America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 5 years ago by delta1. 104 replies replies.
3 Pages123>
Harvard students
tailgater Offline
#1 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
A professor at Harvard is joining Harvey Weinstein's defense team.

Students are protesting.

Is it because:
A. Students at the country's most prestigious law school don't understand that you can't define a lawyer by his clients?
B. Students at the country's most prestigious law school don't understand the concept of "innocent until proven guilty".
C. Students at the country's most prestigious law school don't understand that due process is a right?
or
C. They've fully embraced the intolerance endorsed by today's liberal mouthpieces.


#MeTooMuchASnowflake
victor809 Offline
#2 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Is there an option D - Tail's horribly underinformed about pretty much all topics and this is just one more example?

I did 2 minutes of looking at what this is supposed to be about, and you conveniently ignored the primary reason the students wanted him removed, relating to his conflict in both defending a professor against a couple title IX complaints, and acting as the dean of the department (or something like that).

But I'm sure you would rather it be about harvard students not understanding law. That makes you feel better about yourself.
teedubbya Offline
#3 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
A woman and her husband go to the doctor because the woman is complaining of shortness of breath.

After fifteen minutes, the woman comes out into the waiting room and says, "Apparently, my problem is that I have a nice cooter."

"Excuse me?" says the husband.

"That's what the doctor said. My problem is that I have a nice cooter." The husband is a bit angry and goes in to talk to the doctor.

"What's this about my wife having a nice cooter? I need a damn good explanation."

"That's not what I said," replies the doctor. "I said she has acute angina."
victor809 Offline
#4 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
But she did have one of those fancy electric scooters that she can ride around on.... right?
frankj1 Offline
#5 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
victor809 wrote:
Is there an option D - Tail's horribly underinformed about pretty much all topics and this is just one more example?

I did 2 minutes of looking at what this is supposed to be about, and you conveniently ignored the primary reason the students wanted him removed, relating to his conflict in both defending a professor against a couple title IX complaints, and acting as the dean of the department (or something like that).

But I'm sure you would rather it be about harvard students not understanding law. That makes you feel better about yourself.

there is a choice D...it's the second choice C
Speyside Offline
#6 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
AB CC, so close to AC DC.
teedubbya Offline
#7 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
You just need to put the input where the output normally goes.
Mr. Jones Offline
#8 Posted:
Joined: 06-12-2005
Posts: 19,359
25% of most HARVARD STUDENTS GET IN BECAUSE OF DONATIONS BY MEGA RICH FAMILIES...

SOMEBODY is putting a serious KIBOSH ON this entire investigation...the REAL OLD MONEY KNOWS HOW TO HIDE
"ITS DIRTY DEALINGS"...THEY ARE PROS AT IT...

They are throwing ALL THE "NEW MONEY" Paper trail bush league newbies UNDER THE BUS and steering this investigation towards Hollywood idjits...NO WAY ARE THE ROCKEFELLER AND KENNEDY OLD MONEY TYPES GONNA TAKE ANY HEAT ON THIS INVESTIGATION ....AT A.L.L.
rfenst Offline
#9 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,100
...and that's the way the world works!
KingoftheCove Offline
#10 Posted:
Joined: 10-08-2011
Posts: 7,600
rfenst wrote:
...and that's the way the world works!

And has...............for s very long time.
But da balloon is getting really big now...........someday........bang..........restart..
DrafterX Offline
#11 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,508
I heard da gubment payed for Obama's Harvard stay... Mellow
frankj1 Offline
#12 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
but they used confiscated Iranian money!
DrafterX Offline
#13 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,508
That makes sense... Mellow
frankj1 Offline
#14 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
y'know, I was kidding, but now that I think about it...
tailgater Offline
#15 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
victor809 wrote:
Is there an option D - Tail's horribly underinformed about pretty much all topics and this is just one more example?

I did 2 minutes of looking at what this is supposed to be about, and you conveniently ignored the primary reason the students wanted him removed, relating to his conflict in both defending a professor against a couple title IX complaints, and acting as the dean of the department (or something like that).

But I'm sure you would rather it be about harvard students not understanding law. That makes you feel better about yourself.


Yeah.
that's the real reason.

If that professor was defending or prosecuting a cause that the students believed in, would there be a protest over his ability to properly act as Dean?

Just stop it.



tailgater Offline
#16 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
I was gonna add a third option C, but that would make George Lucas angry.

I call it the 3CPO effect.


tailgater Offline
#17 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
teedubbya wrote:
A woman and her husband go to the doctor because the woman is complaining of shortness of breath.

After fifteen minutes, the woman comes out into the waiting room and says, "Apparently, my problem is that I have a nice cooter."

"Excuse me?" says the husband.

"That's what the doctor said. My problem is that I have a nice cooter." The husband is a bit angry and goes in to talk to the doctor.

"What's this about my wife having a nice cooter? I need a damn good explanation."

"That's not what I said," replies the doctor. "I said she has acute angina."


So this has nothing to do with the Dukes of Hazard?
victor809 Offline
#18 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
tailgater wrote:
Yeah.
that's the real reason.

If that professor was defending or prosecuting a cause that the students believed in, would there be a protest over his ability to properly act as Dean?

Just stop it.





good to know you don't just use that asinine arguing technique with me. You also use it on people you've never met and the only information you have is from an article, which either left out their own words, or you chose to ignore.

But sure tail. whatever.

The funny part is that I don't know whether this is a better example of you telling someone else what they are thinking so you can argue against it, or if this is a better example of you moving goalposts....

I mean... your first argument was that these students "DIDN'T UNDERSTAND"....
Well, I provided you quotes as to what reasons they gave for their protest. These are reasons which contradict your accusation that they don't understand the law.

Now you've moved the goalposts. You're now saying that they are just protesting his inability to properly act as dean because he's defending an unpopular cause. So you're now saying they understand what's going on, and using a technicality as a smokescreen to eject a dean they don't like.

Of course, the above requires you have some innate understanding of why they're doing this. An innate understanding based on.... absolutely nothing. Despite their quotes saying why they are protesting.

whatever tail.

weak sauce.
tailgater Offline
#19 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
victor809 wrote:
good to know you don't just use that asinine arguing technique with me. You also use it on people you've never met and the only information you have is from an article, which either left out their own words, or you chose to ignore.

But sure tail. whatever.

The funny part is that I don't know whether this is a better example of you telling someone else what they are thinking so you can argue against it, or if this is a better example of you moving goalposts....

I mean... your first argument was that these students "DIDN'T UNDERSTAND"....
Well, I provided you quotes as to what reasons they gave for their protest. These are reasons which contradict your accusation that they don't understand the law.

Now you've moved the goalposts. You're now saying that they are just protesting his inability to properly act as dean because he's defending an unpopular cause. So you're now saying they understand what's going on, and using a technicality as a smokescreen to eject a dean they don't like.

Of course, the above requires you have some innate understanding of why they're doing this. An innate understanding based on.... absolutely nothing. Despite their quotes saying why they are protesting.

whatever tail.

weak sauce.


Really?
So I guess there is no way to ever make basic assumptions based on easily identifiable facts.

So I ask you the question:
Victor, do you think that the students would protest against their professor's ability to properly be dean (or house master or whatever he is) if that professor was joining a defense team for a cause the students generally believed in?

tailgater Offline
#20 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185

https://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/triggered-harvard-students-weinstein-lawyer

Harvard has opened an investigation into law professor Ronald Sullivan, who earlier this year joined Harvey Weinstein’s criminal-defense team. Some undergraduates complained that Mr. Sullivan’s decision to represent Mr. Weinstein, who is charged with rape in New York, puts them at risk. By taking the complaint seriously, Harvard puts its commitment to identity politics above the core tenets of due process.

Student backlash was immediate when the New York Post reported in late January that Mr. Sullivan would be representing Mr. Weinstein. A visual and environmental studies major started an online petition to remove Mr. Sullivan from his position as faculty dean of Winthrop House, one of Harvard’s 12 undergraduate residential houses. Mr. Sullivan’s choice of client was “deeply trauma-inducing,” and shows that Mr. Sullivan doesn’t “value the safety of students,” the petition announced. Would Winthrop residents “really want to one day accept [a] Diploma,” the petition asked, from someone who “believes it is okay to defend” Mr. Weinstein?


Yeah.
Really sounds like they're worried about his ability to be a good dean.

Speyside Offline
#21 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
Seems like these students do understand the constitution, freedom of speech. The world has passed you by and this angers you every time you see it. This is understandable. Your point of view has became obsolete, except within the group that holds the viewpoint. This group was the majority for a very long time. Now they are the minority. Year by year this minority will be smaller and smaller. Are you already a dinosaur, you just don't see it. You miss the obvious, to the majority of Americans your opinion is worthless. But you will go right on attempting to marginalize what the reality in front of you instead of trying to understand it. Our country is supposed to represent all our people, not just part of the people like you.
opelmanta1900 Offline
#22 Posted:
Joined: 01-10-2012
Posts: 13,954
#girlpower #yougogirl
victor809 Offline
#23 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
HAHAHAHAH

Yeah... you're going to start with an article that uses the term "triggered" in the title. they already know their audience.

Ok... there's a lot to unpack here. Tons of misinformation, assumptions and general "tailgater" style arguments.

1 - You complained about law students. Your "evidence" of how "law students" think is based on a quote from a Visual and Environmental Studies major. Good work there.
2 - The "change.org" petition mentioned in your article also mentions his defense of the economics professor who "engaged in unwelcome sexual conduct stretching back years and that he created a hostile environment for women at the Education Innovation Labs". That's left out of the article of course. Both actions occurred within 2 weeks of each other.
3 - Again... house dean. Literally the dude that the students are supposed to contact. They want him removed as house dean... not fired as faculty.

So... you've shifted your goalposts again.
You were trying to go after "students at our most prestigious law school"

Now you're complaining about "triggered" environmental studies majors.

victor809 Offline
#24 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
It's funny because there's a lot of assumptions here based on "names".

Harvard is involved... so people assume it's students who know anything about law.
The term "Dean" is used. so people assume it has something to do with education....

At closer look, it appears that the House Dean is a position faculty hold to identify them as someone the students of a house can go and talk to if they have problems. ie... if they think that they are being harassed by their teacher. It isn't inconceivable that a student who has been sexually harassed by their professor wouldn't want to go and talk to a dude who's acting as defense attorney for a very public sexual assault case. That has nothing to do with law... or with guilt or innocence... or even really with who the lawyer is. It's simply that he would not be as effective at his job due to this.

But the article's sell ad clicks to people like tail if they say:
"Triggered Harvard students protest Faculty Dean because they don't understand law!"
rfenst Offline
#25 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,100
Much ado about nothing.
victor809 Offline
#26 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
"Faculty Deans
Each Harvard House is under the leadership of Faculty Deans, living in residence. Among varied duties of the Faculty Deans, the role of academic officer in the residential college system is preeminent. In addition, Faculty Deans are responsible for all House staff, tutorial and Senior Common Room appointments. In short, Faculty Deans set the tone for the House in its activities and in its function as a close-knit community within the context of a larger college and university."

They're overqualified RAs.....
tailgater Offline
#27 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
I googled "Harvard Weinstein"

Nothing more. Nothing less.

First two hits required log in.

Sorry to upset you so much.


And nice deflection, not answering any questions because my first post upset you.

Which speaks volumes.


tailgater Offline
#28 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Speyside wrote:
Seems like these students do understand the constitution, freedom of speech. The world has passed you by and this angers you every time you see it. This is understandable. Your point of view has became obsolete, except within the group that holds the viewpoint. This group was the majority for a very long time. Now they are the minority. Year by year this minority will be smaller and smaller. Are you already a dinosaur, you just don't see it. You miss the obvious, to the majority of Americans your opinion is worthless. But you will go right on attempting to marginalize what the reality in front of you instead of trying to understand it. Our country is supposed to represent all our people, not just part of the people like you.


It's fun when you chime in on an adult conversation.

tailgater Offline
#29 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Look no further than the petition.

Despite my admitted bias, I am deadly accurate with my assessment.

Sorry if that's offensive.

No really though.


KingoftheCove Offline
#30 Posted:
Joined: 10-08-2011
Posts: 7,600
victor809 wrote:
"Faculty Deans
Each Harvard House is under the leadership of Faculty Deans, living in residence. Among varied duties of the Faculty Deans, the role of academic officer in the residential college system is preeminent. In addition, Faculty Deans are responsible for all House staff, tutorial and Senior Common Room appointments. In short, Faculty Deans set the tone for the House in its activities and in its function as a close-knit community within the context of a larger college and university."

They're overqualified RAs.....

Back in 74, I did the dorm thing as a freshman.
My RA was a pot smoking alcoholic................I feel cheated...
tailgater Offline
#31 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
I was an RA for two years.

My son is in the dorms at my alma mater.

I wouldn't have been an RA (or in the dorms) if they had today's rules back then.



victor809 Offline
#32 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
tailgater wrote:
I googled "Harvard Weinstein"

Nothing more. Nothing less.

