Archive for Graves of Academe

Big Surprise

Cuban agents recruiting academics in the US

This is from an internal FBI report:

The academic world—primarily defined as schools, colleges, universities, and research institutes— provides a fertile environment in which foreign intelligence services can operate. Consequently, the Cuban intelligence services (CuIS) are known to actively target the US academic world for the purposes of recruiting agents, in order to both obtain useful information and conduct influence activities.

More at the link. And I won’t even bother to rant; do it yourself. But do go to the link to read about how agents are identified, recruited, possibly blackmailed, etc.

– Aggie

Comments

Who Betrayed the Obamabots?

They tweet, they Skype, they text (heck, they even sext)—but they don’t own a home.

Just 36% of Americans under the age of 35 own a home, according to the Census Bureau. That’s down from 42% in 2007 and the lowest level since 1982, when the agency began tracking homeownership by age.

It’s not all their fault.

They want a home, they say, but…

But student loan debt, tight lending standards and stiff competition have made it next to impossible for many of these younger Americans to make the leap.

“When we surveyed Millennials they cited several barriers to homeownership, especially access to financing,” said Steve Deggendorf, a senior director for Fannie Mae.

Many Millennials simply can’t come up with the hefty 20% down payments. Others don’t have good enough credit to qualify for loans.

Student loan debt is one barrier. That sounds like they have themselves to blame (same goes for bad credit). No one forces those loans on you. There are cheaper education options that leave you ready to start your career with little or no debt to drag you down or force you into a job you hate. But no, the allure of a fancy degree that leaves you unemployable and a bad credit risk was too much. That makes for two left-wing institutions—academia and Millennials themselves—responsible for their “homelessness”.

How about the economy, the economy almost five full years into “recovery”? The economy that can’t create well-paying, full-time jobs? The economy that leaves graduates and post-graduates asking if you want your double decaf with cream, milk, low-fat, or skim? The economy from which more people are retiring and going on disability than are finding work? Recovery Summer is a concept so old it’s new again, like sideburns and bell-bottoms. (If only the GDP hadn’t shrunk last quarter.)

The facts of life are conservative, my hipster, metrosexual, pajama-clad friends, just like home-ownership. You can’t expect to live in a tent in an Occupy encampment one week and buy a center-entry Colonial the next. You can’t be the ones you were waiting for and expect anyone to open the door for you when you get there. You can’t build a life or a home on the foundation of Hope and Change.

By the way, the rent is overdue.

Comments (1)

Maybe They Can Replace it With the Pol Pot-au-Feu

What’s the special at the Che Guevara Collective (and why didn’t they call it “The Motorcycle Dairies”?), Bourgeois Bourguignon?

University of California-San Diego students have run the “Che Café Collective” for 34 years, a vegan co-op and concert venue boasting “exorbitantly low” prices and volunteer staffing. But it’s consistently in the red, costing the student body nearly $1 million over the years, and isn’t kept up to fire or safety codes. School officials are threatening to cut off funding, which would shut down the campus fixture, but a band of students is fighting back.

“The venue has been operating for 34 years and it’s the longest-running volunteer space in Southern California, if not in all of California,” café volunteer Rene Vera told FoxNews.com. “And our building is covered in murals that document a lot of that history.”

You say murals, we say graffiti.

In its heyday, the café hosted up-and-coming acts like Nirvana and Green Day. Staffers would feed the band, often with donated food, and the audience got the leftovers. The decidedly un-capitalist business model worked until crowds began to dwindle, extensive repairs were ordered by campus fire marshals and student groups got sick of subsidizing it.

The university’s student-run newspaper, The Guardian, characterized the venue as a “money pit consistently plagued with safety issues” in a recent editorial, urging its principals to start utilizing better fiscal management of nearly $1 million of student fees are used for renovations.

“Many students also don’t realize that the money being spent on the café’s renovation comes directly from student fees; in other words, we are collectively pouring almost one million dollars of our money into repairing a cooperative that the vast majority of us don’t even use.”

“I do not believe Che Cafe closing will be a severe blow to the campus’ overall aesthetic,” soon-to-be graduate Marco Vasquez, a political science major and vice chair of the university’s College Republicans, told FoxNews.com in an e-mail. “The majority of students that I have spoken to do not know what or where the Che Cafe is, given that it is on the edge of campus. Those who do know either visit it regularly or describe it as creepy.”

The perfect descriptor for its namesake.

When I was a kid, I knew a kid burdened with the name Che by his parents. (My parents mixed with that crowd.) I bet he’s going by Ernesto—even Ernest—now.

PS: Does one get the Trotskys after eating at the Che Guevara Collective?

Comments

Left Wing Civility Watch

A few headlines from The Daily Caller:

RNC Spokesman Stands Up To CNN Anchor’s Blatant Bias On Republican ‘Racism’

‘Over The Line': Even The DNC Blasts Liberal Website’s Attempt To Cast RNC Spokesman As Skinhead

UConn Prof. James Boster Harangues People Preaching Christianity: ‘Bull$#|+! Praise Darwin!

At Dartmouth, The Word ‘Fiesta’ Is Now Racist And White People Can’t Use It

How about some from Newsbusters?

UCLA Professor: GOPers Are ‘Sick and Twisted’ Disseminators of ‘Pure Lunacy’

On MSNBC, WashPost’s Capehart Claims Some GOP Officeholders Have Praised ‘Virtues and Beauty of Slavery’

Barely News: Illinois Gov. Quinn Pulls Tweets Comparing Black Republicans to Jewish Nazi Collaborators

Wait, what?

Quinn’s campaign enthusiastically retweeted its support for an outrageous April 17 column by Neil Steinberg at the Chicago Sun-Times. For all practical purposes, Steinberg equated African-Americans who might support Republican Bruce Rauner in November’s gubernatorial election against Quinn to “Jews (who) collaborated with the Nazis during World War II, helping them to round up their own people in the hopes they’d be the last to go.” Quinn’s people quietly deleted the tweets, according to the Washington Free Beacon’s Adam Kredo, “after local Jewish community officials quietly communicated their outrage to the governor.” Given that the time between the tweets and the deletes was apparently a few days, and that the sort-of apologies came almost a week after Steinberg’s column, I’m not detecting a lot of sincerity here.

Yech!

Sorry, I can’t leave it this way on a Saturday evening. Howsabout a little left-on-left crime?

Randi Rhodes Quitting Radio, Slams Ex-Colleagues Maddow, Franken on Way Out

Rhodes spent considerable time on her show this week saying goodbye to listeners and outlining the rationale for her decision. She also couldn’t resist taking swipes at Al Franken and Rachel Maddow, her former colleagues at now-defunct Air America Radio, especially Maddow (audio) —

So when Air America came I said, oh my God, and the opportunity is amazing…

[P]eople were using it for their own reasons. People were using it not to advocate for others but people were using it for their own advancement, to get someplace else.

Some people saw, you know, a chance to be in a Cabinet and other people saw it as a chance to go to the Senate and other people saw it as a chance to national television.

They continued to take a salary from it, they drained it of its resources, it failed, and then some of them went on to do, you know, the self-aggrandizement thing that they wanted to do. Some of the salaries of the people that, that, that actually sucked the life, the resources out of that platform, Air America, some of them are making $7 million a year now!

This is America, baby! Love it or leave it. We all know what Maddow is; you’re just haggling over price.

Comments

Bloodthirstan Book Club! [UPDATED]

Move over, Oprah (sorry, I didn’t mean anything, there’s plenty of room, really). BTL is launching a book club.

Half of you read Hillary’s new book, Chard Choices (I guess it’s a cookbook), and the other half read Elizabeth Warren’s tome, Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee—no, sorry, A Fat Chance. Aggie and I will facilitate discussion (w/o reading either one).

We’ll want particularly to examine how each woman faced up to hardship in her life. Like when Lieawatha got called anti-Indian epithets by the white kids or Hillary got a blue dress not her own back from the dry cleaners.

To call these books does a disservice to Hemingway and Flaubert. They’re manifestos (With apologies to Marx and Engels). Most ambitious candidates write one. This was my favorite:

Oops. My mistake. He has better hair.

Btw, if you think Warren isn’t running, you’re as dumb as she thinks you are. She’s got to fly under the Clinton radar as long as possible or draw fire.

UPDATE:

An excellent retelling of Fauxcahantas’ Fable in US News. The trail of tears recounts not only the number of times she casually slipped into and out of her buffalo hides, but how cynical the whole affirmative action game is. Harvard touted her as their first law prof of color. (I wasn’t aware that clear was a color.) In one swing of a tomahawk, her career and the racial diversity shell game are laid bare.

UPPERDATE:

Did Crocagawea plant this question?

