Trump's Treatment of Harvard Illegal

My posts are clearly moderate conservative — anyone who actually reads them can see that. To label me “radical right wing” is not only inaccurate but also a classic shoot-the-messenger tactic that you’ve been using for years to dismiss points you’d rather not address. Misrepresenting my views in that way doesn’t advance discussion; it just distorts it.
Readers are smarter than you think.

 

The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
I oppose violent extremism wherever it appears. Criticizing jihadi terrorism is about confronting violence and protecting citizens — it’s not a license to demonize an entire religion or community.
I reject both totalitarianism and religiously-motivated violence. The conversation should be about effective policies to counter violent radicals while protecting civil liberties and avoiding collective blame.
If you’re going to accuse someone of “wholeheartedly supporting” a fascist regime, back it up with specific quotes or actions. Otherwise your claim is just trolling.

 

You constantly defend the Trump admin and repeat their bad-faith arguments.

Examples: You defending the Trump admin defunding Harvard to “protect” Jewish students in this very thread. Defending the defunding of education that has been legally allocated by congress. Defending the state taking control of what is taught in independent institutes of higher education. Defending these instances of overreach that potentially violate the constitution and the law.

 

The only thing I’m defending is the need to hold universities accountable for their failures that we discussed earlier.
That’s my opinion. You’re free to interpret the actions differently, but for me the core issue is accountability.

When large sums of Qatari money are flowing in, these institutions can no longer be described as truly independent centers of higher education. And when outside funding affects the agenda, it is also no longer fully aligned with the national interest—if you understand what I mean.

As for whether the actions in question violate the Constitution, that is for legal experts to determine and resolve. The fact remains that in 2025 we are seeing at least some signs of improvement in how certain issues are being handled.

 

I don't know how "wholehearted" your support is, but it IS unfailing. There is no policy by the current admin that you would not try to defend. This extends, against basic reason" even to actions that, by your own admission, have effect that's opposite to what you claim to want and what you try to use as justification. Example - withholding (illegal, I might add) of funds from Harvard, which you yourself observed INCREASES rather than DECREASES its alleged dependence on Qatar. Support of ANY actions, no matter what they are, is an extreme position. In addition, you did express troubling anti-consent views (branding women who withhold sex "satanic", no less).

From 1984:

 

It’s not about being “unfailing” or supporting everything blindly.
Almost nobody else here posts from the other side of the discussion.
As a moderate Conservative, I try to add that perspective for readers and debaters to consider.
Sometimes that means defending actions I see as moving in the right direction, even if others interpret them differently.
I’m not claiming perfection, but I do think it’s important that the conservative view has a voice in the conversation.
Labeling any consistent conservative perspective as “extreme” is just a way to dismiss it without engaging. And I'm sure not everyone will see my views as conservative enough.

 

I'm sick of what Trump is doing to our country, and I'm tired of hearing some people defend him, as if anything he's done is defensible in any way.

 

I’m sorry, but are not two sides to all issues. Sometimes there is a right and a wrong.