Tulane University (where I once taught) has opened up an investigation into a student, Sarah Ma, after she wrote an opinion piece defending Kanye West in his wearing a “White Lives Matters” shirt and justifying comments that are widely viewed as antisemitic. In addition to the university telling Ma that she should leave the campus for her own safety, Erica Woodley, Tulane’s Associate Vice President & Dean of Students, sent out an email announcing that it was investigating the matter. Woodley stated “While the importance of free expression on a university campus cannot be overstated, words that run counter to our core values impact our community.” Perhaps Tulane cannot “overstate” free speech values, but it is clearly under protecting them in taking this action.
While it should not have to be repeated, defending free speech does not mean that you agree with a speaker or a publication. The point of free speech is that it protects the most unpopular. We do not need protections for popular speakers.
If these accounts are accurate, the question is why Tulane is investigating a student who espoused unpopular, even offensive, views. The solution to bad speech is better speech.
This student has been roundly condemned by many who viewed her defense of Ye as antisemitic. Yet, the university rushed out, after offering the same old claim of being supportive of free speech, to investigate the use of free speech. The message is clear: you have free speech at Tulane so long as it is not too unpopular or deemed offensive to the majority. Here the column “caused much distress” and therefore became the subject of a university investigation.
I have read the column and find many parts of it to be deeply offensive, disturbing, and wrong. Yet, she is not advocating violence or attacking any individuals. She must accept that others will counter her views with equal passion. For those of us who view these tropes to be antisemitic, we can use free speech to denounce the column and the author’s underlying views. Yet, as a Tulane student, Ma expected that she could voice her views on campus without being investigated, physically attacked, or effectively banished.
The question is what is being investigated. Ma wrote an article viewed by many to be offensive. She has a right to do so. If you cannot “overstate” your commitment to free speech, you might want to start by withdrawing the threat of an investigation over its use. If the university is investigating whether the column is offensive and arguably antisemitic, you just need to read the column. The question remains whether the university is barring offensive speech and, if so, what standard will be applied to public comments and publications.
What is particularly chilling is that, in addition to saying that the matter is under investigation, Tulane reportedly advised Ma that she should leave the campus for her own safety.
Ma said that she has received death threats. A campus publication called The Dissident reported that Woodley met with Ma and “advised Ma to leave campus for at least a couple of weeks because Tulane’s administration does not believe she is safe on campus.” Woodley reportedly told Ma that the university could “probably” keep her safe on campus but could not offer even that uncertain protection off campus. So the university is encouraging her to leave campus and study remotely.
It is the obligation of the university to protect not just free speech but those students who engage in free speech. While that may not extend off campus (though the campus police does patrol surrounding streets with student housing), students should be able to count on the university to take whatever actions are needed for their physical protection.
We have previously discussed the failure of Tulane to protect unpopular speech while publicly condemning the speakers. Despite its claim to being highly protective of free speech, the record in recent years shows a growing anti-free speech environment on campus.
Indeed, Tulane ranked 156th in the nation in a recent free speech survey.
Today’s Woke Culture of Nonsense, and, its thin-skinned disciples, reminds one of a drunk taking umbrage. There is no reasoning with the drunk just as there is no reasoning with the Woke Culture.
“Wokies” have no capacity beyond their dank juvenile theology of ‘HURT FELLINGS’. Their brains must be overloaded with “SELF”. Me and I are the motivators for their ‘you must’ statements: “True Egocentricity”.
Our modern American dems are part of an elitist/globalist/fascist regime. Why on earth is anyone that is of a conscience surprised anymore that they behave like an elitist/globalist/fascist regime when they are an elitist/globalist/fascist regime? And they are absolutely grooming your kids to be a part of said elitist/globalist/fascist regime.
Wake up. JFK and his party are both dead. One need look no further than the WEF conference. These people are doing everything you think they are, enabled by their wealth and privilege, and they are every bit as dysfunctional, addicted, insular, and ignorant as you imagine they are, whatever their ages. That is real.
