She's a race pimp.

Surprise, Surprise, Surprise, she will still have a job and be paid her salary. Less work, same pay. How is this a punishment.

Shut up, you dumb ****

Quote:

---

the ideals animating Harvard since its founding: excellence, openness, independence, truth.

---

And here I thought that it was only Aggies that told jokes about themselves.

Quote:

---

I have never misrepresented my research findings, nor have I ever claimed credit for the research of others. Moreover, the citation errors should not obscure a fundamental truth: I proudly stand by my work and its impact on the field.

---

"It is only cheating if you get caught." - Al Bundy

DEI is cancer and must be rooted out of all institutions of American life as soon as possible.

Of course, she made this about her being the "victim'......

Her favorite play? Jurism!

Even including the plagiarism, she had an academic career on par with an associate professor at a significantly below average state school.

And she was the president of the most prestigious university in the country.

Absolute clown world we're living in.

Somebody check how much of that chatGPT wrote

Wouldn't be surprised if she plagiarized that thesis of an 'apology'

Citation errors...


That means you used someone else's words without saying you used them.

THAT. IS. PLAGIARISM.

JFC...

This is quite remarkable. There was a time when unethical, charlatans, once caught, would slink off into the shadows and lay low. Not anymore. There is no shame in our society any longer.

She worked way too hard.

She should have simply taken another's work and replaced their name on the cover page with her own.

Quote:

---

broadly respected research

---

Lolwut? Her academic and research record were razor thin

It was definitely everyone else's fault.

If she has been called the N-word more times than she can count, she should name names and specific instances. Let's call those people out.

Let's see if they really exist. I'm doubtful.

chris1515 said:

---

If she has been called the N-word more times than she can count, she should name names and specific instances. Let's call those people out.

Let's see if they really exist. I'm doubtful.

---

She should definitely let the naysayers know.

Quote:

---

I've been called the N-word more times than I care to count.

---

Doesn't the meaning of this depend on the context?

She is just a race ***** playing the victim card. And she includes the purported name calling, death threats, etc. Typical democrat blaming others to cover her shortcomings. She is a racist, anti-Semite, unqualified, serial plagiarist, and has no place, in any capacity, at any university.

What she has attained so far in life has been because of her skin color and gender, not in spite of it.

She doesn't hate. She doesn't judge by skin color. She doesn't steal others' work. She didn't get a job she wasn't qualified for because of the color of her skin.

She's a VICTIM, y'all!

You know it's not about race when they pull the race card.

The race card is the last refuge of a scoundrel, to paraphrase a popular quote.

captkirk said:

---

Quote:

---

broadly respected research

---

Lolwut? Her academic and research record were razor thin

---

I am a political scientist as well, one of my fields is political behavior and I've neither heard of Gay prior to this, nor read any of her work. Never saw any of it in grad school either. Shows you just how minimal her impact is when her own colleagues don't know her.

Edited to provide some additional information. I looked at her CV and most of her publications are in the top 3 journals of the discipline as well as the top journal in the subfield. This further underlines my point that their contribution to the discipline must have been microscopic for her research to have such high visibility, but to see such low circulation within the field.

Quote:

---

And at a congressional hearing last month, I fell into a well-laid trap. I neglected to clearly articulate that calls for the genocide of Jewish people are abhorrent and unacceptable and that I would use every tool at my disposal to protect students from that kind of hate.

---

a) The congressional testimony wasn't a trap. It was a direct, easy to answer question.
b) This isn't a hard thing to say. It's ****ing common sense. If your students are calling for genocide and the eradication of an ethnic group of other students and celebrating terrorism against them, that should quite clearly violate your code of conduct if it's worth a ****.
c) If she was really serious about this, why didn't she? She allowed Muslim and liberal students to parade around campus for weeks doing exactly this. She even came to their defense and set up support groups when industry was offended and moved to black ball them.

Without a doubt she gets the Heisman Trophy for non-apology apologies. Funny to hear these idiots continue to back her up.

Virtue signaling off the back of a black woman.

Wolf! Wolf!

Calling them 'citation errors' is a terrible gaslight as well.

Did she cite them, but just erroneously?

Maybe in the context of evaluating a paper you might refer to not citing at all as a citation error. But the way she used it makes it sound like she tried to cite those sections but got some detail wrong.

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

Quote:

---

And at a congressional hearing last month, I fell into a well-laid trap. I neglected to clearly articulate that calls for the genocide of Jewish people are abhorrent and unacceptable and that I would use every tool at my disposal to protect students from that kind of hate.

---

a) The congressional testimony wasn't a trap. It was a direct, easy to answer question.
b) This isn't a hard thing to say. It's ****ing common sense. If your students are calling for genocide and the eradication of an ethnic group of other students and celebrating terrorism against them, that should quite clearly violate your code of conduct if it's worth a ****.
c) If she was really serious about this, why didn't she? She allowed Muslim and liberal students to parade around campus for weeks doing exactly this. She even came to their defense and set up support groups when industry was offended and moved to black ball them.

---

She even plagiarized her answers to congress. She repeated the Penn president replied, almost word for word.

I saw a news article on LinkedIn yesterday and the commentary was amazing. Nearly unanimously, every minority commenting was defending her, saying that she was only targeted because she's a black woman. Anyone else that brought facts to the table was labeled a racist.

She was only the president of Harvard because she's a black woman.

As someone who has published about 50% of the journal papers she has (and I'm just a lowly aerospace engineer in private industry), this statement boggles me:

Quote:

---

My critics found instances in my academic writings where some material duplicated other scholars' language, without proper attribution. When I learned of these errors, I promptly requested corrections from the journals in which the flagged articles were published, consistent with how I have seen similar faculty cases handled at Harvard.

---

What? NO NO NO NO NO

The remedy for plagiarism isn't just fixing it when found. It's excommunication.

Remember how Melania was roasted for using phrases from Michelle Obama's speeches? This is a billion times worse. Urkel should be getting roasted by the press a billion times more than Melania was.

The fact the press hammered Melania Trump harder than they roasted Urkel is Example #3,847,509 of how the press has a liberal bias.