First two hits required log in.

Sorry to upset you so much.


And nice deflection, not answering any questions because my first post upset you.

Which speaks volumes.




yeah, I googled harvard weinstein protest. It worked great. I apparently got better information than you did.

Funny how that works.
victor809 Offline
#33 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
tailgater wrote:
Look no further than the petition.

Despite my admitted bias, I am deadly accurate with my assessment.

Sorry if that's offensive.

No really though.




Did you even read the petition?

First paragraph:
"Winthrop Dean Ronald Sullivan is representing Harvey Weinstein in his sexual assault court case. There is also evidence to believe Sullivan has defended Professor Fryer, an Economics Professor who allegedly engaged "in unwelcome sexual conduct stretching back years and that he created a hostile environment for women at the Education Innovation Labs" (quote The Harvard Crimson, linked below)."


And again... your initial argument was that "students at the country's most prestigious law school ....."

The petition was started by a student who has nothing to do with law. If you can't understand that, I really can't help you.

I went to a reasonably prestigious science and medicine university. My close friend was a history major who literally couldn't understand calculus and never took a single math course. If he had started a "change.org" protest against differential calculus, would you have a fit too?
tailgater Offline
#34 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
victor809 wrote:




I went to a reasonably prestigious science and medicine university. My close friend was a history major who literally couldn't understand calculus and never took a single math course. If he had started a "change.org" protest against differential calculus, would you have a fit too?


No.
In fact, even as an engineering major I'd have joined him.
Calculus and Differential Equations sucked. I once proved it by using a derivative.


tailgater Offline
#35 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
victor809 wrote:
yeah, I googled harvard weinstein protest. It worked great. I apparently got better information than you did.

Funny how that works.


The point was that I didn't google any the key words you claim I did.
But you knew that, it just doesn't fit your narrative.


You're all over the place Vic.

I say the students protest because of identity politics.
You say it's because they're afraid their RA will be MIA during the nights.
I show you proof that the politics aren't just a part of the reason, they're the MAIN reason.
You cry about me "moving the goalposts".

You have a small bundle of canned responses and it seems you don't even know when to use them.


this is simple:

the students are protesting because of politics.
I find it funny and think they're snowflakes.
You want to defend them but instead of defending their politics you try to attack me and say I'm wrong.
Because the pseudo-dean professor might spend hours away. And he recently defended another (get ready for it)... criminal!
Which is what I thought defense teams often were supposed to do.

They have every right to do this.
I never said, and I never implied that they don't.

I'm not sure why anyone who agrees with their politics would feel compelled to dig out unrelated sidenotes and then jump up and yell "gotcha!"

It's not my fault the students are more interested in identity politics then they are our justice system.

Speyside Offline
#36 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
Why don't you point out one for me? I'm not sure what I would call your inaccuracies, but certainly not an adult conversation. As usual you address none of my points. How typical, how boring, how tail. Perhaps you could pick another unimportant talking point? You do that quite well.
victor809 Offline
#37 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
tailgater wrote:
The point was that I didn't google any the key words you claim I did.
But you knew that, it just doesn't fit your narrative.


You're all over the place Vic.

I say the students protest because of identity politics.
You say it's because they're afraid their RA will be MIA during the nights.
I show you proof that the politics aren't just a part of the reason, they're the MAIN reason.
You cry about me "moving the goalposts".

You have a small bundle of canned responses and it seems you don't even know when to use them.


this is simple:

the students are protesting because of politics.
I find it funny and think they're snowflakes.
You want to defend them but instead of defending their politics you try to attack me and say I'm wrong.
Because the pseudo-dean professor might spend hours away. And he recently defended another (get ready for it)... criminal!
Which is what I thought defense teams often were supposed to do.

They have every right to do this.
I never said, and I never implied that they don't.

I'm not sure why anyone who agrees with their politics would feel compelled to dig out unrelated sidenotes and then jump up and yell "gotcha!"

It's not my fault the students are more interested in identity politics then they are our justice system.



You're the one injecting "identity politics" into this thing at all.

Look at it a little less emotionally. I know that's hard for a snowflake like you.

Students are protesting a specific faculty member having a student-liaison role for two reasons (these two reasons were both stated in the change.org petition, both stated in the first paragraph)... 1 - that he's defending a high profile rape case. 2 - that he additionally defended a professor at the same college for sexual harassment.

This is a logical protest to make.

Your pearl clutching first post (ignore your backpedaling to just calling them "students" now...)

snowflake wrote:

A professor at Harvard is joining Harvey Weinstein's defense team.

Students are protesting.

Is it because:
A. Students at the country's most prestigious law school don't understand.....


So your first sentence is half correct. It specifically ignores the other part of the protest, which you AGAIN have no evidence is just a cover.

Then you decide to emphasize "most prestigious law school" even though the students protesting aren't lawyers, aren't law students... aren't even real students (really....design?)

give up tail.

This is, as rfenst said, much ado about nothing.... you just want to claim this is some liberal identity politics thing. I see no evidence of that.
teedubbya Offline
#38 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
All I know is a professor at Harvard is joining Harvey Weinstein's defense team and students at the country's most prestigious law school are protesting because they don't understand that you can't define a lawyer by his clients, don't understand the concept of "innocent until proven guilty", don't understand that due process is a right, or they have fully embraced the intolerance endorsed by today's liberal mouthpieces.


I wonder if they understand there is no connection between protesting and legal definitions/terminology as used in court. The next thing you know they will tell me taking Judge Nancy Grace Jr. Off the air for a week isn't a violation of her 1st amendment rights.

Oh the hugehanity!
tailgater Offline
#39 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Speyside wrote:
Why don't you point out one for me? I'm not sure what I would call your inaccuracies, but certainly not an adult conversation. As usual you address none of my points. How typical, how boring, how tail. Perhaps you could pick another unimportant talking point? You do that quite well.


You still here?
tailgater Offline
#40 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
teedubbya wrote:
All I know is a professor at Harvard is joining Harvey Weinstein's defense team and students at the country's most prestigious law school are protesting because they don't understand that you can't define a lawyer by his clients, don't understand the concept of "innocent until proven guilty", don't understand that due process is a right, or they have fully embraced the intolerance endorsed by today's liberal mouthpieces.

!


Where'd you hear that?
tailgater Offline
#41 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Victor, you're not even making sense.
Just calling them students?
Back pedaling?

I know you physically feel it in your sphincter every time someone disparages the left mindedness of college students. So your desperate retort was not unexpected.
Nor was your penchant (some might call it a habit) of blaming me for your discomfort.
Practically predictable.

But I've been consistent.

there are over 200 signatures on the petition.
I don't pretend to be a seer or read minds, but I have a feeling that at least some of those signatures belong to law students.
Maybe you know otherwise?

And it wouldn't even matter if there weren't.

The identity politics played by Harvard et al, is from the top down.

We could have discussed whether it's excessive or even if that's a bad thing.
But you chose to attack me for pointing it out.

Typical.



victor809 Offline
#42 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
tailgater wrote:
Victor, you're not even making sense.
Just calling them students?
Back pedaling?

I know you physically feel it in your sphincter every time someone disparages the left mindedness of college students. So your desperate retort was not unexpected.
Nor was your penchant (some might call it a habit) of blaming me for your discomfort.
Practically predictable.

But I've been consistent.

there are over 200 signatures on the petition.
I don't pretend to be a seer or read minds, but I have a feeling that at least some of those signatures belong to law students.
Maybe you know otherwise?

And it wouldn't even matter if there weren't.

The identity politics played by Harvard et al, is from the top down.

We could have discussed whether it's excessive or even if that's a bad thing.
But you chose to attack me for pointing it out.

Typical.





No... I attack you for being inconsistent, for essentially telling your "opponents" what they think so you have something to argue, and for not being particularly bright.

You've harped on this petition multiple times now. The petition which states clearly in the opening paragraph that the dude defended a harvard economics professor (as in legal defense) in title IX issues. Who cares if some of those 200 signatures is a law student. That's a valid reason, whether you're a law student or not.

And hilariously, you complain about "identity politics" but haven't even started to explain how this plays into that nonsense. I think that's just a term you heard somewhere and wanted a reason to use it.

Then you claim the "identity politics" is played from the top down.... when this is a student petition to remove a house dean (wouldn't that be from the bottom up?)

Just stop being so terrible at logic and I won't attack you.
Speyside Offline
#43 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
^ Isn't your last statement quite illogical?
victor809 Offline
#44 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
.... no?
Speyside Offline
#45 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
How would tail be able to stop using terrible logic? But perhaps paradoxical would be more accurate. I think it is more likely that Trump will be presidential, than tail will be logical.
victor809 Offline
#46 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
true,,,,
tailgater Offline
#47 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
victor809 wrote:
No... I attack you for being inconsistent, for essentially telling your "opponents" what they think so you have something to argue, and for not being particularly bright.

You've harped on this petition multiple times now. The petition which states clearly in the opening paragraph that the dude defended a harvard economics professor (as in legal defense) in title IX issues. Who cares if some of those 200 signatures is a law student. That's a valid reason, whether you're a law student or not.

And hilariously, you complain about "identity politics" but haven't even started to explain how this plays into that nonsense. I think that's just a term you heard somewhere and wanted a reason to use it.

Then you claim the "identity politics" is played from the top down.... when this is a student petition to remove a house dean (wouldn't that be from the bottom up?)

Just stop being so terrible at logic and I won't attack you.


Tell me how I told my opponents what they think.
You constantly spew things like this with no examples.
Then you move on, as if NOT proving point is mission accomplished.

I congratulate you on digging out the actual petition. And you make some valid points. But they don't dismiss what I've maintained from the beginning.

Which brings us to the top-down identity politics.
Having a grass roots petitions does not mean there isn't top-down influence. Heck, it practically proves that there is. The identity politics of Harvard University start at the top with their reactionary kowtowing to the liberal trigger dujuor.
Then, to borrow GHWB's vernacular, it trickles down to the faculty and eventually to the students. How could it not? I have to laugh. Not because you think otherwise, but because you think it proves your point!

So reach into your grab bag and accuse me of something else you like to whine about.
And do it without any reference.
I feel like you're my little brother and I'm slapping you with your own hand.
So do me a favor:
Quit hitting yourself!
Quit hitting yourself!
Quit hitting yourself!



tailgater Offline
#48 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
Speyside wrote:
How would tail be able to stop using terrible logic? But perhaps paradoxical would be more accurate. I think it is more likely that Trump will be presidential, than tail will be logical.


like a high pitched whine.


ZRX1200 Offline
#49 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,476
Speyside wrote:
Seems like these students do understand the constitution, freedom of speech. The world has passed you by and this angers you every time you see it. This is understandable. Your point of view has became obsolete, except within the group that holds the viewpoint. This group was the majority for a very long time. Now they are the minority. Year by year this minority will be smaller and smaller. Are you already a dinosaur, you just don't see it. You miss the obvious, to the majority of Americans your opinion is worthless. But you will go right on attempting to marginalize what the reality in front of you instead of trying to understand it. Our country is supposed to represent all our people, not just part of the people like you.



Jesus H Christ on a popsicle stick.......did that dopamine hit feel good Captain Sanctimony?

LOL
victor809 Offline
#50 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
tailgater wrote:
Tell me how I told my opponents what they think.

tail wrote:

the students are protesting because of politics.

They've told you why they are protesting. They did not use any political terms. You have decided to blame it on "identity politics"" (to be fair to you, you only think that because the article you read told you to call it identity politics, your refusal to point out how it's "identity politics" despite my many requests that you do so pretty much proves that).

Quote:

I congratulate you on digging out the actual petition. And you make some valid points. But they don't dismiss what I've maintained from the beginning.

it actually does dismiss it... completely.... from many angles.
Your initial complaint wanted to stress "students from a prestigious LAW school" these are interior designers... or some other nonsense... your initial complaint only focused on the weinstein defense, but the reality is the petition clearly states an additional reason, one which is very logical.... so even if a law student were supporting this petition, that's not terrible.

...sigh wrote:

Which brings us to the top-down identity politics.
Having a grass roots petitions does not mean there isn't top-down influence. Heck, it practically proves that there is. The identity politics of Harvard University start at the top with their reactionary kowtowing to the liberal trigger dujuor.
Then, to borrow GHWB's vernacular, it trickles down to the faculty and eventually to the students. How could it not? I have to laugh. Not because you think otherwise, but because you think it proves your point!

You still haven't shown how petitioning against this particular professor even is identity politics. I'm not even sure you know what identity politics is at this point.

You certainly don't know what "top down" means.
It's laughable. Your logical leap is "grass roots petitions from students protesting decisions made by faculty is practically proof that the liberal trigger du jour has trickled down to the students".....

By your logic it rained today... so it's gonna be a really dry summer.

Do better tail. You know... be best.

[/quote]

Users browsing this topic
Guest
3 Pages123>