Defend Free Speech on Campus

With thanks to both Nation columnist Katha Pollitt and a student from Hampton University who called me this morning and would like to remain anonymous, we wanted to alert Nation readers to a seriously under-reported travesty about to take place at Hampton, a historically black school in Hampton, Virginia.

Seven Hampton students are facing expulsion hearings THIS FRIDAY. Their "crime" was distributing "unauthorized" literature criticizing the Bush Administration's policies on AIDS, Hurricane Katrina, homophobia, the Iraq war and the Sudan as part of a national series of student protests on November 2nd. "Unauthorized" flyers are distributed and posted all the time of course--it's only when they feature progressive political content that the administration cracks down. This is a free speech issue, an issue of students' rights, and an antiwar issue!

There are a number of ways you can help but you need to act fast. First, call the school. Let Hampton administrators know that you oppose the chilling of free speech on the Hampton campus. Ask them to drop all charges against the students, recognize the activist club as an official student organization, and craft a free speech policy that doesn't criminalize dissent.

Here are the names and contact info for key administrators.

Dr. Bennie McMorris, Vice President for Student Affairs, bennie.mcmorris@hamptonu.edu or 757-727-5264

Woodson Hopewell, Dean of Men, woodson.hopewell@hamptonu.edu or 757-727-5303

Jewel Long, Dean of Women, jewel.long@hamptonu.edu or 757-727-5486

After that, please click here to read and circulate a new statement defending the students. (And please join Howard Zinn, Michael Eric Dyson, Pollitt and many others in signing the petition. To do so, email to: youth_students@worldcantwait.org.) Finally, click here for more info on the case. The more you read, the more pissed off you'll get. Just remember that the hearings are this Friday, so please act quickly.

********************

World AIDS Day Chat

I didn't know it until yesterday but tomorrow, December 1, is World AIDS Day.

To mark the occasion, the estimable Moving Ideas Network and Amnesty International are co-hosting an online chat TOMORROW at 12:00est. Titled Violence Against Women, HIV/AIDS and US Policy, the chat--which features four experts on the AIDS crisis, including Nation writer Salih Booker--will focus on the way the AIDS pandemic has brought to light the inextricable connection between the right to healthcare and other fundamental human rights. Click here to submit questions in advance and click here for more info. Most of all, check out the chat tomorrow at noon.

Comments (56)

1. I'm just curious...

   Doesn't this free speech cover military recruiters as well?

   Todd

   Posted by Oksportsguy at 11/30/2005 @ 5:05pm

2. Can I investigate this a bit?

   It seems odd, shall we say, that a university campus is busting people for "just passing out anti-Bush literature"...even one in Red State Virginia???

   Might there NOT be a "bit" more to the story than Ms Pollit is letting on?

   I mean, "historically black universities" aren't typically "bastions of right-wing orthodoxy"!

   Posted by Mask at 11/30/2005 @ 5:05pm

3. Zero--Skeptical as always:) I don't have the exact fliers but this story below details what happens very well. And in a way does it really matter what the fliers said exactly about Bush's policies on AIDs, Iraq, etc? Here's the link: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2005/11/30/hampton

   Todd--I think a distinction is that this is about Hampton students being told to keep their mouths shut rather than outside interests looking to recruit among students being told to stay off campus. But I do agree that there's a free-specch argument in the campus recruiting debate.

   Mask--I'm no expert on Hampton U but my understanding is that the school is indeed run bya gernally pro-Republican, sometimes very heavy-handed administration.

   Posted by Peter Rothberg at 11/30/2005 @ 5:14pm

4. Mask,

   You'd be surprised how conservative administrators are at black colleges. I did my undergraduate at one and all I can say is that they would administrators at Oral Roberts University blush.

   Posted by bluedot at 11/30/2005 @ 5:16pm

5. Peter,

   I hope and expect to see an "Act Now!" post on Stanley Tookie Williams III, who sits on Death Row at San Quentin and is set to be executed on 13 December. I'm sure you are well aware of the life of this man and do not doubt that you will make the appropriate call for action.

