This Is The Kind Of Monsters That Our Colleges Are Producing

[martybegan]

Your bigotry against geeky/nerdy males is just icing on the cake of your intolerance.

And your sad pathetic attempts at justifying mob violence is not surprising.

And your last statement seals your hack status.

actually, I was pretty nerdy in college.

But I had the good sense to not to stalk girls and take their pictures when they asked me nicely not to.

he was covering a campus event, not stalking. Stop making up shit you know is false.

 

[Mac1958]

 

[martybegan]

Where is the proof that the camera was "inches from the persons face".

did you not watch the video where geeky-boy kept sticking his camera in people's faces.

Was that before or after the people in question started confronting him?

You can't run up to someone and then claim "your camera was in my face"

 

[JoeB131]

Stirring a pot is actually a good thing, otherwise the things on the bottom burn.

They stirring the wrong pot.

Are they? When you have police officers shooting black children in the middle of the street, with no consequences, I would say that's a pot that needs to be stirred.

 

[JoeB131]

Was that before or after the people in question started confronting him?

You can't run up to someone and then claim "your camera was in my face"

Quite right. When they asked you to leave, you should have left, not keep sticking your camera in their faces.

But Creepy-boy kept doing it.

Until some real men confronted him.

 

[JoeB131]

he was covering a campus event, not stalking. Stop making up shit you know is false.

Except Tim Tai wasn't a 'reporter", he was a "Stringer" for EPSN. Which means that he would randomly send stuff in, but he wasn't sent their by anyone.

the other guy with the camera, the one who was actually threatened with the "muscle', was a guy named Mark Schierbecker, wasn't a reporter at all.

 

[martybegan]

Was that before or after the people in question started confronting him?

You can't run up to someone and then claim "your camera was in my face"

Quite right. When they asked you to leave, you should have left, not keep sticking your camera in their faces.

But Creepy-boy kept doing it.

Until some real men confronted him.

They have no right to ask him to leave in a public space at a public university.

and again, your "might makes right" fetish shows your inner fascism.

 

[martybegan]

he was covering a campus event, not stalking. Stop making up shit you know is false.

Except Tim Tai wasn't a 'reporter", he was a "Stringer" for EPSN. Which means that he would randomly send stuff in, but he wasn't sent their by anyone.

the other guy with the camera, the one who was actually threatened with the "muscle', was a guy named Mark Schierbecker, wasn't a reporter at all.

Grasping at "nuance" just shows your weak position here.

And the government doesn't get to decide who is a "reporter" in a public space. I can be a reporter if I want to in that situation.

 

[Uncensored2008]

"University of Phoenix, you must be really smart." Said no Director of Human Resources looking at a resume, ever.

With your 3rd grade education you are in such a position to judge, Comrade Stalin.

I went to the California Polytechnic University in Pomona for my undergrad. Twenty years later I decided to pursue and MBA. I enrolled in Phoenix and was utterly shocked. Granted that a masters program SHOULD be more difficult than and undergrad program, but Cal Poly simply didn't prepare me for the rigors of Phoenix. Poly was a joke, glorified high school. Phoenix was serious, get an education or flunk out. I know that they are criticized for the number of people who drop out, but that's because unlike state schools, people have to actually perform.

When I decided to pursue a Ph.D., the choice was obvious. In August of 2016 I will have my doctorate from Phoenix. You will still have your certificate from the Pol Pot Academy for slow children, so stand proud Comrade Stalin. Someday you may even learn to tie your own shoes.

 

[Uncensored2008]

And that is really a shame. Going to college was basically higher education and "growing up." On line education received the less effective professors if they were professors at all. The tide may be turning.

At Cal Poly, I rarely saw a professor. The professors worked on research projects. Classes were taught by grad students. No need to show up for classes, and I rarely did. If you could pass the finals, you got a good grade, and I did.

Phoenix made me think, since most of the work is in essay form and team interaction, there is no way to just cram for a test and slide by, like I did at Poly. You actually have to apply yourself, put in the tie, and learn concepts. I'm good at taking tests, and through high school and extended high school at Cal Poly, used the ability to pass tests to avoid real work.

Online is far more effective and has far better professors, who actually teach, than the state school I went to.

 

[Uncensored2008]

So, close all the universities and colleges cuz dumb as rocks RW idiots sure as hell don't want an education. Indeed, the R candidates would agree with you.

Many universities offer little in the way of education. Teaching civil unrest and racism, as Mizzou does, is not an actual education. The age of the physical campus with Communist agitators directing activities is coming to a close. It is a model rooted in the 17th century. Sports and radical leftism are the focus of the schools of this nation. Education is a minor consideration, if a consideration at all.

Education is on the rise. This is the 21st century and knowledge is everywhere. What is collapsing is the infrastructure of radical left indoctrination. Real educations that have nothing to do with sports or social agitation are replacing the model from the last millennium.

What will you Communists do with an actually educated populace, where you can no longer fill young hearts with hate and young minds with shit?

 

[Uncensored2008]

i wonder how libs would react if 90% of all colleges and universities were hard core conservative?

That is what they fear.

As education shifts from the methods of 500 years past to modern methods, the focus shifts from trying to get laid or score weed, from a winning football or basketball team, to learning subjects.

Mizzou is built around sports. Education is at best an after thought. They are a sports franchise that use a second rate university as a tax shelter, This is true of most of the 17th century universities in this nation. This is why Asia kicks our ass in education.

As the online universities take over, and there is no stopping it, the focus shifts from Communist activism and the Basketball score, to math, science, business, etc.

2+2=4

No wiggle room, no blaming the 1%, no white oppression, no Capitalist greed, just the fact. Facts are conservative, they either are or they are not. When schools teach the subjects, and only the subjects, leftism dies. Facts on a leftist are like salt on a slug, they burn leftism away.

What Mizzou and Yale are doing is accelerating the decline of the 17th century educational model they employ, but these antiquated institutions are doomed regardless of the racist and America hating actions they engage in.

Personally, I view a hair dressing certificate from Marinellos school of beauty as more prestigious than a bachelors in Black Studies from Yale.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Of course, to keep the peace and officer of the law has the authority to order a group to disperse, as well as a single individual. The instigator as well as those whose emotions have been set on edge by another.

As a matter of fact the only person in authority is the Professor, who has a duty and the authority to keep the peace and maintain control of students and interlopers.

That's a lot of fancy words for justifying a mob intimidating a journalist. And it fails anyway.

Fancy words? Interesting comment for its lack of substance. What does stand out is your use of the word mob.

In Sociology it is defined as:

A group of persons stimulating one another to excitement and losing ordinary rational control over their activity.​

Yet, your use of the word leaves out the antagonist, whose actions bring said "mob" together, and without whom there would be no event upon which to comment.

Though no law seems to prevent his speech or action, we do have a supreme court decision to consider, if one has an open mind and will set aside their bias for the interloper:

"Morse v. Frederick, 551 U.S. 393 (2007), was a United States Supreme Courtcase in which the Court held, 5–4, that the First Amendment does not prevent educators from suppressing, at a school-supervised event, student speech that is reasonably viewed as promoting illegal drug use."

Of course drug use is not the issue here, but a disruption at a public school seemed necessary and sufficient for an educator to act and infringe the First Amendment Right of Expression in both instances.

Witnessing and observing an event as a reporter is not "disrupting".

It figures you go out of your way to defend whiny little twats, because you probably are one, and whiny little twats tend to travel in packs.

Putting a camera in ones face, inches away, goes far beyond witnessing an event, when the witness/observer is holding the camera.

Now you're just being stupid, defending your biased opinion thoughtlessly. Are you channeling BEDOWIN62?

It is interesting how you interpreted the event. I saw the photographer standing firm in one position while the students involved entered "his space." They crept up on him...He did not advance toward them.

I saw someone inciting a riot, and damn lucky he did so in the presence of law abiding students in a higher education environment.

Let's presume he want to chronicle the drug trade and stuck his camera in the face of those on the street corner plying their trade or street walkers or one of those who marched on the mall with Glen Beck (read their signs) and listen to their rants:



Of course most of them seem to have been over weight and at best members of the echo chamber who are ignorant and (being nice) not very bright.

 

[Stephanie]

THE PARENTS need to get their little brats under control. they are making the schools unsafe to attend. YOU PAY TAXES for that place. speak the hell up

 

[Mac1958]

The country appears to be paying more attention to this kind of behavior.

Good.
.

 

[Stephanie]

Someone said something interesting. these are being driven by the DNC because they are WORRIED about losing this upcoming election.

we know they are in bed with the OWS AND BLM Thugs so think about it?

a lot of black folks in on this like . the this new race hustler they put at the Missouri school.
snip:
You think we'll see this on the NBC nightly news? little by little THE TRUTH drips and stinks UP their Agendas. I'd pull my kid out of that school. The video at the site:

SNIP:
Mike Middleton has a long career of race activism and is an expert in the field.
Middleton taught employment discrimination at the university so he ought to be a good fit.
He is a former civil rights lawyer.


In october Mike Middleton was featured prominently with the black campus race activists in a video they released titled, “Response to Skeptics.”

Middleton and Jonathan Butler, the millionaire’s kid and underprivileged hunger striker, made the video last month.

Breitbart.com reported:

Mike Middleton, the man just named as the interim president of the University of Missouri, worked as a political activist with the protestors who forced out his predecessor…

…Middleton retired in August after teaching at the law school for 17 years. But he subsequently worked with the black protestors who created racial tensions by staging a series of direct actions designed to antagonize other students.

Milligan is featured prominently in a video released three weeks ago called “Response To Skeptics,” which was produced by a video team at the university’s Academic Support Center.


all of it here:
New Missouri Interim President Was Man Behind Race Protests - Made Video With Hunger Striker Last Month - The Gateway Pundit

 

[martybegan]

That's a lot of fancy words for justifying a mob intimidating a journalist. And it fails anyway.

Fancy words? Interesting comment for its lack of substance. What does stand out is your use of the word mob.

In Sociology it is defined as:

A group of persons stimulating one another to excitement and losing ordinary rational control over their activity.​

Yet, your use of the word leaves out the antagonist, whose actions bring said "mob" together, and without whom there would be no event upon which to comment.

Though no law seems to prevent his speech or action, we do have a supreme court decision to consider, if one has an open mind and will set aside their bias for the interloper:

"Morse v. Frederick, 551 U.S. 393 (2007), was a United States Supreme Courtcase in which the Court held, 5–4, that the First Amendment does not prevent educators from suppressing, at a school-supervised event, student speech that is reasonably viewed as promoting illegal drug use."

Of course drug use is not the issue here, but a disruption at a public school seemed necessary and sufficient for an educator to act and infringe the First Amendment Right of Expression in both instances.

Witnessing and observing an event as a reporter is not "disrupting".

It figures you go out of your way to defend whiny little twats, because you probably are one, and whiny little twats tend to travel in packs.

Putting a camera in ones face, inches away, goes far beyond witnessing an event, when the witness/observer is holding the camera.

Now you're just being stupid, defending your biased opinion thoughtlessly. Are you channeling BEDOWIN62?

It is interesting how you interpreted the event. I saw the photographer standing firm in one position while the students involved entered "his space." They crept up on him...He did not advance toward them.

I saw someone inciting a riot, and damn lucky he did so in the presence of law abiding students in a higher education environment.

Let's presume he want to chronicle the drug trade and stuck his camera in the face of those on the street corner plying their trade or street walkers or one of those who marched on the mall with Glen Beck (read their signs) and listen to their rants:



Of course most of them seem to have been over weight and at best members of the echo chamber who are ignorant and (being nice) not very bright.

If you have to stoop low enough to call that "inciting a riot" then there is no hope for you.

 

[Stephanie]

Your bigotry against geeky/nerdy males is just icing on the cake of your intolerance.

And your sad pathetic attempts at justifying mob violence is not surprising.

And your last statement seals your hack status.

actually, I was pretty nerdy in college.

But I had the good sense to not to stalk girls and take their pictures when they asked me nicely not to.

he was covering a campus event, not stalking. Stop making up shit you know is false.

He (joey) has to a paid instigator. who in their right mind would come up crap such as that. it's just dumb

 

[Wry Catcher]

Fancy words? Interesting comment for its lack of substance. What does stand out is your use of the word mob.

In Sociology it is defined as:

A group of persons stimulating one another to excitement and losing ordinary rational control over their activity.​

Yet, your use of the word leaves out the antagonist, whose actions bring said "mob" together, and without whom there would be no event upon which to comment.

Though no law seems to prevent his speech or action, we do have a supreme court decision to consider, if one has an open mind and will set aside their bias for the interloper:

"Morse v. Frederick, 551 U.S. 393 (2007), was a United States Supreme Courtcase in which the Court held, 5–4, that the First Amendment does not prevent educators from suppressing, at a school-supervised event, student speech that is reasonably viewed as promoting illegal drug use."

Of course drug use is not the issue here, but a disruption at a public school seemed necessary and sufficient for an educator to act and infringe the First Amendment Right of Expression in both instances.

Witnessing and observing an event as a reporter is not "disrupting".

It figures you go out of your way to defend whiny little twats, because you probably are one, and whiny little twats tend to travel in packs.

Putting a camera in ones face, inches away, goes far beyond witnessing an event, when the witness/observer is holding the camera.

Now you're just being stupid, defending your biased opinion thoughtlessly. Are you channeling BEDOWIN62?

It is interesting how you interpreted the event. I saw the photographer standing firm in one position while the students involved entered "his space." They crept up on him...He did not advance toward them.

I saw someone inciting a riot, and damn lucky he did so in the presence of law abiding students in a higher education environment.

Let's presume he want to chronicle the drug trade and stuck his camera in the face of those on the street corner plying their trade or street walkers or one of those who marched on the mall with Glen Beck (read their signs) and listen to their rants:



Of course most of them seem to have been over weight and at best members of the echo chamber who are ignorant and (being nice) not very bright.

If you have to stoop low enough to call that "inciting a riot" then there is no hope for you.

Gee, thanks so much for sharing. I really do appreciate your sage remarks and brilliant deductions (sarcasm alert).

 

[martybegan]

Witnessing and observing an event as a reporter is not "disrupting".

It figures you go out of your way to defend whiny little twats, because you probably are one, and whiny little twats tend to travel in packs.

Putting a camera in ones face, inches away, goes far beyond witnessing an event, when the witness/observer is holding the camera.

Now you're just being stupid, defending your biased opinion thoughtlessly. Are you channeling BEDOWIN62?

It is interesting how you interpreted the event. I saw the photographer standing firm in one position while the students involved entered "his space." They crept up on him...He did not advance toward them.

I saw someone inciting a riot, and damn lucky he did so in the presence of law abiding students in a higher education environment.

Let's presume he want to chronicle the drug trade and stuck his camera in the face of those on the street corner plying their trade or street walkers or one of those who marched on the mall with Glen Beck (read their signs) and listen to their rants:



Of course most of them seem to have been over weight and at best members of the echo chamber who are ignorant and (being nice) not very bright.

If you have to stoop low enough to call that "inciting a riot" then there is no hope for you.

Gee, thanks so much for sharing. I really do appreciate your sage remarks and brilliant deductions (sarcasm alert).

it's all you and your dime store hack political views deserve.