Trump orders colleges to back free speech or lose funding

[pknopp]

A Texas teacher sued the state after losing her job for refusing to sign a pro-Israel contract

Interesting conflict between state law and personal beliefs.


Meanwhile, at lib schools when conservatives try to speak.

Sometimes it takes riots. It took riots to get blacks equal rights. It took riots to get us out of Vietnam. The founders understood that.

So, you support the use of street violence, against your political enemies.

Sometimes. Is that not what we did in Boston on December 16, 1773?

THank you for your honesty. So many of your lib buddies here, lie about that.


So, are you going to be honest enough to admit that with people like you, and mobs like Antifa, that Trump's move is completely called for?


Or is that too much even for an honest left like you?

My lib buddies? Who is it that often times notes

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.

So, you believe that we fought for independence to stop the British use of free speech against us?

While I expect this out of some I had sort of expected more out of you.

 

[CWayne]

I looked and there is no proof that Liberty gets federal grant money

Evangelical Liberty University received half a billion dollars in federal aid money

Evangelical Liberty University received half a billion dollars in federal aid money
One conservative college got more government cash than NPR last year


Alex Pareene
April 5, 2011 7:45PM (UTC)
Liberty University, the evangelical private Christian school founded by dead apartheid-supporting bigot Jerry Falwell, received $445 million in federal financial aid last year. The Corporation for Public Broadcasting, by the way, received $420 million from the federal government.

Just because a lib editor lies in a headline it does not become a fact

Liberty receive ZERO dollars from the federal government

that money went to students

I keep forgetting.

Cons only believe what they WANT to believe and truth, facts or reality have nothing to do with it.

ok....

why don't YOU see if YOU can find any data suggesting that liberty did NOT get any federal funds.

I read every link and all of them are for student loans and grants to students not the university

Which then goes to the University. Yes there are different rules whether the aide is direct or not. All the same they are benefiting greatly.

No more so than if they were getting student tuition from a bank. The acceptance of direct federal dollars to support the University means that they are subject to the limitations that the taxpayers place on them.

They can turn down the dollars and accept ONLY student tuition, and become private universities.

Somehow, I don't think they'll do that.

The issue here is that Conservatives have a right to speak on University campuses that receive federal dollars AND that the Universities are NOT permitted to throw any obstacles in their way or to allow the student body to prevent it.

 

[CWayne]

Interesting conflict between state law and personal beliefs.


Meanwhile, at lib schools when conservatives try to speak.

Sometimes it takes riots. It took riots to get blacks equal rights. It took riots to get us out of Vietnam. The founders understood that.

So, you support the use of street violence, against your political enemies.

Sometimes. Is that not what we did in Boston on December 16, 1773?

THank you for your honesty. So many of your lib buddies here, lie about that.


So, are you going to be honest enough to admit that with people like you, and mobs like Antifa, that Trump's move is completely called for?


Or is that too much even for an honest left like you?

My lib buddies? Who is it that often times notes

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.

So, you believe that we fought for independence to stop the British use of free speech against us?

While I expect this out of some I had sort of expected more out of you.

You were the one trying to make an equivalency between the two.

The TOPIC is ensuring that OUR Universities are not favoring one ideology over another.

Our fight for independence is not part of that topic.

 

[CWayne]

Interesting conflict between state law and personal beliefs.


Meanwhile, at lib schools when conservatives try to speak.

Sometimes it takes riots. It took riots to get blacks equal rights. It took riots to get us out of Vietnam. The founders understood that.

So, you support the use of street violence, against your political enemies.

Sometimes. Is that not what we did in Boston on December 16, 1773?

THank you for your honesty. So many of your lib buddies here, lie about that.


So, are you going to be honest enough to admit that with people like you, and mobs like Antifa, that Trump's move is completely called for?


Or is that too much even for an honest left like you?

My lib buddies? Who is it that often times notes

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.

So, you believe that we fought for independence to stop the British use of free speech against us?

Keep it in the realm of the topic. I've seen no one (other than those on this forum) claim that they accept violence to silence those they disagree with. However, we have actual deeds in the real world by the left over the past few years of leftists using violence to try and silence those they disagree with.

You have some clown here in this thread, taking statements out of context to try and say that speech itself is violence.

"So, you believe that we fought for independence to stop the British use of free speech against us?"

We had First Amendment rights before the Constitution was ratified?

That aside, violence is neither free speech nor protected by the Constitution.

Correct.

Violence is NOT free speech.

 

[pknopp]

Evangelical Liberty University received half a billion dollars in federal aid money

Evangelical Liberty University received half a billion dollars in federal aid money
One conservative college got more government cash than NPR last year


Alex Pareene
April 5, 2011 7:45PM (UTC)
Liberty University, the evangelical private Christian school founded by dead apartheid-supporting bigot Jerry Falwell, received $445 million in federal financial aid last year. The Corporation for Public Broadcasting, by the way, received $420 million from the federal government.

Just because a lib editor lies in a headline it does not become a fact

Liberty receive ZERO dollars from the federal government

that money went to students

I keep forgetting.

Cons only believe what they WANT to believe and truth, facts or reality have nothing to do with it.

ok....

why don't YOU see if YOU can find any data suggesting that liberty did NOT get any federal funds.

I read every link and all of them are for student loans and grants to students not the university

Which then goes to the University. Yes there are different rules whether the aide is direct or not. All the same they are benefiting greatly.

No more so than if they were getting student tuition from a bank.

Many can not access loans from a bank. That is why the government student loan program was created.

The acceptance of direct federal dollars to support the University means that they are subject to the limitations that the taxpayers place on them.

They can turn down the dollars and accept ONLY student tuition, and become private universities.

Somehow, I don't think they'll do that.

The issue here is that Conservatives have a right to speak on University campuses that receive federal dollars AND that the Universities are NOT permitted to throw any obstacles in their way or to allow the student body to prevent it.

Well not exactly. If the students want to protest, they are also permitted to do that.

 

[jc456]

Sometimes it takes riots. It took riots to get blacks equal rights. It took riots to get us out of Vietnam. The founders understood that.

So, you support the use of street violence, against your political enemies.

Sometimes. Is that not what we did in Boston on December 16, 1773?

THank you for your honesty. So many of your lib buddies here, lie about that.


So, are you going to be honest enough to admit that with people like you, and mobs like Antifa, that Trump's move is completely called for?


Or is that too much even for an honest left like you?

My lib buddies? Who is it that often times notes

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.

So, you believe that we fought for independence to stop the British use of free speech against us?

Keep it in the realm of the topic. I've seen no one (other than those on this forum) claim that they accept violence to silence those they disagree with. However, we have actual deeds in the real world by the left over the past few years of leftists using violence to try and silence those they disagree with.

You have some clown here in this thread, taking statements out of context to try and say that speech itself is violence.

"So, you believe that we fought for independence to stop the British use of free speech against us?"

We had First Amendment rights before the Constitution was ratified?

That aside, violence is neither free speech nor protected by the Constitution.

Correct.

Violence is NOT free speech.

it isn't a protest either. it's a riot.

 

[CWayne]

Just because a lib editor lies in a headline it does not become a fact

Liberty receive ZERO dollars from the federal government

that money went to students

I keep forgetting.

Cons only believe what they WANT to believe and truth, facts or reality have nothing to do with it.

ok....

why don't YOU see if YOU can find any data suggesting that liberty did NOT get any federal funds.

I read every link and all of them are for student loans and grants to students not the university

Which then goes to the University. Yes there are different rules whether the aide is direct or not. All the same they are benefiting greatly.

No more so than if they were getting student tuition from a bank.

Many can not access loans from a bank. That is why the government student loan program was created.

The acceptance of direct federal dollars to support the University means that they are subject to the limitations that the taxpayers place on them.

They can turn down the dollars and accept ONLY student tuition, and become private universities.

Somehow, I don't think they'll do that.

The issue here is that Conservatives have a right to speak on University campuses that receive federal dollars AND that the Universities are NOT permitted to throw any obstacles in their way or to allow the student body to prevent it.

Well not exactly. If the students want to protest, they are also permitted to do that.

Well, that is too bad for them. They can spend 10's of thousands of dollars less and learn a skill that directly benefits society.

They are permitted to PEACABLY protest as long as the protest does NOT interfere with the right of others to speak or otherwise exercise their Constitutional rights.

 

[pknopp]

Sometimes it takes riots. It took riots to get blacks equal rights. It took riots to get us out of Vietnam. The founders understood that.

So, you support the use of street violence, against your political enemies.

Sometimes. Is that not what we did in Boston on December 16, 1773?

THank you for your honesty. So many of your lib buddies here, lie about that.


So, are you going to be honest enough to admit that with people like you, and mobs like Antifa, that Trump's move is completely called for?


Or is that too much even for an honest left like you?

My lib buddies? Who is it that often times notes

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.

So, you believe that we fought for independence to stop the British use of free speech against us?

While I expect this out of some I had sort of expected more out of you.

You were the one trying to make an equivalency between the two.

No, you obviously did not read the full conversation.

The TOPIC is ensuring that OUR Universities are not favoring one ideology over another.

Our fight for independence is not part of that topic.

I was asked a question about whether I support violence. I said sometimes I do and explained why. Don't take conversations out of context. It's never good to jump in late unless you want to read and comprehend things first.

 

[CWayne]

So, you support the use of street violence, against your political enemies.

Sometimes. Is that not what we did in Boston on December 16, 1773?

THank you for your honesty. So many of your lib buddies here, lie about that.


So, are you going to be honest enough to admit that with people like you, and mobs like Antifa, that Trump's move is completely called for?


Or is that too much even for an honest left like you?

My lib buddies? Who is it that often times notes

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.

So, you believe that we fought for independence to stop the British use of free speech against us?

Keep it in the realm of the topic. I've seen no one (other than those on this forum) claim that they accept violence to silence those they disagree with. However, we have actual deeds in the real world by the left over the past few years of leftists using violence to try and silence those they disagree with.

You have some clown here in this thread, taking statements out of context to try and say that speech itself is violence.

"So, you believe that we fought for independence to stop the British use of free speech against us?"

We had First Amendment rights before the Constitution was ratified?

That aside, violence is neither free speech nor protected by the Constitution.

Correct.

Violence is NOT free speech.

it isn't a protest either. it's a riot.

They can riot all they wish, as long as it does not interfere with another's right to speak or exercise their Constitutional right.

I mean, think about what it is they are protesting or rioting against and the purpose of those riots or protests.

They wish to oppress a thought or idea that they do not want to be spread because they disagree with it.

 

[pknopp]

I keep forgetting.

Cons only believe what they WANT to believe and truth, facts or reality have nothing to do with it.

ok....

why don't YOU see if YOU can find any data suggesting that liberty did NOT get any federal funds.

I read every link and all of them are for student loans and grants to students not the university

Which then goes to the University. Yes there are different rules whether the aide is direct or not. All the same they are benefiting greatly.

No more so than if they were getting student tuition from a bank.

Many can not access loans from a bank. That is why the government student loan program was created.

The acceptance of direct federal dollars to support the University means that they are subject to the limitations that the taxpayers place on them.

They can turn down the dollars and accept ONLY student tuition, and become private universities.

Somehow, I don't think they'll do that.

The issue here is that Conservatives have a right to speak on University campuses that receive federal dollars AND that the Universities are NOT permitted to throw any obstacles in their way or to allow the student body to prevent it.

Well not exactly. If the students want to protest, they are also permitted to do that.

Well, that is too bad for them. They can spend 10's of thousands of dollars less and learn a skill that directly benefits society.

Right, only the rich and well connected kids should be able to access higher educations. Sheesh,

They are permitted to PEACABLY protest as long as the protest does NOT interfere with the right of others to speak or otherwise exercise their Constitutional rights.

Or they are willing to accept the consequences. Like the people in Boston did on December 16 1773.

Or Rosa Parks did when she said "no".

 

[CWayne]

So, you support the use of street violence, against your political enemies.

Sometimes. Is that not what we did in Boston on December 16, 1773?

THank you for your honesty. So many of your lib buddies here, lie about that.


So, are you going to be honest enough to admit that with people like you, and mobs like Antifa, that Trump's move is completely called for?


Or is that too much even for an honest left like you?

My lib buddies? Who is it that often times notes

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.

So, you believe that we fought for independence to stop the British use of free speech against us?

While I expect this out of some I had sort of expected more out of you.

You were the one trying to make an equivalency between the two.

No, you obviously did not read the full conversation.

The TOPIC is ensuring that OUR Universities are not favoring one ideology over another.

Our fight for independence is not part of that topic.

I was asked a question about whether I support violence. I said sometimes I do and explained why. Don't take conversations out of context. It's never good to jump in late unless you want to read and comprehend things first.

I did read it. You were attempting to lead the person you were talking to into believing that violence against conservative speech is justified and that you were trying to use our fight for our independence as a legitimate basis for your argument. Just as you were trying to use civil rights.

The two are not equivalent.

 

[IM2]

Colleges have the right not to promote hate speech.

 

[pknopp]

Sometimes it takes riots. It took riots to get blacks equal rights. It took riots to get us out of Vietnam. The founders understood that.

So, you support the use of street violence, against your political enemies.

Sometimes. Is that not what we did in Boston on December 16, 1773?

THank you for your honesty. So many of your lib buddies here, lie about that.


So, are you going to be honest enough to admit that with people like you, and mobs like Antifa, that Trump's move is completely called for?


Or is that too much even for an honest left like you?

My lib buddies? Who is it that often times notes

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.

So, you believe that we fought for independence to stop the British use of free speech against us?

While I expect this out of some I had sort of expected more out of you.

You were the one trying to make an equivalency between the two.

The TOPIC is ensuring that OUR Universities are not favoring one ideology over another.

Our fight for independence is not part of that topic.

I never addressed whatever you are going on about. I really have no idea.

 

[CWayne]

I read every link and all of them are for student loans and grants to students not the university

Which then goes to the University. Yes there are different rules whether the aide is direct or not. All the same they are benefiting greatly.

No more so than if they were getting student tuition from a bank.

Many can not access loans from a bank. That is why the government student loan program was created.

The acceptance of direct federal dollars to support the University means that they are subject to the limitations that the taxpayers place on them.

They can turn down the dollars and accept ONLY student tuition, and become private universities.

Somehow, I don't think they'll do that.

The issue here is that Conservatives have a right to speak on University campuses that receive federal dollars AND that the Universities are NOT permitted to throw any obstacles in their way or to allow the student body to prevent it.

Well not exactly. If the students want to protest, they are also permitted to do that.

Well, that is too bad for them. They can spend 10's of thousands of dollars less and learn a skill that directly benefits society.

Right, only the rich and well connected kids should be able to access higher educations. Sheesh,

They are permitted to PEACABLY protest as long as the protest does NOT interfere with the right of others to speak or otherwise exercise their Constitutional rights.

Or they are willing to accept the consequences. Like the people in Boston did on December 16 1773.

Or Rosa Parks did when she said "no".

No one said that. The problem with your argument is that higher education can ONLY be achieved by taking out crushing debt.

They WILL take the consequences. The discussion is pinned around preventing it, to begin with. The actual argument is our universities looking the other way when conservative speech is oppressed while being hypocritical about having their own ideology curtailed in the public forum.

 

[CWayne]

Colleges have the right not to promote hate speech.

Then you would be barred from every college in the country.

 

[CWayne]

So, you support the use of street violence, against your political enemies.

Sometimes. Is that not what we did in Boston on December 16, 1773?

THank you for your honesty. So many of your lib buddies here, lie about that.


So, are you going to be honest enough to admit that with people like you, and mobs like Antifa, that Trump's move is completely called for?


