I like how she says it was a well laid trap when the vast majority of people were instantly appalled by her response. That is not a well laid trap, it is a question with a known answer that you willingly gave. There's nothing well laid about it. It was a trap, but an easily avoidable one to anyone that doesn't think the way she does.

A lot of these politically driven hires or admissions should be extremely concerned about their own academic product. AI will make it extremely easy to identify plagiarism and other forms of academic dishonesty or fraud efficiently, and a lot of the people in the Humanities that thought they could "fake it until they make it" and would never get caught will now get busted if anyone starts systematically examining past work product.

Thanks for the post, OP. Harvard alum Bill Ackman's take (also provided by OP) is the perfect rebuttal for Gay's OpEd. Posted here for convenience:

https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3436029

From Gay's OpEd: This was merely a single skirmish in a broader war to unravel public faith in pillars of American society. Campaigns of this kind often start with attacks on education and expertise, because these are the tools that best equip communities to see through propaganda. But such campaigns don't end there. Trusted institutions of all types from public health agencies to news organizations will continue to fall victim to coordinated attempts to undermine their legitimacy and ruin their leaders' credibility.

Though Gay may be technically correct about this being a skirmish in the broader war, her conclusions are flawed. Public faith in these pillars of American society IS being unraveled, but not by "zealots" as part of some grand scheme. It's being unraveled because people that have bought into the DEI scheme - such as Gay herself - have completeley undermined these "pillars of American society" in their desire to transform them.

She took the advantages given to her under affirmative action and rather than using that assistance to continue the principles that Harvard was built upon, she became one of many attempting to transform them from a meritocracy based model to a race-based oppressor/oppressed model.

So she's right. It is a broader war. And there's much left to do.

When a racist mob attacks a Black person, it finds a seemingly legitimate reason for the attack that allows for it to accrue popular support and credibility, and which allows the growing mob to deny they are attacking the person in this way because the person is Black. 1/4

— Ibram X. Kendi (@ibramxk) January 2, 2024

she needed to go, campus leftists showed their asses with their antisemitic nonsense and she coddled them for it.

more broadly, this episode has been a fascinating culture war skirmish. folks like chris rufo and associates have been pretty transparent that gay's ouster was a coordinated effort from the media right, and a symbolic victory for conservatives against liberal institutions like academia. that this story remained headline news for weeks and led to this outcome is testament that the right isn't as powerless to control msm messaging and narratives as it sometimes portrays itself.

C@LAg said:

---

College campuses in our country must remain places where students can learn, share and grow together, not spaces where proxy battles and political grandstanding take root. Universities must remain independent venues where courage and reason unite to advance truth, no matter what forces set against them.

---

Yes, only one side should be represented at college campuses. This eliminates any potential "battles".

C@LAg said:

---

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/03/opinion/claudine-gay-harvard-president.html#:~:text=On%20Tuesday%2C%20I%20made%20the,fighting%20antisemitism%20has%20been%20questioned

On Tuesday, I made the wrenching but necessary decision to resign as Harvard's president. For weeks, both I and the institution to which I've devoted my professional life have been under attack. My character and intelligence have been impugned. My commitment to fighting antisemitism has been questioned. My inbox has been flooded with invective, including death threats. I've been called the N-word more times than I care to count.

My hope is that by stepping down I will deny demagogues the opportunity to further weaponize my presidency in their campaign to undermine the ideals animating Harvard since its founding: excellence, openness, independence, truth.

As I depart, I must offer a few words of warning. The campaign against me was about more than one university and one leader. This was merely a single skirmish in a broader war to unravel public faith in pillars of American society. Campaigns of this kind often start with attacks on education and expertise, because these are the tools that best equip communities to see through propaganda. But such campaigns don't end there. Trusted institutions of all types from public health agencies to news organizations will continue to fall victim to coordinated attempts to undermine their legitimacy and ruin their leaders' credibility. For the opportunists driving cynicism about our institutions, no single victory or toppled leader exhausts their zeal.

Yes, I made mistakes. In my initial response to the atrocities of Oct. 7, I should have stated more forcefully what all people of good conscience know: Hamas is a terrorist organization that seeks to eradicate the Jewish state. 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.


Most recently, the attacks have focused on my scholarship. My critics found instances in my academic writings where some material duplicated other scholars' language, without proper attribution. I believe all scholars deserve full and appropriate credit for their work. 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.

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.

Despite the obsessive scrutiny of my peer-reviewed writings, few have commented on the substance of my scholarship, which focuses on the significance of minority office holding in American politics. My research marshaled concrete evidence to show that when historically marginalized communities gain a meaningful voice in the halls of power, it signals an open door where before many saw only barriers. And that, in turn, strengthens our democracy.

Throughout this work, I asked questions that had not been asked, used then-cutting-edge quantitative research methods and established a new understanding of representation in American politics. This work was published in the nation's top political science journals and spawned important research by other scholars.

Never did I imagine needing to defend decades-old and broadly respected research, but the past several weeks have laid waste to truth. Those who had relentlessly campaigned to oust me since the fall often trafficked in lies and ad hominem insults, not reasoned argument. They recycled tired racial stereotypes about Black talent and temperament. They pushed a false narrative of indifference and incompetence.

It is not lost on me that I make an ideal canvas for projecting every anxiety about the generational and demographic changes unfolding on American campuses: a Black woman selected to lead a storied institution. Someone who views diversity as a source of institutional strength and dynamism. Someone who has advocated a modern curriculum that spans from the frontier of quantum science to the long-neglected history of Asian Americans. Someone who believes that a daughter of Haitian immigrants has something to offer to the nation's oldest university.

I still believe that. As I return to teaching and scholarship, I will continue to champion access and opportunity, and I will bring to my work the virtue I discussed in the speech I delivered at my presidential inauguration: courage. Because it is courage that has buoyed me throughout my career and it is courage that is needed to stand up to those who seek to undermine what makes universities unique in American life.

Having now seen how quickly the truth can become a casualty amid controversy, I'd urge a broader caution: At tense moments, every one of us must be more skeptical than ever of the loudest and most extreme voices in our culture, however well organized or well connected they might be. Too often they are pursuing self-serving agendas that should be met with more questions and less credulity.

College campuses in our country must remain places where students can learn, share and grow together, not spaces where proxy battles and political grandstanding take root. Universities must remain independent venues where courage and reason unite to advance truth, no matter what forces set against them.

---

So we are all demagogues!

Old McDonald said:

---

that this story remained headline news for weeks and led to this outcome is testament that the right isn't as powerless to control msm messaging and narratives as it sometimes portrays itself.

---

Incorrect, IMO

The reason this stayed in the news and something actually happened is because she publicly made antiemetic statements to Congress which could not be covered up.

That opened the door to the plagiarism behemoth. If those guys had discovered the same plagiarism without her public statements, I'd almost guarantee it never sees the light of day in the MSM.

obama and his team wrote that for her.

CDUB98 said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

that this story remained headline news for weeks and led to this outcome is testament that the right isn't as powerless to control msm messaging and narratives as it sometimes portrays itself.

---

Incorrect, IMO

The reason this stayed in the news and something actually happened is because she publicly made antiemetic statements to Congress which could not be covered up.

That opened the door to the plagiarism behemoth. If those guys had discovered the same plagiarism without her public statements, I'd almost guarantee it never sees the light of day in the MSM.

---

that the plagiarism was newsworthy at all was partially a consequence of her remarks at the hearing. that it remained headline news as long as it did was anything but organic. but don't take my word for it:

We launched the Claudine Gay plagiarism story from the Right. The next step is to smuggle it into the media apparatus of the Left, legitimizing the narrative to center-left actors who have the power to topple her. Then squeeze.

— Christopher F. Rufo ⚔️ (@realchrisrufo) December 19, 2023

IMO, that tweet backs up what I said.

Lots of words and lots of paragraphs to say "I didn't do nuffin'!".

Quote:

---

Campaigns of this kind often start with attacks on education and expertise, because these are the tools that best equip communities to see through propaganda.

---

Academia's version of "seeing through the propaganda" really means indoctrinating students in radical leftist anti-American ideas. That is the problem. More people are finally getting wise to it, and Academia doesn't like it.
Harvard massively damaged its reputation. As have all Ivy Leagues and many other universities.

JDL 96 said:

---

Quote:

---

Campaigns of this kind often start with attacks on education and expertise, because these are the tools that best equip communities to see through propaganda.

---

Academia's version of "seeing through the propaganda" really means indoctrinating students in radical leftist anti-American ideas. That is the problem. More people are finally getting wise to it, and Academia doesn't like it.
Harvard massively damaged its reputation. As have all Ivy Leagues and many other universities.

---

"Propaganda" to the DEI mind means the upholding of long held institutions and the "pillars of American society". To them, those institutions are all infested with "structural racism" and must be dismantled.

They want the credibility of a university name (Harvard), media outlet (NYT) or corporation (Disney); but, not to continue the traditions they were built on. They want to use that credibility to transform the institutions into something completely different. And then claim that opposing them in any way is spewing "propaganda".

hph6203 said:

---

I like how she says it was a well laid trap when the vast majority of people were instantly appalled by her response. That is not a well laid trap, it is a question with a known answer that you willingly gave. There's nothing well laid about it. It was a trap, but an easily avoidable one to anyone that doesn't think the way she does.

---

There most definitely was a well-laid trap, but not the way she meant it or you think it. The trap wasn't the question in front of her, it was invisible to the sides. She could have sidestepped the trap by answering the way anyone with common sense and decency would answer, but then she would have to essentially admit her deceit. She ascended to her position because of the religion of her politics, a belief which welcomes deceit if it garners power and advances the cause. Better to fall on the sword than to blemish the cause.

The Bee delivers!

Every. Single. Time.

"citation errors"

lol. How many kids to date have been kicked out of Harvard for citation errors?

APHIS AG said:

---

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

---

"And if you get caught, it means you weren't trying hard enough." -Special Forces NCO whose name I've forgotten.

Why is a communist's manifesto posted on TexAgs?

CDUB98 said:

---

IMO, that tweet backs up what I said.

---

sounds like we're in agreement then. the media right was able to successfully control a mainstream media narrative, and score a high profile culture war victory in the process. maybe the media right isn't so powerless against the msm after all!

Old McDonald said:

---

CDUB98 said:

---

IMO, that tweet backs up what I said.

---

sounds like we're in agreement then. the media right was able to successfully control a mainstream media narrative, and score a high profile culture war victory in the process. maybe the media right isn't so powerless against the msm after all!

---

Are you arguing that the left and MSM doesn't care about antisemitism unless they are forced to?

C@LAg said:

---

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/03/opinion/claudine-gay-harvard-president.html#:~:text=On%20Tuesday%2C%20I%20made%20the,fighting%20antisemitism%20has%20been%20questioned

On Tuesday, I made the wrenching but necessary decision to resign as Harvard's president. For weeks, both I and the institution to which I've devoted my professional life have been under attack. My character and intelligence have been impugned. My commitment to fighting antisemitism has been questioned. My inbox has been flooded with invective, including death threats. I've been called the N-word more times than I care to count.

blah, blah, blah

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.

College campuses in our country must remain places where students can learn, share and grow together, not spaces where proxy battles and political grandstanding take root. Universities must remain independent venues where courage and reason unite to advance truth, no matter what forces set against them.

---

If Claudine Gay wrote this resignation letter with no help from others, I will give my 2024 salary to charity.

Did she deny the plagiarism accusations or just whine about things that has nothing to do with it?

What a bogus line this was

I would like to see documentation of each N-Word please………..

Well………. We're waiting….………….

C@LAg said:

---

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/03/opinion/claudine-gay-harvard-president.html#:~:text=On%20Tuesday%2C%20I%20made%20the,fighting%20antisemitism%20has%20been%20questioned

On Tuesday, I made the wrenching but necessary decision to resign as Harvard's president. For weeks, both I and the institution to which I've devoted my professional life have been under attack. My character and intelligence have been impugned. My commitment to fighting antisemitism has been questioned. My inbox has been flooded with invective, including death threats. I've been called the N-word more times than I care to count.

My hope is that by stepping down I will deny demagogues the opportunity to further weaponize my presidency in their campaign to undermine the ideals animating Harvard since its founding: excellence, openness, independence, truth.

As I depart, I must offer a few words of warning. The campaign against me was about more than one university and one leader. This was merely a single skirmish in a broader war to unravel public faith in pillars of American society. Campaigns of this kind often start with attacks on education and expertise, because these are the tools that best equip communities to see through propaganda. But such campaigns don't end there. Trusted institutions of all types from public health agencies to news organizations will continue to fall victim to coordinated attempts to undermine their legitimacy and ruin their leaders' credibility. For the opportunists driving cynicism about our institutions, no single victory or toppled leader exhausts their zeal.

Yes, I made mistakes. In my initial response to the atrocities of Oct. 7, I should have stated more forcefully what all people of good conscience know: Hamas is a terrorist organization that seeks to eradicate the Jewish state. 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.


Most recently, the attacks have focused on my scholarship. My critics found instances in my academic writings where some material duplicated other scholars' language, without proper attribution. I believe all scholars deserve full and appropriate credit for their work. 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.

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.

Despite the obsessive scrutiny of my peer-reviewed writings, few have commented on the substance of my scholarship, which focuses on the significance of minority office holding in American politics. My research marshaled concrete evidence to show that when historically marginalized communities gain a meaningful voice in the halls of power, it signals an open door where before many saw only barriers. And that, in turn, strengthens our democracy.

Throughout this work, I asked questions that had not been asked, used then-cutting-edge quantitative research methods and established a new understanding of representation in American politics. This work was published in the nation's top political science journals and spawned important research by other scholars.

Never did I imagine needing to defend decades-old and broadly respected research, but the past several weeks have laid waste to truth. Those who had relentlessly campaigned to oust me since the fall often trafficked in lies and ad hominem insults, not reasoned argument. They recycled tired racial stereotypes about Black talent and temperament. They pushed a false narrative of indifference and incompetence.

It is not lost on me that I make an ideal canvas for projecting every anxiety about the generational and demographic changes unfolding on American campuses: a Black woman selected to lead a storied institution. Someone who views diversity as a source of institutional strength and dynamism. Someone who has advocated a modern curriculum that spans from the frontier of quantum science to the long-neglected history of Asian Americans. Someone who believes that a daughter of Haitian immigrants has something to offer to the nation's oldest university.

I still believe that. As I return to teaching and scholarship, I will continue to champion access and opportunity, and I will bring to my work the virtue I discussed in the speech I delivered at my presidential inauguration: courage. Because it is courage that has buoyed me throughout my career and it is courage that is needed to stand up to those who seek to undermine what makes universities unique in American life.

Having now seen how quickly the truth can become a casualty amid controversy, I'd urge a broader caution: At tense moments, every one of us must be more skeptical than ever of the loudest and most extreme voices in our culture, however well organized or well connected they might be. Too often they are pursuing self-serving agendas that should be met with more questions and less credulity.

College campuses in our country must remain places where students can learn, share and grow together, not spaces where proxy battles and political grandstanding take root. Universities must remain independent venues where courage and reason unite to advance truth, no matter what forces set against them.

---

Like every POS liberal. Always the victim and never the victor.

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.

---

Translation:

She listens to rap music.

You're welcome.

deddog said:

---

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.

---

Translation:

She listens to rap music.

You're welcome.

---

It's funny how that word is a "preferred pronoun" in urban Black culture, but a White person saying it is worse than Hitler.

Quit sending your kids to universities for an education. The people in charge have been on the wrong side of ethics and knowledge for years.

Fully sufficient independent reasons to fire Gay:
1. Plagiarism
2. Institutional reputational damage
3. Unequal application of student conduct rules
4. Endowment hit
5. Unqualified (correcting for a bad hire)
6. Loss of confidence
7. Lying
8. Conflicts with the board
9. Someone better exists
10. Inability to perform responsibilities (fails in public spotlight)
11. The institution wants to

It's funny when a turtle complains about being taken off the fence post.

I really don't like that she ended that tripe with " I Shall Return " What an ego.










Think General MacArthur

Just so everyone is clear,

Claudine Gay was hired because of the color of her skin and was fired because of the content of her character.

— Bo Loudon (@BoLoudon) January 5, 2024