And Another Thing…


Let freedom ring…except on campus

Mark Elrod, a political science professor at Harding University (my Alma mater), has had a very popular weblog for several years where he, his colleagues, alumni, and other interested parties could discuss issues of the day.

Elrod has always been a Democrat, which puts him decidedly to the left of most of the Harding community. No big deal, right? Academia is big enough to handle dissenting views, isn’t it? Well…

“I’ve come to the realization that I have over-estimated the capacity of both my academic (Harding University) and my religious (Church of Christ) community to deal with critical thinking or dissent in a public forum.  In the last few weeks, I’ve grown tired with dealing with members of both communities who seem to view the world in black and white terms and think of all discussions as zero-sum games.”

This from his post announcing why he is making his blog private. Kind of makes a mockery of Harding’s pretensions of academic excellence and freedom, right?

Let’s clarify that despite his controversial political and social views, Elrod is a believer. Not once has he denied the existence of God, the divinity of Christ, or the authority of scripture. He deserves to be treated like a brother. Yet far too many of his readers, presumably Christians, have gone running like schoolyard sissies to the HU administration because big bad Elrod said something they didn’t like. Boo-friggin’-hoo.

I didn’t always agree with him; but I enjoyed his Political Science class as an undergrad for the same reason I enjoyed his blog; he made me think. You know, like good teaching and writing is supposed to do?

Sad stuff. This is yet another reason why HU won’t ever get dime one from me.


Elrod has posted a clarification of the matter on his blog.

I want to make it clear why I’m making the switch from writing a public blog to a private blog.

I’ve been fielding questions all day about this and I think it may be better to deal with it wholesale rather than retail.

For the record, I was not “pressured” by anybody to change my blog from “public” to “private” status.

I made this decision on my own as the result of the general frustration I have with members of our fellowship who want to make a spiritual judgment about me based on my political views.

One of those views is my public support for Barack Obama for president.

In the last few days, much of that angst has been directed toward my employer and, as a result, toward me as well.

Because of this, I have decided that I would much rather have a private conversation about things that are important to me rather than a public conversation that leads to additional complaints about me to the Harding University administration.

I suspect that this arrangement is going to be beneficial to all of the parties involved.

So he is sick of people gunning for him and questioning his convictions simply because he supports Obama for president. Well, he is still within his rights. I know from experience (admittedly, on a much smaller scale) that it can be very hurtful when people question your character, integrity, and very commitment to the faith just because you have an unpopular opinion on a peripheral matter.

Regardless, Elrod says the school didn’t bust his chops and my respect for him dictates that I take him at his word. So be it. I was wrong, at least on that point. Look for me to eat a little crow in my next post.


Filed under: Faith and Religion, Politics, Rants, School, , ,

55 Responses

  1. policulture says:

    Yeah, I’m crying a river over this. He knew what he was doing and exactly where it would lead when he pushed the envelope on his blog.

    We will be sending a little more than usual to Harding this year…

  2. You are right that they ran “like schoolyard sissies.” The problem is that people like that cannot stand up in the public arena because they don’t even understand their own opinions. Anyone who was secure and informed would not feel threatened by another who presented contrary opinions; it is the ignorant who fear opposition because they don’t know how to answer it.

    Good post.

  3. David B says:

    I’m not sure that the institution (Harding) or the church is at fault here. He hasn’t been disciplined by the U from what I can tell, and nobody’s excommunicated him from the church. It seems that a few individuals are the ones giving him grief, and he’s tired of it.

    Basically it sounds like he doesn’t want to deal with some of the fallout that comes when we say particular speech. I, too, am tired of some of the whining/crying that I see in the Church today, but I’ve come to realize that freedom of speech does not mean that one has the freedom to broadcast any point of view without backlash. The truth makes us free, but proclaimers of the truth have always been persecuted.

    Having read Elrod’s blog for awhile now I’ve noticed that he gets very prickly when people challenge his viewpoint…at times he has even banned people from the blog when they press too hard. Yes, it’s his blog…but it seems that he often does the same things things that he thinks others are doing to him. That’s my take from his entry.

  4. policulture says:

    “it seems that he often does the same things that he thinks others are doing to him.”

    Amen to that.

  5. To correct a few things: I believe Elrod has dealt with opposition from the administration at HU more than once for blog-related issues. It is one thing to disagree with someone, but if it is your employer ordering you to stop saying certain things, that becomes more than just “individuals giving grief.” This kind of employee intimidation and censorship is also very different from banning certain offensive commenters from a personal blog.