MATT LEE, AP: I have a brief question on the QDDR [Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review]. Off the top of your head, can you identify one tangible achievement that the last QDDR resulted in?

JEN PSAKI, State Department spokesperson: Obviously its an extensive expansive process.

LEE: Just one.

PSAKI: The Secretary wants it to be focused on a more narrow range of issues, its always to look at how we can improve things, and we’ll see where we come out in the end.

LEE: So, can you off the top of your head identify one tangible achievement that resulted from the last QDDR?

PSAKI: I am certain that those that were here at the time worked hard on that effort and could point out one.

LEE: Since you’ve come on board that you’ve noticed, that you noticed that you can point to and say wow the first QDDR identified this as a problem and dealt with it.

PSAKI: As you know, I’ve only been here since it was concluded. I’m sure there are a range of things that I’m not even aware of results.

LEE: I won’t hold my breath.

C’mon man, what difference, at this point, does it make?

Comments

A-li! A-li! A-li!

What’s that? Is The Greatest making a comeback? Another “Thrilla in Manilla?”

More like a “Puss-out at Brandeis”. Aggie told you the story yesterday.

This is Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s take [link fixed]:

Yesterday Brandeis University decided to withdraw an honorary degree they were to confer upon me next month during their Commencement exercises. I wish to dissociate myself from the university’s statement, which implies that I was in any way consulted about this decision. On the contrary, I was completely shocked when President Frederick Lawrence called me — just a few hours before issuing a public statement — to say that such a decision had been made.

When Brandeis approached me with the offer of an honorary degree, I accepted partly because of the institution’s distinguished history; it was founded in 1948, in the wake of World War II and the Holocaust, as a co-educational, nonsectarian university at a time when many American universities still imposed rigid admission quotas on Jewish students. I assumed that Brandeis intended to honor me for my work as a defender of the rights of women against abuses that are often religious in origin. For over a decade, I have spoken out against such practices as female genital mutilation, so-called “honor killings,” and applications of Sharia Law that justify such forms of domestic abuse as wife beating or child beating. Part of my work has been to question the role of Islam in legitimizing such abhorrent practices. So I was not surprised when my usual critics, notably the Council of American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), protested against my being honored in this way.

What did surprise me was the behavior of Brandeis. Having spent many months planning for me to speak to its students at Commencement, the university yesterday announced that it could not “overlook certain of my past statements,” which it had not previously been aware of. Yet my critics have long specialized in selective quotation — lines from interviews taken out of context — designed to misrepresent me and my work. It is scarcely credible that Brandeis did not know this when they initially offered me the degree.

What was initially intended as an honor has now devolved into a moment of shaming. Yet the slur on my reputation is not the worst aspect of this episode. More deplorable is that an institution set up on the basis of religious freedom should today so deeply betray its own founding principles. The “spirit of free expression” referred to in the Brandeis statement has been stifled here, as my critics have achieved their objective of preventing me from addressing the graduating Class of 2014. Neither Brandeis nor my critics knew or even inquired as to what I might say. They simply wanted me to be silenced. I regret that very much.

Not content with a public disavowal, Brandeis has invited me “to join us on campus in the future to engage in a dialogue about these important issues.” Sadly, in words and deeds, the university has already spoken its piece. I have no wish to “engage” in such one-sided dialogue. I can only wish the Class of 2014 the best of luck — and hope that they will go forth to be better advocates for free expression and free thought than their alma mater.

I take this opportunity to thank all those who have supported me and my work on behalf of oppressed woman and girls everywhere.

A thorough and well-deserved evisceration.

Or, as Mark Steyn puts it:

As for Brandeis president Frederick Lawrence and the others who took this decision, nobody’s asking them to be as brave as Ayaan Hirsi Ali. They will never know what it’s like to have their associates murdered and to be forced into living under armed guard. They will never have to “share the risk” that Ms Hirsi Ali faces every day of her life. All that was required of President Lawrence & Co was that they not be total craven, jelly-spined squishes who fold like a cheap Bedouin tent at the first hint of pressure.

But Lawrence couldn’t even do that. Ayaan Hirsi Ali campaigns against female genital mutilation – that’s to say, the barbarous practice by which Muslim men deny women sexual pleasure by having their clitorises cut off. Lawrence and the other fellows who run Brandeis are in no danger of any equivalent procedure since it seems clear they’ve nothing down there to chop off anyway. The eunuchs of the American academy are the beneficiaries of western liberty, of the spirit of openness and inquiry that is the principal difference between us and the intellectually stagnant Muslim world. But they will not lift a finger to defend that tradition.

