Texas A&M Won’t Fire Prof Who Called for Killing White People

[rangerrebew]

Texas A&M Won’t Fire Prof Who Called for Killing White People
 
 
 
Posted by Mike LaChance      Monday, May 15, 2017 at 10:30am

“protected by the First Amendment”

This is one of those rare instances where the school has decided it’s very important to stand up for free speech.

The Washington Examiner reports:

http://legalinsurrection.com/2017/05/texas-am-wont-fire-prof-who-called-for-killing-white-people/

[rangerrebew]

So, telling people to kill white people is protected but saying Donald Trump is a microaggression and not permitted? :huh?:

[EC]

Now that is insulting. Donald Trump can't be a microaggression. A yuge one, maybe.....

[the_doc]

If A&M won't fire the guy, they may not be all that far behind Mizzou.  A lot of Aggie parents are going to be ENORMOUSLY pissed off as word gets around.  (Of course, that scenario of ultimate disaster for a respected university is looming up everywhere in America.  I suspect that even a fair number of Berkeley parents are realizing that UC Berkeley is becoming a dangerous place for their little boys and girls.)

[Restored]

Worse yet, many donors will be upset. You can lose several million $$$ like that at a university that is considered fairly conservative.

[catfish1957]

If A&M won't fire the guy, they may not be all that far behind Mizzou.  A lot of Aggie parents are going to be ENORMOUSLY pissed off as word gets around.  (Of course, that scenario of ultimate disaster for a respected university is looming up everywhere in America.  I suspect that even a fair number of Berkeley parents are realizing that UC Berkeley is becoming a dangerous place for their little boys and girls.)

A & M used to be a fairly conservative slanted institute. (esp. vs. left batshit crazy UT)   Not that GHWB was a conservative (he wasn't), still not too many universities would allow a GOP POTUS to spot their library there.

[the_doc]

Worse yet, many donors will be upset. You can lose several million $$$ like that at a university that is considered fairly conservative.

Right!  Texas A&M University has a huge cadre of donors.  Based on the ones I have known, I would guess that the majority of A&M's donors are thoughtful arch-conservatives, not just fairly conservative guys and gals. 

Moreover, they donate to A&M because they are proud Aggies.  (They are gung-ho to a pretty extreme degree.  I have never seen any other school that gung-ho.)  Among other things, Aggies are justifiably proud of a well-documented tradition of the courage of its graduates.  They will be horribly ashamed of the University's decision to become stupidly PC, much less liberal.

 

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

We gotta start putting some strings on these public grants we give these universities amirite?

[the_doc]

We gotta start putting some strings on these public grants we give these universities amirite?

I hate to say that the Texas Legislature should punish A&M, but I think they should.  And they might very well do so.

[the_doc]

A & M used to be a fairly conservative slanted institute. (esp. vs. left batshit crazy UT)   Not that GHWB was a conservative (he wasn't), still not too many universities would allow a GOP POTUS to spot their library there.

GHWB had no direct educational ties to A&M (he was a Yalie, of course), but he needed to plant his Library in Texas, and A&M was his best option. 

GWB was a Yale-and-Harvard guy, and he planted his Library at SMU largely because of his wife's B.S. in Elementary Education, I guess.  (Laura Bush had a Master's Degree in Library Science from UT Austin--and GWB is pro-Longhorn, politics aside--but UT would have been out of the question for several reasons!) 

[Sanguine]

I hate to say that the Texas Legislature should punish A&M, but I think they should.  And they might very well do so.

Abbott is a Longhorn.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

What else do you expect from another Harvard lawyer like Michael K. Young?

He is trying to make A&M more liberal than UT-Austin, which I thought could never happen.

However, he now presides over a school that has faculty members advocating a racist killing of white students who attend the university to clear the way for non-whites.

What could go wrong?

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Right!  Texas A&M University has a huge cadre of donors.  Based on the ones I have known, I would guess that the majority of A&M's donors are thoughtful arch-conservatives, not just fairly conservative guys and gals. 

Then why would they not have objected to placing a Harvard lawyer as President who married a student while previously at Brigham Young?

Methinks you have the old A&M in mind.

[the_doc]

Then why would they not have objected to placing a Harvard lawyer as President who married a student while previously at Brigham Young?

Methinks you have the old A&M in mind.

I never said that Aggies are always smart enough to notice what is going on at their school (ha!).  However, the current mess will get their attention, I believe.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

I never said that Aggies are always smart enough to notice what is going on at their school (ha!).  However, the current mess will get their attention, I believe.

Am afraid their attention is prioritized into believing that by not having to play UT and OU every year they can win a football conference championship.

Still deluded thinking.

[jedidah]

A lot of Aggie parents are going to be ENORMOUSLY pissed off as word gets around.

The ire of Aggie parents pales in comparison to that of former students and their pocketbooks.  The rage is real.

The prof is tenured, which poses problems in trying to ditch him (although I'd promote him to custodian).  The fairly new president, on the other hand, isn't protected by tenure.  His seat is hot.

[jedidah]

A&M was his best option. 

Agreed, but his love for the school is real.  Before his health failed, he was often on campus, in residence at the library, at sporting events, and even working out at the rec alongside students.  My kids saw him frequently.