We don't need no libruls at our school!

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Shrapnel12
Maybe UC Irvine doesn't want to turn into one of those liberal colleges gaining a notorious reputation for shouting down conservatives? If liberals can't respect our freedom of thought and speech, why should we respect theirs?

Just which colleges would these be?

The ones in which professors tell people to stop disrupting lectures to make political points with crazy conspiracy theories?

Conservatism doesn't go down well at college because it isn't a rationally supported belief system. Hell, I haven't been able to get a straight answer from Poly's conservatives for 5 years now on what it actually is.

[Provost Harrison]

Originally posted by Shrapnel12
Maybe UC Irvine doesn't want to turn into one of those liberal colleges gaining a notorious reputation for shouting down conservatives? If liberals can't respect our freedom of thought and speech, why should we respect theirs?

By pre-emptively shouting him down. Pathetic

[Zkribbler]

Curiouser and curiouser. Regents say it wasn't them.
UCI Chancellor falls under a shadow.

Furor disrupts plans for UCI school of law
The decision to drop Erwin Chemerinsky as dean could delay the 2009 opening. In the wake of the turmoil, some faculty members have called for Chancellor Michael V. Drake's resignation.

By Garrett Therolf, Rebecca Trounson and Richard C. Paddock, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
September 14, 2007


For decades, UC Irvine has aspired to open Orange County's first top-flight law school, declaring it to be the university's glaring "missing piece."

The effort was thrown into turmoil after UCI Chancellor Michael V. Drake abruptly dropped respected liberal scholar Erwin Chemerinsky as the school's first dean. Drake said he had lost confidence in the educator, in part, because of Chemerinsky's recent opinion articles that made him a "lightning rod," including a scathing rebuke of U.S. Atty. Gen. Alberto R. Gonzales.

The action ignited a debate about academic freedom and political meddling that only grew more fierce Thursday, with some faculty members calling for Drake's resignation after a hastily scheduled meeting of the university's academic senate on Thursday afternoon.

Officials said the turnaround on Chemerinsky could delay the opening of the law school -- scheduled for 2009 -- and so tarnish the institution that it would be difficult to assemble the scholars and staff needed to establish the school as one of the nation's best -- UCI's long-cherished goal.

On Thursday, an open letter gathered 181 signatures in the first six hours it was posted on a website for students, faculty and staff. In part it said: "We are disturbed because of the deep violation both of the integrity of the university and of the intrusion of outrageously one-sided politics and unacceptable ideological considerations."

Social sciences professor Frank D. Bean said: "If it's a matter of outside pressure, the chancellor should have stood up to that. If it's a matter of concerns over Chemerinsky, why wasn't due diligence done? There are no scenarios that one can construct that are acceptable. Rarely are things so clear cut."

By the end of the day, Drake faced hundreds of faculty members at the senate meeting, and he struggled to squelch criticism.

The chancellor, speaking tentatively and choosing his words carefully, offered no additional detail on what led him to reverse his decision on Chemerinsky. He told the crowd, however, "My decision not to hire professor Chemerinsky had nothing to do with academic freedom or the infringement of academic freedom in any way."

Mark Warschauer, a professor of education, left the meeting saying he didn't think Drake's appearance would put the issue to rest. "I don't think this satisfies," he said.

Jutta Heckhausen, secretary of the academic senate, said the faculty panel would probably meet behind closed doors next week and might consider making a formal statement against the chancellor.

In the meantime, officials leading the launch of the law school said the decision makes it likely the school will not be ready to accept its first class as scheduled in 2009.

In order to meet the target, plans called for a dean to be in place this fall and for six to eight senior faculty members to then be hired this academic year. The search for Chemerinsky took nine months before a formal agreement was reached, and search committee members said they would now probably start again from scratch.

"We had three other finalists, and one of them would have definitely done it a week ago," said psychology professor Elizabeth F. Loftus, a member of the committee. "If you asked them today, I don't know. I don't think the law school will be derailed, but who knows what's going to happen next?"

Although Drake has denied that he took action under pressure from conservatives, Loftus said Thursday that the chancellor told the committee during an emergency meeting Wednesday night that he was forced to make the decision by outside forces whom he did not name. A second member of the committee confirmed Loftus' account to The Times but asked to remain anonymous.

"I asked whether it was one or two voices or an avalanche, and the answer is that it was an avalanche," Loftus said. "But we are not supposed to capitulate to that in the world of academic freedom."

Chemerinsky said that in their final conversation Tuesday morning, Drake told him significant opposition to his hiring had developed but did not specify who the critics were.

"We just agreed that in the public statement, we'd say that I had proven too politically controversial," said Chemerinsky, now of Duke University and formerly of USC.

Drake told him that the appointment would prompt "a bloody fight" within the UC Board of Regents and that "if we won, it would damage the law school," Chemerinsky said. ". . . He said, 'I knew you were liberal, but I didn't realize how controversial you'd be.' He said, 'I didn't realize there would be conservatives out to get you.' "

Chemerinsky said that when he was interviewed by Drake in June, the two men discussed how an administrator or dean needs to be careful about public statements and the potential effect of those statements on the institution he or she leads. But Chemerinsky said Drake never told him he couldn't write opinion pieces.

Several members of the Board of Regents said Thursday they were puzzled by Drake's decision, adding that they believe Chemerinsky's appointment would not have been blocked by the 26-member body.

opcorn:

[aneeshm]

Originally posted by Agathon

Hell, I haven't been able to get a straight answer from Poly's conservatives for 5 years now on what it actually is.

I'm not really conservative, but for what it's worth, I think it's defined as basically "stick with what works."

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by aneeshm


I'm not really conservative, but for what it's worth, I think it's defined as basically "stick with what works," even if it doesn't.

Fixed.

[Gatekeeper]

Admittedly, I don't know squat about the individual who gave the seed money for the law school — $20 million — but could he or folks linked to him be the cause(s) of this debacle?

Gatekeeper

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by aneeshm


I'm not really conservative, but for what it's worth, I think it's defined as basically "stick with what works."

When did things start working?

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by Kidicious
When did things start working?

When FDR got elected.

Oh. You meant recently.

[DRoseDARs]

lol UCI flip-flopped LOL

http://thinkprogress.org/2007/09/17/chemerinsky-re-hired-by-uc-irvine/

Chemerinsky re-hired by UC-Irvine.

Last week, controversy erupted when the University of California at Irvine fired the inaugural Dean of its new law school, constitutional scholar Erwin Chemerinsky, because his “political views would make him a target for criticism from conservatives.” This morning, Chemerinsky and UC Irvine Chancellor Michael V. Drake announced that they had reached an agreement enabling Chemerinsky to return to his previous position.

[Wezil]

Now he should turn it down.

[Zkribbler]

So...UCI finally figured out that it's not a good idea for a governmental entity to refuse to hire one of the nation's leading constitutional scholars because of his political views.

[DRoseDARs]

Originally posted by Wezil
Now he should turn it down.

That would be tre awesome*.





*Because "tre impressionnant" sucks noodles.

[snoopy369]

Originally posted by Agathon


Just which colleges would these be?

The ones in which professors tell people to stop disrupting lectures to make political points with crazy conspiracy theories?

Conservatism doesn't go down well at college because it isn't a rationally supported belief system. Hell, I haven't been able to get a straight answer from Poly's conservatives for 5 years now on what it actually is.

Funny how viewpoints disagreed with by the left automatically become "not rationally supported systems".

[Wezil]

It is the essence of PC - Either you think as we the enlightened do, or else you are wrong.

[Shrapnel12]

Originally posted by Agathon


Conservatism doesn't go down well at college because it isn't a rationally supported belief system.

Yes that's the first thing that pops into my head when I think of liberalism: rational. Tell me which successful socialist government does this rationale come from?

Hell, I haven't been able to get a straight answer from Poly's conservatives for 5 years now on what it actually is.

As a liberal, how would you even know what a straight answer is? Besides, why do you need one? You've already decided for yourself what conservatism is so all that's left to do is hang out with the rest of the cross burners.