Trump's promised Free Speech Executive Order

[Marion Morrison]

When I went to school, me and 1 black friend from the hood were able to speak up against the Humanities department's new policies..

what were the policies you (and your 1 black friend) spoke up against..??

I'd rather not reveal that. Reason being there's a certain year that policy was implemented.

 

[Dale Smith]

Whatever Trump does, you hate. .

true story

Val, being that you are one of those ***** hat wearing, purse swinging commies? Please join your fellow commie antifa pals and take some video of them getting their asses kicked because they are weak sacks of shit. Download it to youtube!!!

LOVED this video of this mask wearing commie getting his sorry ass ran over.....LMAO!

 

[Valerie]

whateverrrrrr ^

 

[sparky]

The White House did not immediately respond a request for comment on details of the order.

~S~

 

[Kilroy2]

Free speech is already in the constitution

I wander what an EO would do except repeat the obvious

Dud gets punched

take boxing lessons or hire Chuck Norris for protection

I hear at 78 he still exercise daily

Still we remember the young lady that got ran over by a right wing supremacist and the crowd of people he tried to run over

Freedom of speech

"There are fine people on both sides" and some of them can drive

unfortunately for the one young lady expressing her free speech, she lost her free speech permanently

yet EZ rider get upset and threatens to do the only thing he is capable of doing

Tells a room full of supporters he is going to do an EO and the crowd momentarily stunned burst into a roar because they can

 

[Dale Smith]

When I went to school, me and 1 black friend from the hood were able to speak up against the Humanities department's new policies..

what were the policies you (and your 1 black friend) spoke up against..??

antifa knocked the **** OUT!!!

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Conservatives have long appreciated that many social problems are complex and fluid — that the success of government initiatives is typically dependent upon local knowledge and local buy-in. Absent these, well-intentioned efforts tend to fail and often cause great harm in the process. As a consequence, conservatives consistently assert that one-size-fits-all and top-down approaches to social problems are unlikely to yield the intended results.


This same logic holds with regard to increasing ideological perspectives in higher education.


One cannot legislate an institutional culture that encourages viewpoint diversity — let alone an environment where diversity is effectively leveraged to improve research or teaching. This must be willingly and willfully enacted by faculty, students and administrators in their day-to-day interactions. Agents must be convinced, not compelled, to learn and grow from diverse perspectives.

Trump’s proposed executive order is counterproductive to this end.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...e9-9361-301ffb5bd5e6_story.html?noredirect=on



Put another way, universities can enforce rules that enhance conservatives’ abilities to speak on campus — but others may grow far less willing to listen. And there is little the White House, or Republican lawmakers, could plausibly do about that.


And of course, Republicans will not retain control of the White House forever. It is highly plausible that Trump’s tactic here would be turned against conservatives in a subsequent Democratic administration.




Consider: Many religious schools receive federal funding. Liberty University, for instance, gets nearly half a billion dollars per year. Yet Liberty University has also faced widespread criticism for its lack of viewpoint diversity and, at times, its outright censorship of those who contradict university president Jerry Falwell Jr.

Whatever Trump does, you hate. So this isn't a valid answer.

You would much rather eliminate the conservative point of view rather than allow it. You only pay attention to censorship when it is of your viewpoints and not conservatives.

Objectively, one would fight for all viewpoints to be allowed in a forum of knowledge. Instead of just one.

You aren't fooling anyone. I've seen your posts. Flaming liberal as they come.

“Trump's promised Free Speech Executive Order”

…is predicated on a lie, having nothing to do with 'free speech.'

It’s yet another example of Trump’s ignorance of, and contempt for, First Amendment case law.

And it’s yet another example of Trump’s authoritarianism and that of his supporters and most on the right.

Universities are not seeking to ‘discriminate’ against conservative speakers, or to otherwise ‘silence’ the right – that’s the lie.

Government is at liberty to regulate and restrict speech provided such regulations and restrictions are content neutral – which they clearly are in the case of universities.

Universities have the role and responsibility to guard against the violence often associated with rightwing hate speech.

Moreover, the notion that the warranted and Constitutional regulation of rightwing hate speech ‘silences’ conservative voices is as ridiculous as it is wrong – in this age of Twitter, Facebook, and other manifestations of social media there are ample other channels of communication afforded to conservatives to propagate their lies, fake news, and misinformation.

 

[Papageorgio]

I have read that President Trump is very concerned with the violence on American campuses and he is vowing to issue an Executive Order saying that colleges will have their federal funding withheld if they violate free speech on campus. This looks very promising.

Trump vows executive order requiring 'free speech' at colleges | Reuters

"If universities do not comply “it will be very costly,” he said. The U.S. government awards universities more than $30 billion annually in research funds."

In other words - Trump wants to make college students as dumb as his base. Why not just put Betsy DeVos or David Duke in charge of all the colleges.

Yeah, exposing people to other viewpoints is a bad thing. You afraid that your viewpoint wouldn’t stand the test of other’s views? Seems you are the one that doesn’t like free speech or ideas.

 

[RandomPoster]

Conservatives have long appreciated that many social problems are complex and fluid — that the success of government initiatives is typically dependent upon local knowledge and local buy-in. Absent these, well-intentioned efforts tend to fail and often cause great harm in the process. As a consequence, conservatives consistently assert that one-size-fits-all and top-down approaches to social problems are unlikely to yield the intended results.


This same logic holds with regard to increasing ideological perspectives in higher education.


One cannot legislate an institutional culture that encourages viewpoint diversity — let alone an environment where diversity is effectively leveraged to improve research or teaching. This must be willingly and willfully enacted by faculty, students and administrators in their day-to-day interactions. Agents must be convinced, not compelled, to learn and grow from diverse perspectives.

Trump’s proposed executive order is counterproductive to this end.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...e9-9361-301ffb5bd5e6_story.html?noredirect=on



Put another way, universities can enforce rules that enhance conservatives’ abilities to speak on campus — but others may grow far less willing to listen. And there is little the White House, or Republican lawmakers, could plausibly do about that.


And of course, Republicans will not retain control of the White House forever. It is highly plausible that Trump’s tactic here would be turned against conservatives in a subsequent Democratic administration.




Consider: Many religious schools receive federal funding. Liberty University, for instance, gets nearly half a billion dollars per year. Yet Liberty University has also faced widespread criticism for its lack of viewpoint diversity and, at times, its outright censorship of those who contradict university president Jerry Falwell Jr.

Whatever Trump does, you hate. So this isn't a valid answer.

You would much rather eliminate the conservative point of view rather than allow it. You only pay attention to censorship when it is of your viewpoints and not conservatives.

Objectively, one would fight for all viewpoints to be allowed in a forum of knowledge. Instead of just one.

You aren't fooling anyone. I've seen your posts. Flaming liberal as they come.

“Trump's promised Free Speech Executive Order”

…is predicated on a lie, having nothing to do with 'free speech.'

It’s yet another example of Trump’s ignorance of, and contempt for, First Amendment case law.

And it’s yet another example of Trump’s authoritarianism and that of his supporters and most on the right.

Universities are not seeking to ‘discriminate’ against conservative speakers, or to otherwise ‘silence’ the right – that’s the lie.

Government is at liberty to regulate and restrict speech provided such regulations and restrictions are content neutral – which they clearly are in the case of universities.

Universities have the role and responsibility to guard against the violence often associated with rightwing hate speech.

Moreover, the notion that the warranted and Constitutional regulation of rightwing hate speech ‘silences’ conservative voices is as ridiculous as it is wrong – in this age of Twitter, Facebook, and other manifestations of social media there are ample other channels of communication afforded to conservatives to propagate their lies, fake news, and misinformation.

Liberals attack conservative speakers for saying anything they deem "offensive" and you blame conservatives.

 

[Papageorgio]

Conservatives have long appreciated that many social problems are complex and fluid — that the success of government initiatives is typically dependent upon local knowledge and local buy-in. Absent these, well-intentioned efforts tend to fail and often cause great harm in the process. As a consequence, conservatives consistently assert that one-size-fits-all and top-down approaches to social problems are unlikely to yield the intended results.


This same logic holds with regard to increasing ideological perspectives in higher education.


One cannot legislate an institutional culture that encourages viewpoint diversity — let alone an environment where diversity is effectively leveraged to improve research or teaching. This must be willingly and willfully enacted by faculty, students and administrators in their day-to-day interactions. Agents must be convinced, not compelled, to learn and grow from diverse perspectives.

Trump’s proposed executive order is counterproductive to this end.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...e9-9361-301ffb5bd5e6_story.html?noredirect=on



Put another way, universities can enforce rules that enhance conservatives’ abilities to speak on campus — but others may grow far less willing to listen. And there is little the White House, or Republican lawmakers, could plausibly do about that.


And of course, Republicans will not retain control of the White House forever. It is highly plausible that Trump’s tactic here would be turned against conservatives in a subsequent Democratic administration.




Consider: Many religious schools receive federal funding. Liberty University, for instance, gets nearly half a billion dollars per year. Yet Liberty University has also faced widespread criticism for its lack of viewpoint diversity and, at times, its outright censorship of those who contradict university president Jerry Falwell Jr.

Whatever Trump does, you hate. So this isn't a valid answer.

You would much rather eliminate the conservative point of view rather than allow it. You only pay attention to censorship when it is of your viewpoints and not conservatives.

Objectively, one would fight for all viewpoints to be allowed in a forum of knowledge. Instead of just one.

You aren't fooling anyone. I've seen your posts. Flaming liberal as they come.

“Trump's promised Free Speech Executive Order”

…is predicated on a lie, having nothing to do with 'free speech.'

It’s yet another example of Trump’s ignorance of, and contempt for, First Amendment case law.

And it’s yet another example of Trump’s authoritarianism and that of his supporters and most on the right.

Universities are not seeking to ‘discriminate’ against conservative speakers, or to otherwise ‘silence’ the right – that’s the lie.

Government is at liberty to regulate and restrict speech provided such regulations and restrictions are content neutral – which they clearly are in the case of universities.

Universities have the role and responsibility to guard against the violence often associated with rightwing hate speech.

Moreover, the notion that the warranted and Constitutional regulation of rightwing hate speech ‘silences’ conservative voices is as ridiculous as it is wrong – in this age of Twitter, Facebook, and other manifestations of social media there are ample other channels of communication afforded to conservatives to propagate their lies, fake news, and misinformation.

More like your views would not stand up to a challenge? It seems that the left has moved away from the liberal way of tolerance and moved to the authoratative view of not to question, just follow. You make my liberal side cringe.with your hate and intolerance, you are totally the opposite of those real liberals of the 60’s.

 

[TemplarKormac]

When I went to school, me and 1 black friend from the hood were able to speak up against the Humanities department's new policies..

what were the policies you (and your 1 black friend) spoke up against..??

"I HAVE MORE BLACK FRIENDS THAN YOU!!!" -Valerie

There you go treating minorities like objects instead of people.

 

[BULLDOG]

Great idea. The audience will just have to let it be known if they like what the speaker is saying or not. I fear it will result in unprecedented violence, but if that's what Trump wants.......

 

[TemplarKormac]

Conservatives have long appreciated that many social problems are complex and fluid — that the success of government initiatives is typically dependent upon local knowledge and local buy-in. Absent these, well-intentioned efforts tend to fail and often cause great harm in the process. As a consequence, conservatives consistently assert that one-size-fits-all and top-down approaches to social problems are unlikely to yield the intended results.


This same logic holds with regard to increasing ideological perspectives in higher education.


One cannot legislate an institutional culture that encourages viewpoint diversity — let alone an environment where diversity is effectively leveraged to improve research or teaching. This must be willingly and willfully enacted by faculty, students and administrators in their day-to-day interactions. Agents must be convinced, not compelled, to learn and grow from diverse perspectives.

Trump’s proposed executive order is counterproductive to this end.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...e9-9361-301ffb5bd5e6_story.html?noredirect=on



Put another way, universities can enforce rules that enhance conservatives’ abilities to speak on campus — but others may grow far less willing to listen. And there is little the White House, or Republican lawmakers, could plausibly do about that.


And of course, Republicans will not retain control of the White House forever. It is highly plausible that Trump’s tactic here would be turned against conservatives in a subsequent Democratic administration.




Consider: Many religious schools receive federal funding. Liberty University, for instance, gets nearly half a billion dollars per year. Yet Liberty University has also faced widespread criticism for its lack of viewpoint diversity and, at times, its outright censorship of those who contradict university president Jerry Falwell Jr.

Whatever Trump does, you hate. So this isn't a valid answer.

You would much rather eliminate the conservative point of view rather than allow it. You only pay attention to censorship when it is of your viewpoints and not conservatives.

Objectively, one would fight for all viewpoints to be allowed in a forum of knowledge. Instead of just one.

You aren't fooling anyone. I've seen your posts. Flaming liberal as they come.

“Trump's promised Free Speech Executive Order”

…is predicated on a lie, having nothing to do with 'free speech.'

It’s yet another example of Trump’s ignorance of, and contempt for, First Amendment case law.

And it’s yet another example of Trump’s authoritarianism and that of his supporters and most on the right.

Universities are not seeking to ‘discriminate’ against conservative speakers, or to otherwise ‘silence’ the right – that’s the lie.

Government is at liberty to regulate and restrict speech provided such regulations and restrictions are content neutral – which they clearly are in the case of universities.

Universities have the role and responsibility to guard against the violence often associated with rightwing hate speech.

Moreover, the notion that the warranted and Constitutional regulation of rightwing hate speech ‘silences’ conservative voices is as ridiculous as it is wrong – in this age of Twitter, Facebook, and other manifestations of social media there are ample other channels of communication afforded to conservatives to propagate their lies, fake news, and misinformation.

“Trump's promised Free Speech Executive Order”

…is predicated on a lie, having nothing to do with 'free speech.'

Curious, is the point you make about supporting free speech also a lie?

It’s yet another example of Trump’s ignorance of, and contempt for...

Is your ignorance and contempt of intolerance merely ignorance and contempt for an opposing point of view?

...First Amendment case law.

What is this case law you speak of? Where does any opinion from any circuit court or the Supreme Court allow for universities and colleges to filter out what they deem to be hate speech?

"Government is at liberty to restrict speech provided such regulations and restrictions are content neutral"

Do you not understand the irony of that statement? "Government is at liberty"? No, of course not. That liberty can be taken purely on the whim of whatever political party has power at any given time. Those whims are subject to political bias. The Government itself cannot be "content neutral" so therefore universities are not "content neutral" period.

Yes, universities do discriminate and you can't stand that they do. It destroys your argument.

CV1

"-which they clearly are in the case of universities"

Uh... so does that include all of the Christian colleges and Catholic oriented educational institutions?

"Moreover, the notion that the warranted and Constitutional regulation of right wing hate speech"

According to C_Clayton_Jones, any opposing idea that leaves a conservative's mouth is considered hate speech.

"in this age of Twitter, Facebook, and other manifestations of social media there are ample other channels of communication afforded to conservatives to propagate their lies, fake news, and misinformation."

You don't have a very long attention span, do you?

https://gizmodo.com/former-facebook-workers-we-routinely-suppressed-conser-1775461006

Moreover, any other "channels of communication afforded to conservatives" would be and are routinely dismissed as "biased". By you.

...

In a nutshell when you say

"there are ample other channels of communication afforded to conservatives to propagate their lies, fake news, and misinformation"

You essentially cannot stand people expressing another point of view other than yours. When facts are presented that contradict your worldview, you deem them as "lies, fake news, and misinformation."

You yourself have no appreciation for free speech. You show contempt for it each time you condemn a conservative for spreading so called lies, fake news, and misinformation. All whilst you do the same. So how can you sit there and act as if you know what is "content neutral"? You can't. Anyone who is as hopelessly biased as you are cannot be an accurate judge of what content is or isn't "content neutral".

Have a friggun seat you tool.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Conservatives have long appreciated that many social problems are complex and fluid — that the success of government initiatives is typically dependent upon local knowledge and local buy-in. Absent these, well-intentioned efforts tend to fail and often cause great harm in the process. As a consequence, conservatives consistently assert that one-size-fits-all and top-down approaches to social problems are unlikely to yield the intended results.


This same logic holds with regard to increasing ideological perspectives in higher education.


One cannot legislate an institutional culture that encourages viewpoint diversity — let alone an environment where diversity is effectively leveraged to improve research or teaching. This must be willingly and willfully enacted by faculty, students and administrators in their day-to-day interactions. Agents must be convinced, not compelled, to learn and grow from diverse perspectives.

Trump’s proposed executive order is counterproductive to this end.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...e9-9361-301ffb5bd5e6_story.html?noredirect=on



Put another way, universities can enforce rules that enhance conservatives’ abilities to speak on campus — but others may grow far less willing to listen. And there is little the White House, or Republican lawmakers, could plausibly do about that.


And of course, Republicans will not retain control of the White House forever. It is highly plausible that Trump’s tactic here would be turned against conservatives in a subsequent Democratic administration.




Consider: Many religious schools receive federal funding. Liberty University, for instance, gets nearly half a billion dollars per year. Yet Liberty University has also faced widespread criticism for its lack of viewpoint diversity and, at times, its outright censorship of those who contradict university president Jerry Falwell Jr.

Any want to deny that free speech is at the center of American tradition???
What could be more 'centrist' than free speech????????

The Obama administration is easily proven to be Far Left: he advanced, to a seat on the Supreme Court, a radical who does not believe in free speech, the first amendment.

"In her 1993 article "Regulation of Hate Speech and Pornography After R.A.V," for the University of Chicago Law Review, Kagan writes:
"I take it as a given that we live in a society marred by racial and gender inequality, that certain forms of speech perpetuate and promote this inequality, and that the uncoerced disappearance of such speech would be cause for great elation."



In a 1996 paper, "Private Speech, Public Purpose: The Role of Governmental Motive in First Amendment Doctrine," Kagan argued it may be proper to suppress speech because it is offensive to society or to the government.
That paper asserted First Amendment doctrine is comprised of "motives and ... actions infested with them" and she goes so far as to claim that "First Amendment law is best understood and most readily explained as a kind of motive-hunting."



Kagan's name was also on a brief, United States V. Stevens, dug up by the Washington Examiner, stating: "Whether a given category of speech enjoys First Amendment protection depends upon a categorical balancing of the value of the speech against its societal costs."

If the government doesn't like what you say, Elena Kagan believes it is the duty of courts to tell you to shut up. If some pantywaist is offended by what you say, Elena Kagan believes your words can be "disappeared".
WyBlog -- Elena Kagan's America: some speech can be "disappeared"
Elena Kagan Radical anti-gun nut?



Free speech is simply the Litmus Test of Fascism/Progressivism vs freedom/conservatism.

 

[Zorro!]

I have read that President Trump is very concerned with the violence on American campuses and he is vowing to issue an Executive Order saying that colleges will have their federal funding withheld if they violate free speech on campus. This looks very promising.

Trump vows executive order requiring 'free speech' at colleges | Reuters

"If universities do not comply “it will be very costly,” he said. The U.S. government awards universities more than $30 billion annually in research funds."

THEY TOLD ME IF TRUMP WERE ELECTED, WE’D SEE AN END TO FREE SPEECH. AND THEY WERE RIGHT! Texas teacher suspended for tweets critical of illegal immigration.

 

[iceberg]

I have read that President Trump is very concerned with the violence on American campuses and he is vowing to issue an Executive Order saying that colleges will have their federal funding withheld if they violate free speech on campus. This looks very promising.

Trump vows executive order requiring 'free speech' at colleges | Reuters

"If universities do not comply “it will be very costly,” he said. The U.S. government awards universities more than $30 billion annually in research funds."

In other words - Trump wants to make college students as dumb as his base. Why not just put Betsy DeVos or David Duke in charge of all the colleges.

not at all but you and the left that keep pushing YOUR mindset as if it's the only valid one need to sit the **** down and give other people a chance to be heard.

don't really give a shit you don't like it.

 

[BULLDOG]

I have read that President Trump is very concerned with the violence on American campuses and he is vowing to issue an Executive Order saying that colleges will have their federal funding withheld if they violate free speech on campus. This looks very promising.

Trump vows executive order requiring 'free speech' at colleges | Reuters

"If universities do not comply “it will be very costly,” he said. The U.S. government awards universities more than $30 billion annually in research funds."

In other words - Trump wants to make college students as dumb as his base. Why not just put Betsy DeVos or David Duke in charge of all the colleges.

not at all but you and the left that keep pushing YOUR mindset as if it's the only valid one need to sit the **** down and give other people a chance to be heard.

don't really give a shit you don't like it.

When has that obese orange fool not been given the chance to be heard?

 

[Dale Smith]

I have read that President Trump is very concerned with the violence on American campuses and he is vowing to issue an Executive Order saying that colleges will have their federal funding withheld if they violate free speech on campus. This looks very promising.

Trump vows executive order requiring 'free speech' at colleges | Reuters

"If universities do not comply “it will be very costly,” he said. The U.S. government awards universities more than $30 billion annually in research funds."

In other words - Trump wants to make college students as dumb as his base. Why not just put Betsy DeVos or David Duke in charge of all the colleges.

not at all but you and the left that keep pushing YOUR mindset as if it's the only valid one need to sit the **** down and give other people a chance to be heard.

don't really give a shit you don't like it.

When has that obese orange fool not been given the chance to be heard?

Ummm, I believe the topic is about marxists that arw trying to shut down any speech that doesn't go along with their commie agenda.

 

[BULLDOG]

I have read that President Trump is very concerned with the violence on American campuses and he is vowing to issue an Executive Order saying that colleges will have their federal funding withheld if they violate free speech on campus. This looks very promising.

Trump vows executive order requiring 'free speech' at colleges | Reuters

"If universities do not comply “it will be very costly,” he said. The U.S. government awards universities more than $30 billion annually in research funds."

In other words - Trump wants to make college students as dumb as his base. Why not just put Betsy DeVos or David Duke in charge of all the colleges.

not at all but you and the left that keep pushing YOUR mindset as if it's the only valid one need to sit the **** down and give other people a chance to be heard.

don't really give a shit you don't like it.

When has that obese orange fool not been given the chance to be heard?

Ummm, I believe the topic is about marxists that arw trying to shut down any speech that doesn't go along with their commie agenda.

You mean like having SNL investigated because they made Trump jokes?

 

[iceberg]

I have read that President Trump is very concerned with the violence on American campuses and he is vowing to issue an Executive Order saying that colleges will have their federal funding withheld if they violate free speech on campus. This looks very promising.

Trump vows executive order requiring 'free speech' at colleges | Reuters

"If universities do not comply “it will be very costly,” he said. The U.S. government awards universities more than $30 billion annually in research funds."

In other words - Trump wants to make college students as dumb as his base. Why not just put Betsy DeVos or David Duke in charge of all the colleges.

not at all but you and the left that keep pushing YOUR mindset as if it's the only valid one need to sit the **** down and give other people a chance to be heard.

don't really give a shit you don't like it.

When has that obese orange fool not been given the chance to be heard?

who said it was about him?

seems like you wish to exersize your right to sound 12 years old and terminally pissed off and hey - i support you in that right; even if i think it's ass-nugget stupid.

it's your right to be ass-nugget stupid. have fun.

but it is not your or anyone elses right to prevent others from using open forums in order to do the same.