I would imagine you are talking about Christian universities, which are different than public universities.
Once a university becomes a mandatory campaign stop for Presidential candidates - openly backing one party over the other and over Christian principles - there's little difference. Any separation of church and state is gone. That "private" entity has a greater role in setting public policy than most public universities.
Berkley (the so called birth of free speech) wouldn't have conservative speakers that were invited by students allowed on campus.
Again, wrong when either side does it, and thankfully rare. (And they played right into Ann Coulter's hands. She tried that in Canada. Announced a speaking tour of Canadian universities, dared everyone to ban her, spouted her usual racist BS in her speeches. Then when it was clear that she wasn't going to be banned, she cancelled a show herself and declared it a ban.)
Funny, a Missouri state senator wrote that "Trump should be assassinated." She doesn't plan on stepping down.
Do you really want to go there? It was a big deal only because it was a Democrat. Several Democrats in Congress have called for her resignation. Meanwhile Trumps comments about Hillary include gems like:
"If she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks. Although the Second Amendment people — maybe there is, I don’t know."
Trump, Mike Huckabee and Rick Perry all had no problems associating with Ted Nugent despite his assassination comments about Obama and Hillary. Other Republicans brought him to the State of the Union address in the House chamber.
But you can't argue with facts, if you speak about conservative issues, you will be labeled a Nazi.
When you talk about today's alt-right-dominated Republican party, their cheerful association with the alt-right and neo-Nazis are the elephant in the room. Eventually Republicans will tell them "No, you are not Republicans. You are not even conservatives." But it obviously won't happen during this administration.
Just like the fringes on the other side. Since you mention universities, that would include universities that ban College Democrats organizations because Democrats can't possibly be Christian - and that make attending rallies by Republican leaders mandatory for students. Accusations of favoritism by professors apply there too.
As for "Tiny fringes like quite a few dems who celebrate Nazi punching?", yes, that fringe exists too. As opposed to the Republican mainstream. There's no Democratic or liberal equivalent of Trump routinely calling for violence at his rallies. Or for Republicans bringing Ted Nugent - who routinely made threats of violence against Hillary and Obama - to the 2013 State of the Union Address and to rallies for Presidential candidates like Rick Perry and Mike Huckabee.
In May 1967 two dozen Black Panther Party members walked into the California Statehouse carrying rifles to protest a gun-control bill, prompting then-Gov. Ronald Reagan to comment, "There’s no reason why on the street today a citizen should be carrying loaded weapons."
Of course if they were white, the NRA and today's alt-right would hail them as heroes.
And if Reagan were a Democrat, they'd launch a jihad against him for that comment.
The question was asked whether opposing violence and championing free speech was so radical a proposal. For Republicans - long before Trump - the answer is 'Yes.'
Politics is the art of getting votes from the poor and campaign funds from the rich by promising to protect each from the other. Peddling fear of some other group is the easy way to do it when you don't have actual leadership ability. Blacks, "feminazis", terrorists, gays, trans people, whatever's available. Peddle fear and hate.
Remember Ted Nugent? The racist, pedophile, draft dodging, illegal hunting, fear mongering chickenhawk of a talentless has-been musician? Who kept making headlines with threats of violence against Obama and Hillary? With wingnutty claims of persecution? (April 2012: "If Barack Obama becomes the President again, I will either be dead or in jail by this time next year.")
So really, no different than the Nazis and KKK in Charlottesville. (Nugent: "Donald Trump is as close to Ted Nugent as you are going to get in politics.")
At the at the Feb 2013 State of the Union address, Republicans made a show of bringing Ted Nugent. And hailed him for being a patriot and upholding American values.
That's where the Republican Party was BEFORE Trump.
So yeah, that's a radical proposal. Trump's calls for violence at Trump rallies weren't just about injecting a little enthusiasm into a placid and contemplative group of people. Demagoguery and fear mongering work. It got Ted Nugent into the State of the Union address, and it got Trump into the White House.
That's nice. Meanwhile the current situation is about racist fascists vs. freedom fighting egalitarians.
Sure, there are tiny fringes. People who resort to violence and punch Nazis, vs. the "good neo-Nazis" Trump assures us exists. But for the most part your claim is a deliberate reversal of reality.
Moderation needs the equivalent of that bendy bit of pipe under the sink. If the wrong thing gets flushed away, it can be recovered. But it tends to fill with dreck. Or the alt-right.
The virtual prison would also allow offenders to remain with their family, and thus offers the hope that they might be re-integrated into society more easily than when isolated in an unnatural prison setting.
The memorials were about reconciliation in a nation that saw over one million killed and wounded.
Nope. Most came decades, even a century later.
General Lee himself lobbied against erecting Confederate memorials fearing they might "keep open the sores of war." They'd have the effect of "continuing, if not adding to, the difficulties under which the Southern people labour."
Please stay on tangent US Civil War not British in India.
Similar examples. Sorry the concept went over your head.
How dare you attempt to imply that I'm a racist
You implied it; I didn't have to. I just pointed out a fallacy in your claims.
You have no idea of my "heritage" .
I'm pretty sure that you don't either.
I'm only stating the blatantly obvious which is even the techno-wizards of the 21st century stand upon the shoulders of their ancestors.
That sounds like a claim made by those "Proud Boy" renamed neo-Nazis. Who are careful to ignore that non-Europeans invented the foundations of civilization, agriculture, science, literature, math, architecture and more.
All those Confederate monuments weren't about preserving 19th century "heritage." They were about intimidation in the 20th. But fine:
The British in India were faced with the practice of "suttee" - the heritage tradition of burning widows on the funeral pyres of their husbands.
Gen. Sir Charles Napier was impeccably multicultural: "You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: When men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks, and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."
Anyone who makes the "heritage" argument for keeping Confederate monuments in public places should be reminded that American heritage includes war against Confederates and Nazis. "You can celebrate your heritage by building monuments to Confederate generals. And then we will celebrate ours by destroying them."
Want to get paid? Do something that actually spends your TIME, like a live show.
Few are interested in live shows. The current system where money is spent based on demand, is better.
The more hours you work, the more you get paid, really that simple.
Nonsense. Education, experience and talent all count, and should be factored in.
And even then, demand and one's choices should override that. I recently had dinner with an old friend who is now highly educated and deep in tuition debt - for something with no demand whatsoever. He's now a security guard for an arena loading dock. I wouldn't call it unfair.
For family-owned business even nepotism is valid - as providing a better future for one's kids is a driving factor for the owner to put in the hard work and take the risks getting started.
And more importantly, Winner could now point to an important benefit of her leak, if only she could point to the tie between her leak and this investigation in North Carolina. With the protection order, she can’t.
She couldn't, regardless of the protection order.
The Espionage Act forbids a public interest defense. The accused either leaked documents or she didn’t, and if she did, guilty is the only possible verdict.
Re: Named for the device used to spy on Hobbit Beauty Queens
We really need to start demanding more accountability
Nothing screams accountability like a Wikipedia entry that ends with "Palantir settled the suit in April 2017 for $1.7 million while not admitting wrongdoing."
On the post: YouTube Briefly Nukes Video Of Nazi Symbol Destruction For Violating Hate Speech Rules
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Once a university becomes a mandatory campaign stop for Presidential candidates - openly backing one party over the other and over Christian principles - there's little difference. Any separation of church and state is gone. That "private" entity has a greater role in setting public policy than most public universities.
Again, wrong when either side does it, and thankfully rare. (And they played right into Ann Coulter's hands. She tried that in Canada. Announced a speaking tour of Canadian universities, dared everyone to ban her, spouted her usual racist BS in her speeches. Then when it was clear that she wasn't going to be banned, she cancelled a show herself and declared it a ban.)
Do you really want to go there? It was a big deal only because it was a Democrat. Several Democrats in Congress have called for her resignation. Meanwhile Trumps comments about Hillary include gems like:
"If she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks. Although the Second Amendment people — maybe there is, I don’t know."
Trump, Mike Huckabee and Rick Perry all had no problems associating with Ted Nugent despite his assassination comments about Obama and Hillary. Other Republicans brought him to the State of the Union address in the House chamber.
When you talk about today's alt-right-dominated Republican party, their cheerful association with the alt-right and neo-Nazis are the elephant in the room. Eventually Republicans will tell them "No, you are not Republicans. You are not even conservatives." But it obviously won't happen during this administration.
On the post: Federal Judge Upholds Magistrate's Ruling, Says Google Must Hand Over Data From Overseas Servers
Re: Court is trying to walk the tightrope
On the post: YouTube Briefly Nukes Video Of Nazi Symbol Destruction For Violating Hate Speech Rules
Re: Re: Re:
Just like the fringes on the other side. Since you mention universities, that would include universities that ban College Democrats organizations because Democrats can't possibly be Christian - and that make attending rallies by Republican leaders mandatory for students. Accusations of favoritism by professors apply there too.
As for "Tiny fringes like quite a few dems who celebrate Nazi punching?", yes, that fringe exists too. As opposed to the Republican mainstream. There's no Democratic or liberal equivalent of Trump routinely calling for violence at his rallies. Or for Republicans bringing Ted Nugent - who routinely made threats of violence against Hillary and Obama - to the 2013 State of the Union Address and to rallies for Presidential candidates like Rick Perry and Mike Huckabee.
On the post: YouTube Briefly Nukes Video Of Nazi Symbol Destruction For Violating Hate Speech Rules
Re: Re: Re: First Amendment > Second Amendment?
In May 1967 two dozen Black Panther Party members walked into the California Statehouse carrying rifles to protest a gun-control bill, prompting then-Gov. Ronald Reagan to comment, "There’s no reason why on the street today a citizen should be carrying loaded weapons."
Of course if they were white, the NRA and today's alt-right would hail them as heroes.
And if Reagan were a Democrat, they'd launch a jihad against him for that comment.
On the post: YouTube Briefly Nukes Video Of Nazi Symbol Destruction For Violating Hate Speech Rules
Re: Re: Re: Re: Against drilling with arms
Sorry it went over your head.
On the post: YouTube Briefly Nukes Video Of Nazi Symbol Destruction For Violating Hate Speech Rules
Re: Re: Against drilling with arms
Politics is the art of getting votes from the poor and campaign funds from the rich by promising to protect each from the other. Peddling fear of some other group is the easy way to do it when you don't have actual leadership ability. Blacks, "feminazis", terrorists, gays, trans people, whatever's available. Peddle fear and hate.
Remember Ted Nugent? The racist, pedophile, draft dodging, illegal hunting, fear mongering chickenhawk of a talentless has-been musician? Who kept making headlines with threats of violence against Obama and Hillary? With wingnutty claims of persecution? (April 2012: "If Barack Obama becomes the President again, I will either be dead or in jail by this time next year.")
So really, no different than the Nazis and KKK in Charlottesville. (Nugent: "Donald Trump is as close to Ted Nugent as you are going to get in politics.")
At the at the Feb 2013 State of the Union address, Republicans made a show of bringing Ted Nugent. And hailed him for being a patriot and upholding American values.
That's where the Republican Party was BEFORE Trump.
So yeah, that's a radical proposal. Trump's calls for violence at Trump rallies weren't just about injecting a little enthusiasm into a placid and contemplative group of people. Demagoguery and fear mongering work. It got Ted Nugent into the State of the Union address, and it got Trump into the White House.
On the post: YouTube Briefly Nukes Video Of Nazi Symbol Destruction For Violating Hate Speech Rules
Re:
Sure, there are tiny fringes. People who resort to violence and punch Nazis, vs. the "good neo-Nazis" Trump assures us exists. But for the most part your claim is a deliberate reversal of reality.
On the post: YouTube Briefly Nukes Video Of Nazi Symbol Destruction For Violating Hate Speech Rules
Re: Re: First Amendment > Second Amendment?
I don't even know how to respond to you without my post being flagged as abusive.
On the post: YouTube Briefly Nukes Video Of Nazi Symbol Destruction For Violating Hate Speech Rules
Moderation needs the equivalent of that bendy bit of pipe under the sink. If the wrong thing gets flushed away, it can be recovered. But it tends to fill with dreck. Or the alt-right.
On the post: Welcome To The Technological Incarceration Project, Where Prison Walls Are Replaced By Sensors, Algorithms, And AI
Re: Re: The 'incapacitating shock' bit offends and infuriates me.
America technological incarceration would have its own protocols.
Alexa: Executing.
Alexa: You said "Aarrgh." Ordering a pirate costume using your default credit card!"
On the post: Welcome To The Technological Incarceration Project, Where Prison Walls Are Replaced By Sensors, Algorithms, And AI
Re: The Word For Today Is ...
For the whole family!
On the post: Because Of Course There Are Copyright Implications With Confederacy Monuments
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Because Of Course There Are Copyright Implications With Confederacy Monuments
Re:
Nope. Most came decades, even a century later.
General Lee himself lobbied against erecting Confederate memorials fearing they might "keep open the sores of war." They'd have the effect of "continuing, if not adding to, the difficulties under which the Southern people labour."
Similar examples. Sorry the concept went over your head.
You implied it; I didn't have to. I just pointed out a fallacy in your claims.
I'm pretty sure that you don't either.
That sounds like a claim made by those "Proud Boy" renamed neo-Nazis. Who are careful to ignore that non-Europeans invented the foundations of civilization, agriculture, science, literature, math, architecture and more.
On the post: Because Of Course There Are Copyright Implications With Confederacy Monuments
Re: Re: Run in Circles Scream and Shout Flail Your Arms All About
On the post: Because Of Course There Are Copyright Implications With Confederacy Monuments
Re:
The British in India were faced with the practice of "suttee" - the heritage tradition of burning widows on the funeral pyres of their husbands.
Gen. Sir Charles Napier was impeccably multicultural: "You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: When men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks, and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."
Anyone who makes the "heritage" argument for keeping Confederate monuments in public places should be reminded that American heritage includes war against Confederates and Nazis. "You can celebrate your heritage by building monuments to Confederate generals. And then we will celebrate ours by destroying them."
On the post: 'Smart' Lock Vendor Locks Hundreds Out Of Their Home With Bungled Firmware Update
Re: Re:
On the post: The MPAA Narrative About Piracy Flips To Danger From Pirate Sites Now That It Has Lost The Moral Argument
Re: Re: Just make it easier to get legally
Few are interested in live shows. The current system where money is spent based on demand, is better.
Nonsense. Education, experience and talent all count, and should be factored in.
And even then, demand and one's choices should override that. I recently had dinner with an old friend who is now highly educated and deep in tuition debt - for something with no demand whatsoever. He's now a security guard for an arena loading dock. I wouldn't call it unfair.
For family-owned business even nepotism is valid - as providing a better future for one's kids is a driving factor for the owner to put in the hard work and take the risks getting started.
On the post: Palantir's Law Enforcement Data Stranglehold Isn't Good For Police Or The Policed
Re: Re:
You mean aside from the many times TD has said that?
On the post: North Carolina Election Agencies First Learned They'd Been Hacked From Leaked Documents Published By The Intercept
She couldn't, regardless of the protection order.
The Espionage Act forbids a public interest defense. The accused either leaked documents or she didn’t, and if she did, guilty is the only possible verdict.
On the post: Palantir's Law Enforcement Data Stranglehold Isn't Good For Police Or The Policed
Re: Named for the device used to spy on Hobbit Beauty Queens
Nothing screams accountability like a Wikipedia entry that ends with "Palantir settled the suit in April 2017 for $1.7 million while not admitting wrongdoing."
Next >>