    Also, to my knowledge, Elrod has never banned any commenter who followed the blog rules, avoided ad hominem attacks, used a polite tone, and used rationally-supported arguments, even if they disagree with his views. There have been several such regular commenters who consistently disagreed in a civil way. However, there have been several individuals who were unable to abide by these rules of civility, and seem to have been banned. I, for one, do not miss that kind of commenter.

  6. odgie says:

    Policulture – Welcome to AAT and thanks for commenting. So what exactly is wrong with pushing the envelope? What damage has Elrod done in the big scheme of things?

    David – Welcome to AAT and thanks for commenting.

    Dave B – True; freedom of speech means the secret police can’t kick in your door, not that everyone has to like it. And I don’t know if the U leaned on him or not.
    I will have to go back and read some of his posts to see if I agree with you on his thin-skinnedness (a new word). Could be you are right. And if it is true that he has banned people who press him, I am going to be very dissapointed.

  7. policulture says:

    There’s nothing wrong with pushing the envelope. But doing it the way he did at a place like Harding, he knew what would likely happen. So his bellyaching about it rings hollow.

    BTW: He deleted the trackback to my blog post about his announcement.

  8. Roland says:

    David M, I am one he banned as is another friend of mine. We both abided by the rules. We did not use foul language. We stuck to the point yet, after pointing out where Elrod was wrong or cracking a joke on a Liberal, we never saw another post of ours again on his site. He even E-mailed me once, when I pointed out an inconsistancy of his. He simply asked for some information on myself. I provided it….and then never saw another post of mine on his site. I know that policulture has also been “banned” by Elrod. Yet, people like GKB can spew hatred towards Conservatives and Christians yet he is allowed free reign on Elrods site and even moderates it from time to time.

    Now, that being said, Elrod has nothing to stand on. His hypocrisy is astounding.

  9. mattdabbs says:

    From all I can tell there have been no consequences aside from a few people challenging his perspective (which is the very thing he tries to do to others all the time). His reaction is as if he has received some kind of heavy handed tactic or some serious threat. The old take my ball and go home thing just doesn’t work when you are the guy who has spent so much time saying that is what those he disagrees with have been guilty of.

    Don’t get me wrong. I like Elrod. I had him for class at Harding. I even respect him and enjoy being challenged by him. I just don’t get this move at all. I hope he enjoys blogging with the 100 other people who agree with him and will help keep him intellectually inbred rather than continuing to rub shoulders and comments with those who dissent with his point of view.

  10. Roland says:

    Also, you really cannot talk about individuals who were unable to abide by certain rules as Elrod moderated every single comment. If any got thru, they were let thru by Elrod and Elrod alone.

  11. Roland says:

    Matt, that is so true. I will never cease to be amazed by those people who only want to hear their own opinions echoed back to them.

  12. GKB says:

    Odgie: Elrod has not “banned people who press him,” he has banned belligerent, offensive, unrelenting folks like the anonymous Policulture bloggers because they do more than dissent- they personalize attacks, they do nothing to advance the debate- the simply cry “Liberals are Evil,” or the more popular “Liberals are Big, Fat Hypocrites” from behind their walls of anonymity. I believe, and I could be mistaken, that Elrod did approach certain bloggers, asking them to change the tone, not the content, of their posts, but nothing happened. Any banning that took place was done after much deliberation and after a number of attempts at civility were tried.

    And the saddest “mockery” is that Harding calls itself a university. You shouldn’t be able to use the label if the reality doesn’t match up. Those calling for the firing of an outspoken Democrat who was quoted in the NYT don’t want a university, they want an indoctrination camp. And folks like Policulture can whine about the whiners when HU provides the option of tenure, so that folks can say what they believe without fear of be fired for non-job related matters.

  13. odgie says:

    In the words of Keanu Reeves, “Whoa.” Thank you everyone for kicking in on this.

    We appear to have a case of “he said, no he really said” going on here. Either Elrod has been sulking over disagreements and banning folks who challenge him or not. I don’t think that anybody is being dishonest, but perspective is a critical thing on matters like this. Matt is right that the “take my ball and go home” tactic doesn’t hold water, if in fact that is what he is doing.

    On the other hand, it is his blog and if he wants to ban people for using ad hominems or questionable language, he is well within his rights. I’ve done the same thing. But if he is banning people just for disagreeing with him…well, what’s the point? Matt is right that a political blog with approved users only will likely be pretty boring.

    I still have no doubt that HU leaned on him, though, Based on my own experience there and a simple question: How else would he know that people are going to the administration if the administration hadn’t told him?

  14. GKB says:

    Matt, the decision to go private was not made in a vacuum. It’s all well and good to extol the virtues of rubbing shoulders with dissenters, but when the dissenters want to take away your livelihood unless you buy into THEIR intellectual inbreeding, it’s quite another matter.

  15. Nobody spews hatred on Elrod’s site that I’ve seen. Nobody. That is what attracts so many readers and commenters to it.

    Odgie, you are right about the administration’s willingness to use strongarm tactics to censor dissidents, and that sets up a crucial distinguishing factor between any alleged censoring that Elrod does on his own personal blog and the intimidation he received from the administration. When an institution ostensibly created for an academic purpose orders one of its employees to stop saying certain things and puts that person’s job in jeopardy, that is a completely different scenario from some individual’s comments not being posted on a web site. One is real life, the other is not. One is censorship, the other is not.

    Given the choice between an open blog where all can come and discuss and a closed one, we all know what Elrod would pick – he has picked to have a very open (yet civil) blog for years, despite the grief and protest he has received for his views. But if the choice is between having a closed blog or being fired…

  16. GKB says:

    David Manes, I spew hatred sometimes. Of course, I don’t mean it as hatred, mostly a strong dislike for fundamentalists and Biblical literalists, but I’ll admit, it wouldn’t be hard for a less-than-generous person to interpret my remarks as hatred.

  17. GKB, I think you give yourself too much hate credit. But even if you do get to “spew hatred,” and even if Elrod is completely arbitrary in deciding which comments to approve and which to not, none of that has any bearing on this situation. Also, none of it justifies the administration’s actions.

    To people like Roland, politiculture, etc… Elrod would only deserve your “hypocritical” slam if he had been going over your head to your employers and superiors instead of discussing political differences to your face. He would only be hypocritical if he tried to get you fired because he didn’t feel like his words alone were doing enough. I’m pretty sure that those “schoolyard sissies” (as they were referred to in the post above) are the ones that Elrod is speaking out against in his last public post.

  18. GKB says:

    Well, and Elrod can’t ban me from his blog, because I run the thing. I could hack it up and have it pointing to Ann Coulter or Limbaugh’s site in a New York Minute!

  19. Speaking of that… next April Fool’s Day…

  20. policulture says:

    For the record, no one at Politics & Culture has ever gone to the Harding Administration to complain about Elrod. We would not do such a thing, and would oppose anyone who did. We simply wanted the opportunity to discuss and debate. But we were denied that opportunity. And I hardly think that anyone was complaining to HU because of any of our comments.

    It is interesting that some people were allowed to post irreverent and inflammatory comments on Elrod’s blog, and others were not. It seems that your ability to post such comments was directly related to your political views.

  21. mattdabbs says:

    I never had Dr. Elrod delete any of my comments even though many were in disagreement with his stance. Not once. He did have his share of anonymous bashers that didn’t deserve to have a voice without a face.


    Harding is not all the bad! You benefited greatly from an education from there and it is really easy to look a gift horse in the mouth.

  22. motherfulkser says:

    Regardless of whether or not certain comments were modified out of his posts, you have to admit that they were some very obvious disagreements, which seemed to be handled in a Christ-like manner… until recently. I was excited about the gay marriage postings in particular, but was heavily disappointed with the snarky, anonymous-like back-and-forth banter that it turned into. Methinks God would encourage these sorts of discussions, not squash them. Too bad we’re not that in tune with His frame of mind.

  23. Roland says:

    GKB, you are living in a dream world. Elrod banned me from his site months ago. I think it was when he was talking about how the Administration should do something about the suffering in Darfur and I brought up the point of Elrod railing against the Iraq war and how was that any different than Darfur. He never posted it and from then on out, he would not let any of my posts stay.

    I don’t think I ever broke any rules there and I was in line with what others (like you) were saying about Conservatives. I just said it about Liberals and he hated that.

    He asked me, after that incident, for more information on myself. I gave it to him and he still does not let me post.

    The thing you are leaving out is that he moderated ALL posts. Any hate or “spew” that got on the site was because HE let it.

    Maybe, GKB, if you stopped looking down your nose at people and would actually contribute to discussions on other blogs instead of leaving sneering, condesending little bits of a post, people would take you more seriously.

