Stanford Student Government Blocks Funding For Pence Speech

One of the free speech issues that we have previously discussed is whether universities are effectively curtailing free speech through student surrogates on campus. We have seen student government bodies and boards engage in blatant content-based discrimination in exercising their control over budgets or publications (here and here and here). The latest example comes from Stanford University where the student government voted against approving a $6,000 grant request from the College Republicans to help host former Vice President Mike Pence for a campus speech. That’s right, they voted against supporting the right of other students to hear from a former Vice President of the United States.

The College Republicans needed 8 votes to approve the funding. However, the final vote was 7 in favor, 7 in abstention, and 1 in opposition.  Somehow the seven students not voting considered that act to be more ethical than just being honest and voting against the funding. It had the same effect. Despite only one student voting against the speech, the school refused to support a former vice president coming to its campus to address faculty and students.

The vote captures the rise of intolerance and speech controls sweeping over our campuses. This is a vice president who played a historic role in defying a president to certify the vote on January 6th. He did the right thing. However, whether you agree or disagree with him, this is an opportunity for students to listen and question someone who held the second highest office in the country and served in a critical capacity in a number of key policy areas, including the election and the pandemic. However, a majority of Stanford students in this vote refused to approve a small level of funding for the event.

One interesting element is that university rules require that events needing security must secure over 50% of funding from on-campus sources. That guarantees this type of control by student government leaders — authority that was abused in this case. Previously the Undergraduate Senate initially blocked conservative speaker Dinesh D’Souza.

Conversely, Stanford students approved sponsorship for an array of highly controversial speakers from the left including Professor Ibram X. Kendi. Kendi has written highly offensive commentary, including questioning the adoption of two Haitian children by Justice Amy Coney Barrett as illustrative of “white colonizer” values.

While Kendi’s event was opposed by conservatives on campus, I believe that all of these voices should be welcomed on campuses. Higher education is supposed to foster rigorous and passionate debate. These speakers are part of that spectrum of viewpoints that add to our rigorous debates and dialogues on social issues. For example, Kendi insists that “The life of racism cannot be separated from the life of capitalism. In order to truly be antiracist, you also have to truly be anti-capitalist.” That would make for a fascinating debate on any campus. Kendi has also called for a “Department of Antiracism” that would be able to oppose “racist ideas” and even veto or nullify any law at any level of government run counter to an “antiracist” agenda. That proposal runs afoul of a host of constitutional guarantees but again it is the type of viewpoint that can lead to substantive debate.

The actions of the Stanford students shows again that we have a rising generation of censors who have been told that barring free speech is a form of free speech. A new poll shows roughly half of the public supporting not just corporate censorship but government censorship of anything deemed “misinformation.”

They learned this intolerance from academic and journalistic figures of my generation. Faculty and editors are now actively supporting modern versions of book-burning with blacklists and bans for those with opposing political views. Columbia Journalism School Dean Steve Coll has denounced the “weaponization” of free speech, which appears to be the use of free speech by those on the right. So the dean of one of the premier journalism schools now supports censorship.  Free speech advocates are facing a generational shift that is now being reflected in our law schools, where free speech principles were once a touchstone of the rule of law. As millions of students are taught that free speech is a threat and that “China is right” about censorship, these figures are shaping a new society in their own intolerant images.

The Stanford vote will be appealed and could be reversed. However, that does not alter the disgraceful initial vote or its implications for free speech at Stanford.



338 thoughts on “Stanford Student Government Blocks Funding For Pence Speech”

  1. I think it is clear that Trump recognized that there wasn’t much danger and a few people saying things they might regret later doesn’t represent those people or his followers. The important issue was whether or not the election was lawless. It was lawless to a great degree and the left created it. That is how the left gains power in many nations and then the people suffer.

    This is the way Anonymous the Stupid discusses an issue. He is creating non existent facts. The VP was never in danger . There was no insurrection. The big question is what part the left and the institutions of government played Jan 6. We already know that the rights and liberties of some were violated. We also know that there were those that instigated much of the violence were likely doing so under FBI direction.

      1. FishWings are you really so misinformed? Do you think that Putin would be on the side of open discussion or on the side of the students who don’t want to allow different opinions? What a poorly placed parallel. If you don’t believe in open discussion it is you who copies and pastes from the Putin handbook. It is you who is his kind of guy. Did you think about it for more than three seconds before you made your comment? After writing and reading many comments on the blog one would like to think that your horizons would have increased. Some say that hope springs eternal but for FishWings one should not hold one’s breath waiting for an expansion of knowledge to happen.

        1. Thinkthrough, Fish Wings is correct that the comment above is simply a cliche, rightwing media template of an answer lacking any substance.

    1. Alan, tell us why Trump’s election claims were dismissed by more than 60 courts. And just to be clear, almost half the judges dismissing those claims were Republican-appointed.

        1. If Trump’s election claims were dismissed by every court, he obviously had no case.

          Any effort to blame ‘deep state’ elements is not a serious argument.

          1. Not so. The only question is whether the cheating and illegalities performed by the left altered the final numbers enough to change the victor. That we do not know, but we should be fixing the election process so it adheres to the law.

            1. The left didn’t cheat or alter anything. They didn’t have to. Trump lost by eight million popular votes – a clear mandate from the American people: “YOU’RE FIRED!””””

              Election Fraud is just another whacko conspiracy theory embrassed by the dunderheads on the right when they get bored squawking about Deep State and ChemTrails and PizzaGate and all the other dunderheaded nonsense.

              No American should be that gullible or dumb and yet half the country is that gullible and dumb.

              Putin is laughing in his Borscht.

              Xi is grinning in his rice.

  2. What Trump Is Saying About Mike Pence

    Former President Donald Trump defended rioters’ chants of “hang Mike Pence” during the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, saying it was understandable because they were angry the election hadn’t been overturned, according to audio released Friday of an interview with the former president in March.

    The audio came from an interview with ABC News’ Jonathan Karl conducted at Mar-a-Lago in March for an upcoming book, “Betrayal: The Final Act of the Trump Show.”

    Asked if Trump was worried about Vice President Mike Pence’s safety during the Jan. 6 riot, Trump said, “I thought he was well-protected, and I had heard that he was in good shape.”

    Karl then reminded Trump that some of his supporters involved in the violent attack were calling for Pence to be killed.

    “Well, the people were very angry,” Trump said.

    “They said, ‘hang Mike Pence,’” Karl told Trump.

    “It’s common sense, Jon. It’s common sense that you’re supposed to protect,” Trump said. “How can you, if you know a vote is fraudulent, right, how can you pass on a fraudulent vote to Congress?”

    Edited From:


    Well here we have it: ‘Donald Trump feels that Mike Pence failed the country when Pence certified ‘fraudulent’ election results’ on January 6th.

    Trump’s claim is either true or false. Either Pence failed the country, or Trump is a malicious liar who incited a coup that day. Johnathan Turley, for his part, has never been that clear on the legality of Trump’s actions. If Trump is, indeed, a malicious coup plotter, then there was much for Turley to write about. But we don’t recall that many columns regarding the constitutionality of Trump’s post-election schemes.

    1. Turley will not address the issue, and you and everybody knows it. He’ll lose his whole Trump base if he does.

  3. What I have never understood is where do students get any say or power in colleges. Theye are there to learn, not protest and violate the rights of others..

    1. “ What I have never understood is where do students get any say or power in colleges. ”

      That’s what student governments are for. They do get a say and if they want power they can seek office by campaigning for a position in student government.

  4. Why eliminate tyranny from government, but leave its vestiges in private companies?
    That makes no sense. It should be eliminated everywhere.

  5. That doesn’t negate how respectful Liberty students are to those with different views. You can educate yourself about ad hominem from the Simon & Schuster writer’s manual, available online from

    1. Liberty university is not known for being a place where the free exchange of ideas is supported. They are a private Christian university that censors its own journalism students.

      Their “tolerance” for different views is limited.

  6. George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams, James Madison, Alexander Hamilton, Ben Franklin, James Monroe, Patrick Henry, John Jay, George Mason et al. called on Mike Pence to save the nation.

    Pence failed them.

    Pence failed America.

    Mike Pence – Benedict Arnold 2.0

    1. Thank you George. Pence is a gutless patsy and a flunky who refuses to turn on the dude who incited a riot that tried to kill him.

      Why would anyone want to hear from someone like that?

      He should be reviled.

      He should be squelched.

    2. George says:

      “Mike Pence – Benedict Arnold 2.0”

      No wonder Stanford students did not want to give a traitor a platform to speak his treason.

  7. It seems that the First Amendment can be used as a pretext to justify any arbitrary thing that you feel like doing.
    It’s a wild card! A magic charm!

  8. (music(
    This summer I fear them coming!
    They’re probably on their way.
    Last spring they did their killings…
    We’re dead if we stay!
    Going to get down to it!
    Soldiers are cutting us down.
    How can you run when you know?

    For dead in Oh Hi O!
    Four dead in O Hi O!

  9. In 1978 I asked my boss to leave work early so I could drive down to Palo Alto to hear Milton Friedman speak at Stanford University. I had a early dinner at the Good Earth Café. Being an Economics Major to be able to hear my idol and Nobel Laureate was going to be exciting, but his speech was totally disrupted and stopped by four “young Democrats” protesting Dr. Friedman’s giving economics advice to Chile. Nothing has changed in over forty years. Stanford continues to cuddle the same totally uninformed woke students.

  10. Are we trapped in a Vortex controlled by the ignoble WOKE? Every day some form of disbelieve is cast forward by Woke, all the while saying, “Don’t believe your lying eyes”. There are so many gyrating woke castings (Guano) it makes your head spin in disbelieve that some mental infantile has an audience of followers and true disciples. We can only hope that Woke’s ‘mantelet’ will weaken allowing common sense and the principles of our Constitution to prevail.

      1. An insurrection?

        What are they going to do, raid the Capitol and assault police officers and destroy offices and threaten to kill the Vice President and the Speaker of the House?

        That kind of insurrection?

        1. “So tomorrow we’re going to shut things down to open up space for a new kind of politics! Starting at 7am we’re going to blockade intersections around the US Capitol to disrupt business as usual in Washington, DC. Then at 12 noon, after we’ve shut down business as usual, and opened up space for a new kind of politics, we’ll join allies from a wide range of social movements for a rally at the Capitol to raise up our demands for the bold action our communities need. “

  11. Most universities have devolved into far Left madrassas. College campuses are now some of the most intolerant places in our country, where conservatives are routinely harassed and discriminated against. It is also common practice to racially discriminate against Asians in the admissions process, as a group that’s “too successful.” What you look like is more important than what you can do. It’s no longer “give us your high achievers.”

    Any institution that engages in racial or political discrimination should not be permitted to receive public funds. They should also be required to be honest in their advertising and marketing. If a university sets a higher bar for Asian or white access, then they should be forced to admit that on their admissions materials. If they lower the bar for black applicants, they should have to admit that, too. Then black students with academic excellence would likely select a different university so as to avoid future assumptions that they met lower standards.

    No more taxpayer funding for Democrat organizations pretending to be public institutions. Like NPR.

    1. Karen S.
      Read an article recently about how a few years ago, the Left would tell conservatives who had been de-platformed, or censored, to go and form their own platforms.
      Now that conservatives are or have done that, the Left is screaming about.

