Jump to content

Longhornfan1024

Certifiably Surly
  • Posts

    2,031
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Longhornfan1024

  1. 19 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

    Your blanket statement is false.  If UT chooses to waive a rule in the interest of keeping the peace, that is not dispositive as to all future actions (regardless of viewpoint).  It can be evidence, yes, which is why a well-run entity documents the action, the reasoning therefor, and all communications with the protesting group to that effect.   And further, the mechanism of enforcement is also quite discretionary.  One doesn't have to go right to "deploy a Roman phalanx with tear gas and truncheons."

    To the first part of your response: even if UT can choose to waive its rules in the interest of keeping the peace, all that does is create the playbook for every other group to come to campus and violate UT's rules.  Are you the KKK and you want to protest against the abolition of slavery in violation of UT's rules?  Tell them you are going to violate the rules ahead of time and occupy campus.  Start at Greg, move to the South Mall, and set up a tent encampment.  Make sure to wear your masks. 

    To the second part of your response: I agree that using mounted troopers and anti-riot tactics created some awful images, but I'm curious about how you would prefer UT to have acted.  Do they send a couple of low-paid dean of students admins to try and disperse the crowd?  Send the entirety of the UTPD police force to that one area of campus and still be out numbered?    

  2. 12 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

    Arguing that UT had to crack down on speech harder than private institutions specifically because of its public status sure is a take. 

    Nothing in my statement leads to this conclusion.  UT "cracking down" on impermissible actions regardless of whether it agrees with the content of the speech related to those actions is the opposite.  Private institutions can choose whether to crack down on speech.  UT doesn't get to pick and choose.  If someone or a group is violating UT's rules, they need to act regardless of the content of that speech.  Otherwise, UT has just creating the playbook for every other group to come onto campus and violate UT's rules.  

  3. 6 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

    So, I presume that you are pissed off when the cops don't pull you over for going 56 in a 55?  When you've had some drinks at the tailgate, and while under control, are clearly intoxicated in public, and the cop just smiles at you and lets you walk by?  Law enforcement and the prosecutors having the good judgment to not go full "ARREST, TRY, AND EXECUTE THEM ALL!" on every single TECHNICAL violation of the law is absolutely necessary for a functioning society.

    So, yeah, the approach that the U of Chicago has taken is a damned good chess move.

    Sure.  The protests at Columbia have gotten way out of hand, and I am all for law enforcement clearing them out of the hall and their encampment.

    But....if you're going to point to campuses where the law didn't go full Gestapo, maybe you oughta point to campuses like Chicago and Northwestern, where administration has been in dialogue with the protesters and has forged a path that has allowed for protest action while also preserving the peace.  It can be done.  Step 1 for administration is "don't be fucking assholes."  When you show up spoiling for a fight.....you often get one.  The job of admin should be to forge a path forward that preserves a functioning and safe academic environment.  Not "showing those whiny bitches who's boss," which then results in over-the-top pushback, which commences a full shitshow.

    Brisket, you're an attorney and you know better than this.  There is a difference between what a private university like Chicago or Northwestern can do and what a public university like UT can do.  If UT chooses not to enforce its rules against this group because they are protesting for a 'good cause' then UT can't enforce its rules against any group.  Otherwise, that would be viewpoint-based discrimination in violation of the first amendment.  It's all or nothing when it comes to enforcing the rules as a public institution, and it sounds like this group intended to and did violate UT's rules.    

    • Like 1
  4. 4 minutes ago, MonkeyDoughnut said:

    Hartzell reached out for help in direct response to this Palestine Solidarity Committee posting on Instagram, specfics being:

      Reveal hidden contents

     

    Brian Davis, a university spokesman, said the university has seen 13 pro-Palestinian events "largely without incident" since the Israel-Hamas war began in October. 

    "In contrast, this one in particular expressed an intent to disrupt the campus and directed participants to break Institutional Rules and occupy the University, consistent with national patterns," Davis said.

     

    Houston Chronicle text on actions:

      Hide contents

    Here is what we know about why the troopers appear to have been called in:

    The Palestine Solidarity Committee advertised the event on Instagram, calling on students to “reclaim our space” by occupying the South Lawn. 

    University rules require groups planning to rally on campus to coordinate with the dean of students. The university did not say whether the Palestine Solidarity Committee, a registered student group, did that. 

    The office of the dean of students on Tuesday sent a letter to the group canceling the rally, which the university alleged had a “declared intent to violate our policies and rules, and disrupt our campus operations.” 

    The letter pointed to an Instagram post by the group that said, “In the footsteps of our comrades at Rutgers-New Brunswick SJP, Tufts SJP, and Columbia SJP, we will take back our university and force our administration to divest, for the people of Gaza!” 

    It also noted the organizers urged attendees to bring face masks, which the letter described as a violation of university rules that forbid students from concealing their identity to obstruct law enforcement.

     

    “Simply put, The University of Texas at Austin will not allow this campus to be ‘taken’ and protesters to derail our mission in ways that groups affiliated with your national organization have accomplished elsewhere,” said the letter, signed by Executive Director of Student Involvement Aaron Voyles. “Such disruptions are never allowed and are especially damaging while our students prepare for the end of the semester and final exams.”

    The letter warned that any attempt to proceed with the planned rally would result in possible suspension from the university or arrest. 

    DPS said in a statement that troopers were deployed at the university’s request and at the direction of the governor. It’s not clear how many state troopers responded to the campus, but the department said they made at least 34 arrests. Many officers were clad in riot gear and others arrived on horseback. The Austin Police Department and the university’s own police force also responded to the event.

     

    The university on Thursday confirmed that the decision to bring in DPS was made by UT President Jay Hartzell and his leadership team, in tandem with Kevin Eltife, the chair of the UT system's board of regents. 

    Brian Davis, a university spokesman, said the university has seen 13 pro-Palestinian events "largely without incident" since the Israel-Hamas war began in October. 

    "In contrast, this one in particular expressed an intent to disrupt the campus and directed participants to break Institutional Rules and occupy the University, consistent with national patterns," Davis said.

    Hartzell said in a statement Wednesday night that the university “held firm” and expressed gratitude to law enforcement. 

    “Breaking our rules and policies and disrupting others’ ability to learn are not allowed,” his statement said. “The group that led this protest stated it was going to violate Institutional Rules. Our rules matter, and they will be enforced. Our University will not be occupied.”

     

    Thanks.  This is helpful.  

  5. 6 minutes ago, Blotto said:

    Because in my opinion,  it was all a planned publicity stunt for abbot to helicopter his flaccid dong around and prove he means business in the state of TX. The next day there was little to no police presence with what I've read was a larger crowd protesting.

    That's not an opinion, it's a supposition.  And it runs counter to Hartzell's text saying he requested DPS presence.  Unless your supposition is also that Abbott ordered Hartzell to request DPS presence, Hartzell requested their presence, and then Hartzell lied to a state senator about the source of the request.  

  6. 7 minutes ago, YGIFS said:

    Good point.  I've saw a number of them last Autumn and earlier in 2024.  In South Mall/Six-Pack and West Mall.  Biggest one I saw was two rows behind me at the Bari Weiss talk at LBJ.  Several dozen made a scene for about 5 mts but it was completely non-violent, though a little obnoxious.  They also waited outside as well left but other than disturbing flags, they got in nobody's personal space.  I still think they're directing their frustration and anger and wishes for UT divestiture from defense companies at the wrong people.  But obviously we all remember knowing everything at 21yo.  

    But yeah, to your point.  A dozen or so UTPD observed/escorted all these protests over the last 6 months and it went fine.  Barely made the Daily Texan newspaper, let alone CNN.  The response by UTPD has been amplified, but the DPS and APD force posture is obviously what's escalating this, which makes the students ante up, and so on and so on.  I'm gonna take a wild guess it has something to do with a prominent Austin resident trying to garner national attention to curry favor with a prominent Florida resident.  Just a wild coincidence this is all happening as short-lists are being created for a prominent position.  I mean the very laws protecting this kind of activity were just signed into law recently in Texas, but not this purpose.  So the whole thing had to be turned on its head.  What a puzzling situation.  

    Is this a wild guess or a "guess"?  I ask because the texts the media released show Hartzell saying he reached out to ask for DPS assistance, not the other way around.  If that's the case it seems like there had to be something to trigger that request if he hadn't already done it for the other protests.  I agree that the mere presence of troopers last Wednesday likely had an escalating effect on the protesters (I won't call them students because it appears a large portion were not students), but what caused the escalating effect on the University to even call in the troopers?  We have a lot of posters here postulating that it's because he disagrees with the content of their speech, but if that's the case, why not call the troopers in one of the first dozen or so times UT had pro-palestinian protesters on campus?  

  7. 22 minutes ago, BehoId, The Underminer! said:

    real talk though: there should be a place in our world for "employed but we're assuming this is just play money because it's a bunch of 16 year olds still on their parents' dime." 

     

    not everything has to be a living wage.  maybe some "please violate the ADEA here" rule.  if you're still on the dole, you get $7.25.  If you're an adult and this is the only job around, you get $20.  this will lead to massive age discrimination, but whatevs. a 16 year old making $20 doesn't help.

    This is stupid.  Don't be so stupid.  

    • Hook 'Em 4
    • Like 2
  8. 1 hour ago, BeardIP said:

    Fair enough. The one thing that sticks out to me is Chanel and Hugo Boss being Nazis. For my part I won’t ever give them any money and wince when I see people— especially gays, blacks and Jews— wearing Hugo Boss.

    Also I don’t like to take any Bayer-backed medicine. 

    Hugo Boss died over 75 years ago.  I'm pretty sure he's not benefitting from people buying the clothes that bear his name.  

  9. 4 hours ago, 'stache said:

    I'm legitimately curious what write-in candidate he thinks meets every one of his beliefs. There will almost never be a candidate that perfectly aligns with one's beliefs. You still vote for the one the better fits, or even if you hate both, the one that isn't under 91 criminal indictments, who has been determined by a jury to have committed rape, and who is less likely to launch an insurrection and attempt to declare himself a dictator.   

    Putin.  

    • Like 2
  10. 17 minutes ago, BehoId, The Underminer! said:

    Presidents since FDR.

    Truman - finished off the Axis.

    Eisenhower - 

    JFK - Moonshot

    LBJ - Civil Rights bonanza

    Nixon - 

    Ford

    Carter

    Reagan - Showed commies we had infinite budget

    Bush - End cold war without chaos

    Clinton - Prosperity computer boom

    GWB

    Obama - Obamacare, DACA

    Trump.

    My guess is if Biden is done, he will be remembered about like Ford.  Just a dude that was there for a few years.

    I'm not sure if you're a troll or just highly uninformed.  

    • Hook 'Em 5
    • Like 3
  11. On 12/16/2023 at 9:26 AM, billfromlaketravis said:

    What’s the easiest/cheapest path to Total Wine Grand Reserve status?

    I’ve heard about ways to game the system. Buy a case of Spirits Direct wine on a certain day and get 10x points or something. 

    Generally, you're correct.  About once every month or two you'll have the option to buy Spirits Direct wine for 10x points.  You can do it on any day as long as you activate the deal on your account.  I don't drink a lot of wine, but I do give it away as gifts.  So I spend $250 (or less depending on my current point total) during a 10x deal and I have Grand Reserve and most of my gifts for the year taken care of.  

    • Hook 'Em 1
  12. TW's year-end grand reserve raffle is up.  What are everyone's thoughts on the best order of the following?  I've only had GTS, so I'm flying blind.

    1.  Pappy 23

    2. Pappy 20

    3. Pappy 15

    4. VW Family Reserve Rye

    5. VW Special Reserve 12

    6. ORVW 10

    7. ER17

    8. GTS

    9. Saz 18

    10.THH

    11. WLW

    • Hook 'Em 1
  13. 13 minutes ago, HenryJames said:

    Six-year-old daughter: If I ate myself, would I be twice as big or would I disappear?

     

     

    Your daughter needs to lay off the pipe.  

    • Haha 3
  14. 11 minutes ago, FirstTimeCaller said:

    I don't think people are able to grasp just how unreal a number having a billion dollars actually is.

    Say you live at Texas Capitol and have a zero net worth. For every million dollars, your location moves one mile away. Make a million and you're at west 6th street. Make $2.5 million and you're now in Tarrytown.

    If you're worth just over $1 billion?

    You're in San Diego.

     

     

    If I had a billion dollars, I'd definitely live in San Diego instead of Austin.  

    • Hook 'Em 1
    • Like 1
    • Haha 2
×
×
  • Create New...