So what are you prepared to do? For some people simply voting differently or speaking out loud is tantamount to asking them to fire a shot. And that is where we currently are. Modern ‘liberals’ are more terrified of embarrassment or of being wrong, not perceived as ‘cool’, and being ostracized, then they are of cutting off a kid’s **** or *******, or killing a baby that has come to full 9 month term. Try, in a moment of sanity, to wrap your head around it, please. We are not dealing with adults anymore, again, regardless of age, and we had better start turning it around right effing now or we are doomed as a free society.
You do not need to be scared of the people that run the internet. Real life, whether they like it or not, still happens in real life, not in a tiny rectangle you have glued to your hand, it is not dictated by algorithms, and it will always be so, and time will bear it out. Rest assured that every ‘crisis’ we currently face from the bull**** pandemic to inflation is about dollars for them and not for you. Period. We really are back in a position that we haven’t seen for centuries, not just decades, such is the generational wealth disparity in modern Western society, and it is going to take spine of the highest magnitude to turn it around again. Bear in mind even that can be done with compassion.
“In addition to the university telling Ma that she should leave the campus for her own safety, Erica Woodley, Tulane’s Associate Vice President & Dean of Students, sent out an email announcing that it was investigating the matter. Woodley stated “While the importance of free expression on a university campus cannot be overstated, words that run counter to our core values impact our community.” Perhaps Tulane cannot “overstate” free speech values, but it is clearly under protecting them in taking this action.”
*******************************************
News Flash to TooLame University: You are expressly allowed to hold racist, totalitarian, indecent, amoral, crime-loving, child-hating. mob rule-advocating views in this country without fear of punishment.
How do you think the Dims stay out of prison, ya morons?
https://memes.getyarn.io/yarn-clip/55042b8e-30d7-41d3-af4c-1f37044e5bd2#hulGS7EY.copy
Mespo– to further prove your point, compare what she is accused of with this: https://twitter.com/theblackspiderm/status/1615451575274594318. Please tell me the video is not genuine! Because of what she wrote, Ma is asked to leave her school because she is not safe, while those condemning and threatening her most likely voted for Biden (if they voted) and will vote for him again. Where are the feminists speaking out because at the White House, Biden insists on swimming in the nude even though his female Secret Service agents have complained? Maybe they are too busy organizing drag shows for children.
Amen, brother.
We can assume that Ma is not black, trans, non-binary, a drag queen, antifa, or any of the other parade of victims that the left would defend no matter what obscene or violent speech they spouted.
GioCon – She is probably of Chinese descent (“Ma means “horse” in the Chinese). It is funny how racial and sexual identity politics works. Here is a young asian woman, defending a black man, but still she is subjected to intimidation by white adminstrators, and no one claims “racism” or “sexism”. Formerly, it would have been considered shameful to intimidate a young woman of any complexion.
What is interesting to me is that we have seen (even discussed on this blog) examples of professors arguing that “free speech” includes shouting out a guest speaker so that no one can hear him/her,- or cancelling/preventing the speaker from even appearing.
If Woodley suggested that Ma leave the campus as a result of her “speech,” -did Woodley tell all students who threatened and negatively reacted to Ma to also leave? Is Woodley supporting the removal of the speaker on one side but not the other?
Here is a copy of the letter Woodley sent:
https://collegedissident.com/tulane-ye/
Ma also received a stigmatizing letter from the local chapter of Kappa Alpha Theta, placing her on “involuntary inactivity” status because “your behavior has created an environment in which I am concerned for the welfare of the other members.”
Well, that will be a nice thing to place on her resume when asked to list activities, memberships, etc.
(apology to everyone for posting a letter already posted.)
OT Warniing – The national debt will reach $31T today, and Congress will be asked to raise the debt limit again. Members who oppose the lifting of the ceiling will be called irresponsible. Per the DM, each of us owe almost $250,000. My thanks to the Democrats and RINOs who have successfully raised the debt limit in the past and will continue to raise it, until our economic system collapses. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11649859/U-S-hit-debt-limit-Treasury-Secretary-Janet-Yellen-prepares-extraordinary-measures.html BTW I wish to add my congratulations to Tulane for beating USC. Too bad they fumbled the football here.
edwardmahl,
I am of the opinion we are past the point that any debt reduction is a possibility. The only thing the government can do is keep upping the ceiling to the point that it does in fact, as you point out, our economic system collapses.