    He is NOT open to debate. He told my friend he can allow what comments he wants and if he doesn’t like it, go make your own blog. So, we did.

    GKB, I assume you also think that the Liberal Universities out there that squash conservative voices..that shout speakers off stage, that literally attack speakers on stage…that THEY are a mockery as well?

  24. We need to realize that we don’t know much about the situation.

    We only know what he’s told us.

    It might be bordering on gossip to start speculating and making accusations about what caused him to go private.

  25. ksw says:


    People at “Liberal Universities” indeed sometimes squash conservative voices . . .by open ridicule, disrespect for “fly over country” and make a mockery of open conversation. But I would encourage you to spend some time on campuses of these universities and you might be surprised at the diversity of expression that is allowed. Problem is, that diversity of expression is sometimes an aspect of intellectual culture that some conservative voices decry. In the midst of so many different ideas, many are grouped under the heading of “liberal” while only a few are labeled “conservative.” Makes conservatives feel like more of a minority than they actually are, at least on liberal campuses.

    The Elrod situation is from another planet. Sure, all institutions make decisions and put pressure on folks when people with money make demands, however, that one’s employment could be jeopardy over something they write on their own time, on their own blog, (especially something so innocuous as Elrod) is something from a completely different educational universe. Now, you might find cases where someone’s eligibility for tenure was brought into question because of certain political views, but that also is not germane to this discussion as Harding has no such thing as tenure.

    Legitimate universities have levels of sanctions for instructors who embarrass the institution in the media or in front of donors. Maybe Harding does not, I’ve not been on campus since the day I graduated. But, you cannot threaten to withhold tenure if you never offered it in the first place.


    p.s. You mentioned “Liberal Universities” like you had some examples in mind. Any similar examples that you’d like to mention?

  26. erdoc says:

    In 1969 I was a student at Harding when James Atterberry the head of the English Department was fired because he made a speech at the Faculty retreat entitled Academic Freedom. I mentioned this to ME in an email, and he told me he was aware of that situation, but he felt that he knew his boundaries, and that would not happen. His recent post of an interview which he gave was probably very controversial to some. In the case of Dr. Atterberry there was on organized push from the Bible Department to get rid of him.(See Jimmy Allen’s “Fire in my Bones” ) My father was actually on the Harding Board at the time. He later told me that they only brought in enough board members to have a quorum. They actually sent the Harding plane to pick up my father. He later told me if had thought he would have gotten up and left the room so that a quorum did not exist. One sickly humorous note. John Howard of Howard’s Jewelers asked Atteberry what Harding was and Atteberry replied a Liberal Arts Christian College. Howard said, “We’re not liberal we’re conservative.” I would imagine that the makeup of Harding’s present board leans to the conservative bent. Also the big money supporters that are needed to keep the university moving forward are also of that bent. I can also imagine that a lot of them could threaten to end support if Elrod remains there. It happened in 1969, it could happen again. I hope it doesn’t. ME should be allowed to continue to be a gadfly.

  27. GKB says:

    @21: “Gift horse” would be one thing. Paying as much as I did for a sub-par education (in my chosen field, that is…I’ve been told many of the other departments are quite decent), doesn’t quite have the same ring.

    @23: Elrod did NOT moderate every comment. I happen to know this for a fact, because I am the one who set up the moderation queue. There were certain criteria that had to be met for comments to sail through without needing an administrator’s touch.

  28. Roland says:

    I agree that it is sad that HU is that rigid IF indeed they did put pressure on him HOWEVER, he knew that all along. He knew the history of Harding AND of the College church. He went forward with eyes wide open. I never liked the curfew at Harding but I knew what it was going in. That may be a lame example but it does fit.

    As I said on my blog, Harding needs someone like him, as much as I dislike his views.

  29. Murray S says:

    Hey Mike, love your blog, I hope my kids will go to ACU, regardless of how much I loved my time at HU. Thanks for the great writing.

  30. mattdabbs says:


    If you continue to pay for a sub par education what does that make you? That doesn’t sound like a very smart strategy. I know you are a smart guy and you know better than that. If you didn’t like it why didn’t you go somewhere that was “on par”? I went through the psychology program at Harding and ended up get selected with 11 other students from the best universities in the country (Harvard, UCLA, and Yale among them) out of 275 applications for a doctorate in clinical psychology from one of the top programs in the country. I hardly call that subpar and I have Harding to thank for providing me a top notch education that enabled me to compete with students from the best universities in the country.

