Denice Denton, R.I.P.

In the July issue of Reason, I adapted this web column about Laura Berg, the New Mexico VA nurse who was accused of treason after bashing the president in a letter to the editor. Toward the end, I mentioned how blogger/columnist Michelle Malkin liked to throw around charges of treason and ask her readers to badger the "traitors."

An even better example of this started two weeks ago at U.C.-Santa Cruz, where a group called Students Against War protested and successfully expelled military recruiters from a job fair. The anti-war students had done this before and won themselves a place in a Pentagon surveillance file. That hardly slowed them down -- they remained confident enough, after their latest stunt, to fire off a media advisory and make themselves available for interviews. Columnist and blogger Michelle Malkin read their press release and posted the students' phone numbers and e-mail addresses on her own site, directing hordes of death threat-tossing readers their way.

Malkin's UCSC post was titled "Seditious Santa Cruz vs. America." Even after the UCSC students cried uncle and pulled their phone numbers offline, Malkin continued to post their information alongside the office numbers for the "capitulationist chancellor" who had refused to purge them.

None of the people who issued threats to UC-Santa Cruz Chancellor Denice Denton actually acted on them. But on June 24, Denton killed herself. A memorial service was held last week.

It's worth remembering that Denton didn't actually do anything to anger Malkin and her readers. She simply failed to expel students who had sent the Malkinites into a fury. While no one is suggesting that her readers pushed Denton over the edge, Malkin has said nothing about the chancellor since her suicide. It might become her to apologize for smearing an academic, and directing people to direct their outrage to her office, in what were the final troubled months of her life.

UPDATE: The saga continues here.

Comments

snorkblaster | July 5, 2006, 2:44pm | #

I doubt the Malkin crap caused Denton to kill herself. Denton was obviously troubled on many fronts -- her victorian delicacy at the idea of Summers' daring to pose an academic question revealed that.

It's a shame when people don't seek help in time. To pin this on Malkin is a cheap shot.

John | July 5, 2006, 3:03pm | #

That is awful that this woman was so troubled. There are few tragedies worse than suicide.

The post forgets the real scandal involving Denton. It was not her failure to restrain the anti-war thugs, it was the fact that she used her position as president to give her girlfriend a do nothing $200,000 a year "consulting" job paid for by the California tax payer. She should have lost her job as President then and never been President when the whole anti-war protester thing happened.

S.R. Chamberlain | July 5, 2006, 3:03pm | #

I agree with snorkblaster. First, if you can't take this kind of scrutiny, you shouldn't hold public office. Second, if you hold public office, you shouldn't spend $30,000 in public funds on a dog run. (http://www.santacruzsentinel.com/archive/2005/December/09/local/stories/01local.htm)

It's always upsetting when someone kills herself. But Denice Denton was no martyr to Michelle Malkin and her moron brigade.

crimethink | July 5, 2006, 3:06pm | #

snorkblaster,

Whatever the cause of this woman's suicide, there is already more than enough evidence that Malkin is a disgusting scoundrel.

Tseren | July 5, 2006, 3:11pm | #

Agreed snork.

This Denton had a lot to answer for in terms of the hundreds of thousands of dollars she used to renovate her University provided home and why she hired her partner for a position that needed to be created so she could get a job.

Malkin had no idea what her emotional state was and was simply an unfortunate coincidence. Although I am no fan of Malkin, I see this as her doing her shtick.

Tseren | July 5, 2006, 3:12pm | #

Agreed snork.

This Denton had a lot to answer for in terms of the hundreds of thousands of dollars she used to renovate her University provided home and why she hired her partner for a position that needed to be created so she could get a job.

Malkin had no idea what her emotional state was and was simply an unfortunate coincidence. Although I am no fan of Malkin, I see this as her doing her shtick.

Tseren | July 5, 2006, 3:12pm | #

Agreed snork.

This Denton had a lot to answer for in terms of the hundreds of thousands of dollars she used to renovate her University provided home and why she hired her partner for a position that needed to be created so she could get a job.

Malkin had no idea what her emotional state was and was simply an unfortunate coincidence. Although I am no fan of Malkin, I see this as her doing her shtick.

John | July 5, 2006, 3:12pm | #

Crimethink,

Malkin maybe all of that, but why does what she did here make her a scoundral? Denton was a highly paid government employee of the state of California. All Malkin did is post her office numbers. What is wrong with people taking government employeess to task for their actions? This whole thread strikes me as just "Malkin did it, so it must be bad" logic.

John | July 5, 2006, 3:12pm | #

Crimethink,

Malkin maybe all of that, but why does what she did here make her a scoundral? Denton was a highly paid government employee of the state of California. All Malkin did is post her office numbers. What is wrong with people taking government employeess to task for their actions? This whole thread strikes me as just "Malkin did it, so it must be bad" logic.

Swimmy | July 5, 2006, 4:03pm | #

Apologizing would just be appeasement.

malk | July 5, 2006, 4:04pm | #

Malkin should be sent to am internment camp near Santa Cruz.

Having said that, if every government employee off'd themselves due to a guilty conscience, we'd be living an a libertopia...

Congrats to the UC Santa Cruz students for getting the military kicked off the campus -- let them recruit the greasers instead...

AML | July 5, 2006, 4:05pm | #

Malkin maybe all of that, but why does what she did here make her a scoundral?

Because she posted the number for the purpose of inciciting harassment. Kind of like me taking your email address and signing you up for spam. It's not illegal, but it's an asshole thing to do.

madpad | July 5, 2006, 4:07pm | #

Malkin maybe all of that, but why does what she did here make her a scoundral?

Perhaps nothing...it's just always good to find and opportunity to call Malkin a scoundrel.

The Real Bill | July 5, 2006, 4:12pm | #

The harassment was justified (even though I too think Malkin is an idiot). The "protests" that pushed the military recruiters off campus were of the violent kind, and should have resulted in expulsions if not convictions.

Andy Freeman | July 5, 2006, 4:14pm | #

> Columnist and blogger Michelle Malkin read their press release and posted the students' phone numbers and e-mail addresses on her own site

Were said phone numbers and e-mail addresses in said press release? If so, complaining about them being distributed is a bit odd because distribution is the whole point of a press release.

Yes, they may have regretted making said press release, but bad decisions have consequences.

ed | July 5, 2006, 4:28pm | #

While no one is suggesting that her readers pushed Denton over the edge...

Unfortunate choice of words, given her method of suicide.
But oddly funny, if unintentional.

SR | July 5, 2006, 4:29pm | #

"This whole thread strikes me as just 'Malkin did it, so it must be bad' logic."

Well, yeah, but you have to admit that approach is correct about 90%+ of the time.

Jennifer | July 5, 2006, 4:29pm | #

This whole thread strikes me as just "Malkin did it, so it must be bad" logic.

I think posting people's contact information for the sole purpose of encouraging others to harass them is a scummy thing to do no matter what your politics are. For me, it wasn't "Malkin did it, so it must be bad"; it was "it was bad and --ooooh, big surprise -- it turns out Malkin did it."

In Shakesperean times, 'malkin' meant "a woman of the lower orders." In true conservative fashion, Michelle Malkin constantly proves that our ancestors really did know a thing or two that they could teach us.

Dogboy | July 5, 2006, 4:30pm | #

"Malkin should be sent to am internment camp near Santa Cruz."

You mean like her parents, were?

Jimmy | July 5, 2006, 4:36pm | #

So are you opposed to the US having a standing military or are you just a fucking classist bitch?

John | July 5, 2006, 4:43pm | #

Jennifer,

If the protesters are going to publish their phone numbers and e-mail addresses in press releases, why is publishing them so wrong? Aren't they kind of asking for it? Moreover, it is a bit rich for the very same people who used group thug tactics to run military recruiters off of UC Santa Cruz to then complain about those very same tactics being used against them. Further, Denton was a public official and people who object to her actions have a right to call her office and complain about them. Do you think Denton is some kind of Praetorian Guard and above the law?

You just don't like Malkin and want an excuse to whine about her. If some lefty blogger had posted the office number of some nitwit sheriff who had messed up a no knock raid and it had resulted in harassing phone calls, I bet you wouldn't have a problem with it at all. I wouldn't either truthfully. The difference is that I don't have a problem when the other side does it either.

Jimmy | July 5, 2006, 4:43pm | #

So are you opposed to the US having a standing military or are you just a fucking classist bitch?

| July 5, 2006, 4:47pm | #

Dogboy,

Perhaps you are not aware that Malkin's parents are Fillipino and as such would not have been interned.

Malkin on the other hand is on record as believing that the internment of the Japanese was a very fine thing.

Enjoy that morsel, troll. It's the last you'll get.

Jimmy | July 5, 2006, 4:54pm | #

My question was for Malk.

Also, what's with the italics disappearing and what is up with your servers???

mishu | July 5, 2006, 5:12pm | #

"Congrats to the UC Santa Cruz students for getting the military kicked off the campus -- let them recruit the greasers instead..."

Did I just go back in time?? Greasers? Congratulations to suppressing speech? I'm still on the internets aren't I?

Jennifer | July 5, 2006, 5:12pm | #

If the protesters are going to publish their phone numbers and e-mail addresses in press releases, why is publishing them so wrong?

Is your number in the phone book? Even though it is readily available to anyone who'd care to seek it out, it would still be wrong for me to post it on a blog with the instructions "this man doesn't have the right political attributes so I encourage my readers to make him miserable. Here's his number. Here's his address. Go forth and harass him, my freedom-loving minions!"

Andy Freeman | July 5, 2006, 5:31pm | #

My phone book doesn't associate my name/phone with any cause or position or invite folks to contact me wrt a cause or position. A press release does - that's why the addreses are there.

If Jennifer disagrees, perhaps she'll tell us what the purpose of a name/address in a press release is.

Julie | July 5, 2006, 5:35pm | #

According to the Santa Cruz paper, Denice Denton was the victim of her own students' thuggery, and she may have also had some problems with her medications.

After her students' success in twice violently forcing out the military recruiters, the students were apparently used to getting their own way using physical intimidation with impunity. They threw a parking barricade through Denton's window, and during a protest they physically prevented Denton from leaving. Why all of those kids are not in jail is beyond me.They are completely out of control.

Warren | July 5, 2006, 5:43pm | #

It might become her to apologize for smearing an academic, and directing people to direct their outrage to her office, in what were the final troubled months of her life.

Huh? I'm not a fan of Malkin, but that's the thing about free speech, everybody gets to use it. Directing outrage at people in positions of power is the preferred means of achieving political aims. If she was sincere in her campaign against Denton while she lived, why should she apologize now that she's dead.

This is another Weigel post that strikes me as absurd on first reading and even more so on subsequent ones. I had a theory that these posts were a result of a subtle, cool dry wit. I've scanned this one several times, if there's sarcasm here, I can't detect it.

Dogboy | July 5, 2006, 5:57pm | #

"Enjoy that morsel, troll. It's the last you'll get.

Comment by: at July 5, 2006 04:47 PM"

At least I have the dogballs to sign my name.

And since when is expressing oneself without swearing or name-calling trolling?

John | July 5, 2006, 6:10pm | #

Again Jennifer,

If it someone had posted the names and numbers of abusive police officers and said go forward and harrass, would you have had a problem? I am guessing no. You just don't like Malkin, which is your right, but you should at least be honest enough to admit it.

pok | July 5, 2006, 6:54pm | #

If the students didn't want their names and addresses published, they wouldn't have published them in their press release, no? They wanted their their bravery published except without the bravery required of it.

The students offered their addresses to the public. They have a habit of staging public political stunts and relishing the controversy they bring. It takes a breathtaking creativity to imagine these students as a reclusive, quiet bunch dragged out to the public against their will. It is a delusion that can only be sustained by amnesia and denial. The students, not Michelle, published the students addresses.

Joanne | July 5, 2006, 6:57pm | #

Thank you John, for a refreshing use of reason - something sorely lacking in many of these posts. Yes, the woman was troubled, but it seems that many of the troubles were largely of her own making. If anyone deserves to be in an internment camp, it should be the violent, first-ammendment overturning "student" protesters at UC Santa Cruz. I can't think what it is they are learning over there (except the same overboard, strong arm, brown-shirt tactics only used by totalitarian regimes), but a little "cooling off time" would do them (and the public) a great deal of good. And effective immediately, all federal funds need to be withdrawn from UC Santa Cruz until they comply with federal regulations in re: allowing military recruiters on-campus. After all, if the anti-war message has so much merit, why should the SAW be so threatened by a couple of recruiters showing up? Let them come in and set up their table and see if they can get anyone to come by (and DON'T harrass whoever does!). Show SOME maturity, for once.

Sigivald | July 5, 2006, 7:15pm | #

Ah, but Jennifer, Malkin's post doesn't say "go harass this person, my minions". In fact, before the update with the Chancellor's information, she says "If you are contacting them, I do not condone death threats or foul language.".

Can't someone put up contact information that is publicly available (not just "in the phone book", even, but published in a press release, for the students, and part of the job itself for the Chancellor) for the purposes of making opinions of the contactee's actions known by interested parties? (Note that we're not talking about the Chancellor's home number, unless it happens to also be her work number, right?)

Isn't mailing or calling the Chancellor (again, at her work number, in fact, a form of "petitioning the Government for a redress of greivances", as the First Amendment explicitly provides for?

I personally don't care for Malkin's style, but I don't see that she's done anything wrong here, or, as she's been accused, told people to harass anyone. Unless being told "you acted badly" constitutes harassment, that is.

just another lurker | July 5, 2006, 7:18pm | #

I agree with Warren's sentiments.

I'm fairly familar with Denice Denton from her stint as Dean of Engineering at the UW, as well as the subsequent issues with the Larry Summers speech and her move to UC-Santa Cruz chancellor. She was embroiled in, and fanned, a lot of controversy. She had her supporters. She also had a lot of people that hated her. She also had, apparently, some strong personal problems, including a bout with cancer.

To bring up her suicide and then focus just on this relatively minor hissy fit with Michelle Malkin is pretty lame. Maybe one of the other Reason staffers could do this story more justice.

Jason Sonenshein | July 5, 2006, 7:42pm | #

Here's another example of conservatives' posting contact information with the intention of bringing harassment onto people who disagree with them. Take a look at the role the Stop the ACLU Coalition played in helping to drive a Jewish family from their home in Delaware. It seems the family had the audacity to file an Establishment Clause claim against the local school district.

Ron Hardin | July 5, 2006, 7:46pm | #

Passive-aggressive suicide must be in Berne's Games People Play.

joe | July 5, 2006, 8:08pm | #

"If Jennifer disagrees, perhaps she'll tell us what the purpose of a name/address in a press release is."

If I can jump in here...

You put your name and phone number in a press release so that the people you sent it to can contact you for more information for the stories they're writing.

But I have an unfair advantage over the Malkin defenders here: I actually know something about press releases beyond the talking points copied off of Malkin's site.

DB | July 5, 2006, 11:15pm | #

Even after the UCSC students cried uncle and pulled their phone numbers offline, Malkin continued to post their information alongside the office numbers for the "capitulationist chancellor" who had refused to purge them

Well, David, I think you said it best yourself: anyone can find detailed location information on anyone else pretty easily. So it is hard to see what Malkin did wrong, by your standards, by posting that information.

Nor is it clear what she has to apologize for when, as you yourself concede, she didn't cause the suicide.

Herrick and His Balls | July 5, 2006, 11:38pm | #

Malkin offers nothing to anyone looking for any opinion worth a piece of crap, but I sort of admire her and Ann Coulter for figuring out that there's a market for the crap that comes out their mouths and making a relatively easy living by peddling it.

That being said, Malkin, as worthless a human as she is, doesn't really deserve any blame in this situation. Posting the student's information was REALLY gay though. My college years turned me from a big-government liberal to a libertarian, and I wouldn't wanted to have been harassed for some of the stupid things I believed when I was a freshman. If these people were older, its one thing, but let college students figure out what's right through trial and error.

Dave | July 5, 2006, 11:49pm | #

Joe-

Aren't you arguing that what Malkin did was wrong because the protesters only wanted to spread their own side of the story? Considering their own tactics, I'd have to say tough shit to that.

pok | July 5, 2006, 11:57pm | #

First, harassment is the last thing these students can complain about for it is the first thing they are so eager to give to everyone else. Second, there is a price for expression, and that is reaction. Third, the kind of reaction that Michelle's bashers ascribe to her is specifically the kind she advised not to make. Fourth, with all of Ms. Denton's clearly more serious problems, blaming Michelle for her suicide is like attributing the death of a pimply, malnourished teen to pimples - it's insane.

haruspicy | July 6, 2006, 12:50am | #

On a related free speech and asembly issue, I'm wondering what Reasonoids think of that Baptist Church group that shows up to protest military funerals. They carry signs like "God is punishing us for homosexuality and your son's death is the result" or things like that. I read that a Republican congressman was trying to pass legislation banning such protests within 500 feet of the funerals. But if the protests were on public grounds then I can't see how that would be Constitutional - and wouldn't the ACLU step in? These protestors are the scum of the earth but such legislation seems like setting a bad precedent for freedom of speech and assembly. I suggest that a better idea would be to not publish where such funerals will be held and for people to show up outside the homes, work, and church (as long as they on public property) and protest those crazies in the Baptist church (note, this is one small splinter group and does not represent any views of the mainline Baptist church).

Jamie Kelly | July 6, 2006, 12:54am | #

There are few tragedies worse than suicide.

That depends. Sometimes suicide is a perfectly rational, meaningful choice.

Hume's Ghost | July 6, 2006, 1:39am | #

"Malkin had no idea what her emotional state was and was simply an unfortunate coincidence."

No, it is not. Malkin's careless and wreckless accusations of treason and sedition at those she disagrees with at every turn, her advocating for other Americans to hate the "seditious moonbat" traitor to their country, is initself inexcusable.

That she reached a sensitive target only further highlights the ethical failing that is Michelle Malkin.

Herrick and His Balls | July 6, 2006, 2:10am | #

haruspicy,

We passed a law like that in Illinois in response to the Westboro Baptist church. I'm not sure that they really addressed whether there were free speech issues, but the protesters have not appeared at funerals since the law passed, and it can't be tried in court unless they actually get arrested, so Illinois might have pulled off getting them away without having the free speech issue challenged.

If there were a free speech issue problem, would it be possible for the state to say sell all the public land 200 yards or whatever from the funeral to the family of the dead for the duration of the funeral for like $1 or some nominal cost so that the protesters couldn't protest there because it would be temporarily private land?

bluzlady | July 6, 2006, 2:51am | #

It's unfortunate that people cannot seem to separate the choice which Ms. Denton made in her personal life from that which she made in her professional life. While I understand that she crossed boundaries with funds, I can also see that she was taking a stand for what she believed in.

kentuckyliz | July 6, 2006, 6:31am | #

Denton's biggest stupidity as a president was permitting the students to remove the military recruiters from campus, more than once. That is risking losing federal funding--and that includes financial aid! A college/university president's top priority is resource development. So, on this count, Denton was an idiot.

Her second level of stupidity was not insisting that the college uphold its code of conduct. If she lets these violent, destructive students get away with it, then others who are disciplined have grounds to charge discrimination and differential treatment. If these protest methods are acceptable in a group Denton agrees with, then they are acceptable in a group Denton doesn't agree with. Just think--violent pro-life protests? How long would Denton sit on her hands in that situation?

Denton and the students deserve the feedback that they got. Free speech causes more free speech and they got it in spades. This is just another example of the Army of Davids becoming their own activists. Disregard the issue and the persons involved, just look at what happened. I think it's a good thing.

brianh | July 6, 2006, 7:50am | #

Dave,

"Aren't you arguing that what Malkin did was wrong because the protesters only wanted to spread their own side of the story?"

Are you saying Malkin only had two choices, (A) run an approving piece on the prostesters using their press release, or (B) publish their personal info and incite their harrassment? How about ignoring it? How about writing something about how they were wrong that didn't involve their home phone numbers and addresses?

A press release is like a party invitation. Malkin basically got a party invitation from someone she didn't like, and rather than ignore it or RSVP, she gave out the address to a few million people she knew and told them to bring toilet paper-- with the excuse that the party throwers "asked for it" by sending out their personal info.

kevrob | July 6, 2006, 8:52am | #

,,,all federal funds need to be withdrawn from UC Santa Cruz until they comply with federal regulations in re: allowing military recruiters on-campus. - Joanne

I would privatize all state institutions such as the University of California campuses. Then they could make their own damn rules about whether recruiters belonged on campus or not. But if even a private school takes Federal aid, how can they not expect to come under the Federal thumb? Who takes the King's shilling....

This is especially dumb when we are discussing schools that:

a.) receive research funds from the Department of Defense or

b.) have an ROTC unit or

c.) are Land Grant institutions. The Constitution doesn't authorize aid to post-secondary education. The Morill Act was passed through Congress in 1862 with the specific objective of establishing colleges that would turn out students who had studied, among other things, military tactics and engineering. It was the National Defense Education Act of its day. Making defense the justification for broad-based aid to education is the fig leaf the pols used to get around nasty Ninth and Tenth Amendment concerns that education isn't a Federal responsibilty.

Kevin

Mr. F. Le Mur | July 6, 2006, 9:13am | #

I doubt the Malkin crap caused Denton to kill herself. Denton was obviously troubled on many fronts -- her victorian delicacy at the idea of Summers' daring to pose an academic question revealed that.

Denton was a professional victim and a white-collar crook (the two often go together). Good riddance.

This is another Weigel post that strikes me as absurd on first reading and even more so on subsequent ones.
Quite so.

In Shakesperean times, 'malkin' meant "a woman of the lower orders."
Close!
In true conservative fashion, Michelle Malkin constantly proves that our ancestors really did know a thing or two that they could teach us.
And 'jenny' means a domestic female ass.

Lamar | July 6, 2006, 9:14am | #

Sure, it's a cheapshot to say Malkin is responsible for this. We don't know whether Malkin's trashy, baser-than-base act had anything to do with this unfortunate suicide. Perhaps it did, if even only .01%. Of course, Malkin is a low brow piece of garbage who lives off the cheapshot, so I'm siding with crimethink.

Jennifer | July 6, 2006, 9:37am | #

You just don't like Malkin, which is your right, but you should at least be honest enough to admit it.

I will freely admit that. And I've already said that Malkin is probably not to blame for this, but she should still have the good grace to apologize after the fact. For example--when Joe exposed the fact that your manly military e-mail addresses were all fakes, if being exposed as a gamy liar drove you to suicide I would expect Joe to at least have the decency to feel bad over what he did, even though your suicide would not have been his fault.

Eric the .5b | July 6, 2006, 9:49am | #

While Malkin sucks, let's be brutally honest. How many "Feh, serves her right" and "Good riddances" would we be hearing here if Denton had gotten flack after aggressively reigning in student speech or doing anything else that offends us?

Even if she did engage in corruption, her suicide is a sad thing.

pok | July 6, 2006, 9:57am | #

"Are you saying Malkin only had two choices, (A) run an approving piece on the prostesters using their press release, or (B) publish their personal info and incite their harrassment? How about ignoring it? How about writing something about how they were wrong that didn't involve their home phone numbers and addresses?"

How about (C) publish their personal info (which they published on their website and press release) and tell them what you think - you know like in a free society, like what we are doing now, except without the suicide?

Andy Freeman | July 6, 2006, 10:04am | #

> You put your name and phone number in a press release so that the people you sent it to can contact you for more information for the stories they're writing.

And to recruit like-minded folk.

They just didn't like the contacts for more information. Oh well.

Andy Freeman | July 6, 2006, 10:07am | #

> In Shakesperean times, 'malkin' meant "a woman of the lower orders." In true conservative fashion, Michelle Malkin

High or low, class always comes out.

haruspicy | July 6, 2006, 11:14am | #

"If there were a free speech issue problem, would it be possible for the state to say sell all the public land 200 yards or whatever from the funeral to the family of the dead for the duration of the funeral for like $1 or some nominal cost so that the protesters couldn't protest there because it would be temporarily private land?"



Herrick, your idea is creative but I fear it would also set a bad precedent: any time there would be speech or assembly someone finds offensive they could then petition the government to sell them public land, for a limited period at a low cost, at or near the site where the protestors want to protest. This would then politicize all speech and assembly.

joe | July 6, 2006, 12:51pm | #

Dave, "Aren't you arguing that what Malkin did was wrong because the protesters only wanted to spread their own side of the story?"

No. I'm arguing that what Malkin did was wrong because faciliating harrassment is a lousy thing to do.

Three skinheads walk up to you on the street and ask you where that Jew bastard Goldstein lives. Do you tell them his address, with the disclaimer that you don't support harrassment? I don't think you do.

Greg D | July 6, 2006, 2:00pm | #

Um, bullshit.

The University did not prevent the protestors from forcing the military recruiters to leave a job fair. IOW, Chancellor Denton didn't do her job.

If that's not worthy of criticism in your world view, then your world view is worthless.

highnumber | July 6, 2006, 2:21pm | #

Unfair to skins, joe.
Most British & American skinheads are very anti-racist. They just don't show up on the TV as often as the nazis. The original skins were soul & reggae fans who lived in England and worked with a large Jamaican immigrant population.
(sorry to go way off topic, but I was on the fringe of the skinhead population in Chicago as a teenager and it irks me when they get maligned. I knew as many black & asian skins as white.)

Jack | July 6, 2006, 2:32pm | #

And I've already said that Malkin is probably not to blame for this, but she should still have the good grace to apologize after the fact.

After reading this tripe now I'm going to commit suicide and I know you didn't make me do it, but I demand that you apologize ... you know that good grace and stuff.

Lamar | July 6, 2006, 2:39pm | #

Hey Greg D., are you familiar with Denton's job description? I'd like a link, please. The article above says she failed to expel the students. Are you saying that her job was to provide security for Army guys? What exactly were her duties to the Army and to the student body? Discuss.

And I'm sorry this discussion led to Jack's suicide. RIP, brother.

Lamar | July 6, 2006, 2:40pm | #

Hey Greg D., are you familiar with Denton's job description? I'd like a link, please. The article above says she failed to expel the students. Are you saying that her job was to provide security for Army guys? What exactly were her duties to the Army and to the student body? Why is someone's worldview that disagree's with yours worthless, yet blabbering on about something to which you are clueless is golden? Discuss.

And I'm sorry this discussion led to Jack's suicide. RIP, brother.

Ben Jabituyah | July 6, 2006, 2:42pm | #

It is a widely-known fact that Michelle Malkin's columns are ghost-written by a white guy -- most likely her husband.

Tseren | July 6, 2006, 2:49pm | #

Lamar, the Solomon Amendment states that any university receiving federal funds must allow military recruiters on campus.

The student protesters used physical assaults on the recruiters to get them to leave.

At a minimum, the students should have received some sort of reprimand.

As the school's president, it is her responsibility (perhaps not directly) to ensure that all employers who attended the job fair be given access and protection from physical attack. Now it may have been difficult, if not impossible, to do something while the attack was taking place. However, she should have, in some way, punished those students involved.

If she did not agree with the militaries stance on a given issue and did not want them to attend, she knew the course of action necessary to make it happen.

Editoress | July 6, 2006, 6:37pm | #

If the students didn't want their names and addresses published, they wouldn't have published them in their press release, no? They wanted their their bravery published except without the bravery required of it.

The students offered their addresses to the public.
No, sorry it's called a press release because it goes to the press/media for contact purposes. I don't know how it got to Malkin but a press release isn't designed for the public. It's to make it easier for the media to contact them. I won't defend their actions, or criticize them, because I'm not familiar with their behavior. But when's the last time you saw a newspaper, magazine or TV station list contact information for a source?

Cody | July 6, 2006, 6:38pm | #

I have no respect for Malkin or for the lobotomized monkeys that jump when she commands. I'm not sure who's worse for America, the legions of monkeys who can't think for themselves of the witch who commands them.

reality check | July 6, 2006, 6:40pm | #

'A college/university president's top priority is resource development'

Kentuckyliz - You have no idea what a university president even does so let alone what his/her top priority should be. Two years at juco doesn't make you an expert

billybob | July 6, 2006, 6:40pm | #

Wow. The heartlessness and evil of republicans takes it down yet another notch. Good job, repubs! Let's see how long it takes you to set another personal (using the term loosely) record.

PMain | July 6, 2006, 6:46pm | #

Joe,

I?m sure w/ your expansive ?press release? past experience, you can explain to me that if organizers didn?t want their contact information released, then why did they publish it on a web-site? Or are you insinuating that it is common practice to release such information on the web & not expect anyone to use it? Apparently Michelle wasn?t well versed enough to know that any information published on the web is solely for public consumption or are you offended mostly by her linking & publishing the document so people could make their minds up themselves?

I guess we could have used the copying or publishing standards listed on the web-site itself, which there weren?t any. Face it, the kids were idiots & their own actions backfired on them. It isn?t like she published their unpublished home addresses or phone numbers, like Michelle?s were in retaliation. As a matter of fact, maps & satellite photos were published showing the exact location of what was believed to be Mrs. Malkin?s house at the time. I guess you were equally as upset about that as well (care post the link to your posts or comments regarding it at the time?) But maybe this is acceptable, since she didn?t publish that information publicly on either the Internet or a press release & only the mystical, yet universally accepted standards of a ?press release? can guarantee total anonymity of publisher. Of the two information releases, which is really ?facilitating harassment? publishing something that was publicly available or publishing that which wasn?t?

Does the calling of Goldstein a ?jew bastard? also follow under your personal experience or is it your vast expertise w/ racist skin-heads that allows you to be so informative?

Phoenix Woman | July 6, 2006, 7:13pm | #

I love all the Malkinites here. The neo-Stalinist method of "shriek until the target gives in" is in full effect, isn't it?

Poor Mr. Weigel, being the target of a Malkinite Shrieking Campaign. Oh well, he can take the extra blog traffic numbers and show them to his advertisers!

Phoenix Woman | July 6, 2006, 7:18pm | #

Oh, and by the way:

Here's Malkin kicking a dead woman who can't kick back. That's the post that sent all the Malkinites over to take up arms on Malkin's behalf. You know, just in case the dead woman Malkin was kicking ever came back to life.

Jim Treacher | July 6, 2006, 7:26pm | #

Is your number in the phone book? Even though it is readily available to anyone who'd care to seek it out, it would still be wrong for me to post it on a blog...

So, just because information might be accessible doesn't mean it needs to be publicized? Interesting. I'll bet you don't hold the New York Times to the same standard.

It is a widely-known fact that Michelle Malkin's columns are ghost-written by a white guy -- most likely her husband.

I do not think the word "fact" means what you think it means. But I'm sure the evidence for this theory must be very amusing.

BlogReader | July 6, 2006, 7:38pm | #

Never thought I would have to break out the tinfoil hat for something in Reason magazine.

While no one is suggesting that her readers pushed Denton over the edge, Malkin has said nothing about the chancellor since her suicide.

No one is suggesting that you beat your spouse either, but why didn't you speak up when no evidence came out? Jebus this article has more problems than all the cast members of Big Brother combined.

Hiya | July 6, 2006, 7:49pm | #

If you like where Malkin is coming from, if you identify with her approach to the world around her, then you are in the dark. You ARE the dark that reasonable, compassionate individuals have been trying to illuminate since the beginning.

Blaise | July 6, 2006, 7:56pm | #

Their contact info was included in the press release. If they didn't want it repeated they ought not to have included it.

Period.

KosFan | July 6, 2006, 7:59pm | #

It would seem that her fellow liberals on campus had a more deleterious impact on her state of mind than Michelle Malkin or anyone else on the blogoshere. Lesbians tend not to be the most stable people to begin with. One hopes some good can come from this...maybe some leftards will follow her lead and take a flying leap themselves! Now she will stew in hell forever...a pity....

Redwretch | July 6, 2006, 8:08pm | #

All of you Malkin admirers have no hearts, and quite frankly, you like being lied to. That, my friends, is her modus Operandi, and you are too stupid (dumb as a rock stupid) to realize this.

KosFan | July 6, 2006, 8:10pm | #

It would seem that her fellow liberals on campus had a more deleterious impact on her state of mind than Michelle Malkin or anyone else on the blogoshere. Lesbians tend not to be the most stable people to begin with. One hopes some good can come from this...maybe some leftards will follow her lead and take a flying leap themselves! Now she will stew in hell forever...a pity....

konopelli/wgg | July 6, 2006, 8:18pm | #

Michelle Malagagmewithaspoon, anchor child, set her all-too-willing, anonymous brown-shirts on a university president who had the temerity to piss off the aforesaid anchor baby.

The University official's crime was not expelling a couple of students from arguably the most liberal university in the whole fucking world who used their rights to free speech to launch a protest against the immoral, imperialistic, criminal invasion/occupation/conquest/rape of iraq to drive uniformed thugs from their homes.

So the aforesaid anchorchild published the contact details for the students and the chancellor, and invited her hordes of fascistic, redneck, Flying Monkey trolls, pond scum, and assorted other soi-disant 'conservative' low-lifes who frequent her cesspool of a blog to pass along their sentiments on the affair.

Sic'd em like willing, slavering, drooling, frothing, profane, shrieking fucking rabid orcs on the Shire.

This is not an inconsequential act: she set up a rhetorical gang-bang. She has some experience in these matters, since she claims herself to have been the object of such attentions form partisans of the Left. (The not-irrelevant difference being that MGagme is a lone operator who as a matter of business-planning invites such abuse openly, while the Chancellor was merely a public official with a huge responsibility--far surpassing anything Gagme would ever be considered for, much less appointed to--trying to balance diverse, powerful interests and constituencies).

The Chancellor subsequently killed herself.

Michelle Gagme disclaims any and all responsibility.

But karma's a bitch. I've lived long enough to know a little about karma. And it doesn't always show up right away. Michelle, when you lose the child your might be trying to conceive (GAWD FORBID), think of the woman who killed herself under your microscope...

sorry 'boudat...

mediageek | July 6, 2006, 8:37pm | #

Quite frankly, I don't care about this entire episode.

Except for the fact that Malkin continues to speak ill of the dead.

That's just poor form.

Whether Malkin's lunatic ravings precipitated Denton's death is both unprovable and immaterial.

That Malkin can't even find enough civility to keep her mouth shut, or at least grunt a simple condolence strikes me as crass.

john raven | July 6, 2006, 8:51pm | #

Malkin doesn't realize that her fellow Republican right-wing wackos wouldn't want to her to live in thier neighborhood. To them she looks like she belongs in a National Geographic photo spread on SE Asia tribal clans.
Of course Malkin looks at herself in the mirror and sees Ann Coulter. Skanks, the both of them.

PMain | July 6, 2006, 10:17pm | #

Wow name calling, gross generalizations & implied racial slurs... we've discovered Liberal Heaven. Just when you thought the author's inane dribblings attempting to tie Malkin's posts about UCSC's pathetic anti-military demonstrations & Denton's inability to actually support, much less provide a safe environment for free-speech was far enough off base, one is pleasantly surprised by commenter?s abilities to delve even further here in baseless profanity. Denton killed herself after running a corrupt & inept administration. It has nothing to do w/ the posting of already publicly released information, "brown shirts" or the Republican Party. Put aside your hatred long enough to grow up & place the blame on the highly educated, but ineffectual former chancellor of Santa Cruz. She decided to end her life through choices of her own.

Cheryl Something | July 6, 2006, 10:24pm | #

Michelle Malkin is a horrible creature, I can't even bare to call her a woman. She is hateful and malicious. Denise Denton didn't deserve the Malkin treatment, no one does.

PMain | July 6, 2006, 10:32pm | #

Cheryl,

But Michelle deserves to be called a "horrible creature" or not be called a "woman" because you disagree w/ her. What a completely rational & insightful argument.

Dennis | July 6, 2006, 10:33pm | #

Trying to connect Michelle Malkin to the suicide is idiotic. This blog has has some very childish posts for sure. All praising free speech until a recruiter tries to speak on campus or a conservative speaker speaks and you toss pies or ( Oreos like at Lt Gov Steele) or shouted down John McCain at the New School. Or tossed pies at Coulter and Malkin. Free speech? Only if it agrees with you Libnuts. Idiots ..

KH | July 6, 2006, 10:42pm | #

Can it be wrong to publish a public official's public contact information?

It depends. Publication in a bland press release has a different moral significance than spiteful dissemination of the same information at a KKK lynch party. The significance of an act depends on its foreseeable consequences.

There's ample evidence that Malkin published Denton's contact information with the expectation that her readers, whose collective character she well understands, would subject this woman to a deluge of vile invective. An act undertaken vindictively with the expectation that it will lead to massive harassment isn't morally equivalent to the same act undertaken with no such spiteful expectation or intent.

In this episode as in so many others, Malkin shows herself to be morally bankrupt. Her supporters disqualify themselves from ever complaining about the corruption or corsening of our political culture.

Dan Kauffman | July 6, 2006, 10:42pm | #

This has been amusing, but I doubt if Malkin will off herself because the Left doesn't like her.

JD | July 6, 2006, 10:48pm | #

What a tawdry tale, from beginning to end.

It's only made more worse by the off-topic blatherings of "Redwretch," "Phoenix Woman" and "konopelli".

Malkin could not win for losing with you clowns. She writes a post demonstrating that Denice Denton did not do her job (maintaining order on the university campus is Job One for a university chancellor) in one of her posts, and she provided contact numbers therein. Contact numbers which are in the public domain.

Several weeks later, Denton takes the Nestea Plunge off the roof level of her partner's apartment building some 65 miles to the north of UCSC (in SFO).

And some of the Reasonoids demand an "apology" from Malkin for having somehow added to the tensions already inside this conflicted woman.

But if Malkin says word one about the demise of Ms. Denton, we get the prospectite grumblebunnies like "Phoenix Woman" who will jump up and down about how Malagasuperfragilisticexpialidocious is a low-life scumbag who speaks ill of the dead, with the requisite Asian Whore references and other such vitriol from the pals of "Phoenix Woman."

Anyone want to start a pool on how soon the ping pong ball blast will happen?

Malkin had nothing to do with Denton's suicide. If Weigel (or Reason in general) wants something to bash Malkin with, there are many other, better ways to do it. Trying to tar her with this is just low.

Wankers.

badgervan | July 6, 2006, 10:51pm | #

The Malkins out there who thrive on hate and have no respect for the truth are destroying our country from within. The ends justify the means for these cretins. They say and do anything to advance whatever their cause of the day is.
You just have to take 'em for what they are: parasites and selfish opportunists.

KH | July 6, 2006, 11:04pm | #

I'm not sure anyone really thinks Malkin killed Denton. But here's the thing:

When you publicly degrade, humiliate or otherwise wrong someone, and the person soon thereafter kills herself for what everyone agrees are unrelated reasons, normal people nevertheless are going to look at you funny. They don't think you caused the death, but it still focuses everone's attention on what a heel you are. Like the way people look at you when you tell an obnoxious cripple joke, unaware of the woman in the wheelchair in the corner. Call it bad moral luck.

Malkin's no killer, but she contributes mightily to the moral & intellectual coarsening of our political culture, and this woman's death adventitiously brings that into focus.

flaming liberal | July 6, 2006, 11:12pm | #

Malkin wouldn't even be here in the good, ole USA if she won't born in this country while her parents were here on work VISAS. She'd be standing in line like all other immigrants banging on the door.

g | July 6, 2006, 11:15pm | #

What's horrible and indefensible about what Malkin did to Denton - whether it had anything to do with her tragedy - is that Denton had absolutely no role in the issue that Malkin had whipped her flying monkeys into a frenzy about.

I am well aware of Denton's scandals. There are a lot of sides to the story, including the point that someone upthread made that she was simply a hard negotiator in a job market; that spousal hires are routine in academia, and that the renovations to the property remain UCSC's property.

Yet Malkin's issue was the student anti-recruitment protestors.

The shitty thing about what Malkin did was that Denton's reaction regarding the student protesters was exactly what any university administrator would have done - she followed the policies of the university and didn't knee-jerk expell the students without due process.

Malkin shone the light on Denton not for her financial or spousal-hire issues, but for the fact that Denton didn't do what Malkin - who doesn't have a clue about university policies - wanted her to do. There are procedures for expelling students, and because Denton stayed within the lines regarding policy, Malkin decided to attack her where she was vulnerable in an unrelated way.

Malkin didn't give two shits about internal UCSC or event UC System governance and administration.

Malkin just wanted to hurt and torment Denton because she saw her as "on the other side", and she used whatever she could get her hands on. And that's vile, and beyond the pale.

Doug | July 6, 2006, 11:17pm | #

It was actually Bush who pulled the 'can run but cannot hide' thing, it was pretty lame but not as lame as Kerry's response.

That said, I've always thought Malkin's tactis are utterly despicable.

Lulu in NYC | July 6, 2006, 11:25pm | #

O, Michelle, Michelle!

(You bug-eyed belle)

A termagant so vicious

She channels Satan’s wishes

Making life here on Earth a living Hell.

g | July 6, 2006, 11:26pm | #

"She writes a post demonstrating that Denice Denton did not do her job (maintaining order on the university campus is Job One for a university chancellor)"

JD --- are you familiar with student disciplinary policy at UCSC? Explain how Denton didn't do her job.

Students are entitled to due process. Go read the student handbook and find out how they violated student policy, and while you're at it, find out whether a complaint was actually made. If Denton did not respond to a valid complaint, she deserves criticism. But if you're saying that she should have taken policy into her own hands just because Malkin thinks she should, you are just as sick as Malkin.

Are you familiar with the UC system's policies on protests? Please, share with us the appropriate policies that mandate the Chancellor expell students who express their views.

Tapioca Zimbabwe | July 7, 2006, 1:04am | #

My new band is called, The Dead Malkins!

Dan Kauffman | July 7, 2006, 2:31am | #

Malkin wouldn't even be here in the good, ole USA if she won't born in this country while her parents were here on work VISAS. She'd be standing in line like all other immigrants banging on the door.

Comment by: flaming liberal at July 6, 2006 11:12 PM
*************************************************
You mean she was born a US citizen while her parents were in the Country LEGALLY????

Wow!

Uhh unless you have American Indian ancestory I don't see where you are entitled to any moral high ground, if you do, what tribe? My ancestors were Cherokee they had to walk here, how did YOUR immigrant ancestors arrive?

Richard L. | July 7, 2006, 4:04am | #

Denton was supposedly qualified to be a UC Chancellor. Yet the bleeding hearts smearing Ms. Malkin portray the Chancellor as a fragile neurotic.

Can you people simply live with realities? Ms. Denton may have been underqualified and she obviously was neurotic but she was no dummy. She knew what she was getting into. Not only did she accept the post but she had the chutzpah to rob the University of half a million dollars for her lavish housing. She then insisted they create a job at 5 times the income of the average California taxpayer for her gay lover. Not exactly a wallflower was she?

Denton chose her own path all the way to the grave. Perhaps now UC will search for an able administrator and not a political symbol.

waldo | July 7, 2006, 4:29am | #

Malkin is a coward who'd say and do anything to stay in sweet with the fascist sucks that run America.

filmex | July 7, 2006, 4:38am | #

Anyone that gives a flying frijol regarding anything Malkin says anytime, should just take their Ann Coulter diploma, go home and comb their tongue.

Topical obsolescence---a contemporary genre of political thought(or lack thereof).

jw | July 7, 2006, 4:54am | #

The problem is the war. The problem is the war. The problem is the war. The problem is the war. The problem is the war. Etc. This is Santa Cruz, California, not the f--king United States. Make love here, not war; it's always been that way. Good luck trying to change it.

L.N. Smithee | July 7, 2006, 7:58am | #

Mr. Weigel writes "It might become [Malkin] to apologize for smearing an academic." And I think she should do just that as soon as Mr. Weigel apologizes for smearing Ms. Malkin.

Turd Kicker | July 7, 2006, 8:23am | #

Malkin maybe all of that, but why does what she did here make her a scoundral?

Because she posted the number for the purpose of inciciting harassment. Kind of like me taking your email address and signing you up for spam. It's not illegal, but it's an asshole thing to do.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

No, that's not what happened. Malkin posted a press release from the idiots in which the idiots listed their own phone numbers. It should also be noted that the idiots then posted Malkin's phone number and address along with pictures of the area in which she lives. Now, who's the bigger asshole?

Erica | July 7, 2006, 8:28am | #

You people who defend a person as despicable as Michelle Malkin are seriously deranged. She is a horrible human being and there is no defense for her. She is at the very least clinically insane. I have seen her on way too many news programs, usually Fox or some other low brow show, and her crazy eyes say it all. She is fucking nuts and all of you people who follow her and protect her are like a weirdo cult. You're freaking scary nutty people. And here you on a website defending her because someone had the audacity to suggest that the crazy bitch apologize for inciting harrassment against an innocent woman. I have no idea how you people will ever manage to get your souls back but good luck with that.

Just curious | July 7, 2006, 8:37am | #

Hey Erica,

Are you by chance a Professor in the Moronics Department?

GOD rolls eyes | July 7, 2006, 8:44am | #

cmon...

suicidal tendencies dont happen overnight. It's amusing to see the liberals call conservatives every name in the book (even mocking their physical traits..)while pretending to be upset over this womans death. And to the one that mentioned brownshirts.. do you know what fascism is? Are the liberals that violently tried to run recruiters off campus..that barricaded denton in her office..that toss pies at conservatives..or show up at events trying to shout down conservative speakers..are they using intimidation and violence to suppress opposing views? Honestly...liberals are Americas insurgents...try to grow up.

w3 | July 7, 2006, 8:50am | #

Honestly I'm just surprised someone would be proud to have a libertarian blog and title it "hit and run" as if that was some virtue.

"Hit and Run" journalism is the kind where you throw out allegations and then hide behind "vacation" or "unavailable" when others call or write to question what you published. You know, like the recent publication by Harvard regarding the "Zionist Lobby."

It's just weird for supposedly left-leaning people to become upset at the posting of publicly available phone numbers for public officials. Very weird. It's like you're saying, "look at me! I'm a freakin' hypocrite!"

Erica | July 7, 2006, 9:02am | #

I notice that I post that Michelle Malkin is a fucking lunatic and they ignore that and say I am a moron and go on about suicidal tendancies. What the fuck is that about???
Is there no one here with the balls to take on the issue of whether Michelle Malkin is certifiably insane. I think she's a full blown lunatic. I am serious when I say that she could indeed check herself into a mental institute and they would take her no questions asked. It's her fucking crazy eyes.
So come on people. Someone with the gonads address the fact that Michelle Malkin is a fucking crazy bitch and you all drank the fucking crazy bitch koolaid.
Oh, and you're all going to hell.

Doug | July 7, 2006, 9:16am | #

What about BOOO FREAKIN' HOOO now Michelle?

It's strange that someone who is an expert disclosing other people's contact information doesn't even publish her own email address.

I bet some people would love to "take a stand".

Just curious | July 7, 2006, 9:22am | #

So, Erica,

If I have interpreted your response correctly, the answer is "yes".

Incidentally, I congratulate you on your cultured and sophisticated use of the English language. Very classy.

CaliOne | July 7, 2006, 9:26am | #

Michelle Malkin is a charlatan. All she has are her overweight / over 60 crowd of uneducated, unemployed losers that see in her some sort of redemption from their racist inclinations just because she is a "brown" person that thinks the same way they do. Just post a link to the Walmart specials, it should be enough of a distraction for these losers.

mojoe | July 7, 2006, 9:28am | #

I used to post here alot. Now I remember why I left.

mojoe | July 7, 2006, 9:35am | #

And I agree with "Just curious" Erica, your well thought out posts are a joy to read.

Tim G. | July 7, 2006, 10:24am | #

No great loss.

Tim G. | July 7, 2006, 10:26am | #

No great loss. You can't blame others for your own actions. You have to use your head.

Brainster | July 7, 2006, 11:36am | #

Let me get this straight: Malkin didn't have anything to do with the woman's suicide, but she should apologize anyway?

This is just an excuse to get angry when she doesn't apologize, an excuse that Greg Sargent and other particularly foolish liberal bloggers have hopped on.

So | July 7, 2006, 11:42am | #

Why the posthumous exaltation of an impaired person, whose conduct was so vile, and whose antipathy to academic inquiry was so fervent.

Death does not exonerate people from their misdeeds in life. Ms Denton was a misfit with epigenetic dysfunction, and now her self-inflicted death is somehow supposed to exonerate here and elevate her life and her nature retrospectively.

Get real. A sleaze is a sleaze, dead or alive. Mrs. Malkin is to be congratulated for her insight and integrity.

Phil | July 7, 2006, 11:43am | #

In response to S.R. Chamberlain:

"Second, if you hold public office, you shouldn't spend $30,000 in public
funds on a dog run."

The funds were NOT "public funds" (as to imply tax payer funds) but
rather PRIVATE funds from an endowment circa 1919. From the very article you cite:

"The renovations, reported by the Sentinel in March and explained as
"significant deferred maintenance and improvements" by university
officials, were funded by a $151 million endowment initiated by a
private donor in 1919."

"...no state money was spent on the chancellor's home renovations..."

Get your facts straight.

Debbie Notkin | July 7, 2006, 1:21pm | #

I knew Denice Denton very slightly. I just want to appreciate you for making the point that there is always time for compassion for those we disagree with, especially when their lives take hard turns.

Suicide is complex and ultimately incomprehensible except from the inside. No one can be blamed for another person's suicide; in my view, no one should be celebrating that suicide either.

I'm so sorry you're coming in for this level of invective just for expressing your opinion.

Martha Bridegam | July 7, 2006, 4:04pm | #

Ah, but Jennifer, Malkin's post doesn't say "go harass this person, my minions". In fact, before the update with the Chancellor's information, she says "If you are contacting them, I do not condone death threats or foul language.".

Are you prepared to swear she didn't say that with a wink?

What Henry II said about Becket was deniable too.

Craig C | July 7, 2006, 6:42pm | #

Hopefully more people in authority who support Leftie agendas will follow Denton's lead.

MelodyLane | July 7, 2006, 6:56pm | #

It was clear that this woman had serious mental and emotional problems as evidenced by her wacky political views. She was clearly imbalanced.

That is certainly sad, but she is the only one who made the choice to kill herself rather than get some much needed help. She was a big girl and had choices.

Let's not compound the crime by blindly blaming someone else for her poor, tragic choices.

MelodyLane | July 7, 2006, 7:04pm | #

Erica wrote: [i]She is fucking nuts and all of you people who follow her and protect her are like a weirdo cult. You're freaking scary nutty people. And here you on a website defending her because someone had the audacity to suggest that the crazy bitch apologize for inciting harrassment against an innocent woman. I have no idea how you people will ever manage to get your souls back but good luck with that.[/i]

Here is another example of a very unbalanced, shrill harpie that is typical of these gals on the left. She does not deal in the realm of facts, evidence and reason so is left with the only weapon she possesses: name calling, a practice she probably learned in junior high. She just has never evolved beyond it.

I hope you get the get the help you need, Erica, lest you end up like poor, unbalanced Denice Denton.

Craig C | July 7, 2006, 7:30pm | #

Erica attacks everybody with "no gonads". She has used a false email address to make her comments.
So who's hiding, Erica?

Lamar | July 7, 2006, 7:42pm | #

Let me get this straight: Malkin didn't have anything to do with the woman's suicide, but she should apologize anyway?
No, she should express remorse at someone's death, you know, like classy people do.

Jim Treacher | July 8, 2006, 12:04am | #

The classy people who are using that person's death to try to score points on somebody they don't like, you mean?

Rich | July 8, 2006, 12:10am | #

I've never visited this website before. Don't guess I'll be back. Some of you folks could use some help with anger management. You're living in a great (albeit flawed) country in a time of incredible opportunites. A little gratitude might be in order. Best regards.

Stogie | July 8, 2006, 1:58am | #

Oh yeah, Denice Denton killed herself because Michelle Malkin posted her public phone number. Erica's comments are so typical of the Left: irrational, unfactual, nothing more than an ad hominem smear.

UC Santa Cruz is a little seditious cesspool of radical groupthink. It is a disgrace to the university system. Next time the Military wants to recruit there, maybe about 200 of us roughneck redneck rightwingers should accompany them. I'd love to kick some hippy ass.

Stogie | July 8, 2006, 1:59am | #

Oh yeah, Denice Denton killed herself because Michelle Malkin posted her public phone number. Erica's comments are so typical of the Left: irrational, unfactual, nothing more than an ad hominem smear.

UC Santa Cruz is a little seditious cesspool of radical groupthink. It is a disgrace to the university system. Next time the Military wants to recruit there, maybe about 200 of us roughneck redneck rightwingers should accompany them. I'd love to kick some hippy ass.

Stogie | July 8, 2006, 1:59am | #

Oh yeah, Denice Denton killed herself because Michelle Malkin posted her public phone number. Erica's comments are so typical of the Left: irrational, unfactual, nothing more than an ad hominem smear.

UC Santa Cruz is a little seditious cesspool of radical groupthink. It is a disgrace to the university system. Next time the Military wants to recruit there, maybe about 200 of us roughneck redneck rightwingers should accompany them. I'd love to kick some hippy ass.

bernie | July 8, 2006, 5:29pm | #

You're off the mark on this one - I linked your post to Michelle Malkin - Cruella de Blog

Big Dog | July 8, 2006, 9:18pm | #

I linked your post here. You are not even in the ballpark. Denton is the only one responsible for the death.

UCSC Chancellor hits rock bottom

JP | July 9, 2006, 1:56pm | #

Hmm, they release the information...good. Michelle puts it on her website, giving them MORE publicity....bad. Stupid woman kills herself.......we must find someone to blame. The liberal mantra. Its never "my" fault. There's always someone else to blame. Ignorant.

Scaramonga | July 10, 2006, 10:54am | #

Malkin had zero role or responsibility for this sicko deciding to do a swan dive off that building. She was caught, plain and simple, blowing taxpayer dollars. Add to that her screwed-up personal life and toss in a couple dashes of classical liberal stupidity and stand back to avoid the spray.