Ward Churchill Week 4 Update--Judge Tosses One Of Two Claims, **Update: Jury Receives Case

"Are you going to allow lies to overcome the truth?"--David Lane, Churchill's attorney

"What we heard here during the course of this trial is there are two worlds - the world the University exists in and the world Ward Churchill lives in . . . Ward Churchill's world was a place where there are no standards and no accountability"--Patrick O'Rourke, CU attorney

**Update 2: Jury receives case:

A jury began its deliberations in Ward Churchill's civil trial against the University of Colorado on Wednesday after hearing the closing arguments from both sides.

"The job you are now undertaking is quite possibly the most important decision you will ever have to make," Churchill's attorney David Lane told the Denver jury during closing arguments. "You are in charge of preserving, protecting and defending the Constitution of the United States of America."

Lane added: "Are you going to allow lies to overcome the truth?"
. . .
CU's attorney countered during his round of closing arguments.

"What we heard here during the course of this trial is there are two worlds - the world the University exists in and the world Ward Churchill lives in," attorney Patrick O'Rourke said. "Ward Churchill's world was a place where there are no standards and no accountability."

Exit questions--how quick a decision, and in whose favor?

---

Scroll for updates--as always, check out the implacable Drunkablog, who managed to cover the majority of the trial from inside the courtroom, and PirateBallerina for additional coverage . . .

**Late breaking update: No chilling of free speech--judge tosses one of Churchill's claims!:

Chief Denver District Judge Larry Naves threw out one of Ward Churchill's two claims this afternoon, ruling that the former professor's assertion that the University of Colorado launched an investigation into his scholarship in retaliation for exercising his First Amendment rights was not "actionable."

The judge and lawyers met out of the presence of the jury Tuesday afternoon to go over the final language on the jury verdict form.

"This case will go to the jury on the other claim where there is clearly an adverse employment action, which is being terminated," the judge said.

The second claim in Churchill's civil lawsuit against the school is the primary claim -- that CU fired Churchill for exercising his free speech rights.

The first claim in his suit, which was dismissed this afternoon, was that CU launched an investigation into the former professor in retaliation for exercising his First Amendment rights, essentially chilling those rights.

Naves said an investigation, in and of itself, is not an adverse employment action.

Churchill didn't lose his job or his pay while the investigation was ongoing, the judge said, and the possibility that an investigation could chill free expression by others who fear that making a controversial statement will result in a whole sale investigation of their scholarship is not sufficient to bring a retaliation claim.

Naves cited several other cases where judges had made similar rulings.

The jury will receive instructions Wednesday morning. Closing arguments will follow.

---

"Where do you guys get off looking at every word he has ever written when the only thing he wrote that upset you was the 9/11 essay?"--Churchill's attorney David Lane


Excellent cartoon from Face the State.

The latest updates on the Churchillpalooza trial--including extensive previous coverage:

Churchill receives the support of terrorist-sympathizer Lynne Stewart.

March 31--Defense concludes:

Ludwig took the stand for a short period Tuesday afternoon, testifying that he felt Ward Churchill was a valuable presence on campus because he served to combat the "cultural amnesia" that the larger society has about the treatment of American Indians.

He said it was "not easy" to fire the professor but that his academic transgressions were serious enough to merit it.

"We can't have one of our faculty members fall below that standard that we have," he told the jury.

March 30--Regents admit Churchill essay sparked probe:

Three former and current University of Colorado regents testified today that they authorized a review of then-Boulder professor Ward Churchill's speeches and writings only to find out whether they were protected under the First Amendment.

Former regent Patricia Hayes and regent Peter Steinhauer, both Republicans, said they found Churchill's comments in an essay about the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, "anti-American." But they said they also were concerned about other instances where Churchill made speeches that they thought appeared to advocate violence and terrorism.

They testified that they wanted to know whether the speeches and essays were considered protected speech under the First Amendment if Churchill had made them as a public employee representing the university.

"Given a fair chance":

Carlisle was the lone regent to vote against firing Churchill in 2007.

She said her decision to stray from her colleagues was based on the fact that the majority of faculty members serving on CU's Privilege & Tenure Committee voted to suspend the professor.

"They're the ones with the scholarship, they were the ones who should be making the decision about what sanctions should happen to Professor Churchill," she testified.

But Carlisle said she had the utmost confidence that Churchill was treated fairly and that the academic misconduct charges against him were fully proven.

"I believe Ward Churchill was given a fair chance to state his case," she told the jury.

March 27--"We did not sacrifice Ward Churchill":

"We did not sacrifice Ward Churchill," said Don Morley, a professor of communications at CU-Colorado Springs and a member of the university's Privilege and Tenure Committee.

Morley testified that he was hoping the fraud charges against Churchill that were being forwarded to his panel from the Standing Committee on Research Misconduct would turn out to be false.

"Why?" CU attorney Patrick O'Rourke asked.

"You just don't want to see one of your own fall and he's one of our own," Morley replied.

He said the Privilege and Tenure Committee was not a rubber stamp for the previous university panels that reviewed Churchill's work for academic misconduct.

His committee gave serious consideration to each allegation of fraud, Morley told the jury, and even absolved Churchill on several when the alleged wrongdoing didn't rise to the committee's higher standard of "clear and convincing" evidence for misconduct.

But what the committee did find in terms of misconduct, Morley said, merited terminating the controversial former ethnic studies professor.

March 26--Free speech doesn't negate academic fraud:

CU Regent Michael Carrigan told the jury that the nationwide furor over an incendiary essay penned by Churchill about the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks was a wholly different matter from allegations that the professor had fabricated, falsified and plagiarized parts of his academic work.

And just because the misconduct investigation grew out of the firestorm over the essay — which CU later determined to be protected free speech — didn’t mean the university could disregard the information it was getting about Churchill’s scholarship, Carrigan testified.

“Essentially, if we ignored these allegations, the message would be that you can plagiarize, you can ghostwrite, you can do it, but just make sure you say something offensive so you can say you should never be investigated and your work should never be scrutinized,” he said.

March 25--Churchill's attorney rests case

March 24--Churchill calls critics "pathetic":

Ward Churchill, fired by the University of Colorado two years ago for allegedly engaging in academic misconduct, called some of his critics "pathetic" during a second day of testimony at his wrongful termination trial Tuesday.

The frank description came after Churchill's attorney, David Lane, asked his client for his reaction to previous testimony from a colleague at CU who, according to Lane, characterized Churchill's three decades of scholarship as "not worth a pitcher of warm spit."

"How did it make you feel?" Lane asked.

"Angry," Churchill replied. "But anger is no new feeling for me."

Boo hoo. Critics also labelled "shit-knitters"--that's a new one.

Ward Churchill Testifies (Finally): "I Am Not In Favor Of Terror," Profit Motive Made 9/11 Victims "Little Eichmanns"

Today's earlier Week 2 recap. Drunkablog contextualizes Churchill's contextualizations on the stand earlier today. PirateBallerina has even more.

From the Denver Post Churchill blog:

Churchill is putting the meaning of his 9/11 essay in context for the jury. "I am not in favor of terror," he said.
. . .
"If the country wanted to avoid a repeat performance, maybe they should stop doing what it was that prompted the attack in the first place."

Churchill said people did not understand that Eichmann was a "bureaucrat, a desk murderer" and his mistake was assuming people understood Eichmann's role when they read the essay.

"When you bring your skills to bear for profit for yourself and your clients, you are the moral equivelant of Adolf Eichmann," Churchill said. "He never killed anyone, but without him the killing would have taken a very different or inefficient form."

Churchill continues to perpetuate a conflation of staggering malevolence--that somehow those working in the Twin Towers on 9/11, those corporate types involved in free market capitalism, are the moral equivalent of a man who organized train schedules and facilitated the murder of millions of Jews. But he's not in favor of terror, so he has that going for him.

Maybe he can't help it--he was just a "copy editor, essentially" for one of his cases of academic misconduct.

Russell Means--Churchill just "writing the wrongs of history" or "righting the wrongs"--depending on the blogger:

"It's an insult to my people and my history," Means said. "It's a scholarly massacre and it's not right. It's full of holes and full of lies. It's unconscionsable, because they don't treat white professors at CU the same way."

Yes they would, if any of them acted as academically irresponsible as Churchill. There is "scholarly massacre" at stake here, the kind perpetrated by Churchill in pursuit of a purely political agenda.

Where's Ward Churchillpalooza Week 3: Week 2 Recap, Will He Finally Take The Stand?

"Simply made-up, simply false . . . He just cheated"--University of Colorado sociology professor Michael Radelet, investigative committee member, on one of Ward Churchill's many faulty historical claims

Week 1 Recap--Churchill is expected to take the stand today, barring any more delays or snafus

March 16--Churchill's 9/11 essay "cruel and gratuitous", more here from the Daily Camera blog

March 17--Michael Yellow Bird on inventions in "oral history"; academic debates surrounding Churchill's questionable claims should "remain in the Academy and not in the courts"

March 18--MYB continued . . . "They don't invent facts, they invent the possibility that these things happen":

For the final question CU attorney Patrick O'Rourke asked indigenous studies professor Michael Yellow Bird during his re-cross Wednesday morning, he pulled up a transcript of previous testimony the professor had given to CU's Privilege & Tenure Committee and asked him if he had made the statement that "fabricated, made-up accounts promote the truth."

With a slight pause, Yellow Bird said yes.

"No further questions," O'Rourke said, closing his binder and taking a seat.

Lynne Stewart, yes that Lynne Stewart, will be defending Churchill this week.

CU investigative committee prof: Not "part of a right-wing attempt to get professor Churchill," problems with sourcing

March 19--technical snafu's deplete Churchill's crowd of supporters; CU's lead attorney goes on the offensive

March 20--Why the Churchill case matters from Vince Carroll of the Post; Churchill "hiding behind" oral tradition

March 23--Churchill lawyer claims that the powers that be at CU "disrespect Native people"; "He just cheated":

University of Colorado sociology professor Michael Radelet, who served on the investigative committee looking into allegations of academic misconduct by Ward Churchill, said his initial concern was that his colleague was being "railroaded" by people who wanted to see him punished for writing a controversial essay.

Radelet said he even signed on to a statement drawn up by his colleagues calling for Churchill's academic freedom and First Amendment rights to be protected by the university during the days after the 9/11 essay came to light.

"I am not and was not a person they would pick if they wanted someone to frame, railroad or even convict Ward Churchill of research misconduct," Radelet told the jury.

He testified that the committee, sensitive to the concept of academic freedom, "bent over backwards" to give Churchill the benefit of the doubt.

Radelet, who looked into allegations that Churchill had falsified information through his contention that there was "pretty strong circumstantial evidence" that Captain John Smith purposely introduced smallpox to the Wampanoag Indians in Massachusetts, said the claim was "simply made-up, simply false."

"He just cheated," he told the jury.

Drunkablog has Radelet's assertions that, by Churchill's standards, just about anyone in Boulder in 1996 could be a suspect in the JonBenet Ramsey murder.

Much more from the aforementioned Drunkablog, who has braved the trial's tedium and icy glares from the Chutchites for two weeks already, and PirateBallerina, who continues to serve up links galore to Churchilliana.

The Daily Camera's blog/story archives are here, and the Race to the Bottom blog offering legal insights into the trial continues to chronicle the Churchill legal saga.

Churchill Trialpalooza Week 1 Recap, Week 2 Preview

The Drunkablog continues his extensive virtual liveblog coverage of the Ward Churchill lawsuit:

Tuesday March 10--"Ordeal by trial"

Wednesday March 11--Vince Carroll's pessimism on the Churchill lawsuit; ex-CU President Betsy "C-word is a term of endearment" Hoffman deposed on video, speaking on then-Gov. Bill Owens' "plan" for Churchill

Thursday March 12--pro-Churchill testimonials from CU faculty, former students; former CU President Hank Brown's testimony

Friday March 13--Churchill's lawyer David Lane's call for "mistrial" rebuffed

Monday March 16--Prof. Marianne "Mimi" Wesson, chair of investigative committee on academic misconduct, accused of bias

The Boulder Daily Camera continues to liveblog as well, and the usual expansive links at PirateBallerina.

Bonus--"Ward Churchill was the hazardous waste dumped in the reservoir"

Churchill, Holocaust deniers--what's the difference?

Could Churchill sycophant Glenn Spagnuolo's own case put a nail in his idol's coffin?

Churchill lawsuit--insubstantial MSM coverage but still substantial interest?

Churchill Trialpalooza Opening Arguments: Churchill's Attorney--"Mob Mentality" Against Client, Churchill "Never Plagiarized"

"The media was out of control -- it was an absolute mob mentality"--Ward Churchill's attorney David Lane, in opening arguments

"Churchill lost his job because he breached the trust of being a university professor. Professor Churchill did things that an eighth grader knows is wrong"--CU defense attorney Patrick O'Rourke

From the Daily Camera--Ward's legal counsel David Lane trots out the Churchill-as-martyr trope:

David Lane, Ward Churchill's attorney, invoked the names of Italian astronomer Galileo, who heretically declared that the Earth was not the center of the universe, and Tenessee teacher John Scopes, who was condemned for teaching evolution in school, as direct comparisons to what his client has undergone in the wake of writing a controversial essay on 9/11.

"Fast forward to 2005... Boulder, Colorado," Lane said during opening statements Tuesday morning.

Lane then moves on accuse CU Boulder of conducting a essentially a "lie-finding" mission using "pet poodles" selected to oust the professor:

Once Churchill's essay became widely public in January 2005, he told the jury, the media wouldn't let it drop.

"The media was out of control -- it was an absolute mob mentality," Lane said.

He said former Gov. Bill Owens threatened to cut funding to CU if it didn't fire Churchill. National media figures also jumped on the anti-Churchill bandwagon, he said.

Lane said all of that pressure prompted CU to find any way it could to get rid of the ethnic studies professor. It didn't stand up for him and defend his free expression rights, Lane said.

"They ran like cowards and they sacrificed this man because they were afraid of the howling mob," he said. "Lacking in courage, CU hung him out to dry."

Lane said the school undertook a full fledged effort to find anything it could in the dozens of books Churchill had written or edited that would justify terminating him. The school picked its own "pet poodles" to head up its committee to look into his client's work, he said, like CU law professor Mimi Wesson. Lane said Wesson, who made disparaging comments about the former professor, was in charge of the Standing Committee for Research Misconduct.

But Lane's biggest challenge, aside from trying to prove that his client was wrongfully terminated due to bias inherent in the system, is his own goal of disproving that Churchill in fact plagiarized or was responsible for any academic misconduct:

He said he would prove to the jury that Churchill never plagiarized and never falsified his work, as the school asserts.

"I think you will see that this guy has devoted his life to telling the truth for people who are not given a voice in society," Lane said, referring to Churchill's long-time affiliation with Native American communities.

He asked the jury to make his client whole again.

Yeah, good luck with that.

CU's attorney Patrick O'Rourke defended the university's actions, declared Churchill's essay "protected speech," but that he committed the "worst kind of academic fraud" possible, and compared his ability to discern appropriate academic behavior to that of a 13-yr-old:

However, he said, when the school began receiving allegations of academic misconduct attributed to the professor, it investigated his writings and found eight instances of plagiarism, fabrication, and falsification. A committee of 20 tenured professors made the determination, he said.

O'Rourke said Churchill's attempts to defend his work on various occasions over the past two years came up short in the eyes of his professorial peers, who held out the possibility that Churchill may have simply made honest errors. They characterized his misconduct as severe, deliberate and damaging.

