Trump orders colleges to back free speech or lose funding

[pknopp]

That was clearly a direct answer as to whether or not I support violence. I said at times I do and gave a couple examples.

You are just ate up with it and read what you wanted to read.

You know, ever so often, I ask a lefty to clarify what they said.


And they are like, "I was clear about what I said, why are you being a dick"?


It is because of lefties like you. Your claim that you did not mean what it looked like you meant, is A not credible, and B. if it were true, than your post was either meaningless garbage or completely misleading.



Either way, seriously, what the fuck is wrong with you?

No, what I said was absolutely what I meant.

And then you argued it, for several pages, until suddenly realizing that we were discussing it wrong, and you decided to walk it back.


EIther way, your behavior was dick like.

Argue what? What exactly did I argue? Please provide quotes to what you are accusing me of doing.

Sorry, I don't know what you mean by those words. DId I say something to make you think I was talking about you? No, I was saying vague, and undefined other shit. YOu got it wrong.

Right, you had no actual issue with what I said, but you still had to jump in with unsubstantiated claims.

If one doesn't want the answer to a question, one shouldn't ask it.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

"I don't disagree with you but let's argue"

Agreement on one point is not agreement on all points, obviously. Don't be a sissy. This is a discussion board

Why do I care? Uh...says the guy who started the thread...what a bizarre comment.

I think students at universities should have the right to reject speakers that deviate far from the norm on certain topics. Not every nutsack deserves forum he actually has no "right" to. That's why I care.

I also care because our poisonous president will likely bastardized and manipulate this bad EC for political ends.

To my knowledge none of the conservative speeches on campus involved mandatory attendance by the violent leftwing thugs

Students at the university wanted to hear the speaker and invited them

often at some expense

The civilized way to disagree is to debate the ideas you dont like

not break windows and set police cars on fire

Those Who Don't Respect Property Deserve to Become Property

It is also uncivilized to be a weakling and not support mowing the rioters down under a hail of bullets. It is a contradiction to be humane to sub-humans.

 

[Correll]

You know, ever so often, I ask a lefty to clarify what they said.


And they are like, "I was clear about what I said, why are you being a dick"?


It is because of lefties like you. Your claim that you did not mean what it looked like you meant, is A not credible, and B. if it were true, than your post was either meaningless garbage or completely misleading.



Either way, seriously, what the fuck is wrong with you?

No, what I said was absolutely what I meant.

And then you argued it, for several pages, until suddenly realizing that we were discussing it wrong, and you decided to walk it back.


EIther way, your behavior was dick like.

Argue what? What exactly did I argue? Please provide quotes to what you are accusing me of doing.

Sorry, I don't know what you mean by those words. DId I say something to make you think I was talking about you? No, I was saying vague, and undefined other shit. YOu got it wrong.

Right, you had no actual issue with what I said, but you still had to jump in with unsubstantiated claims.

If one doesn't want the answer to a question, one shouldn't ask it.

I have no idea what you are talking about. I was perfectly clear. I meant what I said.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

What you consider far from the norm may not be what someone else considers far from the norm.

Which, in objective topics, is not a matter of opinion. Politics are different than academics c, rigorous topics.

Second, even with politics: if MLK speaks, then the grand wizard of the KKK must also be paid to speak? Fuck that.

Strawman.

Not a straw man at all. White supremacists groups exist on campuses and do make this type of demand.

Join us in reality, Chris.

An Eye for a Tooth."An Eye for an Eye" Is Like a Bankrobber Only Having to Give the Money Back.

Anyone who disrupts freedom of speech should be beat up. The only thing wrong with getting even is that it should add punitive damages instead of just shouting back.

 

[Mac-7]

"I don't disagree with you but let's argue"

Agreement on one point is not agreement on all points, obviously. Don't be a sissy. This is a discussion board

Why do I care? Uh...says the guy who started the thread...what a bizarre comment.

I think students at universities should have the right to reject speakers that deviate far from the norm on certain topics. Not every nutsack deserves forum he actually has no "right" to. That's why I care.

I also care because our poisonous president will likely bastardized and manipulate this bad EC for political ends.

To my knowledge none of the conservative speeches on campus involved mandatory attendance by the violent leftwing thugs

Students at the university wanted to hear the speaker and invited them

often at some expense

The civilized way to disagree is to debate the ideas you dont like

not break windows and set police cars on fire

Those Who Don't Respect Property Deserve to Become Property

It is also uncivilized to be a weakling and not support mowing the rioters down under a hail of bullets. It is a contradiction to be humane to sub-humans.

I can live with that contradiction

the rioters should be arrested and expelled

 

[Cecilie1200]

Trump orders colleges to back free speech or lose funding

President Donald Trump signed an executive order Thursday requiring U.S. colleges to protect free speech on their campuses or risk losing federal research funding.

The new order directs federal agencies to ensure that any college or university receiving research grants agrees to promote free speech and the exchange of ideas, and to follow federal rules guiding free expression.

“Even as universities have received billions and billions of dollars from taxpayers, many have become increasingly hostile to free speech and to the First Amendment,” Trump said at a White House signing ceremony. “These universities have tried to restrict free thought, impose total conformity and shut down the voices of great young Americans.”
---
see link for the rest of the story.

but good. if they're not going to allow both sides equal time, then no $ for you.

Colleges aren’t going to back science deniers or white supremacists.

you and Donald need to stfu

Very telling, that you consider merely allowing people to speak to be "backing" them.

You and your leftist tyrant cohorts need to talk even more, so that everyone can see how noxious you are.

See the difference between us and you?

 

[Seawytch]

It is still Federal tax dollars. Your dissembling doesn't change that fact.

Given to the Students, not directly to the Institution. They also admit that fact plainly in their statement.

You really cannot stand being wrong can you? You asked if the NFL got Federal money. The answer is YES.

They got paid by the feds for advertising, that is not federal funding.

"Getting Federal Money" is usually constructed as getting grants, especially in an academic scenario, Research money, etc.

Did Trump say he was going to cut student's pell grants and subsidized student loans?

You morons are trying to nitpick and obfuscate to get any gotcha moment you can.

No, that’s not all they get.

they take a comprehensive look at the federal side of stadium subsidies. They find that since 2000 alone, federal taxpayers have footed $3.2 billion toward private sports stadiums through subsidies in the form of tax-exempt municipal bonds. The amount of revenue the federal government loses gets even bigger—$3.7 billion—when the additional tax benefits that the high-income bond holders receive are taken into account.


Top 10 biggest federal subsidies for pro stadiums (Hint: the Yankees are #1)

That isn't funding, that is something the Feds agreed to WITH THE STATES regarding municipal bonds. The feds have no say really over how the States issue their own debt services.

You keep looking for links, and have to keep expanding on the definition of "funding".

Has Trump threatened to remove the tax free status of municipal bonds?

All of this to ignore the main part of this thread, which is SJW types trying to shut down speech they oppose, often with either the acceptance of school administrators or a hands off policy by said administrations.

It’s our federal dollars going to the NFL. You can duck and dodge all you want, but you asked and I answered. Don’t care if you don’t like the facts, they’re still facts.

 

[my2¢]

He's convinced that someone somewhere is going to insist on censoring free speech and throw all that research money away. University administrations are stupid, but not THAT stupid.

There are university policies and then there's reality. I don't see university administrators as having all that much power to enforce policy. I'm mostly concerned for the scientific community on campus suffering from the actions of (say) those in liberal arts who aren't into research.

 

[martybegan]

Given to the Students, not directly to the Institution. They also admit that fact plainly in their statement.

You really cannot stand being wrong can you? You asked if the NFL got Federal money. The answer is YES.

They got paid by the feds for advertising, that is not federal funding.

"Getting Federal Money" is usually constructed as getting grants, especially in an academic scenario, Research money, etc.

Did Trump say he was going to cut student's pell grants and subsidized student loans?

You morons are trying to nitpick and obfuscate to get any gotcha moment you can.

No, that’s not all they get.

they take a comprehensive look at the federal side of stadium subsidies. They find that since 2000 alone, federal taxpayers have footed $3.2 billion toward private sports stadiums through subsidies in the form of tax-exempt municipal bonds. The amount of revenue the federal government loses gets even bigger—$3.7 billion—when the additional tax benefits that the high-income bond holders receive are taken into account.


Top 10 biggest federal subsidies for pro stadiums (Hint: the Yankees are #1)

That isn't funding, that is something the Feds agreed to WITH THE STATES regarding municipal bonds. The feds have no say really over how the States issue their own debt services.

You keep looking for links, and have to keep expanding on the definition of "funding".

Has Trump threatened to remove the tax free status of municipal bonds?

All of this to ignore the main part of this thread, which is SJW types trying to shut down speech they oppose, often with either the acceptance of school administrators or a hands off policy by said administrations.

It’s our federal dollars going to the NFL. You can duck and dodge all you want, but you asked and I answered. Don’t care if you don’t like the facts, they’re still facts.

And the point is what?

The original topic is about colleges suppressing speech selectively or allowing suppression by proxy, and risking federal grant funding if they do so.

The feds buy tanks and planes from military contractors, is that "funding" or "subsidizing"?

You are trying to ignore the main point of the thread, because you lack the balls (heh) to admit you like what Anti-fa and the SJW types do to disagreeing parties.

 

[Ringtone]

You know how they can "reject speakers that deviate blah blah fucking bullshit"? By just not going to hear them speak.

What you ACTUALLY think is that students who agree with you should be able to reject speakers who don't agree with you on behalf of every other student around.

Boom! Bottom line: private forums are not public forums. Private organizations/institutions do not suppress speech; rather, they promote that speech which advances their worldview. Period. Public forums belong to all. In such the only unlawful speech is that which incites violent criminal behavior.

Leftists incessantly incite violent criminal behavior or suppress lawful speech they don't like.

 

[BlindBoo]

The original topic is about colleges suppressing speech selectively

Wasn't the college responding to credible threats of violence

because you lack the balls (heh) to admit you like what Anti-fa and the SJW types do

Do you think the rabid right hasn't done the same?

At University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Cancellation of Ayers’ Speech Raises Troubling Questions - FIRE

 

[Cecilie1200]

He's convinced that someone somewhere is going to insist on censoring free speech and throw all that research money away. University administrations are stupid, but not THAT stupid.

There are university policies and then there's reality. I don't see university administrators as having all that much power to enforce policy. I'm mostly concerned for the scientific community on campus suffering from the actions of (say) those in liberal arts who aren't into research.

You don't know much about how universities work, clearly.

First of all, the president of a university and his administration have quite broad powers to set and enforce policy on campus. So believe me, putting an end to this censorship and these violent, disruptive protests is more a matter of wanting to than it is a matter of being able to.

Second, there are basically two types of campus speakers. There are the ones the university itself invites to speak, such as when they invite a dignitary to address their graduation ceremony; and there are the speakers who are invited by a student group on campus.

The university will have some sort of organized student government which does various things, including making and enforcing rules for official student groups on the campus. They also make the official decisions as to how the funds for student activities are spent, and they allow or deny requests for invited speakers. They are very much subject to the policies as given them by the university president.

So no, there's no danger whatsoever that any university which gets major research grant money from the US government is going to let a bunch of bigots in Student Services lose them their funding.

 

[iceberg]

Trump orders colleges to back free speech or lose funding

President Donald Trump signed an executive order Thursday requiring U.S. colleges to protect free speech on their campuses or risk losing federal research funding.

The new order directs federal agencies to ensure that any college or university receiving research grants agrees to promote free speech and the exchange of ideas, and to follow federal rules guiding free expression.

“Even as universities have received billions and billions of dollars from taxpayers, many have become increasingly hostile to free speech and to the First Amendment,” Trump said at a White House signing ceremony. “These universities have tried to restrict free thought, impose total conformity and shut down the voices of great young Americans.”
---
see link for the rest of the story.

but good. if they're not going to allow both sides equal time, then no $ for you.

Colleges aren’t going to back science deniers or white supremacists.

you and Donald need to stfu

Yea limit my speech cause you don't like it, ya moistened bint.

 

[martybegan]

The original topic is about colleges suppressing speech selectively

Wasn't the college responding to credible threats of violence

because you lack the balls (heh) to admit you like what Anti-fa and the SJW types do

Do you think the rabid right hasn't done the same?

At University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Cancellation of Ayers’ Speech Raises Troubling Questions - FIRE

"Credible threat". So basically you support the heckler's veto as long as it suppresses speech you don't like.

Please show me cases in the past decade where a left wing student led speech or discussion was disrupted or prevented by right wing protesters.

 

[Unkotare]

"I don't disagree with you but let's argue"

Agreement on one point is not agreement on all points, obviously. Don't be a sissy. This is a discussion board

Why do I care? Uh...says the guy who started the thread...what a bizarre comment.

I think students at universities should have the right to reject speakers that deviate far from the norm on certain topics. Not every nutsack deserves forum he actually has no "right" to. That's why I care.

I also care because our poisonous president will likely bastardized and manipulate this bad EC for political ends.

To my knowledge none of the conservative speeches on campus involved mandatory attendance by the violent leftwing thugs

Students at the university wanted to hear the speaker and invited them

often at some expense

The civilized way to disagree is to debate the ideas you dont like

not break windows and set police cars on fire

Those Who Don't Respect Property Deserve to Become Property

It is also uncivilized to be a weakling and not support mowing the rioters down under a hail of bullets. It is a contradiction to be humane to sub-humans.

Be careful what you wish for...

 

[BlindBoo]

The original topic is about colleges suppressing speech selectively

Wasn't the college responding to credible threats of violence

because you lack the balls (heh) to admit you like what Anti-fa and the SJW types do

Do you think the rabid right hasn't done the same?

At University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Cancellation of Ayers’ Speech Raises Troubling Questions - FIRE

"Credible threat". So basically you support the heckler's veto as long as it suppresses speech you don't like.

Please show me cases in the past decade where a left wing student led speech or discussion was disrupted or prevented by right wing protesters.

Do you think the threats of violence in Berkeley should have been ignored as an attempted heckler's veto?
l
"October 20, 2008

This past Friday, the University of Nebraska-Lincoln (UNL) announced the cancellation of a November speech by William Ayers, citing unspecified "safety concerns" as grounds for the move. According to UNL’s statement, the school’s "threat assessment group" had been monitoring e-mails and had received "other information" suggesting a potential threat to security.

 

[iceberg]

The original topic is about colleges suppressing speech selectively

Wasn't the college responding to credible threats of violence

because you lack the balls (heh) to admit you like what Anti-fa and the SJW types do

Do you think the rabid right hasn't done the same?

At University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Cancellation of Ayers’ Speech Raises Troubling Questions - FIRE

"Credible threat". So basically you support the heckler's veto as long as it suppresses speech you don't like.

Please show me cases in the past decade where a left wing student led speech or discussion was disrupted or prevented by right wing protesters.

Do you think the threats of violence in Berkeley should have been ignored as an attempted heckler's veto?
l
"October 20, 2008

This past Friday, the University of Nebraska-Lincoln (UNL) announced the cancellation of a November speech by William Ayers, citing unspecified "safety concerns" as grounds for the move. According to UNL’s statement, the school’s "threat assessment group" had been monitoring e-mails and had received "other information" suggesting a potential threat to security.

Should they have been allowed to dictate policy over the treat of violence?

 

[Seawytch]

You really cannot stand being wrong can you? You asked if the NFL got Federal money. The answer is YES.

They got paid by the feds for advertising, that is not federal funding.

"Getting Federal Money" is usually constructed as getting grants, especially in an academic scenario, Research money, etc.

Did Trump say he was going to cut student's pell grants and subsidized student loans?

You morons are trying to nitpick and obfuscate to get any gotcha moment you can.

No, that’s not all they get.

they take a comprehensive look at the federal side of stadium subsidies. They find that since 2000 alone, federal taxpayers have footed $3.2 billion toward private sports stadiums through subsidies in the form of tax-exempt municipal bonds. The amount of revenue the federal government loses gets even bigger—$3.7 billion—when the additional tax benefits that the high-income bond holders receive are taken into account.


Top 10 biggest federal subsidies for pro stadiums (Hint: the Yankees are #1)

That isn't funding, that is something the Feds agreed to WITH THE STATES regarding municipal bonds. The feds have no say really over how the States issue their own debt services.

You keep looking for links, and have to keep expanding on the definition of "funding".

Has Trump threatened to remove the tax free status of municipal bonds?

All of this to ignore the main part of this thread, which is SJW types trying to shut down speech they oppose, often with either the acceptance of school administrators or a hands off policy by said administrations.

It’s our federal dollars going to the NFL. You can duck and dodge all you want, but you asked and I answered. Don’t care if you don’t like the facts, they’re still facts.

And the point is what?

The original topic is about colleges suppressing speech selectively or allowing suppression by proxy, and risking federal grant funding if they do so.

The feds buy tanks and planes from military contractors, is that "funding" or "subsidizing"?

You are trying to ignore the main point of the thread, because you lack the balls (heh) to admit you like what Anti-fa and the SJW types do to disagreeing parties.

Subsidies are still tax dollars. The NFL still gets federal funding. Why isn't Trump protecting the free speech of NFL players like he is college students?

 

[jillian]

Guess Trump gets to decide what speech he will protect

He didn’t protect free speech in the NFL

Disrespecting the US flag and National Anthem isn't free speech, its an insult to those who died in-service to the country.
It has nothing to do with BLM.
Neither is antifa rioting "free speech"
Nor is hitting conservatives with pies "free speech"
Nor is indoctrinating college kids into liberalism using grades as leverage "free speech"
Why do you have a problem presenting both liberalism and conservatism fairly, since tax dollars are involved?

Actually that is exactly what free speech is

read and learn sometime in your life

 

[dblack]

They got paid by the feds for advertising, that is not federal funding.

"Getting Federal Money" is usually constructed as getting grants, especially in an academic scenario, Research money, etc.

Did Trump say he was going to cut student's pell grants and subsidized student loans?

You morons are trying to nitpick and obfuscate to get any gotcha moment you can.

No, that’s not all they get.

they take a comprehensive look at the federal side of stadium subsidies. They find that since 2000 alone, federal taxpayers have footed $3.2 billion toward private sports stadiums through subsidies in the form of tax-exempt municipal bonds. The amount of revenue the federal government loses gets even bigger—$3.7 billion—when the additional tax benefits that the high-income bond holders receive are taken into account.


Top 10 biggest federal subsidies for pro stadiums (Hint: the Yankees are #1)

That isn't funding, that is something the Feds agreed to WITH THE STATES regarding municipal bonds. The feds have no say really over how the States issue their own debt services.

You keep looking for links, and have to keep expanding on the definition of "funding".

Has Trump threatened to remove the tax free status of municipal bonds?

All of this to ignore the main part of this thread, which is SJW types trying to shut down speech they oppose, often with either the acceptance of school administrators or a hands off policy by said administrations.

It’s our federal dollars going to the NFL. You can duck and dodge all you want, but you asked and I answered. Don’t care if you don’t like the facts, they’re still facts.

And the point is what?

The original topic is about colleges suppressing speech selectively or allowing suppression by proxy, and risking federal grant funding if they do so.

The feds buy tanks and planes from military contractors, is that "funding" or "subsidizing"?

You are trying to ignore the main point of the thread, because you lack the balls (heh) to admit you like what Anti-fa and the SJW types do to disagreeing parties.

Subsidies are still tax dollars. The NFL still gets federal funding. Why isn't Trump protecting the free speech of NFL players like he is college students?

Education is targeted because control of education as fundamental to controlling society.