Dan Patrick While we're all well aware that he's a moron, does he think that Yippee Ki Yay means goodbye in some other language? It's the same as Yeehaw, any Texan should know that. His usage here...
Yippie Ki Yay! Adios! Sayonara! Auf Wiedersehen! Au Revoir! In every language you can possibly think of: Goodbye!
Dan Patrick
While we're all well aware that he's a moron, does he think that Yippee Ki Yay means goodbye in some other language? It's the same as Yeehaw, any Texan should know that. His usage here is about as authentic as Ted Cruz.
I'm going to pretend he's just a Kesha fan. This is roundly bad, couched in language that legally wouldn't stop Critical Race Theory or any modern historic theory from being taught because no one...
I'm going to pretend he's just a Kesha fan.
This is roundly bad, couched in language that legally wouldn't stop Critical Race Theory or any modern historic theory from being taught because no one is teaching that "one race is superior than another" (ಠ_ಠ ok well, I know who's more likely to do that...)
But it will be abused from the start, and it's exactly why Harvard didn't bow to the federal demands. Faculty will likely sue...whether they're successful or not IDK
Regardless of whether faculty is able to fight back, I think this will further exacerbate brain drain out of the UT System and Texas in general. Bummer, as I really enjoyed my time at UT.
Regardless of whether faculty is able to fight back, I think this will further exacerbate brain drain out of the UT System and Texas in general. Bummer, as I really enjoyed my time at UT.
Well he's from Maryland and Rafael Cruz is from Canada, so they aren't Texans. And no, as a Texan (no longer in Texas, a Tex-pat if you will) you don't have to be born in Texas to be a Texan, some...
any Texan should know that. His usage here is about as authentic as Ted Cruz.
Well he's from Maryland and Rafael Cruz is from Canada, so they aren't Texans.
And no, as a Texan (no longer in Texas, a Tex-pat if you will) you don't have to be born in Texas to be a Texan, some of my favorite Texans were not born there, but they are infinitely more Texan and deserving of the moniker than either of these two jackasses.
Dear Maryland and Canada,
Please take your trash back with you, we don't like litter.
Dear Texas, This has been all you for the past three elections. At least try not to repeatedly vote for actively dumping garbage in your state before trying to pawn off responsibility for litter...
Dear Maryland and Canada,
Please take your trash back with you, we don't like litter.
Dear Texas,
This has been all you for the past three elections. At least try not to repeatedly vote for actively dumping garbage in your state before trying to pawn off responsibility for litter onto others. We also have our own litter problem to deal with.
Texas has more democrat voters than any state other than California ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Ignoring that is ignoring the people who are hurt by republican policies and are fighting to change them in the state
Texas has more democrat voters than any state other than California ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Ignoring that is ignoring the people who are hurt by republican policies and are fighting to change them in the state
I was going to give a summary of the law so that people don't have to click through the clickbait title, but the article seems quite one-sided in its description. Here's the only other real...
And because I figure some of you may trust Claude more than anything from Texas, here's a description I got from 3.7 Sonnet:
You're right to look beyond the surface-level wording of legislation. In this case, SB 37's seemingly innocuous language masks potentially far-reaching consequences through several mechanisms:
The bill uses vague language that could be broadly interpreted. For example, it prohibits courses from requiring students to "adopt a belief that any race, sex, or ethnicity or social, political or religious belief is inherently superior to any other." This seemingly reasonable wording can be interpreted to restrict discussions of systemic racism or historical inequities. The Texas Tribune
The bill fundamentally alters university governance by transferring power from faculty to politically-appointed governing boards. Only governing boards can establish faculty councils, and university presidents can directly appoint members to these bodies. The Texas Tribune This shifts academic decision-making from educators to political appointees.
The bill requires governing boards to conduct comprehensive curriculum reviews to ensure courses "do not distort significant historical events" or teach "identity politics" or "systemic racism," without defining these terms. This vague wording gives politically-appointed boards broad discretion to restrict course content they find objectionable. El Paso Matters
SB 37 creates a state office to investigate complaints against universities, essentially establishing a mechanism for outside political oversight of teaching content. The Texas Tribune This creates a chilling effect where professors might self-censor to avoid investigation.
The bill potentially threatens accreditation by undermining faculty governance, which is required by accrediting bodies like the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges. El Paso Matters Loss of accreditation would make students ineligible for federal financial aid.
The bill imposes bureaucratic burdens like mandatory open meetings, seven-day advance agendas, and recorded votes on faculty senates, creating procedural hurdles that limit their effectiveness. The Texas Tribune
SB 37 was explicitly connected to the DEI ban by supporters, with a proponent from the Texas Public Policy Foundation stating it was "a critical next step to build on the state's ban on diversity, equity and inclusion programs in higher education." The Texas Tribune
The bill represents a typical approach to regulatory capture: create systems of oversight, reporting, and complaint investigation that appear procedural but function to constrain academic freedom and shift decision-making authority to political appointees.
While we're all well aware that he's a moron, does he think that Yippee Ki Yay means goodbye in some other language? It's the same as Yeehaw, any Texan should know that. His usage here is about as authentic as Ted Cruz.
I'm going to pretend he's just a Kesha fan.
This is roundly bad, couched in language that legally wouldn't stop Critical Race Theory or any modern historic theory from being taught because no one is teaching that "one race is superior than another" (ಠ_ಠ ok well, I know who's more likely to do that...)
But it will be abused from the start, and it's exactly why Harvard didn't bow to the federal demands. Faculty will likely sue...whether they're successful or not IDK
Regardless of whether faculty is able to fight back, I think this will further exacerbate brain drain out of the UT System and Texas in general. Bummer, as I really enjoyed my time at UT.
Well he's from Maryland and Rafael Cruz is from Canada, so they aren't Texans.
And no, as a Texan (no longer in Texas, a Tex-pat if you will) you don't have to be born in Texas to be a Texan, some of my favorite Texans were not born there, but they are infinitely more Texan and deserving of the moniker than either of these two jackasses.
Dear Maryland and Canada,
Please take your trash back with you, we don't like litter.
Dear Texas,
This has been all you for the past three elections. At least try not to repeatedly vote for actively dumping garbage in your state before trying to pawn off responsibility for litter onto others. We also have our own litter problem to deal with.
Signed,
Canada
Texas has more democrat voters than any state other than California ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Ignoring that is ignoring the people who are hurt by republican policies and are fighting to change them in the state
I miss Molly ivins and Ann Richards (spelling?)
The actual and only acceptable use of the slogan IMO
I was going to give a summary of the law so that people don't have to click through the clickbait title, but the article seems quite one-sided in its description. Here's the only other real article I could find about this:
https://www.texastribune.org/2025/04/10/texas-senate-bill-37-governing-boards-faculty-senates/
LLM content
And because I figure some of you may trust Claude more than anything from Texas, here's a description I got from 3.7 Sonnet:
You're right to look beyond the surface-level wording of legislation. In this case, SB 37's seemingly innocuous language masks potentially far-reaching consequences through several mechanisms:
The bill uses vague language that could be broadly interpreted. For example, it prohibits courses from requiring students to "adopt a belief that any race, sex, or ethnicity or social, political or religious belief is inherently superior to any other." This seemingly reasonable wording can be interpreted to restrict discussions of systemic racism or historical inequities. The Texas Tribune
The bill fundamentally alters university governance by transferring power from faculty to politically-appointed governing boards. Only governing boards can establish faculty councils, and university presidents can directly appoint members to these bodies. The Texas Tribune This shifts academic decision-making from educators to political appointees.
The bill requires governing boards to conduct comprehensive curriculum reviews to ensure courses "do not distort significant historical events" or teach "identity politics" or "systemic racism," without defining these terms. This vague wording gives politically-appointed boards broad discretion to restrict course content they find objectionable. El Paso Matters
SB 37 creates a state office to investigate complaints against universities, essentially establishing a mechanism for outside political oversight of teaching content. The Texas Tribune This creates a chilling effect where professors might self-censor to avoid investigation.
The bill potentially threatens accreditation by undermining faculty governance, which is required by accrediting bodies like the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges. El Paso Matters Loss of accreditation would make students ineligible for federal financial aid.
The bill imposes bureaucratic burdens like mandatory open meetings, seven-day advance agendas, and recorded votes on faculty senates, creating procedural hurdles that limit their effectiveness. The Texas Tribune
SB 37 was explicitly connected to the DEI ban by supporters, with a proponent from the Texas Public Policy Foundation stating it was "a critical next step to build on the state's ban on diversity, equity and inclusion programs in higher education." The Texas Tribune
The bill represents a typical approach to regulatory capture: create systems of oversight, reporting, and complaint investigation that appear procedural but function to constrain academic freedom and shift decision-making authority to political appointees.
Citations: