Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: everyone

As a 2004 Hamilton alum I can say that Hamilton is actually a conservative campus. The students are fairly apathetic but there are several conservative professors who are the ones causing the stink about Churchill coming to campus. So to joke about "socialist ideas" being the accepted norm on college camuses in general is one thing, but Hamilton is conservative and "socialist ideas" are far from the accepted norm at Hamilton.

Thats said, my understanding is that over the past 20 years Churchill has spoke at over 200 colleges and universities and there has never been any controversy like this over his invitation to speak. The reason you are even talking about this now and know about it is only because the conservative professors at Hamilton have alterted the AP to the controversy that they themselves started. The conservative professors at Hamilton started this controversy by posting around the campus a flier they drafted which equates Churchill to a terrorist. In response, Jessica posted her fliers around campus stating that "You don't have to agree with them to learn from them." That is all that happened at Hamilton. There were no "protests" to Churchill coming to campus as the name of the article would suggest. There were just some fliers.

My point is that not all colleges are liberal and that even though Hamilton is conservative this "controversy" is really not that big of a deal in light of Churchill's track record of previous speaking engagements. The truth is that, while Hamilton is conservative, the school does a good job of bringing both liberal and conservative speakers to campus. During my time at Hamilton the speakers who visited included liberal former president Bill Clinton, conservative former NYC mayor Rudy Guliani, conservative radical Walter Williams, and conservative radical David Horowitz. Churchill and other liberal speakers just balance things out. What bothers Jessica, I think, is that Walter Williams and David Horowitz are just as conservative as Churchill is liberal (if that even make sense) but there was little or no controversy over their arrival on campus. We can learn from every speaker, liberal or conservative, no matter how radical they are.


15 posted on 01/30/2005 2:58:38 PM PST by eb35 (this is over hyped)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: eb35
Walter Williams and David Horowitz are just as conservative as Churchill is liberal

No they aren't. Williams and Horowitz are actually much, indeed infinitely, more liberal. They at least are liberals in some (classical) sense of the term. Churchill doesn't appear to be liberal in any sense. He's a leftist-extremist.

17 posted on 01/30/2005 3:16:25 PM PST by Stultis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: eb35; nicollo
Hello, fellow Hamiltonian, and welcome to FR.

Glad you signed up today to push out the usual Womyn's Center line ("students...apathetic...Hamilton...conservative...can learn from...liberal...radical").

And, no, Ward Churchill isn't the same as Rudy Giuliani or an african-american guest commentator from the PBS Nightly Business Report.

Class of '88

19 posted on 01/30/2005 3:39:18 PM PST by hedgie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: eb35; Stultis
What bothers Jessica, I think, is that Walter Williams and David Horowitz are just as conservative as Churchill is liberal (if that even make sense) but there was little or no controversy over their arrival on campus.

I'll have to disagree. To mirror this buffoon, Williams/Horowitz would have to be arguing something along the lines of the people at OKC deserved what they got at Tim McVeigh's hands...
20 posted on 01/30/2005 5:15:03 PM PST by swilhelm73 (Appeasers believe that if you keep on throwing steaks to a tiger, the tiger will become a vegetarian)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: eb35

"Walter Williams and David Horowitz are just as conservative as Churchill is liberal"




That is a tremendously unfair insult to Williams and Horowitz. There is no basis of comparison. Churchill is praising terrorist murderers of civilians. When did either Williams or Horowitz do that?

This is not about a sliding scale of political opinion it is about Churchill praising murderers and saying civilians deserved to die because they were part of global capitalism. How does he know they are part of global capitalism? Because of their presence in the WTC. Tell that to the widow of the waiter/window washer/secretary who died there.

Do you think Williams or Horowitz defend the killing of civilians who are Marxists?

Ridiculous.


22 posted on 01/31/2005 9:01:35 PM PST by dervish (Europe can go to Islam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson