As legislation is introduced in more than a dozen states across the country to counter political pressure and proselytizing on students in college classrooms, a majority of Americans believe the political bias of college professors is a serious problem, a new Zogby Interactive poll shows.
Nearly six in 10 – 58 percent – said they see it as a serious problem, with 39 percent saying it was a “very serious” problem.
The online survey of 9,464 adult respondents nationwide was conducted July 5-9, and carries a margin of error of +/- 1 percentage point.
Predictably, whether political bias is a problem depends greatly on the philosophy of the respondents. While 91 percent of very conservative adults said the bias is a “serious problem,” just 3 percent of liberals agreed.
Conservatives have long held that college campuses are a haven for liberal professors. The activist group Students for Academic Freedom, founded by David Horowitz, has promoted state legislation invoking a “Students Bill of Rights” on campuses to protect conservative students from academic reprisals by professors who hold contradictory beliefs.
Men were much more likely than women to see the bias of professors as a problem – 64 percent of men agreed, while 53 percent of women said the same.
Whites were twice as likely to call it a “serious problem” as African-Americans, the survey showed.
Shock! Zogby Finds Bias Among College Professors
Posted by Pam
on 7/10/2007
“3, Tofu, how about this bet. We go to a university. For each liberal professor I get to whack you with a tire iron. For each conservative professor you get to whack me. Want to take me up on that?”
=)) =d>
48- “If I was a graduate student going for my pHd in Psychology, I think i would select as a study for my thesis an anaylsis of the classic Liberal mind. Why are they the way they are? Is it mental illness alone, a physical defect in the brain, or both? Why is it that classic, knee-jerk Liberals are unable to reason?”
Classic, ‘knee-jerk Liberals’ do reason, which why saying ‘knee-jerk’ is inaccurate. What a liberal can do which a conservative cannot, is view issues from multiple angles. Converstative think is dull yes/no, black/white, you’re either with us or your with the terrorists thinking. That’s why a liberals first stance is normally not to suggest hitting or killing someone when we hear opinions which go against what we believe.
There are numerious expamples of this in our country, from conservative fundies shooting doctors who perform abortions to the Matthew Sheppard incident.
Mental illness? Look within yourselves first.
5- “Tofu, how about this bet. We go to a university. For each liberal professor I get to whack you with a tire iron. For each conservative professor you get to whack me. Want to take me up on that?
Side bet: Anyone believe we will find a conservative professor before I put Tofu in the hospital with permanent injuries?”
While I don’t normally respond to your ridiculous rantings, this one did intrigue me.
“Liberal” professors aren’t going to “hit” me because it would not be ideologically within their temperaments. Conservatives, on the other hand, who love to be violent, I’m sure we can find many professors of this type who would take a wack at you.
As for your ‘side bet’ as you attempt to permanently injure me, I think you’d be dead before you had the chance. (those mild-mannered liberal professors can kick some ass when the rubber meets the road)
“What a liberal can do which a conservative cannot, is view issues from multiple angles.”
The problem is that this approach, unbounded by reason, logic, or morality, leads to sophistry.
Conservative: The vehicle failed to stop for the stop sign.
Liberal: Should there be a stop sign there? What if there was no stop sign there? What does it mean to stop? What is a stop sign? The stop sign is the real victim…etc., ad nauseum.
Sophistry is what destroyed the world’s first Democracy, Athens.
“Liberal”professors aren’t going to “hit”me because it would not be ideologically within their temperaments.”
You misread what PCD wrote. It would be PCD whacking you for each Lib Professor, NOT the Lib. And I’ve no doubt he is capable of fulfilling his responsibility in this matter…
l-)
55- point noted. And my opinion still stands. PCD is conservative and thus violent and thus would relish a chance to wack someone with a tire iron. His own challange offer proves his violent aspirations.
When it comes to the liberal thought process, I have to agree with Winston Churchill who said ” If you’re not a liberal at 20, you don’t have a heart. If you’re not a conservative at 40, you don’t have a brain.” As for me… Well, honestly on a recent survey I was rated as a liberal libertarian. When it comes to government, I believe that the government that governs least governs best. I’ve seen the level of efficiency in the US government, and I think it is better to leave the money in the hands of the private sector as much as possible. I don’t care what people do in their personal life as long as two conditions are met. They extend me the same courtesy, and don’t expect me to pay for it with my tax dollars. I don’t care about your sexlife, and my gun collection is none of your business. I don’t expect you to pay for my target shooting habit, you shouldn’t expect me to pay for your drug habit. I saw a great t-shirt the other day. It said ” A true liberal is liberal about guns too.” Try wearing that one to a sociology class sometime.
