Getbig.com: American Bodybuilding, Fitness and Figure
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Soul Crusher on February 23, 2011, 05:47:42 AM
-
Columbia’s Disgrace..disabled war hero gets heckled and phony excuses to ban the ROTC keep coming
Frontpagemagazine ^ | 2-23-11 | Daniel Flynn
A disabled war hero gets heckled -- and phony excuses to ban the ROTC from elite colleges keep coming....
“It doesn’t matter how you feel about the war,” Columbia University freshman Anthony Maschek told classmates last week. “It doesn’t matter how you feel about fighting. There are bad men out there plotting to kill you.”
Maschek knows this too well. In 2008, the Army staff sergeant got shot eleven times in a fight in Kirkuk, Iraq. Before arriving at Columbia last August, Maschek had spent two years rehabilitating at Walter Reed Army Medical Center. His road from Idaho to Columbia via Iraq was certainly the one less travelled.
Such a story awes and inspires the rest of America. At Columbia, Maschek got heckled. “Racist!” one student reportedly jeered, while others booed and laughed at the disabled veteran, according to the New York Post.
The wounded warrior’s impromptu speech was part of the second of three campus forums on the possible return of the Reserve Officers Training Corps to Columbia in the wake of the repeal of the congressional ban on open homosexuals serving in the military. At the first forum, like the second, a slight majority of speakers urged the school to continue to keep ROTC out of Morningside Heights. The third forum takes place February 23. The University Senate votes on the matter in April.
Columbia is hardly the sole hotbed of military bashing. With the lifting of the “don’t ask, don’t tell” prohibition on out-of-the-closet gays serving in the armed forces, schools—Yale, Harvard, Stanford, Brown, etc.—that discriminate against ROTC cadets (but not, consequently, against military research grants and contracts) have the face-saving opportunity to welcome back would-be student servicemen. Instead, the disappearance of gays in the military as an issue has prompted ever-more creative rationalizations for continued anti-military discrimination.
“Harvard should promote public service, but supporting the military as a particular form of service is problematic,” sophomore Christian Anderson contended in a debate over ROTC returning to America’s oldest college. “Not everything the military does constitutes public service.” The rebuttal came in response to a College Republican’s seemingly benign remark that including ROTC at Harvard would honor students serving America.
Conrad Honicker, an Emory University freshman, complained in the school paper that the military has “no services in place to update gender, and trans-related health care is systematically denied to transgender service members and veterans…. How can we justify bringing ROTC and military recruiters onto our campus when their values so clearly contradict our affirmation of our transgender friends and peers?”
Alok Vaid-Menon, president of Stanford University’s Students for Queer Liberation, echoed similar concerns regarding the military’s exclusion of the transgendered: “A re-introduction of ROTC on college campuses (including Stanford, Harvard, and Columbia) that include ‘gender identity’ in their non-discrimination clause is a fundamental violation of policy and an endorsement of discrimination.”
Like the Ivy League, the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marines are exclusive institutions. Recruits must pass physical and mental tests. There are size and age restrictions. Moral issues, such as a criminal past or heavy drug use, can disqualify. Elite colleges are similarly particular about who gains entrance. Top students not only understand why such exclusionary measures are necessary for the Ivy League, they take pride in them. Why, then, do they cry “discrimination”—as if it were always a dirty world—at the military for employing selectivity? There have always been people ineligible for military service just as there have always been people ineligible for Columbia, Brown, and Harvard.
The rationalizations—the Vietnam War, the exclusion of gays, transgender rights—have changed. The contempt for the armed services has not.
As is the case at other schools, justifications for keeping ROTC out of Columbia run the gamut. “Transpeople are part of the Columbia community,” remarked one student. A sign–bearer explained via placard: “1 in 3 female soldiers experiences sexual assault in the military.” “Universities should not be involved in military activities,” Professor Emeritus Herbert Gans told the New York Post. “Columbia should come out against spending $300 billion a year on unnecessary wars.”
One wonders what issues would arise as hurdles for ROTC to overcome should the military address the aforementioned concerns. Ageism? Handicappism? Fatsoism? There are scores of phony reasons for banning ROTC. There is one real reason: academia hates the military.
More than forty years ago, when the activists of the 1960s first succeeded in kicking ROTC off college campuses, the buzzphrase of bad-faith radicals was “the issue is not the issue.” It still isn’t.
Daniel J. Flynn is the author of A Conservative History of the American Left (Crown Forum, 2008), Intellectual Morons (Crown Forum, 2004), and Why the Left Hates America (Prima Forum, 2002). He has appeared on Fox News, MSNBC, CNN, Sky News, PBS, CSPAN, and other broadcast networks. He writes a Monday column for Human Events and blogs at www.flynnfiles.com.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Article printed from FrontPage Magazine: http://frontpagemag.com
URL to article: http://frontpagemag.com/2011/02/23/columbias-disgrace/
________________________ _____________________
These leftist scum, communists, progressives, liberal filth, are no different than the muslim savages who do the same thing in te UK.
-
I just skimmed the article pretty good
how do you know they were leftist, communist, progressive, liberal, or muslim? ???
-
I just skimmed the article pretty good
how do you know they were leftist, communist, progressive, liberal, or muslim? ???
I'm sure they were tea baggers and fellow vets for sure!
-
I'm sure they were tea baggers and fellow vets for sure!
Again, I don't see anything in that article about political philosophies of the ones speaking out, or their religions
-
he makes shit up, that' s what he does
-
Again, I don't see anything in that article about political philosophies of the ones speaking out, or their religions
No, of course not - because for 90% of sane people - they knowthe deal and who doe this type of shit.
-
No, of course not - because for 90% of sane people - they knowthe deal and who doe this type of shit.
so you admit to having no proof for your accusations and are basing your comments solely on your own opinions and prejudice?
-
Hahaha, yeah dude, it's really going to be Tea Partiers and other right-wingers heckling war vets. There's not a laundry list of examples of left wingers attacking war vets or anything over the years.
The likes of Code Pink = right wing. ::)
-
Again, I don't see anything in that article about political philosophies of the ones speaking out, or their religions
I read several articles on this disgrace at Columbia-- Mr. Magoo; instead of quoting philosophers and basking in douchebaggery why don't you find a better pair of reading glasses and look into the story a bit more. 333 is 100% correct.
I would assume that such a scholarly and allegedly intelligent individual such as yourself could reach a logically coherent conclusion that wasn't spoon fed to you.
-
I read several articles on this disgrace at Columbia-- Mr. Magoo; instead of quoting philosophers and basking in douchebaggery why don't you find a better pair of reading glasses and look into the story a bit more. 333 is 100% correct.
I would assume that such a scholarly and allegedly intelligent individual such as yourself could reach a logically coherent conclusion that wasn't spoon fed to you.
maybe he's right, I have no clue. I'm just asking him to give proof for the conclusions he draws from articles. If he does then I'll admit he's right.
and it's not a "logically coherent conclusion". It's a move from a particular to a universal statement, which is wrong.
but thanks for the compliments
-
Here is the speech he gave. Notice they laugh at him when he starts telling the truth?
Of course truth to the far left is like holy water to a vampire so we know why they react the way they do.
-
it's entirely possible that the hecklers were just A-holes, and that trying to assign "well, a majority of their members are probably dems" is just as weak as "the majority of the hecklers were white".
Just label them A-holes, kick the motherlovin' shit out of them in an alley while police take a nice lunch break, and call it a day. Using something like this as a reason to attack a certain political group?
-
Don't know, nor care what they are......they just need to be kicked in the face.
-
thats sick.. absolutley sick.., but in that it didnt say anything about political leanings..but maybe im overlooking it. i read fast
-
it's entirely possible that the hecklers were just A-holes, and that trying to assign "well, a majority of their members are probably dems" is just as weak as "the majority of the hecklers were white".
Just label them A-holes, kick the motherlovin' shit out of them in an alley while police take a nice lunch break, and call it a day. Using something like this as a reason to attack a certain political group?
240 - your shilling is getting really bad.
-
hey, you prefer to label them. me, i'd spray em with deer piss. we handle things differently. I wouldn't stop to ask which party they belonged to... I'd just piss on em.
-
maybe he's right, I have no clue. I'm just asking him to give proof for the conclusions he draws from articles. If he does then I'll admit he's right.
and it's not a "logically coherent conclusion". It's a move from a particular to a universal statement, which is wrong.
but thanks for the compliments
QFT
-
thats sick.. absolutley sick.., but in that it didnt say anything about political leanings..but maybe im overlooking it. i read fast
It's easy to read fast and overlook things when you don't want to see the truth.
-
It's a shame when 333 tars every liberal with the anti-vet brush. Nothing new from him of course, generalization is his specialty.
-
You far leftists own the anti war movement and this crap.
-
You far leftists own the anti war movement and this crap.
Thanks for proving my post correct!
-
It's easy to read fast and overlook things when you don't want to see the truth.
HIGHLIGHT the parts that say it was democrats
-
Yessir, all those anti-war protests over the years were carried out by righties.
Talk about stretching. ::)
-
Yessir, all those anti-war protests over the years were carried out by righties.
Talk about stretching. ::)
i think it was done by assholes.. but this 3333 shithead is so quick to put someone on a TEAM (epic JR high school syndrome) that he would rathey imply than confirm.. and then when proven wrong.. issue a half assed retraction
-
You far leftists own the anti war movement and this crap.
???
Have you ever heard of a guy named Ron Paul?
-
i think it was done by assholes.. but this 3333 shithead is so quick to put someone on a TEAM (epic JR high school syndrome) that he would rathey imply than confirm.. and then when proven wrong.. issue a half assed retraction
Let's be honest, if they're protesting and heckling a guy like this then chances are their ideologies and beliefs fall in line with those on the far-left.
???
Have you ever heard of a guy named Ron Paul?
Can you show me where Ron Paul heckles military vets? There's a difference between having isolationist beliefs and calling soldiers "baby killers". ::)
-
Ron paul is about as anti-war as they come. 33 said leftists own the anti-war movement, as well as this crap.
I pointed out Ron Paul - and many republicans - who are also anti war.
-
Ron paul is about as anti-war as they come. 33 said leftists own the anti-war movement, as well as this crap.
I pointed out Ron Paul - and many republicans - who are also anti war.
I'm asking you to show me evidence of Ron Paul acting like these students did. I don't give a fuck about him being anti-war. Lot of people are anti-war yet it's usually people on the far-left that take it to the extreme with the protests and insults like "baby killer". ;)
-
I'm asking for evidence that all leftists act like this anti-war POS?
I mean, probably ALL KKK members are white, but it doesn't mean white people love the KKK. it means a few select a-holes do.
333 added anti-war to the sentence. he didn't just say leftists owned this protest crap. He very casually added "anti war" to it. Suddenly they're grouped together now?
-
I'm asking for evidence that all leftists act like this anti-war POS?
I mean, probably ALL KKK members are white, but it doesn't mean white people love the KKK. it means a few select a-holes do.
333 added anti-war to the sentence. he didn't just say leftists owned this protest crap. He very casually added "anti war" to it. Suddenly they're grouped together now?
Where did I say all leftists act like that? I said that people like this usually have leftist ideologies. Don't try to spin it off of you and onto me. So I'll ask again, where has Ron Paul ever done or said anything like this? He's anti-war but I've never once seen him attack a disabled vet. Have you?
-
it's usually people on the far-left that take it to the extreme with the protests and insults like "baby killer". ;)
O'Reilly Called Tiller A "Baby Killer" Guilty Of "Nazi Stuff ...
So now we're grouping in these protest pricks with people who use 'baby killer'?
I'm betting a LOT more people on the RIGHT use the phrase baby killer, right?
Point of this time wasting exercise is that it's just pointless to blame leftists for this, or right wing nuts for that. Blame a very small group of a-holes, make them bite the curb, split their shit, then the rest of the sensible people can sit down at a Chinese buffet and work out their differences with reasonable conversation. Cool?
-
O'Reilly Called Tiller A "Baby Killer" Guilty Of "Nazi Stuff ...
So now we're grouping in these protest pricks with people who use 'baby killer'?
I'm betting a LOT more people on the RIGHT use the phrase baby killer, right?