      There is a group of people, people who believe in free speech, are forming a new university called The University of Austin. Their intent is to provide for a place where respectful debate can happen. Where tolerance is accepted and encourage.
      They are still in the start up phase and I wish them well.
      I also hope others form universities along the same ideology.

      Be interesting to see which graduates from the differing colleges succeed in the real world.

  12. The students of Liberty University are very tolerant of speakers they disagree with. Maybe the students at Stanford
    can learn about tolerance from Liberty.

    1. Your whole statement is wrong, read the rules of students and administrators at Liberty University. Better yet, find a student speaker at Liberty U to give a speech against Trump and find out how tolerant they are.

    2. Liberty University…is that the place where Jerry Falwell Jr-a sexual deviant who sells the right to have sex with his wife to other men so he can watch- is the president? Very open-minded of them to employ an actual cuck; quite the exercise in tolerance.

      1. Shall we start mentioning all the famous people on the left that are sexual deviants (deviants from societal norms), beginning with Clinton or Roman Polanski.?

        The real difference is not that both sides don’t engage in certain acts. Instead, the left is hypocritical while everyone else recognizes the behavior and deals with it whether or not the individual committing the behavior is a friend or foe.
        The left is filled with hypocrites. You are one of them.

          1. There’s Pussy Grabbers on both sides, but then humans are a sex-crazed, power-obsessed, selfish, war-loving, bloodthirsty, wasteful higher-primate species, innit?

            I wonder if there are any Conservative universities who would refuse to hear from Pence?

            He’s a white-haired patsy.

            The president tries to have him killed and he still won’t roll over.

            Pence has nothing to say that Stanford doesn’t already know.

            It’s not that Stanford is afraid of what he has to say, they just don’t care.

            Because it’s value-less.

      2. Falwell quit. And he took 100 million bucks with him, his net worth. Pretty good for a “man of God”

  13. It may well be intolerance but it is also an exercise of their free speech and Democracy. As far as I can tell from the story. Pence wasn’t banned from speaking, eight people in student government simply decided they wouldn’t use funds from the budget to pay for it. The Republican group seems welcome to come up with an extra $6,000 to pay for his visit themselves.

    On a second note, Turley praises Pence for standing up to Trump and refusing to throw out the results on an election and do his job once. Should he be forgiven for the four years he nodded like a bobble-head doll and backed up Trump’s lies? I would have voted to hear from Pence provided there was an opportunity to ask questions. I wouldn’t expect an honest answer from him though.

    1. Enigma, it is my understanding that university rules require that at least 50% of funding for events that would require security have to get university approval. Therefore, they cannot raise this money from outside organizations.

      This makes it quite easy for universities to favor Democrat speakers, and censor conservatives. Which they do, with regularity.

      Fascist movements favor censorship.

        1. I thought we tried to end hatred and discrimination in the 60’s. I guess it was just a cosmetic change for those that temporarily supported character over color. Now we see their real stripes.

          1. There was some progress in the 60s which in many cases has receded. The Voting Rights Act of 1968 has been gutted. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 is often ignored, and the Fair Housing Act of 1968 is rarely enforced. Being an active Realtor, I see the equivalent of redlining and steering on a regular basis. Restrictive covenants banning Black people and other minorities are still on Homeowners Association agreements. Texas is currently being sued by the Justice Department for violation of the Voting Rights Act vor discrimination against minorities, dozens of lawsuits are in the works against new laws in almost every state designed to suppress votes. The real big lie is that equality exists in America.
            You say we tried to end discrimination in the 60s, wouldn’t actually ending discrimination be the goal?

            1. The Voting Rights Act of 1968 has been gutted. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 is often ignored, and the Fair Housing Act of 1968 is rarely enforced. — enigmainblackcom

              You’ve made serious allegations for which there are remedies at law. Please provide proof of what you assert to be fact.

              If a citizen and resident, please tell us in which state you cannot vote.

              Please cite violations of the CRA you have witnessed.

              Please provide copies of homeowners association agreements “[r]estrictive covenants banning [b]lack people and other minorities”.

              1. You have the Internet, do your own research. Nobody is saying it is impossible to vote, it’s just harder to different degrees. The Supreme Court gutted the enforcement clauses of the VRA in Shelby in 2013, if you want an example of a restrictive covenant, Google George W. Bush restrictive covenant. You won’t accept any proof I provide so find it yourself.

                1. You made the claims, the burden of proof is on you. What you’ve admitted is that you’re nothing more than a blowhard.

            2. Enigma, humans will act in ways that are not always appealing to all. However, the progress made since the ’60s is tremendous despite the left’s attitude that blacks were not equal to anyone else. What a horrid suggestion made by the left, but that is typical of despotic people. Black advancement was tremendous, but the instigators who earned money from poor race relations didn’t want to lose their jobs while others didn’t want a loss of their entitlements or votes, so they put roadblocks in the way.

              Today, the left promotes color over character after failing to push socialism based on class. I find some actions by some people reprehensible, but we see that across the board, where blacks are not the only ones to face discrimination. Asians are relatively quiet, while their children are denied access to certain learning institutions based solely on their race. Do we hear the black community saying such discrimination is wrong? Not really. If the black community and yourself truly believe discrimination is unjust, they and you should agree it is wrong no matter who is discriminated against.

              Will you step up to the plate?

              1. Enigma, I note that you keep complaining, but have nothing to say about the Asians being discriminated against. I hear you talking about charges for ID (I think in Florida where you live it can be obtained for free) but what about the unfairness to Asian children? You have no response to that type of discrimination. Is that because lesser qualified blacks and perhaps others get the slot? Is that what you mean when you talk about discrimination? Are you looking to advance those people that are similar to you only because of their melanin which is quite trivial. Is color more important than character?

