Chasing Katz: Princeton Moves to Fire Classics Professor Who Criticized Anti-Racism Measures

We have been writing about the rising intolerance for conservative and dissenting views on our campuses. Many faculty members are fearful that, if they challenge the liberal orthodoxy at their schools, they will be shunned, investigated, or fired. For many, that fear was realized this month at Princeton where the university used a previously adjudicated grievance against Classics Professor Professor Joshua Katz to seek his termination. Katz had drawn the ire of faculty and students by questioning a proposed anti-racism program of benefits for minority faculty. Princeton President Christopher Eisgruber called on the university board to fire Katz in a move being denounced as a transparent effort to circumvent free speech and academic freedom protections over his prior public stance.

Katz became persona non grata when he questioned a proposal in a “faculty letter” to offer special perks for professors “of color,” including a summer salary and additional sabbatical time.

In a Quillette article, Katz questioned racial justice demands lodged by faculty members in the wake of George Floyd’s death. Katz was responding to the 48 demands and expressly supported some.

Indeed, plenty of ideas in the letter are ones I support. It is reasonable to “[g]ive new assistant professors summer move-in allowances on July 1” and to “make [admissions] fee waivers transparent, easy to use, and well-advertised.” “Accord[ing] greater importance to service as part of annual salary reviews” and “[i]mplement[ing] transparent annual reporting of demographic data on hiring, promotion, tenuring, and retention” seem unobjectionable. And I will cheerfully join the push for a “substantial expansion” of the Mellon Mays Undergraduate Fellowship Program, which encourages underrepresented minorities to enter PhD programs and strive to join the professoriate.

However, as a faculty member of 25 years, he objected to faculty of color receiving special “course relief and summer salary” and an extra semester of sabbatical. He criticized “extra perks for no reason other than … pigmentation.” The article is direct and many faculty likely felt insulted by the criticism. The issue is the role of the university in effectively calling these objections as raw racism. He also objected to the editing of his comments to remove counter evidence of his motivation or intent.

In the article, Katz denounced the request for the university to issue a formal public apology to members of the Black Justice League student group:

“The Black Justice League, which was active on campus from 2014 until 2016, was a small local terrorist organization that made life miserable for the many (including the many black students) who did not agree with its members’ demands.”

The letter framed these requests as attempts to balance racial disparities among school employees.

“It boggles my mind that anyone would advocate giving people – extraordinarily privileged people already, let me point out: Princeton professors – extra perks for no reason other than their pigmentation,” Katz wrote in response to the letter.

Many called for Katz to be fired for expressing such views. The university then featured Katz in a mandatory freshman orientation video that included a “Race and Free Speech” section in which he is condemned as a racist.

It appears, however, that the university was not done with Katz. According to the Wall Street Journal, the university re-opened a previously adjudicated claim of sexual misconduct and then used that as the basis to seek his termination.

After the controversy over Katz’s criticism of the anti-racism measures, the school newspaper decided to focus on the earlier controversy and seek new charges. The university agreed.

Katz had previously been adjudicated over a consensual intimate relationship with a student in 2006. The relationship began when the student was a junior and reportedly continued after her graduation. The student refused to cooperate with the university in its investigation.

The 2018 investigation resulted in a finding that Katz violated school policy prohibiting sexual relationships between teachers as well as its nepotism policy. He was then punished with a one-year suspension without pay.

The prior adjudication and punishment should have closed the question. It is the academic equivalent of the Double Jeopardy Clause in the Fifth Amendment that maintained that no one “shall . . . be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb . . . . ”

However, at the urging of the students, the university re-opened the investigation and found two violations of school policy. It claimed that Katz (1) misled investigators and failed to cooperate with the investigation and (2) discouraged the former student from seeking psychiatric help when she threatened self-harm.

That was enough to allow Eisgruber to seek his termination while claiming it was not about his academic views of the anti-racism measures. The message, however, could not be more clear to dissenting voices on the faculty: if you speak up. any past grievance or issue can be dug up to seek your termination.

Edward Yingling, co-founder of Princetonians for Free Speech, is quoted as saying

“With the firing of Professor Katz, Princeton will have sent a message. If a faculty member or student says something that contradicts our orthodoxy, we will get you—if not for what you said, then by twisting your language, by using the extensive resources of the university to shame you before the student body, and by investigating your personal life for years past.”

I hold no brief for Dr. Katz on the earlier dispute. Indeed, there is little information on the underlying facts of the earlier case. It is enough that he was previously adjudicated and punished for his conduct. One can accept that judgment and still object to a later retroactive and supplemental punishment.

The chilling effect on faculty will be glacial. It is a warning that even closed cases can be re-opened to facilitate your termination if you defy the majority.




115 thoughts on “Chasing Katz: Princeton Moves to Fire Classics Professor Who Criticized Anti-Racism Measures”

  1. It turns out that JT partially posted here about the developing Katz situation on 9/30/21 that generated 23 comments.

  2. “Princeton” refers to a town run br a prince.
    We don’t need to friggin royalty in America.
    That’s why we killed the Redcoats.

  3. I would like to see more of this. Get rid of free thinking professors and leave these “universities” to rot. I will say the woke have been as effective as the CCP so far, and the “universities” are too far gone. Time to cut our losses

  4. Hopefully, the outcome of the November elections will be a signal to the advocates of ‘Wokeism’, their virtue signaling ring kissers and their purveyors of the moral and ethical turpitude infesting our institutions nationwide, that there is no longer a silent majority willing to be held in their thrall. Hopefully is will serve as a kind of 21st century HUAC and rid us of their rot which constitutes an existential threat to our Constitutional Republic.

  5. “However, at the urging of the students, the university re-opened the investigation and found two violations of school policy.”

    The whole point of having an endless supply of policies, regulations, laws, rules, ukases, edicts, proscriptions, taxes, fees, and fines is to make sure everybody is guilty of something. That’s how the trolls plan to control us.

    November can’t come fast enough, and if Princeton receives federal funding, maybe that should be reviewed. Money is also how they plan to control us, but it can control them, too. What goes around, comes around.

    1. ..the thing is..this has been the game in the Corporate world as long as I can remember… you will be somehow ‘terminated’ if you express any disagreement with those in power……

      1. I agree. I didn’t mind it so much when they were just doing it to defend the shareholders’ (or management’s) interests, but now many companies are flacking for the deep state. Corporations as a group were not monolithic but state power is much more so. Corporations acting as the enforcement arm of the state do scare me.

    2. The whole point of having an endless supply of policies, regulations, laws, rules, ukases, edicts, proscriptions, taxes, fees, and fines is to make sure everybody is guilty of something. That’s how the trolls plan to control us.

      DC power sinecure. Lots of laws on the books that are intentionally ambiguous. Makes guilty plea bargins easier to force on those challenging the cabal.

    1. Princeton, founded by Presbyterians……’nuff said.

      🤔 Not even close to enough said.

      So you believe Presbyterians are behind this modern-day lynching? They were also wealthy white men. Blame them too?

      1. Olly……WTF…why am I the bad person re: this comment?
        Are you on something? You’ve really lost your sense of humor, in my opinion.
        I can give examples of Presby churches, wealthy ones. that have shrines honoring thugs like Michael Brown, George Floyd, Trayvon Martin, etc. on their church campuses! It’s very trendy to do in the Presby church right now. And no, of course it’s not ALL Presbys, but enough to alarm critical thinkers. The Episcopalians (for the post part) are the same.
        Sorry you’ve changed.

        1. Olly……WTF…why am I the bad person re: this comment?

          Bad person? No, just poor judgment. There’s nothing humorous in your original comment. “Nuff said,” was anything but. Your follow up provided the context you lacked, but then you resort to blaming me for your poor judgment.

          That original comment was not like you.

