CAMPUS RAPE HOAX.....CONTINUES....MORE OBAMA PC SHENANIGANS...

the feds under Obama have forced down upon the weak kneed administrators, who in many cases share the same idiotic liberal sympathies, these guidelines

if fed rules aren't followed, they punish schools by the withholding of federal funds Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

Do you have any proof of this happening?

The story is available in the College Fix. The student (who is a veteran) was drunk and this TEACHER invited herself to his dorm room. They had oral sex...well, she performed oral sex on him. She left and emailed a couple of friends saying how slutty she was and what she did. Apparently this is not her first time. Anyway, a few months pass and she gets advice (and worried) so she changes her story. He went after her. She filed an account with the college and he was immediately expelled (that includes housing as well). He was not allowed to interview witnesses, nor was he allowed to use campus resources to mount a defense. You can guess the rest. He was removed from class and branded. (figuratively of course)
New rules take effect and now he has filed a lawsuit alleging she was the initiator of the sex. Evidence gathering finds the emails and other male students that she has had sex with. She is still teaching at this time (just before summer break) and is a member of the facility in good standing. Far different from how they treated him.

Nice to see liberalism in action isn't it?

http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/22770/ Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

You're under the same mistaken impression that Rush was. You think that a slut can't be raped. You would be a fucking moron for thinking that. Member of the facility? Why is that liberalism in action? Why wouldn't you just want to find out what actually happened? Would you even accept a rape accusation due to her promiscuous nature?

Seriously, you can only respond with a typo correction?

And the rash of phony campus rape stories isn't happening in a vacum; it has been ginned up by the Obama administration based on a widely discredited study that claimed 20% of college women have been "sexually harassed".............

As expected, the Obama administration tries to advance it's progressive agenda using lies and deceit. And individual rights and liberties are the victim (in addition to the truth).

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archive...-assaulted.php Originally Posted by Whirlaway

You're right, it is ginned up. I doubt it's 20%, it's probably more, especially with creeps like you running around with the attitude you've displayed here. You are subhuman filth. There's nothing too low for you to try and twist and lay at Obama's doorstep.

Read up on what subject you mouth-breathing Rush-quoting idiot? A sexual harassment investigation on a college campus that went wrong? And, that you and the rest of the clown posse want to blame the President of the United States for?

It's fucking stupid. Originally Posted by timpage

Sexual harassment claims, as well as class discrimination claims, have a foundation of institutional bias against the protected class as part of their justification.

Obama and the government he controls and directs has contributed to an anti-white male bias on campus and therefore must be responsible as a party to the attendant problems.

Do you have any proof of this happening? Originally Posted by WombRaider

It's from the education department's office of civil rights

The same people who brought us the idea of a racial quota system in handling discipline in public schools instead of just disciplining the individual actors
These people:
http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/know.html

It's from the education department's office of civil rights

The same people who brought us the idea of a racial quota system in handling discipline in public schools instead of just disciplining the individual actors These people:
http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/know.html Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

A Liberal's request for "proof" is a rhetorical question based upon the "philosophy" that the Liberal is not going to deny the existence of the "thing" requiring "proof," but is a simple-minded assertion that "you can't prove it is true," which is in turn based on the Liberal's "assumption" that conservatives lack the intellectual capacity to secure and present proof of the accusation.

That explains some of the reason Liberals for the most part avoid occupations, like law enforcement and prosecution, because they have to PROVE their own allegations and they are not known generally for being competent to do so .... See the Baltimore "Prosecutor" as a good example.

So they fall back on name-calling and attempting to marginalize their critics.

Well said.

So they fall back on name-calling and attempting to marginalize their critics. Originally Posted by LexusLover

POT meet KETTLE

You can tell from the above quote that LLIdiot is obviously trying to distance himself from childish, "name-calling!"

Surely, LLIdiot would never resort to childish "name-calling" himself.

Or would he?

Let's examine the following "name-calling" episode, which occurred at 7:22 this morning (in another Political Forum thread), from (you guessed it) LLIdiot himself.

That just goes to show you how STUPID you really are ....

You have experience "trying to teach a chicken to do calculus." Originally Posted by LexusLover

As illustrated above, LLIdiot oftentimes engages in (and often initiates) "name-calling" against any and all who disagree with his arrogant, condescending bullshit.

All the while, the Patriarchal Idiot attempts to wash himself clean while engaging in it himself, hoping no one else will take notice.

I can't help but wonder if this friggin' IDIOT actually believes his holier than thou, arrogant & condescending bullshit!

I sure as hell, don't!

LLIdiot, quit deflecting and answer the simple "yes" or "no" question.


LLIdiot = ... DIVERT ... DEFLECT ... REPEAT ... OFTEN ...

A Liberal's request for "proof" is a rhetorical question based upon the "philosophy" that the Liberal is not going to deny the existence of the "thing" requiring "proof," but is a simple-minded assertion that "you can't prove it is true," which is in turn based on the Liberal's "assumption" that conservatives lack the intellectual capacity to secure and present proof of the accusation.

That explains some of the reason Liberals for the most part avoid occupations, like law enforcement and prosecution, because they have to PROVE their own allegations and they are not known generally for being competent to do so .... See the Baltimore "Prosecutor" as a good example.

So they fall back on name-calling and attempting to marginalize their critics. Originally Posted by LexusLover

link?

A Liberal's request for "proof" is a rhetorical question based upon the "philosophy" that the Liberal is not going to deny the existence of the "thing" requiring "proof," but is a simple-minded assertion that "you can't prove it is true," which is in turn based on the Liberal's "assumption" that conservatives lack the intellectual capacity to secure and present proof of the accusation. Originally Posted by LexusLover

This is basically just a plea by LLIdiot for the "liberals" to let his inane bullshit fly without ever asking him for proof. This way, he can continue to blather on without any consequences or fear of being called out. Very good LLIdiot!

Consider this request for "proof" that stopped LLIdiot's bullshit dead in it's tracks. Caught making up his own facts about the Walter Scott case, LLIdiot had to use his dodge-deflect shuffle to run away from the thread forever.

can we leave in the part during which Scott gets control of the taser and shoots the Officer 2x's with taser darts one of which is still "wired" to the taser gun?

" Originally Posted by LexusLover

he shot him in the back"! Speaking of "plain and simple" ...

. has anyone ever seen someone FLEEING by ....

..... running backwards FACING THE POLICE OFFICER?. Originally Posted by LexusLover

Do you finally have a link moron? Or are you going to slink away again?

You're under the same mistaken impression that Rush was. You think that a slut can't be raped. You would be a fucking moron for thinking that. Member of the facility? Why is that liberalism in action? Why wouldn't you just want to find out what actually happened? Would you even accept a rape accusation due to her promiscuous nature? Originally Posted by WombRaider

If you had read any of the story then you wouldn't have posted any of this bullshit. Fuck off!

The story last week (yes, last week) was she was NOW a member of the English department. Don't you know the difference between NOW and THEN?

You're right, it is ginned up. I doubt it's 20%, it's probably more, especially with creeps like you running around with the attitude you've displayed here. You are subhuman filth. There's nothing too low for you to try and twist and lay at Obama's doorstep. Originally Posted by WombRaider

You should read the story before being stupid...

You should read the story before being stupid... Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Speaking of which, is there a reputable "story" from a reputable source stating that the Malaysian Airlines 777 was hijacked, parked on a remote island and cleverly camouflaged by netting and shrubs?

If so, please post the link!

POT meet KETTLE Originally Posted by bigtex

You keep coming up short. Your lap pup Want-a-be-a-Womb asked to be called STUPID whenever he posts something STUPID. Since you haven't asked to be called STUPID, yet, when you post something STUPID, I am not going to call you STUPID, even though I realize you qualify for the label of STUPID most of the time when you post STUPID shit you know nothing about.

Parrots do that all the time. Repeat what others say, and people who hear them doing the repeating actually think parrots are smart. Apparently, that's what you think about yourself. That is: If you keep repeating it enough do you actually believe people will start thinking you are smart? You're not SMART. You are a smartass though..

link? Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

You'll find it on the City map there in Austin showing where Nau's is located.

Before the internet, how did you ever find any information?