Advertisements

Going to College Uninformed is Like Sitting on a Frozen Pole with No Pants On: Stupid

American conservatives should think long and hard about where they send their kids to college.  It’s a serious matter.  After all, what can you become these days without a degree?  If the Left has their way—if you obtain a college degree in due time—you WILL become a liberal.

I fully realize that this has the potential to sound incredibly hypocritical coming from someone who is currently attending college – specifically someone who edits a publication comprised entirely of collegiate writers.  But you’ll soon see why the awkward position I am in is entirely necessary.

The Left’s attempt to indoctrinate my generation is very real and very dangerous.  And it’s succeeding.

As a young, naïve, and semi-informed freshman Business major at the University of Tennessee at Chattanooga, I entered my core-required Macroeconomics 101 course expecting to learn valuable information about the failing economy at a time when it was crucially important.  Instead, I got ten minutes-a-day of Dr. John Garrett’s personal opinions on Fox News, the ignorance of Republicans, and George Bush’s failures at being an intelligent human being.  But not to worry, it’s all in the interest of furthering my education!

I struggled through the semester (it is hard for a conservative to survive a class like this without compromising his or her ideals) and approached finals week with an armful of leftist propaganda to study for the final exam.  But even that armful of garbage didn’t prepare me for what I encountered on the final exam.

To briefly illustrate the agenda of my professor, I’ll share two questions from the actual final examination that I took as a freshman:

Question 1:  “What caused the financial markets crisis of 2007?”
Correct Answer: “Republicans”
 
Question 2:  “Why did Bush side with water companies who contaminated water with arsenic?”
A: Bush heard that arsenic caused kidney stones in cats and he didn’t like cats.
B: Because people said ‘Don’t Mess With Texas’ and it’s enough of a mess already.
C: (and the correct answer) Because he was in favor of deregulation and always gave executives what they wanted.

This isn’t learning.  This isn’t a comprehensive examination of founded teachings.  It is radical indoctrination at its finest, a stupid waste of hard-working students’ time, and an insulting use of taxpayer dollars.

Dr. John Garrett, a self-proclaimed, tenured “genius”, used his platform to teach fallacies to vulnerable students.  And taxpayers pay for him to do this.

Rest assured, letters were sent, emails forwarded, and “investigations conducted.”  Several voices charged the department head, board of directors, and chancellors to review the exam personally, but whether or not they actually did, I do not know.  What I do know is UTC “conducted an investigation” and concluded that Dr. Garrett had done nothing wrong.  There are many wonderful teachers in the world, but in my opinion, there are also some that never deserve to touch a black board again. Needless to say, we want UTC to re-investigate and find a different conclusion.

Don’t let liberal professors win the battle for young minds.  Call and email Dr. John Garrett, Economics department head Ziad Keilany, and Chancellor Roger Brown‘s office and demand Dr. Garrett’s removal or resignation.

Zachary Freeman, Editor-in-Chief // University of Tennessee at Chattanooga // @freeman_zachary

Advertisements

Comments

  1. While I generally agree that Dr. Garrett was well out of line, it seems silly that such anecdotal evidence be used to support the notion that “The Left’s attempt to indoctrinate my generation is very real and very dangerous. And it’s succeeding.” As a student at UW Madison (one of the most liberal universities in the nation), I’ve yet to see any indoctrination going on (then again, I’m pursuing degrees in Statistics and Chemistry). As it is, you haven’t really shown anything about any concerted effort by the left to indoctrinate students, just that you’ve had a bad teacher.

    “If the Left has their way—if you obtain a college degree in due time—you WILL become a liberal.”
    That’s a very bold assertion considering it’s based on a single data point. You ought to be looking for statistically significant evidence that liberal professors are favored (controlling for things like research output and teaching competence). Otherwise, your piece simply amounts to rabble rousing about a conspiracy based on a class that you didn’t like.

    I think “The College Conservative” should change its name to “The College Conservative that isn’t to be bothered with so called ‘statistics’ or ‘evidence'”.

  2. I second Alan’s motion to question the legitimacy of this site

  3. Joyce Bant says:

    It sounded to me like that class was a waste of time and the resources to pay for it. Kudos to Zachary for exposing what was being “taught” in that class. He couldn’t be brain washed, but what about the students that could be. It was very obvious that professor was using his exposure to students to promote his agenda and vent his hostilities.

