Monday, April 22, 2013

Who your college dollars are paying the checks of

The first public event was held on March 28 at Duke University’s Sanford School of Public Policy. Roughly 150 people packed the meeting room; most were faculty, although others were activists and members of organizations affiliated with the state’s progressive community. Eight panelists, from Duke, UNC-Chapel Hill, N.C. State, and N.C. Central, spoke briefly; the moderators were Lisa Levenstein of UNC-Greensboro and Jacquelyn Dowd Hall of UNC-Chapel Hill, both history professors.
...
For, despite suggestions to the contrary, this event was purely partisan; there was no discussion of specific higher education policies, nor was there a single word by any panelist or crowd member that deviated from opinions common to the left wing of the Democratic Party. The event was an attack on the Republican legislature, nothing more. Some participants threw around so much hyperbolic rhetoric and falsehoods stated as fact that their own fitness as professorial models deserves to be closely examined.


So the FBI says "We talked to the guy, and we didn't see anything to worry about."  Even after the trip.  Except
He also noted that "we should have known after signing the May 26 agreement that it would mean the Chechens would start to target us co-equally with the Russians. Somebody dropped the ball, failed to do the math." All of this is informed speculation at this point, but law enforcement agencies should quickly determine whether the U.S. needs to be on high alert against Chechen terrorism.
Well, I wonder if the EffingBI might have had more time to worry about actual threats if they were spending less time worrying about those nasty tea party people and gun owners and anyone else who doesn't fit the proper progressive mold?


Once more, "Let's vote on this before anyone actually reads it; don't worry about the details, we'll take care of them..."
Not like a big immigration bill could have any surprises, right?


This is painful:
That's right Erin. They look like typical college kids. Just like Bill Ayers, Bernadine Dohrn and Kathy Boudin did, 40 years ago.


This is obviously unpossible; the People's Republic of MA does not allow subjects to have a gun without a license!
Damn; when a terrorist won't obey the gun laws, it's just terrible, isn't it?


2 comments:

Keith said...

I wonder why, in the interests of strictly objective and non partizan journalism, the NYT was interested in whether those kids were on some list or other.

Lists, if your not stupid enough to be on one, those with "authoriteh" are likely too stupid to look at you.

Firehand said...

Depends on the subjects in question: in some cases being on a list- especially if you're white/conservative/libertarian/gun owner- is something you belong on.

But if you're a protected species, "Why oh why were you discriminating against these people so?"