Liberal profs admit they’d discriminate against conservatives in hiring, advancement

[NYcarbineer]

One question, according to the researchers, “asked whether, in choosing between two equally qualified job candidates for one job opening, they would be inclined to vote for the more liberal candidate (i.e., over the conservative).”

That's from the article.

Question:

If the premise is that the two candidates were EQUALLY QUALIFIED, how can it be discrimination if you chose the more liberal candidate, or, for that matter, chose the more conservative candidate?

You can't possibly be this fucking stupid.

Point out ANYTHING in what I said that was wrong.

Start by telling us how in a hypothetical situation where 2 candidates are equally qualified, could it be discrimination to choose the liberal instead of the conservative.

 

[NYcarbineer]

In academia, it is.

And if the PURPOSE of higher ed. is to teach students multiple theories to reach independent conclusions, wouldn't it be logical to have more conservatives on staff? Yes or no?

Or is the purpose of higher ed. something completely different?

How many liberal professors do you suppose there are at the late Jerry Falwell's Liberty University?

No one wants to make a guess?

How about we agree that a conservative college like Liberty is just as likely to discriminate against liberals applying for teaching jobs as any liberal college is to discriminate against conservatives.

Anyone have evidence to prove that inaccurate?

 

[HUGGY]

It’s not every day that left-leaning academics admit that they would discriminate against a minority.But that was what they did in a peer-reviewed study of political diversity in the field of social psychology, which will be published in the September edition of the journal Perspectives on Psychological Science.

Psychologists Yoel Inbar and Joris Lammers, based at Tilburg University in the Netherlands, surveyed a roughly representative sample of academics and scholars in social psychology and found that “In decisions ranging from paper reviews to hiring, many social and personality psychologists admit that they would discriminate against openly conservative colleagues.”

A 2007 report by sociologists Neil Gross and Solon Simmons found that 80 percent of psychology professors at elite and non-elite universities are Democrats. Other studies reveal that 5 percent to 7 percent of faculty openly identify as Republicans. By contrast, about 20 percent of the general population are liberal and 40 percent are conservative.

Survey shocker: Liberal profs admit they'd discriminate against conservatives in hiring, advancement - Washington Times

Not surprising at all, but I'm glad it's finally in the open. The Kool Aid drinkers admit they are drinking Hatorade.

I think it is great that you come clean and agree that "conservatives" are a minority.

The constant babble from these morons about how ALL Americans think this or that from Christian Fascist Fuckwits is rediculous. That is why they scrape the bottom of the barrel in thier methods of voter suppression. You wouldn't think these idiots were a minority to hear them tell it in any discussion. BUT we all know it is true. AND they are growing smaller all of the time because they are stupid. They eat high sugar... high greasy..shit food...typically they are fat and thier life exspectancy sucks...as it should. Smarter people take better care of themselves and even though they don't pop out as many moron brats as the Christian Fascists do they live longer... which is a good thing. When I hire people to work on my projects I screen out the religious because they are stupid.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Waaa...waaa... Conservatives are so funny, they cry so easily. The martyrdom syndrome is all conservatives know, a third of the more liberal profs say that given two equally qualified candidates they'd hire the person more open and similar to themselves. Wow does that surprise anyone but the chickenhawk crybabies of the right. Imagine all the tissues you'd need if you hired the conservative. You wingnuts are too funny.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...es-of-midcans-insights-into-contemporary.html

If there are any characteristics that the right wing exemplifies they are the whining, the sky is falling, and martyrdom syndromes. Someone is always plotting to destroy some past utopia that only they can see. Add the Dunning-Kruger effect and you have the perfect right winger, usually a conservative, often republican, but occasionally a libertarian sort of mortal. They are real beauts, guided by the narrative of taxes are bad and government is even worse, the corporations play them like banjos, and like a banjo they willingly acquiesce in their own demise.

You really like going back to threads were you had your ass handed to you, don't you? Tell me something, do you still think that the man that argued that, if we didn't fight the commies in Vietnam, we would be fighting them in San Francisco, was a liberal?

