More Tolerant Left Squelches Free Speech... Again

Photo of Warner Todd Huston.

Now, remember, the left is more tolerant. They are more caring, more civilized and more intelligent than you conservatives. OK? Now that we got that all straight, we can continue to inform you that uncivil leftist whiners in Connecticut have quashed someone's free speech, forcing them to pull out of a commencement speech at a high school. Remember... leftists are more interested in freedom than you Nazis on the right. I hope you remember that?

The AP gives us the story of the hatemongers and protesters at Choate Rosemary Hall, a "prestigious" prep school in Wallingford, CT, who have forced former presidential adviser Karl Rove to cancel plans to deliver the school's commencement speech this coming June.

You see, the left really cares about freedom of speech... unless its speech they don't much like, of course.

Following protests from students, former presidential adviser Karl Rove has withdrawn as this year's commencement speaker at a prestigious prep school, the school's headmaster said Monday.

The choice of Rove as speaker for the June commencement at Choate Rosemary Hall had led some students to plan to walk out of the ceremony. Others had sought to bring comedian Stephen Colbert to campus for an alternate speech.

Instead of commencement, Rove now will speak at the school on Feb. 11, headmaster Edward J. Shanahan said. Shanahan said he will deliver the commencement address at the school, the alma mater of John F. Kennedy and Adlai Stevenson.

Obviously there are no adults in charge of this school of subversives if the powerless headmaster is going to allow the kids to dictate what goes on there. Just as obviously, they are learning a valuable lesson; whine like a petulant, foot-stomping child and you'll get your way. It doesn't matter if your argument has merit in this mode of "education," it matters more that you speak up and be heard -- free speech is king, you see? And then there's the other lesson that these whiners learned. Using your own free speech is the best weapon by which to eliminate the free speech of others.

Nice lesson plan there, Choate Rosemary Hall.

Now, the AP steps in to try and make like this story isn't one about a leftist hatred for free speech, but one where everyone is happy and content with the wonderfulness of the outcome.

Shanahan said he had asked seniors for their opinions on the proposed commencement speech and many said they wanted to hear from Rove--but at some time other than commencement.

Garsh, ain't it nice for them respectful students to want to hear from Mr. Rove "some other time"? Of course, you do realize that they imagine that there will be no other time, don't you? Once they eliminate Rove from the commencement, with that victory under their un-American belts they will eliminate him any other time.

Now to see more of the so-called headmaster's obvious spinectomey...

He said they also were concerned that outsiders might disrupt graduation if Rove appeared in June.

Yeah, let's avoid any kind of proof that you haven't the spine to head off any "disruption," eh? And isn't it amusing how they term these possible disrupters? AP calls them "concerned outsiders." Normal people call them buttinskies who have no business protesting, but AP decided to make nice and act as if such protests by "outsiders" at a private institution would somehow be a legitimate expression of "free speech."

As always, though, Karl Rove is a gentleman even in the face of this un-American attack on his ability to fulfill his invitation.

In an e-mail to students and staff Monday, Shanahan quoted Rove as saying: "I would not want 12 minutes of remarks to be used as an excuse by a small group to mar what should be a wonderful day of celebration for the members of the 2008 graduating class and their families, so I am delighted to instead accept Choate's invitation to speak on campus Feb. 11."

"He was more than understanding," Shanahan wrote to the students. "He was gracious and generous in his thinking about you and 'your day.'"

Too bad no one at this so-called school was as civilized and grown up as was Mr. Rove, including the feckless headmaster.

But, this is the sort of ignorance, hatred, oppression, and uncivilized behavior that we've come to expect from the more caring, more tolerant, more civilized left in the United States today. It is also the sort of inmates-running-the-asylum style of "administration" that has infested our fetid schools.

But remember. WE conservatives are the Nazis.

(A perfect opportunity to refer you to Jonah Goldberg's new book, "Liberal Fascism")


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

WTH...FOS should be LFOS

FOS --> Liberal FOS

If conservatives are RIGHT, then liberals must be WRONG.

But...he's still speaking at

But...he's still speaking at the school. No one's oppressing him or his speech. They just didn't want him at commencement. 

Wait till the College Democrats get mobilized and protest

For now he's allowed to speak. There will be the usual gang of useless, unbathed, tie-dye wearing, people gathered with signs and lies calling for his arrest for "war crimes" and will probably get the college to cancel altogether "for everyone's safety" (of course).

