Bush Won the Election Years Ago -- Get Over It!
Michael S. Meli
One of the real issues fronting this world of common sense and logic, is the fact that the Leftist Marxists who "teach" in the UH classrooms, are still hoping that the recount of the 2000 presidential elections will somehow have Al Gore winning by some astronomical figure--when in reality, despite the number of recounts, Al Gore won exactly "ZERO" times.
That said, I place the professors of higher learning in the same category with Michael Moore--you know the one, "fictitious." Well, if there is anything fictitious in the Iraq War, it is the Minister of...uhh, I forget already, telling al-Jazeera that the Americans are nowhere near Baghdad, in fact, they are nowhere near the Iraqi border. Well, Michael Moore, if the war was fictitious, then, obviously the celebrating Iraqis were not really there, riding Saddam's head in the street. How is it that in the world of real-time footage, someone like Michael Moore--who is now an Academy Award Director--can have the gall and the audacity to blast the President of the United States, while at the same time, not mention anything of the atrocities of the President of Iraq, or, rather, the former president of Iraq?Personally, I think that he lives too much in the world of cameras and microphones, and not not enough time in the world outside mirrors and lights.
Personally, I believe that many of the UH professors, especially the ones in the Social Sciences as well as those in the Humanities departments, walk the same line as Michael Moore. They still refer to the presidential election as the "selection over election" episode, which, I suppose, for them, validates any anti-Bush sentiment they may happen to spew from their denture-filled mouthes as they "teach" objectively.
The problem is, nothing they teach is objective, in fact, as a prominent English professor told our class on the first day of instruction, as we were about to embark on the writings of William Shakespeare, "There is no way to teach or view Shakespeare objectively; therefore, I will teach how I see him, from my eyes." Well, this is a stark contrast from the very essence of expanding the mind. Is it not? You see, by telling the class that she will teach the class from her perspective, she instantly created borders and parameters with regard to essays, homework assignments, and exams. She instantly locked the class in a mental chamber, of which no one would be able to escape without selling out on individual principles and individual thought. The class would then be seeing one of the greatest writers in the world's history through the eyes of one individual! The terrible thing is, we pay her salary, yet we are the ones left feeling as if these teachers are worth a hell of alot more than they are getting paid.
Let me say, I am a strong advocate for expanding our horizons, so when someone that I pay tells me that it's their way, or the highway, they reveal alot more about their character than they realize. They actually live in some fictitious world, and the reality that there are opposing views just does not seem to resonate in their mental sanctuaries.