Remember when Islam put out a contract on Salman Rushdie? That flea-infested Assatollah Khomeini ordered zombie followers to bring him the head—the actual head—of the author of The Satanic Verses for daring to disparage the religion or the prophet or whatever. There was plenty of spinelessness then too, but I seem to recall people wearing “I Am Salman Rushdie” buttons in solidarity. (Though curiously I can’t find any images on line.)

At Brandeis, they’re wearing buttons that say “Ayaan Hirsi Who?” and “Clitorectomy For Thee, Not For Me”.

Comments (1)

Nice University Ya Got Here

Shame if it burned down.

From all that global warming, I mean:

Six months after announcing that Harvard University would not divest its endowment’s holdings from the fossil fuel industry, its president, Drew Faust, unveiled several new initiatives Monday to strengthen the university’s commitment to environmental sustainability and renewable energy.

Harvard says its endowment will be the first of a US university to sign on to a United Nations-supported organization, Principles for Responsible Investment. The principles do not require Harvard to sell specific funds, but rather provide the university’s fund managers with a method for considering environmental and social factors, from water scarcity to human rights.

“Harvard has a vital leadership role to play in this work,” Faust wrote in a letter to the Harvard community. “As a university, it has a special obligation and accountability to the future, to the long view needed to anticipate and alter the trajectory and impact of climate change.”

Faust is also asking alumni and other donors to raise $20 million for a fund to spur research and innovation addressing climate change.

Twenty mill is chump change in Harvard’s $32.7 billion endowment: six basis points. Who wouldn’t toss the equivalent of a nickel to a bum just to be left alone?

Except the bums aren’t going quietly:

“The Climate Solutions Fund is going to be investing in new forms of energy that aren’t destroying the planet, but we are also investing in energy sources that are destroying the planet,” said Chloe Maxmin, a junior and cofounder of a group called Divest Harvard. “You are funding the very thing that you are trying to offset.”

Somebody needs to educate Ms. Maxmin (her real name?) on the art of the shakedown. You don’t bleed the subject all at once, but slowly, over time. You don’t kill the goose that layed the golden egg just to provide the main course for your Christmas dinner. How could she be smart enough to go to Harvard and not know that? Somebody better wise her up before the $20 million offer is off the table.

Harvard will look for off-campus ways to compensate for its emissions, for example by purchasing carbon offsets — helping to fund projects elsewhere that contribute to the environment.

See, Chloe? Money can’t buy you love, but it can purchase absolution. Don’t pee in the pool.

Comments

No Tickee, No Diploma

In yesterday’s blog post about Michelle Obama’s private visit to China on the public’s dime, I noted she said this:

About 800 students attend the Beijing Normal School, and of those, roughly one in four are international students – including some Americans. All the classes are taught in English (one room even has a map of the United States on the ceiling), and the curriculum prepares students to study internationally once they graduate. Many students here hope to one day attend college in America.

To which I retorted:

Which opportunity will be denied to them to make room for affirmative action students. (Am I wrong?)

Looks like I was (and I couldn’t be more proud):

Democrats claim to be a multi-ethnic “coalition of the ascendant,” but identity politics has inherent contradictions. Witness the victory this week by three liberal Asian-American lawmakers in blocking Sacramento’s Democratic supermajority from trying to overturn California’s ban on racial preferences (Prop. 209).

“In the past few weeks, we have heard from thousands of people throughout California voicing their concerns about the potential impacts,” the senators wrote Assembly Speaker John Perez last week, adding that “as lifelong advocates for the Asian-American and other communities, we would never support a policy that we believed would negatively impact our children.”

Their concerns are well founded. In 1996, California voters approved Prop. 209 to block public institutions, notably state universities, from discriminating by race. Asian-American freshman enrollment at the University of California’s 10-flagship universities has since climbed to 40.2% from 36.6% and to 47% from 39.7% at Berkeley.

Admissions rates for Asian Americans relative to other minority groups have also soared. In 1996, Asian Americans were about two-thirds as likely to get into Berkeley as blacks or Hispanics, not controlling for other factors. Today Asian Americans stand a 50% better shot of being admitted. Prop. 209’s ban on racial preferences has helped Asian Americans by forcing admissions officers to focus on such academic qualifications as high-school grades and test scores.

What do grades and test score have to do with getting into Berkeley?

Of course, doing good often comes by way of doing well:

Democratic leaders say they are merely delaying the referendum for discussion, but they know that pushing for Prop. 209’s repeal risks alienating the growing block of Asian-American voters in the same way Republicans have alienated Hispanics. Asian Americans were 11% of California voters in 2012 compared to 6% in 2008, and nearly 80% of them voted for President Obama.

Asian-Americans were in danger of becoming the Jews of the 21st Century (the likes of Jonas Salk and Richard Feynman were rejected from Ivy League schools due to strict quotas), and that would be as wrong today as it was then.

Comments

Pro Choice, As Long As It’s Hers

Maybe opposing abortion on the campus of UC Santa Barbara is like shouting fire in a crowded theater:

A department of feminist studies professor has been accused of going berserk after coming across a campus prolife demonstration that used extremely graphic displays, leading a small mob of students to chant “tear down the sign” before grabbing one of the signs, storming off with it, then allegedly engaging in an altercation with a 16-year-old prolife protestor who had followed the educator to retrieve it.

Untitled

The professor at the heart of the controversy is Mireille Miller-Young, an associate professor whose area of emphasis is black cultural studies, pornography and sex work, according to her faculty webpage. She could not be reached for comment Tuesday by The College Fix.

The confrontation took place at the coastal, public university’s “free speech” area, a heavily traversed part of the quad.

She had me at “pornography and sex work”, so I swung by her webpage (swinging dude that I am).

Imagine my disappointment:

Areas of Study:

Pornography; Sex Work; Black Film, Popular Culture and Art; Feminist & Queer Theory; African American & African Diaspora Studies; Visual Archives; New Media; Ethnography; Oral History

Education:

PhD. New York University (American History and History of the African Dispora
M.A. New York University (American History and History of the African Dispora)
B.A. Emory University (History)

Dissertation: “A Taste for Brown Sugar: The History of Black Women in American Pornography.”

Do all those institutes of higher education demand their degrees back when they see how she spells? Do California taxpayers care that their money pays her salary? And where can I get a copy of her thesis?

Comments

Juan Williams Exposes The Left’s Hatred For Conservative African Americans

The background: Rutgers University hired Condoleeza Rice to be the commencement speaker this year. The faculty immediately voted to request that the invitation be rescinded. The leftist students piled on too, but what is noteworthy is the faculty response.

Juan Williams is black and liberal. He used to work for NPR until they fired him for publicly stating that he feels nervous in an airport when he sees Muslims in traditional clothing. Now he works for Fox, one of the poor, hapless liberals that provides red meat to the hungry conservatives there. (Sorry Fox, the bias is over the top too often).

Condoleezza Rice lacks “moral authority.” She fails to meet the standards of “exemplary citizenship” and she does not have what it takes to “inspire” graduating college seniors.

That crazy thinking comes from the New Brunswick Faculty Council of Rutgers University. They voted last week to ask university leadership to cancel Rice’s invitation to be this year’s Commencement Speaker and receive an honorary degree.

How is the public served by muzzling one of the most thoughtful, accomplished and respected political voices of her time just because she happens to be a Republican?
Yes, apparently the first African-American woman to serve as National Security Adviser and the nation’s Secretary of State doesn’t have what it takes to be honored by Rutgers.

Rice holds a Ph.D. in political science. She has taught college for decades. She was Provost of Stanford University. She worked her way up from a working-class family in the segregated South to the highest echelon of world power and politics.

But according to the Rutgers faculty council, all of that is negated by her service in President George W. Bush’s administration.

They cited her roles in pushing the false claim of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. They also point to her support for using enhanced interrogation techniques to get information from terror suspects.

The facts are right. The conclusion is wrong.

There is an added element at play here. There is a disgraceful double standard amongst liberals, particularly those in academia, in the hatred they direct at black conservatives.

We saw this last April when the conservative neurosurgeon Dr. Ben Carson was forced to step down as a Commencement Speaker for Johns Hopkins University (where he ably served as the head of pediatric neurosurgery).


I am not a conservative but I have spoken out for years against the staggering amount blind hatred directed at black conservatives by liberals.

Liberals are shockingly quick to demean and dismiss brilliant black people like Rice, Carson, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, U.S. Senator Tim Scott (R-SC), Professor Walter E. Williams and economist Thomas Sowell because they don’t fit into the role they have carved out for a black person in America.

Black Americans must be obedient liberals on all things or risk being called a race traitor or an Uncle Tom.

I’ve experienced some of this vitriol firsthand when I have veered by liberal orthodoxy. I wrote about it in my book “Muzzled – the Assault on Honest Debate.”


How is the public served by muzzling one of the most thoughtful, accomplished and respected political voices of her time just because she happens to be a Republican?

Before her commencement speech, I would like to see any of one of the members of faculty council debate Secretary Rice on foreign policy and then let their students see how well their professors’ critique holds up.

Hell, how about we invite the entire faculty council to take their best shot at Secretary Rice in a debate.

Rice is the most famous Republican woman politician in the country. She gave the best speech of the 2012 Republican National Convention and, despite her lack of interest in political office, still gets mentioned as a potential Republican presidential candidate for 2016.

If she is truly on the fence about a White House run, I would suggest she go for it if for no other reason than to rub it in the faces of these pompous jackass professors.

He must feel as frustrated at Fox as BTL and I sometimes feel in the frozen Northeast. When you live in a world where only one perspective is acceptable, and when holders of that perspective can control whether you have a job or not, it gets a little old. Good for Juan Williams for standing up for Condoleeza Rice, Ben Carson, Clarence Thomas, Sowell and the others.

– Aggie

Comments (1)

Academic Probation

It’s not like I disagree with President Obama on everything. Just everything he says and believes. (I’m sure, with John Kerry as mediator, Obama and I could agree that the sky is blue.)

As one conservative famously said of one liberal, there he goes again:

Obama called on an assembly of college and university presidents and leaders of nonprofit and other education groups to rally around a goal of widening opportunities for disadvantaged students.

‘‘We still have a long way to go to unlock the doors of higher education to more Americans and especially lower-income Americans,’’ he said. ‘‘We’re going to have to make sure they’re ready to walk through those doors.’’

The event, which attracted more than 100 leaders in higher education, underscored both the power of the presidency to convene influential figures to bring about change as well as the limitations of a second-term president trying to drive sweeping changes in the face of a divided Congress.

The White House has increasingly been seeking ways to bypass Congress, an approach that can bring about results but that doesn’t often have the breadth or the permanence of a law. Obama said his education initiatives are part of an effort to ‘‘make sure there are new ladders of opportunity to the middle class.’’

‘‘I’m working with Congress where I can to accomplish this,’’ he said. ‘‘But I’m also going to take action on my own if Congress is deadlocked.’’

Eager to put the White House’s stature behind the education push, Obama was joined by first lady Michelle Obama, who urged schools to actively reach out to low-income high schoolers to attract them to their campuses and to provide them with help once they decide to pursue a higher education.

Both the president and the first lady spoke in personal terms, saying they had benefited from a national commitment to expand opportunities for young people that led them to attend elite universities. Obama graduated from Columbia University and his wife from Princeton University, and both graduated from Harvard Law School.

‘‘The truth is that if Princeton hadn’t found my brother as a basketball recruit, and if I hadn’t seen that he could succeed on a campus like that, it never would have occurred to me to apply to that school — never,’’ Mrs. Obama said. ‘‘And I know that there are so many kids out there just like me — kids who have a world of potential, but maybe their parents never went to college or maybe they’ve never been encouraged to believe they could succeed there.’’

Which she hated, from the sound of things:

When I first arrived at school, I didn’t know anyone on right buildings. [Sic] I didn’t even bring the right size sheets for my dorm room bed. I didn’t realize those beds were so long. So I was a little overwhelmed and a little isolated. But then I had an opportunity to participate in a three-week on campus orientation program that helped me get the feel for the rhythm of college life.

And once school started I discovered the campus cultural center, the Third World Center, where I found students and staff who came from families and communities that were similar to my own.

I first heard this on Rush yesterday, and my reaction was similar to his: what did she have in common with the third world? And who doesn’t arrive at college overwhelmed and isolated?

And without her own BMW?

“I remember being shocked,” she says, “by college students who drove BMWs. I didn’t even know parents who drove BMWs.”

Neither did I. But my dorm sheets fit.

