From World Net Daily(not the tabloid site World News Daily), with h/t to Green Hell Blog, something that if proven is quite disturbing. Yet given the kind of treatment I’ve recently received at the hands of an eco-zealot who can’t tolerate my views on climate, I’m not surprised.
Some people have no scruples and no shame. – Anthony
Democrats attack Republican candidate’s children
By Art Robinson
In an effort to do my part in rescuing our country from the out-of-control Obama administration, last year I ran for Congress in Oregon’s 4th District against 12-term incumbent, far-left Democrat Peter DeFazio, co-founder of the House Progressive Caucus.
Although I won the nominations of the Republican, Independent and Constitution Parties and the endorsement of the Libertarian Party, a massive media smear campaign by DeFazio, paid for with money raised by MoveOn.org and from special interests favored by DeFazio in Washington, resulted in a 54.5 percent to 43.6 percent victory for DeFazio in a race that was expected to be much closer.
Although I had never run for public office before, I immediately announced my candidacy for Congress again in 2012.
However, when you take a stand for what’s right, sometimes there is retribution.On Nov. 4, 2010, as soon as the election results were in and they were sure their candidate had won, faculty administrators at Oregon State University gave new meaning to the term “political payback.”
They initiated an attack on my three children – Joshua, Bethany and Matthew – for the purpose of throwing them all out of the OSU graduate school, despite their outstanding academic and research accomplishments. OSU is a liberal socialist Democrat stronghold in Oregon that received a reported $27 million in earmark funding from my opponent, Peter DeFazio, and his Democrat colleagues during the last legislative session.
Read full story here: Democrats attack Republican candidate’s children
UPDATE: I decided to pull the direct link to the website that hurled unspeakable insults to me by an eco-zealot, they don’t deserve the traffic WUWT will generate for them. Such things are best handled by other means. So, I used WebCite to permanently log the website, and you can view it here, scroll all the way to the bottom and note “corrections”: http://www.webcitation.org/5x0pgZdgl
UPDATE2: OSU has posted a statement which you can read here
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I’ve been lurking here obsessively for a couple of years now but have never posted, except once, until now. At times the obsession has been pretty bad (My wife sometimes describes herself as a “wattsupwiththat widow” (!) I’ve personally worked to spread the word about this site and have made a great many “converts” from the pro-AGW Warmist camp (and not the least among them, my physicist brother-in-law). What I first loved about the site, and still do, is its spirit of what I would call “focus and collegiality” in the good old fashioned American sense of that – as in “what do we all have in common here to help us solve this problem — together.” Name the problem, it doesn’t matter. The pragmatic (empirical) solution must dictate the priorities and nothing else. This spirit has always been associated with words like, “I don’t give a tinker’s damn what his politics are, or who his father was, etc. etc., he runs one hell of a #$%$#ing railroad (or shop, or lab or army, or back hoe, whatever!)
My theory is that, in the case of Americans, this spirit has its origins in the stark realities of our frontier origins. We learned that when you first arrive in a howling wilderness, it’s a good idea to shut up and listen and above all not to try and go by the book. In fact if you don’t promptly throw the book away, you’ll stand an excellent chance of dying—as so very many of those folks did, though they’re now forgotten. This environment breeds pragmatists, but also pragmatists with excellent noses for that completely untranslatable American expression – “bullshit.” (Maybe there should be an anti-AGW bumper sticker that simply says “Bullshit Kills”) And these attributes are certainly not limited to Americans, I know Canadians and Australians and many others who have them.
But I digress. As for this site, along with integrity, its focus is what primarily makes it so successful. It addresses a specific phenomenon, or set of phenomena, as central, i.e. a global fraud-in-progress that is founded on distortion, lies, greed and all too often, smears, bad manners and bad breeding. In other words, founded on politics. And even worse, politics masquerading as science.
Speaking of politics, I was lurking and posting among the first few hundred on the original Free Republic website during the late 90’s and watched as its relatively civil and elevated level of discourse descended into the gutter with the arrival and dominance of the howlers and haters and name callers and Trotskyites turned neocons, and all manner of base and vulgar and ill-educated sorts. None of whom gave a damn about the First Amendment or were really interested in free speech at all. At any rate the point is that I’m neither a Demublican nor a Pepublicrat and flatter myself that I take issues just as I take people, one at a time and, insofar as possible, without prejudice.
All of this is aimed at a strong vote in favor of this site remaining as lively and elevated and civil and nonpartisan as it has been so far. Nobody here wants to be issued with an “opinion kit.” Meaning that if you feel one way about any given issue, you’re somehow expected to toe someone else’s line as to how you’re to feel about every other issue besides. One attribute of a truly free person is that he does NOT put his political opinions on and wear them like clothes. Seeing humanity as a series of political interactions from cradle to grave is a form of degrading slavery that we can all do without. It would be easy for the site to go the way of so many others, that have gotten distracted from the most important issues on the table. The most important issue here is exposing the attempted political and economic power grab deriving from the QED fallacious theory of Anthropogenic Global Warming.
At least within the context of this all important mission, someone else’s opinions about any other issues are matters of indifference to me. If there’s any danger that my personal political views of the moment are going to close someone’s else’s ears to the empirical case to be made against this grand global deception, then I will keep my mouth shut about them and remain empirically on topic at all costs.
I think this is already a rule of thumb that the majority of posters to this site seem to follow.
I am concerned about corruption of science, in education. That minds like Freeman Dyson and Linus Pauling could be so demonized today is strange, bizarre. That folk
like David Horowitz have to stand on the ramparts, today, advocating for truth,
above political correctness, is tragic in this advanced age.
I read “Mike”‘s links to Oregon State’s new climate research funding. Whew! $20 million in one, including a K-12 program to help children “understand” this “settled science.” (And, even Gavin S. is now claiming The Science Is Not, Really, Settled…. smile. Well, the child propaganda machines, like the Soviet Union’s, are working overtime…)
I know, personally, many climate scientists — old ones, with settled careers, tenure — who keep their heads down, won’t read blogs, discuss the issue: mitigation is insurance…. period….. don’t ask.
I’ve longed believed the American universities were corrupted by political correctness beyond reality, facts, science. But, I couldn’t prove it.
I wonder if there is a way to prove the political corruption in climate science in the universities — separate the politicians, the money interests, the eco-fascists.
…kinda like the NOAA weather station observers….. millions of eyes and ears.
(BTW, Anthony, whatever *did* happen to your report, published after the hurried NOAA jobbie?) …..Lady in Red
Please contact Oregon’s:
Senate Education and Workfoce Development Committee
House Subcommittee on Higher Education
This story just got a plug on Instapundit which will transmit it as a possible story to Fox News etc. That’s how the Climategate story made its way to an episode of Glenn Beck within a few days.
“REPORT: Oregon State: Republican candidate’s children expelled as retribution? Charlie Martin is looking for independent confirmation of this somewhat hard to believe story.”
http://pajamasmedia.com/tatler/2011/03/07/oregon-state-republican-candidates-children-expelled-as-retribution/
David Hagen:
“Please contact Oregon’s:
Senate Education and Workfoce Development Committee
House Subcommittee on Higher Education”
…to what end?
Robinson’s children might be poster kids, but The System needs to change.
How do we do that, keep the lights focused on the roaches? ….Lady in Red
Anthony i would not worry to much about the beast web site. I read thier crap they wrote in the list and it seems that hate anyone that thinks for them selves. The admin posted on the last comment that murphy was going to put a bullet in his head, so now if the other will do the world the same favor the public would not have to be subjected to such DRIBBLE.
And one other note maybe you should put the link back up and they might see the kind of traffic that makes your site so good with the quality of posters and commenters.
I’ve contacted my congressman -Walden R-Red Sea of Oregon about this.
This if is as stated OSU is going the way of OU.
Depending on the circumstances behind the expulsion, some programs require a 5 year ‘washout’ period before the former PhD candidates will be admitted. Even if they managed to avoid this circumstance, the previous poster is correct about time lost. They would certainly have to repeat any research portion of their PhD work but also in all likelihood repeat most if not all of their PhD class work and retake cumulative exams and any other ‘milestone’ assessments PhD students have to take for particular departmental qualifications.
Being expelled from a PhD program sucks. I know someone who was, about half way through. Grade related. They sold cars for a while and then got into real estate. No PhD for them.
I did some Google searches, and found a few things, but nothing very informative as to the veracity of this report. I’m with Amy Ridenour – we need more information. I don’t doubt some of these assertions are troubling. If they do prove to be even remotely true, I personally will find a way to boycott the state of Oregon as long as the Leadership of that university remains intact. That may sound like a hollow threat, but a word-of-mouth boycott of a state can have immense impact, especially when you can convince your associates, friends, and family to join. I’ll definitely be keeping an eye on this story.
I’m a pretty hard core conservative, but I don’t believe a thing out of WND. However, I have read many other posters say that “we haven’t heard both sides”. If the story is true, and all 3 kids are being thrown out, I fail to see what the other side is. If all three kids have 3.8+ GPA’s and have done some awesome work as the proud father claims, I could see it possible that one of them did some horribly aggregious act and might be dismissed because of it…but really, what are the odds of all 3 kids (high GPA), being thrown out? Yes, we need confirmation on this story…but if indeed all 3 kids and one of the faculty (I looked up Higganbotham, and he seems to be a pretty stand up guy), are going to be dismissed, then there is no other side.
At &:52 PM on 7 March, crosspatch had written:
.
So I went to find that “Shut Up” video.
And damnit, I’ve spent the past hour looking at every one of these Klavan on the Culture pieces available. The guy is not only likely to cause the average “Liberal” fascist’s feculent rostral knob to explode with rage, but he’s pretty funny.
Curse you, crosspatch.
walt man says:
March 7, 2011 at 2:58 pm
Waltman – I normally would not comment on an internal domestic US discussion, but as you bought in the Australian situation and present such a limited and biased description of extremism. I might remind you that extremism exists on both sides. It seems it is o.k. for the Australian Broadcasting (ABC) to be extremist, present one sided and abusive descriptions of skeptics, much to the amusement of one group of like minded “intelligensia” and for those same proponents of academia who spent time on blog sites ridiculing skeptics, it is hardly surprising that this belittlement and poor behaviour rankles others in the community. In Australia the very left wing academics see it as their duty to force their opinions and beliefs on those of lesser status (in their eyes only!!) and expect to get their way and retain control of Climate funding for their own purposes. You also seem to forget the insidious labelling of both Australian skeptical scientists and the lies told to discredit and reframe the debate in an attempt to link any scientific dissent with big oil and tobacco, or simply to present them as crazy and not to be trusted. You also conveniently forget the virilent putdown and labelling of all who questioned the chosen version of post normal science, including the name calling by certain media commentators – all good fun, until it raises some push back as these things inevitably do.
There is surprisingly (for some) in Australia, a vast number of ordinary people who have had a life long interest in the weather and its variability and can think and see and by research through the internet have learned more of the political attempt to overule by a mythical consensus. Those ordinary people do not like the smears, the attempts to avoid having to actually discuss the science or promote discussion between scientists, or explain anything. “I am the scientist, I believe, so you MUST accept my belief as truth!!”
This arrogance is something to behold and when the ordinary person finds that they will be adversely impacted by something they see as a great big lie to introduce a great big tax, that our political minority masters are bringing in. When the political promise was that they would not do this. It is hardly surprising, that among the ordinary taxpayers, this is something they get agitated about, and the least responsible, who have little voice to protest, will revert to primieval personal threats.
But it is not only from one side, you also see it from those that swallowed the big science consensus lie and “believed” the propaganda that they were saving the world.They now see that “idealistic belief” crashing into nothing, and some committed individuals so resort to the same kind of actual threats, or just muttered insults as a means to express themselves.
I could say that the Clive Hamilton’s and others that used such emotive language to put down others are merely reaping the whirlwind that they have sown. The same with politicians who forget who they are really representing in the community.
That is why we need open debate among scientists without professional association restraints, to bring out these issues in the open, admit mistakes where mistakes were made or or conjecture presented as fact. we need to clean up and reform climate science.
Too much has been covered up, reframed for political spin – let honesty and open debate take place. If you don’t, you create a fertile climate for the lowest common denominator to be unleashed among those that “believe” they are disenfranchised or have no other means to express their anger or resentment.
I would prefer civil discussion to both sides of the issue.
D. Malloy Dickson says:
March 7, 2011 at 7:59 pm
And you say it so well, thanks, ditto for Australians!
Speaking of Australia, I see Gillard was meeting with Obama today… after what she just pulled off with her surprise carbon tax, that was not a pretty picture.
Ian H says:
March 7, 2011 at 4:40 pm
Indeed I hate to tell you this, but outside of the US, most people regard the current crop of US republican politicians as borderline insane. They seem in complete denial of reality. In particular they fervently deny that failure to regulate financial markets in the Bush years lead to the global financial meltdown, which is the accepted reality in the rest of the world.
Ian, for your own benefit, please ask yourself how you could possibly know what the people in the whole rest of the world outside of America think. In that light, next consider whether you can then be confident that you know anything at all about the topics you addressed, and certainly regardless of “what most people think”, which you should know by now also has no logical or empirical bearing upon what is true.
It’s your own mind, after all, that you should be most interested in. Is it really working up to the level you want, if you allow it to refer to what you can’t possibly know, what the people of the whole rest of the world think, then use that as a basis for establishing what is real, but which has no general a priori bearing upon reality, “what most people think”, except in regard to what most people think?
Bob Dylan anecdote: once a reporter said to him, “People say ‘x’.” He replied, “Yes, people do say ‘x’.”
I live in Oregon, in the district in which Mr. Robinson challenged Mr. DeFazio. The “smear campaign” consisted of repeating what Mr. Robinson has said and written, such as “public education is child abuse.” Mr. Robinson has the interesting view that as a candidate he can say whatever he likes and that it’s a smear if the press brings it up afterwards. Overall, his campaign was astonishing and very well funded by out-of-state interests.
So I am familiar with Art Robinson and also to a degree with OSU. Robinson’s analysis of OSU’s practices do not concord with reality. His paranoid delusions of sainthood have gotten very tiresome here in Oregon, and those less familiar with them should reserve judgment until he produces something resembling evidence.
I thought that beast awards thingy was some kind of over-the-top satire thing, to be honest.
I, too, live in Oregon’s Fourth District, in the People’s Republic of Eugene, aka Moscow on the Willamette.
I’m not so sure Mr. Robinson was the best candidate for the Republicans to put up against DeFazio, but he made a pretty good run at it, considering. I think he lost by 11 points, which was the closest DeFazio has come to being knocked off in quite some time. Most likely DeFazio was saved by the liberal bastions of Eugene and Corvallis (the latter now being even more liberal than Eugene, if that’s imaginable).
Without knowing more, I’m loath to comment on Mr. Robinson’s allegations, but they do seem far fetched. However, OSU is quite the hotbed of political correctness these days. Former Oregon state climatologist George Taylor’s last few months there weren’t all that pleasant, if my understanding is correct, so it’s within the realm of reason that Mr. Robinson’s kids could have run afoul of the prevailing doctrine and somehow gotten the boot.
If they did get booted, for illegitimate reasons, heads should roll.
Check tomorrow’s Register-Guard (registerguard.com), Eugene’s paper. I know they’ll have an article on it. The R-G’s editorial positions are usually tilted toward the academic, but occasionally the paper’s been able to do some decent reporting.
Let’s take a deep breath and hope more facts surface.
Other than that, Go Ducks!!!
Update.
Here’s the Register-Guard article, apparently posted about the same time I was commenting above. See: http://www.registerguard.com/web/updates/25976532-55/robinson-osu-students-defazio-university.html.csp
Doesn’t tell us much more than we already know. Maybe they’ll do a followup for Wednesday’s paper.
Turns out Corvallis isn’t in the 4th District. I thought it was. The boundary is a bit goofy up there. I guess Eugene alone saved DeFazio’s electoral bacon!
Rob Spooner says:
March 7, 2011 at 10:39 pm
So I am familiar with Art Robinson and also to a degree with OSU. Robinson’s analysis of OSU’s practices do not concord with reality. His paranoid delusions of sainthood have gotten very tiresome here in Oregon, and those less familiar with them should reserve judgment until he produces something resembling evidence.
I live in Greece and as an outside observer I take your “evidence” means:
“evidence that all three of his children on a thesis track are being stopped”.
If you mean “evidence that they are unfairly stopped” my credibility is challenged, because the probability of having all three students of the same family stopped on a thesis program after two years of graduate work, at the same time, is astronomically small. Even for two students.
A badge of honour Anthony…… Wear their vilification, loathing and fear of you proudly…… We love the smell of leftist insults in th’ morning.
Don’t worry Anthony.
First they ignore you. Then they fight you. Then you win.
Dear Rob,
It’s Dr. Robinson, Ph.D. Evidently your “familiarity” has some defects.
If anything has gotten tiresome in Oregon, it’s one-party rule by a cabal with a long running disdain for family values. It’s an Oregon liberal thing: proud of being “weird”, [don’t know the details, but this section seemed over the top ~ ctm]
Now your one-party “saints” are attacking a model family, a man who raised and home schooled his six kids after their mother died, kids who have all earned or were about to earn PhD’s.
I know Dr. Art Robinson. He is one of the most honest men I know. Honesty was a hallmark of his campaign. I have no doubt that his statement is true, indeed understated if anything. The facts Dr. Robinson aired regarding Dr. Jack Higginbotham are also true.
Your charges of “paranoid delusion” are baseless slander without the slightest thing “resembling evidence”. Dr. Robinson’s campaign was funded by small donations from resident Oregonians, not “out-of-state” interests, another baseless lying slander on your part.
DeFazio has not been in Congress for 24 years without creating a machine, a cabal of radical supporters. He is one of the most left-wing of all Congressmen, a long-time officer of the Progressive Caucus, and his staff are closely connected to eco-terrorist groups. He was shocked by Dr. Robinson’s near victory — DeFazio seriously underestimated Dr. Robinson — who has said he will run again in 2012. DeFazio and his closest supporters are vindictive and taking preemptory action.
Readers of this site know that Dr. Robinson drafted a petition against the CAGW Hoax that was signed by 31,000 scientists, destroying the vaunted “consensus” touted by Alarmists. He is a man of courage and conviction, a great American who deserves universal support, not more foul attacks on his character and on his children.
Doesn’t your FBI combat Mafia style businesses in the USA. Go for them hook line and sinker.
Funny how as every part of our society becomes political so does the corruption.
And funny how people can defend the attack of someones children, shame on all of you on this thread.