    If you feel different that is fair enough but I don’t get why you would stick with “sub par” if it was that important to you. Different strokes I guess.

  31. Phil says:

    Elrod just said on Mike Cope’s blog that he did not get any pressure from Harding regarding the changes in his blog. Maybe everybody needs to back up and take a deep breath.

  32. S.C. Denney says:

    To change his blog, specifically, no. To change his lifestyle, yes — which lead him to personally decide to change his blog.

    A travesty, no matter how you look at it.

  33. odgie says:

    S.C. – Change his lifestyle? In all seriousness, how can that be?

  34. GKB says:

    @30: Sallie Mae calls me a defaulter if I don’t continue to pay for my sub-par education. And, it was only once I was finished with my education that I realized it was subpar. However, I was in the Bible department, not pyschology, and perhaps I should just change my definition of par. But, I did graduate more than 7 years ago, and a lot of the older dudes I had are no longer around, so perhaps things have changed.

  35. S.C. Denney says:

    Odgie, the definition of lifestyle is a way of life or style of living that reflects the attitudes and values of a person. Dr. Elrod was very open about his convictions and beliefs, particularly on his blog — that was a part of his “lifestyle.” Harding didn’t like that and has pressured him to change.

    I thought this was more of a truism.

    In all seriousness, are you joking by asking how HU has pressured Dr. Elrod to change his lifestyle?

  36. odgie says:

    S.C. – I’m not joking. I suppose it depends on how one uses the word “lifestyle.” I remember how the school would “promote” a certain lifestyle among the students, but I took it as a given that professors were already living such a lifestyle, otherwise how would they be hired? When someone says something about changing lifestyle in relation to a Christian school, I take it to mean stop drinking and/or smoking, start going to church, etc. And I know that Elrod is a non-drinking, non-smoking church of Christ member. Keep in mind I am not listing these things as defining virtues, just that in my experience these are the type of things that the school cares about.

    I am sure that you will agree that people are more than their politics and social views, so how exactly can the school have a problem with his lifestyle?

  37. Ed says:

    It’s scientifically proven that diversity breeds better students. That’s why prestigious institutions like Harvard sometimes have some very controversial professor’s. It’s sad when people can’t be resolute in their own beliefs, but not respectful of other’s ideas.

  38. Roland says:

    You know, a Liberal professor having a hard time at a conservative college is no different than the few conservatives working at largly liberal colleges. This is nothing new.

    I just read Copes blog. Elrod said he was not pressured. S.C, how much clearer do you need it unless Elrod told you different which would make him out to be a liar.

    The fact remains, no matter if he was pressured or not, HE KNEW what he was doing. He had 20 years to realize that.

  39. mattdabbs says:

    All these Harding accusations put up a red flag for me and was the reason I posted what I did above. Harding is not a perfect place but I have been to state undergrad colleges, state grad schools and Harding undergrad and grad and I would pick Harding over any of them.

  40. Roland says:

    You know, it’s funny Matt. Do many of these folks think that Harding is perfect? That it is some utopia? Every college has issues. What’s so funny, these people ripping on Harding and so forth yet their enrollment just keeps going up and up every year. They keep churning out highly successful people, year after year. Mark Elrod chooses to keep working there year after year. In fact, he always talks about what a great job he has. If Harding is so bad, why is he still there?

  41. andy says:

    Wow, Odgie, you seem to have linked to Pandora’s box with this one. Not that state schools are immune from this (my alma mater had their own version of Elrod), but it does seem much worse/more complicated when it’s at a Christian School.

  42. odgie says:

    @38 – Roland, you are right, it is nothing new. But that still doesn’t make it right for a conservative community to to hassle a liberal or vice-versa (and I know this happens at state schools; I currently attend one).

  43. Roland says:

    Still..we are only hearing one side and even that side is saying he wasn’t forced to do anything.

  44. Adam G. says:

    Harding is my alma mater, and I know from my time there how very conservative the climate is, and I never would have assumed any sort of “academic freedom” on the part of the faculty. Church of Christ institutions almost all hire only Church of Christ (a cappella) people to work for them, and a certain perspective on matters is therefore expected.

    I don’t agree with it. I consider myself a part of both independent Christian Churches and a cappella Churches of Christ and many of my views on a variety of topics would preclude me from any staff position with most Church of Christ institutions. I’m okay about that, but then I’m not the one suffering the wrath of the Bible Belt and beyond.

  45. Jerri Harrington says:

    Oh my goodness! I can’t believe I sent my son into the middle of this hornet’s nest! No wonder he came home disillusioned. I brought him up to believe that we could “tell Christians by their love for one another.” We have a LOT to work on if Jesus is going to find faith when He returns to take us home. I don’t know what that makes me, but all I’m willing to claim is Christ and Him crucified.

  46. odgie says:

    Adam – I share your disagreement.

    Jerri – That about sums it up.

  47. […] conservative, Harding University, liberal, Mark Elrod, partisan politics Well, that was fun. In my last post I ping backed Mark Elrod’s blog and my numbers went through the roof. I learned two things: […]

  48. JH says:

    I’ll respond to two trains of thoughts running through here, and try to keep it real:

    1) w/regards to Matt’s “why did you stay if it sucks so bad” question: There’s any number of reasons why someone might stay at HU when they hate it. Changing colleges is not always possible for a variety of reasons including financial, familial, and academic. Even when it’s possible, it’s never simple. In my case, I came to hate the place toward the end of my sophomore year, but I stayed and graduated anyway because a) leaving HU would deeply disappoint my parents b) I was majoring in Biblical Languages c) I had a good group of friends. As for why I continue to engage in the school’s life through blogs, it’s because HU is intertwined with my own family’s history. Even though I think the place is awful, it’s still “family,” and I’ll always be interested in what’s going on there.

    2) w/regards to Roland’s comment in #40 and elsewhere: Well, I’ll just take this sentence by sentence. Do many of these folks think that Harding is perfect? That it is some utopia? Every college has issues. Yes, but some colleges have more issues than others. This is a strawman. No one has contended HU should be a utopia or perfect. What’s so funny, these people ripping on Harding and so forth yet their enrollment just keeps going up and up every year. This is true in the literal sense, but the rise in enrollment is due to all the new graduate programs, most of which have poor admission standards and very little rigour. In other words, they’re cash cows. Undergraduate enrollment has actually been going down for the last several years. They keep churning out highly successful people, year after year. I’m not sure what you intend to prove by saying this. It would be really surprising if a school which handed out hundreds of degrees every single year didn’t have some successful alumni. Peoples’ success in life depends on a huge variety of factors, of which undergraduate education is only one. Mark Elrod chooses to keep working there year after year. In fact, he always talks about what a great job he has. If Harding is so bad, why is he still there? Well obviously he doesn’t think it’s so bad. In fact, he thinks his job is so great, as you said. What’s your point here?

    I don’t know why he banned you from his blog. But judging by your comments, it might have a lot to do with your argumentation tactics. The internet is full of this kind of stuff, and everyone does it to some extent, but I’ve hardly seen so many straw men, ad hominems, non-sequiturs, false dichotomies, etc. You also have a tendency to throw people into “liberal” and “conservative” camps and then slap a bunch of lame stereotypes onto them. Disentangling all this stuff is tedious work, and it’s easier most of the time just to mock people who do this, (or in ME’s case, ban them) rather than spend way too much time sorting through their “arguments.”

  49. odgie says:

    JH – interesting thoughts and some good points; thanks for kicking in

  50. Matthew says:

    I am glad to hear that the school is not trying to dictate his political views. We must have some freedom here, this is America.

  51. Does anyone here not think the Hussein Day article was the biggest issue?

  52. odgie says:

    @51 Rodney – I think that the article just brought things to light. What it comes down to is Elrod is supporting a Democrat, and some of our brethren can’t stand that.

    Also, I have seen the same comment by an anonymous poster at various sights saying that Elrod “supported” gay marriage, just because he didn’t decry it as the end of western civilization.

  53. Roland says:

    JH, Elrod never really made “argumentation tactics” a reason to deny someone. One would think that if my arguments were so weak as you say, he would enjoy the ease of responding. To be honest, I think he was tired of trying to respond to how often I pointed out his hypocrisy and inconsistency. Even in class he never liked being pointed out when he was wrong. Of course, no one does but it’s all in how you respond to it.

    JH, I’m sorry you hate Harding so much. Obviously that affects how you view points and respond to things. I hate to hear that.

  54. […] Let freedom ring…except on campus (1,051 views) – In which I pingbacked to Mark Elrod’s blog (now gone private), touched on a subject which provoked strong reactions, and learned about the joys of comment moderation. […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: