politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
This is what he got fired for btw:
And this is how he got back:
And yes, he's working there again since December. BTW it's $500,000, not 50,000.
Only because he fought back, I presume. Fight back, on all levels!
He was tenured. Tenured professors are supposed to be nearly bulletproof when it comes to job security.
Possibly a poor choice of words given the circumstances...but there is nothing in the original comment that can or should justify firing a tenured professor. Being tenured should protect your job specifically for voicing controversial positions. That's kind of the point.
Though I wouldn't even say this is controversial...it's a verifiable objective fact with no added opinion or emotional language...the timing may make it a bit dark, but that's kind of the point.
It's ironic how so many people are getting shit for saying mean things about a person who was, at the end of the day, a shining example of first amendment rights.
no shit
The people running these institutions have all revealed an absolute desperation for a cultural zietgiest shift towards right-wing authoritarianism.
They just want it so bad.
The thing is, the professor literally didn't say anything. He posted two photos. One was a headline with the Charlie Kirk quote, and one was about his death.
Not bulletproof, and especially not in Tennessee. I actually have a colleague from grad school at AP.
The real thing here is that they have rules on the books and didn't bother to follow them. That often is a monumental fuck up.
Its actually quite insanely concerning how few people understand how feebile the MAGAts actually are when directly challenged.
Their success since 2016 has solely been due to lack of resistance, not anything meaningful they've done.
I'm going to push back a bit here. Because people say a lot that there is no resistance and, to your point, there isn't any impactful resistance where it matters.
There is a world of difference between people who want to fight for what is right and people who are willing to die for what is right.
The reason we are here is because we have plenty of the former and very very little of the latter.
I do not say this lightly because I fear we are reaching a point that unless people are willing to risk their lives, we will lose our lives to fascism.
Would a potential trial fall under labor dispute (violating tenure agreement) or First Amendment (is the university getting government funding I assume)?
The person who fired him also got a bonus, probably by bankrupting the early education department.
Okay I made that up, but you know it’s likely.