45- “”I say it that way and I mean it that way!â€
How Hilter-esque of you.”
So if it is “Hitler-esque” to express in a clear manner and to not try to find lame excuses for the bad manners or expression style or other people, it could be that you finally discovered the one and only good character attribute of Hitler…
So just to summarize your de facto non-responses to the circumstance that much more muslim civilians were slaughtered by US/allied military than vice versa:
You don’t care… Why should you??? Those muslims are no human beings- they are animals! 8-x 8-x 8-x
PS: Ted could you think of other aspects of being “Hitler-esque”?
“So if it is “Hitler-esque”to express in a clear manner and to not try to find lame excuses for the bad manners or expression style or other people,”
No- it is Hitler-esque of you to accuse a person of being something without really delving into the meat of what they really are. 6 million people were put to death because of this.
“So just to summarize your de facto non-responses to the circumstance that much more muslim civilians were slaughtered by US/allied military than vice versa…”
I didn’t say that at all you goose-stepping git. I said more people are killed by the terrorist than by an military force in Iraq, and that is clearly supported at even Iaqibodycount.com, a clearly anti-Iraqi War website.
here is EXACTLY what I said. Perhaps you should re-read it: “No, you refered to tens of thousands of Iraqis who are “killed by military action on their own ground”implying that the US military killed them when the vast majority of those victims have NOT been killed by any military force, but by terrorists”
If you are going to “summarize (my) defacto non-responses” at least have the commomn courtesy to do so accurately.
To your “summarization”, that was never even implied at all. You are either pulling a Michael Moore twisting of fact once again, or just are having comprehension issues.
“PS: Ted could you think of other aspects of being “Hitler-esqueâ€?”
Sure.
You obviously like the governement to control everything and have freedoms denied to other people even to the point of allowing them to die. You are a bigot to the nth degree, but deny it by cloaking your bigotrty in a shroud of excuses. (ie, when Hitler said the probelem with everything in Germany was the Jews
Regarding this whole convervative/liberal tendancy to violence/non-violence I have to say I’ve rarely seen such an idiotic conversation.
60- ” I said more people are killed by the terrorist than by an military force in Iraq, and that is clearly supported at even Iaqibodycount.com, a clearly anti-Iraqi War website.”
…which is the result of the likely to be expected civil war, that the attack on Iraq created! If you set fire to the fuse of a bomb- who is responsible for the explosion? You or the bomb?!
PS: The links on http://www.iraqibodycount.com point nowhere…
“:which is the result of the likely to be expected civil war, that the attack on Iraq created! If you set fire to the fuse of a bomb- who is responsible for the explosion? You or the bomb?!”
Incorrect- it isn’t the result of a civil war, but the result of terrorist attacks. Sending a homocide bomber into an area with children is NOT the act of someone engaged in a civil war.
”
PS: The links on http://www.iraqibodycount.com point nowhere: ”
Sorry…www.iraqibodycount.org
64- “Incorrect- it isn’t the result of a civil war, but the result of terrorist attacks. Sending a homocide bomber into an area with children is NOT the act of someone engaged in a civil war.”
Call it terrorism or whatever you want. fact is that before the war, there were not hundreds of innocent people dying each week. Your people took over the job (without anybody requesting) to bring freedom and peace to Iraq and you screwed it up! As long as Saddam murdered people it were his victims alone- now YOU are partly responsible for what happens! You opened Pandora’s box!
PS: http://www.iraqibodycount.org is down/empty as well…
“Call it terrorism or whatever you want. fact is that before the war, there were not hundreds of innocent people dying each week.”
That’s a falsehood also. Before the war there were hundred of innocent people dying each week, and many by the same people.
There is a distinct differene between civil war and terrorism, so I refuse to dismiss you “call it whatever you want” statment.
“As long as Saddam murdered people it were his victims alone- now YOU are partly responsible for what happens! You opened Pandora’s box!”
So, to you the murdering was okay as long as it was Sadaam doing it? Geez, there’s that Hilter-esque sense of right and wrong again!.
That said, I would like you to explain to me how we are responsible for terrorists killing innocent people? Pandora’s box was wide open long before we went into the area. The difference between you and I is that I am willing to fight for other people’s lives, freedoms and rights while you are content to watch people die as long as you enjoy your own freedom.
That is the bottom line here Matthias.
Seems to me this is a commonality that you have with the German people of the 30′s and 40′s.
http://www.iraqbodycount.org/
“The difference between you and I is that I am willing to fight for other people’s lives, freedoms and rights while you are content to watch people die as long as you enjoy your own freedom.
That is the bottom line here Matthias. ”
One note Matthias: Have you ever considered the irony of the posaition you take? Really, if America would have done in the 40′s what you want us to do now in the middle east and the Global War on Terror then you’d in all likihood be wearing a brownshirt and bootstraps now.
I’m an isolationist, and even I see that.
Finally it worked with that link (#68) and what a terrific site it is! Download the list with names of victims and you will see, that the majority was killed by (non-terrorist) military action and that they were no soldiers!
“So, to you the murdering was okay as long as it was Sadaam doing it?”
That is not what I am saying, but your people entitled yourself to be the saviors of Iraq, and apart from the fact that there is a remarkable amount of Iraqui people who didn’t want to be “liberated” at all, you as the ones who took over a job were responsible for doing it properly and also you had to seriously concider all risks BEFORE taking action! War is not a game like domino, where one can start something and see how it evolves!
“The difference between you and I is that I am willing to fight for other people’s lives, freedoms and rights”
And that is your fundamental misunderstanding in Iraq: Many people there regard the US military as the occupiers, that they want to get rid of! And that is why people like Mike Kilo hates Muslims in general- because even those of which he thinks that they are supposed to grateful are not!
69- “Really, if America would have done in the 40′s what you want us to do now”
As often as I hear this argument on this site, I would suggest to make it part of your constitution… with the same logic you could say: Hey look how Hiroshima helped to end a war- so let’s drop the bomb at anybody who does play things our way and there will be peace everywhere!
And with the same logic I could say: there is a country, that attacks one country after another, that tortures people, that occupies foreign countries, that spies all over the world, that has more weapons of mass destruction than any other country in the world, with a president that deceives its people, a guy that frees his convicted partners in crime, a country that executes death row, a country that brings civil wars to other countries or lets other “liberated” countries become the drug export nation #1…
How would you call such a country, if it was not your own? “Hitler-esque”? That is how things sound like, if you simplify them to the bare bones…
“Finally it worked with that link (#68) and what a terrific site it is! Download the list with names of victims and you will see, that the majority was killed by (non-terrorist) military action and that they were no soldiers!”
That’s a false representation. They do not state who killed the civilian victims. While the victims were civilian, but the vast majority were killed by terrorist. As an example, here are the last 10 entries:
drive-by shooting
car bomb
gunfire, executed, tortured
gunfire, executed
drive-by shooting
car bomb, possibly suicide
concussion grenades, gunfire
gunfire
gunfire, executed
gunfire
Of these incidents, only 3 are possibly from the military, the ones listed as gunfire, as the military do not do drive by shootings, executiuons, etc.
Meanwhile, if you examine the targets, that com,pletely riules out our miltary as we do not as an example target “market area where labourers gather”.
“apart from the fact that there is a remarkable amount of Iraqui people who didn’t want to be “liberated”at all…”
The only people who wanted this were those who were in power- the Baathist and Sunni that ruled the area. When we arrived, we were greeted as liberators.
“you as the ones who took over a job were responsible for doing it properly and also you had to seriously concider all risks BEFORE taking action!”
And this is were we agree. This far, I am NOT happy with Bush during the occupation, and that IS our responsibilty. Every war goes poorly until it goes well. However, the answer is NOT to leave the area and not finish the job- it is our moral obligation to do so and to see this through until finsihed.
“As often as I hear this argument on this site, I would suggest to make it part of your constitution: with the same logic you could say: Hey look how Hiroshima helped to end a war- so let’s drop the bomb at anybody who does play things our way and there will be peace everywhere!”
That a disconnect of logic on your part. Dropping a bomb in Iraqi like we did in Japan would not save lives in the long run.
“And with the same logic I could say: there is a country, that attacks one country after another, that tortures people, with a president that deceives its people, a guy that frees his convicted partners in crime,, a country that brings civil wars to other countries or lets other “liberated”countries become the drug export nation #1:”
Defend these accusations. Most allare flasehoods, and I left them intact in the quote.
Are you so ignornat Matthias, or just a liar yourself?
These others I agree with, and really don’t care:
“that occupies foreign countries”
(of course we do- we occupied France and Germany too seemed to turn out well. Occupation, in and of itself, is not wrong. The reason however, can be,
“that spies all over the world”
(okay…so? How is that relevant or even bad?)
“that has more weapons of mass destruction than any other country in the world”
(Again- so? We’ve fully demonstarted that we are responsible enough to have these and that we are the balance agaiinst other countries who would readily use their if we didn’t have them)
“a country that executes death row..”
(Rightfully so, with due process and in a humane manner)
“How would you call such a country, if it was not your own? “Hitler-esqueâ€? That is how things sound like, if you simplify them to the bare bones:”
The fact here Matthias is that you’ve lied about many of those accusation. You are dealing in ad hominem attacks.
However given everything said and strwamed through logic and truth, I would not call such a country Hilter-esque.
I would call them a positive force in the world.
I’ve challenged you to back your accusations. Seeing that no one has been able to do so thus far, I see you cowering away into a corner also.
“The only people who wanted this were those who were in power- the Baathist and Sunni that ruled the area. When we arrived, we were greeted as liberators.”
And I guess, the shiites (like quite the rest of Iran) are also very happy that you removed Saddam… 8-|
Not to mention Al Quaeda, who had no chance to infitrate Iraq during Saddam’s reign… 8-|
Or the curds, who now have a better area of retreat for their PKK-terrorists coming from their assaults in Turkey 8-|
What a huge happy family! I really don’t understand how some of those people cannot like the US military?! 8-|
Do you every deal in fact matthais?
“And I guess, the shiites (like quite the rest of Iran) are also very happy that you removed Saddam:”
Yes they were, as they were one of the groups that Sadaam had tortured and executed on a regular basis
“Not to mention Al Quaeda, who had no chance to infitrate Iraq during Saddam’s reign:”
Yes, because this is a great excuse to keep Sadaam in power. “To keep al Queda out, let’s allow Sadaam to kill another half million people.”. Besides, it is a fact that Sadaam had ties with al Queda anyway (he also had a history of working with other terrorist organizations). The relationship, while not fully developed, stiill existed.
“Or the curds, who now have a better area of retreat for their PKK-terrorists coming from their assaults in Turkey.”
You are completely ignorant on this topic. I wonder where you get your information from?
Actually, they are “Kurds” not “curds”. The Kurdish area was mostly independant before we got there. Our arrival had little impact on what the do in Turkey, but more so their southern border. Or are you claimimng that Sadaam served as a buffer between the Kurds and Turkey?
Matthias, you have to do better than this. I’ve rebuffed sucessfully every comment you’ve made. Please do better in the future.
I’ve got a question for you Matthias:
You say your wife is a Muslim, but my understanding is that a Muslim woman can only marry a Muslim man.
Are you Muslim, or is your wife not follow the laws Islam, or is there something I am missing (such as another branch of Islam other than Shi’ite or Sunni)? Can you clarify this please?
GOOD CATCH, TED! I heard just this morning that a Muslim woman is expressly prohibited, under penalty of death, from marrying a non-Muslim!
You got some ‘splainen to do, Matthias!
Post #76: =d>
76- My wife is a muslima and I am a christian. It was quite a “fight” between her family and us but in the end “we won”. Unfortunately we were not (yet) able to celebrate a churchly kind of wedding.
Maybe this explains, why I have a very balanced view on both religions.
“Maybe this explains, why I have a very balanced view on both religions” =))=))=))=))
80- Nice, that I contribute to your personal exhilaration.
I must say, that I find few funny aspects about issues that cost thousands of people’s lives… but maybe that is a cultural difference between you and me…
Well Matthias….it just struck me funny. Having read all your posts I walk away with the impression NOT that you understand both religions but that you are close minded, naive and ill informed. That’s why I laughed. Hey, it’s better than getting angry.