Immigration

College Republicans Get In Huge Trouble for Posting 'I.C.E. I.C.E. Baby' Signs

But dumb, offensive speech still isn't violence.

|

Mike Stotts/Splash News/Newscom

The College Republicans at the University of California, Merced advertised their club last month with signs that read "I.C.E. I.C.E. Baby" and provided the phone number for Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Now the student government is considering defunding them and similar organizations, in part because College Republicans might use those funds to attend conservative conferences and spread hateful rhetoric on campus.

The initial advertising campaign provoked a response from school administrators several days after the incident. The officials condemned the group's "bigoted and hateful" tactics but reminded students that "as nasty as the club's signs were, they are protected by the First Amendment."

When the student legislature got wind of this, it released a statement saying it "would like to apologize to the student body for not taking a definitive stance against the violent actions from the College Republicans sooner." It continued: "Members of the senate believe that we should not tolerate or support any individual or organization that perpetuates hate speech on our campus. Direct endangerment of any kind should be condemned on this campus."

If any students saw the I.C.E. phone number on the College Republicans' sign and did, in fact, call it to report an undocumented student who was then deported or questioned, that would indeed be direct endangerment. But the reference to "hate speech" takes the statement in a different direction, veering toward the "words are violence" jargon that has become all too common on campuses.

On March 21, the legislative branch of the student government released a statement lamenting the fact that another student government division––the Inter Club Council––granted funding to the CRs to attend the California College Republicans state convention, saying that the conference "will enable their organization to network with individuals that share their harmful views" and that those hateful sentiments would be brought back to the Merced campus.

The College Fix reports that "Senators asked students to attend an April 4 Senate meeting to discuss 'financial bylaw changes that will prohibit student fees from funding partisan organizations on campus, a policy implemented on other UC campuses.'" This meeting was allegedly coupled with a discussion of the "formal timeline of the violent actions committed" by College Republicans, making it pretty clear that the discussion of withholding funds was related to the conduct of these conservative provocateurs. It's not clear how a prohibition on student fee funding for partisan organizations will be applied, or which organizations will be considered partisan––would a pro-choice group, for example, fall into that category? A genuinely neutral removal of student funds for all political organizations would be constitutionally acceptable, but any discrimination on the basis of a group's point of view could run into First Amendment problems.

In an April 16 statement, the California College Republicans say they "view any attempt to defund CRUCM as an explicitly biased attack against conservative values and ideas….Any repercussive action by UC Merced student government or campus administration is an assault on First Amendment rights." They don't say whether they plan to take legal action if they lose their fees, but they're hinting that this issue won't be resolved quietly. This is, after all, the same litigious College Republicans chapter that threatened to sue their school when administrators quoted high security fees for bringing the right-wing pundit Ben Shapiro to campus.

Fears of deportation, or of having their Dreamer or Temporary Protected Status (TPS) revoked, are real for many students. A call to I.C.E. from an antagonistic fellow student would be life-altering to some in UC-Merced's student body. But even shitty, loathsome speech is protected by the First Amendment. The more we equate words with violence, the easier it becomes to justify suppressing speech––and who would be in charge of drawing those boundaries for what type of speech is allowed? The best responses to the College Republicans' flier will consist of nonviolent activism and other forms of speech, not measures that chip away at everyone's First Amendment rights.

Advertisement

NEXT: Trump Is Trying to Convince Rand Paul to Vote for Pompeo: Reason Roundup

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. College Republicans might use those funds to attend conservative conferences and spread hateful rhetoric on campus

    But you repeat yourself, amirite?

    1. It’s not the “hateful rhetoric” that got them into trouble. It’s the Vanilla Ice reference. Let’s face it, if there’s going to be any limit to free speech, Vanilla Ice is a decent place to start.

      1. Queen probably sued the lot of them.

        1. “If any students saw the I.C.E. phone number on the College Republicans’ sign and did, in fact, call it to report an undocumented student who was then deported or questioned, that indeed be direct endangerment. ”

          Lemme get this straight… A “defacto” branch of Government Almighty, a State College, wants to prohibit people from spreading the phone number to another branch of Government Almighty, which is ICE. So what we really have going on here, is for our taxpayer money to go and have different flavors of Government Almighty go and fight each other! Flat out!

          One or the other should change, to STOP THE MADNESS!!! I’m an open-boarders type person, so I think ICE should stop “endangering the humans”! Save the whales?!?!? OK, but let’s also save the humans!!!

          1. Taxpayer-funded battles?

            It’s always comes back to Colosseums and bread and circuses.

            1. I’m making over $7k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life.

              This is what I do… http://www.jobs63.com

            2. I’m making over $7k a month working part time. I kept hearing other people tell me how much money they can make online so I decided to look into it. Well, it was all true and has totally changed my life.

              This is what I do… http://www.jobs63.com

      2. Don’t pretend you don’t know full well that Cool as Ice is one of the greatest films of all time.

        1. He was so ahead of his time…

        2. How about “Ice Station Zebra”? I hear that it was HUUUUGELY Biggly a hit with Howard Huge (Spelling?) in his old age…

          1. Howard Huge? The giant Dog comic character that wasn’t Marmaduke?

            1. I meant Howard Hughes as in filthy-rich oil tycoon whose mind decayed in old age… He watched “Ice Station Zebra” in an endless loop! See http://www.wired.com/2015/12/h…..ning-room/ ….

          2. “Ice Station Zebra” is why there’s an episode of The Prisoner without Patrick McGoohan.

  2. Why is that dumb or offensive? I think it is kind of funny. But whatever it is, there is nothing offensive about it. Doesn’t Robby believe the mere saying of the word “ICE” is offensive?

    1. Inuit and Sami aside, ice people are predominately pretty pale.

      1. I have heard that hateful peoples have been known to call them “ice niggers”!

        I’m OK with such people moving into my neighborhood, as long as they can help me keep my beer cold, from time to time…

    2. My favorite libertarian writer Shikha Dalmia said it best:

      Abolish ICE Now: It’s an evil agency that terrorizes hard-working and peaceful people.

      Damn right “ICE” is offensive!

      1. Only to communis traitors. In fact, reactioms such as yours should trigger investigations int,potential sedition charges. I imagine your loyalty will be found wanting.

    3. Robby?

      Liz Wolfe is a writer from Austin, Texas.

      Looks like your preconceptions are jumping the gun a little more openly than usual.

      1. It was the college beat, so I assumed it was Robby. Sue me.

        1. Yeah, I saw ‘Wolfe’ and my first thought was “Robby must be on vacation and she’s covering the ‘Campus Free Speech’ beat.”

          1. I think Liz covers when Robby is stressed. Robby got stuck on links duty this morning so that may have caused the angst.

            1. Step up Robby. Christian makes 5+ shitposts a day!

          2. Also, the layers-deep libertarian-fail in a couple of places seems very Robby.

            If you use an ‘and then’ to explain the scenario to describe ‘direct endangerment’ you’ve wholly bastardized the word ‘direct’. Even the term ‘direct endangerment’ is a bit oxymoronic.

    4. Totally agreed John. So, I can see why it would be offensive to people who disagree with ICE. But that requires us to lower the threshold of offensive so low that everything is offensive. Oh shit, I think I just figured out their plan.

      Time for me to start getting offended about literally every government agency.

      1. If ICE is offensive t someone, they are probably an illegal, or some commie traitor.

  3. If any students saw the I.C.E. phone number on the College Republicans’ sign and did, in fact, call it to report an undocumented student who was then deported or questioned, that indeed be direct endangerment.

    How so?

    I thought the prevailing mantra was “See something, Say something”.

    1. Calling armed government agents to haul someone away is always endangerment. Always.

      1. So, what if you watch your neighbor kill and bury { (1) his wife, (2) his husband, (3) the children, (4) Vanilla Ice–choose one that gets you most/least concerned}?

        1. Intriguing question. So, we have a male neighbor that has a wife and a husband. That means we’re somewhere that accepts polygamy. But, generally, where polygamy is accepted, there’s just one husband in the situation and several wives. So, it’s probably some kind of weirdo cult. People in weirdo cults tend to have lots of kids. And Vanilla Ice tried to pretend like he didn’t simply steal Under Pressure from Queen.

          So, based on numbers alone, I’m going with most concerned about the kids and least concerned about Vanilla Ice.

          Did I get it right?

        2. One might then argue that endangerment is a proportional response. Even in the case of Vanilla Ice.

        3. Murder is a clear violation of the NAP. Working in this country without government permission is not.

          1. Now all you have to do is get your conception of the NAP enshrined into law and hey presto you’re within spitting distance of an argument.

      2. Calling armed government agents to haul someone away is always endangerment. Always.

        Sure, but the cops are the ones endangering someone directly. Saying the person on the phone is endangering someone directly means that the cops bear no responsibility for not enforcing non-violent crimes in a non-violent manner.

        The term direct endangerment is a bit of an oxymoron itself. If I point a gun at you, you’re in rather direct danger of being shot by me. If I get a group of random people, wave a gun around, and shoot someone randomly without selecting them by name, they were all endangered by me directly but the one who got shot was no more directly endangered than the one who didn’t.

        Maybe she’s alluding to a swatting-type of scenario but, if so, it seems very poorly done.

    2. Other than a nod to Citizen X’s comment, I agree. But, it’s sort of like saying that calling the police on someone who’s committing murder might directly endanger that person. Excuse me while I don’t give much of a fuck about that endangerment.

      “The officials condemned the group’s “bigoted and hateful” tactics but reminded students that “as nasty as the club’s signs were, they are protected by the First Amendment.””

      A reference to ICE is astonishingly nasty? Maybe even sufficiently nasty to make one clutch their pearls?!?! Referencing ICE isn’t even the slightest little bit nasty. It’s stupid and intended to be provocative. But, it’s about as nasty as calling someone some other moronic childish insult like poopy-head, libtard, rethuglican, or cuck.

      1. Indeed, if calling the police on a criminal is now regarded as sanctionable “endangerment”, they’ve gone off the deep end.

        1. +1, this is ridiculous.

      2. “Fears of deportation, or of having their Dreamer or Temporary Protected Status (TPS) revoked, are real for many students. A call to I.C.E. from an antagonistic fellow student would be life-altering to some in UC-Merced’s student body. But even shitty, loathsome speech is protected by the First Amendment. ”

        That call to ICE may or may not be shitty, loathsome, or dickish. But, the call to ICE shouldn’t be life-altering for most UCM students. It shouldn’t be life-altering for the ones who are American citizens or for the ones who are there legally and complying with the terms of that. It really should only be life-altering for ones who aren’t here legally.

        It may be insulting/demeaning. But, so is a lot of the college experience.

        1. These are the same people who believe in trial by ordeal for anyone accused of years-after-the-fact sexual assault. You can’t have it both ways you totalitarian pieces of fuck.

  4. Ah, the memories.

    (Trigger warning: Do not click)

    1. Knowing you, Eddie, Imma guess that link leads to a naughty picture of a nun.

      1. Worse than that.

        1. A priest?

  5. In a time when our president is attacking our cherished institutions like the Federal Bureau of Investigation, I think it’s heartening to know that the next generation of Republicans has the exact same amount of reverence as do currently the Democrats for the government agencies like Immigration and Customs Enforcement that enforce our laws and keep us all safe.

    1. I think it’s heartening to know that the next generation of Republicans has the exact same amount of reverence as do currently the Democrats

      In the era of fake news and reality as satire, I’m personally having trouble figuring out which exact way this would go.

      If I assume College Republicans are bigoted racists, then I have to assume the invocation of Vanilla Ice is a reverent act, and that College Republicans are making the assumption that college students and/or the public at large would never abuse a publicly available phone number.

      If I were a College Democrat or just a libertarian-type looking to insult and “DDOS” ICE this is almost exactly what I’d do and I’d probably put ‘Paid for by College Republicans’ at the bottom of the flyer to boot. Maybe a swastika on the back of a couple flyers in the lower-right hand corner too.

      1. libertarian-type

        Maybe ‘ANARCHO-capitalist type’ would be a better description.

  6. Fears of deportation, or of having their Dreamer or Temporary Protected Status (TPS) revoked, are real for many students. A call to I.C.E. from an antagonistic fellow student would be life-altering to some in UC-Merced’s student body.

    So is getting arrested for any other crime. Is it now going to be a crime to call the police? Life sucks Robby. Grow a pair and get over it.

    1. “having their Dreamer or Temporary Protected Status (TPS) revoked”

      Their TPS status is described in their TPS report.

      1. Did you get that memo?

      2. Yeeeeeaaaaah. I’m going to need you to post this on Saturday.

        1. The Bobs would like to have a word with you.

          1. What would you say you do?

    2. In California they are trying to make it a crime to call federal authorities

      1. Except when they need to call the federal authorities to get their welfare, food stamps, and grants for various social programs.

      2. And student loans. I forgot student loans. Cannot have young adults wasting their formative years learning about socialism at universities without student loans.

        1. Don’t forget that illegal alien’s pay less in tuition than out of state citizens. That makes sense, right?

    3. So who wants to tell John that Robby didn’t write this article?

      1. So, Robby didn’t write it and that matters why?

        1. Calm down, I’m just messing with you for repeatedly calling out Robby when he didn’t write the article. It’s a joke, no need to get all defensive about it.

          1. IT WAS OFFENSIVE !

          2. Defensiveness is all Red Tony knows.

            1. I am not saying a word. Go whine to someone who cares.

          3. I love how half the comments on this thread are long diatribes from John about why his assumption that Robby wrote this piece was justified. Fucking legend.

            1. Literally 3 posts. Out of 127. Every day you make it easier to understand the absolutely retarded shit you espouse.

    4. Robby?

      Liz Wolfe is a writer from Austin, Texas.

      Again with the preconceptions out in the open. Tsk tsk.

      1. Seeing something stupid about colleges and assuming Robby wrote it is such a terrible assumption. My God, Robby would never do that.

        I will never understand the loyalty he commands from his fanboys. Does he have to get restraining orders against you people? As annoying as he can be, you have to respect the kind of fanatical devotion and love he inspires in you and others. It would be a bit creepy if you were Robby, but from the outside it is remarkable.

