The nice thing about students literally repressing Minutemen founder Jim Gilchrist‘s speech at Columbia University last night is that it reminds us that some on the Left in America have actually come to believe that free speach means nothing more than shouting down anyone who disagrees with you.
As one of the students said:
“I don’t feel like we need to apologize or anything. It was fundamentally a part of free speech. … The Minutemen are not a legitimate part of the debate on immigration.”
It stunneds me that this student can’t see the irony in believing that HIS free speech gives him the right to decide who else deserves to be heard.
What are they teaching at Columbia?
And how many of these students are attending the Columbia School of Journalism?
October 7th, 2006
When I was a young man I was a fervent liberal.
I was a liberal because I believed with all my heart what Evelyn Beatrice Hall said in 1906:
“I disapprove of what you say, generic viagra unhealthy but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”
One of the main reasons I am no longer a liberal is because liberals turned their back on that belief years ago…as evidenced by their embracing of politically correct speech, cialis their elevation of feelings above freedom of expression, and this weekend’s protest against the Nazis who spoke in Madison.
The question I have to ask is who was acting more like fascists: the Nazi’s exercising their freedom of speech, or the crowd who would have gladly suppressed it?
August 28th, 2006
On WPR this morning, cialis canada sickness I heard an advocate for New Orleans say the Federal government had failed New Orleans by building inadequate levees and should therefore provide the city with massive amounts of aid including a huge jobs program.
Liberals always think the answer to bad government is more government.
Conservatives know that just means more bad government.
April 13th, 2006
I was listening to a story on NPR the other day about ourtenwords.com.
Ourtenwords.com is a web site that is soliciting Democrats for ten words that “can define the Democratic Party’s message.”
I was less surprised that the Democrats NEEDED a web site to figure out what they stood for…
…than I was shocked by the fact that the web site founder’s own ten words included “personal responsibility.”
I actually laughed out loud in my car.
I can’t think of two words LESS related to the Democratic Party.
Democrats blame everybody and everything in the universe for people’s bad behaviors EXCEPT for the person who actually commits the crime, viagra buy health or is addicted to drugs, cialis or gets pregnant, buy viagra or sneaks into the country illegally.
I really am amazed.
How could ANYONE actually use the words “personal responsibility” to describe the philosophy of the Democratic Party?
The Party of Group Entitlement?
Sure.
The Party of Collective Bargaining?
Without a doubt.
The Party of Personal Responsibility?
Don’t make me laugh. (Again.)
What really brought this into focus for me was a call-in program I heard this morning on WPR about the Duke lacrosse players who allegedly raped a black stripper at an off-campus party.
The callers all had something they wanted to blame for this hideous crime:
• Racism.
• Sexism.
• Class privilege.
• White privilege.
‚Ä¢ The players’ parents.
‚Ä¢ The players’ coach.
• The sense of entitlement engendered by being a college athlete.
‚Ä¢ Etc…Etc…Etc…
Can you guess how many of the callers wanted to hold the players who may have committed the crime “personally responsible?”
Not ONE.
Zero.
Zilch.
And at the risk of being offensive to my two left-leaning readers…that’s what I sometimes think the Democratic Party really stands for.
Nada.
Naught.
Nothing.
Don’t get me wrong. There are some very important and valuable ideals that many individual Democrats believe in, but lately ‚Äì as a party ‚Äì the Democrats seem to be standing against lots of things and standing for very little.
April 6th, 2006
You say Delay.
And I say Gary.
You say Jensen.
And I say Thompson.
Delay! Gary! Jensen! Thompson!
Let’s call the whole thing Abramoff.
Neither side has the high ground folks. Try to remember that when you’re throwing stones.
January 26th, 2006
Because “more money” is not the answer to the question “how do we get public schools up to the standards of most private and parochial schools?”
That’s #2.
December 30th, 2005
Taxes.
I once asked a liberal what percentage of my income would be enough for him?
50%?
80%?
90%?
I offered him a deal:
I told him I’d pay whatever percentage of my income he named in taxes for the rest of my life, viagra usa cialis if…
…he promised he would NEVER ask for another nickle.
He wouldn’t take the deal.
He just couldn’t bring himself to actually set a limit.
That’s reason #1.
December 27th, 2005