Also of concern, according to Bloomberg, Saudi Arabia is now open to oil payments other than the US dollar. In short, the petrodollar just might of died. That could lead to the collapse of the dollar as the world reserve currency.
The Saudis and China are already talking about payments in yuan.
UpstateFarmer: yes, indeed. While our brilliant leaders have been haggling over pronouns, men in women’s sports, Joe’s crimes, trashing the Constitution, and, of course, everything Trump, China and Russia have been building up trade relations with the Global South, Middle East, Africa and Asia. BRICS will soon incorporate Saudi Arabia, Algeria, and a long list of nations wanting to enter into a non-bullying relationship with a superpower. Goodbye US hegemony — which, since Bill Clinton, has only been used to destroy and dominate. The Democrats and Rinos have driven America into the ground economically and morally. Time to turn over the reins of power to more rational actors.
GioCon,
Every time the Fed cranks up the printing press to create money out of thin air, not only does it have an inflationary impact for Americans, but globally as the dollar is the world reserve currency.
And they know that.
At last count, 14 countries have applied to be admitted to the BRICS. They are trying to set themselves up to get the least amount of splatter on them when it all collapses. That is why we are seeing the emerging multi-polar world. Even our so-called allies see it (the Saudis) and are looking to strengthen ties with China.
GioCon – I believe you are implying that our media and political leaders concentrate on silly issues that divert our attention from the defining “power” issues of our day. If so, I agree wholeheartedly. We are in decline b/c we are blind and we afraid to try to see. Wewatch the silly sideshows, or even freak shows, while behind our backs our enemies are readying the blade for the fatal blow. Sorry to sound so morbid, but we should be concerned.
edwardmahl: I’ve pulled out all my paper money from my Monopoly game and buying up all the remaining properties, in case I need it -before it is worth less and less and less.
lim – save enough money to get of jail, if need arises.
naw, I’m saving my two gold front teeth for that, and my catalytic converter.
Lin,
I would recommend those rural properties, with access to fresh water, and enough acreage for small livestock.
Wood lot be a plus!
Democrats hate free speech, The Constitutiona and the USA
Also time tax all non-profits where anyone gets a $100k+
Time to end all federal aid and loans for colleges. They are democrat indoctrination centers
Rashida Tlaib could not be reached for comment.
hullbobby, speaking for myself as a Muslim, I have a deep and abiding respect and affection for the Jewish people. I condemn bigotry directed against anyone, especially the Jewish people.
I feel sorry for poor Kanye. He’s mentally ill. I feel a lot less sympathy for Rashida Tlaib. She’s not mentally ill. I understand that no matter how much the Israelis concede, it will never satisfy the radical Islamists. As a political leader, she should understand that complexity, but she indulges in a great many unfortunate conceits, including–I suspect–antisemitism.
Peace.
Hullbobby has no idea what “affection” or “affectionately” means so he’s probably going to call you a bigot while you are exactly the opposite.
“While the importance of free expression on a university campus cannot be overstated, words that run counter to our core values impact our community.”
You gotta love the “yes/but” crowd: “Yes, we believe in free speech. But not for those who disturb the mob.”
She didn’t say or imply “no free speech for those who disturb the mob.” She acknowledged the fact that people can be affected by speech. That shouldn’t be a controversial claim.
“She acknowledged the fact that people can be affected by speech. That shouldn’t be a controversial claim.” It shouldn’t be a reason to censor, bully, cancel or threaten either.
I agree that people being affected by speech is not a reason to censor, bully or threaten. Earlier, I explicitly said “I don’t agree with Ma, but no one should be threatening her safety.”
None of which changes the fact that Sam pretended Dean Woodley was implying “Yes, we believe in free speech. But not for those who disturb the mob” when she wasn’t.
“She didn’t say or imply . . .”
Apologists for the suppression of opinions have a fantastic ability to evade the obvious.
People who fond of straw man arguments have a fantastic ability to pretend that their substitutions are legit.
Once again, JT fails to link to the full text of a document he quotes from. Here’s the entire Tulane letter: https://www.thefire.org/research-learn/tulane-university-email-tulane-students-january-12-2023
It’s striking that they didn’t condemn threats of violence as an unacceptable response to speech one objects to. I don’t agree with Ma, but no one should be threatening her safety.
“Tulane ranked 156th in the nation in a recent free speech survey.”
And GWU is ranked even lower. Perhaps Turley should invest more effort in improving things at his home institution.
As an aside, given Turley’s frequent demands that social media be free speech zones that publish all legal speech, and given the citation above from FIRE and Turley’s use of many of their statements, it’s striking that Turley is silent about FIRE’s recent statement that “FIRE is disturbed by calls for government action to force or pressure social media companies to censor. … At the same time, we must resist the impulse to invoke coercive state power to force social media platforms to host or publish content they may wish to restrict.”
https://www.thefire.org/research-learn/fire-statement-free-speech-and-social-media
Anonymous: You’re like the silly book reviewers who ignore what the book actually said and instead gripe about all the things they would have wanted the book to say. In other words, they deflect, distract and entirely miss the point.
Thank you Jonathan for an excellent article. Tulane’s investigation of this student’s exercise of free speech isn’t surprising as many colleges and universities appear to be quite selective in their outrage if it’s an opinion they strongly disagree with. And it goes hand-in-hand with the explosion of the anti-free speech movement in the United States today. Thank you.
Maybe Tulane should read BLM comments first !!
Why anyone take the time and effort to defend Kanye West is beyond me, but hey, it is a free country . . . well . . .
Personally I think Kanye West is an imbecile, he opens his mouth to change his socks way too often, but you’re absolutely correct, it’s a free country and we’re free to our own opinions even if it’s defending the free speech rights of an imbecile like West.
Well said, Steve!
The emailed statement from Tulane’s Associate Vice President & Dean of Students, Erica Woodley, “While the importance of free expression on a university campus cannot be overstated, words that run counter to our core values impact our community” compounded by telling Ma that she should leave the campus for her own safety is signature significant. Signature significance posits that a single act can be so remarkable that it has predictive and analytical value, and should not be dismissed as statistically insignificant.
An Associate Vice President & Dean of Students at a college should be promoting free speech and intellectual dialogue between students on this issue to teach them the lessons these young adults should be learning; but no, Woodley is talking out of both sides of her mouth to pander to everyone. Aside from her pandering words, Woodley’s actions tell us exactly what we need to know about her, she is actively promoting that students should kowtow to the perceived social power of irrational psychological snowflakes that tend to take offense at anything they disagree with in a “violent” way instead of arguing with better free speech in an intellectual way, if you’re not going to kowtow to irrational people then you should run for the hills like a coward.
In my opinion, Woodley should be removed from her position as Dean of Students.
I remember not to long ago there was a phrase tossed about on a regular basis. “this is a teaching moment”. This happening on a college campus…where, like, yaknow, teaching is suppose to be happening, should maybe use this as a teaching moment? Host a couple of speeches, have a debate or two, maybe this person identified as an offender, could experience a change of position when exposed to more speech…instead of being told to get off campus. Silencing a person only can have the effect of further entrenching their position.
I keep thinking the Dean of Students, with a hand full of undergrad degrees, a couple of Masters, and at least one Phd, would have been educated to the reality. Censoring an individual, does nothing to educate them. Dialogue, not censoring, is the most logical path….at a University.
And yet, Ye was right on all counts.
He wasn’t. Only a fellow anti-Semite would think he was.
BMan wrote, “Ye was right on all counts.”
Anonymous the troll replied, “He wasn’t.”
So now we’re just supposed to take your words “He wasn’t” as fact even though you haven’t offered any explanation to support your claim?
So how was Ye wrong?
Do you even know what Ye said or are you just trolling for effect?
Anonymous the troll replied, “Only a fellow anti-Semite would think he was.”
That’s a pure attack the messenger ad hominem. You’re an unethical hack and a troll.
No you idiot, it’s rhetorically and intellectually fair game to agree that Ye was right without being anti-Semite. What we’re seeing in your comment is how the mind of a blithering idiotic troll works, you immorally extrapolate something one person does or says to determine the morality of another person. That’s evil as in profoundly immoral and wicked.
Ye’s statements were in the news, so I didn’t think that I needed to repeat his statements. I assumed (apparently mistakenly) that they were known.
Ye has said things like “I’m a bit sleepy tonight but when I wake up I’m going death con 3 On JEWISH PEOPLE,” and “the Jewish community, especially in the music industry…they’ll take us and milk us till we die,” and “Jared Kushner is an example of how the Jewish people have their hand on every single business that controls the world,” and “There’s so many Black musicians signed to Jewish record labels and those Jewish records labels take ownership not only of the publishing…but also ownership of the culture itself…It’s like a modern-day slavery,” and “Like if Rahm [Emanuel] is sitting next to [President] Obama or Jared [Kushner] sitting next to [President] Trump, there’s a Jewish person right there controlling the country.”
I wouldn’t think I’d need to explain that going “death con” on Jews is anti-Jewish.
I wouldn’t think that I’d need to explain that accusing Jews of milking people til they die is anti-Jewish.
I wouldn’t think that accusing Jews of controlling the country is anti-Jewish.
Other anti-Semites, like the extremist Goyim Defense League, believe he’s a fellow anti-Semite, unfurling a banner with “KANYE IS RIGHT ABOUT THE JEWS” while giving a Nazi salute.
“it’s rhetorically and intellectually fair game to agree that Ye was right without being anti-Semite”
HOW? HOW can someone believe that he is “right on all counts” about “going death con” without being an anti-Semite?
Anonymous,
It is painfully clear that you didn’t bother to read the article that Sarah Ma wrote, Turley linked to it. Here is a link to the article again, read it!
https://collegedissident.com/ye-wrong/
As I’ve said elsewhere in this thread, “I think Kanye West is an imbecile, he opens his mouth to change his socks way too often”; that said, you can shove your anti-Ye cherry picking propaganda and nonsensical morality extrapolations where the sun doesn’t shine.
Steve,
What’s painfully clear is that you’re trying to move the goalposts.
BMan said “Ye was right on all counts.”
I responded “He wasn’t. Only a fellow anti-Semite would think he was.”
You asked “how was Ye wrong?” and said “it’s rhetorically and intellectually fair game to agree that Ye was right without being anti-Semite”
I gave you examples of Ye being wrong, and I asked you “HOW can someone believe that he is “right on all counts” about “going death con” without being an anti-Semite?”
You haven’t answered that question.
Nowhere in the exchange was Ma mentioned until you brought her up. BMan didn’t bring her up. I didn’t bring her up. Her article is irrelevant to whether Ye “was right on all counts.” So don’t deflect to her article.
Explain how someone can believe that Ye is right about things like “I’m going death con 3 On JEWISH PEOPLE,” and “the Jewish people have their hand on every single business that controls the world” without being an anti-Semite.
“you can shove your anti-Ye cherry picking propaganda”
YOU are the one who asked “how was Ye wrong?” so don’t complain when I give you examples of his anti-Semitism.
I don’t care whether you think he’s an “imbecile.” The issues are (a) Is “Ye … right on all counts”? (MY answer is clearly NO. What is YOUR answer?) and (b) you claimed “it’s rhetorically and intellectually fair game to agree that Ye was right without being anti-Semite” but you won’t explain HOW someone can say that “the Jewish people have their hand on every single business that controls the world” is “right” but not be an anti-Semite. Stop running away from that task.
Steve,
Correction: your belief that Ye’s an imbecile means that you don’t believe he is “right on all counts,” so I need not have asked about that.
But you do still need to explain HOW someone can say “Ye was right on all counts” “without being anti-Semite” (your claim), when those those counts include things like “the Jewish people have their hand on every single business that controls the world” and “I’m going death con 3 On JEWISH PEOPLE,” and “the Jewish community … they’ll take us and milk us till we die.”
It’s pretty clear that the trolling commenter, Anonymous, thought the conversation was still in progress or maybe just wanted the last word so he could think like trolls usually do that that last word would somehow make him right and me wrong.
Wrong again Anonymous!
This Anonymous troll thinks wrong a lot. Sometimes it’s mildly entertaining watching “him” flail his rhetorical sword about here and there. One swing and a miss after another is the usual pattern. Sobeit.
I think you’re the one trolling here. You were asked a legit question about a claim you made, and you ran away from answering it. You are also very quick to start insulting people you disagree with. Grow up.
OT,
Pennsylvania drops college degree mandate for state jobs
“Executive order signed Wednesday by Gov. Josh Shapiro instructs the state to prioritize skills and experience over credentials for 65,000 positions”
https://justthenews.com/nation/states/center-square/pennsylvania-drops-college-degree-mandate-state-jobs
Upstatefarmer, I see your post as very much on point. Universities are so engrossed in woke nonsense, they are turning out a product the consumer sees no value in. I know in Iowa, half the work force, works for Government. If the govt stops using a college degree as a sceening tool, universities are in big trouble. I have one child with an engineering degree, and a second with a Masters in education. Both great students and ready for college, but I have lots of friends that are directing their kids into the trades or finding companies willing to train in careers they like. Universities are ignoring all the signs they are become more and more irrelevant.
The underlying concept of taking skills and experience into account as high priorities in hiring practices is actually a good thing but to blindly elevate them over an applicants’ earned credentials is an insult to those that worked very hard to obtain those credentials and will very likely result in a work force that is too undereducated to properly adapt. This Pennsylvania Executive Order is openly pandering to the irrational “woke” crowd that promotes equity over equality and thinks a High School diploma from a one room school house should garner the same respect (a feeling of deep admiration for someone or something elicited by their abilities, qualities, or achievements) as technical or higher education degrees.
The college of hard knocks is really good for somethings but it’s nowhere near equivalent to earning higher education degrees.
I went to Tulane and experienced an environment consistent with what is described in the article. It is a bad place to be perceived as anything but Zionist, more or less. Over 30% of the student population is Jewish (or at least was when I went) and we called it (more or less affectionately) Jewlane. Also, like many schools, there is administrative bloat and diversity-hiring practices that poison the well of intellectual rigor. It has only gotten worse. That’s why they don’t get a dime of my money.
P.S. The Cotton Bowl win was epic, though, so everything’s fine.
Macroman, as a conservative and a supporter of free speech and Professor Turley I have to say that you sound like a true Jew hater and a damn bigot. Calling the school “Jewlane” rolls off of your tongue as if it is a funny moniker, but it isn’t, it is a bigot’s way of picking on a specific group. Sorry you had to matriculate with so many of “them”. Odd that it is you that is the snowflake, you that is the one triggered by something that should have had no effect on you at all.
I am against Tulane’s actions with regard to the student, even if I totally disagree with her thoughts and writings. But people like Macroman are just as much of a problem as the lefty losers that want to shut down any speech with which the disagree. Macroman, we don’t want you on our side, you make us look as bad as the lefty nut jobs.
Many of my college friends were Jewish, and they called it Jewlane. The nickname came from Jews themselves.
I’m not on your “side,” because I’m not an idiot (that’s the only “side” you’re on). You are reading things in my comment that aren’t there. I made no complaint about matriculation with Jews, I did not say “them” etc. You are hallucinating.
Just keep bragging about going to “Jewlane”. But I guess you think I am an idiot because you think I am Jewish. But hey, some of your best friends are Jews. Nice!
as a conservative and a supporter of free speech and Professor Turley I have to say that you sound like a true Jew hater and a damn bigot.
Damn hullbobby, you certainly got triggered in a hurry. If I had never seen you post comments, many of which reflect your conservative values, I would have suspected you lean woke.
I grew up in West Minneapolis. A community adjacent to mine and where most of my high school (Jewish) friends lived, was St. Louis Park. It was those friends that referred to their own community as St. Jewish Park. It rolled off their tongue as a funny moniker. They weren’t making fun of their own religion, they were poking fun at the % of the population there being Jewish.
Thank you, Olly. Getting so triggered about what I didn’t even write has Hullbobby stuck in a mental rut, maybe somebody else can talk him out of it. He clearly listens to nothing I say.