  4. Alan, this is a personal experience journalistic piece. Of course the evidence is anecdotal. It’s called qualitative data analysis. The author’s statement “and it’s succeeding” is clearly based on the fact that this professor, even with his egregious behavior, is still teaching. Inductively, that means that most students have not complained and, ergo, a certain portion of them have been indoctrinated.

    Additionally, his assertions are not based on a single data point. He well presents that they are based on the daily experiences and cumulative information received in the form of qualitative data. That is the nature of this kind of research. Further, I would suggest that your area of study is quite immune from liberal indoctrination. Liberals cannot infiltrate as easily in the hard sciences–facts are their kryptonite. However, students (like this author) immersed in business-from-an-academic-perspective, students of the humanities, and those of the soft-sciences (sociology/psychology) are likely receiving a larger portion of this kind of unethical instruction because so much of those research areas are given to interpretation of information, rather than pure scientific method research or mathematical reasoning.

    Please do not discount the data just because it’s not presented here in quantitative form. My 20+ years of professional data analysis, both qualitative and quantitative, experience tells me that if this student sat in that professor’s class and recorded the number of times he made a statement about a Republican administration paired with a pejorative, we would have all the data points you need to create a robust analysis.

  5. @Lisa B, Obviously this professor was trying to indoctrinate students, I’m not disagreeing with that. (Though I doubt that many students were successfully indoctrinated given that 1. some proportion of students already agreed with the professor 2. Some students may have disagreed, but didn’t bother complaining and 3. We have no idea how many students complained, universities very rarely dismiss tenured professors, regardless of how many people complain about material). Additionally, his assertions really are based on one data point, sure this same professor was bashing conservatism daily, but all that this shows is that this individual professor has a strong liberal bias, not the institution, and certainly not academia as a whole (as the author seems to suggest). I’m not just dismissing qualitative arguments out of hand, I’m just saying that a case study like this is not easily extrapolated out to a wider context. Without showing that there is a higher than expected proportion of this sort of behavior, all that has been proven is that Dr. Garrett is a poor professor. For example, I had an extremely biased conservative professor for my required ethnic studies class, who, day in and day out criticized and demeaned anyone who disagreed with him. All that this shows is that this one guy was biased, not my University (which is incidentally one of the most liberal universities in the nation). It certainly isn’t evidence of a wide reaching conservative plot or some nonsense like that.

  6. This thing is being psychoanalyzed to death!

  7. Probability theory is hardly psychoanalysis.

  8. John Whelan says:

    Another tragic victim.
    The persecution of American conservatives is one of the great underreported human tragedies of our time.

  9. Until the situation is reversed…then tantrums start.

  10. Too true, Alan. I am glad to see you are encompassing the full range of data exploration. Please forgive us, Joyce, these are issues that are often swept under the rug on campuses and it’s important to be able to shed light on academic impurity. Frankly, it’s just too difficult to find people who, as Alan suggests, are not already indoctrinated when they arrive on campus and can discuss these issues in an unbiased way.

    As a recovering academic, myself, I can’t help but feel for his author. No, I don’t think his experience can be extrapolated–however qualitative data rarely can unless it is corroborated. I am constantly looking for bright students who have the time to pursue that kind of research. I wish I did!

  11. It’s more than true from what i’ve experienced myself. I know that to really understand something you need to see both sides of a situation, but as i constantly ran into at Bridgewater State in MA was that being a conservative was wrong. I took a history of mexico course, not womens history, or social history, but i was forced to learn the history of Mexico through that of a poor womans eyes. She stated that in the first class we would cover no wars through out the class, and if anyone has researched Mexican history they’d know that war is a major part. I could not tell you one thing i learned in that class other than how to write liberal papers so that i could, for lack of a better word, bullshit my teachers into liking me and giving me fair grades on papers. I’ve taken several psych couses that have had conflicting views from one teacher to the next, as well as a “human geography” class that was an indictment on anything conservative and when we were allowed to do free choice research papers my ideas were turned away because he felt they were wrong. These are the short list on a long trip through the liberal education system. I’ve been trying to become a teacher because i feel that kids need to know the real world before they are forcibly indoctrinated to believe that if they don’t go to college they are instantly a failure, college isn’t for everyone, and if they are confused on what to do, community college is not a failure either. Teacher Unions as well as unions ingeneral are good and bad due to the fact of the they protect both the bad and the good teachers.

  12. Every teacher has a bias. It’s something you learn in Sociology. Everybody has their own opinions and viewpoints, and it is impossible to rid yourself of them entirely. Yes, there are certain things that are out of line. Yes, there are a lot of professors out there (especially tenured ones), who feel as though they have the liberty to spout their beliefs and personal opinions where they really shouldn’t. I go to a liberal school (in the School of Business), and I have seen my share of liberals AND conservatives. I really don’t feel any pressure to go one way or another. I just feel the pressure to obtain good grades, and if I do get a professor like that then I file a complaint with the proper individuals. If the professor is too awful, then I drop the class. If that is the only professor for that specific class, then I don’t bother taking it until I make sure something HAS come of my complaint. One bad professor shouldn’t be the basis for a general argument over college though…That’s really unfair to the college.

  13. I support Zachary here. There is no place for personal political agendas in the classroom. Teaching is not about that…it about educating our youth to think for themselves so they can fomulate their own solutions to the problems they will face.

    The liberal agenda is well known and even written down… controlling education is the at the top. Personally, I have watched my niece, raised in a conservative family her whole life, flip from conservative thought to liberal thought in 4 years while at the University of Houston. All of her friends are the same way…indoctrinated. Yes, that is the correct word due to the fact that they can spew out the liberal mantra but cant back it up with facts nor can understand the principals of those policies and how they affect society.

    ~M

  14. Three points from an objective party:
    1) You never actually disproved the points on the exam. As for the first cited question, I admit the answer is not *strictly* republicans. The answer to that question is complicated and blame ought fall on a host of people. That said, republicans are, without question, one of those blameworthy parties–frankly, one of the most blameworthy. While it is my, and many people’s belief, that blame should fall on many, some people believe the blame should fall on few people or parties. Some argue for republicans, others for democrats, others still for banks, and so on. If your teacher is someone who believes it is solely republicans fault, and he presented an argument for that in class, then that would be the answer to his question. That answer is not objectively correct or incorrect, but there is a case to be made. As for the second question, that is probably much closer to an undisputed truth. Politics, all of it, democrat or republican, is captured by big-industry. The water industry is one of the largest. Consider that since the EPA, a more liberal agency, governs standards on tap water, it is consistently found to be cleaner and safer than bottled water. Bottled water is regulated by the FDA, which not only tends to be more pro-business but is arguably one of the most captured agencies in America. One primary complaint I have with economists in general is that the assumptions and factors are both flawed and theoretical. If you learned in economics class that, practically speaking, lobbying buys power and dictates many economic decisions and regulations, you probably learned more than simply reading and theorizing about Adam Smith vs. Karl Marx.

    2) Don’t mislead yourself, or others, into believing that conservative indoctrination does not occur. Conservative teachers spread their propaganda just as intensely as liberal teachers. It might seem unbalanced since a huge majority of academics are self-proclaimed liberals, but that only means that the percent of people espousing one view or the other is disproportionate. The actual intensity, slant, and fervor with which each side pushes their view is equal. I was a political science major at an institution where almost every political science professor was CONSERVATIVE. The amount of propaganda pushing was equally intense as with my liberal teachers, and in some cases, even worse. Now, before you go dismissing this comment as being written by a liberal and thus it is making me feel like the push is harder from conservatives, consider 2 things. 1st, that same biased outlook you’d be accusing me of having would apply to you. I.e. As a conservative, you’d be more susceptible to noticing and being pissed off by liberal bias. Second, I am not a liberal. I am about as split down the middle as you could possibly be on issues.

