Bloomberg slams liberal "culture of censorship" in Ivy League

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Nate Silver confirms that right of center politicians are almost totally absent these days as graduation speakers in the Ivory Tower. Lots of lip service is given to tolerance and a preference for diversity. That's the PC thing to do, particularly among those who like to think they are enlightened. The reality is very different. Click on the poll on that which Nate links in his article.

Part of the problem is that the Democrats haven't really done anything that would get students riled up and part is that while all politicians prefer speaking to like-minded people, conservatives have been more prone to that because they could afford to.  They still act like they can do that because they don't seem to have truly grasped that the political ground has eroded out from underneath them nationally because regionally they still have solid ground.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

So you're still not admitting that censorship goes on and now you're claiming that all this is part of a plan by the "others" to make the uni's look bad?

  Since when is it censorship to not invite people you don't agree with to give a speech?  What's next?  Chastising the DNC for never having a Republican as their keynote speaker?

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Censorship is when a person is prevented from speaking to those who want to hear what is being said.  While the examples of conservative speakers being kept from being able to speak at events where no one who doesn't want to listen has to be there are examples of censorship, graduation ceremonies suffer from the captive audience problem since for most, the reason the people are there has nothing to do with who the speaker will be.  The conversation had returned to the original topic of this thread graduation speeches in particular, not generic speeches that happen to be held on a college campus.