        1. Is it as bad as the automatic slavering hatred he gets from others? Even when he’s not involved?

          Just once admit you made a mistake and move on, geez.

          1. “John|4.19.18 @ 10:47AM|#

            It was the college beat, so I assumed it was Robby. Sue me.”

            He did, blame the people who won’t let it go.

            1. Oh look, John has his very own white knight now.

              1. Jesus Christ you’re tiresome.

                1. Why would anyone come here to have a civil conversation when that is get they get back?

                  Why can’t you just admit you didnt see what John said and move on.

                  1. Why would anyone come here to have a civil conversation when that is get they get back?

                    Ask John.

                    Why can’t you just admit you didnt see what John said and move on.

                    I did see what John said. I’ve also had the privilege of experiencing his posting habits for eight years.

                    1. So you act like an asshole to me. Makes perfect sense.

                    2. Well I’m certainly not sorry if I hurt your feelings. If you want to stick up for John every time he flies off the handle then you’re going to be busy.

                    3. No no, it’s my fault, next time I’ll stay out of the way and let you two slapfight it out.

                    4. That’s almost always the safest bet.

                    5. I’ve also had the privilege of experiencing his posting habits for eight years.

                      There was that vacation while he was sulking over at glib.

                    6. I enjoy offending you Sparky. You are a whiny bully who deserves it. You and Jordan and several others constantly kick others around and then whine and cry when I give it back to you. Every time you go to whine about my being a dick to you, remember, that you are every bit as much of a dick to me and everyone else on here. You want to be a dick, fine. What is the point of the internet if not to be a dick. But could you please stop being such a pussy about people doing the same to you or your beloved reason staff?

                    7. I enjoy offending you Sparky. You are a whiny bully who deserves it.

                      I wouldn’t have it any other way.

                      Every time you go to whine about my being a dick to you, remember, that you are every bit as much of a dick to me and everyone else on here.

                      Everyone here is a dick to everyone else here at one time or another. I’m not sure I ever recall whining about it. Unless you call bringing it up whining.

                      But could you please stop being such a pussy about people doing the same to you

                      Again, I’m not sure I ever recall doing this. But then again, I’m guessing you’re calling me a pussy for doing what you’re doing right now. That is, calling someone else a dick.

                      or your beloved reason staff

                      I honestly don’t give a shit who you pick on. The fact that you constantly call out Robby for ridiculous shit is what makes everyone think you’re an idiot. Hell, I’ve called out Robby as well when he posts crazy things, but never with the foaming at the mouth vehemence that you can always manage to work up.

                    8. Everyone here is a dick to everyone else here at one time or another. I’m not sure I ever recall whining about it. Unless you call bringing it up whining.

                      You are whinning about it right now. What is this except you whinning about how mean I am to your beloved Robby?

                      $park? leftist poser|4.19.18 @ 11:24AM|#

                      Why would anyone come here to have a civil conversation when that is get they get back?

                      Ask John.

                      Why can’t you just admit you didnt see what John said and move on.

                      I did see what John said. I’ve also had the privilege of experiencing his posting habits for eight years.

                      What, do you want a date with the guy? You should just ask him out.

                    9. You are whinning about it right now. What is this except you whinning about how mean I am to your beloved Robby?

                      Ok, so given this then you’re also being a giant pussy whiner right now.

                      Like I said, it’s not that your mean to Robby, it’s that you get completely pissed off at the dumbest things.

                    10. And you don’t get pissed off at stupid things? You’re here every fucking day making it clear that you’re a miserable fuck and potshotting people because you have nothing of value that anyone wants to hear.

                    11. Why shouldn’t anyone call out Robby? He is an idiot progtard with all his false equivalencies, and his articles are usually soft headed bullshit. Not Dalmia bullshit, but bad.

                    12. ” Everyone here is a dick to everyone else here at one time or another. I’m not sure I ever recall whining about it. ”

                      He whined.

        2. Another conclusion jump! What makes you think I’m a Robby fanboi?

          Face it, Jack, you’ve just been outed, as if no one knew anyway.

          1. Yes you are a Robby fanboy. If you don’t like being called that, stop defending and whining about everyone being unfair to him. Or least stop being so defensive about the allegation. Thanks for showing the board how big of a nerve I struck.

            1. It’s unbelievable that people still think this is some kind of winning retort. I think lc1789 learned this from you as he throws it out a lot too.

              1. He did win. Just admit it and move on.

    5. Isn’t there someplace other than a libertarian board where you can vomit the sentiment “Being arrested sucks, get over it”?

      1. Democratic Underground perhaps. Just make it clear that you’re calling for concentration camps for Trump voters.

  7. the “words are violence” jargon that has become all too common on campuses

    It is nice to see Depeche Mode enjoying a comeback.

