Gandhi and Professor Peters . . . or, how to win an argument with a liberal

Bedarin 2014/03/08 00:21:43
Another answer
Add Photos & Videos

When Gandhi was studying law at the University College of London, there was a professor, whose last name was Peters, who felt animosity for Gandhi, and because Gandhi never lowered his head towards him, their "arguments" were very common.

One day, Mr. Peters was having lunch at the dining room of the University and Gandhi came along with his tray and sat next to the professor. The professor, in his arrogance, said, "Mr Gandhi: you do not understand... a pig and a bird do not sit together to eat ", to which Gandhi replies, "You do not worry professor, I'll fly away ", and he went and sat at another table.

Mr. Peters, green of rage, decides to take revenge on the next test, but Gandhi responds brilliantly to all questions. Then, Mr. Peters asked him the following question, "Mr Gandhi, if you are walking down the street and find a package, and within it there is a bag of wisdom and another bag with a lot of money; which one will you take?"
Without hesitating, Gandhi responded, "the one with the money, of course".
Mr. Peters, smiling, said, "I, in your place, would have taken the wisdom,
don't you think?"
"Each one takes what one doesn't have", responded Gandhi indifferently.

Mr. Peters, already hysteric, writes on the exam sheet the word "idiot" and gives it to Gandhi. Gandhi takes the exam sheet and sits down. A few minutes later, Gandhi goes to the professor and says, "Mr. Peters, you signed the sheet, but you did not give me the grade."
Add a comment above

Top Opinion

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest

  • Patrick Henry~PWCM~JL 2014/03/16 15:31:15
    Patrick Henry~PWCM~JL
    OMG!!! HILARIOUS!!! More wisdom from the mind of Gandhi!!!
  • frank 2014/03/16 15:14:41
    I love it, it’s so true.
  • Jackie G - Poker Playing Pa... 2014/03/16 15:03:52
    Jackie G - Poker Playing Patriot
    I like it
  • whipnet 2014/03/16 14:16:11
    Gandhi should have been at the IMPROV, not in India.

  • JDood 2014/03/12 03:40:04
    That was priceless!
  • wtw 2014/03/10 04:35:45
    Is that true or just legend--either way it is fantastic!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • Arizona1950 2014/03/10 00:03:31
    Gandhi ... wish we had more like him.
  • Dwight 2014/03/09 22:59:25
    I never realized Gandi was such a whit.
  • LMA 2014/03/09 21:52:51
    thats pretty good
  • Howler 2014/03/09 21:39:06
    Great post.
  • fawghawn l hawn 2014/03/09 21:35:11
    fawghawn l hawn
    the left have been doing the elmer fudd on their hats as of late
    we need to reexamine ghandis method of getting local control of,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
    salt,THAT,,was his fulcrum for dealing with bits like that pefesser elitist hoightytoighty
    holier than thou establishment wonk for totalitarianism,and eventually,,freedom for india
  • Ken 2014/03/09 18:30:03
    But who was the "liberal" in this argument; Professor Peters, who I don't know, or Gandhi, who created a socialist state in India??
  • Bedarin Ken 2014/03/10 11:15:57
    Both were liberals.
  • Ken Bedarin 2014/03/10 12:35:14
    So the poster was pointing out that only a liberal can win an argument with a liberal?

    (At least, I thought that is what I said.)
  • L Dub 2014/03/09 10:37:07
    L Dub
    'Love it!
  • Andy K 2014/03/08 14:44:32
    Andy K
    It seems that Gandhi had a sharp wit and the professor seemed, well witless to say the least. Some arguments are just not worth the time. I have always been told not to argue with an Idiot because you only lower yourself to their level!
  • R.J. 2014/03/08 04:11:16
    Another answer
    Our founding fathers were Liberal.
  • Kycatfan R.J. 2014/03/08 08:35:28
    Yes, but with a completely different definition than today.
  • R.J. Kycatfan 2014/03/09 21:48:18
    Stay with the Party line. i Wish people would think for themselves.
  • Kycatfan R.J. 2014/03/12 08:42:47
    Do you mean like the ideologues that march in lockstep with the left. The classic definition of liberal would be an ideology which is rational and promotes freedom, life, liberty and protection of individual rights rather than one that thinks the government needs to step in and alleviate perceived social ills.
  • R.J. Kycatfan 2014/03/18 02:06:25
    No lockstep on the Left, They are to opened Minded, Our Founding Fathers were not of the Right Wing. LOL What Social ills ??
  • Kycatfan R.J. 2014/03/19 07:17:27
    Really? Where would you put them today? Which ones would be elected in NY or Cali? LOL do you think that lessens the truth of it? The social ills where the government constantly steps in to level the field but only results in lowering the bar. Every Dem. voting for BO care would be lockstep.
  • big_Guy91 2014/03/08 03:01:26
    I've seen this as so true throughout much of life. After all, how do you explain so many irresponsible college students?
  • Ric U. 2014/03/08 01:49:56
    Ric U.
    Two liberals fighting is always hilarious.
  • Mike 2014/03/08 01:27:01
    Another answer
    Mr. Peters must have been a conservative................that explains it all.
  • Bedarin Mike 2014/03/08 02:53:17
    A conservative University professor . . . get real.
  • TKramar Bedarin 2014/03/08 18:05:22
    there are plenty. all of my business professors were conservative, and staunchly so.

    Ghandi was a liberal.
  • Bedarin TKramar 2014/03/09 12:07:39
    Yes, but it had a different meaning then.
  • TKramar Bedarin 2014/03/09 16:46:38
    not really...words don't change in meaning.
  • Ken TKramar 2014/03/09 18:38:07
    Really .... at one time being conservative meant tending to oppose change.. ... it still does in the dictionary.

    Today the status quo and the law:
    1) Support a woman's right to choose an abortion
    2) Favor hiring and admission policies which encourage diversity through the use of quotas and racial preferences
    3) Bans religious activities such as prayer and Bible reading in public schools and at government sponsored events

    To support these policies is to oppose change. Would you call me a conservative if I was in favor of continuing these policies?
  • TKramar Ken 2014/03/09 19:16:41
    Yes, otherwise you would be a progressive.
  • Ken TKramar 2014/03/09 20:06:36
    Guess I need to ask the question a different way.

    At CPAC (Conservative Political Action Convention), did anyone speak for or in support of:
    1) A woman's right to choose an abortion?
    2) Hiring and admission policies which encourage diversity through the use of quotas and racial preferences?
    3) Bans on religious activity such as prayer and Bible reading in public schools and at government sponsored events?

    Are you asserting that those who participate in CPAC are progressives?
  • TKramar Ken 2014/03/09 20:16:26
    I wouldn't know, I don't follow CPAC.
  • Howler Ken 2014/03/09 21:51:44 (edited)
    Mr. Ken has on numerous past posts, made it very clear that he is satisfied with the policy and direction of the self-labeled, "Progressive" Obama admin, and the pseudo-Democrat caucus which named itself the "Progressive" caucus and includes almost every - if not every - U.S. legislator who prides themselves in their leftist ideological goals.

    Aside from that Mr. Ken can twist, deceive, and play all the political semantics to his heart's content, but his failed attempt at political cleverness is all too obvious.

    Keep it up, however, because it is fun to read.
  • Ken Howler 2014/03/10 02:45:39
    I don't know TKramar's positions in any detail ... but based on what he has said, I suspect you will find he agrees with me... and believes the so called conservatives of today, like you, are nothing more than progressive falsely calling themselves conservatives.

    So Howler shout as loud as you wish "I am a conservative" because we are listening to what you say...we are watching your positions and you, as most so called conservatives, are supporting progressive positions.
  • Howler Ken 2014/03/10 04:33:51
    Mr. Ken, Howler doesn't give one hoot in hell what anyone wants to call Howler.

    The present-day Progressive/Conservative argument Mr. Ken needs to address is why the Obama admin and the pseudo-Democrats in the legislature call themselves Progressives to the public to which they speak and try to rule.

    Howler does not support them, and is actually diametrically opposed to their direction, policy, and ideology.

    Now, if Mr. Ken finds out that these political scum choose to call themselves Conservatives, while holding on to their same policy, direction, and ideology to which Howler is opposed, then Howler can be called the Progressive.

    Matters not to Howler.

    Mr. Ken's political word-games never fail to entertain.
  • Ken Howler 2014/03/10 12:37:29
    And clearly TKramer recognizes that "a rose by any other name would smell as sweet" and calling something conservative does not make it so.
  • Howler Ken 2014/03/10 16:32:30
    ...Then according to Mr. Ken's own rule, calling something Progressive does not make it so.

    However, Obama calls himself a Progressive, as does ALL of the members of the Progressive legislative caucus (who also call themselves Democrats, and they collectively vilify conservatives.)

    Thus, also according to Mr. Ken's rule, it looks like Obama and those Democrats are once again trying to deceive, or maybe they simply need to ask Mr. Ken as to what they should publicly label themselves.

    Drink up Mr. Ken.
  • Carriename 2014/03/08 01:10:27 (edited)
    Another answer
    Ghandi, was liberal . So two liberals fighting with each other? lol
    Never heard of this before. Why sit NEXT to someone, who you have distain for?
    They were just egging each other on. NOT MATURE. I don't get the "lower your head", part.
  • Sint John Jones 2014/03/08 01:09:28
    Sint John Jones
    I like this funny and smart stuff. And Gandhi was a great man!

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2016/02/10 00:24:56

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals