Bacon's Rebellion

Democracy Thrives in Sunlight

UVa Updates: Jefferson Legacy, Honor System, Tuition Credit

—

by

James A. Bacon
in

The University of Virginia Board of Visitors met Thursday and Friday last week and discuss several matters of interest to the broader community. Here are some headlines:

Clement Defends Jefferson’s Legacy; Ryan Stays Mum
Jefferson Council blog

Whitt Clement, rector of the University of Virginia, gave a brief defense of Thomas Jefferson and his legacy at the Board of Visitors meeting Friday.

“We are a University founded by Thomas Jefferson, and honoring his legacy and his contributions to our nation has, and will always be, an indelible part of what it means to live, learn and work here,” Clement said. “That is the policy and the position of this institution and it will not change under our leadership or that of President [Jim] Ryan or his team.”

Board of Visitors Discusses Rollout of “Living Honor” Campaign
Jefferson Council blog

The University of Virginia Alumni Association presented an overview to the Board of Visitors last week of its “Living Honor” marketing campaign.

The initiative, proposed by President Jim Ryan and Rector Whitt Clement, is designed to aid students and alumni in learning about Honor and its role at the University following a student vote last year to reduce the single sanction for honor offenses from expulsion to a two-semester leave of absence.

The goal, according to alumni association President Lily West and Chief Marketing Officer Susan Klobuchar, is to build greater understanding of the Honor system and to engage members of the university community in a conversation about honor.

UVa Board of Visitors Approves Credit to In-State Undergraduate Students
UVA Today

The University of Virginia Board of Visitors today approved a one-time $690 credit to in-state undergraduate students for the 2022-2023 academic year. The credit is equivalent to the 4.7% increase in tuition that was adopted in 2021 for this academic year.

— JAB

Share this article

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)

Comments

61 responses to “UVa Updates: Jefferson Legacy, Honor System, Tuition Credit”

  1. Virginian78 Avatar
    Virginian78

    The issue that everyone is overlooking with the tuition refund is that the base tuition remains at the previously approved increase of 4.7%. The years forward will use the increased tuition level (+4.7%) as the base in the next year’s calculation.

    1. DJRippert Avatar
      DJRippert

      Exactly right. One can imagine there will be both another hike next year and no tuition credit. Canceling the hike this year would have made next year’s increase look worse.

  2. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/288a254484994f81e828f75b467aab01daa1daee6f97153e96be29484491b253.jpg here’s an interesting thing:

    1. DJRippert Avatar
      DJRippert

      I give up. What is the interesting thing?

      I find the rejection interesting in that the same “woke” people who insist that American history be taught “warts and all” don’t want to take money to publish a view of American history that emphasizes the positive. Apparently, “warts and all” really means “only warts” to the woke.

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        It was a purchased half page AD in the RTD

      2. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        You’re confused between teaching facts versus opinions.

        1. DJRippert Avatar
          DJRippert

          Please read the bullet points from the ad that was rejected and tell me which of those bullet points expresses an opinion.

          1. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            There was a BR post about it. Good discussion in there but in general the Jefferson Council viewpoint is not the full story of Jefferson and is at odds with most research and Monticello.

            Which is what you would say in any historical discussion IMO.

            It’s not hard at all to find the actual words of Jefferson with regard to his views of black people,

            https://www.monticello.org/thomas-jefferson/jefferson-slavery/jefferson-s-attitudes-toward-slavery/

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Jefferson_and_slavery

            there are 175 separate references in the wiki.

            The Jefferson Council portrays less than a full account.

          2. James A. Bacon Avatar
            James A. Bacon

            “The Jefferson Council portrays less than a full account.”

            That’s because we’re rebutting the conventional wisdom… which also portrays less than a full account…. and suppresses dissenting views. It’s a classic case of David versus Goliath.

            In LarryWorld, David should have ditched his sling and stones and taken up a sword and shield against his mighty foe.

          3. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            You’re basically calling the Wiki and it’s 175 references “Larry’s world”. Not so honest as usual.

          4. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            It’s really not “conventional wisdom”, it’s the documented history and Jefferson’s own words he wrote.

            Not Larry World, but actual history written by actual historians and suppressed by those who do not want it told.

            This is the way that history books have been written in the past and basically did not tell the whole truth.

        2. James A. Bacon Avatar
          James A. Bacon

          Don is right, Larry is wrong.

          The text of the ad was 100% accurate. The alumni association never revealed where it was not. The RTD reviewed the amended ad before publication and found nothing inaccurate. The only statement in the ad that might be considered controversial declares that the most comprehensive and authoritative look at the Jefferson-Hemings controversy concluded there was little basis for declaring Jefferson the father of her children. While one might disagree with the Turner Commission’s conclusion, the ad accurately states what the commission found.

          1. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            The AD does not tell the whole story about Jefferson and his complete attitudes about slavery.

            It presents a one-sided view that while accurate in words is not accurate in the complete history.

            This is the good, bad and ugly of history where some do not really want the bad and ugly presented in schools and history books.

            Jefferson’s attitudes about slavery were essentially the forerunner of White Supremacy that was adopted by Jim Crow and became the
            justification for disparate treatment.

            Jefferson himself, in his own words, did not believe blacks could live in peace with whites if they became freemen.

            He advocated that they be returned to Africa.

            this is all in the history.

          2. DJRippert Avatar
            DJRippert

            The whole story of Thomas Jefferson would fill several volumes.

            If a leftist group wanted to take out an ad that said:

            1. Jefferson was an enslaver.
            2. Many believe Jefferson had a long running relationship with his slave Sally Hemmings, starting when she was 14.
            3. Jefferson and John Adams hated each other.

            Would you also reject that ad because it omitted the fact that Jefferson was the author of the Declaration of Independence?

            Personally, I’d accept both ads.

          3. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            Whether an Ad is rejected or not is up to the publication.

            But what ought to be in history books taught in school is NOT just what the Jefferson Council’s version is which really is what history books in the past actually did – they left out relevant and important facts that should be told – i.e. the good, bad and ugly.

            Not a “white-wash” which is what Jefferson Council is doing IMO.

          4. DJRippert Avatar
            DJRippert

            Nobody said the ad was the totality of what should be taught in school. Nobody.

          5. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            Nope. Just like other deceptive ads don’t do that either,

            It’s fair to point that out.

          6. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            They’re promoting it like it is.

            It’s misleading and not the full truth.

          7. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            You know what’s odd and funny? This is Mr. Plantation Elite here basically defending a typical white-wash version of Jefferson.

          8. DJRippert Avatar
            DJRippert

            The Jefferson Council has one perspective. There are others with different perspectives. Why is this hard? The facts are the facts. Jefferson was an enslaver. He also pushed through the Louisiana Purchase. He founded the University of Virginia. In my opinion, he had children with one of his slaves, Sally Hemmings.

          9. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            Not hard. I just don’t care for the whitewash version , the version that for decades was in school textbooks and the fact that Jefferson Council prefers and promotes the whitewash version is telling with respect to the group and their members.

          10. Matt Adams Avatar
            Matt Adams

            Their ad would be false using this statement:

            “3. Jefferson and John Adams hated each other.”

            Jefferson and Adams were friends prior to Adams holding the Presidency and then Jefferson. Before their deaths they reconciled.

          11. DJRippert Avatar
            DJRippert

            Lincoln too …

            https://www.history.com/news/abraham-lincoln-black-resettlement-haiti

          12. James A. Bacon Avatar
            James A. Bacon

            The AD does not tell the whole story about Jefferson and his complete attitudes about slavery.

            I never suggested that the ad told “the whole story,” only that it told the part of the story omitted from the now-conventional narrative and that it was 100% accurate. Of course, in LarryWorld it doesn’t matter what anyone else says, only the misleading meaning that Larry imputes to them.

            It’s nice to know that you now hew to the tell-the-whole-story standard. I expect you’ll be supporting my call to remind Virginians that Jefferson consistently fought the slave trade and the geographic expansion of slavery in the U.S.

          13. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            Jefferson fought the slave trade but he also considered slaves to be inferior and sent back to Africa. He did not think they could live as equal free men.

            that’s the entire history that should be told – not one that leaves this aspect out but still claims to be accurate.

            Jefferson felt the same way about Native Americans and based the westward expansion on Manifest Destiny.

            You can’t get an accurate history if you only tell part of it.

            Should school books only tell the Jefferson Council version?

          14. James A. Bacon Avatar
            James A. Bacon

            Jefferson fought the slave trade but he also considered slaves to be inferior and sent back to Africa. He did not think they could live as equal free men.

            Who’s suppressing this part of the history? No one. Everyone at the Jefferson Council readily acknowledges it. When we dispute the dominant narrative, are we supposed to recite all the pieces of that narrative that we acknowledge? You’re just making stuff up.

          15. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            There is no “dominate narrative”. There is what is in the history books and when you choose to not tell all of it, you are, in fact, engaging in suppressing the whole truth – which is what we have been doing is Va School books in the past and now argue that in telling it, it is “divisive”.

            Ya’ll don’t want to tell the whole truth, You CHOOSE to tell only part of it in your Ads – leaving a false narrative for those that don’t know the entire history,

            No one is making this up except you guys who cannot be honest about Jefferson and prefer a white-wash version.

          16. Cathis398 Avatar
            Cathis398

            it is one of the rare occasions when I agree with JB.

            the editors of the Cav Daily are just some of the college-age and college-related folks who seem to believe, and act and talk as if they believe, that anything good about Jefferson is a lie made up to conceal the “real” truth about him, which is only that he was a slaveholder.

            these students, and some faculty, seem unwilling to confront the complexity of human beings. including their own. they need Jefferson to be evil. some of them talk as if Jefferson was just any other plantation owner and he should be deleted from US history in any context but that one. Never mind that in Jefferson’s original draft of the Declaration, slavery was described as “cruel war against human nature itself,” whose deletion Jefferson later ascribed to Georgia & SC and regretted, https://www.history.com/news/declaration-of-independence-deleted-anti-slavery-clause-jefferson, and that “Throughout his entire life, Thomas Jefferson was publicly a consistent opponent of slavery,” https://www.monticello.org/thomas-jefferson/jefferson-slavery/jefferson-s-attitudes-toward-slavery/, which is somehow dismissed as a dishonest cover story for his personal owning of slaves.

            we need to find ways to understand the good and bad in all of us with much more complexity and nuance.

            people want to reduce the world to heroes and villains. that’s a false and very dangerous way of thinking.

            Jefferson’s personal role as a slave trader and slave owner must be taught, and so should his bizarre (but in many ways typical for major thinkers of his time) views on race. but so should the rest of what he did and said. we would all benefit from wrestling with the difficult truths about human beings that Jefferson exemplifies.

          17. Cathis398 Avatar
            Cathis398

            it is one of the rare occasions when I agree with JB.

            the editors of the Cav Daily are just some of the college-age and college-related folks who seem to believe, and act and talk as if they believe, that anything good about Jefferson is a lie made up to conceal the “real” truth about him, which is only that he was a slaveholder.

            these students, and some faculty, seem unwilling to confront the complexity of human beings. including their own. they need Jefferson to be evil. some of them talk as if Jefferson was just any other plantation owner and he should be deleted from US history in any context but that one. Never mind that in Jefferson’s original draft of the Declaration, slavery was described as “cruel war against human nature itself,” whose deletion Jefferson later ascribed to Georgia & SC and regretted, https://www.history.com/news/declaration-of-independence-deleted-anti-slavery-clause-jefferson, and that “Throughout his entire life, Thomas Jefferson was publicly a consistent opponent of slavery,” https://www.monticello.org/thomas-jefferson/jefferson-slavery/jefferson-s-attitudes-toward-slavery/, which is somehow dismissed as a dishonest cover story for his personal owning of slaves.

            we need to find ways to understand the good and bad in all of us with much more complexity and nuance.

            people want to reduce the world to heroes and villains. that’s a false and very dangerous way of thinking.

            Jefferson’s personal role as a slave trader and slave owner must be taught, and so should his bizarre (but in many ways typical for major thinkers of his time) views on race. but so should the rest of what he did and said. we would all benefit from wrestling with the difficult truths about human beings that Jefferson exemplifies.

          18. walter smith Avatar
            walter smith

            Jim – In the interest of pursuing Hemingway sparseness, and eliminating unnecessary prose, the second half of your first sentence was not necessary. Under well-accepted scientific principles, it is no longer necessary to state as much – it is accepted as fact.
            Larry’s idiotic comments which only portray the DNC talking points, never state the RNC talking points. Therefore (ergo propter hoc), he is being deceptive in all he does, besides being always wrong.

          19. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            Do you consider Monticello the DNC?

          20. walter smith Avatar
            walter smith

            Yes. It sold out to protect Slick Willie. They got something like 10 million for it. And if they were so confident they were right, they would welcome the debate we have asked for…for years. Did I mention the current head of the Monticello Foundation is Melody Barnes, an Obamaite and one of Jim Ryan’s chief hench(wo)men?

          21. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            how about this:

            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/ad1d031cf2e9d2eb7b6d6dda5c65175bc77337f2785cc8bae97cc98e94622a02.jpg

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Jefferson_and_slavery

          22. walter smith Avatar
            walter smith

            What about it Larry? Wikipedia is not accepted by most academics, and is edited by Lefties to accord with the then narrative. Even the founder says it has been ruined. Because people suck. Particularly lying Lefties – but I repeat myself! Have you read the Scholars’ Report?
            The issue isn’t Jefferson and Hemings. The issue is a cudgel to try to destroy the man. Even if he fathered six children with Sally Hemings, which he most likely did not even father one, he is still a giant of world history to be revered.

          23. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            Walter, Wikipedia is a compendium of references, in this case 175 different references

            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/9a5c7322ad712571898f159e3ee683e8bef5dd65f3bef8a1493b6f6e9d102ca3.jpg

            Laying out ALL the facts about Jefferson is NOT about “destroying” him but instead an honest and objective history of the man – the good, bad and ugly.

            A great man who basically helped make the United States what it is, but a flawed man with racist ideas also.

            We actually damage his history when we attempt to white-wash it like the Jefferson Council and the “Scholars” are doing which is what Virginia had been doing in it’s school textbooks for decades.

            Why you guys think this way is beyond me. It’s basically a lie that you believe in and promote when you won’t tell the whole history. Virginia admitted it was a lie and is changing, albeit not easily with folks like Youngkin claiming he wants the good and bad but not if it is a “divisive concept”.

            Ya’ll are going to lose Walter because basically you’re wrong.

            It seems to be how Conservatives think and act sometimes to their own detriment.

          24. walter smith Avatar
            walter smith

            There is a reason your eyes are brown.
            I think the way I think because I do think. I do not parrot the lies du jour from the DNC to be mindlessly repeated. How’d your faith in Fauci work out? Mueller? Is the two tier justice system good or bad? Do you even know what an inherently divisive concept is? Oh, that’s right…it’s not taught and everybody is lying (sounds like a wackadoodle conspiracy theory to me. Oh, wait, I forgot – when you Lying Lefties do it, it is A-OK)

            Meanwhile, as to Wikipedia

            Most criticism of Wikipedia has been directed towards its content, its community of established users, and its processes. Critics have questioned its factual reliability, the readability and organization of the articles, the lack of methodical fact-checking, and its political bias.
            Since the launch of Wikipedia in January 2001, several controversies have occurred. Wikipedia’s open-editing model, under which anyone can edit most articles, has led to various concerns, such as the quality of writing, the amount of vandalism, and the accuracy of information on the project.
            In a blog post in May 2020, Sanger described Wikipedia as “badly biased” and as favoring left-wing and liberal politics. In his opinion, portions of the Donald Trump Wikipedia article are “unrelentingly negative”, while the Barack Obama article “completely fails to mention many well-known scandals”.
            Sanger is one of the founders of Wikipedia.

            Here is some liberal “brilliance”
            Men can have babies
            There are about 100 different sexes
            Math is racist
            All of society is organized as oppressor and oppressed (in case you don’t know, that is an inherently divisive concept, as intended – Marxist in origin, and generally and most divisively applied to all whites are oppressors and all blacks are victims. It is a lie and poison – again, as intended)

          25. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            Walter, do you think public school is “destroying” Jefferson by telling the whole history that the Jefferson Council refuses to do?

            Wikipedia, like other things is not perfect by a long shot but when you have 175 different and unique references, you can read as many as you want to learn as much as you want or you can do what you guys are doing which is using a blind eye and ignore what you don’t want to believe.

            If you are representative of the thinking on the Jefferson Council, methinks you guys are REALLY far right and I do wonder how and why folks like JAB continue to be affiliated with a group that apparently is populated by folks who are heavy into conspiracy theories and anti-govt sentiment.

