Unfortunately, Liberal Keep Being Liberals

[PoliticalChic]

The notion that liberals are not Americans is probably the most retarded idea I've heard in my entire life. Get a life, chickie.

Comments about everything except the point: Liberals are out to prevent any discussion or debate about their dictums.
Afraid to draw the obvious conclusion that Liberals like nothing better than censoring opposing views.....and no where is this less appropriate than in universities???

The professor is a douchebag.

However, do you have anything other than anecdotes to conclude that liberals broadly don't want any discussion or debate about their beliefs such that any reasonable person would conclude that they are tantamount to Nazis or communists?

I'm trying to differentiate the professor's over-reaction and yours. I'm not seeing any.

"I'm not seeing any."

I'm responsible for what I post, not for the lack of comprehension you evince, as a result of your biases.

The professor is both courageous and correct.
In the thread, I've given not only the case of the university employee forbidding any exchange of opinion beyond that advanced by the Liberal agenda, but included the administration of the university taking the very livelihood of anyone....the professor....who dares to make the Liberal fascism known.

But...in the vain hope that yours was an honest post.....I will post more on this case.

Why not make the thread about ONE individual who happened to do this, instead of making a wholly indefensible argument that this one individual's actions are representative of liberalism in general?

Because the actions highlighted in the OP are representative of liberalism in general.

True story.

And the shoe fit....that's why you're squealing like a stuck pig.

 

[PoliticalChic]

How can "liberals" not want any debate on their beliefs if not all liberals agree on the same thing? 1 in 5 liberals don't agree with gay marriage.

That implies that 80% do agree. So again, what was your point?

That her argument that liberals brook no dissent is a logical fallacy.

Clearly, since 100% of liberals don't agree on gay marriage, there is dissent amongst liberals.

No liberals on this forum have attempted to prevent her from keeping this thread up and thus making her argument,

so there are, what, a hundred times as many examples disproving her assertion as she provided in making it.

"No liberals on this forum have attempted to prevent her from keeping this thread up and thus making her argument,..."

See..you left out the comma...

I can help:

No, liberals on this forum have attempted to prevent her from keeping this thread up and thus making her argument,...

Now, it is correct.

 

[PoliticalChic]

And per the title....that means not being Americans.


Seems to raise hackles when I point out that Liberalism is simply one more iteration of the totalitarian political persuasion.
And, yes, I do mean that Liberalism belongs in the same family with communism, socialism, Nazism, etc.

And no, I don't mean that Liberalism is about gulags and concentration camps, FDR's efforts toward the Japanese notwithstanding, because the American version is suffused through, and extenuated by, America's history.



"The excesses of the European versions of fascism were mitigated by the specific history and culture of America, Jeffersonian individualism, heterogeneity of the population, but the central theme is still an all-encompassing state that centralizes power to perfect human nature by controlling every aspect of life., albeit at the loss of what had hitherfore been accepted as ‘inalienable human rights.’"
Jonah Goldberg

Modern Liberalism is not guided by such American concepts as unalienable rights.
Liberalism, and institutions pervaded by its tenets, accept the silencing of those with opposing views.

Yes, they do.
Most especially universities, the monasteries of Liberalism....as you will find below.




1. " Marquette Philosophy Instructor: “Gay Rights” Can’t Be Discussed in Class Since Any Disagreement Would Offend Gay Students

2. A student ... in a philosophy class (“Theory of Ethics”), and the instructor (one Cheryl Abbate) was attempting to apply a philosophical text to modern political controversies. ...She listed some issues on the board, and came to “gay rights.”

She then airily said that “everybody agrees on this, and there is no need to discuss it.”




3. The student, a conservative who disagrees with some of the gay lobby’s notions of “gay rights” (such as gay marriage).... told Abbate that if she dismisses an entire argument because of her personal views, that sets a terrible precedent for the class.

4. The student argued against gay marriage and gay adoption, ... Abbate made some plausible arguments to the student — pointing out that single people can adopt a child, so why not a gay couple? She even asked the student for research showing that children of gay parents do worse than children of straight, married parents. The student said he would provide it.

