By and large campuses as organizations have the right to choose whom they invite to speak, and about what. Wildly colored speech is distasteful to people trying to learn powers of discrimination and analysis. So are invitations to knee-jerk reactions against broad categories such as "liberals".

For Bruce's edification, the definition of a liberal is not "a whiny self-indulgent spittle-spined bleeding-heart wuss" or anything near it.

Webster's offers: "I adj.1. Possessing a free and generous heart. 2. Appropriate and/or fitting for a broad and enlightened mind. 3. Free from narrowness, bigotry, or bondage to authority or creed. II n. 1. Any person who advocates liberty of thought, speech or action."

I strongly suggest we all strive to find words that actually describe what we are trying to say, rather than indulging in knee-jerk label-mongering.