Do you disagree that suppressing the speech of citizens on college campuses, baby boomer or not*, is against liberal values?

No, peak liberalism is professing lofty principles, like pretending you care about free speech and individual rights, then suspending your own principles when it applies to people who you don’t like, for example, supporting punching somebody in the face for having racist beliefs, which itself is bad enough, not to…

Karma against whom?

.

Whoa whoa hold on. It may not have been minority leaders standing on podiums, but it is very much prevalent in left-leaning cosmopolitan culture that white men are evil, and every time something happens it’s because of white men, and white men have a jackboot on everyone’s throat. If you don’t believe me just spend 5…

This must not have actually happened. It must be fake news or a dream or something. Because as everybody knows, “racism = prejudice PLUS POWER”, and therefore only whites can be racist.

Right, by “debate” I guess I was referring to the author’s debate with himself.

This is a reasonable take. However, while the rule is that you *can* challenge these things via instant replay, then the conclusion in this situation is the correct one. The debate shouldn’t be whether the goal should have been overturned in this instance, because the rules were correctly enforced. The debate should…

It’s one thing to claim that the Bruins got screwed in Game 3 because Bobby Ryan *broke* the rules and didn’t get caught (which happens all the time btw — don’t retaliate), but it’s an entirely different thing to say the Bruins got screwed because the rules were properly enforced in an inconvenient situation.

He’l’ be disappointed when he finds out none of it is true and he’s actually dead, full stop.

Yes, nothing is ever anyone’s fault. It’s always “someone else’s” fault.

There’s an understatement.

It’s his money - why shouldn’t he?

Liberals who claim to be welcome and accepting and tolerant of all types of people — you know, the people who really care about PEOPLE — seem to enjoy making ageist attacks if it is the right kind of target. Bigotry is cool if the people you’re attacking “deserve it”.

Yes, of course, it’s always about race. Person wants to understand government - gets criticized on the basis of his gender and race.

Yes, his views do not fall in line with the acceptable progressive positions. He must be silenced.

So.. the player definitely looks white. I would not have known he had African ancestry until I read it in this article. This is an interesting test case for so-called hate speech laws. A few questions:

It’s also not much of a “death penalty” if it’s just 1 year. It’s more like a “1-year sentence”

Yes, because why should liberals care about the welfare of other human beings?

Maybe Rachel Maddow is a thinking person who occasionally may not hold a position you expect her to hold? Just because she is left-leaning doesn’t mean she is required to toe the ideological line for every issue.