bookmark_borderStatue of Confederate soldier hanged in North Carolina

In an absolutely disgusting act of bigotry and hatred, a mob of excuses for human beings in Raleigh, North Carolina tore down statues of Confederate soldiers from atop an obelisk and hanged one of the soldiers from a light post.

According to the Associated Press:

Protesters in North Carolina’s capital pulled down parts of a Confederate monument Friday night and hanged one of the toppled statues from a light post.

Demonstrators used a strap to pull down two statues of Confederate soldiers that were part of a larger obelisk near the state capitol in downtown Raleigh, news outlets reported.

Police officers earlier in the evening had foiled the protesters’ previous attempt to use ropes to topple the statues. But after the officers cleared the area, protesters mounted the obelisk and were able to take down the statues.

They then dragged the statues down a street and used a rope to hang one of the figures by its neck from a light post. The other statue was dragged to the Wake County courthouse, according to the News & Observer.

Out of all of the despicable acts of destruction that have taken place over the last few weeks, hanging a statue is the worst yet. Every person (and I hesitate to even use that term) who participated in or applauded this horrific act should be hunted down, caught, and jailed for the rest of his or her life. Then, he or she should burn in hell for all eternity.

There are no words to fully convey the moral wrongness of what was done to this statue. There is no justifiable reason for someone to have such anger, rage, and hatred towards a statue. The statue did not hurt anyone. The statue did not do anything wrong to deserve this. The artist(s) who designed and built this statue did not deserve to have their work destroyed in this manner.

Apparently, someone decided that in order to make a statement against acts of violence that have been perpetrated against African-Americans, it would be a good idea to “lynch” a statue representing the Confederacy. No idea could possibly be worse. The statue that was so cruelly destroyed represents the soldiers who fought bravely for the South’s independence, despite being outnumbered and outgunned. It represents the Confederate States of America, a country that existed from 1861-1865 before being crushed by the more populous and industrialized North. I would go so far as to say that the statue represents resistance to government authority; in other words, freedom.

By pulling down and hanging statues of Confederate soldiers, these excuses for human beings are stomping on the underdog. They are trampling on the idea of freedom, the idea of rebellion, and the idea of resistance to authority. It is bad enough that the authoritarian federal government brutally and barbarically crushed the South’s attempt to secede and form their own country. But apparently that was not enough because now, in the year 2020, mobs feel a need to brutally and barbarically destroy statues representing that rebellion as well. The fact that the brave, honorable, losing side of a war is not even allowed to be honored with a statue or monument is beyond absurd. The fact that those who sympathize with the winning side of a war would have such rage towards the side that they unjustly defeated is incomprehensible. What was done to this statue is the ultimate act of bullying and intolerance.

Every living thing (“person” is too kind a term) who participated in or contributed to this destruction is a bigot and a bully who should not be allowed to exist on Earth. I condemn this act in the harshest possible terms.  

bookmark_borderMayor freaks out about “nooses,” finds out they were actually swings

In Oakland, CA police found five ropes hanging from trees in a city park. Mayor Libby Schaaf denounced this as an act of racism and announced that a hate crimes investigation was underway.

The only problem: the ropes were not nooses at all. They were swings that a local man set up to use for fun and exercise. Victor Sengbe, who happens to be black, explained: “Out of the dozen and hundreds and thousands of people that walked by, no one has thought that it looked anywhere close to a noose. Folks have used it for exercise. It was really a fun addition to the park that we tried to create. It’s unfortunate that a genuine gesture of just wanting to have a good time got misinterpreted into something so heinous.”

That’s for sure.

But bizarrely, city officials don’t seem to care. Schaaf said that people must “start with the assumption that these are hate crimes.” She continued: “Intentions don’t matter when it comes to terrorizing the public. It is incumbent on all of us to know the actual history of racial violence, of terrorism, that a noose represents and that we as a city must remove these terrorizing symbols from the public view.”

Director of parks and recreation Nicholas Williams added, “The symbolism of the rope hanging in the tree is malicious regardless of intent. It’s evil, and it symbolizes hatred.”

These are some of the dumbest sentiments I have ever heard.

First of all, to say that something is “malicious regardless of intent” is an oxymoron. The definition of “malicious” is “full of, characterized by, or showing malice; intentionally harmful; spiteful” or “vicious, wanton, or mischievous in motivation or purpose.” In other words, it is the intention that determines whether or not an action is malicious.

Additionally, to start with the assumption that the ropes are hate crimes is just wrong. A central tenet of the American legal system is that people are presumed innocent unless proven guilty. And logically, if something could have either an evil or an innocuous explanation, one should assume the innocuous explanation. Why automatically assume the worst of your fellow human beings?

To describe rope swings as “terrorizing symbols” and to claim that they “terrorize the public” is preposterous. How could someone be terrorized by some ropes hanging from trees? Contrary to the claims of Schaaf and Williams, intentions do matter. The ropes were not nooses. They were swings. Swings are not evil. Swings do not symbolize hatred.

If you are terrorized by swings, that is your problem. Removing the swings, as the city did, is unfair to Sengbe and all the other Oakland residents who enjoyed them. The mayor and city government owe their citizens an apology for their ridiculous overreaction.

bookmark_borderRebels open playgrounds in New York

New York City Mayor Bill DeBlasio is under fire for banning kids from playing in parks at the same time as he encourages mass protests about racial issues.

On Monday, city employees welded the gates to a playground shut in the Williamstown neighborhood of New York. They later replaced the welding job with a lock to prevent children from using the playground.

“How long can we keep our kids in prison?” asked one local mom. “I don’t feel like I live in a free country.”

David Niederman, president of the United Jewish Organizations of Williamsburg and North Brooklyn, said: “We are dealing with families who have been imprisoned in their homes for three months, and they can’t go and breathe fresh air? Kids cannot have what they need, which is fresh air.”

And State Assemblyman Joseph Lentol made a good point about children’s ability and right to make their own decisions: “These kids have parents that can instruct them on safe distancing and making sure they are not only safe distancing and make sure the playground isn’t full. There’s an honor system… We’ve given them enough information to do what’s right and let’s trust them to have at least a little bit of fun.”

In addition to the obvious individual liberty concerns, DeBlasio is facing allegations of anti-Semitism because the playgrounds that he has ordered closed are in predominantly Jewish areas.

The Reagan Battalion pointed out DeBlasio’s hypocrisy:

Fortunately, community leaders fought back against DeBlasio’s authoritarian, discriminatory policies. Assemblyman Joe Lentol organized a rally demanding the opening of the park, and several people cut open the lock with bolt cutters.

 

bookmark_borderMinneapolis truck driver did nothing wrong – highways are for driving on, not protesting

During the chaos that erupted in Minneapolis following the death of George Floyd, a tanker truck drove down a highway that was filled with protesters. Protesters pulled the truck driver, Bogdan Vechirko, out of the truck and beat him. He suffered cuts to his face and also had his phone and wallet stolen. Police then arrested Vechirko. This despite the fact that authorities failed to properly barricade the Interstate 35 West Bridge, and despite the fact that Vechirko noticeably slowed down in an attempt to avoid hitting anyone, as can be seen in the videos at the above link.

My first reaction upon hearing of this incident was, “Is it now customary to arrest the victims of crimes instead of the perpetrators?”

Fortunately, Vechirko was released without charges being filed.

But unfortunately, there is now a racist petition calling for Vechirko to be arrested again. The anonymous individual who created the petition on change.org wrote the following:

so on May 31st we had a peaceful protest from the US BANK STADIUM to 35W bridge until a white a supremacist came in with his semi gas truck and ploughed through us. and no the highway wasn’t open but rather closed for the protest. It was the most traumatic experience of my life and I’ll never forget the ones who helped me when I was in panic. this could’ve turned into a mass killing but it was a miracle that no one was hurt. and the fact that he planned all this and was seeing through to it was just inhuman and disgusting. we read his texts from his phone and this was clearly premeditated. what he did was terrorism and he should be charged for it! if a black man or a Muslim man did this he would be long gone and convicted and the media would blast him as a terrorist ASAP. they didn’t even handcuff him and were protecting him but it’s okay to do that to black people and even kill them? “peaceful protestors are being teargassed, run over, and beat up before being unlawfully arrested, but this guy–WHO DROVE INTO A CROWD–was released without being charged bc he was “frustrated” by traffic? Sounds about white.” And that’s white privilege people. I demand that we come together to combat racial injustice in this broken justice system and that they treat everyone with equality.

There are so many things wrong with this that it’s hard to figure out where to start.

  • First of all, someone creating a petition calling for an innocent person to be arrested should at least use proper punctuation and grammar.
  • Second, what evidence does this individual have that Vechirko was a white supremacist? How could someone think it is even remotely acceptable to just state that someone is a white supremacist without providing any evidence to back up that claim?
  • Third, the highway was not closed for the protest. Authorities were intending to barricade the highway but did not do it quickly enough, and Vechirko and his truck were already on the bridge before they had time to put barricades up.
  • Fourth, it was the most traumatic experience of your life? Seriously? You chose to go onto a highway to protest. Highways are for driving on. You have no right to be upset when a truck does exactly what it is supposed to do on a highway. Vechirko is the one who was dragged out of his truck and beaten by a mob, and you, a member of that mob, complain that you are traumatized?
  • Fifth, it seems that the individual behind the petition is claiming that he/she read texts from Vechirko’s phone after the group of protesters stole it. I don’t think that being part of a mob who beat and robbed someone is something that one should brag about.
  • Sixth, if a black person or Muslim was beaten and robbed by a mob for driving a truck on a highway, he/she would be neither “long gone and convicted” nor “blasted as a terrorist ASAP.” He/she would be portrayed as a victim and martyr and would not have been arrested in the first place.
  • Seventh, it was correct for the police to protect Vechirko and not handcuff him, because he did nothing wrong and was the victim of a crime.
  • Eighth, “sounds about white” is a blatantly racist statement. Why do you think that it is OK to insult someone because of the color of his skin? Vechirko was released without being charged not because of his race but because he did nothing wrong. He should not have even been arrested in the first place.
  • Ninth, there is no such thing as white privilege. Not being charged with a crime when you did not commit any crimes is a right, not a privilege.
  • Tenth, how can you demand that the justice system treat everyone with equality when your petition is asking for the exact opposite of that?

Other than that, this petition makes perfect sense.

The bottom line is that a highway is for driving. A tanker truck has every right to be on the highway. Protesters do not have a right to be on the highway. Vechirko did nothing wrong. The protesters did something wrong by being on the highway. They – particularly the ones who decided to drag him out of his truck and beat him – are the ones who should be charged with crimes, not him.

bookmark_borderBerklee College wrong to apologize for letting cops use bathroom

In one of the most ridiculous examples of the anti-police attitudes that have taken over America, Berklee College of Music in Boston apologized for allowing cops to use its bathrooms. Yes, you read that right. During the May 31 Black Lives Matter protest, college employees committed the dastardly deed of allowing cops stationed nearby to enter the building to go to the bathroom.

Berklee’s Public Safety Department posted the following message on Instagram:

The fact that Berklee would apologize for this boggles my mind. “We have heard from many of you personally and across social channels of your hurt and anger that this access was permitted,” the letter reads. “We understand that many members of our community feel betrayed. We are deeply sorry for the impact this had on our community and for perpetuating feelings of oppression, silencing, and marginalization… This should not have happened, and going forward, it will not happen again.”

It is also incomprehensible to me that someone could feel hurt, angry, or betrayed that cops were allowed to go to the bathroom. How does letting cops use the bathroom perpetuate feelings of oppression, silencing, or marginalization? If you require that cops be forced to wet their pants in order for you to feel comfortable, you have some serious problems. Anyone with such a mean-spirited, messed-up way of looking at the world does not deserve to be accommodated in any way.

Berklee’s promise that “it will not happen again” is disturbing. What are the cops supposed to do if they have to go to the bathroom?

“Are you allowing Berklee protestors to use the bathrooms?” asked one commenter on Instagram. I disagree with the implication that fairness requires the college to let protesters use the bathrooms as well as cops. People who attend protests are doing so because they want to. They are doing so on their own time, and they are free to go home at any time if they need to go to the bathroom. Cops, on the other hand, are at the protest because it’s their job. Their job requires being stationed in public places for hours at a time, often far from the bathrooms at the police station. They do not have the option of going home until their shift is over. And over the course of a shift, it’s pretty likely that every worker at some point will need to use the bathroom.

Letting cops use the bathroom is the kind, humane thing to do. It does not hurt anyone in any way. How could anyone be against that?

bookmark_borderNASCAR is wrong to ban the Confederate flag

Following the Black Lives Matter protests, NASCAR decided to ban display of the Confederate flag at its races. NASCAR’s statement read:

“The presence of the confederate flag at NASCAR events runs contrary to our commitment to providing a welcoming and inclusive environment for all fans, our competitors and our industry. Bringing people together around a love for racing and the community that it creates is what makes our fans and sport special. The display of the confederate flag will be prohibited from all NASCAR events and properties.”

African-American NASCAR driver Bubba Wallace had called on the organization to ban the flag. “No one should feel uncomfortable when they come to a NASCAR race,” he said. “It starts with Confederate flags. Get them out of here. They have no place for them.”

In my opinion, banning the Confederate flag is the wrong decision and actually makes NASCAR less inclusive. Just like the trend of tearing down statues that are objectionable to the politically-correct crowd, banning the Confederate flag shows complete disregard for people who like the flag and consider it an important symbol. A common justification given for banning Confederate flags, statues, and other imagery is that to many people, these things are symbols of racism. But the fact that many people think something does not make it true. The Confederate flag is a symbol of the Confederate States of America, a country that existed from 1861-1865. Yes, the Confederacy had slavery. But slavery is not the sole thing that the Confederacy stood for, nor the sole reason why it went to war in an attempt to gain independence. The Confederate flag does not stand for slavery or racism. It stands for the Southern culture, for the brave soldiers who fought for the South’s independence, for states’ rights, and most importantly of all, for resistance to government authority. That is why I, who have lived in Massachusetts my entire life and am distantly related to Ulysses Grant, love and cherish the Confederate flag. That is why my heart soars whenever I see its stars and bars flapping in the breeze. And that is why I’m devastated by the attempts to eradicate Confederate imagery from America’s culture.

Obviously, not everyone feels the way I do. Plenty of people don’t like the Confederate flag, and that’s fine. But the fact that you dislike and disagree with something does not give you the right to have it banned. Bubba Wallace recently began displaying a “Black Lives Matter” paint scheme on his car, which is awesome. I personally would not do so if I was a NASCAR driver, because I disagree with many of the things the Black Lives Matter movement and people associated with it have done recently. But I would never argue that displaying support for that movement should be banned. Just as NASCAR drivers and fans have every right to express their support for Black Lives Matter, drivers and fans should be able to express their admiration for the Confederacy as well.

By taking away the freedom of expression of one group of people in order to make another group of people more comfortable, NASCAR is essentially saying that some people’s feelings and opinions matter more than others. That is neither fair nor just, and it makes NASCAR less welcoming, inclusive, and diverse.

bookmark_borderNo, Christopher Columbus Park is not “dedicated to white supremacy”

After the horrific attack on the Christopher Columbus statue in Boston, representatives from the United American Indians of New England, North American Indian Center of Boston, Indigenous Peoples Day MA, and New Democracy Coalition held a press conference near the site where the statue used to be. The purpose of the press conference was apparently to insult the statue and by extension, the Italian-American community. 

“For 500 years plus, Black and indigenous people have endured a campaign of state violence,” complained Jean-Luc Pierite, president of the North American Indian Center of Boston, without providing any explanation of what he means by this or any evidence that it is true.

“It’s a park dedicated to white supremacy; it’s a park dedicated to indigenous genocide,” said Mahtowin Munro of United American Indians of NE and IndigenousPeoplesDayMA.org. “The messaging is clear with the statue here that this is an area where white people are welcome, but where our people are not welcome. So we’ve been asking for years that this statue come down and that Columbus be no longer celebrated.”

“This statue needs to be permanently removed,” said Kevin Peterson, founder of the New Democracy Coalition. “It is an insult to Native American people, it is an insult to the very idea of democracy. We demand that this statue be removed and that it is never seen again.” 

These comments are so deeply wrong – morally, philosophically, and intellectually – that it is difficult to determine which statement is the most preposterous.

First of all, Christopher Columbus Park is not dedicated to white supremacy or indigenous genocide. That is not even remotely close to being true, and it makes absolutely no sense that anyone would say or think that. Christopher Columbus Park is dedicated to…. Christopher Columbus. It might be true that Columbus was a white supremacist (as was pretty much every single person in the 15th century) and it could be argued that his actions amounted to genocide (although that is highly debatable), but to equate Columbus with white supremacy and genocide, as if those are his only two attributes, is ridiculous. Columbus was a person. He had many different qualities, both positive and negative, and did many different things over the course of his life. Discovering an entirely new continent, which Europeans did not know about before, was a pretty significant achievement. Was he perfect? No. Did he treat indigenous people in the best possible way? No. But it is wrong to claim that honoring Columbus is the same thing as honoring white supremacy and indigenous genocide. 

Equally preposterous is the claim that “the messaging is clear” that only white people are welcome in Columbus Park and not indigenous or black people. There is no messaging that only white people are welcome in Columbus Park. People of all races are welcome there. That should not even need to be explained. As far as I know, no one has ever said, suggested, or implied in any way that only white people are welcome in the park. I walk through the park frequently and see people of all races, ages, and genders hanging out there. If you do not feel comfortable in the park, that is your own problem. If you hate Christopher Columbus so much that you are unwilling to set foot in a park that bears his name, that is your choice. No one did anything to make you feel unwelcome.

The contention that the statue is an insult to Native American people and to the idea of democracy is also false. How can a statue be an insult to someone? There is no historical figure that is liked and admired by all people. For any statue, there are going to be some people who like it and some people who don’t. If you believe that Columbus’s treatment of indigenous people outweighs his positive attributes, then you are probably not a fan of his statue. That is fine. But that does not mean the statue’s existence is an insult to you. There are numerous historical figures that I dislike. For example, I don’t like Hubert Humphrey because he sponsored the Durham-Humphrey Amendment, and I don’t like General Richard Sherman because of the atrocities he committed against the South during the Civil War. But I don’t claim that statues depicting them are an insult to me, nor do I demand that those statues be removed.

As for the demand that the Columbus statue be permanently removed, that is not only unreasonable but demonstrates true bigotry and intolerance. What right do you have to demand that a statue be removed, never to be seen again? Different people have different values, preferences, and opinions about which attributes are admirable in a historical figure and how the different attributes should be weighed. Therefore, different people will come to different conclusions about which historical figures deserve to be honored with statues. Yet the speakers at this press conference are arguing that their opinions, and only their opinions, should determine which statues are allowed to exist and which are not. What makes their opinions more important than other people’s opinions? They are demonstrating not one iota of consideration for those who admire Columbus and cherish the statue.

The criticisms of the statue and the demands to remove it are even more offensive when one takes into account the fact that Columbus was from Italy (he was born in Genoa, which was not part of Italy at the time but is now), and his statue and park are located at the southern edge of the North End, the Italian part of Boston. Columbus was essentially the first Italian-American. To many Italian-Americans today, his accomplishments are a source of pride. His statue represents the Italian-American community and symbolically welcomes Bostonians and visitors to the North End. It is disturbing that someone would equate celebrating Italian-American heritage with white supremacy. Not only do the people who spoke at the press conference consider the existence of anything they dislike to be a personal insult to them, but they apparently believe that their culture is the only one that deserves to be honored and celebrated. Not only do they believe they have a right to order the removal of any statue they dislike, but they believe they have a right to obliterate a symbol of Italian heritage from Boston’s Italian neighborhood. Go ahead and celebrate Indigenous Peoples Day if you want to. Put up statues of notable indigenous people from history. But you do not get to tell other people to stop celebrating Columbus Day, and you do not get to take away the Columbus statue from those who cherish and appreciate it.

The only good thing to occur during the anti-Columbus press conference was that, according to Boston.com, a resident of the North End shouted his objections to removing the statue, at times drowning the speakers out. Good for him.

Munro, naturally, complained that this was emblematic of how indigenous people have allegedly been silenced for centuries. “We will not allow ourselves to be silenced anymore,” she said.

News flash: you have never been silenced. You and your fellow speakers at the press conference are the ones who are trying to silence any views that differ from yours. You are demanding that a beautiful statue be removed because you personally do not like it. You are demanding that other people stop celebrating a historical figure because you personally do not admire him. You are acting as if your views and preferences are the only ones that matter. How dare you gather at the site of a statue that has just been brutally beheaded and rub salt into the wounds of those who love the statue and the Italian heritage that it stands for? You are the ones who are truly being racist, discriminatory, and intolerant. 

bookmark_borderBully attacks free speech in Watertown

This week, in one of the latest examples of Black Lives Matter supporters taking things too far, a woman named Mary Burns decided to bully and insult an innocent person who was cleaning up the sidewalk. 

On Tuesday, Burns was riding her bike through Watertown, MA and saw a man mopping away messages that had been written in chalk on the sidewalk. The messages expressed support for the Black Lives Matter movement. The man mopped away some of the messages and erased the word “black” from the phrase “black lives matter” so that it simply read “lives matter.”

Burns decided to accost the man and pick a fight with him, and then tweeted about the interaction:

Continue reading “Bully attacks free speech in Watertown”

bookmark_borderChristopher Columbus statue destroyed in despicable act of bigotry

P6300014a.jpg

In a despicable and disgraceful act of bigotry, someone beheaded the statue of Christopher Columbus in Boston.

Every time I hear about a statue of a historical figure being vandalized, torn down, or otherwise damaged, my blood boils and my soul aches. I love history and I love statues. I believe that a historical figure does not need to be perfect to deserve having a statue in his or her honor. I believe that it is important for a nation to have a wide variety of statues representing a range of different ideologies and viewpoints. I believe that destroying a statue is one of the most morally repugnant actions a person could do. But this one really hits home. To me, this statue is not just any statue. It is a statue that I know well and have a particular affinity for.

This statue stood in Christopher Columbus Park, on the edge of the North End, the Italian neighborhood of Boston. My office is near the statue, and before the Covid-19 apocalypse hit, I walked by it nearly every day during my lunch-time walk. Christopher Columbus Park is beautiful. It has an elegant trellis, colorful flowers of various kinds, and a view of Boston Harbor. The statue has always been the focal point, overlooking the grass, flowers, and water from his pedestal in the center of the park. The fact that someone could see this statue and decide that it would be a good idea to rip his head off is completely incomprehensible and disgusting.

Additionally, I find this act of destruction to be particularly reprehensible because I am half Italian-American. Christopher Columbus was not perfect. But he is a symbol of Italian-American pride. It is no coincidence that his statue stands at the entrance to the North End, welcoming Bostonians and visitors to the Italian part of Boston. The destruction of the Christopher Columbus statue is an act of hate against Italian-Americans. I consider it to be an attack on me personally, as well as all who share my ethnicity.

In his comments today, Boston Mayor Marty Walsh failed to take a strong enough stance against this act of destruction and bigotry. “We don’t condone any vandalism here in the city of Boston, and that needs to stop,” he said. Walsh mentioned that the Columbus statue has been vandalized twice before in 2006 and 2015. He also added, “Given the conversations that we’re certainly having right now in our city of Boston and throughout the country, we’re also going to take time to assess the historic meaning of the statue.”

In other words, because the statue has been repeatedly targeted by vandals, he is considering getting rid of it permanently. This somewhat contradicts his statement that he does not condone vandalism. Removing the statue permanently is exactly what the vandals want and are attempting to accomplish through their acts of vandalism. Giving in to the demands of the vandals would essentially be condoning what they are doing. It would also be an act of cowardice. I hope that Walsh stands up for the Italian-American community and all people who value true diversity, as opposed to caving to the bullies who believe that only politically-correct views deserve to be expressed and that some lives matter more than others.

The excuse for a human being who did this should be found, arrested, and punished to the fullest extent of the law. This is a hate crime and should be prosecuted as such. The Christopher Columbus statue needs to be repaired and restored to his rightful place, with a round-the-clock armed security guard protecting him at all times. The excuse for a human being who did this reprehensible deed should be made to pay for the repairs, as well as for the security detail. This excuse for a human being should be sentenced to as many years in prison as possible, and when he or she is released (hopefully never), statues of Christopher Columbus should be erected all over his or her neighborhood so that he or she is forced to look at Christopher Columbus at all times for the rest of his or her miserable life.

Continue reading “Christopher Columbus statue destroyed in despicable act of bigotry”

bookmark_borderUCF Professor Charles Negy deserves to be promoted, not fired

An uproar is taking place at the University of Central Florida because a professor had the audacity to disagree with the prevailing, politically correct narrative on racism.

Psychology Professor Charles Negy, author of “White Shaming: Bullying Based on Prejudice, Virtue-Signaling, and Ignorance,” has been active on Twitter since the death of George Floyd and the resulting protests. A sampling of his tweets is as follows:

Continue reading “UCF Professor Charles Negy deserves to be promoted, not fired”