producer of cigarettes and tobacco? The United States!
What part of our country grows all our tobacco? Anyone know what states in particular? Mostly what's called North Carolina. Alright. That's where all the cigarette capitals are. That's where a lot of them are located from. Now if we have the right to fly to Bolivia or Peru and drop chemical weapons on top of farmers' fields because we're afraid they might be growing coca and that could be turned into cocaine and sold to us, well then don't the Peruvians and the Iranians and the Chinese have the right to invade America and drop chemical weapons over North Carolina to destroy the tobacco plants that are killing millions and millions of people in their countries every year and causing them billions of dollars in health care costs?
Make sure you get these definitions down.
Capitalism: If you don't understand the economic system of capitalism, you don't understand the world in which we live. Ok. Economic system in which all or most of the means of production, etc., are owned privately and operated in a somewhat competitive environment for the purpose of producing PROFIT! Of course, you can shorten these definitions down. Make sure you get the gist of it. Do you see how when, you know, when you're looking at this definition, where does it say anything about capitalism is an economic system that will provide everyone in the world with the basic needs that they need? Is that a part of this system? Do you see how this economic system is at odds with humanity? At odds with caring and compassion? It's at odds with human rights.
Anytime you have a system that is designed to procure profit, when profit is the bottom motive -- money -- that means money is going to become more important potentially than what? Safety, human lives, etc.
Why did we invade Iraq?! How do we know that the invasion of Iraq for weapons of mass destruction-- even if weapons had been found, how would you have known, how could you prove--that that was not a real reason for us to go there.
There are dozens upon dozens of countries that have weapons of mass destruction. Iraq is one of dozens. There are plenty of countries that are controlled by dictators, where people have no freedom, where they have weapons of mass destruction and they could be potentially threatening to America. We're not invading any of those countries!
0345.
[Pause.]
I'll give you guys another minute or two to get some of these [definitions] down. I agree with Joey. Try to condense these a little bit. I took these straight out of the dictionary.
Anyone in here watch any of Mr. Bush's [State of the Union] speech last night? I'm gonna talk a little about some of things he had to say.
0452
...One of things that I'll bring up now, since some of you are still writing, is, you know, Condoleezza Rice said this the other day and George Bush reiterated it last night. And the implication was that the solution to the violence in the Middle East is democratization. And the implication through his language was that democracies don't go to war. Democracies aren't violent. Democracies won't want weapons of mass destruction. This is called blind, naive faith in democracy!
0530.
Who is probably the single most violent nation on planet Earth?!
Unidentified brainwashed student interjects: We are.
The United States of America! And we're a democracy. Quote-unquote.
Who has the most weapons of mass destruction in the world? The United States.
Who's continuing to develop new weapons of mass destruction as we speak?!The United States.
So, why does Mr. Bush think that other countries that are democracies won't wanna be like us? Why does he think they'll just wanna be at peace with each other?! What makes him think that when the Palestinians get their own state that they won't wanna preemptively invade Israel to eliminate a potential threat to their security just like we supposedly did in Iraq?! Do you see the dangerous precedent that we have set by illegally invading another country and violating their sovereignty in the name of protecting us against a potential future--sorry--attack? [Unintelligible.]
0625.
Why doesn't Mexico invade Guatemala? Maybe they're scared of being attacked. Ok. Why doesn't North Korea invade South Korea?! They might be afraid of being attacked. Or maybe Iran and North Korea and Saudi Arabia and what else did he add to the list last night - and Zimbabwe - maybe they're all gonna team up and try and invade us because they're afraid we might invade them. I mean, where does this cycle of violence end? You know?
This whole "do as I say, not as I do" thing. That doesn't work. What was so important about President Bush's speech last night--and it doesn't matter if it was President Clinton still it would just as important) is that it's not just a speech to America. But who? The whole world! It's very obvious that if you listen to his language, if you listen to his body language, and if you paid attention to what he was saying, he wasn't always just talking to us. He was talking to the whole planet. Addressing the whole planet!
He started off his speech talking about how America should be the country that dominates the world. That we have been blessed essentially by God to have the most civilized, most advanced, best system and that it is our duty as Americans to use the military to go out into the world and make the whole world like us.
0759.
Sounds a lot like the things that Adolf Hitler use to say.
We're the only ones who are right. Everyone else is backwards. And it's our job to conquer the world and make sure they live just like we want them to.
Now, I'm not saying that Bush and Hitler are exactly the same. Obviously, they are not. Ok. But there are some eerie similarities to the tones that they use. Very, very "ethnocentric." We're right. You're all wrong.
I just keep waiting. You know, at some point I think America and Mexico might go to war again. You know. Anytime Mexico plays the USA in a soccer match. What can be heard chanting all game long?
0841
Do all Mexicans dislike the United States? No. Do all Americans dislike Mexico? No. But there's a lot of resentment--not just in Mexico, but across the whole world--towards America right now.
We told--Condoleezza Rice said--that now that Hamas got elected to lead the Palestianians that they have to renounce their desire to eliminate Israel. And then Condoleezza Rice also went on to say that you can't be for peace and support armed struggle at the same time. You can't do that. Either you're for peace or war. But you can't be for both.
What is the problem with her saying this? That's the same thing we say. That is exactly the same thing this current administration says. We're gonna make the world safe by invading and killing and making war. So, if we can be for peace and for war, well, why can't the Palestinians be for peace and for war?!
0950.
*Student Sean Allen, who is taping Bennish's rant, speaks up:*
Allen: Isn't there a difference of, of, having Hamas being like, we wanna attack Israelis because they're Israelis, and having us say we want to attack people who are known terrorists? Isn't there a difference between saying we're going to attack innocents and we're going to attack people who are not innocent?
1007
Bennish: I think that's a good point. But you have to remember who's doing the defining of a terrorist. And what is a terrorist?
Allen: Well, when people attack us on our own soil and are actually attempting to take American lives and want to take American lives, whereas, Israelies in this situation, aren't saying we want to blow up Palestine...
Bennish: How did Israel and the modern Israeli state even come into existence in the first place?
Allen: We gave it to them.
Bennish: Sort of. Why? After the Israel-Zionist movement conducted what? Terrorist acts. They assassinated the British prime minster in Palestine. They blew up buildings. They stole military equipment. Assassinated hundreds of people. Car bombings, you name it. That's how the modern state of Israel was made. Was through violence and terrorism. Eventually we did allow them to have the land. Why? Not because we really care, but because we wanted a strategic ally. We saw a way to us to get a hook into the Middle East.
If we create a modern nation of Israel, then, and we make them dependent on us for military aid and financial aid, then we can control a part of the Middle East. We will have a country in the Middle East that will be indebted to us.
Allen: But is it ok to say it's just to attack Israel? If it's ok to attack known terrorists, it's ok to attack Israel?
Bennish: If you were Palestinians, who are the real terrorists? The Israelis, who fire missiles that they purchased from the United States government into Palestinian neighborhoods and refugees and maybe kill a terrorist, but also kill innocent women and children. And when you shoot a missile into Pakistan to quote-unquote kill a known terrorist, and we just killed 75 people that have nothing to do with al Qaeda, as far as they're concerned, we're the terrorists. We've attacked them on their soil with the intention of killing their innocent people.
Allen: But we did not have the intention of killing innocent people. We had the intention of killing an al Qaeda terrorist.
Bennish: Do you know that?
Allen: So, you're saying the United States has the intention to kill innocent people?
The Rocky Mountain News is reporting that Mr. Bennish, the teacher on the rant, has been placed on leave.
An Overland High School geography teacher was put on leave Wednesday while Cherry Creek Schools investigates whether he violated district policy that requires balanced viewpoints in the classroom.
Jay Bennish, who teaches 10th grade world geography, is being investigated for making biased, anti-President Bush comments in class during a discussion of the State of the Union speech last month.
"These are serious allegations and we're very concerned about it," said Tustin Amole, spokeswoman for Cherry Creek Schools. "This does not reflect the type of teaching that we want to see in Cherry Creek school district."
Bennish could not be reached for comment Wednesday night.
On Feb. 1, Bennish, who has been at Overland High School since the fall of 2000, had a discussion in his class about the State of the Union address.
