Because it sounds really really stupid

Hey man, I can't force you to like read dumb stuff, like your president.

I think students should have the right to discuss exactly these ideas, sure.

ok good.

Foldn usually seems pretty relaxed. That's just one of those P things I assume?

lol

If you go to the Antonin Scalia School of Law you may get a whole course on them.

Fly:

It's starting to look like Rachel Maddow committed a major error of judgment by going out on a limb in her zeal to blow this "Ted Cruz Linked to the D.C. Madam?" angle into a major expose. If all this "information" about Sibley is true, it's very doubtful that the Supreme Court will lift the gag order. That leaves Rachel high and dry with a sensational story she pushed hard - that fizzled.

I doubt if Sibley himself is going to release the phone records to a news organization - especially if he's trying to shake down Cruz for cold hard cash. Unless something really dramatic happens, (like Sibley suddenly disappearing or turning up dead), we've probably heard the last of this story - even if it is true.

http://www.vox.com/2015/9/10/9298577...rnings-college

There is an extensive debate going on about something that doesn't actually exist.

It's such a small issue that etc overblown because of the sensitive liberal stereotype.

As was noted, some of the things FoldnDark described as safe spaces were just letting lgbt youth talk to someone. He's mad at that, I'm sure I can dig up several posts that he's made recently decrying the bigoted laws in NC, Georgia or Mississippi, right?

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer...=twitter_nymag

Maddow's discussion of this had tons of caveats. She noted that the guy was wacko like 10 times. She also never speculated who would potentially be implicated.

when did she do that?

I've seen her cover Sibley and his dead man switch and supreme court petition, but never push a Ted Cruz connection specifically.

That's what they said about the knockout game and look what happened.

Cal State LA students physically disrupted a speech by a guy I don't agree with on much of anything, Ben Shapiro, in the name of making the campus a safe space. Fire alarm was pulled, entrances and exits were blocked so that people couldn't get into the speech. He wasn't inciting violence, or even hatred. He was just giving a speech to a campus group that had invited him, which he should be allowed to do. If I'd still been in LA, I'd have gone and just shoved my way through. But I'm a redneck with a short fuse.





I especially liked the Orwellian sight of people pushing and shoving speech attendees while chanting "No Violence!"

It's the frustrating thing about this place sometimes because it's very unlikely
Foldn is mad at letting lgbt youth talk to someone. Far more likely there's some confusion going on somewhere.

Foldn care to clarify if you have any objection to such a thing at all and if so why?

Again that is probably like a very small minority that take time out of their day to go Lisa Simpson on Ben Shapiro. Ideally they just hold a counter protest outside. So what?

obviously not true and you know that.

It's an equivocation fallacy. the phrase "safe space" is changing definition from post to post.

http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2015/12...ad-at-all.html

Basically the trigger warning/safe space panic is pretty much a "kids these days" idiot thing mixed with a "can't even write ethnic slurs on your neighbor's car" thing.

There's like, no evidence of any actual harm being done to anyone by what appears to be a handful of cases where students make unreasonable requests and are rejected.

90% of the writing about it seems to be white dudes feeling smug about how when they read the Bell Curve they thought it made some good points or whatever other bizarre self-esteem exercise for the writer, with some indirect smugness by the readers. It's a bull**** mix of "free speech absolutism" that immediately switches into high dudgeon tone policing as soon as somebody gets called Islamophobic.

Alan- No cable news pundit will ever get held accountable for bad reporting.

trump's odds keep rising for some reason. how often will he lose despite getting to 1237? never?

it seems it would be a disaster to take it away from him in that situation but someone like cruz might not care that much.

Given that Republicans tend to do things like fight wars without thinking through what happens in the aftermath, isn't it likely that at least some Republicans think that things will work themselves out if they rat**** Trump, whether because they have a basic sense of entitlement, strong faith in their own personal ability to figure it out as they go, or a belief that God will somehow provide because they are doing His work by screwing Trump?

Wat? Trump's odds have taken a yuuuuge drop the last couple weeks. On PredictIt Cruz has closed to within $0.06 of becoming the betting favorite.

it might be using rise/drop the wrong way round which is kinda shameful on a gambling forum. he's gone from about 1.25 (80%) to 2.22 (45%) now on betfair is what i meant.

Doesn't make much sense tbh

Damn. So much ownage overnight.

Highlights were the dude asking how you could know trump supporters were racist as a gotcha hypothetical and then foldn thinking the ability to opt out of a book about rape was akin to book burnings.

Lol