Being an Ohioan I paid particularly close attention to the Oberlin College/Gibson's Bakery story where the college attacked the bakery for years claiming they're racists. The fact is Oberlin is a leftist insane asylum, and the inmates are in charge. Oberlin College students wage war against the hidden racism of their cafeteria menus, and it's my guess just about everything is racist, and that idiocy is tolerated, and it's my guess, it's encouraged.
"Considerable focus has been placed on the role of progressive college professors in setting the intellectual norms on campus. The ever-growing ranks of left-leaning administrators are equally consequential in transforming our educational institutions into progressive caricatures of academies of learning. Presidents, provosts, development officers, human resource and residence hall advisors, deans of diversity, and inclusion and student life and Title VI and IX staffers interact on a daily basis with students in all aspects of their campus lives, acting as parents, nursemaids, friends, and, too infrequently, disciplinarians. They often lead the charge for speech codes, safe spaces, and limits on free speech. Johns Hopkins Professor Benjamin Ginsberg calls the situation “administrative blight.”
Recapping the events involving Gibson's Bakery. Oberlin students, black students, Aladin, Endia Lawrence and Cecilia Whettstone were robbing Gibson's Bakery. A bakery worker confronted them and ended up being beaten by the thieves, including being kicked by two women. They were arrested and later found guilty.
However, from the get go Oberlin students and faculty were outraged at Gibson's Bakery for defending their business against thieves, claiming they're actions were racists, protesting for days, and even sending out notices claiming racism. In spite of the fact there was not one iota of evidence of racism. Gibson's sued, and then it really started. University staff sent them an e-mail warning they were going to "rain fire and brimstone" on their business.
Thomas Lifson writing about this stated the students and the university "pretending that they are interested in "social justice."' in effect "wanted its students to be granted something akin to extraterritoriality, exempt from law enforcement action in the town of Oberlin .......This is utterly appalling — a cancer on social order.
The fact is, this isn't an isolated case. Lifson points out the number of shoplifting arrests in Oberlin involving Oberlin University students is appalling.
As revealed in a tweet
from L.I., a 2017 article in a student publication at Oberlin, The
Grape, discussed the predominance (over 80%!) of Oberlin students in
shoplifting arrests in that small Ohio city. Oberlin students acted as predators on the larger community. The
pervasiveness of the student culture that regarded shopkeepers as prey
is indicated by the admission of the author that he himself had stolen
from the people he interviewed.
They lost the lawsuit and Gibson's was awarded tens of million of dollars, and they've trying everything they can to squirm out of it, even claiming poverty. That didn't work. But they've not given up on not paying, they want others to pay for their transgressions.
On August 8, 2023, Bob Unruh published this article, College falsely shouts racism, now wants OTHERS to pay $36 million 'Colossal failure of leadership'. As it turns out they want their insurance companies to pay for that judgement, and their attorney's fees. Their acts were outrageous and illegal, so I find this to be an interesting twist.
In Ohio in order to have a legitimate business, you must have liability insurance, and those who insure pest control companies make it clear if the business commits an illegal act, they're on their own, and it also appears this is the claim by the universities insurance companies, but it seems they might not have worded their contract with the university definitively enough, so the university wants them to pay for their illegal acts. There's more here. Oberlin College sues 4 insurance companies over Gibson's Bakery settlement.
I'm not an attorney, and will happily admit I think judicial rulings can be as confusing as trying to understand the definitions of logical fallacies. So this may or may not be worth spit, but in the past the Ohio the Supreme Court has ruled in what seems to me to be a somewhat similar case, and with what seem to be to some awfully strange reasonings - reasonings I will admit I don't understand at all - have found against the insurance company. But that was a 4-3 split ruling, so it will be interesting to see how this plays out if it goes that far.
No comments:
Post a Comment