58% of Republicans Now Believe College Is Bad For the Country — Yes, You Read That Correctly
community » Discussions » Category » News & Politics » Discussion » 58% of Republicans Now Believe College Is Bad For the Country — Yes, You Read That Correctly
More than half of the Republicans surveyed for a Pew Research ... The vast majority Democrats, meanwhile, say colleges are helping the nation: 72 percent say they think higher education is having a …
According to a new Pew Research Center survey, 58 percent of Republicans now think " colleges and universities ... in 2015 when only 37 percent of Republicans believed …
A new Pew Research Center poll released on Monday revealed that there is one U.S. institution perceived through a larger partisan divide than even the media: It’s …
Don't underestimate the damage liberal professors can do to a young impressionable mind. You really need to warn your kids not to believe a darn thing they say.
My kids went to Johns Hopkins. They learned science. The same would have been true if they went to Tuffs, or Wash U., which they looked at also. Maybe parents need to be more involved in helping their kids find a school.
The secondary education system is broken in this country. Part oft the problem is a system where students are entitled to take a University President hostage and can force him to have minders when he goes to the bathroom without fear of repercussions.
But the cost is part of the problem and ties into the issue Brooks was so inelegantly trying to get at in his article. An education at an elite school like Hopkins is probably still sound, but a lot of qualified kids are going to struggle to raise $250,000+ for four years of schooling. That's a significant barrier that isolates the upper middle class from those kids who have parents who won't earn $250,000 in four years, total.
The problem really lies with the kids who borrow massive amounts of money to get degrees from the less than elite university. I know a lot of people paying off tens of thousands of dollars in debt that they simply can't afford. They delay getting married, delay having kids etc.etc. because they are paying more for their loans then they are for rent because they aren't making 85,000 a year with a communications degree from a directional state school.
It's a broken system. I can't believe support is actually as high as it is.
Schools like Hopkins give out huge grants to kids who pulled the grades because they want that kind of kid. My daughters got a full ride to the school because the were smart.
That is what the FSAFA is for. It's so that kids who wouldn't otherwise be able to go to a school can.
The bigger problem is post grad work. That is where they rack up the bucks.
Pick your undergrad wisely and you really shouldn't be in such a hole financially.
Full rides are great for the .3 percent of students that get them. The other 99.7% of students have to deal with costs that have increased over 1000% over the last few decades. I'm in the group of people who don't that is eithe acceptable or sustainable.
I agree that there has been a huge and unexplainable increase in a college education and I also believe that those who meet the qualifications should be able to go to college. Sadly, many of our universities have taken a profit margin into their accounting.
One of the issues that comes back again and again-some of the degree programs are truly useless when you get out of the school, so going to school becomes the end rather than the means. Additionally, it seems many schools in primary and secondary education fail to teach people to think and to reason. Kind of read, memorize, regurgitate-which does a grave disservice to our future.
I do encourage kids to consider all avenues-there is truly nothing wrong with vocations, which is something that we, as adults, have forgotten-we want our kids to go to college-virtually every parent says that, though a poor choice in what they study can leave them with no useful talents and a huge amount of debt. As in an article a few months ago, I lamented that our Governor was telling everyone 'free college for New Yorkers' but no free vocational schools.....still need people to fix the toilet, HVAC, roof and so on. How does the saying go? In the Land of the Blind, the one eyed man is king?
Until American businesses cease to export jobs, there will be a limit to the "practicality" infused into school curricula. Further, as long as science-denial is politically expedient, and, funding for research is cut, and, as infrastructure repair and resurgence is a political football … education, indeed, other than the basics, is an end rather than a means.
The political-disparaging of the arts as fodder for the poorly-educated voter, erodes the residual benefits as well as the obvious value the arts themselves.
The first reference to "The Dumbing of America" came from Ralph Waldo Emerson … IN 1838!
I will probably be told that my article is off topic, I do not think it is, its all about Education...
Why the doctor shortage is about to get worse, especially in areas where Trump voters live.
Trump immigration policies disrupt health care:
The United States has faced a persistent physician shortage for decades, particularly in rural and poor urban areas. Now, with two new Trump administration policies, the problem is only going to get worse.
Foreign national doctors have helped to fill this massive geographic gap in health care, receiving training in the United States and then working in underserved areas in return for continued visa status and the prospect of settling permanently in the U.S. More than a quarter of all physicians in the U.S. are foreign nationals, a figure that has remained relatively unchanged for decades, and American patients have benefited greatly from their presence.
President Trump’s new travel ban , combined with another major change announced by immigration authorities, threatens to turn the current regime for foreign national doctors on its head and intensify the country’s shortage of doctors. That’s bad news for all of us, especially for residents of rural and small-town America. Those areas are already disadvantaged in recruiting doctors — and they are also where Trump racked up his winning margins on Election Day.
Trump’s new executive order, with some exceptions, bars nationals of Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen from obtaining new visas. This executive order came a few days after the government announced a six-month suspension of “ Premium Processing ” for H-1B skilled worker visas. These are the visas many doctors must use, and the program allowed fast processing of them.
How do these fit together?
The travel ban is shrinking U.S. access to quality physicians and will make life harder for many who are here, by preventing their relatives from visiting or living in America. Syria and Iran have long supplied us with top-notch physicians (about 14,000 doctors in the U.S. hail from these two nations). Barring new visas from these countries will cut off an important supply of great doctors.
And even doctors in the U.S. supposedly unaffected by the new order are going to be hurt. For example, once these doctors become U.S. citizens, they can petition for their elderly parents to join them in the U.S. Under the new order, until some uncertain date in the future when the ban is lifted, parents must go through a stringent case-by-case waiver process . This could be a deal breaker in retaining these doctors.
Premium processing is critical in many physician immigration cases. The normal processing time for the visa doctors use is around eight months. Premium processing cuts that to two weeks. Employers pay an additional $1,225 to get the faster turnaround , which more than covers the government’s extra costs in getting the work done fast.
What’s the big deal if these cases take months instead of weeks? Well, for one, the country’s teaching hospitals all select their medical residents this month and those doctors all begin their training July 1. The doctors must use Premium Processing to have any shot at starting on time; without it, training programs across the country will be disrupted.
And the program that allows doctors to take jobs in underserved areas after their training is finished also will be disrupted. For a variety of reasons, the doctors often only have a few weeks to get a work visa approved and transition from their training programs to the small-town and inner-city hospitals and clinics they’ve agreed to serve in exchange for being able to stay in America. A lot of patients will find themselves without access to these trained, vetted doctors for months because of the suspension of the program.
The suspension will also prevent doctors from traveling internationally and from renewing their driver’s licenses for the months their cases are pending, a serious problem for doctors living in rural communities.
Perhaps that’s the Trump administration’s plan: to make the lives of the foreign doctors difficult enough that they’ll want to leave, while preventing new ones from coming. If that’s the case, then the first to be harmed will be the urban and rural poor, who will be forced to wait longer and travel further for the care they so desperately need.
It’s been nearly two years since the University of Missouri was taken over by radical race agitators, but it’s still suffering the consequences of the turmoil.
Just this week, it was reported that Mizzou was “temporarily” shuttering seven dormitories due to plummeting student attendance. It was also cutting 400 jobs — including a few non-tenured faculty — in order to cope with the 35 percent decline in student enrollment. That was an even bigger fall from the 2016 school year’s staggering 25 percent decrease in enrollment. (RELATED: Mizzou’s Enrollment Keeps Plummeting After 2015 Protests)
It appears that fewer kids want to go to a campus that is notorious for caving into leftist protesters and letting them set the university’s agenda. But this alienation from previously admired universities isn’t just an issue for Mizzou — it’s an issue plaguing all of higher education.
As revealed in another bit of news this week, average Republicans are starting to look with disdain upon higher education, according to the latest Pew Research study.
By a strong majority — 58 percent — Republicans think American colleges are not a good influence on America. This contrasts with the large number of Democrats — 72 percent — who still see higher education as a noble institution. (RELATED: Majority Of Republicans Think Higher Education Is Bad For America)Pew found that the number of Republicans who had favorably viewed American colleges had dramatically dropped — in just two years. In 2015, a majority of GOP voters — 54 percent — still saw higher education as a good thing. Now, more Republicans think it is a bad thing than a good thing.
To those who think that this stat confirms Republican voters are backward troglodytes, the GOP-leaning folks who had actually attended college were more likely to think these institutions are bad for America. First-hand experience seems to have brought on this negative conclusion rather than sheer ignorance.
The study is a stark reminder of how much things have changed in our society. For one, the idea of a President Donald Trump was still thought impossible and colleges had not yet fallen victim to riots and hostile takeovers.
We’re a different country now than we were before Trump came down the escalator to announce his presidential run. A heightened awareness of campus issues is one of the major trends in society that has likely contributed to more Republicans disapproving of universities.
Mizzou’s unrest in the Fall of 2015 was one of the chief catalysts for this rising concern with higher education. Left-wing students — along with the help of over 30 striking football players — forced out the university’s president over wildly exaggerated claims of “systemic racism” occurring at the school. These horrifying incidents included a crude swastika made out of poop being discovered in a dorm bathroom and a protest leader nudging the president’s vehicle during a parade.
That was enough to kick out Mizzou’s top official, however, and students promptly celebrated their triumph by having a massive safe space in the middle of campus. Infamously, a professor threatened a journalist with violence for entering that safe space.
Things at colleges have only gotten worse since then. Trump’s election convinced several universities that they need to turn into “sanctuary campuses” that disobey federal immigration law in order to appease their distraught students. Multiple right-leaning speakers — such as internet provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos and scholar Charles Murray — have been met with violence when they’ve appeared on campus. Threats of violence have forced the cancellation of other speakers.
And in the most extreme example of campus insanity, racial agitators at Evergreen State College decided to take the title of my book, “No Campus for White Men,” literally and kick out all Caucasian students and faculty for a day. When one professor protested that insane idea, leftist students staged a hostile takeover of the university and essentially held several faculty members hostage in order to earn acceptance of their racist demands. (RELATED: No Campus For Professors Opposed To Anti-White Racism)
To the average person with a teenage son or daughter, seeing these events would make you second-guess taking out another mortgage to pay for your child to attend college. What are these kids learning that makes them see racism everywhere and feel the need to push such radical agendas? Is it worth the 50k in student loan debt just for your child to learn about how America is an evil, white supremacist society?
That’s why it shouldn’t come as a shock so many Republicans are suspicious of higher education. The ones with college degrees who have a greater distrust of these institutions know first hand that they are no longer the vaunted gateways to the middle class. Often, they are simply indoctrination centers that leave you heavily in debt and feeling unwelcome for your right-wing beliefs.
No one wants to fork over the skyrocketing cost of tuition if all they learn is that there are 37 genders and the need to check their white privilege.
That encapsulates the raw deal a college education is increasingly becoming. The average starting salary for recent college grads ($36,000) roughly equals the average amount of student loan debt that alum is burdened with ($35,000).
It’s hard to enjoy the life of the middle class when you’re enslaved to student loan debt all your life — all for an education you found to be mostly worthless.
Pundits and commentators bemoan how President Trump is undermining America’s institutions, yet they often overlook how rotten many of these institutions are. Why are citizens beholden to value institutions they view as hostile towards red America and offering little in value?
The idea that everyone should go to college is a recent invention. It could be a short-lasting one, too, if campus insanity and exorbitant tuition become the defining features of higher education. http://dailycaller.com/2017/07/14/no-campus-for-republicans/
Should Universities Dial Back Their Leftist Agenda?
YOU FAILED TO INCLUDE THE WORD THAT APPEARS JUST ABOVE THE HEADLINE IN THE LINKED ARTICLE …
"OPINION"
It's the OPINION of DEPUTY EDITOR, Scott Greer.
No question that the protests hurt enrollment … but when posting a piece verbatim, it's deceptive to omit that what appears to be a "report," is actually an opinion.
But a Republican base that believes the first black president is probably a Kenyan because (insert Rush Limbaugh farting noises here) while being convinced that The Entire Worldwide Community Of Scientists is plotting against humanity and only the noble truth-tellers of Ma and Pa Oil Company can defeat them can go straight to hell, postage-paid.
This is all while we watch them eagerly support presidential corruption and, just for good measure, foreign espionage efforts so long as Team Red tells them to there's at least some merit in noting for the record that the majority of the party is as dumb as a box of rocks and twice as stubborn.
Is science telling you things you don't want to hear? Declare science the enemy. Is the media reporting news that makes you feel bad inside? Declare the news to be invalid. Is college turning out people who are able to read charts and graphs and numbers on their own without Sean Hannity's shouty explanations as to why Numbers are Bad? Burn them down. That way we will never have to hear bad news again, not now, not when Florida is underwater, not ever.
Yep, This is what Education does and The ACA (OBAMACARE) That you Hate so much...
Affordable Care Act helps expand future primary care workforce
Funding for the National Health Service Corps will provide scholarships to students in training for primary health care careers
HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius today announced the opening of the 2011 application cycle for the National Health Service Corps (NHSC) Scholarship Program . This year’s scholarships are being supported with up to $28 million of the Affordable Care Act funds dedicated to the NHSC, and will help address shortages in the primary health care workforce today and for the future.
The NHSC Scholarship Program is administered by the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) and awards scholarships to students pursuing a career in primary care. Recipients receive payment for tuition, required fees and other reasonable educational costs, a monthly support stipend, and assistance in finding a practice site upon completion of a training program. Disciplines eligible for the NHSC scholarship program include: physician, dentist (general or pediatric), nurse practitioner (primary care), certified nurse-midwife, and physician assistant. Upon graduation, scholarship recipients serve as full-time or part-time primary care providers between two and eight years at an NHSC site in a high-need Health Professional Shortage Area.
“The NHSC Scholarship Program encourages the nation’s future medical and oral health providers to choose primary care,” said Secretary Sebelius. “The program delivers on our commitment to help address our nation’s primary care workforce shortage.”
“More than 7,000 students with the drive to be nurses, doctors or dentists have signed up to be notified of this opportunity in just the last year,” said HRSA Administrator Mary K. Wakefield, PhD., RN. “Students should not be deterred by the cost of their education especially when they seek to make an impact on the health of our nation’s underserved communities.”
The NHSC also includes a Loan Repayment Program that provides financial incentives in the form of loan repayment to primary care providers who have completed their education in exchange for serving in an underserved community for a minimum of two years.
Interested students can apply online at www.NHSC.hrsa.gov/scholarship . The 2011 NHSC Scholarship Program application cycle will remain open until June 9, 2011. For more information about the Affordable Care Act’s investments in primary care workforce, visit www.HealthCare.gov .
###
The NHSC makes our communities healthier by providing financial and other incentives to medical, dental, and behavioral health care providers who are bringing their skills where they’re needed most: Areas of the United States with limited access to health care. These areas can be rural or urban. The NHSC has been around since 1972 and has connected over 37,000 primary health care practitioners to communities all over America. www.NHSC.hrsa.gov
See, Your Right Wing Information Bureau will not give the Benefits to the Nation of ACA, Your Repeated REPEAL and "GET RID OF OBAMA POLICIES" hurt AMERICANS...What do you think will happen when this particular program has Vanished from OBAMACARE, your rural Community Healthcare Providers will also Vanish, Education is so important, it allows a person to see the good, bad and LIES and able to make EDUCATED DECISIONS not based on what is been shouted from the AIRWAVES, But look at all sides of an issue and CONSIDER what are they, the ones trying to remove a vital program (which just needs to be fixed) What are they trying to do for THEMSELVES...I tell you what, its called ONE TRILLION DOLLAR TAX CUTS..$1,000,000,000,000 Trump, did not want to be President because he loves Americans, Trump LOVES Trump and this is how he was going to SCREW AMERICANS..YEP!!! This is how to do it, Give yourself a $1,000,000,000,000 Tax Cut and it would be LEGAL...IDIOTIC TRUMP VOTERS...
I try to read from many sources, and I'm pretty sure most of them are liberal.
In Law School, one of the first things we learned is that there are two sides to every story (if not more) but what we now see in the media and reflected among the members here on NT, that's no longer applicable.
Sources matter. If you are choosing sources with an agenda than you could have a false impression."
Perrie, are you really going to educate Buzz on choosing sources? He's a lawyer (barrister, attorney, what other names are there?) and has been on this earth a while now (according to him), and is well-spoken. I think he's likely smart enough to know about choosing sources, instinctively.
I totally disagree, Gary. I think human beings pick their sources to back up what they already feel to solidify that in their minds. It's not meant as a put down to Buzz, or anyone else, but just a fact of human nature.
Sources matter. If you are choosing sources with an agenda than you could have a false impression.
You mean like Huffington Post the first article in the article?
The vast majority Democrats, meanwhile, say colleges are helping the nation: 72 percent say they think higher education is having a positive effect, versus 19 percent who say such institutions are hurting the country.
The gist of this "thinking" is that political correctness is ruining the world, thus higher education is a bad idea .
Pew didn't say Republicans were against higher education , but Huffington Post did. I wonder how the results would have come out had there not been an agenda? Subtle as it may seem to some of you,
America hits peak anti-intellectualism: Majority of Republicans now think college is bad
Democrats and independents who lean Democrat, on the other hand, continue to hold a positive attitude toward such institutions, with 72 percent saying they approve of higher education.
So Pew could have asked Republicans if they thought a higher education was bad and achieved completely different results. I don't know a soul who doesn't think a higher education, be it vocational or professional, to not be beneficial or good for anyone, but you see how these sites have used the poll.
96,
Did you read your own story?
I'm sure he did. I did. Is that all you got out of it? The student, which was his first encounter of anyone he cared to use as an example of someone trying to put forth an idea that didn't fit this Liberal Professor's opinion, without the input in the Liberal Professor's article by the student. Who knows if it is actually accurate. After all it came from "Vox" who is extremely left wing.
But if it is true, I disagree with the student's assumption the "Poor Black People" caused it and I disagree Wall Street is the only story to be told. Frank Raines made over $100,000,000 before the Housing bubble burst. Barney Frank and Maxine Waters fought to have regulations while Barney Frank said everything is fine. Bill Clinton himself said it was the Democrats who didn't take his advice on regulations. So, the Liberal Professor had his say so without the student having the opportunity to defend himself, now let's hear from a Conservative student without the Liberal Professor having the podium.
How Liberal Professors Are Ruining College
In New England, they outnumber conservatives 28 to 1. Why that’s bad for everyone
You kind of proved my point about news sources. newsmax and the NYPost are both conservative publications. I found your article from insider Higher Ed to be fair.
Of course you would. You need a pin.
From the same author at "Higher Ed", Scott Jaschik.
The Liberal (and Moderating) Professoriate
Faculty members identify as liberals and vote Democratic in far greater proportions than found in the American public at large. That finding by itself won't shock many, but the national study released Saturday at a Harvard University symposium may be notable both for its methodology and other, more surprising findings.
The 72-page study -- "The Social and Political Views of American Professors" -- was produced with the goal of moving analysis of the political views of faculty members out of the culture wars and back to social science. The study offers at times harsh criticism of many of the analyses of these issues in recent years (both from those hoping to tag the professoriate as foolishly radical and those seeking to rebut those charges). The study included community college professors along with four-year institutions, and featured analysis of non-responders to the survey (two features missing from many recent reports).
Oh by the way talking about that Anti-Semitism from your Politico comment.
The Trump administration has faced pressure to more strongly condemn anti-Semitism after a rash of incidents across the country, including the desecration of Jewish cemeteries and threats against Jewish community centers. Trump earlier this week said the threats are “horrible and are painful and a very sad reminder of the work that still must be done to root out hate and prejudice and evil.” Vice President Mike Pence visited a vandalized cemetery near St. Louis. “There’s now a real awareness that anti-Semitism has reawakened as a major problem of the year 2017,” Marcus said. “There’s more pressure to do something about it.”
Oh by the way, does anyone other than those alt-right people exhibit any of these traits? Yes, as you said it comes from both the extreme left and extreme right, which no one on this site relates to, except maybe a couple. It's revealing to brag about how many professions are occupied by Democrats and then turn around and try to say they aren't many Liberal professors.
Also Hillary Clinton supported BLM and as I recall, they're pretty anti-Semitic along with some other ideas she promoted. She actually told them the time for talking is over and now is the time for action.
I just tried to show you that everyone is guided by their beliefs. I know your Politico comment inferred left and right. I know some of it seems condescending, but it is not meant to be.
It's alright to use Conservative sites as much as it is alright to use Liberal sites, but to tell someone their information is from a Conservative site with an agenda and ignore the same holds true for the Liberal sites in this article at the top of the screen is very revealing, whether you recognize it or not. But why should I be surprised?
The thing that says it best is when the NYT or Washington Post reveals a leak, the leak becomes the news and when Nunes reveals information, where did he get it and did he get it legally becomes the news from these same sources.
I expect this article to be deleted or closed as the last few I've put the truth of the matter in a comment have been.
Now, as slow and methodical reader, having finally made my way through your comment and the linked articles, I believe that it supports the theory I stated above. Excellent post, Six.
Don't underestimate the damage liberal professors can do to a young impressionable mind. You really need to warn your kids not to believe a darn thing they say.
Please cite the sources of this piece of right-wing fodder for the base.
You may enjoy this article written by a liberal professor who's very own liberal students "terrify" him.
Can't say I enjoyed it, but there is truth to it. How pervasive is the phenomenon he described … I don't know … but i saw it with some of the individuals I represented years ago … and I know these years later … it's beyond the perennial, "I'm being picked on for no reason" "defense".
But nothing like what the professor experienced comes out of nowhere; there are "Victim-crats," and, there are those whose paranoia evolved from a society that is responsible for actions that fomented that paranoia. It isn't an "either-or" phenomenon.
If we are going to rant about those who don't take "personal responsibility," then we'd better not be putting up road blocks to the so-called benefits of being responsible. For example, you can't expect the Working Poor to continue to work for shit wages while legislating to take away their ability to obtain health care … that while rewarding the employers who pay the shit wages by taxing the rest of us -- instead of them -- for the welfare they cause!
And now, I'll give you the other side of the coin; when Ferguson, Missouri had an African American candidate for mayor , this not long after the Michael Brown killing, ONLY 2% of the Black community bothered to vote! Bitch like hell justifiably then sit on your ass when you can address the sources of your bitching? A pox on both their houses!
To quote an individual who shall remain nameless … "IT'S COMPLICATED" … but it's not that complicated.
All sides, social, cultural, political, ethnic, racial, gender-based, etc., NEED TO STOP THE SELF-SERVING, RHETORICAL BULLSHIT, and, NEED TO STOP VOTING SOLELY OR PRIMARILY ON THESE RELATED INTERESTS.
All the righteous indignation that uses the bottom-line as justification for institutionalized, inherent unfairness … will destroy us … as it is already doing. We don't have to be "Our Brothers' Keepers," but if we force our brothers into a corner, that while spitting in their faces and telling them "it's raining," once they believe they have nothing worthwhile to lose, or, may be on the way to there because the real and perceived greed of an oligarchic hierarchy that's writing the rules for everyone … initially they'll plead for fairness … then whine incessantly, rightly or wrongly … and ultimately …
… scorch the earth.
Yeah, I'm a "liberal," but I'm a liberal who doesn't want it all my way … I want it sane and fair.
Did you read your own story? The singular complaint came in from a conservative student and then this professor went on to talk about the impact social justice has had on liberal professors. Not that liberal professors are pushing an agenda, but rather the delicate little flowers that some of us have raised, or not allowing the debate of any sort because of how they "feel"
The video stopped, and I asked whether the students thought it was effective. An older student raised his hand.
"What about Fannie and Freddie?" he asked. "Government kept giving homes to black people, to help out black people, white people didn't get anything, and then they couldn't pay for them. What about that?"
I gave a quick response about how most experts would disagree with that assumption, that it was actually an oversimplification, and pretty dishonest, and isn't it good that someone made the video we just watched to try to clear things up? And, hey, let's talk about whether that was effective, okay? If you don't think it was, how could it have been?
The rest of the discussion went on as usual.
The next week, I got called into my director's office. I was shown an email, sender name redacted, alleging that I "possessed communistical [sic] sympathies and refused to tell more than one side of the story." The story in question wasn't described, but I suspect it had do to with whether or not the economic collapse was caused by poor black people.
This isn't an accident: I have intentionally adjusted my teaching materials as the political winds have shifted. (I also make sure all my remotely offensive or challenging opinions, such as this article, are expressed either anonymously or pseudonymously). Most of my colleagues who still have jobs have done the same.
I am frightened sometimes by the thought that a student would complain again like he did in 2009. Only this time it would be a student accusing me not of saying something too ideologically extreme — be it communism or racism or whatever — but of not being sensitive enough toward his feelings, of some simple act of indelicacy that's considered tantamount to physical assault.
In 2009, the subject of my student's complaint was my supposed ideology.
In 2015, such a complaint would not be delivered in such a fashion. Instead of focusing on the rightness or wrongness (or even acceptability) of the materials we reviewed in class, the complaint would center solely on how my teaching affected the student's emotional state.
This phenomenon has been widely discussed as of late, mostly as a means of deriding political, economic, or cultural forces writers don't much care for. Commentators on the left and right have recently criticized the sensitivity and paranoia of today's college students. They worry about the stifling of free speech, the implementation of unenforceable conduct codes , and a general hostility against opinions and viewpoints that could cause students so much as a hint of discomfort .
When feelings become more important than issues
The abortion debate was canceled because it would have imperiled the "welfare and safety of our students." The Afrofunk band's presence would not have been "safe and healthy." No one can rebut feelings, and so the only thing left to do is shut down the things that cause distress — no argument, no discussion, just hit the mute button and pretend eliminating discomfort is the same as effecting actual change.
But I've seen what's being described here. I've lived it. It's real, and it affects liberal, socially conscious teachers much more than conservative ones.
Two years ago 54% of Republicans were positive about college.
What happened 2 years ago, lol?
Trump whined SO MUCH about political correctness over the past two years that he has turned his party against higher education. And some people say this fool will do no damage.
The gist of this article is that in the last 2 years there has been a change in how Republicans view college.
From your article:
Those shifts comes amid several high-profile controversies over freedom of speech on campuses across the country, including protests earlier this year at the University of California, Berkeley after scheduled appearances by conservative commentators Ann Coulter and Milo Yiannopoulos were canceled. Conservative critics have said these incidents are silencing opposing ideas, while some people who disagree with inviting polarizing figures to campus say the safety concerns in these cases outweigh the importance of free speech.
When you have college kids saying that they think the 1st Amendment is bad.. that is a problem.
I agree entirely with this statement, quoted by Perrie, save for the fact that those who disagree are no less polarizing than Conservative or right-wing speakers. Screaming and shouting to block a speaker whose views may differ is not exactly teaching students to think critically and to distinguish between concepts. All it is doing is teaching students to be3 robots and regurgitate that which is being shoved down their throats by the Professors and administration.
"Those shifts comes amid several high-profile controversies over freedom of speech on campuses across the country, including protests earlier this year at the University of California, Berkeley after scheduled appearances by conservative commentators Ann Coulter and Milo Yiannopoulos were canceled. Conservative critics have said these incidents are silencing opposing ideas, while some people who disagree with inviting polarizing figures to campus say the safety concerns in these cases outweigh the importance of free speech."
The only reason "safety" is a concern is the violence that is being permitted - discipline and honour are no longer on campus.
The left-leaning professors and administrators, well in the majority, have been influencing the students, and the permitting of Leftist causes to dominate and harrass not only those on the Right but also certain minority groups - allowing safe spaces for progressives and treating conservatives as second class, is something that I certainly don't remember from my years in University and Law School. I certainly don't blame Republicans for their disdain.
The left-leaning professors and administrators, well in the majority, have been influencing the students, and the permitting of Leftist causes to dominate and harrass not only those on the Right but also certain minority groups - allowing safe spaces for progressives and treating conservatives as second class, is something that I certainly don't remember from my years in University and Law School. I certainly don't blame Republicans for their disdain.
Buzz, again, based on what? Some well publicized events at well known liberal schools. Are you aware that there are 2,618 4 year colleges and universities and another 1,666 2 year colleges. Do you actually think that the majority of them are liberal brain washing machines? Do you have evidence of this?
I live on LI. We have 7 universities and 2 colleges. None of them are particularly political.
Perrie, again, based on everthing I have read or heard in the media of all political bents. Why don't we ever hear from all those entirely neutral universities with unbiased staff, with views contrary to the fact that pretty all I ever get to see or read indicates that universities are totally liberal if not progressive.
In Toronto, at York University and at Ryerson University, a Jewish student would not dare wear a kippah, and have to keep a very low profile. Donors to the Universities have stopped donating because of what's happening on those campuses.
In Toronto, at York University and at Ryerson University, a Jewish student would not dare wear a kippah, and have to keep a very low profile. Donors to the Universities have stopped donating because of what's happening on those campuses.
And maybe that says something more about Toronto, or the university. It never happened on any of my daughter's campuses. And it doesn't mean that it is happening all over either.
I realize how upsetting that can be to read, but it doesn't mean it is an epidemic either.
You kind of proved my point about news sources. newsmax and the NYPost are both conservative publications. I found your article from insider Higher Ed to be fair. Did you take note of this:
Studies say professors lean left but challenge idea that this results in indoctrination or harms conservatives.
Faculty members were more likely to categorize themselves as moderate (46.1 percent) than liberal (44.1 percent). Conservatives trailed at 9.2 percent.
Faculty members, when examined by sector, differed widely. At community colleges, 19 percent of faculty members called themselves conservatives, and only 37.1 percent said they were liberals. Liberal arts college faculty members were most likely to identify as liberal (61 percent, compared to only 3.9 percent as conservatives).
When it came to voting, professors (even in the humanities) were not a monolith, with 15 percent in the humanities saying they had voted for President Bush in his re-election bid. Bush won just under a third of the vote in business and just over a third in computer science and engineering. And Bush won a narrow majority of votes from faculty members in the health sciences.
and this from Politico:
— The rise of the “alt-right” white nationalist movement is partially to blame — but so are extremists on the far left,
So the problem is coming from two directions and no where in that article do they blame the professors.
Seems to me this is just another example of over-generalization. Yes there have been a few over-hyped situations at a a few schools. This does not make all other schools guilty of the same type of behaviour or thinking. Guilt by association is an exceptionally bad way of thinking and gets innocent people hurt.
Those shifts comes amid several high-profile controversies over freedom of speech on campuses across the country, including protests earlier this year at the University of California, Berkeley after scheduled appearances by conservative commentators Ann Coulter and Milo Yiannopoulos were canceled. Conservative critics have said these incidents are silencing opposing ideas, while some people who disagree with inviting polarizing figures to campus say the safety concerns in these cases outweigh the importance of free speech.
I agree that colleges accepting the silencing of opposing points of view is un-American at best. And that may have swayed poll respondents, dependent on the way the question was posed and where it was posed. When you stop listening to the views of anyone that doesn't share your point of view, you have become as close-minded as you feel those 'others' are. I saw a lot of this here and in many other news stories in the run up to and since the election.
Possibly these folks that responded feel that the way these educational institutions are willing to fold to 'popular opinion' is an antithesis to the purpose of secondary education.
For eight years Republicans were the minority in congress, and made the most noise. They learned nothing from themselves. The minority always is the one making the noise, because the majority is fat and happy and doesn't care. And of course, all the noise is distracting and keeps one awake at night, therefore: it must be removed, and forcibly, to teach them "manners".
