Liberal Professors forcing their opinions on students

[NYcarbineer]

So, how many of you people who agree with the thread title and premise, especially you conservatives, hold views now only because you were forced to take on those views by a college professor,

and now are forced to keep them?

 

[regent]

So how did conservatives escape that indoctrination by college professors? Why haven't conservatives closed down the colleges when in power?

 

[Spare_change]

You're trying to equate being a liberal professor is equal to presenting only a left view. You cannot prove that is what is being done.

What is your highest level of educational attainment?

Me? How is my education level relevant? But, I'll tell you anyway ....

Bachelors in Journalism from University of Wisconsin
Masters in Political Science from University of Maryland
Waaaayyyy too long at the School of Hard Knocks

 

[Spare_change]

q=http%3A%2F%2Fblog.talkingphilosophy.com%2F%3Fp%3D7707

Quit the sniveling...America is the land of opportunity...there is NOTHING stopping conservatives from choosing a career in teaching....except conservatives themselves...it is rooted in the fact that conservatives are too self absorbed, selfish and ignorant. They are not 'givers' they are 'takers'

It's not quite that simple - liberal academia picks those most in line with their ideals. Thus, fewer conservatives ...

Business does the same thing ... thus, fewer liberals.

Dogma infested mind...academia picks those with the credentials and so does business. There is no shortage of liberals in business, and the ONLY thing stopping conservatives from a career in academia is desire.

Reality, reality, wherefore art thou?

Let me google that for you

I never meant to say that the conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally Conservative. I believe that is so obviously and universally admitted a principle that I hardly think any gentleman will deny it.

John Stuart Mill, in a letter to the Conservative MP, John Pakington


We have a political party and *news* channel that caters to people who live in Black-n-White World. Even though nearly all societies have some socialist aspects to them, Faux News and Republicans like to spotlight individual things and label them and anyone who supports them as "socialist."

Most of Faux News viewers are non-1%er retirees, which means they are lapping up most of the socialism the US offers its citizens: social security and Medicare.

I guess your generalizations make you feel good ... at least, I hope that is the purpose of it. Because I fail to see any other function of character assassination.

 

[Politico]

So, how many of you people who agree with the thread title and premise, especially you conservatives, hold views now only because you were forced to take on those views by a college professor,

and now are forced to keep them?

The premise is dumb. No one can force you to take on views.

 

[frigidweirdo]

The Professors The 101 Most Dangerous Academics in America - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=217

Conservative Parents Left-Wing Children National Review Online

Articles Do Left-Wing Professors Really Proselytize on Campus

I can go on and on ... but that's a start.

BTW - what the hell difference does the source make? Isn't it the content that is important? Please tell me you don't reject information merely because you don't like the source. Please tell me you actually review the information because it might, just might 1) be right, or 2) provide ammunition to bolster your position.

Please tell me ...

The whole point of a source is that is shows that you're not just making stuff up. Do you think at college people write in their bibliography "BTW - what the hell difference does the source make? Isn't it the content that is important? Please tell me you don't reject information merely because you don't like the source. Please tell me you actually review the information because it might, just might 1) be right, or 2) provide ammunition to bolster your position."?

The point on this board is that a lot of people peddle complete nonsense and pass it off as "fact". If they presented sources, GOOD SOURCES, then it would probably mean that there is some basis to what they're saying. But usually the only basis for what they're saying is the Republican Party Bullsheet machine.

Now I look at your sources, a wikipage about a book by a guy called David Horowitz. He, according to Wikipedia "is an American conservative writer." hardly a surprise there. His parents were Communists, I guess he went through the Liberal education system then, and became a Conservative because he was told to be liberal. He even went to Berkeley, wasn't that a really liberal place? Surely he should be liberal.

Here's what wiki says

"Some stories Horowitz has used as evidence that U.S. colleges and universities are bastions of liberal indoctrination have been disputed.[57] For example, Horowitz alleged that aUniversity of Northern Colorado student received a failing grade on a final exam for refusing to write an essay arguing that George W. Bush is a war criminal.[58][59] A spokeswoman for the university said that the test question was not as described by Horowitz and that there were nonpolitical reasons for the grade, which was not an F.[60]Horowitz identified the professor in this story[61] as Robert Dunkley, an assistant professor of criminal justice at Northern Colorado. Dunkley said Horowitz made him an example of "liberal bias" in academia and yet, "Dunkley said that he comes from a Republican family, is a registered Republican and considers himself politically independent, taking pride in never having voted a straight party ticket," Inside Higher Ed reported.[61]"

Sounds like this guy peddles bullsheet just for the hell of it.

Second source by Dennis Prager - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia who would appear to be a bit of a conservative in a religious way more than anything else.

As for Richard Winchester, i don't know who he is, I found some guy who does tax law at some place or other, but it could be any other Richard Winchester.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

It should come as no surprise that there is no evidence that colleges and universities are “bastions of liberal indoctrination,” where the notion is a lie contrived and propagated by the partisan right.

 

[frigidweirdo]

The Professors The 101 Most Dangerous Academics in America - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=217

Conservative Parents Left-Wing Children National Review Online

Articles Do Left-Wing Professors Really Proselytize on Campus

I can go on and on ... but that's a start.

BTW - what the hell difference does the source make? Isn't it the content that is important? Please tell me you don't reject information merely because you don't like the source. Please tell me you actually review the information because it might, just might 1) be right, or 2) provide ammunition to bolster your position.

Please tell me ...

The whole point of a source is that is shows that you're not just making stuff up. Do you think at college people write in their bibliography "BTW - what the hell difference does the source make? Isn't it the content that is important? Please tell me you don't reject information merely because you don't like the source. Please tell me you actually review the information because it might, just might 1) be right, or 2) provide ammunition to bolster your position."?

The point on this board is that a lot of people peddle complete nonsense and pass it off as "fact". If they presented sources, GOOD SOURCES, then it would probably mean that there is some basis to what they're saying. But usually the only basis for what they're saying is the Republican Party Bullsheet machine.

Now I look at your sources, a wikipage about a book by a guy called David Horowitz. He, according to Wikipedia "is an American conservative writer." hardly a surprise there. His parents were Communists, I guess he went through the Liberal education system then, and became a Conservative because he was told to be liberal. He even went to Berkeley, wasn't that a really liberal place? Surely he should be liberal.

Here's what wiki says

"Some stories Horowitz has used as evidence that U.S. colleges and universities are bastions of liberal indoctrination have been disputed.[57] For example, Horowitz alleged that aUniversity of Northern Colorado student received a failing grade on a final exam for refusing to write an essay arguing that George W. Bush is a war criminal.[58][59] A spokeswoman for the university said that the test question was not as described by Horowitz and that there were nonpolitical reasons for the grade, which was not an F.[60]Horowitz identified the professor in this story[61] as Robert Dunkley, an assistant professor of criminal justice at Northern Colorado. Dunkley said Horowitz made him an example of "liberal bias" in academia and yet, "Dunkley said that he comes from a Republican family, is a registered Republican and considers himself politically independent, taking pride in never having voted a straight party ticket," Inside Higher Ed reported.[61]"

Sounds like this guy peddles bullsheet just for the hell of it.

Second source by Dennis Prager - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia who would appear to be a bit of a conservative in a religious way more than anything else.

As for Richard Winchester, i don't know who he is, I found some guy who does tax law at some place or other, but it could be any other Richard Winchester.

 

[ninja007]

the other issue is conservative tuition goes to the schools to "support" these lies.

 

[Disir]

You're trying to equate being a liberal professor is equal to presenting only a left view. You cannot prove that is what is being done.

What is your highest level of educational attainment?

Me? How is my education level relevant? But, I'll tell you anyway ....

Bachelors in Journalism from University of Wisconsin
Masters in Political Science from University of Maryland
Waaaayyyy too long at the School of Hard Knocks

If you had that background then you would be critical of your sources. You would be able to tell the difference between objective and subjective.

 

[bripat9643]

So how did conservatives escape that indoctrination by college professors? Why haven't conservatives closed down the colleges when in power?

Some people are simply impervious to bullshit.

 

[NYcarbineer]

So, how many of you people who agree with the thread title and premise, especially you conservatives, hold views now only because you were forced to take on those views by a college professor,

and now are forced to keep them?

The premise is dumb. No one can force you to take on views.

Tell that to the author of this thread.

 

[bripat9643]

So, how many of you people who agree with the thread title and premise, especially you conservatives, hold views now only because you were forced to take on those views by a college professor,

and now are forced to keep them?

The premise is dumb. No one can force you to take on views.

Tell that to the author of this thread.

About your sig line: It's good of you to announce to the entire forum that you're an enemy of capitalism - a socialist, in other words.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The widespread rightwing claim that liberal professors force their opinions on students is a good example of the rightwing propaganda machine trying to force IT'S opinion on others.

Do you REALLY want a list of examples where left wing ideologues, masquerading as college professors, have forced their opinion on students? Do you REALLY want us to give you examples of liberals abusing their position?

Do you?

(PLEASE say yes!)

Yes. And I want you to prove that force was used, in a real sense of what force is and its consequences, and I want you to show enough examples to prove that a broader brush generalization about liberal professors is valid,

and I also want you to prove that there is a clear distinction between liberal and conservative professors.

 

[NYcarbineer]

So, how many of you people who agree with the thread title and premise, especially you conservatives, hold views now only because you were forced to take on those views by a college professor,

and now are forced to keep them?

The premise is dumb. No one can force you to take on views.

Tell that to the author of this thread.

About your sig line: It's good of you to announce to the entire forum that you're an enemy of capitalism - a socialist, in other words.

So?

 

[regent]

I think many believe progressive teaching is teaching the earth is more round than flat. Education changed with the likes of Copernicus, Newton and the Age of Enlightenment, and some are still fighting the change.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

I think many believe progressive teaching is teaching the earth is more round than flat. Education changed with the likes of Copernicus, Newton and the Age of Enlightenment, and some are still fighting the change.

As if John Locke and Voltaire of the Enlightenment would agree with submitting to tyranny.

Modern liberals are the Counter Enlightenment, professing Big Government.

 

[Spare_change]

You're trying to equate being a liberal professor is equal to presenting only a left view. You cannot prove that is what is being done.

What is your highest level of educational attainment?

Me? How is my education level relevant? But, I'll tell you anyway ....

Bachelors in Journalism from University of Wisconsin
Masters in Political Science from University of Maryland
Waaaayyyy too long at the School of Hard Knocks

If you had that background then you would be critical of your sources. You would be able to tell the difference between objective and subjective.

Excuse me? Are you questioning my background?

Then, what the hell did you ask for? You can be assured THAT is my background.

 

[Disir]

You're trying to equate being a liberal professor is equal to presenting only a left view. You cannot prove that is what is being done.

What is your highest level of educational attainment?

Me? How is my education level relevant? But, I'll tell you anyway ....

Bachelors in Journalism from University of Wisconsin
Masters in Political Science from University of Maryland
Waaaayyyy too long at the School of Hard Knocks

If you had that background then you would be critical of your sources. You would be able to tell the difference between objective and subjective.

Excuse me? Are you questioning my background?

Then, what the hell did you ask for? You can be assured THAT is my background.

Bullshit. I don't buy it. What journalist doesn't believe in checking out the source? What individual with a Masters in Poli Sci cannot differentiate between subjective and objective?

 

[regent]

I think many believe progressive teaching is teaching the earth is more round than flat. Education changed with the likes of Copernicus, Newton and the Age of Enlightenment, and some are still fighting the change.

As if John Locke and Voltaire of the Enlightenment would agree with submitting to tyranny.
Modern liberals are the Counter Enlightenment, professing Big Government.

I don't think big government is part of any political ideology. To bring the size of government into the picture depends more on what government is in power and what that government does with that power, rather than its size. After Reagan made all those comments about the evils of government did he reduce the size of government or even its debt? Did he even make an attempt?