New Gallop poll: GOP Losses Span Nearly All Demographic Groups

Originally posted by drwizardphd
Who cares how they contributed campaign money? That doesn't change the fact that Professors generally don't talk about politics in class.

Have you been to college? Did your professors really try to brainwash you into a liberal? If they did I would recommend you attend a school where they actually teach what they're supposed to, like I did.

Your assumptions are incorrect, twice here.

1. Not only did I go to college I have TWO bachelor's degrees - one in computer science and one in physics. Please don't assume anything you clearly already don't know.

2. I know for a fact that most college level professors lean liberal. But don't take my word for it. How about a study which not only proves it?

College faculties, long assumed to be a liberal bastion, lean further to the left than even the most conspiratorial conservatives might have imagined, a new study says.

By their own description, 72 percent of those teaching at American universities and colleges are liberal and 15 percent are conservative, says the study being published this week. The imbalance is almost as striking in partisan terms, with 50 percent of the faculty members surveyed identifying themselves as Democrats and 11 percent as Republicans.

www.washingtonpost.com...

Keep in mind that was in 2005. Now that the Democrats are aided by the liberal media in villifying the GOP, you can safely bet that the ratio of liberal to conservative professors has increased significantly.

3. Lastly, here is my response to your argument that professors only get to talk to students in "poli-sci" classes and in no other class.

Look at the reviews on this book and tell me what you think they say:

“A professor’s job is not to tell students what to think; it is to help them to think carefully, critically, and for themselves. There is a legitimate place for the catechist, the preacher, the social activist, and the community organizer; but that place is not the university classroom. Professors who seek to indoctrinate their students violate a sacred trust. They should be forcefully challenged and publicly held to account. In One-Party Classroom, David Horowitz does just that. The book should provoke a discussion of the ethics of classroom instruction that is long overdue.”
—Robert P. George, McCormick Professor of Jurisprudence and Director of the James Madison Program
in American Ideals and Institutions, Princeton University

and

“Definitive proof that, whether they succeed or not, thousands of professors go to work every day with the intention of indoctrinating their students in their personal political prejudices.”
—Candace de Russy, former trustee, State University of New York

www.amazon.ca...

I believe the ball is in your court if you think you have anything left to respond with, sir.

[edit on 22-5-2009 by sos37]

Originally posted by grover
reply to post by Doc Velocity

 

Bite me.

And don't give me that liberal crap.

Amazing. Someone who put you in your place and this is all you can come back with, Grover? I'm disappointed. I knew you were a bad sport when it came to losing but this response to FACT was just pathetic. The least you could have done was conceded with some dignity. Instead, you've only proven further as a Democrat that your political party aren't the saints that you want us all to believe.

Originally posted by drwizardphd
That's actually not what I said, I said people who have higher education (a.k.a 4 or more years of college) tend to lean to the left, as is evident from the Gallup poll in the OP.

Um, actually you did, or at the very least implied it.

I'm guessing someone didn't go to college?

Who cares how they contributed campaign money? That doesn't change the fact that Professors generally don't talk about politics in class.

Have you been to college? D

?

Why yes I did, thank you. My major was Electrical Engineering, but I did get my share of Reagan policy bashing Professors in my soft subjects, which by the way, taught classes that had nothing to do with politics. When Professors do talk about political tinged issues, don't you think their beliefs will find their way in? To deny that most faculty at the University level are liberal and tend to support Democratic candidates and policies is folly. A group that supports one side by a 75% to 9% margin politically is totally impartial when it comes to subjects that they teach, giving each viewpoint the same amount of time? I've been down this road before, perhaps your University was more of the exception than what I experienced and have observed.

[edit on 22-5-2009 by pavil]

Originally posted by sos37


1. Not only did I go to college I have TWO bachelor's degrees - one in computer science and one in physics. Please don't assume anything you clearly already don't know.

So in earning both of your bachelor's degrees you believe you weren't educated, you were simply exposed to liberal propaganda? I'm just trying to clear up what you said in the other post. You know, when you said "College graduates aren't being educated about anything".

Originally posted by sos37

“Definitive proof that, whether they succeed or not, thousands of professors go to work every day with the intention of indoctrinating their students in their personal political prejudices.”
—Candace de Russy, former trustee, State University of New York

I haven't met a single one of these "thousands of professors". Maybe things have changed since you were in college, but my professors did not go into politics unless it was a government class.

Originally posted by pavil
To deny that most faculty at the University level are liberal and tend to support Democratic candidates and policies is folly. A group that supports one side by a 75% to 9% margin politically is totally impartial when it comes to subjects that they teach, giving each viewpoint the same amount of time? I've been down this road before, perhaps your University was more of the exception than what I experienced and have observed.

Again, I'm not denying that most professors are liberal. I would agree with that statement.

I also agree that my government professors (the only ones who actually discussed politics) did in fact give away their beliefs, although only very subtly and they were very moderate in discussing their beliefs in order to encourage open discussion. Surprisingly, both of my government professors were pretty obviously conservative, one even used to make fun of Kerry's infamous flip-flops on a fairly regular basis. The other was a hardcore Hobbes-ian who would make most Republicans think they were liberal.