                When are you going to step up to the plate and actually add your voice to those others that believe in MLK’s character over color? I’m there. I’m waiting. Who is the racist?

            3. Enigma:

              Voter ID is not associated with any decrease in minority voting. Because minorities have ID. There are many ways to get free ID.

              Joe Biden and Democrats also materials misrepresented the Georgia voting law, including what it does, and how to meet voting requirements.

              The lying propaganda is so unfortunate, because well-meaning people actually believe that any effort to protect voting integrity is discriminatory. They’re just falling for a ploy.

              1. ID’s aren’t always free, when they aren’t it constitutes a poll tax. Besides ID, there are dozens of ways to make it harder to vote and Republicans (copying Democrats from the past) are utilizing all of them. Georgia has removed hundreds of thousands from the rolls, sometimes for having a name similar to a felon, lots of other reasons that conveniently focus on minorities more. Most of the focus on suppressing votes is in Fulton County (Atlanta) which just happens to me majority Black. All the places Trump wanted votes thrown out; Philadelphia, Milwaukee, Atlanta, etc were predominately minority. The new redistricting maps in Texas where the Justice Department is suing to stop them is designed to hurt minorities. You’re smart enough to know this exists. I can only speculatre as to why you deny it.

                1. Black people in the Caribbean have photo voter ID.

                  Are our black people stupider than them?

                  You are convincing me.

                  1. Blacks in the Caribbean have nothing in common with American Blacks. Nada. While race baiters like Al Sharpton like to drag us Caribeños into their race baiting shtick, we are different from Al Sharpton sheeple by various metrics including:

                    We love America
                    We came to America to work
                    We take the jobs Black Americans believe are beneath them
                    We follow the laws since we were welcomed as foreigners
                    We enthusiastically attain US citizenship, carry ID cards and raise families
                    And some of us run for political office and win, earning the hatred of race baiting self-loathing, angry blacks like Joyless Reid

                    1. Please be more specific, rather than merely repeat the talking points put out by the extremist corporate media…

                      Which states, and more specifically, what is each state legislating that suppresses voters? I am no fan of voter suppression.

                2. Enigma:

                  You need an ID in order to fully function in American society. You need ID to open a bank account, cash a check, get an apartment, buy alcohol, buy cough syrup, notarize a document, sign a loan, get a job, go to Disneyland, volunteer at your child’s school…There are myriad ways that you need a photo ID.

                  Years ago, I searched state by state and could not find a single one that did not offer some sort of assistance to get ID. If you know of states that do not offer free or reduced cost ID, then let me know.

                  In my research, I also found multiple alternative forms of ID that could be used. For instance, in Georgia, you need photo ID to vote in person. 6 different kinds of photo IDs are acceptable. If you do not have any of those, you can go to any registrars office or DMV to get a free photo ID, by using a birth certificate, utility bill, student ID, etc.

                  It is not a poll tax to require identification. A photo ID is not a poll tax because it’s given free of charge, and because ID is required to be a fully functioning citizen of the US.

                  You have often claimed that voter ID laws are racist or designed to discourage minorities from voting, yet the data shows these laws do no such thing. The vast overwhelming majority of US citizens, including 69% of black voters, support voter ID laws. So when are you going to abandon the propaganda you’ve been fed that identifying yourself to vote is unfair or racist?

                  You have declared that the redistributing was designed to hurt minorities. What evidence do you have on the state’s intent? Or do you “just know” because a disparity automatically proves intent?

                  Democrats and Republicans both draw district boundaries that benefit them politically. They quite literally both do this, because their goal in drawing districts is to get a political advantage. Statistically, blacks vote Democrat more often than Republican. Big cities tend to vote Democrat. Any redistricting that benefits Republicans at all, rather than confer an advantage to Democrats, could therefore be called racist. How convenient. Meanwhile, Democrats are free to redistrict to their hearts’ content. That does not treat both political parties equally. The crux of the Democrats’ argument is essentially that they MUST concentrate their voters in a way that benefits the Democrat Party, or else it violates the Voting Rights Act. Works pretty well for them. Democrats also have the advantage in that the law does not require intent to harm to meet the standard of violating the Voting Rights Act. Since the standard is so low, they might win.

                  As an aside, I actually do know that occasionally it can be difficult to get ID due to the supporting documentation needed. One of my friends is an old cowboy. He let his drivers license lapse accidentally. When he went to get a new one, it was discovered that his last name wasn’t what he thought it was. He was actually born under a different last name, and his birth certificate was later changed when he was still a baby. As DMV records became more modernized, somehow the earlier birth certificate became associated with him. He had no idea he’d ever had a different last name. His mother and father have already passed on, so there’s no one to ask. But apparently, that was not his real Daddy. He had to jump through some hoops to get this sorted out. He’s white. It wasn’t racist to clarify his identity. The only reason why he had a problem is because he’d been known by two names, one of which his Mama had never told him about. That tends to create some technical difficulties later on.

                  1. Yoiu keep talking about ID and how reasonable it is. I don’t disagree with ID in general, though it can be used as a tool to make it harder for some people to vote. I’m going to set aside every argument I do have about ID and ask you for a second to consider all the other things these laws are doing. Reducing early voting including on weekends and after hours during the week. Moving polling places to hard to reach locations, reducing vote by mail, “cleansing” the rolls by the hundreds of thousands. Allowing citizen poll watchers and removing distance requirements. Placing armed officers at polling locations (if you need background on how this has historically been used just ask). Acknowledge the impact of Gerrymandering and redistricting. To only talk about ID and ignore everything else is obfuscation. You know it’s real but are apparently satisfied with the result so you allow it to continue with your silence and excuses.

