Probably best to leave that particular exchange at that, yes?

English, please?

Barry, I understand where you’re coming from. And when folks like you stop intentionally mischaracterizing other people’s arguments, then “fair and balanced” blah blah blah unicorns and rainbows, whatever. Until then, go back to Reddit or Stormfront or wherever this particular brand of rhetoric is still appreciated.

1) Management *always* has the time, energy and money for what they want. They’ll probably hire more vice-whatevers (and staff), and spend more money on this, but they’ll do it.

2) The real Salaita Principle is that *liberals and leftist* are not to be hire. I’ll buy you a nice bottle of wine when a public university ‘de-hires’ a professor for using bad language in support of Israel (and by that I mean supporting *anything* that Israel does). That’s easy, because internet searches are easy, and the pro-Israel groups will do a lot of this work.

When I attempt to evaluate their careers, when I attempt to evaluate their contributions to higher education, I’m concerned with the whole range of things that they’ve done. What’s their life work? Where does the main weight of their intellectual professional and moral commitments lie? What’s the full range of things that they’ve done?

That’s largely a book in which for many of those people their primary works of scholarship are simply set aside and ignored. Occasional political comments are taken out of context sometimes, letters to the editor, you know, occasional political interventions and their entire lives — and their meaning and their presence in American culture is evaluated on the basis of those occasional statements. That to me, as a scholar, was a fundamental violation of fairness.

I expect to look at the full range of someone’s work and to evaluate their careers in their entirety.”

by Cary Nelson (http://www.cary-nelson.org/nelson/horowitz-nelson-debate.html)