P/cloudy
48°
P/cloudy
Hi 54° | Lo 25°

Kelly Ayotte speaks to New England College graduates

  • Kira Zannoni, of Winchester, Massachusetts, shares a moment with her mother, Mary Boissonneault, of Pelham, after the graduation ceremony at New England College, where she finished her undergrad degree in fine arts. The ceremony was held at the Henniker campus on Saturday, May 18, 2013.<br/><br/>(JOHN TULLY / Monitor Staff)

    Kira Zannoni, of Winchester, Massachusetts, shares a moment with her mother, Mary Boissonneault, of Pelham, after the graduation ceremony at New England College, where she finished her undergrad degree in fine arts. The ceremony was held at the Henniker campus on Saturday, May 18, 2013.

    (JOHN TULLY / Monitor Staff)

  • Kira Zannoni, of Winchester, Massachusetts, shares a moment with her mother, Mary Boissonneault, of Pelham, after the graduation ceremony at New England College, where she finished her undergrad degree in fine arts. The ceremony was held at the Henniker campus on Saturday, May 18, 2013.<br/><br/>(JOHN TULLY / Monitor Staff)
Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate Kelly Ayotte speaks to the Monitor during an editorial review board; Thursday, August 12, 2010.<br/><br/>(Alexander Cohn/Monitor Staff)

Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate Kelly Ayotte speaks to the Monitor during an editorial review board; Thursday, August 12, 2010.

(Alexander Cohn/Monitor Staff)

At Sen. Kelly Ayotte’s own college graduation, she wouldn’t have believed she would someday hold public office.

“But I’m living proof that life surprises you,” she told New England College graduates yesterday.

Ayotte was the keynote speaker at the college’s commencement ceremony in Henniker, where she received an honorary degree. The Republican senator and former New Hampshire attorney general didn’t speak about politics yesterday. Instead, she told graduates about the start of her career as an attorney and encouraged them to pursue their own passions.

But the content of her speech didn’t stop some graduates from silently protesting Ayotte’s presence – many of them held signs and wore rainbow pins on their gowns in support of gay rights.

Jesse Kilcullen held a sign proclaiming “gay rights are civil rights” during
Ayotte’s speech, and said she disagreed with the college’s decision to invite Ayotte. Many students don’t share the senator’s conservative political beliefs, she said.

“I think it was in poor taste for the school . . . we’re known to be a very liberal place,” Kilcullen said.

Other students distributed fliers before yesterday’s ceremony, proclaiming that “NEC students, faculty & staff support equality.”

Graduate Erin Faith Page, who was the undergraduate speaker yesterday, gathered signatures on a petition and circulated an online video in protest of Ayotte’s visit. As a gay woman, she couldn’t support her school’s choice of speaker, she told The Telegraph last month.

Page told WMUR last week that she planned to have a diversity flag onstage as she spoke, but said at the start of her speech yesterday that she decided it would be in the way of the flowers at the podium. She didn’t mention gay rights – or Ayotte – in her address, which focused on New England College as a “never-ending circus.”

Students’ four years on the Henniker campus were magical, Page said, with “plenty of weird.” Each day was filled with studying to prepare for productions like tests, papers and shows, with professors as ringmasters and classmates as “fellow circus freaks,” she said.

“Relish this moment as one as we come together as a community for the last time,” Page said. “Because our never-ending circus is ending, but a new experience is just beginning.”

Ayotte spoke of life after graduation, and told graduates they’ll find unexpected opportunities. She began as a lawyer at a private firm, hoping to “make a lot of money” and have a successful career. But after working as a defense attorney, she decided to become a prosecutor.

“But I have to tell you, when I first applied for the attorney general’s office, guess what?” she said. “I didn’t get the job. And it was discouraging. . . . So I want to say to all of you, if there’s something you really want to do, keep at it. Don’t take no for an answer.”

