Patterico's Pontifications

I’m guessing this is what you actually intended to link.

Beldar (c5146b) — 9/24/2007 @ 3:26 am

Woof, key graf:

The invitation to Ahmadinejad isn’t about giving a voice to the voiceless, and it’s not about educating Ahmadinejad. It’s about a mystical belief in the power of the academy to bring peace upon the earth. Just as Yale thought it could tame the Taliban’s mouthpiece and make him good, Columbia believes that by granting Ahmadinejad access to its prestigious forum, something magical will happen as he is exposed to the glowing truth of liberal values that emanate from its gentle hearts, and his own hidden goodness will shine forth, and we will all understand each other, beat our centrifuges into tamborines, and lead a global chorus of “We Are the World.”

Yeah, that about sums it up.

Beldar (c5146b) — 9/24/2007 @ 3:28 am

“As valuable as rigorous scholarship may be in understanding the world, it has its limitations“……from Taylors article.

And this defines the state of our “enlightened” higher educational system in the 21st century. The next question for President Bollinger would be if Osama Bin Laden were available, would he be provided a platform? Perhaps if Jeffery Dahmer had been allowed to speak at Columbia, we would have understood his “taste for humanity” too.

Rovin (7f64b8) — 9/24/2007 @ 4:15 am

If the good professors of Columbia really want to titillate themselves by flirting with the Heart-of-Darkness, they should invite Dick Cheney to speak – flanked by a ROTC honor guard saluting the American flag!

Perfect Sense (b6ec8c) — 9/24/2007 @ 4:47 am

I fixed the link. Thanks, Beldar.

Patterico (2a8eaa) — 9/24/2007 @ 5:11 am

Whew!

Is Wingnut Nation apoplectic about this, or what?

They are outraged at the indecency of letting a representative of an oppressive government speak freely to members of a free society. Imagine!
Why should his countrymen learn that opposing viewpoints can be expressed without fear of reprisal in the US? No. It’s much better that he go home without having accomplished his great PR feat. Young Iranians don’t need to see the way
democratic ideals operate. We’d rather they learn that only selected speech is allowed in the US.

Yeah. That’s much better.

Semanticleo (4741c2) — 9/24/2007 @ 6:42 am

…and while the idiots at Columbia welcome a terrorist sponsoring oppressor of the people and anxiously sit at his feet to glean, students in Tehran know precisely what sort of ‘freedom of speech’ is promoted and supported by Ahmadinejad’s rule. This time our complete and utter shame before the world cannot be blamed on Bush. Our institutes of higher education where hubris and arrogance are the bedrock of the ivory towers, have done the job more efficiently than any one president could possibly do.

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZGI3NmYwMzlmYjMzMjBmMDFkZGM0NDE3ODAzNmExMGQ=

Dana (b4a26c) — 9/24/2007 @ 7:07 am

It should be a federal crime for any place to openly invite terrorist supporters and i hope they lose a big bundle ovet this

krazy kagu (fc3721) — 9/24/2007 @ 7:15 am

Do you think there are those that would like to transform a significant portion of Iranian youth (complete with videos and hateful signs) into little Ahmeds? They are probably the only thing holding certain people back. Maybe they want to lump them all together into one anti-US heap. It’s good for PR, just in case…………………..

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/22/AR2007092201447.html

Semanticleo (4741c2) — 9/24/2007 @ 7:22 am

It is hilarious that in one breath the neocons swawk about how the Iranian government is stifling dissent and censoring criticism — and in the next breath howling about how Ahmadinejad is allowed to speak here. Columbia truly represents what the U.S. is all about, and why we’re different from Iraq.

I completely understand Columbia’s point, and it’s not about convincing Ahmadinejad that he’s wrong. It’s about showing that the U.S. is different from Iran. We let him talk in the U.S., and although the neocons (who really aren’t much different from him) clamor to shut him up, he actually gets to speak. Iranians see that, yes, there is a difference between Iran and the U.S. (although the neocons would like to erase it).

Phil (6d9f2f) — 9/24/2007 @ 7:48 am

Young Iranians don’t need to see the way democratic ideals operate. We’d rather they learn that only selected speech is allowed in the US.

Utter BS Semanticleo. Are you refering to the “selected” speech at CSU’s student paper?

Do you think there are those that would like to transform a significant portion of Iranian youth (complete with videos and hateful signs) into little Ahmeds?

This wouldn’t compare to the youths here in the U.S. with their chronic BDS, (which is never in any way regulated/censored).

