I’ve often wondered if Dr. Mike Adams is simply a needy provocateur, lighting up a string of fizzling rhetorical firecrackers in a bi-weekly bid for attention; or if his bold, assertive lack of empathy is sincere, and he’s just an unusually bald-faced sociopath. Well, in today’s column, Dr. Mike betrays a previously unsuspected vulnerability, and I’ve finally realized that despite all his crass, insulting bluster, he actually is capable of feeling a deep, and deeply moving, pity for himself. Yes, Dr. Mike is going through a change of life, and he’d really appreciate it if we’d drop everything while he makes an important — even historic — announcement.
As you are surfing the Internet this morning, I am in a car driving west somewhere between the Appalachian and Rocky Mountains.
Dr. Mike is keeping his location vague to throw off Obama’s Predator drones.
The particular column you are reading right now is the 639th I have written since I became a columnist for Townhall in September of 2003.
Really? It feels like more.
It will also be my last.
Well, this is something of a shock, especially for us. World O’ Crap was established one month before Townhall handed Dr. Mike a byline, and s.z. discovered his unique voice no more than a month or two later. In the interim I’ve waded through scores of his columns, first as a devotee of Wo’C, and later as a contributor; in fact, I doubt his fans have followed his work as closely as we have, and I think we’re owed an explanation!
My first column for Townhall was called “NAMBLA: Coming to a Campus Near You.”
Actually, you know what? I’m good. Best of luck, Dr. Mike!
In that column, I argued that the diversity movement had gained such momentum – ironically, from not being subjected to competing ideas –
How are you ever going to learn to think for yourself if you’re not willing to stand up for uniformity?
– that it would not be long before pedophilia was accepted and actively promoted on our nation’s campuses – all in the name of “tolerance” and “diversity.” That time has now arrived.
I’m not certain how Dr. Mike knows this, but I’m pretty sure that by crossing state lines he’s compounding the felony.
My most recent column included a revealing email exchange with a university administrator.
That would be this column, “How to Win Friends and Manipulate Hypocrites,” in which Dr. Mike wrote to the “Advisor of the LGBTQIA Office at a university we will call The University of No Civility Whatsoever (UNCW). Her name has been changed to protect her from the consequences of her own poor decisions.” Poor decisions such as being willfully, stubbornly gay, even in the presence of a studly Associate Professor of Criminology.
Dear Jane Doe: I am interested to know how the speech “Gay, lesbian, and queer individuals with a Christian upbringing: Exploring the process of resolving conflict between sexual identity and religious beliefs” will handle such an obvious conflict between Christianity and homosexuality.
On [sic] must either a) turn away from the sin of homosexuality or b) commit the additional sin of altering the scriptures to justify one’s own sinful conduct.
Which alternative will your speaker recommend?
Dr. Mike’s colleague doesn’t care to answer his pop quiz, and reminds him that the last time they corresponded, he surprised her by publishing her emails. She closes with a quote: “People pay for what they do, and still more, for what they have allowed themselves to become. And they pay for it simply: by the lives they live.”-James Baldwin.
But Dr. Mike will not be ignored. Nor will he have fancy-talkin’ Negroes thrown in his face — especially ones he’s never heard of.
I would like to request that the UNCW LGBTQIA Office extend an invitation to Mike Haley, a former homosexual, to come give a speech at UNCW. Mike would be able to provide some balance to what your center intends to do; namely to lead people into a lifestyle that is bad for their physical and emotional well-being.
Will you consider hosting Mike or will you only host people who are going to promote homosexuality?
I am not a follower of James Baldwin but I do believe it is unethical to withhold information, which could lead people out of the trap of homosexuality that ruins so many promising young lives.
Mike’s colleague says 1) She won’t speak for the lecturer, 2) If he’s so interested he can buy a ticket, 3) She’s never heard of ex-gay Mike Haley, and 4) Dr. Mike is perfectly free to sponsor the guy himself. Her response is not well-received:
You are refusing to host or sponsor a speech by Mike Haley because you believe we have enough ideological balance on the issue of homosexuality here at UNCW.
Please respond in writing.
And later:
Jane, you have simply lied when you have stated that you know don’t know Mike Haley other than what I say about him. Previously, you claimed a familiarity with my oeuvre and I have discussed Mike in a previous column
You know, I claim a familiarity with Dr. Mike’s oeuvre, and I’d be hard pressed to pick the Mike Haley column out of six hundred and thirty-eight other pieces that are so alike in tone and subject matter that they’re less essays, and more a form of repetitive motion injury.
Anyway, the Unpromoted Professor closes by writing himself a letter of recommendation (“My tactic of exposing lying public officials in order to expand the marketplace of ideas is very effective. That is why my columns are the height of ethical discourse”), then threatens to harass her again next week.
Careless readers of that column considered it to be somewhat mundane and unenlightening – perhaps even petty.
Because, if nothing else, Dr. Mike’s work is remarkably consistent.
The more careful readers noticed that, in one of the administrator’s emails, she included a quote by James Baldwin, which said “If you fall in love with a boy, you fall in love with a boy. The fact that many Americans consider it a disease says more about them than it does about homosexuality.”
Of course, when Baldwin made that statement he was not a “boy.” He was a grown man suggesting that pedophilia is not a disease but, instead, that opposition to pedophilia is a disease. I disagree.
Says the teacher who married one of his own students.
That’s why I’m a follower of Jesus, rather than a follower of Baldwin or Muhammad.
And that’s why Jesus is always looking nervously over his shoulder, and frequently changing cabs.
In several hundred nationally published columns Mike Adams said: “The University of North Carolina does not protect free speech.”
In response, the university said: “You don’t have a right to say that.”
And, sadly, the court agreed saying that because I mentioned my column in my promotion application, it was now a part of my “official duties.” And that means the First Amendment no longer prevents the university from discriminating against me for my beliefs.
For those who may be tuning in late, let me quote a very clear and concise explanation of Dr. Mike’s failed lawsuit against his own university, written by a commenter Jeffrey Kramer at Whiskey Fire:
1) Adams presented [his Townhall] columns as evidence of his “research,” i.e. as fulfillment of one of the requirements for promotion to full professor.
2) The faculty said that these columns were not scholarship, and didn’t serve Adams’s case.
3) Adams then said that when the university rejected his application, it showed they were engaged in viewpoint discrimination (because they didn’t like the conservative views expressed in the columns).
4) The judge said that according to the law, you can only sue for viewpoint discrimination if the views expressed are not part of your job. (So, for example, if you are a speechwriter for a liberal Democrat and you’re fired because you keep on writing speeches which express conservative Republican principles, you have no discrimination case.) But Adams was plainly asserting that he did regard those columns as part of his university work, since he was presenting them as evidence of how well he was performing his university-mandated research duties!
5) The judge went on to say (my non-lawyerly translation from legalese follows) that Adams was guilty of first degree chutzpah for trying first to say “I want you to evaluate these opinion columns as evidence of my scholarship” and then, when the work was negatively evaluated, turning around and saying “how dare you judge me on the basis of these opinion columns; that’s viewpoint discrimination!”
It seems that Dr. Mike — by turning out hundreds of fact-free, wingnutty screeds, while failing to write any scholarly works in his field — has managed to both publish and perish. But like his native South, he vows to Rise Again!
My attorneys at the Alliance Defense Fund have appealed the case to the 4th Circuit. And we’ll go to the Supreme Court if we lose there.
“I’ll never succumb! I’ll never surrender! In the meantime, I better quit my column.” But Dr. Mike wants you to know that he would’ve got away with his plan to pass off warmed over FoxNews talking points and tongue-lashings administered to imaginary lesbians as original scholarship, if it hadn’t been for those meddlin’ pedophiles!
Of course, I don’t have to tell you that the Faculty Senate has remained silent on the issue of my pending appeal. They’ll never say my columns are protected free speech unless they start featuring pictures of naked little girls. But I can’t bring myself to provide comfort and pleasure to pedophiles. Call me old fashioned.
Well, it’s about the only thing I haven’t called you.
And, since this column is not protected by the First Amendment, I must bid you farewell.
Good night, sweet prince. And a flight of douchebags sing thee to thy rest.