Regents rush to prove they’re not racist!
The regents of the Universities of Wisconsin get a do-over Wednesday. A make-up test, if you will. Saturday 12-09-23 they flunked basic math and forgot whatever history they ever learned.
Legislative Republicans wanted to fire $32 million worth of well paid diversity, equity, and inclusion commissars. The president of the university system got Speaker Vos and Co. to settle for keeping them all if the university system agreed not to hire any more for the next three years. In return, the Madison campus gets its new engineering building, 35,000 employees get pay raises, and another faculty position teaching Locke, Hume, Burke, Jefferson, and Adam Smith.
The Regents chose Woke ideology over engineering, better pay, and classic liberalism by a vote of 9 two 8 — the majority composed of Democrats appointed by Gov. Tony Evers.
‘BIPOC’
The merchants of Woke monger their guilt by disguising DEI as “teaching black history.” It does no such thing. DEI shames white people as oppressors to be blamed for the poor decisions of black and brown (but not Asian!). It is social engineering. Robin DiAngelo helped write Woke ideology with the 2018 publication of her book, White Fragility. (“One of the worst books ever written,” says the author of Black Racism.)
Next month the University of Washington professor will indoctrinate Wisconsin’s K-12 teachers through the Educational Equity Network, a function of the WI Department of Public Instruction. The promo for its January 25 Institute advises:
Based on her second NY [Times] best-selling book, Dr. DiAngelo identifies many common white racial patterns and breaks down how well intentioned white people unawarely perpetuate racial harm. These patterns include rushing to prove that we are “not racist,” downplaying white advantage, romanticizing black, indigenous and other peoples of color (BIPOC), pretending white segregation “just happens,” expecting BIPOC people to teach us about racism, carefulness, guilt, and shame.
DPI employee and former Madison school board member Ananda Mirilli is also on the bill of fare with “Racial Equity in Rural Wisconsin.” There is no escape. Resistance is futile.
Make a difference!
Madison school board members Savion Castro and Maia Pearson are seeking re-election in April. They are thoroughly Woke. Get 100 signatures to get on the ballot. Nomination papers are not due until January 3. The forms candidates need can be found here even though, strangely, the city’s website has not been updated!
Blaska’s Bottom Line: DEI is the hill upon which Tony Evers and his Democrats have chosen to fight. The shame and guilt taught from UW-Parkside to UW-Superior is injected directly into our kids’ classrooms and, increasingly, into workplace sensitivity training — public and private sector. It sharpens the oppressor/victim dichotomy now weaponized against Jews and Asians. It stifles free inquiry.
DiAngelo’s new book is titled Nice Racism: How Progressive White People Perpetuate Racial Harm.
43 responses to “DEI does not teach history!”
[…] This post originally appeared at https://davidblaska.com/2023/12/12/dei-does-not-teach-history/ […]
The ONLY reason any of those RAYcist Racial Grievance Grifters make any bank whatsoever is because of White Lefty Guilt**
That Winter Institute lineup is pathetically homogenous, but no surprise; intellectual lightweights are nothing without a **glassy-eyed, unquestionin’, lock-steppin’ ideologically monocultured audience.
To a one, they’d be embarrassingly eviscerated by Jason L. Riley (PLEASE STOP HELPING US: How Liberals Make It Harder For Blacks To Succeed), John McWhorter, Robert Woodson, Sr., Larry Elder, the late Walter E. Williams, the inimitable Dr. Thomas Sowell, and so many others.
Regarding the latter, Amazon just delivered The Gotch’s Winter Reading List selections: Sowell’s Social Justice Fallacies and Conquests And Cultures
The Gotch
“Some ideas are so stupid that only intellectuals believe in them.”—George Orwell
“Socialism in general has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it.” T. Sowell
“Intellectuals solve problems, geniuses prevent them.” A. Einstein
The Gotch
Are you talking about “stable geniuses”?
“It is not inequality which is the real misfortune, it is dependence.”
Voltaire
” ‘It is not inequality which is the real misfortune, it is dependence.’ “
Bravo Indigo November Golf Oscar!
Generational Dependence/Ignorance is Lefty’s despicable raison d’être end; DIE is the means!
The Gotch
You don’t think there’s a problem with racial equity in rural Wisconsin? Heck it rears it’s ugly head in Milwaukee: https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/local/wisconsin/2023/12/15/dnrs-first-black-game-warden-recounts-struggle-for-respect/71811222007/
Robin DiAngelo’s books could be the perfect read for those daily reflective “alone time” moments we all enjoy. However they could be improved exponentially by making them “Ultra Soft (TM)” and septic tank friendly.
She’s an errand girl…sent by grocery clerks…to collect a bill.
Nice hearing from you, p******rts!
The Gotch
Long time no see.
Rs are the biggest snowflakes. Dare to be honest about racism and you’ll get shut down. Rs act like they want a marketplace of ideas, but shut down anyone who doesn’t toe their line. DEI & CRT don’t teach that all white people are evil, but it is telling to see the projection scare-mongering that Rs demonstrate when talking about it. Maybe it’s time for some honest self reflection?
If you don’t like what’s being taught, go get a teaching job and bring your perspective to the table. But no, Rs won’t do that because – while they lie and pretend teaching is such an easy job not worth good pay or benefits – few of them have the balls to do it. Instead they sit on the sidelines and complain complain complain.
Most Rs can’t debate about racism because when put up to actual facts and logic they curl around into their circular reasoning while they try (and fail) to avoid the unavoidable conclusion that they harbor racial-supremacist views.
This very article blames simply “poor decisions” for the racial disparities in our country. If I were to dig deeper and ask: well then, if your premise is correct, why do certain racial groups appear make more poor decisions than others? Then the game begins… dance around, dance around, avoid, avoid the only logical conclusion that the premise leads to.
I’ve been around the block enough with you jokers to see that logic and fact are immaterial – racists will always find a way to avoid confronting racism.
“The function, the very serious function of racism is distraction. It keeps you from doing your work. It keeps you explaining, over and over again, your reason for being. Somebody says you have no language and you spend twenty years proving that you do. Somebody says your head isn’t shaped properly so you have scientists working on the fact that it is. Somebody says you have no art, so you dredge that up. Somebody says you have no kingdoms, so you dredge that up. None of this is necessary. There will always be one more thing.”
Toni Morrison
So it goes with the Board of Regents. Agree to this, and next year there will be one more thing. Then the following year as well. There will never be a point where Rs stop this path, never a point when they decide that the college system is doing fine. There will always be a critique and a demand. Then we might as well have the R party run the colleges (but they won’t work there, as I said they’re scared of that) – what’s the point of pretending like there will be any academic freedom?
Get college to what the Rs want: outsourced job training that the workers pay for themselves. That’s what the stock-holding class wants. Why should an industry bear its own costs?
Rs biggest fear is poor people learning critical thinking. Oh, they give lip service to it. But actions speak louder than words, and there is a war being waged against any education that teaches anything except what the stockholders want. It was fine once-upon-a-time when mostly people with money went to college – they were already brainwashed into thinking the world was great. But now that poor people go to college too… better not let them start thinking too critically about the world and getting to the bottom of why things are so crummy.
Rollie, seriously, you say about all those “Rs”: “Instead they sit on the sidelines and complain complain complain.” I’d say given this screed of yours, maybe look in the mirror. I hope it makes you feel good, because as for convincing anyone, I doubt it seriously.
I’ve been an “R” for a long time, and I’ve been in the education business for far longer. I don’t see much of an argument here about the problems I see in the field. Perhaps if you paid a bit more attention to actual ed critics like Glenn Loury, John McWhorter, Robert Woodson, Roland Fryer, Coleman Hughes, Tabia Lee, Ian Rowe, Wilfred Reilly, etc.
As far as convincing anyone, I’m not worried – it’s clearly the Cons that are worried. The truth wins the long game. I’ll misquote MLK with ~”I may die, but the movement will live on”. Let people read and discuss and more and more will see. This is why Cons are trying so hard to shut down thought. Cons’ ideas don’t hold up under a fair hearing, and young people – especially poor ones – see that when given a chance. So Cons try to limit the chances.
And that you self identify as an R is a red flag. Sure, vote for who you have to in our broken political system, but to actually identify as a D or an R is like throwing your brain away. Both parties are cesspools of stupidity.
And hopefully, it will be another long time before we see your nonsense again.
Poor guy has his bubble burst with someone who has different opinions. Is it really more fun being in an echo chamber? I seek out different viewpoints daily and see if what people are saying makes any sense. Sometimes it does. Maybe 95% of what I hear on AM 1130 is BS, but sometimes they make good points.
You’d think a debate would be welcome on the “Policy Werkes” – maybe the name should be changed to “Circle Jerks”? This forum has a sad lack of diversity of thought. (Oh no! Forbidden word!) There are plenty of things you all could push back on me but all I get is bland jokes and weak non-substantive party-line nothings. Obviously most weak Madison liberals appear to be afraid to put their hat in this ring, sticking to their own circle jerk echo chamber – or have they simply realized the same thing as me?
I’m afraid using the term “Circle jerk” two times in one post, puts you in a whole other category, all together. Nobody here is telling you shut up. Your words are here unedited, for all to see and snicker.
Rollie, you assume way too much. You assume I don’t read other opinions, you assume I watch Fox news, you assume I live in a bubble. Psychologists call this projection. Don’t assume. and don’t assume you know me. And you should probably stop going to circle jerks too.
“DEI & CRT don’t teach that all white people are evil…”
I’ve seen, read, and heard about so many instances of the contrary that I can say you are patently wrong. Plenty to be seen by what Blaska alone posts. Even more elsewhere, and not only from conservatives. The real liberals (not you obviously) are getting fed up with this claptrap as well and calling for an end to it. I have numerous friends and colleagues across the political spectrum that have pulled their kids out of public schools because of this nonsense. Met plenty more parents in my travels that have done the same. Are you seriously going to tell me that they’re all liars and/or racists?
“This very article blames simply “poor decisions” for the racial disparities in our country. If I were to dig deeper and ask: well then, if your premise is correct, why do certain racial groups appear make more poor decisions than others? Then the game begins… dance around, dance around, avoid, avoid the only logical conclusion that the premise leads to.”
You have repeated this argument like some deranged feedback loop for as long as you’ve been coming here, and it’s the same stinking pile of BS every time. The two genders are given to different strengths and weaknesses but no reasonable person says one is superior to the other. How is it so far-fetched to you that the same is true among the races?
“But actions speak louder than words, and there is a war being waged against any education that teaches anything except what the stockholders want.”
Newsflash Rollie, that’s what the stockholders (i.e. taxpayers) are supposed to do. My clients pay me for a service and they get to define the results they want to see and, to a certain degree, how I deliver those results. The stockholders here are calling for schools that teach real diversity of thought and not narrow-minded ideology that defines every individual as an oppressor or the oppressed. And guess what, it’s starting to work. If donors closing their checkbooks and sending Liz Magill packing in the wake of those hearings is just the beginning, the rest is going to be damn fun to watch. And when the dust settles, we’ll all be better off for it.
Hear Hear, MtR!
The Gotch
“The two genders are given to different strengths and weaknesses but no reasonable person says one is superior to the other. How is it so far-fetched to you that the same is true among the races?”
Open your eyes. The dominant viewpoint throughout world history is that men are superior to women. I agree that this is not reasonable, but you’re acting like it’s a long established fact, when even now, even in the US there are huge groups of people that do not think women should have the same rights as men.
Then you’re trying to paint the terrible racial outcome discrepancies in our culture as simply “natural strengths and weaknesses”!? So I’m supposed to believe that Black women are simply not as equipped to birth healthy babies as White women are?! You’re telling me that’s why so many more of their children die in childbirth! And you truly believe that it’s not racist to believe that?!
If a farmer has more cattle die in one barn than another, would you tell him “don’t look to what’s happening in the barn as a cause, all cows die sometimes, that it’s just natural differences in strengths and weaknesses”?!?
Terrible arguments such as the one you make are what force me to go around and around with you all and are exactly why DEI initiatives were created. Now that racists are getting sick of people like me pointing out that their statements are racist Cons need to shut it all up.
Newsflash Mordecai: Evers won the governorship and the stockholders/taxpayers gave him the authority to appoint members to the board of regents. Yes, I’m sure you believe that the majority agrees with you, but that is a media driven effort. If Rs start winning statewide office, they can appoint members to the board and run the U how they want. And if we had anything resembling actual democracy, your ideas would have been washed away long ago and Rs know that very well.
The funny thing is that I don’t think this DEI stuff even works and don’t mind that it’ll go away. It just makes racists mad and gets them all wound up. It’s basically a white liberal establishment approach to the problem of racism, but like any establishment approach to most things it’s just expensive window dressing. But what I see from Cons isn’t “racism exists, but here’s a better way to address it”, it’s just “racism doesn’t exist”. So while I agree that these DEI positions are ineffective, at least it acknowledges the existence of the problem.
“Open your eyes. The dominant viewpoint throughout world history is that men are superior to women. I agree that this is not reasonable, but you’re acting like it’s a long established fact, when even now, even in the US there are huge groups of people that do not think women should have the same rights as men.”
Pure deflection. My eyes are just fine, and their views come from a wide variety of experiences. Not acting like anything of the sort either, I just recognize that the solution to past discrimination is not present discrimination despite what Ibram X. Kendi and his Church of Antiracism acolytes profess. I also recognize that using retribution to right past wrongs has a terrible record in history and I flatly reject it here. Which groups don’t think women should have the same rights as men, pray tell?
“So I’m supposed to believe that Black women are simply not as equipped to birth healthy babies as White women are?! You’re telling me that’s why so many more of their children die in childbirth! And you truly believe that it’s not racist to believe that?!”
Nope. Just like it’s not racist to point out that overwhelmingly white rural populations have higher rates of obesity, drug and alcohol abuse, diabetes, poverty, and tend to have lower rates of health insurance and stable employment. They are both matters of combinations of circumstance, personal choice, innate abilities, agency, and willpower.
“Now that racists are getting sick of people like me pointing out that their statements are racist Cons need to shut it all up.”
As I said earlier, the real liberals (not you obviously) are calling for an end to it as well. And rightly so, because real liberals value free speech and expression, the marketplace of ideas, and the pursuit of truth. DEI/CRT as ingrained in our education system today is a vehicle to trample all three while laughing under a mask of social justice.
“Evers won the governorship and the stockholders/taxpayers gave him the authority to appoint members to the board of regents. Yes, I’m sure you believe that the majority agrees with you, but that is a media driven effort. If Rs start winning statewide office, they can appoint members to the board and run the U how they want”
More deflection. The legislature also exists to keep the governor in check at the whim of their constituents/stockholders, and it’s great when they have to compromise to get something done. Believe that it’s a media-driven effort at your own peril—a number of Dem strategists have said on record that promoting DEI/CRT is a losing campaign strategy and it’s going to show in 2024 if they keep touting it. Fine by me though.
“And if we had anything resembling actual democracy, your ideas would have been washed away long ago and Rs know that very well.”
Listen to yourself talk—the goal of democracy is to wash away and drown out ideas? That is the most blatant example of Progressive Newspeak I’ve heard in a while. But thanks for making your endgame so obvious.
“But what I see from Cons isn’t “racism exists, but here’s a better way to address it”, it’s just “racism doesn’t exist”.
Quote where I said that. Barring that, quote where anyone else on this board said that. You’ve gone from deflection to projection. What next?
“Anyone with that much money is not looking out for my interests, I know that.”
Ha. You don’t and can’t know that. I guess bigotry was next.
“Afraid of democracy? I bet you are.”
Nope, love democracy. Mainly because it demands accountability. When a gaggle of unelected UW Regents goes against taxpayer wishes, don’t be surprised when those same taxpayers look for other avenues of forcing their hands.
Thank you for your thoughtful response.
I appreciate that you included “combinations of circumstance” in explaining outcome discrepancies.
Yes, and circumstance is exactly what DEI addresses. The battle against DEI is the battle against the consideration of circumstance. Racism has been a very potent circumstance throughout US history. Rural white people also have circumstances, and DEI can help them as much as anyone else. The other factors you cite are randomly distributed among populations, but circumstance isn’t. We decide what those are (absent acts of God). This is what DEI has the potential to highlight: circumstances are generally created by our social constructs, our collective decisions. If not for the circumstances we create, Black people and rural White people would experience similar rates of the effects of the non-circumstantial effects on their lives.
I say your ideas would wash away with democracy because your ideas take it as a given that we will create circumstances for each other that disadvantage some more than others. That oppression is just something that happens naturally and we shouldn’t question it. If we had democracy, people would have more power over their lives and would not let the few create poor circumstance for the many. Oppression and democracy are inversely correlated. Democracy has washed away plenty of bad ideas over the years. It doesn’t say people can’t think them, but it shines bright light on what these ideas really mean.
What you’re calling checks and balances is a euphemism for minority power, which is distinct from fundamental rights. I’m ok with fundamental rights, but what Vos did has nothing to do with that. He didn’t argue that DEI is unconstitutional. He used non-democratic mechanisms to force a minority view on the majority.
Cue the tyranny of the majority argument from Cons, where they try to scare-monger that majority power means stringing up the minority in nooses. With a constitution that guarantees fundamental rights this shouldn’t occur. Now sure, historically people got strung up in nooses even with our constitution. But the antidote to those horrific practices was not less democracy – it was more democracy. Throughout world history the best answer to oppression and injustice has been democracy. Yet here in the US we have people celebrating the least democratic aspects of our government… hmmm.
“If donors closing their checkbooks…”
Look who believes that money is the last word! Donors can kiss my butt.I hope they do close their checkbooks. Anyone with that much money is not looking out for my interests, I know that. So does the majority of the world’s population. Afraid of democracy? I bet you are.
“Anyone with that much money is not looking out for my interests.”
I’m curious. Are people with less money, less likely to be looking out for your interests? Do you resent people with great wealth? I think so.
I don’t think I can boil it down to only one word, and I don’t think “resent” would be the one if I tried. While I won’t say it’s impossible to amass great wealth honorably, I don’t think most very wealthy people have.
For example, if you have a piece of steel and do work upon it to increase its value, then sell it for a profit, that’s honorable. If you have a piece of steel and you hold it until its price increases and profit from its sale, that’s dishonorable. Making money via interest from money-lending = not honorable. Making money from other people’s work = not honorable.
And I’m not even necessarily proposing that we outlaw these activities, I’m just saying I don’t respect them and I think they’re immoral, and I don’t like associating with these activities (but since I’m not ready to be Amish I can be viewed as a hypocrite, and I’m willing to be honest about that, and I am trying to improve my life).
“If you have a piece of steel and you hold it until its price increases and profit from its sale, that’s dishonorable. “
Curious; you own real estate, equities, or mutual funds?
Asking for a friend…
The Gotch
Are you interested in not making money? Perhaps you have taken a vow of poverty, however unintentionally. Then follow the paupers for guidance. Peace be with you.
I hosted high school students from Mali and Egypt for a year. They attended school in our small town in S. Carolina. Near the end I asked them if they noted any racism. Both said no. Funny how Rollie sees it everywhere.
” Near the end I asked them if they noted any racism. Both said no.”
C’mon ex, RAYcism is a learned behavior; those kids didn’t…um…benefit from the ongoing year-after-year…er…experience of being marinated in victimhoodie/oppressor-oppressed Lefty hatred.
The Gotch
I’m drinking coffee out of a yellow mug. Therefore all coffee mugs are yellow.
Are you as ready to acknowledge accounts of racism as you are accounts of tolerance? Are anecdotes a suitable substitute for data?
Because either racism is negatively impacting people or there’s something inherently wrong with American Blacks. Picking the latter is the definition of racism, and Cons reject the former without putting forward any other explanation.
Lots of you seem to think this is circular reasoning, but it’s not (assuming we all use correct definitions of words):
Z can only be explained by X or Y. X is rejected. Therefore Y explains Z.
“Because either racism is negatively impacting people or there’s something inherently wrong with American Blacks. Picking the latter is the definition of racism”
Rollie, Rollie, Rollie…ALL RACE ALL THE TIME.
You’re on record claiming that the observation that there exist arguably destructive cultural and behavioral pathologies within black/minority communities is the definition of White Supremacy and RAYcism most foul.
When other Black people (including [GASP!] Lefties!) make that same observation, the person citing them (yours truly) is accused of finding a minority who thinks he way the they do.
Have the temerity to question that culture, or its predictable results? Fuggeddaboudit! Lefty wants certain cultures to be the everLUVin’ Third Rail…secularly sacrosanct and unchallenged; untouchable.
Dr. Thomas Sowell, who at age 93 endured RAYcism, bigotry, prejudice, and discrimination on a level even today’s BIPOC snowFLAKES, and the race hustlers who herd them, couldn’t even dream of, much less manufacture:
“Cultures are not museum pieces. They are the working machinery of everyday life. Unlike objects of aesthetic contemplation, WORKING MACHINERY IS JUDGED BY HOW WELL IT WORKS, COMPARED TO THE ALTERNATIVES.
“The judgement that matters is not the judgement of observers and theorists, but the judgement implicit in millions of individual decisions TO RETAIN OR ABANDON PARTICUAL CULTURAL PRACTICES, decisions made by those who personally benefit or who personally pay the price of inefficiency and obsolescence.” (bolds/caps/italics mine)
The Gotch
Exactly. You believe certain cultures are superior to others. Lots of people do, of all races and from all cultures. You have particular measures that you think accurately judge the quality of a culture, and use that to compare cultures to each other. When it’s White culture that a person thinks is superior, we call it white supremacy. If I recall correctly there are a few other cultures you like to include under your supreme-culture umbrella, but it pretty much boils down to how well they assimilate into White America.
I’m not making a moral judgment on that. It’s simply an opinion which you are making very clear: You think particular cultures are inferior, and you think it’s their own darn fault.
“Because either racism is negatively impacting people or there’s something inherently wrong with American Blacks. Picking the latter is the definition of racism, and Cons reject the former without putting forward any other explanation.
Lots of you seem to think this is circular reasoning, but it’s not…”
On that, you’re correct—it’s not circular reasoning, but rather faulty logic that rejects all other possibilities. But since you believe it, let’s expand on it:
Assume disparities in black success are due to racism. Racism is either caused by whites or it isn’t. Picking the former means that there is something inherently wrong with American whites. And that, according to you, is the definition of racism.
Logic like that is at the heart of the reason we’re trying to dredge this DEI/CRT trash out of our schools.
The problem is that’s not an accurate depiction of my logic. I’ll assume that’s just an error snd not a purposeful act. Taking your example of White racism, my logic would be this:
Suppose we observe racist attitudes among White people more often than other people. This observation can only be caused by 2 potential explanations: these attitudes are inherent in White people themselves, or these attitudes are caused by factors external to White people. Essentially internal or external causation. You claim I’m rejecting all other possibilities, but what other are there beyond internal or external?
If we were talking about something like higher rates of blonde hair, I would argue that it is White people themselves which causes this – it is natural to them.
But since we’re talking about an attitude, or philosophy, I would argue that it is not natural for a White person to be racist more often than other races. It must be caused by something external. (Also note that there is probably an internal cause of racist attitudes too. But because that would be common among all people, it wouldn’t result in a higher rate of racist attitudes in one race over another.)
To dig deeper, I argue that this external causation is the actions of the people who hold power. Not a racial or ethnic group, but a specific set of individuals whom control(ed) power. (They could also happen be White, but I hope it’s clear that doesn’t mean it’s inherent to White people.) It is well understood that racism is/was a tool known to and promoted by the rich/powerful to keep and increase their wealth/power. There’s a pretty decent historical record of this.
Even if you disagree that this is the cause of higher proportions of racism among Whites, you must either claim that it is a natural feature of White people, or you must claim that it is caused by a different external force than the one I identified. There are no other logical paths, except claiming that the observation itself is invalid, or walking away from contemplating it at all.
I will go even further. Because we lack strong democratic institutions and traditions in our culture, (and crazy to contemplate the fact that it’s better here than most places!!) most of who we are are because of the intentions and actions of the rich/powerful; the good of who we are and the bad of who we are. Those with power shape our world. They shape what all of our options and conditions are. They shape what our laws are. We have much less direct input into the conditions of our lives than we are led to believe.
Thus isn’t a defeatist attitude, it’s an empowering one. It is defeatist to accept the lies that the rich/powerful feed us. Doing that will never win freedom. We first must identify the forces acting upon us, and the critics of DEI are pushing to stop us from discussing the external forces that act upon our lives.
Why? Because it leads to questioning the actions of the rich/powerful and increases demands for democratic participation in the decisions that define the conditions of our lives.
“It is defeatist to accept the lies that the rich/powerful feed us.”
Whew! Glad THAT’S been cleared up.
Good thing the Marxist/Separatist pap being distributed by bLM/CRT/DIE (Oppressor-or-Oppressed, Colonizers, the “game” is rigged, minorities can’t succeed because of White Supremacy/RAYcism, etc.) aren’t lies at all, but immutable truths to be accepted without question, right…?
One more thing
Why does Lefty want wide open borders allowing…nay…welcoming tired, poor, huddled masses yearning to breathe free, a despicable act which succeeds only in dooming them to a brutally undemocratic existence?
The Gotch
Rollie accusing anyone of “circulation reasoning” is funny as hell.
After careful reconsideration of the no-brainer offer that they turned down, the regents saw the advantages of policies that are not insane. But it was close, they had to agree not to hire any more Professor Butt Cheeks like this one:
pic.twitter.com/3GD3d8RWYR
After careful reconsideration they’ve given in to threats of a mob boss. Be a real shame if something terrible happened to this nice university system you have here…
And they’ve set a terrible precedent that will echo through future years. Rs should have passed a law to get what they want (if this was such a great offer that would have been easy, right?) but instead they choose to abuse the corrupt political system to get their way. Why stop here? Wait until next year, they’ll demand way more next time around now that they know who will roll over.
So much easier to rule like a dictator than using messy democracy. Instead of winning governorships and appointing members to the Board of Regents, Rs will just boss them around like this. Don’t like the way the U is run? Win some statewide elections and change it.
Not only that, but Vos calls his crusade “the single most important issue that we are facing as a people, as a nation, and really, humanity.” LMFAO. Whitewashing White Supremacy is the most important issue HUMANITY is facing!?! Move over nuclear holocaust, the UW system is saying institutionalized racism exists and water is wet.
But Rs clearly can’t stand living in a place where people who don’t agree with them are allowed any shred of power over our own lives. They want to not only keep widely unpopular policy positions, but also hold on to power anyway. MAGA indeed! Minority rule, just like the way we used to do it before all the vermin secured the right to vote. (Which is a history that Rs are hurrying to throw down the memory hole -just bringing it up probably makes you want to burn me at the stake. How dare this person defile the honorable history of our great country with factual statements about its history! We must cleanse the educational system! Only things that make stockholders money shall be taught, all other teaching is hereby banned!)
“After careful reconsideration they’ve given in to threats of a mob boss.”
Oooh…OOOOH…you mean like
violent intimidation…I mean…1st Amendment demonstrations at any of a number of ***MMSD board meetings or when despicable Lefty TRASHED former MMSD President Gloria Reyes’ property?***article accompanied by picture of activist Blaska being…um…peacefully engaged by
unruly mobster…I mean…concerned citizen.The Gotch
If other people jump off a cliff, should you do it too? Your stock reply is quite often “but liberals did such and such”. That’s what people do when they have no logic or reason with which to rebut the other person’s points. You could have tried to justify the statement that DEI is humanity’s biggest threat, justify why Vos’s actions are consistent with basic democratic principles, argued that no, Rs are just fine with abiding by the will of the people. Really anything that deals with the substance of my claims.
You should have added on a “but her emails!!!” while you’re at it 😉
“Your stock reply is quite often ‘but liberals did such and such’.”
The Gotch was pointing out that your slobbering “(them giving) in to threats of a mob boss” was half-witted hyperbole, completely unburdened by anything remotely resembling a fact-based Reality.
He then followed up with ACTUAL BONA FIDE examples of heinous mob skullthuggery (sic), committed with a craven impunity/immunity reserved for those knowing full well (thanks to despicably suffocating White Lefty Guilt) they’re beyond the reach of law-n-order.
You not recognizing that is troubling…TROUBLING!
The Gotch
I get it. Before criticizing a good hearted R, I have to first recite every bad thing someone classified by the media as a liberal has ever done. I’m sure after I pay that penance you’d be willing to engage me in the subject at hand rather than evading me.
“I get it. Before criticizing a good hearted R***”
Rollie…buddy…at the risk of harshin’ yer mellow, please note The Gotch is (as we say at the meetings) a non-participating Lefty, and currently an unequivocally devout Independent.
Glass half full?
+ 1 for the good hearted reference.
Glass half empty?
***the rest……really?
The Gotch