          26. walter smith Avatar
            walter smith

            Larry – you are a waste of time. You mis-state (lie?) what people believe and you refuse to acknowledge 2+2 = 4.
            A cement wall at least gives an echo. You just mindlessly repeat your same old, same old, and often wrong assertions.
            Meanwhile, you say TJC needs to say all about TJ, when you never do state all the reasons you are wrong…about everything! Like Covid, CLIMATE!, SCIENCE!, RUSSIA! ad infinitum
            Physician heal thyself!

          27. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Yes, yes he does.

    2. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      Well, either Jefferson fathered the Hemings progeny, or a close relative, like a brother, did.

      1) Jefferson raped a 16-year old slave girl, or
      2) lent her out on a cold night so his relative could.

    3. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      Well, either Jefferson fathered the Hemings progeny, or a close relative, like a brother, did.

      1) Jefferson raped a 16-year old slave girl, or
      2) lent her out on a cold night so his relative could.

  3. M. Purdy Avatar
    M. Purdy

    Why again are we attacking President Ryan? Because he failed the Jefferson Council’s purity litmus test that says we can’t acknowledge Jefferson’s hypocrisy, deep moral flaws, and affair with Sally Hemmings while also stating that he was an outright genius and inspiration? Can’t imagine why anyone in Charlottesville thinks that might be an extreme position…

    1. James A. Bacon Avatar
      James A. Bacon

      I’ve yet to hear Ryan make a public statement that was favorable to Jefferson. Saying that he will not allow the statue to be torn down is hardly an endorsement of Jefferson’s genius. That’s fine if you’re a student or faculty member, but when you’re entrusted with managing the brand of the 3rd top public university in the country — founded by Jefferson — yeah, I think you need to do more than Ryan has done.

      1. M. Purdy Avatar
        M. Purdy

        He’s praised his brilliance, and expressed his admiration for setting the lofty animating principles of our country and the university itself. Should he be more effusive? Should he not mention the whole “slavery thing” or acknowledge that it is very, very, very likely he had children with sally hemmings? (Also, it’s the 3rd ranked public school in the nation, not state.)

        1. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          Purdy’s World – coming up…. 😉

        2. Nancy Naive Avatar
          Nancy Naive

          JAB needs to hear it explicitly that Ryan worships TJ as much as he.

          1. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            and without referring to the unpleasant stuff….

            JAB “likes” the white-wash version.

          2. Nancy Naive Avatar
            Nancy Naive

            Wash is redundant.

        3. Nancy Naive Avatar
          Nancy Naive

          “Should he not mention the whole “slavery thing” or acknowledge that it is very, very, very likely he had children with sally hemmings(sic)?”

          Sally Hemings. Please correct. Some might assume you might think slave names, while not recorded in census records, are not even worthy of being capitalized. Not me, mind you, but certain others…

          This problem is solvable. Open the box, pop a tooth and silence forever the white supremacist, Southern slavery apologists on this matter.

        4. Nancy Naive Avatar
          Nancy Naive

          “Should he not mention the whole “slavery thing” or acknowledge that it is very, very, very likely he had children with sally hemmings(sic)?”

          Sally Hemings. Please correct. Some might assume you might think slave names, while not recorded in census records, are not even worthy of being capitalized. Not me, mind you, but certain others…

          This problem is solvable. Open the box, pop a tooth and silence forever the white supremacist, Southern slavery apologists on this matter.

          1. M. Purdy Avatar
            M. Purdy

            I’d be fine with doing the DNA test with old Jeff, but it’s really up to the folks at Monticello and his relatives. And obviously, intellectually honest people would admit the truth, one way or the other;-). What’s funny about the whole veneration thing at both of my alma maters is how differently they’ve chosen to handle them. UVa is genuinely contextualizing, getting rid of Confederate stuff, admitting the role of slavery in the founding of the university, and openly discussing its founder’s shortcoming. VMI, on the other hand, is having a tough time coming to terms with its history, even with the well-intentioned crew running the place now (though admittedly, its situation is significantly more difficult given how intertwined it is with the Confed.). Many VMI alums are demanding no apologies, mythological purity, and absolute resistance to change, and they’re often given a forum on this site.Which approach is more is a more intellectually honest and durable long-term strategy? A purity test or coming to terms with one’s past?

          2. M. Purdy Avatar
            M. Purdy

            I’d be fine with doing the DNA test with old Jeff, but it’s really up to the folks at Monticello and his relatives. And obviously, intellectually honest people would admit the truth, one way or the other;-). What’s funny about the whole veneration thing at both of my alma maters is how differently they’ve chosen to handle them. UVa is genuinely contextualizing, getting rid of Confederate stuff, admitting the role of slavery in the founding of the university, and openly discussing its founder’s shortcoming. VMI, on the other hand, is having a tough time coming to terms with its history, even with the well-intentioned crew running the place now (though admittedly, its situation is significantly more difficult given how intertwined it is with the Confed.). Many VMI alums are demanding no apologies, mythological purity, and absolute resistance to change, and they’re often given a forum on this site.Which approach is more is a more intellectually honest and durable long-term strategy? A purity test or coming to terms with one’s past?

      2. James A. Bacon Avatar
        James A. Bacon

        Correction made. Top three in the country.

      3. Nancy Naive Avatar
        Nancy Naive

        You really need to learn to win gracefully.

    2. Nancy Naive Avatar
      Nancy Naive

      Ryan spoke…

      “We are a University founded by Thomas Jefferson, and honoring his legacy and his contributions to our nation has, and will always be, an indelible part of what it means to live, learn and work here,” Clement said. “That is the policy and the position of this institution and it will not change under our leadership or that of President [Jim] Ryan or his team.”

      The rector has said. Ryan has not corrected, nor had Clement walk back the comment. Thus, this is the position of the administration.

      1. James A. Bacon Avatar
        James A. Bacon

        You don’t find it a little bit curious that Ryan himself has not spoken out — that Clement and the UVa communications department have to recycle a quote from two years ago. Ryan was sitting right there next to Clement. He couldn’t have added a few words? It is clear to me that he is trying to thread a needle between conservative alumni and his woke internal constituencies by saying nothing.

        1. Nancy Naive Avatar
          Nancy Naive

          Why would he? You have shown him that he is a target of the reactionary Right and the Church of St. Jefferson. Why take a chance your ilk will use the archaic form of one of his words as fodder?

          “It is clear to me that he is trying to thread a needle between conservative alumni and his woke internal constituencies by saying nothing.”

          What more proof is needed of my conjecture than you have just assigned nefarious motive to silence? Imagine if he had actually uttered a word.

          How does one answer the TJC’s equivalent of “Does this dress make my butt look big?”

          1. walter smith Avatar
            walter smith

            Why would he and why should he are two different things.
            Why would he? He is a quisling, but quite effective Marxist, and defending Jefferson would alienate his fellow radicals and end his dream of being President of an Ivy (after destroying UVA first).
            Why should he? It is in his job description; it is true (which is why they won’t have an honest debate); and he is paid about $1.4 million a year (salary, bonus, deferred comp, accrued sabbatical, benefits).

            Clear enough?

        2. Nancy Naive Avatar
          Nancy Naive

          Why would he? You have shown him that he is a target of the reactionary Right and the Church of St. Jefferson. Why take a chance your ilk will use the archaic form of one of his words as fodder?

          “It is clear to me that he is trying to thread a needle between conservative alumni and his woke internal constituencies by saying nothing.”

          What more proof is needed of my conjecture than you have just assigned nefarious motive to silence? Imagine if he had actually uttered a word.

          How does one answer the TJC’s equivalent of “Does this dress make my butt look big?”

        3. Nancy Naive Avatar
          Nancy Naive

          Why would he? You have shown him that he is a target of the reactionary Right and the Church of St. Jefferson. Why take a chance your ilk will use the archaic form of one of his words as fodder?

          “It is clear to me that he is trying to thread a needle between conservative alumni and his woke internal constituencies by saying nothing.”

          What more proof is needed of my conjecture than you have just assigned nefarious motive to silence? Imagine if he had actually uttered a word.

          How does one answer the TJC’s equivalent of “Does this dress make my butt look big?”

  4. Nancy Naive Avatar
    Nancy Naive

    Pick one…
    https://www.monticello.org/research-education/thomas-jefferson-encyclopedia/horses/
    and JAB can whomp it some more.

Leave a Reply

Read More