Every bill passed by Progressives forces us - Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Federal Taxes that pays for things that most Americans don't want to pay for, like bank bail outs, solar companies that went bankrupt, things like this that have wasted many taxpayers money.
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Do conservatives ever wonder WHY liberalism is prevalent in higher education?
- Thread starter Billy000
- Start date
Every bill passed by Progressives forces us - Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Federal Taxes that pays for things that most Americans don't want to pay for, like bank bail outs, solar companies that went bankrupt, things like this that have wasted many taxpayers money.
Truthmatters
Diamond Member
- May 10, 2007
- 80,182
- 2,272
- 1,283
- Banned
- #402
One problem I find. is that conservatives often have their own history, their own thinking methods, their own sciences, and many other beliefs that differ from from what is taught in most schools. These boards are full of these beliefs. I also think conservatives believe that science, history, biology and those subjects are really decided by political parties and ideology, and not by some type of scientific method.
If conservatives win an election they expect schools to now teach students their beliefs, their sciences, their history, and sadly education just goes on and they cannot understand why no change.
Is this subject really that far over your head? The question is why educators are more liberal than the general population. The fact that conservatives have views that "differ from what is taught in most schools" is, by definition, obvious. Only people who feel that their beliefs are morally superior (i.e., good vs. evil) to those with whom they disagree view this as a "problem."
Not morally superior but more superior in the sense looking for the truth. The truth being that which was subjected to the scientific method at best ,or accepted as the truth by the educated community.
One of the purposes of education is to liberate the mind from old wives tales, from superstition, and have the ability to recognize opinion when used as fact.
the right hates that
Truthmatters
Diamond Member
- May 10, 2007
- 80,182
- 2,272
- 1,283
- Banned
- #403
Good point. The people who call themselves liberals today arent really liberals. Indeed, liberalism is of and pertaining to liberty. So why do they call themselves liberals if they are all too happy to sacrifice individual liberty for collective security? Because progressivism became a bad word when they were found out to be socialists. Read the quote below.
Below is the platform of the democrat Liberal party.
Upton Sinclair: "The American People will take Socialism, but they won't take the label. I certainly proved it in the case of EPIC. Running on the Socialist ticket I got 60,000 votes, and running on the slogan to 'End Poverty in California' I got 879,000. I think we simply have to recognize the fact that our enemies have succeeded in spreading the Big Lie. There is no use attacking it by a front attack, it is much better to out-flank them."
Okay so why is this one individual significant to this discussion? I don't get it. This is one person with his own opinions. He does not speak for liberalism.
We recognize the importance of personal freedom, however, some very specific personal freedoms need to be limited for the benefit of all. To say we don't favor the idea of personal freedom is a massive oversimplification.
Every bill passed by Progressives forces us - Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Federal Taxes that pays for things that most Americans don't want to pay for, like bank bail outs, solar companies that went bankrupt, things like this that have wasted many taxpayers money.
dear idiot you have no proof of your claims
Redfish
Diamond Member
Okay so why is this one individual significant to this discussion? I don't get it. This is one person with his own opinions. He does not speak for liberalism.
We recognize the importance of personal freedom, however, some very specific personal freedoms need to be limited for the benefit of all. To say we don't favor the idea of personal freedom is a massive oversimplification.
Every bill passed by Progressives forces us - Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Federal Taxes that pays for things that most Americans don't want to pay for, like bank bail outs, solar companies that went bankrupt, things like this that have wasted many taxpayers money.
dear idiot you have no proof of your claims
those are not claims, they are facts. liberalism is destroying this country.
When are people like you going to understand that there is a fundamental difference between liberalism and socialism. As a liberal, I completely reject the ideas of socialism and communism. You really need to educate yourself on this matter. If you do not understand these definitions, then you are incapable of making informed opinions.
We do understand that.
They started out calling themselves Progressives. When the people started seeing what they were (socialists) they hijacked the word liberal to hide their ideology of socialistic ideology. Now they are going back to the word Progressive because people are seeing again what they stand for.
No, I really don't think you understand it. Where are you getting this information from? How do you know this is true? Seriously give it some thought. How do you know that what you are saying here is true? Where are your sources? Just because something sounds like it could be true, it doesn't mean that it actually is true.
By reading U.S. History.
