If this is what academia has come to... you can keep it!
I have rarely seen a more perfect example of the Left's belief in free speech than Paul Deignan's tale over at Info Theory (h/t Protein Wisdom).
Follow the comment thread yourself (which Mr. Deignan has thankfully saved off the pre-ban portion here while the rest is available here) to see just what kind of 'trollish' behaviors he was displaying. Apparently just disagreeing with the fact Judge Alito is an extremist is enough to be considered a troll, especially when you dismantle the authors arguments with stated fact and case law. The bastard had the gall to bring fact and precedent into a 'liberal' discussion about an obviously evil judge ('Bitch' said so, so it must be true); the nerve of some people.
Well the fact a conservative viewpoint was discouraged, and even banned, from a liberal website is nothing new to the blogosphere, but what makes this story somewhat unique is the fact that a professor who was involved in the 'discussion' actually contacted Mr. Deignan's PhD advisors in an attempt to discredit him. Yes, that's correct, a History professor from the University of Northern Iowa (yes it does exist) contacted the PhD advisors of a Engineering student at Purdue over a post on a blog, in which if you read the comments, the student is one of the few people generally acting civilly.
It even gets more interesting in that after repeatedly giving the professor a chance to step back and calm down (which Professor Wally has refused to do) Mr. Deignan has begun the process of suing him. Now normally I think internet squabbles should stay on the internet but in the case of a tenured professor (oh, did I mention Professor Wally is also tenured at UNI) going so far as to attempt to block a student from getting his PhD over what is essentially an unrelated exercise of free speech (unless someone can create a tie-in between an appointment to the Supreme Court and Mechanical Engineering I am unaware of) I say it has escalated to the point that real world harm has been attempted and must be dealt with, and it just so happens in this case Paul has the financial abilities to follow through with legal means. I say go for it.
BitchPhD tries to downplay the whole affair on both the original thread and by creating a new one. Oddly enough on the original thread she discusses the how she is such a staunch supporter of free speech and academic freedom that she has to ban Paul for the common good and later extends the banning threat to anyone else who even brings up Paul's banning (now you see how free speech works under the liberal academic rules). But the icing on the cake is the new thread. She somehow manages to totally gloss over Professor Wally's real world attempt to destroy Paul's career in her explanation of the lawsuit, as well as cherry pick selective parts of some of Paul's comments in a very bad attempt to make him sound trollish. The only problem is that if you read even her selected quotes, they are nowhere near the level of a troll and if you read his full comment history you will see his comments backed up with precedent and fact whereas most of hers, and professor Wally's for that matter, consist of personal attacks on Paul.
Of course, being a privately run blog, even though publicly available on the internet, freedom of speech does not truly exist and Bitch has every right to ban whoever she wants. I just find it funny how she in one breath claims to support open dialogue while in the next one using her administrative powers to quell any possible opposition.
As an added bonus to us on the right watching this all unfold is the fact that both of those bastions of Liberal ideology, the LA Times and New York Times have come out with relatively positive reviews of Alito's judicial history, as well as the long list of Democratic lawyers who have also publicly praised him. But then again, why should we poor unwashed masses take their word for it when BitchPhD has already told us he is in fact unfit for the SCOTUS.
For a much more detailed, and honest, look at Judge Alito from another left leaning blog source check out this Moon Over Pittsburgh post. Moon's breakdown of Alito's record puts so many others I have seen, especially BitchPhD's sad attempt, to shame. It seems that Moon, unlike so many others from the left understands that if you have a Conservative President you will more than likely get a Conservative appointee and that while it may not be someone a Liberal person wants, you still need to evaluate them on their judicial merits, not just your ideological ones.
Follow the comment thread yourself (which Mr. Deignan has thankfully saved off the pre-ban portion here while the rest is available here) to see just what kind of 'trollish' behaviors he was displaying. Apparently just disagreeing with the fact Judge Alito is an extremist is enough to be considered a troll, especially when you dismantle the authors arguments with stated fact and case law. The bastard had the gall to bring fact and precedent into a 'liberal' discussion about an obviously evil judge ('Bitch' said so, so it must be true); the nerve of some people.
Well the fact a conservative viewpoint was discouraged, and even banned, from a liberal website is nothing new to the blogosphere, but what makes this story somewhat unique is the fact that a professor who was involved in the 'discussion' actually contacted Mr. Deignan's PhD advisors in an attempt to discredit him. Yes, that's correct, a History professor from the University of Northern Iowa (yes it does exist) contacted the PhD advisors of a Engineering student at Purdue over a post on a blog, in which if you read the comments, the student is one of the few people generally acting civilly.
It even gets more interesting in that after repeatedly giving the professor a chance to step back and calm down (which Professor Wally has refused to do) Mr. Deignan has begun the process of suing him. Now normally I think internet squabbles should stay on the internet but in the case of a tenured professor (oh, did I mention Professor Wally is also tenured at UNI) going so far as to attempt to block a student from getting his PhD over what is essentially an unrelated exercise of free speech (unless someone can create a tie-in between an appointment to the Supreme Court and Mechanical Engineering I am unaware of) I say it has escalated to the point that real world harm has been attempted and must be dealt with, and it just so happens in this case Paul has the financial abilities to follow through with legal means. I say go for it.
BitchPhD tries to downplay the whole affair on both the original thread and by creating a new one. Oddly enough on the original thread she discusses the how she is such a staunch supporter of free speech and academic freedom that she has to ban Paul for the common good and later extends the banning threat to anyone else who even brings up Paul's banning (now you see how free speech works under the liberal academic rules). But the icing on the cake is the new thread. She somehow manages to totally gloss over Professor Wally's real world attempt to destroy Paul's career in her explanation of the lawsuit, as well as cherry pick selective parts of some of Paul's comments in a very bad attempt to make him sound trollish. The only problem is that if you read even her selected quotes, they are nowhere near the level of a troll and if you read his full comment history you will see his comments backed up with precedent and fact whereas most of hers, and professor Wally's for that matter, consist of personal attacks on Paul.
Of course, being a privately run blog, even though publicly available on the internet, freedom of speech does not truly exist and Bitch has every right to ban whoever she wants. I just find it funny how she in one breath claims to support open dialogue while in the next one using her administrative powers to quell any possible opposition.
As an added bonus to us on the right watching this all unfold is the fact that both of those bastions of Liberal ideology, the LA Times and New York Times have come out with relatively positive reviews of Alito's judicial history, as well as the long list of Democratic lawyers who have also publicly praised him. But then again, why should we poor unwashed masses take their word for it when BitchPhD has already told us he is in fact unfit for the SCOTUS.
For a much more detailed, and honest, look at Judge Alito from another left leaning blog source check out this Moon Over Pittsburgh post. Moon's breakdown of Alito's record puts so many others I have seen, especially BitchPhD's sad attempt, to shame. It seems that Moon, unlike so many others from the left understands that if you have a Conservative President you will more than likely get a Conservative appointee and that while it may not be someone a Liberal person wants, you still need to evaluate them on their judicial merits, not just your ideological ones.
posted by Bic at 5:02 p.m.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home