• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Coulter's speech at Berkely cancelled... again.

poweRob said:
I'm pretty sure she's happier than a pig in **** that it got cancelled. More TV time now. Attention whore is all she is and she'll do or say anytihng to get it.
Click to expand...

You're right, it's obvious to the discerning among us that she has no business being there, and that she had no desire to make the trip, and thus she's no victim
 
Jack Fabulous said:
I'm helping her get attention? Seems to me that the only reason she's getting attention at all is because of the threats of violence. If she just went there, spoke, and went home afterwords I doubt that it would even get mentioned outside of her own blog.
Click to expand...

she knew this would happen after Milo so yeah, it's all orchestrated by her for attention and her fans are the rubes being used to spread the word

some other right wing hack will follow next. Before you know it there will be 20x the number of conservative speakers "planned" at berkeley as usual, what a coincidence
 
Jack Fabulous said:
I'm helping her get attention? Seems to me that the only reason she's getting attention at all is because of the threats of violence. If she just went there, spoke, and went home afterwords I doubt that it would even get mentioned outside of her own blog.
Click to expand...

That's it, in a nutshell.
It's not like she was going to say anything important. She's a performer, and there's no such a thing as bad publicity.
Anne Coulter? Berkely? Her voice should have echoed in the room. That would have been the only legitimate protest.
 
poweRob said:
They are anarchists. They brag about it and are proud of it. They go to protests garbed in ski masks and carrying crow bars. I know you'd like to assign them as average liberals and progressives to get your hack on but, you'd be wrong. They are assholes off on their own and the liberals hate them because they ruin their message when they drop in and start destroying things. And then they have to deal with people like you who eat up the chance to conflate the two.
Click to expand...

I'm racking my brain trying to think of a time when these "anarchists" caused a liberal or progressive speech to be canceled. I guess maybe when Bernie was shouted down at one of his speaking events with Black Lives Matter there. It seems to be happening MUCH more to conservative and Republican speakers, don't you think?
 
poweRob said:
Just don't show up. Let her speak to an empty room and let that embarrass her.
Click to expand...

That's what I would do. Seems the most obvious, effective approach. Her only audience is really those that already agree with her propaganda anyway.
 
Ikari said:
The OP DID say it was a dark day for Free Speech,



and since that was who I was replying to...that's who I was replying to.

jesus.
Click to expand...

No need to be snotty. If you intend for your posts on a public forum to be a private conversation, you should say so.
 
Moon said:
No need to be snotty. If you intend for your posts on a public forum to be a private conversation, you should say so.
Click to expand...

Every need to be snotty, when obvious is obvious and it is missed, snarky is the natural result.
 
Jack Fabulous said:
It is a dark day for free speech.
Click to expand...

Conservatives seem to have chosen to forget that "free speech" refers to the constitutional right. Well, most of the ones here at least. All of a sudden, they're claiming that any time a right-winger does not make a previously announced speech, that means their "free speech" is somehow threatened.

That's stupid, wrong, and dishonest.





Moon said:
She didnt say its a dark day for the 1st amendment, but it definitely is for the principle of free speech.
Click to expand...

Take "free" out of that sentence and replace it with "unrestricted" and you might be somewhere in the general vicinity.

No state actor prevented her from speaking. She chose to change her mind and canceled her speech. I'm not sure why you think conservative loudmouth ****wits have some kind of right to say whatever they want on private property.

It's triply absurd, because you folk are shocked that when a person who makes a living by insulting the left and lying about the left announces she'll speak on a very left campus, people on the left plan on protesting. Quadruply, because we all know full well that it's typically only a small portion of people generally unconnected with planned peaceful protests show up specifically to cause trouble - and lately in that area it's been two groups of people causing the problems: one on the left, one on the right, both of which showed up just to cause trouble.





It's a dark day for integrity, if anything.
 
Last edited:
Quintuply absurd because nobody seems to be reading the article:

Conservative commentator Ann Coulter told Fox News on Wednesday she would no longer give a planned speech at UC Berkeley after Young America’s Foundation pulled its support for the event amid threats of violence, calling her decision "a dark day for free speech in America." The speech was originally scheduled to take place Thursday – but Berkeley asked to postpone it until next month after protests over the planned speech grew into a nationally-watched firestorm.


Coulter, YAF -- which had helped organize and finance the event -- and the Berkeley College Republicans initially fought the school’s decision, with YAF and the college Republicans filing a civil rights lawsuit on Monday. But by Wednesday YAF had “actively” opposed Coulter’s speech, she said, and “ordered the lawyer not [to] file for [a] court order” which would have mandated a room for the talk. The college Republicans are bound by YAF’s decision, Coulter said, “so there’s nothing more I can do.”“I looked over my shoulder and my allies had joined the other team,” Coulter said in an email. In a series of tweets, Coulter said she was "so sorry for free speech crushed by thugs.



Sooo...her own supporters switched sides, and that's the left killing the right to free speech? Oh, and yes, she is very much talking about the right to free speech:

"It’s sickening when a radical thuggish institution like Berkeley can so easily snuff out the cherished American right to free speech,"

Ann Coulter cancels Berkeley event amid protests, says decision 'a dark day for free speech in America' | Fox News



If people want to rant about Hated Liberals, they should probably at least bother to read the source material that forms the basis for their silly complaints.
 
Mr Person said:
Conservatives seem to have chosen to forget that "free speech" refers to the constitutional right. Well, most of the ones here at least. All of a sudden, they're claiming that any time a right-winger does not make a previously announced speech, that means their "free speech" is somehow threatened.

That's stupid, wrong, and dishonest.
Click to expand...

No, it is correct in this instance. The first amendment along with the rest of the constitution applies to state and local governments as well as federal government. Since the U of California is a government operation it applies to them as well. If it were a private university the first amendment would not apply.
 
chromium said:
she knew this would happen after Milo so yeah, it's all orchestrated by her for attention and her fans are the rubes being used to spread the word

some other right wing hack will follow next. Before you know it there will be 20x the number of conservative speakers "planned" at berkeley as usual, what a coincidence
Click to expand...

She orchestrated this with the Young America’s Foundation ?? How do you know this ??
 
fmw said:
No, it is correct in this instance. The first amendment along with the rest of the constitution applies to state and local governments as well as federal government. Since the U of California is a government operation it applies to them as well. If it were a private university the first amendment would not apply.
Click to expand...

UC Berkeley. Duh. Forgot about the UC.

Anyway, it didn't even cancel her event - see above - it just wanted to postpone it given all the right-left fighting at protests; she canceled it.
 
Ikari said:
It was certainly about safety. Clearly. And anyone being honest would admit that.

Now that being said, Berkley, and the whole lot of us, need to get a handle on this crap. These black-bloc or Antifa or whatever the fudge they are jackholes cannot be allowed to successfully use violence to shut down the free exchange of ideas or the preaching of counter-ideology. Any of these people using violence, engaging in vandalism in order to prevent speakers from speaking need to be arrested, they need to be charged, they need to be thrown in jail. They are messing with some of the most fundamental rights we have in America, speech and protest.

But Berkley has a duty to their student population, and after seeing what happened the last time, there was legitimate safety concerns.
Click to expand...

There was also a legitimate concern in Protland with regard to the Avenue of Roses parade which got shut down. Organizers cancel 82nd Avenue of Roses Parade, after protesters threaten to shut it down | OregonLive.com
How much stuff should we keep shutting down in the interests of public safety?
 
Mr Person said:
Conservatives seem to have chosen to forget that "free speech" refers to the constitutional right. Well, most of the ones here at least. All of a sudden, they're claiming that any time a right-winger does not make a previously announced speech, that means their "free speech" is somehow threatened.

That's stupid, wrong, and dishonest.







Take "free" out of that sentence and replace it with "unrestricted" and you might be somewhere in the general vicinity.

No state actor prevented her from speaking. She chose to change her mind and canceled her speech. I'm not sure why you think conservative loudmouth ****wits have some kind of right to say whatever they want on private property.

It's triply absurd, because you folk are shocked that when a person who makes a living by insulting the left and lying about the left announces she'll speak on a very left campus, people on the left plan on protesting. Quadruply, because we all know full well that it's typically only a small portion of people generally unconnected with planned peaceful protests show up specifically to cause trouble - and lately in that area it's been two groups of people causing the problems: one on the left, one on the right, both of which showed up just to cause trouble.





It's a dark day for integrity, if anything.
Click to expand...

"No state actor prevented her from speaking"

Berkley is a state actor, they failed to supply proper security.
 
If there's one thing millenials and the greater american culture do deserve endless condemnation for, it's the constant claims to being a victim, even when they do the same damn thing as the supposed oppressor

"The lawsuit has not been dropped," said YAF spokesman Spencer Brown. "At no time did Berkeley provide a time or place for Coulter to speak, and unconstitutionally violated the First Amendment rights of students in preventing YAF's campus lecture from taking place. We are moving ahead with the lawsuit."

So let's see, berkeley cancels because it's unsafe and then YAF drops her because it's unsafe. What a bunch of ****ing babies, good luck in the real world and when you get laughed out of court
 
Mr Person said:
Quintuply absurd because nobody seems to be reading the article:

Conservative commentator Ann Coulter told Fox News on Wednesday she would no longer give a planned speech at UC Berkeley after Young America’s Foundation pulled its support for the event amid threats of violence, calling her decision "a dark day for free speech in America." The speech was originally scheduled to take place Thursday – but Berkeley asked to postpone it until next month after protests over the planned speech grew into a nationally-watched firestorm.


Coulter, YAF -- which had helped organize and finance the event -- and the Berkeley College Republicans initially fought the school’s decision, with YAF and the college Republicans filing a civil rights lawsuit on Monday. But by Wednesday YAF had “actively” opposed Coulter’s speech, she said, and “ordered the lawyer not [to] file for [a] court order” which would have mandated a room for the talk. The college Republicans are bound by YAF’s decision, Coulter said, “so there’s nothing more I can do.”“I looked over my shoulder and my allies had joined the other team,” Coulter said in an email. In a series of tweets, Coulter said she was "so sorry for free speech crushed by thugs.



Sooo...her own supporters switched sides, and that's the left killing the right to free speech? Oh, and yes, she is very much talking about the right to free speech:

"It’s sickening when a radical thuggish institution like Berkeley can so easily snuff out the cherished American right to free speech,"

Ann Coulter cancels Berkeley event amid protests, says decision 'a dark day for free speech in America' | Fox News



If people want to rant about Hated Liberals, they should probably at least bother to read the source material that forms the basis for their silly complaints.
Click to expand...

Same thing when cephus made some blog post whining about liberals after Milo got canned. You'd think if there's one time to lay off blaming the other side it would be when a conservative group cancels one of its own

At least Coulter is honest enough to point this out, calling the YAF turncoats and crediting liberals like Maher for standing by her
 
Ikari said:
I mean, she's going to sell this. It's not really a "dark day for free speech" since the government hasn't made any law against it. However, there needs to be some clean up on campuses and those engaged in violent protest need to be arrested, charged, and jailed since we cannot permit individuals to use violence as a way to curtail speakers they do not like.
Click to expand...

When the authorities, to include the police, have a policy of not protecting the citizens from the violence and intimidation of another group, that's a violation of free speech because it has been condoned by the government.
 
Fishking said:
When the authorities, to include the police, have a policy of not protecting the citizens from the violence and intimidation of another group, that's a violation of free speech because it has been condoned by the government.
Click to expand...

Citation needed. Please show us the documented policy of Berkeley police to not protect people from violence. I'll wait.
 
Jack Fabulous said:
Ann Coulter cancels Berkeley event amid protests, says decision 'a dark day for free speech in America' | Fox News


She's right. It is a dark day for free speech.
Click to expand...

The Attorney General needs to get involved, investigate, and most likely bring civil rights violation charges against the campus police and the campus faculty there. They can either get prosecuted and lose their careers and jobs or they can actually get serious about ensuring the rights of everyone are upheld.
 
poweRob said:
It was a hotbed already after the whole Milo bit... Which is why she is the moth attracted to that flame. She wants that attention. It sells books.
Click to expand...

So? That legitimizes violence somehow?
 
Ikari said:
It was certainly about safety. Clearly. And anyone being honest would admit that.

But Berkley has a duty to their student population, and after seeing what happened the last time, there was legitimate safety concerns.
Click to expand...

All due to them fostering and condoning an environment where it has come to this point. They get legitimate excuse from culpability here.
 
poweRob said:
They are anarchists. They brag about it and are proud of it. They go to protests garbed in ski masks and carrying crow bars. I know you'd like to assign them as average liberals and progressives to get your hack on but, you'd be wrong. They are assholes off on their own and the liberals hate them because they ruin their message when they drop in and start destroying things. And then they have to deal with people like you who eat up the chance to conflate the two.
Click to expand...

Bet they voted for Bernie, eh?
 
Ikari said:
It's not really a "dark day for free speech" since the government hasn't made any law against it.
Click to expand...

That's not the government's only responsibility.

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men
Click to expand...

The whole purpose of government is to protect rights. In this case, the government refused. They refused by not doing what you say next:

However, there needs to be some clean up on campuses and those engaged in violent protest need to be arrested, charged, and jailed since we cannot permit individuals to use violence as a way to curtail speakers they do not like.
Click to expand...

Berkeley had a responsibility to do this, and not let these violent and oppressive protests happen. They specifically balked.
 
chromium said:
she knew this would happen after Milo so yeah, it's all orchestrated by her for attention and her fans are the rubes being used to spread the word
Click to expand...

Oh? It's all orchestrated? So she can mind-control leftists into committing acts of violence? Interesting theory you have there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom