Suppose conservatives gave $2 million to Armstrong Williams or Jeff Gannon to run a website devoted to criticizing leftwing media for lack of journalistic ethics. But that's just what George Soros and friends have done for David Brock -- a man of no character whose journalistic misdeeds dwarf those of the gentlemen mentioned. Brock is a self-convicted liar who made his name by writing a series of articles and a book designed to destroy the reputations of two individuals, Bill Clinton and Anita Hill, which he has since claimed were based on accusations which he knew at the time were lies.
Why does anyone give credence to this knave? The answer is politics. When I first became a conservative I introduced myself to Norman Podhoretz the editor of Commentary Magazine. Podhoretz said to me: "When you were a leftist, David, they let you get away with everything. Now that you're a conservative, they won't let you get away with anything." Truer words were never said.
David Brock having sold his soul lately to the Soros crowd, seems to get away with everything. His latest caper is an attempt to discredit the academic freedom movement by claiming that we made up the story about a Colorado final exam that required students to "Explain Why George Bush Is A War Criminal" and the professor who gave an "F" to a student who wrote why Saddam Hussein was a criminal instead.
Actually Brock claimed that there was an apparent rightwing media conspiracy to promote our allegedly false story. Brock's headline was "Media Repeat Unsubstantiated Horowitz Tale Of Anti-Conservative Bias On Campus."
The first question that comes to mind is who could actually doubt this story, particularly in the Wake of the Ward Churchill Affair? Does anyone think that Churchill, a man who thinks he is living in Nazi Germany, would have scruples about putting such a "question" on an exam? And there are thousands of Ward Churchills on our college faculties. And even if the story were mistaken, is the overwhelming academic presence of leftists who use their classrooms as political soapboxes "unsubstantiated?" (See www.studentsforacademicfreedom.org and www.noindoctrination.org for just two sites with ample confirming evidence.)
The story about the Colorado exam is true and was even referenced by the president of the university in question, Kay Norton, at legislative hearings on the Academic Bill of Rights. The complete facts are available here. But facts obviously have never meant anything to David Brock.
Footnote: The MediaMatters article, written by a Brock flunky who seems tasked with smearing myself in particular and who signs himself S.S.M. actually refers to another academic assignment with an identical framework. Students at Foothills College were assigned to write an essay on why the US Constitution is a ruling class document and not a milestone in the creation of government of, by and for the people, as one misguided American put it. A 17-year old Kuwaiti in the class wrote that actually the US Constitution was a milestone in the creation of government of, by and for the people. He was given an "F" and sent to the school psychologist on the grounds that no rational person could believe that the US Constitution was in fact a milestone in the creation of government, of, by and for the people. I have met this young man and published an article by him, which is as articulate and well-written as any I have encountered by a seventeen-year-old (let alone by one for whom English is not a first language and who had been in this country only five months when the incident occurred. I'm not going to bother with the fatuous attacks on this brave young man by S.S.M. or the bloggers he cites. This is just a another shameful incident in the shameful saga of David Brock and the bottom-feeders he attracts.