Leftist Academic Hatred Online Lowers Expectations of Rational Discourse

Citizen Protest Of Government Abuses

[Facebook comments embedded]
[From article]
Whether or not you agree with the actions of the Bundy family and their supporters in taking over a vacant, federally-owned building on the Malheur Wildlife Reserve near Burns, most Americans would wish for a peaceful resolution to the “standoff.” But from the beginning of the standoff, the Bundy Ranch Facebook page has been spattered with posts calling for the Oregon protesters and their families to be slaughtered. Since the killing by law enforcement officers of LaVoy Finicum, a rancher from Arizona who acted as spokesman for the “occupiers,” the vicious rhetoric has only intensified.
[. . .]
What would cause an ordinary-looking guy to pray for the deaths of an entire group of Americans who were peacefully protesting government overreach? James Brent’s Facebook page reveals his profession: San Jose State University Professor -- he studied Political Science at Ohio State.
The San Jose State directory confirms that James Brent, the man “praying” for the Bundys to be shot and killed, teaches Political Science at a California university.
[. . .]
Renee Wheeler and Sherry Hartin apparently think the ranchers are worse than the ISIS terrorists currently ravaging Syria and Iraq, calling for their elimination post-haste.
[. . .]
Renee Wheeler and Sherry Hartin apparently think the ranchers are worse than the ISIS terrorists currently ravaging Syria and Iraq, calling for their elimination post-haste.
[. . .]
Most Americans would agree with Sheriff Ward. There is always space in a free society for disagreement and peaceful protests. Let’s hope America’s ‘safe space’ for peaceful disagreement isn’t overrun with obscene calls for the killing of Americans whose only crime is to defy federal overreach.

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/02/san_jose_state_polysci_professor_left_death_wish_on_bundy_ranch_facebook_page.html

February 17, 2016
San Jose State Poly-Sci Professor left death wish on Bundy Ranch Facebook page
By Marjorie Haun

Updated: Cambridge Chronicle and City Councilors Condemn Protected Speech

Posted October 27, 2015 5:45 PM ET; Last updated October 28, 2015 7:45 PM ET



"'based on this information, that’s not something we want to be a part of,' said Councilor Marc McGovern," a social worker in diversity saturated, conformist Cambridge, MA. He says he works with the most vulnerable population. Who is more vulnerable in Cambridge, MA than a person who holds different views than the majority, 10-20 years ago or even at present? There is no support for offensive speech, called hate speech, which is protected by the US and the Massachusetts Constitutions, in this allegedly tolerant city. There is also no compassion from this politically motivated social worker who shows lack of support for the Constitution he swore to protect. Under the Civil Rights statute of Massachusetts MGL Ch. 265, Sec 37, intimidating a person in the free exercise of a constitutionally protected right is a felony. Stormfront promotes nationalism, not supremacy. Notice the Chronicle's neutral recognition of a black separatist organization, whose forum was attended by most of the city council and school committee candidates in Cambridge last week. Use of the word supremacism, may more properly be applied to the Cambridge chapter of black separatists and nationalists who ran that candidate forum.




[From updated version]
[Councilor Mazen said] we didn’t know about the offensive views from his past and condemn those views in the strongest terms, I am confident that he has become a promoter of diversity now

Here is a public official condemning protected speech, violating his oath of office. That can be intimidating, and a chilling effect on a civilian. The Councilor mentions diversity, without defining what he means. Certainly he does not mean diversity of opinion. Few persons in Cambridge support diversity of opinions. The comments by Mr. Sanzone show he does not assert his right to express his unpopular opinions, opinions protected by the US and Massachusetts Constitutions. He appears to be intimidated by the reactions of Cambridge politicians and voters who disagree with his ten-year-old expression. His fear and intimidation is not unique. Many people fear being called racist, homophobe, Islamophobe and sexist if they express their opinion on contemporary controversial issues. It shows that the prevailing doctrine in this nation is to censor speech which may offend some person, or hurt his feelings. That is what the protection of the First Amendment and the concept of free speech is all about. Speech you like does not need protection. Shameful that so very few understand that. And fewer who do, refuse to stand up and assert their right to hear unpopular speech. Yet they seldom disagree with hateful and misguided expression that is published by mainstream publications calling for the deaths of Americans, Israel, Jews, and Christians. Is there a lack of critical thinking ability in this nation among voters, and elected officials?


