Friday, September 22, 2017
Woman freaks out over Hobby Lobby’s raw cotton display | New York Post
Woman freaks out over Hobby Lobby’s raw cotton display | New York Post:"A Texas woman has been getting ridiculed online for being “too sensitive” after she blasted the arts-and-crafts chain Hobby Lobby for selling faux raw cotton stalks — which she found offensive."
Northwestern Investigated Laura Kipnis Again for Violating Title IX with Her Opinions - Hit & Run : Reason.com
Northwestern Investigated Laura Kipnis Again for Violating Title IX with Her Opinions - Hit & Run : Reason.com:
"The forces of darkness really don't want Prof. Laura Kipnis to criticize the campus sex bureaucracy—but they keep proving her right about it.
"The forces of darkness really don't want Prof. Laura Kipnis to criticize the campus sex bureaucracy—but they keep proving her right about it.
You will recall that Northwestern University investigated Kipnis after she wrote an essay about campus sex politics for The Chronicle of Higher Education.
Students claimed her article had violated Title IX, the federal statute ostensibly dealing with gender equality on campus.
One of those students has also filed a defamation suit against Kipnis for her book Unwanted Advances: Sexual Paranoia Comes to Campus, which cast aspersions on the student's sexual harassment claims against a former professor.
But that's not all: Unbeknownst to the public, Kipnis has been dealing with another Title IX investigation. Several Northwestern graduate students—including the one who is suing Kipnis—filed a Title IX complaint against the professor last May.
The details, according to The New Yorker's Jeannie Suk Gerson, are insane:
Students claimed her article had violated Title IX, the federal statute ostensibly dealing with gender equality on campus.
One of those students has also filed a defamation suit against Kipnis for her book Unwanted Advances: Sexual Paranoia Comes to Campus, which cast aspersions on the student's sexual harassment claims against a former professor.
But that's not all: Unbeknownst to the public, Kipnis has been dealing with another Title IX investigation. Several Northwestern graduate students—including the one who is suing Kipnis—filed a Title IX complaint against the professor last May.
The details, according to The New Yorker's Jeannie Suk Gerson, are insane:
Kipnis told me that she was surprised when Northwestern once again launched a formal Title IX investigation of her writing. (A spokesperson from Northwestern did not respond to a request for comment by press time.) Kipnis said that investigators presented her with a spreadsheet laying out dozens of quotations from her book, along with at least eighty written questions, such as "What do you mean by this statement?," "What is the source/are the sources for this information?," and "How do you respond to the allegation that this detail is not necessary to your argument and that its inclusion is evidence of retaliatory intent on your part?" Kipnis chose not to answer any questions, following the standard advice of counsel defending the court case.She did submit a statement saying that "these complaints seem like an attempt to bend the campus judicial system to punish someone whose work involves questioning the campus judicial system, just as bringing Title IX complaints over my first Chronicle essay attempted to do two years ago. In other words, the process was the punishment. Possible evidence of retaliatory purpose, she learned, included statements in the book that aggressively staked out her refusal to keep quiet, expressed in her trademark hyperbole. Her prior Title IX investigation, she writes, "has made me a little mad and possibly a little dangerous....I mean, having been hauled up on complaints once, what do I have to lose? 'Confidentiality'? 'Conduct befitting a professor'? Kiss my ass. In other words, thank you to my accusers: unwitting collaborators, accidental muses." Also presented as possible evidence was her Facebook post quoting a book review—"Kipnis doesn't seem like the sort of enemy you'd want to attract, let alone help create"—on which Kipnis had commented, "I love that."
As Ken White of Popehat tweeted in response to this news:
Northwestern U put Laura Kipnis through an opaque, punitive #TitleIX process based on what she wrote.
Again. thefire.org/breaking-laura…
...In any case, it should be obvious that the text of Title IX does not empower university officials to investigate tenured professors for criticizing Title IX, nor was the law intended to weaponize students' grievances..."
Read on!
History for September 22
History for September 22 - On-This-Day.com:
John Houseman 1902, Tommy Lasorda 1927 - Baseball manager, Pat (Chiyoko) Suzuki 1930
Andrea Bocelli 1958 - Opera singer, Joan Jett 1960, Scott Baio 1961 - Actor ("Happy Days," "Joanie Loves Chachi")
1862 - U.S. Republican President Lincoln issued the preliminary Emancipation Proclamation. It stated that all slaves held within rebel states would be free as of January 1, 1863.
1903 - Italo Marchiony was granted a patent for the ice cream cone.
1914 - Three British cruisers were sunk by one German submarine in the North Sea. 1,400 British sailors were killed. This event alerted the British to the effectiveness of the submarine.
1949 - The Soviet Union exploded its first atomic bomb successfully.
1964 - "The Man From U.N.C.L.E." debuted on NBC-TV.
1980 - A border conflict between Iran and Iraq developed into a full-scale war.
1988 - Canada's government apologized for the internment of Japanese-Canadian's during World War II. They also promised compensation.
1998 - U.S. President Clinton addressed the United Nations and told world leaders to "end all nuclear tests for all time". He then sent the long-delayed global test-ban treaty to the U.S. Senate.
Thursday, September 21, 2017
The NDAA Is Fatally Flawed And Threatens Nati | The Daily Caller
The NDAA Is Fatally Flawed And Threatens Nati | The Daily Caller:
"Looking at some of the early Christmas gifts buried deep on the National Defense Authorization Act for both liberals like Elizabeth Warren and our enemies like North Korea and Iran, it’s almost hard believe Republicans won an election in November.
Somehow, deep in the fine print almost no one in Washington ever reads, are a series of provisions snuck in to the NDAA by Senator Warren and Obama Administration holdovers at the Defense Department that will actually make America less safe and grow government bureaucracy."
"Looking at some of the early Christmas gifts buried deep on the National Defense Authorization Act for both liberals like Elizabeth Warren and our enemies like North Korea and Iran, it’s almost hard believe Republicans won an election in November.Somehow, deep in the fine print almost no one in Washington ever reads, are a series of provisions snuck in to the NDAA by Senator Warren and Obama Administration holdovers at the Defense Department that will actually make America less safe and grow government bureaucracy."
Canadian School Bans Cartwheeling, Because We Can't Be Too Careful - Hit & Run : Reason.com
Canadian School Bans Cartwheeling, Because We Can't Be Too Careful - Hit & Run : Reason.com"Yes, a school in Canada banned cartwheels.
What's worst about this is the school's reasoning:
Cartwheels have been banned at M.T. Davidson Public School in Callander.Cartwheels are not permitted on school property in the playground rules section of the school's draft handbook for 2017-18. The rule came into effect this school year even though injuries have not been reported, principal Todd Gribbon admitted."The activity can cause concussions, and neck and wrist injuries," he said.
True—any activity, including a cartwheel, can cause injury.
Walking down the stairs can cause falls resulting in concussions, neck, and wrist injuries.
Walking outside can get you hit by a car.
Swimmers can drown.
Bakers can catch their hair on fire.
Those brave enough to consume solid food can choke.
Students sitting still too long can get embolisms...."
Walking down the stairs can cause falls resulting in concussions, neck, and wrist injuries.
Walking outside can get you hit by a car.
Swimmers can drown.
Bakers can catch their hair on fire.
Those brave enough to consume solid food can choke.
Students sitting still too long can get embolisms...."
Revelations of Comey Wiretapping Manafort May Explain “Uncomfortable” March 20th Congressional Answer… | The Last Refuge
Revelations of Comey Wiretapping Manafort May Explain “Uncomfortable” March 20th Congressional Answer… | The Last Refuge:
"Knowing that former Campaign Manager Paul Manafort was wiretapped by the Obama Administration via the FBI, James Comey, let’s take another look at Comey’s testimony.
New York Representative Elise Stefanik begins her March 20th, 2017, questioning by asking director Comey what are the typical protocols, broad standards and procedures for notifying the Director of National Intelligence, the White House and senior congressional leadership (aka the intelligence Gang of Eight), when the FBI has opened a counter-intelligence investigation.
The parseltongue response from Comey is a generalized reply (with uncomfortable body language) that notification of counter-intel investigations are discussed with the White House, and other pertinent officials, on a calendar basis, ie. “quarterly”."
"Knowing that former Campaign Manager Paul Manafort was wiretapped by the Obama Administration via the FBI, James Comey, let’s take another look at Comey’s testimony.
New York Representative Elise Stefanik begins her March 20th, 2017, questioning by asking director Comey what are the typical protocols, broad standards and procedures for notifying the Director of National Intelligence, the White House and senior congressional leadership (aka the intelligence Gang of Eight), when the FBI has opened a counter-intelligence investigation.
The parseltongue response from Comey is a generalized reply (with uncomfortable body language) that notification of counter-intel investigations are discussed with the White House, and other pertinent officials, on a calendar basis, ie. “quarterly”."
Let's not get used to violent progressive activism - The College Fix
Let's not get used to violent progressive activism - The College Fix
We should not ‘normalize’ this behavior under any circumstances
We should not ‘normalize’ this behavior under any circumstances
In what has become an all-too-frequent occurrence, a recent protest on a college campus turned violent: students at Georgia Tech, who turned out to mourn the police shooting of a fellow student and criticize the police for doing it, ended up clashing with police, setting fire to a police car and scuffling with officers in the street. Three people were arrested and two cops were injured.
The shooting in question appears to have been one of “suicide-by-cop;” the young man who was shot left behind suicide notes, phoned in the police call that led to his death, and urged officers to shoot him while he came at them with a knife. In this light, the violent protests seem all the more misplaced and counterproductive.
We seem to have taken it as a matter of course that, upon becoming upset, a percentage of leftists will inevitably resort to violent behavior, up to and including assault, especially on college campuses where progressive ideology is effectively ubiquitous.
At Berkeley this assumption is so ingrained that the school recently spent more than half a million dollars on security when conservative speaker Ben Shapiro came to speak. $600,000 just so a relatively mainstream political commentator could come to a public university: is something wrong with this picture?
But they would have been so anyway, as all useless violent demonstrations invariably are.
But we have dug ourselves into something of a pit in this regard.
As Megan McCardle points out this week, our political culture has “normalized the Left’s violence.” We seem to have taken it as a matter of course that, upon becoming upset, a percentage of leftists will inevitably resort to violent behavior, up to and including assault, especially on college campuses where progressive ideology is effectively ubiquitous.
At Berkeley this assumption is so ingrained that the school recently spent more than half a million dollars on security when conservative speaker Ben Shapiro came to speak. $600,000 just so a relatively mainstream political commentator could come to a public university: is something wrong with this picture?
There is something deeply broken about a political environment that seems to have become more or less inured to violence as a workaday sort of occurrence..."
Read on!
Here's 13 things that make people dislike you immediately, according to science - ScienceAlert
Here's 13 things that make people dislike you immediately, according to science - ScienceAlert:
"...Below, Business Insider rounded up various scientific findings on the traits and behaviours that make people dislike you, both online and in person.
1. Sharing too many photos on Facebook
If you're the kind of person who shares snapshots of your honeymoon, cousin's graduation, and dog dressed in a Halloween costume all in the same day, you might want to stop.
A 2013 study found that posting too many photos on Facebook can hurt your real-life relationships.
"This is because people, other than very close friends and relatives, don't seem to relate well to those who constantly share photos of themselves," lead study author David Houghton, of Birmingham Business School, said in a release.
Specifically, friends don't like it when you've got too many photos of family, and relatives don't like it when you've got too many photos of friends.
Ben Marder, of the University of Edinburgh, also worked on the study, and warned: "Be cautious when sharing and think how it will be perceived by all the others who may see it. Although sharing is a great way to better relationships, it can also damage them."
2. Having too many, or too few, Facebook friends
In a 2008 study, Michigan State University researchers asked college students to look at fictional Facebook profiles and decide how much they liked the profiles' owners..."
Don't bother to read on.
The article is not the point.
This is what passes for "research" and "scientific findings" in our universities?!!
What a waste of public money!
And a waste of brainpower... if there is any left.
"...Below, Business Insider rounded up various scientific findings on the traits and behaviours that make people dislike you, both online and in person.
1. Sharing too many photos on Facebook
A 2013 study found that posting too many photos on Facebook can hurt your real-life relationships.
"This is because people, other than very close friends and relatives, don't seem to relate well to those who constantly share photos of themselves," lead study author David Houghton, of Birmingham Business School, said in a release.
Specifically, friends don't like it when you've got too many photos of family, and relatives don't like it when you've got too many photos of friends.
Ben Marder, of the University of Edinburgh, also worked on the study, and warned: "Be cautious when sharing and think how it will be perceived by all the others who may see it. Although sharing is a great way to better relationships, it can also damage them."
2. Having too many, or too few, Facebook friends
In a 2008 study, Michigan State University researchers asked college students to look at fictional Facebook profiles and decide how much they liked the profiles' owners..."
Don't bother to read on.
The article is not the point.
This is what passes for "research" and "scientific findings" in our universities?!!
What a waste of public money!
And a waste of brainpower... if there is any left.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)