Ayotte told graduates it was difficult to leave her comfort zone and her job as attorney general to run for the U.S. Senate in 2009.

“I decided to do this, again to take a risk, because I was concerned about the state of our country and the economic challenges we face and, frankly, the opportunities that I hope all of you will have as you graduate from this great institution,” she said.

Jack Maguire, a member of the college’s board of trustees, introduced Ayotte yesterday, noting her growing influence in national politics.

“It has occurred to some of us who risk making political forecasts that Sen. Kelly Ayotte stands a double-digit chance of becoming the first woman president of the United States, Maguire said. “Graduates, remember this probabilistic prediction. It could someday add further luster to this great day.”

Graduate Ryan Beausoleil said he enjoyed Ayotte’s speech.

“I felt privileged because having a sitting senator speak at your graduation, it’s a big deal,” he said.

Beausoleil grew up in Littleton and majored in criminal justice. He hopes to find a job working as a police officer in New Hampshire.

Greg Fournier, who earned degrees in history and biology yesterday, said he enjoyed all of the speakers.

“I thought (Ayotte) handled it well . . . kept it very friendly,” he said.

Fournier, a Henniker native, said he is “ecstatic” to graduate and to continue looking for jobs in biomedical engineering.

Kilcullen, who joined in protesting Ayotte’s speech, said she is going “wherever the wind takes me.” The graduate from Westchester, N.Y., earned a degree in biology and hopes to find a job doing biomedical research before pursuing a Ph.D.

Other students joined yesterday’s quiet protest, but said they didn’t have strong personal opinions about the senator’s visit.

“I wasn’t angry, but because some people I knew felt strongly about it, I wanted to support them,” said Haley Kovich of Barrington, R.I.

Kovich studied English and creative writing, and she hopes to find a job in Boston while pursuing her dream of writing novels. She said she’s looking forward to “just breaking out on my own” and learning to live independently, away from her parents and the comforts of a college campus.

Graduate Alicia Bartosik said she didn’t feel strongly about the school’s choice of speakers because she doesn’t follow Ayotte’s political career. “I think it’s great that we got a senator to come here,” she said.

Bartosik, who earned a degree in history, will spend next year as an AmeriCorps volunteer in Boston schools. Graduation is bittersweet, she said, but “it’s time.”

Though their studies are over, graduate student speaker Amy Levesque reminded her classmates yesterday that their learning will continue.

“Tomorrow is going to be the first day of a new semester, and we get to choose what to learn next,” Levesque said.

(Laura McCrystal can be reached at 369-3312 or lmccrystal@cmonitor.com or on Twitter @lmccrystal.)

Great Quote by Bruce Currie: "Buttressed by the facts, reality may indeed have a 'liberal' bias." This sums up nicely the problem conservatives have with science.

A couple of points Bruce. My statement was about your tone and your name calling. And as usual, you responded with nastiness. Like I said why would anybody respond to you when you take that tone? If you are going to call folks trolls, they just might not be inclined to answer you. You do not comment on what folks say Bruce. You pick out sentences and focus on that, ignoring the rest of the post. That is a Dem tactic. Then you you go into assume mode, stating that I think this or that when I have not said it. It is called putting the person on the defensive. When folks comment on your links, you get all upset, yet you trash every link given to you, even if it from a Lib media, or govt stats. So like the Fish, I voted you off the island.

Demeanor is not something you can change, it is based on a persons life experience, their background, their value set, ethics and overall morality. Certainty, well Tony Schwartz says it best: "Let go of certainty. The opposite isn't uncertainty. It's openness, curiosity and a willingness to embrace paradox, rather than choose up sides. The ultimate challenge is to accept ourselves exactly as we are, but never stop trying to learn and grow.” There is no learning in the platitudes we read here daily, just certainty and absolutism.

Coming from one who routinely disparages the reality of climate change, the facts of evolution, the findings of economics on the Great Recession, income inequality, and issues dark hints about the conspiratorial insidiousness of Obama,the UN, Agenda 21, and the IPCC, the post above seems a bit of a disconnect. The irony detector spots this one: "There is no learning in the platitudes we read here daily, just certainty and absolutism."

Let's make this crystal clear, so that there is no question about where I stand on any of the things you mention. I believe that the climate is changing but I am not a raving maniac about it like some folks and I think that to live a meager existence and see man as evil, etc. I over the top and I find those folks the extremists. I believe in evolution but there are many unanswered questions. Economists do not universally agree on this last great recession, many whom you quote are politically driven (aka Krugman, etc). Income equality? Income is earned not a given or a gift or something to be expected to be given to you from others. You don't like that? You should move to Venezuela or Russia or Chechnya. Let me know, I will chip in on the ticket price. Obama is a failure, he can't lead and he is a bully, no one can deny that. The UN is an impotent body of diplomats asking to get along in Rodney King fashion. Agenda 21??? Not even sure what that is. The IPCC is a fraudulent, politically driven agenda organization.....like the UN, it is biased and we all remember the emails from climate scientists. Character, demeanor, values matter. Either you have them or you don't. Absolutism and constant bashing folks with so called "facts", changing the debate to deflect from Obama to Bush and going back to blame Bush for everything is the hallmark of Alinsky. Many progressives posting here are perfect examples.

Reply to Itsa below: more of the same over-generalizations that quickly devolve into ad hominem attacks on the integrity of those who disagree with you.

You mean adhominem comments like "teabaggers", "republicants", "right wingers", "deniosphere", "carp per diem", "teapublicans", "carpers", "birchers", "racists","birthers", "haters","trolls"........you use those phrases every week on here and you are worried about 'ad hominem' attacks. If the shoe fits...........re-read your posts and we will talk about impugning the "integrity"of those who disagree with you or character or demeanor.

Reply to itsa below: I think you're making a false equivalence, between words aptly descriptive of one's opinion on a topic, such as "denier", "birther", and name-calling that is intended to distract or divert attention from the topic at hand. In this regard, you conveniently overlook a significant difference between most of your posts and and most of mine, one that has earned you membership in the quartet I've dubbed the Carp Per Diem gang, all of whom are familiar to regular readers of these threads. Your posts generally consist of distortions of fact, and freely bestowed opinions that you seem to treat as fact. Then, when your central point is contradicted, facts and reasoning to explain why it's false, your response is almost invariably a genuine ad hominem attack on the character or patriotism of the poster. Often you even complain about the use of facts to refute claims. Too bad. It's one thing to feel strongly on a subject, and to voice an opinion. But it's something very different to hold an opinion that is readily shown to be untrue, or at least unproven and contradicted by evidence. We're all entitled to our opinions--but not our own facts.

Reply to Mr "dark hints about the conspiratorial insidiousness of Obama" Currie below. Concerned yet?

Reply to GWTW: Yes, I am concerned. But unlike you and your fellow Carpers, I don't see conspiracy behind every scandal, nor impeachment around the corner. The CM published a letter I wrote last year critical of the Obama administration's treatment of whistleblowers like Bradley Manning. In the past, on this site, I've criticized the Obama administration policies on drones, and Wall St. banksters. Let me know the next time you write something critical of the right or even the middle--it will be probably be a first.

Reply to Mr. Concerned below. I have never said the word impeachment here, and as far as "conspiracy behind every scandal"..no, incompetence certainly plays a part. Something critical of the right? Too eager to lay down when challenged. Candy Crowley/Romney moment comes to mind.

Still waiting for you to explain why Susan Collins is not a moderate, offer your definition of 'moderate', and provide examples of your view of 'moderate' politicians active today since they don't include Susan Collins. The silence is deafening.

I voted you off the island Bruce. That means I no longer respond to your posts. I do not care for you civil tone.

Meant to write uncivil tone.

You remind me of the Fish that use to be on this forum Bruce. You have the same tone. Why would anybody answer you when you say things like "this should be good"?

Why indeed. Or maybe because it would require a coherent, logical, and thoughtful paragraph with more than a cherry-picked fact in between the usual lard of repetitive opinion?

Bruce, you should read your own posts. Over and over again you make sweeping statements. You start out by accusing the poster of making statements that are not based on facts. Then you go ahead and do what you are accusing them of. Discuss the gun laws and compare them. That would be a fair way to have a debate. You actually believe there are no moderate Reps. You also actually believe that the right does not believe in climate change. They do, that is not the issue. The debate is how much climate change do we have, the rate, and the impact. You are correct, there is no Liberal Agenda. It is now a Progressive Agenda Everything is not Black and White Bruce, but from your posts, you see it that way. That is called tunnel vision, denial or just so entrenched in your politics, you cannot fathom that your party just might have an agenda and are not telling you to the truth.

Your post drips with unintentional irony--not for the first time. It's members of the Carp per Diem brigade who make sweeping statements un-moored from reality--yours on climate change above for example. There is NO debate in the scientific community on the impact continued fossil fuel use will have on human societies. I agree with you that everything is not "black and white" in politics or in life, but nuance and subtlety seem lost on the Carpers, who have climbed on or cheered on every conspiracy band wagon that has gone by since 2008. The Monitor site would need drool buckets these last several weeks were it real and not virtual. As for my claim there are no moderate Republicans--can you name more than a handful? First, before you do: define "moderate" and give examples of moderation in governance. Manchin--Toomey comes to mind as the most recent example of an effort at bipartisanship, and we see how that ended. I can think of one offhand at the national level right now--Susan Collins. The Republican Party has veered far to the rightward--much further than the Democratic Party has drifted leftward. There are no Republicans in the tradition of Ike, Claiborne Pell, or Margaret Chase Smith. Today's Republicans treat science and the environment with contempt: "Drill here, drill now." They treat government at all levels with contempt, and their preference is for a new version of the Articles of Confederation. The Party of Lincoln is now the Party of Jefferson Davis.

Anybody who believes Susan Collins is a moderate has no clue what the term means. Both parties have drifted to the extreme in my opinion. It is very difficult to find any moderate politician.

Anyone who believes Susan Collins is NOT a traditional moderate seriously misunderstands history and politics in this country, and truly has no "no clue". BTW: Still waiting for you to post your definition of "moderate" and examples of "moderation" and while you're at it, feel free to explain why you believe Collins is other than a moderate Republican, in the mold of Chase Smith and Ike (this should be good!). And thanks for proving, with your putdown of Collins, my point about the rightward lurch of the once and former GOP. Q.E.D.

Reply to Mr Diversity below. Google 'Collins is not a moderate" and tell me who in this country truly has no clue.

Reply to GWTW below: No, I won't do that. It would be a waste of time, and a good example of how a search engine can give misleading and inaccurate information--scoring replicate postings as 'hits' from the metastasized right wing blogosphere rather than much in the way of accuracy or truthfulness. Why don't you, or Rabbit, for once, own up to your extremism, by stating what you think exemplifies 'moderation' and why (evidently) you think you embody those traits? Susan Collins, to I'd bet 90+% of political scientists in this country, embodies the traits of traditional Republican moderation. The majority of the GOP left her and Olympia Snow behind. But that doesn't make the majority "moderate" by any stretch. You can kid yourselves, and try to fool the readers of these posts, but the content of your posts, with such niceties as "Obama is a thug" betray you. There's nothing 'moderate' about that sentiment So man(?) up, and own your extremism. You might even convince a few readers you're not really trolls. Though that might be a tall order.

Contradiction alert: In a post above, you wrote, "you actually believe there are no moderate Reps". (Yes, I do.) But in this post, you write: "it is very difficult to find any moderate politician." Which is it?

Reply to Mr Diversity below. Since you wont google it, I'll list a few on the first page that argue Collins is no moderate: Senateguru, Salon and Dailykos.

Reply to GWTW below: From "National Journal": "Collins has compiled a centrist voting record." http://www.nationaljournal.com/almanac/2010/person/susan-collins-me/ If you Googled "Collins is no moderate", you'd likely get what you were looking for, but it wouldn't be accurate, regardless of the source. Garbage in, garbage out.

Reply to Mr Diversity below. It would seem then, that the group that does not see Collins as a moderate is the left. And that shows you how far to the left the left have moved.

Yet another reply to GWTW below: Keep trying to dig yourself out of that hole you've put yourself into. Collins gets flack from both left and right, depending on the issue at hand, as any fair minded survey quickly reveals, which is a sure sign of moderation. And while you're at it, why not offer your own definition of 'moderate', and provide examples of those you regard as exemplars of such 'moderation'? Still waiting for Rabbit to do the same. The silence is deafening on that front, while opinion from the self-described 'moderates' flows on unabated: "Obama is a thug." "All politicians are crooks."

Reply to to the person who thinks I'm a troll. I have put myself in nothing that I need to get out of. I made no claim about Collins. I simply did a Google search and shared the results with you. Here..I'll even share what was said on one of the first web sites listed: 'Arch-conservative Rick Santorum, who was bounced from his Senate seat in 2006 for being too conservative for his electorate, has called Susan Collins a “team player” for Senate conservatives when they need her vote. Because Susan Collins is no moderate. Susan Collins is a “team player” for the furthest-right-wing elements of the Republican Party, only offering Maine voters the illusion of a moderate."

To GWTW below: You made a Google search? Try Googling 'Collins is a RINO' for some very different results. You made no claims about Collins? None you can't walk away from, when they can't be substantiated. You cite a progressive piece that dumps on Collins by calling her a "'team player' for the right". Which makes Collins what exactly, in your view? The best recent example of Collins' moderate stance (RINO in your parlance) was her vote in support of Manchin-Toomey. Still waiting for your definitions,btw. But, then you might not be able to walk away from a statement that you actually made.

Reply to Mr Move the Goalposts below: Why would I google 'Collins is a RINO'?? Wasn't the question whether or not Collins was a moderate?

Reply to GWTW below: Mon dieu! Moving the goal posts! Why that's precisely what YOU did, when you googled "Susan Collins is NOT a moderate". Have you no shame, to post such gloriously obtuse (i.e. 'troll-like) nonsense for everyone to read?

Response to GWTW: This line began as an attempt to clarify both the definition of 'moderate' and to identify examples of moderates in the Republican Party. I think we finally established there is at least one: Susan Collins. Which fact provides no support for your claim that the Democratic Party has moved farther left than the Republicans have move rightward. That claim does not hold up to the facts, as political scientists Tom Ornstein and Robert Mann pointed out in the WaPo last year. They could be describing the CM's Carp Per Diem gang, just as well as the John Boenhers and Paul Ryans of the GOP: "We have no choice but to acknowledge that the core of the problem lies with the Republican Party." In their words, it's become "ideologically extreme, scornful of compromise, unmoved by conventional understanding of facts, evidence, and science, and dismissive of the legitimacy of its political opposition." For as long as I've been on this site, there has been a steady rain from conservatives of opinion masquerading as fact on here--including muddying the definition of 'moderate', that aptly fits this description. They went on to say that while Democrats "may have moved from their 40 yd. line to their 25, Republicans have moved from their 40 to somewhere behind the goal post." Rabbit claimed to be a moderate, but doesn't know what the word means, then took her ball and went home. You, on the other hand, know that Collins is a moderate, but can't resist the cheap partisan sniping from your far-right vantage point at any opportunity: Bully for you. But that's also troll-like behavior, shedding more heat than light. Bottom line--the Republican Party has lost nearly all of its moderate voices. And you seem to be o.k. with that. But we'll never know, since you're content to sit back smugly and blame the nation's ills on one party and one president. Does that make you part of the solution, or part of the problem? Does it even matter to you? it's impossible to tell.

Last reply to GWTW on this thread (I hope): Quote: "The left thinks it." Response: So does Rick Santorum, apparently.

Last reply to Mr Long Diatribe: So Rick Santorum thinks Collins is not a moderate. I dont know how that helps your case. Something in her voting record must be appealing to him.

To Rabbit, Itsa, and Van Your comments would lead one to believe that the conservative view is the only one protected by freedom of speech. Just as you have the right to complain about liberals Liberals have the right to complain about conservatives. A differance of opinion is what keeps us from becoming sheep to political leaders and ideologyof any sort. What would you have said if Hillary Clinton ar Jean Shaheen was the commencement speaker. We all know how much you admire them. Would you have then defended anyone who protested thier speech ?

Nice Spin Say-what. Nowhere in any of most posts did I say anybody should be banned from speaking. My point, is that graduation speeches should be free of politics. You are not there to promote your political agenda, you are there to inspire, give your experince with pursing your career etc. President Obama did that and Kelly Ayotte did that. Both great speeches. I find it pretty ironic with 100 of the top colleges in the US having liberal graduation speakers, that the left has a problemo with the very few conservative speakers that have been asked. Just like when I pay to see a performer perform music, art etc, I go there to get inspired not listen to their politics. If I wanted to do that I would sit in the audience of Bill Maher or go to an Oreilly event. The left cannot handle opposing views. That is evident when we have the folks here going bonkers because the CM has Grant writing. It is also evident when we have posters here stating Ayotte's speech was cowardice. It is not the right that have issues with freedoms, it is the left. So much so they want the govt to take those freedoms away.

To quote your post "New ideas require facts and the willingness to listen to the other side. When that is not allowed, then we have half of the story, so any judgements you make are based on not getting all the info." Yet so often you are unwilling to listen yourself. You often simply respond to anything a liberal has to say with liberal bad conservative good.

No problem with Clinton or Shaheen speaking to a college. Let them speak. Then debate the merits. Its why I read the Monitor.

No one attempted to shout Ayotte down or prevent her from speaking. Her appearance was a fait accompli. Students simply made clear their differences with Ayotte, and/or their preference for a different speaker. Had she voted for Manchin-Toomey, she would likely have been very well-received, in spite of her stance on gay rights. Students are being lambasted for their positions here because they happen to disagree with a political figure who took a controversial and unpopular position on an important issue, and who then went on to limit the 1st Amendment rights of her constituents in her orchestrated town meetings--none of which were as rude as the Tea Party-dominated town meetings Shea-Porter participated in in 2009.

No surprise here. On perhaps the happiest days of a 21 year old student's life they have to protest, they have to show disrespect, they have to ruin things for others who may or may not agree with them. This is the result of indoctrination by higher education, the end result of professors pushing an agenda. To imagine that millennial's can't see the forest for the trees, have no understanding of respect or character and are the future leaders of this country it is truly stunning and troublesome. We need to note that many of our recent grads fall into the "low information" voter category.

Funny how over the years terms and meanings have changed. The old time liberal many moons ago was different. Then a liberal was free from bigotry and tolerant of the behavior of others. They promoted choice for everyone in regards to speech, religion, politics etc. Remember the 60's folks. We accomplishe great things because we were savy enough to get the facts, all facts. Not so today. When you have a student say their school is liberal, and then trashes a speaker they disagree with, then the whole tolerant issue goes out the window and bigotry kicks in. New ideas require facts and the willingness to listen to the other side. When that is not allowed, then we have half of the story, so any judgements you make are based on not getting all the info. You would not do that if you were buying a car say. You would make sure you had all the info to make a sound judgement. Yet many today accept the media as truthful, Sad.

I suggest that the choice of graduation speaker is different from that of an ordinary speaker come to campus, or from a professor who espouses unpopular or controversial views. Implicit in the choice of a college commencement speaker is an endorsement of that speaker's views or achievements. To remain silent in the face of such an endorsement is to acquiesce in that endorsement. Given Ayotte's unwillingness to stand up to the gun lobby and support Manchin-Toomey, her cowardice is for these students a lesson in how not to act. Instead of inspiration for their commencement, students got a profile in cowardice and a speech of pious platitudes.

"Page told WMUR last week that she planned to have a diversity flag onstage as she spoke," Celebrate diversity....You know, except for those people who think differently.

Diversity of "opinion" is not to be tolerated by progressives. To those folks it is about race, something you can point out and call on to demonize others. There is no diversity of "opinion" to progressives, just their "opinion" and the folks that are wrong. Of course that is their "opinion". Whatever happened to the melting pot???

Ayotte' speech was about her career and how to achieve it, and that is how it should be when your speaking to graduates starting out on their own careers. The top 100 colleges in the US will have Liberal Speakers at graduations this year. What that tells all of us it that these places of higher learning are biased, want to promote a liberal agenda, and feel that only liberals have anything to offer the graduates.

Re: "What that tells all of us is that these places...are biased..." Really? You make that sweeping statement based on how many facts carefully gathered and evaluated? What you claim to be a 'liberal agenda" surely has more to do with the fact you happen to disagree with 'liberals" than any careful assessment of the facts. On nearly every issue, you're a predictable Johnny-One-Note, despite your unconvincing claims to the contrary, just like the other trolling members of the Carp per Diem Gang. Cases in point: Ayotte's 'no' vote on the Manchin-Toomey bill--which would have closed most of the gun show loopholes, AND made it a felony offense to create a federal gun registry. To give herself political cover for going against the wishes of 90% of her constituents, she votes instead for an amendment that would have cynically weakened existing background laws rules. But it allows Ayotte to claim that she voted for a background check law. You'd think reading the posts in her defense that she was principled and brave. Instead, her votes and her "town meetings" betray her feet of clay. As does especially the denier stance of nearly all "conservatives" (what are they really conserving?) on the issue of climate change, when there is NO debate on the science that the planet is heating up, and we are responsible. Buttressed by the facts, reality may indeed have a 'liberal' bias. Regressives have been railing about the same things--'socialism', taxes, unions, states' rights, etc. since Hebert Hoover and before. The record when regressives control the economy--as they have over the last 30 years--is there for all to see. Those who see our recent history without blinders are moderates, progressives and liberals. There are no moderates in the modern Republican Party. Only those who seek to return us to the 19th century of unbridled wealth for the few.

Thank-you Monitor for doing this article!! It shows how intolerant the liberal left are. Here is a quote intolerant quote form the article: “I think it was in poor taste for the school . . . we’re known to be a very liberal place,” Kilcullen said. She also said she disagrees with Ayotte's Conservative Views. So in this liberal's intolerant world all Conservatives should be banned from speaking at liberal schools? I am glad Ayotte was not political in her speech, and a lot of people enjoyed her speech. I appreciate it when politicians do not go political in non political settings like graduations. Nice Job Kelly!!!

I read that the top 100 colleges in the US all will have Liberal Speakers. What does that tell you? Simple, our colleges have lost the ability to educate our kids in the area of hearing the facts and deciding for yourself. That is what happens when liberalism is presented as the only correct political policy at schools and through the media. I often see on TV where the guy goes around and asks college students about current events. They state they do not know, do not follow that, have no clue who Biden is, but they think President Obama is doing a good job because he champions social issues.

Well, I suppose there is some hope for our recent graduates. Some actually knew Ayotte was a senator. As to the free speech nazis...lets hope they dont seek public office.

Post a Comment

You must be registered to comment on stories. Click here to register.