In light of President Obama’s (quite admirable) recent comments on college as a place for the open exchange of ideas, could his administration call off its rules pressuring colleges to adopt unconstitutional speech codes? [Hans Bader, Glenn Reynolds, USA Today] “University of California considering recognizing a ‘right’ to be ‘free from … expressions of intolerance'” [Eugene Volokh; regents go back to drawing board; Sarah McLaughlin/FIRE; AAUP] “Deciding who is eligible to complain about microaggressions is itself an act by which the majority imposes its will.” [Megan McArdle] And the New Yorker contributes a politically correct “Lord of the Flies.”
4 Comments
” President Obama’s (quite admirable) recent comments ”
I suggest they are cynical, not admirable.
His history shows that you just can’t believe a thing he says.
Not a damn thing.
Didn’t Obama once say that, with the required carbon and other environmental regulations that electricity rates would skyrocket? I believe he told the truth that time.
” . . . he told the truth that time”.
That time. Well hurrah. You reach that conclusion only because of facts that emerged later. However facts that emerged over the years following this president’s public statements have too often proved his statements wrong, misleading, or narrowly but misleadingly “true”. You can keep your health plan. My mother was denied health insurance. A video. Not a smidgen of corruption. ISIS is the junior varsity. A red line in Syria. And so on.
You can’t believe a thing this president says.
Not a damn thing.
[…] Could the University of California’s planned “principles against intolerance” someday restrict the scholarship of criminologists? [Heather Mac Donald/City Journal, earlier] […]