Category Archives: Political Correctness

Subscribe to New Jersey 101.5 FM on

Maybe, just maybe, the Antichrist isnt a man, Jim Gearhart says. Maybe, just maybe, its an ideology.

And maybe the latest controversy whipped up by Sen. Bernie Sanders is just another sign of it, Jim says.

Wait what?

Jim was incensed a lot of people were when he read about Sanders questions of Russell Vought, nominated by President Trump to be deputy director of the Office of Management and Budget. In a hearing earlier this month, Sanders suggested Voughts belief that non-Christians are condemned to hell amounted to Isamaphobia and perhaps anti-Semitism.

Do you believe people in the Muslim religion stand condemned? an account by NPR quotes Sanders saying. What about Jews? Do they stand condemned, too?

Vought answered over and over again: Im a Christian.

Jim references a column by Fox News Todd Starnes that shares his indignation. Jim says he suspects a Muslim or other non-Christian would have never been subjected to the same sorts of questions. But he says the politically correct forces of the left see badgering a Christian over his faith as perfectly OK.

What earthly or celestial difference does it make who believes what, really? Jim asks in the latest edition of the Jim Gearhart Show podcast, which comes out every Thursday on iTunes, Google Play and the New Jersey 101.5 app. Were talking about beliefs. Now, putting things into practice is another matter. But you can believe anything that you really want. The important thing is the existential predicaments of mankind, I would think personkind, sorry about that and the inevitability that wed better get our acts together before our mutual annihilation, which, if you watch cable television, you will know is imminent.

In that case, Jim says, certainly all theology is moot, and theres nobody left to believe anything.

But hows that get us to the Antichrist?

Youll need to check out the full podcast for the answer.

The video just part of the latest installment of the Jim Gearhart Podcast, available every week on New Jersey 101.5 and in the New Jersey 101.5 app. You can alsosubscribe with your favorite podcasting app for iPhones, Android devices or your computer:

Get The Jim Gearhart Show on Google Play

Get Jim on iTunes

Love podcasts? Also check out Forever 39, Annette and Megans new podcast about turning 40 and loving life along the way. This week, they explore the average number of sexual partners men and women have.

Also: The New Jersey Guys, Chris and Dan, ask talk about the best sports trophies and top sports rivalries. And in Speaking Millennial, Bill Spadea, Jay Black and Jessica Nutt meet to discuss how millennials shop for groceries, Jays hate of both the National Spelling Bee and hipsters, and the shocking reveal of Jessicas fathers secret life as a spy.

Townsquare Media staff

More from New Jersey 101.5:

Subscribe to New Jersey 101.5 FM on

Continue reading here:

Maybe Bernie Sanders and political correctness are signs of the ... - New Jersey 101.5 FM Radio

Time to focus more on strategy.

There's a disconnect between the way Uber, the ride-hailing company, is trying to transform itself and what it really needs to fix to become a sustainable business. Instead of reconsidering its business model and protecting itself against a regulatory backlash, it has decided to go politically correct.

Uber's Ex-Communications Chief on Kalanick Taking Leave

As a result of much highly public soul-searching, caused by accusations of mistreating women and fostering a testosterone-fueled internal culture, Uber nowhas no chief financial officer, chief operating officer, chief business officer or chief marketing officer, and its chief executive officer Travis Kalanick has gone on indefinite leave. But it's going to have achief diversity officer. That may be the first for a taxi company (which is ultimately what Uber is) and that's fine; but it won't address the root problem.

At a recentall-staff meeting, board member Ariana Huffington suggested that once a woman gets on a company's board, "there's a lot of data that shows" more women tend to follow. Fellow director David Bonderman retorted, "Actually, what it shows is that it's much more likely to be more talking." Predictably, this caused an outcry and Bonderman was forced to step down from the board. But he was right, not because women are more prone to idle talk than men -- they aren't -- but in the sense that the changes the company is making are about more vacuous talk than much else. The lasting image to illustrate it, supplied byHuffington herself, is Kalanick -- a driven macho who, in running Uber, has tried to bend every rule he encountered on his path -- headinginto a lactation room to meditate.

Thereporton the company's culture, written by former attorney general Eric Holder and Tammy Albarran, contains a set of standard corporate governance recommendations for startups that have lost their way: Less of a role for the founders, more seasoned executives, more independent directors, formal review, feedback and compensation-setting procedures, mandatory training for managers, a robust complaint process. But it also calls for reformulating Uber's 14 cultural values as set out by Kalanick. Uber, it says, should "eliminate those values which have been identified as redundant or as havingbeen used to justify poor behavior, including Let Builders Build, Always Be Hustlin',Meritocracy and Toe-Stepping, and Principled Confrontation."

The Sharing Economy

Uber is a company that sacrificed everything to super-fast expansion. It doubled its gross bookings -- the total amount passengers paid for its taxi service -- to $20 billion last year. "Always hustlin'" and "principled confrontation" is how that growth happened: Uberhas tried to steamroll over competitors and sidestep regulators, includingbydevioustechnicalmeans, to get where it is today. Its business model and its narrative to investors, who have made Uber the most highly valued startup in the world have depended upon that ruthless expansion.

It has beenarguedthat Uber's strategy in the urban transportation market has been to destroy the competition rather than simply muscle into hundreds of cities' low-margin taxi markets. If that hadn't been the plan, it would have made no sense for Uber to engage in debilitating price wars and subsidize rides, as it does in every city it enters.

In the process, of course, Uber lost$2.8 billionlast year, not counting the money spent trying (unsuccessfully) to conquer the Chinese market. That's more than any other startup has burned through in a year. But is putting in a mature company's corporate governance procedures and appointing a chief diversity officer the way to fix those losses?

If the company's business strategyremains the same -- growing the business at a breakneck pace to dominate every market -- then it's a mistake to reconsider the company's culture as radically as Uber appears poised to do with all the expensive consultants it's been hiring. Replacing a focus on achievement atany price with more meetings, meditation and new-age rhetoric while still trying to be aggressive can only lead to cognitive dissonance, flagging employee morale and more painful staff departures.

It would make far more sense to rethink the strategy first. Uber could focus on profitability rather than expansion. That would mean cutting costs, phasing out subsidies and perhaps leaving markets -- primarily European ones -- where the regulatory climate is only going to get tougher for "gig economy" companies. It could also mean doing the math in case Uber drivers are eventually recognized as employees, not independent contractors, in many markets. Fareincreases -- and not necessarily cleverly packagedones such as the current price differentiationplan-- would also be on the cards. The company could decide to spend more on its driverless car push rather than on trying to win dominance in specific cities: Gaining an edge in automated driving could differentiate Uber from competitors who now have pretty much the same technology as it does, from a customer's point of view.

Clear thinking from leading voices in business, economics, politics, foreign affairs, culture, and more.

Share the View

The internal culture would inevitably shift in line with a more prudent new strategy. Uber wouldno longer be a privateer running a black flag -- it would be a reasonably cautious player, attracting a different type of employee. Perhaps the new management team, when it's hired, will move in this direction -- but then the culture-altering moves should be left to that new team. Instead, Uber is tearing itself apart before it decides where it's going as a business. That's putting the horse ahead of the cart; culture change should be organic and constructive, and a highly public political correctness show definitely isn't.

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.

To contact the author of this story: Leonid Bershidsky at lbershidsky@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Therese Raphael at traphael4@bloomberg.net

Read the rest here:

Political Correctness Won't Fix Uber's Problems - Bloomberg

Adam Ulbricht, Times Writers Group 7:30 a.m. CT June 13, 2017

Adam Ulbricht(Photo: Submitted photo)

One can little doubt the power of language. We learn our vocabularies at a young age and continue picking up phrases and beliefs as we go through life.

Like many things, language is learned beginning with family. As we grow, we attend school. Literature and pop culture eventually lend a hand in expanding our knowledge base.

But language is also susceptible to change. The norms of today are vastly different than in the 90s when I was a young kid. We are currently living in a time of change where political correctness is the prevailing movement.

The notion of political correctness was defended in an editorial on May 27 by Times Writers Group columnist Ben Ament (Relish refusing to be politically correct? Thats just rude). Here, Mr. Ament argued that the PC movement is nothing more than just being polite to one another.

This over-simplified explanation doesnt address the full reality, though. Youll get no argument from me that we should strive to be civil in our interactions with other people. However, this is not whats necessarily playing out everywhere.

Political correctness has played a role on college campuses for around a decade now. Since then, there have been plenty of examples of student groups across the country shutting down speakers in a rather not-so-polite manner. Be it Charles Murray or Milo Yiannopoulous, members of the PC crowd have shown they will act to silence opposing speech.