How much hate do we have to endure from a lunatic that is allowed a forum to preach more of his tripe all for the “we are the world” diversity crowd. I could give a rat’s a** about what the youths of Iran think about this nation. I’m more concerned about the garbage being fed our own youths. But that’s just me being selfish.

Rovin (7f64b8) — 9/24/2007 @ 7:48 am

“I could give a rat’s a** about what the youths of Iran think about this nation.”

That’s it, in a nutshell………….

http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/coffeehouse/2007/sep/24/simple_error_

Semanticleo (4741c2) — 9/24/2007 @ 7:54 am

sorry……

http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/coffeehouse/2007/sep/24/simple_error_my_ass

Semanticleo (4741c2) — 9/24/2007 @ 7:57 am

“I could give a rat’s a** about what the youths of Iran think about this nation.”

Before I even read your link Sem, let me edit this comment. My concern for our own youths take precedent over the youths of Iran. If you think listening to any more of BS from this piece of human waste is in any way enlightening or is an example of tolerance, then we just simply disagree.

Rovin (7f64b8) — 9/24/2007 @ 8:10 am

Columbia truly represents what the U.S. is all about, and why we’re different from Iraq.

or did you mean Iran?

Ahhh, yeah, right Phil. Like the difference that allowed the minutemen to speak at this same college campus? Only when the agenda fits the narrow minds of the hippy-crits.

Rovin (7f64b8) — 9/24/2007 @ 8:28 am

You know, I would respect the left’s lies about “freedom of speech” much more if they were not in the business of routinely censoring any and all speech by conservatives in america or anyone with a thought that challenges their idiotic viewpoint.

Sematicleo, where was your moral outrage over censorship when Larry Summers was forced out at harvard? What about the people protesting Rumsfeld even joining a thinktank at Stanford? How about pies in the face to Ann Coulter? How about not allowing ROTC on campuses? Your and the left’s silence is deafening, yet you bend over backwards to invite a homicidal maniac who supports terrorism and denies the holocust. And you then try to call conservatives names? You are an idiot and your movement (the left) is devoid of any sense of shame.

Why you love terrorist enablers and america haters like Iran’s president (someone how stilfes dissent in his own country and routinely imprisons and kills people he dislikes for political reasons)( and yet you hate people who simply have a different political ideology than you is staggering in its psychosis and vileness.

when the left stops attempting to censor true political debate from the right in america, then maybe you can come forward and make an argument that having Iran’s president speak at Columbia is all about “freedom of speech.” Until that day comes, you and your leftist brethren are simply lying – you support him b/c he hates america. Anyone who loves america or wants to see america’s interests protected you have no use for and want to censor.

Great Banana (aa0c92) — 9/24/2007 @ 8:58 am

Yes, we conservatives are “afraid” of having Iran’s president speak. He does not have ANY opportunity to speak to americans or others. Columbia will be the first opportunity he ever will have to get his views heard. That is why this is all about “freedome of speech.”

Meanwhile, the left does not want to allow ROTC on the campus. What are they afraid of the ROTC for?

Meanwhile the left forced Larry Summers out of his job at Harvard b/c he indicated that there might (horrors) be a differnce between men and women.

Meanwhile the left is trying to keep Rumsfeld from getting a position at think tank that operates on the Stamford campus – what are they afraid of.

Meanwhile leftist organizations on college campuses routinely steal all issues of any conservative newspapers. What are they afraid of?

Meanwhile leftists routinely shout down any conservative speakers at their campuses. What are they afraid of?

Meanwhile leftist groups keep people like the Founder of the Minutemen from speaking at campuses? What are they afraid of?

Meanwhile . . . the list goes on and on.

The left arguing that this is about freedom of speech is absurd. First, freedom of speech applies to the gov’t censoring someone. It does not mean that anyone or any private institution has to give you a platform.

Second, Ahmadjean (spelling?) is not a U.S. Citizen or legal resident, so has no constitutional rights.

Third, Ahmadjean has plenty (yes PLENTY) of platforms to be heard, so there is no freedom of speech argument.

this is simply a question of good taste and good judgment. the fact that the left is so happy to see him speak at Columbia says more about them (particularly when contrasted to the thuggish left’s true feelings toward free speech, above), than anything.

Great Banana (aa0c92) — 9/24/2007 @ 9:06 am

Cleo

Good lord, is your moral compass permanently broken or what?

In this day and age of omnipresent media, Ahmadinnerjacket can “deliver his message” to American audiences without being given the honor of being invited to speak at an ostensibly respected university.

