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.
A little late I know. There is a world of difference in such a Public Policy Statement of Intent, & putting it into practice & adhering to it. Just saying it is not always enough, although I am well aware in this letigious politically correct world, that all organisations MUST have a “policy statement” about everything & anything! I spent 10 years as a school governor at my childrens primary school, & the plethora of “policy statements” I had to delve into & re-write in accordance with Guvment guidelines was incredible. Most of them didn’t even apply to a small village school! It’s all part of the “making you feel guilty you’ve committed a crime” behavioural control system! Do you colonials have similar issues with all institutions/businesses/companies/firms?
BTW just for the record, I think OSU have behaved appallingly, & to single out three members of the same family is surely suspicious? AtB
Robert Wykoff says: March 7, 2011 at 9:27 pm
If all three kids have 3.8+ GPA’s …
[if] 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? …
all 3 kids and one [Higganbotham] of the faculty
Pure, untimely, coincidence, surely not!
DCC says: March 7, 2011 at 7:40 pm
Meat would be to add “If the students involved will give us permission to disclose the circumstances, we [the university] will do so.”
They are already showing their true colours.
It is said “It’s Not The Crime, it’s The Cover-Up”, but, in this case, it looks like it is the crime (on four people) as well.
Assuming there is an investigation, how independent will the investigators be? Investigators suffering climate change do appear to loose their independence and investigative skills. Well they do in Norfolk, England.
This thread is an example of why the US is so often isolated from the rest of the world.
Of course, if someone’s kids got expelled from university because of a parent’s political or other views, that is disgraceful. I would be defending those students, whatever their parent’s views might be.
But once again, it is the confabulation of political opinions and personal integrity that leaves people in the rest of the world baffled. Apparently, if you don’t agree with a particular worldview (in every respect) you are a worthless individual, a serial liar and a sociopath. Anthony has recently experienced this on the website-that-I-will not mention, as they do not deserve any hits courtesy of WUWT. In fact, they accused him of even worse than that, in many people’s opinion.
I do not think that generic terms like left and right are very useful. Calling anyone who is not a US right wing Republican a person without integrity and intelligence is not only wrong and stupid, it also prevents overcoming CAGW nonsense.
While I suppose that it has been therapeutic for people to vent on this thread, the deep streak of paranoia that pervades US political consciousness looks pretty ugly to the rest of the world. It may be that the US political system is so corrupt that it is deserved. But, in more relaxed democracies, we apply Occam’s Razor.
Wow,
That was quick.
“Accusations” published on the Web on 7 March 2011.
OSU completes “investigation” and finds no substancer to the claims on 7 March 2011.
Even Muir Russell could learn something from these guys!!!
^^^ “But once again, it is the confabulation of political opinions and personal integrity that leaves people in the rest of the world baffled.”
I am part of the ROW and I disagree.
Actually I beleive that we are experiencing an increasing polarity of political views Worldwide in Anglo-Saxon societies at least.
At 3:11 AM on 8 March, johanna had written:
.
Okay, so let’s go with the law of parsimony. Ready, johanna? Regarding three individual tenure-track postgraduate students, against each of whom is taken expulsion proceedings from the same department of the same university hard on the heels of a vigorously contested congressional district election (part of a nationwide contest in which, as a whole and at both local and state levels, America’s “Liberal” fascist political faction had its metaphorical guts ripped out as a reaction principally against the largely unconstitutional actions taken by our Blue Party in the 111th Congress and the practices of the Fraudulence-in-Chief currently infesting the White House) and the challenger’s announcement that he’s coming after the National Socialist Democrat American Party incumbent again in 2012, let me repeat an old military dictum incorporated by writer Ian Fleming in his novel Goldfinger (1959):
.
Should that not be preferred as the simplest of all contesting theories?
This has got to be a beat-up. Its like a tabloid headline which gets you reading, but the truth is a bit of a let down.
But what is going on in America when people start writing this sort of rubbish? Clearly this article is designed to further polarize the land of the free into Left and Right, and in doing so increase animosity and distrust between Democrats and Republicans. Its almost as though some people in the US are looking longingly at the more politically unstable parts of the world, and wishing it on themselves.
What do these people want – a civil war? Over here in Australia, maybe I shouldn’t care, but we have a nasty habit of copying everything the US does…..
America has been in decline for the last few decades, but, a bit like climate change, who would have had any idea it would happen so fast?
Your democracy is just as corrupt, there’s just less at stake for each individual politician because your country doesn’t have the financial base the U.S. does. Americans loudly and visibly demonstrate their distaste for any appearance of corruption because if you back off from what is visible to you, you essentially surrender all corruption that is invisible to you. At the very least, politicians in the U.S. have to look over their shoulder once in a while. “More relaxed” democracies bring you the European Union, lots of rules with no representation.
The U.S. is isolated from the rest of the world because the rest of the world has always treated the U.S. as if there’s nothing to learn from it.
John Brookes says:
March 8, 2011 at 6:16 am
Same babble from you John, different site, not doing too well at JoNova I see, and a cheap shot into the bargain!
Kate7 says:
March 7, 2011 at 7:48 pm
eadler wrote: “Read Dr. Robinson’s article from SPPI a little over a year ago and then ask yourself if there isn’t sufficient motivation to attack his family”
I’m speechless. What are you? What is wrong with you. Are you so filled with hate that you can’t reason?
Kate,
I never said that. I was quoting Dave, who wrote that. He felt that OSU had the motivation to attack Robinson’s family. He wasn’t justifying it. You need to read a little more carefully.
This may sound a little harsh, but I have to laugh at the non-Americans who post here expecting America and Americans to somehow be “better” then bemoan that we are not more like them. Johanna, above, seems to think that political values are somehow separable from the moral fiber of the individual. CAGW was never about science but rather is a struggle for souls. Those who refuse to see that likely sold their souls long ago.
Bingo. Couldn’t have said it better myself.
Why is walt man trying to compare his examples of Mann mail to this topic unless he is just trying to detour it? Is it Anthony or Dr. Robinson’s experience he is trying to sidetrack? Anyway, I’m just too politically incorrect to resist the urge to reply, so here goes …
{obligatory humor: That’s not a
Threat!Knife!}. Well I see lots of personal opinion in there aimed at MM, transmitted by people who have opinions and the right to express them, while none of it is sycophantic or complimentary to be sure, or in the best of taste, but you did say threats. What threats? Unless you are trying to dilute a meaningful term like threat, which is a bad idea because you may one day face a real threat (e.g., your daughter is stalked by an ex-boyfriend who threatens to kill her), and you will finally understand how petty your comment is there. People in the know will tell you that real threats rarely come in emails where the IP address and routing is almost always obtainable. The same people will also tell you that real threats are never to be discussed publicly, and they are instructed as such, so I am calling bull{snip} on both the FBI and Mann whining. I get the feeling that Mann is simply acting as a classic drama queen here. Cry Me a River.Well I’m not a UK resident and different laws obviously apply, but if it were here in the States I would say this: ‘Man up you weenie! Don’t get your panties in a bunch. If you are asking for blind obedience, and for the citizens to just pay the tax and shut up, you don’t belong in public office. That colorful language appears everywhere from TV to hip hop, why should the ruling class be spared? Perhaps a Praetorian Guard can be implemented to protect your new-age sensibilities.‘ I would also add: ‘Be thankful it is only coarse language because we used to favor tar and feathers to decorate our would-be tyrants and rulers.’ Is that too harsh? Does it pass the threat test? (sigh). I’m living in a world of {snipsies}. What is stunning is the arrogance of that last phrase small rise in energy prices. Oh lord, PLEASE let our liberals here come out of the closet like that. They will do more for the cause of destroying socialism then we can ever hope for. Please let them speak like this!
Oh dear! Playground humor. Walt my boy (and fordie), you need to find some new heroes to groupie for, these ‘scientists’ have no spine, they’re backbone free. Why would you follow someone with no spine is beyond me. Are you telling me that you never heard anything like this before? In grade school or growing up in your neighborhood? Yikes. Helpful suggestion though, never ever play poker because you get rattled way to easy.
Say what? Not in my hood or likely anywhere outside of the beltway, or politically correct ivory towers. I guess it would be threatening if you were a dog. Seriously though, this is to be expected when all the men are out working the real jobs, the rest become climate scientists and whine about the serfs not worshipping them enough!
It’s bad enough that liberals think they can escape the unwashed masses behind rope lines, gated communities, Malibu mansions and CO2 belching private jets, but people such as this little Mann aren’t just hypocritical ecophobic private citizens like Cameron and Streisand, Mann and his ilk are living at least partially on the public dole. When they accept public money, they do not work for any government, they work for the taxpayers. These threatening emailers are presumably taxpayers, the same taxpayers who fund these public employees. So my question to walt man and others, now that I’ve walked you through the chain of command, do you still think Mann should be whining about commentary from his employers? Or should the system be rigged so that they only receive positive feedback? <—(pssst, see the double entendre in there!)
Now, about all the strange postings here concerning the crybaby Mann. Liberals should *never* attempt to put forth hypocrisy arguments. Has anyone noticed that walt man is using [1] examples of hate mail to these (in)famous public employees (Mann et al) as some kind of comparison to the On-Topic [2a] nasty commentary directed at private citizens (like Anthony) and [2b] bureaucratic tribal retribution aimed at Dr. Robinson’s children. Apples and Oranges once again! Let’s break it down:
In case 1 pushed by several trolls here, the so-called threatening emails are from the employers to the employees (citizen taxpayers to public employee scientists). I have no problems with this (within the boundaries of the law of course) as it is employer (taxpayer) feedback. If you cannot handle the criticism get out, but you cannot dodge accountability although you may really want to. Verdict: Taxpayers HAVE standing in *this* court.
In case 2 we have …
(A) disparaging commentary mentioned by Anthony in the top post from (presumably) private citizens to private citizens (from eco-zealots to Anthony). If and only if Anthony Watts accepted taxpayer money then this would be like case-1 and the senseless comparisons would fly. But as it stands now, these are just little trolls spouting their ecobable to another private citizen. Then again some of these commenters may be public employees on the taxpayer dime disguised as private citizens attacking Anthony in which case we would have the inversion of case-1, public employees attacking private citizens. (ahem, could that happen?) Verdict: eco-zealots have NO standing in *this* court.
(B) And there is the main topic of this thread where a partially public institution allegedly attacking a private citizen (OSU vs. Dr. Robinson). The possibility that OSU may be receiving State/Federal funding makes this potentially radioactive. The fact that the school shut up about it makes me very suspicious. But there is certainly no comparison to case-1 above. Verdict: quasi or public institutions have NO standing attacking private citizens. Epic fail.
Anyway, there are commenters more civilized than myself that may disagree with and believe that all this coarse language hurts everyone. Well, I’ll remain an outlier on this. Besides, did these leftist crybabies tone it down or come to the aid of other people being publicly crucified? No they did not, because they were too busy banging the nails into the hands and feet of those very sacrifices. So to the liberals whining now about these trivial ad hominems sent in private emails (which no-one would know about had they not publicized it themselves), I ask a question: How would you like to trade places with Joe McCarthy, or Nixon, Goldwater, Reagan, Oliver North, Judge Bork, Quayle, Clarence Thomas, Ken Starr, GWB, Cheney, Libby, Monckton, Sarah Palin …?.
Answer: you wouldn’t last a minute in their shoes. Welcome to the real world.
I read the piece just now. Can someone explain what this has to do with science or global warming or, as Anthony opines, ‘climate ugliness’?
What the piece appears to be is an upset father trying to push right wing talking points to incense people over the treatment of his kids. That it was even published is shameful, that this website gives it play is just poor form.
John Brookes says: (March 8, 2011 at 6:16 am)
” Clearly this article is designed to further polarize the land of the free into Left and Right, and in doing so increase animosity and distrust between Democrats and Republicans. ”
The reason, John, is that we have far too many politicians who are lawyers. They are taught to be adversarial; increasing animosity and distrust runs in their veins. They see the world as a place where he who postures best wins. I am not against lawyers, we all need one at some time. I am against bringing the lawyer mentality to the job of running the Country.
Mark S says:
March 8, 2011 at 7:24 am
Another drive-by. I’d love to see more details here, but I’m sure that the fact that Dr. Robinson was the originator of the Oregon Petition Project had absolutely nothing to do with these events, Right Mark?
Rob Spooner
March 7, 2011 at 10:39 pm
But public education IS child abuse in the hands of you lefties. You are more interested in Marxist indoctrination then education with the result that children’s minds are permanently damaged by the molding of their cognitive processes needed for them to except as truth the socialist lies.
The purpose of Elementary school is to produce Democrats.
The purpose of High School is to produce Socialists.
The purpose of the University is to produce Marxists.
Mark S says:
March 8, 2011 at 7:24 am
“That it was even published is shameful, that this website gives it play is just poor form.”
It was most kind and efficient of you to include such an excellent review of your own comment right within the body of the comment itself.
The local paper there, the Democrat Herald, says that they were contacted by Robinson. They tried to contact everyone involved but the only response they got was from Higginbotham, telling them to contact the official University spokesperson, so apparently he’s not willing to speak publicly about any of this on behalf of Robinson, despite the above comments that make it sound like he’s totally on Robinson’s side. The paper is getting stone-walled by everyone at the university, wich in itself kinda sounds guilty to me.
John Brookes says:
March 8, 2011 at 6:16 am
Clearly this article is designed to further polarize the land of the free into Left and Right, and in doing so increase animosity and distrust between Democrats and Republicans.
Whaaaaa, go have a good cry, Brookes, maybe someone will give you your bottle or change your diaper. Life is just sooo difficult once you have to think a little and use words instead to deal with yourself and life.
And so your current best attempt at this adjustment is to repeat that feckless, “Polarization is always evil,” meme, allegedly true because it’s allegedly “what most people say” or something equally useless. And because everything’s just so much better handled by Totalitarianism or group-think, which have given the World such grand maxims as the Islmofascist’s deathworshipping ‘ethic’, to the effect that, “Everyone must commit suicide while killing Infidels in order to prove they are not Infidels”, or Communism’s “Social Justice” ‘ethic’ of enslavement, essentially stating that, “We must act so as to become ‘equal’ slaves by letting the Central Government ‘redistribute’ everything possible ‘equally’, except for its own maximal share, conveniently necessary to keep everyone else so ‘equal’.”
So you say those are better than a “polarizing” system based upon the inherent right and creativity presumed in regard to each individual person’s free thought capacity, and the inherent economic Liberty of each to seek their own betterment, within the limits of some laws which define “criminality”; and which demonstrably creates wealth for everyone, including even the persistently indigent and validly incapable? And while Islmofascism and Communism are provenly or certifiably abject failures in assisiting people and Humanity to deal with life?
Brookes, what are your own noble non-polarizing – adopted because they’re “what most people say”, even the whole “rest of the world”, perhaps EU-approved, or self-annointed, “It’s true because I say it” – thoughts? Is one of them, “America is evil or failing because people are rightfully able to think and act on their own”, thus necessarily producing the evil-in-itself “polarization”? Which is in fact “polarizing” itself.
Obviously, Brookes, according to you, you can have no control over what you say or think. At best, noises and appearances just pop into your head and then you repeat them, perhaps arguing after the “thinking” of the great Howard Dean, that ~”you know they are true because your unconscious must have worked on them.”
Otherwise, you can give no basis for what you say or think beyond the justifications pertaining to what a competent Parrot could offer.
Boo hoo.
Someone here opined:
“….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….the accepted reality in the rest of the world.”
First thing every morning when I arise, I wonder what the rest of the world thinks of us. “Self,” I say, “how do those geniuses in Myanmar, Luxembourg, Sudan, Togo, Belgium, Libya, Paraguay, Ukraine, Ireland, Syria, and Croatia view us today? They have so brilliantly run their own affairs that we must perforce consider their opinions.”
Sometimes the Collective Ignorance, as exemplified by the UN, prevents me from getting my beauty rest.
First, Robinson says that this has been going on since November, so it’s quite likely that OSU has known of his allegations for some time. I doubt that their investigation began yesterday. The Eugene Register-Guard attempted to find anyone to corroborate Robinson’s side and came up with nobody, as evidently was the case with the Corvallis paper.
In the election, Robinson didn’t just lose in Eugene. He lost in Springfield massively. He lost here in Florence on the coast. He lost in Pleasant Hill in the foothills of the Cascades.
It’s perfectly OK to say that public education is child abuse, and even elaborate as someone on this blog has just done. The First Amendment protects this. It’s delusional to think that it is then a smear when the press points out that you, a candidate for public office, have called public education child abuse. That’s the other part of the First Amendment.
Not a drive by. I didn’t know that this was the Dr. Robinson of the Oregon Petition fame. I get the climate connection now. The piece is still horrible and unsubstantiated but I get why Anthony is giving it play now.
Rob Spooner
March 8, 2011 at 10:36 am
Thank you for providing such wonderful evidence of the validity of the point I was making.