Ann Coulter vs. the Jesuits at Fordham: A college invite is rescinded
Pundit Ann Coulter
I have written this blog now for several years, and only mentioned acidic pundit Ann Coulter once. Three weeks later, I am bringing her up again because this incident demonstrates a sensible way to handle controversies over college speakers.
Coulter was invited to Fordham University in New York to speak on Nov. 29 by the College Republicans.
The planned appearance triggered protests and a student petition. A group of students argued that tuition should not be used to underwrite speakers at the private college who are “not compatible with the values the Fordham community professes – particularly the Jesuit tenet of ‘Men and Women for and With Others’.”
See what you think of Fordham President Joseph M. McShane’s response and of the decision Friday night by the Fordham College Republicans to cancel Coulter’s appearance.
First, Father McShane’s statement:
The College Republicans, a student club at Fordham University, has invited Ann Coulter to speak on campus on November 29. The event is funded through student activity fees and is not open to the public nor the media. Student groups are allowed, and encouraged, to invite speakers who represent diverse, and sometimes unpopular, points of view, in keeping with the canons of academic freedom. Accordingly, the University will not block the College Republicans from hosting their speaker of choice on campus.
To say that I am disappointed with the judgment and maturity of the College Republicans, however, would be a tremendous understatement. There are many people who can speak to the conservative point of view with integrity and conviction, but Ms. Coulter is not among them. Her rhetoric is often hateful and needlessly provocative — more heat than light — and her message is aimed squarely at the darker side of our nature.
As members of a Jesuit institution, we are called upon to deal with one another with civility and compassion, not to sling mud and impugn the motives of those with whom we disagree or to engage in racial or social stereotyping. In the wake of several bias incidents last spring, I told the University community that I hold out great contempt for anyone who would intentionally inflict pain on another human being because of their race, gender, sexual orientation, or creed.
“Disgust” was the word I used to sum up my feelings about those incidents. Hate speech, name-calling, and incivility are completely at odds with the Jesuit ideals that have always guided and animated Fordham.
Still, to prohibit Ms. Coulter from speaking at Fordham would be to do greater violence to the academy, and to the Jesuit tradition of fearless and robust engagement. Preventing Ms. Coulter from speaking would counter one wrong with another. The old saw goes that the answer to bad speech is more speech. This is especially true at a university, and I fully expect our students, faculty, alumni, parents, and staff to voice their opposition, civilly and respectfully, and forcefully.
The College Republicans have unwittingly provided Fordham with a test of its character: do we abandon our ideals in the face of repugnant speech and seek to stifle Ms. Coulter’s (and the student organizers’) opinions, or do we use her appearance as an opportunity to prove that our ideas are better and our faith in the academy — and one another — stronger? We have chosen the latter course, confident in our community and in the power of decency and reason to overcome hatred and prejudice.
Joseph M. McShane, S.J., President
From the College Republicans late Friday:
The College Republicans regret the controversy surrounding our planned lecture featuring Ann Coulter. The size and severity of opposition to this event have caught us by surprise and caused us to question our decision to welcome her to Rose Hill. Looking at the concerns raised about Ms. Coulter, many of them reasonable, we have determined that some of her comments do not represent the ideals of the College Republicans and are inconsistent with both our organization’s mission and the University’s. We regret that we failed to thoroughly research her before announcing; that is our error and we do not excuse ourselves for it. Consistent with our strong disagreement with certain comments by Ms. Coulter, we have chosen to cancel the event and rescind Ms. Coulter’s invitation to speak at Fordham.
We made this choice freely before Father McShane’s email was sent out and we became aware of his feelings – had the President simply reached out to us before releasing his statement, he would have learned that the event was being cancelled. We hope the University community will forgive the College Republicans for our error and continue to allow us to serve as its main voice of the sensible, compassionate, and conservative political movement that we strive to be. We fell short of that standard this time, and we offer our sincere apologies.
–From Maureen Downey, for the AJC Get Schooled blog
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
413 comments Add your comment
NWGA Teacher
November 10th, 2012
6:03 pm
@ red herring: Was she denied free speech? I thought she was denied a paid speaking engagement. Big difference.
indigo
November 10th, 2012
6:04 pm
Robin – 5:42
You’re a legend in your own mind.
Michael Paul Goldenberg
November 10th, 2012
6:06 pm
Under the circumstances, I think this was handled well, without censorship. The president of Fordham expressed his viewpoint but did not make threats or use the power of his position to ban the speaker. It really doesn’t matter that some politically correct groups called for her to be banned or that they made the weak argument that, if taken to its logical conclusion, would mean that speakers should be paid only from the student funds of those students who wish to have that speaker appear on campus. What matters is how things actually went down. And surprisingly, the campus Republicans chose to withdraw their invitation of their own free will.
I’ve been on two major university campuses as a student: University of Florida in the ’70s and University of Michigan in the ’90s. While I was in Gainesville, William F. Buckley spoke at UF and, despite some protests, it was an event worth attending (which I did, though like many others, I stood outside the hall where he spoke and heard the talk via loudspeakers. At University of Michigan, a conservative speaker (it may well have been Buckley), was invited to speak, and not only was there a great deal of protest, but a group made up of some students and some off-campus people interrupted the talk repeatedly, shouting their obnoxious slogan, “No free speech for fascists.” I didn’t attend that event, but I was disgusted by what happened nonetheless. It was one of many things that happened in Ann Arbor in that decade that convinced me that political correctness had gone way to far at the University of Michigan.
The Coulter/Fordham situation shows that it’s possible for administrators to handle situations with wisdom and for students to show their respect for their institution and its president by gracefully backing down. I doubt very much that the campus conservatives at Michigan would have done the same in the 1990s. I doubt that the PC extremists would have, either. But at least Fordham has people who know how to behave as sane adults.
Top School
November 10th, 2012
6:10 pm
Lines drawn…like with Romney and Obama…you are either “for” or “against”.
No need to debate.
Honestly…I don’t care where she speaks.
She is a WHITE disgrace to my RACE.
I am not listening…and waiting for her mentality to slowly fold in on itself. It has proven to do so through out history. No matter how much money she receives for her evil deeds …she will never be satisfied and POOR.
LESS will follow as the younger minds are exposed to the FACTS.
Those young minds are the current voters that MADE THE DIFFERENCE.
They are researchers …using the technology to check the FACTS and KNOW the difference.
Ann ACID depends on OLD SPEW to keep her in the limelight.
The OLD…ARE getting OLD… FAST. The election proved the NEW …and YOUNG are putting those with this mentality out to pasture.
It’s OLD FEAR BASED POLITICS AND RELIGION…
It is dying out quickly …even as we blog.
America spoke
November 10th, 2012
6:13 pm
@Dusty/Grob/Lee, It seems that reading comprehension is in short supply for you (and others on this blog). The Fordham president DID NOT rescind the invitation. He did not say Coulter could not speak on campus. The Fordham College Republicans, with whom I am certain y’all identify, are the ones who rescinded Coulter’s invitation! Please try reading with a critical mind, next time!
As for your “oh, y’all are so mean to W,” and “it’s okay to invite Michael Moore,” just more obfuscation on your part. W put this country into its current economic problems, plus started an illegal, immoral war that has taken hundreds of thousands of innocent lives – American, British, Iraqi, Australian, French, NATO and more. W and his junta should be tried for crimes against humanity and locked away, forever, in The Hague!
buzz
November 10th, 2012
6:13 pm
Couldn’t agree more with Dawg88’s comments on the hypocrisy that exists today amongst those claiming to be faithful Catholics. When over half of Catholics polled voted for Obama it speaks to the fact that not only is our nation in peril but also our Church. Absolutely disgusting.
Voter
November 10th, 2012
6:36 pm
@NWGA Teacher – You’re correct, she was a invited guest speaker, paid for, I don’t know. The point was Father McShane’s letter applied indirect pressure for them to un-invite her. That is different. If they had invited Reverend Lowry or Paster Wright, what would Father McShane say then? When your boss or head of college or dean of university says that they are “disappointed with the judgment and maturity” of your choice. That is applying pressure to what they think you should be doing.
Voter
November 10th, 2012
6:37 pm
@Michael Paul Goldenberg – you missed the point entirely.
Lexi
November 10th, 2012
6:38 pm
Bill Mack:
When you folks chastise our beloved leader and his sidekick for their coarse speech I will take those critisms seriously. I also suggest that she has made a positive contribution to our culture, as evidenced by the large number of books she sells to people voluntarily parting with their money to buy them, that is, without the visible hand of central planners dictating those choices or spending money confiscated from others.
Voter
November 10th, 2012
6:40 pm
@Lexi – Well said.
DeKalb family
November 10th, 2012
6:48 pm
Impressive response from both parties. They set a standard we should all aspire to, and one that would greatly improve our civil discourse. I’m inspired!
Cherokee
November 10th, 2012
7:05 pm
Good discussion, generally, and a relevant topic.
Interesting that the Jssuits rejected her, while here in Georgia, she was an invited guest of the so called Christian Coalition.
I wonder which one of those groups more closely reflects the teaching of Jesus Christ, who called us to love our enemies, and speak well of those who speak ill of us.
James
November 10th, 2012
7:06 pm
Enter your comments here
James
November 10th, 2012
7:08 pm
Coulter is what David Frum mean when he says “conservative entertainment complex” – her acid tongue adds nothing to the conversation except lies and misdirection while filling her personal coffers.
Hilarious
November 10th, 2012
7:09 pm
Coulter sells vitriol to people who are energized by it. Us v. Them! Un-Americans v. Real Americans!
SOSHALUSM!!!!
As far as I’m concerned she should take as much money as she is legally able from these people, and spend it on whatever she wants.
They deserve it.
Lexi
November 10th, 2012
7:09 pm
If I were forced to guess I’d say Jesus would choose the side who doesn’t make fun of people who cling to their religion and guns…
michael ryan sebastian douglas jesus crucifix peter john mark paul dee see
November 10th, 2012
7:23 pm
Mr. Voter, the following: “The point was Father McShane’s letter applied indirect pressure for them to un-invite her.” Do you realize how inane and therefore asinine this statement seems, particularly within the context of the previously mentioned press releases? Do you even know father mcshane? BONO of U2 is at FORDHAM UNIVERSITY.
RGB
November 10th, 2012
7:45 pm
The soporific hostess of this blog appears to harbor a vendetta against Ann Coulter.
The justification offered is “because this incident demonstrates a sensible way to handle controversies over college speakers.”
Or it could be that the hostess is a leftist who can’t go head-to-head with Coulter and counter any of her arguments.
I’ll look for your third “rare” anti-Coulter installment next week. Or perhaps not.
waterstim
November 10th, 2012
7:56 pm
But it is entirely ok for Louis Farrakan to march through traditional Black colleges and give all of the speeches he want. Your double-standard is naseating. All of you should be ashamed.
Steve
November 10th, 2012
8:06 pm
Does putting someone’s comment in “moderation” mean you are censoring comments and just posting those which agree with your liberal viewpoints?
Lexi
November 10th, 2012
8:11 pm
Waterstim:
Welcome to the real world rules for radicals. No hypocrisy here-move on.
justin Case
November 10th, 2012
8:13 pm
Let me see if I understand this….if you disagree with what she has to say it’s because she spews hate speech but if she disagrees what you say it’s racist….me thinks we have some very sick puppies out there!
bill
November 10th, 2012
8:32 pm
I am amazed at the hipocrasy of the catholic church and the intellectual dishonesty of Fordham Univesity. I have seen them choose a Pope mired in the sex scandal coverup and past membership in the Hitler Youth but rejecting a speaker whose ideas do not meet their muster. Galileo was condemned for saying the earth rotated around the sun so any person who has a modern or different idea being rejected is no surprise. Perhaps she would be more welcome if she kept her mouth shut and dressed as an altar boy.
Lexi
November 10th, 2012
8:55 pm
Look, the Catholic Church is liberal, and its sway over its colleges is crumbling. It lacks a sense of proportion. Boston College students are agitating for birth control and Fordham is worried about a sharp tongued female speaker. And I thought its biggest problem was its location in the Bronx.
waterstim
November 10th, 2012
9:04 pm
Agitating for birth control. LOL. It’s as close as a walk across the street.
Dr. Monica Henson
November 10th, 2012
9:05 pm
@bootney, there’s a big difference between respecting someone’s opinion that is in opposition to one’s own versus treating hate speech as acceptable. As tempting as it would be to take the opportunity to annihilate such a harridan in a public forum, I would never debate anyone who makes reference to “retards” and “faggots,” as Coulter has done. Engaging them in discourse gives credibility to their hateful characterizations.
The United States Constitution guarantees the Ann Coulters of the world, along with their intellectual brothers the Ku Klux Klan, the right to spew their venom freely. Common decency, however, guarantees that they have a very small audience, if any at all. There’s nothing in the Constitution requiring anyone to listen to their “intellectual ideas.”
josh
November 10th, 2012
9:05 pm
Im a Black gay guy who loves Ann Coulter. She is the reason I stopped being a democrat. People are too sensitive. She does not spew hate. Is she offensive? Sometimes yes, but once you get passed her delivery, the root of what she is saying is usually true! The offensiveness, is part of her sense of humor. Some people need to get one!
Private Citizen
November 10th, 2012
9:11 pm
I wonder what they’re teaching at Fordham if a parcel of students there think this is an appropriate speaker for an academic institution. Academic speakers should either have received awards in their field or be on the “cutting edge” (pardon me for the jargon) of doing new things, progressive things, insight and addressing social ills and making solutions. Pop authors for not fit this description, particularly those who exploit controversy. Here is my idea of an appropriate academic speaker: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zb5-l45dbow
Another interesting and provocative academic speaker is Cornel West. I do not agree with everything he says but he is a expressive speaker with an unusually dense use of language and brings dimension to what he says. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n1w6w2n9Hks
Maureen Downey
November 10th, 2012
9:16 pm
@Steve, All first-time posters go into moderation. Doesn’t matter what they say. Many comments go into moderation automatically because of language that trips the auto filter.
And there are a handful of folks who go into moderation because I have flagged their IP addresses — mostly because they have drawn a chorus of complaints through the “report this comment” feature.
As I have noted repeatedly, this blog is not the town square where all comments are allowed. It is more akin to a living room where folks are invited by the AJC to come and swap views. If they are disrespectful or attack, they are not allowed back. If you take the time to read this blog, you will find many divergent views. All views are welcome as long as posters adhere to common decency.
Maureen
Lexi
November 10th, 2012
9:27 pm
Waters trim:
Birth control is probably nine dollars a month across the street.
So quaint for the other side of the aisle to decide who repubs should invite as “appropriate.” Again, popular speech doesn’t need protecting, and, surely college kids don’t need their speakers screened. In their unbounded wisdom, They voted overwhelmingly for our dear leader.
curt
November 10th, 2012
9:47 pm
I’m a big believer in freedom of speech and the sharing or ideas and facts to come to agreement or agree to disagree. However, giving a forum to those who denigrate others and spew hate filled vitriol are another matter.
There is now a breed of commentators who thrive on sensationalism and anger to make a living. People like Coulter, Limbaugh and a few others show no mercy, humanity or eloquence in how they convey their thoughts and the emotions they stir when whipping people into a frenzy and taking no responsibility for their words. An example was the violence on campuses after the recent election. I was glad to see a university stand up to these people. Freedom of speech is one thing. Inciting violence and hate is quite another and Coulter is the queen of mean.
Private Citizen
November 10th, 2012
9:48 pm
Lexi, Certainly there is some concept about what is an appropriate speaker for an academic institution. If it is considered to be like hiring a band for a party or a comic for entertainment, maybe the university is drifting in their mission. The best universities instill in their students a sense of personal duty and mission to elevate and improve society. The students are supposed to be the best and the brightest and therefore rightfully have the means to do so.
Bob
November 10th, 2012
9:48 pm
Topschool, by bringing up Coulters looks shows you to be a petty bimbo. My money says she is a notch above you in the looks and smarts category. And Robert Byrd was the face of the dem party if Jessie Helms was the face of the repub party. History shows that one of them was a major player in the KKK. I voted for the charter amendment after reading some of your posts, did that pass ?
Soldier mom
November 10th, 2012
9:50 pm
Lexi – birth control under insurance cost 30.00 per month for my daughters, if I didn’t have insurance, $115.00 per month. Of course that depends on how much you want to pay for insurance as to how much it costs. As far as Jesuits, my husband was raised in catholic schools, went to a Jesuit college, Canisius, and is disgusted by Ann Coulter and the venom she spews. This isn’t about catholic and Jesuits or religious beliefs, it is about some people having the common decency to stand up to those dividing o country through one liners and snarky sound bites and saying enough is enough. she does NOT represent the values of Catholics, Jesuits, or anybody else. She sells herself to bitter people for money, and they up it hook, line, and sinker. This is a capitalistic society after all. You want to buy her hate, do it. I choose not but I certainly don’t want my daughters college funds going to that crap!
Pride and Joy
November 10th, 2012
9:56 pm
RGB you said about maureen “Or it could be that the hostess is a leftist who can’t go head-to-head with Coulter and counter any of her arguments.”
Maybe not but I will.
Here’s one — Ann Coulter called Obama a retard.
Now why is that a bad thing?
Our government gives us the right to criticize our government including the person in the highest office.
So, it would be ok to call Obama an idiot, moron, stupid-idiot and so on…but retard? Retard is a pejorative term to make fun of those who are mentally retarded. the mentally retarded aren’t stupid or idiotic nor are they morons. They have a diminished capacity — an innocent diminished capacity. So to associate someone we might deem as stupid and instead call him a retard is to hurt those innocent people who are mentally retarded. It doesn’t hurt the President. he’s the prez and he signed up for it — who it hurts is those human beings who are mentally retarded. it’s unfair to them; it’s cruel; it’s unkind and it hurts the families of mentally retarded human beings.
Does taht help?
It should.
So go ahead and throw insults at the man I voted for for Prez — twice. If you like, call him an idiot, a moron, a hypocrite and so on….but to call him a retard, as Ann did is to take a huge punch in the face at the innocent victim, the mentally retarded person. doyou see the difference? Ann was hurting the wrong person. If she wants to hate on a government official — go ahead — but to hate on an innocent human being — well, she might as well go home and kick the dog and slap her kids around for having a bad day.
Lexi
November 10th, 2012
9:59 pm
I know full we’ll that “liberals” want to impose their own ideas of which speakers are “appropriate” on everyone-that’s thought control, pure and simple.
There are numerous leftist a who spew venom, many mentioned in this thread, including Farrakan, and other men of the cloth.
Robert Casey
November 10th, 2012
10:17 pm
Ann uses “hate speech”? I wonder if Fordham College used one of the more common national Biology Textbooks in the 1970’s like
Biology 1972 Villee, Claude A. (M) Bio W. B. Saunders, Philadelphia
3 Villee finally(!) cleanses his text of any explicit reference to eugenics. However, in its place, and to close the chapter titled “Inheritance in Man: Population Genetics,” the author substitutes two sub-sections – “Factors Changing Gene Frequencies: Differential Reproduction” and “Evolution: The Failure to Maintain Genetic Equilibrium” (718). Villee’s citing of E. A. Hooton, C. S. Coon (786) and Franz Weidenreich (789) betray continued adherence to concepts of “racial development.” Text could easily be classed as a “4,” if one is willing to read, and not even too carefully, between the lines.
http://www.textbookhistory.com/?p=2077
The truth is that liberal “humanist” scientists taught eugenics racism throughout most of the 20th century in both High Schools but especially college. And this seeped into the further public psyche through movies like the very popular Johnny Weismuller “Tarzan” movies. I dare anyone to laugh at the hilarity of Cheetah (the Chimpanzee) vs. the Negro servant/porter in New York City in 1942’s “Tarzan’s New York Adventure.” All the great liberal icons of pre WWII America were these “normal” racists – including Woodrow Wilson and FDR.
And liberalism continues this eugenics racism in so many ways – including now INSISTING that Black Americans STILL need “special help” and special laws – help and laws to be provided by the new kinder gentler racists, liberals still – liberal “Christians”, liberal “intellectuals”, and especially liberal Politicians. Restraint in the face of evil, restraint in the face of lies and untruths, is no virtue at all, unfortunately.
Ronin
November 10th, 2012
10:28 pm
Monica @ 9:05, while I agree with your views on charter schools. There is no such thing as “hate speech”, it’s a politically correct term to identify language that some find offensive. As I mentioned before, the same goes with “hate crimes”, either it’s against the law or it’s not. Race or ethnicity should have nothing to do with determining if a law has been broken.
Also, while “retard” is now viewed as politically incorrect. 20-30 years ago, it was common to refer to a person with with mental handicaps as “retarded”. It was short for mentally retarded cognitive development. The progressive movement has seen fit to castrate any person or entity via the media that says something offensive.
While I don’t particularly like the delivery of Ann Coulter, it’s simply free speech, which is guaranteed by the constitution. Those who disagree with the message can turn off the TV, radio or choose to skip the newspaper article.
Liberal Pariah
November 10th, 2012
10:36 pm
Where is the TOLERANCE that Liberals shove down our throats? Hypocrites every one of you.
catlady
November 10th, 2012
10:38 pm
Tastefully and elegantly handled by all, with much more grace than Ms. Coulter. Amen and amen!
Liberal Pariah
November 10th, 2012
10:38 pm
uh curt, where is your list of hate speakers from the Left side of the political spectrum? Or do you think MSNBC is not your coveted ‘hate speech’?
Liberal Pariah
November 10th, 2012
10:40 pm
Ann Coulter has a worldview that offends some sensibilities and she has an acerbic manner in expressing them. Wonder how many Liberal speakers with Miss Coulter’s credentials are allowed to spew their hate on Fordham’s campus? Just sayin…
Liberal Pariah
November 10th, 2012
10:41 pm
Why couldn’t those that did not want to hear Ms. Coulter just not attend?
I am sure the Vagina Monologues were playing somewhere at the time
catlady
November 10th, 2012
10:42 pm
I am intuiting from the president’s letter than student affairs money would be spent. As such, it was appropriate to disinvite a provider of hateful rhetoric. Glad the students decided this. Would be fine if any outside group, using its own money, decides to showcase her off-campus.
Truth in Moderation
November 10th, 2012
10:43 pm
I would far rather hear a college lecture by Ann Coulter than by Ben Bernanke. What a waste of time and Federal “fiat” notes!
http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/21242022
How ’bout that $16 trillion deficit Mr. Bernanke? Where is Germany’s gold, Mr. Bernanke?
“For decades, German central bankers have contented themselves with written affirmations from their American colleagues that the gold still remains where it is said to be stored. According to the report, the bar list from New York stems from “1979/1980.” The report also noted that the Federal Reserve Bank of New York refuses to allow the gold’s owners to view their own reserves.”
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/german-politicians-demand-to-see-gold-in-us-federal-reserve-a-864068.html
Liberal Pariah
November 10th, 2012
10:55 pm
Cracks me up…who are any of you to define hateful rhetoric? If the students wanted to hear her, what in the name of the First Amendment should keep them from it? Nobody had to go. And I will bet if you dig deep enough you will find plenty of speakers in the past at Fordham who have been PERCEIVED negatively by someone on campus. Still waiting on someone to tell me why there is no TOLERANCE for Ms. Coulter when that seems one of the cornerstones of the Liberal worldview.
Grob Hahn
November 10th, 2012
11:01 pm
America spoke, it appears you did not read well into what I wrote. You even went on to make assumptions about me that are off the mark. I’m well aware the students pulled the plug first. However, it’s clear they did so because of intense pressure from very intolerant classmates and faculty. ALL Americans should take heed when someone is refused a voice for what appear to be reasons of pure prejudice.
Grobbbbbbbbbbbb
Soldier mom
November 10th, 2012
11:08 pm
Liberal pariah – it isn’t ALL the students that want to hear coulter, it is the college republicans, and what percentage of the population of Fordham are they? If the students want to hear her, let them pay their own money, but don’t take those fees out of the student fees paid by ALL students, even the ones who dont agree with her particular brand of entertainment. You are aware she is entertainment and not education aren’t you?
James
November 10th, 2012
11:09 pm
A quick internet search shows that Chris Matthews was Fordham’s commencement speaker in 2006 and received an honorary degree. Yes, the same guy who said a few days ago that he was glad for Hurricane Sandy (in which dozens of people were killed) because it was good for politics (for his candidate). And who knows the loons that Fordham’s more liberal-leaning clubs have brought in as speakers without protests from others.
TrishaDishawareagle
November 10th, 2012
11:10 pm
I have never considered other peoples feelings important and I am never going to start doing something that stupid, either. This culture obsession with compassion and empathy sickens me. I happen to believe had the college democrats invited a race pimp such as cornell west, this blog entry would never have materialized from it..