A Lesson in Un-Civil Discourse: The Controversial Former Attorney General Visits Wabash
by Sean Clerget ‘09
Thursday March 15th, 2007 marked a historic day for the conservatives of Wabash College. John Ashcroft’s speech in the Pioneer Chapel served as the highest profile event to visit campus since Ann Coulter. Moreover, events that transpired later that same evening led to a shift in conservative organizations on the campus of Wabash College.
These events caused details regarding the Ashcroft event to be overlooked, a problem which this article hopes to remedy. Many people questioned and criticized Mr. Ashcroft for being combative in the question and answer session following his speech. However, before I comment on that, I should review the events that took place earlier in the day. In the planning of the event, Tyler Gibson ’09, who served as the event coordinator,
secured time in Mr. Ashcroft’s schedule to sit in on Professor Scott Himsel’s class entitled “Civil Liberties in War and Peace”. Mr. Ashcroft does not normally do these sorts of things, but agreed as a favor. All junior Political Science majors were invited to join the class for the event. The plan did not include inviting professors outside of the Political Science department, although several showed up.
Before the session began, Professor Stephen Morillo, who is not part of the Political Science department, walked in, sat down, and said “I’ll listen to what he has to say, but I won’t believe a word of it.” The lack of open-mindedness displayed in that statement from a faculty member who aligns himself with liberals and Democrats is rather comical, considering that those two groups have been known to preach open-mindedness and tolerance as great virtues. Some faculty members consider themselves to be above opinions that are not in line with theirs, and that is disappointing to see.
Professor Himsel began the class by outlining a case in which a federal judge in New York, a Clinton appointee, wrote an opinion and ruled against certain uses of the Patriot Act. Mr. Ashcroft took the floor next and began to defend his position. It took approximately thirty seconds before Dr. Morillo began muttering comments under his breath. Of course, anyone who has ever heard Dr. Morillo speak about politics knows that being discreet is not exactly his forte. Mr. Ashcroft continued speaking because Dr. Morillo’s comments were just audible enough for the people around him to hear. Next, Dr. Morillo raised his hand and asked a very pointed question. Mr. Ashcroft began to answer when Dr. Morillo interjected with a disagreement.
A debate ensued, and again Dr. Morillo interrupted Mr. Ashcroft. At that point, Mr. Ashcroft paused and asked Dr. Morillo if he was a student in the class. Upon receiving negative answer, Mr. Ashcroft proceeded to ask if he had read the materials for that day’s class and again received negative response.
Mr. Ashcroft then said, “It was my understanding that this was going to be a class.” Finally, a student raised his hand and said “I am an undergraduate in this class,” implying that Morillo was hogging the opportunity to engage Mr. Ashcroft. After those events, Dr. Morillo stayed relatively quiet for the rest of the session. Again, it must be said that Mr. Ashcroft agreed to participate in a class, not to be lectured to by a history professor.
Following that exchange, the group seemed to settle down and resumed its discussion
regarding the case at hand. However, that temporary peace was broken when Political Science major Kyle Cassidy ’08 asked a question and then interrupted Mr. Ashcroft’s response. He then engaged in an argument with Mr. Ashcroft, interrupting him with some regularity. This incident eventually led to another confrontation later that evening in the Chapel. By the end of the session, Mr. Ashcroft was understandably frustrated.
Later, Mrs. Janet Ashcroft, who accompanied Mr. Ashcroft on the trip, said that although they had encountered protests and arguments at other campuses, no one had been this rude.
If students on this campus expected Mr. Ashcroft to just sit back and listen to lectures from history professors and undergraduate students, they were certainly mistaken. Mr. Ashcroft defended his positions all day long and for doing so in such a strong manner, and not deferring to student and faculty attacks, he was criticized in the Bachelor. The reason that Mr. Sterling Carter ‘07, mentioned in the Bachelor editorial entitled “John Ashcroft a Waste of Student Money,” had a somewhat heated exchange with Mr. Ashcroft was a result of his inability to follow the very clear rules which were explained before the question and answer session began. At one point Mr. Ashcroft told Jason Simons ‘08 not to give the microphone back to Mr. Carter, seeing as Mr. Carter continued to lecture Mr. Ashcroft instead of actually asking a question. It was the political statements made by students, and not the defenses made by Mr. Ashcroft, that took away from the quality of discourse during the event.
After the speech, Mr. Ashcroft came down from the stage to greet his wife and friends in attendance. Mr. Cassidy, who had been at the earlier session, then yelled a question at Mr. Ashcroft and began moving towards him. Mr. Ashcroft responded by saying “No, you don’t get to ask a question because you didn’t play by the rules.” For some reason this student felt that it was his moral duty to confront Mr. Ashcroft and had to be restrained by student staffers.
That this student thought he had the right to approach a guest of our college in such a confrontational way and somehow felt empowered to battle for anti-Ashcroft folks everywhere, indicates that he has given himself far too much intellectual
credit.
Despite the ungentlemanly behavior of a few, the event was relatively well-received on campus and certainly was well attended, considering the Chapel was full. The staff, pleased with how smoothly the event proceeded, wishes to thank everyone who attended Mr. Ashcroft’s speech and behaved in a gentlemanly manner. It is unfortunate that the poor behavior of a few caused the Ashcroft’s to question the quality of behavior at our institution. However, despite these events, by the end of the evening the Ashcroft’s had nothing but positive things to say about Wabash College.
Although it should be noted that a great deal of funding for the Ashcroft event came from The Foundation For a Traditional Wabash, with which this organization was previously affiliated, it was the members of what is now The Wabash Conservative Union who, according to Jim Amidon, “…did the work of an entire staff of professional event organizers, and did so with gobs of political baggage to work through.”
Some people may have thought that this new group would not be able to function very well after the split from the foundation, which had provided many resources. Although the funding provided by that group was helpful, this issue of The Phoenix should put to rest any doubts about the abilities of The Wabash Conservative Union. In a short span of two weeks, this group of dedicated conservative students put on one of the largest events in the recent history of Wabash College, and put out a quality publication from scratch. It was extremely rewarding to see the chapel full of Wabash students
at the Ashcroft event, just as it has been rewarding to put together this publication from the ground up. Let it be known that conservatism is not in shambles on this campus. There is a group of dedicated students who are focused on fighting for conservative issues at Wabash College. The same professionalism that was exhibited by the members of The Wabash Conservative Union in the execution of the Ashcroft event can be expected to continue in all the actions of this group including its publication: The Phoenix.
Related posts:
