Tuesday, October 26, 2004

Chilling Political Speech on Campus

By

Read full article...

Posted 10/26 | Add a Comment

    Comments:

    You must register to comment.

    Login | Register

  1. I hope everyone understands that the same group of funders who hounded Howard Dean out of the race, came together to fund the Naderfactor and hound Ralph Nader. Of course the President of the Naderfactor is Tricia Enright, the former communication director of trhe Dean campaign who moved over to the John Kerry campaign. Those who were anti-war under Dean and are not seeking a job in the Kerry administration, might want to stick to their guns and vote for Nader. That is what the Centerist wing of the Democrats are afraid of. They should be afraid.

    Posted by steve conn from seward,alaska  on  10/26  at  12:35 PM

  2. CSN, here is my letter . . . good luck! ....................
    ....................
    .....................


    Having heard of the choice made to exclude the Columbia Students For Nader representative from your presidential debate, I think it best to point out the obvious: this will seriously reflect not only on your organization but your university entire as well as the leading candidates’ campaigns. It is unconscionable to pretend many and intelligent people are not sympathetic to Nader even if these many also intend to vote for Kerry. Those students supporting Nader should be given an opportunity to voice their political concerns. If their case is not a strong one, or a leading one, that will be proven by debate and only debate. Your organization is called the Columbia Political Union. Do you understand political unity to be best realized by exclusion? I recommend you reconsider your decision simply for credibility’s sake.

    Thank you for your time,

    Theo Papathanasis

    Posted by Theo from  on  10/26  at  12:36 PM

  3. I sent a letter as well. This is just irreprehensible.

    o whom it may concern,

    My name is Zoran Bajic. I am just finishing up community college with the intentions of transferring to a four-year university after the completion of this semester. I just wanted to say that, because of my major, Columbia University has been high on my list of prospective schools. The correct phrasing now, though, would be “was” high on my list. I recently read an article claiming that the CPU would not allow a representative from Columbia Students for Nader to participate in the campus presidential debate. I find this unconscionable. How do you call yourself a “political union” yet bar representatives from inclusion solely because they are not considered “poplular” ? It makes me question if Columbia University carries this attitude over when dealing with students of minority.


    -Zoran Bajic

    Posted by Zoran Bajic from  on  10/26  at  02:32 PM

  4. I am a complete outsider in your dealings but I am assuming that your group is supposed to demonstrate democracy in ways that we can not view in the real world. I believe you should include all that resemble reality. The more the marrier. I am not a Nader fan and have been working for the last 18 months to get rid of Bush. I am scared that Nader will ruin it again. He was not the only reason last time but he was one of the reasons Gore lost. With out the Nader vote Gore would have won. Or if he had won Tenn. Or if he had won Ark. If Bush had not stole it.

    Posted by Terry isler from  on  10/26  at  06:34 PM

  5. Oh my God!  No “Nader stand-in” at a college mock presidential debate?

    Looks like Ashcroft and his goose-stepping brownshirts are finally taking over.

    Go for youe gas masks - quick!!

    Posted by Just by Now from  on  10/27  at  06:48 PM

  6. Why are people so shocked about Nader’s exclusion at the faux debates?  I’d like to see all “awed” critics translate their horror into action respecting the exclusion...in the real world...of Nader. In fact, the mind should be encouraged to go even further, reminding oneself that even if he did get in....  And so on.  Please, let’s have our “starting point” be that letters to the editor about Friedman’s excesses in the NYTimes and drafts going to Columbia University with regard to exclusion will fall in the same wastebasket. Perhaps I should have read the article and the commentary more carefully. If so, I apologize.  I don’t think so, however.

    Posted by Richard Oxman from  on  10/27  at  07:19 PM
    7. Commenting is not available in this weblog entry. {/if}

    Next entry: It Is Either There or Here, and Better Them Than Us: A Pro-War Political Myth

    Previous entry: In U.S., Her Work, the Vote and Democracy

    [ads]

    Support Press Action