Dem Senators bring verbal pen-knife to verbal gunfight with George Will

posted at 2:01 pm on June 15, 2014 by Jazz Shaw

In case you missed the origins of this story earlier in the week, George Will took to his usual platform at the Washington Post with some words of caution regarding federal government intervention regarding sexual assaults on the nation’s college campuses. In it, he attempted to inject corrective remedies into some of the hyperbole currently engulfing the topic. Of course, in his usual fashion, Will led off with a paragraph which seemed designed to poke a stick in a few wasp nests.

Colleges and universities are being educated by Washington and are finding the experience excruciating. They are learning that when they say campus victimizations are ubiquitous (“micro-aggressions,” often not discernible to the untutored eye, are everywhere), and that when they make victimhood a coveted status that confers privileges, victims proliferate. And academia’s progressivism has rendered it intellectually defenseless now that progressivism’s achievement, the regulatory state, has decided it is academia’s turn to be broken to government’s saddle.

A careful reading of Will’s full editorial would show that he was essentially making two points. First, the “math” being cited to define the number of sexual assaults taking place was unfit for a 3rd grade Common Core tutorial. Second, Will noted that expanding and inflating the definition of sexual assaults to include micro-agressions – such as a boy staring for too long at a young coed with a low cut blouse – would tend to dilute the pool of actual assaults and diminish the seriousness of the real problem.

Such a stance brought the usual list of suspects up on their hind legs and into an immediate attack posture. This culminated in a coalition of Democratic Senators (Feinstein, Blumenthal, Tammy Baldwin and Robert Casey) penning a letter to the WaPo, chastising them for allowing Will to breath the same air as the rest of us.

After running their letter and litany of complaints, this weekend the Post ran a rare response from George Will. Here’s a key sample.

The administration asserts that only 12 percent of college sexual assaults are reported. Note well: I did not question this statistic. Rather, I used it.

I cited one of the calculations based on it that Mark Perry of the American Enterprise Institute has performed {link}. So, I think your complaint is with the conclusion that arithmetic dictates, based on the administration’s statistic. The inescapable conclusion is that another administration statistic that one in five women is sexually assaulted while in college is insupportable and might call for tempering your rhetoric about “the scourge of sexual assault.”

The Senators were likely faced with the difficult task of flipping back and forth to dictionary.com to translate Will’s writing, so we should probably have some sympathy. For the entire time I have been writing I have cited George Will as one of the top five wordsmiths of our generation. Whether you agree with him or not… whether you think he leans too far in one philosophical direction or the other… there is no denying that Will is a master of the English language and flexes it like Mr. Olympia in the final pose-off. If you’re going to pick a fight with someone in the pages of a leading national paper, you’d best be loaded for bear before you go after George Will.

Sadly, that was a lesson that the Senators learned a bit too late. But all of these entries are worth a read if you’re looking for some good material this weekend and are interested in the actual facts behind the very serious subject of sexual assault on campus and elsewhere.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Dem senators bring tired, old talking points and name-calling to serious discussion.

mankai on June 15, 2014 at 2:06 PM

As for what you call my “ancient beliefs,” which you think derive from an “antiquated” and “counter-intuitive” culture, allow me to tell you something really counter-intuitive: I think I take sexual assault much more seriously than you do. Which is why I worry about definitions of that category of crime that might, by their breadth, tend to trivialize it. And why I think sexual assault is a felony that should be dealt with by the criminal justice system, and not be adjudicated by improvised campus processes.

See the sexual assault obama causes with the illegal child trade at the border.

Schadenfreude on June 15, 2014 at 2:09 PM

I am so glad I am retired and no longer have to involve myself with any of these institutions or the workplace. I wouldn’t last more than a day before I committed some kind of “minor aggression” toward some easily offended person of a protected group.

rlwo2008 on June 15, 2014 at 2:09 PM

But all of these entries are worth a read if you’re…interested in the actual facts…

Silly rabbit, facts are for reasonable people, NOT ideological savants! Progressives don’t rely upon facts, they rely upon repetition and spam (using the media, entertainment, the academy, etc., etc.) to deluge the truth in an ocean of their sewage.

It’s hard to sniff out the truth when it’s buried in progressive stink.

xNavigator on June 15, 2014 at 2:11 PM

I’d like the Senators to explain where the hell they get off using their taxpayer funded official positions to publicly vilify the protected speech of a private citizen.

RadClown on June 15, 2014 at 2:17 PM

It is not simply the words Mr. Will employs, but his ideas that when translated into liberal diction give Democrats a beating.

Windsweeping on June 15, 2014 at 2:21 PM

I’m a fan of George Will, except Will made a big deal about sayinig that Cantor’s loss had little to do with amnesty, and it sounds as if Will is in line with the establishment types that want the Chamber of Commerce & amnesty shill Kevin McCarthy to be the Majority Leader, and as I and others have warned, that considering McCarthy’s expressed philosophy on what the House should do on immigration, McCarthy as Majority Leader may very well follow Paul Ryan’s dictate to bring amnesty to a vote in August.

http://www.redstate.com/2014/01/22/surprise-surprise-kevin-mccarthy-backs-amnesty/

A better choice for Majority Leader is Tea Partier Raul Labrador.

On Huckebee last night Kansas anti-amnesty leader & congressman Tim Huelskamp said this:

What I see with many of my colleagues is they say one thing at home and do another thing in Washington… Eric Cantor said he was a conservative, but he was pushing for some amnesty, and higher spending (etc)…

I think Raul Labrador would be a great Majority Leader. A new face with a new vision. When conservatives across this country are saying we need new leadership, we’ll see what the D.C. establishment does. [McCarthy would be more the same, but...] Congressman Labrador is a great conservative. He’s willing to negotiate, but he’s not going to compromise away principles [like McCarthy].

-Congressman Tim Huelskamp (R-Kansas)

anotherJoe on June 15, 2014 at 2:24 PM

Second, Will noted that expanding and inflating the definition of sexual assaults to include micro-agressions – such as a boy staring for too long at a young coed with a low cut blouse – would tend to dilute the pool of actual assaults and diminish the seriousness of the real problem.

Who’s said that should be sexual assault?

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 2:26 PM

If there’s a sexual assault, report it to the police.Academic administrators have no business, and no authority to prosecute sexual assault crimes. If they aren’t reporting crimes to the legal authorities, that is a crime called misprisonment of felony. Charge them with that crime.

And if the police/D.A. decline to prosecute then do not libel a young man as a rapist.

rbj on June 15, 2014 at 2:28 PM

If there’s a sexual assault, report it to the police.Academic administrators have no business, and no authority to prosecute sexual assault crimes. If they aren’t reporting crimes to the legal authorities, that is a crime called misprisonment of felony. Charge them with that crime.

And if the police/D.A. decline to prosecute then do not libel a young man as a rapist.

rbj on June 15, 2014 at 2:28 PM

Most schools have codes of conduct that students agree to abide by. If the student agrees not to commit sexual assault, however the school defines it, then the school has the right to adjudicate it.

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 2:33 PM

I’d like the Senators to explain where the hell they get off using their taxpayer funded official positions to publicly vilify the protected speech of a private citizen.

RadClown on June 15, 2014 at 2:17 PM

So Senators can’t be critical of any private citizens’ speech? That’s ridiculous.

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 2:35 PM

Don’t these progressives ever learn? Wait, never mind. sarc/off

Conservchik on June 15, 2014 at 2:36 PM

Second, Will noted that expanding and inflating the definition of sexual assaults to include micro-agressions – such as a boy staring for too long at a young coed with a low cut blouse – would tend to dilute the pool of actual assaults and diminish the seriousness of the real problem.

Who’s said that should be sexual assault?

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 2:26 PM

Where I come from we call that “lunch”.

VegasRick on June 15, 2014 at 2:40 PM

If there’s a sexual assault, report it to the police.

They won’t because of the ramifications of filing a false Police report. Much easier to destroy some guy that either rejected you or worse, made a pass at you, through the federal sanctioned and college approved “let’s f**k over men” rules. Plus you get the added bonus of inflating figures for future man bashing.

lowandslow on June 15, 2014 at 2:42 PM

Rape = heinous felony

Politicizing rape = despicable

Conservchik on June 15, 2014 at 2:42 PM

Who’s said that should be sexual assault?

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 2:26 PM

You don’t pay real close attention to most things going on around you do you? lol…

Tim Zank on June 15, 2014 at 2:45 PM

Most schools have codes of conduct that students agree to abide by. If the student agrees not to commit sexual assault, however the school defines it, then the school has the right to adjudicate it.

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 2:33 PM

Sexual assault is a crime. These young men are being labeled as rapists. That’s on their permanent record.

rbj on June 15, 2014 at 2:46 PM

You don’t pay real close attention to most things going on around you do you? lol…

Tim Zank on June 15, 2014 at 2:45 PM

I guess not. I’ve never heard anyone call “staring” sexual assault. If you (or Jazz, given that he’s the one making the claim) can point me to a source, I’m happy to be educated.

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 2:47 PM

Sexual assault is a crime. These young men are being labeled as rapists. That’s on their permanent record.

rbj on June 15, 2014 at 2:46 PM

First off, Sexual assault and rape are not the same thing. All rapes are sexual assaults. Not all sexual assaults are rape.

Second, so what if it’s a crime? Why can’t the school kick someone out for committing a crime?

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 2:49 PM

Do most people here think that the only type of sexual assault is rape?

If so, I guess that would explain why people get so upset about the term being used for lesser offenses.

I’m genuinely curious about this, and would appreciate serious replies.

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 2:52 PM

democrats are such hypocrites…panties in a bunch and quibble about statistics and all the while allowing the systematic destruction of babies in the womb, especially minority babies……

crosshugger on June 15, 2014 at 2:54 PM

PROBLEM:

(“micro-aggressions,” often not discernible to the untutored eye, are everywhere)

SOLUTION:

…forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us.

ZenDraken on June 15, 2014 at 2:56 PM

I’m happy to be educated.

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 2:47 PM

Thank you for the laugh. You obviously don’t read Instapundit. You should. The Other McCain is another blog the reports on these bogus tribunals constantly. He’s an actual *Credentialed* reporter too! So you can trust him.

Mord on June 15, 2014 at 2:57 PM

First off, Sexual assault and rape are not the same thing. All rapes are sexual assaults. Not all sexual assaults are rape.

Second, so what if it’s a crime? Why can’t the school kick someone out for committing a crime?

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 2:49 PM

Jeez, some of these kids are being convicted of rape. The school administrators are labeling them as rapists. Not that they plagiarized, or disrupted a classroom, or cheated on a test. But rape, or another sex crime. You simple are refusing to understand what the schools are doing: labeling a young man as a criminal, without the benefit of a criminal trial.

Read instapundit for many more links on this. Guys are fighting back, suing the schools and either winning or getting a settlement. Which means the administrative procedures have no basis in fact.

rbj on June 15, 2014 at 2:58 PM

I guess not. I’ve never heard anyone call “staring” sexual assault. If you (or Jazz, given that he’s the one making the claim) can point me to a source, I’m happy to be educated.

This is the point in the discussion where themuppet pretends they never heard of Title IX, it’s guidelines and abuses.

lowandslow on June 15, 2014 at 2:58 PM

Most schools have codes of conduct that students agree to abide by. If the student agrees not to commit sexual assault, however the school defines it, then the school has the right to adjudicate it.

themuppet

A code of conduct doesn’t exempt them from the criminal justice system. So no, they don’t get to ignore the legal system just because they come up with a code of conduct.

xblade on June 15, 2014 at 3:00 PM

This is the point in the discussion where themuppet pretends they never heard of Title IX, it’s guidelines and abuses.

lowandslow on June 15, 2014 at 2:58 PM

You’re right. I’ve genuinely never heard of Title IX (it’s guidelines and abuses) stating that staring is a sexual assault.

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 3:03 PM

A code of conduct doesn’t exempt them from the criminal justice system. So no, they don’t get to ignore the legal system just because they come up with a code of conduct.

xblade on June 15, 2014 at 3:00 PM

If your employer thinks that you’ve committed a crime, they can fire you. Right? They don’t have to wait for a verdict in a court of law.

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 3:04 PM

The problem is that the electorate of those Dem Senators will not bother to look into such pesky details as what was actually said. They’ll learn from specially trained people that George Will basically said: rape is good, and he practices it every other weekend, and the Senator boldly stood up to this pervert.

PBH on June 15, 2014 at 3:06 PM

…he’s got a gun…they have a knife…and the politburo press supplies them with flak and ballistic jackets………what else is new?

KOOLAID2 on June 15, 2014 at 3:08 PM

Such a stance brought the usual list of suspects up on their hind legs

ROFL

I don’t always agree with George but this was a pretty good stomping, then again taking-on most of the morons in Congress isn’t exactly like challenging Kasparov to a game of chess.

Bishop on June 15, 2014 at 3:11 PM

I don’t always agree with George but this was a pretty good stomping

That was Jazz.

lowandslow on June 15, 2014 at 3:14 PM

Second, so what if it’s a crime? Why can’t the school kick someone out for committing a crime?

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 2:49 PM

The schools are adjudicating these so-called “crimes”. The accused have constitutional rights which are violated if the university usurps the proper role of the criminal justice system.

Certainly a university can reserve the right to kick out a student who has been convicted of a felony, but they have no proper right to pretend to the expertise of the court system and to accuse, convict and judge a student of a crime based on overseeing an honor code.

It doesn’t matter if a student agrees to this honor code or not; if the accusation rises to the level of a criminal act, then the school had better back out of the way and quit practicing what amounts to vigilantism.

Dolce Far Niente on June 15, 2014 at 3:14 PM

That was Jazz.

lowandslow on June 15, 2014 at 3:14 PM

I was ROFL’ing at Jazz, opining about George.

