Image 01 Image 03

Punishing Bad Behavior Week in Education

Punishing Bad Behavior Week in Education

Your weekly report on education news.

The fallout from the nonsense at Stanford Law School continues. It looks like people have reached the limit.

And there’s more to the story.

In other news, this was pretty huge.

Legal Insurrection’s latest project is off and running.

How not shocking.

DEI is still a hot topic on campus.

That’s all?

Beyond parody.

Everyone is canceled.

What a waste of time.

How is this fair?

A theology degree. LOL.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Lowering standards, demanding equity, CRT, a complete absence of discipline or respect, a focus on gender issues instead of academics, etc., are all hallmarks of the Left in their push to “improve” education at all levels. How can they not see the extreme destruction to the student’s and our country’s future these changes represent?

    Whitewall in reply to Cleetus. | March 25, 2023 at 9:14 am

    They can see. That’s the point. The Democrat ( left if you insist) will see nothing unless he believes it first. Gradually over generations…..

E Howard Hunt | March 25, 2023 at 10:54 am

The worst thing these brats screamed at Judge Duncan was that he wasn’t smart enough to gain admittance to Stanford Law School. This really sums the whole attitude up.

Subotai Bahadur | March 25, 2023 at 2:04 pm

They will not release the names of the students who created the disturbance. The Federalist Society which sponsored the speech paid Stanford to make and provide a video of the speech for the Federalist Society, and Stanford has said they are going to blur the faces of all the students to functionally protect them from the consequences of their actions. Depending on the terms of the contract, it might make for an interesting lawsuit by the Federalists against Stanford.

However, be that as it may, there were videos of the events released online. The best option is to find as many of them as possible and identify the guilty parties.

The next best option is to use other means of identification; clothing, body morphology, and other means of identification to compile a list of guilty parties.

The final option is simply to assume that every student at Stanford Law School was a supporter of the disturbance.

Whatever option is available, we know that Stanford will protect the guilty parties at all costs, and indeed probably will punish no one except those who did NOT take part in it. Neither will the legal profession, such as it is. It is what it is.

The only recourse, regardless of whichever way the list is compiled, is for civilian patriots and patriot law firms along with what fraction of judges who are not on the side of the Left to refuse to ever hire anyone on whichever list is developed. And that includes, if necessary, anyone who is in Stanford Law School regardless of year, now.

Subotai Bahadur