A free society is dependent on our ability to express ourselves and disagree with one another. Sometimes thoughts, words or ideas that we dislike, or outright reject, are unpleasant.

The recent photos of comedian Kathy Griffin holding a fake severed head of the president serves as a good reminder of that lesson. Although you may disagree with her, she has the right to such expression.

But it doesnt just stop there. Political correctness can also find itself devoid of logic at times. For example, the accepted term undocumented immigrant has replaced illegal immigrant in order to provide greater dignity for those that fall into this category. The problem is that we do document those who are here without legal status. The Pew Research Center says the illegal immigration population remained at a little more than 11 million in 2016 for the eighth consecutive year.

Mr. Ament also touched upon a larger philosophical debate. According to his article, the long held Golden Rule is a bit too self-serving. Instead, he introduced the Platinum Rule in which he wants to treat others as they would like to be treated.

On the surface this may sound pleasant. After all, theres nothing wrong with being respectful to others. However, the idea that you can somehow abandon your self-serving ways is misguided.

Everything that we do is self-serving in some form or fashion. If you give to charity, help a stranger or call someone by the gender pronoun they identify as, do you not receive self-gratification?

What makes the Golden Rule successful is that humans are self-interested. This acts as a powerful incentive when following the Golden Rule. Being self-interested and treating others with respect are not mutually exclusive ideas.

I believe that we can live in a mutually beneficial society based on the belief of individualism. The average entrepreneur serves as a great example. If someone takes the risk and starts up a company that hires employees and provides a product or service of value, are they not serving both themselves and fellow humans? Their success provides employment and a tax base to communities, which reaches to other areas like local schools, libraries or churches.

Will there be people who violate rules? Absolutely. There will always be those who take advantage of others. Im certain that this new Platinum Rule has its own limits, which people will test.

Again, Ill say that political correctness is about a lot more than just being polite. Its a political philosophy as much as its a way to control the meaning of words and language. If language didnt hold such powerful meaning, Mr. Ament and I wouldnt be writing our columns and you wouldnt be reading.

This is the opinion of Adam Ulbricht, whose column is published the second Tuesday of the month.

Read or Share this story: http://on.sctimes.com/2sXB00a

Visit link:

Political correctness is about more than being polite - St. Cloud Times

Subscribe today for full access on your desktop, tablet, and mobile device.

Let friends in your social network know what you are reading about

Comedians have stepped into the shoes of journalists as truth-tellers because comedians have the license to strip away political correctness

Try Another

Audio CAPTCHA

Image CAPTCHA

Help

CancelSend

A link has been sent to your friend's email address.

A link has been posted to your Facebook feed.

Jamison Lewis, Charles City, Letter to the Editor 5:15 p.m. CT June 13, 2017

Comedian and writer Kumail Nanjiani gives the commencement speech at Grinnell College Monday, May 22, 2017, where he graduated from in 2001. Described as "the future of funny" by GQ magazine, the Pakistan native earned a bachelor's degree in computer science and philosophy before moving to Chicago then New York City. He became a go-to guest on popular TV shows such as "The Colbert Report," "Veep" and "Portlandia." Since 2014, he's been playing the role of Dinesh, a witty but hapless software engineer, on the HBO hit "Silicon Valley."(Photo: Rodney White/The Register)Buy Photo

Daniel Finney writes that comedy is confused in its purpose when it mixes political messages with laughter [Comedy's missteps are killing the political left, June 8]. That "confusion" is called satire and it can be traced back through Lenny Bruce, to Mark Twain, and on to Aristophanes.

Comedians have stepped into the shoes of journalists as truth-tellers because comedians have the license to strip away political correctness and liesto expose the heart of the matter.

Two of the three professors Finney quoted, who moonlight as stand-up comics, must certainly be aware that in either role they are vulnerable to political attack. That's why most of Finney's article sounded like the cautionary wisdom of those who may be hearing footsteps and anticipating loud bangs on their doors. Lenny Bruce went from straight comedy to performances where he read from law books. His "degree in free speech" was a baptism by fire.

Pity the poor wretch whose speech transgressions become political fodder. For an Iowa example, look up Carl Childress, an English professor at University of Northern Iowa who in 1970 assigned his class to write about selected forbidden words. Chuck Grassley, as I recall, pounced like a cat that had stumbled on a free meal.

Jamison Lewis, Charles City

Read or Share this story: http://dmreg.co/2sZocX6

2:15

4:14

3:53

3:50

2:14

4:01

3:55

3:54

4:43

5:24

Read more:

Comedians can strip away political correctness to expose heart of the matter - DesMoinesRegister.com

By Evan Lips | June 12, 2017, 20:18 EDT

Printed from: http://newbostonpost.com/2017/06/12/in-name-of-political-correctness-media-sanitizes-orlando-nightclub-massacre-anniversary/

Mainstream media types and their ilk on Monday grappled with their coverage of the one-year anniversary of an Islamic State-inspired terrorist attack in which a lone gunman shot and killed 49 patrons of a gay nightclub in Orlando, Florida, with outlets like the Washington Post receiving heavy criticism for apparently downplaying the motive behind the killings.

WaPos lead story boasted more than 1,000 words without once mentioning the words jihad, terror, Muslim, or Islamic.

The story itself focused on the memorial and the terrorists weapon of choice noting that by the end of the night, more than 1,000 people had gathered to remember what happened last June, when Orlando became the first U.S. City of the summer before Falcon Heights, Minn., and Baton Rouge and Dallas to be upended by gun violence.

The newspapers coverage was later mocked on social media, when the hashtag #WashPostRemembers began to circulate on Twitter:

The social media giant itself, utilizing its moments news feature, also appeared to intentionally avoid any mention of the killers religion:

A transcript of the killer Omar Mateens 911 call to police seconds after the massacre leaves little doubt as to what his motivations were:

Orlando Police Dispatcher: Emergency 911, this is being recorded.

Mateen: In the name of God the Merciful, the beneficent [Arabic]

Dispatcher: What?

Mateen: Praise be to God, and prayers as well as peace be upon the prophet of God [Arabic]. I wanna let you know, Im in Orlando and I did the shootings.

Dispatcher: Whats your name?

Mateen: My name is I pledge of allegiance to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi of the Islamic State.

Dispatcher: O.K., whats your name?

Mateen: I pledge allegiance to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi may God protect him [Arabic], on behalf of the Islamic State.

Dispatcher: All right, where are you at?

Mateen: In Orlando.

Dispatcher: Where in Orlando?

[End of call.]

The New York Times also caught some criticism for sprinkling in some racism coverage in its columns recapping the Orlando massacre:

Mateens hometown newspaper of record, the Orlando Sentinel, also appeared to question what truly motivated the mass-murderer. The Sentinels lead story, featuring the headline Pulse Gunmans Motive: Plenty of Theories, But Few Answers, acknowledges the 911 call transcript but points out that not everyone killed at Pulse was gay.

The report goes on to raise the question of whether Mateen himself was gay as well.

The city of Orlandos own proclamation, which declares June 12 as Orlando United Day A Day of Love And Kindness, like the WaPo report, omits any reference to terrorism or the religious views that apparently fueled Mateens rampage:

comments

Visit link:

In Name Of Political Correctness, Media Sanitizes Orlando Nightclub Massacre Anniversary - NewBostonPost (blog)

Image via Pexels

Last month, I gave my Intro to Journalism class a lecture on free speech. We talked about our rights, power, and responsibilities as members of a free and independent press. The lecture ended with a lively discussion, but the part that sparked the most engagement involved the term political correctness.

The class came to define it as engaging in discourse in a way to minimize pushback or controversy. It was the best way of fitting in with certain politics. When I asked what type of politics a politically correct person usually has, the class pretty much unanimously answered liberal. But my follow-up question threw a wrench in their assumptions.

What is something conservatives are politically correct about?

Crickets.

After moments of silence, one student answered that maybe a PC thing on the right would be on the topic of abortion. He mentioned conservative media darling Tomi Lahren getting suspended from The Blaze for her pro-choice comments. I asked the other students whether they considered that an example of political correctness on the right, but their replies were generally more in the realm of umI guess. I could see some were having light-bulb moments, but other students were still struggling to reconcile an idea they found logical yet did not feel to be true.

Why do we act as if President Trumps accusations of fake news arent just PC ways of attacking news outlet that give him any modicum of negative press?

If my students (most of whom are generally progressive) understand that people can have diverse politics, why was it difficult for them to conceive that non-liberals can be PC as well?

ICYMI:Headlines editors probably wish they could take back

The blame could be placed in large part on conservative media for using the term as a go-to attack on the left. But looking deeper, the mainstream news media as a whole bears some responsibility, mainly as more left-leaning publications took on a greater burden of balance than their right-leaning counterparts. For example, as reporters and commentators debate whether avoiding the terms radical Islamic terrorism or illegal immigrants is politically correct, many within the mainstream media have tacitly accepted the rebranding of white supremacists and white nationalists as alt-right.

But who is acting out of political correctness is this case? The left out of a fear of alienating certain audiences by calling out racism, or the right and its instinct to deflect any accusation that the bigotry on its fringes is moving toward the center? The prevailing idea is that political correctness comes from the left, but it can come from the right as well.

Why was there bipartisan condemnation of comedian Kathy Griffins picture with a bloody Trump head, but no such furor when folks lynched and burned effigies of President Obama?

Upon Trumps election, why did pundits ruminate over the lefts identity politics, as if being white or working class is not an identity? Why is there a continued debate over the use of the phrase radical Islamic terrorism while white male extremism is seldom used? Why was it okay to debate whether former president Barack Obama was a secret Muslim but not whether our current president, who mispronounces books in the Bible and appears to not know that Protestants are Christians, is truly a man of faith?

Why are generally liberal, centrist, or apolitical news outlets scrambling to hire the Megyn Kellys of the news world, though Fox News isnt exactly shopping for a Joy Ann Reid? Why was there bipartisan condemnation of comedian Kathy Griffins picture with a bloody Trump head, but no such furor when folks lynched and burned effigies of President Obama? Shouldnt the same people defending Bill Mahers racist joke defend Stephen Colberts homophobic satire of President Trump? Why do free speech absolutists scurry out of the woodwork to defend Milo Yiannopoulos, Richard Spencer, and Ann Coulter, but not Linda Sarsour, George Ciccariello-Maher, or Keeanga-Yamahtta Taylor? Have we made up our mind on whose opposing views are okay for college students to hear?

ICYMI: The New York Times reporter who tweets like its going out of style

Why do we act as if President Trumps accusations of fake news arent just PC ways of attacking news outlets that give him any modicum of negative press? And when the media do call out his dishonesty, why dont they get a pat on the back for telling it like it is? Why didnt conservative media call out the presidents political correctness when he didnt say radical Islamic terrorism during his summit address to the Arab and Muslim world? If a free and independent press is paramount within our democratic society, why isnt all media up in arms about the GOPs anti-media strategy for 2018?

You will get different answers to these questions from different people, but that is precisely the point. Each persons answers are informed by their own ideas, experiences, and viewpoints. Their answers will either be PC or telling it like it is, depending on the politics the speaker subscribes to.

The problem with the discussion on political correctness is that it accuses liberals and progressives of doing something that people of all political leanings do. Groups tend to mediate which politics are acceptable within the group, so if liberals can have political correctness, conservatives can as well. If its the issue many assert it is, then it cant exist in isolation. So who decides that one view is PC and another is forthright?

As long as the mainstream media surrenders the right to define and frame specific issues and not others, it enables the weaponization of language, and allows right-wing politics to directly and indirectly set the terms for what discourse is legitimate. And it makes journalists complicit in promoting a glaring double standard when it comes to issues of free speech.

The PC-charge does seems to be losing at least some of its potency. Many news outlets have been more open about calling things as they see them, such as President Trumps lies, or his supporters willingness to defend virtually anything he does. But the lure of wanting to appeal to the anti-PC crowd persists. As more liberal journalists fight against the idea of liberalism as feelings over facts, a whole news industry on the right fueled grievances, fears, attacks, and false equivalencies. Its also why outlets like MSNBC can have scholars and activists on to explain why black-on-black crime is a racist term, and also get political commentary from former reporters of Breitbart, a site with tags dedicated to black crime and black-on-black violence. If this is the type of balance news outlets need to have, then the burden should be equally distributed, not just for the liberal media.

Shouldnt the same people defending Bill Mahers racist joke defend Stephen Colberts homophobic satire of President Trump?

There are few things more political than language, so a critical-thinking press should not allow itself to be exploited in political arguments. Journalists have too often allowed the accusation of political correctness to skew the way they think about and cover topics. If the press is going to engage in this type of discourse, it either needs to be critical of both sides along the political spectrum for being PC, or it needs to eliminate the term from its lexicon.

ICYMI:The hidden message in memo justifying Comeys firing

Read the original:

Time for equal media treatment of 'political correctness' - Columbia Journalism Review

The war of words between LSU and a former tenured education professor fired by the university in 2015 is heating up in Baton Rouge federal court as a judge considers a civil rights lawsuit filed against the school.

Teresa Buchanan claims she was fired for using vulgar language, saying her free speech and due process rights were trampled by LSU Chancellor F. King Alexander and other top administrators, and she wants monetary damages and her old job back. She worked for LSU for nearly two decades.

+6

A former tenured LSU education professor fired last year for, among other things, using vulg

"This is a case of political correctness run amok," Buchanan's attorneys argue in a recent court filing. "The defendants at LSU fired Dr. Teresa Buchanan ... for 'sexual harassment' based on speech having nothing to do with either 'sex' or 'harassment.'"

LSU contends its termination of Buchanan was appropriate and necessary to protect students from her verbally abusive behavior.

"This case is not about salty language; students and others observed aggressive and bullying behavior by (Buchanan) in the classroom," attorneys for Alexander, Damon Andrew, A.G. Monaco and Gaston Reinoso argue. "(Buchanan) cannot hide behind the shield of academic freedom while creating a hostile learning environment for the students she was hired to teach."

Andrew is dean of LSU's College of Human Sciences and Education. Monaco is associate vice chancellor of the Office of Human Resource Management, and Reinoso is director of the Human Resource Management office.

Robert Corn-Revere, one of Buchanan's attorneys, declined Thursday to elaborate on the court documents filed on her behalf and instead said he would let those filings "do the talking for us for now." The attorneys for Alexander and his colleagues did not respond to a request for comment.

Buchanan, who specialized in early childhood education and trained elementary school teachers, alleges in her January 2016 lawsuit that her "occasional use of profanity" was part of her teaching approach and "was not directed at nor did it disparage any student."

LSU has said Buchanan was fired in June 2015 for "documented evidence of a history of inappropriate behavior that included verbal abuse, intimidation and harassment of our students."

+2

Attorneys for LSU Chancellor F. King Alexander and other university administrators are askin

A five-member faculty had recommended that Buchanan not lose her job, but the LSU Board of Supervisors unanimously agreed to fire her.

The American Association of University Professors came to Buchanan's aid shortly after her termination, criticizing her firing and pledging money to assist her legal defense.

In addition, the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, a group that advocates for free speech on college campuses, put LSU on its list of worst offenders early last year. The university was featured on the list largely due to Buchanan's termination.

A group that advocates for free speech on college campuses has named LSU to its list of wors

Buchanan's controversial comments included saying "f*** no" repeatedly in the presence of students, using a slang term for vagina that implies cowardice, and telling a joke that the quality of sex gets worse the longer a relationship lasts.

Buchanan has said she's proud of the job she did at LSU and doesn't regret anything she did.

In recent court filings, Special Assistant Attorneys General Sheri Morris and Carlton "Trey" Jones III, the lawyers representing Alexander and his colleagues, say Buchanan's conduct clearly violated LSU's sexual harassment policies, which mirror a blueprint for campus anti-harassment policies promulgated by the U.S. Departments of Education and Justice.

But Buchanan's attorneys claim LSU's sexual harassment policies are "defective" and unconstitutional, and that her firing also was unconstitutional.

"It's absurd for (Buchanan) to claim that defendants' recommendations to enforce policies consistent with federal guidelines are unreasonable," Morris and Jones argue.

Buchanan's attorneys, however, insist that the speech for which she was fired "falls squarely within the First Amendment's protections.

"The First Amendment ... does not permit university officials to equate offendedness with harassment," they argue.

But LSU's attorneys disagree that Buchanan's "embarrassing, humiliating and intimidating speech" toward a captive audience of classroom students was a valid part of her teaching approach.

U.S. District Judge Shelly Dick, who is presiding over the case, has not ruled or scheduled a hearing on LSU's and Buchanan's dueling motions for summary judgment, which ask the judge to rule in their respective favors.

Follow Joe Gyan Jr. on Twitter, @JoeGyanJr.

See more here:

Ex-LSU prof: firing "political correctness run amok"; LSU: she created "hostile learning environment" - The Advocate

Political correctness has been taken too far

Dynamite the Washington Monument. Bulldoze the Jefferson Memorial. Anything named for these slave-holding traitors in the eyes of the British in the 1700s should be erased immediately!

This is the obvious next step in the opinions of recent letter writers advocating removal of more Confederate monuments and statues. Does political correctness make them feel better about themselves or are they merely liberal lemmings?

History is primarily written by victors, but cherry-picking chapters of our nations saga to make a point is beyond mindless. The Stars and Stripes is our flag, one writer stated. Some Founding Fathers had slaves. Since our national banner waved over most of them in some form, I guess we need a new flag, too, huh?

These folks should get busy renaming the myriad streets, buildings, schools, towns, counties and other entities across the South that honor Confederate heroes. That deed done, they can focus on cleansing some U.S. military installations and Navy vessels of these despicable Americans names. Every town with a Confederate monument on the courthouse lawn better hire a wrecking ball. Where does this insanity end?

As a proud South Carolinian living in Buffalo for nearly two decades, Id never condone the Confederacys role in slavery. But to ignore Americas overall complicity in this shameful practice is gross ignorance and denial at its worst. And if Southern pride and heritage are garbage, as one local stated, I suggest he get over it, to put it very mildly. Let the labeling begin.

Derek Smith

Williamsville

Original post:

Letter: Political correctness has been taken too far - Buffalo News

Only months ago the world noted the passing of a great astronomer. Dr. Vera Rubin was an esteemed scientist. For the millions who were apprised of her death last December she was touted as the supposed "discoverer of dark matter," the strange mass that were told constitutes by far the real stuff of the cosmos. Vera Rubin didnt discover "dark matter" though; no one has. It is unknown if it even exists or not. She herself repeatedly corrected those who seemed determined to anoint her as its discoverer, refusing to acquiesce to the knee-jerk inclination to consider "settled" yet another dispute in science, and holding firm to something else the scientific method.

What she did uncover doesnt require exaggerations that actually demean her work by misconstruing it. Indeed, her achievement is more than sufficient to stand on its own with other monumental findings of the great titans of science.

Dr. Rubin found that the Andromeda Galaxy is spinning too quickly. She is the astronomer who discovered that the periphery of that galaxy is revolving at such an accelerated velocity that it should be rending the galaxy asunder, flinging the outlying stellar systems into the void. Andromeda doesnt possess sufficient mass to account for the gravitational power that is somehow managing to hold the galaxy together.

In effect, she has caused science to wonder if Newtonian physics and the whole of classical celestial mechanics might be in error in some way that, or else some very important, unknown nuances must be currently beyond our understanding at this point. As it turns out, all galaxies are rotating too quickly based on their masses.

It was left to others to try to explain what Vera Rubin had discovered, the invention of others that a halo of "dark matter" must envelope galaxies so as to make sense of their dizzying rotational velocities. Dr. Rubin had little to do with that. When she was asked if "dark matter" was at the heart of solving her enigma she answered as any reasonable scientist would who had no verifiable proof, "If I had my pick, Id like to learn that Newtons laws must be modified in order to correctly describe gravitational interactions at large distance. Thats more appealing than a universe filled with a new kind of sub-nuclear particle."

Heeding Dr. Rubins own words though might require decades of careful study and observation, so its hardly surprising that those who demand that science get to the point and be done with it brush off such silly conservatism and simply stamp this whole matter "case closed."

Such impatience with the truth though produces a society in which an obituary for a great woman becomes just another public speech to praise someone, one imprecise rather than adhering to fact. So its fair to ask what would impel those to insert "dark matter" into Vera Rubins mouth, especially now that she cant speak for herself.

Politics certainly might, especially the kind running amok in a balkanized nation obsessed with identity politics. Dr. Rubins gender might actually have worked against her in this instance, giving rise to the unnecessary and patronizing aggrandizement. Activists, obsessed with ferreting out victims everywhere, cant imagine a more bountiful hunting ground than the unfair, iniquitous, male-dominated scientific community. And, its not beyond them to put politicking and crusading above the lifetime of work and stellar accomplishments of those same great female scientists whom they supposedly champion.

Then again, this might just be yet another example of what happens when one of the forces most dangerous to science political dogma masquerades as its cheerleader. It is those insisting they are "with science" who comprise the segment of society most likely to assume the term "alpha constant"to be the name of a rock band their understanding of physics and chemistry are slightly more sophisticated than the comprehension of a cargo cult.

Since flipping a switch and having light appear seems like magic to those neophytes who have never struggled with circuits or Maxwells equations, it is hardly surprising they think science can, should and does solve everything and right now. The idea that we simply arent sure about dark matter could seem impossible and outrageous to them, since it implies "unsettled" science.

Our world viewed from the perspective of those who despise the rigor of the scientific method is a bizarre, meta-Orwellian place, afflicting society with more than just blundering obituaries, but with such psychoses as the recently published thesis on "intersectional quantum physics to fight the oppression of Newton."

This lunacy wasnt broadcast on Comedy Central, but was instead printed in the Minnesota Review.

Science has no gender, nor race, nor political affiliation. And, science can never be settled; it only pauses, and then moves forward again.

David Nabhan is a science writer, the author of "Earthquake Prediction: Dawn of the New Seismology" (2017) and three previous books on earthquakes. Nabhan is also a science fiction writer ("Pilots of Borealis," 2015) and the author of many scores of newspaper and magazine op-eds. Nabhan has been featured on television and talk radio all over the world. His website is http://www.earthquakepredictors.com. To read more of his reports Click Here Now.

2017 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Excerpt from:

Political Correctness Won't Change Ever-Changing Science - Newsmax

A Facebook post by a Republican congressman on the growth of Islam in Europe has drawn condemnation from the Council on American-Islamic Relations among others but the lawmaker, after deleting the post, did not apologize.

U.S. Rep. Jeff Duncan of South Carolina last week posted an image of a white-masked man (Europe) with a noose around his neck holding a watering can above a small tree (Islam) to which the other end of rope is attached. The takeaway being that one day Islam will grow tall enough to hang Europe.

Chew on this picture a little, Duncan wrote in his Facebook message. The tree, IMHO, is much taller today..

Indivisibles chapter in the 3rd Congressional District which Duncan represents posted a screenshot of the Facebook post after 9:30 p.m. Tuesday, the Post and Courier reported. Indivisible is a national organization against Republican President Donald Trumps administration, the paper said.

The Indivisible chapter on Twitter called the image a white supremacist meme, the Post and Courier said.

Bakari Sellers a CNN contributor who served in South Carolinas legislature as a Democrat tweeted, Jeff I know youre not racist. Lets put that to the side. But this is bigoted, ignorant and embarrassing.

While the Post and Courier said Duncan deleted his Facebook post hours before Sellers called him out, the paper characterized Duncan as bullish about the whole thing in his statement Wednesday.

Ive never been politically correct, nor do I care to be, Duncan told the Post and Courier. The truth is that Europe has allowed radical Islam to grow unchecked for too long, which has led to their current predicament. I want to keep America safe. Sometimes that means having to shove political correctness aside, being honest about the threats facing our country, and taking precautions like the ones President Trump has tried to implement.

The Post and Courier said Duncan didnt address why he deleted his Facebook post.

A Duncan spokesman told the paper that the congressman figured the media would probably choose to sensationalize something this trivial, instead of engaging in an actual dialog about how to keep America safe, which has always been his goal.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations, the nations largest Islamic advocacy group, on Thursday called on Congress to rebuke Duncan.

Rep. Duncans clearly racist and Islamophobic message is unworthy of a member of the United States Congress and he should be rebuked by his colleagues of all political stripes, CAIR government affairs director Robert McCaw said, according to WYFF-TV.

Duncan supports Trumps proposed travel restrictions to the U.S. from some Muslim-majority countries, the Post and Courier said, adding that Duncan introduced the Terrorist Deportation Act, which would deport any non-citizen whose name appears on a terrorist watch list.

The United Kingdom has suffered from 3 Islamic terrorist attacks in the past 3 months, and has prevented an additional 5 from taking place. For the past several years, I have called for us to put political correctness aside and do what is right for the country to keep our citizens safe, Duncan wrote on his Facebook page June 4, the day after the deadly London Bridge terror attack, for which the Islamic State has claimed responsibility.

Duncan continued, Our borders and broken immigration system are the soft underbelly of our country. We must take the necessary and appropriate precautions to prevent the war against radical Islam from spreading to our shores. To my colleagues who have obsessed over a warped notion of political correctness, I ask that you put politics aside and do what is right for the national security of the United States.

This story has been updated.

See the rest here:

Islam post by GOP congressman blasted by critics. He replies, 'I've ... - TheBlaze.com