    1. +1 silence

  8. The best party on campus?

    No, that would be a toga party

    1. Massive bong hits are now generally legal in CA.

  9. “If any students saw the I.C.E. phone number on the College Republicans’ sign and did, in fact, call it to report an undocumented student who was then deported or questioned, that indeed be direct endangerment.”

    Since when is it endangerment to report a criminal act?

    1. You would do that to your pot smoking friends?

      1. If I didn’t like pot, sure. Would you call the cops on your friends if they were stealing something? What are you a snitch or something?

        You don’t like border laws. Tough shit. Not everyone agrees with you.

        1. “Not everyone agrees with you.”

          That is a relief.

          1. I favor strict border controls.

            I wouldn’t snitch on my pot smoking friends.

            1. I wouldn’t either. But I don’t like pot laws.

    2. “Since when is it endangerment to report a criminal act?”

      my thoughts exactly

  10. obama’s jd deported way more people than bush’s, I guess I don’t know how trump is stacking up, but this is a mainstream, bipartisan policy position. I really don’t understand how anyone can call it ‘political’. Oh well, more proof if you’re not libertarian you’re a hypocrite.

    1. To be a hypocrite and also completely without a hint of self awareness is the unique talent of libertarians.

    2. Obama did not deport more people than Bush. Like the unemployment numbers, Obama changed the metric for deportation reporting in such a way as to greatly overstate deportations. Which actually went down significantly during his administration.

      Obama is a liar, so always check his work when he makes a claim

      1. I don’t recall if Obama himself changed the metrics, but the metrics were changed and the net effect was indeed to artificially inflate deportation numbers. Thus Obama can simultaneously be great for immigrants, or terrible on immigrants, depending on which glasses you happen to be wearing.

        It’s a brilliant move if you’re the type of person that wants to be able to tell every potential supporter you helped them and every potential supporter than you hurt their enemies while doing whatever the fuck you want.

        1. It works great for someone like Obama. Who lacks any real integrity.

          1. It’s the sort of tactic which only works if you’ve got the media in the tank for you. Anybody but a Democrat attempting it would have what they were doing pointed out every time they tried it.

  11. So, the Left has discovered that a powerful Federal government can be dangerous. Apparently they are surprised by this.

    1. If Sessions gets s relocated by a more aggressive AG with better priorities, the. Progressives can learn jus how much suffering can be visited upon them by the feds. I can only hope this happens sooner than later.

      1. The only lesson they are capable of learning is ‘it wasn’t the right king this time’. That’s it.

  12. If any students saw the I.C.E. phone number on the College Republicans’ sign and did, in fact, call it to report an undocumented student who was then deported or questioned, that indeed be direct endangerment.

    What? Reporting a crime is endangerment? Right.

    1. Libertarianism for maximum cop buttfucking! Amurca!

      1. Tony is for buttfucking but against Libertarianism.

        Tony supports big government buttfucking all of us.

        1. One day you’ll figure out the difference between taxing a billionaire 1% of his income and sending hundreds of thousands of members of the underclass to rape cages, then you might have a grownup political philosophy.

          1. One day you’ll be able to count above 5. I’m an optimist.

          2. One day you’ll figure out that confiscating that last niggling 50% of their wealth from anyone who makes 5 dollars a year more than you do won’t even cover 6 months of your 5 Year Plan. And then you might notice the gulags in all of the paradises where your grownup political philosophy is ascendant. Hopefully you’ll join them.

          3. Tony, you ar into some really kinky, faggoty shit.

          4. We heard it here first, Tony supports a 1% income tax on billionaires. Notably, one of the biggest tax cuts in history.

      2. “Libertarianism for maximum cop buttfucking! Amurca!”

        And yet you spend all your time buttfucking little boys Tony.

  13. But yesterday someone from the daily wire thought that something undefined should happen to a vile prof from CA. See, complete equivalence.

  14. “But even shitty, loathsome speech is protected by the First Amendment. ”

    Even this article.

  15. I was watching the local news last night and they reported on a “vile act of hatred”. Apparently someone spray painted “White lives matter” on a building.

    1. So would it be OK to display a sign that says “White lives do NOT matter” ?!?!

  16. The officials condemned the group’s “bigoted and hateful” tactics but reminded students that “as nasty as the club’s signs were, they are protected by the First Amendment.”

    I like how the University authorities don’t even pretend neutrality anymore.

    If any students saw the I.C.E. phone number on the College Republicans’ sign and did, in fact, call it to report an undocumented student who was then deported or questioned, that indeed be direct endangerment.

    So breaking US immigration laws confers some kind of legal immunity?


    1. I like how the University authorities don’t even pretend neutrality anymore.

      “We realize that even though these people are troglodytes that don’t deserve to breath the same air as us, we have to at least pretend that we aren’t actively against them. Thus, we’re instituting a policy of one-sided enforcement of rules and regulations to shut them down, but please understand we will not do this to you or those who agree with us. That is all.”

  17. Good god people are obsessed with hating brown people.

    1. I don’t really like brown rice. Is that the same?

        1. Because it’s brown. Duh.

      1. Any rice – white, brown, Thai black, Texas red, wild, whatever – is but a canvas on which the chef paints. It’s a base for actual flavors to rest on and not an entree itself. Except for jasmine rice, that shit is delicious all on its own.

        1. I had curry fried rice at a Chinese restaurant the other night. After eating it I came to the conclusion that rice should always be cooked in curry.

          1. After eating it I came to the conclusion that rice should always be cooked in curry.

            Curried rice is still canvas. The minimum requirements to raise it beyond that status are eggs and animal fat, IMO. Otherwise, it’s still just rice.

            1. While the dish did contain vegetable bits, egg bits, and meat bits, I still maintain that it would have been good without all that.

        2. Except for jasmine rice, that shit is delicious all on its own.

          You skipped Spanish rice you bigot.

          1. Wouldn’t that make him a spigot?

          2. Spanish rice is a finished painting, broheim.

        3. Saffron rice is also delicious on its own.

          1. Why do you people keep trying to add spiced-up, modified rice dishes to my list of plain-ass rice types. Why.

            1. Because nobody likes you.

            2. Saffron rice is a type of rice to normal people. The bits of gold in Goldschl?ger do not make it a mixed drink.

    2. People are obsessed with hating people.

      FIFY

      People are obsessed with people hating people.

      FIFY v2

    3. You do know that you have no idea how others’ brains work, right? You have no idea that the vast majority of them don’t hate “brown people”, even if they are being tribalist?

      You do realize you’re the worst tribalist here, right?

      1. Not a single one of these immigration enforcement obsessives has Canadians in mind.

        1. Even the brown ones?

          http://www.chronicle.com/blogs/brains…..ults/46113

          The “libertarian” types did the best.

        2. So what?

          1. So we agree that it’s not about immigration per se.

            1. Again – so what? Is there a law somewhere that says we all have to believe diverrrrrsity is a wonderful thing?

              1. Physical diversity isn’t a net boon or harm in particular. It’s just a bunch of different looking people.

                Notably, the diversity people think that we should be a monoculture.

                If they do say cultural diversity, you’d have a hard time figuring out how that could be what they mean when, for example, a Muslim might think their gay coworker should be put to death but it seems unlikely that the other coworkers would agree unless the gay coworker also ate their lunch out of the communal fridge. For the one Muslim coworker, diversity doesn’t mean the same thing.

                And before someone gets their candy panties in a twist, feel free to replace ‘Muslim’ with ‘Christian Fundamentalist’ if that floats your boat. I mean, sure, it’s a profound misunderstanding of Christianity but it’s an accurate picture of a minority of a minority of them.

                1. This is a major philosophical hangup for me and my idea of Libertopia. How do we allow for such vastly differing opinions? Even with things like abortion, some people like Kevin Williamson have a visceral personal disapproval of law-abiding citizens. Issues like whether an embryo or a gay person should live are inextricably linked to our sense of morality. I would not be happy if murder were legalized tomorrow.

                  One of my more philosophical libertarian acquaintances has basically just concluded that Libertopia would have to be groups of small, self-segregated tribes in (as much as possible) harmony. Sorta like how Amish communities exist independently of larger society.

                  I suppose unlike murder, gay people and those who have abortions are not directly infringing upon the person or property of non-consenting others, so we can exist without interference from others, but don’t we have some duty to call out and prevent what we perceive as evil?

                  1. It’s a paradox: Liberal society demands that differences of opinion be permitted, but historically liberal society has only actually been possible is a society where there’s widespread consensus.

        3. White people typically don’t migrate to white countries. Brown people, on the other hand, know their lives will be better living in the same country as white people. That’s why so many of them move to white countries (despite all the bigotry going on).

          1. White people typically don’t migrate to white countries.

            Red Rocks considers all non-Germanic people non-white.

            1. I suspect my skin’s quite a bit darker than yours, and I’d rather live near white people, too.

        4. Not a single one of these immigration enforcement obsessives has Canadians in mind.

          I do.

          (That said, I’m not obsessed with immigration enforcement, though I think nations have borders and can legitimately control who crosses them and that laws should be enforced.)

        5. Only because Canadians aren’t streaming across out borders. If they were, we’d care.

          1. Women from every superstitious satrapy in the world are streaming across the border INTO Canada, where there are absolutely no antichoice laws against birth control. Much of Canada’s success in repealing primitive taboos followed after the 1972 LP platform plank was copied by the Supreme Court into the Roe v. Wade decision. An Austin lawyer handled the case, BTW.

          2. Women from every superstitious satrapy in the world are streaming across the border INTO Canada, where there are absolutely no antichoice laws against birth control. Much of Canada’s success in repealing primitive taboos followed after the 1972 LP platform plank was copied by the Supreme Court into the Roe v. Wade decision. An Austin lawyer handled the case, BTW.

    4. Thank you for being a reliable race baiter.

    5. I hate white people, black people, brown people, red people, and yellow people.

      1. I hate everyone equally
        You can’t tear that out of me
        No segregation separation
        Just me in my world of enemies

      2. But you’re okay with the maroons.
        Everyone has an in-group.


      3. There are only two things I can’t stand in this world. People who are intolerant of other people’s cultures… and the Dutch.

        -Nigel Powers

    6. People,
      People hating people,
      Are the luckiest people,
      In the world.

    7. You what famous Democrat hated brown people?

      1. all of them?

    8. Yeah and we should murder those people in the streets to demonstrate our tolerance, right comrade?

      Neck yourself pronto faggot.

    9. Tony, why do you hate brown people so much? Or is it a progtard thing? You fucking kiddie raping racist piece of shit.

    10. It’s curious, then, that it appears to be primarily non-citizen brown people that earn all the ire. Almost as if it isn’t color at all, but rather nationality. Is nationality an immutable trait inherent to a persons nature?

  18. I like the idea of withholding money from partisan campus groups, cuz it will be fun to watch all the Raza, LGBTXYZ, and Junior Commie clubs argue about their impartial agenda.

  19. We should probably round up and execute easily offended people.

    1. This is what came out of abandoning corporal punishment for children.

      No generation that was raised knowing what a good ass-kicking from the old man was has ever, ever been confused about the difference between words and violence.

    2. We should probably round up and execute easily offended people.

      The most easily offended people are adequately addressed simply by being offensive and allowing them to execute themselves. I would say the ‘easily-offended-but-not-really’ or ‘offended-in-proxy’ people who are the problem as not only are they not actually offended, they tend to execute in proxy as well.

  20. Most people don’t know that the Central Valley region of Commifornia has all sorts of conservatives that live there.

    They will be rounded up and sent by trains to the East for resettlement.

  21. “If any students saw the I.C.E. phone number on the College Republicans’ sign and did, in fact, call it to report an undocumented student who was then deported or questioned, that indeed be direct endangerment. ”

    In what world is reporting a law breaker direct endangerment?

    1. Welcome to clown world.

  22. Honestly as long as an immigrant supported the First Amendment, I’d make them a citizen on the spot.

    1. Honestly as long as an immigrant supported the First Amendment, I’d make them a citizen on the spot.

      First and second. Nothing says, reciprocally, “I respect and trust your words, beliefs, and actions as a human being under penalty of death.” like saying, “I respect and trust your words, beliefs, and actions as a human being.” and then handing them a gun.

      But, then again, there’s a reason why it’s called a “Mexican Standoff”.

  23. BORDERS ARENT WHAT GOVERNMENF IS FOR!

    1. Yup. Government is for free needle exchange programs and redistribution of wealth.

      1. Government is just the name we give to the gulags we build together.

    2. How is there a government if there are no boundaries to its jurisdiction?

      1. There can be a government without borders if that government happens to be the government of the entire planet. I mean, sure, the ‘border’ would be the atmosphere but technically everyone alive falls under the same government.

  24. But even shitty, loathsome speech is protected by the First Amendment.

    And I bet the numerous leftist organzations at a college that size provide ample evidence of this every day. Probably too numerous to limit to a single blog post, though.

  25. It’s an asshole move to take pleasure and trivialize the suffering of others.

  26. So would you report a pot smoker? On principle?

    1. I want all marxists dead on principle.

  27. A call to I.C.E. from an antagonistic fellow student would be life-altering to some in UC-Merced’s student body. But even shitty, loathsome speech is protected by the First Amendment.

    A call to the campus bias incident response office from an antagonistic fellow student would be life-altering to some of UC-Merced’s student body. Let me know when that becomes shitty and loathsome.

    1. They don’t call it Mer-Dead for nothing. Right down Highway 99 from Turdlock and Molesto.

  28. I wonder if SWATing is shitty and loathsome. We’ll have to wait until a Republican does it to find out.


  29. If any students saw the I.C.E. phone number on the College Republicans’ sign and did, in fact, call it to report an undocumented student who was then deported or questioned, that would indeed be direct endangerment.

    Yes, they would have been ‘in danger’ of following the law. A dumb law, perhaps, but you might ask yourself why an illegal immigrant pays less in college tuition than a domestic citizen student form another state, and to that there isn’t a good answer other than citizenship is a disability in California.

    1. It’s a great law.

      No more illegals! No more open borders!

      1. I don’t really have any particular desire to weed out or otherwise remove illegal immigrants, but I do point out the idiocy of having expansive labor protections that were literally intended to put immigrant and minority labor at a severe disadvantage while also claiming that you want open borders.

        If you throw immigration wide open today without reforming our ‘safety nets’ and welfare systems, than you bankrupt the entire nation tomorrow. The same can’t be said if you do it in reverse, and this illustrates the intellectual dishonesty (or outright stupidity) of virtually every Reason author.

        It’s a profound and idiotic misunderstanding of the problem, but Reason continually sticks their head up their own ass on the subject so I get to keep having fun at their expense.

    2. An illegal immigrant of established local residency pays less in college tuition than a domestic citizen student from another state in Texas, too.

      You know why? Local residents even the illegal ones, pay the local taxes that pay for state government, including public colleges and universities.

      Well, at least in the states that are sensible enough not to have income taxes. If Cali’s got a problem because working under the table because you don’t have papers means not paying income tax, well, that’s Cali’s idiotic choice to have an income tax, right?

      1. Yes, the people in Cali are extremely idiotic.

      2. Hello again, bigoted, authoritarian, right-wing Mini-Me.

        — Rev. Kirkland, your better

  30. So by that logic, the police should never be called on any criminal, since that would be endangering.

    If you’re a criminal, that’s the risk you take.

  31. If any students saw the I.C.E. phone number on the College Republicans’ sign and did, in fact, call it to report an undocumented student who was then deported or questioned, that would indeed be direct endangerment.

    Direct endangerment? Seriously? How so? To whom?

  32. …veering toward the “words are violence” jargon that has become all too common on campuses.

    Whatever happened to the old saying “Sticks and stones may break my bones but words can never hurt me”?

  33. This is sweet! I hope somebody did call ICE! Frankly I would call ICE on illegal immigrants all the time if I thought they’d actually show up. People calling in tips gets them out of the “randomly harassing people” issue. Problem is they’d probably never come and actually arrest/boot the people. When I was in school in California growing up I could have pointed out that like 1/3 of my class was all illegal immigrants. It’s not hard to enforce this stuff. It’s not that I hated all the kids or anything, but we simply don’t need millions of uneducated immigrants in the USA in the 21st century.

  34. If any students saw the I.C.E. phone number on the College Republicans’ sign and did, in fact, call it to report an undocumented student who was then deported or questioned, that would indeed be direct endangerment.

    Endangering law breakers with being arrested doesn’t seem like a bad thing.

    1. Really! In Christian Socialist Germany and Holland there were disloyal subjects who actually harbored, aided and abetted selfish Jews in flagrant violation of the law.

  35. The fledgling nanny-state right-wingers of the Federalist Society and authoritarian bigots-in-training of the College Republicans have rights, too.

  36. “Fears of deportation, or of having their Dreamer or Temporary Protected Status (TPS) revoked, are real for many students. A call to I.C.E. from an antagonistic fellow student would be life-altering to some in UC-Merced’s student body.”

    As it should be life-altering. A call to the police about me, if I were a law-breaker, might well be life-altering.

  37. “If any students saw the I.C.E. phone number on the College Republicans’ sign and did, in fact, call it to report an undocumented student who was then deported or questioned, that indeed be direct endangerment. ”

    Getting apprehended by ICE and deported is not endangerment physically. Sure it’s a hassle for those here illegally, but if you do something else against the law and get held accountable, we don’t say the police action is a direct endangerment. Or if it is, it’s legitimate… the statement above clearly implies that be deported or questioned would somehow be illegitimate law enforcement behavior.

    We’ve gotten to this funny place where someone saying something you don’t like is violence. What a load of crap…

  38. Reporting illegal aliens is a bad thing? So US citizenship and legal immigration are totally meaningless. Thanks for the update.

  39. “If any students saw the I.C.E. phone number on the College Republicans’ sign and did, in fact, call it to report an undocumented student who was then deported or questioned, that would indeed be direct endangerment. “

    In what twisted reality does reporting criminals (aka “undocumented students”) to the authorities constitute the crime of “endangerment”?

  40. Question: Is it OK to circulate the names, addresses and photographs of Internment and Coerced Emigration agents?

  41. “Fears of deportation, or of having their Dreamer or Temporary Protected Status (TPS) revoked, are real for many students. A call to I.C.E. from an antagonistic fellow student would be life-altering to some in UC-Merced’s student body.”

    So would a call to the police stating factually that their fellow student had robbed them at knifepoint.

    Reporting a crime is not antagonistic- I don’t necessarily agree with the law that the remedy for said crime should be deportation or revocation of status, but I think that the only way to change the law is to… change the law.

  42. A soverign nation without secure borders is neither soverign nor a nation.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.