USA Politics

Brigantium said:
Self-interest, maybe, rather than direct corruption.
Click to expand...

Yes. But we're talking about lie and deceit here.
Anyways, we all know the story, we're discussing detail and numbers. No lessons will be learned. Moving along...
 
bearfan said:
I actually read this entire thing. A few things .. okay. Mostly though, they demonstrate how totally idiotic they are
Click to expand...
Skimming.....

The general Admin stuff is all fine. Diversity training is important, a lot of that is funding stuff, respecting people, etc. So is some of the other stuff. But this:

"The university must divest any and all partnerships with U.S Customs and Border Patrol ○ This includes, but is not limited to, ceasing Border Patrol recruitment at universitysponsored career fairs, as well as eliminating the presence of Border Patrol agents at Spring Break safety fairs on the UA Mall"

A lot of this is just nonsense.
 
LooseCannon said:
Skimming.....

The general Admin stuff is all fine. Diversity training is important, a lot of that is funding stuff, respecting people, etc. So is some of the other stuff. But this:

"The university must divest any and all partnerships with U.S Customs and Border Patrol ○ This includes, but is not limited to, ceasing Border Patrol recruitment at universitysponsored career fairs, as well as eliminating the presence of Border Patrol agents at Spring Break safety fairs on the UA Mall"

A lot of this is just nonsense.
Click to expand...

I read the tenure of this whole thing as "we have a viewpoint, you need to fund it and violate the 1st (Speech and Association) and 4th Amendment (Due process) rights of anyone who disagrees." On top of that, the entire concept of "safe spaces" at institutions that all have something like "preparing students for life in the real world" is one of the dumbest ideas in the history of mankind .. and that is saying a lot.
 
bearfan said:
On top of that, the entire concept of "safe spaces" at institutions that all have something like "preparing students for life in the real world" is one of the dumbest ideas in the history of mankind .. and that is saying a lot.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure if they use safe space in the same way I use the term, but the term for me means a location designated for people to go and know that the volunteers/people have had strong diversity training so they can go without worrying about hearing some sort of negative slur or wherever. I'm all for safe spaces.
 
LooseCannon said:
I'm not sure if they use safe space in the same way I use the term, but the term for me means a location designated for people to go and know that the volunteers/people have had strong diversity training so they can go without worrying about hearing some sort of negative slur or wherever. I'm all for safe spaces.
Click to expand...

I see it as a way to stifling any dissenting view, which seems like a poor idea on a state funded college campus aka a public space. 1st Amendment and all that. Someones dorm room or apartment, sure .. people can live in whatever kind of bubble they want. In a building or a common space .. fuck them, everyone has the same right to that space.
 
bearfan said:
I see it as a way to stifling any dissenting view, which seems like a poor idea on a state funded college campus aka a public space. 1st Amendment and all that. Someones dorm room or apartment, sure .. people can live in whatever kind of bubble they want. In a building or a common space .. fuck them, everyone has the same right to that space.
Click to expand...
I don't think there's something wrong with having a room or lounge set out as a designated space...if there's a constitutional problem with it, create a volunteer group that licenses the space for use as a "safe zone" - which would be in line with general constitutional law. I don't think we are talking about like a fenced area in the middle of a common that says "safe zone" and people are not allowed to speak certain things here.

Maybe these kids are, but that is not how I associate it.

Certainly asking for volunteers to run safe zones from their place of business or place of residence is a fine thing.
 
If you are talking about reserving a room, like a club on Tuesdays from 8-10 or something like that sure (assuming anyone can attend .. not based on race/religion/sexual orientation) .. carving out a piece of public property where sets of views/words are essentially banned/censored .. no.

On the other hand, there have been some recent "safe spaces" that were basically large chunks of grass (Black Lives Matter at various schools) and the deal at the University of Missouri ... most assuredly no
 
I think that the same rules have to apply as apply to school clubs: if a Safe Space group can apply to use a bit of a school or block a room or whatever, then so can a Racist Fuckwads R Us group, and even a Ted Cruz for President group. For reference, I'm fine with this.

At my alma mater, the Students Union runs a "safe space" in their building, which, I think is allowed, as their building is wholly leased from the university to the SU entity, which is not supported by public money. Other safe spaces are recruited from willing members of the campus community. This seems to be a logical way to do things.
 
Stuff like that is fine, I am still not a fan of it .. but reading through demands and how this has been attempted to be implemented at some campuses, I think they are looking for something much bigger and campus-wide minus the ability for any counter arguments. The "well, the Nazis can get a room" argument always comes up, but the real problem with this is that it also stifles reasonable debate on issues like race, immigration, budgeting, defense, etc when a safe space turns a chunk (if not all) of a campus into a place where you cannot argue for positions that are pretty moderate to just right (or just left for that matter) of center. That is my big problem with this, if some group wants a place to hang out without hearing any opposing views in a room, I guess that is fine ... but it is really going beyond that in practice.
 
It's really not about "not hearing opposing views", it's about gay people not wanting to be called fags, black people not wanting to be called niggers, Asian people not wanting to be called chinks, women not wanting to be told to get back in the kitchen, etc. At least, that's what the movement is at its very core. I think there's this big assumption that such is what "tolerance" is. There's certain opinions that one doesn't want to espouse in a tolerant, safe environment, but beyond that...

Now, I agree that in practice some people take things too far.

But I also agree that if the Nazis want a space on campus, the Nazis should be able to lease a space on campus. Do I think they should be able to do it without being protested? Of course not, but the door swings both ways.
 
LooseCannon said:
It's really not about "not hearing opposing views", it's about gay people not wanting to be called fags, black people not wanting to be called niggers, Asian people not wanting to be called chinks, women not wanting to be told to get back in the kitchen, etc. At least, that's what the movement is at its very core. I think there's this big assumption that such is what "tolerance" is. There's certain opinions that one doesn't want to espouse in a tolerant, safe environment, but beyond that...

Now, I agree that in practice some people take things too far.

But I also agree that if the Nazis want a space on campus, the Nazis should be able to lease a space on campus. Do I think they should be able to do it without being protested? Of course not, but the door swings both ways.
Click to expand...


The top part of your post, I get ... but I think taking it too far .. way too far .. is the real problem here and it is going well into limiting opposing views on legitimate policy issues .. not name calling. As evidenced by things like shutting down research arms, banning the border patrol at events, the issue of non-citizens getting the financial benefits of citizens, removal of a presumption of innocence in sexual assault complaints, enforced racial segregation in certain dorms.building (not rooms) etc, etc, etc.

and of course, all in the name of "diversity"
 
Yes, I agree, @bearfan. And I'm a pretty liberal guy. But a lot of that stuff is quite wrong. But I remember what it's like at that age: those who are engaged are often predisposed to want to make radical changes to the world.

And yeah, @Cornfed Hick. Though I think I meant a handful of wholly good politicians - many have done good things for selfish reasons, or done good things and some really bad things.
 
These protests going down right now are completely fucking absurd! Trump hasn't committed any crimes and he has all the right in the world to try and run for president. This is going down in history as the most insane election year ever!
 
Well he has the right to run for president just like everyone else has the right to protest the rally of a racist asshole.

Edit: Not condoning the violence that went down BTW.
 
Last edited:
It's quite ironic that one form of free speech stopped another. And ya, the violence wasn't good either. The protesters say they don't like Trump's hateful ways, yet they were quite hypocritical with their actions earlier tonight. And I'm definitely predicting this to be one hell of a year if Trump wins the nomination. It's really going to be wild.
 
nsJdzqo.jpg
 
Oh, fuck off, Travis, and especially Dr. Carson, who was a spectacular neurosurgeon and is otherwise a weapons grade moron. A man so stupid he doesn't understand the Constitution he proclaims to love.

This isn't about freedom of speech. There's no freedom of speech problem here. Trump was holding a private, ticketed event. He rented the hall for a private event. That literally precludes the concept of freedom of speech, which is regarding government interference in speech. What happened is people bought tickets to the Trump event and were removed, and the crowd got testy at them, primarily because Mr. Trump has been encouraging them to do so.

Trump cancelled his rally not because it wasn't safe, but because it was a political move to do so, to win a political cycle. And it worked. It was brilliant and genius and it reinforces his narrative among his targeted audience, way more so than actually appearing would have done. It is, in fact, one of the things Trump has done that shows political savvy and intelligence, and we should talk about it significantly for that.

But freedom of speech? Fucking learn what it means before you complain it was taken away.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top