Honestly is there anyone on here (other than agent00f who is nothing more than a troll degrading what's left of these forums) who think the whole concept of this isn't racist?
Honestly is there anyone on here (other than agent00f who is nothing more than a troll degrading what's left of these forums) who think the whole concept of this isn't racist?
Would someone care to explain why what's happening at a whacky little liberal arts college in Washington state is more important than what's happening in Washington DC?
Would someone care to explain why what's happening at a whacky little liberal arts college in Washington state is more important than what's happening in Washington DC?
If you are incapable of paying attention to more than one issue at a time, that is hardly other people's problem. So far, I haven't seen anyone make the claim what you are asserting they have. Perhaps you widen your narrow focus a bit and look at more than one thing at a time.
I can pay attention to more than one thing at a time, but thank you for your concern. What I asked was, why is this more important? The POTUS openly attacks the 1st amendment on an almost daily basis, but his supporters want us to believe that these liberal arts students are the ones who have the power to take away our right to free speech.
You might want to take your own advice.
Hey, I guess it's just been a slow news cycle for the right wing media.Please show me where someone suggested this was more important that the president's activity. Then I will accept your straw-man and discuss it as-if it has merit.
Would someone care to explain why what's happening at a whacky little liberal arts college in Washington state is more important than what's happening in Washington DC?
Fair enough. Except that this topic is a deflection by itself, but whatever. Yes, the students are wrong. The only people who don't believe that are the students and the straw liberals that live rent-free in the heads of 'conservatives.'Vic, you're doing what conservatives do all the time around here - every time we discuss bad behavior of conservatives, they deflect by changing the subject. Don't do it. There are scads of Trump threads where we can discuss all manner of vile things he does on a daily basis.
Vic, you're doing what conservatives do all the time around here - every time we discuss bad behavior of conservatives, they deflect by changing the subject. Don't do it. There are scads of Trump threads where we can discuss all manner of vile things he does on a daily basis.
I can pay attention to more than one thing at a time, but thank you for your concern. What I asked was, why is this more important? The POTUS openly attacks the 1st amendment on an almost daily basis, but his supporters want us to believe that these liberal arts students are the ones who have the power to take away our right to free speech.
You might want to take your own advice.
Would someone care to explain why what's happening at a whacky little liberal arts college in Washington state is more important than what's happening in Washington DC?
For those who do not have the time to watch any of the various interviews with Weinstein, I will summarize a few salient points. This was much worse than I thought before listening to the interview.
Weinstein hasn't merely been accused of being a racist without basis and he hasn't merely been yelled at. That would be bad enough. He's been stalked, physically threatened (with kidnapping and death), and harassed to the point where he is holding his classes in a downtown park instead of on campus because it isn't safe for him on campus. He has been advised that there are students who are literally, physically searching the campus, door to door, and car by car, for him.
But that isn't the worst of it. The worst of it is that elements of the administration and faculty are at least passively complicit, and in some cases, maybe actively. The university president isn't supporting him at all, has said nothing to tamp any of this down, and won't even allow the police on campus to protect him. This man should be fired, and an investigation should be pursued into his conduct. In that order. Any university president who fails and refuses to physically protect his own employees should be out of a job.
You seem to be a (the?) voice of reason in this thread, thank you for that and the summaries. Can you take a guess as to the mentalities and motivations of the President and colleagues of Professor Weinstein who as you suggest are complicit and even negligent in looking out for the Weinstein's safety? Is their fear of being accused of racism so great and powerful that it leads to a situation like this? What kind of thinking, or lack thereof, by the administration and Weinstein's colleagues allow this to happen and to the point police have been barred from campus? And what of the campus culture?
I sincerely look forward to reading your thoughts on this. Thanks.
You seem to be a (the?) voice of reason in this thread, thank you for that and the summaries. Can you take a guess as to the mentalities and motivations of the President and colleagues of Professor Weinstein who as you suggest are complicit and even negligent in looking out for the Weinstein's safety? Is their fear of being accused of racism so great and powerful that it leads to a situation like this? What kind of thinking, or lack thereof, by the administration and Weinstein's colleagues allow this to happen and to the point police have been barred from campus? And what of the campus culture?
I sincerely look forward to reading your thoughts on this. Thanks.
I don't know about everything Pulsar said above, but I do know what Weinstein said in his interview about the president. He said that this president, who is relatively new, is allied with a radical professor who herself is encouraging what is going on with the students. I'm filling in some grey areas here, but my educated guess is that it started as a political alliance, but now a frankenstein has been created and this president probably knows it's gone too far but doesn't have the courage to stand up to it. At a minimum, he's guilty of extreme malfeasance in failing and refusing to protect his own staff. Other administrators like the dean and provost seem aware of the problems with this particular professor but they seem to fear her. For their part, I think they're worried about being labeled racist. Many faculty are also supporting Weinstein privately but won't go public for the same reason. There's something really poisonous in the culture of this institution. They desperately need to fire this president and get someone in there who will do his job.
So far as the culture of the students, Weinstein says they are mostly liberal, and that they generally sympathize with the core objectives of the protesters, but the majority do not support these tactics or the targeting of Weinstein. He says only two students have dropped his classes over this, and that his own students are supportive because they know he isn't a racist.
As you can see in the Evergreen videos (and so, so many more), those who aren't "smart" (a.k.a. progressive-compatible in politics = intelligence) are drummed out by the 95% left-leaning professors and their brainwashed students alike.
It's already at an extreme level... prepare for the soon-coming boiling point.
See right below. He has a long history of ignorance and speak about things that he has no freaking idea.
Smart/educated? Enlightenment? You don't say.
Exhibit A (again) = http://www.portvapes.co.uk/?id=Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps&exid=threads/high-chance-of-china-taiwan-war.2499383/#post-38743019
Keep boasting and lying and I will keep posting your own ignorance for everyone to see and laugh at. LOL.
You are welcome (again).
Cry some more.
Honestly is there anyone on here (other than agent00f who is nothing more than a troll degrading what's left of these forums) who think the whole concept of this isn't racist?
I think if you read the university president's blog you can get more than a flavor for why this is happening.
1. He supports trigger warnings and safe spaces for certain students.
2. He sent out information on how to 'de-stress' after the election.
3. He fully supports illegal students, and promises to keep their information secret from the federal government. He also promises them financial aid.
His tone and thought-processes clearly suggest that he does not believe in personal responsibility to a very great degree, and truly believes all the 'special snowflake' bullshit that's been going on. As a result, he believes these students have been traumatized and experienced all sorts of horrible things. He's not just humoring their protests - he already made his whole faculty go through the equivalent of sensitivity training when students complained last year. He doesn't blame the students who are threatening the professor. He's protecting those students because he thinks they are reacting to being mistreated.
I simply can't elaborate on how horrible this mindset is. He's lost the middle ground entirely.
Honestly is there anyone on here (other than agent00f who is nothing more than a troll degrading what's left of these forums) who think the whole concept of this isn't racist?
This thread was like the Christmas truce of WW1. And @agent00f is the officer that comes along saying he'll shoot his own men if we don't get back in our trenches and start blowing each other up again.
Screw that.
The entire situation is ridiculous, and continues to scar the progressive movement. It's no wonder the mainstream don't care to report the dumb details.
No, the labor strike analogy is largely accurate, even if it doesn't reflect the situation as you would prefer, which is presumably what prompted you to draw some ridiculous comparison instead.
You are wound tighter than me, sheesh.
It was good to see liberals recognizing problems in liberal youth today and not feeling compelled to invalidate that recognition because the source of truth was the enemy. And here you go trying to make it a partisan problem again.
Honestly, eff off on that attitude.
Seems my assessment of your motivations was accurate. Try forming an argument if you disagree with anything I've said.