Her mother is Korean.
Maybe this isn’t quite a stupid republican idea of the day, but I don’t see where else it fits, and I didn’t want to make a new thread about it, yet.
So, here’s what I don’t understand. A student from Georgia state university is booking richard spencer to speak at the university of cincinnati. He is threatening to sue if they don’t grant the venue.
The republicans at the university of cincinnati said they don’t want him there.
So, what right exactly does a student that is from a different university have to insist that UC honor this speaker? I can see if it is at least a request by students at UC, the admin should consider it, but a student from another university? Seems that should go into the circular file.
I don’t get it either, but perhaps clarification will be forthcoming.
If he winds up getting a forum, the best thing his opponents can do is pack the hall. And I mean pack it. Take up ALL the seats, and don’t leave any for the alt-right fuckheads. And then sit on their hands.
Since when do Republicans approve of refusing to allow a speaker on campus?
That’s a really good idea. Instead of a heckler’s veto, you have a silent veto.
At first, he thinks, “Nice crowd.” But then he just gets silent stares from the audience for his entire presentation.
I wonder how many events he could go to like that before he had to just give up.
I think that the fact that the requester is a student at Georgia State is purely incidental: He’s Spencer’s publicity manager, or whatever the job title is, and is asking for that reason, not because he happens to be a student.
Still, I’m not aware of any law or interpretation of law that would mean that anyone who requests to give a talk at a university must be accommodated. A university might have a policy about talks requested by students or others from within the university, but even that would only be a school policy, and would probably require more than just one person making the request.
The public university’s refusal cannot be based on the content of the speech, assuming they are a general public forum. What kinds of speakers do they permit, and under what rules?
Specifically?
The statement the UC College Republicans released has excellent language:
Very nicely put, eh.
And somewhat contradicted by their Facebook page and their recent past.
So I’d guess, running coach, that either it’s a PR lie or that sometime between then and now, something happened to change their minds.
I’d be very curious in hearing someone ask the UC College Republicans about their sponsorship of that “comedy” night earlier this year.
Well, since nowish, which is a nice change of pace.
Their twitter feed is full of some insults by alt-righters calling them “cucks” and such for their action, but maybe these cincinnati republicans can start a new trend of moderate and sane conservatism.
They organized an event to coincide with an anti-trump protest, but rather than trying to shout them down, they ran a “Water balloon a Republican” fundraiser, which I have no idea how much they raised, but they say it was a success.
What little I know of the actions of this group, I find I can respect. (I’m sure if I look hard enough, I can find something deplorable about them, but at least they don’t seem to be shoving their deplorables in my face.)
ETA: and within the edit window, I see that snowboarder Bo has found some deplorableness… That means it’s quarry time!
… Cameron Padgett, 29, a student at GSU in Atlanta …
29? Hmm. I wonder if “Padgett” is a pseudonym for “Blutarsky”.
And bring earbuds and an hour of their favorite music.
Yep. Don’t matter, since being hot and unattainable is all I need. :smack:
I was an older student. The kids hated us, since we were there to learn. Cam? He might be ineducable.
Sure, but what a lot of people don’t seem to appreciate is the fact that it’s a university, even a public university, doesn’t mean that anyone just gets to demand a room, for whatever they want, whenever they want.
Almost every university i’ve been associated with has regular, annual speaker series, generally organized by student committees. The one my university had when i was in grad school was called the Milton S. Eisenhower Symposium; one of the speaker series at the university where i currently work is called the Arts and Lectures Series.
These things are generally planned and booked months in advance, partly because you need to find the speakers and arrange mutually acceptable dates, and partly because you need to organize a place for the event among all the other demands for rooms and lecture theaters on a typical university campus.
Most universities also have rules regarding who gets to speak, based not on content, but on the principle that, if a special event with a dedicated room is going to be arranged, then the invitation to speak should come from some university-recognized group or department or organization. It could be an academic school or department, or an official student body such as a club or organization. A student or a faculty member or someone off the street can’t just decide that they want to invite their favorite writer or sports star or actor and expect to have a room set aside for their pet event.
This is both to ensure that the university space is used for events that have some relevance to (at least some of) the people on campus, and to ensure that they can accommodate speakers without interfering with the day-today running of the university. On our campus, which is not especially large by public university standards, just organizing rooms for the regular semester routine of classes and department meetings and student organizations is a herculean task. And classes meet until 8 or 9 or 10 at night. I’m a faculty member, and if I wanted to invite someone to speak to a group of students one evening this semester, it would probably be very difficult for me to get a room on anything less than a month’s notice, and some times and places probably wouldn’t be available at all.
There’s also the question of money. Use of university property for events outside the regular class and meeting schedule generally has to be paid for. This is often a case of just moving money around, because department and student groups are allocated budgets by the university for this sort of thing. But if my department, for example, wants to open up a 120-seat lecture hall after hours for a speaker, that will incur a bill for staffing and other infrastructure costs, with additional fees if there are any special requirements like unusual technology. The department has to foot the bill out of its annual budget. We can’t have unlimited events, because our department budget won’t sustain it. Same for student groups. That’s why you need an organization to invite a speaker, because that organization is responsible for logistics and costs.
Some people seem to be under the impression that, because it’s a public university, anyone can just sent an email and demand a (literal and figurative) platform for their speech. But that’s not how it works.
Well, they’re not really refusing to allow him. They don’t actually have that power anyway. They are, as far as i can tell, simply making clear that Spencer has not been invited by their organization to speak, and that they don’t like what he has to say.
They’re not saying that he can’t come. They’re not saying he should be banned from campus. They’re not saying that other campus groups should be forbidden from inviting him. But they’re under no obligation to invite or sponsor him just because they happen to be conservatives or Republicans. A refusal to invite is not a ban.
Let’s also be clear that the alt-right has made a habit of not actually booking and paying for rooms to speak in, not responding to followup requests or completing paperwork to fulfill their end of the bargain, then when they don’t actually have a space, putting on a show in public about how they were “denied” space when this is clearly false.
Joe Arpaio says he’s going to continue the investigation into Obama’s birth certificate.
This article, from a local Arizona TV station, sounds like they support the investigation.
Holy. Freaking. Shit.
What is the matter with these people??
BTW, Rick Kitchen, you are the [del]king[/del] emperor of finding great stories!
Why do you continue to expect crazy people to act rationally? 
What actually is the point of this investigation ?
So Obama couldn’t be elected again :smack:
Would he then be removed from the list of presidents, and who then would’ve been the real president at the time ? Joe Biden or John McCain and Mitt Romney ?
Would all Obama’s laws and bills be repealed immediately as being illegal ?
Or is it simply trying to prove that Democrats are, um… something… gullible, traitors… what exactly ?