"They said this is wrong," O'Rourke said. "Churchill lost his job because he breached the trust of being a university professor. Professor Churchill did things that an eighth grader knows is wrong."

More to come this afternoon.

More on the ex-professor in SP's extensive Ward Churchill archives.

More at Drunkablog and PirateBallerina.

Perhaps the 15 minutes are over--altry attendance and lack on national press coverage.

The Denver Channel 7 has a Twitter-style liveblog going as well, and has the testimony from the first witness for the plaintiff:

Professor Evelyn Wu-Dehard [Hu-DeHart, ed.] is called to the stand.

She is a professor of history and ethnic studies at Brown University, formerly at CU.

Says ethnic studies emerged from the civil rights movement in the 60s and 70s. Says the contributions of blacks, Hispanics and Asians had been ignored for years. The notion of citizenship was reserved for white people.

"When CU tried to recruit me … Ward Churchill was already here."

Her opionion: Ward Churchill is one of the leading Native American scholars. One whose scholarship crosses a wide range. His impact is perhaps the single largest of all in ethnic studies.

"I think the worst thing that can happen to a scholar is when no one cares about you. When you provoke others. That is the highest testament to scholars."

She had written that Ward Churchill was not your typical academic.

He was in academic services. He had already be publishing and writing as a scholar. He did not have the usual criteria. Absence of Phd., which says you have an analytical mind. He was able to convince CU to hire him because of his published works.

She said he was an activist... an applied scholar. He takes information and applies it to areas of social import.

Break for lunch, resume at 1:30pm.

Churchill Trialpalooza Roundup

**Update--More from Drunkablog--jury selection completed:

A jury of four men and four women -- including two alternates -- has been seated in Ward Churchill's wrongful termination trial against the University of Colorado.

Denver District Judge Larry Naves gave a set of admonishments to the jury, telling them not to read about the case in newspapers or on the Internet or to watch anything about it on television.

Opening statements are scheduled to be made Tuesday at 9 a.m.

The lawyers in the case took an hour vetting the prospective jury as a group Monday afternoon, asking questions about the role of the First Amendment and about the kind of questions a public university has the right to ask when an employee is making controversial statements.

They also asked the jurors if they thought they could be fair in the case.

Lawyers had already met individually with each potential juror in the morning.

Bonus video from last week's Ward rally at CU, with moonbats issuing support from the "free speech" cage.

---

Drunkablog made the rounds this morning in Civic Center park ("Save Ward!" rally) and the Denver City and County building for the jury selection, but not much was going on . . . yet.

Looking at the Left has more reflections on the Churchill kerfuffle, and kook-aid guzzling Ben Whitmer soldiers on in his support of his idol mentor.

Churchill's lawyer, David Lane, parrots the continued charge of a CU "witch hunt" borrowed from William "free as a bird" Ayers:

"He is looking forward to having his day in court finally in a public forum so the public can hear what this witch hunt was all about," Lane said.

The trial is being held in the courtroom of Denver Chief District Judge Larry J. Naves.

Prospective jurors began receiving questionnaires about their knowledge of Churchill and the facts of the case last week.

The jury will be asked to consider two claims: that the university retaliated against Chur chill first by launching an investigation into his academic record and then by firing him. Churchill, 61, is seeking reinstatement and a financial judgment.

"In firing Mr. Churchill, CU did the right thing in the right way for the right reasons," said Ken McConnellogue, a spokesman for the CU system. "Essentially, I think that Churchill has had a trial by a jury of his peers and now he wants a do-over, and so we hope the jury sees things the way we do."

Churchill was roundly criticized in the court of public opinion, justifiably terminated by due process of his academic peers, and now has his day in court.

Some see no resolution in sight, and the decision in this lawsuit as anything but the final word in the Churchill/CU saga.

Stay tuned for more "As the Ward Turns"--as the lawsuit's first full day will commence tomorrow with opening arguments scheduled for 8:30 am Tuesday.

William Ayers To Defend Ward Churchill At CU In March Ahead Of Ex-Professor's Lawsuit

Thankfully, Drunkablog was on top of this over a week ago:

Come and hear the shocking truths behind the right-wing attacks on Churchill. Hear what they don’t want you to know!

Date: Thursday, March 5, 2009
Time: 6:00pm - 9:00pm
Location: Glenn Miller Ballroom, at CU Boulder inside the UMC

Anti-Palin Instructor Andrew Hallam Cleared By Metro State

**Update--Hallam needs "mentoring":

"The investigation concluded that Hallam must learn to curb the use of vulgar language in class, and that the introduction of controversal topics must have a substantial relationship with the subject of the class," according to a news bulletin released by the college Tuesday.

"While discipline is not warranted, appropriate mentoring is recommended."

The findings of the investigation was announced by Metro State College president Stephen Jordan on Tuesday.

Hallam, 36, will be assigned a faculty member to serve as his mentor for the rest of this semester, according to Cathy Lucas, spokeswoman for the college. He could not be reached for comment Tuesday.

Lucas said the college will also add an all-day session on how to maintain political balance in classes to orientations given to part-time as well as tenure track faculty members.

Wow. More diversity training at a college/university.

Didn't see that one coming.

---

Not even a slap on the wrist or a strongly worded letter.

Shock--Metro State found no wrongdoing:

A college English instructor's assignment to write an essay on whether Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin is living a fairy tale has been cleared of wrongdoing.

Metropolitan State College of Denver probed the assignment by Andrew Hallam after some students complained it was politically biased.

Hallam's class was reading "Sleeping Beauty" and the assignment was to consider Palin's speech at the Republican National Convention. The speech was based on Palin's life and the assignment was to discuss whether the nominee is living a fairy tale.

An internal investigation found the assignment didn't require students to undermine Palin. The inquiry concluded students didn't feel personally belittled or insulted by Hallam.

Oh really?

Matt Barber told WND his sister is one of five students who have been belittled by the teacher, and "bullied and harassed" by other students "because they support McCain-Palin."

The students had documented a series of incidents in which Hallam reportedly told his class, "Bush-bashing is one of my favorite things to do."

In another class, the students report, Hallam said he loved swearing and the f-word was his favorite word.

"He used the f-word a few more times that day," they reported.

When Hallam handed out the Palin writing assignment, the students reported "he said he would give the Republicans a chance to speak about it and asked who in the class was a Republican. Five of us raised our hands. When we did, [one other student] … said 'F*** you!' Mr. Hallam did nothing about this. At the end of the class period, after a lot of the Republicans had voiced their side of the issue, another kid said, 'They're full of s***, but we let them talk anyway.'"

Not even enough backbone to criticize or punish an instructor whose political derangement created an undoubtedly hostile atmosphere to those who disagreed with his views. Since those students who complained obviously held the wrong point of view, nothing could or would be done by Metro State.

I hear there is still an opening for deranged, leftist, academic hacks--perhaps Mr. Hallam should contact the CU Ethnic Studies department once his Metro State appointment has run out.

Michelle Obama At CU--Professors Cancel Classes For Visit

**Update--lackluster turnout for the wife of "The One," at 11:40am MDT:

All of those who were in line are now on the fileld, which is only about a quarter filled.

With an estimated crowd capacity of 7000 for Farrand Field, this would be a turnout of less than 2000 on a campus bursting with lefties. Look for the numbers to grow (through crowd inflated estimates) later in the day.

Perhaps they should have offered that other enticement so popular at CU.

The Rocky is blogging from Farrand Field on the CU Boulder campus--where we learn that classes have been cancelled so that students can attend a rally with Barack Obama's wife Michelle, and not the candidate himself:

The lines are flowing relatively quickly into Farrand Field, which can hold about 7,000 people. Attendees are going through minimal security checks, with no metal detcetors. Officials are mostly just visually scanning people.

One of those who just entered was Christina Donahue, 19, an English major, who said her professor canceled class so students could attend the rally.

"It's important to be out and politically active and vote," Donahue said. "This will be an important part of history."

Since she is 19, this will be the first time she can vote.

"A lot of people are really interested," Donahue said. "They want to be part of it and contribute."

She, along with the thousands of others expected to attend, are filling out information cards for the Obama campaign.

On a liberal campus like Boulder perhaps it would be unsurprising to find that classes would be canceled for the Democratic nominee (his wife is another matter) reflecting, no doubt, the political leanings of the professors. The students don't seem to be showing up quite yet (10 am MDT):

Perhaps they're sleeping in or sitting in class, because the crowd so far is distinctly lacking in CU students -- the Obama campaign's target audience.

Whoops! Looks like the misguided students need a little encouragement.

But biased professors and instructors? Well, well, well:

Duke Austin, a 33-year-old graduate student and instructor in CU’s Sociology Department, was out near the lines to get in with a sign that said, “No bailout for the rich” on one side and “Don’t surge Afghanistan” on the other.

Austin describes himself as a “critical Obama supporter.”

“I think the movement surrounding Obama is more progressive than Obama himself. If the movement wants to influence change in Obama, it has to do it before the election,” he said.

Austin was among the organizers of protests during the Democratic National Convention and is part of the group Students for Peace and Justice.

Just another day in academia in the People's Republic of Boulder.

BDS-Suffering Metro State Instructor Andrew Hallam Assigns Essay Criticising Sarah Palin

**Update 2--shocker: Metro State instructor staying silent

**Update--Metro students discuss the Palin-basing assignment with talk radio show host Mike Rosen

"Bush-bashing is one of my favorite things to do"--Metro State instructor Andrew Hallam

2000-2008: Bush Derangement Syndrome.
August 2008-?: Palin Derangement Syndrome.

Another lefty professor from the Ward Churchill school of biased teaching has earned the coveted media attention desired by so many on the left in their quest for self-promotion and "raising awareness" of their political philosophies (video):

Metro State College is investigating a professor who asked students to write an essay critical of Republican vice presidential candidate Gov. Sarah Palin. One student said the instructor singled out Republican students in the class and allowed others to ridicule them.

"I was shocked, I was holy cow, this is just an open door for him to discuss politics with us," said Jana Barber, a student in the class.

Barber shared the first class assignment with CBS4. Instructor Andrew Hallam asked students to write an essay to contradict what he called the 'fairy tale image of Palin' presented at the Republican National Convention.

"What the faculty's responsibility is to provide opportunity for critical thinking and civic engagement so bringing something of relevancy into the classroom was the faculty's goal," said Cathy Lucas, spokeswoman for Metro State. "Should he have broadened it and included all the political figures, yes."

Metro State officials are investigating claims of bias, harassment and bullying.

Hallam declined an interview with CBS4. He has revised the assignment.

Students may now write about any of the candidates.

The Daily Blogster has the earlier known details of the story, that detail the explicit bias of the class atmosphere promoted by the instructor, including the implicit approval of harassment of self-identified conservative/Republican students in the class by their fellow students:

Matt Barber told WND his sister is one of five students who have been belittled by the teacher, and "bullied and harassed" by other students "because they support McCain-Palin."

The students had documented a series of incidents in which Hallam reportedly told his class, "Bush-bashing is one of my favorite things to do."

In another class, the students report, Hallam said he loved swearing and the f-word was his favorite word.

"He used the f-word a few more times that day," they reported.

When Hallam handed out the Palin writing assignment, the students reported "he said he would give the Republicans a chance to speak about it and asked who in the class was a Republican. Five of us raised our hands. When we did, [one other student] … said 'F*** you!' Mr. Hallam did nothing about this. At the end of the class period, after a lot of the Republicans had voiced their side of the issue, another kid said, 'They're full of s***, but we let them talk anyway.'"

The students are in the process of filing the necessary complaints.

Drunkablog makes the necessary and inevitable comparison to another local teacher with a bias problem--Jay Bennish.