Campus Version of Miranda

GLENN MCCOY © Belleville News-Democrat. Dist. By UNIVERSAL UCLICK. Reprinted with permission. All rights reserved.

Racist Tells Auburn Students Football is Evil

It was a victory for free speech: Richard Spencer, by order of a Federal court, was able to speak at Auburn University.

Unlike most of the people the social justice warriors call “racist,” Spencer really is.

You are welcome to watch the entire speech (below) if you want to know what a racist thinks, but we found one particular segment particularly interesting: Spencer condemns football.

And he specifically mentions SEC (Southeastern Conference) football. At Auburn!

While overshadowed by the best football program in the nation at rival Alabama, Auburn has been quite a powerhouse, winning the 2010 National Championship, and losing the 2013 championship game to Florida State.

If you haven’t already inferred the reason, Spencer makes it obvious in the talk: a lot of the athletes are black.

The audience, which of course is highly self-selected from among the minority of students inclined to agree with Spencer, isn’t too impressed with this.

There are better reasons not to be a racist, but loving SEC football is not a bad one.

Can Snobbery Save the Liberals?

From Daniel Greenfield in Frontpage Mag:

The Atlantic’s May cover features Alec Baldwin covered in orange makeup holding up a Trump wig. The cover asks, “Can Satire Save the Republic?”

What is satire saving the Republic from? Republicans. While making America safe for Socialism.

After Bush won, Democrats fought back by doubling down on the ridicule. Before long they were getting their news from Jon Stewart’s smirk. Stewart spawned a whole range of imitators. Today you can find numberless clones of the Daily Show across cable and even on CBS and, soon, on NBC.

The left is devoutly convinced that this snickering can save America. That it’s better than the news.

The Peabody awards celebrated the Daily Show as “a trusted source of news for citizens united in their disappointment and disgust with politics and cable news.” But the media was the first in line to anoint the politics of contempt, ridicule and disgust as the future of journalism. Now the future is here.

The Washington Post, once a paper of record, swarms with snarky Stewartesque headlines like, “Jeff Sessions doesn’t think a judge in Hawaii — a.k.a. ‘an island in the Pacific’ — should overrule Trump.” Journalism is dead. And replacing it with snarky lefty spin hasn’t saved the Republic. Or anything else.

But the left’s faith in the power of its contempt has nothing to do with its tactical effectiveness.

The left remains convinced that Jon Stewart brought down Bush and Tina Fey brought down Palin because ridiculing the right isn’t just an ugly tactic. Instead it carries an almost religious meaning. Mocking Republicans can save us. Every ideology expresses its superiority through its own triumphalism. Sneering is the left’s own invocation of its own superiority. These are the grown up politics of kids who were convinced that they were better than everyone else because they looked down on them.

Much as Allahu Akbar denotes the superiority of the Muslim and the inferiority of the non-Muslim, the knowing smirk, the lifted eyebrow and the braying laugh of the audience when the unironic applause sign flashes is the prayer of the progressive to the cruel little god of his own ego.

The ritual is tribal. A lefty dons the mock wig of the hated enemy and is ritually humiliated for the entertainment of the tribes of Manhattan, Berkeley and Marin County. The foe is destroyed in effigy. The video of his destruction is virally spread with titles such as, “Saturday Night Live Destroys Trump.”

And yet Trump, like all the other viral subjects of destruction, is never destroyed. The tribal ritual lets lefties vent their anger on a totem that, unlike Trump, can actually be destroyed by liberal laughter.

Satire isn’t trying to save the Republic. It isn’t stopping Trump. It’s saving the left.

Trump has proven even more indestructible than Bush. It’s hard to think of any insult that the left hasn’t hurled his way. A dictionary of them could run all the way from Abuser to Xenophobe. To no avail. Instead he has proven exceptionally adept at treating the left with as much contempt as it treats him. When lefties bemoans his cruelty and vulgarity, what they really mean is that he is beating them at their own game without wasting time on their pretenses to saving the Republic on Saturday Night Live.

Saturday Night Live is still the only place that progressives have been able to beat Trump.

Mocking Bush didn’t save the Republic from him. If anything, liberal disdain helped make him a two-term president the way that it helped put Trump in office. Obama won by taking the opposite road. He kept his contempt and arrogance just enough in check to appear aspirational during his original race.

Elitist contempt isn’t an effective tactic. American politics is anti-establishment. Stewart, Colbert, Oliver and Bee are only revolutionary to likeminded lefties in lavish condos. To the Tennessee coal miner, the New Mexico checkout girl and the Pennsylvania steelworker they convey the smugness of an establishment in all its insufferable disdain for flyover country, for the working class and for everyone outside that golden circle of the tall towers and hot clubs in the big cities that really, truly matter.

Liberals need to believe that even their pettiest acts are ennobling. Their Whole Foods organic avocadoes are saving the planet. Their fair trade yoga pants are saving indigenous tribes. Even their ridicule of the “Other” on TV is the redemptive and salvific process by which they save America.

This isn’t idealism. It’s elitism. They’re not spitefully lashing out because they lost an election. Instead they’re saving the country by watching a lefty hack who had become more famous for his credit card commercials, and racist and homophobic slurs do a tepid slurred imitation of Trump.

What a piece of work is a progressive. How noble in reason, how infinite in faculty. In action how like an angel, in apprehension how like a god.

Beneath the Midtown Manhattan sound stages and green rooms, the million dollar contracts of the performers, the Ivy League degrees of the writers and the suave sophisticated five-star restaurants where they rendezvous is the dark and primitive world of the firelit circle in which enemies are bound and destroyed by a magic fed on the anger and hatred of the watchers.

The tribal signifiers of power have changed. The totems are class, cool and hip. And much of the country does not recognize their claim to lead the tribe. Each time America dissents, the left wears out its lip sneering at them. Contempt is the final refuge of failed tyrants. If you can’t rule, you can always sneer.

The left’s faith in contempt tells us far more about them than it does about the objects of their contempt. Art is a reflection of the artist. Some artists strive to create while others only destroy. The left remains convinced that it can create through destruction, that it can build a fair society through theft, an ethical society by destroying its values and a high-minded society through contempt.

It must believe in the redemptive power of its thievery, amorality and hatred. Or face a moral reckoning.

When they go low, we go higher, they chant, before laughing as Alec Baldwin snorts through his nose. It’s not funny or meaningful. It’s wish fulfillment. The left gets a Trump they can destroy in a world where they are bound to win because they are naturally superior.

For a movement obsessed with the redemptive power of its own power and convinced of the utter truth of its own imaginary visions, what could be more sacred than acting out the destruction of its enemies?

Is it any wonder that getting high on snarky delusions of potency and superiority appears so uplifting? Can satire save the Republic? Its fumes are almost as good as actually winning an election. But a better question would be can the Republic save satire?

Saturday Night Live’s war on Trump is also a war on comedy as mediocre casts turn to outside performers to portray recognizable political figures, based not on talent, but sheer recognizability.

Tina Fey had a passing resemblance to Sarah Palin while Larry David shared an accent with Bernie Sanders and was forty years older than the average SNL cast member. Alec Baldwin is a real life version of what progs think Trump is; angry, dumb and bigoted. A bad man with no self-control. And that is appropriate. The left’s effigy of Trump is a self-portrait. Their hatred of Trump is pure projection.

Baldwin’s bad acting won’t save the Republic. He isn’t funny, but he doesn’t need to be. Funny is surplus to requirements. The point isn’t laughter, it’s barely sublimated hatred. Baldwin understands hatred far better than comedy. He knows that what his prog audience wants is not a good imitation but a contemptible one. One they can despise and feel superior to. And that is what he gives them.

Saturday Night Live could not satirize Obama to save its life. It can’t satirize Trump either for the same reason. The façade of humor is falling away from the left’s worship of its ideological idols and fanatical hatred of its enemies. And hatred isn’t funny. It’s clumsy. It’s stupid. And it’s ugly.

Comedy is creative. Contempt isn’t comedy. Ultimately it’s just contemptible.

Liberals like to claim that the Trump election has loosed the forces of hatred and bigotry in America. And it has. From the left. We’ve long claimed that, relative to conservatives, liberals have a superior ability to segregate and isolate themselves from other points of view. Their college professors were virtually all liberals. Their neighborhoods are enclaves of liberalism, like the East Side in Milwaukee. They are in professions where virtually everybody is a liberal: academia, journalism, social services.

This has rendered them unable to understand or even take seriously conservative arguments. It has rendered them unable to have any empathy with working class people (the core Trump constituency) or with middle class conservatives.

They paid the piper in November 2016. And there is no reason to believe more than a tiny minority of them will learn any lessons from that. It’s just too comfortable being smug.

Bill Clinton’s Advice for O’Reilly

Yale: Students “Of Color” Turned Into Arrogant Bullies By Liberal Pandering

It was all over the news last year: leftist activists at Yale were incensed by an e-mail sent out by the wife of a Yale house master suggesting that the university should not be trying to dictate to students what sort of Halloween costumes they should wear.

The house master, one Nicholas Christakis, was bullied by students, and eventually caved in, offering an abject apology, and resigning as house master.

We just had a Twitter exchange with him, in which he denied he apologized. But in fact he did.

But for a sickening exhibition of the bullying he was subjected to, check out this article. It has a series of videos showing in excruciating detail how Christakis, rather than calling out and refuting the arrogant claims the students made of being “hurt,” panders to the students.

Christakis is a well-meaning liberal who thinks he is for free expression on campus. But he is simply unwilling to stand up for free expression when faced with the irate demands of racial minorities. He even begs for absolution by telling a black female student that he’s a leftist who agrees with her racial grievances.

While intolerant leftists on college faculties are a big part of the problem, liberals like Christakis are the enablers of both the intolerant faculty leftists and the intolerant student activists.

It’s hard not to conclude he got the treatment he deserved.

They Know How to Get Rid of Troublemakers

College Journalist Bigots Pounded on Twitter

We blogged about this: the editorial board of a trendy, tony, expensive leftist college demanded that speakers they don’t like be forbidden to speak, and that “hostility” should greet those who express unapproved views.

But outside a campus newsroom, where a larger group of Americans gets a voice (as on Twitter), views like this don’t go over well.

You’ll have to click on the blank white space in the embedded Tweet below to see responses (or click here).

Editorial: "Our Wellesley community will not stand for hate speech, and will call it out when possible": https://t.co/vJBHC658jB

— The Wellesley News (@Wellesley_News) April 14, 2017

Update

We left a critical comment in response to the original Wellesley News editorial. We said (first quoting the article, and then responding):

>>> Rather, we are not referring to those who have already had the incentive to learn and should have taken the opportunities to do so. <<<

I see. People who disagree with your leftist, politically correct intolerant views need to be punished. So ironic that people who talk about “hate speech” always turn out to be the real haters.

After four days, our comment has not been approved. And neither has any other.

So we wrote the editor of the Wellesley News, and asked the following:

Why aren’t you approving comments on your editorial saying that politically incorrect views should be censored at your college?

Is it that you got really pounded, and are trying to conceal that fact?

The e-mail quickly bounced with the following error message:

<editor thewellesleynews.com=""> :
Remote host 181.224.137.93 does not like recipient editor@thewellesleynews.com Remote host said: 550-Sorry. Mailbox full. You tried to send mail to editor@thewellesleynews.com 550-Unfortunately the mail box of this user is full. Try to contact the owner.

It is fair enough that the editors of the Wellesley News are getting pounded, although we hope most of the messages are reasonably civil (as the responses on Twitter [see above] are). But if the little leftist snowflakes are learning that the issue of free speech looks different outside their narrow campus environment, that’s a lesson they need to learn.

Yet Another Fake Racial Hate Incident

From Heat Street:

The University of Southern California has apparently identified the person who put up a “No Black People Allowed” sign and a Confederate flag on campus as a black man who’s not studying at the university.

According to The Tab, the university’s Department of Public Safety (DPS) is currently questioning the man, suspecting he recently put up the inflammatory placard together with a Confederate flag and “#MAGA” – meaning President Trump’s campaign slogan “Make America Great Again”.

The student outlet reported that the man isn’t “affiliated with the university” and acted because of disagreement with someone. The man was supposedly identified by DPS after a security camera recorded the incident.

USC Department of Public Safety Assistant Chief David Carlisle has confirmed to the College Fix that the alleged culprit won’t be facing any charges because there was “no crime committed”.

Since Donald Trump’s election as President, there has been an explosion of fake hate crimes across the country. Numerous hoax hate crimes were reported in the media, only to later find themselves retracting the stories.

Back in February, a black waitress in Virginia has accused a customer of leaving no tips because he “don’t tip black people,” prompting multiple media outlets to champion the waitress’ cause. The woman received around $3,600 in donations after a local resident started a fund raiser for her.

As it turned out, it was either the waitress herself or someone known to her who fabricated the receipt showing the racist words

In December, a female student at the University of Michigan reported being attacked by a man who threatened to set her on fire if she didn’t remove her hijab. The Police found the student’s story false.

