Trump orders colleges to back free speech or lose funding

[Pogo]

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

Of course they do. I myself am banned from posting commentary on both the CNS "News" AND on Hateway Plundit sites. They did that because I'll go in there and call them on their bullshit stories, and they don't like that. And I don't think for a second that that's limited to me.

 

[JustAGuy1]

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

Of course they do. I myself am banned from posting commentary on both the CNS "News" AND on Hateway Plundit sites. They did that because I'll go in there and call them on their bullshit stories, and they don't like that. And I don't think for a second that that's limited to me.

No, they did it because you're game playing little punk.

 

[JustAGuy1]

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

Go ahead and hit me with a pie. It won't end well.

 

[Pogo]

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

Of course they do. I myself am banned from posting commentary on both the CNS "News" AND on Hateway Plundit sites. They did that because I'll go in there and call them on their bullshit stories, and they don't like that. And I don't think for a second that that's limited to me.

No, they did it because you're game playing little punk.

Oh? So you work for CNS "News" AND Hateway Blunder?

 

[Unkotare]

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

Go ahead and hit me with a pie. It won't end well.

Because you’re allergic to pie?

 

[JustAGuy1]

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

Go ahead and hit me with a pie. It won't end well.

Because you’re allergic to pie?

Sure, you go with that.

 

[Ringtone]

Of course they do. I myself am banned from posting commentary on both the CNS "News" AND on Hateway Plundit sites. They did that because I'll go in there and call them on their bullshit stories, and they don't like that. And I don't think for a second that that's limited to me.

Rolls eyes

Once again, lefty, private forums are not public! In this context suppression connotes an illegitimate use of administrative power. You are being censored. It's private.

 

[Pogo]

Of course they do. I myself am banned from posting commentary on both the CNS "News" AND on Hateway Plundit sites. They did that because I'll go in there and call them on their bullshit stories, and they don't like that. And I don't think for a second that that's limited to me.

Rolls eyes

Once again, lefty, private forums are not public! In this context suppression connotes an illegitimate use of administrative power. You are being censored. It's private.

That's what you just said in the post you cut out. What the fuck is your point?

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

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 threat of violence?

Replace Bunting Practice With a Home Run Derby


Bats on brats. Only threatening worse consequences to the disruptive extortionists will stop that. The college officials pretend to suppress free speech out of a realistic view of what will happen, when actually they're cowardly weaklings and quisling traitors who refuse to use all their powers of retaliation.

 

[Ringtone]

Of course they do. I myself am banned from posting commentary on both the CNS "News" AND on Hateway Plundit sites. They did that because I'll go in there and call them on their bullshit stories, and they don't like that. And I don't think for a second that that's limited to me.

Rolls eyes

Once again, lefty, private forums are not public! In this context suppression connotes an illegitimate use of administrative power. You are being censored. It's private.

That's what you just said in the post you cut out. What the fuck is your point?

Look, you leftist silly ass, you implied that private forums don't have a natural and constitutional right to freely associate and express as they see fit. Yes they do.

Moron. Nobody suppressed your speech. You were censored.

Words have meaning.

 

[Pogo]

Of course they do. I myself am banned from posting commentary on both the CNS "News" AND on Hateway Plundit sites. They did that because I'll go in there and call them on their bullshit stories, and they don't like that. And I don't think for a second that that's limited to me.

Rolls eyes

Once again, lefty, private forums are not public! In this context suppression connotes an illegitimate use of administrative power. You are being censored. It's private.

That's what you just said in the post you cut out. What the fuck is your point?

Look, you leftist silly ass, you implied that private forums don't have a natural and constitutional right to freely associate and express as they see fit. Yes they do.

Moron. Nobody suppressed your speech. You were censored.

Words have meaning.

No, Illiterati, I did not. YOU not only implied that, you came right out and said it so I contradicted you Lurn to reed. Words to indeed have meaning and you don't get to change them because you wish they'd been different words.

 

[JustAGuy1]

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

Of course they do. I myself am banned from posting commentary on both the CNS "News" AND on Hateway Plundit sites. They did that because I'll go in there and call them on their bullshit stories, and they don't like that. And I don't think for a second that that's limited to me.

No, they did it because you're game playing little punk.

Oh? So you work for CNS "News" AND Hateway Blunder?

You're a punk troll who plays word games. You like calling other people names and generally belittling anyone who doesn't think just like you.Personally? I think you're over compensating for something. Maybe abuse as child. Maybe you got beat up by the cool kids. Maybe it's a little dick. It's something though and you are desperate to show yourself prove to other people you're smarter than you actually are. Sad really.

 

[Pogo]

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

Of course they do. I myself am banned from posting commentary on both the CNS "News" AND on Hateway Plundit sites. They did that because I'll go in there and call them on their bullshit stories, and they don't like that. And I don't think for a second that that's limited to me.

No, they did it because you're game playing little punk.

Oh? So you work for CNS "News" AND Hateway Blunder?

You're a punk troll who plays word games. You like calling other people names and generally belittling anyone who doesn't think just like you.Personally? I think you're over compensating for something. Maybe abuse as child. Maybe you got beat up by the cool kids. Maybe it's a little dick. It's something though and you are desperate to show yourself prove to other people you're smarter than you actually are. Sad really.

That's nice, dear.

 

[Ringtone]

Of course they do. I myself am banned from posting commentary on both the CNS "News" AND on Hateway Plundit sites. They did that because I'll go in there and call them on their bullshit stories, and they don't like that. And I don't think for a second that that's limited to me.

Rolls eyes

Once again, lefty, private forums are not public! In this context suppression connotes an illegitimate use of administrative power. You are being censored. It's private.

That's what you just said in the post you cut out. What the fuck is your point?

Look, you leftist silly ass, you implied that private forums don't have a natural and constitutional right to freely associate and express as they see fit. Yes they do.

Moron. Nobody suppressed your speech. You were censored.

Words have meaning.

No, Illiterati, I did not. YOU not only implied that, you came right out and said it so I contradicted you Lurn to reed. Words to indeed have meaning and you don't get to change them because you wish they'd been different words.

Imbecile. The context goes to unlawful or illegitimate suppression of speech. You're reading is nonsensical. Suppression of speech is not the same thing as censorship of speech, and private forums are not public!

 

[Pogo]

Of course they do. I myself am banned from posting commentary on both the CNS "News" AND on Hateway Plundit sites. They did that because I'll go in there and call them on their bullshit stories, and they don't like that. And I don't think for a second that that's limited to me.

Rolls eyes

Once again, lefty, private forums are not public! In this context suppression connotes an illegitimate use of administrative power. You are being censored. It's private.

That's what you just said in the post you cut out. What the fuck is your point?

Look, you leftist silly ass, you implied that private forums don't have a natural and constitutional right to freely associate and express as they see fit. Yes they do.

Moron. Nobody suppressed your speech. You were censored.

Words have meaning.

No, Illiterati, I did not. YOU not only implied that, you came right out and said it so I contradicted you Lurn to reed. Words to indeed have meaning and you don't get to change them because you wish they'd been different words.

Imbecile. The context goes to unlawful or illegitimate suppression of speech. You're reading is nonsensical. Suppression of speech is not the same thing as censorship of speech, and private forums are not public!

NO SHIT SHERLOCK. You said, QUOTE, "Private organizations/institutions do not suppress speech". I then demonstrated that indeed they DO. Days later you're still trying to figure it out.

 

[Ringtone]

Rolls eyes

Once again, lefty, private forums are not public! In this context suppression connotes an illegitimate use of administrative power. You are being censored. It's private.

That's what you just said in the post you cut out. What the fuck is your point?

Look, you leftist silly ass, you implied that private forums don't have a natural and constitutional right to freely associate and express as they see fit. Yes they do.

Moron. Nobody suppressed your speech. You were censored.

Words have meaning.

No, Illiterati, I did not. YOU not only implied that, you came right out and said it so I contradicted you Lurn to reed. Words to indeed have meaning and you don't get to change them because you wish they'd been different words.

Imbecile. The context goes to unlawful or illegitimate suppression of speech. You're reading is nonsensical. Suppression of speech is not the same thing as censorship of speech, and private forums are not public!

NO SHIT SHERLOCK. You said, QUOTE, "Private organizations/institutions do not suppress speech". I then demonstrated that indeed they DO. Days later you're still trying to figure it out.

Dear Lord, never mind. You're a friggin' moron. Zoom Right over your head.

 

[Pogo]

That's what you just said in the post you cut out. What the fuck is your point?

Look, you leftist silly ass, you implied that private forums don't have a natural and constitutional right to freely associate and express as they see fit. Yes they do.

Moron. Nobody suppressed your speech. You were censored.

Words have meaning.

No, Illiterati, I did not. YOU not only implied that, you came right out and said it so I contradicted you Lurn to reed. Words to indeed have meaning and you don't get to change them because you wish they'd been different words.

Imbecile. The context goes to unlawful or illegitimate suppression of speech. You're reading is nonsensical. Suppression of speech is not the same thing as censorship of speech, and private forums are not public!

NO SHIT SHERLOCK. You said, QUOTE, "Private organizations/institutions do not suppress speech". I then demonstrated that indeed they DO. Days later you're still trying to figure it out.

Dear Lord, never mind. You're a friggin' moron. Zoom Right over your head.

That's it Danth, claim victory and exit stage right. Don't let the door hit you in the ass. You'll need that ass for future threads.

 

[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.

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.

Wow, you had to go back to 2008 for a tu quo que attempt?

And you didn't answer my question.

My answer is the University was gutless in the situation you listed, just like universities are being gutless now.

 

[martybegan]

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?

Why do you feel the need to deflect instead of discussing the attack on right leaning student's rights to speech and association?

 

[Cecilie1200]

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?

Why do you feel the need to deflect instead of discussing the attack on right leaning student's rights to speech and association?

If Seabiscuit were ever forced to conduct a straightforward discussion of a topic without deflection and topic-hopping, her head might explode.