<p>I am bored so I will post another thought. Has anyone given consideration to the fact that party affiliation does not matter, that regardless of who is president the world will go on, people will die and then people will not care about those who came before them.
They will form new arguements and new party’s and engage in similar debates over different topics, but that too will be in vain, it just seems the whole political climate is stupid and the party system is the largest production of factions (which according to Federalist 10) is directly anemic to government and a neccessary consequence therein.</p>
<p>it’s funny…
ccolleges are supposed to have a liberal bias
and i’m a liberal terrified to go to a conservative one…
i don’t mind being challenged…i just can’t handle conservatives…(no offense)
so, i think your son is completely legit in not wanting a liberal school.</p>
<p>From mathmom:
</p>
<p>mathmom, you remind me of the famous quote from Pauline Kael:</p>
<p>[Out</a> Of Touch Elitists | The Talent Show](<a href=“http://www.thetalentshow.org/2005/06/21/out-of-touch-elitists/]Out”>http://www.thetalentshow.org/2005/06/21/out-of-touch-elitists/)</p>
<p>Is it possible that the reason you don’t know anyone who has gotten more conservative over time is that you, like Ms. Kael, have lacked diversity of point of view in the people you associate with?</p>
<p>There are plenty of people who have grown more conservative over time. I’m one of them. After burning my draft card during the Vietnam War and demonstrating at the Pentagon ad nauseum, I acted on my convictions and went to work for the federal government in order to help people. It was such a disaster that within two weeks I had converted from socialist to libertarian. Within a year I read Free to Choose and although I’ve often varied my position slightly, I’ve never gone back to socialism and statism.</p>
<p>If you are open minded and would like to meet people who have grown more conservative over time check out the following:</p>
<p>[The</a> New York City Junto](<a href=“http://www.nycjunto.com/]The”>http://www.nycjunto.com/)</p>
<p>[The</a> New Criterion](<a href=“404 | The New Criterion”>Events | The New Criterion)</p>
<p>[Manhattan</a> Institute](<a href=“http://www.manhattan-institute.org/]Manhattan”>http://www.manhattan-institute.org/)</p>
<p>All of these groups have regular meetings in New York City. They are all very open to newcomers. Most of the members are moderates or conservatives. My guess is that the vast majority were leftists when they were younger.</p>
<p>It’s certainly possible. I hang out with a bunch of pretty conservative guys in the weight room at the local Y. I just don’t think they were more liberal when they were younger. Certainly many 1960s radicals became more conservative, but I come from a slightly later generation, we didn’t start off radical.</p>
<p>Well, maybe you had a really great youth. I know that there were a lot of things I didn’t in my younger years that I really liked. But I definitely wouldn’t want to see my kids doing them. And just about every psychology and sociology class I’ve ever taken (1st major was psych); discussed how our norms, values, morals, etc… are continuously changing. Maybe not every belief and facet in our lives, but generally speaking, we are always learning and changing our position. As such, the youngest and oldest generations tend to be more liberal than the middle generations. The youngest is use to being taken care of, plus their mortality isn’t usually in question. The older generations are usually in need of being taken care of again and they are coming to terms with their mortality. The middle generations are working and stressing more. They’ve learned from many of their mistakes. They want to pass on that knowledge to their kids. Because finances are much more important to them, they have a tendency of becoming more conservative in many more of their opinions. But then again, what the hell does college know.</p>
<p>
I essentially agree with this … even the worst of social policies and financial policies will eventualy fade way. Unfortunately foreign policy is the one area where I do not think this thought holds … poor decisions by an administration can raise tensions, cause wars, and ruin the lives of millions … and both republican and democratic presidents have proven this to be unfortunately true.</p>
<p>Re people getting more conservative over time: I don’t know about mathmom, but I limited my statement to social conservatism, i.e., not economics (including free markets vs. statism) or foreign policy. I know lots of people who got more conservative over time on those fronts, starting with me. But I don’t know anyone who has gone from supporting gay rights to opposing them, for example. That’s an area where I have gotten more radicalized, even over the past few years. I used to think it was enough to remove overt persecution, but as I see the effect of legal inequality on the lives of my friends, and as they have challenged my satisfaction with the status quo, I have come to believe that it’s not enough just to eliminate hate crimes and employment discrimination.</p>
<p>Geeps20, back to your original question. My daughter is now a senior, and has 10 applications out. She is conservative (socially and politically), rather shy, brilliant 
and was looking for a “classical” education. When we were searching for colleges, we looked into the following, and here is a sampling of what we found, speaking on both conservative social and political issues (similar to the Horowitz book I mentioned above?):</p>
<p>What is the core requirement of the college? Is it strong, or can, for example, a class requirement be fulfilled with a course on feminism instead of the Constitution?
What majors are available? Is there an emphasis on majors such as Queer Studies? At some LAC’s we researched, one can graduate with a degree in History without ever taking an American History course.
What are the required “freshman seminars”? You wouldn’t believe some of the offerings.
Does the school seem at times more publically concerned with things such as “gender-neutral” bathrooms, at the risk of offending those who might be gender-confused, than course content and offerings?
What is the dorm layout? Co-ed buildings, halls, floors, rooms, or bathrooms?
What types of organizations are active on campus?
Is there a required “tolerance/diversity” training course for incoming freshman?</p>
<p>If possible, visit the campuses. Look at the bulletin boards in the student center. Go to the bookstore and look at the required texts. For example, at one college, the required readings for an advanced English Composition course were unbelievably liberally-biased. Read the school newspapers.</p>
<p>This board is a great resource. We found current students who were willing to share their experiences with us. One student I spoke with, a conservative at a very liberal ivy, said he loved debate and thrived in the atmosphere. My daughter, however, is more of a debater on paper, and we are looking for an atmosphere where she can feel comfortable socially, and not stifled or ridiculed. Every kid is different, so I really think an assessment of your child’s personality is important. Even at highly-liberal LAC’s, if the student is up for it, they can pick and choose their courses and stay away from professors or classes that are politically charged.</p>
<p>kentuckymom, your list interests me, because if I were in your shoes I might look at some of the same factors, except backwards:</p>
<p>Strong core vs. weak distribution, traditional majors vs. weird majors, far-out freshman seminars – In some cases, what you may be seeing is devices that effective sort the students (and faculty) by political preference. If there is a strong core, and everyone has to take it, then I would predict that it will be controlled by the liberal faculty majority, and perhaps dominated by the liberal student majority. If there are choices, or no core at all, then all parts of the political spectrum can have their own bits of turf. In terms of educational philosophy, I might expect conservative students to be drawn to the idea of a strong core, but in terms of reality conservative students may well be more satisfied at a college that lets them populate the traditional courses and lets the students who want to learn Queer Studies take other classes.</p>
<p>Co-ed floors, bathrooms? If you really care, that’s going to restrict college choices a lot. Co-ed rooms? A sign of political correctness, surely, but also mainly a symbolic sop to a hypothetical problem. I can’t pretend to be conservative, but if I were, unless I were an Orthodox Jew or a Wahhabist Muslim, co-edness would be very low on the list of things I cared about.</p>
<p>I agree with reading the school newspaper, but read a range of other student publications, too. If you don’t you could miss the usual evidence of a vibrant conservative student culture.</p>
<p>Diversity training? Have you found a college without it? Even I can agree that these can get awfully silly. But one of the reasons it exists is because even conservatives agree that when you bring together students from different backgrounds and make them live and work cheek-by-jowl with less supervision than they are used to, it helps to lay down some basic ground rules about behavior and respect. (When all you were doing was mixing boys from Andover, Exeter, and Groton, and sticking the occasional public school kid from Stuy or, more likely, New Trier, into one of their rooms, this was not such a big concern.) If one called it “Politeness Training” or “Good Manners”, it wouldn’t be so objectionable, and the content would not be very different.</p>
<p>If you really follow those rules, it would box you into a world of religiously affiliated colleges, and you don’t need the rules to identify them. If that’s not your intent, and you are trying to decide where among mainstream/selective colleges a conservative student would best thrive, I’m not certain those rules will tell you what you want to know.</p>
<p>editing post</p>
<p>Ive been away for a few days, so I apologize if Im not in step with where this conversation stands right now.</p>
<p>Also, Ill reiterate that while the topic of liberal bias on campus is a concern of mine, as a parent of one current college freshman and one high school senior who is awaiting responses from colleges shes applied to, its not number one on my list of criteria for selecting colleges for my kids. Higher on the list are the more conventional things like academic rigor/reputation of the school, a solid curriculum in my kids areas of interest, size, location (i.e., city vs. rural, that kind of thing), cost, availability of extracurricular activities my kids like, etc. </p>