It seems that minorities have been making the most noise throughout our Country. Protests after protests! What have they accomplished? Nothing! If they wanted to burn and pillage their own communities they certainly accomplished that only.
So, the minority Congress achieved the same thing as our minority people. Nothing! Let's say it, again. Nothing!
If they wanted to burn and pillage their own communities they certainly accomplished that only.
QUESTION: While I am not in favor of "burning and pillaging," when the law-of-the-land fails to be implemented even-handedly -- in particular, both historically and perpetually, so as to adversely affect minorities primarily, what must desperate people do?
Jesus, MLK, the Kennedys … Abraham Lincoln, et al, attempted peaceful and legal strategies to correct injustices … and were murdered for their peaceful efforts.
Let us not deceive ourselves … on at least two counts;
1) More often than not, WHEN BURNING AND PILLAGING ACCOMPANIES OTHERWISE "THE RIGHT TO PEACEFUL ASSEMBLY," it is more often not at the hands of those who demonstrate in peace, rather in those of agitators from the "outside".
The power brokers will often divide and conquer the masses by playing to the all-to-willing bigots who, in their intellectually slovenly, lazy, stupid and convenient way, are receptive conduits.
A REPUBLICAN ACQUAINTANCE OF MINE RECENTLY CONFIDED IN ME THAT …
"6 out of 5 Republicans are bad with fractions!"
Donald Trump has for months denied any connection between Russia and his campaign … and now that Trump Jr. dispelled that bullshit story … Trump is not only acknowledging that connection, but wants us to believe it's no big deal!
And the TRUMP-HATES-ALL-THE-SAME-PEOPLE-I-HATE sycophants … drag their knuckles and go right along with it.
Anyway, any group of dumb schmucks that think "college is bad for the country" …
… used to think that cars with more than one bumper sticker was college!
Shame on angry, ill-informed, dumb white dopes who would yield to Putin in order to maintain a bigot/xenophobe/misogynist liar as their POTUS.
Donald Trump has for months denied any connection between Russia and his campaign … and now that Trump Jr. dispelled that bullshit story … Trump is not only acknowledging that connection, but wants us to believe it's no big deal!
He has been lying since he started his campaign and now that he has been caught lying his attitude is "Just forgot all of the lies because what I was lying about was no big deal anyway", as if that makes all of his lies OK and we're not supposed to wonder what else he has been lying about all of this time. He lies so casually that it is impossible to tell when he is lying or telling the truth. Hell I don't know if he even knows half the time.
This is why we need this investigation. Now that we know for sure that he has been lying about something that he thinks is no big deal, but actually is, we need to know just how deep was and still is his connection to Russia and Putin. How much influence did Putin have with getting him elected and why does he insult even our closest allies, but fawns over Putin? I don't think that there is any doubt that the connection he had with Putin before he still has today and is working in treasonous concert with now.
You would think throughout this seed someone would want to know the exact questions that were asked in this Pew Poll that has allowed everyone to have an opinion without having any knowledge of this information.
You would think in any of these polls or fact checkers there would be a comment section, but usually there isn't. They have the last word, just throwing out a poll, maybe explaining how they do their polls, but not including the poll questions themselves.
I would say this is a symptom in itself as to the intellectual level of our society today. Taking the results of a poll without even having the poll questions available to help determine whether it is accurate is not a lot different than having someone tell you a story that incriminates someone without the evidence leading up to that incrimination.
Everything is so political today. For example statistics indicate 80% of Psychiatrists consider themselves to be Democrats. 100% of Research Psychologist who occupy this occupation in the chart above are shown to be Democrats. It is impossible for any occupation that is 100% Democrat or Republican to be unbiased in their opinions. Republicans are presented to be bad and Democrats are presented to be good, enlightened. Do you ever wonder what party or leanings the people or companies who do these polls come from?
Republicans are considered more conservative than Democrats. I would say the word Liberalism has been perverted. How many people on here consider themselves to be Liberals? The word Liberal doesn't mean liberal today any more than the word Gay means gay as it has in the past.
It has been pointed out that a source was from Newsmax in a comment to argue a point, but no one pointed out the comments in the article came from Salon, Pop Sugar Celebrity and Huffington Post. They were just click bait tweets made up as an article.
We don't know one question from the poll, so how can we really say we are having an intelligent discussion when the most important aspect of the poll is missing? If the questions are available, then they should have been the very first thing we read in the article.
You would think throughout this seed someone would want to know the exact questions that were asked in this Pew Poll that has allowed everyone to have an opinion without having any knowledge of this information.
You would think in any of these polls or fact checkers there would be a comment section, but usually there isn't. They have the last word, just throwing out a poll, maybe explaining how they do their polls, but not including the poll questions themselves.
Six,
Of all the polling groups, the Pew, which is non partisan and non- advocacy, is also the most transparent of all polling organizations, which is why I use them frequently. So all you had to do was go to page 2 of this poll to find out the methodology. Here let me help:
The gist of this "thinking" is that political correctness is ruining the world, thus higher education is a bad idea.
The article was set up to imply that Republicans didn't believe in higher education and thought it was bad for the country.
There were many comments after my comment above, so at the time I posted it I wasn't addressing any of them.
Any research group can get the results they want by asking the right questions and get completely different results by changing the question or questions very little.
Republicans don't believe in higher education.
Try to convince me Pew didn't know their poll would have that effect would be ludicrous.
OK, I've read all the comments before I commented. I am branded a liberal on the site, but I see myself as a moderate. I have nothing earth-shattering to say, and all I can do is speak from my own experience.
I attended Murray State University in far western KY for 4 years and graduated with a degree. I earned two degrees, got my teaching certificate, and had a major in Earth Science/Geology, (total 64 hours, I qualified for either), and a minor in Sociology. I have worked my entire adult life in the field I chose to study.
My school was not a bastion of liberal education. Way back when, the most daring thing we ever did, was applaud a streaker who ran down campus one night. No one tore anything up, and, as we cheered, the streaker was quietly ushered into a police car. No one screamed or yelled, no one called out about anyone's rights being violated, etc.
We had a lot of famous people come and talk with us: Ralph Nader, Vincent Price, F. Lee Bailey, and, it was so long ago, I feel like we went to see Cicero... We had a wide range of political viewpoints available for our education. No one ever complained that I knew of, nor did anyone protest, that I knew of.
Little Murray was not a large school-- about 7500 when I went there-- now about 10,500-- and it was located in the heart of the bible belt. A statue of Robert E. Lee is on the Courthouse square, as is a statue of Nathan B. Stubblefield, who invented the wireless radio at the same time Marconi did. Marconi got the credit. There is a nice veteran's memorial, and several local nifties, like the barn with cartoon characters painted on it. (Some farmer used the fence from a drive-in movie theater to cover his barn.) My son is leaving to attend MSU in the fall. The best golden delicious apples are found in Murray, just south, at a farmer's market.
It is not at all surprising to me that republicans feel this way, as many people in the area feel this way. Many of the local residents see having a van as a place to have mobile platform for weird sexual proclivities, which are the scourge of mankind. (Really? A van?) I had professors who were die hard republicans, and they were good teachers, and I had professors who were ultra-liberal, and most of them were good teachers. The exception to that being one sociology professor I had who taught a class entitled, "The Family" as a course in necrophilia, spending the entire semester talking about dead people-- I never figured out what that had to do with "The Family". Someone important should have complained about him, because, needless to say, none of the students protested, and perhaps we should have.
Nothing I learned in class changed the basic person I was inside. So I have doubts about the influence of liberal professors brain washing the masses. Same for conservative professors brain washing the masses. Most of us have established our core values by that time, and while we can grow and change, and we can all screw up at any moment, we are already who we are. All of us can have different experiences that can enable us to change our minds, but no one professor, or group of professors, ever changed my mind about anything important, in a drastic way.
I learned how to think like a geologist- which is just a viewpoint, or way of thinking of things-- it's not a political or religious philosophy. It's just a way of analyzing data. I learned the vocabulary of my field. And I learned that I love to study rocks, but not necessarily the classes about rocks. Can you imagine anything more boring than to learn how to properly label the faces of a crystal, according to the Miller indices? BORING. Have I ever used it? Nope.
While I do not feel that college is for everybody, I do see it as an important first step for many people who wish to excel in their field-- or even participate in their field. I decry the costs of today's colleges-- my tuition my senior year was about $275, and I guess there are some people who aren't formed yet, but I was what I was, when I was in school. More willing to get up and get dressed up every day, at least more than I am now, but basically the same person. I've learned a lot since then-- but I still basically like people, I still smile at everyone, and still pretty much leave everyone else be, etc.
So, I kind of see all this college disapproval as being a conservative thing-- sort of like thinking that all van owners partake in weird sexual proclivities... Or that having a pink or red patio/party light means you're advertising... Or like the postman who accosted me on my own porch with his viewpoint of Creationism, just because I received a registered letter from the KY Geological Survey.
My thought: I don't want a doctor that didn't attend Medical school and is not certified, when I hire an expert, I expect them to be an expert and be formally educated in their field, and a college degree is a good thing to have, if you wish to participate in a whole host of fields. I don't think I'm better than the plumber, which is an art, in and of itself, but I want my plumber to be certified, and I certainly want him to be bonded and licensed.
OK, I've read all the comments before I commented. I am branded a liberal on the site, but I see myself as a moderate. I have nothing earth-shattering to say, and all I can do is speak from my own experience.
Don't you know that anything left of right is still left. Same is true the other way around. It seems that no one gets moderates anymore.
Maybe, and I'm just spitballing here, it's because you constantly post orthodox liberal thoughts and upvote the most malicious, dishonest, and venomous personal attacks by liberals against conservatives.
Maybe, and I'm just spitballing here, it's because you constantly post orthodox liberal thoughts and upvote the most malicious, dishonest, and venomous personal attacks by liberals against conservatives.
Sean, I make a point to not post malicious comments about/to other members. I try hard to be pleasant and fair and honest. So, I take offense at your accusation and challenge you to find 3 malicious, vicious comments that I've made to a more conservative member of the site, and to find the same number of malicious/vicious comments that I've voted up.
The gist of this "thinking" is that political correctness is ruining the world, thus higher education is a bad idea.
Don't underestimate the damage liberal professors can do to a young impressionable mind. You really need to warn your kids not to believe a darn thing they say.
Dean and Sean,
My kids went to Johns Hopkins. They learned science. The same would have been true if they went to Tuffs, or Wash U., which they looked at also. Maybe parents need to be more involved in helping their kids find a school.
The secondary education system is broken in this country. Part oft the problem is a system where students are entitled to take a University President hostage and can force him to have minders when he goes to the bathroom without fear of repercussions.