This is my edit for clarity.

Bishop on June 15, 2014 at 3:16 PM

Liberal response: “OMG. Jazz said, ‘Gun.’”

locomotivebreath1901 on June 15, 2014 at 3:19 PM

The POTUS used the same calculator for school shootings ….I guess.

CW on June 15, 2014 at 3:21 PM

I’m genuinely curious about this, and would appreciate serious replies.

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 2:52 PM

I doubt it, but I’ll give it a shot.

/Serious face on

The term “sexual assault” has been bastardized by the feminist movement to include literally EVERYTHING that a normal man does. Asking a woman for her phone number on a campus is now a risky proposition. Especially if you try more than once, that might be “harassment”.

There is even a movement among radical college feminists to make PIV sex the equivalent of “Rape” even if it is consensual. I am not making this up. This “movement” may not be large and it may also be fully populated by confused and/or crazy young women, but it is there and it isn’t laughed off campus.

Normal people view “sexual assault” as an assault of a sexual nature. If banging a drunk chick equals Rape, wouldn’t a chick banging a drunk guy also be “Rape”? Colleges and every Senator that signed that letter say “NO”. The man is always at fault. I think that is unfair and so do a growing number of college aged men who have been falsely accused of rape and are now suing colleges. Read Instapundit.

Mord on June 15, 2014 at 3:21 PM

They don’t have to wait for a verdict in a court of law.

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 3:04 PM

So, any opinions about that Duke U ho ?
Was she raped raped or what ?

burrata on June 15, 2014 at 3:21 PM

The schools are adjudicating these so-called “crimes”. The accused have constitutional rights which are violated if the university usurps the proper role of the criminal justice system.

Certainly a university can reserve the right to kick out a student who has been convicted of a felony, but they have no proper right to pretend to the expertise of the court system and to accuse, convict and judge a student of a crime based on overseeing an honor code.

It doesn’t matter if a student agrees to this honor code or not; if the accusation rises to the level of a criminal act, then the school had better back out of the way and quit practicing what amounts to vigilantism.

Dolce Far Niente on June 15, 2014 at 3:14 PM

There is no constitutional right to not be kicked out of school for a suspicion of criminal conduct.

Are you honestly suggesting that private actors can’t treat people negatively because they suspect them of committing a crime?

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 3:21 PM

So, any opinions about that Duke U ho ?
Was she raped raped or what ?

burrata on June 15, 2014 at 3:21 PM

I don’t know what you’re referring to.

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 3:22 PM

I’m not in any way trying to diminish real rape — it is a heinous, violent crime and should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law without any hesitation.

But Libtards — who control virtually every university in the country — do try to broaden the definition of rape to such a crazy degree that every woman on earth could claim she was raped by that standard. It’s part of Libtard victim culture and man-hating culture. I’ve known, and loved, many girls in college who have made casual (as opposed to criminal) claims along these lines, and then when I ask them to tell me the details, it is in no way rape; it’s more like buyer’s remorse. And these are girls that are near and dear to me, and remain so to this day.

Meanwhile, in addition to tanking any serious academics at universities, Libs have devolved them all into whorehouses more or less. So the Lib message to girls is, ‘go to college, learn nothing, be a whore, and here’s your license to prosecute anyone you regret banging.’

I know this sounds harsh. I am not in any way attempting to minimize real rape. It does definitely happen. But, I mean, c’mon.. We’ve all been to college. We know what it’s like. Girls are hardly for the most part innocent bystanders. It’s not PC to say, but it’s true.

WhatSlushfund on June 15, 2014 at 3:23 PM

Normal people view “sexual assault” as an assault of a sexual nature. If banging a drunk chick equals Rape, wouldn’t a chick banging a drunk guy also be “Rape”? Colleges and every Senator that signed that letter say “NO”. The man is always at fault. I think that is unfair and so do a growing number of college aged men who have been falsely accused of rape and are now suing colleges. Read Instapundit.

Mord on June 15, 2014 at 3:21 PM

Yes, a woman banging a drunk man would be rape (if you agree that drunk people can’t consent). Men typically don’t report it though.

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 3:24 PM

I’m happy to be educated.

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 2:47 PM

Highly dubious claim.

Judge_Dredd on June 15, 2014 at 3:26 PM

We should be in the streets protesting against this PC rubbish. We should call these idiots out with their nonsense, twisted words, and prejudices and lies, but instead we sit by like lambs at a slaughter while this idiocy gains further traction and perceived legitimacy. When will America and the Western world take back their society? Tell me a million member march at the White House wouldn’t be a great starting point.

leader4hru on June 15, 2014 at 3:27 PM

Highly dubious claim.

Judge_Dredd on June 15, 2014 at 3:26 PM

It looks like i won’t be, either. No one has pointed to anyone claiming that staring is sexual assault. All i’ve gotten are recommendations to read instapundit.

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 3:27 PM

I don’t know what you’re referring to.

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 3:22 PM

We have an early front runner for the Nathan Thurm Award.

Judge_Dredd on June 15, 2014 at 3:29 PM

We have an early front runner for the Nathan Thurm Award.

Judge_Dredd on June 15, 2014 at 3:29 PM

Is it the duke lacross case?

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 3:31 PM

Is it the duke lacross case?

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 3:31 PM

I would imagine so.

Judge_Dredd on June 15, 2014 at 3:32 PM

It looks like i won’t be, either. No one has pointed to anyone claiming that staring is sexual assault. All i’ve gotten are recommendations to read instapundit.

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 3:27 PM

In Birschtein v. New United Motor Mfg., Inc., 92 Cal. App. 4th 994 (2001), the Court reversed the lower court’s grant of summary judgment, holding that a campaign of staring may constitute actionable sexual harassment.

sharrukin on June 15, 2014 at 3:34 PM

I would imagine so.

Judge_Dredd on June 15, 2014 at 3:32 PM

I’m not really sure what that has to do with this. If you want my opinion, the “victim” was a terrible person who should be prosecuted. The prosecutor was a horrible person who should be prosecuted.

I honestly don’t know what actions the school took prior to the criminal case, so I have no comment on it.

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 3:35 PM

I don’t know what you’re referring to.

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 3:22 PM

I’ m referring to the most important civil rights and women’s rights issue of just a few years ago, which was rioted by none other than the 2 greatest racist con men and shakedown thugs of our times , Al Charlatan and JackAssN . It was about a ho who cried rape,for a shakedown of course !
Then everything got Nifonged :)

burrata on June 15, 2014 at 3:36 PM

In Birschtein v. New United Motor Mfg., Inc., 92 Cal. App. 4th 994 (2001), the Court reversed the lower court’s grant of summary judgment, holding that a campaign of staring may constitute actionable sexual harassment.

sharrukin on June 15, 2014 at 3:34 PM

Good find. However, at the risk of being too technical, sexual harassment is not sexual assault.

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 3:36 PM

Sexual assaults are down 60 percent from 1995.

There’s no such thing as a “rape culture.” It doesn’t exist.

A Chair of Some Kind on June 15, 2014 at 3:38 PM

How old is George Will? It seems to me he’s been writing ever since I can remember. I usually passed up his column because although I’m not illiterate reading him is like wading through treacle. He loves words, isn’t afraid to use them and never heard of E.B. White. That’s not to say I don’t appreciate or agree with him.

crankyoldlady on June 15, 2014 at 3:39 PM

That’s not to say I don’t appreciate or agree with him.

crankyoldlady on June 15, 2014 at 3:39 PM

He’s like Krauthammer or Kondrache. He’s right as much as he’s wrong. He’s like a republican David Brooks.

Judge_Dredd on June 15, 2014 at 3:43 PM

There is a reason there is a shallow end of a swimming pool.

Some people would drown if there were only a deep end.

jaydee_007 on June 15, 2014 at 3:47 PM

He’s like Krauthammer or Kondrache. He’s right as much as he’s wrong. He’s like a republican David Brooks.

Judge_Dredd on June 15, 2014 at 3:43 PM

Do provide an Example of where he is wrong!

jaydee_007 on June 15, 2014 at 3:48 PM

First, the “math” being cited to define the number of sexual assaults taking place was unfit for a 3rd grade Common Core tutorial.

So…that means the number of sexual assaults calculated is actually on a sound mathematical foundation???

yaedon on June 15, 2014 at 3:48 PM

Do provide an Example of where he is wrong!

jaydee_007 on June 15, 2014 at 3:48 PM

I didn’t say he was wrong on this. But don’t forget that he had Obama over to his house for dinner after he won. Listen to me, as I’ve said this a few times before. Any “republican” or “conservative” that gave one ounce of credence to a man who accomplished absolutely nothing in his life is no all-knowing seer. How is it that the wizards of smart such as Will and Althouse and countless others couldn’t see coming what the vast majority of commenters on this board did?

Judge_Dredd on June 15, 2014 at 3:53 PM

Do provide an Example of where he is wrong!

jaydee_007 on June 15, 2014 at 3:48 PM

Is he wrong or right on immigration reform?

tanked59 on June 15, 2014 at 4:29 PM

I am so glad I am retired and no longer have to involve myself with any of these institutions or the workplace. I wouldn’t last more than a day before I committed some kind of “minor aggression” toward some easily offended person of a protected group.

rlwo2008 on June 15, 2014 at 2:09 PM

Me too. PC went into the trash with my ties.

Oldnuke on June 15, 2014 at 4:32 PM

He’s like Krauthammer or Kondrache. He’s right as much as he’s wrong. He’s like a republican David Brooks.

Judge_Dredd on June 15, 2014 at 3:43 PM

I remember Kondrache. Whatever became of him?

crankyoldlady on June 15, 2014 at 4:36 PM

The FBI statistics show that since the 60′s & 70′s, rape is way down across the board.

A newspaper reporter for a medium-sized city in PA told me that it is rare to get a report of a real “rape-rape” (that isn’t against a family member or a child). Mark up one more “victory” for the internet.

Given that the victimhood industry needs such malevolence, they are now trying to change the definition.

J_Crater on June 15, 2014 at 4:39 PM

I remember Kondrache. Whatever became of him?

crankyoldlady on June 15, 2014 at 4:36 PM

I haven’t watched FOX since the election but I have to assume he and Fred Barnes are still contributors.

Judge_Dredd on June 15, 2014 at 4:42 PM

If your employer thinks that you’ve committed a crime, they can fire you. Right? They don’t have to wait for a verdict in a court of law.

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 3:04 PM

You then procure legal counsel and file suit against them for wrongful termination, if you, in fact, did not commit the offense they fired you for.

College’s are judge, jury, and executioner, in a metaphorical sense, in these cases. Truth is almost never sought out, protecting women is the main goal, even if they are not being truthful.

Sexual assault is a law enforcement issue, until they deputize college employee’s it should be left to the PD.

Leering at some “healthy” young lady in a low cut shirt may be in bad taste, but it ain’t assault…

cervelorod on June 15, 2014 at 4:46 PM

You then procure legal counsel and file suit against them for wrongful termination, if you, in fact, did not commit the offense they fired you for.

cervelorod on June 15, 2014 at 4:46 PM

I’m sorry, but that’s simply wrong. You can fire an employee for any (or no) reason (other than illegal discrimination) unless prohibited by contract. That includes a suspicion of a crime.

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 4:53 PM

Leering at some “healthy” young lady in a low cut shirt may be in bad taste, but it ain’t assault…

cervelorod on June 15, 2014 at 4:46 PM

I agree. And despite the fact that Jazz wrote that some people consider leering to be assault, no one has been able to produce any evidence of it.

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 4:54 PM

You then procure legal counsel and file suit against them for wrongful termination, if you, in fact, did not commit the offense they fired you for.

cervelorod on June 15, 2014 at 4:46 PM

Also, under your view that colleges can only expel students convicted of felonies, a school would be required to allow someone like James Holmes or the Santa Barbara killer to stay in school until formally convicted. Crazy.

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 4:58 PM

Good find. However, at the risk of being too technical, sexual harassment is not sexual assault.

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 3:36 PM

ok so i don’t have time to go run and find links but im sure you know how to use google and no i am not being nasty lol im just in a hurry i have work shortly. i read a story last year and i believe it was posted here to hot air at some point. A male college student was brought up on charges by the college for sexual assault the police REFUSED to prosecute and stated they felt NO crime had been committed. The boy was summarily tried by a jury of his “peers” ( female college admins) was DENIED the right to an attorney was DENIED the right to speak on his own behalf and then found guilty and expelled. what did he do wrong? he dated a girl for 6 months and they of course were sexually active. he broke up with the girl, she filed rape charges against him with the school. Now this young adult has a VERY large BLACK MARK on his college transcripts. Tell me how you think this is ok …. i have 6 little boys my oldest is about to enlist in the army and my youngest is 7 i am grateful i don’t have daughters to worry over but now i must worry over whether some obnoxious little brat with an axe to grind can ruin my sons entire life with a charge that does not have to be based on fact only on her word. THAT is the issue and THAT is what is being argued here. if you can not or will not see it for the issue it is then the other commentors here are correct and you are simply a troll who doesn’t actually care about the issue as long as you win right?

katee bayer on June 15, 2014 at 5:21 PM

Second, Will noted that expanding and inflating the definition of sexual assaults to include micro-agressions – such as a boy staring for too long at a young coed with a low cut blouse – would tend to dilute the pool of actual assaults and diminish the seriousness of the real problem.

Who’s said that should be sexual assault?

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 2:26 PM

Educate yourself: http://www.academia.edu/1097255/Microaggressions_The_new_racism_Review_of_Microaggressions_in_Everyday_Life_Race_Gender_and_Sexual_Orientation_

davidk on June 15, 2014 at 5:38 PM

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 4:53 PM

Actually that is incorrect – once you dismiss for cause – you open yourself up in every state for a countersuit that will be based upon whether or not you actually can prove the case. Even in employment at will states.

So when you fire for cause you make sure you can prove it – whatever civil or criminal penalties the state may try and convict them of is a different story. Sometimes you may wait for the state to convict and then terminate once the state has proved the case, since you no longer have to.

Zomcon JEM on June 15, 2014 at 5:41 PM

katee bayer on June 15, 2014 at 5:21 PM

If that’s actually what happened, I’m not ok with him being wrongfully accused of rape and expelled as a result.

However, generally, I don’t think it’s wrong for colleges to expel students who are suspected of committing rape, even if the student hasn’t been formally convicted. I do think there should be some standards in place, of course.

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 5:43 PM

If your employer thinks that you’ve committed a crime, they can fire you. Right? They don’t have to wait for a verdict in a court of law.

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 3:04 PM

Wow, I’ve been in higher ed for 17 years and don’t recall students being called employees. Last I checked, they pay us to educate them. I didn’t realize we paid them for the privilege./

Seems to me the students are the employers and should be able to fire faculty of administrators who trample on their rights.

mankai on June 15, 2014 at 5:55 PM

After careful consideration, I have concluded that TheMuppet is an idiot; moreover an idiot who insists on advertising.

Oldflyer on June 15, 2014 at 6:03 PM

It looks like i won’t be, either. No one has pointed to anyone claiming that staring is sexual assault. All i’ve gotten are recommendations to read instapundit.

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 3:27 PM

This is from the San Diego (Oregon) County Probation Office:

Examples of Sexual Harassment/Sexual Assault

Calling out dirty names  Passing sexual notes or pictures
Grabbing, touching or pinching  Grabbing someone’s buttocks 
Starting sexual rumors or telling stories about someone 
Writing sexual graffiti about someone
Standing in someone’s way or standing too close 
Gestures or looks – winking, licking lips or suggestive body movements 
Comments about a person’s body  Whistles or rude noises 
Staring at someone’s body  
Bumping into someone or brushing up against the person
Exposing your genitals or buttocks  Pulling down someone’s pants as a joke
Requests for sex, assault, or rape  Threats or insults

The terms “sexual harassment” and “sexual assault” are used interchangeably in this document:

Athanasius on June 15, 2014 at 6:11 PM

Now the Senators will claim “Victimhood”. Perhaps Reid will hold a special session to canonize them.

GarandFan on June 15, 2014 at 6:34 PM

There is no constitutional right to not be kicked out of school for a suspicion of criminal conduct.

Accused of a crime without a trial and then punished? I hope those schools have a hefty bank account. Smart lawyers should set up shop outside the grounds.

Are you honestly suggesting that private actors can’t treat people negatively because they suspect them of committing a crime?

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 3:21 PM

Have a chat with certain bakers. They’ll tell you about “private rights”.

Thing is, conservatives need to fight like liberals to make the point. Maybe some day they will and then things will get really interesting.

kim roy on June 15, 2014 at 6:53 PM

There is no constitutional right to not be kicked out of school for a suspicion of criminal conduct.

Are you honestly suggesting that private actors can’t treat people negatively because they suspect them of committing a crime?

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 3:21 PM

Let me guess – besides not understanding current trends in “sexual assault” issues on campus, you also don’t understand slander/libel law?

GWB on June 15, 2014 at 7:19 PM

OK, that didn’t work. Evidently HA’s filter doesn’t care if the links are embedded or not. So, here is my brief research, broken up into separate comments, for muppet’s sake:

[Part 1]
Here you go, muppet:
http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/189762/
http://www.aei.org/article/society-and-culture/rape-culture-is-a-panic-where-paranoia-censorship-and-false-accusations-flourish/
http://www.nationalreview.com/node/377492/print

GWB on June 15, 2014 at 7:54 PM

evidently the filter also doesn’t like if you post too many across multiple posts. *sigh* come on guys……………..

GWB on June 15, 2014 at 7:57 PM

I’m a fan of George Will, except Will made a big deal about sayinig that Cantor’s loss had little to do with amnesty, and it sounds as if Will is in line with the establishment types that want the Chamber of Commerce & amnesty shill Kevin McCarthy to be the Majority Leader, and as I and others have warned, that considering McCarthy’s expressed philosophy on what the House should do on immigration, McCarthy as Majority Leader may very well follow Paul Ryan’s dictate to bring amnesty to a vote in August. anotherJoe on June 15, 2014 at 2:24 PM

Whew! That’s one heck of a run on sentence! How did you get from the topic at hand to Cantor’s loss and the ramifications thereof?
Will’s opinion on that topic is perfectly reasonable and may very well be correct!

Vince on June 15, 2014 at 8:48 PM

Universities aren’t private actors.

Malachi45 on June 15, 2014 at 10:16 PM

Universities aren’t private actors.

Malachi45 on June 15, 2014 at 10:16 PM

Well, public universities aren’t, at any rate. They are an arm of the government, and thus an institution in which one’s constitutional rights must be respected. Including the right to an “impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed,” and also, “to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have assistance of counsel for his defense.” (amdt. 6)

This means, of course, that determining guilt via university tribunals in which the accused is not allowed to defend themselves is an unconstitutional exercise of public university power.

Unfortunately, this article is behind a subscription wall, but I think it has one of these stories in it.

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304558804579374844067975558?mg=reno64-wsj&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB10001424052702304558804579374844067975558.html&fpid=2,7,121,122,201,401,641,1009

Cheshire_Kat on June 15, 2014 at 11:45 PM

The problem with Academia adjudicating any kind of assault lies in their confusion between the terms “assault” and “battery.” They are used quite interchangeably, but have entirely different standards. A sexual “battery” is easier to prove, because it is based on actual physical conduct. An “assault” depends on the reasonable fear of the victim that a sexual battery is “imminent”.

What Academia has done is to greatly expand the so-called “reasonableness” of the victim’s perception of an imminent “battery” or touching, and to do so in an atmosphere where the constitutional protections of the defendant are ignored or unfairly minimized. (Honestly, where else can you find written testimony of an unidentified witness used in such a kangaroo court, without the ability to cross-examine? Why yes, Muppethead! University Honor Court!)

BigAlSouth on June 16, 2014 at 6:12 AM

Finally! Will is finally making the “legitimate rape” argument.

mountainaires on June 16, 2014 at 6:26 AM

Most schools have codes of conduct that students agree to abide by. If the student agrees not to commit sexual assault, however the school defines it, then the school has the right to adjudicate it.

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 2:33 PM

Most schools don’t spell out their definition of sexual assault and, as in the case of Drew Sterrett at University of Michigan, even make it difficult to find out what the complaint is who had made it.

UM’s process is much like the instant replay rule in college football and requires accepting without question the complainant’s version of events unless the accused presents indisputable evidence to refute it. To make that less likely they also refuse to allow the accused to have representation before the board that will decide his fate.

Nomas on June 16, 2014 at 8:06 AM

I’ve enjoyed listening to and reading George Will, for years. Having said that, I would love to just once, see him get emotional about something. His quiet demeanor and the professorial way he has, is probably why liberals don’t get on him the way they do Coulter or Limbaugh. As long as a conservative doesn’t get emotional, sarcastic, or too “out of line,” libs tolerate them. I’d give a thousand bucks to hear the following exchange:

Juan Williams: George, I have to take exception to your analysis.
George Will: Oh, BITE ME, Juan!

NevadaD on June 16, 2014 at 8:46 AM

…all of these entries are worth a read if you’re looking for some good material this weekend and are interested in the actual facts behind the very serious subject of sexual assault on campus and elsewhere.

Since when does the Left care about facts?

earlgrey on June 16, 2014 at 10:32 AM

If your employer thinks that you’ve committed a crime, they can fire you. Right? They don’t have to wait for a verdict in a court of law.

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 3:04 PM

If your employer falsely fires you on the supposition that you’ve committed a crime which, it turns out, you did not, you have recourse. Not so in academia. You are punished without benefit of evidentiary process or defense, your reputation is destroyed, and the stain remains even if you get the administrators to admit to having made a mistake.

Freelancer on June 16, 2014 at 9:27 PM

I’m sorry, but that’s simply wrong. You can fire an employee for any (or no) reason (other than illegal discrimination) unless prohibited by contract. That includes a suspicion of a crime.

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 4:53 PM

You’re completely incorrect on this point. Assuming you are referring to a common “at-will” employment condition, the employer can end employment of a person without giving cause. However, using your own attempt at making a point, if they fire you on the suspicion of having committed a crime, it would mean that they indicated and documented such. At that point, the at-will feature of the employment contract isn’t of concern, the reason for termination rises to paramount significance, and if it can be demonstrated to have been falsely applied, brings legal recourse. You can take that to the bank, it is done time and time again.

Freelancer on June 16, 2014 at 9:37 PM

Also, under your view that colleges can only expel students convicted of felonies, a school would be required to allow someone like James Holmes or the Santa Barbara killer to stay in school until formally convicted. Crazy.

themuppet on June 15, 2014 at 4:58 PM

James Holmes confessed (no conviction required), and Eric Rodgers killed himself (unavailable to return to school). Quite the fail you’ve provided there.

Freelancer on June 16, 2014 at 9:40 PM