I also was in my 20's when the socialist party renamed themselves in 1972.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_Party_(United_States,_1912)
History of the socialist movement in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In 1972, the Socialist Party voted to rename itself as Social Democrats, USA (SDUSA) by a vote of 73 to 34 at its December Convention; its National Chairmen were Bayard Rustin, a peace and civil-rights leader, and Charles S. Zimmerman, an officer of the International Ladies Garment Workers Union (ILGWU). In 1973, Michael Harrington resigned from SDUSA and founded the Democratic Socialist Organizing Committee (DSOC), which attracted many of his followers from the former Socialist Party. The same year, David McReynolds and others from the pacifist and immediate-withdrawal wing of the former Socialist Party formed the Socialist Party, USA.
Bayard Rustin was the national chairperson of SDUSA during the 1970s. SDUSA sponsored a biannual conference that featured discussions, for which SDUSA invited outside academic, political, and labor-union leaders. These meetings also functioned as reunions for political activists and intellectuals, some of whom worked together for decades. SDUSA also published position papers.
Redfish
Diamond Member
Question for your liberal posters:
Why would you not support an educational system that presented all viewpoints equally and then let the students draw their own conclusions?
Why do you support indoctrination rather than education?
Why would you not support an educational system that presented all viewpoints equally and then let the students draw their own conclusions?
Why do you support indoctrination rather than education?
Okay so why is this one individual significant to this discussion? I don't get it. This is one person with his own opinions. He does not speak for liberalism.
We recognize the importance of personal freedom, however, some very specific personal freedoms need to be limited for the benefit of all. To say we don't favor the idea of personal freedom is a massive oversimplification.
Every bill passed by Progressives forces us - Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Federal Taxes that pays for things that most Americans don't want to pay for, like bank bail outs, solar companies that went bankrupt, things like this that have wasted many taxpayers money.
dear idiot you have no proof of your claims
Have you ever worked TM?
Try to op-out of paying payroll taxes and see how far that gets you.
Try sending back your social Security check and see how that goes. (Hint - not very well).
- Thread starter
- #408
We do understand that.
They started out calling themselves Progressives. When the people started seeing what they were (socialists) they hijacked the word liberal to hide their ideology of socialistic ideology. Now they are going back to the word Progressive because people are seeing again what they stand for.
No, I really don't think you understand it. Where are you getting this information from? How do you know this is true? Seriously give it some thought. How do you know that what you are saying here is true? Where are your sources? Just because something sounds like it could be true, it doesn't mean that it actually is true.
By reading U.S. History.
I also was in my 20's when the socialist party renamed themselves in 1972.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_Party_(United_States,_1912)
History of the socialist movement in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In 1972, the Socialist Party voted to rename itself as Social Democrats, USA (SDUSA) by a vote of 73 to 34 at its December Convention; its National Chairmen were Bayard Rustin, a peace and civil-rights leader, and Charles S. Zimmerman, an officer of the International Ladies Garment Workers Union (ILGWU). In 1973, Michael Harrington resigned from SDUSA and founded the Democratic Socialist Organizing Committee (DSOC), which attracted many of his followers from the former Socialist Party. The same year, David McReynolds and others from the pacifist and immediate-withdrawal wing of the former Socialist Party formed the Socialist Party, USA.
Bayard Rustin was the national chairperson of SDUSA during the 1970s. SDUSA sponsored a biannual conference that featured discussions, for which SDUSA invited outside academic, political, and labor-union leaders. These meetings also functioned as reunions for political activists and intellectuals, some of whom worked together for decades. SDUSA also published position papers.
No, you still dont get it. This very specific party you are citing is NOT the liberal party nor is it the major democratic party.
Wicked Jester
Libsmackin'chef
Perhaps its because liberalism represents intellectual ideas? Perhaps something can be said why political scientists tend to be liberal.
Wicked Jester
Libsmackin'chef
My god, woman,....just where in the hell were you educated?The people on the right we talk to here are unsavable.
They will never admitt when they have been beaten by the facts.
They embrace lies and hate this countrys government.
They are here to help Grover distroy this country.
What we do is keep them from having a place to lie without challenge.
its the town hall and they just will lie lie lie to whomever listens.
someone has to be standing at the town hall who is willing to not let their lies stand unchallenged.
its a never ending job
Because that/those school/s need to be shuttered.
Seriously, you are the poster child of this nations failing public school system, and you fully make the case for much needed Charter Schools, and Voucher Programs.
Anybody looking for proof that liberals have destroyed this nations public school system, need look no further then racist TM's posts.