* * *

[From article]
“We were welcoming him to the slate, but, based on this information, that’s not something we want to be a part of,” said Councilor Marc McGovern, a Unity Slate member.



http://cambridge.wickedlocal.com/article/20151026/NEWS/151026521/?Start=1
UPDATED: Cambridge council candidate resigns after past online hate speech revealed

By Amy Saltzman
asaltzman (at) wickedlocal.com
Posted Oct. 26, 2015 at 5:51 PM
Updated at 1:16 PM
CAMBRIDGE Chronicle

Journalists Censor Political Speech Using Civility Standards, Not US Constitution

Ugliness like beauty depends on who is doing the perceiving. For Atkins, there is not enough discussion of race. (Atkins: Black lives did not matter at the GOP debate, August 9, 2015,
Kimberly Atkins, Boston Herald) I see it every day online, in print, over radio and TV waves. The White House and the Department of Justice discuss it frequently. Obedient worshiper journalists repeat what politicians say. Black Americans work at all levels of government. There are many multi millionaire black athletes, businessmen and celebrities. Did the candidate forum moderators mention disabilities? Are persons with disabilities allowed to speak for themselves? Can they appear e.g., on taxpayer funded WGBH-TV in Boston? WGBH broadcasts  a weekly show called Basic Black. Only black professionals appear as panelists discussing how white people oppress black people. Do disabled persons have a weekly show as black people do? Disabled persons are seldom permitted to appear on the air on taxpayer funded WGBH-TV. Sometimes journalists lack perspective on where they are in society. Disabled persons are still prevented from entering buildings, or riding public transportation. Few of them have jobs. They are thought of as stupid and ignorant even if they have graduate degrees. Did anyone notice their absence from the candidate forum?


[From article]
In a two-hour debate, which frankly felt much longer, only two candidates were even asked about race.
[. . .]
Meanwhile, it seems like each day there is a new dash-cam video showing people of color who, unfortunately, did not dodge the bullets fired in their direction.
[. . .]
perhaps they could join in an actual discussion of the racial tensions, opportunity inequities, heavy-handed policing and race-based distrust that has become part of the American fabric. As Kelly correctly pointed out, it has been called the civil rights issue of our time.
If the candidates cared a little more, maybe we’d even get some solutions.
[. . .]
But for Republicans, it seems more politically expedient to ignore ongoing race-based struggles.
If only black America had that luxury.

http://www.bostonherald.com/news_opinion/columnists/kimberly_atkins/2015/08/atkins_black_lives_did_not_matter_at_the_gop_debate

Atkins: Black lives did not matter at the GOP debate
Sunday, August 9, 2015
By: Kimberly Atkins
Boston Herald

* * *



Nor did the founding fathers expect to find journalists who censor offensive speech. The purpose of the First Amendment was to protect speech you hate. Journalists seem to have forgotten that. Especially offensive was the focus by Megyn Kelly, a moderator, who used her position to attack rather than to provide a forum for voters to hear the candidates.

[From article]
Indeed, what does appearing presidential mean today?
What does public service mean today?
“Our founding fathers were farmers, professional men, businessmen giving of their time and effort to an idea that became a country,” Ronald Reagan noted. “They could not have foreseen a nation governed by professional politicians who had an interest in getting re-elected. They probably envisioned a fellow serving a couple hitches and then eagerly looking forward to getting back to the farm.”

http://www.bostonherald.com/news_opinion/columnists/joe_fitzgerald/2015/08/fitzgerald_fiorina_carson_brought_civility_to_gop


Fitzgerald: Fiorina, Carson brought civility to GOP food fight
Saturday, August 8, 2015
By: Joe Fitzgerald
Boston Herald

* * *

Here's another journalist who appears to have forgotten what the First Amendment is all about. Especially at a political debate. The main purpose was to protect hated political speech. Dumbed down nation was extended to professional journalists. 

[From article]
In a response that could only have been outdone in its inappropriateness by Trump unfurling a Confederate flag tablecloth

http://www.bostonherald.com/news_opinion/columnists/tom_shattuck/2015/08/shattuck_front_running_trump_is_playing_by_his_own


Shattuck: Front-running Trump is playing by his own rules

Saturday, August 8, 2015

By: Tom Shattuck
Boston Herald

University Of Minnesota Athletic Director Resigns After Offending Women

Norwood Teague, Lover of Women

[From article]
One of the women, whose names are blacked out in the reports, told school administrators that at a recent event, what started out as her texting with athletic director Norwood Teague about setting him up with one of her friends devolved into him repeatedly pinching her butt and asking to perform oral sex on her.
[. . .]

The other woman said Teague seemed intent on being next to her at the event and that she felt cornered by him at times. She said he kept asking when she was going to marry her boyfriend, and that he made unwelcome physical advances such as rubbing her back and poking her side.
University of Minnesota President Eric Kaler at Friday’s press conference.Photo: AP
Both women said they left the event with others because they felt that Teague might otherwise try to follow them.
Teague resigned Friday, effective immediately, and apologized for having sent “inappropriate texts” in a statement issued through television station KARE 11. He said he drank too much that night and that he will be seeking help for an alcohol problem.

http://nypost.com/2015/08/07/minnesota-ad-resigns-after-drunken-sexts-get-real-gross/

Minnesota AD resigns after drunken sexts to colleagues
By New York Post Wire Report
August 7, 2015 | 3:49pm

Massachusetts Flag Offends Some

[From article]
Massachusetts is the Algonquin word for “a big hill place.” Its state flag features a Native American.
Minnesota Public Radio reports that political correctness is leading some in the Bay State to reconsider the design of the flag:

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2015/07/will_pc_overtake_lake_chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg.html

July 8, 2015
Will P.C. overtake Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg?
By Mark J. Fitzgibbons

Oklahoma University Student Fraternity Banned For Offensive Speech

Students protest the racist comments Monday.

Photo: AP
Still no definition of what racism is. Is it a crime? Is it offensive speech? What is the purpose of the First Amendment? To protect speech that we love? Wah. I don't like what he said, throw him off campus.

[From article]
The University of Oklahoma closed a fraternity linked to a video of students singing racial epithets, ordered its members to move out of the house and labeled the actions of those involved “disgraceful.”
“Effective immediately, all ties and affiliations between the university and the local SAE (Sigma Alpha Epsilon) chapter are hereby severed,” University President David Boren said on Monday.
Members have until midnight on Tuesday to vacate the premises and people could be seen loading goods into moving trucks behind the fraternity house.
[. . .]
“To those who have misused their free speech in such a reprehensible way, I have a message for you. You are disgraceful,” Boren said.
[. . .]
“We apologize for the unacceptable and racist behavior of the individuals in the video, and we are disgusted that any member would act in such a way,” Sigma Alpha Epsilon’s national headquarters said in a statement after verifying its OU members were involved.

http://nypost.com/2015/03/09/fraternity-shut-down-after-video-of-racist-chant-surfaces/

Fraternity members ordered off campus after racist video surfaces

By Reuters
March 9, 2015 | 9:42am
New York Post

NYC Mayor Bloomberg Reveals Unpopular Statistics About Homicides

Now Everyone Look to the Right, Follow The Bouncing Ball

Is this another case of politicians saying one thing in private and another in public? Is that what the White House calls transparency? 

[From article]
“It’s controversial, but first thing is all of your — 95 percent of your murders, and murderers, and murder victims fit one [unintelligible]. You can just take the description, Xerox it, and pass it out to all of the cops. They are male, minorities, 15 to 25. That’s true in New York, it’s true in virtually every city in America,” said Bloomberg.
“You’ve got to get the guns out of the hands of the people getting killed,” he continued. “First thing you can do to help that group is to keep them alive.”
[. . .]
“It’s all the same group. Nobody in New York gets murdered — if you get murdered the first thing you want to do is [ask] ‘what were you selling or who are your family members.’ Because it just has to be you’re a drug dealer or you [unintelligible] a family quarrel. There’s just no other kind of murder whatsoever,” Bloomberg asserted.

http://dailycaller.com/2015/02/16/heres-audio-from-the-event-michael-bloomberg-is-trying-to-block-from-being-broadcast-audio/

Here’s Audio From The Event Michael Bloomberg Is Trying To Block From Being Broadcast [AUDIO]
5:03 PM 02/16/2015
CHUCK ROSS

Offensive Speech Is Protected By Constitution

Nina Korchok says, "Many questioned why a magazine would print cartoons that could be viewed as both hateful and discriminatory." Nowhere in this well reasoned essay is the background of what the notion of free speech means. The idea is to defend speech that you hate. There is no need for defend speech that you like and and with which you agree. It is hateful, offensive speech that needs to be protected. In ancient Greece there was a 12 hundred year tradition of free speech. No laws, no constitutional amendment. They celebrated diverse ideas, going as far as to allow St. Paul to preach in Athens. The Greeks did not have to contends with the feminization of their nation. Or the effort to create the therapeutic state, both of which focus on feelings rather than reason. An example of the misguided academic movement is the recommendation by Prof. Bishara that, "media outlets can make their audiences as inclusive as possible." Speech and news that appeals to all persons may no longer be news but pablum and propaganda.

[From article]
Many questioned why a magazine would print cartoons that could be viewed as both hateful and discriminatory. Many still questioned how a magazine would continue to publish cartoons of the prophet after such a tragedy.
[. . .]
Bishara also explained how media outlets can make their audiences as inclusive as possible.
[. . .]
“But they also regard humor as something above and beyond that, that part of their freedom is to be able to make fun of absolutely everything.

http://tuftsdaily.com/arts/2015/01/22/walking-tightrope-censorship-free-speech/

Walking the tightrope between censorship and free speech
BY NIKA KORCHOK

JANUARY 22, 2015
Tufts Daily

You Can't Stand The Truth

[From article]
Opponents of the truth (whose side we were all on at one time or another) find themselves in what C.S. Lewis describes as a “terrible fix.” They have made themselves enemies of the one thing which they cannot stand to be with, which is also the one thing which they cannot really do without. As Lewis puts it, the Author of truth “is the only comfort, He is also the supreme terror: the thing we most need and the thing we most want to hide from. He is our only possible-ally, and we have made ourselves His enemies.”
[. . .]
“Truth is incontrovertible,” wrote Winston Churchill. “Panic may resent it; ignorance may deride it; malice may distort it; but there it is.” And it will be there for all time and beyond time. In spite of all our efforts, we will all ultimately answer to the truth -- better to do so in this world than the next.

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/01/the_truth_is_always_offensive.html

January 25, 2015
The Truth is Always 'Offensive'
By Trevor Thomas

Is There a Right To Offend? Are Only Special Persons Entitled To That Right?

[From article]
Do liberals actually believe in the right to offend? Their attitude seems to me to be ambivalent at best. And this equivocation was apparent within hours of the attack, when news outlets censored or refused to publish the images for which the Charlie Hebdo editors were killed. Classifying satire or opinion as “hate speech” subject to regulation is not an aberration. It is commonplace.
Indeed, the outpouring of support for free speech in the aftermath of the Paris attack coincides with, and partially obscures, the degradation of speech rights in the West. Commencement last year was marked by universities revoking appearances by speakers Condoleezza Rice and Ayaan Hirsi Ali for no other reason than that mobs disagreed with the speakers’ points of view. I do not recall liberals rallying behind Condi and Hirsi Ali then.
Nor do I recall liberals standing up for the critics of global warming and evolutionary theory, of same-sex marriage and trans rights and women in combat, of riots in Ferguson and of Obama’s decision to amnesty millions of illegal immigrants. On the contrary: To dissent from the politically correct and conventional and fashionable is to invite rebuke, disdain, expulsion from polite society, to court the label of Islamophobe or denier or bigot or cisnormative or misogynist or racist or carrier of privilege and irredeemable micro-aggressor. For the right to offend to have any meaning, however, it cannot be limited to theistic religions. You must have the right to offend secular humanists, too.
Brendan Eich donated a thousand dollars to Proposition Eight in 2008. Six years later it cost him his job. In 2014, when Charles Krauthammer merely stated his agnosticism on the question of what causes global warming, liberals organized a petition demanding his removal from the Washington Post. A rather touchy climate scientist named Michael Mann—subtly parodied in Interstellar—has sued National Review and Mark Steyn for disagreeing with him. Last May, after some sensitive souls complained, the Chicago Sun-Times removed from its site a column by Kevin D. Williamson critical of transgender activism. No one wept for Kevin.
The liberal desire to regulate speech, especially political speech, is overwhelming. The Democrats’ ideal campaign finance regime is one in which speech would be closely regulated by bureaucrats and courts. The left was apoplectic in 2010 when the Supreme Court in its Citizens United decision overturned, on First Amendment grounds, parts of McCain-Feingold. Citizens United, remember, had sued the FEC because its film critical of Hillary Clinton had been deemed an illegal instance of “electioneering.” The nerve.
A campaign finance system designed by Lawrence Lessig and Harry Reid would suppress opposing viewpoints and use disclosure as a cudgel by which to impugn and ostracize would-be Brendan Eichs. In 2010, Ohio Democrat Steve Driehaus filed a complaint with the Ohio Elections Commission against the pro-life Susan B. Anthony List. Driehaus charged that the nonprofit had posted an offensive billboard in his district—and that this advertisement violated a state law criminalizing “inaccurate” statements about candidates for office.
This inability to distinguish between statements of fact (2+2=4) and statements of opinion (Steve Driehaus is a jerk) is a testament to the liberal confusion and irresolution towards free speech and the right to offend. Last year the Driehaus case went to the U.S. Supreme Court. The justices dismissed the complaint. Unanimously. The Court’s decision was not surprising. What was surprising, shocking, was that the now-overturned Ohio law existed in the first place.

http://freebeacon.com/columns/blasphemy-for-me-but-not-for-thee/

Blasphemy for Me, But Not For Thee
Column: Do liberals actually believe in the right to offend?
BY: Matthew Continetti
January 9, 2015 5:00 am

Banning Words Is Impossible

[From article]
Cuomo charged that Bundy’s remarks were the opposite of King’s peace-loving message, which provoked the rancher to concede that his wording may have been poorly chosen. “Maybe I sinned and maybe I need to ask forgiveness and maybe I don’t know what I actually said,” he said. “But you know when you talk about prejudice, we’re talking about not being able to exercise what we think and our feelings. We don’t have freedom to say what we want.”
“If I say ‘negro’ or ‘black boy’ or ‘slave,’ if those people cannot take those kind of words and not be offensive, then Martin Luther King hasn’t got his job done yet,” he continued. “I should be able to say those things and they shouldn’t offend anybody. I didn’t mean to offend them.”

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/bundy-if-people-were-offended-by-negro-then-mlk-hasnt-got-his-job-done-yet/

Bundy: If People Were Offended by ‘Negro,’ Then MLK ‘Hasn’t Got His Job Done Yet’
by Andrew Kirell
10:18 am, April 25th, 2014

Former US Rep. Television Host Censored For Discussion of Offending Word

[From article]
'Just got kicked off the air until further notice. Tried to have honest discussion about racist terms and management censored my language,' he said.

His mistake is he believes that offensive use of words is evenly applied. They are only used to censor non leftist speakers and to discredit them. It is called the Hypocracy.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2663385/Republican-radio-host-kicked-air-using-racist-slurs-discussion-offensive-words.html

Republican radio host kicked off air for using racist slurs in discussion about offensive words

By JOSHUA GARDNER



PUBLISHED: 01:39 EST, 20 June 2014 | UPDATED: 04:58 EST, 20 June 2014

The New Normal

[From article]
But we've lost the cleansing quality of "dirty" speech. Now it's casual, boorish, smooth and corporate. Everybody is walking around sounding like Howard Stern. The trash-talking Jay-Z and Kanye West are superwealthy businessmen surrounded by bodyguards, media consultants and image-makers.
[. . .]
Back in the 1990s, growing explicitness and obscenity in popular culture gave rise to the so-called culture wars, in which the right and the left fought over the limits of free speech. Nowadays no one blames the culture for what the culture itself has become.
[. . .]
shocking history-in-the-making that was once hidden now became visible in American living rooms, night after night, through new technology, TV in particular.
[. . .]
Behind the Internet's success in making obscene images commonplace is the dirty little fact that it was the pornography industry that revolutionized the technology of the Internet. Streaming video, technology like Flash, sites that confirm the validity of credit cards were all innovations of the porn business.
The author of this piece ignores the legalization of sodomy, and homosexual sex. What role does law play in all of these "advances?"

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304451904579238140379017148

America the Vulgar
Whatever happened to the subtle thrill of real transgression?
By LEE SIEGEL
Updated Dec. 6, 2013 7:27 p.m. ET

AZ May Ban Profanity on Internet

http://townhall.com/columnists/rachelalexander/2012/04/04/arizona_to_ban_annoying_behavior_on_the_internet

Arizona to Ban “Annoying” Behavior on the Internet
Rachel Alexander
TownHall.com
April 4, 2012

MA Man Loses Gun License Over Blog Comments

http://boston.cbslocal.com/2011/01/18/arlington-man-loses-gun-license-due-to-blog-about-tucson-shooting/

Arlington [MA] Man Loses Gun License Due To Blog About Tucson Shooting
By Beth Germano,
WBZ-TV CBS Boston
January 18, 2011 11:59 PM

Censorship is Goal of Critics

[From article]
"Slate's Jack Shafer, who probably goes farther than I would when he writes, "Any call to cool 'inflammatory' speech is a call to police all speech, and I can't think of anybody in government, politics, business or the press that I would trust with that power."
[. . .]
These critics' aim is simply to exploit this horror as an opportunity to yell "shut up" at their political opponents."

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/censorship_is_an_absurd_answer_1UMN72Uu0J1gLKVTNaPQVJ

Censorship is an absurd answer
Jared Loughner's 'ideas' are irrelevant
Jonah Goldberg
New York Post
Last Updated: 12:18 AM, January 12, 2011
Posted: 10:08 PM, January 11, 2011

Unedited Speech

[From article]
“People are walking around thinking they can do and say things without any responsibility, because they see public figures doing the same thing and not facing a lot of recourse,” says Lisa Gaché, CEO of Beverly Hills Manners, which teaches etiquette classes to kids and adults. “We’re living in a completely egotistical society.”

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/so_sorry_that_have_to_apologize_B3n1DGpByA25qx8QYj1jxH

I'm so sorry that I have to apologize
Charlie Rangel and the art of the non-apology
By LESLIE GORNSTEIN
New York Post
Last Updated: 5:15 AM, December 5, 2010
Posted: 12:46 AM, December 5, 2010

Changing Place Names

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/americans-redraw-the-map-to-erase-offensive-names-1913020.html

afp/getty images

Intercourse in Pennsylvania has managed to hold on to its name, while California's Negrohead Mountain has been renamed Ballard Mountain

[From article]

"Areas mapped during the gold rush were often given names that reflected the no-nonsense argot of prospectors. Generations of students have giggled at a river in California that enjoys the name Shitbritches Creek. That somewhat lavatorial name has survived, so far. As have a place called Hell in Michigan, an Intercourse in Pennsylvania, and a town called Crappo, in Maryland

."

Americans redraw the map to erase 'offensive' names

California says goodbye to Negrohead mountain, but Intercourse, Pennsylvania survives – for now

By Guy Adams in Los Angeles

Independent (UK)
February 28, 2010