Mr. Masugi should enroll in a writing class. Regardless of his views, and whether I would agree with them or not, that was a rather poorly written article.

I see that NLT regular David Frisk made an appearance in the comments section, arguing whether it was 200 or 400 in attendance -yaaaaawn- and relating his picketing experience. Did he have a sign that said "This man should not be allowed to speak!"? Also, he was hot on the investigative journalist trail for Churchill’s honorarium. If the $5,000 figure is correct, that’s about 1/6th the figure (or even less) that Ann Coulter ("we need to execute more liberals") pulls in for her well-reasoned, responsible musings, in case you want to keep this in perspective, but I’m guessing you don’t.

Churchill reminds me of the dunking clown at the county fair. The clown sits in his cage baiting farm boys until they spend a dollar to throw balls at the target until they soak him. Clown has lots of practice in verbal combat and has heard all the insults so is prepared with all the comebacks. Even if he is dunked he climbs back out hoping to bait the guy out of a few more dollars. After work he dries off and collects his check; another day’s work.

Unless the man is insane it means nothing to him but a paycheck. After all, he’s just a clown.

G.M.

Well stated, Mr Maddox. I like the metaphor.

The only thing I have a problem with was this:

The newsreport noted the individual Colleges’ attempt to distance themselves from the event. Responsibility should not be ducked:

The visit was sponsored by the Intercollegiate Department of Black Studies and Intercollegiate Department of Asian American Studies, and not directly by any of the seven distinct academic institutions that comprise the Claremont Colleges.

The venue where Churchill spoke, Bridges Auditorium, is a facility shared by the colleges.

What responsibility is being ducked here? Just wondering. Let me know what I missed when I check in later. Thanks!

Mr. Shields, I am not a student journalist, but a doctoral candidate.
In my post, I was urging that students be told how much Psychiatric Ward’s honorarium was. My message was never -- not here, and not at the event -- that Churchill shouldn’t be allowed to speak. It was that he shouldn’t have been invited and that people shouldn’t listen to him. Big difference.

As for your big yaawwn about the size of the audience, well, do you yawn about a lot of other things, too? I’m guessing that you do. Aristotle tells us that "the whole and all things ... are composed of small things." That’s in the Politics. Think about it.

I’d also suggest that in the future you review your posts for good manners before sending.

Mr. Maddox, with respect, I think you are wrong about Churchill being merely a "clown." Clowns do not talk about serious subjects. Churchill does. His comments, persona, manner, etc., are indeed ridiculous -- but the same can be said of Hitler. Churchill has very successfully drawn attention to himself, and the right and the respectable left have failed to make him persona non grata. This is a serious business. Students are gullible, and people in general are gullible. Like Michael Moore, Churchill is a dangerous extremist. To the extent that he is not countered and denounced, his rantings become accepted as normal discourse. Very dangerous.

David Frisk,

I think you are absolutely right about the effect Churchill’s teaching may have on young minds. Students are taught to trust teachers and most students have never seen a trap like Ward Churchill shaped so much like a teacher.

You are also right that education’s leaders should be concerned about new students being exposed to an intellectual ambush.

But he still reminds of the dunking clown.

G.M.

Fair enough. The man is certainly ludicrous.