Rachel Maddow Ridicules Ozarks School
John Schmalzbauer
Posted: 10.23.2009 / 4:23 PM PDT
On December 2nd, former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin will speak to a capacity crowd at the College of the Ozarks, just 30 miles south of Nixa. According to an October 20th press release, “The ticket line quickly filled, consuming all tickets available to the public.”
MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow wasted no time in ridiculing a place that could get so excited about Sarah Palin. Quoting directly from the college’s student life policy, Maddow noted the school’s rule against homosexual conduct. In so doing, she reduced an entire institution to its position on one issue.
Such treatment angered some Ozarks conservatives. In the words of a local blogger, “What else would we expect from Maddow except a biased personal view of a school that she knows little about based on her own sexual preferences?”
Had Maddow’s assistants done their homework, they would have discovered a school with a history of assisting the underdog. Founded in 1906 as a high school for those “without sufficient means to procure such training,” it became a four-year college in 1964. In a region with more than its share of poverty, C of O has provided free tuition to students who are willing to work. Dubbed Hard Work U, it is part of the Work Colleges Consortium, a group that includes Berea College in Appalachia, a pioneer in interracial education.
To be sure, C of O is conservative. The college’s vision “is to develop citizens of Christ-like character who are well-educated, hard-working, and patriotic, “including “an understanding of American heritage, civic responsibilities, love of country, and willingness to defend it.” Such sturdy values are also celebrated in the campus streetscape. Students can literally drive through the Gates of Opportunity past Lake Honor, before turning onto Patriotic Place, Vocational Way, and Spiritual Street. The campus museum (dubbed the “Smithsonian of the Ozarks“) includes an enormous collection of firearms, memorabilia from the golden age of Ozarks country music, and the original car from the Beverly Hillbillies.
In light of these commitments, it is not surprising that the college has played host to Margaret Thatcher, George H.W. Bush, Norman Schwarzkopf, and Barbara Bush. Palin’s December visit is part of a long tradition of hosting conservative luminaries (who are given a “Hard Work U” t-shirt).
And yet no institution can be reduced to a single political ideology.
This week I visited the College of the Ozarks as part of a recruiting trip for Missouri State University. During my visit, I noticed a professor had assigned a book unlikely to be quoted by Governor Palin. The book in question was Rob Bell’s Jesus Wants to Save Christians.
Though Bell usually steers clear of partisan politics, he is no fan of American military might. According to Bell, the “Bible is a story of people living on the underside of military super powers. . . . So when you read this story, and you read this book, as a citizen of the most powerful empire this world has ever seen, you may miss some of its central ideas. Because when it says some trust in chariots but we trust in God and you have 42.8 percent of the world’s weapons, you’re the one with the chariots.”
Such prophetic irony is worthy of Jon Stewart or Stephen Colbert. Or Rachel Maddow.
October 23rd, 2009 at 8:02 pm
I should add that my own institution’s non-discrimation policy includes sexual orientation, a sign that the Ozarks are beginning to change. This was accomplished after a long battle. Here is the policy: http://www.missouristate.edu/equity/nondiscrimination_statement.htm
My point was not to endorse the College of the Ozarks policy, but merely to point out that no institution can be summed up by one issue.
November 2nd, 2009 at 11:24 am
Athough it is a shame that the school was smeared because it had the audacity to invite an individule that Maddow does not agree with, it can take some comfort in knowing that few people watch the show. Those that do support Maddow would have nothing but distain anyway for a school that requires WORK from its students. That is not how they do it at Brown University! The truley enlightened can get free school money from Obama, and that whole silly “work” thing can be shown to be a waste of time.
November 2nd, 2009 at 8:10 pm
@ JSCAM8: Really? Your response to stereotyping by Maddow is to double down on the stereotyping.
Meanwhile, savor the irony of honoring, Sarah Palin with a “Hard Work U” t-shirt.
November 6th, 2009 at 1:03 pm
Expecting Rachel Maddow to view a school with overtly homophobic policies through any other lens is akin to asking a non-white person to evaluate the positive traits of the Klan. When an organization devotes itself to stomping on your civil rights, it’s hard to see it or its members in any other light.
November 6th, 2009 at 3:00 pm
Policywank: Fair point. I’m sure it is a painful issue for Maddow. At the same time, you are assuming that C of O students spend most of their time thinking about discrimination against gays and lesbians. Most of their time is spent reading novels, textbooks, and studying geology and sociology.