I’ve got nothing for this. Just WTF Up next arresting someone at a Mall wearing an I Love Jesus Tee Shirt!!
MRR wrote, “Just WTF Up next arresting someone at a Mall wearing an I Love Jesus Tee Shirt!!”
You’re welcome to your own opinions but wow that’s out there! In my opinion you just jumped off the cliff of reality into complete absurdity. There is no justification for that kind of nonsensical extrapolation.
There was a guy recently kicked out (not arrested though) of Mall of America for wearing an “I love Jesus” t-shirt. That’s what MRR is referring to.
True story. He was eventually allowed to stay. Now the Mall of America has a local group organizing to show up there, all wearing similar t-shirts.
Macroman, would you have been as outraged if the shirt supported Israel, or would that turn the Mall into The “Jewmall of America”? I say this after your sickening comments calling Tulane “Jewlane”.
The difference between bigots like Macroman and myself is that I support the wearing of the Jesus shirt as well as Jews being able to be overrepresented at Tulane due to academic excellence. MAcroman cannot do the same.
Sorry MAcroman, you are as bad as Anonymous and Svelaz and I am sorry that you purport to be a conservative.
What on Earth in my benign comment gave you the impression that I am outraged? Where do I “purport to be a conservative”? Why are you making things up and attacking me for them? What is wrong with you? I never said the Jewish population at Tulane was a problem, I was simply stating a fact. You have extremely poor reading comprehension.
You are spewing hate and calling me a bigot for no reason and you think you are the moral one in this conversation. What a joke!
If I misconstrued your meaning I apologize, but when I see someone calling a particular university “Jewlane” it gets my back up. Again, if this is not your attitude then I apologize. But maybe it is you that needs to better comprehend how your words are taken and try using some more common sense. Jewlane is a slur and yet you don’t get it because… you have Jewish friends.
I’m telling you, man. Jewlane is not a slur. I literally preceded it with “more or less affectionately.” You don’t know it isn’t a slur because you’re ignorant about Tulane (and semi-literate). I am not ignorant of Tulane, and I shared a bit about what I know. You responded by calling me a “damn bigot.” You’re not a good person or a good reader. You continue to try to mock me rather than admit you’re wrong. No class or integrity. And no I did not suspect you are Jewish as, as you said earlier, Jews are smart.
Was he harrassing people?
I hadn’t heard about that. I’d like to read about it.
For the record; this whole conversation is an unrelated deflection.
I just looked this up. I think found the correct video. Here’s what I learned from the video.
1. The shirt did not say “I Love Jesus”.
2. The shirt said on the front “JESUS SAVES” and on the back “JESUS
COEXISTIS THE ONLY WAY” (the COEXIST was lined through)3. The security guards called the shirt soliciting and that some guests in the mall were offended.
4. The man wearing the shirt was not harassing others.
5. The guy wearing the shirt said that he was kicked out the day before for 24 hours for preaching in the mall.
My Opinion
1. The shirt is only offensive to immature snowflakes, they should be kicking the snowflakes out for wasting their time.
2. The shirt is no more soliciting than any other shirt that has a product name on it. The claim is a bald-faced unethical rationalizing lie.
3. The security guards ignorantly allowed themselves to be pawns in a woke game of totalitarian control of social norms in public.
4. It’s my opinion that the security guards overreacted because of their experience having to kick him out for preaching in the very recent past. The security guards did in fact overreacted this time. They should have simply stated that if he starts preaching again he will be kicked out again.
I’m done with this deflection.
Why are prejudicial comments “VIEWED” as antisemitic, but innocuous comments against other groups are CLEARLY RACIST? Just like the difference in reporting between 2 equally bigoted jackals David Duke & Louie Farrakhan.
LJ Feld wrote, “Why are prejudicial comments ‘VIEWED’ as anti-Semitic, but innocuous comments against other groups are CLEARLY RACIST? Just like the difference in reporting between 2 equally bigoted jackals David Duke & Louie Farrakhan.”
You ask why? The answer is “pure bias” is driving the rhetorical responses.
Bias makes you stupid.
Bias based in facts is smart…like risk management