Not that this is un-heard of since Columbia’s Dean stated clearly that he’d have no problems having Hitler grace Columbia’s hallowed halls.

But if you think this honoring of the bearded-wonder will demonstrate “free speech” to young Iranians, you are truly deluded. What it does is teach Iranian youths that Americans have no morality, that we see no difference between democratic and totalitarian regimes, that we are too craven, nihilistic and self-loathing to even stand up for our own professed beliefs and virtues. Iranian students that yearn for liberty will take no comfort from Columbia’s red-carpet treatment of their oppressor (who has already taken steps to control their information in case his PR campaign doesn’t go as planned…he’s already shut down the offices of a news site that doesn’t toe the Ahmadinnerjacket line.

Why should Iranian dissidents take any comfort from American Leftists that would as soon toss them under the bus least their morning ritual of latte and snarking about eeevvviiilll conservatives be disturbed?

Darleen (187edc) — 9/24/2007 @ 9:08 am

test?

Darleen (187edc) — 9/24/2007 @ 9:14 am

Finally,

Cleo, do you really believe the “youth” of Iran will hear everything Iran’s president says, gets asked, etc. while he is here? Or, do you suppose, they will get an extremely censored and edited version of what he says?

If you think that the fact that he will be free to speak here while they are not free to speak there will change their minds to support the U.S. and hate him, you are even dumber than I have believed until now.

The left loves Iran’s president for the same reason the left loves Fidel and Chavez. THe left loves a dictator who can totally control the citizens b/c that is what the left ultimately wants. They don’t want freedom for everyone, they want to control everyone – control all choices. A central economy. A single healthcare system (no choice). Hate crime laws to criminalize certain thoughts. A “fairness” doctrine so the wrong thoughts are not publicized. High Taxes and a “living wage” so everyone makes the same amount of money. Banning trans-fat and cigarette smoking. etc. etc.

The only dictator the left ever disliked was Pinochet, and they hated him b/c he was for a free-market economy. the left has loved every other dictator there ever was. Stalin, Lenin, Mao, Castro, Chavez, and now Ahmajadean (spelling?).

Why does the left love these dictators so much? Seriously, ask yourself what it is about your ideology that causes you to love such evil cretins people.

Great Banana (aa0c92) — 9/24/2007 @ 9:14 am

What the heck… I stripped the links out of this post and I hope it will post THIS TIME ….

My dear Cleo

In this day and age of omnipresent media, Ahmadinnerjacket can “deliver his message” to American audiences without being given the honor of being invited to speak at an ostensibly respected university.

But if you think this honoring of the bearded-wonder will demonstrate “free speech” to young Iranians, you are truly deluded. What it does is teach Iranian youths that Americans have no morality, that we see no difference between democratic and totalitarian regimes, that we are too craven, nihilistic and self-loathing to even stand up for our own professed beliefs and virtues. Iranian students that yearn for liberty will take no comfort from Columbia’s red-carpet treatment of their oppressor (who has already taken steps to control their information in case his PR campaign doesn’t go as planned…he’s already shut down the offices of a news site that doesn’t toe the Ahmadinnerjacket line.*

Why should Iranian dissidents take any comfort from American Leftists that would as soon toss them under the bus least their morning ritual of latte and snarking about eeevvviiilll conservatives be disturbed?

Darleen (187edc) — 9/24/2007 @ 9:17 am

Muslims Against Sharia condemn, in the strongest possible terms, the decision of Columbia University to provide a speaking venue for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Apparently letting Akbar Rafsanjani speak at the National Cathedral was not the height of American Dhimmitude, because providing a venue for the world’s foremost anti-Semite, whose proclaimed goal is the destruction of the USA and Israel, definitely takes the cake. What is surprising is that we don’t hear any complaints from Columbia alumni who should be ashamed of their silence.

More on the subject: Why Does Columbia host Ahmadinejad?

Muslims Against Sharia (8dcfb3) — 9/24/2007 @ 9:50 am

I want to support Columbia’s decision because I’m a firm believer that the best way to discredit bad policies and politicians is to make them publicly defend their ideas. But Columbia has no traction with me since it’s clear this is all a sham. If Columbia really believed in free speech, it would have defended the Minuteman’s Jim Gilchrist speech at Columbia (both last year and this year) with the same passion and conviction it’s shown regarding Ahmadinejad’s planned speech.

However, I’m glad we live in a country where even highly regarded Ivy League colleges can look utterly foolish and receive non-stop publicity making that fact crystal clear.

DRJ (ec59b5) — 9/24/2007 @ 10:14 am

GB;

Your peel is coming off.

I didn’t say anything about ‘free speech’ except
in an indirect way in reference to the Iranian youth which is a VAST MAJORITY OF THE POPULATION. They are watching, and listening. They will find ways of hearing the message; “We believe in free speech, except for……”

I would have a lot more respect for your position if you at least acknowledged the is an agenda being promulgated which, like the runup to Iraq, is designed to triangulate a desired result.

What exactly do you have to fear from Ahmed? No, he doesn’t deserve a forum, and contrary to your predisposed belief in what I think, I wasn’t combing the Net during the Larry Summers matter, and I WANT Rummy to be heard within Academia. It’s the best way of dislodging him further from any credibility whatsoever on Foreign Policy and military strategy. But I will expect that he be called on any attempted revisionism, and I would expect no less from you regarding Ahmed’s toxicity.

Semanticleo (4741c2) — 9/24/2007 @ 10:55 am

DRJ,

I doubt Columbia is in charge of Ahmadinejad’s security.

Jonathan Haidt’s work suggests that the moral judgment system the right uses to condemn things like Ahmadinejad’s visit to Columbia developed before humans learned to speak, making it impossible to articulate in words why they feel it’s immoral.

He calls this dilemma Moral dumbfounding.

http://faculty.virginia.edu/haidtlab/mf.html

alphie (99bc18) — 9/24/2007 @ 11:10 am

Cleo,

It’s amazing to me that you, and other lefties, when it is time to appear reasonable will state “gee, we don’t believe in silencing rummy, or summers, or whoever”. Yet, when those things happen (i.e., when the left sets out to censor a conservative or a non-blessed thought) you lefties are never actually around to do anything or say anything about it. So yes, I do believe you are full of B.s. and your love of a good dictator like the Iranian president trumps anything else – otherwise you would write long screeds at lefty sites about how the ROTC should be let back on campus, Summers should be heard, and lefties should not shout down conservative speakers.

Your “reasonableness” is much noted in the silence of it when it counts. So yes again, you are full of b.s. You and your leftist brethren love a dictator. The left loved Stalin, Lenin, Mao, and Loves Fidel and Hugo. The left is now proving its love for Ahmadajean (spelling is wrong, I know).

And, based on those undiputable facts, you want to lay claim to some mantle of reasonableness? You want to argue that him speaking at Columbia is good for the U.S., that you are consistent on such theories? Please, you and I both know you are lying in thought and deed and the stench of hypocrasy and america hatred from the left coming from its Ahmajadean love is revolting.

So, all your clever bon mottes (clever in your mind, anyhow) will not change the actual facts. Go to KOS, your ideological soul mates think Amadajean is a better lead than Bush. When the left grows up, and stops the constant lying on each and every issue, than maybe you will have some credibility and intellectual capacity or honesty. Until then, birds of a feather – you and your lefty adolation of people like Amahjadean prove your hatred for everything that makes this country great. And, letting despotic terrorists speak at prestige universities is not now, nor has it ever been, what made this country great. No good service to the U.S. comes of it, it does nothing to promote U.S. interests or values, and does everything to promote our (and by our, I mean America – I know it is difficult for you) enemies interests. You and your ilk are all about supporting those who are promoting out enemies interests, and I really can never understand why.

Great Banana (aa0c92) — 9/24/2007 @ 11:48 am

Oh and cleo,

“I would have a lot more respect for your position if you at least acknowledged the is an agenda being promulgated which, like the runup to Iraq, is designed to triangulate a desired result.”

What agenda is being promoted by being against Amahjadean speaking at Columbia? And, like the runup to the Iraq war – by that you mean Bill Clinton, Hillary, and all the other dem leaders who said, well before Bush took office that Iraq had and sought more WMDs. No matter how many times you say it, it does not make your lies true. Yes, the intelligence may have been wrong. That is not the same thing as “triangulating a desired result”. I’m so sick of leftists and their constant lying. Why can’t you ever argue in honesty? Is it that you know your favored ideas and policies are so far discredited that you can never win in an honest debate? That is the only rational answer as to why the left lies at every opportunity.

Great Banana (aa0c92) — 9/24/2007 @ 11:53 am

“well before Bush took office’

GB; You should get out more. You seem to make a lot of assumptions about me.

Let me risk unhinging you further. Some people want to attack Iran. Some people don’t like us talking to Syria. Some people don’t like the Nuke Deal we made with NoKo. These three groups talk to each other. Connect the dots.

http://www.aei.org/publications/pubID.26726,filter.all/pub_detail.asp

http://www.aei.org/publications/pubID.26421,filter.all/pub_detail.asp

http://www.aei.org/publications/pubID.26441,filter.all/pub_detail.asp

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/906386.html

http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/coffeehouse/2007/sep/24/simple_error_my_ass

Semanticleo (4741c2) — 9/24/2007 @ 12:08 pm

Gawd…
I’m so fucking sick of having clowns like Great Banana assign beliefs to “the Left” willy-nilly, without the slightest indication that those beliefs are in any way grounded in reality.

“Since you don’t believe (insert extremist conservative talking point here), you must believe (insert unfounded accusation of sedition/wickedmess/ Satanic origin here)”

No. That’s bullshit. We’ll tell you what we believe, and extend you the same privilege, but you don’t get to tell us what we believe just because you have a hard-on for patriotic indignation.

Leviticus (3c2c59) — 9/24/2007 @ 12:55 pm

Levi – Then we shall expect to see you be the first in line to call BS on alphie and semen next time they start making shit up.

JD (c3bb88) — 9/24/2007 @ 1:22 pm

Don’t count on it, JD (but you knew that). I’ve seen lefties state that conservatives want to starve children, kick the elderly out onto the streets, kill the homeless, rape the earth, rob senior citizens of Social Security, imprison women, and all sorts of evil things. I have yet to see anyone like Leviticus get up and say that’s wrong.

Steverino (5f7efc) — 9/24/2007 @ 1:29 pm

“Levi – Then we shall expect to see you be the first in line to call BS on alphie and semen next time they start making shit up.”

-JD

Assuming I see the post, and assuming I interpret it the same way as you do, and assuming that the post is really made-up, as opposed to awkward of inconvenient for your argument, then yes, expect me to be first in line to call BS.

Leviticus (3c2c59) — 9/24/2007 @ 1:34 pm

Too freakin’ funny. Rather than a simple yes, Levi has to put multiple caveats on it.

JD (c3bb88) — 9/24/2007 @ 2:01 pm

Leviticus;

As you can see, it’s a mistake to reply to a trollop.

Semanticleo (4741c2) — 9/24/2007 @ 2:04 pm

Semen – Do you never tire of shitting all over these threads?

JD (c3bb88) — 9/24/2007 @ 2:36 pm

wait,WAIT!
Freedom of Speech is a right we hold for American Citizens!!! We don’t shed our blood and mortgage our future so that a despotic putz like this whack job, can spew his hatred.
The biggest problem of feeding this philosophical voyuerism of these milk-fed “Students” is that it adds an air of legtimacy to these idiots (Ahmadinejad).
What is Bollenger thinking? I can only assume by his actions that he is not.

paul from fl (7da085) — 9/24/2007 @ 3:30 pm

“Rather than a simple yes, Levi has to put multiple caveats on it”

-JD

Yes… rather than letting you pigeonhole me with a bunch of bullshit definitions just so you can bleat about it when I fail to comply, I added MULTIPLE (reasonable) caveats to my response.

Looks like you missed my original point.

Leviticus (f6f899) — 9/24/2007 @ 4:20 pm

I dunno, after hearing Bollinger’s warm introduction to the schmuck, Clint’s excellent article seems just a teensy bit less excellent.

Xrlq (6c2116) — 9/24/2007 @ 4:46 pm

I dunno, after hearing Bollinger’s warm introduction to the schmuck, Clint’s excellent article seems just a teensy bit less excellent.

Why, because Bollinger said some mean things to him before the students applauded him and the dean shook his hand?

Patterico (2a8eaa) — 9/24/2007 @ 5:28 pm

Semen – Do you never tire of shitting all over these threads?

This is a pretty good example of an inappropriate comment of the sort I would like not to see here.

Patterico (2a8eaa) — 9/24/2007 @ 5:29 pm

I see Semanticleo is citing to the thug Larry Johnson again.

SPQR (6c18fd) — 9/24/2007 @ 5:49 pm

Sorry, Patterico.

JD (c3bb88) — 9/24/2007 @ 5:50 pm

9/24/2007

Clint Taylor Rips Columbia over Ahmadinejad Talk

42 Responses to “Clint Taylor Rips Columbia over Ahmadinejad Talk”

Favorite Sites

Links

Patterico Sells Out