But the cost is part of the problem and ties into the issue Brooks was so inelegantly trying to get at in his article. An education at an elite school like Hopkins is probably still sound, but a lot of qualified kids are going to struggle to raise $250,000+ for four years of schooling. That's a significant barrier that isolates the upper middle class from those kids who have parents who won't earn $250,000 in four years, total.
The problem really lies with the kids who borrow massive amounts of money to get degrees from the less than elite university. I know a lot of people paying off tens of thousands of dollars in debt that they simply can't afford. They delay getting married, delay having kids etc.etc. because they are paying more for their loans then they are for rent because they aren't making 85,000 a year with a communications degree from a directional state school.
It's a broken system. I can't believe support is actually as high as it is.
Sean,
Schools like Hopkins give out huge grants to kids who pulled the grades because they want that kind of kid. My daughters got a full ride to the school because the were smart.
That is what the FSAFA is for. It's so that kids who wouldn't otherwise be able to go to a school can.
The bigger problem is post grad work. That is where they rack up the bucks.
Pick your undergrad wisely and you really shouldn't be in such a hole financially.
Full rides are great for the .3 percent of students that get them. The other 99.7% of students have to deal with costs that have increased over 1000% over the last few decades. I'm in the group of people who don't that is eithe acceptable or sustainable.
Sean,
I agree that there has been a huge and unexplainable increase in a college education and I also believe that those who meet the qualifications should be able to go to college. Sadly, many of our universities have taken a profit margin into their accounting.
One of the issues that comes back again and again-some of the degree programs are truly useless when you get out of the school, so going to school becomes the end rather than the means. Additionally, it seems many schools in primary and secondary education fail to teach people to think and to reason. Kind of read, memorize, regurgitate-which does a grave disservice to our future.
I do encourage kids to consider all avenues-there is truly nothing wrong with vocations, which is something that we, as adults, have forgotten-we want our kids to go to college-virtually every parent says that, though a poor choice in what they study can leave them with no useful talents and a huge amount of debt. As in an article a few months ago, I lamented that our Governor was telling everyone 'free college for New Yorkers' but no free vocational schools.....still need people to fix the toilet, HVAC, roof and so on. How does the saying go? In the Land of the Blind, the one eyed man is king?
Until American businesses cease to export jobs, there will be a limit to the "practicality" infused into school curricula. Further, as long as science-denial is politically expedient, and, funding for research is cut, and, as infrastructure repair and resurgence is a political football … education, indeed, other than the basics, is an end rather than a means.
The political-disparaging of the arts as fodder for the poorly-educated voter, erodes the residual benefits as well as the obvious value the arts themselves.
The first reference to "The Dumbing of America" came from Ralph Waldo Emerson … IN 1838!
Frightening!
I will probably be told that my article is off topic, I do not think it is, its all about Education...
Why the doctor shortage is about to get worse, especially in areas where Trump voters live.
Trump immigration policies disrupt health care:
The United States has faced a persistent physician shortage for decades, particularly in rural and poor urban areas. Now, with two new Trump administration policies, the problem is only going to get worse.
Foreign national doctors have helped to fill this massive geographic gap in health care, receiving training in the United States and then working in underserved areas in return for continued visa status and the prospect of settling permanently in the U.S. More than a quarter of all physicians in the U.S. are foreign nationals, a figure that has remained relatively unchanged for decades, and American patients have benefited greatly from their presence.
President Trump’s new travel ban , combined with another major change announced by immigration authorities, threatens to turn the current regime for foreign national doctors on its head and intensify the country’s shortage of doctors. That’s bad news for all of us, especially for residents of rural and small-town America. Those areas are already disadvantaged in recruiting doctors — and they are also where Trump racked up his winning margins on Election Day.
Trump’s new executive order, with some exceptions, bars nationals of Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen from obtaining new visas. This executive order came a few days after the government announced a six-month suspension of “ Premium Processing ” for H-1B skilled worker visas. These are the visas many doctors must use, and the program allowed fast processing of them.
How do these fit together?
The travel ban is shrinking U.S. access to quality physicians and will make life harder for many who are here, by preventing their relatives from visiting or living in America. Syria and Iran have long supplied us with top-notch physicians (about 14,000 doctors in the U.S. hail from these two nations). Barring new visas from these countries will cut off an important supply of great doctors.
And even doctors in the U.S. supposedly unaffected by the new order are going to be hurt. For example, once these doctors become U.S. citizens, they can petition for their elderly parents to join them in the U.S. Under the new order, until some uncertain date in the future when the ban is lifted, parents must go through a stringent case-by-case waiver process . This could be a deal breaker in retaining these doctors.
Premium processing is critical in many physician immigration cases. The normal processing time for the visa doctors use is around eight months. Premium processing cuts that to two weeks. Employers pay an additional $1,225 to get the faster turnaround , which more than covers the government’s extra costs in getting the work done fast.
What’s the big deal if these cases take months instead of weeks? Well, for one, the country’s teaching hospitals all select their medical residents this month and those doctors all begin their training July 1. The doctors must use Premium Processing to have any shot at starting on time; without it, training programs across the country will be disrupted.
And the program that allows doctors to take jobs in underserved areas after their training is finished also will be disrupted. For a variety of reasons, the doctors often only have a few weeks to get a work visa approved and transition from their training programs to the small-town and inner-city hospitals and clinics they’ve agreed to serve in exchange for being able to stay in America. A lot of patients will find themselves without access to these trained, vetted doctors for months because of the suspension of the program.
The suspension will also prevent doctors from traveling internationally and from renewing their driver’s licenses for the months their cases are pending, a serious problem for doctors living in rural communities.
Perhaps that’s the Trump administration’s plan: to make the lives of the foreign doctors difficult enough that they’ll want to leave, while preventing new ones from coming. If that’s the case, then the first to be harmed will be the urban and rural poor, who will be forced to wait longer and travel further for the care they so desperately need.
It’s been nearly two years since the University of Missouri was taken over by radical race agitators, but it’s still suffering the consequences of the turmoil.
Just this week, it was reported that Mizzou was “temporarily” shuttering seven dormitories due to plummeting student attendance. It was also cutting 400 jobs — including a few non-tenured faculty — in order to cope with the 35 percent decline in student enrollment. That was an even bigger fall from the 2016 school year’s staggering 25 percent decrease in enrollment. (RELATED: Mizzou’s Enrollment Keeps Plummeting After 2015 Protests)
It appears that fewer kids want to go to a campus that is notorious for caving into leftist protesters and letting them set the university’s agenda. But this alienation from previously admired universities isn’t just an issue for Mizzou — it’s an issue plaguing all of higher education.
As revealed in another bit of news this week, average Republicans are starting to look with disdain upon higher education, according to the latest Pew Research study.
By a strong majority — 58 percent — Republicans think American colleges are not a good influence on America. This contrasts with the large number of Democrats — 72 percent — who still see higher education as a noble institution. (RELATED: Majority Of Republicans Think Higher Education Is Bad For America) Pew found that the number of Republicans who had favorably viewed American colleges had dramatically dropped — in just two years. In 2015, a majority of GOP voters — 54 percent — still saw higher education as a good thing. Now, more Republicans think it is a bad thing than a good thing.
To those who think that this stat confirms Republican voters are backward troglodytes, the GOP-leaning folks who had actually attended college were more likely to think these institutions are bad for America. First-hand experience seems to have brought on this negative conclusion rather than sheer ignorance.
The study is a stark reminder of how much things have changed in our society. For one, the idea of a President Donald Trump was still thought impossible and colleges had not yet fallen victim to riots and hostile takeovers.
We’re a different country now than we were before Trump came down the escalator to announce his presidential run. A heightened awareness of campus issues is one of the major trends in society that has likely contributed to more Republicans disapproving of universities.
Mizzou’s unrest in the Fall of 2015 was one of the chief catalysts for this rising concern with higher education. Left-wing students — along with the help of over 30 striking football players — forced out the university’s president over wildly exaggerated claims of “systemic racism” occurring at the school. These horrifying incidents included a crude swastika made out of poop being discovered in a dorm bathroom and a protest leader nudging the president’s vehicle during a parade.
That was enough to kick out Mizzou’s top official, however, and students promptly celebrated their triumph by having a massive safe space in the middle of campus. Infamously, a professor threatened a journalist with violence for entering that safe space.
Things at colleges have only gotten worse since then. Trump’s election convinced several universities that they need to turn into “sanctuary campuses” that disobey federal immigration law in order to appease their distraught students. Multiple right-leaning speakers — such as internet provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos and scholar Charles Murray — have been met with violence when they’ve appeared on campus. Threats of violence have forced the cancellation of other speakers.
And in the most extreme example of campus insanity, racial agitators at Evergreen State College decided to take the title of my book, “No Campus for White Men,” literally and kick out all Caucasian students and faculty for a day. When one professor protested that insane idea, leftist students staged a hostile takeover of the university and essentially held several faculty members hostage in order to earn acceptance of their racist demands. (RELATED: No Campus For Professors Opposed To Anti-White Racism)
To the average person with a teenage son or daughter, seeing these events would make you second-guess taking out another mortgage to pay for your child to attend college. What are these kids learning that makes them see racism everywhere and feel the need to push such radical agendas? Is it worth the 50k in student loan debt just for your child to learn about how America is an evil, white supremacist society?
That’s why it shouldn’t come as a shock so many Republicans are suspicious of higher education. The ones with college degrees who have a greater distrust of these institutions know first hand that they are no longer the vaunted gateways to the middle class. Often, they are simply indoctrination centers that leave you heavily in debt and feeling unwelcome for your right-wing beliefs.
No one wants to fork over the skyrocketing cost of tuition if all they learn is that there are 37 genders and the need to check their white privilege.
That encapsulates the raw deal a college education is increasingly becoming. The average starting salary for recent college grads ($36,000) roughly equals the average amount of student loan debt that alum is burdened with ($35,000).
It’s hard to enjoy the life of the middle class when you’re enslaved to student loan debt all your life — all for an education you found to be mostly worthless.
Pundits and commentators bemoan how President Trump is undermining America’s institutions, yet they often overlook how rotten many of these institutions are. Why are citizens beholden to value institutions they view as hostile towards red America and offering little in value?
The idea that everyone should go to college is a recent invention. It could be a short-lasting one, too, if campus insanity and exorbitant tuition become the defining features of higher education. http://dailycaller.com/2017/07/14/no-campus-for-republicans/
Should Universities Dial Back Their Leftist Agenda?
Yes No
Login with your social identity to vote
Dishonest, XX,
YOU FAILED TO INCLUDE THE WORD THAT APPEARS JUST ABOVE THE HEADLINE IN THE LINKED ARTICLE …
"OPINION"
It's the OPINION of DEPUTY EDITOR, Scott Greer.
No question that the protests hurt enrollment … but when posting a piece verbatim, it's deceptive to omit that what appears to be a "report," is actually an opinion.
But O.K.
Republican voters turn against book learning as the party's enstupiding accelerates
But a Republican base that believes the first black president is probably a Kenyan because (insert Rush Limbaugh farting noises here) while being convinced that The Entire Worldwide Community Of Scientists is plotting against humanity and only the noble truth-tellers of Ma and Pa Oil Company can defeat them can go straight to hell, postage-paid.
This is all while we watch them eagerly support presidential corruption and, just for good measure, foreign espionage efforts so long as Team Red tells them to there's at least some merit in noting for the record that the majority of the party is as dumb as a box of rocks and twice as stubborn.
Is science telling you things you don't want to hear? Declare science the enemy. Is the media reporting news that makes you feel bad inside? Declare the news to be invalid. Is college turning out people who are able to read charts and graphs and numbers on their own without Sean Hannity's shouty explanations as to why Numbers are Bad? Burn them down. That way we will never have to hear bad news again, not now, not when Florida is underwater, not ever.
Yep, This is what Education does and The ACA (OBAMACARE) That you Hate so much...
Affordable Care Act helps expand future primary care workforce
Funding for the National Health Service Corps will provide scholarships to students in training for primary health care careers
HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius today announced the opening of the 2011 application cycle for the National Health Service Corps (NHSC) Scholarship Program . This year’s scholarships are being supported with up to $28 million of the Affordable Care Act funds dedicated to the NHSC, and will help address shortages in the primary health care workforce today and for the future.
The NHSC Scholarship Program is administered by the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) and awards scholarships to students pursuing a career in primary care. Recipients receive payment for tuition, required fees and other reasonable educational costs, a monthly support stipend, and assistance in finding a practice site upon completion of a training program. Disciplines eligible for the NHSC scholarship program include: physician, dentist (general or pediatric), nurse practitioner (primary care), certified nurse-midwife, and physician assistant. Upon graduation, scholarship recipients serve as full-time or part-time primary care providers between two and eight years at an NHSC site in a high-need Health Professional Shortage Area.
“The NHSC Scholarship Program encourages the nation’s future medical and oral health providers to choose primary care,” said Secretary Sebelius. “The program delivers on our commitment to help address our nation’s primary care workforce shortage.”
“More than 7,000 students with the drive to be nurses, doctors or dentists have signed up to be notified of this opportunity in just the last year,” said HRSA Administrator Mary K. Wakefield, PhD., RN. “Students should not be deterred by the cost of their education especially when they seek to make an impact on the health of our nation’s underserved communities.”
The NHSC also includes a Loan Repayment Program that provides financial incentives in the form of loan repayment to primary care providers who have completed their education in exchange for serving in an underserved community for a minimum of two years.
Interested students can apply online at www.NHSC.hrsa.gov/scholarship . The 2011 NHSC Scholarship Program application cycle will remain open until June 9, 2011. For more information about the Affordable Care Act’s investments in primary care workforce, visit www.HealthCare.gov .
###
The NHSC makes our communities healthier by providing financial and other incentives to medical, dental, and behavioral health care providers who are bringing their skills where they’re needed most: Areas of the United States with limited access to health care. These areas can be rural or urban. The NHSC has been around since 1972 and has connected over 37,000 primary health care practitioners to communities all over America. www.NHSC.hrsa.gov
See, Your Right Wing Information Bureau will not give the Benefits to the Nation of ACA, Your Repeated REPEAL and "GET RID OF OBAMA POLICIES" hurt AMERICANS...What do you think will happen when this particular program has Vanished from OBAMACARE, your rural Community Healthcare Providers will also Vanish, Education is so important, it allows a person to see the good, bad and LIES and able to make EDUCATED DECISIONS not based on what is been shouted from the AIRWAVES, But look at all sides of an issue and CONSIDER what are they, the ones trying to remove a vital program (which just needs to be fixed) What are they trying to do for THEMSELVES...I tell you what, its called ONE TRILLION DOLLAR TAX CUTS..$1,000,000,000,000 Trump, did not want to be President because he loves Americans, Trump LOVES Trump and this is how he was going to SCREW AMERICANS..YEP!!! This is how to do it, Give yourself a $1,000,000,000,000 Tax Cut and it would be LEGAL...IDIOTIC TRUMP VOTERS...
I think Dean is absolutely right.
Based on what, Buzz?
Based on all the various news and opinion articles I've been reading over the past couple of years.
Buzz,
Sources matter. If you are choosing sources with an agenda than you could have a false impression.
I try to read from many sources, and I'm pretty sure most of them are liberal.
In Law School, one of the first things we learned is that there are two sides to every story (if not more) but what we now see in the media and reflected among the members here on NT, that's no longer applicable.
"Buzz,
Sources matter. If you are choosing sources with an agenda than you could have a false impression."
Perrie, are you really going to educate Buzz on choosing sources? He's a lawyer (barrister, attorney, what other names are there?) and has been on this earth a while now (according to him), and is well-spoken. I think he's likely smart enough to know about choosing sources, instinctively.
I totally disagree, Gary. I think human beings pick their sources to back up what they already feel to solidify that in their minds. It's not meant as a put down to Buzz, or anyone else, but just a fact of human nature.
Buzz,
Sources matter. If you are choosing sources with an agenda than you could have a false impression.
You mean like Huffington Post the first article in the article?
The vast majority Democrats, meanwhile, say colleges are helping the nation: 72 percent say they think higher education is having a positive effect, versus 19 percent who say such institutions are hurting the country.
And the first comment set the stage...
The gist of this "thinking" is that political correctness is ruining the world, thus higher education is a bad idea .
Pew didn't say Republicans were against higher education , but Huffington Post did. I wonder how the results would have come out had there not been an agenda? Subtle as it may seem to some of you,
and from.....
PopSugar Celebrity
It's unclear why Republicans might feel this way towards higher education , especially considering that a report by the US Census Bureau in 2015 found that as people acquired more degrees, their average annual earnings increased as well.
and last but not least is Salon...
America hits peak anti-intellectualism: Majority of Republicans now think college is bad
Democrats and independents who lean Democrat, on the other hand, continue to hold a positive attitude toward such institutions, with 72 percent saying they approve of higher education.
So Pew could have asked Republicans if they thought a higher education was bad and achieved completely different results. I don't know a soul who doesn't think a higher education, be it vocational or professional, to not be beneficial or good for anyone, but you see how these sites have used the poll.
96,
Did you read your own story?
I'm sure he did. I did. Is that all you got out of it? The student, which was his first encounter of anyone he cared to use as an example of someone trying to put forth an idea that didn't fit this Liberal Professor's opinion, without the input in the Liberal Professor's article by the student. Who knows if it is actually accurate. After all it came from "Vox" who is extremely left wing.
But if it is true, I disagree with the student's assumption the "Poor Black People" caused it and I disagree Wall Street is the only story to be told. Frank Raines made over $100,000,000 before the Housing bubble burst. Barney Frank and Maxine Waters fought to have regulations while Barney Frank said everything is fine. Bill Clinton himself said it was the Democrats who didn't take his advice on regulations. So, the Liberal Professor had his say so without the student having the opportunity to defend himself, now let's hear from a Conservative student without the Liberal Professor having the podium.
How Liberal Professors Are Ruining College
In New England, they outnumber conservatives 28 to 1. Why that’s bad for everyone
The freshman had his hesitations. “I am somewhat ‘in the closet,’” he emailed me from the safety of his dorm room.
Buzz,
You kind of proved my point about news sources. newsmax and the NYPost are both conservative publications. I found your article from insider Higher Ed to be fair.
Of course you would. You need a pin.
From the same author at "Higher Ed", Scott Jaschik.
The Liberal (and Moderating) Professoriate
Faculty members identify as liberals and vote Democratic in far greater proportions than found in the American public at large. That finding by itself won't shock many, but the national study released Saturday at a Harvard University symposium may be notable both for its methodology and other, more surprising findings.
The 72-page study -- "The Social and Political Views of American Professors" -- was produced with the goal of moving analysis of the political views of faculty members out of the culture wars and back to social science. The study offers at times harsh criticism of many of the analyses of these issues in recent years (both from those hoping to tag the professoriate as foolishly radical and those seeking to rebut those charges). The study included community college professors along with four-year institutions, and featured analysis of non-responders to the survey (two features missing from many recent reports).
continue reading article
Oh by the way talking about that Anti-Semitism from your Politico comment.
The Trump administration has faced pressure to more strongly condemn anti-Semitism after a rash of incidents across the country, including the desecration of Jewish cemeteries and threats against Jewish community centers. Trump earlier this week said the threats are “horrible and are painful and a very sad reminder of the work that still must be done to root out hate and prejudice and evil.” Vice President Mike Pence visited a vandalized cemetery near St. Louis. “There’s now a real awareness that anti-Semitism has reawakened as a major problem of the year 2017,” Marcus said. “There’s more pressure to do something about it.”
Oh by the way, does anyone other than those alt-right people exhibit any of these traits? Yes, as you said it comes from both the extreme left and extreme right, which no one on this site relates to, except maybe a couple. It's revealing to brag about how many professions are occupied by Democrats and then turn around and try to say they aren't many Liberal professors.
Also Hillary Clinton supported BLM and as I recall, they're pretty anti-Semitic along with some other ideas she promoted. She actually told them the time for talking is over and now is the time for action.
I just tried to show you that everyone is guided by their beliefs. I know your Politico comment inferred left and right. I know some of it seems condescending, but it is not meant to be.
It's alright to use Conservative sites as much as it is alright to use Liberal sites, but to tell someone their information is from a Conservative site with an agenda and ignore the same holds true for the Liberal sites in this article at the top of the screen is very revealing, whether you recognize it or not. But why should I be surprised?
The thing that says it best is when the NYT or Washington Post reveals a leak, the leak becomes the news and when Nunes reveals information, where did he get it and did he get it legally becomes the news from these same sources.
I expect this article to be deleted or closed as the last few I've put the truth of the matter in a comment have been.
Great post six! Mega dittos. Nothing you wrote should be removed by anyone.
Now, as slow and methodical reader, having finally made my way through your comment and the linked articles, I believe that it supports the theory I stated above. Excellent post, Six.
Thanks for reading it Buzz. If you read the entire comment including...
The freshman had his hesitations. “I am somewhat ‘in the closet,’” he emailed me from the safety of his dorm room.
you need to take a break! LOL
Don't underestimate the damage liberal professors can do to a young impressionable mind. You really need to warn your kids not to believe a darn thing they say.
Please cite the sources of this piece of right-wing fodder for the base.
Please … list them.
No. Your go to tactic will not work anymore. You've read the stories here. Don't "pretend" to be ignorant.
Amac,
You may enjoy this article written by a liberal professor who's very own liberal students "terrify" him.
He is afraid of the monsters he and his liberal associates have created. Hopefully the irony is not lost on you.
You may enjoy this article written by a liberal professor who's very own liberal students "terrify" him.
Can't say I enjoyed it, but there is truth to it. How pervasive is the phenomenon he described … I don't know … but i saw it with some of the individuals I represented years ago … and I know these years later … it's beyond the perennial, "I'm being picked on for no reason" "defense".
But nothing like what the professor experienced comes out of nowhere; there are "Victim-crats," and, there are those whose paranoia evolved from a society that is responsible for actions that fomented that paranoia. It isn't an "either-or" phenomenon.
If we are going to rant about those who don't take "personal responsibility," then we'd better not be putting up road blocks to the so-called benefits of being responsible. For example, you can't expect the Working Poor to continue to work for shit wages while legislating to take away their ability to obtain health care … that while rewarding the employers who pay the shit wages by taxing the rest of us -- instead of them -- for the welfare they cause!
And now, I'll give you the other side of the coin; when Ferguson, Missouri had an African American candidate for mayor , this not long after the Michael Brown killing, ONLY 2% of the Black community bothered to vote! Bitch like hell justifiably then sit on your ass when you can address the sources of your bitching? A pox on both their houses!
To quote an individual who shall remain nameless … "IT'S COMPLICATED" … but it's not that complicated.
All sides, social, cultural, political, ethnic, racial, gender-based, etc., NEED TO STOP THE SELF-SERVING, RHETORICAL BULLSHIT, and, NEED TO STOP VOTING SOLELY OR PRIMARILY ON THESE RELATED INTERESTS.
All the righteous indignation that uses the bottom-line as justification for institutionalized, inherent unfairness … will destroy us … as it is already doing. We don't have to be "Our Brothers' Keepers," but if we force our brothers into a corner, that while spitting in their faces and telling them "it's raining," once they believe they have nothing worthwhile to lose, or, may be on the way to there because the real and perceived greed of an oligarchic hierarchy that's writing the rules for everyone … initially they'll plead for fairness … then whine incessantly, rightly or wrongly … and ultimately …
… scorch the earth.
Yeah, I'm a "liberal," but I'm a liberal who doesn't want it all my way … I want it sane and fair.
96,
Did you read your own story? The singular complaint came in from a conservative student and then this professor went on to talk about the impact social justice has had on liberal professors. Not that liberal professors are pushing an agenda, but rather the delicate little flowers that some of us have raised, or not allowing the debate of any sort because of how they "feel"
The video stopped, and I asked whether the students thought it was effective. An older student raised his hand.
"What about Fannie and Freddie?" he asked. "Government kept giving homes to black people, to help out black people, white people didn't get anything, and then they couldn't pay for them. What about that?"
I gave a quick response about how most experts would disagree with that assumption, that it was actually an oversimplification, and pretty dishonest, and isn't it good that someone made the video we just watched to try to clear things up? And, hey, let's talk about whether that was effective, okay? If you don't think it was, how could it have been?
The rest of the discussion went on as usual.
The next week, I got called into my director's office. I was shown an email, sender name redacted, alleging that I "possessed communistical [sic] sympathies and refused to tell more than one side of the story." The story in question wasn't described, but I suspect it had do to with whether or not the economic collapse was caused by poor black people.
This isn't an accident: I have intentionally adjusted my teaching materials as the political winds have shifted. (I also make sure all my remotely offensive or challenging opinions, such as this article, are expressed either anonymously or pseudonymously). Most of my colleagues who still have jobs have done the same.
I am frightened sometimes by the thought that a student would complain again like he did in 2009. Only this time it would be a student accusing me not of saying something too ideologically extreme — be it communism or racism or whatever — but of not being sensitive enough toward his feelings, of some simple act of indelicacy that's considered tantamount to physical assault.
In 2009, the subject of my student's complaint was my supposed ideology.
In 2015, such a complaint would not be delivered in such a fashion. Instead of focusing on the rightness or wrongness (or even acceptability) of the materials we reviewed in class, the complaint would center solely on how my teaching affected the student's emotional state.
This phenomenon has been widely discussed as of late, mostly as a means of deriding political, economic, or cultural forces writers don't much care for. Commentators on the left and right have recently criticized the sensitivity and paranoia of today's college students. They worry about the stifling of free speech, the implementation of unenforceable conduct codes , and a general hostility against opinions and viewpoints that could cause students so much as a hint of discomfort .
When feelings become more important than issues
The abortion debate was canceled because it would have imperiled the "welfare and safety of our students." The Afrofunk band's presence would not have been "safe and healthy." No one can rebut feelings, and so the only thing left to do is shut down the things that cause distress — no argument, no discussion, just hit the mute button and pretend eliminating discomfort is the same as effecting actual change.
But I've seen what's being described here. I've lived it. It's real, and it affects liberal, socially conscious teachers much more than conservative ones.
The runaway costs, the indoctrination etc..
It's a necessary evil.
Two years ago 54% of Republicans were positive about college.
What happened 2 years ago, lol?
Trump whined SO MUCH about political correctness over the past two years that he has turned his party against higher education. And some people say this fool will do no damage.
I have to agree with John on this. I looked at the Pew results and found it startling.
The gist of this article is that in the last 2 years there has been a change in how Republicans view college.
From your article:
Those shifts comes amid several high-profile controversies over freedom of speech on campuses across the country, including protests earlier this year at the University of California, Berkeley after scheduled appearances by conservative commentators Ann Coulter and Milo Yiannopoulos were canceled. Conservative critics have said these incidents are silencing opposing ideas, while some people who disagree with inviting polarizing figures to campus say the safety concerns in these cases outweigh the importance of free speech.
When you have college kids saying that they think the 1st Amendment is bad.. that is a problem.
Is college bad Perrie?
Of course not. College is important but it isn't for everyone. To say college is bad, would be the dumbing down of America.
I agree entirely with this statement, quoted by Perrie, save for the fact that those who disagree are no less polarizing than Conservative or right-wing speakers. Screaming and shouting to block a speaker whose views may differ is not exactly teaching students to think critically and to distinguish between concepts. All it is doing is teaching students to be3 robots and regurgitate that which is being shoved down their throats by the Professors and administration.
"Those shifts comes amid several high-profile controversies over freedom of speech on campuses across the country, including protests earlier this year at the University of California, Berkeley after scheduled appearances by conservative commentators Ann Coulter and Milo Yiannopoulos were canceled. Conservative critics have said these incidents are silencing opposing ideas, while some people who disagree with inviting polarizing figures to campus say the safety concerns in these cases outweigh the importance of free speech."
The only reason "safety" is a concern is the violence that is being permitted - discipline and honour are no longer on campus.
The left-leaning professors and administrators, well in the majority, have been influencing the students, and the permitting of Leftist causes to dominate and harrass not only those on the Right but also certain minority groups - allowing safe spaces for progressives and treating conservatives as second class, is something that I certainly don't remember from my years in University and Law School. I certainly don't blame Republicans for their disdain.
The left-leaning professors and administrators, well in the majority, have been influencing the students, and the permitting of Leftist causes to dominate and harrass not only those on the Right but also certain minority groups - allowing safe spaces for progressives and treating conservatives as second class, is something that I certainly don't remember from my years in University and Law School. I certainly don't blame Republicans for their disdain.
Buzz, again, based on what? Some well publicized events at well known liberal schools. Are you aware that there are 2,618 4 year colleges and universities and another 1,666 2 year colleges. Do you actually think that the majority of them are liberal brain washing machines? Do you have evidence of this?
I live on LI. We have 7 universities and 2 colleges. None of them are particularly political.
In Toronto, at York University and at Ryerson University, a Jewish student would not dare wear a kippah, and have to keep a very low profile. Donors to the Universities have stopped donating because of what's happening on those campuses.
And maybe that says something more about Toronto, or the university. It never happened on any of my daughter's campuses. And it doesn't mean that it is happening all over either.
I realize how upsetting that can be to read, but it doesn't mean it is an epidemic either.
I found this to be a good, fairly neutral up-to-date analysis.
Buzz,
You kind of proved my point about news sources. newsmax and the NYPost are both conservative publications. I found your article from insider Higher Ed to be fair. Did you take note of this:
Studies say professors lean left but challenge idea that this results in indoctrination or harms conservatives.
and this from Politico:
— The rise of the “alt-right” white nationalist movement is partially to blame — but so are extremists on the far left,
So the problem is coming from two directions and no where in that article do they blame the professors.
Seems to me this is just another example of over-generalization. Yes there have been a few over-hyped situations at a a few schools. This does not make all other schools guilty of the same type of behaviour or thinking. Guilt by association is an exceptionally bad way of thinking and gets innocent people hurt.
Thank you very much. You expressed my views much better than I could ever!
Those shifts comes amid several high-profile controversies over freedom of speech on campuses across the country, including protests earlier this year at the University of California, Berkeley after scheduled appearances by conservative commentators Ann Coulter and Milo Yiannopoulos were canceled. Conservative critics have said these incidents are silencing opposing ideas, while some people who disagree with inviting polarizing figures to campus say the safety concerns in these cases outweigh the importance of free speech.
I agree that colleges accepting the silencing of opposing points of view is un-American at best. And that may have swayed poll respondents, dependent on the way the question was posed and where it was posed. When you stop listening to the views of anyone that doesn't share your point of view, you have become as close-minded as you feel those 'others' are. I saw a lot of this here and in many other news stories in the run up to and since the election.
Possibly these folks that responded feel that the way these educational institutions are willing to fold to 'popular opinion' is an antithesis to the purpose of secondary education.
For eight years Republicans were the minority in congress, and made the most noise. They learned nothing from themselves. The minority always is the one making the noise, because the majority is fat and happy and doesn't care. And of course, all the noise is distracting and keeps one awake at night, therefore: it must be removed, and forcibly, to teach them "manners".
It seems that minorities have been making the most noise throughout our Country. Protests after protests! What have they accomplished? Nothing! If they wanted to burn and pillage their own communities they certainly accomplished that only.
So, the minority Congress achieved the same thing as our minority people. Nothing! Let's say it, again. Nothing!
If they wanted to burn and pillage their own communities they certainly accomplished that only.
QUESTION: While I am not in favor of "burning and pillaging," when the law-of-the-land fails to be implemented even-handedly -- in particular, both historically and perpetually, so as to adversely affect minorities primarily, what must desperate people do?
Jesus, MLK, the Kennedys … Abraham Lincoln, et al, attempted peaceful and legal strategies to correct injustices … and were murdered for their peaceful efforts.
Let us not deceive ourselves … on at least two counts;
1) More often than not, WHEN BURNING AND PILLAGING ACCOMPANIES OTHERWISE "THE RIGHT TO PEACEFUL ASSEMBLY," it is more often not at the hands of those who demonstrate in peace, rather in those of agitators from the "outside".
The power brokers will often divide and conquer the masses by playing to the all-to-willing bigots who, in their intellectually slovenly, lazy, stupid and convenient way, are receptive conduits.
Our politics are being hijacked by a comparatively small number of people who seek to dominate the debate by screaming the loudest. They see the world as an urgent struggle between true believers and nonbelievers. They attempt to impose strict litmus tests and insist on conformity. They demonize dissent and consider all political opponents their enemies. Fear is their favourite tactic as they try to divide and conquer
I wouldn't be too concerned …
A REPUBLICAN ACQUAINTANCE OF MINE RECENTLY CONFIDED IN ME THAT …
"6 out of 5 Republicans are bad with fractions!"
Donald Trump has for months denied any connection between Russia and his campaign … and now that Trump Jr. dispelled that bullshit story … Trump is not only acknowledging that connection, but wants us to believe it's no big deal!
And the TRUMP-HATES-ALL-THE-SAME-PEOPLE-I-HATE sycophants … drag their knuckles and go right along with it.
Anyway, any group of dumb schmucks that think "college is bad for the country" …
… used to think that cars with more than one bumper sticker was college!
Shame on angry, ill-informed, dumb white dopes who would yield to Putin in order to maintain a bigot/xenophobe/misogynist liar as their POTUS.
Donald Trump has for months denied any connection between Russia and his campaign … and now that Trump Jr. dispelled that bullshit story … Trump is not only acknowledging that connection, but wants us to believe it's no big deal!
He has been lying since he started his campaign and now that he has been caught lying his attitude is "Just forgot all of the lies because what I was lying about was no big deal anyway", as if that makes all of his lies OK and we're not supposed to wonder what else he has been lying about all of this time. He lies so casually that it is impossible to tell when he is lying or telling the truth. Hell I don't know if he even knows half the time.
This is why we need this investigation. Now that we know for sure that he has been lying about something that he thinks is no big deal, but actually is, we need to know just how deep was and still is his connection to Russia and Putin. How much influence did Putin have with getting him elected and why does he insult even our closest allies, but fawns over Putin? I don't think that there is any doubt that the connection he had with Putin before he still has today and is working in treasonous concert with now.
Democratic vs. Republican
occupations
You can collapse or expand these different occupations on the site.
You would think throughout this seed someone would want to know the exact questions that were asked in this Pew Poll that has allowed everyone to have an opinion without having any knowledge of this information.
You would think in any of these polls or fact checkers there would be a comment section, but usually there isn't. They have the last word, just throwing out a poll, maybe explaining how they do their polls, but not including the poll questions themselves.
I would say this is a symptom in itself as to the intellectual level of our society today. Taking the results of a poll without even having the poll questions available to help determine whether it is accurate is not a lot different than having someone tell you a story that incriminates someone without the evidence leading up to that incrimination.
Everything is so political today. For example statistics indicate 80% of Psychiatrists consider themselves to be Democrats. 100% of Research Psychologist who occupy this occupation in the chart above are shown to be Democrats. It is impossible for any occupation that is 100% Democrat or Republican to be unbiased in their opinions. Republicans are presented to be bad and Democrats are presented to be good, enlightened. Do you ever wonder what party or leanings the people or companies who do these polls come from?
Republicans are considered more conservative than Democrats. I would say the word Liberalism has been perverted. How many people on here consider themselves to be Liberals? The word Liberal doesn't mean liberal today any more than the word Gay means gay as it has in the past.
It has been pointed out that a source was from Newsmax in a comment to argue a point, but no one pointed out the comments in the article came from Salon, Pop Sugar Celebrity and Huffington Post. They were just click bait tweets made up as an article.
We don't know one question from the poll, so how can we really say we are having an intelligent discussion when the most important aspect of the poll is missing? If the questions are available, then they should have been the very first thing we read in the article.
Six,
You can stop applauding Six, XX.
You would think throughout this seed someone would want to know the exact questions that were asked in this Pew Poll that has allowed everyone to have an opinion without having any knowledge of this information.
You would think in any of these polls or fact checkers there would be a comment section, but usually there isn't. They have the last word, just throwing out a poll, maybe explaining how they do their polls, but not including the poll questions themselves.
Six,
Of all the polling groups, the Pew, which is non partisan and non- advocacy, is also the most transparent of all polling organizations, which is why I use them frequently. So all you had to do was go to page 2 of this poll to find out the methodology. Here let me help:
You can keep on applauding Jefferson.
58% of Republicans Now Believe College Is Bad For the Country — Yes, You Read That Correctly
You can even leave out the part about "Yes, you read that correctly".
The whole premise of the article was 3 tweets from 3 Liberal sites.
The first comment was to set the stage.
The gist of this "thinking" is that political correctness is ruining the world, thus higher education is a bad idea.
The article was set up to imply that Republicans didn't believe in higher education and thought it was bad for the country.
There were many comments after my comment above, so at the time I posted it I wasn't addressing any of them.
Any research group can get the results they want by asking the right questions and get completely different results by changing the question or questions very little.
Republicans don't believe in higher education.
Try to convince me Pew didn't know their poll would have that effect would be ludicrous.
OK, I've read all the comments before I commented. I am branded a liberal on the site, but I see myself as a moderate. I have nothing earth-shattering to say, and all I can do is speak from my own experience.
I attended Murray State University in far western KY for 4 years and graduated with a degree. I earned two degrees, got my teaching certificate, and had a major in Earth Science/Geology, (total 64 hours, I qualified for either), and a minor in Sociology. I have worked my entire adult life in the field I chose to study.
My school was not a bastion of liberal education. Way back when, the most daring thing we ever did, was applaud a streaker who ran down campus one night. No one tore anything up, and, as we cheered, the streaker was quietly ushered into a police car. No one screamed or yelled, no one called out about anyone's rights being violated, etc.
We had a lot of famous people come and talk with us: Ralph Nader, Vincent Price, F. Lee Bailey, and, it was so long ago, I feel like we went to see Cicero... We had a wide range of political viewpoints available for our education. No one ever complained that I knew of, nor did anyone protest, that I knew of.
Little Murray was not a large school-- about 7500 when I went there-- now about 10,500-- and it was located in the heart of the bible belt. A statue of Robert E. Lee is on the Courthouse square, as is a statue of Nathan B. Stubblefield, who invented the wireless radio at the same time Marconi did. Marconi got the credit. There is a nice veteran's memorial, and several local nifties, like the barn with cartoon characters painted on it. (Some farmer used the fence from a drive-in movie theater to cover his barn.) My son is leaving to attend MSU in the fall. The best golden delicious apples are found in Murray, just south, at a farmer's market.
It is not at all surprising to me that republicans feel this way, as many people in the area feel this way. Many of the local residents see having a van as a place to have mobile platform for weird sexual proclivities, which are the scourge of mankind. (Really? A van?) I had professors who were die hard republicans, and they were good teachers, and I had professors who were ultra-liberal, and most of them were good teachers. The exception to that being one sociology professor I had who taught a class entitled, "The Family" as a course in necrophilia, spending the entire semester talking about dead people-- I never figured out what that had to do with "The Family". Someone important should have complained about him, because, needless to say, none of the students protested, and perhaps we should have.
Nothing I learned in class changed the basic person I was inside. So I have doubts about the influence of liberal professors brain washing the masses. Same for conservative professors brain washing the masses. Most of us have established our core values by that time, and while we can grow and change, and we can all screw up at any moment, we are already who we are. All of us can have different experiences that can enable us to change our minds, but no one professor, or group of professors, ever changed my mind about anything important, in a drastic way.
I learned how to think like a geologist- which is just a viewpoint, or way of thinking of things-- it's not a political or religious philosophy. It's just a way of analyzing data. I learned the vocabulary of my field. And I learned that I love to study rocks, but not necessarily the classes about rocks. Can you imagine anything more boring than to learn how to properly label the faces of a crystal, according to the Miller indices? BORING. Have I ever used it? Nope.
While I do not feel that college is for everybody, I do see it as an important first step for many people who wish to excel in their field-- or even participate in their field. I decry the costs of today's colleges-- my tuition my senior year was about $275, and I guess there are some people who aren't formed yet, but I was what I was, when I was in school. More willing to get up and get dressed up every day, at least more than I am now, but basically the same person. I've learned a lot since then-- but I still basically like people, I still smile at everyone, and still pretty much leave everyone else be, etc.
So, I kind of see all this college disapproval as being a conservative thing-- sort of like thinking that all van owners partake in weird sexual proclivities... Or that having a pink or red patio/party light means you're advertising... Or like the postman who accosted me on my own porch with his viewpoint of Creationism, just because I received a registered letter from the KY Geological Survey.
My thought: I don't want a doctor that didn't attend Medical school and is not certified, when I hire an expert, I expect them to be an expert and be formally educated in their field, and a college degree is a good thing to have, if you wish to participate in a whole host of fields. I don't think I'm better than the plumber, which is an art, in and of itself, but I want my plumber to be certified, and I certainly want him to be bonded and licensed.
That's just what I think.
Doswer:
OK, I've read all the comments before I commented. I am branded a liberal on the site, but I see myself as a moderate. I have nothing earth-shattering to say, and all I can do is speak from my own experience.
Don't you know that anything left of right is still left. Same is true the other way around. It seems that no one gets moderates anymore.
According to some of our more far right members, that is certainly true!
LOL.. so it seems.
My next step will be to buy a van, so I can partake in all that weird sexual proclivity I keep hearing about that van owners participate in...
I am branded a liberal on the site
Maybe, and I'm just spitballing here, it's because you constantly post orthodox liberal thoughts and upvote the most malicious, dishonest, and venomous personal attacks by liberals against conservatives.
That might have something to do with it.
Maybe, and I'm just spitballing here, it's because you constantly post orthodox liberal thoughts and upvote the most malicious, dishonest, and venomous personal attacks by liberals against conservatives.
If ever there was a pot …
You got me, I'm always calling myself a moderate and constantly calling for strict moderation.
Sean, I make a point to not post malicious comments about/to other members. I try hard to be pleasant and fair and honest. So, I take offense at your accusation and challenge you to find 3 malicious, vicious comments that I've made to a more conservative member of the site, and to find the same number of malicious/vicious comments that I've voted up.
Put your money where your mouth is.