Should Bill Ayers be allowed to speak at the University of Wyoming?

First Northern Bank of Wyoming
36% (179 votes)
60% (299 votes)
No Opinion
3% (17 votes)
Total votes: 495

Sure are a lot of posts

Sure are a lot of posts about Obama here today. I didn't know the question involved the president. Was he scheduled to speak too?


Good one!

Isn't everything his fault?

Surely if he would prove his citizenship and produce a real birth certificate Ayers wouldn't have been scheduled to speak! (For you dense folks, I'm kidding.)

Q: How do you drive a Birther mad?
A: Put him in the oval office and tell him the President's Kenyan Birth Certificate is hidden in the corner.

Thank you that really made

Thank you that really made my day!!


off topic still

Check out the link below, The current President of the United States Of American was born in Honolulu August 4th 1961. The birth was also recorded in a local newspaper.

Of course the document could be frabricated by the left or right wing, but highly doubtful. The news paper documenting the birth could also be forged.

Maybe all humans originate from space aliens.

...and your post could be

...and your post could be forged. Maybe you don't actually exist. Maybe this post is forged and I don't exist either.

This Obama citizenship thing isn't really that complex:

1 - The Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."

2 - Barack Obama was born in the state of Hawaii, and is therefore a legal U.S. Citizen.


Maybe SM should be more accurate about their poll questions. There is so much ignorance floating around and far too many people who don't care enough to even know WHAT Ayers was scheduled to speak about.
How about, "Should Professor William Ayers be allowed to speak at the University of Wyoming about social justice and education?

With so many refusing to even take a gander at President Obama's birth certificate, sometimes things really need to be spelled out.

I still do not think this

I still do not think this has to do with censoring someone because of their views. I do not agree with his views by any means, but that is not reason to deny him a platform. It is the way he felt it necessary to get those views across, which was blowing up buildings with no regard to the lives that could have been lost in the process, that changes the playing field. Where do we draw the line? Maybe the Fort Hood shooter has a view he would like to get across, so should we give him a platform too? How about child molesters and murderers? Should they have a platform too? NO! I think that when they committed these crimes, they gave up some of their rights! If you decide to bring harm to others (and that includes bombing buildings) you lose some credibility. I would not want any university funds used (or university buildings used) to give a platform to someone who has no disregard, regret, or repentance for committing a crime. We are also talking about someone who got away with his crime, even though he admits guilt. So forgive me if I am a little reluctant to want this man to have a platform in my state. If you or I had committed this crime, we would still be serving jail time!


It isn't about speaking....

Should it cost the school anything for him to or should they pay him to speak, of course not. Should he be allowed to speak if he would like to for free and at the same time be able to draw a crowd, sure any free citizen should have that right.

The Weather Underground

The Weather Underground, of which Bill Ayers was the co-founder, was a self proclaimed "communist revolutionary group" who's stated goal was to "overthrow" the United States Government through the use of violence in protest of it's involvement in the Vietnam War. To draw attention to themselves, and their movement, they set about blowing up government buildings for some ten years in the 1960's and 70's.

Those both in support of Mr. Ayers right to speak and those that oppose his message and communication would do well to keep this in mind I should think.


You might as well let Bill

You might as well let Bill Ayers speak at UW.He's no worse then the joke we currently have as President of the United States.At least you know where Ayers really stands,which is more then you can say for our boy barry.

This country has reached the point where Hitler would be a valued member of society.

He should have been allowed

He should have been allowed (although not payed in any way) to speak. Generally those type of ideas discredit themselves in the light of day. Not allowing him to speak put him on a pedestal. I'm sure there are those who would not want to let the TEA party speak and use Grinnell Plaza like they did the other day. Freedom is about allowing those you disagree with to have their say.

how do you know you disagree with him

how do you know you disagree with him. he hasnt given his presentation yet. peace


Who is more dangerous?

I do not trust people who are unwilling to listen or change. Ignorance is dangerous.

The U.S. is using violence and threats of violence at this very moment to control the mid east and North Korea. So are we also terrorists? The right wing tea parties across this nation are preaching to take aim at the enemy (obama) are they terrorists?

Let Ayers speak, if you dont like him or what he has to say dont go, dont listen. Life is that easy, you can turn the channel any time you want, you are free to read, to listen, to watch and to speak how you like.

Freakin people in Wyoming think Obama is a radical because he is black, give me break. Maybe this is the way Americans behave today.

Color has nothing to do with it.

He is also 1/2 white. This guy is on a power trip.

not correct

We're against him not because of the color of his skin...but because he's a non-American who is turning this country into a near communist country. The man refuses to say the Pledge of Allegiance he won't even place his hand on his heart in respect without saying it. What truly Patriotic and American leader would do such a thing. He believes in negotiating with terrorists, giving those who wanted to devistate our country with death and panic the Constitutional rights of Americans....... when less than 20 yrs ago we, as a country, were told "we do not negotiate with terrorists". My gosh, when Cuba gives him the thumbs up because he signed the Healthcare Know something's wrong! He and Pelosi and all those other Democrats on Capital Hill who believe that the constitution should be abolished and all our Constitutional rights along with it, destroyed....That, sir, is what we're against. We believe that we should be given back the government we were raised to believe in....a government for the people and by the people....not politicians who want to pad their pockets and force us to bow to their every whim!....What else would you call someone, who was placed in their office by us to do as we requested, who signs a bill without even reading it first...knowing full well that it will impact every single American's lives for the worse, but decides to do it anyway...That was the Democrats....That is why we fight for what's rightfully ours.

J. S. Luckjohn


Please correct any of the following statements:

1. Obama is half black, half white, so he is black.
2. Obama is not an American
3. Obama is not a leader
4. Democrats want to abolish the constitution
5. Trying to negotiate or make peace with with terrorists
is wrong.
6. Cuba is glad that the U.S. has some type of national healthcare legislation.
7. Obama does not read the bills he signs.
8. Every American's life is now affected in a
negative way because of the democrats.

The previous administration (republican)ran this country into the ground with deregulation and greed. The next administration (democrats) is still trying correct the carnage with regulation and spending. Either way it is now up to the tax payers to correct the problems. Give to Ceaser what is Ceasers, give to God what is Gods.

To make the statement that The President Of the United States of America is not a Patriot is the most absurd thing I have ever heard. You think you are patriot? I beg to differ. You voted Obama in, now deal with it. Right wing rhetoric is based upon denial.

1) I'm not racist, I do not

1) I'm not racist, I do not care that he is black...that is not the point. I would be more than proud to have a real American citizen and a black person in office.

2)It has been proven that he was not born in America and so does not (according to law) have legal right to the Oval Office.

3)He is Not a leader, he is a puppet.

4)Since you fight this point, then YOU tell me where your "Right to bear arms" is going and why we are all now being taxed for owning guns as of next tax season for not having them registered (don't believe me, look it up)

5)What I'd said was wrong was for the President of this country to be giving terrorists OUR rights after killing Americans on our home soil.

6) This fact is well known as it was reported on national news CNN, Fox, CNBC and MSNBC included that Cuba was giving Obama a "thumbs up" (and sir that is a quote) for signing that bill into effect.

7)I did not state that Obama doesn't read the bill, I stated that the Democrats and those on Capital Hill do not...again, another well reported fact. That is why the Republicans refused to sign, because they had brains and wanted to read it first.

8)Since Palosi and her circus got onto Capital Hill, the housing market dropped, we have been placed into a recession, people are living in tent societies all over the country (which yes, in the past we had plenty of homeless people, but these are not just a single person sleeping in an alleyway or huddled up around a trashcan fire...these are families who lost their home because of theirs being foreclosed or because jobs were lost which led to them losing their homes... which happened more in the past 2 years), we are now more in debt with the deficit than we have EVER been in the past...need more? It will Always be up to the taxpayers to fix Washington's messes because they will always refuse to give up their gold toilets, personal jets and yachts, padded pockets and cushy will never change.

Whether I am or am not a "patriot" I don't honestly know...but I DO believe in the rights we, as true Americans, were granted and I believe that due to those rights we were born a FREE people....I just want it to stay that way!...and I DID NOT VOTE THAT "man" into office...I did not want to have to look my children in the eye and tell them that I would do something that cruel to them...and I truly feel sorry for anyone who has to do just that.

J. S. Luckjohn

Birthers *rolling eyes*

Birthers *rolling eyes*

Absolutely laughable!

I'd love to see this "proof" you speak of... President Obama was not born in the USA? Please, do share.

If by "puppet" you mean he acts according to the majority of Americans wishes, I completely agree!

I'd also like to know exactly where your right to keep and bear arms has been infringed upon?

By "man" are you now insinuating that he is not even human?

My brain now hurts from even trying to understand this rediculous jumble of fact free trash.

I'm curious. If Obama

I'm curious. If Obama couldn't legally run for the office, why didn't Hillary Clinton or any of the other candidates expose it early in the campaign?

Why would Hillary expose

Why would Hillary expose anything?She had no chance of winning the presidency,at least with Obama in she has a place in his administration.

That makes no sense. If she

That makes no sense. If she exposed it she would have been the leading democratic candidate. Surely all of the other campaigns (both left and right) had plenty of people digging for dirt on Obama. Shooting for the democratic nomination is much better than hoping to be picked for a position in an administration that you know will disintegrate if the leader's ineligibility is exposed.

Hillary never had a chance

Hillary never had a chance at winning and she knew that.She's happy to be tagging along period.

Obama never stood a chance of being ineligible,for the simple fact that nobody cared to really even look.All your brainwashed liberals were to worried about "CHANGE".The SCOTUS wouldn't even touch the issue and now you've got Barry appointing two Justices to SCOTUS.

The ramifications and fall out that would be caused, if it was proven that barry was illegaly elected so far reaching at this point.Every decision he's made from the paint scheme in the white house to Health Care would be illegal.

"for the simple fact that

"for the simple fact that nobody cared to really even look."

Really ?

Are you kidding, do you know how many people DID look? You're kidding right? Do you know how many lawsuits were filed, and rejected to get access to the long form birth certificate only to be denied? How many facts do you have? Did it matter that the ONE "Original" birth certificate that he and Hawaii supplied listed him as Black and not Negro. Now aside from the fact that every other birth certificate that was issued during the time that he was born, when a black person was involved the original birth certificate lists them as "Negro". That was the only thing I found of interest. Honestly should it matter, he is in the seat now. One man can NOT make a difference if it is not for the will of the people.. It is the acceptance of the people that creates success for any one man... If you don’t like his point of view gather your friends, and have them gather their friends and don’t support the Obama point of view.. It’s really that simple.. The world needs to stop thinking that it will be one MAN that will be our savior...

Isn't it ironic that if what

Isn't it ironic that if what KLW says is true, that nobody cared to look, then that means the "birthers" didn't check either and they are just ASSUMING that he is not a citizen. The Clinton and McCain campaigns were both well-funded with manpower for locating skeletons in Obama's closet. If Obama wasn't a legal US citizen one of those groups would have exposed it. By clinging to such absurd ideas, Birthers are shooting themselves in the foot just like the 9/11 Truthers. Wait a second... now that I look a little closer, there is something fishy about this. See that little squiggle above the doctor's signature? That looks a lot like the "C Rock" which proves the Apollo moon landings were faked! Maybe the Birthers are on to something after all.

Oh my goodness

Now THAT was funny! Thanks for the great belly laugh, Steve!


I'm glad to see that everyone is staying on topic here about Bill Ayers.
Way to go Sheridan Media!
By making people loggin to stop some of the senseless whinning and arguing going here has really worked. Steve, shouldn't you be working rather than using your website to spout off? You post more useless crap on here than anyone.

Topic is freedom

Your post is a perfect example of senseless whinning, arguing, spouting off and useless crap. Maybe try to be a little more thankful to that you are even allowed to post.

The topics are guidlines to follow not anal retentive law of the land. Dont like the posts, dont read them, better yet dont respond if you think it is "OFF TOPIC". Good thing I dont use my real name on my posts, I might have to take some kind of responsibility for my words.

I agree. This thread has

I agree with you "papa" in the respect that this thread has moved off topic. Of course you have just contributed to the off topic posts yourself.

We didn't start requiring user accounts to prevent arguments. We required them to prevent anonymous attacks against individuals.

Moderating this website is part of my job, and any of the site moderators are free to post their own comments while doing that. However, if you'll look at the time stamps on my comments you will see that most of them are made when I'm not on the clock. I'm posting this comment while I wait for today's Public Pulse to finish uploading. I'm also importing this weekend's AT40 show for KLQQ and National Geographic Weekend for KROE at the same time, and watching the import of On Air With Ryan Seacrest to see if an adjustment I made to it yesterday has fixed a problem we've been having with it for the past few days. I can multitask, and I like to squeeze every drop of CPU power from my computer :)

Where is your evidence that

Where is your evidence that nobody cared to look? Obviously someone did which is why the Obama campaign released his birth certificate. I would think that the McCain campaign would have LOVED to find a way to knock Obama out of the race. That's the point I'm trying to make. Even if Clinton for some absurd reason didn't want Obama out, she would certainly expect that McCain or someone else would, and therefore wouldn't want to be even remotely associated with his administration when it all came crumbling down.

your answer..

Steve to answer that question fully you would have to research both of their business and fincancial affiliations and find the connection...there is one I promise you, but as there are certain subjects on the net...yes even this site...that Uncle Sam is keeping an eye on constantly I will refrain from mentioning it directly.

J. S. Luckjohn

No, all you have to do is

No, all you have to do is look at Obama's birth certificate, which shows that he is a natural born US citizen.

How would they know if he

How would they know if he was qualified? They are no more capable of getting into his records than anyone else. I find it odd that when so many candidates freely supply transcripts, writings and other records Obama does not and few people question the matter. Several in the press admitted that obama got a pass on such questions during the election.

A copy of Obama's birth

A copy of Obama's birth certificate has been publicly available since 2007.

Speak anywhere, but not with my tax dollars!

This man is not only a "self-proclaimed terrorist", he IS a terrorist. He is known by the federal government to be linked to bombings done in the U.S. He ought to be sitting in federal prison, but since he isn't, he can speak anywhere is likes. HOWEVER, if I discover that the university paid him a fee for speaking, for travel, for lodging, or food, etc, they will be hearing from me.

I attended UW, and there were controversial speakers then too. They spoke outside without perks and were monitored by law enforcement. Why anyone would invite this scumbag to speak is beyond me.


OK as long as the same decision is made for same on the right ..

I don't want my tax dollars spent on people who drove us into a 1 billion dollar a month WAR in Iraq and who are guilty of treason exposing a CIA agent!!! or to have some nitwit woman from Alaska speak!

Where do you draw the line?

With Liberty and Just FOR ALL

With Liberty and Just FOR ALL


we are trying to draw the line here, with our voices. The American people we in favor of the war and thus congress approved it. Those who felt it wasn't the right choice should have convinced more to join their perspective just like we are doing right now with Bill Ayers.

I have to agree with you on

I have to agree with you on that one... I think the issue is no one "The People" knows how to draw the line. Federal and State government is so blurred...

Me neither

Me neither. I'd like to rid this country of both major parties neither of which give a **** about either freedom, or the good of the huge majority of people in this country.

Speak anywhere, but not with my dollars.

This man is not just a "self-proclaimed terrorist", he IS a terrorist. He is known by the federal government to have been linked to bombings in this country. He ought to be sitting in federal prison. But since he isn't, he can speak anywhere he likes. HOWEVER, if I find out that my tax dollars went to pay him a fee, for his travel, for lodgings or for food, etc., the university will hear from me.

I attended UW, and there were controversial speakers then too, but not by invitation, and no perks were given. They were done outside and monitored by law enforcement. Why anyone at UW would invite such a scumbag to speak is beyond me.


The irony of the question- .

The irony of the question- . . . should he "be allowed to speak."

UW's actions backfired

John from Wyo
UW caved from pressure from politicians and those with deep pockets.

Now, Bill Ayers will draw a HUGE crowd with media from across the globe. Wyoming hasn't had this much attention since Matthew Sheppard's memorial service in 1998. UW and some short-sited folks created a mountain out of a mole hill.

UW leadership will ultimately get what it deserves. If Ayers was allowed to speak in the first place, there would have been little press coverage in comparison to the media circus that will now come to Laramie. They created their own headache.

Now, UW will need to restore a damaged reputation, a reputation that prior to the Ayers mess was one of open dialog for the sake of academic freedom. Good luck.

John from Wyo


I would like to know how he is being compensated for his appearance? If my child was going to UW I would not want his tuition paying the way for Mr Bill to speak. Yes he has free speech, come on down Mr Bill and enlighten us, but not on my dime. Does any one know how he is being paid and how travel and lodging is being covered?

Free Speech

This is what makes America great.. We can have the Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad speak at Columbia University, yet we would balk at Bill Ayers ? The guy is a radical, but at least he has conviction. That's more then I can say for most people now days. Most people don’t even know who he is.


People in Wyoming are so quick to judge and persecute. Ponder this and the cultural momentum of today:

The following quote from Herman Goering, Hiltler's Reichsmarcshal, made at the Nuremberg trials.

"Naturally, the common people don't want war, but they can be always brought to the bidding of the leaders, tell them they are attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and endangering the country. It works the same in every country."

This was nothing more that FEAR tactics.

The leadership within the University of Wyoming and State of Wyoming bowed to the radical political tactic's of irrational thinkers (quite frankly "tantrums") to cancel Bill Ayers visit to the University of Wyoming. The biggest disappoint is not that Bill Ayers wasn't allowed to speak, it's a disappointment in the principle to promote free and diverse thinking. Unfortunately, this risks setting a precedent "Don't comply with who we want to deliver a message and we'll threaten to KILL them or YOU"

When a university casually aligns it's decisions with actions of "ONE" political idealism, it has lost it's charter to educate "objectively". This is especially true for a state that proudly embraces the term "Equality Rights" on the state flag, but ironically citizens align themselves with one dimensional thinking. Student's and citizens become the losers when they are not allowed to progress and broaden local traditional opinions and observe state leaders not respecting difference.

I hope in the future, if the University thinks to entertain a speaker aligned with the radical conservative political right, their decision will be consistent with canceling Bill Ayer's. That is, not allowing radical right wing KOOKS to speak.

With Liberty and Just FOR ALL

With Liberty and Just FOR ALL


Yes, as much as it pains me to say it, I do believe he should have the right to speak, but those that don't want him there also should have the right to assemble outside of the building in protest and also to attend the lecture.

It sounds like he's a self-proclaimed terrorist, and if that's true, then I can't understand why he isn't lecturing from within a prison cell.


"self-proclaimed terrorist"

By today’s standards, the “framers of our constitution and declaration of independence” would be classified as "terrorist". Are you comfortable with that? It's all a matter of perspective when you try to gloss over the message of a speaker. Where would our country be today without terrorists like John Hancock, President of the Continental Congress, Edward Rutledge, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams (second President), and Thomas Jefferson (third President). If you call someone a terrorist, I think you should at least fully understand what they stand and fight for.

Bill Ayers

While I do not condone violence or the threats that were made against the University of Wyoming, it is interesting that we are talking about a man who used violence to demonstrate his views about the Vietnam War and other government actions. I have never heard him express regret for the bombings that his group were responsible for. Even though no one was killed the potential was definitely there. Even though I also believe in free speech, I find it hard to condone giving someone a platform who has very little concern for the safety of others just to get his point of view across. That is why I think there is such opposition to his speaking at the university - not because of disagreement, but because of his extreme ways (and I think terrorist applies here) of getting his point of view out there for all to see. Responding to the university with threats of violence is wrong, but it seems ironic when you consider they are protesting a man who seems to condone violence himself.


The 1st Amendment entitles his right to free speech

The 1st Amendment to the Constitution of the United States affords Mr. Ayers and every other citizen the right to freedom of speech. The question of whether he be "allowed" to speak is rather ignorant. The more appropriate question should have been "should the University of Wyoming have canceled his speech, or did they have the right to cancel his speech".

Nonetheless, I appreciate the fact that my tax dollars did not qo towards the funding of such a pitifull display. All such engagements for non-academic orators should be privately funded in my humble opinion and attendance should be strictly voluntary as well.


I believe he should have,

I believe he should have, I'm very wary of censorship. Besides in Wyoming who would really want to listen?