LadyJazzer wrote: Since she didn't speak, she wasn't "shouted down"...
...Next....
If I was a student, I wouldn't want that lying warmonger speaking at my graduation either.
Both parties at their conventions only allow protestors in free speech zones/cages. Technically they aren't denying free speech since they let them talk.
She wasn't shouted down but she was threatened and LJ applauds this.
Only the Left should be permitted to speak in your world? Gotcha.
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
And did you know it's illegal to spit on the sidewalk in Texas?
She wasn't threatened... The people with the free-speech rights made it clear they would exercise that right. I applaud their right to express their free-speech.
Got any other irrelevant, untruthful charges you want to make?
They threatened to disrupt the event if she was to speak there. If that isn't stifling free speech, I don't know what is.
Would you be upset if conservatives promised to disrupt DU's graduation if Senator Clinton was going to be the speaker?
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
Photo-fish wrote: Who is threatening domestic terrorism? Nobody in that story. Maybe you have your topics mixed up Fred. Sounds like the students free speech was louder than that of Condi's.
Yes!!!! Louder is what counts, consideration of others be damned.
So you might also be against big $$$ lobbyist and special intere$t groups funneling large amounts of money into small elections?
We have been told that money = speech and corporations are people. There seem to be some very loud voices out there, considerations of others be damned.