The comparison to the Klan breaks down at that point. C of O is not just about one thing. Moreover, there are plenty of graduates of such schools who have more liberal views on such issues, sometimes views developed in college. Evangelical young people are growing more tolerant of civil unions and (to a much smaller degree) gay marriage. Some of them attend places like College of the Ozarks.
November 6th, 2009 at 3:10 pm
FYI: Here is a link to some survey data on younger evangelicals on civil unions and gay marriage: http://faithinpubliclife.org/content/news/2009/10/evangelicals_step_up_for_marri.html
“In a recent survey during the 2008 presidential election cycle, 58 percent of young white evangelicals supported some form of legal recognition of gay partnerships, whether in the form of civil unions or marriage. Twenty-six percent supported full marriage rights. The promise of this rising evangelical support of LGBT human rights cannot be overstated. If trends continue, evangelicals can no longer be counted on as a solid unwavering base of the Religious Right. And without the support of young evangelicals the Religious Right will become even more of a reservoir of aging bigots than a dynamic and growing grassroots movement.”
-Marta Cook, Center for American Progress
November 7th, 2009 at 2:04 am
Little wonder it is mocked and held up to ridicule: a school dedicated to develop citizens of Christ-like character who are well-educated, hard-working, and patriotic, “including “an understanding of American heritage, civic responsibilities, love of country, and willingness to defend it.”
This begs the question: what has being well-educated, hard-working, and patriotic to do with being Christ-like? Not to mention the rest of the conservative reactionary claptrap. What utter nonsense. Christ had nothing to do with any of those things, and, were He here today, would be leading the charge in ridding the temple of these money-changers and betrayers who use His name in vain in furthering their agenda of hate and intolerance.
Jesus wept, for He knew the evil that would be done in His name.
November 9th, 2009 at 9:21 am
Yawara: I’m fairly certain that Rob Bell would endorse much of your critique of American civil religion. His critique is part of the curriculum at College of the Ozarks. Sometimes reforms come from within an institution.
November 12th, 2009 at 11:38 am
John, you have done a nice job answering these messages. But sometimes assumptions overwhelm reason and there are too many issues lurking in the shadows to address in a single message or blog. Yawara has done a great job showing this. Inviting Sarah Palin to lecture students on Christian values is to invite the anti-Christ to lecture on how to best follow Jesus. Furthermore, for her to lecture on hard work and the value of higher education is cynical and hypocritical. She quit her job as governor because she wanted to make more money and couldn’t wait two more years, she was a lazy student in college, she refuses to engage in any kind of critical discussion, and she is a war lover. The “conservative” is a misnomer.
November 13th, 2009 at 12:40 am
I never praised the decision to invite Sarah Palin. You or I might choose different speakers to speak to the students in Point Lookout, but that wasn’t my main point. Have you spent any time at the school? Even looked carefully at the webpage? Sat down and had a conversation with someone there (ideally, more than one person)? Didn’t think so.
There are plenty of things that folks might criticize about this little school, but it shouldn’t be done in black/white, polarized terms. That is using the same kind of rhetoric that people criticize Palin for using. Palin lacks empathy for those on the other side and so do people who judge a college on the basis of a few pieces of information.
November 13th, 2009 at 12:44 am
Azi: I should add that I appreciate your comments. Perhaps my interpretation of the school is shaped by a lunch with several thoughtful faculty, none of whom sounded like Sarah Palin or Mike Huckabee, but more like interesting college professors with nuanced views of the world.
I should also mention that I attended a similar institution where many people (including me) became more engaged with issues of social justice, poverty, and peace. Surveys of the student body by the political science department found just such a shift, not in everybody but in enough to matter.
December 3rd, 2009 at 10:45 pm
Thanks for the even-handed, anti-dichotomous treatment of C of O, John. Your words could be echoed for Calvin College where I work. I can’t count the number of times I’ve been sidled up to and regaled with dismissive, contemptuous blather about how criminally conservative OR liberal Calvin College is, depending on the personal bias of the blatherer. We actually have a complex mix of extremes and moderation, passion and apathy on campus, and it’s sad that the polarizers off-campus will do their best to destroy one of the few fragile communities where Christians might figure out how to weld together the best of political ethics from both dominant ideologies. For example, is there any chance we can prophetically condemn the military-industrial complex while praising military actions that protect oppressed minorities from tyrants? Could we maybe BOTH recognize the value of hard work AND support public welfare for the helpless? Stop assuming that the part of your opposite’s rhetoric you agree with is just empty lip service and start using agreement to build a better policy and a better culture. If you need to attack someone, attack the attack dogs and muzzle them. Not censorship, just a boycott.