          1. Olly………The original comment was pure me. And I’m sorry you think I have poor judgment.
            Or do you say that to all women these days? My statement was humorous. I ran it by my focus group.

            1. LOL.

              Presbyterians in the 1700s considered themselves Christians. Not sure what they consider themselves today. Princeton was founded as an outgrowth of the “Great Awakening” movement of the 1700s.

              Princeton, Rutgers, Brown, and Dartmouth universities were all established as a direct result of the Great Awakening. Some have even seen a connection between the Great Awakening and the American Revolution –Christians enjoying spiritual liberty in Christ would come to crave political liberty. The Great Awakening not only revived the American church but reinvigorated American society as well.


              It appears Nancy Pelosi has incurred excommunication from the Catholic Church via latae senteniae (automatic excommunication) as explained in the Code of Canon Law, due to her pro-abort extremism. CIC states:

              Can. 915 Those who have been excommunicated or interdicted after the imposition or declaration of the penalty and others obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to holy communion.

              Her Archbishop in San Francisco has been warning her for years, and most recently she has ignored his requests for a meeting. Now its official: Pelosi is a scandal to Catholics, as if anyone had any doubts

              1. Estovir….Thank you for the interesting history. We have several close friends who are Presbies.(Two of them are Presby ministers) They are all woker than woke, wealthy and educated (post graduate degrees, Ph.D’s ) So, we don’t talk politics and keep our conversations happy and light.
                Like Shelby Steele said recently…..the greatest threat to America now is “white guilt”.

                1. Back in my college days, the Jesuits on campus used to joke out loud if Episcopalians were still Christian, and this was back in the 80s. Indeed all of the Christian denominations have become so splintered and lukewarm, that the following verse to mind:

                  “So, because you are lukewarm, neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of my mouth”
                  Revelations 3:16

                  I try not to be lukewarm but at times I can be too much like St Paul (polemic) and not very Christ-like. The struggle is real.

                  A very close friend of mine, a Cardiologist Physician and Catholic Priest Monsignor / Canon Lawyer, used to say: “I am Catholic in spite of the leadership”. So true. May God have mercy on all of us sinners

                  1. Estovir,
                    True true true!
                    My Methodist minister went to a Presbyterian seminary.
                    On one of his final essays, his professor took-off points from his grade and wrote on his paper:
                    “Too much Bible”.

                  2. Methodists are self destructing. Gay marriage is the fragging grenade tossed into the sanctuary. It will further separate Methodists into the whited guilt faction, and the Jesus Christ faction. Our Daughter is a full time employee of a church. Not a Minister, though she preaches several times a year. The congregation struggles with aligning wokeism with Christ.

                    1. Iowan2——We’re new to UMC, but like it so far, especially the minister who preaches Bible stories, straight out of the Bible. Very old-fashioned and nostalgic. It’s a wonderful experience, compared to The Episcopalians……who unfortunately for us, are waiting for their elderly to die so that there are no more traditional services. The contemporary services are teaching the new, improved Jesus Christ, “paraphraising” and actually changing , Jesus’ words to suit wokeism. They also are promoting anti-white writings by “Intellectual” pissypalians. The new priests coming out of the Episcopal Seminary of the Southwest in Austin, Tx, have been taught this blasphemous crap at the Seminary.
                      But back to the Methodists, I wish your daughter the best. I know you’re proud of her.

              2. Estovir…P.S. I am SO glad the church is penalizing Pelosi!

              3. Estovir,
                “Some have even seen a connection between the Great Awakening and the American Revolution –Christians enjoying spiritual liberty in Christ would come to crave political liberty. The Great Awakening not only revived the American church but reinvigorated American society as well.”

                John Wesley was part of this Great Awakening, too. Because of his influence in America, I believe our Revolution did not devolve into tyranny and terror the way France’s did.


                1. PS:
                  There’s no question that religiosity in colonial America mitigated the violence in the American Revolution that sullied the French version. Not having a filthy rich clergy class helped, too

            2. 😀 Pure you? Focus group of one, or how many, Sybil? That is humerous.

              1. Gosh, Olly, that was so tibia of you. Let’s not put our soleus at risk and put on a sad fascia


                  1. mespo….The Mister got her autograph in the 1060’s. He had a huge crush on “Pet”!

                    1. “1960’s” not 1060’s! Billy the Conqueror hadn’t even done his thang yet in 1060’…LOL

          2. I just took Cindy’s comment as meaning the Ps are notoriously woke liberals in the main.

    2. At the founding of Princeton, Presbyterians were much more sensible.

      The Presbyterian church has changed quite a bit even from Eric Liddel’s time in the 1920s.

      1. Prairie…..Thank you Prairie.
        Before the Clinton administration,in the 1990’s, it was acceptable to find humour in generalizations, because there was always some truth behind them. That practice was dealt a death blow by the Obama administration. No one is free to laugh anymore. The Left has people spooked and unable to lighten up and see or publicly acknowledge humour. They are the new Puritans.
        I know the colonial Presbys are not the same as today’s.. And as you know the Presbyterian church is the church of Scotland, and they are not like many American Preby churches. i really do understand that.
        And of course people absolutely don’t have to laugh at anything I say, like, at all……. but they shouldn’t be judgemental if I want to laugh.

        1. We are close to a fairly conservative Presbyterian church. So there is dissension amongst the members as to the church’s direction.

          I did have to agree with Olly, to a degree, though. ‘Nuff said was rather unfair.

          1. Prairie……It was said in jest, which is neither fair nor unfair.

        2. We must laugh, or all that is left is tears. Humor is a survival technique. If you know any Dr’s, or EMT’s, the dark humour is jaw dropping. Tragedy demands it.
          My Mom was a WWII nurse in Europe. That woman would let things slip sometimes that make you think your brain was playing tricks on you.

  6. Princeton “re-opened a previously adjudicated claim of sexual misconduct and then used that as the basis to seek his termination.”

    Destroyers always need a pretext they hope the public will swallow. Three of their current favorites are: Financial “improprieties,” “Me-Too” improprieties, and ethnic improprieties. The third is Katz’s Princeton “crime.” The second is the university’s pretext.

  7. Imagine the school trying to defend a suit from a student because of discrimination:

    Lawyer: So he f***ed a student in violation of policy and he was still employed?
    School: Yes.
    Lawyer: So he f***ed a faculty member in violation of policy and engaged in nepotism and he was still employed?
    School: Yes.
    Lawyer: And you knew he objected to the institutional goals of diversity and equity?
    School: Yes.

    I don’t see that ending well. He should have been booted long ago.

    1. “Lawyer: And you knew he objected to the institutional goals of diversity and equity?”

      So much for “academic freedom.” Tenure, which he has, is supposed to protect such ideological dissent.

      And for the nth time, we see that the old Left has morphed into the new fascists.

      (That relationship with a student occurred some 16 years ago. Odd, isn’t it, that it’s only resurfacing now.)

      Incidentally, if you start firing faculty for “inappropriate” behavior, the faculty lounges will soon be empty. Wait . . . I’ve changed my mind. Let the firing begin.

      1. The professor is putting the school on notice that he is a liability for discrimination. By keeping him on they would be assuming that risk.

    2. Rule of law.

      In how many different fashions don’t you understand those three words?

  8. While I disagree with most of JeffSilberman’s views, I respect that he has a difference in opinion. His opinion is just as valid as mine, even though we may disagree. While we have never spoken, I have read these comments for some time.

    The attacks against liberal commenters and against conservative commenters needs to stop. The political debate should be about ideas, not about who can scream down the others’ throats louder. While that may be the world it is today, that does not give us, as civilized debaters and commenters, the go-ahead to do it here. While technically it is protected speech, it’s not very civil. Let us all calm down, take a deep breath, and consider the ideas, rather than our opinion of the person giving the idea. I have no idea who Jeff is, nor do I have any idea who anybody else is here. Our experiences form our political views. Clearly Jeff has experiences that I don’t and vice versa and I respect that.

    Think about the words you choose carefully. Do you want to debate ideas? Or do you want to be seen as someone whose ideas are so weak they resort to just shouting everyone else down? Someone whose opinions are well-thought, evidence-based, and well-reasoned? Or someone who refuses to even consider the possibility that they might be wrong?

    We are all different. We all hold our own opinions. You have the freedom to say what you want. But we have the freedom to think of you how we want too. Will you be polite and thoughtful, or rash and disrespectful?

    I leave that to you to decide, reader of this comment.

    1. @JP

      Opinion is fine, it’s just that Jeff et. al. ha fundamental misunderstanding, either through will or through ignorance, of very easily demonstrable facts and are puerile of the simplest tenets of law (this is a legal blog, not a politics blog, though there is just overlap). It doesn’t help that those opinions very often cut-pasted from other sources either.

      Jeff is free to share whatever he likes, and that hasn’t ever been in question (you seem to be implying he shouldn’t be shut down – he has never been in danger of being shut down, as that is how children deal with conflict, not grown adults) – we are equally free to draw our own conclusions. That’s what free speech is. I happen to not agree with anything he says, am happy to vocalize that fact, but disagreement and criticism are not attacks, and I’d never seek to erase him.

    2. JP,
      Jeff and I have gone a few rounds against each other. And we have vastly different viewpoints on almost everything .But our dialogue has always been respectful. With some humor and sarcasm thrown in. I too think that the function of this blog is the free exchange of ideas. And I would never want it to become an echo chamber. But you are correct. Some here just seem to use it as a rage venting apparatus. I sometimes need to take a break because it is just exhausting. But Jeff is not one to initiate disrespect. I am not in favor of censoring anyone. Even those who seem to have only one purpose to be here. To insult Turley. I think that is a form of mental illness. I know some couch it as being ” calling out” . But that is

      1. The problem with Jeff and Anonymous isn’t that they have moronic opinions, it’s that they opine 100 times on every issue to the point of almost ruining the comments section.

        Actually I think that Anonymous is a paid troll.

        1. Bobby,
          I can’t keep track of all of the Anonymous (s). But My experience is that Jeff will comment and then respond to a corresponding post or rebuttal. I don’t have a problem with that. Mimics a conversation.

        2. Bobby,

          Who would pay anyone to troll here? What would be the point? Does anyone suppose that this blog is so politically influential that it would pay to hire a shill? I don’t think so.

          People here love to hear themselves talk and since there is no one around us to listen, we come here to find an outlet. Though we don’t share each other’s values, beliefs, facts or temperaments, we do have Res Ipsa Loquitur in common. As Turley likes to say, we are “family” as much as we would hate to admit it.

    3. JP, A part of the rouge-troll problem is the layout of this Website, If Turley would remove the “Recent Comments” panel on the right side of this page, then trolls would have to read through all JT’s entries to see which ones were recently commented on.

      I tested this by commenting on an older Article, that no-one would ordinarily read and comment on, but it did list in the ‘Recent Comment’ panel. Low & Behold the troll showed up and commented over my comment. So it show it that the trolls are using the Recent Comment List to manage their work.

      Jeff is a very old troll, He was around early in the late 80s early 90s. Icann-at-Large was a Group started by a fellow in New Zealand (Joop), Jeff cut his teeth on that site with his endless & mindless rhetorical. I kind of recall he was related to Wild West Domains some how (GoDaddy bought them).

      Anyway He’s not going away. I think he is a Hired-Hand to disrupt ‘civilized debaters and commenters’ as you put it. He/They will target Free Speech venues (Like this this) in order to bury; revealing, truthful, substantiated, brutally-honest, intellectually, thoughtful Speech.

      There are some people who are always going to be your Devils Advocate, to the point that it kills you.
      And that’s what They are aiming for, to shut you up.

    4. JP,

      I appreciate your attitude. I wish more people here shared it. I don’t believe that you have ever replied to one of my comments. I wish you would. You seem to be someone- like Paul- with whom I can have a respectful and civil debate unlike many people here. I am not proud. I welcome being corrected.

    5. The political debate should be about ideas,

      True enough. But here leftist often are only left with smearing those persons with a different opinion. Forced to, because the facts and their agenda are to often at odds with reality.

      1. RE: “”” Forced to, because the facts and their agenda are to often at odds with reality.”” Spend any serious time watching ‘The View’, and one can clearly see the logic behind that observation. The educated and informed mind boggles at the utterances issuing from that panel. Having said that, its long run and position in the daytime ratings are not only cause for concern, but explain much with respect to the forces abroad in our society.

  9. The purpose of this little shame game is self-censorship.

    Which is why the MORE people speak up, the better things will be for everyone. Do not let these little fascists win while playing their sick little games. Hit back, speak up and get louder. Every time. It is the way.

    1. “Hit back, speak up and get louder.”

      Or leave them to their own devices.

      1. “Or leave them to their own devices.”

        No. That is how we got here.

        Professor Katz stood on principle. We need more like him. We need the full faculty to stand behind Katz, no matter whether they agree with his position or not. They won’t, of course, which is again, how we got to this bullsh*t nonsense of being fired for having ‘wrongthink.’

        1. So I suppose you are right. Leave them to their own devices. Rot in the hell of your own making, fascists.

          1. “Rot in the hell of your own making, fascists.”

            Yes. That was my broader point: Eventually, evil self-destructs.

            Stay and fight them or leave them is a complicated issue that depends on the particulars of a person’s experiences. What are the benefits/costs of staying? Are there rational grounds for believing that you can fight and win?

  10. This is foundational tenets of leftist. I see a huge spot light illuminating the collage attacking the Prof, and refusing to engage in a discussion of the ideas he presented.

    We see that all day here. Attacks on host, carefully avoiding engaging in the debate.

    Prof Katz, offered how the Universities policies are intellectually vapid. The experts with multiple Masters, an at least one Doctorate, are not smart enough to debate the lowly Professor. So like a 4th grade bullies, they gang up on him and give him a beat down, to shut him up.

    It is clear from Princeton’s reactions they are in the wrong. Don’t need to dig too deep into the facts to figure it out.

  11. To paraphrase a comment heard back along: Sh*t like this is why Trump won.

    Trump would call these people out, to their faces, and then shutdown the leftwing lunatic “journalists” by responding appropriately: “I’m not going to answer that. You are Fake News.” Trump would hit them head on and throw it back in their faces. It was glorious. And so “they” had to get rid of Trump, of course. By any means necessary.

    More speaking up, like what Professor Katz did, no matter the fallout, is what the country needs.

    Trump showed the way. He took the incoming. Prof Kaz will show the way. Keep speaking up, Katz.

    Elon Musk is showing the way. More pushback against these little authoritarians is needed, not less. It is a daily grind. Do not back down.

    1. “Trump showed the way. ”

      One can argue all sorts of things about Trump, but one thing is sure. Trump showed the way.

      Arguing about Trump’s presumed failures, such as tweeting, sexual relationships, etc., has led the way for the left to gain solid control over the nation. Thinking it can be reversed with the usual politician is pure fantasy. To undo what the left has done with the quiet acquiescence of many so-called conservatives will need at least four terms of a Trump in power, even if he acts in a fashion acceptable to all.

      When Obama was voted in for a second term, the nation’s fate was sealed. Lying, cheating and stealing under the iron grip of authoritarians were on the way in. We now see that in the actions of the FBI, DOJ and the rest of the executive branch, the media, academia, and an acquiescent legislature. Things do not look good for the future.

