January 23, 2004

GUVMINT SKULS R GUD

The Prime Minister recently said that some people were shifting their children away from government schools because such places were too politically correct and too values-neutral.

Which is true. I know parents who’ve taken their kids out of government schools for precisely these reasons. But according to The Age’s Farrah Tomazin and Orietta Guerrera, government schools are stacked to the windowsills with wonderful, wonderful values:

A study commissioned by the Federal Government last year found that state schools were doing a good job teaching "values" - contradicting Prime Minister John Howard's claims that they are "too values-neutral".

The study found that schools in all sectors, including state and private, had good systems to promote and foster values such as tolerance and understanding, social justice and respect.

”Tolerance and understanding, social justice and respect” sound like exactly the sort of vague, valueless PC values the Prime Minister is complaining about. This report doesn’t contradict him; it supports him. But why listen to me? I don’t know nothin’. Listen to Greens candidate for Lord Mayor of Brisbane Drew Hutton, a former “teacher educator” at the Queensland University of Technology:

Now retired from many years’ teaching from QUT, I am proud to say I used my position as a teacher educator to influence the content of social science curricula and to champion peace and environmental education in schools as well as more democratic school environments and teaching practices.

To hell with you, Drew. Anyway, according to this AP piece, the Prime Minister’s comments are “a rare political stumble”; Professor Bunyip eloquently disagrees.

Tim Dunlop and Christopher Sheil would disagree with the Professor, but I haven’t noticed yet if either have declared themselves to be the products of government schools, or if they send their children to these enforced tolerance gulags. Updates will no doubt follow in comments.

UPDATE. Wendy James has assembled an essay from comments posted on this issue by teacher S. Whiplash. Very worth reading ... although Chris Sheil warns that Whiplash “has an established record of blogging trenchantly in favour of Howard” and is therefore “best disregarded”.

Whatever you say, Senator McCathy! Chris apparently believes we can only rely on Whippy’s testimony if it “cut(s) across his political preferences”. Does Sheil apply the same caveat to his own writing?

UPDATE II. As suspected, public school defender Tim Dunlop is a private school boy ... but at one stage he wanted to go to a public school and "had a big argument with my parents about it". No word yet from Sheil.

UPDATE III. Of course, Sheil is another private school kid.

Posted by Tim Blair at January 23, 2004 04:25 AM
Comments

The study found that schools in all sectors, including state and private, had good systems to promote and foster values such as tolerance and understanding, social justice and respect.

There's a historical parallel dancing on the tip of my tongue... let them eat cake?... no... ah, got it! "Oh, we got both kinds. We got country and western."

Posted by: Guy T. at January 23, 2004 at 04:51 AM

--to champion peace and environmental education--

And that's part of the reason why parents are pulling their children out of school, idiot.

Posted by: Sandy P. at January 23, 2004 at 05:35 AM

Bunyip doesn't have comments but i gotta say his post on the topic was fuckin A. Eloquent and devastating. We've went through this in Ontario in 1995 the conservative party made it a prominent election platform to whack the teacher's unions and school boards, who naturally cried shrill and blue and went to the barricades but the silent majority backed the government to the hilt through all the work stoppages etc ad nauseum. Our educ system is in better shape now, although they would never admit it.

Posted by: matt at January 23, 2004 at 05:40 AM

"promote and foster values such as tolerance and understanding, social justice and respect."

But not, I suspect based on similar schools in the US, values such as sitting at your desk, not disrupting class, paying attention, and learning what you're being taught.

Posted by: Mike G at January 23, 2004 at 06:14 AM

Seconded re the Bunyip's lack of comments boxes, so I'll comment here instead:

'... "veteran teacher and principal" Chris Bonnor... told the Silly's Kelly Burke that swearing to honour God, Queen and country as a youth had enhanced his respect for Him, her and it not a jot."

Oooooookkkkkaaaayyyyy. So the theory is nowadays that getting today's kids to salute the Threefold Flax of Diversity, Multiculturalism, and Tolerance Of Everything But Intolerance is going to succeed in enhancing their respect for these values?

Has anyone else wondered how, in the age of Will & Grace and The Birdcage, it came about that cynical teens use "that's so gay" as a mildly derogatory put-down?

Posted by: Uncle Milk at January 23, 2004 at 06:22 AM

"Has anyone else wondered how, in the age of Will & Grace and The Birdcage, it came about that cynical teens use "that's so gay" as a mildly derogatory put-down?"

Not really. It takes years of brainwashing and insularity to get to the point where the PoMo Multiculti stuff makes sense; children have more reactive bullshit detectors until it's beaten/bored out of them.

Posted by: LabRat at January 23, 2004 at 06:25 AM

Uh, make that "threefold flags" -- unless you're imitating Alexander Downer.

Posted by: Uncle Milk at January 23, 2004 at 06:25 AM

"That's so gay" as put down - that's the influence of Southpark . .

Posted by: AStext at January 23, 2004 at 06:51 AM

"As a teacher, I'm proud to say I avoided actually educating my students in favour of indoctrinating them with my Leftist politics."

As for more Democratic teaching practices and school environments, I wonder if she let the kids vote on what grades to get, and if she confused this action of hers with education?

Posted by: Sigivald at January 23, 2004 at 07:27 AM

The Bunyip rules, no doubt. He's on my short list of bookmarked blogs.

Words just fail at the spectacle of those educrats failing to see that what they try to claim credit for is precisely what is being objected to by (some) parents.

Posted by: R C Dean at January 23, 2004 at 07:36 AM

Re: "That's so gay"

The first time I heard it was from the mouth of my middle sister in 1994 or so (she was a junior in high school at the time).

According to imdb, South Park started in 1997, so you can't blame South Park for the origin of that remark. Perhaps for the popularity -- but according to my sister at the time, that was the very popular way to express the popular "that's so lame" of my day (i.e. 3 years before).

Posted by: meep at January 23, 2004 at 07:39 AM

Here's my take on the matter. Don't want to clutter up Tim's comments section too much, y'know!

Posted by: Marty at January 23, 2004 at 07:43 AM

It's interesting that none of the lefty types have commented on this issue. maybe it's because they know they would be on a hiding to nothing if they did.

I can't understand why anyone can give any credence to the lefty educational lobby. Can't these lefty idiots see that their policies have ruined the public school system? Can't they see that students from less advantaged backgrounds are even less likely to succeed now that they were 20 years ago?

The blindness of the lefty is an amazing thing.

Posted by: Toryhere at January 23, 2004 at 08:30 AM

Environmental education?

Oh, I get it.

If you believe in the unproven theory of man-made global warming, you're inlightened.

If you can make a strong case that it's not true, then you're stupid, and need to be 'educated.'

These teachers aren't looking for critical thinking, they just want the little kiddies to all toe the left-wing line.

Yeah, I want my kids to go to a school like that.

Posted by: jay at January 23, 2004 at 08:38 AM

My daughter was on the negative side of an interschool debate "Smoking should be banned in public places". In researching the topic on the net she found good information debunking the dangers of passive smoking which were anticipated to be at the core of their opponents' case.

When she proposed this for inclusion in their case the teacher stated that "No student of hers would promote such an argument".

Apart from the idiocy of such a stance in the context of competitive debating, here was a clear instance of a political viewpoint being imposed by the teacher on her students. She didn't even consider looking at the material to assess its credibility.

Go to it PM!!

Posted by: amortiser at January 23, 2004 at 09:03 AM

I usually support Howard but he has got it wrong on this one. Public schools are occasionally a bit lefty (i just graduated in 2002 after 13 years of public schooling), but it's not too hard to beat the teachers in arguments and is not as big as a deal as he is making out.

Oh and you would have to pay me to go to a private school, the mere thought of actually being punished severely for the slightest infraction makes me shiver. Overall, we do have a (comparitively) great public school system here, and hence the government needs to back down from provoking the teachers unions unnesscecarily and restore some funding to public schools from pivate.

Oh can anyone explain to me exactly why a girls private school with a few hundred students got an indoor swimming centre from the government while our nearby public high school had no sporting facilities at all really?

Posted by: Chris Rice at January 23, 2004 at 09:04 AM

I enjoyed the Professor's article and agreed with most of it but found it a bit depressing. I assume what he means is that Howard, Anderson etc will do is make a big fuss about education..scoop in all the votes and then after the election forget about education for another three years. I know its mostly a state government responsibility and so there is little scope for Howard to do much about it but really what do I get out of all this fuss and bother. Of course it fun to see the lefties all get stirred up and make fool of themshelves but that doesn't really help my kids at all.

Posted by: mike at January 23, 2004 at 09:12 AM

"It's interesting that none of the lefty types have commented on this issue. maybe it's because they know they would be on a hiding to nothing if they did.
"

spleen is a style of production, you seen one post you seen them all

lefties visit occasionally, that is on the days they tolerate righties, (days with an "r' in them)

Posted by: dolebludger at January 23, 2004 at 09:55 AM

I went to a public school half my life and considerably more exellent english-language schools in Indonesia and Italy for the rest. The point of comparison this allowed me is the reason I regard our public educators with such utter contempt. I have not met one I wouldn't punch in the neck if I met his or her worthless, time-serving ass now as an adult.

Fuck them, our public schools are a disgrace.

Posted by: Amos at January 23, 2004 at 09:57 AM

The Prime Minister is on the right track (though I'm not sure of his strategy, and Latham seems cleverly to be avoiding getting sucked in). When I studied SOSE method (Social Science/History/Geography etc.) for my Dip Ed in 1997, the Victorian Government Curriculum Standards Framework stated certain values that should be addressed in SOSE classes - as I remember them, I think they were Enviromental Sustainability, Democratic Process and Social Justice. This always seemed to me a very incomplete, partisan and unsatisfactory set of values. I addressed this in a class paper to my bemused (and rather thick) fellow La Trobe students and hippy lecturer - suggesting to them that the values of Respect for legitimate Authority and Rationality (or "Reasonableness") might have an equally important place, if students were to understand how societies function. Teacher training, for this conservative, was agony from start to finish.

Posted by: Ben Palmer at January 23, 2004 at 09:59 AM

Gee guys, I'm glad we got all the latest, up-to-date info on this from PROF BUNYIP! Where'd he get his qualifications, incidentally? University of the Billabong?

If you guys don't like the public education system, why not get a Dip Ed (preferably from a more venerable institution than Professor Bunyip), and do it better yourselves? Its gotta be more challenging than standing in front of the same 15 dribble-splattered, slack-jawed cretins at Quadrant meetings each month.

Posted by: Adam at January 23, 2004 at 10:01 AM

"Oh can anyone explain to me exactly why a girls private school with a few hundred students got an indoor swimming centre from the government while our nearby public high school had no sporting facilities at all really?"

Chris,
Because the government is obliged to provide resources for *every* child's education. That includes children who go to private schools with $10k/year fees. I suspect that some of that $10k may have something to do with the pool.

The government doesn't provide as much support as it does for each government student (only about 30%), so it's a cheap deal for the government. Otherwise these private school kids would be costing them more money in the public system.

The big thing about private schools is choice. You can freely (fees aside) choose whatever school you prefer. Try that with a government school. If state governments freed up the ridiculous zoning system, ignoring idiot teacher complaints, then you'd see some competition for students between government schools which would improve them out of sight.

Parents often sell their house and move to other suburbs *just* to get into a specific school's zone, like Mentone Girls High for instance. Consider how out of place a system like this is in a free economy.

Some people advocate a school voucher system where parents are free to choose any public or private school (depending on availability) and every kid gets the same basic funding. This is a good idea, except that the basic funding is all too likely to become the new Medicare Bulk Billing amount, covering only part of a kid's real education costs.

Posted by: Craig Mc at January 23, 2004 at 10:12 AM

Given that both you and the PM have only made generalisations is it possible to specify what values you think should be taught and what values now being taught in public achools shouldn't be taught?

Posted by: Homer Paxton at January 23, 2004 at 10:14 AM

"That's so gay" was around when I was at High School 15 years ago. We also had another variation - "As gay as AIDS"

Posted by: Mike Hunt at January 23, 2004 at 10:19 AM

Adam, as it happens I'm a teacher at a Victorian state school. Some of the political correctness at my school is laughable: English teachers, for instance, who ask their students to write a "sonnet on racism" or who debate in the staff room which of Michael Moore's books to put on the curriculum. However, the most immediate crisis facing state schools isn't rampant political correctness, but a breakdown in discipline. There are no effective sanctions against misbehaving students and no reality check for students who choose not to work.

Posted by: Mark Richardson at January 23, 2004 at 10:22 AM

Oh can anyone explain to me exactly why a girls' private school with a few hundred students got an indoor swimming centre from the government while our nearby public high school had no sporting facilities at all really?

The obvious answer is because the state government won't fund it!
Perhaps if they spent less on coordinators for gender awareness or for heterosexism in ESL, they could afford a sports ground.

