Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
While I attended one of the most liberal universities in the Midwest, my dissertation committee allowed me liberal -- in the best sense of the word -- latitude.
They let me write a dissertation with evangelical flavor, on Jesus. And then passed it with honors.
Truly liberal.
The problem, of course, is that every time I have shared that moment with other academicians they have looked at me with dropped jaws, knowing that could never happen at a university today. Too open-minded, too fair, too tolerant.
I was reminiscing about that experience when I read about conservative columnist Ann Coulter's visit to the University of Kansas. A few years previous, Ann had written something kind about another conservative lawyer and feminist (that latter word utilized in the very best sense), Phyllis Schlafly. Schlafly, at my alma mater, was absolutely shouted down in a manner that should have made the officials of the school shudder in shame.
After all, KU is liberal. Open-minded. Fair. Tolerant.
Well, they weren't that night. Schlafly had hardly begun before she was shut down for the evening by the gays, the lesbians, the "peace" activists, the Democrats -- the "tolerant."
So, 25 years later the protégé shows up in Ms. Coulter. She waxes warm to begin ("I've come to find I like liberals a lot more. They're kind of cute when they're cold, shivering, and afraid."). Hecklers in the crowd interrupted her speech. Coulter said two things reported by the local paper that got her through the rest of the evening.
"I think there are some people in the audience who meant to be at the sexual reorientation class down the hall." Touché.
"Could 10 of the largest College Republicans start walking up and down the aisles and start removing anyone shouting?" She did this when, of course, the university had no authorities in the area to take care of problems they knew would arise.
At Earlham College, a school renowned for its peace studies program, Associated Press tells us conservative William Kristol, publisher of The Weekly Standard and former chief of staff to Vice President Dan Quayle, was met 30 minutes into his speech with an ice cream pie. Action may well be taken in this case; the college president was sitting on the stage at the time and some of it landed on him, too.
Alas, liberalism -- true generous, abundant, broad-minded, kind and gentle liberalism -- is dead. In its place are those who talk tolerance, but practice quite the opposite.
No place is this more apparent than on the college campus, according to a recent study. Robert Lichter, Stanley Rothman and Neil Nevitte found evidence of "possible discrimination against conservatives" in information gleaned from 183 four-year schools.
Possible discrimination? Now that is a liberal descriptor ...
72 percent of those teaching at American universities and colleges are liberal; 15 percent are conservative.
50 percent of faculty members identify themselves as Democrats; 11 percent as Republicans.
The more elite the schools, the worse it gets with an 87-13 liberal-conservative breakdown there.
84 percent of the professors and instructors are in favor of abortion rights; 67 percent believe homosexuality is acceptable; 88 percent want more environmental protection even if it raises prices or costs jobs; and 65 percent want the government to ensure full employment, something not even the Democratic Party is willing to stick its proverbial neck out to say.
Faculty in all fields of study are dominated by avowedly liberal professors, but more so in English literature, philosophy, political science and religious studies, where 80 percent of the teachers call themselves liberal and no more than 5 percent label themselves conservative.
How can schools get away with this?
Three ploys:
Play with the language; while being remarkably prejudiced and fanatical yourself, label everything else (particularly Republican, conservative or evangelical) as bigoted, small-minded, and, yes, intolerant.
Hope against hope taxpayers and alumni of a bygone era don't notice.
Shout down everyone with whom you disagree, when they come to town.
Tolerance, American-style.
Bonnie said:The Liberal Version of Tolerance...
... Shout down everyone with whom you disagree, when they come to town.
Jimmyeatworld... I could just add the ironic situation a few weeks ago, when military recruiters were driven away by tolerant, peace loving Liberals who were throwing rocks and bottles, then jumped to the hypocritical justification of freedom of speech.
Pale Rider said:They won't do this to you "one on one", only in a crowd. Like a pack of sissie little cowards.
I love talking to liberals face to face, "one on one", because if they ever get all loud and think their going to "shout me down", I get all UP IN THEIR FACE, making the physical challenge very apparent, if that's where they're going with their big loud out of control mouth, and if they were ever to start swinging, well, that's just a signal to me to start having a REAL good time. What we used to call in the military, a little "wall to wall counseling"...
Bonnie said:I can remember on a few occasions going to political events or rallies and had rocks thrown at me from those wonderfully tolerant and open minded libs, what's worse is seeing them do it to priests, nuns, and old people. And the media not once actually put any of that on the air. Imagine if we had been the ones throwing rocks??
no1tovote4 said:I was in D.C. and walking with a Buddhist Priest with which I was talking when we came accross a pro-life rally outside an abortion clinic that was being met with pro-abortion resistence, as we passed we were attacked by the pro-abortion group who assumed that we too were part of the protest. I had never seen anybody strike a Buddhist Priest until then. I was disturbed.
Bonnie said:I can remember on a few occasions going to political events or rallies and had rocks thrown at me from those wonderfully tolerant and open minded libs, what's worse is seeing them do it to priests, nuns, and old people. And the media not once actually put any of that on the air. Imagine if we had been the ones throwing rocks??
Avatar4321 said:I think this is a major problem boiling under the surface of american politics. We have alot of people ready for violence. just look at the last election. Tire slashing, vandalism, gun fire at campaign headquarters, the fact is this nation is getting closer to the edge of all out war with itself. I think the anger is growing on both sides of the isle although Ive seen it most consistancy with the left. I think the next few years could be key to determining the viability of our future as a free nation.
ScreamingEagle said:You mean THE REVOLUTION is coming?
Avatar4321 said:I think this is a major problem boiling under the surface of american politics. We have alot of people ready for violence. just look at the last election. Tire slashing, vandalism, gun fire at campaign headquarters, the fact is this nation is getting closer to the edge of all out war with itself. I think the anger is growing on both sides of the isle although Ive seen it most consistancy with the left. I think the next few years could be key to determining the viability of our future as a free nation.
NATO AIR said:We already went through that in the 60's remember?
Thank God no one has been assasinated like back then.
Kathianne said:I agree. The tone has been bad for awhile. I hope by '08 that both sides have started to act like grown-ups.
NATO AIR said:I could not bear to lose our great leaders, like this country did in the 60's.
We lost Bobby, Malcom and Martin, we cannot lose George, Condeleeza and Barrack.
Kathianne said:The jury in this quarter is still out on Barrack. (word of warning, always beware of Chicago pols.)
NATO AIR said:You are right, but still I believe he may end up being as advertised, a new, better face of the Democratic Party. I hope at least
I do not want people killing American leaders as they did in the 60's. This country would perhaps be in a better condition, politically and socially, if we had not murdered our own best hopes for the future in the 60's.
Kathianne said:Since you weren't alive in the 60's and I was but a mere child, WE didn't do any such thing. Crazies did. A redneck, a Russian wannabe, and a Muslim.
NATO AIR said:That is true. I just hope no crazies in this era do something similar.