Out of courtesy I have to ask what your comment even means? I missed something, fill me in. [....] Oh jeez, I think I see what you are getting at, more empty words, fighting commies is the operative slogan. I think you fail to realize backing up a corrupt government is south Vietnam may have been advertised as fighting communism, but the war ended badly and today you can buy clothing made in Vietnam at Macy's. Also check your home for products made in China, another communist country. History is a great deal more complicated than the slogans and empty rhetoric of the chickenhawks and neocons.

I do love how conservatives brag that they have won some internet debate based on their personal bubble. Victory again by words, theirs. Too funny.

Still ignoring the facts. When I pointed out that there has never been a liberal who was elected as president, you tried to argue that FDR, LBJ, and JFK were all liberals. LBJ was not actually elected, and actually lost the primary battle to a liberal from his own party. The fact that he argued using the domino theory, that if we did not fight our enemies in Vietnam we would be fighting them in Hawaii one week and San Francisco the next probably helped him lose. He didn't actually say commies, but everyone knew what he meant.

As for FDR, you just want to call him a liberal because he is, in your view, the greatest president ever. You conveniently ignore the fact that he thought Keynes was an idiot, and that the Bonus Army was met with force under his administration. As for JFK, isn't he the one that got us into Vietnam in the first place?

Me pointing out your total lack of historical perspective, and that, every single time you try to comment on history, you start with a set of facts that is completely contrary to what the rest of the world uses, does not mean I am declaring myself the winner in an internet debate. It is simply you being wrong. I have never debated you because you have never actually defended anything you have posted, you just keep posting quotes from other people.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

So the premise of the survey is dependent on your theory that the liberals who said they wouldn't discriminate are lying?

good one. You never fail to deliver.

No, it is based on the premise that one third of those surveyed admitted to the discrimination. The reason this was so shocking to the people who took the survey is they expect people to lie, or did you miss the part where they said they usually have to trick people to get them to admit to discrimination?

You said you wouldn't believe the 2/3's that said they wouldn't discriminate, therefore you have rejected the idea that the study has any credibility, in your opinion.

So, by your own logic, any conservative for example who says he isn't a racist ought not be believed,

because everyone lies to make themselves look good.

Are you a racist?

I did not reject the credibility of the study. The study was designed to determine how much discrimination there is in the academic community, not to prove there wasn't any. The authors of the study expected to find it, what surprised them is how much of it is open. I don't know how you can take that as proof that discrimination does not exist, but partisan logic only makes sense to partisans.

Then you throw in the race card, proving beyond doubt you know I am right.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I am sure the conservatives would discriminate against the liberals if the numbers were reversed.

It isn't right, but if its not illegal, why worry?

if the left is caught doing something than say the other side would do it to with no evidence what so ever. I really cant wrap my brain around liberal thinking. Really, i bet you would be screaming how evil conservatives are if they were doing it. and your logic is very flawed.

The central theme of the article in the OP is the implication that this is something unique to liberals.

No it isn't. The central theme is that, since liberals dominate the academic fields, they feel comfortable in openly discriminating against anyone who does not share their views. I feel quite certain that, if conservatives had the upper hand, they would be doing the same thing.

Unlike you, I will admit they would be wrong to do so.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Actually, I usually don't. But around here they seem so popular, I wanted to give it a try. I have to admit, it has pleasant oaky notes, but was disappointingly immature with distinct elements of green pepper and markedly astringent.

In other words, you are too stupid to actually argue from a position of strength, so you resort to making stupid jokes.

Translation: You're incapable of arguing from a position of strength, so you resort to logical fallacies, like ad hominems. BTW, this entire thread is a joke.

Ad hominems are only a logical fallacy if you actually present an argument I fail to address, you didn't.

 

[chanel]

In academia, it is.

And if the PURPOSE of higher ed. is to teach students multiple theories to reach independent conclusions, wouldn't it be logical to have more conservatives on staff? Yes or no?

Or is the purpose of higher ed. something completely different?

How many liberal professors do you suppose there are at the late Jerry Falwell's Liberty University?

I would guess very few. But how many students go there? And I can say with certainty that most Catholic colleges lean left.

Are you suggesting that conservative students should only attend evangelical Christian schools? Should they stay away from public universities where they may not "fit in"? Hmmmm. Sounds like these researchers are on to something eh?

