Ann Coulter vs. the Jesuits at Fordham: A college invite is rescinded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
Dr. Monica Henson
November 11th, 2012
2:15 pm
Ronin, I actually have no problem with the term “mentally retarded” in describing an individual with an IQ that falls into that range. I have three special needs children, all now adults, two of whom are mentally challenged, so I’m well acquainted with the issues and terminology surrounding those conditions. I’m not offended at all, as many are, with the descriptive terminology.
What offends the ever-living hell out of me is to use the term “retard” to describe a person who is not mentally challenged yet who disagrees with the person applying the nomenclature.
Whether it offends me personally or not, I’d still argue that this is hate speech, as it is demeaning terminology applied to members of a social group. “Faggot” is hate speech, inarguably. I can’t think of any instance where calling someone that name would not rise to the level of hate.
Dr. Monica Henson
November 11th, 2012
2:30 pm
@bootney, it’s easy to call me “cowardly” when you’ve never engaged in a public debate with me using your real identity, on a stage, when there’s not time to think over and thoughtfully craft responses. I’ve done public debates numerous times on a variety of topics.
I’m no advocated of censorship. I don’t advocate banning Coulter’s books. If Fox “News” and other outlets want to air her rants, I’m free to change the channel and my tax dollars don’t pay for her airtime. I do judge Fox negatively by the fact that they give her a platform and many of their on-air personalities openly agree with her, so I don’t watch when she’s on. (I actually only watch it from time to time to see what all the right-wing screeching and howling is about, and it always confirms my suspicions that it’s a right-wing propaganda machine masquerading as a news channel, just as MSNBC is a left-wing version of the same.)
My tax dollars DO help support Fordham University. If Fordham were to choose to provide a platform for hate speech, and the way Coulter uses terms like “retard” and “faggot” IS such, then I do not support that. Let her find privately-funded venues, get book contracts from publishers that are private corporations, etc., if she wants an audience. I would never advocate banning her books or picketing her, etc., in a privately supported arena. I can demonstrate with my pocketbook my opinion of her and those who give her a platform.
I rarely have ever had people challenge my “stones…integrity, and the courage to air it out and let the people decide.” I was a trained journalist before I became an educator. I’m no promoter of censorship. I am, however, an advocate of common decency, and I’m pretty sure there are very few people in the United States who believe that terms like “retard” and “faggot” are decent and fit to be used in any venue.
emoody
November 11th, 2012
2:37 pm
when isw the Brainwashing going to stop.I guess when this country goes third world,
Dr. Monica Henson
November 11th, 2012
2:48 pm
bootney posted, “more than that, as long as someone is not doing an Al Sharpton and inciting violence (resulting in death) I would never not allow someone the chance to voice their opinion.”
Ann Coulter has, in her column and on television, stated that all terrorists are Muslims and publicly advocated killing any Middle Eastern Muslims who would not convert to Christianity: “We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity” (2001); “Not all Muslims may be terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslims—at least all terrorists capable of assembling a murderous plot against America that leaves 7,000 people dead in under two hours” (2001); ” “The fact of Islamo-Fascism is indisputable. I find it tedious to detail the savagery of the enemy … I want to kill them” (2007).
Dr. Monica Henson
November 11th, 2012
2:58 pm
Tom Miller posted, “I have read the letters and comments in vain searching for one quote from Ann Coulter that would disqualify her from being allowed to speak. This is the new tactic of the radical left – to simply dismiss people they disagree with and censor their speech.”
First off, I am a conservative, not a radical leftist liberal. I am not advocating censorship, but that tax-supported institutions remove themselves from the business of providing platforms for hate speech.
The fact that I find terms like “retard” and “faggot” morally repugnant and not fit for publicly funded speeches (which is what a university speaking engagement is) does not = censorship. I am not advocating that her books be banned, or that she be prevented from privately-funded speaking engagements.
Lexi
November 11th, 2012
2:59 pm
Not defending Fordham, but it is a private university. Doubtful anyone’s tax dollars provide it substantial support- certainly less so than public television receives.
Academia employs the likes of Bill Ayers, his Frau and Angela Davis, and we are to believe that liberals want civil discourse, right?
I love teaching. I hate what it is becoming...
November 11th, 2012
3:01 pm
@Tom Miller “I am particularly interested that you use the following quote:
“ There is no serious dialogue or engagement of ideas between the left and the right in this country.””
You honestly consider what Coulter has to offer as “serious dialogue or engagment of ideas”? I am advocating for “serious dialogue” but Ms. Coulter is NOT an example of it!
Dr. Monica Henson
November 11th, 2012
3:23 pm
Yes, Fordham is a private university, but it has an extensive athletics program, a public radio station on its campus, and a school of education (including a graduate school, among other programs supported in large part by federal funds. Most private universities, even sectarian schools, receive substantial public funding to go with their private endowments and high tuition charges.
Lexi
November 11th, 2012
3:39 pm
Dr Monica: of the Fordham programs you named, which ones receive substantial tax dollars? Athletics? The graduate program? The education school? Most of what you call “funding” is research grants, but that hardly makes it a public university “supported in large part” with tax dollars.
I love teaching. I hate what it is becoming...
November 11th, 2012
3:42 pm
@emoody “when someone like Ann Coulter comes along an tells them the truth they cannot handle it.”
What kind of truth would that be?
Truth like, “I think [women] should be armed but should not vote … women have no capacity to understand how money is earned. They have a lot of ideas on how to spend it … it’s always more money on education, more money on child care, more money on day care. ”
Or, “When contemplating college liberals, you really regret once again that John Walker is not getting the death penalty. We need to execute people like John Walker in order to physically intimidate liberals, by making them realize that they can be killed, too. Otherwise, they will turn out to be outright traitors. ”
Or, “Liberals hate America, they hate flag-wavers, they hate abortion opponents, they hate all religions except Islam, post 9/11.”
Or, “Liberals don’t read books – they don’t read anything … That’s why they’re liberals. They watch TV, absorb the propaganda, and vote on the basis of urges.
Or, “We need somebody to put rat poisoning in Justice Stevens’s creme brulee.”
Vester: You say you’d rather not talk to liberals at all?
Coulter: I think a baseball bat is the most effective way these days.
Is that the kind of truth and “dialogue” you folks are advocating? If so, this country is truly doomed.
Top School
November 11th, 2012
3:47 pm
I think Ann Coulter sums it up simply in the quote below…
“I’m a Christian first, and a mean-spirited, bigoted conservative second, and don’t you ever forget it.” by Ann Coulter
Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/a/ann_coulter.html#2SDGMP3AveUOIXUo.99
Top School
November 11th, 2012
3:54 pm
“I know Jesus Christ died for my sins, and that’s all I really need to know.” by Ann Coulter
And with the number of vomited responses ( over 200 ) on this blog…she’s being PAID for her sins. The folks commenting here ain’t makin a dime.
She is laughing and coming up with the next vile comment while she skips her way to the bank making another deposit.
fastaire
November 11th, 2012
4:17 pm
Lexi don’t listen to Dr. Monica Henson for answers on federal support by Fordham University. It is obvious she has no real knowledge on the subject. I would guess that she most likely does not know what a federal program is if she sites athletics and college radio as receiving federal funds. If you want to see exactly what federal programs for which Fordham received funds that information is readily available. Just go to the Federal Audit Clearing House and search for Fordham under “Search the Single Audit Data Base” and you will find the university’s Data Collection Form which will list each program for which they received funds and the total they expended under the federal program. You can then look up in the what these programs are at OMB by their CFDA numbers. Most of the funds will be from student financial aid programs such as the Direct Student Loan Program and Perkins. They receive and expended $188,742,850 from federal programs for the year ended June 30, 2011. They have not yet submitted their data collection form for the year ended June 30, 2012.
ShooShee
November 11th, 2012
4:19 pm
Wow. 260+ comments! And most of them stoop to the same level as Coulter. Acidic. Egocentric. Holier than Thou. Haughty. Looks to me like the critique of Coulter is the same thing as Coulter, but from an anti-Coulter perspective. At least this post boosted readership for the struggling AJC – and will provide good stats with which to boost advertising dollars. But reading it made me ill. I would have hoped that you all could rise above the fray and ignore the invitation to incite more hatred. Talking bad about someone who talks bad is still bad.
And to think that this forum has the power to change the direction of education in Georgia. I would have expected better leadership from the AJC. I’m sad that I read any of this post at all.
Top School
November 11th, 2012
4:19 pm
Free speech does not always mean you will be given the opportunity to speak. Ann Coulter suffers from early signs of tourettes syndrome . If properly diagnosed with a psychological report … one would also discover Coulter would qualify as a lethal card carrying sociopath.
“If the press really thinks Obama is Lincoln, they ought to treat him like they treated Bush, ’cause that’s how they treated Lincoln. His critics compared Lincoln to an ape; they called him an illiterate baboon”. by Ann Coulter
Robert Casey
November 11th, 2012
4:20 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 Black 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. Moderation in the face of evil, restraint in the face of lies and untruths, is no virtue at all, unfortunately.
Halftrack
November 11th, 2012
4:39 pm
Civility should be shown at all speeches on the campus. Do they have any example that they have refused to let a Liberal speak on campus. Why not? The school should have a set of rules that applies to both Pro & Con alike. Double standards does not allow for critical thinking. Something of value might be said otherwise.
Joe
November 11th, 2012
4:43 pm
The utter hate and vitriol from the left is frightening. Emboldened by the re-election of their Dear Leader, it is not difficult to see how countries turn to communism and all dissent is snuffed out. Simply call it “hate speech,” “lies,” “uncivil,” etc. and get enough zombies to go along and, voila, speech can be censored.
The far left in this country – represented quite well in this long discussion – is not interested in a debate of ideas. It merely has declared itself to be correct (see Fred and others) and therefore there is no need to allow dissenting opinion. Or at least dissenting opinion that carries a tone of which they do not approve.
Funny, this sounds much like North Korea, Cuba, China, the old Soviet Union and all other communist totalitarian monstrosities. Of course, this model is responsible for untold millions of deaths of its own people when those people were no longer “useful” to the cause. Amazingly, this is the road down which some of the people on this thread want to travel. How in the world do people get to be so hate-filled and gullible?
Atlantan
November 11th, 2012
4:52 pm
But oddly the Ann haters take no issue with the President referring to his dissidents as “tea-baggers” and he didn’t mean it in a nice way…… (if you are unclear on the definition google it). Maureen I’ve yet to see it bother you.
I bet they’d welcome Bill Clinton with open arms too – let’s see – sexual harassment, impeachment, lying under oath, etc,..
What the left does speaks so loudly I cannot hear what they are saying…………….
The left is the most vitriolic, hateful and hypocritic group of Americans.
sloboffthestreet
November 11th, 2012
5:12 pm
Maureen, Let’s get back on track.
A quote from today’s article about Charter Schools!
“A lot of folks think they can teach, and they can’t,” said Verdalia Turner, president of the Georgia Federation of Teachers.
I agree and never truer words have ever been spoken Verna. So exactly what do you plan to do with the Public School Teachers who so obviously cannot even teach their dog to sit? Continue to employ them as you have in the past and subject our children to failure at their incompetent hands????
Maureen Downey
November 11th, 2012
5:17 pm
@Slob, Just back from walking my dog where I ran into a neighbor who teaches at one of Atlanta’s top private schools. He is mentoring a Teach for America teacher at a very poor elementary school in metro Atlanta. He remarked how impressed he was with the school and the quality of instruction and staff there. He said the kids were learning and were doing challenging stuff. He would prefer fewer state directives on what is taught and when, but overall thought the school and teachers were remarkable.
Is that what you want to discuss?
Maureen
emoody
November 11th, 2012
5:23 pm
“To I love teaching but hate what I teach”,Can you teach or do you train,an as far as the country being doomed it is well on it,s way ,this country is going to turn into a third world countrry sooner than you think,” if you were a real teacher you would see that ,teachers cannot teach anymore all they can do is train.
Lexi
November 11th, 2012
5:36 pm
Here’s an idea: those folks who believe Ann Coulter has nothing worth hearing or reading could, oh I don’t know, refrain from buying her books or attending her lectures instead of denying the misguided the pleasure of reading and hearing Ann.
Is Ann more polemical than the Rev. Jeremiah Wright? Al Sharpton? Jessie Jackson? Bill Ayers? Angela Davis? Maureen?
JamVet
November 11th, 2012
5:45 pm
Congratulations to both Joseph M. McShane and Fordham College Republicans!
Does Ms. Coulter drive constructive, responsible dialogue forward or backwards?
Given her own documented and loathsome words over a LONG period of time, it appears that the answer to these folks was obvious…
I love teaching. I hate what it is becoming...
November 11th, 2012
6:06 pm
@emoody “…Can you teach or do you train(?)”
I work for a great adminstration, so for the most part, I am still able to “teach”. It is getting harder, as the rediculous levels of paperwork and data mining grow even deeper, while standardized tests suck the life out of learning – but I still “teach” my little heart out. The day I find myself forced into solely “training” my students, is the day Ieave and take up some other career.
And I am a “real” teacher, thank you. However, I am still optimistic overall. What good does a total gloom and doom outlook do anyone? We certainly can’t solve our problems if we just bury our heads in the sand, or throw turds at each other.
I love teaching. I hate what it is becoming...
November 11th, 2012
6:09 pm
@Lexi “Here’s an idea: those folks who believe Ann Coulter has nothing worth hearing or reading could, oh I don’t know, refrain from buying her books or attending her lectures instead of denying the misguided the pleasure of reading and hearing Ann.”
I think you missed the point that student fees were going to be used to pay Ms. Coulter, including fees paid by students that she would classify as idiots, traitors and retards, suggesting they need to be hit upside the head with a baseball bat. If the “misguided” wanted to pay her from their own pockets, I am sure that would have been fine with everyone involved.
Private Citizen
November 11th, 2012
6:48 pm
refrain from buying?… Let’s see, got some spending money. What to do, buy an Anne Coulter book or a DVD of Idiocracy? (a great movie – both from the same era) No question on that!!!! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wW-4LU79qbU
The Russians like it, too. http://kinostok.tv/video/64484/Idiocracy-2006
Ed Johnson
November 11th, 2012
7:35 pm
@Lexi, asks: “Is Ann more polemical than the Rev. Jeremiah Wright? Al Sharpton? Jessie Jackson? Bill Ayers? Angela Davis? Maureen?”
Well, speaking of Bill Ayers, here’s his open letter to President Obama that’s spot-on…
http://www.good.is/posts/an-open-letter-to-president-obama-from-bill-ayers
Carmine Lucia
November 11th, 2012
7:47 pm
I have read Fr. McShane’s statement regarding the College Republicans/Ann Coulter issue. As an alumnus I have taken a special interest in it. I am not writing to debate his position on this issue nor his motives for doing so. What I will say is the way he went about it is not what good leaders do.
If as a leader, in this case president of a university, you wish to build the trust of those under that leadership, you never take them to the woodshed in public view. To publicly state your disappointment in their judgment and maturity is to disparage them as individuals and, whether intended or not, may cause the student body as a whole to belittle any future endeavors taken under the label of “College Republicans”. Indeed it can go so far as to promote self doubt in those individuals that have not yet built the level of self confidence so necessary for success.
Had you made your statement to the leaders of the organization privately, you could have conveyed to them not only your disappointment but also, on a positive note, displayed a level of leadership to be emulated by them long after their stay at Fordham is concluded. Leaders protect those under their employ. They nurture them and modify behavior in a constructive way. They do not tear them down in public. That should have been the message of the “teachable moment”. In fact, if what I read is true, the College Republicans hashed it out among themselves and decided not to proceed with the event before your statement was published. If you wanted to express your feelings at that point you could have written about how proud you are in the way that these young people handled the situation. You could have spoken about the maturity they displayed in reversing their decision and their reasoning behind doing so. Their explanation and apology was magnificent and our national leaders can learn a great deal just by reading it.
Now, all you young Democrats who may agree with Father’s actions be careful out there. If it can happen to one group it can happen to all groups. I would suggest to all of you to have tolerance for each other and continue on with your political efforts. They are very important especially in light of the less than civil campaign we have just witnessed at the national level. Ensure that when your day’s work is done you can look at yourselves in the mirror and be satisfied with the results of your work not only as a democrat or a republican but as a member of the Fordham community measured against the goals and ideals of a Jesuit education.
So long as you can do that, press on with your work and have the self confidence that what you are doing is honorable. Most importantly do not be afraid of criticism for nobody is perfect; not you, not me and, in this case, certainly not Fr. McShane.
George Steel
November 11th, 2012
7:53 pm
I am curious of all the hateful coments about Ann Coulter. I have read all of her books and her columns are excellent. Many people have mentioned her hate, of course without giving any examples. Let me suggest you read some of her books or at least give some support for your negative comments.
Private Citizen
November 11th, 2012
7:54 pm
from the comments to the Ayers letter:
“I worked with a wonderful teacher here the other day to do a hands on science activity. It was her first year there at the school and she told me she was coming from a public school. I intend to teach in public school so I was curious as to why she left. She taught 4th grade, for one year. She told me she came home every day crying and had so much work to do extra because of standardized testing, she was running on about 3 to 4 hours of sleep a night.”
Lee
November 11th, 2012
8:19 pm
@Don, re: “Hey Lee, this has nothing to do with her views. Bill Kristol or Jim Baker would be most welcome at Fordham. But this point is wasted on the likes of you, who haven’t the intellect to distinguish between thoughtful discourse and mindless, spiteful name-calling. If you are a college graduate, your money was wasted. If you aren’t, it shows.”
Okay Don, I’ll take a stab at it. What you posted was not thoughtful discourse.
I like this game. Do another one…
Truth in Moderation
November 11th, 2012
8:34 pm
Well, at least Ann is pro-life.
Most that blog here are not. One of mine has autism/Asperger’s and is gifted in STEM subjects. He was taught a Biblical world view and Scientific Creationism in private Christian school and home school. For high school he was sent to a public STEM school where he has excelled academically and socially. He is on course for a full scholarship at a leading engineering school. After completing his AP Biology course, he was forced to consider the claims of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution. I simply told him that if I were not a Creationist, he would be dead. When I was pregnant with him, I agreed to a test that would indicate if he had Down’s Syndrome (MENTAL RETARDATION), only because it would be to his BENEFIT if the delivery doctor knew ahead of time. My test came back positive. Many women with an Evolutionary view of life would have made the decision to abort, based on this information alone. However, mine did NOT have Down’s Syndrome. Later he was diagnosed with Asperger’s, a completely different disability. A close relative has worked as a private and public school Special Ed teacher for years. In the 80’s, most of her “clients” were Down’s Syndrome adults. Now, she says she rarely sees them because the tests allow them to be aborted. Currently, most of her students are ADHD or are on the Autism Spectrum.There are no tests for them……yet.
Mike
November 11th, 2012
8:42 pm
America doesn’t need fake conservatives and fake Christians. Any hateful bigot can claim to be Republican and get away with it…..well….COULD get away with it. But this election is changing the course of Republican culture. Looks like the right wing will be forced to actually behave themselves as the Christians they claim to be.
Or am I too hopeful?
Fred ™
November 11th, 2012
9:02 pm
Lexi
November 11th, 2012
3:39 pm
Dr Monica: of the Fordham programs you named, which ones receive substantial tax dollars? Athletics? The graduate program? The education school? Most of what you call “funding” is research grants, but that hardly makes it a public university “supported in large part” with tax dollars.
+++++++++++++++++
Does Fordham enjoy tax exempt status? Why yes it does. Does Fordham accept students using Pell grants or ANY other tax payer money? Why yes it does.
There is a disconnect between talk radio listeners/Ayn Rand sycophants and folks who actually think for themselves and do their own research. There is no such thing in this Country (or any other0 as pure capitalism and there never has been. Government and Government force protect the so called “private” industries just like they protect us all.
I know you hate to hear or even acknowledge that, but your distaste does not alter the truth. Talk radio/Fox lies don’t change it either DESPITE their Dr. Goebbels propaganda attempts at doing so.
When Private Universities refuse ALL public money, scholarships, GI bill, Research grants, ect and denounce their tax exempt status and pay tax money on their operations and endowments they will THEN be truly private. Until then, they are sucking at the Gov’t teat like any other big business enjoying their Corporate welfare.
Fred ™
November 11th, 2012
9:04 pm
George Steel
November 11th, 2012
7:53 pm
I am curious of all the hateful coments about Ann Coulter. I have read all of her books and her columns are excellent. Many people have mentioned her hate, of course without giving any examples. Let me suggest you read some of her books or at least give some support for your negative comments.
+++++++++++++++++++
Calling the President a retard is LOVE speech? Really? Are you the deluded?
My2Cents
November 11th, 2012
9:36 pm
Pity. Ann Coulter couldn’t help but be improved by contact with Jesuits.
William Cordivari
November 11th, 2012
9:43 pm
Censorship always comes from the left because they cannot bear the truth and they are bereft of ideas. They are incapable of arguing successfully so they bully and censor people like Anne Coulter.
tjatl
November 11th, 2012
10:06 pm
“”When Private Universities refuse ALL public money, scholarships, GI bill, Research grants, ect and denounce their tax exempt status and pay tax money on their operations and endowments they will THEN be truly private. Until then, they are sucking at the Gov’t teat like any other big business enjoying their Corporate welfare.”
THANK YOU, Fred!
I suspect some Ann fans also think nothing of collecting their “disability”. A lot of rural white folks don’t think of “disability” as “welfare”. They buy the hype about welfare queens, but don’t think of themselves as “takers”. I’d be curious to find out how many rural white folks on “disability” voted Republican. Methinks the majority of them….
Truth in Moderation
November 11th, 2012
10:55 pm
James 5:12
“But above all things, my brethren, swear not, neither by heaven, neither by the earth, neither by any other oath: but let your yea be yea; and your nay, nay; lest ye fall into condemnation.”
Do Jesuits swear an oath?
http://vaticannewworldorder.blogspot.com/2012/06/jesuit-oath-of-induction-is-also.html
Truth in Moderation
November 11th, 2012
11:07 pm
Hillsdale College, Patrick Henry College, and Grove City College are the only colleges left that didn’t fall to the sword of federal funding and federally guaranteed student loans.
annie rocks
November 11th, 2012
11:12 pm
Not surprised a conservative speaker would be banned by liberals. It happens alot, Years ago Jonah Goldberg had a book called Liberal Fascism so these things are fairly common on college campus nowadays.
tjatl
November 11th, 2012
11:51 pm
@Truth – I applaud your decision, particularly as a fellow parent of a child with spectrum issues. I endured three emotionally painful miscarriages.
However, the rationale behind the vast majority of voluntary terminations have nothing to do with adverse prenatal test results. They largely have to do with whether the woman (or child, in some cases) has the financial / social wherewithal to raise a child.
I cannot understand how you could support the vile vitriol from Ann Coulter simply on the basis of her “pro life” position.
Truth in Moderation
November 12th, 2012
12:46 am
“However, the rationale behind the vast majority of voluntary terminations have nothing to do with adverse prenatal test results.”
Do you have statistics on that?
“Vile vitriol” from Ann Coulter…..
I would liken Ann’s style to “shock therapy”. Sometimes our thought processes are stuck in an introverted loop, which we can’t escape, except with a sudden shock. I remember one parenting expert giving advice on how to deal with a child throwing a rolling-on-the-floor tantrum- throw a cup of cold water on their face! It works because the shock of the unexpected water forces their brain to escape the tantrum loop and deal with the sudden change of temperature. In the same way, Jesus confronted sin in the proud Pharisees and Sadducees, the religiously “upright” of his day. Of course, to them, His words were “vile vitriol” because they were forced to see themselves as they actually were. Ann is no saint. I don’t agree with everything she says, but, her style has precedence, and unfortunately is needed in this self-deluded world.
It seems Ann got her say, regardless of Jesuit judgement…..SIX PAGES OF COMMENTS AND COUNTING!
Real Athens
November 12th, 2012
1:11 am
There are six pages of comments because some want to equate the speech of Ann Coulter (and her “precedence of style”) with that of Jesus in Matthew 21:28-46.
And why was it the GOP posted such pitiful numbers in the last election?
Talk about doubling down on delusional.
Real Athens
November 12th, 2012
2:47 am
“If a prostitute keeps on prostituting and denies Christ, is she saved?
If a woman keeps on “voluntarily terminating” her babies and denies Christ, is she saved?
If a woman continues to fornicate, and denies Christ, is she saved?”
Think I’d leave judgement in the more capable hands. Who are you? The Decider?
Lexi
November 12th, 2012
4:28 am
Ed Johnson, Nov. 11, 7:35
What is the point about Ayers? That he’s really a sweetheart, or he “reformed”?
For the uninitiated, from the NY Times:”No Regrets for a Love Of Explosives; In a Memoir of Sorts, a War Protester Talks of Life With the Weathermen
By DINITIA SMITH
Published: September 11, 2001
Facebook
”I don’t regret setting bombs,” Bill Ayers said. ”I feel we didn’t do enough.” Mr. Ayers, who spent the 1970’s as a fugitive in the Weather Underground, was sitting in the kitchen of his big turn-of-the-19th-century stone house in the Hyde Park district of Chicago. The long curly locks in his Wanted poster are shorn, though he wears earrings. He still has tattooed on his neck the rainbow-and-lightning Weathermen logo that appeared on letters taking responsibility for bombings. And he still has the ebullient, ingratiating manner, the apparently intense interest in other people, that made him a charismatic figure in the radical student movement.
Now he has written a book, ”Fugitive Days” (Beacon Press, September). Mr. Ayers, who is 56, calls it a memoir, somewhat coyly perhaps, since he also says some of it is fiction. He writes that he participated in the bombings of New York City Police Headquarters in 1970, of the Capitol building in 1971, the Pentagon in 1972. But Mr. Ayers also seems to want to have it both ways, taking responsibility for daring acts in his youth, then deflecting it.
”Is this, then, the truth?,” he writes. ”Not exactly. Although it feels entirely honest to me.”
But why would someone want to read a memoir parts of which are admittedly not true? Mr. Ayers was asked.
”Obviously, the point is it’s a reflection on memory,” he answered. ”It’s true as I remember it.”
Mr. Ayers is probably safe from prosecution anyway. A spokeswoman for the Justice Department said there was a five-year statute of limitations on Federal crimes except in cases of murder or when a person has been indicted.
Mr. Ayers, who in 1970 was said to have summed up the Weatherman philosophy as: ”Kill all the rich people. Break up their cars and apartments. Bring the revolution home, kill your parents, that’s where it’s really at,” is today distinguished professor of education at the University of Illinois at Chicago. And he says he doesn’t actually remember suggesting that rich people be killed or that people kill their parents, but ”it’s been quoted so many times I’m beginning to think I did,” he said. ”It was a joke about the distribution of wealth.”
He went underground in 1970, after his girlfriend, Diana Oughton, and two other people were killed when bombs they were making exploded in a Greenwich Village town house. With him in the Weather Underground was Bernardine Dohrn, who was put on the F.B.I.’s 10 Most Wanted List. J. Edgar Hoover called her ”the most dangerous woman in America” and ”la Pasionara of the Lunatic Left.” Mr. Ayers and Ms. Dohrn later married.
In his book Mr. Ayers describes the Weathermen descending into a ”whirlpool of violence.”
”Everything was absolutely ideal on the day I bombed the Pentagon,” he writes. But then comes a disclaimer: ”Even though I didn’t actually bomb the Pentagon — we bombed it, in the sense that Weathermen organized it and claimed it.” He goes on to provide details about the manufacture of the bomb and how a woman he calls Anna placed the bomb in a restroom. No one was killed or injured, though damage was extensive.
Between 1970 and 1974 the Weathermen took responsibility for 12 bombings, Mr. Ayers writes, and also helped spring Timothy Leary (sentenced on marijuana charges) from jail.”
Ayers most famous contribution to literature is his quote:”Guilty as sin. Free as a bird.”
No “hate speech” there. Nice guy. And friend of our dear leader.
Lexi
November 12th, 2012
4:46 am
So, Fordham is not “private” because it avails itself of tax breaks, accepts low income students who have their education subsidized by Pell grants and the like, and sells its research services to the federal government? Under that test there are not very many private citizens, since all tax filers get tax breaks, even if availing themselves of the lowly standard deduction and personal exemption. And, many who pay no income taxes get money back from the government, through earned income credits (sweet). Some of us get free phones. Some watch opera financed in part by taxpayer grants. So, we are all alike “public citizens,” equally beholding to our imperial federal government, right? I agree that the government ought to refrain from engaging in these activities, but, having its nose under the tent is no justifcation for it claiming it owns the tent.
One last time: I share the knowledge that student fees are spent on speakers with which many students disagree, and the sentiment that the practice is wrong (sounds like union check-off dues supporting political causes). Where I suspect we diverge is that I don’t hear liberals complain when those fees are used to bring lefties to speak on campuses, though some students find the speakers and speeches repugnant. Why not get the universities out of the business entirely of being speakers bureaus?
BitterEXdemocrackkk
November 12th, 2012
7:16 am
The skulls of mush at Fordham, and most other colleges, only WISH they were as SMART and WITTY as Ann Coulter. The level of hatred hurled at her is just unbelieveable by the ‘tolerant’ leftwingers.
STRIVE to be SMARTER than the EVIL democrackkks WANT you to BE!
BitterEXdemocrackkk
November 12th, 2012
7:30 am
Ann Coulter is one of the most brilliantly witty journalists in America and her humor is sometimes difficult to understand for the indoctrinated clueless masses. Young college skulls of mush are mostly spoonfed politics from a lieberal viewpoint, as is campus norm, and they know no other actualities associated with the Constitution. They don’t know a republic from a democracy. Where’s all the leftwing ‘tolerance’ for free speech?