Category Archives: School Indoctrination

Muslims at Hartford Seminary: You deserve to die because you are an infidel

This was supposed to be a scholarly interfaith discussion at Hartford Seminary and this is what they got from the scholarly Muslims attending:

Campus Watch:

Another case in point is Hartford Seminary (HS) in Connecticut (alluded to in Palmer’s letter). HS boasts the oldest Islamic Studies program in America. Several of its faculty members endorse and promote Islamist views, most notably Ingrid Mattson, former president of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA).

A year ago HS accepted a $1-million gift from the IIIT. The money will be deployed in strengthening an Islamic Studies program that is deeply at odds with classical liberal principles of untrammeled academic inquiry and the free exchange of ideas. The troubling nature of the courses is well fleshed out in the published narrative of Andrew Bieszad, a Catholic HS graduate with a master’s degree in Islamic Studies. Bieszad’s thoughtful chronicle of his 2007-2010 sojourn in HS’ allegedly mainstream program reveals a harrowing portrait of Islamic privilege run amok.

Here, for instance, is Bieszad’s account of what transpired during a class in “interfaith dialogue”:

I had done interfaith dialogue before, so this was not a new experience for me. We were separated into groups for the dialogue, and when I was permitted to speak, I said, ‘I am Catholic, and I do not believe in Islam.’ Following me, one of the Muslim students spoke. She said that she was Muslim, and then she addressed me directly. In a soft, Arabic accented voice, she told me, ‘You are an infidel because you do not accept Islam’ and that ‘according to Islam you do not deserve to live.’ A second Muslim student heartily agreed, and after repeating the first student’s comments, she added that ‘in Islam, the Koran and the tradition of the prophet are very clear about this’ and that ‘you deserve to die.’

This was one of several publicly-made threatening statements and insults that I would receive from Muslim seminary classmates for my open disagreement with Islam.

Christian Students CENSORED at 160 Public Universities. ADF Defends! (video)

Most people have no idea what is going on at our public universities.

A hundred million secular Marxists didn’t suddenly become libertarians in 1989 when the wall fell. They had to go to work somewhere and many went to work at public schools and universities and they brought their twisted philosophy with them.

Persecution of Christian, Jewish, conservative, libertarian and traditional students on campus is so common and prevalent that there are multiple legal groups fighting it including the Alliance Defense Fund, The Rutherford Institute, the ACLJ, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), the Student Press Law Center and believe it or not, many of these cases are so egregious that the ACLU has even been stepping up to defend such persecuted students.   These civil rights groups are overwhelmed with requests for help. The problem is that bad. Just because you don’t run into these radical leftists or hear about them in your daily lives does not mean they aren’t there.

[Full Disclosure: FIRE and the ACLU helped in a case I was involved in at Indiana University – Editor.]

Having worked for the campus in a job where I ended up in every office at one time or another I know first hand that about half of the professors in the liberal arts department either have pictures of Karl Marx on their wall and/or have his book prominently displayed. Books by Adam Smith, Frederick Hayek, Milton Friedman…. good luck.

Western Ky. Univ. Turns Blind Eye To Vandalized Pro-Life Display

‘Kids for Christ’ club silenced because they were “religious,” no longer silenced (In Oklahoma of all places).

Honor Student Denied Credit Because Community Service Event Was Religious

Christian Club Told It’s Not Religious; Forced To Have Non-Christian Leaders (In North Carolina)

Teachers Unions Losing Popularity Among Teachers & the Public

Wall Street Journal:

However Wisconsin’s recall election turns out on Tuesday, teachers unions already appear to be losing a larger political fight—in public opinion. In our latest annual national survey, we found that the share of the public with a positive view of union impact on local schools has dropped by seven percentage points in the past year. Among teachers, the decline was an even more remarkable 16 points.

On behalf of Harvard’s Program on Education Policy and Governance and the journal Education Next, we have asked the following question since 2009: “Some people say that teacher unions are a stumbling block to school reform. Others say that unions fight for better schools and better teachers. What do you think? Do you think teacher unions have a generally positive effect on schools, or do you think they have a generally negative effect?”

Respondents can choose among five options: very positive, somewhat positive, neither positive nor negative, somewhat negative, and very negative.

In our polls from 2009 to 2011, we saw little change in public opinion. Around 40% of respondents were neutral, saying that unions had neither a positive nor negative impact. The remainder divided almost evenly, with the negative share being barely greater than the positive.

But this year unions lost ground. While 41% of the public still takes the neutral position, those with a positive view of unions dropped to 22% in 2012 from 29% in 2011.

Political campaigns may already have noticed this shift. In a recent address on education, GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney called teachers unions “the clearest example of a group that has lost its way.”

The survey’s most striking finding comes from its nationally representative sample of teachers. Whereas 58% of teachers took a positive view of unions in 2011, only 43% do in 2012. The number of teachers holding negative views of unions nearly doubled to 32% from 17% last year.

Perhaps this helps explain why, according to education journalist and union watchdog Mike Antonucci, top officials of the National Education Association are reporting a decline of 150,000 members over the past two years and project that they will lose 200,000 more members by 2014, as several states have recently passed laws ending the automatic deduction of union dues from teachers’ paychecks.

George Soros Funds His Own “Open Society” (read oligarchy) University and Spends $400 Million Influencing American Universities; Elite Media Silent…

..but if the Koch Brothers make a donation it is evil vulture capitalists buying the system and wrecking democracy in the “elite media”.

CNS News:

School is letting out around the United States, but for George Soros, education never stops. Soros has given more than $400 million to colleges and universities, including money to most prominent institutions in the United States. He also helped establish Central European University (CEU) which, in turn, uses its resources to promote his personal goal of an “open society.”

Imagine that, a whole university funded by one of the most controversial figures in the world. Soros has used that $400 million worldwide to indoctrinate students and teach them to promote liberal, and in some cases extremist, causes. But don’t expect the American news media to make it a big issue, even though they have done so for the Koch brothers.

CEU, which is essentially Soros’s own university, has received $250 million from the liberal billionaire. The Founder and Chairman of the Board is none other than Soros. More than half of CEU’s 20 member board are closely tied to the liberal financier. President of the Soros-funded Bard College Leon Botstein is Chairman of the Board.

While the Left shrivels at the thought of the Koch brother’s donations to universities, Soros gave more than 50 times as much. Bard College was the American institution that received the most from Soros (more than $75 million). Grants to Bard for “community service and social action” included a Palestinian youth group and an initiative to educate prisoners across the country.

All of the Ivy League universities, along with a variety of state schools, private institutions, and even religiously-affiliated institutions, were also funded by Soros.

The Koch brothers were vilified by the American political left for donating almost $7 million to universities while their beloved Soros gave more than 50 times that amount to the same type of groups.

Soros’s Center for American Progress, which received $7.3 million from his foundations, posted a report on their Think Progress blog titled “Koch Fueling Far Right Academic Centers at Universities across the Country.”  In the article, the Koch-hating leftist Lee Fang lists universities that received money from the Kochs to include George Mason University, Utah State, and Brown. Totaling nearly $7 million, grants as small as $100,000 were criticized. A donation of $1.5 million to Florida State University supposedly gave the Kochs “a free hand in selecting professors and approving publications.”

Alternet, funded by Soros complained about a “shady deal” that helped the Kochs fund Florida State University. Colorlines, also funded by Soros, said of the same donation: “FSU Trades Academic Freedom for Billionaire Charles Koch’s Money.”

This information is all part of an extensive new Special Report on Soros by the Business and Media Institute (a sister organization of CNSNews.com). The report, “George Soros: Godfather of the Left,”also detailed Soros’s many controversial dealings around the world.

UPenn Professor: Cops are pigs, conservatives are schmucks, America is a perverse place, we need useful Marxist concepts….

And you think this is unusual? This is what a majority of college professors either fully endorse or are very sympathetic to.

When The Wall fell in 1989 a few hundred million communists did not suddenly become libertarians. They had to go somewhere.

The Blaze:

There has been no shortage of partisan teaching in the news lately, but Professor Philippe Bourgois of The University of Pennsylvania may have just brought proselytizing from the lectern to a new low.

Bourgois, a Professor of Anthropology at Penn, gave a public lecture recently slandering police officers, conservatives, doctors and America itself, all while encouraging and complimenting the teachings of Karl Marx. The rant took place in front of students on the campus of Bryn Mawr College, located west of Philadelphia. The talk was a panel discussion entitled ‘The Transformation of Poverty Governance’ and revolved around how America is handling it’s welfare state.

See the video HERE.

The Chronicle of Higher Education = Authoritarians on Campus

When black studies PhD candidates put out marxist nonsense and label it race studies, it is as disingenuous as it gets. When black studies “scholars” trash black people for not being marxist such as Dr. Thomas Sowell and Dr Walter Williams and others why is this allowed to be passed of a great civil rights historical scholarship? It is nonsense to anyone with a residue of common sense, but to thousands of radical leftists with a stalinist bent, speaking such obvious truths results in a call for censorship.

If people want to know what more and more people think of American education as the national joke, this is a great example of why.

Bernard Goldberg:

The “higher education community,” as they like to be known, worships at the altar of diversity – unless, of course, we’re talking about diversity of opinion.  Then these supposedly smart academics show us how dumb they can be.

The Chronicle of Higher Education, which publishes articles for that community, just fired a woman named Naomi Schaefer Riley. Why? Because she expressed an opinion many of those scholars in the “higher education community” didn’t like.

Academics, liberals who brag about being open-minded, read something they disagreed with and then, like a mob, hunted down the offender and made her pay. Ms. Riley was hired to provide conservative commentary and then was canned because she provided it.

Here’s what happened:

The Chronicle published a cover story recently called “Black Studies: Swaggering Into the Future” which said in part that “young black studies scholars … are less consumed than their predecessors with the need to validate the field or explain why they are pursuing doctorates in their discipline.”  There was also a companion piece about five Ph.D. candidates who, we’re told, “are rewriting the history of race.”  Nowhere in the articles is anyone quoted who is skeptical of black studies as an academic discipline.

Enter Naomi Schaefer Riley, who wrote a piece for the Chronicle’s Web site – (that was her job) — that said that the dissertation topics the graduate students mentioned were obscure at best and “a collection of left-wing victimization claptrap” at worst.

What happened next, sadly, is no surprise.  After those oh so tolerant academics read what she wrote they bombarded her messages calling her – wait for it – a racist.

Ok, I’m not shocked, either. But that was only the beginning.  Then 6,500 academics signed an on line petition demanding that she be fired.

For a few days, the Chronicle sort of stood its ground saying, Ms. Riley’s blog was an “invitation to debate.”  But after about 72 hours, the pressure had become too much for the Chronicle’s editor, Liz McMillen.  She issued a statement that Ms. Riley says reads like “a confession at a re-education camp.”

“We’ve heard you,” Ms. McMillen wrote to the mob.  “And we have taken to heart what you said.  We now agree that Ms. Riley’s blog posting did not meet The Chronicle’s basic editorial standards for reporting and fairness in opinion articles.”

This, of course, was nonsense. Naomi Schaefer Riley – a white woman who, if it matters is married to a black man – was fired because she said things about race that are unacceptable in liberal academic circles.  She was fired because she had an unpopular opinion, which is a crime against humanity on many college campuses.  And she was smeared with the word “racist” because that’s the word liberals use to describe anybody with views on race they don’t agree with.

In an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal about the mob that got her fired, Ms. Riley tells us that “If you want to know why almost all of the responses to my original post consist of personal attack on me, along with irrelevant mentions of Fox News, The Wall Street Journal, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum and George Zimmerman, it is because black studies is a cause, not a course of study.  By doubting the academic worthiness of black studies, my critics conclude, I am opposed to racial justice – and therefore a racist.”

Liberals like to howl about the chilling effect when supposed enemies of free speech try to getthem fired for something they said.  In academia, these enemies, of course, are always conservatives.  Liberals are always the victims of the mob.  All of this proves a point: They’re not only dumb, these academic authoritarians – they’re also breathtakingly clueless.

 

More on this story can be seen at  The Weekly Standard HERE.

Commencementgate: Colleges pick leftist commencement speakers 7-1

Washington Examiner

The liberal tilt of America’s top colleges and universities has gone off the charts with the ratio of liberal-to-conservative commencement speakers reaching 7-1, an all-time high, according to a new survey of graduation ceremonies at the top 100 schools.

“It was particularly awful this year,” said Ron Meyer of the Young America’s Foundation, which conducted the survey. “The ratio has never been this bad.”

According to the conservative youth group, of the top 100 universities in the latest U.S. News rankings, 71 featured liberal speakers while 10 hosted conservatives. And of the top 35 schools, only one asked a conservative to speak. Emory College, ranked 20th in the nation, had Obamacare foe Benjamin Carson give the commencement.

Sixteen Obama officials will speak, more than the total number of conservatives, and conservative journalists were shut out while 11 liberal and mainstream reporters, anchors and commentators were given the spotlight including Barbara Walters, Cokie Roberts, Katie Couric, Soledad O’Brien, Tom Brokaw and Brian Williams.

See their list here.

A previous YAF survey found that Bush administration officials spoke at the top 100 schools a total of 14 times, and he served eight years. In President Obama’s first three years, officials have spoken 29 times.

Sowell: The Pathology of Academics Who Constantly Get It Wrong (video)

Dr. Thomas Sowell

American intellectuals by and large said the USSR had a better system.

Intellectuals said that the USA should unilaterally disarm before Reagan won the Cold War.

British intellectuals called for English disarmament before WWII.

Leftist academics get the effect of tax policy wrong almost every time….etc.

New Muslim Brotherhood Egyptian Govt: OK To Have Sex With Dead Wives…

Leftist teachers at school teach that other cultures are equal to or superior to Western Civilization. The Obama Administration has been actively supporting the Muslim Brotherhood and even parroting their PR.

Ynet News:

Egypt’s Islamist-dominated parliament is set to introduce a law allowing husbands to have sex with their dead wives up to six hours after death. Critics fear that the controversial law highlights a trend of increasingly anti-women legislation since the so-called Arab Spring.

The proposed law has sparked much controversy, specifically within Egypt’s National Council for Women, which has been campaigning against the law, saying that it “marginalizes and undermines the status of women and would negatively affect the country’s human development.”

Related:

Prof. Niall Ferguson Blasts Obama and MSNBC on Egypt – LINK

Analysis: Obama proposes $800 million in aid for the Muslim Brotherhood – LINK

Former head of CIA “bin Laden Unit”: Libyan rebels are like the Taliban – LINK

My Concerns About the Operation in Libya & Egypt – LINK

Islamic militants receive two-thirds vote in Egypt – LINK

AP: Egyptian Women March Against Abuse by Military – LINK

It’s official, Egypt is a disaster – LINK

Marxist Left allies with Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and Middle East – LINK

Libya’s transitional leader says Islamic Sharia law will be the “basic source” of all law – LINK

Documentary: Origins of Political Correctness – How Marxists Founded “Critical Theory” To Use Academia to Undermine Western Civilization & Indoctrinate Children

So much of what you saw in school and from the PC left will make more sense after to watch this documentary. It is a must see.

“Total intolerance for any view but Marxism”

Bill Whittle on the propaganda of the PC narrative. His video includes some information on “The Frankfurt School of Marxism” who invented the concepts of  “Critical Theory”, “Political Correctness”, radical feminism, etc.

“The left has been telling these lies for almost 100 years in order to resurrect a political philosophy that has killed no less than 100 million people and still will not die.”

 

UPDATE –  Video: Teachers lying to students, far left indoctrination….. LINK.

American Professors Gather in Iran for Occupy Wall Street Conference (video)

If there is any doubt about just how anti-American and radical far left academia has become…

The Weekly Standard:

An alarming news report from Iran’s Press TV, a propaganda arm of the Iranian government, showing American professors gathering in Tehran to discuss the Occupy Wall Street Movement:

See the video from MEMRI HERE.

200 Jewish Students Receive Eviction Notices from Jihadist Student Activists at Florida University

Creating a hostile and intimidating environment on campus is not protected speech. It is intended to intimidate Jewish students, interfere with their education with such a threatening environment and is designed to infringe on their liberty interest. Florida should lower the boom on this behavior, but considering how antisemitsm is pushed by academia in general I am not hopeful.

The Blaze:

More than 200 Jewish students at Florida Atlantic University in Boca Raton, FL found “eviction” notices posted on their dormitory doors Friday, unaware that it was part of a publicity stunt by Students for Justice in Palestine.

The organization’s chapter president, Noor Fawzy, explained, “We want to raise awareness about the plight of the Palestinians…The intent is to expose Israel‘s illegal policies and give students a feel of what it’s like to live under occupation.  “The ”notice” explained that more than 25,000 homes have been demolished since the “occupation of Palestine” began in 1967.

While SJP appears to have gotten university approval for the stunt (some members may have even been escorted by an employee official as they were posting the signs), the school has since removed the postings after many expressed their disapproval.

Charles Brown, the school’s senior VP for student affairs, released a statement: “The recent mock eviction postings did not comply with the policies of University Housing and Residential Life or the Office of Student Involvement and Leadership concerning the distribution of printed material, and therefore the postings were removed.”

Jackie Klein, a student at the school, explained, “Free speech is good for everyone, but this is a bit intimidating…They should be able to promote their views, but in a respectful way.”

Rayna Exelbierd, who received one of the notices, said, “We’re taking it very seriously. We’re considering it a hate crime. The flier promotes hate; it doesn’t promote peace. People were scared by it. People felt threatened by it.”

More than 50 students gathered at Hillel Wednesday to discuss the flyers, but have chosen not to contact “Students for Justice in Palestine” because its members have chanted anti-Israel slogans at their events in the past.  Scott Brockman, Hillel’s executive director, commented: “While protecting and ensuring free speech on campus, the tactic used by Students for Justice in Palestine is unacceptable.”

New Study Shows University of California Run by Leftist Radicals

The National Association of Scholars study can be found here:

http://www.nas.org/images/documents/A_Crisis_of_Competence.pdf

http://www.nas.org/images/documents/Noindoctrinationorg_UC_courses.pdf

Brietbart News:

Think a University of California degree is worth its weight in gold? Think again. According to a new study, you might want to rethink that second mortgage needed to send junior to a UC campus.

The California Association of Scholars, a division of the National Association of Scholars, have just released an incendiary report showing that all nine of the University of California’s campuses have been compromised by too many politicized courses and radical faculty members. CAS members include a number of current or past professors from the UC system who have taught at UC-Berkeley, UCLA, UC-Santa Cruz, and UC-San Diego.

Conservatives have long complained of a strong liberal bias in college classrooms, and this new study shows just how far off track it has gone in one of the most prestigious public university systems in the country. You can read the full CAS 81-page report here.

CAS’s president John Ellis knows very well of what he speaks; he’s a professor emeritus of German Literature from UC Santa Cruz. “The quality of education at the University of California has been jeopardized by political activism,“ Professor Ellis said in a phone interview. “Dogmatism is rapidly displacing open-minded inquiry, especially in the social sciences and humanities, to the severe disadvantage of students.”

A Crisis in Competence: The Corrupting Influence of Political Activism in the University of California isn’t trying to purge the system of differing left of center opinions. The well-documented study just hopes to even the playing field so students get a quality education – an education that has standards and teaches students to look at all sides of the issues. The CAS report emphasizes common sense observations that seem to be beyond the grasp of the assumed intelligent members of the UC Board of Regents.

One observation points out that “a political science department with one half of the spectrum of political thought missing cannot be considered a competent department.” It seems only a Marxist professor with an agenda and no common sense would disagree with that idea from this new study. Unfortunately, as the study shows, there are a lot more Marxists now teaching in the University of California system than you would think.

The CAS report took the time to carefully vet the studies it cites from various institutions, including George Mason University, the Center for the Study of Popular culture, and many others. They even scoured carefully scrutinized and recorded students complaints on the subject, many of which you can read here.

Here a just a few of the conclusions about the University of California system that CAS came to:
There has been a sharp increase in faculty members who self-identify as radicals. This has led to “one party” academic departments, such as at Berkeley, where left-of-center faculty members outnumber their right-of-center colleagues in Political Science by a ratio of 28:2, in English 29:1 and in History 31:1. A number of these professors are openly avowed Marxists! (Has Van Jones applied for one of these positions?)

Many curricula promote political activism, in violation of UC regulations. Critical Race Studies at UCLA’s School of Law, for example, aims to be a “training ground” for advocates committed to racial justice theory and practice (sounds like Harvard during the Professor Derrick Bell/Obama years).

Several departments attempt to erase the study of Western tradition. History majors are now not required to take a survey course in Western civilization on any of the nine University of California campuses. Four more UC campuses have dropped their American History requirements (many UC students cannot even answer basic questions about American or World History).

Suppression of free speech is commonplace. Speakers at UC Berkeley who have been shouted down by protesters include Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Secretary of State Madeline Albright, and Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O’Conner (but Columbia welcomes Iran’s Ahmadinejad to speak with open arms).

Radical and left-of-center UC professors favor hiring like-minded new academics and block the hiring of new professors who don’t “think the right way.” (Why would a conservative incur the enormous debt and hassles pursuing a Ph. D. if the possibility of a professor’s job is little or nil?)

The advancement of “social justice” is now the open aim of a number of UC faculty members and even whole departments in the system (if a student asks questions or writes answers or papers that challenge these professors and their radical assumptions they can expect a poor grade).

The UC curriculum has been gutted because too many professors now show an open preference for promoting a partisan political agenda. These are just a few of the important issues confronting the UC system that the CAS study raises and documents in very credible fashion.

Iowa Republicans blast law school over refusal to hire conservative professor as faculty. Professor sues.

Those of you who follow this web site and others such as FIRE know that this kind of illegal discrimination is commonplace on campus.

Fox News:

Teresa Wagner
Teresa Wagner, pictured above, is suing a former dean at the University of Iowa College of Law for employment discrimination after she was turned down for a faculty position. The law school rejected her candidacy because of her conservative political views.

Iowa Republicans are taking aim at the state’s top law school for denying a faculty position to a conservative law professor, who an assistant dean once said embraces politics the rest of the faculty “despises.”

Teresa Wagner, who works as an associate director of writing at the University of Iowa College of Law, is suing former dean Carolyn Jones for employment discrimination, claiming she was not hired for a professor position because Jones and other law faculty disapproved of her conservative views and activism.

To hold a law faculty position at the publicly funded university is viewed as a “sacred cow,” Wagner said in an interview, and “Republicans need not apply.”

The case, which goes to trial this October, has become a chief concern for Republicans in Johnson County, who on Monday passed a resolution calling on the Iowa House of Representatives’ oversight committee to investigate hiring practices involved in Wagner’s case and others like it.
“We think the hiring policies need to be such where there a

re certainly non-discriminatory practices which relate to political philosophy, as well as to race and gender and other issues,” said Bob Anderson, chairman of the Johnson County Republican Party. He claims students are deprived of “diversity of political thought” when conservative thinkers, like Wagner, are rejected based on their politics.

“We have a very active, conservative Republican community within the University of Iowa, which has not been met with an appropriate sense of respect for their ideas,” he told FoxNews.com. “We see generally the climate as unfavorable.”
Wagner, who graduated with honors from the law school in 1993, has taught at the George Mason University School of Law. She has also worked for the National Right to Life Committee, which opposes abortion, and the conservative Family Research Council.

In 2006, Wagner applied for a full-time instructor position with the law school and was denied. She was also rejected for an adjunct or full-time position in four subsequent attempts, according to her attorney, Stephen T. Fieweger.
“For the first time in years, there are more registered Republicans in the state of Iowa than there are Democrats, which is obviously not reflected at the University of Iowa,” Fieweger told FoxNews.com.

Fieweger said Wagner’s candidacy was dismissed because of her conservative views, and he cited a 2007 email from Associate Dean Jonathan C. Carlson to Jones in which Carlson wrote: “Frankly, one thing that worries me is that some people may be opposed to Teresa serving in any role, in part at least because they so despise her politics (and especially her activism about it).”

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/04/05/iowa-republicans-blast-law-school-over-refusal-to-hire-conservative-professor/

More Indoctrination: Virginia middle-schoolers assigned opposition research on GOP candidates – UPDATED!

This is a rampant problem. Civil rights groups such as FIRE, ADF and others are so swamped that they can only take the most egregious cases.

The Daily Caller:

A Virginia middle school teacher recently forced his students to support President Barack Obama’s re-election campaign by conducting opposition research in class against the Republican presidential candidates.

The 8th grade students, who attend Liberty Middle School in Fairfax County, were required to seek out the vulnerabilities of Republican presidential hopefuls and forward them to the Obama campaign.

“This assignment was just creepy beyond belief — like something out of East Germany during the Cold War,” one frustrated father, who asked for his family to remain anonymous, told The Daily Caller.

The assignment was for students to research the backgrounds and positions of each of the GOP candidates for president and find “weaknesses” in them, the parent explained. From there, students were to prepare a strategy paper to exploit those weaknesses and then to send their suggestions to the Obama campaign.

Liberty teacher Michael Denman, who declined to comment, unveiled the assignment in mid-January when he broke the Civics Honor’s class into four groups, one for each Republican candidate. The students were then to collaborate as a group and research the backgrounds of their assigned candidate.

Denman assigned two kids to write a paper revealing the identified “weaknesses,” two to write the attack strategy paper and two others to locate an individual inside the Obama campaign to whom they could send the information.

“My classmates don’t actually know a lot, but a few of us tended to agree that the most recent instruction on this project just didn’t seem right,” one of the students told TheDC. “Mr. Denman didn’t tell us where to find the information, just to research on them.”

 This is priceless, check out the excuse that the school administrator offers up: 

As a result, the school received multiple phone calls from parents frustrated with the political nature of the assignment, the father told TheDC.

“I was shocked that a school teacher would so blatantly politicize the curriculum of a middle school classroom,” the parent said. “I asked [my child] if a similar assignment had been handed out to examine the background and positions of President Obama to see if the teacher was at least being bipartisan.”

No similar assignment was given to research Obama’s history, identify his weaknesses or pass them along to the Republican candidates.

John Torre, a spokesman on behalf of the Fairfax County Public School system, insists that students were never instructed to actually send their results to the Obama campaign.

“Instead, the teacher simply asked his students to find out the name of the office that would receive such information,” Torre wrote in an email to TheDC.

OH! It is all OK because they never sent the results to the Obama Campaign office, as if that makes a residue of difference. Of course, the only reason the results were not sent in is because they got caught. Notice how the excuse completely fails to address the main issue at hand, which is blatant indoctrination. After seeing countless hundreds of instances of this kind of misbehavior and much worse at public schools, I sometimes wonder if there is an unwritten rule that one may not have an IQ of over 90 to be a public school administrator.

Lawsuit: School administrators force 12 year old to give up her Facebook password

I am considering authoring a book called School Administrators Gone Wild simply because the volumes of the most incredible stupidity coming from public school administrators is shocking. Most parents have no idea of the scope of this problem. There are at least five civil rights groups that focus just on legal violations at schools and they are overwhelmed with more cases than they can handle (and that isn’t even including the ACLU).

Legal papers, filed by the ACLU say the 12 year old girl, “was intimidated, frightened, humiliated and sobbing while she was detained in the small school room,” while school staff and a sheriff’s deputy read her private messages…

UK Telegraph:

The case has been brought by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), and comes amid growing concern in the United States about individuals’ ability to keep their email and other online accounts secret from their school, employer and government authorities.

A number of prospective employees have complained that they were forced to hand over their passwords to Facebook and Twitter when applying for jobs.

In the Minnesota case, the 12-year-old girl, known only as RS, is said to have been punished by teachers at Minnewaska Area Middle School for things she wrote on Facebook while at home, and using her own computer.

The ACLU is arguing that her First and Fourth Amendment rights, which protect freedom of speech and freedom from illegal searches respectively, were violated.

She is said to have been punished with detention after using Facebook to criticise a school hall monitor, and again after a fellow student told teachers that she had discussed sex online.

Legal papers, filed by the ACLU say: “RS was intimidated, frightened, humiliated and sobbing while she was detained in the small school room,” while school staff and a sheriff’s deputy read her private messages.

It went on: “RS was extremely nervous and being called out of class and being interrogated.” The lawsuit says that the mother of RS had not given permission for the viewing.

A spokesman for the school district said: “The district is confident that once all facts come to light, the district’s conduct will be found to be reasonable and appropriate.”

The case highlights growing concern in the US about the extent to which supposedly private communications can be kept from those in authority.

The ACLU recently forced the Department of Corrections in Maryland to stop requiring applicants to provide their Facebook passwords when applying for jobs.

California public school abuse so bad that cameras likely to be placed in classrooms

 

CBS LA:

LOS ANGELES (CBS) — The California State Supreme Court has ruled school districts must be responsible to reduce the risk of children being molested by staff members. Otherwise, they may face civil lawsuits.

The ruling allows districts and school administrators to be sued if it is demonstrated they were negligent in employing staff or faculty

KNX1070 legal analyst Royal Oakes says the ruling could have a significant impact on any civil cases filed against the LA Unified School District as a result of the Miramonte Elementary School sex abuse scandal.

The ruling could additionally lead to revamping of LAUSD policies regarding hiring, vetting of new or transferred employees, and improved means of employee surveillance, up to and maybe including efforts such as cameras in the classroom.

UCLA Students to be asked to declare sexual orientation when applying…..

Yet another example of how radicalized to the point of bumbling abject stupidity academia has fallen.

CBS LA:

The next influx of UC students may be asked to state their sexual orientation.

In January, the Academic Senate recommended that upon accepting admission offers from a University of California school students should have the option of identifying themselves as lesbian, gay, bi-sexual or transgender.

The UC Board of Admissions and Relations with Schools had mixed reactions but agreed that the question would allow them to collect important statistical information. They recommended putting the question on the SIR forms instead of college applications to protect students’ privacy.

The news made the front page of UCLA’s campus paper Daily Bruin and is stirring controversy across UC campuses.

 

About Civility Part III: Cable Networks Eagerly Bash Rush But Embrace Crude Bill Maher

Warning, some of these descriptions are graphic. What is interesting is that even after Bill Mahar said these horrible things, attacked and mocked Christians etc, the networks said what a delight and pleasure it was to have him on while making more of these attacks, examples of which you will see below.

Much of the time, those shouting *civility* are the biggest hypocrites imaginable. For some shocking evidence of just what I am talking about take a look at About Civility Part I and About Civility Part II [you can see our previous Sandra Fluke coverage HERE and HERE.]

 

Via Newsbusters:

Monday, on MSNBC’s The Ed Show, host Ed Schultz — who last year had to apologize after he called conservative radio host Laura Ingraham a “slut” — urged liberals to exploit Limbaugh’s use of the same term (also with an apology) to get his show cancelled. Schultz fantasized: “If there is a time to get him off the air, this is the push. I mean, if women in this country are serious about what they hear on the free airwaves of America, there’s no better time.”

Now, here’s a rundown of some demeaning language used by Bill Maher in just a nine day period last March:

■ On March 18, 2011, Maher, on his HBO show Real Time, employed a crude term for a female body part when talking about Sarah Palin: “Sarah Palin finally heard what happened in Japan, and she’s demanding that we invade Tsunami. I mean, she says, ‘These Tsunamians will not get away with this.’ Oh speaking of dumb twats….”

■ A week later, on his March 25 show, Maher insulted Palin and Michele Bachman as “bimbos.” Talking about the GOP field, Maher argued: “If Bachmann and Palin get in, that’s two bimbos, and then there’s Mitt Romney, a millionaire, and Newt Gingrich, a professor. We just need a skipper and a buddy – we’ve got Gilligan’s Island.”

■ Two days after that, on March 28, Maher employed the C-word in talking about Palin during a show in Dallas. According to a favorable review in the Dallas Voice: “It’s that fearlessness — he acknowledged that some people would probably be uncomfortable with some of his remarks about religion, not to mention calling Sarah Palin a ‘cunt’ (‘there’s just no other word for her’) — that makes Maher the most dangerous person in comedy.”

But none of this prompted any of the scolding that has greeted Limbaugh’s transgression. In fact, in the days and months that followed, CNN and MSNBC cheerfully included Maher a dozen times as a guest in their line-up. Only Chuck Todd, filling for Chris Matthews on Hardball, brought up Maher’s vicious comments just one day after the day after his Dallas event: “Any regrets on what you said?”

Maher, predictably, said he wasn’t sorry: “I’m not trying to hurt somebody’s feelings. But if you want me to say ‘I’m sorry, what I said was wrong,’ no, sorry, I can’t go there.”

 

These demeaning comments have not caused the news networks to sour on Maher, as he continues to make regular appearances and receive pats on the back from CNN and MSNBC hosts:

■ On March 22, 2011 — in the midst of his storm of nasty comments about conservative women, Maher appeared on CNN’s In the Arena. Host Eliot Spitzer did not ask about Maher’s “dumb twat” insult of Palin from four days earlier, or pose any hostile questions to Maher. Spitzer ended by genuflecting: “Your show is brilliant. I love watching it.”

■ On March 29, 2011, Maher made his MSNBC Hardball appearance with Chuck Todd, as noted above. While Todd — unlike CNN’s Spitzer — did ask Maher about how he was “getting hammered in the conservative blogosphere, among a lot of conservative hosts” for his nasty comments about Palin and Bachmann, he was in no way judgmental.

Todd ended that interview by publicizing both Maher’s upcoming show on HBO as well as appearances in Indiana and North Carolina. “Bill Maher, always entertaining to have you on.”

■ On April 12, 2011, MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow hosted Maher, and not once asked about his nasty comments about women. Instead of scolding Maher for his deplorable remarks, Maddow was thrilled to have him: “It is nice to see you….I’m very excited….Thank you so much for being on with us, Bill. It’s really nice to see you. Thank you.”

■ On May 3, 2011, Maher popped up on The Joy Behar Show on CNN’s Headline News Network. Behar fawned over her guest: “I love your show. I watch you every week, and I really get irritated when they put you on hiatus.”

■ On May 17, 2011, Maher showed up on MSNBC’s Hardball, where Chris Matthews touted him as their “star guest.” Maher trashed Michele Bachmann as a “frothing loon,” jabbing that “Bachmann is the candidate for people who find Palin too intellectual.”

■ On June 14, 2011, CNN’s Anderson Cooper interviewed Maher about the GOP debate. Maher unleashed his usual invective, declaring that the Republican candidates “have just horrible, society-killing ideas about America.”

■ On July 11, 2011, Maher appeared as a guest on CNN’s Piers Morgan Tonight, and made the host laugh with a crude reference to Palin and Michele Bachmann. Morgan asked Maher about the GOP nomination: “If you had a choice, gun to your head, which one is it? Palin or Bachmann?”

Maher replied: “I would need a gun to my head. I hope Sarah Palin gets in so that they split the MILF vote.” MILF is an acronym for a “Mother I’d Like to Fuck.” The CNN host ended the interview by telling Maher: “May you remain gloriously uncensored on HBO…Love the show.”

■ On August 3, 2011, fill-in host Michael Eric Dyson had “the great Bill Maher” on MSNBC’s The Ed Show. Dyson touted Maher as “my very good friend.”

■ On October 11, 2011, Maher returned to MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow show, which Maddow eagerly promoted. “The one and only Bill Maher is going to be here for an interview tonight,” she promised viewers. Talking about the radical Occupy protesters, Maher used the occasion to suggest violence against Fox News owner Rupert Murdoch: “If a brick came through Rupert Murdoch’s window, I have a feeling Fox News would be a lot more gentle on the Wall Street people….”

■ On January 25, 2012, CNN’s Cooper brought Maher onto his show to talk about Obama’s State of the Union speech and the Republican nomination contest. During that interview, Maher made a derogatory reference to Mormons, predicting Romney would be the nominee and: “I think Obama is going to beat him like a runaway sister wife.” Cooper winced: “Geez, your runaway sister wife? I haven’t heard an LDS punchline in quite a while.”

■ On February 27, 2012, Chris Matthews was thrilled to see Maher back on Hardball where he talked about the Republican “crazies” and “idiots.” “Hey, Maher, you’re the best,” Matthews flattered. “You’re the funniest, smartest guy around….Thank you, Bill Maher — you’re an Irish guy, too. Thank you for coming on.”

■ That same night, Morgan interviewed Maher again, this time prompted by his $1 million donation to Obama’s SuperPAC. Maher mocked Christianity: “You’re allowed to have your opinion that a Palestinian 2,000 years ago walked on water and did magic tricks and was really —  he’s really still his own father and all that stuff.” As always, Morgan was delighted: “Bill Maher, always a great pleasure.”

 

Sandra Fluke: Catholic Institutions Should Pay for My Sex Change!

Sandra Fluke
Sandra Fluke

Sandra Fluke demanded in her testimony to Congress that Catholic Universities, Hospitals and other institutions give her $3,000 worth of birth control because she goes to school at Georgetown (Catholic) University which is enough to buy so many condoms that she could have sex three times a day, every day she is in school. Fluke also wants Catholic institutions to pay for so called “morning after” abortion pills (See our previous Sandra Fluke coverage HERE).

It gets better.

Fluke, according to transcripts, also expects Catholic institutions, insurance companies, government, small businesses etc to pay for sex changes.

Media Research Center:

Sandra Fluke, Gender Reassignment, and Health Insurance

Sandra Fluke is being sold by the left as something she’s not. Namely a random co-ed from Georgetown law who found herself mixed up in the latest front of the culture war who was simply looking to make sure needy women had access to birth control. That, of course, is not the case.

As many have already uncovered Sandra Fluke she is, in reality, a 30 year old long time liberal activist who enrolled at Georgetown with the express purpose of fighting for the school to pay for students’ birth control. She has been pushing for mandated coverage of contraceptives at Georgetown for at least three years according to the Washington Post.

However, as I discovered today, birth control is not all that Ms. Fluke believes private health insurance must cover. She also, apparently, believes that it is discrimination deserving of legal action if “gender reassignment” surgeries are not covered by employer provided health insurance. She makes these views clear in an article she co-edited with Karen Hu in the Georgetown Journal of Gender and the Law.

The title of the article, which can be purchased in full here, is Employment Discrimination Against LGBTQ Persons and was published in the Journal’s 2011 Annual Review. I have posted a transcript of the section I will be quoting from here. In a subsection of the article entitled “Employment Discrimination in Provision of Employment Benefits” starting on page 635 of the review Sandra Fluke and her co-editor describe two forms of discrimination in benefits they believe LGBTQ individuals face in the work place:

“Discrimination typically takes two forms: first, direct discrimination limiting access to benefits specifically needed by LGBTQ persons, and secondly, the unavailability of family-related benefits to LGBTQ families.”

Their “prime example” of the first form of discrimination? Not covering sex change operations:

“A prime example of direct discrimination is denying insurance coverage for medical needs of transgender persons physically transitioning to the other gender.”

This so called “prime example” of discrimination is expounded on in a subsection titled “Gender Reassignment Medical Services” starting on page 636:

“Transgender persons wishing to undergo the gender reassignment process frequently face heterosexist employer health insurance policies that label the surgery as cosmetic or medically unnecessary and therefore uncovered.”

To be clear, the argument here is that employers are engaging in discrimination against their employees who want them to pay for their sex changes because their “heterosexist” health insurance policies don’t believe sex changes are medically necessary.

Read more HERE.

Harvard holds conference on eliminating Jews – UPDATE Harvard: The Jewish people do not exist….

UPDATE – Harvard Anti-Israel Conference: The Jewish People Do Not Exist – LINK

Make no mistake, when jihadist activists team with progressives on campus have an event called “the one state solution” it means taking Israel off the map for good and the Jews with it. Antisemitism is nothing new on campus as so many including Allen Dershowitz and David Horowitz have pointed out countless times; indeed this very writer has authored at least a dozen pieces on the subject. Rarely, is such genocidal bigotry this plainly stated and in your face. Usually it is thinly sugar coated with colorful euphemisms, but upon cross examination it doesn’t take long to get to the true intent that everyone is perfectly aware of. If you have any doubts about just how bad this problem is, this video should help bring you up to speed. Keep in mind that there are very few on campus who will have the moral fortitude to stand up to this, and it has the blessings of much of the leftist elite and the Harvard administration.

Wall Street Journal:

by Professor Ruth King Wisse February 29th, 2012

Harvard’s Latest Assault on Israel

Promoting the Jewish State’s destruction at a school dedicated to ‘democratic governance.’

In 1948, when the Arab League declared war on Israel, no one imagined that six decades later American universities would become its overseas agency. Yet campus incitement against Israel has been growing from California to the New York Island. A conference at Harvard next week called “Israel/Palestine and the One-State Solution” is but the latest aggression in an escalating campaign against the Jewish state.

The sequence is by now familiar: Arab student groups and self-styled progressives organize a conference or event like “Israeli Apartheid Week,” targeting Israel as the main problem of the Middle East. They frame the goals of these events in buzzwords of “expanding the range of academic debate.” But since the roster of speakers and subjects makes their hostile agenda indisputable, university spokespersons scramble to dissociate their institutions from the events they are sponsoring. Jewish students and alums debate whether to ignore or protest the aggression, and newspapers fueling the story give equal credence to Israel’s attackers and defenders.

A featured speaker at Harvard’s conference is Ali Abunimah, creator of the website Electronic Intifada, who opposes the existence of a “Jewish State” as racist by virtue of being Jewish. A regular on this circuit, he also keynoted a recent University of Pennsylvania conference urging “Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions” (BDS) of, from and against Israel. Ostensibly dedicated to protecting Palestinian Arabs from Israeli oppression, BDS has by now achieved the status of an international “movement,” some of whose branches exclude Israeli academics from their journals and conferences.

But the economic war on Israel did not start with BDS. In 1945, before the founding of Israel, the Arab League declared a boycott of “Jewish products and manufactured goods.” Ever since, the Damascus-based Central Boycott Office has tried to enforce a triple-tiered boycott prohibiting importation of Israeli-origin goods and services, trade with any entity that does business in Israel, and engagement with any company or individual that does business with firms on the Arab League blacklist. Although the U.S. Congress took measures to counteract this boycott, and the Damascus Bureau may be temporarily preoccupied on other fronts, the boycott momentum has been picked up by Arab students and academics.

Freedom of speech grants all Americans the right to prosecute the verbal war against Israel. But let’s differentiate toleration from abetting. Harvard may tolerate smoking, but its medical school wouldn’t sponsor a conference touting the benefits of cigarettes because doctors have learned that smoking is hazardous to health. The avowed mission of the Harvard Kennedy School of Government, host of the upcoming conference, “is to strengthen democratic governance around the world by preparing people for public leadership and by helping to solve problems of public policy.” How farcical that instead of seeking to strengthen democratic governance, its students hijack its forum for “studying” how to destroy the hardiest democracy in the Middle East.

The pattern of anti-Israel attack, administrative embarrassment, Jewish confusion, and media exploitation of the story will continue until all parties realize that the war against Israel is fundamentally different from biases to which it is often compared. Once Americans acknowledged the evils of their discrimination against African-Americans, they abjured their racism and tried through affirmative action to compensate for past injustice. Arab and Muslim leaders have done the opposite. Having attempted to deny Jews their right to their one country, they accused Jews of denying Arabs their 22nd. After losing wars on the battlefield, they prosecuted the war by other means.

Students who are inculcated with hatred of Israel may want to express their national, religious or political identity by urging its annihilation. But universities that condone their efforts are triple offenders—against their mission, against the Jewish people, and perhaps most especially against the maligners themselves. Smoking is less fatal to smokers than anti-Jewish politics is to its users. Remember Hitler’s bunker.

Ms. Wisse, a professor of Yiddish and comparative literature at Harvard, is the author of “Jews and Power” (Schocken, 2007).

Orange County Register: As climate case melts, zealots resort to fraud

OC Register:

Respected scientist admits using false identity to obtain documents from a skeptic group.

Peter Gleick, a global warming true believer and purported scientific ethics expert, has admitted soliciting, receiving then distributing confidential fundraising and budget documents from the Heartland Institute under false pretenses, all to discredit Heartland, a free-market think tank that disputes global warming alarmism.

We await determinations of whether violations of state or federal laws on wire fraud and identity theft, and perhaps other offenses, occurred. Illinois-based Heartland has called in the FBI.

Mr. Gleick admitted the scheme in which he posed as a Heartland board member to obtain confidential files and sent them to global warming blogs as if they had been leaked by an insider. He denies, however, forging an accompanying “confidential strategy memo.” Heartland says the memo is not genuine, and there are indications it may have been created on the West Coast, where Mr. Gleick is president and founder of the Pacific Institute in Oakland.

Mr. Gleick requested a leave of absence from the institute after posting his confession online, in which he said, “My judgment was blinded by my frustration with the ongoing efforts – often anonymous, well-funded and coordinated – to attack climate science.”

Unfortunately, we are accustomed to global warming zealots making a sham of ethics as well as tarnishing science. Thanks partly to leaks of climate researchers’ emails in recent years, the global warming movement has been revealed to be a cloistered club of insiders, who bully dissenting scientists, plot to keep contrary views from being published and manipulate data.

That’s why Mr. Gleick’s antics don’t surprise us. For example, Greenpeace reportedly stole garbage from Chris Horner, a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, which also debunks global warming alarmism. The pilfered refuse showed up in media reports intended to “reveal a secret cabal I orchestrated from my basement,” Mr. Horner wrote in his book, “Red Hot Lies.”

Global warmists contend that Heartland and other critics secretly are funded by Big Oil and other fossil fuel interests. The irony is that the stolen Heartland documents reveal the small think tank’s budget of $6 million pales compared with the $26 billion in Obama administration stimulus funds pumped into global-warming friendly causes, plus the hundreds of millions spent annually by warmist-friendly groups like Greenpeace, World Wildlife Federation and the Sierra Club.

As real life increasingly refutes the theory of global warming doom, warmists have become more shrill and desperate. Mr. Gleick’s tattered reputation is but the latest result of a movement fraught with credibility problems. Perhaps more damaging is the uncooperative climate. Despite soaring carbon dioxide emissions for 10 to 15 years, temperatures remain essentially flat or, perhaps, have even declined, depending on which standard is used.