You didn't answer my original questions.

 

[NYcarbineer]

if the left is caught doing something than say the other side would do it to with no evidence what so ever. I really cant wrap my brain around liberal thinking. Really, i bet you would be screaming how evil conservatives are if they were doing it. and your logic is very flawed.

The central theme of the article in the OP is the implication that this is something unique to liberals.

No it isn't. The central theme is that, since liberals dominate the academic fields, they feel comfortable in openly discriminating against anyone who does not share their views. I feel quite certain that, if conservatives had the upper hand, they would be doing the same thing.

Unlike you, I will admit they would be wrong to do so.

Where did I say they wouldn't be wrong to do so? Don't lie about what I said.

 

[NYcarbineer]

No, it is based on the premise that one third of those surveyed admitted to the discrimination. The reason this was so shocking to the people who took the survey is they expect people to lie, or did you miss the part where they said they usually have to trick people to get them to admit to discrimination?

You said you wouldn't believe the 2/3's that said they wouldn't discriminate, therefore you have rejected the idea that the study has any credibility, in your opinion.

So, by your own logic, any conservative for example who says he isn't a racist ought not be believed,

because everyone lies to make themselves look good.

Are you a racist?

I did not reject the credibility of the study. The study was designed to determine how much discrimination there is in the academic community, not to prove there wasn't any. The authors of the study expected to find it, what surprised them is how much of it is open. I don't know how you can take that as proof that discrimination does not exist, but partisan logic only makes sense to partisans.

Then you throw in the race card, proving beyond doubt you know I am right.

First of all, you've never even SEEN the study, except for one example question provided in the propaganda piece in the OP,

which you admitted was a bogus question.

Are you a racist or not? Is that too difficult a question for you?

 

[NYcarbineer]

If I were given two equally qualified candidates, and if I knew one was liberal and one was conservative,

and if I made my hiring decision based on their politics, I would definitely hire the liberal.

Not one person here can make a substantive argument that I would be engaging in job discrimination.

 

[bripat9643]

One question, according to the researchers, “asked whether, in choosing between two equally qualified job candidates for one job opening, they would be inclined to vote for the more liberal candidate (i.e., over the conservative).”

That's from the article.

Question:

If the premise is that the two candidates were EQUALLY QUALIFIED, how can it be discrimination if you chose the more liberal candidate, or, for that matter, chose the more conservative candidate?

You can't possibly be this fucking stupid.

Point out ANYTHING in what I said that was wrong.

Start by telling us how in a hypothetical situation where 2 candidates are equally qualified, could it be discrimination to choose the liberal instead of the conservative.

In a hypothetical situation where 2 candidates are equally qualified, how could it be discrimination to choose the white guy instead of the black guy?

 

[bripat9643]

In academia, it is.

And if the PURPOSE of higher ed. is to teach students multiple theories to reach independent conclusions, wouldn't it be logical to have more conservatives on staff? Yes or no?

Or is the purpose of higher ed. something completely different?

How many liberal professors do you suppose there are at the late Jerry Falwell's Liberty University?

No one wants to make a guess?

How about we agree that a conservative college like Liberty is just as likely to discriminate against liberals applying for teaching jobs as any liberal college is to discriminate against conservatives.

Anyone have evidence to prove that inaccurate?

Liberty University is a private school that does't accept government money of any kind.

Try again.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The central theme of the article in the OP is the implication that this is something unique to liberals.

No it isn't. The central theme is that, since liberals dominate the academic fields, they feel comfortable in openly discriminating against anyone who does not share their views. I feel quite certain that, if conservatives had the upper hand, they would be doing the same thing.

Unlike you, I will admit they would be wrong to do so.

Where did I say they wouldn't be wrong to do so? Don't lie about what I said.

Where did I say you said that? What I said is that I, unlike you, will admit they will be wrong. You have never once said that the liberals who do this are wrong. You have tried to argue that it is not discrimination because the candidates are equally qualified, and that it is not illegal. You have not said it is wrong. Even now, you are not saying it, you are trying to argue I am putting words in your mouth. I stand by my statement.

Unlike you, I will say this is wrong no matter who does it.

 

[bripat9643]

if the left is caught doing something than say the other side would do it to with no evidence what so ever. I really cant wrap my brain around liberal thinking. Really, i bet you would be screaming how evil conservatives are if they were doing it. and your logic is very flawed.

The central theme of the article in the OP is the implication that this is something unique to liberals.

No it isn't. The central theme is that, since liberals dominate the academic fields, they feel comfortable in openly discriminating against anyone who does not share their views. I feel quite certain that, if conservatives had the upper hand, they would be doing the same thing.

You would be wrong about that because at one time conservatives did dominate the academic field. Liberals couldn't have gotten their foot in the door if conservatives didn't open it in the first place. Once liberals got control they closed the door behind them. Anyone who thinks liberal act the same as conservatives doesn't really understand liberals.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

You said you wouldn't believe the 2/3's that said they wouldn't discriminate, therefore you have rejected the idea that the study has any credibility, in your opinion.

So, by your own logic, any conservative for example who says he isn't a racist ought not be believed,

because everyone lies to make themselves look good.

Are you a racist?

I did not reject the credibility of the study. The study was designed to determine how much discrimination there is in the academic community, not to prove there wasn't any. The authors of the study expected to find it, what surprised them is how much of it is open. I don't know how you can take that as proof that discrimination does not exist, but partisan logic only makes sense to partisans.

Then you throw in the race card, proving beyond doubt you know I am right.

First of all, you've never even SEEN the study, except for one example question provided in the propaganda piece in the OP,

which you admitted was a bogus question.

Are you a racist or not? Is that too difficult a question for you?

What makes it a propaganda piece?

 

[chanel]

if the left is caught doing something than say the other side would do it to with no evidence what so ever. I really cant wrap my brain around liberal thinking. Really, i bet you would be screaming how evil conservatives are if they were doing it. and your logic is very flawed.

The central theme of the article in the OP is the implication that this is something unique to liberals.

No it isn't. The central theme is that, since liberals dominate the academic fields, they feel comfortable in openly discriminating against anyone who does not share their views. I feel quite certain that, if conservatives had the upper hand, they would be doing the same thing.

Unlike you, I will admit they would be wrong to do so.

Of course that would be wrong. But you and I and most conservatives on this board would most likely appreciate our children being exposed to diverse points of view. A 50/50 balance would be ideal.

But as we have seen by the libs on this thread, they would be pleased with 100 percent liberal colleges. And that's really the point of the OP.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Since this is not about public higher ed only, let's try again.

How many liberal professors do you suppose there are at the late Jerry Falwell's Liberty University?

No one wants to make a guess?

How about we agree that a conservative college like Liberty is just as likely to discriminate against liberals applying for teaching jobs as any liberal college is to discriminate against conservatives.

Anyone have evidence to prove that inaccurate?

Liberty University is a private school that does't accept government money of any kind.

Try again.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Chanel, your conclusion is silly because it is not true based on the postings here. Try again.

The central theme of the article in the OP is the implication that this is something unique to liberals.

No it isn't. The central theme is that, since liberals dominate the academic fields, they feel comfortable in openly discriminating against anyone who does not share their views. I feel quite certain that, if conservatives had the upper hand, they would be doing the same thing.

Unlike you, I will admit they would be wrong to do so.

Of course that would be wrong. But you and I and most conservatives on this board would most likely appreciate our children being exposed to diverse points of view. A 50/50 balance would be ideal.

But as we have seen by the libs on this thread, they would be pleased with 100 percent liberal colleges. And that's really the point of the OP.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I did not reject the credibility of the study. The study was designed to determine how much discrimination there is in the academic community, not to prove there wasn't any. The authors of the study expected to find it, what surprised them is how much of it is open. I don't know how you can take that as proof that discrimination does not exist, but partisan logic only makes sense to partisans.

Then you throw in the race card, proving beyond doubt you know I am right.

First of all, you've never even SEEN the study, except for one example question provided in the propaganda piece in the OP,

which you admitted was a bogus question.

Are you a racist or not? Is that too difficult a question for you?

What makes it a propaganda piece?

I already explained that. Reread my posts.

Are you a racist or not?