You support the troops by supporting the mission! If you don't support the mission, have the guts to say you don't support the troops.

choate is a HIGH

choate is a HIGH SCHOOL.

poor rove is not wanted for a HIGH SCHOOL graduation.

Please Try Again

No, Reebus Canebus, Choate is the elite Connecticut grade 9-12 equivalent of Yale University. It's certainly no "high school". Many elite politicians went to such schools, on both sides of the aisle. Jean-Claude Kerry went to one, so did Chappaquidick Fats.

But in the past, most if not all of these elite prep schools encouraged the dissemination of various viewpoints, until the Dawn of Time circa January 2001.

Chappaquidick Fats. ROFL.

Chappaquidick Fats. ROFL.  I have NEVER heard that one.  Great :)

PLEASE!

Geeze Bal..that is SOOO WEAK!.. better you said nothing, then to insult us. Lame...

These kind of "defenses"

These kind of "defenses" come from Balboa in a Pavlovian way...

But it's true. So he's not

But it's true. So he's not being 'squelched'. He was moved. 

So some left wing yutts

They made all the decisions?When you can speak?So when are the allowable dates to be posted?If it had been Chomsky or someone like that it would of been fine right.I dont even like Rove but it is crock of shit when a few communist decide who and when people can speak.It is a free country except to those left wing piss ants.They think they have control.Wrong Answer.

You are missing the point

Bal,

You appear to very often miss the very obvious point of many issues. It would be equivelent to NB saying you, Balboa, can only post here on Sunday evenings, after 11 P.M. because many of the posters here often disagree with you and complained and just to keep harmony among the members. Before you were free to come here and post any damn time you pleased. He was invited to speak at the commencement, but because "some" of the students threatened to walk out in protest, they began to panic, like the herd animals they are and Karl Rove graceously let them off the hook. They gave him an alternative date to speak but it isn't the same. It is a slap; I know it, you know it and everyone else knows it.

Your analogy stinks for

Your analogy stinks for someone who claims I miss the point.

NO ONE is squelching Rove's free speech! 

But he's not "free" to speak

at the graduation, right?

No one's "free" to speak at

No one's "free" to speak at a graduation unless invited. They invited him. Students said "No thanks," apparently saying they were interested in hearing him speak but not at graduation. So they switched the date. Whoop-de-doo.

Bal is correct - the local

Bal is correct - the local lefties welcomed Rove's speech with wide open arms - because they value DISSENTION, DIVERSITY, ETC, ETC...

But Rove refused to speak because there were some black, Jew, and chink students at the school...

Run with it MSM - get it on the wire NOW:)

before the truth gets out... 

TM

I agree with your post but why use a racial slur?

i was paraphrasing libs

i was paraphrasing libs trying to paraphrase conservatives - didn't work out I guess:) - sorry

Well TM

It not right(no pun intended)just because some libs are racist.So they try to push the label on others.Not a good place to go.I do know what your saying just people shouldnt sink to their level even paraphaseing.It did surprise me coming from you so I took you were doing something to that effect.

It's a private event.

It's a private event. Disinviting someone from a private ceremony is not oppression, it does not violate their right to free speech. Protesting is also a valid and legally protected way of expressing an alternate point of view. Rove speaks some other time, students stand outside the venue and protest, everyone has expressed their constitutionally enshrined right to free speech, and we can all be happy. Right?

Wrong...

.... Because all of you (especially you visiting leftists) have strayed from the main point. And that point is that the LEFT never gets removed from their invited speaker's rostrums. On the other hand, the left CONSTANTLY removes conservatives from those same rostrums.

Ipso facto, Conservatives do not protest speakers, but LEFTISTS do!

So, leftists are against free speech, QED.

Your headline doesn't

Your headline doesn't reflect that. 

YOU miss the point that HE'S STILL SPEAKING at the school. So apparently they're only against Rove being at commencement, not at the school.

And you can't be against free speech if you disinvite someone. That makes no sense.

Unabashed nonsense, Warner.

Unabashed nonsense, Warner. One, your original story is not about what side of the ideological line protests speakers and which does not. However, do the names Ward Churchill, Ahmadenijad, or Cindy Sheehan mean anything to you? All have been protested, loudly and righteously, at speaking events. How about Marilyn Manson concerts being picketed by hysterical born again-types?

[Rebuttal to WTH's anticipated reply of 'Oh, so now you're comparing Rove to those freaks and terrorists?']: No. The nature or political stance of the speaker is irrelevant. What matters, according to the argument you're now trying to advance, is the political motivation of the protesting groups. You claim conservatives never protest speakers. You are dead wrong. I'm guessing your high school debate team never made it to state, huh?

The conservative is as guilty of protesting speech by people they deem unworthy of hearing as the left is. Except, of course, that guilt should have nothing to do with it! People are perfectly free to express their distaste at a speaker they disagree with! But as to your absolutist ideological delineation, ipso facto nothing.

And, as much as some of the posters here are determined to play down its importance, the main fact is that Rove backed out. So how can you make this about the headmaster giving in to student demands? They 'got their way' because Rove agreed to reschedule. But, you claim, this never happens to liberal speakers (not even the ones who are protested against, contrary to your statement). Well, perhaps not. What has this to do with media bias? Might I remind you that Gilchrist and Coulter, to name some notorious examples, did make speeches at so-called liberal institutions. Are a couple of accuracy-imparied pie-throwers or loud-mouthed group of 'protesters' indicative of anything about the institutions that hosted them? Do these events have ANY 1st Amendment significance other than their irritating ubiquity on Hannity & Colmes?

Sorry, no QED for you.

"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors."
-Emily Bronte

Any time you have to defend

Any time you have to defend your point by saying that one thing NEVER happens and another thing CONSTANTLY happens you have left facts behind and are simply speaking to your own bias. Pairing that kind of blurriness with logic statements like "QED" brings tears to my eyes.

I would love to see you back up the statement "conservatives do not protest speakers."

Anybody else smell bacon besides me?

Fried bacon? 

None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free. -J.W. von Goethe

lol RDH

She makes a good point RDH. Seems WTH takes a while to respond btw, I love the smell of bacon , Damn now i'm craving a blt.

"Suck it"

Pop Tech

I've seen all your

I've seen all your self-congratulatory gasses, but there's nothing to reply to!

Not a one of you have offered a SINGLE example to show how conservatives have stopped liberals from speaking. You keep claiming that I couldn't possibly be right to say that it is ONLY the left that quashes free speech.... yet give no examples to prove your fairy tale story.

On the other hand, there are dozens of instances where conservatives have had their freedom of speech curtailed by leftist university scum all across the country. Coulter, Rove, Horowitz.... just to name a few in the last year alone.

So, go on. Give us that long list of leftist extremists who have had their speaking engagements quashed or seriously disrupted by conservatives on our campuses.

Go on.

We are waiting... (in vain)

See first two paragraphs of

See first two paragraphs of my reply above.  You claimed that the right does not protest speakers they do not agree with.  This is demonstrably false.  The calls to fire Jay Bennish are similar, but of course, a slightly different story since it did not involve a paid speaking engagement.  If you're now changing the nature of the argument again to say "Well, all those examples of liberal performers still performed in spite of those conservative protestors", then all you're demonstrating is that conservatives aren't as good at playing this game. 

"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself and fling the curses on his neighbors." -Emily Bronte

Also Warner

There is no self congatulatory gasses. I was just questioning your statement to clevepig.

.".. Because all of you (especially you visiting leftists) have strayed
from the main point. And that point is that the LEFT never gets removed
from their invited speaker's rostrums"

Nowhere in your article did you mention or even imply this point. What would you do you were the principal Warner? Your article talks about a bunch on intolerant children. I apologized in the past because you proved me wrong about the point of the sexual charged Target article, in this case if you would please point out even once where the suppossed "main point" where leftist extremist get their speaking engagements quashed, I would appreciate it. Hopefully it will not take 2 days.

"Suck it"

Pop Tech

Last reply

First of all, I see no reason to allow YOU to set my schedules. If I decide to let it "take two days" then too bad for you.

But, truthfully, I haven't the time usually to keep up too closely on these replies. Once a thread starts to get over 70 replies, it is just too much for me to stay up on. I just don't have enough time in a day to do it. I do two podcasts, write for about 12 different sites, manage three sites, and also keep up on TV, Radio, and print news to do what I do.

You'll forgive me if your little replies are not too high on my list of priorities.

But, to answer your question... the whole ARTICLE is a reply to your point. Go read it.

I'll leave you, though, with another answer to another of your questions:

"What would you do you were the principal Warner?"

I would have told these loud-mouthed, half sentient, snot nosed, petulant little punks that anyone who disrupted the invited speaker would be forcibly removed from the graduation ceremony, would NOT get his diploma, and would be permanently kicked out of school. And, since it is a private school, I'd also tell them that any of their younger brothers and sisters and any of their own children would be banned from going to that school forever into the future.

Children have NO right nor any intellectual capacity to make the rules FOR a school... ANY school. Period.

(Also, remember, I support taking away the vote for anyone under 21)

warner

I believe your methods are bit extreme, but I appreciate you responding. thx

"Suck it"

Pop Tech

You would not be headmaster

You would not be headmaster for long with that approach. Board of trustees, alumni, pissed off parents...you'd be lucky to find work in that field again.

And you would not have the right to deny them their diploma. You'd be sued to high heaven, and you'd lose.

Also, the "permanently kicked out" part is a bit superfluous, no?

And your choice of adjectives to describe the "protesting students" despite the fact that you know nothing about them or their manner of protest merely demonstrates an utter inability to analyze this issue with even an iota of reason.

You still have not addressed the list of people I gave who have been protested before or during scheduled lectures. The fact that Ahmadinejad's lecture was not canceled does little for the fact that patriotic, conservative Americans voiced aggressive disapproval. Your premise is deeply flawed here.

"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors."
-Emily Bronte

Since my last post, which

Since my last post, which ended with a throwing down of the rhetorical gauntlet, has gone unanswered for almost 48 hours, may I assume you have nothing further in regard to the empirical fact that the right has also made many an attempt to restrict free speech in some way?  And hey, it ain't all about celebrity lecturing engagements, how 'bout those uber-Patriotic types who think speaking against the Iraq war, once it began, constituted treason?   

"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself and fling the curses on his neighbors." -Emily Bronte

jasonc

Warner seems to be too busy to respond, but he has plenty of time to throw stones. Don't you know how tedious and time consuming it is to find a post when there are over 80? sarc on.

I am still curious about when he said only conservatives get kicked out these speaking engagements. when he only backs it up by saying..the whole article talks about it. lol.

Hillary has a friend

You said "conservatives do

You said "conservatives do not protest speakers."

I rebut that by suggesting that you google "Clinton protest" and look at the first page. You'll find student protests at schools, prolife protests at Catholic charities, and international protests. I don't have the time to compile statistics on how many speakers of various political persuasions get disinvited or decline to speak at venues, but I can at least falsify that one silly statement.

cleverpig

You make a great point cleverpig They were expressing their freedom of speech. Curious what Warner meants about the main point.

"we can continue to inform you that uncivil leftist whiners in
Connecticut have quashed someone's free speech, forcing them to pull
out of a commencement speech at a high school. "

Interesting that Warner says you are missing the main point that the left never gets removed, when nowhere in the main article does he mention about this scenario. Warner just mentioned about how rotton and uneducated these childrn are and how people don't know how to keep control. Nowhere did Warner show what he would do instead.

"Suck it"

Pop Tech

Balboa

Now you are just being deliberately obtuse.

Oh, I absolutely agree,

Oh, I absolutely agree, bal....Stephen Colbert would be a much better choice for commencement, given the solemnity of the occasion and all...

After all, some people don't like Rove, but EVERYONE wants to hear Colbert speak, right?

 

True and.....

The kids get the headmaster and not Colbert for commencement!  Now that to me is the way to send those kids off! :)

As far as I'm concerned, any

As far as I'm concerned, any college senior class that thinks Stephen Colbert is the best choice for a commencement speaker is too stupid to be sent out into the real world.

Choate isn't a college, BTW.

Choate isn't a college, BTW. Nothing wrong with either as a speaker, but Colbert is probably less controversial.

Okie Dokie. That explains

Okie Dokie. That explains why the kids wanted to have Stephen Colbert.

Actually

Choate is the grade 9-12 version of Yale University, right down the road. It's VERY exclusive.

Well, it IS still High

Well, it IS still High School. And apparently a very snooty one to boot. You know, the kind where Daddy says "Look, we pay beaucoup bucks to send our little Biffs and Muffys here, and if they say they want to wear short and sandals to graduation, and have Paris Hilton as a speaker, then you'd better make it happen. Or, your next endowment fund caller will be on hold until he passes out."

motherbelt

Have to remind you again that it was Rove that withdrew his name. What would you have done if you were the principal? Took away the students freedom of speech?

Romney five years ago

lemme ask you Shawn

How come these stories only surface when students complain about Republican speakers? Ever hear of BJ getting asked not to show up at a commencement? You really think every kid in the audience wanted to listen to him?

It's just as well Rove bowed out though. If he had insisted on showing up, the kids would probably have shouted him down (like the MinuteMen) chased them off campus (like the CIA) or rushed the stage to throw things at him (like Ann Coulter).

No, I really can't think of a good reason why Rove would have agreed to step down.

 

candance

Your right, I have not heard about Bill Clinton getting asked not to show up for a commencement. Has it happenned before? Might be cheaper if he does not show becaue I heard he charges 100k per speech.

I also agree with you about the reasons Karl Rove withdrew his name. At least you are not blind and shrug it off as Karl Rove being a gentleman.

Romney five years ago

Brilliant video Shawn! I've

Brilliant video Shawn! I've been battling the idiots on here who believe Romney's LIES but nothing, I mean NOTHING is like watching the PASSION in his eyes as he rails against being called "pro-life"! THANKS! I really hope some of these JUDAS REPUBLICANS who want to believe his lies for tax cuts, take notice!

keith

"I've been battling the idiots on here who believe Romney's LIES"

lol, thx Keith, but I would not call them idiots, I would say umm....misguided ;-)

Romney five years ago

Um, I guess it's you who is "blind", shawn

Re-read candance's words.  I think she was being facetious, shawn, when she said she couldn't think of a reason why Rove should have bowed out.

If he wasn't being a gentleman in deciding to not allow a few fools to disrupt the ceremony for the majority, why do you think he bowed out?

"He was a would-be sharp operator who lacked for the satisfaction of his ambition only the quality of sharpness..." -Michael Chabon, "Gentlemen of the Road"

Why hello RJ

"Um, I guess it's you who is "blind", shawn"

Lol, guess it just would not be you without some sort of snarkiness. The "boy genius" bowed out because he did not want Ann Coulter or Andy Card treatment.

Romney five years ago

Let me get this straight, shawn

It's not snarky when you call others blind, but when it's shown that the label best applies to you it is snarky?    ookaay....

And you know that Rove bowed out to avoid "Ann Coulter or Andy Card treatment" because....?  On the other hand, since there would be parents present, it's unlikely that the students would engage in that particular style of "liberal debate."

 

"He was a would-be sharp operator who lacked for the satisfaction of his ambition only the quality of sharpness..." -Michael Chabon, "Gentlemen of the Road"

RJ

I guess what Shawn is trying to say is that it's okay to live in a culture where paid speakers are routinely shouted down or chased off stage. Those kids didn't actually rush the stage - they just intimidated Rove into thinking they would until he backed out - so that's not the same as surpressing his speech.

So we live in a country where conservative speakers are so afraid of a riot they don't even bother showing up, and still liberals find some loophole (he backed out voluntarily) to prove it's not a sign of fascism.

What do you believe, the facts before your eyes or the liberal explanation?

 

So now a handful of prep

So now a handful of prep school kids who succeeded in having replaced a graduation day speaker whom they found distasteful are going to usher in American fascism?

The sheer histrionics of self-victimization on this site are astounding.  Guess what: No one's suppressing your free speech or censoring your thoughts.  You can say whatever you want.  And I'm quite certain Rove will give a speech another day.

"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself and fling the curses on his neighbors." -Emily Bronte

okay Jason

1) When a handful of prep kids succeed in getting Bill Maher, John Edwards, or Joe Biden to cancel, we can talk about a handful of kids being no big deal.

2) This is just another example of the current trend of right-wing speakers being chased off campus or rushed off stage.

 

As usual the liberals on here miss the forest for the trees. Every case is treated with "well this time it's different" while the rest of us see it as a symptom of a greater problem.

It will still be no big

It will still be no big deal if any of the names you mention were to withdraw from a speech under similar circumstances.  This is about nothing more or less than the question of whether 18-year-olds have the right to speak their mind about the particulars of a ceremony that is about them.  I say they absolutely do.  We all know Huston's view, they should sit down and shut (not misquoting you, am I Warner?).  Why do you insist on cramming such a benign incident into a one-size-fits-all ideological blender?

Finally, a thought: if those kids were in fact planning on pie-throwing or walk-outs, wouldn't they have been pleased about Rove's presence so they could have the opportunity to perform their antics? 

"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself and fling the curses on his neighbors." -Emily Bronte

double standard

whether 18-year-olds have the right to speak their mind about the particulars of a ceremony that is about them.

I'm not going to say teenagers have no right to speak up for themselves, but again you're missing the point. This is about a handful of liberal students whining until they got their way and it affected the entire student body. What if there were other kids looking forward to meeting Mr. Rove? What if there are kids who don't like Stephen Colbert? What about their free speech?

And again I emphasise my point that these exceptions are only made for liberal students. When conservative students whine they're told to either not show up or find a new school. I know. I've been there. I've sat in classrooms where Republican ideas were mocked, Bush was called a criminal, evangelical students were embarrassed for being "weird" and liberal viewpoints were pushed without pause. I remember *one* occasion where a conservative student spoke up about something...and the school paper took the time to write a scathing rebuke of his horrible behavior.

Liberals constantly act like there is no bias in schools, and every example is picked apart as either the exception to the rule or not a big deal.

 

only leftward students get

only leftward students get this kind of special treatment - every time...

"and still liberals (try) to prove it's not a sign of fascism."

That same thing caught my eye, candance.

As I was scrolling down this thread just a few minutes ago, the higher than usual number of leftists who jumped in....and their determination  to defend the Choate students by laying it off on Rove....was striking.

The story seems to have touched a sensitive nerve.

 

 

It is absolutely liberal

It is absolutely liberal fascism at its best. Hence my tag line alerting everyone to Jonah Goldberg's new book.

candance

these kids protested a controversial figure that was going to be at their school. If the principal or district supervisor cancelled his engagement, that would be supression of free speech.

I will ask you the same as motherbelt. What would you have done if you were the prinipal? Force them to stop?

Also RJ, I did not say you were blind, I meant people that could not see Rove backed out because of fear of getting chased off the stage were blind. You attacked me personally. That is the difference.

Romney five years ago

You're ducking, shawn

Quack, quack. 

Did you not say  "At least you are not blind and shrug it off as Karl Rove being a gentleman."  

Did I not say, in response to another of your posts, that Rove was being a gentleman?

But even if I hadn't said that to you, it's disingenuous to deny that your statement wasn't directed "personally" at anyone who disagrees with your position. 

By your rules, shawn, perhaps I should have said "anyone who couldn't see that candance was being facetious is blind."  How's that?  Nice and PC for you?  Would that allow me, like you, to claim it's not really a "personal attack?"    ;^)

 

"He was a would-be sharp operator who lacked for the satisfaction of his ambition only the quality of sharpness..." -Michael Chabon

I finally agree w/Balboa

But...he's still speaking at the school. No one's oppressing him or his speech. They just didn't want him at commencement. 

Yes!!! And, everybody was allowed to ride the busses in Montgomery, they just didn't want them up in front. Bal, you're welcome at my house next Thanksgiving, but you have to eat in the kitchen with the other children. 

Liberals don't care what you do, as long as it's mandatory.  -Franksam

Once again the liberals and

Once again the liberals and neoprogressives on campus are the ones that are disruptive, anti-free speech, and hate filled. "He said they also were concerned that outsiders might disrupt graduation if Rove appeared in June." is a perfect illustration of liberal intolerance. I've said it before: the majority of prisoners, malcontents, reprobates, flag-burners, building burners, and protesters are (d)emocrats.

Now, I'm sure that McCain (D-AZ) would have been allowed to speak. Liberals always allow other libs the right to speech. Not us eeeeeeeeeeeviiiiiiiiiiiiilllllllllllll conservatives who took the fight to the Islamofacists and liberated 50 million people. Nope.

You support the troops by supporting the mission! If you don't support the mission, have the guts to say you don't support the troops.

Tolerance

So much for "tolerance" -- one of the mantras of the modern "liberals". Sickening, but not surprising.

NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"

choate is a HIGH

choate is a HIGH SCHOOL.

can't believe a HIGH SCHOOL is filled with american hating liberals. especially of the obscenely rich kind.

No, No, No

No, Reebus Canebus, Choate is the elite Connecticut grade 9-12 equivalent of Yale University. It's certainly no "high school". Many elite politicians went to such schools, on both sides of the aisle. Jean-Claude Kerry went to one, so did Chappaquidick Fats.

But in the past, most if not all of these elite prep schools encouraged the dissemination of various viewpoints, until the Dawn of Time circa January 2001.

Best arguments ever for the

Best arguments ever for the redistribution of wealth.

The hypocritical elitist don't care to here from those whom might burst their bubbles

 

"Always do right. This will gratify some people, and astonish the rest". Mark Twain

Choate

This kind of school where people who insists there is nothing wrong with the public school, sends their own children. In a sense it is easy to see why they insist there is nothing wrong with Public education. This way their own children get a superior education while the mainstream kids get under educated, passed along dumber than a post and when they all enter the work force, the publice educated kids end up working for the Choate kids of the world. Pretty good plan actually.

I call BS on the "headmaster"

Five dollars (US) says he agrees with the "students" and suffers from BDS-the whole thing was an excuse to do what he wanted in the first place.

He's not spineless per se, he's a weasel. Which is more disgusting, IMHO.

 

"to call an illegal immigrant an "undocumented alien" is the same as calling a streetcorner drug dealer an "unlicensed pharmacist".

Effing typical.

Effing typical.

Stephen Colbert? Yeah, and

Stephen Colbert? Yeah, and here is the lame excuse the kids would have for defending Stephen:

"He's sarcastic-- he doesn't mean what he says! You really can't take a comedian seriously can you?"

Brainwashed-- brainwashed. You needn't step more than 2 steps outside of your door to see this kind of crap. It's always the excuse of "comedy".

"Well, Stephen can make assaults on conservatives and Bush because he does it 'in a comedic way'."

Hmmm...

choate is a HIGH

choate is a HIGH SCHOOL.

when i was in high school, if i had a choice between nixon's cheif of staff or george carlin, guess who i would pick?

Who CARES if they want to

Who CARES if they want to hear him?

They are kids and should have NO CHOICE!

Kids should be seen and not heard.

so we send kids to school to

so we send kids to school to learn how to think BUT only if they shut up and do what conservatives know is best for them?

Kids have no capacity to

Kids have no capacity to determine what is good for them and what isn't. So, yes, they should just shut up until they have the ability to make decisions for themselves.

For instance, I wouldn't have cared a whit what YOU would have "wanted to hear" when you were in high school. No one should pay any attention to what high school students "want."

Warner, they're graduating

Warner, they're graduating college and about to enter the mythical 'real world' (or Ivy League universities, more likely). They're 17 or 18 years old. These are not children, Warner. And if a vocal group of them adequately demonstrate to their headmaster a reasonable opposition to having a highly politicized, controversial figure speak at their commencement, more power to them. This is not censorship. No one is telling Karl Rove he can;t say what he wants to say. In fact, his ability to communicate his thoughts to the American public is exponentially greater than the average Americans. Your characterization of these young adults is more reactionary and infantile than usual, Warner.

Would you be so good as to provide one single example of someone from Choate, student or faculty or administrator, referring to conservatives as Nazis or asserting that only they, the Connecticut liberals, are open-minded? Didn't think so.

You know as well as anyone that if it was Barack Obama being disinvited from a speaking engagement because the audience of that speech voiced opposition, you would be cheering the implication that the younger generation isn't so enamored with him after all. Deny it, WTH, I dare you. You certainly wouldn't be characterizing it as unrestrained censorship.

95% of the angry comments on this thread are so obviously based on class envy; those rich Choate brats, they don't appreciate anything, they have no idea about free speech, blah blah etc. Some kids didn't like the idea of having a right-wing ideologue being associated with their upcoming right of passage. End of story.

"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors."
-Emily Bronte

I don't care if they are

I don't care if they are "rich brats" or not, their parent's money has nothing whatever to do with the main point. They are still dumb kids. The REASON they are in school and then need to go on to college is because they are NOT yet learned enough