patrick.net

rdm says

But speaking of malfeasance that is not theoretical and unproven, is it too much to ask that the Trump administration comply with the whistleblower law as it was written?

Somebody hearing something 2nd, 3rd, 4th hand dealing with a matter that is outside your job description is not being a Whistleblower; it's being a gossip.

It certainly does not trigger the handover of transcripts of conversations with a foreign power by the President, whose Foreign Policy powers are largely unrestricted as the SCOTUS has made clear repeatedly.

CornPoptheOriginalGangster says

rdm says

But speaking of malfeasance that is not theoretical and unproven, is it too much to ask that the Trump administration comply with the whistleblower law as it was written?

Somebody hearing something 2nd, 3rd, 4th hand dealing with a matter that is outside your job description is not being a Whistleblower; it's being a gossip.

It certainly does not trigger the handover of transcripts of conversations with a foreign power by the President, whose Foreign Policy powers are largely unrestricted as the SCOTUS has made clear repeatedly.

This whole affair shows that the deep state is still spying on the President, just like during the campaign.

rdm says

But lets ignore the facts and talk about Biden and the 48 hour rule.

So what impeachable offence has the president committed?

rdm says

But lets ignore the facts and talk about Biden and the 48 hour rule.

So what impeachable offence has the president committed?

rdm says

But lets ignore the facts and talk about Biden and the 48 hour rule.

So what impeachable offence has the president committed?

rdm says

But lets ignore the facts and talk about Biden and the 48 hour rule.

So what impeachable offence has the president committed?

rdm says

But lets ignore the facts and talk about Biden and the 48 hour rule.

So what impeachable offence has the president committed?

rdm says

But lets ignore the facts and talk about Biden and the 48 hour rule.

So what impeachable offence has the president committed?

rdm says

But lets ignore the facts and talk about Biden and the 48 hour rule.

So what impeachable offence has the president committed?

rdm says

But lets ignore the facts and talk about Biden and the 48 hour rule.

So what impeachable offence has the president committed?

rdm says

But lets ignore the facts and talk about Biden and the 48 hour rule.

So what impeachable offence has the president committed?

rdm says

But lets ignore the facts and talk about Biden and the 48 hour rule.

So what impeachable offence has the president committed?

rdm says

But lets ignore the facts and talk about Biden and the 48 hour rule.

So what impeachable offence has the president committed?

rdm says

But lets ignore the facts and talk about Biden and the 48 hour rule.

So what impeachable offence has the president committed?

TDS

You got to have a beer with everyone first to get to know them personally and give them a chance. Except for realtors.

If the articles you posted actually had a valid point they wouldn’t need 5000 words of drivel you’d need to wade through to understand. The truth is generally fairly simple. That’s why people don’t like your giant posts of pointless crap that makes you dumber then before you read it.

It starts out with a 20 year old example where the professor chose to not teach a class due to student protests. I don’t see what this has to do with today when professors are routinely fired for suggesting students lighten up about Halloween costumes.

Then I scanned ahead a little to where the article stated that both the left and right are being censored on college campuses, then I stopped reading when it failed to provide an example of leftist groups being censored.

Please provide an example of a leftist group being significantly censored to the extent that conservative groups are on campus otherwise delete this post.

Political correctness is the biggest scourge of the 21st century.

Everything is fine Jazz, don't worry go back to sleep. We got this!

:
I call bullshit on the idea that Haidt, Jordan Peterson, and countless others are wrong. I've heard about it from kids that go off to colleges and see the weird behavior.

You must not have seen the Yale Halloween incident a few years back. The guys wife is guilty of suggesting that perhaps people lighten up just a little about Halloween costume rules. (cultural appropriation)

www.youtube.com/embed/hiMVx2C5_Wg

:
Or a much more extreme version was the incident at Evergreen with Brett Weinstein

www.youtube.com/embed/2cMYfxOFBBM

Student: "I'm fearful of having a nuanced opinion."

YOU don't care?!
HEY! There I was, naively thinking that the intent of your antisemitic, anti-republican, getting-in-every-topic, contaminating-every-thread, use-repetition-instead-of-substance propaganda trolling is to make this world a better place.
And then - KABOOM! "I don't care!"
WTF?

personal

marcus is light years from alt right. So is Bill Maher, who said that Trump won because of political correctness - and here I tend to agree with them.

He does have a point. Especially because if Duterte had his druthers, he'd kill Bill for aiding and abetting the CIA cocaine pipeline through Arkansas when he was Guv, and using the Arkansas state police as his own personal Murder Inc. Of course, he had quite a history also of pardoning all of the drug dealers who moved the product.

:
Here is the email that the triggered Yale students were reacting to. WHAT THE FUCK ??

Dear Sillimanders:

Nicholas and I have heard from a number of students who were frustrated by the mass email sent to
the student body about appropriate Halloween-wear. I’ve always found Halloween an interesting
embodiment of more general adult worries about young people. As some of you may be aware, I teach
a class on “The Concept of the Problem Child,” and I was speaking with some of my students
yesterday about the ways in which Halloween – traditionally a day of subversion for children and
young people – is also an occasion for adults to exert their control.

When I was young, adults were freaked out by the specter of Halloween candy poisoned by lunatics,
or spiked with razor blades (despite the absence of a single recorded case of such an event). Now,
we’ve grown to fear the sugary candy itself. And this year, we seem afraid that college students are
unable to decide how to dress themselves on Halloween.

I don’t wish to trivialize genuine concerns about cultural and personal representation, and other
challenges to our lived experience in a plural community. I know that many decent people have
proposed guidelines on Halloween costumes from a spirit of avoiding hurt and offense. I laud those
goals, in theory, as most of us do. But in practice, I wonder if we should reflect more transparently, as
a community, on the consequences of an institutional (which is to say: bureaucratic and administrative)
exercise of implied control over college students.

It seems to me that we can have this discussion of costumes on many levels: we can talk about
complex issues of identify, free speech, cultural appropriation, and virtue “signalling.” But I wanted to
share my thoughts with you from a totally different angle, as an educator concerned with the
developmental stages of childhood and young adulthood.

As a former preschool teacher, for example, it is hard for me to give credence to a claim that there is
something objectionably “appropriative” about a blonde-haired child’s wanting to be Mulan for a day.
Pretend play is the foundation of most cognitive tasks, and it seems to me that we want to be in the
business of encouraging the exercise of imagination, not constraining it. I suppose we could agree that
there is a difference between fantasizing about an individual character vs. appropriating a culture,
wholesale, the latter of which could be seen as (tacky)(offensive)(jejeune)(hurtful), take your pick. But,
then, I wonder what is the statute of limitations on dreaming of dressing as Tiana the Frog Princess if
you aren’t a black girl from New Orleans? Is it okay if you are eight, but not 18? I don’t know the
answer to these questions; they seem unanswerable. Or at the least, they put us on slippery terrain
that I, for one, prefer not to cross.

Which is my point. I don’t, actually, trust myself to foist my Halloweenish standards and motives on
others. I can’t defend them anymore than you could defend yours. Why do we dress up on Halloween,
anyway? Should we start explaining that too? I’ve always been a good mimic and I enjoy accents. I
love to travel, too, and have been to every continent but Antarctica. When I lived in Bangladesh, I
bought a sari because it was beautiful, even though I looked stupid in it and never wore it once. Am I
fetishizing and appropriating others’ cultural experiences? Probably. But I really, really like them too.

Even if we could agree on how to avoid offense – and I’ll note that no one around campus seems
overly concerned about the offense taken by religiously conservative folks to skin-revealing costumes
– I wonder, and I am not trying to be provocative: Is there no room anymore for a child or young
person to be a little bit obnoxious… a little bit inappropriate or provocative or, yes, offensive? American
universities were once a safe space not only for maturation but also for a certain regressive, or even
transgressive, experience; increasingly, it seems, they have become places of censure and prohibition.
And the censure and prohibition come from above, not from yourselves! Are we all okay with this
transfer of power? Have we lost faith in young people's capacity – in your capacity - to exercise selfcensure,
through social norming, and also in your capacity to ignore or reject things that trouble you?
We tend to view this shift from individual to institutional agency as a tradeoff between libertarian vs.
liberal values (“liberal” in the American, not European sense of the word).

Nicholas says, if you don’t like a costume someone is wearing, look away, or tell them you are
offended. Talk to each other. Free speech and the ability to tolerate offence are the hallmarks of a free
and open society.

But – again, speaking as a child development specialist – I think there might be something missing in
our discourse about the exercise of free speech (including how we dress ourselves) on campus, and it
is this: What does this debate about Halloween costumes say about our view of young adults, of their
strength and judgment?

In other words: Whose business is it to control the forms of costumes of young people? It's not mine, I
know that.

Happy Halloween.

Another video of wacked out teenagers at Yale, reacting to that email

www.youtube.com/embed/9IEFD_JVYd0

www.youtube.com/embed/xJbHkWTHiZ0

Crybaby:

:
Yeah, and let's not forget the pedophile ring they ran out of a pizza parlor in DC.

Amazing the stuff they can make up and succeed in selling, when the policies and performance in office aren't on balance negative enough.

No, the pedo ring was run by Jeffrey Epstein and it wasn’t in a pizza parlor. Still, the Clintons were regular patrons. Awful people. Aren’t you glad that we conservative voters saved you from having a Ma Clinton POTUS?
Poor Democrats. Always insisting that reality is something other than it is, Black is white, up is down, the door is a jar, the crosswalk is wherever we say it is. We always have to save them from their own stupid ideas before they try to turn them into reality and get run over by the retard bus.

Trump is undoubtedly a fucking cunt
Problem is that his opponent was a fucking cunt cubed

That's quite an incoherent whine from the CollegeHipHop website.

What's wrong with ProfessorWatchList.org ? It's a website that documents the people who say certain things and behave in certain ways.

Amazing. These jazzy leftists not only want to censure the speech that they don't like, but they also want to censure people who quote and document their very own words!

"You aren't allowed to say that!"
"You aren't allowed to document that I said that!"

Looks like a good site btw:


https://professorwatchlist.org/index.php/about-us says

Professor Watchlist is a project of Turning Point USA.

The mission of Professor Watchlist is to expose and document college professors who discriminate against conservative students and advance leftist propaganda in the classroom.

This website is an aggregated list of pre-existing news stories that were published by a variety of news organizations throughout the past few years. While we accept tips for new additions on our website, we only publish profiles on incidents that have already been reported somewhere else. TPUSA will continue to fight for free speech and the right for​​ professors to say whatever they wish​;​ however students, parents, and alumni deserve to know the specific incidents and names of professors that advance a radical agenda in lecture halls.

A veritable minefield of Progressive trip wires and slogans. Take away the sloganeering, and there's isn't even a modicum of debased reasoning left.

'Join the Cult of Victimization, and get your gold stars and free shit!"

I actually agree 100% that rich private colleges such as Harvard fuel inequality. Megarich can buy their kids into there, where they will be passed no matter how stoopid they are (see GWBush and Yale). In these colleges they will network with other rich and powerful to later screw over everyone else.
The idea that thses colleges foster right wing beliefs though is not supported by facts. Ms Sotomayer and Obama anyone...

Thanks Jazz and Hircus! ProfessorWatchList.org is a great website.

jazz_music says

And it serves the neoliberal goal of dumbing America down into more economically hamstrung chattel.

At least they have iPhones and aren't starving.

Good way to find out which campuses have crazy prodessors.

Because it says a lot about school culture.

6rdB says

I actually agree 100% that rich private colleges such as Harvard fuel inequality.

The rich classes do need a properly versed butler class of one percenters but sub .01 percenters to attend to their many bureaucratic needs and to treat their various maladies. That's why so many of the peasants are let in the Ivies, while the ensconced dynastic RichFucks stick to their private clubs, psychopath calling cards and high signs.