Protests support student’s suspension

By
Posted: Wednesday, March 14th, 2012 at 12:29 am | Last Updated: Thursday, March 15th, 2012 at 7:36 pm
View Comments Comments Print This Article Print This Email This Article Email This Tweet This Article Tweet This Add This Article to Delicious Delicious

The fire is still burning in the aftermath of the suspension of a 56-year-old student from Oakland University.

A feminist group on campus, Students Advocating for Gender Awareness, and history fraternity, Phi Alpha Theta, have collaborated to protest what they said is an “inaccurate representation of the facts from the media.”

They gathered signatures from students for a petition and wrote a letter to President Gary Russi and Dean of Students, Glenn McIntosh.

 

Supporting the University

Vanessa Vojinov, a member of SAGA, said the purpose of the letter was to show support for the university’s decision to suspend the student and the petition is to raise awareness of what actually occurred.

“Phi Alpha Theta decided that they were going to have a letter to the president saying that they supported his decision and they wanted all the student organizations to sign it,” Vojinov said. “(SAGA) decided that student organizations weren’t big enough. (SAGA) wanted it like an outcry against sexual harassment from the student body itself.”

SAGA began tabling March 5, gathering signatures from students for a petition that they will eventually submit Russi and McIntosh. As of March 12, they had 633 signatures.

“This (petition) is more focused on recognizing that it is sexual harassment and the (Phi Alpha Theta collaborative letter) is more focused on the OU policy to suspend (the student),”Alex Allen, SAGA president, said.

 

Challenging the media

Allen said the key to the problem isn’t a free speech issue, but a sexual harassment issue.

“We really wanted to challenge a lot of the media … and the way that they are framing it as a free speech issue,” Allen said. “A lot of the headlines were like ‘OU student suspended for journal’ without really referencing what was in the journal, that the teacher was affected by it or that it was sexual harassment.”

OU did not charge the student, Joseph Corlett, with sexual harassment, according to documents released by the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, a non-profit educational foundation based in Philadelphia. The student was charged with intimidation, violating ordinance 6.02, unlawful individual activities, of the University Ordinances and Regulations due to the content in an assignment in his Advanced Critical Writing course, which he described his sexual attraction to his instructor.

For SAGA, the student didn’t just commit intimidation, he committed sexual harassment as well.

“Sexual harassment is a form of sex discrimination, which is illegal under title seven of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,” Allen said. “(In this case) it would be that Joseph Corlett’s journal entries were unwanted sexual attention.”

According to Allen, sexual harassment is more than physical harassment or what culture perceives as something that is of a sexual nature.

“The intention is less important than the effect it has on the person,” she said. “It is less important that Mr. Corlett thought that what he was doing is ok and more important that the professor was uncomfortable with it.”

 

Student challenges protests

The student’s attorney, Brian P. Vincent, said the student did not commit sexual harassment.

“In terms of their protest, Joe’s speech, with respect to the charge in this matter, was entirely protected,” Vincent said. “We take issue with their assertion that Joe’s conduct has in some way violated the university’s own sexual harassment misconduct or the law.”

Corlett said the definition of sexual harassment, according to the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights, shows that what he wrote does not fit the definition. He said the director of OU’s Office of Inclusion and Intercultural Initiatives, Joi Cunnigham,  said his work did not violate the OU’s policies during his hearing.

“(The Director) explained to the hearing committee that my daybook did not meet the definition of sexual harassment or intimidation according to (the Office of Civil Rights), with which OU must comply, according title nine,” Corlett said.

Cunnigham could not be reached by press time for comment.

Vincent said there were “procedural errors” that also occurred, which he didn’t specify, but he said that it is federal law that universities that accept federal funds comply with title nine, also known as the Mink Equal Opportunity in Education Act.

Recently, OU denied Corlett’s appeal to have Corlett reinstated, according to Vincent, but he said they will continue to stay with the case.

“The point is that popularity or majority rule or petition signing has absolutely nothing to do with the first amendment,” Corlett said. “It’s absolutely irrelevant to the first amendment. In fact, only when those among us have the least popular speech protect will the rest of us have protection.”

OU officials are still unable to comment on the matter.

To read OU’s sexual harassment policy for students visit http://bit.ly/A1L7pW and for faculty http://bit.ly/xTXmm1 

 

Contact Assistant Campus Editor Jordan Gonzalez at jrgonzal@oakland.edu

 

 

  • Anonymous

    I’m a strong supporter against sexual harassment. But I saw these girls at the OC and they asked me to sign their petition about sexual harassment, they did not clue me into any details and I felt I was manipulated into signing their form and hope they did not do this to others.

  • S. Minnix

    Well..here we go again.

    What are the odds that this forum thread will stay quiet?

    Someone want to give me 100-1 that it won’t?

    Let’s hope it stays civil.

  • Joseph Corlett

    “We really wanted to challenge a lot of the media … and the way that they are framing it as a free speech issue,” Allen said. “A lot of the headlines were like ‘OU student suspended for journal’ without really referencing what was in the journal, that the teacher was affected by it or that it was sexual harassment.”

    Ms. Allen apparently missed the first FIRE press release which has the Daybook in full and the subsequent international quoting of same. So much for “really referencing”. Perhaps Ms. Allen knows the definition of sexual harassment better than OU’s Diversity Director and attorney, Ms. Joi Cunningham , who testified at my hearing that the Daybook did not meet the standard for sexual harassment as defined by the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights with which OU must comport as a Title IX school.

    “OU did not charge the student, Joseph Corlett, with sexual harassment, according to documents released by the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, a non-profit educational foundation based in Philadelphia. The student was charged with intimidation, violating ordinance 6.02, unlawful individual activities, of the University Ordinances and Regulations due to the content in an assignment in his Advanced Critical Writing course, which he described his sexual attraction to his instructor.”

    This paragraph is contradictory. This is OU ordinance 6.02:

    #6.02 – Unlawful Individual Activities
    “No person shall engage in any activity, individually or in concert with others, which causes or constitutes a disturbance, noise, riot, obstruction or disruption that obstructs or interferes with the free movement of persons about the campus or which interferes with the free, normal, and uninterrupted use of the campus for educational programs, business activities and related residential, food service and recreational activities, nor shall any person in any way intimidate, harass, threaten or assault any person engaged in lawful activities on campus.”

    When you are charged with violating 6.02, you are automatically charged with intimidation and (sexual) harassment. It’s the great catch-all ordinance designed to nab all the folks the administration doesn’t like and is probably unconstitutionally vague. At least Joi Cunningham couldn’t answer when I asked her at my hearing how a student could avoid violating 6.02. If the University’s own attorney can’t say how to avoid breaking the rules, how is a student supposed to know?

    According to Ms. Allen ““The intention is less important than the effect it has on the person,” she said. “It is less important that Mr. Corlett thought that what he was doing is ok and more important that the professor was uncomfortable with it.”

    This is the epitome of political correctness and is completely refuted by OU’s sexual harassment policies and flies in the face of the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights Dear Colleague letter of July 28, 2003, fourth paragraph, second sentence “Harassment, however, to be prohibited by the statutes within OCR’s jurisdiction, must include something beyond the mere expression of views, words, symbols or thoughts that some person finds offensive.” http://thefire.org/article/5046.html
    As long as OU accepts federal student loans, it must accept the guidelines of the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights.

    I suggest Mr. Gonzales read his stories aloud before publishing them in the paper. He forgot a “to” between “submit” and “Russi” and the following sentence makes no sense: “The student’s attorney, Brian P. Vincent, that the student committed sexual harassment.” According to the 2010 AP Stylebook, required for my Journalism class, “title nine” should be written as “Title IX” (p. 249) “Protect” should be “protected” in my last quote. Let’s hope the Oakland Post devotes more time to fair and balanced reporting and editorial writing than they do to proofreading.

  • DiegoXoto

    OMFG, don’t these feminists know that in this case a sexual harassment issue and a free speech issue is the same. You can’t call those stories sexual harassment because not everyone views sexual harassment in the same way and some people like what others would call sexual harassment. I am a strong supporter for female rights but in this case it was not sexual harassment. the idea that someone or an entire university can limit the free speech Americans are guaranteed, in a creative writing class no less, is the true harassment.

  • M. Scott

    S Minnix, I’m sure we could do without your commentary on the comments this time around.

  • Jorge Rodrigez

    To Mr. Corlett:

    In case you didn’t know this, no one ever publishes their story with it being read by basically all of the staff, so don’t blame any one person.

    Second, if you are so interested in AP errors as silly as “title IX” being spelled as “title nine” (which has nothing to do with free speech, by the way), then you might be interested in knowing that you spelled “Mr. Gonzales” incorrectly. The correct spelling of his name is “Mr. Gonzalez” with a Z.

    Misspelling someone’s name is one of the biggest errors you can do in Journalism. Just saying.

  • We are watching you, Kowboy

    So sue ‘em, Corlett.

    Your cut and paste rants are meaningless and tiresome.

  • S. Minnix

    To M. Scott:

    I am permitted to whatever commentary I wish. I will tell you what I was told by someone else. Shush.

    It’s not about me, you, or the comments. It’s about the situation at hand. I thought Jordan did a great job again, I only wish maybe more questions would have been asked to SAGA, such as if they felt the suspension was just enough, or if not, what would they have liked to see happen?

    This will be the last time I make my presence known on the subject, unless my name is brought in again.

    Mr. Corlett,

    Stop trying to pick on The Post. What you don’t realize is even the people who were supporting you are starting to turn around and run because you won’t be quiet about it. The police give you a right to remain silent when you commit a crime. Do yourself a favor and heed those words right now. Save it for the judge and the court system.

    I still think the three-semester ban was harsh. At the same time, your actions can be questioned severely. For example, the made-up note from the professor. Why? Why would you do this? Did this do any good for your case? That’s the one thing I have the hardest time figuring out. It’s almost like talking to an imaginary friend.

    It did nothing to further your case that’s for sure. I don’t know how Mr. Vincent is going to deflect that in a court of law, but it’s going to be extremely difficult.

    I would just let it go. Don’t say anything else. Let the courts decide your fate.

    The best thing to do for all of us is to get away from this thing. Let’s get back to making Oakland University a better place for everyone, and not on media scandals and lawsuits!

  • Justin C.

    Mr. Corlett,

    I am a copy editor for The Oakland Post. In this message, I speak on behalf of myself and not the student-newspaper when I say thank you for pointing out these errors. I am merely a neophyte journalist who is learning as I go along, so any errors that you point out help me, so I thank you.

    However, there is a great deal of irony when you call me out for grammatical errors, because when looking at your message, there are more errors in that than there are in the article. First and foremost, you capitalized “u” in “university” in the middle of a sentence. You do not do that unless you mention the entire university’s name (i.e. Oakland University, University of Michigan, etc.) or if “university” is the word that starts the sentence. The second error that I noticed was that you placed a period outside of the quotation marks. The only exception to placing a period after the quotation mark is if there is a parentheses mark that follows the quotation (i.e. “like this”). Third, you failed to use the quotation marks properly. You do not use the quotation mark twice at the same place when quoting some one. You use the quotation mark once and then use an apostrophe to denote that someone is speaking within a quote (i.e. “…and he said, ‘I do not like making an ass out of myself, but sometimes it is required to get the message straight’”). Also, when you make mention of someone saying something, you put a comma before the quotation mark. Fourth, you missed placing a lot of commas to give the reader a chance to breathe. Fifth, you fail to use a colon to separate your own words from the Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights Dear Colleague. Not only that, but you failed to place quotation marks around “Dear Colleague.” Sixth and most important is that you misspelled the reporter’s last name. That right there is a sin in journalism, to misspell the person’s name. Seventh, you capitalize the “j” in journalism. As mentioned before, you do not need to capitalize letters in the middle of the sentence. Perhaps the greatest irony is that you’ve taken a journalism class and actually used the “AP Stylebook” to correct me, but you failed to correct your own errors, showing that even you can’t always be right. So before you go talking about other people making errors, you should check your own message for errors.

    Once again, I thank you for finding those errors, and assure you and the students at Oakland University that even journalists, whether a neophyte or an expert, are expected to make errors, as nobody is perfect.

  • Spencer Linter

    If this was Facebook, that post would have 200 likes right now^^

  • Jorge Rodrigez

    One more thing, Mr. Corlett:

    Ordinance 6.02 never mentions the word “sex,” “sexual” or “sexually” in it. So Mr. GonzaleZZZZZZ’s article had no “contradictory paragraphs.”

    You can violate ordinance 6.02 without committing sexual harassment. Since you weren’t even charged with that, why you would say you would say “when you are charged with violating 6.02, you are automatically charged with intimidation and (sexual) harassment” is beyond me.

    But who am I to criticize. It is not like I know anything about the details about this. I am just a casual observer.

    Goodnight and good luck. I am done with debating this.

  • Joseph Corlett

    Justin:

    Fair enough, but did I have any sentences that didn’t make sense?

  • Joseph Corlett

    “The best thing to do for all of us is to get away from this thing. Let’s get back to making Oakland University a better place for everyone, and not on media scandals and lawsuits!”

    S. Minnix:

    I agree. Oakland University is the best place when male students know that their good faith efforts at completing their assignments, following the class syllabus, and repeatedly asking for instruction will be met with guidance instead of suspension.

    I continue to hope that the OU adminstration comes to its senses. I can’t believe every one of their attorneys were all absent the day law school covered the Bill of Rights, but I guess stranger things have happened. They are about to pay some serious tuition for that ignorance. Excuse me, Michigan taxpayers and OU students are about to pay for that ignorance.

  • We are watching you, Kowboy

    “Michigan taxpayers and OU students are about to pay for that ignorance.”

    So what’s going to be tough guy?

    Gonna dip into Grampa Lloyd’s inheritance and put up some cash to sue?

    Bring it on, loser.

  • Sue Danimm

    OK, Joe, I’ll bite. Do you really want us to believe that your efforts in this class were “good faith”? Really? So where was that “good faith” when you announced your intentions for your daybook early in the semester to two other women in the class? And where was that “good faith” when they told you clearly and in no uncertain terms that they thought that it would be a VERY BAD idea, that it would make the professor VERY UNCOMFORTABLE and that, in fact, your plans to document your erotic musings were so far outside the goals of the assignment that it didn’t even address the daybook assignment itself? Maybe that’s why your question to the professor was “Is any topic off limits?” rather than, “Is it ok to document my sexual fantasies about you and your colleagues?” Good faith, indeed.

    What exactly were you hoping to learn about critical writing when you eroticized a pregnant woman? How did you think it would assist your analytical skills to announce that while you sleep in the nude, you never feel naked because you always have your gun at hand? In your hostile and aggressive (and also sexualized) letter to the student who wouldn’t take your unwanted phone call, was there some underlying grammatical issue at work? And when you meditated on the panties worn by your OCC professor, is it possible that your real motivation was to work out some problem with syntax?

    I doubt it. All of the evidence suggests that you’d been trolling for this all along, that you set up the University, that you set up the professor, and that you’ve never shown any “good faith” interest in education.

    The larger message from OU to you is clear, Joe: we don’t want you here. Go away. Stay away from here, Joe, and don’t come back.

  • Javontae Jones

    Is there anywhere where i can see the full writings.

  • Chuck-E-Cheese

    Hey Javontae! Yes, you can read his notebook here: http://thefire.org/article/14153.html

  • Sue Danimm

    And here is the link to a letter written to Corlett by Mary Beth Snyder explaining that her office had been receiving complaints about his behavior for a full year prior to the ENG 380 incident. The people at FIRE tend to hide or bury this piece of information, because it reveals their dishonesty in (mis)representing this as a case of free speech:

    http://thefire.org/public/pdfs/69810e07fbbdf6f984bc80eb6b7d7c9e.pdf?direct

    Also, by the by, you’ll note how they black out his contact info, in order to protect his privacy, a courtesy that was never extended to his professor, who has been named repeatedly and thereby exposed to all sorts of public abuse. There were some especially nice little gems over at the “Reason” magazine blog yesterday, a column appropriately named, “Hit and Run.”

  • M. Scott

    Javontae:
    Here’s a better link where his “daybook” is transcribed for easier reading:
    http://jezebel.com/5885677/the-creepy-hot-for-teacher-essays-that-got-a-student-kicked-off-campus?tag=college

  • Joseph Corlett

    Ms. Danimm:

    My musings at this site have been seriously curtailed by my attorney as we approach litigation, but your mischaracterizations are so blatant and egregious I’ll risk his wrath with a response.

    I’m experienced enough a writer to know which criticism to take and which to disregard. When classmates who have placed 1st, 2nd, or 3rd in the OCC Student Essay Contest give advice, I will be more inclined to follow it. I took 4th place in 2009-2010 out of nearly a thousand entries. Ironically, that essay was about my attraction to a woman. Good thing the women in English 380 weren’t classmates 3 years ago, huh? http://www.oaklandcc.edu/essay/Docs/essays_10/Joseph%20Corlett%20-%20Edited%20Essay.pdf

    “Maybe that’s why your question to the professor was “Is any topic off limits?” rather than, “Is it ok to document my sexual fantasies about you and your colleagues?”

    There is not a single sexual fantasy of mine in the Daybook. Anyone who says otherwise is a liar.

    “Dr. Spearman has dark hair and eyes and occasionally rests her hand across her pregnant belly. However, it is her relentless teaching style I find irresistible. I’ve heard sled dogs will run themselves to an exhaustive death without countenancing by their musher. Wiping the sweat from her brow, Dr. Spearman would teach until she dropped were it not for the requisite break. She is hot and not just from the bun in her oven. (Too cliché?) When we’re alone after class, I politely told her I love her style. She admits to loving her job and appreciates my noticing.”

    In the above quote from my Daybook, I pay homage to one of the most dedicated and inspiring instructors at Oakland University and you characterize it as “eroticiz(ing) a pregnant woman”? Are you kidding me? What part of “teaching style” do you not understand? Again, in supreme irony, Dr. Spearman assigned Robert Barthelme’s “Me and Miss Mandible”, the story of a student having sexual relations with his instructor, in her Fiction 303 class. So it’s fine to study and read about having sex with a teacher at OU, but writing factually that one is merely attractive will get you suspended? Apparently so.

    “The larger message from OU to you is clear, Joe: we don’t want you here. Go away. Stay away from here, Joe, and don’t come back.”

    As long as the state of Michigan continues to take a hundred bucks a week or so from me and my wife in state taxes, Oakland University, a public institution, will continue to accept us as students, whether our ideas are politically correct or not. You, Ms. Mitzelfeld, and every other American have no Constitutional right to not be offended. Get used to it.

  • We are watching you, Kowboy

    Corlett -

    You go, girl!!

    Cough up some Grampa Lloyd cash and sue, sue, sue!!

    Nobody has a Constitutional right to not be offended! That’s for sure, Kowboy!

    Too bad you were booted for a year-long pattern of intimidating and threatening behavior!!!

    This case is not about freedom of speech; rather is about behavior, including speech that is intimidating. Your extraordinarily lame “PR campaign” orchestrated by hack lawyers at FIRE served no purpose to change either opinion nor facts of the matter.

    In the end, you have been hustled by FIRE for their own publicity, leaving you with nothing other than the animus of people far and wide, thanks to the internet. You have been chumped!

    No wonder your dream “team” of a crack (2 years experience) lawyer want to curtail your “musings.” Your entire internet existence indicates an aggressive, intimidating douchebag. Your latest post continues your exemplary record. What a client!!!!

    No wonder the ACLU has rejected you as meritless!

    So fight, fight, fight! Posture, posture, flail away!!

    It will change nothing. Nothing about this matter. Nothing about your admission to OU.

    Nothing about your wretched existence.

  • Sue Danimm

    Well I certainly hope your lawyer doesn’t read THAT post, Joe, because you admit to the fact that you were warned ahead of time that your writing would be harassing and intimidating, and yet you ignored those warnings and went ahead and did it anyway. That’s a pretty incriminating admission.

    Do you really not see the difference between writing your sexual musings about a painting versus writing your sexual musings about an actual specific person? The very person who will read them? Do you really not see that the statement “she is hot” is a way of eroticizing a person?

    Paying taxes doesn’t entitle you to admission at OU, Joe. Admission is contingent on your willingness to accept and follow some basic rules of behavior, the basis of any civil society. Get used to it.

  • We are watching you, Kowboy

    “I’m experienced enough a writer to know which criticism to take and which to disregard.”

    I’m not an experienced writer, but I know that this sentence is poorly constructed. Disregard, if you wish.

    “When classmates who have placed 1st, 2nd, or 3rd in the OCC Student Essay Contest give advice, I will be more inclined to follow it. I took 4th place in 2009-2010 out of nearly a thousand entries.”

    Wait a minute – you are actually bragging about an honorable mention in a community college contest? Wow. No wonder you have such expertise as to the legal merits of your case! Did you win “Most Improved” in Little League?

    “There is not a single sexual fantasy of mine in the Daybook.”

    Good grief. The *entire* thing is a fantasy about your teacher. Not only that, you “fantasized” that you were caught and repremanded.

    Oh, that was “just riffing,” right? Yes, that was more of your fantasy.

    What an idiot. Your entire life is a fantasy.

    Keep it up, Corlett. Reality has caught up with you, and you are lucky that the price you have paid to date is only a suspension.

    .

  • Not Lolita

    Kowboy – “…but writing factually that one is merely attractive will get you suspended? Apparently so.”

    Vanna White sells more than vowels; see if she can set you up with a clue next time you head out to the Carolina coast [assuming an invitation is offered and your ankle bracelet allows of course]. After years of peddling “fear” following being hooked on it yourself, why the F would you think others are not susceptible to the same poli-marketing? Are you that ignorant? Oh, wait… I see my error holstered in the small of your back; strapped to your ankle; shouldered, rubbing your Ban Roll-On™ off; tucked in your belt so when you look down real power is seen and Kowboy is happy.

  • We are watching you, Kowboy

    Um, “. . .writing factually that one is merely attractive”?

    That is not a fact, moron.

    It is an opinion.

    Such as “I find her attractive.” Another may say “I find her unattractive.”

    Besides, you went way beyond that, expressing your fantasy that you and the teacher would become Facebook friends, implying some kind of relationship would spring from your “writing.”

    Stick to your voyeurism and sneaking upskirt shots. Stick to playing “Logicman” in internet forums.

    You don’t do so well in person. You won’t do well in court.

  • Joseph Corlett

    Ms. Danimm:
    I was never warned that my writing would be harassing and intimidating which is the legal reason it can be neither. Ask Ms. Joi Cunningham, OU’s Diversity Director and attorney; she agrees with me. The Huffington Post and even Jezebel, with her reputation for not playing fair, were both women enough to admit they were wrong when they made the same untruthful allegation:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/13/student-barred-from-campus-for-writing-of-attraction-to-female-professor_n_1273449.html

    http://jezebel.com/5886036/classmates-were-afraid-of-hot-for-teacher-essayist

    Are you woman enough to do the same? (You can skip the highlighted box like HuffPo, a simple retraction and apology will do nicely.)

  • Not Lolita

    Newsflash….

    Shoeless Joe still in the grave, has better traction than feckless Kowboy.

    Huffy says- “FIRE Vice President of Programs Adam Kissel said Corlett did not have a weapon on him in any of her classes.”

    Can either of you prove that? I must of missed the apology and retraction, but did note a correction.

    Jeez says- “…he said, “who knows?” When pressed, he said he was “a creative writer” and that he was “just riffing.” Nonetheless, the note implies he was aware that his writing might be offensive, and that there could be consequences.

    Despite this, Corlett swears that Prof. Mitzelfeld gave no indication she had any problem with his essays until he was suddenly banned from class.”

    Swearing of course is not proof.

  • We are watching you, Kowboy

    Yawn.

    “I was never warned that my writing would be harassing and intimidating which is the legal reason it can be neither. ”

    Because you are too stupid to see that what you have done would produce the effect it did is not because it was not spelled out for you in excruciating detail.

    Ignorance of the fact does not excuse what it did, moreover implying a “legal” reason is a lie and grasping at straws.

    “Ask Ms. Joi Cunningham, OU’s Diversity Director and attorney; she agrees with me.”

    C’mon, Logicman, ever heard of the “Appeal to Authority” fallacy?

    Also, nice of you to neglect that you were expelled for a PATTERN OF BEHAVIOR THAT OCCURRED FOR OVER ONE YEAR.

    Get it? Quit the BS line you and your propaganda minister are trying to disseminate. It was NOT JUST THE ESSAY, idiot. It will not now nor ever fly.

    “Are you woman enough to do the same?”

    It’s time to recognize the inner woman in you wanting to come out of the darkness. Really, you will be more comfortable with yourself. Your facade of heterosexual overcompensation has long ago crumbled away.

    So where is the lawsuit, Corlett?

    Are you “man” enough to put up?

  • Not Lolita

    > So where is the lawsuit, Corlett?

    Are you “man” enough to put up? <

    You obviously were not watching close enough! Did you not see where he had received good grades on past projects? Are you not aware that, waxing poetic like, polishing a slab of granite once to a 10k mirror means w/o doubt that one would do so each and every time in the future, never forsaking some of those piddly intermediate grits [Mitt likes cheesy grits BTW] or considering the type and color of stone at hand. Get real; get glossy.

  • Sue Danimm

    It’s just so cute that he keeps addressing me as “Ms. Danimm.” He can’t see that Sue Danimm is my pseudonym. He thinks he’s showing us what a feminist he is by using Ms but he’s actually revealing a fundamental lack of perception.

  • Not Lolita

    I don’t know Sue, I read it more as an easier way to type Mizzz much like one would hear from the lips of Rush [the entertainer, not the entertainers (can I get an A...men for that?)]

    I starting to wonder if Joe is looking to fill the shoes of Andy Breitbart. Maybe he has something to do with his early passing. I swear you didn’t hear that from me though.

  • Spencer Linter

    Does anyone else thing Corlett is also posting as “Not Lolita”? … Because it sure seems like this guy is having an argument with himself, with this mysterious “Not Lolita” as his only support…

  • Sue Danimm

    Oh goodness no. Not Lolita has been witty, articulate and original. Couldn’t possible be Kowboy.

  • We are watching you, Kowboy

    No, Not Lolita is just really good at sarcasm!

    “. . . it sure seems like this guy is having an argument with himself”

    Yes, but Corlett is already operating with half a brain, so further dividing it with a sock puppet is beyond his capability!

    He does, however, certainly appear to trying to convince himself of his “argument,” rather oblivious to reality whizzing right on past him. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/obtuse

  • Not Lolita

    Well darn it all. I suppose the jig is up. Sound application of logic has uncovered my masked identity. At least I hope it was that and not a leak from this papers IT Dept… though that would hand a victory in a second suit.

    It should be obvious that if I am not Lolita then I must be Kowboy… unless Not Lolita is an anagram of my true name.

    Always wanted a Stetson.

  • seeker

    Let Joe talk. OU’s lawyer will have a field day with the Joe’s own posts should Joe be foolish enough to do more than just troll the Post comments section.