Author: Kate

What’s The Opposite Of Diversity?

University!


One of the student panelists grabbed the microphone out of turn and handed it to a line of protestors who delivered speeches that condemned the “liberal script” in the name of “radical, emancipatory change” and “institutional transformation.” Afterwards, my classmates defended their behavior because they were smashing “hegemonic power structures” and “flipping the power dynamic.”..
All of this is on video, which some classmates have posted online, exulting in the evidence of how they spoke truth to power. Meanwhile, my peers have derided me on blogs and Facebook. One accused me of “pernicious, destructive, far-reaching silencing.”
…The day after disrupting the open board meeting, the protesters insisted on mandatory campus “teach-ins” for all students. Though it was the day before exams at a school that prides itself on its academic rigor, the administration acquiesced and endorsed the teach-ins to heal our “fractured community.”
Each attendee received a list of student “demands,” which included making courses in ethnic studies and gender and sexuality required for graduation…

Oh, Shiny Pony!

Gerald Caplan;

I’m not sure what’s more outrageous: that these organizations shelled out very big bucks to have an MP address them – and if I were involved in any of them I’d want heads to roll – or that this MP didn’t have the good sense or ethical sensibility to decline.
On the contrary, since becoming a Member in 2008, Mr. Trudeau has raked in $277,000 in speaking fees from 17 speeches.
[…]
That handsome MP’s reward includes a $157,731 annual salary plus $25,850 in accommodation expenses plus 64 round-trip plane trips. At a time when fewer and fewer Canadians make a secure, livable wage or get any benefits and pension at all, this must seem like winning the lottery. But for MPs outside the cabinet, it’s just the beginning. Yet speaking to a school board, university or hospital means being paid a second time from the public purse, a clear case of double-dipping by any standard.

“When the president does it, that means that it is not illegal”

Obama’s man at the IRS;

(1) Is it credible that William J. Wilkins, a well-trained lawyer with a history of counseling 501(c)(3)’s, would have learned of the political targeting of groups and not informed The White House?
(2) How is it that the systematic harassment of conservative groups continued at the IRS even after President Obama’s man at the IRS knew of the previous targeting as of August 4, 2011?

More – IRS Scandal Reaches to White House

Navigation