   Posted by parodunn at 11/30/2005 @ 5:28pm

6. Peter,

   Why do we need to draw a distinction?

   Are not all people covered under the 1st amendment in terms of freedom to speak their mind?

   Aren't white supremacists, although we may despise their message (and I do) allowed to peacefully march and speak their crap?

   So too should military recruiters be allowed to speak on campus, and so too should Hampton students be allowed to speak and not told to keep their mouths shut.

   Todd

   Posted by Oksportsguy at 11/30/2005 @ 5:28pm

7. Parodunn--Agree with you! Here's somethign quick for now.

   DON'T LET THEM KILL THE PEACEMAKER

   Rally and Benefit for Stan Tookie Williams

   Tuesday, December 6th

   7pm - 10pm

   National Black Theater of Harlem

   South Tower - Temple of Liberation

   2031 5th Avenue at 125th Street

   2,3 to 125th Street or 4,5,6 to 125th Street

   $5 Donation

   Posted by Peter Rothberg at 11/30/2005 @ 5:45pm

8. The difference between the recruiters and the students is that one is paid in order to entice people away from the academic setting, while the others are volunteering their own time and energy to foster intellectual debate on the subject. I find it ironic that you would defend recruiters to a minority college, when the poverty that helps to create such institutions is the very thing that drives them away from the academic life and into a military one.

   I'm especially curious as to how doing one's job, which one is paid to by the government, constitutes "Free" speech. It is not free in any regard, it's essentially internal marketing for a different job track. They are induced to make these pitches by the very nature of their jobs, and thus cannot claim to have the detached ideal inherent in "free speech", which is to say personal opinion borne not of any outside bonds, but solely of the heart alone.

   Posted by Megido at 11/30/2005 @ 6:02pm

9. Todd--Medigo makes a good point. When we speak of constitutional free speech we're talking about people expressing their personal opinions. This is what is never meant to be abridged. Speech designed to sell a product or, as Megido rightly says, speech in the course of doing one's job has always been considered in a different category by the Supreme Court.

   Posted by Peter Rothberg at 11/30/2005 @ 6:05pm

10. Universities have not been bastions of free speech for decades. There have been dozens of mostly right wing views and invited speakers supressed (see John Leo editorials for details). Commonly the university uses student safety concerns, racial concerns or "incompatible with mission" concerns to defend its supression position. The university of Harvard President "suggested" that gender may play a role in Scientic acumen. It should have started a reasonable debate where actual data could have been reviewed but it only created a firestorm and an apology.

    So much for free speech in universities.

    Posted by kinggeorge at 11/30/2005 @ 6:10pm

11. Peter

    Would it be possible to actually GET a copy of this taboo flyer and post as a PDF on this blog header? Hard to evaluate the merits of the unseen. (Although granted, in principle it shouldn't matter WHAT it said.)

    Posted by leftofcenter at 11/30/2005 @ 6:17pm

12. LOC--I'm trying to get a copy. Good idea!

    Posted by Peter Rothberg at 11/30/2005 @ 6:22pm

13. I'm just curious...

    Doesn't this free speech cover military recruiters as well?

    Todd

    Posted by OKSPORTSGUY 11/30/2005 @ 5:05pm

    Of course it covers military recruiters as well. Freedom of speech should be absolute. I know why you're making this comparison, though, but if you'll recall the upheaval about military recruiters wasn't about them recruiting on campus - although many people object to that - but about a guy who got thrown off campus for standing right next to a recruiter holding up a sign warning his fellow students against enlisting.

    So, I ask you, shouldn't freedom of speech also include those who object to military recruiters on campus?

    Posted by Amsterdam69 at 11/30/2005 @ 6:38pm

14. I think Todd is trying to turn the conversation back to the earlier thread concerning San Francisco and military recruitment in public k-12 schools. Oranges to apples. Admittedly, I have only attended state universities, but military recruiters were all over the place at ever school I've attended. At UNC (Chapel Hill, that avowedly liberal enclave) they usually have a table in the Pit right next to the credit card companies.

    But, much as some people would like to turn this into a military recruitment debate, this is in fact a debate about students exercising their free speech rights on a college campus.

    Still, can anyone fill me in one how much private colleges (providing they don't get money from Uncle Sam) can legally prohibit the exercise of free speech? I'd be very interested.

    Posted by LisaJo at 11/30/2005 @ 7:33pm

15. Still thinking out loud here. Speech may be legally different from activities, but can't colleges like BJ University (Heh-heh. She said "Bob Jones") exercise considerable control over student activities without facing legal penalties?

    Heh-heh. "BJ University."

    Posted by LisaJo at 11/30/2005 @ 7:39pm

16. Being one who believes that having the facts plays a large role in making an informed opinion, I visited the University's webpage. Below you will find the pertinent code for students which they agree to follow. Based upon this code, the students violated their agreed to code of conduct. It is not even about the content. People must learn accountability in following agreed to rules.

    Student Tenure

    Students are expected to maintain acceptable standards of conduct, as defined by the University, on and off campus. They are especially reminded to observe the regulations with respect to student demonstrations, visitation in the residence halls initiation, illegal drugs, alcoholic beverages, honesty on examinations, honesty in matters dealing with the personal property of others and in scholarly writings or research. Appropriate decorum is expected in the library, dining halls, auditorium, classrooms, offices and at social affairs. It is never appropriate to use profanity, vile, obscene, threatening and/or otherwise abusive language. The possession or use of knives, firearms or weapons of any kind is strictly prohibited. Students must never accost, cajole, or proselytize students, parents or others who are invited to the campus. Students are advised that visitors to the University should always be treated as one would treat a guest in one's home.

    Reports received by the University of student misconduct, arrest, or involvement with other illegal or illicit activities off-campus are subject to administrative review for disciplinary action up to and including separation from Hampton University.

    Students should always be honest in all endeavors while on or off the campus. Students found making false statements during class related experiences, on documents related to any services or programs offered at the University, during investigations into allegations of misconduct, or during administrative disciplinary proceedings will be subject to separation (suspension or expulsion) from Hampton University.

    Students are expected to cooperate fully with University Officials, staff, faculty and other agents/designated persons at Hampton University. Failure to follow the directives or requests of University officials will subject the individual(s) to severe and immediate disciplinary action, as determined by the Dean of Students, Dean of Women or Dean of Men.

    The University reserves the right to take disciplinary measures compatible with its own best interest.

    http://www.hamptonu.edu/about/student_tenure.htm

    One additional point of relevance; This is indeed a conservative university, founded as a missionary college. In fact it encourages students to attend the Sunday services. Students attending there should be under no misconception as to the type of institution they are attending. Perhaps changing to a university more in-line with their political beliefs would be beneficial to them an the university.

    Posted by love liberty at 11/30/2005 @ 8:49pm

17. Hey Frank,

    I thought Bush was inspired and I even tuned in to Rush and found him to be better than usual! You must have heard both Bush and Rush while under water. Obviously something impeded your hearing, or maybe just the ability to hear truth?

    Posted by love liberty at 11/30/2005 @ 8:50pm

18. http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2005/11/30/hampton

    If you go to the link, you can leave a comment.

    Rio Bravo What are the strong points of the University of Wisconsin at Madison. Well, I got a good education! Elected not to participate in a graduate student strike for benefits though I was sympathetic to the concerns. Got it say it was also as cold as I have ever been except for when I was in Minneapolis one weekend.

    Posted by audiojoebob at 11/30/2005 @ 8:52pm

19. Don't you just love it? When the man comes into office, we're all promised an American renaissance. Now when he doesn't commit too many gaffes in a three minute statement, we're looking for "better than usual". Jimmy Carter used to ask "Why not the best?" And though Carter's best was also below standard, none of his followers would have thought it was appropriate to say, "Well, he was better than usual", or, "He wasn't at his worst". Good old neo-conservatives. Ever the militant apologia for mediocrity.

    Posted by Legba at 11/30/2005 @ 9:51pm

20. Back to the point...

    Maybe they're just "rumors"....but I hear a LOT more stories about conservative students, conservative speakers, and conservative campus newspapers being silenced, shut out, protested LOUDLY and (as for the papers) thrown in dumpsters...and a LOT more campuses who have anti-Bush, anti-war, anti-anything-on-the-Right rallies.

    I just have a gut feeling that the kids at Hampton U...violated the RULES (that everybody has to abide by) and didn't have their speech "squelched in an Orwellian nightmare".

    Posted by Mask at 11/30/2005 @ 10:58pm

21. well, after reading te university statement i have to say...

    if it is a private university not recieving state funding and those are the rules the students should, instead of just walking out of classrooms, transfer en masse to other universities. sounds like an awful place to me anyway.

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 11/30/2005 @ 11:57pm

22. I graduated from Hampton Institute in 1981 and President Harvey has been in place since 1978. This breaks my heart... but doesn't surprise me in the least.

    Posted by nyknicks12 at 12/01/2005 @ 12:16am

23. ibble -

    sounds like an awful place to me anyway.

    Au contraire! Hampton is a wonderful place - albeit a much more commercially developed place than in my days - a gorgeous campus on a peninsula in an historic town.

    The school community was there for you if you reached out and accepted its embrace in totality.

    "Our Home by the Sea."

    However, buck the system a bit too much and you'll get squashed like a grape.

    "Education for Life"

    My kids go to Pitt and Wisconsin. I can't afford Hampton.

    Posted by nyknicks12 at 12/01/2005 @ 12:29am

24. ibble -

    sounds like an awful place to me anyway.

    Au contraire! Hampton is a wonderful place - albeit a much more commercially developed place than in my days - a gorgeous campus on a peninsula in an historic town.

    The school community was there for you if you reached out and accepted its embrace in totality.

    "Our Home by the Sea."

    However, buck the system a bit too much and you'll get squashed like a grape.

    "Education for Life"

    My kids go to Pitt and Wisconsin. I can't afford Hampton.

    Posted by NYKNICKS12 12/01/2005 @ 12:29am | ignore this person

    sorry man - did not mean to insult - just sounds kind of stifling to me...

    that aside far be it from me to trample nostalgic memories. believe me - i know how that goes.

    by the way, the way its going now, perhaps your kids are better off where they are anyway...?

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 12/01/2005 @ 12:40am

25. Liberty

    I see your skills at cut and paste haven't dulled since you stomped off in a tizzy. From reading Peters column and reading the latest of your greatest, I don't see any connection between the university policy and Peter's article.

    I've read the policy through a number of times and don't see any reference to passing out "unauthorized" literature.

    Perhaps you could point out the relevance.

    Posted by Will C. at 12/01/2005 @ 01:52am

26. I remember when I was living the campus life, while some groups managed to edit their protest content within the accepted guidelines, other groups used other channels outside the campus environment to display their protest content when this one was out the guidelines and rules.

    So what is the problem, these guys should manage to survive the complex environment of communicating, if they are so radical that they could not manage to pass through the legitimate and lerss legitimate filters, than they probably do not represent a fair and representative opinion, or, they should go back to the design table to fine-tune their communication strategy, so as to sustain the issue.

    This is campus environment, this group should learn to sustain the game.

    Posted by areyouok at 12/01/2005 @ 03:50am

27. I'll give another example just recently...

    A college activities organization just paid Cindy Sheehan $11,000 for a speaking engagement, out of a mandatory "activities fee" from its students.

    The activities group declared (quite seriously...LOL) that Ms Sheehan's speech was "non-political" and that her fee was "normal for such speakers".