5. Abbate explained that “some opinions are not appropriate, such as racist opinions, sexist opinions” and then went on to ask “do you know if anyone in your class is homosexual?” And further “don’t you think it would be offensive to them” if some student raised his hand and challenged gay marriage?

The point being, apparently that any gay classmates should not be subjected to hearing any disagreement with their presumed policy views.





6. .... as the student said that it was his right as an American citizen to make arguments against gay marriage. Abbate replied that “you don’t have a right in this class to make homophobic comments.”

She further said she would “take offense” if the student said that women can’t serve in particular roles. And she added that somebody who is homosexual would experience similar offense if somebody opposed gay marriage in class.

She went on “In this class, homophobic comments, racist comments, will not be tolerated.”

She then invited the student to drop the class."
Marquette Warrior Marquette Philosophy Instructor Gay Rights Can t Be Discussed in Class Since Any Disagreement Would Offend Gay Students

There is literally... (l i t e r a l l y ) NOTHING as mercilessly intolerant as a Liberal. They a threat to civilization... on the whole and entirely.

Of course, we need more tolerance at universities as we see at the conservative ones.

As an excellent example, Bob Jones University:

http://www.bju.edu/life-faith/student-handbook.pdf

Try from page 23, Social Life. lol

You have only two modes:

Either you lie, or you pretend not to understand, and change the focus of the argument.

Case in point..."Try from page 23, Social Life."

Where does it say that opposing opinions will be cause to have student drop the course?

It doesn't ...does it.
That's a tactic reserved for Liberal institutions.


Once again....it is not possible to have an honest discussion with a Liberal.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The notion that liberals are not Americans is probably the most retarded idea I've heard in my entire life. Get a life, chickie.

Comments about everything except the point: Liberals are out to prevent any discussion or debate about their dictums.
Afraid to draw the obvious conclusion that Liberals like nothing better than censoring opposing views.....and no where is this less appropriate than in universities???

The professor is a douchebag.

However, do you have anything other than anecdotes to conclude that liberals broadly don't want any discussion or debate about their beliefs such that any reasonable person would conclude that they are tantamount to Nazis or communists?

I'm trying to differentiate the professor's over-reaction and yours. I'm not seeing any.

"I'm not seeing any."

I'm responsible for what I post, not for the lack of comprehension you evince, as a result of your biases.

The professor is both courageous and correct.
In the thread, I've given not only the case of the university employee forbidding any exchange of opinion beyond that advanced by the Liberal agenda, but included the administration of the university taking the very livelihood of anyone....the professor....who dares to make the Liberal fascism known.

But...in the vain hope that yours was an honest post.....I will post more on this case.

Why not make the thread about ONE individual who happened to do this, instead of making a wholly indefensible argument that this one individual's actions are representative of liberalism in general?

Because the actions highlighted in the OP are representative of liberalism in general.

True story.

And the shoe fit....that's why you're squealing like a stuck pig.

I'm trying to debate you on the facts of the issue.

To be representative of liberalism in general, an action would have to be characteristic of most liberals' actions in the same scenario on the same issue.

Prove that, please.

 

[NYcarbineer]

And per the title....that means not being Americans.


Seems to raise hackles when I point out that Liberalism is simply one more iteration of the totalitarian political persuasion.
And, yes, I do mean that Liberalism belongs in the same family with communism, socialism, Nazism, etc.

And no, I don't mean that Liberalism is about gulags and concentration camps, FDR's efforts toward the Japanese notwithstanding, because the American version is suffused through, and extenuated by, America's history.



"The excesses of the European versions of fascism were mitigated by the specific history and culture of America, Jeffersonian individualism, heterogeneity of the population, but the central theme is still an all-encompassing state that centralizes power to perfect human nature by controlling every aspect of life., albeit at the loss of what had hitherfore been accepted as ‘inalienable human rights.’"
Jonah Goldberg

Modern Liberalism is not guided by such American concepts as unalienable rights.
Liberalism, and institutions pervaded by its tenets, accept the silencing of those with opposing views.

