Mere Rhetoric: We're Calling Bullshit On UC Irvine's "Evil Conservatives Made Us Fire Chemerinsky" Claims

Bullshit:

Scholars across the political spectrum protested what they called an assault on academic freedom after the University of California at Irvine withdrew a job offer from a liberal professor who wrote an op-ed criticizing the Bush administration... On Aug. 16, Chemerinsky was offered the job as dean of the University of California at Irvine law school, scheduled to open in 2009. The same day he got the job offer, the Los Angeles Times ran an op-ed by Chemerinsky urging California to reject a plan by Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales that would, he argued, make it harder for those on death row to have their cases reviewed in federal court. According to Chemerinsky, the UC-Irvine chancellor told him on Tuesday that he "knew I was liberal but didn't know how controversial I would be." The chancellor also said some conservative opposition was developing," and the University of California regents would have "a bloody fight" over approving him, Chemerinsky said.

UC Irvine is not worried about conservative opposition. If they were, they wouldn't run courses dedicated to proving that American unilateralism is responsible for Islamic terrorism. They wouldn't allow their people to give exclusive interviews to anti-Semitic hate groups who write darkly about how "the large majority of citizens" are about to "lose patience with" Jews. They might be worried about certain conservative donors - but certainly not conservatives from within the academy and certainly not intellectual conservatives outside of it.

Even if they were averse to public controversy, not even they're dumb enough to think they could lose a public fight over Erwin Chemerinsky. Who would they lose to? All those conservatives who dominate academia?

Not that there ever would have been a fight. Chemerinsky is universally recognized as one of the greatest legal minds in America. Even if he wasn't, he still is not a controversial figure. No one dislikes Erwin Chemerinsky. He taught for many years at USC and we have friends who attended his classes and are unanimous that they've never met anyone who dislikes him. He was also a championship debater for Northwestern in the 1970s and we know and occasionally work for people who are still friends of his. You can't not like Chemerinsky. You can disagree with him. But you can't not like him.

And everybody knows that. Of all of the things that conservatives could rail against the UCI administration for, there's quite simply no way - on this issue of all issues - that they encountered significant opposition. Conservatives have predictably railed against this firing without exception - ann anyone with a brain would have known beforehand that this would be the reaction.

UC Irvine is in the position of claiming that hiring one of the greatest legal minds on the planet (which he is) would create a fight from conservatives (which it wouldn't) more than other things they've done (which is laughable) and that they would lose (which is impossible). Why is it that every time a timid administrator wants to make a stupid decision, he or she reaches for "evil conservatives" as the most readily available scapegoat?

References:
* Scholars Decry Law School's About-Face on New Dean [WaPo]
* UC Irvine Course Description: American Unilateralism Responsible For Islamist Barbarism [MR]
* UC Irvine Gives Interview to Anti-Semitic Hate Group, Wonders Why Everyone Thinks There's Anti-Semitism on Their Campus [MR]

Previously:
* UC Irvine Muslims Can't Decide Between Seething Resentment and Fantasies Of Global Conquest [Video]
* UC Irvine Muslims React to Anti-Terrorism Memorial
* More Nazi Imagery on UC Irvine's Campus. Administration on Hate Speech: "One Person's Hate Speech is Another Person's Education".