Sean Allen, a student in the class, taped the discussion, in which Bennish made a number of unfavorable comments about Bush that upset Allen's father.
"He said that some people may compare (Bush) to Hitler," Amole said.
The school district did not learn about Bennish's lecture until last Wednesday, when it received an e-mail about it from an out-of-state person who had seen an online column on it written by Walter Williams on www.townhall.com, Amole said. That same day, Allen's father also called the principal of Overland High School to complain about the teacher, and the complaint was forwarded to the district, which began its investigation.
"After listening to the tape, it's evident the comments in the class were inappropriate," Amole said. "There were not adequate opportunities for opposing points of view."
Here is the link to Mr. Williams' initial column on the subject.
I am incensed at this incident. As a college student, I have already dealt with one overt, liberal professor. But, as I pointed out in the title, teachers are supposed to teach, not indoctrinate. This is indoctrination at it's worst. This man truly feels that President Bush is nearly equal to Hitler. He believes the United States is the most evil, destructive nation on the face of the earth. And he equates Israel to the terrorist animals that have tried to destroy that nation.
Above, Mr. Bennish makes the incorrect assertion that democracies are more violent than any other form of government. That is not true. Democracies, like the United States, respond to threats. They do not invade to occupy and conquer, like the Soviets did during the Cold War and like Hitler did during World War II. Our invasion of Iraq was justified on a few levels. First, as has been pointed out now with more and more evidence coming out, Saddam Hussein did have WMDs, and those weapons were moved out of the country. He brutalized and terrorized over 25 million people in Iraq. He flaunted seventeen UN resolutions to comply with the 1991 cease-fire, and disarm. He continued his work on WMDs even while the IAEA and UNSCOM searched his country for them. He stole millions of dollars from the Oil-for-Food program; continuing the suffering of his people.
Saddams' crimes are a laundry list of offenses against his people and the world.
Democracies do not go to war with other democracies. True democracies can negotiate their problems. Was Germany a democracy in 1939 when they bolted over the border into Poland? Was North Korea a democracy when it invaded South Korea? What about Vietnam? What about the former Eastern Bloc countries that fell to Soviet Communism? These were not democracies waging war on another one; these were totalitarian dictatorships bent on conquering a neighbor.
Later (though not transcribed yet; I heard this) Mr. Bennish states that what occurred on 9/11 was virtually acceptable. All the targets, in his opinion, were "military targets." The CIA had offices in the World Trade Center, therefore it was a "military target." The white House, the Pentagon, and the Capitol building were all "military targets," according to Mr. Bennish. This is a false assertion on his part. The WTC complex was a civilian target; it was an economic center within a metropolis. (We are not Saddam Hussein; we do not put military bases in civilian area, per se.) Likewise, the three buildings he rattled off in DC are also not military targets. We have a civilian government, not a military governorship. One could make a feeble argument for the Pentagon to be a military target, but it does not wash, and it is due mostly to the amount of civilians that work within the complex.
A military target is considered, under the rules of war, a threat to opposing troops. None of these places even come close to the definition. As a matter of fact, they are precisely the contrary.
This teacher did not need to be put on leave. He is clearly on the tape saying these things, and what he is stating is anything but geography. The comments, while supported by the freedom of speech, does not give this man the right to pervert his trust and responsibility as an educator, and launch into an anti-American rant. Because he abused his position, he should be fired. There is no place in a high school for this sort of garbage. We know that the colleges are infested with those on the Left; many of them being sixties radicals that decided to enter teaching to sway a whole new generation to their way of thinking. But high school is the last step for many young men and women before entering the "real world." They need the knowledge and the skills to excel in society. This sort of "education" is not going to help them in the real world. Teachers like this only ensure that when these kids hit the "real world," the wake-up call they will receive will hit them with the force of a Mack truck.
And this story comes on the heels of this story yesterday. And we wonder what is wrong with the children of this nation.
The answer is the system that is educating them because it is not education. It is indoctrination, and it is high time that it stopped. To Hell with tenure, and to Hell with the teacher's union. Get these knuckleheads out of the classroom, and get the people in there that will actually teach kids.
Bunny ;)
posted by Syd And Vaughn | 3:09 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home