Effete University Presidents Overdose on Political Correctness

 

"This should be the easiest question possible" Representative Elise Stefanik said, and she was right.

Liz Magill

But the presidents of the University of Pennsylvania, Harvard and MIT could not answer it.

It's not original to wonder, "Under what specific context would calling for genocide be okay at Harvard, Penn or MIT?"

I've always wondered just what a university president does, beyond going hat in hand to the waiting rooms of billionaires, while wearing an expensive suit, and asking for a million dollar donation.

Gordon Gee, a sort of gadfly of university presidents, having got himself million dollar gigs at Brown, Vanderbilt, Ohio State, and West Virginia, once said his job was to be sure the official campus bird is the crane, as in one of those things you need to build large buildings. And when someone asked if he was going to fire the athletic director for having said something particularly politically incorrect, Gee responded, "I'm just hoping the athletic director doesn't fire me. We all know where the power is here."

President of Harvard, Charles Eliot, in the 1920's  said that the mixing of the races was an anathema and we should forbid immigration to keep the blood lines of America pure.

But, Liz Magill, a Constitutional scholar could not bring herself to say, "Freedom of Speech is not an absolute right. As Oliver Wendel Holmes said, 'You cannot falsely shout 'Fire!' in a crowded theater.  And you cannot advocate by speech for the violent overthrow of the United States government. And, it is clear, nobody on the campus of the University of Pennsylvania should be allowed to call for a new Holocaust or genocide."

Once, at a very fancy cocktail outside Washington, DC an Arnold and Porter lawyer, in his very expensive suit and I got to talking about the ouster of Larry Summers as president of Harvard after he said that women did not seem to gravitate toward math and science, thus violating the politically correct dogma that women can do anything as well as men, and in high heels, while dancing backwards. So he was gone. Faculty voted him out as if he had reaffirmed Harvard's support for eugenics.

"A damn shame," the Arnold and Porter lawyer told me. "He had such a perfect blend of skill sets for the job of being Harvard's president."

"And what could those skill sets possibly be?" I asked. "Being Harvard's president has got to be one of the easiest jobs in the world: You just sit back, keep your mouth shut and watch the donations flow in."

So, Liz Magill has lost her sinecure and, if there is any sense left at Harvard, Claudine Gay should lose hers. I didn't hear what the MIT president said.

It's interesting how Ivy League colleges have been clamoring to put women, particularly women of color, in their presidential offices. Maybe now, they'll be looking to place John Fetterman clones, big guys who talk straight and don't ever try to parse and adjust their words, but hit you between the eyes with, "Call for genocide on campus? We'll gen your backside right off campus."

Slaughter of the Innocents: Gazza and Israel

 

Nightly images of dead and dying children from Gazza are a mute argument against the Israeli strategy of counter terrorism.

You come and slaughter our children and rape our women, look what you get in return!

The problem is with the "you."

Those Palestinian children did not rape your women.

It's a question of what you are willing to allow to respond to an outrage.

And it's also a question of the enemy your are fighting.

In the 1940's, there was Hitler and the Japanese military. If you ravaged civilians on your way to defeating the German and Japanese armies and navies, there was a clear outcome you could point to: Hitler dead, the Japanese military defeated and surrendering on the deck of an American battleship, and it's all over.

Never mind all those innocent children you incinerated in Dresden, Berlin, Hamburg, Hiroshima, Tokyo and countless other cities and towns around the world.

They were "innocent" bystanders, but we were willing for them to suffer to accomplish the greater good of a military victory, an end to that war.

And then there was always the question of whether those children and their families were completely "innocent" or actually "willing accomplices." 

In the case of Germany, it is now pretty clear a sizable part of the population, including children in the Hitler youth, fully embraced the stuff Goebbels was feeding them about being part of a master race and the need to exterminate the  vermin Untermensch.

 But isn't a twelve year old boy so malleable as to be innocent for having been recruited into that gang? What is "innocent" in a child? The American army executed 16 year old boys who acted as spies for the German army when the Americans swept into Germany. But, of course, those kids were post pubertal. In Gazza we are seeing 7 year old kids dying. What kind of threat could they be?

Those Gazza kids and their parents are more powerful than any Israeli bomb, simply from a strategic viewpoint. In practical terms alone, the Israelis are simply stupid to drop bombs on them.

You cannot defeat an idea. You cannot kill hatred with bombs. Couldn't do it in Belfast. Couldn't do it in Selma, Alabama. You have to find another way. 

You bomb a church in Birmingham and kill four little Black girls, you've already lost the war. The wives who sent off their husbands with packed lunches to the Ku Klux Klan rallies have to watch the images of those dead girls on TV and everything begins to crumble.

Frontline's 20 Days in Mariupol

Just what I needed, after daily servings of the carnage in Gazza, a documentary of children dying and mothers crying from the Ukraine: "20 Days in Mariupol."

Can I bear to watch yet another 90 minutes of unremitting horror show? 

But, as President Zelensky has said, as long as people can see the horror, they will do something to try to help; when Ukraine recedes behind the news from Gazza, help to Ukraine dries up.

Republicans in Congress from Rand Paul to Marjorie Taylor Green to Lauren Boebert are trying to "America First" the country into abandoning Ukraine. It's not even a new story: Charles Lindbergh and a whole bund of right wing American Nazis tried to keep America from coming to the aide of embattled Britain, and would have gladly come to terms with Adolph Hitler and his control of Europe from the Rhine to the North Atlantic. 

Now, it's Vladimir Putin and his murderous hordes launched against Ukraine.

A democracy which had the misfortune of having a border with Russia is simply being annihilated by a dictator. The NATO countries seem aware of the threat posed. They suspect once Mr. Putin has crushed Ukraine, like Hitler, he will look for another country to accuse of provoking him into a war he cannot avoid.

Democracies barely work, so the attraction of the dictator, the strongman who claims to be essential to control, law and order and harmony is understandable. Italy has put a immigrant hating woman, Georgia Meloni, in power. Hungary voted in Viktor Orban, another White power autocrat and even the Netherlands just voted in Geert Wilders, who is a vehement anti Muslim and right wing champion.

So we are not the only ones dealing with Confederate Congressmen who speak ominously of Ghost Buses in the sky coming to seize your government from you, of Marjorie Taylor Green who says this is, always was and always should be a White Christian nation and Lauren Boebert who says the Constitution never mentions separation of church and state and the right of individual citizens to own howitzers is not only guaranteed by the 2nd amendment but God given.

Today, waiting for the light to turn green at Lafayette and Exeter Road, I saw a plaid shirt guy in his mega pickup truck, flying a big Trump flag take the right hand turn and head toward Exeter, no doubt in pursuit of ghost buses and planning to execute the plan Congressman Clay Higgins was talking about when he told the head of the FBI, we are coming for you; your day will come.

Standing against these middle aged men and young women are the quiet members of the Hampton Dems club--mostly men past retirement age and a spectrum of women in their middle years. 

Hampton is not Mariupol. 

Yet.

Ghost Buses In the Sky! Ode to January 6th

 

(To the tune of "Ghost Riders in the Sky" --Hughie Edward Thomasson)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LtmZM0OWO8

Old Congress folk got talkin' one dark and windy day/

Inside a paneled hearing room Clay Higgins had his say/

When all at once upon the screen he flashed for all to see/

All painted white and bundled tight, white buses numbered three/

Their license plates were painted over, their bumpers burnished steel/

Their tires were black and shiny, their foul exhaust made us squeal/

Yippie-i-oh Yippie-i-ay!

Ghost buses in the sky!

Ghost buses in the sky!

Their windshields all streaked with mud, their windows burning bright/

Their drivers trying to control them, but they careened clear out of sight/

Cause they've got to drive forever on those roads up in the sky/

And we all know, they're loaded with agents and provocateurs from the FBI!

Yippie-i-oh Yippie-i-ay!

Ghost buses in the sky

Ghost buses in the sky. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1OvB9kvLR7c

A Republic, If You Can Keep It: Ghost Buses In The Sky!

 

Asked what sort of government the Continental assembly had given the people, Benjamin Franklin smiled at the woman who had stopped him, and said, "A Republic, Ma'am. If you can keep it."

Now, roughly 230 years later, the tenuous nature of that gift seems as apparent as ever.

Congressman Higgins

Less than 90 years after the United States were formed into a fractious whole, a Civil War was required to keep it together, as the second American revolution established the principle that if you wanted to be a member of the club, you had to abide by certain rules which applied to all members, and that once you'd joined, you could not leave.

That second part may seem almost Mafia like, but it was a simple acknowledgement of the problem of knowing the will of the people. Less than 5% of people in the South owned any significant number of slaves, but the power of a small minority was able to whip up secession fever, and Lincoln was probably correct in asserting that the Southern aristocracy had established a mind control over the population to act against its own best interest.

If ever there was a fantasist's delusion, the delusion of fighting for Tara and the wonderful cause of plantation life, of defending those 19th century concentration camps, was it.

Today, from the Neverneverland of fantasy and conspiracy, located mainly in the old Confederacy and its diaspora in the Mountain West, we have that emergence of the "stab in the back" theory, alive and well in the form of the revisionist history patriots, among them Clay Higgins from Louisiana. Mr. Higgins is  trying to tell us that January 6th, like the attacks on 9/11, were an inside job, carried out by the Democrats and their federal government provocateurs. (And if you want to see it, you can review the documents held at Area 54, along with those space aliens the government doesn't want you to know about.)

Representative Higgins has "mounds of evidence" those brave patriots  did not storm the Capitol, but merely marched to it to peacefully protest a stolen election, and were the victims, not the malefactors. 

Relishing the spotlight, the  Louisiana Republican, presents "indisputable, convincing" evidence (having done "my own research") that it was actually FBI agents in "ghost buses" who drove the attack on the Capitol, which was actually a crowd of everyday tourists, until the FBI agents started their "nefarious" actions. (Mr. Clay was clearly very proud of using such a 50 cent word as "nefarious" as it established his intellectual credentials.)

And everyone in law enforcement obviously knows all about "ghost buses" which are directed like drones using Soros space lasers from a basement in a secret pizza pallor in Washington, DC. Or maybe San Francisco. Or Portland, Oregon. 

But, whatever you think of the volumes of rock solid "evidence" assembled by Mr. Clay and his staff, his merry band of freedom warriors, you can plainly see he represents his constituents, just as clearly as Marjorie Taylor Green, Jim Jordan and Lauren Boebert represent their voters.

Nobody doubts those representatives represent their constituents, as the result of free and fair elections. 

And that is the problem Benjamin Franklin foresaw.

Our Republic can only last as long as there are enough aroused voters to vote down those molded out of the same Clay as Higgins. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1OvB9kvLR7c

Wouldn't you have just loved it if the FBI man, Christopher Wray, had the presence of mind to lean forward and whisper into the microphone, "Well, actually, Mr. Higgins, we might just have to look into space laser driven Ghost Buses filled with space aliens from Area 54."

"Ghost Buses In The Sky," is already playing on radio stations in Louisiana. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3LtmZM0OWO8

Audi Alteram Partem: The Case Against Public Schools

 

As the argument for separation of church and state has emerged in Hampton, prompted by the town warrant which provides an account to pay the bills for the Sacred Heart School of Our Lady of The Miraculous Medal Catholic Church, all sorts of irrelevant, misleading and frankly dumb arguments have emerged:

1. We are only paying bills only for non religious items in this religious school: Of course, if you pay to paint the walls of the classrooms so the Church can now buy new altars or pictures of Jesus, you cannot separate money which allows one from another, and, in fact, it has been revealed bills were paid for paper crowns possibly used in acting out nativity scenes, and for computers which may or may not have streamed mass from St. Patrick's Cathedral.

2. We are not really paying checks to the Catholic Church; we just pay invoices for some of their expenses. This, of course, is the same argument the husband makes when he is caught paying for the rent, the groceries and the wine for his mistress. "I never paid to have sex with that woman!" A classic distinction without a difference.

3. We must support all children in Hampton, and we cannot discriminate against those who prefer to go to a Catholic school or a religious school out of town, or a remedial school out of town. 

This tracks Justice Alito's argument that if a town or state chooses to fund any private school not part of the public school system it cannot discriminate against religious schools. 

Of course, using this loaded word, "discriminate," evokes the connotation that discrimination is bad in all circumstances, since racial discrimination led to segregated public schools, as an effort to  discriminate against oppressed minorities.

Lost in this, is the distinction between something you cannot change--your skin color--and something you believe in, namely that as a Catholic; e.g., you believe homosexuality is a sin, or as a Muslim you believe boys and girls should not go to school together or girls should not go to school at all.

In the case of the SHS, this "we're only doing this to support every Hampton child" is suspect because 75% of the SHS children are from out of town, so what you are really saying "we're only doing this to support all Catholic kids" or not even that, because a substantial number of these kids may not even be Catholic, but may be seeking out SHS for other reasons--as Frank DeLuca suggested, many of the kids at SHS were there because their parents rejected the idea of closing public schools during the pandemic, and SHS remained open. How many of these parents were anti vaaxers or believed COVID was a hoax is unknown.

The most fundamental problem of all is what government aims to do with respect to funding public schools. If the aim is to provide an education at public expense for every child living within a jurisdiction, then we have committed to paying for all children, but we really have never done this.

In Utah, next door to every public school is a school for the Church of the Latter Day Saints (the Mormons) and at noon, the children leave the public schools and file next door to the Mormon school for "lunch" and religious instruction. Then around 2 PM they all return to the public school building to resume their secular education. No public funds go to the Mormon schools. Mormon parents tithe to the church and the non Mormon children who have the schools to themselves in the middle of the day are not discriminated against. Surely nobody in Utah would claim religious schools there, which receive no state funds, are discriminated against. The difference is the Church of the Latter Day Saints respects the idea of separation of church and state. Financial support for the Church is built into Mormon worship. 

But the Catholic Church in Hampton, unlike the Mormons,  feels entitled to town funds because the Church has got that warrant article. And that church knows that "Recommended by the School Board" and "Recommended by the Budget Committee" means it gets its money every year. 

It's a sweet little deal, and all totally "legal," apart from being unconstitutional.

 At Deliberative Sessions members of the congregation say, "Well, any other religious or private school in town can do the same thing we do, and ask the voters to approve money for them."  

Well, almost any other church can ask. When an amendment to the article was proposed which said that if we appropriate $65,000 to the Catholic Church then any other private school in town will be awarded the same, two objections were raised by members of the congregation:

1/ There are no other private schools in town.

2/ If a Church of Satan moved to town with its own school, they would get the money. Which is to say, we only give money to churches we like.

Nothing wrong with that!

The Ideal Public School

If the commitment to public schools is to be sustained, we have to ask ourselves what that idea of a public education means.  

Once, it meant a place where kids could learn to read and write and do sums.

But as our nation grew and grew more diverse, complex and industrialized, and as we began to compete with highly developed countries like Germany, England and France, we realized education was essential to becoming a first world nation. You don't develop an Einstein in a little red one room school house. 

The Brits, with their sophisticated Oxbridge system developed radar, the Enigma decoding machine, the CAT scan and the MRI.

Ron Desantis has harped on the idea of public schools as a place where "indoctrination" happens. This is a way of saying, "they are teaching our kids stuff we disagree with." 

In the past, when my parents went to school, public schools taught new immigrants English, and they played a vital role in the assimilation of a whole generation of people new to this country, and likely they still do. 

And, in my time, they promulgated ideas of good citizenship (staying informed of public policies, controversies, voting) and obligation to serve the nation (paying your taxes, serving in the military) among other things.

Public schools became especially controversial when the anti-war movement fomented resistance to government policies on the campuses of public universities. It was no accident that the Ohio National Guard opened fire on students at a public university, Kent State, and slaughtered students who were learning and teaching ideas the local townsfolk abhorred: That sometimes the United States does really bad things, like burning kids in Vietnamese villages.

And, in New Hampshire, William F. Loeb, the owner and editor of the Manchester Union Leader, made the public schools, especially the University of New Hampshire, his most special whipping boy, inveighing against the pointy headed professors who believed they could get by teaching their communistic ideas of brotherhood and Kumbya and getting paid by the state to do it, not to mention all those "small breasted women" who wanted to talk about love and peace and opposing the building of the world's biggest oil refinery on the Great Bay at the doorstep of the campus at Durham, New Hampshire.

Nowadays, the objections are over sexual things: sexual preference, gender identity, whether or not a person born a boy and still harboring male genitalia should be able to strip naked and shower in the girls' locker room.

I'm no expert, but I suspect the current efforts to do "charter schools" and to fund religious schools in New Hampshire with taxpayer money are part of a conviction on the part of the governor and his head of state education, Mr. Edelblut, that public education is a bad thing and ought to be destroyed and replaced by private schools. 

Is Separation of Church and State Anti-Catholic, Anti-Christian, Atheistic?

 My first introduction to anti-Catholicism was not from the Ku Klux Klan, although it had a presence where I grew up.

I had read about anti-Catholic sentiment when I was in elementary school, in a book which depicted the campaign of Al Smith for President, and the role anti-Catholicism played in defeating him.

But all of that seemed remote and unreal to me. 

Although not Catholic myself, many, if not most, of my friends were. There were pictures on the walls of their houses showing Christ opening his chest to show his heart well before cardiac surgery was feasible, and I asked my parents about these and they responded cryptically, a little uncomfortably, that they were religious and left it there. I had no better luck asking them about the bloody Christ on the cross artifacts on the walls.  

I knew in my seven year old mind there was something different about my family from Sean O'Rourke's family, but whatever that was it didn't seem to matter when Sean and I went out to throw a football or explore the neighborhood with our friends, or have sandwiches his mother made in her kitchen. She always smiled at me and she and my mother would sit on the porch and laugh and chat.

No, it wasn't until I was 13 and John F. Kennedy ran for President that I heard that in some parts of the country his being a Catholic was a problem. 

"But Sean's Catholic and he's going to run for President and I'm going to be his Vice President," I told my mother. 

"And why aren't you running for President?" my mother asked. 

"It was Sean's idea," I explained. "He has Dibs."

Seeing Kennedy campaign in the South, in West Virginia, in the Baptist Bible Belt, and looking at the way those Southerners looked at him, the wariness, the distrust, brought it home to me.

But I loved the way Kennedy went right at the problem, directly, courageously telling them, "Don't vote for me because I'm a Catholic, but don't vote against me because of that."

His famous statement, below, thrilled me.

"Because I am a Catholic, and no Catholic has ever been elected President, the real issues in this campaign have been obscured—perhaps deliberately, in some quarters less responsible than this. So it is apparently necessary for me to state once again—not what kind of church I believe in, for that should be important only to me—but what kind of America I believe in.

I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute—where no Catholic prelate would tell the President (should he be Catholic) how to act, and no Protestant minister would tell his parishioners for whom to vote—where no church or church school is granted any public funds or political preference...

I believe in an America that is officially neither Catholic, Protestant nor Jewish—where no public official either requests or accepts instructions on public policy from the Pope, the National Council of Churches or any other ecclesiastical source—where no religious body seeks to impose its will directly or indirectly upon the general populace or the public acts of its officials—and where religious liberty is so indivisible that an act against one church is treated as an act against all.

For while this year it may be a Catholic against whom the finger of suspicion is pointed, in other years it has been, and may someday be again, a Jew—or a Quaker—or a Unitarian—or a Baptist. It was Virginia’s harassment of Baptist preachers, for example, that helped lead to Jefferson’s statute of religious freedom. Today I may be the victim—but tomorrow it may be you—until the whole fabric of our harmonious society is ripped at a time of great national peril.

Finally, I believe in an America where religious intolerance will someday end—where all men and all churches are treated as equal—where every man has the same right to attend or not attend the church of his choice—where there is no Catholic vote, no anti-Catholic vote, no bloc voting of any kind—and where Catholics, Protestants and Jews, at both the lay and pastoral level, will refrain from those attitudes of disdain and division which have so often marred their works in the past, and promote instead the American ideal of brotherhood."

I was even more moved when he won, when he faced down that prejudice, that hate, and emerged victorious and put to rest all those suspicions. 

Even now, that Joe Biden is Catholic never comes up as a reason to suspect he is under the power or sway of the Pope.  The current crops of crazies find other reasons to hate Biden, but the Catholic thing simply has no resonance any more. 

Kennedy did that, as far as I'm concerned.

Real Hate

In my mind, JFK vanquished anti-Catholicism. All that was just a relic of some dark age.  Catholics were glamorous, open minded, looking to the future, modern, unencumbered by  past doubts.

My friends married without a thought about religion--Jews married Catholics, Catholics married Protestants with hardly a mention, at least in America. 

In Ireland, Catholics and Protestants still hated one another, which baffled me and my friends. It was hard to imagine that could be true, to us Americans. Here in America, with our Constitution, religions simply did not clash, not any more.

I've seen plenty of marriages performed by Catholic priests where the groom steps on a glass wrapped in a cloth napkin, as is the tradition at Jewish weddings. 

All that business about "mixed" marriages is just a relic now. It might have meant marrying "outside the faith" once upon a time, but now it means a Democrat marrying a Republican.

But whenever we discuss separation of church and state, in Hampton, in 2023,  there is a certain element of the Catholic parish who respond that whoever favors drawing a barrier between the church and the state is anti-Catholic, hates Catholics, wants to discriminate against Catholics. 

Because, if you saw the Church properly, you'd know it is a good institution, a wonderful source of joy and truth and morality and bonding of humanity, so why would you ever want to exclude the Church from the benefits of social organizations like the government? Only those hostile to religion, like Thomas Jefferson, would want to draw a line between the Church and the state.

But Kennedy can hardly be said to be hostile to the Church and he was, as anyone can plainly see, emphatic about drawing that line.

Actual Anti Catholicism 

Could it be he saw that drawing the line protects the Church as well as the state, that it allows people to retain the benefits of religion, just as a Catholic wife does when she goes to mass and leaves her husband home watching a football game? 

It gives everyone much needed space.

Now, in Hampton, we have a group which insists separation of church and state persecutes the Church, is motivated by the most vile and hateful motives.

And roving goons drive by in cars and shout obscenities at mothers who have signed petitions in favor of separation of church and state, while  children look up from their play in their front yards. 

We do not know who those goons are, or even if they are members of the congregation, but we can have no doubts it was the opposition to the warrant article that sent them rumbling through town. They are part of the blinded crowd.

THE FEAR

We had Kennedy who brought us so far, and now look what that blinded crowd has done. Oh, how far we have fallen...