        2. Enigma, you don’t mean that. The free choice thing. We gave some of that up so a minority person could not be discriminated against.

            1. Actually, Enigma, I have come to believe a return to a poll tax would be a good thing. Then, quite possibly, the black communities would be able to elect representatives who are not retarded or crazy or otherwise defective like Hank Johnson, Lee, or Mad Max. Hardly anyone in the CBC makes sense when talking. If the folks in the black community who really wanted a competent government badly enough to pay a small poll tax were to vote then they would be electing great people instead of the clown show they get. It would probably clean some of the morons out of the white representatives as well.

                1. Enigma– I expressly said a poll tax would do good for white people.

                  You are become the Juicy Smollett of the commenters; there is nothing you will not misread to twist into a argument that you are oppressed.

                  Pure racist.

              1. Though Enigma infers that you are a racist below, he lacks the understanding of what it means to vote. It’s not something you sell or give because someone told you to. It is part of a citizen’s responsibility to provide feedback to our leaders. That feedback should be by serious people who take the time and energy to vote while caring enough about their vote to do so with care. To me, that means that voting need not be easy. Instead, voting rights should be equal under the law.

                Enigma has a childish view of voting compromised by his inability to sort real racism from his ghosts of racism. Take note of how he doesn’t care when Asians are denied admission to schools even though they are not white. He is looking for an advantage for his group, whether deserved or not.

                1. “Take note of how he doesn’t care when Asians are denied admission to schools even though they are not white.”


                  He also doesn’t seem to care when Asians are beaten and robbed by feral blacks.

                  He doesn’t seem to care that looting has become a national pastime for feral blacks.

                  He doesn’t care that feral black men are slaughtering innocents in black communities.

                  He doesn’t seem to care that actual slavery still flourishes in Africa.

                  He seems to be phony from his uppermost hair down to the tips of his toes.

                  1. I agree. Enigma is promoting all the things you say. It doesn’t have to be that way but for those that benefit financially or otherwise from his type of argument. Instead of denying a proper education to these children, we could do better for the same or less of a cost.

                    The problem is that the left is worried about votes, including teachers and their unions. The left doesn’t care. They never do. The left is interested in power at the expense of the individual, and Enigma has fallen into that trap. His ‘payment’ is he can say, ‘I am fighting racism’. Too bad. Enigma’s fight promotes the worst type of racism and destroys black lives daily.

                    1. “Enigma’s fight promotes the worst type of racism and destroys black lives daily.”




                The intent of the Founders is clear and based on sound reasoning.

                Turnout in 1788 was 11.6% by design. General state vote criteria were male, European, 21 and 50 lbs. Sterling/50 acres. Immigrants were required to be “…free white person(s),….”

                Elections were limited, restricted and controlled, which was not only the intent of the American Founders but of the creators of democracy in Greece and its perpetuators in Rome.

                It is demanded that every person be allowed to vote merely to assure that opponents finish “…fundamentally transforming the United States of America…” from Americans to illegal alien, foreign invader hyphenates.

                “A fool and his money are soon parted.”

                – Thomas Tusser

                The Constitution reserves to States the power to certify or deny the vote by any criteria, including payment of taxes, income, national origin, etc.

                The revolutionary slogan, “Taxation without representation,” is replaced in modernity by the inconvenient truth of, “Representation without taxation” for 45% of the population comprised of “…persons of indigent fortunes,…under the immediate dominion of others…whereby some who are suspected to have no will of their own….”

                No person who does not pay taxes, and no person who receives a pay, benefit or entitlement check from any level of government should be allowed to vote.

                “The true reason (says Blackstone) of requiring any qualification, with regard to property in voters, is to exclude such persons, as are in so mean a situation, that they are esteemed to have no will of their own.”

                “If it were probable that every man would give his vote freely, and without influence of any kind, then, upon the true theory and genuine principles of liberty, every member of the community, however poor, should have a vote… But since that can hardly be expected, in persons of indigent fortunes, or such as are under the immediate dominion of others, all popular states have been obliged to establish certain qualifications, whereby, some who are suspected to have no will of their own, are excluded from voting; in order to set other individuals, whose wills may be supposed independent, more thoroughly upon a level with each other.”

                – Alexander Hamilton, The Farmer Refuted, 1775

            2. OMG! Don’t elections discriminate against minorities. I thought that was the idea. Please cite the Constitution wherein the right to and freedom of discrimination are denied.

              Does freedom of assembly force people to desegregate?

              Seems like it would be dictatorial and tyrannical to force someone to love and respect another entity – enter unconstitutional forced busing, fair housing laws, non-discrimination laws.

              Could/should anyone be forced to love and respect Attila the Hun, Vlad the Impaler, Adolf Hitler, “Crazy Abe” Lincoln et al.?

              It may just be the deleterious and pathological effects of the illicit “feast of the parasite” of matriculation affirmative action, grade-inflation affirmative action, employment affirmative action, quotas,

              welfare, food stamps, minimum wage, rent control, social services, forced busing, public housing, utility subsidies, WIC, SNAP, TANF, HAMP, HARP, TARP, HHS, HUD, Agriculture, Commerce,

              Education, Labor, Energy, Obamacare, Social Security, Social Security Disability, Social Security Supplemental Income, Medicare, Medicaid, “Fair Housing” laws, “Non-Discrimination” laws, etc.

              Dang! That’s a lot to digest! Ya’all got to have a huuuuge appetite!

      1. Karen,

        University policies require that for special events with security, event organizers must demonstrate their ability to fund the event before extending an invitation to a speaker. At least 50% of funds must come from on-campus funding sources.