Or is that too much even for an honest left like you?

My lib buddies? Who is it that often times notes

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.

So, you believe that we fought for independence to stop the British use of free speech against us?

While I expect this out of some I had sort of expected more out of you.

You were the one trying to make an equivalency between the two.

The TOPIC is ensuring that OUR Universities are not favoring one ideology over another.

Our fight for independence is not part of that topic.

I never addressed whatever you are going on about. I really have no idea.

I agree, you don't understand.

 

[pknopp]

Sometimes. Is that not what we did in Boston on December 16, 1773?

My lib buddies? Who is it that often times notes

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.

So, you believe that we fought for independence to stop the British use of free speech against us?

While I expect this out of some I had sort of expected more out of you.

You were the one trying to make an equivalency between the two.

No, you obviously did not read the full conversation.

The TOPIC is ensuring that OUR Universities are not favoring one ideology over another.

Our fight for independence is not part of that topic.

I was asked a question about whether I support violence. I said sometimes I do and explained why. Don't take conversations out of context. It's never good to jump in late unless you want to read and comprehend things first.

I did read it. You were attempting to lead the person you were talking to into believing that violence against conservative speech is justified and that you were trying to use our fight for our independence as a legitimate basis for your argument. Just as you were trying to use civil rights.

The two are not equivalent.

I never even addressed the issue. I specifically said that if one wanted my opinion on a particular instance that they would have to actually present that instance. No one ever did.

 

[pknopp]

Sometimes. Is that not what we did in Boston on December 16, 1773?

My lib buddies? Who is it that often times notes

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.

So, you believe that we fought for independence to stop the British use of free speech against us?

While I expect this out of some I had sort of expected more out of you.

You were the one trying to make an equivalency between the two.

The TOPIC is ensuring that OUR Universities are not favoring one ideology over another.

Our fight for independence is not part of that topic.

I never addressed whatever you are going on about. I really have no idea.

I agree, you don't understand.

I don't, explain it to me.

 

[rightwinger]

Sometimes it takes riots. It took riots to get blacks equal rights. It took riots to get us out of Vietnam. The founders understood that.

So, you support the use of street violence, against your political enemies.

Sometimes. Is that not what we did in Boston on December 16, 1773?

THank you for your honesty. So many of your lib buddies here, lie about that.


So, are you going to be honest enough to admit that with people like you, and mobs like Antifa, that Trump's move is completely called for?


Or is that too much even for an honest left like you?

My lib buddies? Who is it that often times notes

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.

So, you believe that we fought for independence to stop the British use of free speech against us?

While I expect this out of some I had sort of expected more out of you.

You were the one trying to make an equivalency between the two.

The TOPIC is ensuring that OUR Universities are not favoring one ideology over another.

Our fight for independence is not part of that topic.

Again the question arises ....does that include Christian Schools and Military Academies?

 

[jc456]

Sometimes. Is that not what we did in Boston on December 16, 1773?

My lib buddies? Who is it that often times notes

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.

So, you believe that we fought for independence to stop the British use of free speech against us?

Keep it in the realm of the topic. I've seen no one (other than those on this forum) claim that they accept violence to silence those they disagree with. However, we have actual deeds in the real world by the left over the past few years of leftists using violence to try and silence those they disagree with.

You have some clown here in this thread, taking statements out of context to try and say that speech itself is violence.

"So, you believe that we fought for independence to stop the British use of free speech against us?"

We had First Amendment rights before the Constitution was ratified?

That aside, violence is neither free speech nor protected by the Constitution.

Correct.

Violence is NOT free speech.

it isn't a protest either. it's a riot.

They can riot all they wish, as long as it does not interfere with another's right to speak or exercise their Constitutional right.

I mean, think about what it is they are protesting or rioting against and the purpose of those riots or protests.

They wish to oppress a thought or idea that they do not want to be spread because they disagree with it.

exactly, they resort to violence in the riot to scare away the opposition. The thing they don't understand is that the opposition can fight back. And the MSM only reports on the fighting back. what a society of evil!!!!