DGS49
Diamond Member
Liberals have a hard time with reality. They think that "corporations" are evil because all they want to do is make money. They don't want to get involved in any activity where they actually have to produce something, or where they can fail. They are the kind of people who sponsor youth sports leagues where they don't keep score, so that no one's feelings will be hurt.
What better environment for such people than a university?
Remember that during the Vietnam War (before the draft lottery) you could virtually assure yourself that you would never be drafted if you remained in school, or better yet, if you became a teacher. Thus, the community of academics and teachers is one that is skewed dramatically toward the sort of person for whom military service was totally abhorrent.
Conservatives enjoy competition; we want to be judged quantitatively; we want to be accountable for our own activities. The academic world is the LAST place where someone like this wants to end up, where you are basically waiting for someone to retire or die for your next promotion.
This conservative never, ever wonders why liberalism is prevalent in higher education. The reasons are obvious.
What better environment for such people than a university?
Remember that during the Vietnam War (before the draft lottery) you could virtually assure yourself that you would never be drafted if you remained in school, or better yet, if you became a teacher. Thus, the community of academics and teachers is one that is skewed dramatically toward the sort of person for whom military service was totally abhorrent.
Conservatives enjoy competition; we want to be judged quantitatively; we want to be accountable for our own activities. The academic world is the LAST place where someone like this wants to end up, where you are basically waiting for someone to retire or die for your next promotion.
This conservative never, ever wonders why liberalism is prevalent in higher education. The reasons are obvious.
Newby
Does it get any better?
- Jan 6, 2009
- 9,094
- 1,749
- 190
Perhaps its because liberalism represents intellectual ideas? Perhaps something can be said why political scientists tend to be liberal.
Caue they can't handle living in the real world?
Question for your liberal posters:
Why would you not support an educational system that presented all viewpoints equally and then let the students draw their own conclusions?
Because not all view points are created equal?
Why do you support indoctrination rather than education?
And yet it didn't work on y
u, right?
bendog
Diamond Member
Girls in graduate school.
Wyatt earp
Diamond Member
- Apr 21, 2012
- 69,975
- 16,396
- 2,180
The people on the right we talk to here are unsavable.
They will never admitt when they have been beaten by the facts.
They embrace lies and hate this countrys government.
They are here to help Grover distroy this country.
What we do is keep them from having a place to lie without challenge.
its the town hall and they just will lie lie lie to whomever listens.
someone has to be standing at the town hall who is willing to not let their lies stand unchallenged.
its a never ending job
What the fuck is this shit? Lmao, you do know its the oppisite dont ya? liberals are like little kids wanting a new toy and conservitives are the adults that have to say "no" get a job first to pay for it..
No, I really don't think you understand it. Where are you getting this information from? How do you know this is true? Seriously give it some thought. How do you know that what you are saying here is true? Where are your sources? Just because something sounds like it could be true, it doesn't mean that it actually is true.
By reading U.S. History.
I also was in my 20's when the socialist party renamed themselves in 1972.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_Party_(United_States,_1912)
History of the socialist movement in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In 1972, the Socialist Party voted to rename itself as Social Democrats, USA (SDUSA) by a vote of 73 to 34 at its December Convention; its National Chairmen were Bayard Rustin, a peace and civil-rights leader, and Charles S. Zimmerman, an officer of the International Ladies Garment Workers Union (ILGWU). In 1973, Michael Harrington resigned from SDUSA and founded the Democratic Socialist Organizing Committee (DSOC), which attracted many of his followers from the former Socialist Party. The same year, David McReynolds and others from the pacifist and immediate-withdrawal wing of the former Socialist Party formed the Socialist Party, USA.
Bayard Rustin was the national chairperson of SDUSA during the 1970s. SDUSA sponsored a biannual conference that featured discussions, for which SDUSA invited outside academic, political, and labor-union leaders. These meetings also functioned as reunions for political activists and intellectuals, some of whom worked together for decades. SDUSA also published position papers.
No, you still dont get it. This very specific party you are citing is NOT the liberal party nor is it the major democratic party.
Yes it is, they have the same exact ideology and they have hi-jacked the word liberal (now going back to the word progressive) and they stand for the exact opposite of true liberalism. They are oppressors and not liberators.
The have also hi-jacked the party and now control the whole party.
This is why over 800,000 have left the party since 2011.
- Thread starter
- #417
By reading U.S. History.
I also was in my 20's when the socialist party renamed themselves in 1972.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_Party_(United_States,_1912)
History of the socialist movement in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In 1972, the Socialist Party voted to rename itself as Social Democrats, USA (SDUSA) by a vote of 73 to 34 at its December Convention; its National Chairmen were Bayard Rustin, a peace and civil-rights leader, and Charles S. Zimmerman, an officer of the International Ladies Garment Workers Union (ILGWU). In 1973, Michael Harrington resigned from SDUSA and founded the Democratic Socialist Organizing Committee (DSOC), which attracted many of his followers from the former Socialist Party. The same year, David McReynolds and others from the pacifist and immediate-withdrawal wing of the former Socialist Party formed the Socialist Party, USA.
Bayard Rustin was the national chairperson of SDUSA during the 1970s. SDUSA sponsored a biannual conference that featured discussions, for which SDUSA invited outside academic, political, and labor-union leaders. These meetings also functioned as reunions for political activists and intellectuals, some of whom worked together for decades. SDUSA also published position papers.
No, you still dont get it. This very specific party you are citing is NOT the liberal party nor is it the major democratic party.
Yes it is, they have the same exact ideology and they have hi-jacked the word liberal (now going back to the word progressive) and they stand for the exact opposite of true liberalism. They are oppressors and not liberators.
The have also hi-jacked the party and now control the whole party.
This is why over 800,000 have left the party since 2011.
No, those two parties I mentioned in my last post do not exist anymore. It's convenient you left out the wiki article to modern liberalism. If you were to read that article - and i suggest you should - you will see that the socialist movement is NOT the same thing as modern liberalism.
Wyatt earp
Diamond Member
- Apr 21, 2012
- 69,975
- 16,396
- 2,180
No, you still dont get it. This very specific party you are citing is NOT the liberal party nor is it the major democratic party.
Yes it is, they have the same exact ideology and they have hi-jacked the word liberal (now going back to the word progressive) and they stand for the exact opposite of true liberalism. They are oppressors and not liberators.
The have also hi-jacked the party and now control the whole party.
This is why over 800,000 have left the party since 2011.
No, those two parties I mentioned in my last post do not exist anymore. It's convenient you left out the wiki article to modern liberalism. If you were to read that article - and i suggest you should - you will see that the socialist movement is NOT the same thing as modern liberalism.
you do know anyone can edit wiki and make stuff up right? you need a better source then wiki in your debates. just saying..........
- Thread starter
- #419
Yes it is, they have the same exact ideology and they have hi-jacked the word liberal (now going back to the word progressive) and they stand for the exact opposite of true liberalism. They are oppressors and not liberators.
The have also hi-jacked the party and now control the whole party.
This is why over 800,000 have left the party since 2011.
No, those two parties I mentioned in my last post do not exist anymore. It's convenient you left out the wiki article to modern liberalism. If you were to read that article - and i suggest you should - you will see that the socialist movement is NOT the same thing as modern liberalism.
you do know anyone can edit wiki and make stuff up right? you need a better source then wiki in your debates. just saying..........
Um he used these sources. Not me.
No, you still dont get it. This very specific party you are citing is NOT the liberal party nor is it the major democratic party.
Yes it is, they have the same exact ideology and they have hi-jacked the word liberal (now going back to the word progressive) and they stand for the exact opposite of true liberalism. They are oppressors and not liberators.
The have also hi-jacked the party and now control the whole party.
This is why over 800,000 have left the party since 2011.
No, those two parties I mentioned in my last post do not exist anymore. It's convenient you left out the wiki article to modern liberalism. If you were to read that article - and i suggest you should - you will see that the socialist movement is NOT the same thing as modern liberalism.
Oh yes they are alive and well, just rebranded.
You think that they will call themselves socialists? They would never get elected if they did, and they know it.
Maxine Waters slipped one time and almost said socialist, she corrected herself.
You know that this was written by lefties.
Did you read wiki modern liberalism?
Right at the top is says
It has its roots in Theodore Roosevelt's New Nationalism, Woodrow Wilson's New Freedom, Franklin D. Roosevelt's New Deal, Harry S. Truman's Fair Deal, John F. Kennedy's New Frontier, and Lyndon B. Johnson's Great Society
They are the same Progressives as back then and the same as the socialist party now.
Similar threads
- Replies
- 13
- Views
- 167
- Replies
- 76
- Views
- 769
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 48
- Views
- 89
- Replies
- 79
- Views
- 366
- Replies
- 267
- Views
- 988
- Replies
- 544
- Views
- 3K
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 8518
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 484
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-