Saturday, March 14, 2009

Birds of a Feather

Left wing radical, former University of Colorado professor, Ward Churchill, is suing the university to get his old job back and lots of taxpayer money. His lawyer is trying to argue that Churchill was fired for his public statements congratulating the 9-11 terrorists. The fact is, as Denver Post columnist Mike Rosen points out, Churchill was fired for
"academic fraud, following a thorough investigation by his peers - two dozen faculty members serving on three separate committees - judged that he was guilty and should be held accountable for "repeated and deliberate" plegiarism, fabricated research, willful misstatements of facts, and violations of "bedrock principles of scholarship."


Rosen, a former Rocky Mountain News columnist, is one of several former Rocky writers whom the Post has wisely hired. He points out that Churchill's lawyer will argue that "Churchill's inflammatory speech was what drew attention to him." Rosen writes, "Yeah. So what? Should inflammatory speech serve as an impervious cloak of protection for fraudulent academics?"

Former GOP Senator Hank Brown was President of the University of Colorado when Churchill finally was dismissed. Brown testified in court that he felt it was his moral obligation to recommend Churchill be fired, because he couldn't expect students to follow the university's academic code, if the school couldn't hold the faculty to the same standards!

You've got a point there, Mr. Brown.

Oh, one more thing. Obama colleague Bill Ayres was on campus last week to rally support for Churchill. Birds of a feather.

5 comments:

Mrs. Who said...

Buzzards, the both of them.

Hapkido said...

Arguing that "inflammatory comments" are no grounds to draw attention to actions throughout his career is like arguing catching a serial killer for speeding is no grounds for bringing him up on murder charges.

That lawyer is about as greasy a person as churchill.

Terri Wagner said...

That man didn't meet the requirements of the university to be a professor. It's that simple. What's shocking is that it took his admitted inflamatory comments to bring the deception to light. Where's the university's vetting process?

mushroom said...

The sad thing is that even if Churchill is not reinstated, the University has to spend money on the process that could go to education. It would be more appropriate for the judge to issue a summary judgment against Churchill and make him pay the University's legal fees.

Bob's Blog said...

Mrs. Who: yes, the worst!
Hapkido: I like your analogy.
Terri: Nonexistent!
Mushroom: Excellent idea!