        On campus funding means funding from the group not the university. The reason why they are requesting the grant is to meet that funding requirement. They can come up with the $6,000 themselves and be able to have their event.

    2. “One interesting element is that university rules require that events needing security must secure over 50% of funding from on-campus sources. That guarantees this type of control by student government leaders — authority that was abused in this case.” – From Turley’s post

      1. Karen, not over 50%. They must meet AT LEAST 50%.

        The students are free to raise the funds they need by other means.

        1. Svelaz:

          I think you are misreading this.

          Turley said, “One interesting element is that university rules require that events needing security must secure over 50% of funding from on-campus sources.”

          That means on campus sources must supply >50% of funding.

          They cannot raise the funds by other means.

          1. Karen, the actual policy doesn’t require that more than 50% funding must be from campus sources.

            The link in his column states that AT LEAST 50% of funding needs to be from campus sources. It means groups needing a grant must have at least 50% of funds from any source as long as it’s from campus activities such as fundraising or other types of activities to raise money.

    3. enigma:

      “It may well be intolerance but it is also an exercise of their free speech and Democracy. ”
      So in your world, denying someone the right to potentially disagree with you publicly and based solely on your perception of their politics beliefs is “free speech.” Then, of course, you go on to obsess about Trump which has absolutely nothing to do with the topic. Please don’t wonder why many of us find the thoughts of the left to be deranged.

      1. I spoke about Pence, mentioning Trump in the same context as Turley did. You can’t give Pence credit for a single act and ignore the rest of his record.
        Yes, there are speakers I wouldn’t pay to hear, especially when they spread lies. The list is short. These days, and this doesn’t particularly apply to Pence to my knowledge. Free speech is an excuse to advocate racist policies and beliefs, Marjorie Taylor Greene would be an example, there are many others. Some of the speech apparently supported by Kevin McCarthy is exactly the same as yelling fire in a crowded theater.

        1. …there are speakers I wouldn’t pay to hear… — enigmainblackcom

          And you are free to do so, by exercising your freedom to associate, or not, as you see fit. A right you would deny others, by denying the speakers’ right to their freedom of speech, because you merely dislike what they might have to say.

          Short list or long, the end result is the same — you deny others what you, yourself, wish to exercise, freedom of speech. I don’t visit or read your website, but that does not mean I think it should be closed down so that others cannot.

          1. Free speech isn’t nor has it ever been absolute. I do get censored on Facebook from time because someone issues a complaint. I contest it every time and have never been found to be in violation of community standards. There are people out there promoting violence, rape, and murder. They should be censored. What are your thoughts about the fake Critical Race Theory arguments in high schools where it isn’t being taught? Books are being banned, principals fired, and most discussion of race in any context is being blocked. Has Freedom of Speech been violated?

            1. Free speech isn’t nor has it ever been absolute. — enigmainblackcom

              True, but it also isn’t subject to the whims of anyone who merely dislikes or disagrees with what is being said.

              What are your thoughts about teachers posting videos about how they deceive parents about what is being taught and bragging about using woke ideology to indoctrinate students?

                1. enigmainblackcom,

                  Have posted two comments with links in response (two video links in the first, and one in the second). Hopefully Darren will see fit to approve and post.

                    1. Seems like you’re the one who dismisses evidence… No wonder you project that tendency onto others.

            2. Race essentialism: Critical race theory reduces individuals to the quasi-metaphysical categories of “blackness” and “whiteness” and then loads those categories with value connotations—positive traits are attributed to “blackness” and negative traits are attributed to “whiteness.” Although some critical race theorists formally reject race essentialism, functionally they often use these categories as malicious labels that erase individual identities….

              Critical race theory supporters have attempted to dismiss parents with three primary counterarguments: that critical race theory isn’t taught in K-12 schools, that opponents can’t define critical race theory, and that critical race theory is just “teaching history.” Here are the responses to rebut those claims. …


                    1. Enigma, you say that parents are indoctrinating their children. The conclusion that one must then logically come to is that the children must be taken from their parents at an early age and be instructed on how to think by the state. According to your logic no other course of action should be considered. As to CRT being taught in K-12 I offer the following link. Either you are trying to gaslight us about CRT or you have been gaslighted by those who provide you with your information. In this case we should give you the benefit of the doubt but we should also encourage you to do your own research rather than parroting a CNN talking point from Chris Cuomo. To just redribble what you have heard without doing your own due diligence can only be described as laziness in order to fit an idea into your preconceived narrative. Perhaps you are capable of doing better if you so desire. The future will tell the tale.

                    2. Well America was conquered, founded and built by white people – with help from black slaves – and if you take a look at most African nations, do you want them running anything?

                      That’s racist, but whatever, it’s the truth.

                      White people and black people have very different ways of going about things, so there is gonna be a clash.

                    3. Try atarting with your local school district and see how much CRT is being taught. They are banning books in mine, I’m going to attend the next meeting to prove to myself they are who I think they are.

                    4. I have seen a lot of faulty textbooks, so I don’t deny that sometimes they are a bit lax. I think discussions concerning the history of slavery from ancient times to the present should be in the textbooks, emphasizing the American experience. At the same time, we should teach that the English-speaking people of the world were the first to end slavery and slavery was heavily disputed in the US since the founding of the nation. Additionally, I think that the Civil War should be taught, including the number of people who died from that war and that slavery was abolished. We should be focussing on slavery today in Africa by those of similar race that were enslaved in the US. We should also discuss slave labor in China and slavery in the Middle East and elsewhere.

                      Slavery is a human rights issue that needs to be taught so that we seek to avoid such limitations here and elsewhere in the world. Slavery no longer exists in the US unless one thinks of the Southern border open to human rights abuses. We should be looking for equality under the law, not equity of results.