<p>=====</p>
<p>The evidence of Liberal dominance and oppression of opposing views on college campuses is overwhelming and undeniable. (See excerpts below from surveys and articles).</p>
<p>The problem goes well beyond questions about what a professor should or should not say in a classroom. A deeper examination reveals that the issue is much more wide ranging, subtle, and insidious than that. </p>
<p>Tobin and Weinberg (survey #1, below) point out that Liberals are campus leaders and decision makers. They decide which classes are required (or not) for academic majors. They decide which classes are taught and which books are used in those classrooms. They determine the tone and the philosophical approach (i.e., agenda) toward the subjects they teach. They determine what research is done on campus and how it is done. They are our kids academic and career advisors. They are the supposed experts that are called upon by communities and media for opinions and insights about politics and the world. </p>
<p>Based on their survey, Tobin and Weinberg observe that a dominant political ideology and behavior, seeping into teaching and research, corrupts the very ideal of higher education. It cheapens what the university is about and what it can achieve. Vigorous and rigorous debate, opposing views, challenging conventional wisdom, all grounded in the theory and data of accepted norms in a field are what enrich higher education. Ratios of 10-to-1 and 44-to-16 in favor of any group on campus limit that melting pot of ideas, allowing faculty to largely agree with each other, while tinkering at the margins about trivial details, tangents, or insignificant findings. Groupthink strangles the heart and soul of the ideal of the liberal university. They go on to say that college faculty are supposed to provide a broad range of analytical tools, intellectual paradigms, and approaches to addressing problems in American society and around the world. Can faculty think creatively, when they clearly operate confined within their own ideological box?</p>
<p>=====</p>
<p>When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging. - Will Rogers</p>
<p>I find much of the debate on this thread to be enlightening and entertaining. Ive read much from both sides that is thoughtful, rational, and well supported.</p>
<p>But some, I repeat <em>some</em> of the posts by liberals on this thread strike me as being apologist, or in denial; as tinkering at the margins about trivial details, tangents, or insignificant findings. (Note that I said “posts”, not “people”.)</p>
<p>On top of that, I cant help thinking With the number of Liberals in positions of power and authority on college campuses for decades now, and with the liberal sympathy for equality, commitment to tolerance, even for those who do not tolerate you, and appreciation of openness, one would think that higher education in America would be the model of openness and diversity. (Quotes are from The Future of Liberalism by Alan Wolfe, Knopf Publishing Group, (February 3, 2009)). </p>
<p>But that simply doesnt square with what the preponderance of evidence shows. In fact, the evidence shows that the opposite is true. </p>
<p>So I think the deniers and apologists of liberal bias on this thread - and elsewhere, for that matter - should stop digging. They should stop defending the indefensible. Especially since what theyre defending is the opposite of what they claim as their core beliefs, or dispositions, as Alan Wolfe calls them. Instead, they should walk the talk of liberalism. They should work to replace the faux diversity that exists on many campuses today with a real one. </p>
<p>=====</p>
<p>For those of you who might question where Im getting the info I use to support my positions and personal observations, here are links and selected excerpts from a few surveys and articles:</p>
<p>1) Institute for Jewish & Community Research, 2006</p>
<p><a href=“http://jewishresearch.org/PDFs2/FacultySurvey_Web.pdf[/url]”>http://jewishresearch.org/PDFs2/FacultySurvey_Web.pdf</a>
Read the Major Findings, Introduction, and Conclusion of this survey from 2006.</p>
<p>“Only 16% of faculty identify as Republican and 17% as conservative or very conservative versus 46% who identify as Democrat and 48% as liberal or very liberal. This represents just under a 3-to-1 disparity in favor of Democrats and liberals.”</p>
<p>Faculty hold a certain number of beliefs that are pervasive, but not monolithic. They include:
Criticism of many American foreign and domestic policies.
Propensity to blame America for world problems.
A tendency to strongly support international institutions such as the United Nations.
Strong opposition to American unilateralism.
Criticism of big business.
Skepticism about capitalisms ability to help address poverty in developing nations.</p>
<p> one chilling effect of common ideology: most faculty say that, to one degree or another, that their colleagues are reluctant to speak out against what they consider dominant or popular opinions at their institutions. When asked How often, if at all, do you perceive that faculty at your institutions are reluctant to express their views because they might be contrary to the dominant or popular position? 25% said very/fairly often, and another 38% said occasionally, a total of 63%, in an institution where the answer should be zero, or as close to zero as possible.</p>
<p>2) American Council of Trustees and Alumni, November, 2007</p>
<p><a href=“https://www.goacta.org/publications/downloads/PoliticsintheClassroom_.pdf[/url]”>https://www.goacta.org/publications/downloads/PoliticsintheClassroom_.pdf</a></p>
<p>49% of the students at the top 50 colleges and universities say professors frequently inject political comments into their courses, even if they have nothing to do with the subject. Almost one-third-29%-feel they have to agree with the professor’s political views to get a good grade."</p>
<p>3) American Council of Trustees and Alumni, May, 2006</p>
<p><a href=“https://www.goacta.org/publications/downloads/ChurchillFinal.pdf[/url]”>https://www.goacta.org/publications/downloads/ChurchillFinal.pdf</a></p>
<p>“Ever since tenured ethnic studies professor Ward Churchill called victims of 9/11 “little Eichmanns,” he has become the veritable poster boy for extremism in American academe. In this report, ACTA places Churchill in context and finds–based on a broad survey of publicly available materials–that Ward Churchill is not only not alone–he is quite common. The study concludes that throughout American higher education, professors are using their classrooms to push political agendas in the name of teaching students to think critically. The study offers concrete steps colleges and universities can take to ensure a balance between students’ academic freedom to learn and professors’ academic freedom to teach, research, and publish.”</p>
<p>4) The Washington Post, March 29, 2005</p>
<p>[College</a> Faculties A Most Liberal Lot, Study Finds (washingtonpost.com)](<a href=“http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A8427-2005Mar28.html]College”>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A8427-2005Mar28.html)</p>
<p>By their own description, 72 percent of those teaching at American universities and colleges are liberal and 15 percent are conservative, says the study being published this week. The imbalance is almost as striking in partisan terms, with 50 percent of the faculty members surveyed identifying themselves as Democrats and 11 percent as Republicans.</p>
<p>“The findings, by Lichter and fellow political science professors Stanley Rothman of Smith College and Neil Nevitte of the University of Toronto, are based on a survey of 1,643 full-time faculty at 183 four-year schools.”</p>
<p>“Rothman sees the findings as evidence of “possible discrimination” against conservatives in hiring and promotion. Even after factoring in levels of achievement, as measured by published work and organization memberships, “the most likely conclusion” is that “being conservative counts against you,” he said. “It doesn’t surprise me, because I’ve observed it happening.””</p>
<p>5) The Greensboro News-Record, January 25, 2009</p>
<p>[Charles</a> Davenport Jr.: An episode of intolerance at Elon : News-Record.com : Greensboro, North Carolina](<a href=“http://www.news-record.com/content/2009/01/22/article/charles_davenport_jr_an_episode_of_intolerance_at_elon]Charles”>http://www.news-record.com/content/2009/01/22/article/charles_davenport_jr_an_episode_of_intolerance_at_elon)</p>
<p>Innumerable studies have demonstrated that our universities are dominated by liberals. One of the most thorough surveys, undertaken by Neil Gross of Harvard and Solon Simmons of George Mason University, was published in September 2007. </p>
<p>Gross and Simmons surveyed 1,417 full-time professors at 927 institutions and confirmed what most objective observers already knew: that the university campus is a bastion of left-wing thought. According to the study, 62 percent of professors are liberal, and only 19 percent are conservative. In 2004, 78 percent voted for John Kerry, only 20 percent for Bush.</p>
<p>The fact that a professor is liberal, in and of itself, is not a problem. All too often, however, a professor’s political opinions influence the manner in which he interacts with and grades his students. In light of the preponderance of leftist professors, this creates a hostile classroom environment for traditionalist students and, left unchecked, “institutional discrimination” against conservatives.</p>
<p>6) The Smith College Sophian, February 5, 2009</p>
<p>[Smith</a> Speaks: The clandestine conservative voice - Features](<a href=“http://media.www.smithsophian.com/media/storage/paper587/news/2009/02/05/Features/Smith.Speaks.The.Clandestine.Conservative.Voice-3614928.shtml]Smith”>http://media.www.smithsophian.com/media/storage/paper587/news/2009/02/05/Features/Smith.Speaks.The.Clandestine.Conservative.Voice-3614928.shtml)</p>
<p>“I am what I am. I am from the South. I’m a conservative,” [Sarah] Perkins [Class of 11] tells me, explaining that, though she heeds a self-proclaimed responsibility to express her opinions, she still finds the Smith atmosphere to be politically stifling."</p>
<p>“At times, Smith really does shut people out, and there can be tyranny here - where just one opinion is expressed,” she said."</p>
<p>"For Sarah Brock '09, a self-described “working class, down-to-earth, Midwestern conservative” from Flint, Michigan, the experience of being a conservative on Smith campus has been nothing but “painful and stressful.”</p>
<p>“For Brock, a turning point in her education at Smith that caused her to no longer vocalize conservatism took place in an anthropology class during her sophomore year, in which she described being “attacked” by both student and professor for her approbation of a conservative idea. “I view professors’ jobs in that scenario as mediators in that situation, but that’s not what you get here,” she concluded, and from that point on remained silent in the class.”</p>
<p>7) Students for Academic Freedom, November 12, 2007</p>
<p>[The</a> End of the University As We Know It - News - Students For Academic Freedom](<a href=“http://www.studentsforacademicfreedom.org/news/2556/the-end-of-the-university-as-we-know-it]The”>http://www.studentsforacademicfreedom.org/news/2556/the-end-of-the-university-as-we-know-it)</p>
<p>Alarms about the political subversion of the academic curriculum were first sounded more than a quarter of a century ago with such books as The Closing of the American Mind, Illiberal Education and Tenured Radicals. Lesser known but more specifically documented texts followed, including Zealotry and Academic Freedom by Neil Hamilton (1995) and Professing Feminism: Education and Indoctrination in Womens Studies, by Daphne Patai and Noretta Koertge (2003; originally published 1994).</p>
<p>Several organizations including the National Association of Scholars and the American Council of Trustees and Alumni have contributed to these efforts, and in 2003 I began a campaign for an Academic Bill of Rights to protect students from being proselytized in university classrooms.</p>
<p>These activities have been strongly resisted by the teacher unions who have conducted a campaign of reckless ad hominem attacks against their critics, stubbornly denying the facts while avoiding the issues they raise.</p>
<p>8) The Washington Times, February 5, 2009</p>
<p>[Washington</a> Times - Conservative students decry left’s ‘intolerance’](<a href=“http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/feb/05/conservative-student-groups-decry-intolerance-from/]Washington”>http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/feb/05/conservative-student-groups-decry-intolerance-from/)</p>
<p>Last weeks vandalism of crosses used by a conservative group for a pro-life demonstration at George Washington University had underscored conservatives concerns that they are harassed and marginalized on campus.</p>
<p>James Bopp, general counsel for the James Madison Center for Free speech, said that the act was part of an alarming number of acts of intolerance from the left. </p>
<p>Weve seen a lot of suppression on college campuses lately. This takes us down a dark road, Mr. Bopp said.</p>
<p>Robert Lockwood, president of the GW chapter of the Young Americas Foundation, said, Intolerance of conservatism on campus is not a growing trend, it is an accepted norm.</p>
<p>9) Frontpagemag.com, March 21, 2007</p>
<p>[FrontPage</a> Magazine](<a href=“http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=2FEC320F-6785-477D-B6FF-70145CC7A880]FrontPage”>http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=2FEC320F-6785-477D-B6FF-70145CC7A880)</p>
<p>“Politically Correct Death Threats at Georgia Tech”</p>
<p>"This past February, while other Georgia Tech students were exchanging flirtatious Valentines Day notes, Ruth Malhotra received an anonymous letter whose message was anything but amorous: </p>
<p>This Valentines Day, you cannot attack gay marriage. It is about love and you are about hate.
This Valentines Day, you cannot condemn a womans choice. It is about love and you are about hate.
This Valentine Day, you cannot protest the Vagina Monologues. It is about love and you are about hate.
No, this Valentines Day, you will be Raped. Sex is about love and through it you will experience hate. I cannot wait. "</p>
<p>“To find a rape threat in her mailbox was almost a relief to Malhotra after months of receiving death threats. (One of the most charitable, from a fellow student, said, “I really want to choke you, *****.”) As with all the other letters, she turned the vicious Valentine over to the campus police, which added it to the “ongoing investigation” that so far has yielded nothing.”</p>
<p>"Malhotra cant help believing that a university that claims to be more committed to “civility” than any other school in the country and routinely initiates proceedings against students who commit such offenses as smoking in the dorms would certainly have immediately sprung heroically into action if she had been a black, Hispanic, lesbian, or almost any other woman receiving such messages. But she is a conservative activist and almost by definition a thorn in Georgia Techs side. So the schools administration, beginning with president Wayne Clough and working downward to various assistant deans, has sat on its hands while Malhotra endures what her attorney David French calls “a persecution.”</p>
<p>winchester, well done, thank you for your research. I agree with you on every point, except that we did place liberal bias higher on our list, because we felt it had could have an underlying and pervasive effect on the other priorities you mentioned.</p>
<p>winchester, was anyone claiming that there wasn’t a liberal bias on most campuses?..and for logical reasons as it becomes more difficult to hold onto racist, homophobic, and/or sexist views (ie, social conservatism) as one gets more and more educated</p>
<p>KM, why should one have to take an american history course for a degree in history?..and why would one want to avoid a diversity training course?..what views, specifically, would be propagated in a diversity training course that would be so aversive?</p>
<p>liberals are tolerant, yes, but expecting them to be tolerant of intolerant views is oxymoronic…hence, the argument that liberals should be open-minded to close-mindedness is illogical.</p>
<p>Thanks kentuckymom. I half expected to get comments that my post was way too long. I may yet. So yours was a nice surprise.</p>
<p>I can imagine a scenario where bias could be a factor for my daughter too. For example, if she’s having a tough time deciding between two schools that are otherwise equal in her mind, or possibly when it comes down to it she gets cold feet about the pervasive effect you mentioned.</p>
<p>I mean, it’s one thing to be able to shrug off the occasional outlandish statement by a teacher or class mate as happens now at my daughter’s high school. But she can come home to “safety,” so to speak, at the end of each day. It’s another thing entirely to be immersed in an environment for four years.</p>
<p>Mazatl</p>
<p>No, I dont think anyone claims theres not a liberal bias. But many posts do seem to attempt to discredit or trivialize the concern, and in that sense deny its validity. </p>
<p>And, on the subject of bias on campus, the claim that liberals are tolerant is simply untrue.</p>
<p>(partly) Tongue-in-cheek alert!!!</p>
<p>So if expecting liberals to be tolerant of intolerant views is oxymoronic, then it follows that liberals are intolerant of intolerance. And if liberals are intolerant of intolerance, then it also follows that liberals are intolerant of themselves. </p>
<p>Or, in simpler terms, liberals cant stand themselves.</p>
<p>Now, explain to me again about logic?</p>
<p>“But she can come home to “safety,” so to speak, at the end of each day.”</p>
<p>I think “sanity” would have been a better choice of words…lol</p>
<p>Winchester,
Thank you for your posts. I have learned so much from you from this thread. I am not in anyway as articulate or as informed as you, so the best I can do is post this blog from Michael Berube.</p>
<p>[url=<a href=“http://www.michaelberube.com/index.php/weblog/academic_freedom/]Michael”>http://www.michaelberube.com/index.php/weblog/academic_freedom/]Michael</a> B</p>
<p>perhaps we should compile a list of who is tolerant and who is not. the rules are, you can’t use the words ‘liberal’ or ‘conservative’ and you can only speak for yourself. give an example of what you where tolerant of or intolerant of. . .the who’s the why’s and the outcomes. . . the thread has become a soap opera. self reflection (i believe) always reveals flaws in one’s character which, hopefully, can make one more understanding of others. there are so many ‘digs’ at each other’s opinion that it’s become a pointless endeavor to honestly try to help a poster navigate a college choice decision. name calling and labelling is prevalent here, and rarely results in productive discussion. are we trying to help each other or tear each other down? i’m confused.</p>
<p>winchester…great post…the liberal loony bias is worse than I thought.</p>
<p>“winchester, was anyone claiming that there wasn’t a liberal bias on most campuses?.”</p>
<p>actually there were quite a few…and quite a few more downplaying it…</p>