    3) Your stance on your own approach to education suggests a personal flaw that runs deeper than that of your teacher. This, to me, is the most concerning part of your “post”. You state that it was “hard” for you to survive in a class like this “without compromising your ideals.” This suggests a problem I have with everyone who has a view point: patently closed mindedness. After graduation, I was conversing with my undergrad constitutional law professor about how his class was going. He told me about a student who was struggling. He explained, “The student is so pre-set in his beliefs and ways that when presented with a problem, he already knows how he *wants* to answer it, then he manipulates facts and cases in a flawed manner to incorrectly reach his conclusion. That isn’t how law works, and really, that isn’t how logic works. You are supposed to let data lead to the conclusion; not pick a conclusion and then figure out how to get there.” Now, given your own admission of being “semi-informed”, it seems you should have a desire to assimilate as much information as possible. Instead, that was not your mentality. My belief about your closed mindedness is further evidence in two later points you make. First, you described the date (etc) you had for exam prep as “garbage” and “propaganda”. Did you ever take the time to read it? To read it carefully? To analyze? And even if you did, was it with an open mind, or just with the assumption upfront it was wrong–I think the answer is obvious. Second, after the school conducted an investigation and reached a conclusion, you said you want them to do another investigation AND reach the other conclusion. This almost begs the direct comparison to the student my teacher referenced. Now, I’m sure you, and your defenders, will say “look at those test questions, it’s clear the professor is biased” or will say “maybe the institution’s investigation was like the student your teacher described; they knew they’d keep him and just reached that conclusion.” My response to the first is that you gave a us a limited sample of why your teacher sucks. You said he spent 10 minutes of class in “Bush-Bashing Mode”, what about the other hour-or-so? Guessing it was more productive, otherwise you would have said something like “he literally spent the whole class ramming leftist agenda down my throat.” As to second, it is possible the institution did this; especially given the desire to protect tenured professors. But, two things to consider. First, you are in east Tennessee; that neck of the woods is very, very conservative (I live in Tn., so I know). So if that type of word got out, it wouldn’t necessarily be good for the school. Second, to become as credentialed as this professor as well as become tenured, you have to spend a lot of time doing research and being recognized. Perhaps he actually knows a lot more about this subject than you do and understands economics at a level you likely never will. I’d bet that is a true statement.

    In sum, I don’t deny a liberal bias in academia. It exists. There is a bias everywhere. The solution, however, is probably not blogging about what you deemed a bad experience. Your post is not remotely compelling that there is a problem with teachers having a bias. Your 8th grade civics teacher probably had a bias too. What is more troubling is the blatant closed mind you have to actually studying an issue. A closed mind to trying to learn and engage critically with someone like your professor who has practically infinite more experience and knowledge on economics than you. And what is most troubling is that you pass off your closed mindedness as a substitution for being right in the described events, when, unfortunately, you probably never even consider the other side, let alone the fact you might be, gasp, WRONG.

  15. Just to add a few points to what I posted based on reading some of the other comments added during drafting.

    1) @Austin Michaels: You seem to equate free thinking with conservatism. You entirely reject, with no proof, that someone coming out of college and being liberal must be the product of liberal indoctrination, yet you seem to brilliantly dance around the obvious question. Why would her being conservative, after being raised in a strictly conservative home, not be the same type of indoctrination? Interestingly enough, there is strong evidence that suggests American generations alternate between supporting their parents politics and not. Ex. Gen. 1 is conservative; Gen. 2 is conservative. Gen 3, then, becomes liberal; gen. 4 is also liberal. Gen 5, then, becomes conservative and so. Evidence suggests this pattern in the oscillation where every third generation switches political viewpoints.

    2) @Austin Michael and @Zachary Freeman: Austin suggests that the kids can’t back up the liberal opinions they spout. That seems troubling. Broadly speaking, it is troubling when anyone can’t back up their opinion. Zach, in light of this, how would you have answered those two test questions–let’s assume they were essay questions and you could write as much as needed. I’m curious how you would answer them.

    –I would, again, like to note I am not a liberal. I am, however, very critical of the recent wave of young conservatives because I find, on the whole, they state stronger opinions than young liberals with far less evidence to support anything they say.–

  16. I’m a lesbian. I’m also politically conservative. During a discussion about whether criminal justice is fair in this country, a gay classmate piped up and claimed that not only are certain races hated by the justice system, but GLBT people are as well.

    I made the mistake of disagreeing out loud. I replied, “I’m sure there is some bias, but it’s ridiculous to claim that the entire justice system is out to target certain races or even gay people. That kind of claim in this day and age is patently absurd!”

    Both my classmate AND the instructor unleashed on me. We were just two sessions in. I dropped the class and went for the course with the higher difficulty – and I actually learned something in it.

  17. @Mel. The criminal justice system is, unquestionably, biased.

    Ex. African-Americans make up less than 20% of the country, yet over 70 plus % of the prison population. Either you recognize a bias in the system, or you believe that african-americans are, like, worse criminals or something. The war on drugs is likely the most tangible example of this. Billions of dollars every year to stop the larger drug issue, yet over 80% of the arrests and incarcerations every year end up being weed related, often simple possession, and African-American youth from inner cities. Meanwhile lawyers and psychologists have the highest cocaine abuse rates in the country.

    You see no bias, anywhere?

  18. @Michael is this a serious comment? Go into those areas and see who are actually the people who are getting locked up. My friend who is white they falsified the police report and the person never showed to court, they gave my friend who had a completely clean record 6 months probation. Meanwhile the Black kid in front of him on his 7th drug charge had the case dropped for community service. The reason that there is a higher crime rate is because of the environment, i know plenty of black kids that have never been to jail and are educated upstanding members of society. I also know the kids that are in gangs and are running drugs because “it’s hood”, it’s a matter of work ethic and the kids that get caught don’t have it. Call me racist all day if you’d like, but i’ve been discriminated against more as a white male than most of my black friends have been from white people.

  19. @Robert:
    First, I do “go into those areas”. Though, I wouldn’t really term it that way. It’s not third world, or hood, it’s part of America. As for what I’ve seen and do: I have been active in inner-city community service for 10 years. That has ranged from teaching aid, rebuilding projects, tutoring, probono work at juvenile court, and legal aid. So, I’d say that my experience, time, and money give me ample personal experience to speak to the issue. As for this claim, “My friend who is white they falsified the police report and the person never showed to court,…”. First, it is not actually a complete or coherent clause or thought, but parsing through your poor prose, I think I get the story you sharing. The thing is, falsified police reports happen all the time. Usually to African-Americans. Studies show that between 40-60% of incarcerated blacks on drug crimes are totally innocent, meanwhile numbers possibly as 60-80% of white’s that get off on drug charges are, in fact, guilty. Second, as for the black man in your story that you clearly believe should be damned, you provided no real evidence. If it’s his 7th possession of weed, that would be different than if it is his 7th time selling heroine. Based on sentencing laws, I’m guessing, with a high degree of confidence, not a single charge was a felony. Also, you are quick to believe your friend who says the report was falsified, but why would you refuse to impute that same possibly to the black kid’s situation? That need to consider the white kid getting screwed and the black kid getting off, even in the face of your own belief in falsified reports, does suggest racial bias on your part–a bias, by the way, you seem to have no issue with having. So, please, before sharing that little story with me, consider that you saw one bite of one slice of a very large pie. In 10, plus years of volunteering, doing legal work, and doing political research, I find the issue to be a bit larger than “my white friend got screwed while this black kid wasn’t.”

    Second, I largely reject your claim that crime is the product of environment. No doubt environment plays a factor, but I think you and I would disagree on the size of environment. You likely are referring to culture in the home and, as you put it, “the hood.” The problem is that the culture extends to other areas you don’t consider. I’ll start with the legal system since I have the most expertise and experience with it. Juvenile courts, by and large, fail our cities’ youth. I watched more times than I can recall judges sentencing children without the state satisfying the burden of proof. I’ve seen children deprived the basic right of silence–literally, I’ve seen a judge say, “well, the state hasn’t met their burden yet, so I want to hear from the defendant.” I’ve seen totally innocent 7 and 8 year olds be locked up, given a record, or some other punishment before they have had the chance for a chance. Many of these judges and others, like you, assume that because a kid is black, poor, and ends up in juvenile court he or she must be guilty and there is no other explanation or reality. Long before children would ever have a chance, our system gives them a record that damns them. This problem is only heightened by the failing inner-city education system. Some children change school districts up to 7 times in a single school year. There is never a desire for education installed, never a comfort level in the classroom. Meanwhile, more and more evidence comes out suggesting our intellectual curiosity and desire and disposition to learn peaks by 3 or 4 years old. The only early development education that really exists comes from parents or private schools. Children, who have no control over the family they are born into, never receive any type of education by 3 or 4, which, it seems, is predisposing them against success in school. Even valedictorians of inner-city school usually get nothing better than a decent scholarship to the lower-end state schools. So imagine the lack of incentive (and, given that you are likely a huge lover of capitalism, you should understand this point) a moderately intelligent kid, with a record from when he was 9, has when he enters middle school? There is no future for him. None. You probably say, “see, that’s the culture I’m talking about. these kids just give up and sell drugs and commit crimes.” You aren’t seeing the forest through the trees. That environment was never brought about because they are black. Being black doesn’t mean they are like that. The inequality of their circumstance long before they were ever born created that environment. Are all people always a product of an environment? No, absolutely not. But there is no way around the fact that there is a huge societal failure here as well. There is no way around the fact that plenty of suburb-white (and black) kids buy and sell weed on a regular basis and never caught or prosecuted at the rates blacks are. And, perhaps, if you actually “went into those areas”, spent some real time there, tried to look at the bigger picture, and, yes, tried to realize race has literally nothing to do with crime rates (etc), you might understand more of this problem than you care to admit falls on the system and those who fail to accept they play some part in it.

    Third, as for your discrimination, please cite examples. That’s really easy to say “oh, I’ve been discriminated against”, but I’d love to hear how. For whatever your pathetic excuse to conjure up a discrimination story, I can promise it won’t compare in severity or number to the countless instances of discrimination I’ve seen in juvenile court alone. As for you “black friends”, the issue is really less about race and more about class. But, I’m willing to bet those black kids that aren’t discriminated against are not in the lower-class. They are likely middle class to rich.

    So, as to your initial question, “was I serious”; the answer is yes. I’m serious because it is a real problem, as is your ignorance. Re-read what you wrote. At almost every premise, argument, and turn you say something to the effect “I know…”, yet you don’t provide any evidence.
    You know your friend’s police report was falsified; you provide no evidence.
    You know the black kid was actually guilty and the court let him off too easy; you provide no evidence.
    You know the problem is the environment; you provide no evidence.
    You know the criminals had, realistically, other options; you provide no evidence.
    Et cetera.
    I’d encourage you to spend more time, as I’ve done, “in those areas” and “with those people”. Maybe then you understand more. Maybe then you’d stop saying “with those people” and just say “with people”. Maybe.

    So, here is my question to you: do you seriously believe that socio-economic class has nothing to do with this? Do you seriously believe the discrimination you’ve faced for being white is worse than discrimination faced by a 9 year old, innocent, black child in the courts that ruins his life before he ever had a chance to live it? Do you seriously believe that that black, inner city kids are actually more likely to commit crimes because they are black and from the city? Do you seriously believe that the problem is as simple as you think it is?

  20. @Robert:
    I should also note that I don’t seek solely to blame the system. I recognize autonomy exists. My larger point is that the system fosters a reality where autonomy is choosing between terrible choices. Often a life in gangs and crime vs. a life trying to pass school even though it won’t really matter if you do. (NOTE: this is a huge oversimplification of my point; my primary purpose was to address that I recognize autonomy is in play as well; something I failed to adequately note in my longer post)

  21. Sounds like your teacher was bad, but your article was equally bad.

    Alan is correct. It would be nice to some actual data to support such a broad claim. This article does not help me to decide whether there truly is a Liberal bias in colleges and universities.

  22. @ George W…this was point-of-view reporting, not a research thesis. One can derive from the title of this piece that the author addresses a simple argument, here. Based on his personal experience, it is vital for parents of college-age kids to understand: prepare your kids before sending them out. And, if you are college age, be prepared for such experiences. Parents and collegians often do not realize that Universities are under no obligation, ethical or legal, to keep bias out of the classroom. This author demonstrates that point rather fully, here.

    Like all good rhetorical arguments, you must process it through the filter of your own experience: have you seen people get emotionally involved in their beliefs so that it affects their work? Do you know people who are so dogmatic that they don’t care if they are offensive? Have you heard people say and do things, in a professional setting, that are unprofessional? Then you understand that as long as there are human instructors or humans creating academic programs, there will be bias. The question this piece inspires is: if that bias is overt and affects the students’ ability to succeed in the classroom, should paying students (and parents) have to put up with it?

  23. Sure, this was just personal experience and I suppose the point about being prepared is good (I was a Boy Scout after all). However, since when did personal experience and rhetorical arguments support assertions like:

    “The Left’s attempt to indoctrinate my generation is very real and very dangerous. And it’s succeeding.”

    Holy Bayes’ Theorem Batman!

  24. Lisa B,
    If this piece were framed as “I dealt with a single teacher biased toward leftist beliefs” then yes, I’d agree with you.

    Just looking at the first paragraph, however, makes me think he is addressing college-bound kids at large. Most of these kids will not have his teacher. So why does he conclude that his single anecdote applies to all or most college-bound students?

    I had a college professor who enjoyed Rob Zombie movies. Should I report this as a pandemic?

  25. @ Alan: rofl!!

    @ George: I agree, the writing, here, is wrought with hyperbole. Still, though the filter of my own experience, I completely buy the premise that overt bias in the classroom (especially at the collegiate level) is often present, impacts student success, and should be openly discussed in front of paying students and parents. When the lights turn on, the roaches scatter–even if, in this case, the light is somewhat colored for effect :)

  26. While I do agree, I graduated from a liberal university with an arts degree and for a short time I was a liberal or more an independent, for I couldn’t go left or right too far without finding some fault. As I grew into adulthood and began working, doing anything I could for a paycheck, I saw the people I graduated with still NOT working and still trying to go into more and more schooling. The more I worked and less they worked, I found myself distancing myself from the very friends I had during college. Distancing myself largely because I became the source of their income and their discussions of life soon had no relevancy in the real world that I was experiencing. Their warm and fuzzy talks about global peace and curing world hunger, meant a hill of beans to someone working two, sometimes three jobs, to pay his bills.

    Soon I was more conservative than they could ever be, mostly due to earning a real paycheck and seeing a large percentage of it being stripped away to pay for giveaway programs in my own state (like also giving it to my friends for alcohol and cigarettes). When I eventually joined the Navy 4 years after graduation, all those “friends” stopped talking to me and I haven’t spoken to them since. That was 17 years ago.

  27. 9/22/10 politico.com:
    College professors and administrators are donating heavily in the midterm elections and are overwhelmingly supporting Democrats over Republicans, according to a new study.
    An analysis of Federal Election Commission data conducted by the Center for Responsive Politics shows that Democrats have raked in more than $400,000 just from employees of the University of California’s network of colleges — 86 percent of all donations from UC employees.
    Harvard employees ranked second in donations to Democrats, giving $327,028 to the party — 77 percent of total donations from employees of the university.
    Employees of Stanford, the University of Texas and Princeton also gave more than $100,000 to Democrats. At Princeton, no donations have gone to a Republican, the study found.
    The employees of only a few universities — mostly in the South — gave predominantly to Republicans. Among them are the universities of Alabama, Georgia and Kentucky.
    Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) has been the top recipient of academic donations, collecting more than $175,000 — likely from those active University of California donors.
    Sens. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Harry Reid (D-Nev.) have also received more than $100,000 from university employees, as has Charlie Crist, the Republican-turned-independent senate candidate in Florida.
    As to high screwal teachers? 95% of the NEA’s (teacher’s union) go to democrats.

    It’s kind of like the democrat media, isn’t it?
    -8/27/10 The Examiner: “Obama, Democrats got 88% of 2008 contributions by TV network execs, writers, reporters”: Senior executives, on-air personalities, producers, reporters, editors, writers and other self-identifying employees of ABC, CBS and NBC contributed more than $1 million to Democratic candidates and campaign committees in 2008. Democratic total of $1,020,816 was given by 1,160 employees of the three major broadcast television networks, with an average contribution of $880. By contrast, only 193 of the employees contributed to Republican candidates and campaign committees, for a total of $142,863. The average Republican contribution was $744.

    But the lot of them will say: “Me? Biased? How absurd! What are you, a fascist Tea Partier?”

    And thank you, Ben — who “…questions the legitimacy of this site” — for illustrating the fascist tendency of liberals to shut down opposition to their opinions:
    -11/18/10 huffingtonpost.com: Senator Jay Rockefeller said: “There’s a little bug inside of me which wants the FCC to say to Fox and to MSNBC, ‘Out. Off. End. Good-bye” (knowing that Fox is at the top cable news channel and MSNBC is at the bottom).
    -3/22/11, The Blaze: “They [the Tea Partyers) don’t deserve the freedoms that are in the Constitution, but we’ll give it to them anyway.” Democrat Senator Lautenberg.
    -1/7/11 CBS News: President Obama is planning to hand the U.S. Commerce Department authority over a forthcoming cybersecurity effort to create an Internet ID for Americans.

  28. Professors tend to be liberal… This proves that there’s liberal indoctrination how?

  29. John Whelan says:

    Exactly. These conservatives are perpetual victims.

Trackbacks

  1. […] Going to College Uninformed is Like Sitting on a Frozen Pole with No Pants On: Stupid (thecollegeconservative.com) […]

What Do You Think?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: