Campos Has An Assassination Problem Of His Own
It’s important to understand what Paul Campos is really about in this piece taking Instapundit to task. Campos uses the word fascist, yet facts suggest as regards fascism, Campos has one shoe on the wrong foot, and the other foot in his mouth. There’s more besides this below being false.
Glenn Reynolds, the well-known University of Tennessee law professor who authors one of the Internet’s most popular blogs, recently advocated the murder of Iranian scientists and clerics.
Let’s assume Campos qualifies as something of a legal scholar, given his having been the director of the Byron White Center for American Constitutional Study at the University of Colorado. Why then would he not be able to do what Powerline has done – and prove that Reynold’s comments were well within the law?
Obviously he could have, but a legal discussion isn’t what Campos has in mind.
Why does right-wing extremism in our universities, as represented by such things as law professors calling on the Bush administration to commit murder, get so much less attention?
Putting Campos’ debunked hyperbole aside, perhaps we hear less about libertarian and conservative viewpoints in academe because there are so few individuals in academe willing to express them – precisely because of liberals like Campos. How else can he explain this:
Certainly, it’s worth asking Reynolds’ administrative superiors at the University of Tennessee what limits, if any, the terms and conditions of Reynolds’ employment put on his behavior.
Campos isn’t attempting to make a legal point. He wants a discussion within the mostly liberal-leaning administrative hallways of the academy where such things as the rule of law, or perhaps even fairness, don’t always exist.
In short, Campos tries to make himself look like he’s on the higher ground, while embarking on a lowly witch hunt through a political world of ideas with which he disagrees. That isn’t journalism or even opinion – it’s trash.
Campos and the Rocky Mountain News deserve to be taken to task for printing rubbish contaminated with the type of political speech that can’t stand up to argument, so it invariably opts to try and shut any opposition, or valid argument down.
So, just who is the fascist here, Mr. Campos? From where I sit, it looks as if it’s actually you. Assassinating free speech is far more dangerous to America than killing some Iranian nuclear scientist, though I’ll just assume you’d disagree.
Hey Dan, did you know that Walter Reed Medical Center is in an amazing amount of disarray? Its a front-page story in the Washington Post.
Little known fact, Walter Reed isn’t actually a part of the VA, but is directly administored by the Pentagon. In fact, during the big sweep of base-closings Bush proposed back a few years back, Walter Reed was actually on the list.
Jon Soltz, chairman of VoteVets.org has a theory about why Walter Reed is in such bad shape.
“You know, last year the Republican Congress decided they were going to have BRAC a lot of military installations around the country, which means Base Realignment and Closure. Walter Reid came up on that list.
I think you‘re seeing the affects of that policy, which is Why are you going to fix the paint and clear the mice out of an institution that‘s closing.”
Hey, Zifnab – did you know it looks like you sit at your PC just waiting for me to post? BTW, we’re all still waiting for you to tell us how it tastes to eat my shorts.
“Hey, Zifnab – did you know it looks like you sit at your PC just waiting for me to post? BTW, we’re all still waiting for you to tell us how it tastes to eat my shorts.”
It’s called RSS, Dan… or should I say Bart?
Walter Reed is almost 100 years old and that was largely why it was scheduled for replacement during the last BRAC (the BRAC is not Bush)-of course it is affiliated with several neighboring hospitals like the one at Ft. Belvoir and the Navy center at Bethesda which also provide care. The worst of the Army wounded go to Brooke Army Medical Center in San Antonio but that is not a club Zifnab could use to club the President with, so he ignores it. This is apparently the latest lefty talking point, but it is tiresome to those of us who know something about the Army health care system. If money was being spent on WRAMC the cry would be about why we were spending so much on an antiquated facility.
Aren’t these the same peole that want govt provided healthcare for everyone?
Be careful what you wish for, you may just get it
“Be careful what you wish for, you may just get it”
Funny. Denial of claims? Penny pinching at every level? The worst care for the lowest paid? Sounds alot like the private sector.
Jesus, Riehl, Campos makes a number of legal arguments for why assassination of foreign civilian scientists is not ok. You just ignore them entirely. The most glaring bit you and Reynolds ignore is that the U.S. is not, and has not been “at war” with Iran since 1979 – or ever for that matter. You idiot wingers always whine about “shutting down free speech” when your evil ideas are attacked.
Sounds alot like the private sector
no, sounds worse – why not fix the private sector instead of putting yourself at the mercy of the govt
It didn’t strike me that the powerline analysis proved reynolds was within the law. That analysis may show that scientists w/in military facilities are fair game for military action, but nowhere did i find anything about mullahs.
I realize that you may consider the religious leaders to be military, but tht’s got to be a stretch even for you.
Indeed his comments are well within the law.
Now, if he or someone else were to act on them, they’d be in a bit of trouble with the law.
Saying you shouldn’t call for the death of scientists is “assassinating free speech”?? Good work Dan, that’s not completely over the top ridiculous rhetoric at all.
If you update, may I suggest adding that that “the unhinged left is attempting to smash Freedom to pieces with the burning hammer of media bias injustice.”
Alternatively, you could claim that “Democrats are trying to kill all that is good in the world by drowning it in a bucket of murder children’s tears.”
Hmmmmm.
The Moonbat-O-meter is redlining.
Riehl World is double happiness: Dan’s observent, amusing, insightful and intelligent posts and the insane lib maniacs in the comments! I mean, Zifnab, legalize, et alia…Um, if Dan is such a mouth breathing wingnut why the hell are you in his comments 24/7/365? I occasionally read some lefty blogs but they are uniformally so stupifingly idiotic I am forced to flee with tears of laughter streaming down my checks and rarely go back for days-weeks-months at a time…Let alone wasting my brainpower on commenting! Really, you guys are somehow BENEATH pathetic…
Oh yeah, and thanks again Dan!!
E
“Um, if Dan is such a mouth breathing wingnut why the hell are you in his comments 24/7/365?”
It’s a guilty pleasure. Also, modern intertubes technology pretty much renders any given blog into an abstraction, so, Riehlly™, this is just one of but many sites that we read, defined as “skim over any new posts and then hold our heads and groan for a few moments” in the case of most right-wing blogs. The thing is, hardly any of the big-time wingnuts allow comments because they’re cowards (kudos to Dan for enduring a pretty much endless stream of pantsings and kick-me signs in the wake of his high-profile series of snafus and silliness, I must say) and if they do then they’re “registration closed… since 2001!” Stalinist circle-jerks like LGF and HotAir where sociopaths toe the party line with a proficiency that would earn them a 6-figure salary from some Scaife-funded wingnut welfare outfit if they were marginally attractive enough to be Fox News “political analysts.”
So, in a way, he’s the best we’ve got! Oh, and unlike Bill Quick, Dan doesn’t cuss like a sailor when we call him on his bullshit. It’s kind of cute, like seeing myself back when I went to Sunday school and felt dirty for saying “darn” and “heck”.
(Also, sometimes there’s a Sadly, No! post that gives us insight into a post that we didn’t even realize was Riehlly Stupid™ at first glance, like that one about Anna Nicole Smith and impotence that he ended up locking the comments on.)
Instapundit:
“But I said Iran has been at war with us; we, however, have not been at war with Iran.”
Legalize:
“The most glaring bit you and Reynolds ignore is that the U.S. is not, and has not been “at war” with Iran since 1979 – or ever for that matter.”
It would probably help if you read the the material, Legalize. You wouldn’t sound so, uhm, desperate to make your point.
“Stalinist circle-jerks like LGF and HotAir…”
Wow, I knew Leftard memories were short, but I had no idea they were THAT short! Zifnab’s already established that Leftards suffer from ADD, but scarshapedstar had just demonstrated both Long Term AND Short Term Memory Loss by forgetting which side of the political spectrum Communism firmly resides on.
And note to Moonbats: I know you can’t focus beyond the keywords (due to that ADD thing) but trust me when I write that just because something has the word “law” in it doesn’t automatically equate to a legal argument.
Gee, when Mr Riehl was screaming for Ward Churchill to be fired for expressing a political opinion he didn’t like, did he consider THAT to be facism?
accessories to fit the official enclownment
There isn’t much I can add to the beclowning of Professor Paul Campos (about whom I’ve complained before). I guess it wasn’t enough to have called Glenn a “Bush dead-ender” and “jingoistic right-wing ideologue” so it has to be ratcheted…
We sold weapons to a country that’s at war with us? Hello? And, yes, I noted that Instanpundit mentioned that he wouldn’t mind if North was in jail. Okay. How about Elliot Abrams, John Negroponte, John Pointdexter, Otto Reich, and, say, Robert Gates? Instanpundit is okay with these guys–who are certainly as tangled up in Iran-Contra as North–running illegal covert ops in Iran? There are some differences between Ward Churchill’s extremism and Reynolds’s advocacy of assassinations but I’m not sure the differences are in Reynolds’s favor. (For one, Reynolds can’t argue his position is “alternative academic criticism” or “progressive history” or “creative essay” or whatever.)
And whoa there. I’d say that asking UT to explain their policy concerning faculty who advocate illegal violence–”Certainly, it’s worth asking Reynolds’ administrative superiors at the University of Tennessee what limits, if any, the terms and conditions of Reynolds’ employment put on his behavior.”–is pretty polite considering what happened to Churchill and their relative political roles.
“We sold weapons to a country that’s at war with us? Hello? “
??????
You sold a great deal of stuff to the shah. But that would have been BEFORE you were at war with them.