It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Geraldo Rivera quits Yale over college name change --"political correctness is lame"

page: 3
26
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 08:27 AM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

Just making sure you understand that integrity and Geraldo go together like oil and water.




posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 08:28 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

In my history class our teacher had films from Costa Rica-WW II Holocaust-Russia and it's pissing match with the US and all flavors of civil rights movements. Quite a class.



posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 08:30 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Perhaps



posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 08:33 AM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

I wasn't aware of what a disaster my history class in high school was until I took college history. I enjoyed the World history class SOOOOOOOOOOOO much more than my high school history classes that I took several more when I didn't have to and even considered picking up history as a minor for a while.

High school history is just indicative of the politics that rule the state in charge of that public education department.
edit on 13-2-2017 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 08:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: seasonal
All because Calhoun, who was born in 1870, was a slave owner/advocate.


1782. He was also a white supremacist.

And who cares what a private business does?








The OP, and other "conservatives" care what a private institution does.

Unless it lines up with what they think it should do, in which case it's totally cool and nobody else should care.



posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 08:39 AM
link   
a reply to: Shamrock6

Please look over my responses before calling me the c-word.



posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 08:41 AM
link   
a reply to: Shamrock6

Apparently, this guy was like Hitler.

So what's worse?

Changing the name or waiting 50 years after the civil rights movement to change the name?

Either way, attributing hate and white supremacy to an inert construction of mortar and stone is silly.



posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 08:41 AM
link   
I just find it odd that the people pushing for this have no issue calling themselves DEMOCRATS given the racist history of the party. The selective outrage is comical.



posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 08:42 AM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

I really like Geraldo's integrity too.

Like that time he got kicked out of Iraq for leaking operational details.

Or that time he lied about being near combat in Afghanistan when he was a couple hundred miles away from it.

He's just full of integrity



posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 08:44 AM
link   
a reply to: Edumakated

This is a really terrible false equivalence. There is no way that the democrats of today are the same as the democrats of yesterday. This is like blaming white people today for white people owning slaves in the 1800's.



posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 08:45 AM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

Or, third option, getting all worked up over what a private institution is doing with their own stuff?

Option 3 seems particularly stupid to me.

Changing the name of the building doesn't erase anything, and I don't dispute that for a second. Which is exactly the point: it doesn't erase anything. So why are people getting butthurt about it?



posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 08:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: Edumakated

This is a really terrible false equivalence. There is no way that the democrats of today are the same as the democrats of yesterday. This is like blaming white people today for white people owning slaves in the 1800's.


Did you even read what you wrote?

"Democrats today are not the same as Democrats of yesterday".... so again, this Calhoun guy is dead. He held a position that is deplorable today, but pretty much par for the course in his time. So why all the fuss?

"Blaming white people today for white people owning slaves..." Are you f'n serious? White privilege, blaming every ill black people face today on slavery... I mean c'mon man, you cannot be serious.



posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 08:49 AM
link   
a reply to: seasonal

I look at the totality of your posts - liberals are bad, and you "understand the go Trump feeling."

You may not call yourself a conservative but you have a blindingly clear bias in your posts. Posting the way you do and then trying to claim centrism doesn't really work.



posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 08:50 AM
link   
a reply to: Shamrock6

I didn't think I was butthurt, but appreciate the clarification.

I only question the motive and motivation. . . now.

Was this guy a white supremist 50 years ago, how about last year? The year before?

I also question what does the change actually do?

Is it still the same building?

A rose by any other name. . . .

Anyway, looking for something to irritate people. Waiting on a plumber to get to the house.




posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 08:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6
Posting the way you do and then trying to claim centrism doesn't really work.


Especially when you shoot down your own premise of 'they're erasing history' by stating that you just learned about John Calhoun this week because of the incident.



posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 08:54 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Taking the name away IS an attempt to remove this man's legacy and history. While it does not erase it one fell swoop, it is taken away from the public eye. In time, and only in time, is the legacy and history eroded down to nothing.

Changing the name accomplishes nothing more than pandering to a small group of people with hurt feelings. The correct way to approach the issue is to educate those with the hurt feelings and help them understand why his name is on a prestigious building to begin with. They have no right to change the name based on their feelings, just as you are trying to say "its nobody's business what a private organization does".



posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 08:54 AM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

Didn't say you are. Butthurt conservatives are the butthurt ones. Not butthurt cowboys (there's a brokeback mountain reference in there somewhere, I'm sure of it).

As for the timing of it, there were student protests over the name. Yale had refused to change the name in the past, now reversed their position after recent protests. I have no doubt that being able to give the appearance that they're listening to their students played a large part in it.

But again, my question is (still) simply what does it matter? Yale could have changed the name to Purple and it's still their prerogative to do so.



posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 08:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Edumakated

"Democrats today are not the same as Democrats of yesterday".... so again, this Calhoun guy is dead. He held a position that is deplorable today, but pretty much par for the course in his time. So why all the fuss?

That still doesn't mean his name should be honored on a building.


"Blaming white people today for white people owning slaves..." Are you f'n serious? White privilege, blaming every ill black people face today on slavery... I mean c'mon man, you cannot be serious.

This has nothing to do with blaming white people today for white people from yesterday owning slaves.



posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 08:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: chadderson
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus
Changing the name accomplishes nothing more than pandering to a small group of people with hurt feelings. The correct way to approach the issue is to educate those with the hurt feelings and help them understand why his name is on a prestigious building to begin with. They have no right to change the name based on their feelings, just as you are trying to say "its nobody's business what a private organization does".

Because he gave a ton of money to the college back in the day to get his name put on the building. That's usually how it goes.



posted on Feb, 13 2017 @ 08:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: chadderson
Taking the name away IS an attempt to remove this man's legacy and history.



Even if that were the case, it is their building, what's it any of your business?


While it does not erase it one fell swoop, it is taken away from the public eye. In time, and only in time, is the legacy and history eroded down to nothing.


Call me when you are no longer able to find information about Calhoun.


Changing the name accomplishes nothing more than pandering to a small group of people with hurt feelings. The correct way to approach the issue is to educate those with the hurt feelings and help them understand why his name is on a prestigious building to begin with. They have no right to change the name based on their feelings, just as you are trying to say "its nobody's business what a private organization does".


They can change the name and tell you it was because it made their farts smell better and you have zero say in the matter. Do you know why? Ain't your building. They have every right to change it, just like you have every right to get all snowflakey over it.



new topics

top topics



 
26
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join