Technically, she doesn’t come right out and say she hated Princeton, but she comes pretty close:

“My experiences at Princeton have made me far more aware of my ‘blackness’ than ever before,” the future Mrs. Obama wrote in her thesis introduction. “I have found that at Princeton, no matter how liberal and open-minded some of my white professors and classmates try to be toward me, I sometimes feel like a visitor on campus; as if I really don’t belong. Regardless of the circumstances underwhich I interact with whites at Princeton, it often seems as if, to them, I will always be black first and a student second.”

Wait a minute. Didn’t we just learn that she was saved by the Third World Center, frequented by “families and communities that were similar to [her] own”? It’s nothing to me how “black” she felt or when, but she admits to feeling plenty black from the get-go.

She went on:

“Predominately white universities like Princeton are socially and academically designed to cater to the needs of the white students comprising the bulk of their enrollments.”

To illustrate the latter statement, she pointed out that Princeton (at the time) had only five black tenured professors on its faculty, and its “Afro-American studies” program “is one of the smallest and most understaffed departments in the university.” In addition, she said only one major university-recognized group on campus was “designed specifically for the intellectual and social interests of blacks and other third world students.” (Her findings also stressed that Princeton was “infamous for being racially the most conservative of the Ivy League universities.”)

Give her credit: she stepped out of that cesspool of white privilege into that bastion of diversity, Harvard Law School. As Barack did from Columbia. Which only puzzles me further about the point of this conference. Aren’t the President and the First Lady iron-clad proof of “unlocked doors” and “ladders of opportunity”? Even pot-heads and malcontents can win big in America.

And what role does government have to play in the admission practices of private institutions? It can (and has) outlawed discrimination (except for reverse-discrimination, affirmative action); it can (and has) provided funding for poorer students. The Obamas can’t seriously believe any of what they’re saying.

No, there’s a subtext here that needs airing. Young people and academia are largely leftist, and they need each other to remain so. If young people had to work from age 21, they’d learn much earlier that the facts of life are conservative. If academia didn’t have a steady supply of young dolts willing to take on ruinous debt to major in Transgender Studies, they’d go out of business. In either case, Democrats would suffer. Which is why the gangsta in the White House and his moll opened their fat yaps.

You’re welcome.

Comments

No Place for Hate

For an Israeli University to refuse an honorary degree to a Nobel Prize Laureate (one of the real prizes, not that Poxy peace thing), his politics must be really beyond the pale.

Neo-Nazi? White Supremacist? Radical Islamist?

Worse: Zionist.

The Executive Committee of the University of Haifa has refused to award an honorary doctorate to Professor Israel (Robert) Aumann due to his pro-Israel politics, Ha’aretz reported Sunday.

Professor Aumann won the Nobel Memorial Prize for Economics in 2005 for his work on conflict and cooperation through game theory analysis. However, despite his intellectual prowess – he is a noted professor from the Center of Rationality at Israel’s top-level Hebrew University of Jerusalem, he is a visiting professor at Stony Brook University, and is one of the founders of the Center for Game Theory and Economics there – the University has decided to reject the Professor for political reasons.

At a hearing to discuss the candidacy last week, the director, Ami Ayalon, agreed with other board members not to award the title, citing concerns that “the Professor’s politics are not in line with the University’s values.”

Zionism is generally defined as: “the national movement for the return of the Jewish people to their homeland and the resumption of Jewish sovereignty in the Land of Israel.”

It’s practically a war crime!

Among the board’s concerns were remarks by Aumann in 2010 stating that “the most sensible solution” to the Israeli-Arab conflict is “a Jewish state and an Arab state, where the Jewish state is settled by Jews and the Arab state is settled by Arabs.”

Aumann also insisted on other religious-Zionist principles, including that “Jerusalem needs to remain Jewish” and citing the importance of religiosity in maintaining a Jewish state. Aumann has reiterated these principles several times before, stressing the importance of maintaining Israel’s Jewish heritage.

If you find it odd that an Israeli University would discriminate on the basis of pro-Israel views, you don’t know Haifa:

The University has been the site of anti-Israel activity before. In 2012, during Operation Pillar of Defense, Arab students demonstrated in mourning not of IDF soldiers, but for downed terrorist Ahmed Jabari. The university later made a public statement against the incident and banned further student demonstrations.

Earlier this year, terror victims’ advocacy organization Almagor publicly spoke out against the university for providing legal aid to convicted terrorists and murderers.

Another example how politics trumps other forms of identity. Religion, national unity, all of them. Leftists are leftists, regardless of other ties.

Comments

« Previous entries Next Page » Next Page »