Point of this time wasting exercise is that it's just pointless to blame leftists for this, or right wing nuts for that. Blame a very small group of a-holes, make them bite the curb, split their shit, then the rest of the sensible people can sit down at a Chinese buffet and work out their differences with reasonable conversation. Cool?
Hahaha, you're such a c*nt it's funny. I'm talking about slurs against soldiers in general, not just "baby killer". That was what we call an example.
ex·am·ple
[ig-zam-puhl, -zahm-] Show IPA
noun, verb, -pled, -pling.
–noun
1.
one of a number of things, or a part of something, taken to show the character of the whole: This painting is an example of his early work.
But it's funny that you're bringing a guy calling an abortion doctor "baby killer" into this. Shows how little you've actually got to go on.
Again I'll ask, when has Ron Paul attacked a disabled vet?
-
anyone who delivers a slur against a soldier deserves to have their face split open with the butt of an M-16. no questions asked.
To me, it's just trivial to whine about the fact a higher % of protesters are dems. You're just having a circlejerk "me too!" fest on how much you hate people on the left. That kinda hate is why Obama is sitll polling at 45+%... cause repubs are often perceived as a-holes. They don't welcome in moderates - they trash them nonstop. Dems won a lot of conservative voters in 2008 by promising them this or that. Repubs lost a lot of dem voters by treating them like shit, using lib as a slur, etc.
So that's my 2 cents... don't waste time saying "98% of protesters are dems... what do you guys think? high five, brother!"
instead, think of ways to appeal to moderate, and even left voters. That 2010 tea party momentum won't be present in 2012... all those obama voters that stayed hom in 2010 will show up to vote AGAINST a repub they've heard shittin' on "libs" for 5 years straight.
-
240 - the dems start out w 45 percent regardless due to factors I have listed many times.
-
anyone who delivers a slur against a soldier deserves to have their face split open with the butt of an M-16. no questions asked.
To me, it's just trivial to whine about the fact a higher % of protesters are dems. You're just having a circlejerk "me too!" fest on how much you hate people on the left. That kinda hate is why Obama is sitll polling at 45+%... cause repubs are often perceived as a-holes. They don't welcome in moderates - they trash them nonstop. Dems won a lot of conservative voters in 2008 by promising them this or that. Repubs lost a lot of dem voters by treating them like shit, using lib as a slur, etc.
So that's my 2 cents... don't waste time saying "98% of protesters are dems... what do you guys think? high five, brother!"
instead, think of ways to appeal to moderate, and even left voters. That 2010 tea party momentum won't be present in 2012... all those obama voters that stayed hom in 2010 will show up to vote AGAINST a repub they've heard shittin' on "libs" for 5 years straight.
Me? I don't hate people on the left. I hate people on the far-left.
You keep throwing that 45% around though. Obama's approval rating is currently down in 50 of 57 states. Not that it matters as the economy is going to determine whether Obama gets reelected or not.
-
Code pink, moveon.org, etc are all what 240?
-
Code pink, moveon.org = annoying ass wussies.
It wouldn't be fair to say "KKK, timothy mecveigh military types, and fat people who carry signs with misspelled racist terms at tea party rallies are all........."
And expect someone to say "white" or "republican" - would it?
No, it would be grasping at straws and pointless, and really an exercise in "hey, let's have a circle jerk and bash repubs!"
-
Disgusting. I would put this in the liberal hate speech or left-wing censorship threads, but it doesn't quite fit. Maybe I should create a liberal douchebaggery thread.
Those kids should be slapped in the face.
-
Code pink, moveon.org = annoying ass wussies.
It wouldn't be fair to say "KKK, timothy mecveigh military types, and fat people who carry signs with misspelled racist terms at tea party rallies are all........."
And expect someone to say "white" or "republican" - would it?
No, it would be grasping at straws and pointless, and really an exercise in "hey, let's have a circle jerk and bash repubs!"
You really are a complete and total moron. I'm reminding you just in case a paper airplane of a thought should collide against the walls of your hollow skull and convince you of the contrary.
-
This is why USA should bring back the draft. There will always be those who will continue to hate the military. But, I guarantee there will be more people who will appreciate what the military does.
-
Many on the far left would probably go MJ Hassan onm people.