However, remember that the taxpayer gives $7,200 (on average) to each public school kid,
and only $4,700 per kid at other schools.
The difference in the cost of education is paid by the kids' parents, and they pay for all the extra facilities as well.

Posted by: Peggy Sue at January 23, 2004 at 10:29 AM

Adam, my dear fellow,

Professor Bunyip's popularity and credibility among rightist ozbloggers and followers is based on his ability quickly both to deconstruct and background-check the many grandstanding experts, commentators and lobbyists who speak for the privileged centre-left across our media. In terms of the internet at least, he is a Professor of Ideological Forensics. Oh, and he's also very funny.

Posted by: Ben Palmer at January 23, 2004 at 10:31 AM

This is a complete non sequitur but I just read the following line in the latest Spectator.

"Barbara Amiel continues to file copy efficiently down the phone to the Daily Telegraph, at about £500 for 1,000 words..."

Is that a fairly standard rate?

Posted by: Pig head Sucker at January 23, 2004 at 10:43 AM

The most telling fact about private verus public education is the *very* large number of teachers who work in state schools, but send their own progeny to non-state schools.

Darling-of-the-Left Don Dunstan sent his own sons to his alma mater, St Peter's.
When Dunstan's kids were harrassed at St Peter's, he did not send them to the local high, but to a different independent school.

When the current SA labor government come to office, the old and new Ministers of Education both sent their daughters to the same non-state school.

Posted by: May Lee at January 23, 2004 at 10:51 AM

I attended a Victorian Public Secondary School in the mid 80's when corporal punishment was outlawed as cruel and unnecessary (I got the Cuts twice and it wasn't that bad. Yeah I did deserve it too). Teacher bashing soon became a sport amongst some of the more thuggish students. I can't remember exactly how many student teachers went through the school in the next 2 years I was there, but it was a lot. They averaged about 2 weeks before they left.
The only discipline available was the Time-Out room which became a sort of clubroom for all the bullies where they could sit and plot all day without being required to do any work.

Posted by: Huddo at January 23, 2004 at 10:53 AM

Drew Hutton shoots himself in the foot with this quote:

"I am proud to say I used my position as a teacher educator to influence the content of social science curricula and to champion peace and environmental education in schools as well as more democratic school environments and teaching practices."

There you have everything that's wrong with modern schools in a horrible little nutshell. A successful school is a fascist police state, not a democracy. Would you prefer to have your child in a school where the decisions are made by trained and knowledgable adults, or one where the decisions are made by his or her ignorant, puberty-addled colleagues?

Posted by: Andrew D. at January 23, 2004 at 10:58 AM

"That's so gay" was a common expression when I was in high school in Illinois in 1983 (and, for what it's worth, I'm pretty sure the first time I heard it was in South Dakota in the 4th or 5th grade).

Posted by: ScrapOfCat at January 23, 2004 at 11:01 AM

Though having a 100% public school education I do agree that class discipline was indeed a significant problem.

OT when Wilson Tuckey was Federal Minister for Forests a few years back he received a number of letters and pictures from a primary school class regarding timber harvesting, specifically the evils of killing trees and if you cut trees all the animals will all die and have nowhere to live(!?), complete with pictures of cut trees, dead animals evil loggers with oversized chainsaws – you get the drill.

Not to leave a wrong un-righted the Minister took the time to visit the class in question and dispel some of the greenie myths and inform them of some salient facts regarding forest management, fire hazard reduction, etc. From what I’m told the session degenerated into a bit of a heated argument between the teacher and the Minister in front of the class, the Minister confronted the teacher by refuting the claim that “all the little birdies die when you cut a tree down” where the teacher vehemently denied that she told her young class this, a child up the back piped up – “yes you did Miss”…

Posted by: Antipodean at January 23, 2004 at 11:42 AM

Out of the mouths of babes :)

Sprung!!

Posted by: amortiser at January 23, 2004 at 12:32 PM

Chris Rice

Where did you get the idea that pupils at private schools get punished for minor infractions. it sounds like you've been reading "Tom Brown's School Days" as modern guide to private schools.

The point is that there are many types of private schools: from Cranbrook and Ascham to the local Catholic school. Most of them however, perform better than Government schools. The main reasons for this are discipline, parental pressure and a far better selection of teachers.

Posted by: Toryhere at January 23, 2004 at 12:41 PM

The only values that should be taught in school are intellectual and academic ones; academic honesty, self-discipline, and critical thinking. Social values are or should be a parental responsibility; trying to teach them makes parents resent the school system and wastes time and resources while real education gets short shrift.

Posted by: LabRat at January 23, 2004 at 12:48 PM

Just between you and me Labrat, I think that is what we are saying. Poor kids these days get so much lefty bullshit crammed down their throat from an early age that they are incapable of defininf a moral and academic absolute. By negating the evidence of academic honesty and critical thinking, by means of only providing a post modern approach to education and basis of reasoning, kids are being provided with a third rate at best education.

However, I am not saying this is the sole providence of the public sector. Going through high school at a Catholic college in Brisbane, I was subjected to the usual lambasting by teachers with a decidedly left-wing bent. The difference being that at least they were prepared to mark on merits rather than just on prior attitudes.

I survived by leaving a liberal sprinkling of shooters magazines lying around and starting the school's first Young Conservative Club. I even got one of the bastards to attend as the Club Sponsor. End note, that teacher is now a proud member of the Liberal Party.

Posted by: Todd at January 23, 2004 at 01:02 PM

I have no Idea what Australian public schools are like nowadays, I only know what they were like then; shit.

Posted by: Amos at January 23, 2004 at 02:12 PM

"...and every kid gets the same basic funding. This is a good idea, except that the basic funding is all too likely to become the new Medicare Bulk Billing amount, covering only part of a kid's real education costs."

Craig Mc - it already is! The basic funding isn't enough, basically!

Posted by: Kae at January 23, 2004 at 02:56 PM

Of course Public schools are too bloody politically correct. My mum works at one which insisted that if you were going to spend any time over the holidays with a student, you were to notify the principal to get it approved. My cousin happens to go to the school she works at, and so my mum had to seek permission to see her at Christmas. I mean, what in the hell? Makes me glad my parents had the foresight to send me to the private school up the road.

Posted by: Carlye at January 23, 2004 at 03:13 PM

The only values that should be taught in school are intellectual and academic ones; academic honesty, self-discipline, and critical thinking. Social values are or should be a parental responsibility; trying to teach them makes parents resent the school system

A school is a 'society'; it comprises people who interact with each other constantly. Thus a set of social values is inherently part of a school.

Posted by: Peggy Sue at January 23, 2004 at 03:31 PM

Dear Tory

Now you mention it I think if you traced the lineage of modern education theory/bullshit you'll find that the rot started when Thomas Arnold, (Headmaster of Rugby), implemented his reforms. Tom Brown may well have been the among first victim of evil trendy pinko infiltration of the education system.

JH

Posted by: James Hamilton at January 23, 2004 at 03:41 PM

I had good teachers and bad teachers at my hihg school. Some basically defended Hitler and some were very slightly left of center


"help us, help us, Those mean lefites are trying to tell people that white people aren't the superior race. What are we to do?"

Posted by: bob at January 23, 2004 at 03:51 PM

You went to school? I rest my case.

Posted by: S Whiplash at January 23, 2004 at 04:04 PM

I was never influenced in any way by teachers at school. My political views were developed outside any educational institution. there was never any pressure to conform to "lefty" ideas. It's typical paranoia. See the enemy, insult the enemy even if it is only inside your own head.

Posted by: bob at January 23, 2004 at 04:21 PM

Todd: Wasn't responding to Blair and the majority of the commenters, I was responding to the poster earlier who asked what values schools SHOULD be teaching if not tolerance, environmentalism, etc.

Me? I was lucky enough to go to a private school where they DID teach critical thinking and intellectual integrity while holding the ideology.

Posted by: LabRat at January 23, 2004 at 04:55 PM

Teach me to hit "post" without finishing the thread...

A school may be a society, but it's one that in virtually no way resembles the one outside. It's up to parents to teach children how to behave in a civilized manner and schools to enforce the idea that behavior has consequences outside of Mom- but that doesn't belong in the curriculum, that should be part of the structure of the way the place is *run*.

Posted by: LabRat at January 23, 2004 at 04:58 PM

"A study commissioned by the Federal Government last year found that state schools were doing a good job teaching "values" - contradicting Prime Minister John Howard's claims that they are "too values-neutral". "

I hope it's because it's so bloody obvious, but nobody so far has said much about the real purpose of schools: Reading, Writing, and Maths. (Here in the US we call it the "3 R's", mainly because we don't know how to spell "writing", preferring the shorter "'ritin'", and we have now idea what "maths" are, nor how many of them there are. We do "'rithmetic" instead.

Reading: that we might learn from the wisdom of ages past, notably ancient Greece, and learn what ideas have turned out to be dead ends.

Writing: that we might learn to communicate effectively with one another, and perhaps add some small bit to that pile of wisdom.

Arithmetic: that we might train our minds to follow logical patterns, develop a sense of critical thinking, gain an understanding of the workings of the Universe, and perhaps even balance our checkbooks.

Posted by: Mike at January 24, 2004 at 04:16 AM

[i](Here in the US we call it the "3 R's[/i]


Two R's, come Tuesday.

(ah, the simpsons)

Posted by: Quentin George at January 24, 2004 at 06:55 AM

I went to a public school in Canberra right after having been to a major private school in QLD.

My memories of the place are not pleasant, and I have to say I certainly disapproved of their methods. "Timeout" was basically solitary confinement version of detention, and usually only used during lunch hours. That was their worst punishment available.

I did like it at first how the teachers had you call them by their first names (even though I still used titles - sir, miss) and had very different teaching techniques.

I don't know if it was leftist behaviour, but my social sciences teacher downmarked me for 'racism' in one of my papers. I thought it was a great piece of work..and she obviously liked it except for a paragraph circled in red with the note "please come speak with me". I cant remember a lot of what the paper was about, but the particular phrase went along the lines of "if the white man hadn't come along, the aboriginals would have had their own society, even though a 3rd world one". As an adult I can see that phrase is obviously..uh, not something you'd like to mark. But if a 14yo has just spent the last 4 years living in, or visiting Papua New Guinea, he's bound to perhaps NOTICE that a race with no outside influence on it doesn't advance too quickly. But that was fine. I didnt like the talk that followed, but it certainly taught me to try and word things a little better.

My english teacher however is unforgivable. One Nation was popular at that time, and students had done walkouts to protest. One day we were sitting in a circle and had to discuss One Nation. Being a Queenslander I was somewhat familiar with her policies, the reasons for their existence, and I of course..hated her guts.
But when we're in this circle, nobody else knew. They all hated her like I did, but for entirely different reasons. Stupid as I was, I actually asked if any knew her policies. Nope. None. So what'd I do? Play devil's advocate and start explaining One Nation. I didn't care what my peers thought about me not outright spitting on Hanson. But the teacher, no, she was VERY unhappy. She actually looked at me with hate, and that was the end of me thinking my english teacher was cool. (why we were discussing politics in english I do not know). Being hated for being on Hanson's side when I wasnt, wasnt very fun.

Posted by: Ken at January 24, 2004 at 12:00 PM

"Not to leave a wrong un-righted the Minister took the time to visit the class in question and dispel some of the greenie myths and inform them of some salient facts regarding forest management, fire hazard reduction, etc."

Yet more proof that Wilson Tuckey is a national living treasure.

Posted by: Yobbo at January 24, 2004 at 12:34 PM

I was never influenced in any way by teachers at school.

What?
Nothing your teachers ever did or said had any influence on you?
You must be completely autistic.

Posted by: Peggy Sue at January 24, 2004 at 01:13 PM

Tim, perhaps you could explain why going to a Catholic school precludes you from supporting public schools?

Posted by: Robert at January 24, 2004 at 01:56 PM

It doesn't.

Posted by: tim at January 24, 2004 at 04:35 PM

So why does it matter that Tim Dunlop's parents sent him to a private school? Or Chris Sheil's or mine, for that matter? What's your point?

Posted by: Robert at January 24, 2004 at 05:02 PM

It adds another interesting layer to the debate, Rob, when some of the loudest defenders of government schools have no (or little) direct experience of them.

That's all. It's doesn't preclude them from holding any views; it just puts their views in a certain context.

Posted by: tim at January 24, 2004 at 06:03 PM

Whatever you say, Senator McCathy! Chris apparently believes we can only rely on Whippy's testimony if it "cut(s) across his political preferences". Does Sheil apply the same caveat to his own writing?

tim, I'm afraid you missed the point, which of course does and must cut both ways, a technical truth I thought I made plain enough in this later comment.

Posted by: cs at January 24, 2004 at 06:27 PM