  12. Prof. Katz seeks out a kickass attorney and digs into Princeton’s gold laden pockets.

    1. Pigmentation is the next Transgender. It is reasonable to extrapolate from this progressive descent into madness that anyone should be allowed and even encouraged to live life in the hue of their choice and reap the social grabpack of said tinge

  13. Katz should have a legal team present this case to the Supreme Court

    Katz is being made an example of by Princeton, from its President, Christopher Eisgruber. By criticizing the faculty letter, Katz was the first member of the university community who dared object to the new social justice regime that President Eisgruber wants to implement.

    Filing a complaint with the EEOC won’t work. EEOC Chair Charlotte A. Burrows received an A.B. from Princeton University and a J.D. from Yale Law School.
    Charlotte Burrows first joined the agency as a commissioner in 2015, and previously served as an associate deputy attorney general. A member of the Democratic Party, Burrows also served as an aide and counsel to Senator Ted Kennedy.

    1. I agree. That Princeton would make such a frightening decision is beyond the pale and deeply disturbing. Even Netflix is waking up to the stupidity of extreme thinking!

  14. If this sort of thing continues in the Ivy League and and other colleges and Universities, it would seem that there may be more and more faculty looking for teaching jobs. That might result in a free market solution and the slow rise of an anti Ivy League or such. Seems like their should be a lot of recruiting targets out there. if we can maintain the free market it could save us. Of course states could intervene and and start forcing more choice on to state supported institutions and force due process and open discussion. One would wonder if there would be a migration of tenured professors out of the cloistered progressive universities to more open institutions. We already see this in the movement of large numbers of people from California, New York and such bastions of progressivism to the less progressive and conservative states. As those people and their money move elsewhere these sort of antics in Progressive Universities may become less and less of an issue because, I suspect, their endowments may start to suffer. There seems to be an incredible shift in power and money rushing out of the of the Northeast and West Coast. The only question will be if the migrants change their habits to those of the areas where they are moving and leave behind the reasoning and thinking of the areas they have left. Of course the other shift might be caused by the Federal Government by it’s use of contracting with Universities for services and research. Loss of those contracts could hinge on University behavior in admissions and faculty hiring, among other things. Could be interesting.

    1. I’ve gad this thought too, and I think it’s likely if things continue in this fashion. I personally believe the bloom is off the rose and their degrees won’t be worth much in the future.

    2. I agree with you concerning government grants etc. If there were to be a congress and administration with enough courage to use anti-discrimination legislation to protect conservatives – turning the left’s best tactic against them, so too speak, to “urge” universities to cease and desist their meanderings into prog ideology. I won’t hold my breath, though, since rational approaches with the left are as fruitful as rational discussion with an Islamic jihadist, there is no rational behavior with fanatics.

  15. Everyone should read what Edward Yingling, the co-founder of Pricetonions for Free Speech, wrote about hounding someone forever and in fact twisting their words to do so. It is maddening that people considered educated would act this way and it is so disappointing that our young privileged students follow like sheep to the slaughter.

    What is happening on our college campuses is the reason why we have a Biden administration that feels emboldened to create a Governance Board of Disinformation headed by a human cartoon who spews disinformation daily. This is how we get such uncritical thinking by our journalists. This is how we see a person like Joy Reid hosting a TV show on a network that is part of NBC. The country is getting dumber by the minute and the reason is that schools like Princeton, Harvard and all other universities and even law schools are teaching down to the students, teaching partisan BS to the students and letting the students with the biggest mouths set the agenda. I always thought that the students would change after getting into the corporate world, but it is the corporate world that is changing as we see from things like the “Disney Walkout” and MLB moving an all-star game as well as other asinine moves, The country is doomed because this will not stop.

    Let’s now watch as one particular “Anonymous” comments about how Turley is one-sided, Turley neglected some story he finds important and how Turley is the bane of his entire existence. We shall also see JeffSilberman, a seriously obsessed person, come on and scream that Trump is the devil and that Fox News is talking into his aluminum hat.

    1. hullbobby

      Both individuals are seriously disturbed.

      Look at the hours that they spend on here every day.

      Kind of pathetic that a person would make a blog (especially some one else’s blog) a major focus of their lives.

      I know that we feel contempt, but we should pity them.

      1. Monument, I can feel sorry for Jeff because he does seem troubled and he doesn’t sound like a bad guy. But Mr. Anonymous is a jerk who is trying to ruin the site.

    2. Hi Bobby,

      You flatter me by mentioning my name. I see that I am not being ignored and that my words are having an impact.

      I confess that I am obsessed with exposing Trumpist lies and Turley’s hypocrisy. In the interest of free speech, it is beneficial that there are a few of us willing to expend the time to provide a different viewpoint. This blog would be rather boring without a little pushback from NeverTrumpers. You people would actually miss our presence because you would have no one to hate and bully. You should be grateful that we are willing to stick around notwithstanding your name-calling.

      You are a goddamn liar. I have NEVER said that Turley is the devil. I have complimented Turley time and again for his utter contempt for Trump. I applaud and praise Turley as a NeverTrumper. I do fault him for his hypocrisy in earning an income as a Fox contributor while ignoring the rage provocateurs who are his colleagues. Turley correctly exposes the hypocrisy by certain individuals in the MSM. I simply apply the same standard to his own writings. Fair’s fair.

      1. “I see that I am not being ignored and that my words are having an impact.”

        Don’t get confused. Not being ignored doesn’t mean people think you have something to say. You don’t. Your impact is not intellectual. Instead, it is a way to release tension with a big laugh at your expense.

        1. I appreciate Bobby taking the time to read my contribution and to respond. Even your response is better than nothing. Thanks.

      2. Jeff, ‘earn to read, I said that you think Trump is the devil, not Turley. You always seem to have the need to be obsequious towards Turley as you then go on to criticize him. Trump was in office for 4 years, what did he do to “end democracy”? What did he do to shut down the media? What did he do the investigate his opponents? Meanwhile Biden, Obama and Clinton used the FBI, the media and big tech to actually subvert democracy before, during and after the 2016 election.

        1. Bobby,

          Obviously, I dispute all your assertions. You are wasting your breath. I am a NeverTrumper.

          It remains to be seen the longtetm fallout from Trumpism. My guess is that history will record Birtherism/Trumpism/Q-Anon as one of the darkest periods in modern American history.

          1. RE:”My guess is that history will record Birtherism/Trumpism/Q-Anon as one of the darkest periods in modern American history.” Dark!?!?!? There’s a conversation ongoing on here regarding Wokeism, Right Speaking, a ‘Ministry of Truth’ and a Cancel Culture Gestapo that smells of the ‘Red Baiting’ and HUAC of the ’50’s, bent on wrecking lives, and and you think your issues with Trump are as you characterize them. I expect that my grandchildren will look back and see it appear like late afternoon compared to the way the sun has sunk below the horizon across the past 18 months.

            1. We shall see who is correct- BirtherismTrumpism/Q-Anon or Wokeism/Progressivism. I hope you will live to see all your hopes for this country go unfulfilled.

              1. RE:””I hope you will live to see all your hopes for this country go unfulfilled”” Likewise, if Wokeism/Progressivism be your vision. In due course, we will have an answer to the direction the electorate wishes to take this nation.

                  1. RE:””””The masses are the asses.”””” As history and the rise of totalitarian states have shown.

  16. Lefty justice.

    We are shocked, but when we think about it, not surprised.

    This is where lefties have been going for a long time.

  17. “Power is not a means; it is an end. One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish the dictatorship. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power.” George Orwell (1984)

    I am surprised they have not yet established the daily Orwellian “Two Minute Hate” for the students and faculty.

Comments are closed.

Res ipsa loquitur – The thing itself speaks
%d bloggers like this: