Wednesday, September 23, 2009

Professor Underreacts to Chancellor's Overreaction

The sudden turn of events -- Cramer was in the advisory role for less than a week -- occurred after he sent an e-mail shortly after midnight Thursday boasting about his marksmanship skills. He termed it a joking response to a pair of fliers being circulated with his photograph and home address and inferences that he may be a racist. [More]
That's it? I'd do the same and more, and I would not be joking. Matter of fact, I'd try to track the weasels down, out their real identities and post their addresses, likenesses, class schedules--see how they like CUM ULLA SELLA IN PUGNO TABERNA, the damn cowards.

I may not be able to hit a quarter with a .45 seven times out of 10 at 50 feet like Professor Cramer claims he used to do, but that's OK. If they sent anyone out to my home, I wouldn't be aiming for their quarters.

Tell Chancellor Holden Thorp what you think of his decision to essentially fire this guy for warning off anonymous punks playing terrorist, which is what the flier distributors are: holden@unc.edu

Tell him there's an FBI snitch being tried for giving out work addresses of judges on his blog. Ask him why he sides with scum, and why he's not demanding an investigation.


[Via Mack H]

7 comments:

Santander said...

E-mail sent.
I don't know what good it's gonna do. Chapel Hill is about the most "progressive" town in NC (and SC and VA and GA for that matter).

This is the same place that would like to put a complete ban of handguns in place... but they're smart enough to know it wouldn't hold up.
http://www.dailytarheel.com/content/gun-control-case-reignites-debate

Now if this had happened at N.C. State University... the guy would still have his job. :-)

Tony

Santander said...

Chancellor Thorp,

Why on Earth did you fire Professor Emeritus Elliot Cramer?
There are many of us who agree with the Herald Sun that your actions were a gross overreaction.

Let's put this into perspective...

1. Professor Cramer is made aware of fliers circulated with his name, picture, and home address and suggest that he is a racist.
2. He responds to the sender and you that he feels that he can protect himself if need be (the statement about good pistol marksmanship).
3. Then, you fire him.


As soon as you fired Professor Cramer you made yourself look like an ass and have now gotten national attention. This is negative national attention for UNC Chapel Hill.
If you felt his response to be inappropriate, don't you think a better response would have been to just let him know privately?
Even still... I (as a North Carolinian) find nothing wrong with Professor Cramer's response (which was private until you fired him). Defending oneself is a perfectly normal, moral, and legal reaction.

And about the thing that triggered it all... what are you doing to investigate the people who have instigated this matter by publishing threatening flyers?

Tony (redacted) (product of North Carolina University System)

bob r said...

It appears to me he _should_ have been fired. But not by the person who _did_ fire him and not for the reason he was fired.

His job title was "adviser to Youth for Western Civilization". In accepting his firing for the reason given, he has demonstrated that he is not willing to _defend_ against actions that are antithetical to "Western Civilization". The specific action being the dismissal of someone for making a statement that is "... perfectly normal, moral, and legal ...", as Tony put it. Being unwilling to defend freedom of speech makes ones a poor adviser on the virtues of Western Civilization.

straightarrow said...

Sorry David, I just couldn't ask the question since I already know the answer and have no tolerance left for liars. However, I did email this hypocrite. Here it is:

" I know you have already received emails asking why no investigation of the intimidation and terror tactics against Professor Cramer is in the works. I also read you poor excuse for justification of your request for his resignation of his advisory role.

So, I won't ask you those questions. You and I know you will not anwer them anyway. You see, you have no defense of yourself or your actions. You can't claim fealty to first amendment issues about the flyers and then deny it to Cramer. Nor can you say it was inappropriate for Cramer to intimate that there would be consequences for untoward physical actions against his person while not taking a stand against the intimidation tactics that generated the response.

You simply are a hypocrite. No more consideration is ever again due for anything you might say as you have revealed yourself as unprincipled and dishonest. I do seriously hope you are accorded exactly the level of respect you have earned.

So no questions from me as to why you aren't acting responsibly,instead , I will just point out that you are now known as the miserable creature you are.

Completely disrespectfully,
Charles H. Sawders"

appropriately the verification word is "wherfor"

straightarrow said...

I do somewhat agree with Bob r, Cramer's response should have been something like "You asked me to do this, and I accepted, they will have to ask me to leave as I now serve them."

Mack said...

David,

Excellent write up on this.

Curious how the principle of Academic Freedom only seems to apply to the Progressive/Marxist opinion and not so much to others.

Which is why the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) is so important. Check them out, if you like.

Ned said...

Well stated, bob r.