                      The only question is whether or not you wish to see equality under the law for all American citizens or just the ones that might look like you? Don’t you think that color is one of our least important attributes?

                    5. Thinkitthrough says:

                      “say that parents are indoctrinating their children. The conclusion that one must then logically come to is that the children must be taken from their parents at an early age and be instructed on how to think by the state.”

                      Children have to be *taught* whom to hate. If not by their parents, who?

                    6. Parents are the ones that are entitled to teach certain things. Teachers do no have that right.

                      Collective guilt: Critical race theory claims that individuals categorized as “white” are inherently responsible for injustice and oppression committed by white populations in the past. This concept is sometimes framed as “white guilt,” “white shame,” and “white complicity,” which are psychological manifestations of collective guilt.


    4. The fact that Pence was calling around to see if it could be done, is enough proof had he found the so-called legal basics, things could have gone a lot different. Pence should have known immediately it was a coup attempt by Trump, and yet he sat back as nothing happened, until Secret Service removed him.

      1. Fish wings, so Pence is bad because he sought legal advice about a contested election, in order to ascertain what the correct, legal move was?

        1. Pence is a lawyer, he was protecting his 6. He should have known, if not, he is surrounded by lawyers that would have known in a heartbeat.

    5. However … If Vice President Pence speaks, the event will be disrupted by the same intolerant and woke people who denied a student group the small amount of money.

      1. When you say “woke people” are you referring to people that want to hear the whole story or truth that has been hidden, or would you want people to listen to the same intolerant people that want the truth and story withheld.

        1. …truth that has been hidden… — FishWings

          Please, enlighten us with this hidden truth to which you refer…

          1. Slavery, voting rights, women’s rights. Gay, and American Indian abuse. The American justice system and it’s abuse of minorities. Wealth inequality, but do you’re own homework next time, because there’s more, lots more.

  14. Who’s going to break it to Kendi that one of the most racist countries on Earth is North Korea. If a Korean woman gets pregnant by a Chinese man, she will be captured, imprisoned, and suffer a forced abortion.

    Then there is the infamous racism of Communist China, against ethnic groups like the Uighur.

  15. The Left has never been tolerant. They tolerate things they agree with and censor that which they disagree with. The tolerance banner was used to legitimize their movement in the eyes of the public who bought the lie hook, line and sinker. Now when the Left seizes power in an institution they go about proving they are every bit as totalitarian as any of the ancient regimes they used to rail against but now apparently use as role models.

    Can’t wait for the inevitable reckoning. I’m guessing the first of many beat downs will occur in the midterms so long as Dims don’t get to rig them. Note the long-term Dims abandoning ship like the rats they surely are. Oh, for the good ol’ days when folks were run out of town on a rail, tarred and feathered, and left to their own devices. Had sort of a cleansing of the body politic feel to it — like an enema.

    1. Lol you’re correct that “the left” is intolerant…of anti semites and racists. Cast out from the Democratic Party in the civil rights era those same racists and anti-semites have found a home under the big tent of the Republican Party-congrats, I guess. Behold the future of the Republican Party:
      Who seems more tolerant- the guy in the Camp Auschwitz shirt or the Proud Boy whose shirt proclaims “6 million Jews was not enough?”

      1. The left is anti-Semitic, anti-American and a whole host of other bad things. One can listen to the videos of leaders in the Democrat Party a few years ago and compare it to what is being said today. A complete about face.

        Cowards and hypocrites make up the left.

        I won’t lend support to the Republicans, but most of the racists and anti-Semites reside on the left. Even Richard Spencer the well known white nationalist admitted voting for Biden.

        1. Yeah the left is so racist and anti-Semitic they elected a half-black man as president and a half-black woman as Vice President and had a Jew as a presidential contender.

          Bernie didn’t have a chance of course.

          He’s a Seinfeld character who is too old, too liberal, too shrill and too Jewish for the Red States, who would rather hunt him down and barbeque him than vote for him.

          But Bernie was representing the left.

          Is Pence Jewish?

          The Right is White.

          I think your math is wrong.

          Possibly because you don’t have a brain in your head.

          1. You are an idiot. Trump has Jewish orthodox grandchildren.

            (I support policies that work, not political parties) Start with slavery and work your way into reconstruction. Then look at segregation and the KKK, all Democrats. Look at the civil rights legislation held up by Democrats. Then a bright spot, the era of MLK where character over color became the issue. Today you can look at the WOKE left and Democrats where we are back to color over character. I will repeat myself. You are an idiot.

            1. The Democratic party of the late 19th Century and into the middle of the 20th Century has very little resemblance to the Democratic party now.

              And all the KKK and Civil Rights abuses were southern Democrats, who might as well be right wingers.

              Who created and voted in the Civil Rights Act?

              Kennedy and Johnson = Democrats.

              Look it up.

              And again, hard to paint the Democrats as racist when they elected a half-black president and a half-black vice president.

              The Republican party is as white as the hair on Pence’s head, with a few ethnic opportunists joining in because they think that’s where the money is.

            2. I’m from Alabama so I’ve heard some version of “ThE rEaL rAcIsTs are DeMboCraBs!” More or less every election cycle since I was 5, usually shouted inarticulately by a dude in a union suit and coveralls with an “Unreconstructed” pin on the (I was going to say ‘lapel’ but do overalls have lapels? Must remember to investigate later) and waving a confederate flag. The really funny thing about it is the way the people who post it really think they Did Something. Like, congrats on copy pasting the same nonsense that’s floated around racist comment sections word for word since the BBS era, 10/10 for following directions but minus several million points for lack of creativity. That whole argument gets a big yawn from me- it’s just a noxious poutine of white grievance and failure to reckon with reality. If you’re going to post nonsense, at least make it original nonsense.

              I will repeat myself: your bumptious arguments are a sad and stinky stew whose (sadly familiar) flavor has not improved with aging. Find a new recipe- you’re stinking up the joint.

              1. Yeah the Democrats who created and voted in the Civil Rights Act (1964) and elected a half-black man to the presidency and a half-black woman to the vice presidency are racists.

                Pull the other one, mate.

      2. hey Anonymous, if the “left is intolerant of anti-Semites how do you explain, Tlaib, Omar, Cori Bush and AOC? How do you explain Al Sharpton having a platform at your conventions?

        Won’t it be fun seeing how Anonymous ignores my simple question!

    2. Mespo,

      “ The Left has never been tolerant. They tolerate things they agree with and censor that which they disagree with.”

      The right disagrees with CRT. They don’t tolerate it at all. They are censoring it in schools because they don’t agree with it.

      It seems the right isn’t tolerant either. Why is it ok for them to censor CRT?

      1. Because the right is as white as the hair on Pence’s head.

        White makes Right.


        California is run by Democrats/leftists/liberals or whatever you want to call them and it is by far the most tolerant, most influential, most progressive, most productive and most prosperous state in the union.

        What the left doesn’t tolerate is blind stupidity ignorance, and that is what the right objects to

  16. Banning Mike Pence shows just how stupid the “right\left” thing has gotten. In a world of frothing at the mouth partisans each lauding their own parties as the answer and each declaring the opposite party is the problem, and neither taking anything even remotely close to an honest look at themselves, mister Pence was a breath of fresh air.

    I’ll never forget how in the early days of the Trump presidency when mister Pence took his daughter to see it, and at the end of the performance the cast decided to make a little political speech directed at the Trump administration with Mr Pence sitting in the wings. Had Trump been there he’d have walked out no doubt in a huff, went home and bashed the play on Twitter. In fact, he wasn’t there and he still bashed the play and cast on Twitter that night. But not mister Pence.

    Mister Pence calmly placed a hand on his daughter’s knee encouraging her not to be upset and said to her smiling, “that’s what freedom sounds like”.

    He was right, that is what freedom sounds like. And what he said was what a true leader sounds like.

    And he went on to show us that same country over party mentality throughout his tenure as Vice President.

    Mister Pence isn’t a lot of show and hype, he doesn’t make loud boisterous speeches, but he honors the Constitution, he honors Americans regardless of who they voted for and while that is the last thing the frothing at the mouth partisan constituency of this country wants right now, it is in fact exactly what this country needs more than anything else in the world.

    You’d think they’d embrace a man like Pence to speak at a university. But the liberals seem to want to have nothing to do with anything reasonable or logical these days.

    1. Sorry, getting ready for work and wasn’t paying attention and I neglected to include the name of the play, it was the musical “Hamilton” that they were attending.

    2. Mister Pence calmly placed a hand on his daughter’s knee encouraging her not to be upset and said to her smiling, “that’s what freedom sounds like”.

      The left is setting the rules for discourse. President Trump just played by the rules. The other thing President Trump did, was his own wet work. Not being a politician, but rather a leader, he would not ask his aides to do in his name, what he would not do himself. Instead of having some underling, or congressional staffer float a narrative, wink and nod about the source, President Trump did his own talking. The one thing you did hear during the Trump Administration, ‘trial ballons’. President Trump just put it out there and saw what happened. Refreshing leadership, but foriegn to politicians that only know game playing.

      What all people forget, what happened to President Trump was set to happen to any Republican that might have been elected. And everyone of them would not have survived the 4 year term. Because like Pence, they would have folded to maintain decorum. It sounds nice, but it cedes power and control.

      1. Blaming his infantile schizophrenic behavior on the left is the marker of mindless minion but calling sitting up late at night “Tweeting” insults at private Americans and companies that dare speak a single word against him “wetwork” is the marker of this generation of camo wearing CGI superhero cartoon worshipping infants.

        Bootlicking or buttlicking it all looks the same. When the emperor’s butt naked but his lemmings are praising the craftmanship of his tailor, then its like being in a body snatchers movie. You want out but where ya gonna go? The infected are everywhere.

        As for calling Mister Pence’s honoring the Constitution you clowns pay lip service to one minute and wipe your a%%es with the next, “decorum”, ..that just speaks the failure of your parents to instill in you any sense of integrity whatsoever.

        Its a rotten person who’ll lie to another. But its a hopeless person who’ll lie to themselves.

        Right now the liberals are steamrolling over the Constitution, destroying the concept of the individual and taking us all into the Orwellian nightmare we’ve made movies about for the past half century, and our only alternative gave us a New York Millionaire paranoid character disordered neurotic elitist who never did an honest days work in his life and spent his entire presidency on the internet insulting anyone that didn’t vote for him and are still licking his a$$ trying to convince everyone that the lipstick they’re painting on their pig somehow makes it a beauty queen.

        I swear I feel like any minute I’m going to see Donald Sutherland standing along the road, mouth open, jaw slack, high pitched scream coming out as he points a bony finger in my direction.

        In the words of Charleton Heston, … “its a maaaadd house!! ….. a maaaaaaaddddddddddddd house!!!!!!”.

        1. Most of that was correct but not this: “Right now the liberals are steamrolling over the Constitution, destroying the concept of the individual and taking us all into the Orwellian nightmare we’ve made movies about for the past half century, ”

          That’s a bunch paranoid ChemTrails BS.

          Trump wiped his butt with the Constitition and the Democrats are merely steamcleaning it.

          “Destroying the concept of the individual?”

          How so?

          Orwellian nightmare?

          Trump’s alternative facts was 21st Century Newspeak.

Leave a Reply