    They earlier had had a military office speak....and paid him $600.

    Posted by Mask at 12/01/2005 @ 07:02am

28. RIO

    re: UWM paper. Universities get real touchy about using their "official" name on anything they have not approved of. Had the same thing with our school club T-shirts. Sounds like that is where that one goes awry. Not a 1st Amend issue.

    As to the "roomie" ad, bad editoral policies...or just a bad editor who should be reprimanded. Doesn't sound so much like 1st am, or "agenda" as an incompetent editor who should be beaten about the head and upper torso.

    re: "Dubya's speechifying".....guess my TV picked up a different broadcast? I saw a bout of "status quo" cheerleading to his base. "Stay the courrse", "Making progress", "gettin' better all the time". Same old tired lines we've heard theses past 2.5 years....except now he said it all at once so he can call it a "plan"? That's right up there with that 1% mandate.

    Posted by leftofcenter at 12/01/2005 @ 08:03am

29. re: Hampton's "rules"

    Would be nice to know if this (Hampton) campus has proscribed "areas" for free speeech / whatever goes. Our campus has several. I do believe we also have rules about where you can hand out political flyers. Be nice to hear the admin's logic on their actions....

    Posted by leftofcenter at 12/01/2005 @ 08:07am

30. MEGIDO

    "The difference between the recruiters and the students is that one is paid in order to entice people away from the academic setting, while the others are volunteering their own time and energy to foster intellectual debate on the subject. I find it ironic that you would defend recruiters to a minority college, when the poverty that helps to create such institutions is the very thing that drives them away from the academic life and into a military one."

    Funny, the other week, I spent the day with the Commanding General of US Army Recruiting Command. When we talked about school and college penetration plans, NOT ONE WORD OR THEME talked of enticing kids away from school. That is simply not what we do, any information you have to the contrary is wrong. I have no doubt that is the perception of many, but perception is often NOT reality.

    PS The majority of combat jobs in the army are DISPROPORTIONATLY held by WHITES, I am not white, but that is a FACT.

    And by the way, ok one group seeks to "foster intellectual debate" it is the other group that SEEKS TO PROTECT IT. That is a more accurate characterization.

    Posted by CPT at 12/01/2005 @ 09:03am

31. I understand the point that is being made about Hampton being a conservative college, and therefore the students should understand where they are and act accordingly.

    In fact, that's a wonderful idea........at one time blacks were owned by whites in this country. These slaves should have just understood the situation and acted accordingly. At one time, the British attempted to stifle our desires in our new home.....maybe we should have understood where we were and acted accordingly.

    Hogwash, the freedom of speech is central and paramount to our supposed "free democracy". In fact, we are so proud of our freedoms here that we now strive to promote those freedoms and spread them around the globe. I attend a university which does not squelch free speech. There is a place on campus called the speakers circle where anyone can go and spread their "word" or propaganda. I have to listen to religious zealots and others spew complete bullshit and hatred all the time when I walk by this location. Nonetheless, I am glad that the circle is there, and isn't being policed by the administration on campus. If we are going to allow folks like CPT and Liberty to spread their propaganda on a regular basis.............then shouldn't we all have that right.

    Posted by jpolston at 12/01/2005 @ 10:26am

32. JPOLSTON

    Thanks for allowing us to spread "our propaganda"

    Is anyone with a different point of view from your position, not spreading propaganda? I like to say differing points of view, propaganda has a such a negative connotation.

    And no, there is no absolute right to make up whatever about anyone and attempt to pass it off as facts. Its called lible and slander.

    Posted by CPT at 12/01/2005 @ 10:56am

33. I find it somewhat remarkable that students are disciplined in countless numbers across liberal American universities for violating so-called "speech codes," but the moment that students are disciplined at a conservative university, we're told to "Act Now!", even while having no idea at all what the students are supposedly being punished for saying.

    Yes, yes, I know: apples and oranges. As the song lyrics go: "Apples when it agree with you, oranges when it don't."

