OT: Loyola Chicago - Clueless or Biased...or both?

[BradleyBrave]

Very, very pathetic justification by Loyola Chicago for canceling a Karl Rove speaking engagement and replacing him with an Obama appointee. Sad really.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/28/chicago-school-refuses-host-rove-welcomes-obama-appointee/

[Da Coach]

This happens all the time. Conservative speakers like Rove, and others like Ann Coulter, William Krystol, etc. routinely get shouted down, harassed, and even assaulted when they appear as invited speakers on college campuses.
So much for liberals believing in the first amendment.

http://www.anncoulter.org/cgi-local/article.cgi?article=50

http://www.chrishardie.com/blog/2005/03/the_pieing_of_w.html

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/2821184/ann_coulter_canada_speech_cancelled.html?cat=9

http://conservativeamericannews.com/free-republic/lesbian-activists-at-smith-college-riot-shut-down-ryan-sorba-speech

http://www.examiner.com/x-7507-Frisco-Conservative-Examiner~y2009m4d17-Is-freedom-of-speech-dying-on-todays-college-campuses

http://online.wsj.com/article/NA_WSJ_PUB:SB124000847769030489.html

and other innumerable examples which can be documented upon request.

[Beninator]

Just another example here of making a mountain out of a mole hill!

[BradleyBrave]

Just another example here of making a mountain out of a mole hill!

How is it a mountain out of a mole hill?

[Beninator]

How is it a mountain out of a mole hill?

First off... In the grand scheme of things, how many people really care about the President's Interfaith Council? Secondly, if we avoid the attention grabbing first paragraph from the Faux News link, two quotes from the article make me think that this is a lot to do about nothing.

"Our university considers its on-campus speakers on a case-by-case basis, and very carefully," he said. "Dr. Patel's speech on Aug. 27 will focus on the importance of interfaith leadership and transformative education, two topics that are directly associated with the university's mission. This is a very different lecture than what was proposed by our College Republicans, who informed the university in their proposal that they are inviting Karl Rove 'to speak in October 2010 to speak about the upcoming elections and their impact on public policy.'"

Then more importantly:

"The school has offered to host Rove after the midterm election on Nov. 2, but the conservative group said Rove would not be able to speak then because of his busy schedule."

Remember this is about Karl Rove who is the king of dirty tricks and slime!

[tornado]

those claiming to be the MOST open minded and tolerant, certainly appear to be the MOST intolerant of any opinion they don't share...even to the point of forming secret societies to try to eliminate those with opposing opinions...

http://spectator.org/blog/2010/07/23/journolist-equals-journalistic

http://technorati.com/politics/article/journolist-proves-objectivity-in-media-is/

[Da Coach]

Faux news....Remember this is about Karl Rove who is the king of dirty tricks and slime!

The usual tactic that liberals resort to is name-calling and ad hominum attacks. Why is this necessary if you truly believe you are right?

And though we hear this attack on Karl Rove all the time, can you give any examples of "dirty tricks and slime"? I don't know of anything illegal, unethical, or immoral Rove has ever done.
On the other hand, talk about dirty tricks and slime, the fraud perpetrated by Dan Rather and CBS, which they finally admitted was a fraud after everyone in the country knew it, was intended to fool the public and try to swing the 2004 elections. BTW- Dan Rather is still a highly sought-after speaker on college campuses, and I don't see administrators trying to block him from speaking

Universities never seem to have any problems with inviting liberal speakers like Barack Obama's friend, and confidant William Ayres, and other radicals who have histories of criminal pasts.

[Beninator]

The usual tactic that liberals resort to is name-calling and ad hominum attacks. Why is this necessary if you truly believe you are right?

And though we hear this attack on Karl Rove all the time, can you give any examples of "dirty tricks and slime"? I don't know of anything illegal, unethical, or immoral Rove has ever done.
On the other hand, talk about dirty tricks and slime, the fraud perpetrated by Dan Rather and CBS, which they finally admitted was a fraud after everyone in the country knew it, was intended to fool the public and try to swing the 2004 elections. BTW- Dan Rather is still a highly sought-after speaker on college campuses, and I don't see administrators trying to block him from speaking

Universities never seem to have any problems with inviting liberal speakers like Barack Obama's friend, and confidant William Ayres, and other radicals who have histories of criminal pasts.

You have got to be kidding me about Karl Rove!!! The man was nicknamed "Turd Blossom" by W!!! Maybe not illegal... but certainly immoral!

examples....ok just a couple.. all you have to do is google Karl Rove dirty tricks or Karl Rove smear campaign and you will get quite a few examples!

Do you remember the smear tactics used against John Mccain in the South Carolina primary when Mccain was running against W? Of course Rove denies this... But if a person is going to these extremes....

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/35728837

"One of the more notorious dirty tricks of which Rove is accused is the so-called ???push-pull poll??? conducted in South Carolina during the 2000 primaries, when George W. Bush and John McCain were vying for the Republican presidential nomination. The poll suggested that McCain, who has an adopted daughter from Bangladesh, had fathered an illegitimate child with a black woman.
???Nothing to do with it,??? Rove told Lauer of the rumor. ???This is the kind of thing the media love, these kind of allegations. But for people in practical politics, I??™ve got to tell you, I was seized with fear when this rumor began to circulate through South Carolina. It was sent out by a professor at Bob Jones University.???
Rove then used the anecdote to criticize the way McCain dealt with the smear.
???I thought John McCain would seize it for what it was, which was an enormous opportunity to give an insight into who he and his wife are because Cindy McCain adopted a child from an orphanage in Bangladesh,??? Rove told Lauer. ???The story of this is an incredible tale of love and compassion. But rather than doing that, John McCain said, ???I??™m a victim,??™ and was angry and complained about it and pointed the finger at Bush when he had no evidence whatsoever.???
Later the article goes on to say......

"Others, including fellow Republicans, don??™t buy Rove??™s denials. As Lauer reported, ???Roy Fletcher, McCain??™s deputy campaign manager, said of the South Carolina smear, quote, ???This whole thing, it was orchestrated by Rove.??™ ???
And Cindy McCain, the senator??™s wife, said she would not stab Rove in the back if he walked by her. ???I would stab him in the front,??? she reportedly said."

and this little gem from a 60 minutes interview as reported by the Huffington Post.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/22/karl-rove-60-minutes-expo_n_87925.html

"A Republican operative in Alabama says Karl Rove asked her to try to prove the state's Democratic governor was unfaithful to his wife in an effort to thwart the highly successful politician's re-election," CBS's Scott Pelley reports for 60 Minutes. "Rove's attempt to smear Don Siegelman was part of a Republican campaign to ruin him that finally succeeded in imprisoning him, says the operative, Jill Simpson."

Simpson speaks to Scott Pelley in her first television interview, to be broadcast on "60 MINUTES" Sunday, Feb. 24, at 7 p.m. ET/PT, on the CBS Television Network.

Simpson spoke to Pelley because, she says, Siegelman's seven-year sentence for bribery bothers her. She recalls what Rove, then President Bush's senior political adviser, asked her to do at a 2001 meeting in this exchange from Sunday's report.

"Karl Rove asked you to take pictures of Siegelman?" asks Pelley.

"Yes," replies Simpson.

"In a compromising, sexual position with one of his aides," clarifies Pelley.

"Yes, if I could," says Simpson.

Slime.... immoral.....unethical..... yep all the above describes Karl Rove!

[Da Coach]

So because you don't agree with his political beliefs and actions you are saying he should be censored? I still don't see anything he's done that comes close to being immoral or illegal.

I am saying that regardless of whether you agree with his politics, if criminals like William Ayres and Angela Davis are welcomed on college campuses, then why censor Karl Rove?
Liberals claim to be the champions of the freedoms in our Bill of Rights, then justify reasons why they should be applied unevenly and only to those they agree with.

[Beninator]

So because you don't agree with his political beliefs and actions you are saying he should be censored? I still don't see anything he's done that comes close to being immoral or illegal.

I am saying that regardless of whether you agree with his politics, if criminals like William Ayres and Angela Davis are welcomed on college campuses, then why censor Karl Rove?
Liberals claim to be the champions of the freedoms in our Bill of Rights, then justify reasons why they should be applied unevenly and only to those they agree with.

Those two examples that I just cited are not immoral?????? I'll agree that they aren't illegal... but not immoral??????? How far do conservatives have to go to compromise their principles? I don't care what party a person like this belongs to... Those actions are IMMORAL! Wow.... We must have a different set of beliefs then! As far as censored, Rove wasn't censored. He was asked to reschedule his speech at a later date after the elections. I have no problem with Rove giving a speech on campus but I do respect Loyola's right to have the speech scheduled after the election.

[Da Coach]

Oh come on. You are simply citing politics, which all politicians do, including democrats. You don't remember the election-eve surprise revelation by democrats in November, 2000, when they realized they could lose the election, so they released a 24 year old DUI report on George Bush and tried to trump it into a big deal.

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/03/05/rove_says_dui_revelations_nearly_sunk_bush.html

How is this dirty politics any different from anything you claim Rove has done? I think it's even worse.

But talk about compromising principles! If a conservative congressman had been discovered to have done anything close to the corrupt actions of Charles Rangel, he would have resigned immediately in shame. But when it's a democrat, his collegues all rally around him and make him a hero. It takes ethics committees months to try to decide his fate, and in the end, he'll resume his congressional positions, including his powerful chairmanships as if nothing happened.

[Beninator]

I'll agree that both are politics and that this happens on both sides, but I would not deny that this is immoral as you have done with Karl Rove! Can't Republicans ever be wrong in your mind? I am a former Republican and have left the party as I am disgusted as to what the party has turned into!
And I will again state my belief that while both are immoral, instructing someone to take compromising sexual photographs is much more immoral than the release of W's apparently factual DUI report on election eve!

and fwiw.. I think that Charlie Rangle should resign.

[LG281]

To have a compromising sexual photograph taken of your self...don't you have to put yourself in a compromising position?

So what is the immoral part of taking a picture of an immoral act? In my mind its the immoral act.

Now taking a picture (and presenting it out of context) that suggests something is going on would be immoral in my book. But this would be easiliy down played by the subject of the photo.

- - -

So its clear - I view myself as a fiscally conservative independent. I don't care what party a person belongs to...is their platform strong and do I agree with them on more important issues than the other candidate.

As for Faux News - I personally think you should read both CNN/MSN and FOX news because the truth is somewhere in between.

[ChewaBrave]

Private university. They will do what they please. I'm honestly surprised people still get excited about this type of thing. In the course of reading politics, we always hear about how "liberal" our colleges are. That being the case, you'd figure this wouldn't even be news worthy. Personally, I love these threads, simply for the fun in seeing how haphazardly people throw around the terms liberal, and conservative. The ridiculous overarching generalizations are fun.

[SFP]

I'm not a Karl Rove fan but the guy is very entertaining with great insight into the American political landscape. He is not a lunatic like Ann Coulter. Cancelling him is admitting that you cannot embrace people with different view points which only empowers him and makes you look like a hypocrite. Discussions of all persuasions regardless of belief is healthy for democracy. Historically when there is a failure of society to fairly balance discussions of different beliefs terrible things have happened.