Why so many of these hoax hate incidents?

Simple. There is a huge demand for them. On college campuses, there is an Axis of Grievance: left-wing activists and the legion of bureaucrats who pander, pamper and cater to them. These incidents are grist for the grievance mill for the activists, and “issues” to be “addressed” for the bureaucrats. And the bureaucrats need these “issues” to justify their jobs.

Outside academia, the media has an insatiable demand for stories that fit their current narrative. The current narrative is that the election of Donald Trump has loosed the forces of hatred and bigotry. They don’t seem to much care that it was Trump (and not Hillary) who was constantly dogged with riots outside his election rallies. Nor that it is leftists on college campuses who shout down and sometimes assault conservatives (including those like Charles Murray and Ben Shapiro who opposed Trump).

Media people, like academics, live in a little self-contained world, and it’s extremely difficult for the real world to penetrate their consciousness.

College Journalist Bigots: The Wellesley News

One interesting thing about the rise of political correctness on college campuses is that student journalists, people whom one might suppose would support free speech, have overwhelmingly lined up in favor of suppressing opinions the left does not like.

A particularly egregious example appears in the Wellesley News, the student paper of that very expensive, very elitist northeastern institution.

Many members of our community, including students, alumnae and faculty, have criticized the Wellesley community for becoming an environment where free speech is not allowed or is a violated right. Many outside sources have painted us as a bunch of hot house flowers who cannot exist in the real world. However, we fundamentally disagree with that characterization, and we disagree with the idea that free speech is infringed upon at Wellesley. Rather, our Wellesley community will not stand for hate speech, and will call it out when possible.

Of course, what speech is “hate speech” is a matter of opinion. In a free society, anybody has a right to their opinion as to what is “hate speech.” We think the speech of Black Lives Matter is hate speech. But in a free society, nobody has the right to decide that certain opinions need to be shut up.

Wellesley students are generally correct in their attempts to differentiate what is viable discourse from what is just hate speech. Wellesley is certainly not a place for racism, sexism, homophobia, Islamophobia, transphobia or any other type of discriminatory speech. Shutting down rhetoric that undermines the existence and rights of others is not a violation of free speech; it is hate speech. The founding fathers put free speech in the Constitution as a way to protect the disenfranchised and to protect individual citizens from the power of the government. The spirit of free speech is to protect the suppressed, not to protect a free-for-all where anything is acceptable, no matter how hateful and damaging.

Translation: people we agree with should be protected by the Constitution, but not people we disagree with.

This being said, the tone surrounding the current discourse is becoming increasingly hostile. Wellesley College is an institution whose aim is to educate. Students who come to Wellesley hail from a variety of diverse backgrounds. With this diversity comes previously-held biases that are in part the products of home environments. Wellesley forces us to both recognize and grow from these beliefs, as is the mark of a good college education.

So the “home environment” is bad, but the Wellesley environment is good. And just who decided that? People completely assimilated into the Wellesley environment.

However, as students, it is important to recognize that this process does not occur without bumps along the way. It is inevitable that there will be moments in this growth process where mistakes will happen and controversial statements will be said. However, we argue that these questionable claims should be mitigated by education as opposed to personal attacks.

Sounds nice, but just read on.

We have all said problematic claims, the origins of which were ingrained in us by our discriminatory and biased society.

Yes, it’s “society” that is prejudiced, and Wellesley is a model of enlightenment.

Luckily, most of us have been taught by our peers and mentors at Wellesley in a productive way. It is vital that we encourage people to correct and learn from their mistakes rather than berate them for a lack of education they could not control. While it is expected that these lessons will be difficult and often personal, holding difficult conversations for the sake of educating is very different from shaming on the basis of ignorance.

Note the utter contempt for anybody whose opinions might differ from those of these student journalists.

This being said, if people are given the resources to learn and either continue to speak hate speech or refuse to adapt their beliefs, then hostility may be warranted.

Yes, we have the right to shame and bully people who don’t agree with us.

If people continue to support racist politicians or pay for speakers that prop up speech that will lead to the harm of others, then it is critical to take the appropriate measures to hold them accountable for their actions.

Yes, we have to punish people who try to bring “racist” speakers to campus. And we leftists get to decide who is a racist.

It is important to note that our preference for education over beration regards students who may have not been given the chance to learn. Rather, we are not referring to those who have already had the incentive to learn and should have taken the opportunities to do so. Paid professional lecturers and politicians are among those who should know better.

We at The Wellesley News, are not interested in any type of tone policing. The emotional labor required to educate people is immense and is additional weight that is put on those who are already forced to defend their human rights. There is no denying that problematic opinions need to be addressed in order to stop Wellesley from becoming a place where hate speech and casual discrimination is okay. However, as a community we need to make an effort to have this dialogue in a constructive and educational way in order to build our community up. Talk-back, protest videos and personal correspondences are also ways to have a constructive dialogue. Let us first bridge the gap between students in our community before we resort to personal attacks. Our student body is not only smart, it is also kind. Let us demonstrate that through productive dialogue.

But “productive dialogue” has to exclude anything that we consider “racism, sexism, homophobia, Islamophobia, transphobia or any other type of discriminatory speech.” That is, pretty much any political opinion we disagree with, we intend to try to shut that up.

That people like this will soon be dominating the mainstream media is a scary prospect indeed.

United Airlines

The Red Line That Wasn’t

GLENN MCCOY © Belleville News-Democrat. Dist. By UNIVERSAL UCLICK. Reprinted with permission. All rights reserved.

Race and School Discipline: The Leftist Fantasy

Now that Heather McDonald has received the honor of being shouted down and shut up by raving leftist campus bigots, it’s time to review another of her articles.

McDonald, one of our favorite scholars on criminal justice issues, is a “law and order” person. She believes that people who commit crimes should be punished. Since blacks commit proportionately many more crimes than whites, this makes her a racist in the eyes of the politically correct.

Remember, a key doctrine of the politically correct is that anything bad that happens to black people must be the result of white racism.

This past Christmas season, she noted the usual mall flash mobs, mostly consisting of black kids, and remarked on the connection to school discipline. Some key points from her essay:

Judging by video evidence, the participants in the violent mall brawls over the Christmas weekend were overwhelmingly black teens, though white teens were also involved. The media have assiduously ignored this fact, of course, as they have for previous violent flash mob episodes.

Of course, while the media assiduously ignore the racial component of flash mob violence, they can’t resist showing the video. And that tells the story.

That disproportion has significance for the next administration’s school-discipline policies, however. If Donald Trump wants to make schools safe again, he must rescind the Obama administration’s diktats regarding classroom discipline, which are based on a fantasy version of reality that is having serious real-world consequences.

The Obama Justice and Education Departments have strong-armed schools across the country to all but eliminate the suspension and expulsion of insubordinate students. The reason? Because black students are disciplined at higher rates than whites. According to Washington bureaucrats, such disproportionate suspensions can mean only one thing: teachers and administrators are racist. The Obama administration rejects the proposition that black students are more likely to assault teachers or fight with other students in class. The so-called “school to prison” pipeline is a function of bias, not of behavior, they say.

. . .

The idea that such street behavior does not have a classroom counterpart is ludicrous. Black males between the ages of 14 and 17 commit homicide at ten times the rate of white and Hispanic males of the same age. The lack of socialization that produces such a vast disparity in murder rates, as well as less lethal street violence, inevitably will show up in classroom behavior. Teens who react to a perceived insult on social media by trying to shoot the offender are not likely to restrain themselves in the classroom if they feel “disrespected” by a teacher or fellow students. Interviews with teachers confirm the proposition that children from communities with high rates of family breakdown bring vast amounts of disruptive anger to school, especially girls. It is no surprise that several of the Christmas riots began with fights between girls. School officials in urban areas across the country set up security corridors manned by police officers at school dismissal times to avoid gang shootings. And yet, the Obama administration would have us believe that in the classroom, black students are no more likely to disrupt order than white students. Equally preposterous is the claim that teachers and administrators are bigots. There is no more liberal a profession than teaching; education schools are one long indoctrination in white-privilege theory. And yet when these social-justice warriors get in the classroom, according to the Obama civil rights lawyers, they start wielding invidious double standards in discipline.

. . .

Over the last year, a Seattle school district in the throes of “restorative justice” experienced an alleged gang rape and several student deaths. Criminal charges, including murder, were filed against a group of students not yet out of middle school, reports the Seattle Times. Teachers’ unions in Fresno, Des Moines, New York City, and Indianapolis have all lodged complaints about the anti-discipline philosophy, according to Education Week. The Fresno teachers signed a petition pointing out that students are returned to class after cursing at teachers and physically assaulting them, without suffering any consequences. Fresno’s teachers have been injured trying to stop fights; some are retiring because teaching where severely disruptive students cannot be dislodged has become impossible. In Des Moines, students now hit and scream at each other and their teachers, reports the Des Moines Register.

Read the entire article.

Of course, the real “school to prison pipeline” is what happens when schools teach kids they can engage in disruptive and even violent behavior with zero or trivial consequences. That is, unless it becomes the “school to getting yourself killed pipeline” for people like Michael Brown or Trayvon Martin, who somehow thought they could attack an armed individual with impunity.

This whole business reveals the dirty little secret of the race hustlers and the social justice warriors. Deep down, they would rather articulate grievances than make things better for black kids. Of course, they won’t admit this (not even to themselves), but to face the issue squarely, they would have to admit that disorder in the black community creates these kinds of conditions in schools, and that white racism has virtually nothing to do with it.

And if they admit that, their whole world comes crashing down.

Not News

GLENN MCCOY © Belleville News-Democrat. Dist. By UNIVERSAL UCLICK. Reprinted with permission. All rights reserved.

Media Hypocrisy: Filibuster Judicial Nominee

Now, with Senate Republicans poised to use the “nuclear option” to quash a Democratic filibuster against Trump Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch, the media is portraying this as some sort of radical coup d’état. But back in 2013, when the Democrats used the same tactic to get Obama judicial appointees approved, the media spin was much different.

From the Media Research Center, a roundup of media reaction from the time the Democrats went nuclear.



The print media were equally bad.

. . . the cable network news hosts and analysts weren’t the only ones championing the nuclear option. On the pages of the Los Angeles Times, Reid’s move was celebrated in a November 22 editorial “Democrats bust the filibuster, and good for them.”

The Times editorial board crowed: “We welcome this action not because it represents a comeuppance for arrogant Republicans but because filibustering presidential nominees is undemocratic and violates the spirit if not the letter of the Constitution, which says that the president shall appoint judges and other officials ‘by and with the advice and consent of the Senate’ — not by and with a supermajority of the Senate.” The Times went on to call it “a victory not just for the Democrats but for good government.”

That same day, The New York Times championed the procedure in an editorial headlined “Democracy Returns to the Senate.”

Of course, the Republicans would be foolish to let the Democrats use the “nuclear option” and not use it themselves. That would simply make them suckers. Of course, often the Republicans have acquiesced in the role of suckers, but they seem to be wising up.

Even if one believes that requiring sixty senators to confirm a presidential appointee is appropriate, what the Republicans are doing will make that outcome more likely. So long as the Republicans fail to retaliate for the Democrat’s use of the tactic, the Democrats will have no incentive to stop using it.

For readers with a tolerance for academic jargon, the proper tactic in a Prisoner’s Dilemma is “tit for tat.” Or in everyday language, “we are not going to let you get away with screwing us over.”

Virulent, Abusive Facebook Posts of Former Marquette Official

That Marquette’s administration is strongly leftist and politically correct is obvious from their actions. Their public statements are also politically correct, but one wonders just how much virulent passion lies behind their public statements?

At least one of them, no longer working at Marquette, has let it all hang out. Bob Deahl, recently retired Dean, College of Professional Studies at Marquette University, has a Facebook page on which he does nothing to conceal his hatred of Republicans and conservatives.

[Warning: Offensive Language]

Attack on Conservative Christians

At the top of his page at this moment, he reposts (with obvious approval) an article that claims:

Worse than this chronic fixation on sex, gender, and sexuality, is that Conservative Christianity has somehow deputized itself as qualified and entitled to police such things for the world, with the Bible (not Science, facts, or reason) as its sole authority on the matter.

More accurately, not merely the Bible—but the Bible as carefully filtered through a repressed, puritanical, selective interpretation crafted almost exclusively by men raised to believe that God was a dude and that Eve ate the fruit and seduced poor Adam.

If that’s not bad enough, he adds his own comment:

F’ing sick nutcases

We all, of course, can imagine what would happen to any university bureaucrat who said anything even faintly resembling this about Muslims. But he doesn’t work at Marquette anymore, so he can let it all hang out.

On Trump and His People

In another shared post he says:

Well the Russians sure have succeeded in ruining AmeriKa....they got Trump elected who is, almost everyday, using his ignorant power to change things that will ruin our environment, health care, freedom and personal liberties, education, progress on sustainability, and on and on ....this monster asshole is a tool of the Russians and is RUINING this country.

If that seems pretty ordinary anti-Trump rhetoric these days, that’s merely a symptom of how the president has utterly deranged his enemies.

In other shared post about Mike Flynn he said “Disgusting white trash like the entire Trump family and administration.” But that was nothing compared to his next post, which said about Trump:

Corrupt, Incompetent, Mentally Disturbed, Malignant Narcisist, Idiot, asshole, monster

And then about Mike Pence:

You total fucking piece of inhuman shit.....You piece of pathetic gutless, heartless, cruel piece of shit...

And then about mild-mannered Boy Scout Paul Ryan:

Ideological asshole and morally bankrupt to boot

And then back to Trump:

this monster is destroying this country

He is a bit milder with Betsy DeDevos:

she is just one of many completely clueless, ignorant, arrogant right wing cabinet members...

But then returns to Mike Pence:

Just remember this is the extremist right wingnut bigot, sexist, homophobic, mysoginist that is now our VP...

Then, in a commentary on a video, he goes into a more extended rant on Trump:

Here is what everyone is missing...the ESSENCE of this asshole, what Trump REALLY believes in is....MONEY...he believes everything exists to MAKE MORE MONEY. And many of the Republicans see that this is Governments role as welll...they confuse Governing and Running a Business. So they don’t give a shit about you or me or the well-being of society or the common good or that government is about care and service and assistance...hence go fuck yourself about health care and social security and safety, etc....everything is just about making money. ThatHere is what everyone is missing...the ESSENCE of this asshole, what Trump REALLY believes in is....MONEY...he believes everything exists to MAKE MORE MONEY. And many of the Republicans see that this is Government's role as welll...they confuse Governing and Running a Business. So they don’t give a shit about you or me or the well-being of society or the common good or that government is about care and service and assistance...hence go fuck yourself about health care and social security and safety, etc....everything is just about making money. That’s all Trump cares about...he does NOT care about you duped Trump voters and supporters THAT IS FOR SURE....That’s all Trump cares about...he does NOT care about you duped Trump voters and supporters THAT IS FOR SURE....

Then Deahl posts a fake video with Donald Trump holding up a book reading “Fuck the Planet,” and comments:

Sums up this complete asshole's approach to life

Fan of Angela Davis

And of course, he is enthusiastic about Angela Davis speaking at Marquette. Indeed, he claims:

So proud of Marquette University for hosting Dr. Angela Davis who spoke on Freedom, equality, gender, race, feminism, LGBT, transgender, Palestinian, and other rights issues! Lots is students and faculty AND LOTS of members of our great community

Back to Trump’s People

And of Ivanka Trump joining the White House staff:

More pathetic ignorant corruption

If Ivanka can be attacked, of course Sean Spicer will be, with Deahl calling him a “mentally unbalanced man” and then back to Trump calling him an “asshole” and Republicans “Pathetic heartless bastards...ALL of them.”

Then, why not lump a bunch of people together and say:

Trump and Spicer and Bannon and all these Trump relatives are ALL fucking incompetent idiots

Not satisfied with attacking Trump and his Administration, he asked of Scott Walker:

When will this pathetic little boy idiot drop out ignoramace just finally go away

But then back to Pence:

Pence is an extremest to the extreme, a cruel, hateful homophobe and terribly anti gay and anti women....He must NEVER become president

And then Mike Pence meeting with the Congressional Freedom Caucus, with the observation:

Mysoginist racist white pigs, ALL

Conclusion?

We could go on and on, since Deahl does, but this raises a question. Is Deahl the secret id of the Marquette Administration, having come out of the closet since his division (Professional Studies) went down the drain?

That would be a questionable generalization, but neither would be be completely off base.

Campus bureaucrats are motivated by two things: their own ideology, and their own bureaucratic interests. Thus when an administration panders to the campus left, is it because the bureaucrats are leftists, or because they fear that campus leftists can make trouble for them, and thus need to be placated?

Marquette has gone much further than it has had to to merely placate the campus left. It’s hard to avoid the conclusion that attitudes like Deahl’s are pretty common among people who run this “Catholic university.”

Update

As of 4/16/2017 Deahl seems to have sanitized his Facebook page by deleting the vast majority of his posts.

Why the Social Justice Warriors Hate Israel