Ward Churchill's Intimidation Works: University of Colorado Folds

Conservative Tymes

About Me
Name:Sher Zieve Location:United States
Sher Zieve is a Conservative political commentator who firmly believes that if Leftists ran the country (left to their own devices), it would be the end of the United States as a sovereign nation.

Friday, March 11, 2005
Ward Churchill's Intimidation Works: University of Colorado Folds
Irrespective of the fact that seditionist Ward Churchill blatantly lied on his Resume to secure his professorial position as University of Colorado and has called for the violent overthrow of the USA, he and his attorney are close to getting a “big bucks” payoff from the school. Today’s Denver Post reports that the university and Churchill have reached a “buy out” figure, toward his departure. This is, yet, another magnificent example of leftist lies and criminal behaviors paying off big time. Although the amount of the settlement is being kept under wraps, speculation is that it could be as much as $1.0MM. This is another splendid illustration of unethical behavior paying off, which will soon be a precedent etched in stone, that is now available for viewing by all college students. For those young academics wondering how to make their fortunes in the world, this could be the way! The template that has, now, been drawn is: 1. Create a fake Resume; 2. Lie about your heritage; 3. Plagiarize and affect copyright infringements on others’ works; 4. Lie about your military service and, last but not least, 5. Denigrate your country and its citizens in favor of their enemies. This is a very simplistic model and one that should be easy to follow…even for Churchill’s supporters and students!

One of the initial lunacies affected by the University of Colorado was hiring this man, in the first place. Churchill had only a Master’s degree, not a doctorate. The reason given was that the university was afraid it would ‘lose Churchill to another school’. University of Colorado was afraid of losing a non-PhD to another university? That’s a new one! Then, the University of Colorado placed Churchill on a fast-track that would give him the quickest tenure of any professor prior to that time. What were they thinking? Was the reason because Churchill had claimed to be of American Indian heritage (a fact that has been strongly denied by numerous American Indian groups)? In respect to Churchill’s hiring, mistake after mistake seems to have been made by the University of Colorado. But, bear in mind, this is the same university that promoted “sex for athletic recruits” and is in the process of dismissing Phil Mitchell, PhD because he is “too overtly Christian”. Further, with Churchill’s payoff the Colorado taxpayers will, more than likely, end up paying for a portion of his “bribe to leave”.

The only positive thing to come from this madness is that any wise parents who have read about the Churchill debacle (and the others the school has wrought and continues to produce) will not send their sons and daughters to the University of Colorado. Eventually, corruption destroys itself.



This is another essential reason for parents and students to THOROUGHLY check out colleges before applying.

Ellie

Sad and agrivating to see our "places of higher learning" being held hostage by a rabid group trying to destoy our model of self government and institute their own idea of paradise, much like the Taliban tried to do in Afganistan.

Churchill (the ultimate irony is his namesake) is just one example of what has been happening on our college campuses throughout the United States. Academia in the U.S. is being held hostage by the radical left - looney tunes like Churchill as well as the femi-nazi's. The by-product are all these left-leaning journalists, ACLU lawyers, etc. Where else in a free market economy are you going to find such a thing as "tenure?"

The good news is the latest - the University broke off negotiations about a "buyout". as an alum of CU med school, I can state with conviction that they will have great difficulty soliciting donations of money if they pay that jerk and fraud one cent to "buy him out".

OTOH, if they want money to fight any lawsuit he is threatening to file, count me in as a contributor!!

:banana:

Article Published: Sunday, March 13, 2005
Sacred cow of tenure laid low?

By Kevin Simpson
Denver Post Staff Writer

In both shouts and murmurs, the Ward Churchill controversy has echoed through universities across the country amid the escalating clash of politics and academic freedom.

Even before the furor over the CU professor's writings - he compared some of the Sept. 11 victims to a top Nazi - some college faculty had sensed an erosion of liberty to broach provocative or unpopular views.

Churchill put a face on those concerns.

"It's like the old Dylan line - you don't need a weather vane to know which way the wind is blowing," said Robert Polhemus, English professor and chairman of the faculty senate at Stanford, paraphrasing the singer's "weather man" line. "For a generation, professors took both tenure and academic freedom for granted in a way that won't be possible in the next decade."

Legislators in at least eight states, including Colorado, have entertained bills or resolutions in the past several months reflecting the conservative push to balance what they claim is an overbearing liberal bias on campus. And tenure has long been open to attack on the grounds that it too thoroughly insulates even incompetent academics.

CU is just the latest skirmish.

At the University of Iowa, the faculty senate parried what it fears to be a politically charged challenge to free speech in academia by rattling off a resolution urging the CU regents not to use Churchill's controversial essay to damage his academic career.

"I think (the controversy) is being seen across the country as an effort to use ideas that very few people would agree with, and the expression of those ideas, as a wedge issue," said Katherine Tachau, professor of medieval history and president of the faculty senate.

Churchill, a tenured professor and then-chair of CU's ethnic studies department, recently came under attack for the essay he wrote on Sept. 11, 2001, shortly after the terrorist attacks. Several legislators and Gov. Bill Owens have called for his removal.

Churchill subsequently stepped down as department head but retained his $94,000 annual salary. Meanwhile, CU initiated a review of his academic work scheduled to conclude this week, but a financial settlement to ensure the professor's departure remained possible.

"But that leaves the problem that a politically motivated attack from outside the university resulted in somebody being treated in a manner that explicitly attacks their ability to say and publish what they want," said Tachau. "A best-case scenario would be for the university and governor to affirm that we do not like what he says, but we defend his right to say it."

But Polhemus said that settlements in conflicts like this are "what universities do."

"Universities hate to have huge rifts or conflicts because they depend upon donors, and people have to work together," he said. "If they can possibly solve it amicably so people's interests aren't run roughshod over, they'll do that."

Not a hot topic at ASU

Although academics from coast to coast have followed the headlines, faculty at Arizona State University haven't found the Churchill matter a hot topic at the water cooler, said Doug Johnson, chairman of the personnel committee of ASU's academic senate.

The subject hasn't come up at meetings on tenure or faculty governance, and Johnson figures most professors might regard the CU circumstances as an extreme case of pushing the rhetorical envelope.

"I don't see that this is such a hot button that people immediately respond," he said. "We don't feel our ability to speak on an issue is threatened. It's more of an anomaly than anything else."

At Boise State University, civil engineering professor George Murgel said he senses a similar attitude, but while immediate reaction to the Churchill controversy has been somewhat muted in Idaho, Murgel doesn't minimize the possible ramifications - particularly where the touchy issue of faculty tenure is concerned.

"If he has problems in his work, and it's been glossed over for years in evaluations, that would be a more stinging indictment of the overall system than just him," said Murgel, also president of the faculty senate. "It could trigger a look all around the country at review systems, and could push the argument to do away with tenure altogether.

"That could be your worst- case scenario in all this."

Questioning motivation

But some question the motivation for the review of Churchill's work and wonder if such a politically influenced move - particularly one advanced from outside the university itself - can be trusted.

"We're not trying to eviscerate tenure of having responsibilities," said Iowa's Tachau. "But the way there's been political pressure brought to bear on the university, and (opposition to tenure) has been taken up as a cause célèbre outside of academe, we're suspicious of the fairness of any process he's going through."

The Churchill drama has captured rapt attention in some corners, such as the nationwide law school faculty e-mail group to which Judith Wegner subscribes.

Wegner, a former dean of the University of North Carolina law school and current chair of faculty, said most people in her field are watching developments closely and fitting them into a larger context.

"I'd say there's a pretty broad awareness, a concern not just about that, but put together with the David Horowitz 'academic bill of rights,' the Patriot Act, the difficulty of foreign students to engage in research or travel, constraints on grants in some places - it's a worrisome time, honestly," she said.

Whatever the outcome, most professors agree that the Churchill controversy touches on one facet of academic freedom that isn't going away any time soon.

"Maybe Ward Churchill is a con man or loony, or maybe the people against him are other kinds of loonies who just want to shut down discussion and force their own monolithic view on the world," said Stanford's Polhemus. "I don't know, but I know the issue about what professors say, and who they offend in the classroom, is going to be an issue in the coming years."

Staff writer Kevin Simpson can be reached at 303-820-1739 or ksimpson@denverpost.com .


Ellie