Most of academia’s leadership is too invertebrate and too soggy with political correctness to fight the OCR-DOJ mischief. But someone will. And it is so patently unconstitutional that it will be swiftly swatted down by the courts. Still, it is useful idiocy because, coming right now, it underscores today’s widespread government impulse for lawless coercion — the impulse that produced the Internal Revenue Service’s suppression of political speech that annoys the Obama administration.
May 25, 2013
"[T]he government is blurring the distinction between physical assaults and 'sexually themed' speech..."
"... in order to justify censoring and punishing the latter."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
39 comments:
And it is so patently unconstitutional that it will be swiftly swatted down by the courts.
When did Will become such an optimist?
Is there anything more predictable than the lefts assault on free speech in whatever venue it can gain a foothold?
The lefties are still cheering dearly departed Chavez' shutdown of media outlets that opposed his policies.
Talk about a leftist wet dream.
Never forget, George Will is known as The Perrier Conservative.
He still thinks there are rules out there and the Lefties play by them.
"it is so patently unconstitutional that it will be swiftly swatted down by the courts"
Like BarryCare?
Lawrence?
Kelo?
Roe?
Two Indian braves spot an Indian girl on the opposite side of the stream.
"Do you think she'd come across for two bucks?" asked one.
I heard that in the fifth grade.
It may even have been in my Child's Book of Jokes.
Fortunately the school system didn't get Pell grants and so didn't have to worry about it.
I think bright colors in playgrounds is what finally drove out all masculinity from boy children.
We played in colorless boxes, old cars and asphalt.
Makes you wonder who is running the show in this administration. Every department is infected with incompetent, ideological buffoons.
"The end result of 'progressive' politics is totalitarianism."
------Eric Voegelin
Imagine a college applying these rules to discipline a student for playing a rap song in a music class. The lyrics are (so I am told, it's not my thing) often quite nasty in the depiction of women and much besides. The school takes immediate protective action -- say, banning such 'music' from campus -- while it adjudicates the complaint.
Anyone think OCR-DOJ would defend application of its speech code in that context? That any college would apply it in that context? Me neither. There are many ways to show the insuperable problems with the OCR-DOJ rules.
pm317 said...
Makes you wonder who is running the show in this administration. Every department is infected with incompetent, ideological buffoons.
Nobody is running the show. Every facet of this administration is administering policy like they want to, with no oversight whatsoever.
It's probably important to publicize the otherwise faceless bureaucrats that are doing this and hopefully shame them.
Anurima Bhargava, Chief U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division, Educational Opportunities Section
Gary Jackson, Regional Director U.S. Department of Education Office for Civil Rights Seattle Office.
If I were related to either of these people, I'd be deeply ashamed, and if I were their friend I'd let them know I could no longer be so.
"the impulse that produced the Internal Revenue Service’s suppression of political speech that annoys the Obama administration."
Poor construction: It is not clear if what annoys the administration is political speech or the Internal Revenue Service's suppression of the annoying speech.
George Will speaking out against Puritan overreach?
The schools is their experiment lab. From there its meant to leak out to the web.
Didn't Obama blame the web for something in his confusing speech?
Ultimately, they want to sensor the web.
Historically speaking, is there any difference between what Hitler's paladins Himmler & Heydrich did, and what Obummer is doing right now? Does anyone really doubt that Zero would round up the Tea Party and put them in camps if he thought he could get away with it?
JG
The DOJ today released evidence of the porn sites that James Rosen has visited over the past year. These porn sites claim that their models are all over eighteen. Perhaps, but they look a lot younger. Also, an analysis of his credit card data reveals that he and his wife have consistently overspent on eating out in expensive restaurants. And this in a country where many children go to bed hungry. James Rosen is clearly trying to hide his degeneracy and profligacy behind the first amendment. Fortunately, there are right thinking men in DOJ who have their priorities in order and will not rest until the truth is discovered and revealed.
Left wing authoritarians are in charge in these agencies and in many academic institutions. When not in charge, they intimidate those who supposedly are, who seem to be easily cowed.
Of course this has been going on for quite a while. The question is whether the broad public will care enough to do something about it.
All I know is is that someone better get their case to be readily "swatted down" in front of the SCOTUS before Obama gets to appoint another Justice..
@Glenn Howes
Anurima Bhargava, Chief U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division
That name sounds Indian and no, I am not related to her. oh, look what I found googling her name
A prediction here about who will most articulately expose this First Amendment problem, in a way that could galvanize opposition to it: Ted Cruz.
"That name sounds Indian and no, I am not related to her."
She does look sweet. Who would have guessed that behind those big brown eyes is the mind of a lefty fascist?
The government is also blurring the distinction between journalism and espionage. It's all part of the general msneuvering to be arbitrarily in control of everything. It's akin to Nancy Pelosi's "we need to pass the bill so you can find out what's in it". This version goes "after you break the law, we'll let you know what the law is."
By the way, Pelosi should have been run out of town on a rail the moment she uttered that sentence. Anyone with that view of the law is patently unqualified for public office.
"Ultimately, they want to sensor the web."
Ain't that the truth. The deposed gatekeepers (in the press and the government) have been trying to figure out how to crack that nut for a long time now. It hasn't gotten far, so far, but just like jihadists, they'll never rest in the quest. Unless they're stomped on repeatedly.
This yet another example just how fascist our government is becoming. It's also yet another illustration of how the people willingly embrace tyranny.
All to many "conservatives" are willing to have the government also censor speech on their behalf. As they say, the chickens have come home to roost.
This is the country the sixties' elite liberal campus rioters and their younger wannabe followers (Obama) have given us. The baby boon generation, children of the greatest generation has turned out to be the sorriest generation.
The feminazis have a friend in the White House. Think about what that says about the deterioration of our culture.
These federal employees can't be sequestered away fast enough, in my opinion.
You and I are paying these peoples' salaries. And for what?
widespread government impulse for lawless coercion...
Its a mouthful, but Add a third to the list of possible scandal themes.
Culture and Climate.
I'm trying to reduce it to one word but 'impulse'... Impulse OED?
My impulse is to resist the OED.
First lets get the Star Trek out of the way ... at 1/4 Impulse Power.
Then there is revenge.
My first impulse was to run up on you and do a rambo
Impulse is personal. no?
Sorun said...
That name sounds Indian and no, I am not related to her.
She does look sweet. Who would have guessed that behind those big brown eyes is the mind of a lefty fascist?
just look at the smile.
It's got that "I know I'm right and I have the power to make you knuckle under" look a lot of Lefty apparatchiks have.
We serve student populations facing discrimination and the advocates and institutions promoting systemic solutions to civil rights problems.
Nothing covers like an SS umbrella.
Makes you wonder who is running the show in this administration. Every department is infected with incompetent, ideological buffoons.
That's why they're untouchable.
Swallowing whole the narrative that this amounts to nothing more than a Laurel & Hardy skit...
Never, ever entertain the possibility that the characters involved are serious people, with a serious agenda, that finally made it to the big stage.
"All to many "conservatives" are willing to have the government also censor speech on their behalf. As they say, the chickens have come home to roost."
The conservative-as-censor is largely a projection of the left's unhealthy need for total control and their own righteous zealotry in obtaining it.
The Washington Post has finally realized that its kind pushed us Through the Looking-Glass. Welcome to the other side of transformative change. If you had not ignored traditional knowledge (e.g. history), and the terms and circumstances of reality, we may have avoided this repetitive divergence.
Oh, well. Progressive corruption is a predictable conclusion of exploiting differentials and gradients, and normalizing dysfunctional behaviors, in order to advance political, economic, and social standing.
I wonder if the Democrats, in the majority, will be able to reject their cash cow without incentives to compensate them for rejecting "easy street."
The conservative-as-censor is largely a projection of the left's unhealthy need for total control and their own righteous zealotry in obtaining it.
Oh, bullshit. Pull you head out of your ass and look at the demands of the right. They want tyranny too, just THEIR tyranny.
Where are the republicans who actually support--really support--smaller government, including the military? Conservatives love the war on drugs, the war on porn, prohibition and, frankly, crony capitalism.
Conservatives supported the enhancement of the police state; just lock 'em up! Don't lie and pretend you don't remember "law and order" Republicans.
Then look at the federal marriage rights act. Where does that authority come from? Shouldn't true conservatives believe that is an individual choice, not one dictated by the government? After all, if the federal government has the power to say who married and who doesn't, don't they also have the power to say who has children and who doesn't? And how parents raise their children? Once you allow the federal government power over the most personal aspects of our lives, where does it end?
Conservatives believe in the law of consequences.
This is very hard for liberals to understand.
To liberals there is no law that can't be broken by the elite.
Not to worry -- these harrassment rules only apply to white hetero males.
If conservatives learn anything they should abolish the dept. of education and eliminate in its entirety the non-profit and charitable section of the tax code for starters.
Then look at the federal marriage rights act. Where does that authority come from? Shouldn't true conservatives believe that is an individual choice, not one dictated by the government? After all, if the federal government has the power to say who married and who doesn't, don't they also have the power to say who has children and who doesn't? And how parents raise their children? Once you allow the federal government power over the most personal aspects of our lives, where does it end?"
Just because too much of something is no good doesn't mean a little bit of something is no good. Marriage is a state defined contract. Think it through to such things as property distribution, inheritance and child support.
Post a Comment