Trump says he’ll sign executive order for free speech on college campuses


Trump made no such distinction… you are.

Private universities, like USC, recieve government funds.

Where in the EO does Trump specifically make the distinction that his EO will only affect public universities receiving federal dollars?


Youre really not going to read a thing I post or do a simple internet search, do you, and focus on what Trump did and did not say. It’s a rally speech, not a PhD thesis defense, your Honor. Yes, private schools do receive some funds, but not the majority of their money come from the government; however, government sometime can contract research for private schools as well, and that comes in a form of grants. The company I work for also receive governmental contracts for some research work done there, yet it is a private company and in no way is the company being subsidized by Uncle Sam.

Ever wonder why private school tuition costs more than public? Bc instead of getting some of that money from the government, they get it from you kids to pay for their operations. Simple economics that apparently you cant even get, so its no wonder why you keep repeating the same old question while failing to connect simple dots laid out for you. You really should sue USC and get your money back.


Yes, but the difference here is that Obama wanted to do unconstitutional things; Trump is wanting to do things that are within the constitution. Try again.


You pose some very interesting questions. While it becomes a bit more complex, the direction of ‘better to allow it, and let it be rejected’ has advantages:
Ideas for which there are few takers, will, like mildew, die in the sunshine of free expression.
People (college students in this case) will choose ideas not out of coerced conformity, but out of intellectual honesty.

When you prevent those with whom you would reasonably disagree from speaking you do three things:

  1. Give power to the ideas you suppress- by suppressing them. When you drive ideas underground, they become far more attractive- especially to the young.

  2. You establish permission to suppress any idea which you or anyone else who is vocal, disagrees with. This is what has happened on campuses nationwide - no more sunshine.

  3. Any part of the opposing ideology that is demonstrably false, or even stretched, becomes a great lie, and tends to invalidate the ideas that oppose what is suppressed.


I am… I’m reading every single word.

You are making assumptions about what the EO will say. I am looking at the person who announced the EO to draw my initial conclusions.

He tweeted that schools would recieved NO GOVERNMENT FUNDS if they deny free speech. From that tweet it seems like Trumps desire is just public universities but ANY school that receives government funds.

But let’s assume for a second he means only public schools. What evidence is he using to assert that there is a problem with public universities denying free speech? I’ve not see a single instance of a university denying free speech just for the hell of it. They all have very specific reasons.


Yes, like: “the speaker is conservative”


Good points.

So what are we even really talking about? What school has denied someone the opportunity to speak and why?

I remember Berkely and that Milo fella, but they cited safety concerns. Are there other examples?


Actually quite a few. There are also examples of professors advocating demonstrations, and blocking attendees from hearing speakers. One ex. would be Shapiro talking at Cal State LA- several videos on that one. There are other examples, try this search and notice both the quantity and the sources…


When has a school stated that conservative views are the reason why they were banned?


I was half joking, they usually cite ‘security concerns’ after a prof or some oddball student group cries out that the speaker is some ‘ist’ or another. The phenomenon is not exclusive to the left, either. The FI
RE database includes roughly (eyeballing) 50 from the right, about 225 from the left, and fifty or so N/A.

It is the denial or revocation by a college bowing to the heckler’s veto that is dangerous. It is no less dangerous from the right than from the left.


I think this is a wonderful idea for Donald to push. Granted, he’s easily distracted by the next piece of shiny that comes his way, but here’s hoping he actually follows through.


Again, youre focusing on semantics while ignoring the fact that what type of school it is doesnt matter. Public will get hit harder than private, for reasons stated above and how they are funded. You really need someone to hold your hands intellectually, do you?


I never made any claim as to which type of university would be most affected by this EO. You made the claim that this would only affect public universities. That just isn’t true, at least based on Trumps comments.


When have you stated that the reason you post is to troll? And yet… here you are, trolling…


Please point me to that claim that you jsut made up, that I said that funding cut only affect public schools. Goes to show that you cant read, or read but not comprehend the words you claimed you “read”, monte. Same old monte.


It’s trolling to as for facts to back up ridiculous assertions? Interesting perspective


Prove that no facts were provided to back up assertions.


You replied to this post

Then you said

So what was the point of your reply? You pointing out the fact that USC is a private school is in no way relevant to their ability to recieve federal funding.

I made an inference based on your reply.


Prove a negative? Don’t you have a masters in engineering? Lol

I haven’t seen evidence of university campuses infringing on the 1A rights because they are conservative


The blind man has not seen the blue sky either.