Skidmore students want art proffesor fired for observing police rally

[pknopp]

Well shoot. Is it a good thing or bad thing for someone to demand that someone get fired over being involved in a protest?

Then that would include school teachers and mayors of cities, right?

Especially mayors of cities.

To me, it's a little dicey to be a mayor of a city representing ALL of the people of that city charged with protecting ALL their interests out protesting and supporting a group of people committing crimes, attacking LEO, and calling for special treatment JUST BECAUSE OF THEIR SKIN COLOR over that of other races.

That's what elections are for.

If so, then taking your argument to its logical conclusion, rather than going to war with Adolf Hilter and WWII, we should have just waited to see if he'd be removed from power first, come Germany's next election?



The failing of elections is that far from their ideal, elections also depend on the electorate being intelligent and well informed making good decisions. Those days seem past us in the USA today, with more and more voting based on half-truths and feelings / emotions driven largely by media-paid, special-interest driven propaganda.

Godwin.

Not at all. Hitler was an easy and obvious example of comparison. I could use many others. Just because he is used or mentioned does not always invalidate or reduce the statement to godwin's law.

The thread is about a couple who went to watch a rally. You went to Hitler. Bravo.

 

[toobfreak]

Well shoot. Is it a good thing or bad thing for someone to demand that someone get fired over being involved in a protest?

Then that would include school teachers and mayors of cities, right?

Especially mayors of cities.

To me, it's a little dicey to be a mayor of a city representing ALL of the people of that city charged with protecting ALL their interests out protesting and supporting a group of people committing crimes, attacking LEO, and calling for special treatment JUST BECAUSE OF THEIR SKIN COLOR over that of other races.

Leadership, without core convictions, a moral outlook and courage to stand behind values has always dicey. No history of it working out positively, that I am aware of.

A mayor is not a "leader," he is an ADMINISTRATOR. As such, his personal opinions and views should be kept separate to himself and at home when they contrast with his responsibility of serve everyone in the city equally regardless of their "politics."

 

[toobfreak]

Well shoot. Is it a good thing or bad thing for someone to demand that someone get fired over being involved in a protest?

Then that would include school teachers and mayors of cities, right?

Especially mayors of cities.

To me, it's a little dicey to be a mayor of a city representing ALL of the people of that city charged with protecting ALL their interests out protesting and supporting a group of people committing crimes, attacking LEO, and calling for special treatment JUST BECAUSE OF THEIR SKIN COLOR over that of other races.

That's what elections are for.

If so, then taking your argument to its logical conclusion, rather than going to war with Adolf Hilter and WWII, we should have just waited to see if he'd be removed from power first, come Germany's next election?



The failing of elections is that far from their ideal, elections also depend on the electorate being intelligent and well informed making good decisions. Those days seem past us in the USA today, with more and more voting based on half-truths and feelings / emotions driven largely by media-paid, special-interest driven propaganda.

Godwin.

Not at all. Hitler was an easy and obvious example of comparison. I could use many others. Just because he is used or mentioned does not always invalidate or reduce the statement to godwin's law.

The thread is about a couple who went to watch a rally. You went to Hitler. Bravo.

That is not an argument, but it is a fantastically crude oversimplification.

 

[pknopp]

Well shoot. Is it a good thing or bad thing for someone to demand that someone get fired over being involved in a protest?

Then that would include school teachers and mayors of cities, right?

Especially mayors of cities.

To me, it's a little dicey to be a mayor of a city representing ALL of the people of that city charged with protecting ALL their interests out protesting and supporting a group of people committing crimes, attacking LEO, and calling for special treatment JUST BECAUSE OF THEIR SKIN COLOR over that of other races.

That's what elections are for.

If so, then taking your argument to its logical conclusion, rather than going to war with Adolf Hilter and WWII, we should have just waited to see if he'd be removed from power first, come Germany's next election?



The failing of elections is that far from their ideal, elections also depend on the electorate being intelligent and well informed making good decisions. Those days seem past us in the USA today, with more and more voting based on half-truths and feelings / emotions driven largely by media-paid, special-interest driven propaganda.

Godwin.

Not at all. Hitler was an easy and obvious example of comparison. I could use many others. Just because he is used or mentioned does not always invalidate or reduce the statement to godwin's law.

The thread is about a couple who went to watch a rally. You went to Hitler. Bravo.

That is not an argument, but it is a fantastically crude oversimplification.

It's factual. There is no where to fit Hitler into this conversation.

 

[toobfreak]

It's factual. There is no where to fit Hitler into this conversation.

No, it's either bullshit or stupidity on your part. My comment wasn't about Hitler at all. My point was that just because someone is elected and will face election again is not a just reason to merely overlook anything they do while in office.

That is why we have censure, sanctions, reprimands and even impeachment, for a violation of the trust. A mayor has no business being on the street late at light with a bunch of people with torches promoting racially-changed issues who are also connected with property damage and attacks upon the very police on his parole.

 

[pknopp]

It's factual. There is no where to fit Hitler into this conversation.

No, it's either bullshit or stupidity on your part. My comment wasn't about Hitler at all. My point was that just because someone is elected and will face election again is not a just reason to merely overlook anything they do while in office.

No one told you to ignore anything.

That is why we have censure, sanctions, reprimands and even impeachment, for a violation of the trust. A mayor has no business being on the street late at light with a bunch of people with torches promoting racially-changed issues who are also connected with property damage and attacks upon the very police on his parole.

That's up to the electorate.

 

[toobfreak]

It's factual. There is no where to fit Hitler into this conversation.

No, it's either bullshit or stupidity on your part. My comment wasn't about Hitler at all. My point was that just because someone is elected and will face election again is not a just reason to merely overlook anything they do while in office.

No one told you to ignore anything.