Yes, they do.
Most especially universities, the monasteries of Liberalism....as you will find below.




1. " Marquette Philosophy Instructor: “Gay Rights” Can’t Be Discussed in Class Since Any Disagreement Would Offend Gay Students

2. A student ... in a philosophy class (“Theory of Ethics”), and the instructor (one Cheryl Abbate) was attempting to apply a philosophical text to modern political controversies. ...She listed some issues on the board, and came to “gay rights.”

She then airily said that “everybody agrees on this, and there is no need to discuss it.”




3. The student, a conservative who disagrees with some of the gay lobby’s notions of “gay rights” (such as gay marriage).... told Abbate that if she dismisses an entire argument because of her personal views, that sets a terrible precedent for the class.

4. The student argued against gay marriage and gay adoption, ... Abbate made some plausible arguments to the student — pointing out that single people can adopt a child, so why not a gay couple? She even asked the student for research showing that children of gay parents do worse than children of straight, married parents. The student said he would provide it.

5. Abbate explained that “some opinions are not appropriate, such as racist opinions, sexist opinions” and then went on to ask “do you know if anyone in your class is homosexual?” And further “don’t you think it would be offensive to them” if some student raised his hand and challenged gay marriage?

The point being, apparently that any gay classmates should not be subjected to hearing any disagreement with their presumed policy views.





6. .... as the student said that it was his right as an American citizen to make arguments against gay marriage. Abbate replied that “you don’t have a right in this class to make homophobic comments.”

She further said she would “take offense” if the student said that women can’t serve in particular roles. And she added that somebody who is homosexual would experience similar offense if somebody opposed gay marriage in class.

She went on “In this class, homophobic comments, racist comments, will not be tolerated.”

She then invited the student to drop the class."
Marquette Warrior Marquette Philosophy Instructor Gay Rights Can t Be Discussed in Class Since Any Disagreement Would Offend Gay Students

There is literally... (l i t e r a l l y ) NOTHING as mercilessly intolerant as a Liberal. They a threat to civilization... on the whole and entirely.

Of course, we need more tolerance at universities as we see at the conservative ones.

As an excellent example, Bob Jones University:

http://www.bju.edu/life-faith/student-handbook.pdf

Try from page 23, Social Life. lol

You have only two modes:

Either you lie, or you pretend not to understand, and change the focus of the argument.

Case in point..."Try from page 23, Social Life."

Where does it say that opposing opinions will be cause to have student drop the course?

It doesn't ...does it.
That's a tactic reserved for Liberal institutions.


Once again....it is not possible to have an honest discussion with a Liberal.

I was responding to the other poster's generalization about intolerance.

 

[NYcarbineer]

How can "liberals" not want any debate on their beliefs if not all liberals agree on the same thing? 1 in 5 liberals don't agree with gay marriage.

That implies that 80% do agree. So again, what was your point?

That her argument that liberals brook no dissent is a logical fallacy.

Clearly, since 100% of liberals don't agree on gay marriage, there is dissent amongst liberals.

No liberals on this forum have attempted to prevent her from keeping this thread up and thus making her argument,

so there are, what, a hundred times as many examples disproving her assertion as she provided in making it.

"No liberals on this forum have attempted to prevent her from keeping this thread up and thus making her argument,..."

See..you left out the comma...

I can help:

No, liberals on this forum have attempted to prevent her from keeping this thread up and thus making her argument,...

Now, it is correct.

Who has tried to prevent you from having or keeping this thread on the board?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Comments about everything except the point: Liberals are out to prevent any discussion or debate about their dictums.
Afraid to draw the obvious conclusion that Liberals like nothing better than censoring opposing views.....and no where is this less appropriate than in universities???

The professor is a douchebag.

However, do you have anything other than anecdotes to conclude that liberals broadly don't want any discussion or debate about their beliefs such that any reasonable person would conclude that they are tantamount to Nazis or communists?

I'm trying to differentiate the professor's over-reaction and yours. I'm not seeing any.

"I'm not seeing any."

I'm responsible for what I post, not for the lack of comprehension you evince, as a result of your biases.

The professor is both courageous and correct.
In the thread, I've given not only the case of the university employee forbidding any exchange of opinion beyond that advanced by the Liberal agenda, but included the administration of the university taking the very livelihood of anyone....the professor....who dares to make the Liberal fascism known.

But...in the vain hope that yours was an honest post.....I will post more on this case.

Why not make the thread about ONE individual who happened to do this, instead of making a wholly indefensible argument that this one individual's actions are representative of liberalism in general?

Because the actions highlighted in the OP are representative of liberalism in general.

True story.

And the shoe fit....that's why you're squealing like a stuck pig.

I'm trying to debate you on the facts of the issue.

To be representative of liberalism in general, an action would have to be characteristic of most liberals' actions in the same scenario on the same issue.

Prove that, please.

1. "I'm trying to debate you..."
I never argue or debate....I simply explain why I'm right.


2. "...characteristic of most liberals' actions in the same scenario on the same issue."
As per the OP/thread.
Absolutely.



3. From “The Death of Feminism,” by Phyllis Chesler:
"Academic feminists who received tenure, promotion, and funding, tended to be pro-abortion, pro-pornography (anti-censorship), pro-prostitution (pro-sex workers), pro-surrogacy, and anti-colonialist, anti-imperialist, and anti-American…proponents of simplistic gender-neutrality (women and men are exactly the same) or essentialist: men and women are completely different, and women are better. They are loyal to their careers and their cliques, not to the truth.



4. " Liberals stamp out dissent by social and professional ostracism and legal discrimination. This is the modern version of methods used by medieval Christianity: a secular Inquisition.

a. Intelligentsia as grand inquisitors: in the media, universities, the law, political and professional groups. The dominating ideologies include anti-capitalism, feminism, multiculturalism, and environmentalism. They form the unchallengeable orthodoxy in academia. No challenges or deviations are permitted, and anyone who does not share these values is defined as extreme.

b. These ideologies have as their common theme the overturning of the established order of the West.

c. How ironic that intellectual liberty is assaulted within the institutions of reason."
Melanie Philips, “The World Turned Upside Down,” ch 6

 

[PoliticalChic]

And per the title....that means not being Americans.


Seems to raise hackles when I point out that Liberalism is simply one more iteration of the totalitarian political persuasion.
And, yes, I do mean that Liberalism belongs in the same family with communism, socialism, Nazism, etc.

And no, I don't mean that Liberalism is about gulags and concentration camps, FDR's efforts toward the Japanese notwithstanding, because the American version is suffused through, and extenuated by, America's history.



"The excesses of the European versions of fascism were mitigated by the specific history and culture of America, Jeffersonian individualism, heterogeneity of the population, but the central theme is still an all-encompassing state that centralizes power to perfect human nature by controlling every aspect of life., albeit at the loss of what had hitherfore been accepted as ‘inalienable human rights.’"
Jonah Goldberg

Modern Liberalism is not guided by such American concepts as unalienable rights.
Liberalism, and institutions pervaded by its tenets, accept the silencing of those with opposing views.

Yes, they do.
Most especially universities, the monasteries of Liberalism....as you will find below.




1. " Marquette Philosophy Instructor: “Gay Rights” Can’t Be Discussed in Class Since Any Disagreement Would Offend Gay Students

2. A student ... in a philosophy class (“Theory of Ethics”), and the instructor (one Cheryl Abbate) was attempting to apply a philosophical text to modern political controversies. ...She listed some issues on the board, and came to “gay rights.”

She then airily said that “everybody agrees on this, and there is no need to discuss it.”




3. The student, a conservative who disagrees with some of the gay lobby’s notions of “gay rights” (such as gay marriage).... told Abbate that if she dismisses an entire argument because of her personal views, that sets a terrible precedent for the class.

4. The student argued against gay marriage and gay adoption, ... Abbate made some plausible arguments to the student — pointing out that single people can adopt a child, so why not a gay couple? She even asked the student for research showing that children of gay parents do worse than children of straight, married parents. The student said he would provide it.

5. Abbate explained that “some opinions are not appropriate, such as racist opinions, sexist opinions” and then went on to ask “do you know if anyone in your class is homosexual?” And further “don’t you think it would be offensive to them” if some student raised his hand and challenged gay marriage?

The point being, apparently that any gay classmates should not be subjected to hearing any disagreement with their presumed policy views.





6. .... as the student said that it was his right as an American citizen to make arguments against gay marriage. Abbate replied that “you don’t have a right in this class to make homophobic comments.”

She further said she would “take offense” if the student said that women can’t serve in particular roles. And she added that somebody who is homosexual would experience similar offense if somebody opposed gay marriage in class.

She went on “In this class, homophobic comments, racist comments, will not be tolerated.”

She then invited the student to drop the class."
Marquette Warrior Marquette Philosophy Instructor Gay Rights Can t Be Discussed in Class Since Any Disagreement Would Offend Gay Students

There is literally... (l i t e r a l l y ) NOTHING as mercilessly intolerant as a Liberal. They a threat to civilization... on the whole and entirely.

Of course, we need more tolerance at universities as we see at the conservative ones.

As an excellent example, Bob Jones University:

http://www.bju.edu/life-faith/student-handbook.pdf

Try from page 23, Social Life. lol

You have only two modes:

Either you lie, or you pretend not to understand, and change the focus of the argument.

Case in point..."Try from page 23, Social Life."

Where does it say that opposing opinions will be cause to have student drop the course?

It doesn't ...does it.
That's a tactic reserved for Liberal institutions.


Once again....it is not possible to have an honest discussion with a Liberal.

I was responding to the other poster's generalization about intolerance.

So? That has nothing to do with my post.
Consider yourself having been put in your place.

 

[PoliticalChic]

How can "liberals" not want any debate on their beliefs if not all liberals agree on the same thing? 1 in 5 liberals don't agree with gay marriage.

That implies that 80% do agree. So again, what was your point?

That her argument that liberals brook no dissent is a logical fallacy.

Clearly, since 100% of liberals don't agree on gay marriage, there is dissent amongst liberals.

No liberals on this forum have attempted to prevent her from keeping this thread up and thus making her argument,

so there are, what, a hundred times as many examples disproving her assertion as she provided in making it.

"No liberals on this forum have attempted to prevent her from keeping this thread up and thus making her argument,..."

See..you left out the comma...

I can help:

No, liberals on this forum have attempted to prevent her from keeping this thread up and thus making her argument,...

Now, it is correct.

Who has tried to prevent you from having or keeping this thread on the board?

Every Liberal who has posted an attack on me rather than responding to the points made in the OP/thread.

Meaning, every Liberals.

 

[Ame®icano]

And per the title....that means not being Americans.


Seems to raise hackles when I point out that Liberalism is simply one more iteration of the totalitarian political persuasion.
And, yes, I do mean that Liberalism belongs in the same family with communism, socialism, Nazism, etc.

And no, I don't mean that Liberalism is about gulags and concentration camps, FDR's efforts toward the Japanese notwithstanding, because the American version is suffused through, and extenuated by, America's history.



"The excesses of the European versions of fascism were mitigated by the specific history and culture of America, Jeffersonian individualism, heterogeneity of the population, but the central theme is still an all-encompassing state that centralizes power to perfect human nature by controlling every aspect of life., albeit at the loss of what had hitherfore been accepted as ‘inalienable human rights.’"
Jonah Goldberg

Modern Liberalism is not guided by such American concepts as unalienable rights.
Liberalism, and institutions pervaded by its tenets, accept the silencing of those with opposing views.

Yes, they do.
Most especially universities, the monasteries of Liberalism....as you will find below.




1. " Marquette Philosophy Instructor: “Gay Rights” Can’t Be Discussed in Class Since Any Disagreement Would Offend Gay Students

2. A student ... in a philosophy class (“Theory of Ethics”), and the instructor (one Cheryl Abbate) was attempting to apply a philosophical text to modern political controversies. ...She listed some issues on the board, and came to “gay rights.”

She then airily said that “everybody agrees on this, and there is no need to discuss it.”




3. The student, a conservative who disagrees with some of the gay lobby’s notions of “gay rights” (such as gay marriage).... told Abbate that if she dismisses an entire argument because of her personal views, that sets a terrible precedent for the class.

4. The student argued against gay marriage and gay adoption, ... Abbate made some plausible arguments to the student — pointing out that single people can adopt a child, so why not a gay couple? She even asked the student for research showing that children of gay parents do worse than children of straight, married parents. The student said he would provide it.

5. Abbate explained that “some opinions are not appropriate, such as racist opinions, sexist opinions” and then went on to ask “do you know if anyone in your class is homosexual?” And further “don’t you think it would be offensive to them” if some student raised his hand and challenged gay marriage?

The point being, apparently that any gay classmates should not be subjected to hearing any disagreement with their presumed policy views.





6. .... as the student said that it was his right as an American citizen to make arguments against gay marriage. Abbate replied that “you don’t have a right in this class to make homophobic comments.”

She further said she would “take offense” if the student said that women can’t serve in particular roles. And she added that somebody who is homosexual would experience similar offense if somebody opposed gay marriage in class.

She went on “In this class, homophobic comments, racist comments, will not be tolerated.”

She then invited the student to drop the class."
Marquette Warrior Marquette Philosophy Instructor Gay Rights Can t Be Discussed in Class Since Any Disagreement Would Offend Gay Students

There is literally... (l i t e r a l l y ) NOTHING as mercilessly intolerant as a Liberal. They a threat to civilization... on the whole and entirely.

Of course, we need more tolerance at universities as we see at the conservative ones.

As an excellent example, Bob Jones University:

http://www.bju.edu/life-faith/student-handbook.pdf

Try from page 23, Social Life. lol

You have only two modes:

Either you lie, or you pretend not to understand, and change the focus of the argument.

Case in point..."Try from page 23, Social Life."

Where does it say that opposing opinions will be cause to have student drop the course?

It doesn't ...does it.
That's a tactic reserved for Liberal institutions.


Once again....it is not possible to have an honest discussion with a Liberal.

 

[Moonglow]

Unfortunately, Liberal Keep Being Liberals

So from one you get many,,,the blessing of the Lord is upon liberal.....(s)....

 

[PoliticalChic]

Unfortunately, Liberal Keep Being Liberals

So from one you get many,,,the blessing of the Lord is upon liberal.....(s)....

One what???

Liberal???

In universities?????

1. Higher Education Research Institute at the UCLA published a survey in 2002, of 55,521 professors at 416 colleges and universities nationwide. They found that 48% of the professors identified themselves as ‘liberal’ or ‘far left;’ 34% as ‘middle of the road. In 2004, Klein and Western published a study of the voter registration of the professors at U of C, Berkeley, and at Stanford, over 1000 professors, and concluded that the findings supported the ‘one party campus’ conjecture. At Berkeley, 9.9 to 1, and at Stanford, 7.6 to 1 of Democrats to Republicans.
Ideological diversity does not exist on most campuses.


In 2005 Klein and Stern surveyed 1,678 professors, and found that faculty is heavily skewed toward Democratic, and the most lopsided fields are Anthropology (30.2 to 1) and Sociology (28 to 1).


So....what's wrong with this skewed view in 'higher education'???
This:
Most professors obsessively believe that Europe is culturally more sophisticated and mature than America. Barry and Judith Rubin explain, in their book “Hating America: A History,” that European intellectuals are bothered by Americans’ refusal to defer to a refined upper class and to recognize their own inferiority. They conclude that anti-Americanism is put forth by these intellectuals, who have influence in the realm of ideas: books, media and universities.


One, huh?

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

The professor is a douchebag.

However, do you have anything other than anecdotes to conclude that liberals broadly don't want any discussion or debate about their beliefs such that any reasonable person would conclude that they are tantamount to Nazis or communists?

I'm trying to differentiate the professor's over-reaction and yours. I'm not seeing any.

"I'm not seeing any."

I'm responsible for what I post, not for the lack of comprehension you evince, as a result of your biases.

The professor is both courageous and correct.
In the thread, I've given not only the case of the university employee forbidding any exchange of opinion beyond that advanced by the Liberal agenda, but included the administration of the university taking the very livelihood of anyone....the professor....who dares to make the Liberal fascism known.

But...in the vain hope that yours was an honest post.....I will post more on this case.

Why not make the thread about ONE individual who happened to do this, instead of making a wholly indefensible argument that this one individual's actions are representative of liberalism in general?

Because the actions highlighted in the OP are representative of liberalism in general.

True story.

And the shoe fit....that's why you're squealing like a stuck pig.

I'm trying to debate you on the facts of the issue.

To be representative of liberalism in general, an action would have to be characteristic of most liberals' actions in the same scenario on the same issue.

Prove that, please.

1. "I'm trying to debate you..."
I never argue or debate....I simply explain why I'm right.


2. "...characteristic of most liberals' actions in the same scenario on the same issue."
As per the OP/thread.
Absolutely.



3. From “The Death of Feminism,” by Phyllis Chesler:
"Academic feminists who received tenure, promotion, and funding, tended to be pro-abortion, pro-pornography (anti-censorship), pro-prostitution (pro-sex workers), pro-surrogacy, and anti-colonialist, anti-imperialist, and anti-American…proponents of simplistic gender-neutrality (women and men are exactly the same) or essentialist: men and women are completely different, and women are better. They are loyal to their careers and their cliques, not to the truth.



4. " Liberals stamp out dissent by social and professional ostracism and legal discrimination. This is the modern version of methods used by medieval Christianity: a secular Inquisition.

a. Intelligentsia as grand inquisitors: in the media, universities, the law, political and professional groups. The dominating ideologies include anti-capitalism, feminism, multiculturalism, and environmentalism. They form the unchallengeable orthodoxy in academia. No challenges or deviations are permitted, and anyone who does not share these values is defined as extreme.

b. These ideologies have as their common theme the overturning of the established order of the West.

c. How ironic that intellectual liberty is assaulted within the institutions of reason."
Melanie Philips, “The World Turned Upside Down,” ch 6

Yep... that's fascism alright. The funniest part is how horrified they get when they're exposed to the evidence which identifies them as fascists.

It's like the Cross being presented to a poltergeist... . "THAT'S RIDICULOUS! We're not evil, we just can't stand the sight of an opposing linear equation expressing a 30% Y bias! You have no understanding of geometry!"

 

[Moonglow]

Unfortunately, Liberal Keep Being Liberals

So from one you get many,,,the blessing of the Lord is upon liberal.....(s)....

One what???

Liberal???

In universities?????

1. Higher Education Research Institute at the UCLA published a survey in 2002, of 55,521 professors at 416 colleges and universities nationwide. They found that 48% of the professors identified themselves as ‘liberal’ or ‘far left;’ 34% as ‘middle of the road. In 2004, Klein and Western published a study of the voter registration of the professors at U of C, Berkeley, and at Stanford, over 1000 professors, and concluded that the findings supported the ‘one party campus’ conjecture. At Berkeley, 9.9 to 1, and at Stanford, 7.6 to 1 of Democrats to Republicans.
Ideological diversity does not exist on most campuses.


In 2005 Klein and Stern surveyed 1,678 professors, and found that faculty is heavily skewed toward Democratic, and the most lopsided fields are Anthropology (30.2 to 1) and Sociology (28 to 1).


So....what's wrong with this skewed view in 'higher education'???
This:
Most professors obsessively believe that Europe is culturally more sophisticated and mature than America. Barry and Judith Rubin explain, in their book “Hating America: A History,” that European intellectuals are bothered by Americans’ refusal to defer to a refined upper class and to recognize their own inferiority. They conclude that anti-Americanism is put forth by these intellectuals, who have influence in the realm of ideas: books, media and universities.


One, huh?

Oh you should see my old school chums that are professors at OU...They maybe liberals but their Native American liberals with nerd overtones...

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

I'm trying to debate you on the facts of the issue.

LOL! Seriously?

To be representative of liberalism in general, an action would have to be characteristic of most liberals' actions in the same scenario on the same issue.

Prove that, please.

ROFLMNAO! You're seeking evidence of characteristics in US Academia, which reasonably sustain the premise that such is liberal; which is to say mired in the counter-cultural morass of Left-think?

Here ya go: brace yourself...

"Indoctrinate-U"

 

[PoliticalChic]

I'm trying to debate you on the facts of the issue.

LOL! Seriously?

To be representative of liberalism in general, an action would have to be characteristic of most liberals' actions in the same scenario on the same issue.

Prove that, please.

ROFLMNAO! You're seeking evidence of characteristics in US Academia, which reasonably sustain the premise that such is liberal; which is to say mired in the counter-cultural morass of Left-think?

Here ya go: brace yourself...

"Indoctrinate-U"

Wow.

"...SILENCE PEOPLE WITH ALTERNATIVE IDEAS...."
The film......makes one want to cry.

Where has America gone?

 

[Moonglow]

I'm trying to debate you on the facts of the issue.

LOL! Seriously?

To be representative of liberalism in general, an action would have to be characteristic of most liberals' actions in the same scenario on the same issue.

Prove that, please.

ROFLMNAO! You're seeking evidence of characteristics in US Academia, which reasonably sustain the premise that such is liberal; which is to say mired in the counter-cultural morass of Left-think?

Here ya go: brace yourself...

"Indoctrinate-U"

Wow.

"...SILENCE PEOPLE WITH ALTERNATIVE IDEAS...."
The film......makes one want to cry.

Where has America gone?

It's still here, but as in life so goes society, once you leave, you can never go back, or, the more things change, the more they stay the same..Well, now there is a tidbit of non-liberal philosophy for you to squander...like the tree that made no noise as it hit the ground, since no one was around to hear it.....

 

[GreenBean]

The notion that liberals are not Americans is probably the most retarded idea I've heard in my entire life. Get a life, chickie.

She's using a tactic popular with Lefties in that she has altered the definition of a word - in this case "American" to suit her needs for a particular preposition. She is basically stating that Liberals are "Un-American" . Most of what she had to say is too deep for you to comprehend ... I think "Special" people such as yourself should limit yourselves to conversations relative to spongebob and mickey mouse

 

[Moonglow]

The notion that liberals are not Americans is probably the most retarded idea I've heard in my entire life. Get a life, chickie.

She's using a tactic popular with Lefties in that she has altered the definition of a word - in this case "American" to suit her needs for a particular preposition. She is basically stating that Liberals are "Un-American" . Most of what she had to say is too deep for you to comprehend ... I think "Special" people such as yourself should limit yourselves to conversations relative to spongebob and mickey mouse

For a girl that can't spell, I'd say your shoveling shit about Polivinylchic......

 

[GreenBean]

I would simply state that comparing "liberalism" (whatever the hell that means) to totalarianism, does not make any sense, politically. Liberals are all about social freedom, this would never fly in a socialist government.

The far right (proponents of fiscal freedom) has a far more progovernment platform, despite efforts to convince us otherwise.

I would simply state that comparing "liberalism" (whatever the hell that means) to totalarianism, does not make any sense, politically.

Once again - definitions - see my signature quote from PJ Orouke which will give you a more correct understanding of how she is defining "Liberal"

“At the core of liberalism is the spoiled child — miserable, as all spoiled children are, unsatisfied, demanding, ill-disciplined, despotic and useless. Liberalism is a philosophy of sniveling brats.”