Churchill Updates 080307--Deranged Supporters Can't Spell, Ode To Churchill
RMN columnist Mike Rosen discusses how a deranged Case Western Reserve University doctoral candidate and Churchill supporters equates CU's Regents to Nazis (and has difficulty spelling anything correctly), and how Churchill's dismissal has nothing to do with free speech:
"Subject: You are f**king nazi's (sic)
"It is IMPOSSIBLE to speak politely, intelligibly, with reason to moral cretins masquarding (sic) as humans, cretins utterly devoid of intelligence, humanity, common sense, courage: YOU ARE ALL F**KING NAZI'S (sic). May you and all your progeny burn in hell for eternity. Perhaps there is a special place there for nazi's (sic)."
The above e-mail was sent to all nine of the CU regents July 25, the day after their decision to fire Ward Churchill. The sender was one Paulette Sage, a doctoral candidate in sociology at Case Western Reserve University. Sage's spelling deficiencies and her ignorance of the difference between the plural and possessive is embarrassing enough, but her equating the CU regents with Nazis is positively idiotic.
Sadly, Sage typifies hysterical academic leftists distraught at Churchill's demise and appalled that one of their own tenured philosopher-kings could be held accountable for his behavior by administrators, taxpayers, tuition-paying customers, the community or even a panel of fellow academics.
Ward Churchill flunks the First Amendment:
Churchill will argue that no matter how offensive his speech, the First Amendment is designed expressly for the purpose of protecting his right to say it, and that faculty members especially must be able to speak and write unpopular views because their role is to stimulate free and open debate on cutting edge, controversial issues. He is right up to a point. Courts have granted more leeway to professors to say offensive things than they have accorded to administrators, on the theory that unrestrained exchange of ideas lies at the core of academic freedom.
However, there are outer limits. The University of Colorado should not have to tolerate speech which can reasonably be expected to cause serious disruptions of its normal operations. For example, there is an active ROTC program on campus. The university would have a legitimate concern that Churchill’s incitements to kill or maim military officers could threaten the peaceful functioning of this program and lead to further disruptions on campus.
Academic freedom must be accompanied by academic responsibility. Professor Churchill’s defamatory and incitement speech failed the test of First Amendment protection. He deserved to be fired on this basis alone. Of course, if the allegations against Churchill regarding plagiarism and other acts of misconduct turn out to be true, his firing is a no-brainer.
A little "love" poetry (think Barry White) for the ex-professor.
Things are a little "tense" for the professors at the University of Colorado-Colorado Springs campus following the Churchill dismissal.