However, none of my other professors brought up their political beliefs. Not a single instance I can recall. Maybe my school was the exception, maybe they're cracking down on professors talking off subject. Either way, in my experience, I haven't seen it happen.

reply to post by sos37


It is a matter of historical fact that Nixon and Kissinger expanded the Vietnam war into both Cambodia and Laos... they also increased the bombing of the north in an attempt to force them to surrender.

In focusing just on the death toll he conveniently ignores that fact and then accuses me of rewriting history.

As far as I know expanding the area of conflict is De Facto, an escalation.

So no he did not put me in my place...

I said bite me for his attitude which I had said before did not have to be so sarcastic and it has nothing to do with my political beliefs.

[edit on 22-5-2009 by grover]

So Cheney the dick has seen fit to take on the president every chance he can... as far as I can tell this is a gross breach of courtesy granted by the former administration to the current one... regardless of who that is. He comes of as petulant and surly (not that he ever did come across as anything but)... and while he always sounds like he knows what he is talking about... in reality he has a horrible track record with the truth.

So mr. cheney just here are those nukes in Iraq or any of those other WMD?

reply to post by sos37


Your roll call only proves that slightly more repubs voted against the bailout than for the bailout, but that could be for many reasons, such as they wanted a bill with more pork to suit them and give them something for their district to help them get re-elected after voting for such an unpopular bill. That is how they got enough repubs to vote for the bill the second time. Of course there are also other reasons, such as they want to blame the whole bill on the democrats as you are trying to do. You might be surprised to know that they do play politics in Washington DC. My only question is, are you delusional enough to buy into this political pratfall, or do you just prefer to be deluded.

Once again, where is your proof that the repubs were actually against the bailout?

www.cnsnews.com...

The Senate added $110 billion in tax breaks and other sweeteners to the “rescue” package that now awaits a House vote. But the same tax breaks that pleased some Republican critics angered conservative "Blue Dog" Democrats who are concerned about increasing the budget deficit.

You claim that GW only signed the bill because Bernanke recommended it, but of course you assumed that the democrats enthusiastically supported the bill because they are socialists. What garbage, no one buys this but those foolish enough to listen to the crappolla put out by Rush.

By the way, why not take some of the money being given to the banks and help out GM and Chrysler, which is what was done. The Banks and Investment firms are the ones who created this mess, if we are going to bail them out after they created this mess, we should also bail out others that have been affected. Japan is bailing out their auto industry, and Europe will probably bail out theirs as well.

reply to post by sos37


I had to answer this last, as your comments here are so ridiculous, it is pathetic.

Bottom line - it's not your "valuable" Democrat ideals and principals that are keeping people away from the Republican Party and it's not even the right wing extremists. It's the fear of being villified and chastized of belonging to a party of "hatemongers and racists". And you know what? I can prove that, too.

WAA WAA WAA, those mean democrats are making people feel guilty and that is why people are turning away for the republican party. It's all the fault of the liberals, and the liberal college professors, and the liberal media.

What utter nonsense, blaming the democrats for the failures of the republicans. Instead of trying to blame others for the failures of your party, you should concentrate on what the repubs do that alienates moderates.

When it comes to dealing with the PC crowd, grow a pair. I don't put up with it, and I don't think anyone else should either. A great many moderates such as myself have lost patience with the PC crowd, and that is why they are losing ground in the democratic party. A great many moderates were very upset with what happened in the Miss USA pageant, and that is why that whole event is losing audience anyway. It isn't like repubs aren't quick to call anyone to the left of Reagan a socialist and a commie.

Suddenly, members of the Democrat party who were "okay" with people being different now are suddenly furious that someone stands up and says "Hey, I think differently than you do."

Really, got any links to prove this? Sounds like rabid right wing propaganda, again, from you, without any factual basis.

Same thing with blaming Clinton that the democrats lost congress. You make this claim, you prove it.

I would say Dole is one of the best candidates that the repubs have nominated in a long time. What's a matter, too moderate for you. Clinton was a very popular president, and remains so.

Personally, I believe in promoting that people take responsibilities for their own failures.

reply to post by grover


Heaven forbid that a repub president should be held responsible for their failures. All we get is denial, denial, denial.

Nixon badly managed the Vietnam war, and deserves ample credit for his failure there. Nixon cut back on troop deployments to reduce body counts in the unpopular war, but increased bombing, which made the U.S. even more vilified in Vietnam, directly leading to the embarrassing way the pull out was conducted. This doesn't mean Dixiecrat Johnson doesn't deserve his share of the blame for the failures in Vietnam, no one claims that it does.

Well the self devouring has begun...

www.huffingtonpost.com...

The Republican Party's anti-tax litmus test is becoming much more rigid and localized. And in some cases it is leading to party efforts to purge elected officials....

.... in California, the purging of Republican pols unwilling to take the party line on economic issues is becoming systemic. Under the national radar but making news in the state, recall efforts have been launched targeting several GOP officials for voting with their Democratic colleagues on Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's budget. One of the members in the spotlight is Assemblyman Anthony Adams, whose alleged indiscretion was simple: the budget he supported called for a state-wide vote on raising income and sales taxes and car-registration fees. In other words, in the eyes of his fellow party members, he had voted for a tax increase.

Embraced by two prominent Orange County Republicans, a recall petition declares that Adams "broke his tax pledge" and "must go."....

And apparently its not just happening in California but in other states as well.