    Pax,

    DrewHarris

    Posted by DrewHarris at 12/01/2005 @ 12:29pm

34. Mask, Regarding your 7:02 A.M. post: Was the college activities organization elected by the students? If so, then a majority of the students could fight their actions if they disagreed with them. If not, then they should fight it by other means.

    Seems like both examples you cited were paid to speak, and that it was just plain capitalistic, free market "supply and demand" that determined the price paid. Are you now going to criticize the free market?

    You may be seeing more examples of repressing conservative viewpoints because of your bias, or the news outlets that you frequent - I can't really say as I don't know of an objective, comprehensive study of free speech violations on college campuses. I'm sure that it happens in both directions, depending on the political leanings of the administration in question.

    Posted by AZTeacher at 12/01/2005 @ 12:43pm

35. Amsterdamn,

    "So, I ask you, shouldn't freedom of speech also include those who object to military recruiters on campus?"

    Absolutely! They should have the right to protest the recruiters if they so choose.

    I never said they shouldn't have that right = )

    Todd

    Posted by Oksportsguy at 12/01/2005 @ 12:48pm

36. CPT, Regarding your 9:02 post: When you say disproportionately, do you mean representation relative to the specific population of each minority group, or in general? There's a big difference there.

    I'd agree that "propaganda" has a negative connotation, but each person must judge the merits of information critically for themself, and if they deem it to be propagandistic, then they may certainly label it as such. I personally have never talked directly to a recruiter, so I can't make that judgement myself. Recruiting advertisements on TV I would consider very propagandistic, though no more than any other type of advertisement.

    Posted by AZTeacher at 12/01/2005 @ 12:50pm

37. Peter

    off topical item: dunno if you ever caught my compilation of "Dubya's Fireside Theater" by Frankgrits

    GOP theater" [geodude.home.mchsi.com]

    Posted by leftofcenter at 12/01/2005 @ 12:54pm

38. AZTEACHER

    As you well know, most college students RARELY participate in college "politics"...except the activists, who tend Left on most college campuses. And given that the fee is usually somewhere from $7-10 a student, it's hard to get "worked up about it" even among the small conservative group on campus.

    And this was well-known by those who started up the "PIRGs" (Public Interest Research Groups) on campuses back in the late 70s....where a mandatory fee was levied upon the students, to pay for "non-partisan" public interest activities (i.e. liberal activities)...basically a stealth plan to fund liberal activism on campus, with a "option out" option that was written in teeny, tiny fine print on the student contracts (knowing that it would be soon ignored after the 'furor' died down).

    Not sure how the "free market" figures into it, as it is more like a Soviet commissariat deciding which speaker is chosen...the one who "tends to the Left" and gets "$11,000" or the one who "tends to the Right" and gets "$600"?

    Posted by Mask at 12/01/2005 @ 2:48pm

39. CPT

    No, I dont feel as if any differing viewpoint other than my own is propaganda. However, I have probably read at least one to two hundred of your posts here, and even more by LL, and have no trouble in saying that most of your dribble sounds as if you drank the kool-aid long ago, and think little for yourself. As a supposed military recruiter whose job is to entice kids into joining an organization that doesn't give them the same freedom they are supposed to protect, I expect nothing less.

    Posted by jpolston at 12/01/2005 @ 3:38pm

40. Mask, My point about political involvement is that if you don't get involved, then you shouldn't complain. Just like any other political activities - if I don't vote in an election, then I have no influence over the outcome, and I shouldn't complain about the result. Liberals have fought for influence on campuses vigorously since the sixties, and have made some progress. If conservatives are unsatisfied, then they should do the same. You act as if conservative students have no responsibility to advocate for themselves. The free market enters in because organizations probably offer an amount that will entice the speaker that they want to come. Cindy Sheehan is a prominent figure right now, whether conservatives want to admit it or not, so they offered what they believed would bring her to speak. Supply and demand. Economics 101.

    Posted by AZTeacher at 12/01/2005 @ 3:43pm

41. The biggest problem with politics on campus is that too many student activists assume that their role in the leadership in a group is entitled to subsidy. Any political group should be entitled to rent a room at a rate reasonable to students, but subsidies for any political group are hogwash. Political work on campus needs to be strictly voluntary, for the sake of the integrity of each political organization itself. If it cannot win supporters on its own steam, it need not expect any help from people who are actually opposed to a certain openly stated political position. By the same token, student activists should have the right to solicit for voluntary donations on any campus, without opposition from educators or security. Students who work with my own organization are few, but they've bought in of their own volition. And that's how it's supposed to work, so far as I'm concerned.

    Posted by Sweetdaddy at 12/01/2005 @ 3:55pm

42. AZTEACHER

    I referred to the number of minorities in the Army, as oppossed to those in direct combat roles. About 26-30% of the Army, but 15-18% in direct combat jobs.

    JPOLSTON

    Why does someone HAVE to be "drinking kool-aid" merely beacause they interepet things differently. Like you, my opinions are based on my education, work and life experience. I see things differently, I suspect you will refine your outlook as you age.

    Posted by CPT at 12/01/2005 @ 4:02pm

43. Sweetdaddy, Yes, I would agree with you. Activism should be strictly voluntary and independently funded - not funded by fees imposed on students. This would bypass any problems with partisan concerns.

    Posted by AZTeacher at 12/01/2005 @ 4:34pm

44. CPT, I'm still not clear what statistics you believe are disproporionate. Define your terms. Are you saying that 26-30% of the Army is composed of minorities? And only 15 to 18% of direct combat jobs are filled by minorities?

    Posted by AZTeacher at 12/01/2005 @ 4:36pm

45. AZTEACHER

    As I said, the fees "taxed" upon the students are usually per capita, quite low...so hardly a cause celebre for any conservative students at a predominantly liberal college, to get worked up about. Plus, even if the did, as MANY polls show, the faculty and administration of many of these schools "tends Left" as well, so you'd be going up against "the Establishment" as well as an organized opposition of your fellow students.

    My point about the PIRGs was that they were DELIBERATELY set-up to be "stealth funding programs" for the liberal activists on campus.

    As to Ms Sheehan, I don't begrudge her her fee....it was merely noted that she (on the Left) gets a HUGE fee (and I might add, the student organization claimed she was "non-partisan"...which is a total lie)...and an opposing speaker was chosen who gets $600, not an Ann Coulter, Bill Kristol, Thomas Sowell (Boo! Hiss! Boo! to all of them....just saving some posts from others..hehe), who would get something equivalent.

    The student organization went "cheap" for their "right wing" guest...but happily endorsed (with their high fee) the "left wing" guest..and forced the students to pay for it (with their mandatory fee). Sorta like if I took $50 from you...then said "I'm going to make you eat at this Vegan restaurant run by a co-op, and the bill is going to be $45 ...but later you can get a shake at a McDonalds in a Wal-mart!"

    Posted by Mask at 12/01/2005 @ 4:38pm

46. Mask, Like I just stated in my last post, I think that schools should not be imposing an activity fee for such purposes, although I did go see Michael Moore at U of Arizona. Not sure if the student organization paid him to come or not, but I did have to pay five bucks to get in.

    The Republican organization on campus was upset that there wasn't equal time for the other side, so they countered by having Ann Coulter come to speak soon afterward. Don't know if it's indicative of relative popularity of them, but Moore attracted about 15,000, and Coulter didn't manage to fill a room that held about 500.

    Can you cite some of these "many" polls that reflect that most faculty and administration are liberal? I'd be inclined to believe it about faculty, but not necessarily about administration.

    Posted by AZTeacher at 12/01/2005 @ 4:48pm

47. is it just me or does Peter look really stoned in his pic?

    Posted by vrwc at 12/01/2005 @ 5:57pm

48. AZTEACHER

    Yes, thats what I am saying.

    That any suggestion that minorities or the poor are bearing the brunt of the burden is simple not accurate.

    Posted by CPT at 12/01/2005 @ 6:56pm

49. Students should be able to find their own politics, and fund it themselves. Whether that is possible with these right wing nutbags trying to drive "left" professors off campus is another question. I can't say I care much myself for postmodern turkeys with tenured positions, but I'd rather have them on campus than not have them on campus. I don't mind Ann Coulter, so long as there's always a Patricia Williams on hand to kick her ass. In fact, I love seeing right wing speakers debate serious progressive scholars, because the progressives always kick their asses. My only grief is that the folks out in the country don't get to see that spectacle. I'm sure it really wouldn't take much to sway them, once they see what a bunch of swaggering bullies the politicians they support actually are.

    In fact, one of the joys of my life these days is watching Ted Stevens, that nasty old jackass from my homestate of Alaska, take a drubbing so often from J. Stewart on the Daily Show. For decades that old "oil company butt boy" as Stewart calls him has been unassailable in towns like Fairbanks, but he's gotten so venal and stupid in the last few years that now even a lot of folks in the interior can see it. Oh, yes, let a hundred flowers blossom, a thousand schools of thought contend. And watch the right go down in flames.

    Posted by Legba at 12/01/2005 @ 8:24pm

50. First of all, I think it is wrong to censor people's opinions, whether they are on the left or right. That's what great about this country. That being said, it is my persepctive that the rightwingers are twisting this post around. Do you or do you not think it is wrong to censor the students on the college campus? If you do, sign the petitition. If you don't, please explain why it is right for students to be censored.

    Maybe if each side did a better job respecting the other side's right to express their opinions, we wouldn't be in the bad place we're at in this country.

    Posted by Turk33 at 12/01/2005 @ 11:10pm

51. TURK33

    I think it is wrong to censor the students on the college campus, but I also think that they should increase their editorial quality, and, work their grass-roots to solve the problem from inside. I mean, why should we provide national support each time some people start to cry because it does not go in the direction they want. When I was at campus, we had to fight, not only with force, but also with intelligence to get our ideas through, as in real life..............

    Posted by areyouok at 12/02/2005 @ 03:30am

52. AREYOUOK,

    I would agree with you, but who decides the directions that are allowable? Who does the editorializing? Maybe if it was you or I it would be ok, to you and I, but I bet there are people (on this board, even) who would completely disagree with my or your editorializing. That's the point - we have free will to editorialize ourselves and pick through the information we receive and make our own decisions. Ithink it would be great if Nazi's could never hold rally's, but since that policy could be held against me if I was espoousing an unpopular position, I realize that the Nazi's should be allowed to their little marches. Let's face it, if no one showed up to protest (which is their desired end anyway), I'd bet they'd have fewer marches.

    Posted by Turk33 at 12/02/2005 @ 07:51am

53. TURK33

    I agree with you, this proves the issue is more complex than simply disagreeing, protesting, editorializing and so on. of course the campus should be the breed place to experiment with this complex environment.

    Posted by areyouok at 12/02/2005 @ 08:20am

54. CPT, The telling statistic would be - how does the number of troops from each minority group compare with the total population of that minority group in the U.S. If a higher percentage of that minority group is serving than the relationship of the total population, then it is disproportionate. The figures that you have cited are meaningless without the context of comparing them to the general population.

    Posted by AZTeacher at 12/02/2005 @ 10:47am

55. For the record I emailed these adminsitrators asking about clarification of the event and got no response.

    Posted by leftofcenter at 12/02/2005 @ 10:58am

56. for everyone:

    www.collegefreedom.com/hampton.htm

    documents and media coverage regarding the case. shows the one flier students handed out regarding the Iraq war. Click on example of anti-war flier....

    nice posts...

    Posted by nostereotypes at 12/05/2005 @ 7:05pm