Harvard Welcomes Terrorist

[hspder]

[quote]hedo wrote:
He wouldn’t want to visit to have a frank discussion because it is doubtful you would be able to add anything relevant to his worldview. This goes for GWB or anyone any other president. When a US president makes a visit you listen…he talks. That’s it.

Arroganced is the downfall of many men. Humility and respect would serve your students far better then arrogance.[/quote]

What you just wrote – basically, that the POTS is above the people, or, rather, that the people are “beneath” him and hence need to keep themselves in check and not delude themselves into thinking they can contribute anything – represents all that has gone wrong with this country; I once thought that conservatives didn’t really want to go back to feudal times, but apparently I was wrong.

It’s quite amazing how much you have in common with the same dictators that you claim to despise… It does hurt seeing yourself in the mirror, doesn’t it?

I suggest you consider moving to Saudi Arabia, were you clearly would be much happier. Because, my friend, over here the emperor is naked.

One thing we can agree on: Arrogance is the downfall of many men – an nations. And it will be ours.

[Headhunter]

Hspder,

If your lib students wanted to invite Hillary Clinton to speak and a minority of the student-body vocally disapproved, should Hillary be forced to speak off-campus? Is right and wrong decided by whose got the biggest mob, or by objective standards of justice?

Stanford is private property but it is not the students’ private property. They thus have absolutely no say in who can be on it. To think otherwise shows them to be evil little fascists.

You don’t seem to grasp that its LIBS who want to return us to feudalism. Libs create government program after government program, expecting productive members of society to fund these programs, at the point of a gun. The lib bureaucrat is the feudal baron of old, issuing directives to the serfs. Your economics and politics are holdovers from the dark miasma of human history.

[hedo]

[quote]hspder wrote:
hedo wrote:
He wouldn’t want to visit to have a frank discussion because it is doubtful you would be able to add anything relevant to his worldview. This goes for GWB or anyone any other president. When a US president makes a visit you listen…he talks. That’s it.

Arroganced is the downfall of many men. Humility and respect would serve your students far better then arrogance.

What you just wrote – basically, that the POTS is above the people, or, rather, that the people are “beneath” him and hence need to keep themselves in check and not delude themselves into thinking they can contribute anything – represents all that has gone wrong with this country; I once thought that conservatives didn’t really want to go back to feudal times, but apparently I was wrong.

It’s quite amazing how much you have in common with the same dictators that you claim to despise… It does hurt seeing yourself in the mirror, doesn’t it?

I suggest you consider moving to Saudi Arabia, were you clearly would be much happier. Because, my friend, over here the emperor is naked.

One thing we can agree on: Arrogance is the downfall of many men – an nations. And it will be ours.
[/quote]

Attack the man…not the message. How typical.

No the post was about respect for the office. The highest office in the land.

Showing respect to the president of the United States, is what people used to do and still do in most of the country. What’s wrong is that some people don’t respect institutions anymore and this is apparently reinforced at the universities, instead of being taught. Do yo get it now?

Need to take those blinders off. Everying isn’t about the individual and idealogy. As I stated before you can respect the office and not the man. It’s just good manners.

I’ve been to Saudi Arabia. Didn’t really care for it. It’s repressive and hot and I like my wine and beer.

If your as smart as you claim to be, I am sure your realize the post was about arrogance vs. respect not fuedalism and servitude. You introduced politics, I was talking about character. They are building character at Stanford I would assume?

That mirror reflects in many directions doesn’t it?

[Zap_Branigan]

[quote]hedo wrote:
…
If your as smart as you claim to be, I am sure your realize the post was about arrogance vs. respect not fuedalism and servitude. You introduced politics, I was talking about character. They are building character at Stanford I would assume?

…

[/quote]

Universities don’t build character. Good parenting does, surviving hardship often does, the military does…

Gathering a bunch of spoiled rich kids on a manicured campus for 4 years of drinking and the occasional poli-sci class probably hurts their character.

While college can be a great place to gain knowledge, I have found that the traditional 4 year college experience often sets back things like wisdom and character.

[hedo]

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
hedo wrote:
…
If your as smart as you claim to be, I am sure your realize the post was about arrogance vs. respect not fuedalism and servitude. You introduced politics, I was talking about character. They are building character at Stanford I would assume?

…

Universities don’t build character. Good parenting does, surviving hardship often does, the military does…

Gathering a bunch of spoiled rich kids on a manicured campus for 4 years of drinking and the occasional poli-sci class probably hurts their character.

While college can be a great place to gain knowledge, I have found that the traditional 4 year college experience often sets back things like wisdom and character.[/quote]

Zap you may be closer to the mark then I am.

[hspder]

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Is right and wrong decided by whose got the biggest mob[/quote]

Yes. It’s called a Democracy. Get over it. Don’t take my word for it:

Main Entry: de?moc?ra?Cy
Pronunciation: di-'m?-kr&-sE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -cies
Etymology: Middle French democratie, from Late Latin democratia, from Greek dEmokratia, from dEmos + -kratia -cracy
1 a : government by the people; especially : rule of the majority

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
or by objective standards of justice?[/quote]

They are one and the same: if you haven’t realized that yet, I hate to break it to you, but the biggest mob DEFINES the “objective standards of justice”.

With regards to your other comments about the eViL LiBS: repeating yourself over and over again does not make you “more right”. I have addressed those comments before, I will not repeat myself. If you want to post over and over and over again that liberals = eViL, it’s your prerogative. Don’t expect, however, for me to waste my time repeating myself too.

[hspder]

[quote]hedo wrote:
Showing respect to the president of the United States, is what people used to do and still do in most of the country. What’s wrong is that some people don’t respect institutions anymore and this is apparently reinforced at the universities, instead of being taught. Do yo get it now?[/quote]

Respect is not something you have the right to – it’s something you earn. GWB has no implicit right to be respected because he is the POTS. He has to earn our respect – and keep deserving it. It is my firm belief that was, in great part, what was behind the American Revolution: that those in power had no implicit right to be there and to be respected, that the power was in the people’s hands and the government’s role was to work for the people. “For the people, by the people”, remember?

Respecting institutions – the King / Emperor, the Clergy – was the tenet of Feudal times, not of a Democracy, even of a Representative one.

[hspder]

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Universities don’t build character. Good parenting does, surviving hardship often does, the military does…

Gathering a bunch of spoiled rich kids on a manicured campus for 4 years of drinking and the occasional poli-sci class probably hurts their character.

While college can be a great place to gain knowledge, I have found that the traditional 4 year college experience often sets back things like wisdom and character.[/quote]

Knowing the area you work in, and having a slight idea of the alma maters of the people you work with and for (from what you’ve told us), and even though I still maintain we have one of the best Higher Education systems in the planet (along with the UK – I guess we learnt from the best) I know exactly why you feel like that. But Stanford is different. Don’t take my word for it – come by and talk to some of the students and faculty. Failing that, talk to some of our alumni you might find in you neck of the woods. You’ll see how far off base you are when it comes to Stanford. This place was built on a quite unique foundation, and is still a quite unique place. We make sure of that. We’re actual educators, not a knowledge supermarket like most.

Not that it is perfect, of course – there are plenty of idiots over here too. But the underlying culture is so pervasive even our idiots are can?t escape it… Or they’ll leave or be thrown out.

[Headhunter]

[quote]hspder wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Is right and wrong decided by whose got the biggest mob

Yes. It’s called a Democracy. Get over it. Don’t take my word for it:

Main Entry: de?moc?ra?Cy
Pronunciation: di-'m?-kr&-sE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -cies
Etymology: Middle French democratie, from Late Latin democratia, from Greek dEmokratia, from dEmos + -kratia -cracy
1 a : government by the people; especially : rule of the majority

Headhunter wrote:
or by objective standards of justice?

They are one and the same: if you haven’t realized that yet, I hate to break it to you, but the biggest mob DEFINES the “objective standards of justice”.

With regards to your other comments about the eViL LiBS: repeating yourself over and over again does not make you “more right”. I have addressed those comments before, I will not repeat myself. If you want to post over and over and over again that liberals = eViL, it’s your prerogative. Don’t expect, however, for me to waste my time repeating myself too.
[/quote]

This is your best example yet of ‘social metaphysics’. Long ago, when confronted with a difference of opinion with someone else, you felt intimidated. You then decided that whoever was the biggest bully or vocal group was who decided what reality is.

Hate to break it to you, Prof, but right and wrong are not defined by the loudest thugs you can find. Right and wrong are a function of the definition of what a human being is (rational being). If the mob decides, for ex, that all Jews are evil, then that does not make it right — which it would, according to your metaphysics.

This is why libs must become fascists. Since they do not believe in an objective ethics (one based upon the defining charactersistics of MAN), they then come to believe that force is a viable option, when dealing with other men. They become gentlemanly thugs, playing the violin in the morning (Reinhard Heydrich) and sending Jews to Treblinka in the afternoon.

I did not surrender my consciousness to the will of others. That’s why we’re different, Doc. Your smarter than me but I live through my own consciousness, not vicariously through others. Try it sometime.

[hedo]

[quote]hspder wrote:
hedo wrote:
Showing respect to the president of the United States, is what people used to do and still do in most of the country. What’s wrong is that some people don’t respect institutions anymore and this is apparently reinforced at the universities, instead of being taught. Do yo get it now?

Respect is not something you have the right to – it’s something you earn. GWB has no implicit right to be respected because he is the POTS. He has to earn our respect – and keep deserving it. It is my firm belief that was, in great part, what was behind the American Revolution: that those in power had no implicit right to be there and to be respected, that the power was in the people’s hands and the government’s role was to work for the people. “For the people, by the people”, remember?

Respecting institutions – the King / Emperor, the Clergy – was the tenet of Feudal times, not of a Democracy, even of a Representative one.
[/quote]

Pride and arrogance at it’s finest, as well as an interesting use of a cliche instead of reason. You’ve just described anarchy in case you haven’t realized it. How sad.

Does the quest for knowledge at Stanford only extend as far listening to those who share the same idealogy?

It’s OK to have character, it may be anti-PC, but a dose of character sounds like it would do wonders out there.

Have a wonderful day.

[hspder]

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Hate to break it to you, Prof, but right and wrong are not defined by the loudest thugs you can find. Right and wrong are a function of the definition of what a human being is (rational being). [/quote]

I never said “loudest thugs”. I said “majority” – as did you before using your usual bait and switch.

Majority and “loudest thugs” are two completely different things.

The fact that you don’t understand the difference and that you fail to realize that, by the definition, the majority will always defend what is more intrinsically human, speaks volumes of your bias.

[hspder]

[quote]hedo wrote:
You’ve just described anarchy in case you haven’t realized it.[/quote]

Interesting. So you believe Democracy and Classic Liberalism are the same as Anarchy.

Newsflash: they’re not.

Since you clearly won’t take my word for it, maybe nephorm or LBRTRN are around and will care to jump in; if not, I suggest you PM one of them. I’m sure they’ll be happy to educate you.

[quote]hedo wrote:
Does the quest for knowledge at Stanford only extend as far listening to those who share the same idealogy?[/quote]

Yeah, all the stuff I said before about us liking to listen to conservatives was just me joking. In reality, we keep the Hoover Institution guys around just because we like to make fun of them. They’re all Masochists, that’s why they stick around.

[quote]hedo wrote:
It’s OK to have character, it may be anti-PC, but a dose of character sounds like it would do wonders out there.[/quote]

So, for you character = respecting others just for their position, not for their actions.

Yap, that’s the very definition of feudalism right there.

[nephorm]

[quote]hspder wrote:
The fact that you don’t understand the difference and that you fail to realize that, by the definition, the majority will always defend what is more intrinsically human, speaks volumes of your bias.[/quote]

I have to disagree here… by that measure, it would seem that a democratic vote would legitimize the Holocaust, for example.

Democracy is imperfect; it just tends to represent the interests of all more often than other forms of government.

Classical Liberalism recognizes this problem, which is why constitutional limits and natural rights are so important.

[Headhunter]

[quote]hspder wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Is right and wrong decided by whose got the biggest mob?

Yes. It’s called a Democracy. Get over it. [/quote]

I’m still shocked that someone who has such an extraordinary intellect and education would truly believe this definition of right and wrong. Please say this to Dr. Sowell; I’m curious of his reaction.

[thunderbolt23]

Hmmm. Odd. Hspder has given us two looks:

1. The Snarling Elitist, the one who believes that most everyone is ridiculously stupid and needs oversight by their Enlightened, Educated Betters

and now,

2. The Bona Fide Egalitarian, who believes “ain’t no man better’n me, even the President of the United States” and has signed up as a true-blue democrat, believing the majority rule serves us best.

On one hand, an insulated proto-aristocrat (“most people are too stupid to be trusted to govern themselves”), and on the other, a little ‘d’ democrat who is comfortable with the will of the people (“It’s called democracy - get over it”).

Anyone else confused?

[hedo]

[quote]hspder wrote:
hedo wrote:
You’ve just described anarchy in case you haven’t realized it.

Interesting. So you believe Democracy and Classic Liberalism are the same as Anarchy.

Newsflash: they’re not.

Since you clearly won’t take my word for it, maybe nephorm or LBRTRN are around and will care to jump in; if not, I suggest you PM one of them. I’m sure they’ll be happy to educate you.

hedo wrote:
Does the quest for knowledge at Stanford only extend as far listening to those who share the same idealogy?

Yeah, all the stuff I said before about us liking to listen to conservatives was just me joking. In reality, we keep the Hoover Institution guys around just because we like to make fun of them. They’re all Masochists, that’s why they stick around.

hedo wrote:
It’s OK to have character, it may be anti-PC, but a dose of character sounds like it would do wonders out there.

So, for you character = respecting others just for their position, not for their actions.

Yap, that’s the very definition of feudalism right there.
[/quote]

You have to realize your condescending attitude doesn’t really play on the internet. As far as we know you could be a janitor at Stanford or a professor. So try and stick to the point.

In your world nobody deserves respect unless they have demonstrated to you and a bunch of college age kids actions worthy of respect. Of course you decide what that standard is. College professors excepted of course. I see.

Sounds more like egoism then politcal correctness.

Fuedalism that’s a pretty funny tangent. It doesn’t make any sense but it was funny.

[Headhunter]

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Hmmm. Odd. Hspder has given us two looks:

1. The Snarling Elitist, the one who believes that most everyone is ridiculously stupid and needs oversight by their Enlightened, Educated Betters

and now,

2. The Bona Fide Egalitarian, who believes “ain’t no man better’n me, even the President of the United States” and has signed up as a true-blue democrat, believing the majority rule serves us best.

On one hand, an insulated proto-aristocrat (“most people are too stupid to be trusted to govern themselves”), and on the other, a little ‘d’ democrat who is comfortable with the will of the people (“It’s called democracy - get over it”).

Anyone else confused?[/quote]

Yup. I think I’m going back to my ‘janitor’ theory.

I once asked him to put up a pic of his 3 Phds, and he just laughed. He probably thought none of the faculty would lend him their Phd diplomas, they’d all have to be the right dates, and it’d be impossible to do all that. I even offered to never post in this Forum again if he posted a pic of that, which never happened. (He’s had time now to fake them, so no Hspder, you can’t do it now.) Man, Prof X, Vroom, and so forth would’ve loved it!

He is a brilliant guy, no doubt of that. If he is a faculty member there, I congratulate him. I also pity the students.

[Headhunter]

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Hmmm. Odd. Hspder has given us two looks:

1. The Snarling Elitist, the one who believes that most everyone is ridiculously stupid and needs oversight by their Enlightened, Educated Betters

and now,

2. The Bona Fide Egalitarian, who believes “ain’t no man better’n me, even the President of the United States” and has signed up as a true-blue democrat, believing the majority rule serves us best.

On one hand, an insulated proto-aristocrat (“most people are too stupid to be trusted to govern themselves”), and on the other, a little ‘d’ democrat who is comfortable with the will of the people (“It’s called democracy - get over it”).

Anyone else confused?[/quote]

Yup. I think I’m going back to my ‘janitor’ theory.

I once asked him to put up a pic of his 3 Phds, and he just laughed. He probably thought none of the faculty would lend him their Phd diplomas, they’d all have to be the right dates, and it’d be impossible to do all that. I even offered to never post in this Forum again if he posted a pic of that, which never happened. (He’s had time now to fake them, so no Hspder, you can’t do it now.) Man, Prof X, Vroom, and so forth would’ve loved it!

He is a brilliant guy, no doubt of that. If he is a faculty member there, I congratulate him. I also pity the students.

[Professor_X]

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
I even offered to never post in this Forum again if he posted a pic of that, which never happened. (He’s had time now to fake them, so no Hspder, you can’t do it now.) Man, Prof X, Vroom, and so forth would’ve loved it!

[/quote]

Your posts are slowly becoming more tolerable, however, I still think someone rammed blunt metal objects into your head as an infant or possibly tried strangling you with your own birthcord. I mean, I know that is what I personally would do with the spawn of Satan. Maybe I’m the minority on that one.

[anon31651765]

[quote]Headhunter wrote:

He is a brilliant guy, no doubt of that. If he is a faculty member there, I congratulate him. I also pity the students.

[/quote]

Similar to how I pity yours?