User talk:Aehlinger

Warning of account blocking: Obama's position was not that of a professor and don't insist otherwise here, except on talk pages.--Aschlafly 19:08, 9 June 2008 (EDT)

Yes he was, his own employer said he was. There is no way to argue against this. --Aehlinger

You haven't stated precisely what the press office his employer actually said, and there's no denying that Obama was never a real professor.--Aschlafly 19:25, 9 June 2008 (EDT)

Well, if you'd checked the references people tried to put in before you reverted them, you might've seen what the University said. But here it is: http://www.law.uchicago.edu/media/index.html

Whether being called a professor by the University of Chicago makes him a "real professor"...well, I guess that depends on how Conservapedia feels about the University in question. Wandering 19:29, 9 June 2008 (EDT)

We've all seen what the press office said, Wandering. Again, you don't raise the quality of your edits and comments soon, your account is going to be blocked. This will remain a quality site.--Aschlafly 19:32, 9 June 2008 (EDT)

I'll raise the quality of my edits and comments when you'll tell me what's wrong with them. You still haven't told me how I "deleted information" from the Professor values page. But for the moment, I'd appreciate an explanation of how "You haven't stated precisely what the press office his employer actually said" and "We've all seen what the press office said" reconcile. Am I making some terrible critical reading error here? Did you make a typo? Or is your complaint that the edits did not include a quotation of the press office? Wandering 19:46, 9 June 2008 (EDT)

I think to "remain a quality site", one must first achieve the status of "being a quality site". --Jareddr 19:39, 9 June 2008 (EDT)

Sir, if you want to question my credibility and threaten my account, then please provide me specifics of what I am doing in contradiction to the web pages rules. I am adding citations and completely factual information, like stating that the University of Chicago calls him a professor. Whether or not you think that makes him a real professor is an opinion, but it is a FACT that they call him one. That is all I said. You are threatening my account because what I say does not fit your agenda, not because I am saying something incorrect OR biased. --Aehlinger

Aehlinger, the University of Chicago never conferred the title of professor on Obama, and never claimed it did.--Aschlafly 19:41, 9 June 2008 (EDT)

Read the press release. I quote, "Senior Lecturers are considered to be members of the Law School faculty and are regarded as professors". Yes, they did call him a professor. --Aehlinger

No, your statement is illogical. The press office, choosing its words carefully, said the obvious: that some (incorrectly) treat and regard any faculty members as though they are professors. Should someone falsely claim to be a professor on his own resume, however, it would be a scandal.--Aschlafly 19:49, 9 June 2008 (EDT)

Then why did they make that same "mistake"? "Several times during his 12 years as a professor in the Law School, Obama was invited to join the faculty in a full-time tenure-track position, but he declined." Why refer to him as a professor if they think it's incorrect to refer to him as a professor? Wandering 19:52, 9 June 2008 (EDT)

How is my statement illogical? When they made the aforementioned quote, they were referring to their own Law school, as a respected institution would not make sweeping claims about other institutions for financial reasons. Additionally, how were you able to assume from their statement that they implied that "other institutions" "incorrectly" treat them as faculty members. Please provide me with a source that uses either phrase. If you can't, then we must interpret the statement as referring to themselves. Thus, they are directly saying that Obama is considered a professor at their institution. --Aehlinger

The University of Chicago's press office is obviously not going to embarrass Obama. But woe to anyone who claims on his resume that he's a professor when he was just a Senior Lecturer.--Aschlafly 20:00, 9 June 2008 (EDT)

I agree, they are not going to embarrass Obama, but institutions such as the University of Chicago have their own interests in mind ahead of any individual. They could have easily ignored the situation and not released a press release at all had they known that his claims were incorrect. Saying "woe to anyone who claims on his resume that he's a professor when he was a Senior Lecturer" is not a fact, but an opinion which by Conservapedia's own Commandments (#5) must not have sway in determining what appears in an article. --Aehlinger

No, Aehlinger, we welcome logic here and it is not necessary to have a citation to support the claim that "2+2=4". If you think any Senior Lecturer would be telling the truth by claiming on his resume that he holds the title of Professor, then perhaps this site isn't for you. We don't entertain denials of obvious truths here.--Aschlafly 20:10, 9 June 2008 (EDT)

Well then, I apologize for interfering with your "logic". It is clearly not so obvious to me that "Senior Lecturer" does not equal "Professor" after a world-renowned university makes a claim exactly to the contrary. I suppose I will never understand that kind of logic, so I will no longer attempt to understand or interfere. I agree, we shouldn't entertain denials of obvious truths here. --Aehlinger

Aehlinger, you're not correctly stating what the University of Chicago said. Obviously the title of "Senior Lecturer" is not equal to the title of "Professor", and not even the media relations department of the college claimed otherwise. In academic departments, such a claim would be greeted with laughter or scorn, and any attempt to pawn that off on one's resume would result in immediate firing or refusal to hire.--Aschlafly 20:28, 9 June 2008 (EDT)

Aschlafly, sadly, your interpretation is not so obvious to me. In the direct quote, "Senior Lecturers are considered to be members of the Law School faculty and are regarded as professors," I read their statement to mean something that is true of the professorship hierarchy at most (if not all) US institutions. At the University of Chicago (I know - I took adjunct classes there), Senior Lecturers are among multiple employment positions that are considered professors. Senior Lecturers is a subcategory of professor (along with adjunct, emeritus, associate, full, etc.), but still under the heading of professor. The university does not employ anyone under solely the title of "Professor", without some sub-category attached. Hence, there are two possible interpretations of this hierarchy. You can either say that no positions may be called a professor (I discount this option as obvious). Or, you are able to correctly call a Senior Lecturer a Professor, along with other positions that are also sub-categories of professor like adjunct professors or associate professors. And, yes, this statement was made by their media relations department. I don't know how to explain my logic any more clearly. --Aehlinger