Intolerance is drowned out by a standing ovation

[DealMonkey]

How is turning your back "intolerant" or "showing your hatred?" It's not. Just more wingnut hyperbole.

 

[RichardE]

Originally posted by: zendari
Liberals showing their true colors and hatred.

As Rice even said, they are encouraged to protest if they feel that way, just as individuals in Iraq are allowed to protest. Or is everyone suppose to be a mindless drone to whichever party is in power?

 

[RightIsWrong]

I think that the OP is so far off base that they aren't even close to being in the ballpark where the base is even located anymore.

Intolerance is best displayed by not allowing an apposing viewpoint to be expressed. The students and faculty here didn't do that. They allowed the viewpoint to be expressed. Just because you don't feel that they gave the proper respect to the good doctor doesn't equate to them being intolerant.

A much better example of intolerance would be "Free Speech" zones set up by the Bush administration or the screening at speaking engagements and forcing people to sign "oaths" before allowing them into the rooms. When you don't even allow those that dissent with you in the vicinity, I would say that that screams more of intollerance. But I'm sure that you already know that Mosh. Even if you never admit it.

 

[tommywishbone]

Sleazy is a bloodthirsty mass murderer, just like her leader. She deserves a war crimes trial and the maximum punishment possible. Who cares if a few sheeple stand & turn their backs? Laughable.

When I was a criminal, I wish my only punisnment had been, the judge & jury standing and turning their backs. Again, laughable.

Herr Bushler is laughing at all of us.

 

[Todd33]

Main Entry: in·tol·er·ance
Pronunciation: (')in-'täl(-&)-r&n(t)s
Function: noun
1 : lack of an ability to endure <an intolerance to light>

I guess it was intolerance, why would you want to tolerate these people? It's ok for righties to scream at woman at planned parenthood, telling them they are murderers and going to hell but it's somehow bad to stand and turn your back at your own graduation? I'd say the OP is doing the spin along with her ignorant backers like Zentroll et al.

 

[Forsythe]

This is one stupid excuse for a thread.
How about the Bush Admin's way of only hearing things they want to hear at town meetings. They handpick people so they don't get people that protest against them. And when they do, the rest of the crowd boo's them so htey can't get their opinion out.
This is a protest, it has got nothing to do with intolerance, i don't even see where you can fit that in.

 

[chowderhead]

they have every right to turn their backs to this political person. I would be pissed if my graduation was used to further a political agenda and defend something I don't agree with. I wouldn't be disruptive (see that Chinese reporter being arrested for shouting at the Chinese President) but you should have every right to turn your back to her as a sign of protest.

 

[Starbuck1975]

The point of a political demonstration is to draw attention to one's position or disagreement with someone else's position. That's the way things are supposed to work.

No, this is called attention whoring.

It would have been more appropriate to perhaps listen to what Rice had to say, and then perhaps respond in a manner that was respectful to the speaker while still communicating disagreement.

beleive that the intolerance and rudeness presedence was set when the GOP members of the House & Senate refused to stand up for,
or to applaud, during President Clinton's State of the Union Speech when the GOP was pushing so hard for impeachment.

So in other words, liberals are no better then conservatives, with the "you started it" mentality taking precedence to all other considerations.

they have every right to turn their backs to this political person. I would be pissed if my graduation was used to further a political agenda and defend something I don't agree with. I wouldn't be disruptive (see that Chinese reporter being arrested for shouting at the Chinese President) but you should have every right to turn your back to her as a sign of protest.

There is a time and a place for everything...granted, it would be damaging to place constraints on what is appropriate in terms of free speech, but turning your backs on a speaker at graduation doesn't really communicate a profound message beyond perhaps a lack of maturity.

If these students felt so strongly against Rice speaking, perhaps they shouldn't have shown up to receive their degrees...oh wait, that might cause an inconvenience...far more convenient to just turn your backs on the speaker...yeah, that will show her!!!

I am no fan of Rice, but this supposed protest, and the supposed outrage over it, illustrate everything that is wrong with American politics.

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

The point of a political demonstration is to draw attention to one's position or disagreement with someone else's position. That's the way things are supposed to work.

No, this is called attention whoring.

It would have been more appropriate to perhaps listen to what Rice had to say, and then perhaps respond in a manner that was respectful to the speaker while still communicating disagreement.

beleive that the intolerance and rudeness presedence was set when the GOP members of the House & Senate refused to stand up for,
or to applaud, during President Clinton's State of the Union Speech when the GOP was pushing so hard for impeachment.

So in other words, liberals are no better then conservatives, with the "you started it" mentality taking precedence to all other considerations.

they have every right to turn their backs to this political person. I would be pissed if my graduation was used to further a political agenda and defend something I don't agree with. I wouldn't be disruptive (see that Chinese reporter being arrested for shouting at the Chinese President) but you should have every right to turn your back to her as a sign of protest.

There is a time and a place for everything...granted, it would be damaging to place constraints on what is appropriate in terms of free speech, but turning your backs on a speaker at graduation doesn't really communicate a profound message beyond perhaps a lack of maturity.

If these students felt so strongly against Rice speaking, perhaps they shouldn't have shown up to receive their degrees...oh wait, that might cause an inconvenience...far more convenient to just turn your backs on the speaker...yeah, that will show her!!!

I am no fan of Rice, but this supposed protest, and the supposed outrage over it, illustrate everything that is wrong with American politics.

you are lost. This wasn't an open forum where students could politely lecture with Rice, this was a commencement and she was delivering a commencement speech.

The faculty/students had every right to do what they did, you don't have to like it. I am just hoping to clarify your misunderstandings.

I would argue that the protest these faculty/students perpetrated are exactly what is RIGHT with American politics. Unless they are out in the streets rioting and throwing sticks and stones at police these students did nothing wrong.

 

[chowderhead]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

they have every right to turn their backs to this political person. I would be pissed if my graduation was used to further a political agenda and defend something I don't agree with. I wouldn't be disruptive (see that Chinese reporter being arrested for shouting at the Chinese President) but you should have every right to turn your back to her as a sign of protest.

There is a time and a place for everything...granted, it would be damaging to place constraints on what is appropriate in terms of free speech, but turning your backs on a speaker at graduation doesn't really communicate a profound message beyond perhaps a lack of maturity.

If these students felt so strongly against Rice speaking, perhaps they shouldn't have shown up to receive their degrees...oh wait, that might cause an inconvenience...far more convenient to just turn your backs on the speaker...yeah, that will show her!!!

I am no fan of Rice, but this supposed protest, and the supposed outrage over it, illustrate everything that is wrong with American politics.

Why should the students have to give up going to their graduation because they strongly disagree with the speaker. I would support a student's right to protest Clinton or whatever political figure a college wants to pick. If Bob Jones University ever invited Michael Moore, I wouldn't have a problem if the students wanted to turn their backs on him.

If they are not disruptive, then their act of turning their backs on her is a sign of protest. Because they shouldn't/can't be disruptive or speak, their actions are their way of communication, of showing their disapproval. I think that is more mature than booing or hissing, etc.

 

[Starbuck1975]

you are lost. This wasn't an open forum where students could politely lecture with Rice, this was a commencement and she was delivering a commencement speech.
The faculty/students had every right to do what they did, you don't have to like it. I am just hoping to clarify your misunderstandings.

I didn't misunderstand anything, thank you very much.

If they are not disruptive, then their act of turning their backs on her is a sign of protest. Because they shouldn't/can't be disruptive or speak, their actions are their way of communication, of showing their disapproval. I think that is more mature than booing or hissing, etc.

Turning your back on someone does not communicate a message other then disapproval of the speaker...it is nothing more then a polite way of conducting a personal attack.

Granted, they did demonstrate some restraint and maturity in not disrupting the ceremony. But what exactly was their message, save perhaps for disapproval of Rice?

The faculty/students had every right to do what they did, you don't have to like it. I am just hoping to clarify your misunderstandings.

I never said they didnt have a right to do it...I am simply stating that their form of protest was a meaningless gesture that accomplished nothing.

I would argue that the protest these faculty/students perpetrated are exactly what is RIGHT with American politics.

I disagree...this tit for tat immaturity is everything that is wrong with American politics. Those who protested did not bother to hear Rice's message...they went in close minded, and turned their backs as a symbolic representation of their close mindedness.

This lack of respect across the political divide is everything that is wrong with American politics, and both Democrats and Republicans are guilty of it.

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

The point of a political demonstration is to draw attention to one's position or disagreement with someone else's position. That's the way things are supposed to work.

No, this is called attention whoring.

It would have been more appropriate to perhaps listen to what Rice had to say, and then perhaps respond in a manner that was respectful to the speaker while still communicating disagreement.

Dude, what parallel universe are you living in?! 99.99% of the time, anyone opening their mouth during a speech by any adminstration member (or Bush himself) are escorted physically from the area. There's almost never give-and-take and most certainly not during a commencement speech at graduation. When was the last time they had a Q&A session during a commencement speech?

That's almost laughable.

 

[OrByte]

Starbuck, a lack of respect is not giving the other side a chance to voice their opinions. In this case, everyone had their say. Again, you may not like the message or the methods, but they excercised their freedoms, and it worked.

We know exactly what the students were saying when they turned their backs on her, unless one lacks a sense of reasoning...In short, they dissaprove of everything that she represents, which is an administration that lied to get us into a war with Iraq, and an administration that continues to challenge the balance of power in our government by usurping powers from congress to the white house. You can claim 'personal attack' all you want, but this was symbolic of turning our backs against a corrupt government, and I am all for that.

their gesture accomplished much, because you and I are sitting her debating the very gesture.

 

[Rainsford]

I think I'm going to drown in irony here. Not only is this a thread where conservatives are lecturing liberals about tolerance, but it's mosh doing the lecturing. I need to lie down.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Dude, what parallel universe are you living in?! 99.99% of the time, anyone opening their mouth during a speech by any adminstration member (or Bush himself) are escorted physically from the area. There's almost never give-and-take and most certainly not during a commencement speech at graduation.

That has been the case for every Presidential Administration for as far back as I can remember...protestors do not have access to the Presidential Conventions of either party, and disruptive audience members at political or other ceremonial events are usually escorted out of the venue.

If I go to a rock concert, and yell "you suck" to the band on stage in a manner that is disruptive, I will be escorted out...is it a violation of my free speech...perhaps...but there is also a time and a place for protests to maximize the intended message of said protest.

When was the last time they had a Q&A session during a commencement speech?

Doesn't matter...a commencement speech by its nature is not intended for a give and take...but there are other ways to protest what is said at the commencement...I can think of quite a few alternatives. For instance, those opposed to Rice speaking could write as much in the school newspaper, or hold discussion forums to criticize her speech after the fact...these professors who chose to protest could hold debates in their classes on the content of the speech...all far more proactive and content driven then a simple gesture.

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

The first time I saw something like this was when Clinton gave the commencement at (can't remember the name) university and half the students refused to shake his hand when they walked across the stage to get their diplomas.

But...

They did not yell at him during the speech and they did not turn their backs to him. they didn't go out of their way to make a scene and disrupt his speech. The treatment received by Dr Rice and McCain (and I don't even like McCain) was rude, childish and low class.

 

[Starbuck1975]

We know exactly what the students were saying when they turned their backs on her, unless one lacks a sense of reasoning...In short, they dissaprove of everything that she represents, which is an administration that lied to get us into a war with Iraq, and an administration that continues to challenge the balance of power in our government by usurping powers from congress to the white house. You can claim 'personal attack' all you want, but this was symbolic of turning our backs against a corrupt government, and I am all for that.

I doubt many of them put that much thought into the gesture...perhaps some did, but I guess we will never know because there was no press release or official statement to accompany the protest.

their gesture accomplished much, because you and I are sitting her debating the very gesture

Perhaps, but the gesture is lost on the intended target, largely because in American politics things degrade to stunts and shenanigans as opposed to meaningful debate.

Maybe its me, but turning your back on a speaker comes across as something high school kids do, not young adults about to graduate from a rather prestigious university.

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: Rainsford
I think I'm going to drown in irony here. Not only is this a thread where conservatives are lecturing liberals about tolerance, but it's mosh doing the lecturing. I need to lie down.

QFT...this is surreal.

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

Dude, what parallel universe are you living in?! 99.99% of the time, anyone opening their mouth during a speech by any adminstration member (or Bush himself) are escorted physically from the area. There's almost never give-and-take and most certainly not during a commencement speech at graduation.

That has been the case for every Presidential Administration for as far back as I can remember...protestors do not have access to the Presidential Conventions of either party, and disruptive audience members at political or other ceremonial events are usually escorted out of the venue.

If I go to a rock concert, and yell "you suck" to the band on stage in a manner that is disruptive, I will be escorted out...is it a violation of my free speech...perhaps...but there is also a time and a place for protests to maximize the intended message of said protest.

Um, so if you understand how this works, why would you even suggest that these people could somehow interject their opinions in some more civil way? You're completely contradicting yourself. You act like there's some other way to deal with the administration members should you wish to protest them. If you open your mouth, wear a t-shirt, hold up a sign or banner, etc., you're ejected. Apparently turning your back and remaining otherwise quiet and civil is the only method left for the protestors to get their point across.

Ever think about that?

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975
Doesn't matter...a commencement speech by its nature is not intended for a give and take...but there are other ways to protest what is said at the commencement...I can think of quite a few alternatives. For instance, those opposed to Rice speaking could write as much in the school newspaper, or hold discussion forums to criticize her speech after the fact...these professors who chose to protest could hold debates in their classes on the content of the speech...all far more proactive and content driven then a simple gesture.

So, why in the F did you just say this: "It would have been more appropriate to perhaps listen to what Rice had to say, and then perhaps respond in a manner that was respectful to the speaker while still communicating disagreement."

All of your examples are AFTER THE FACT. Since when does a protest occur after the target of the protest is long gone? Sorry, but your ideas suck.

And for the record, just by the reactions from the freeper-types in here, the protestors very much struck a nerve. Good for them for finding a way to express their sentiments without being tossed out by the administration goons.

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

We know exactly what the students were saying when they turned their backs on her, unless one lacks a sense of reasoning...In short, they dissaprove of everything that she represents, which is an administration that lied to get us into a war with Iraq, and an administration that continues to challenge the balance of power in our government by usurping powers from congress to the white house. You can claim 'personal attack' all you want, but this was symbolic of turning our backs against a corrupt government, and I am all for that.

I doubt many of them put that much thought into the gesture...perhaps some did, but I guess we will never know because there was no press release or official statement to accompany the protest.

their gesture accomplished much, because you and I are sitting her debating the very gesture

Perhaps, but the gesture is lost on the intended target, largely because in American politics things degrade to stunts and shenanigans as opposed to meaningful debate.

Maybe its me, but turning your back on a speaker comes across as something high school kids do, not young adults about to graduate from a rather prestigious university.

I am curious, and maybe I will regret asking this but, how do you feel about the two black athletes at the 1968 Olympics? Raising their fists during the National Anthem (ala Black Pathers) it was, at the time, a similar protest against the assasination of MLK Jr and the threat of racism and fighting for civil liberties. It was a demonstration...something that I think this country needs more of these days.

 

[Starbuck1975]

I am curious, and maybe I will regret asking this but, how do you feel about the two black athletes at the 1968 Olympics? Raising their fists during the National Anthem (ala Black Pathers) it was, at the time, a similar protest against the assasination of MLK Jr and the threat of racism and fighting for civil liberties. It was a demonstration...something that I think this country needs more of these days.

I don't think there is a blanket response to that question. Protest is largely a matter of perception, principle and appropriateness.

It is not for me to say what is an appropriate venue for a protest, nor is their a universal gauge that determines the point beyond which someone feels strongly enough about something to engage in protest.

What I do recognize is that some forms of protest are more effective then others. Certainly, there have been instances where fairly bold protests made provocative statements that changed the course of American history. In other cases, you have a bunch of idiots with too much free time on their hands.

The principles of free speech protect both forms of free speech, although I fully support the former and find the latter more amusing then anything else.

All of your examples are AFTER THE FACT.

So write an article in the school paper before the fact explaining why you disagree with Rice speaking...get together with like minded individuals and release a statement...clearly articulate your points as to why her speaking offends your group, motivating you to engage in a form of silent protest at the ceremony.

Otherwise, you are just a bunch of idiots standing there with your backs to the stage.

Um, so if you understand how this works, why would you even suggest that these people could somehow interject their opinions in some more civil way? You're completely contradicting yourself.

No I am not...as I have said repeatedly, a gesture without a message is meaningless. Whether that message is communicated prior to the event or after the fact is irrelevant.

And for the record, just by the reactions from the freeper-types in here, the protestors very much struck a nerve. Good for them for finding a way to express their sentiments without being tossed out by the administration goons.

That you dismiss all who are somewhat supporting the OP as freepers only demonstrates your own close mindedness to anyone that doesn't see the world the way you do.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
The treatment received by Dr Rice and McCain (and I don't even like McCain) was rude, childish and low class.

Bullsh8! It was a classy, non-disruptive, non-violent expression of their opinions that accomplished the goal of getting some public attention to their views.

It would have been "rude, childish and low class" if they had mooned her... which I would have loved to see happen. :laugh:

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975
So write an article in the school paper before the fact explaining why you disagree with Rice speaking...get together with like minded individuals and release a statement...clearly articulate your points as to why her speaking offends your group, motivating you to engage in a form of silent protest at the ceremony.

Who the hell are you to tell people how and when to protest? You're completely missing the point of protest. I mean, come on. Are you that far out of touch?

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975
Otherwise, you are just a bunch of idiots standing there with your backs to the stage.

Merely, your obtuse opinion. Virtually everyone else on the planet got the message loud and clear.

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975
No I am not...as I have said repeatedly, a gesture without a message is meaningless. Whether that message is communicated prior to the event or after the fact is irrelevant.

Again, you seem to be the only one not getting the message. It appears there's been so much protest of this administration, there's no longer any need to repeat the reasons people are protesting. It's a given.

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975
That you dismiss all who are somewhat supporting the OP as freepers only demonstrates your own close mindedness to anyone that doesn't see the world the way you do.

Well, there seems to be a universal reaction to this form of protest (the back-turning). So excuse me, but if the shoe fits wear it. You strike me, having been on these forums for quite some time and observing your remarks, as a Bush-supporting conservative.

Please feel free to calibrate me,if I have surmised incorrectly.

 

[Theb]

she discussed what she called a "commitment to reason," or an obligation to test and challenge their own views.

That's odd, I thought she was a christian.
Heh


And as far as John McCain, I would be annoyed too if someone gave a stump speech at my graduation.

 

[sandorski]

In other parts of the world these students would have stood up and pulled the string dangling out from underneath their shirts. Be glad they protest this way, it could be much worse.