More on Bill Ayers' wife, Bernadine Dohrn
Crossposted on Marathon Pundit.
Bill Ayers' (scroll down a few posts) wife, Bernadine Dohrn was also a member of the 1960s terror group the Weather Underground. She's a law professor at Evanston's Northwestern University, but she does not have a license to practice law in Illinois.
Here's what FrontPage Magazine said about Professor Dohrn last year:
By 1984, however, Dohrn was ready to reenter the legal profession. She took, and passed, the New York State bar exam, and was hired by a major law firm. The Character Committee of the New York Bar Association, however, denied Dohrn’s admission application, citing her questionable commitment to the rule of law.
But Northwestern apparently has a lesser standard for its law faculty. Indeed, one does not need a law license to teach law, which is good for Dohrn, because judging from her experience with the New York Bar Association, she has likely disqualified herself from practicing law in any U.S. jurisdiction. In fact, she told the New York Times that she has yet to apply for admission to the Illinois Bar Association, despite running her Children and Family Justice Clinic.
Only in academia!
11 comments:
Isn't there a limit of three posts a week?
This frankly does not matter as long as the work that she publishes can stand up to peer review as quality work. Do you know that she has published bad work or if she is a bad classroom lecturer (she may very well have published lackluster work, but you haven't shown that)? Until you can prove these, then you're just dissing someone you disagree with for the sake of disagreement.
>I'm surprised that the previous commenters have forgotten the old saying, "Those who can, do; those who can't, teach; and those who really can't teach at Northwestern University."
>I mean do you expect anything else from a school that holds a unique place in Electoral College history? Six times a Northwestern alum has been the Democratic nomineee for President, and each time they lost by a bigger and bigger margin (William Jennings Bryan in 1896, 1900 and 1908; Adlai E. Stevenson in 1952 and 1956; and George McGovern in 1972). (It's a record held by my alma mater that no other school can match (or quite frankly, would want to.)
>So are any of you wasting your time fretting about these two?
RANDALL SHERMAN
Good points RS and Pat.
BL: My point is that "higher" education is polluted with far left whackos such as Dorhn, Ayers, and Ward Churchill. On Marathon Pundit, I'm going to do a Churhcill post later 2day. John
It's not called the Ayers College of Commerce & Industry for nothing.
But it doesn't at all matter whether they're left or right wing, what matters is that their good scholars. Ward Churchill clearly is not, as he has been found to be a plagarizer and a fabricator in his academic works, and he should be fired for that. Do you have any evidence that Ayers or Dohrn have been bad academics? I don't agree with their politics either, but it doesn't matter if most people in academia are liberal if their work is thorough, honest, and original (which Ayers and Dohrn may or may not be, but you haven't made that point).
I think it helps if Dad donates money to the school. We should dig around at who's donating at DePaul.
Anyone who cites FrontPage Magazine, run by noted crank David Horowitz, and home to the insane rantings of Ann Coulter, cannot be reasoned with. Enjoy your koolaid!
Of course you're gonna hate Horowitz. He changed sides!!!
Bill, on this MP post, I quoted you. Since I'm being accused of overposting, I'm not going to put it up here.
I didn't quote FrontPage, Insider, on this one.
Ward Churchill and the Weather Underground
http://marathonpundit.blogspot.com/2006_01_01_marathonpundit_archive.html#113648325439656749
If it hadn't become such a police state in this country, I would leave my name. Bernardine, Bill, Ward...none of you, including Frontpage's Hecht understand at all the passion of the people who wanted to stop the Vietnam War and fashion a better society in the 60's and 70's. Were their methods wrong? Of course! Do they admit that now? Of course! Do kids screw up? Of course! I am COMPLETELY non-violent myself, but would I understand, but don't condone the violence of that era, that was intended to mirror the war's violence to make a political and social point ANY DAY over the random violence without principle that exists on our streets today. Not to mention the economic and moral violence being waged against our citizens in our corporate and government offices...jobs being shipped overseas, political shenanigans for personal gain, war abroad for special interests. I have met these three people and they are extremely bright and passionate people. Are they perfect? Of course not. Are they a threat to our security? Of course not! It is so fashionable to pick out the Left to denigrate when this country is being sold down the river by special interests...and our kids die in a war that hasn't made any one of us more secure! Who are the real terrorists in this country now?
Ward Churchill not very repetent. Read his April 2005 interview over at Indigenism, Anarchism, and the State. Not only does he endorse violence, but he considers you expendable. Good luck.
The Weather Underground is another thing that I will completely defend. Of the spectrum of responses mounted by the white left at the time, Weather was the most valid response of all, which does not mean that it actually had a viable strategy. But the response pattern was entirely legitimate. But ultimately, they got boxed into symbolic actions, and that is explicitly the case now as well.
Brian Flanagan and Mark Rudd, who are in this new film about the Weathermen, are saying you know, we made a conscious decision to do only property actions,which was not the original impulse and not the original understanding. It was a sort of wounded response to having three people killed in the Greenwich townhouse explosion. Well, in human terms I understand that these were their friends and all that, but if you are actually serious about engaging in an armed struggle and plan on testing the capacity of the United States, you have to anticipate that you're going to incur casualties. And three is hardly an insurmountable toll that's been taken.
Post a Comment