Liberal Bias at Universities

An interesting article that I think holds a lot of truth, esp. at my university in DC.


BlankThe Washington Times

www.washtimes.com (http://www.washtimes.com)


Poll confirms Ivy League liberal tilt

Robert Stacy McCain

THE WASHINGTON TIMES

Published 1/15/2002


More than 80 percent of Ivy League professors who voted in 2000 picked

Democrat Al Gore and just 9 percent voted for Republican George W. Bush,

according to a new survey. The poll by Luntz Research Companies also found

that only 3 percent of the professors describe themselves as Republicans and

that Bill Clinton was the Ivy League faculty's pick for best president of

the past 40 years.


"All that this survey shows is what we already know, that the elite

universities are subsidiaries of the Democratic Party and political left,"

said David Horowitz, president of the Center for the Study of Popular

Culture, which commissioned the poll. Frank Luntz, the Republican pollster

whose firm conducted the survey, said he was "disappointed" to find such

political conformity.


"I think if parents saw the political leanings of these professors, they'd

be upset," he said. "I think universities should insist on the same

diversity in their faculty that they look for in their students . I have a

problem when these faculties have no Republican or

conservative representation at all."


The poll * available on the Web at www.frontpagemagazine.com (http://www.frontpagemagazine.com) * not only

surveyed the professors' general views, but also asked their opinions on

specific issues, and compared those responses with nationwide poll results.

"Issue by issue, the faculty is so out of touch with the American people,"

Mr. Luntz said.


The poll of 151 professors and administrators in social science and liberal

arts faculties at Ivy League universities had a margin of error of plus or

minus 8 percent. The survey found: While Mr. Gore and Mr. Bush each had 48

percent of the popular vote in the last presidential election, 84 percent of

the professors who voted in 2000 picked Mr. Gore * more than nine times as

many as voted for Mr. Bush. Asked to name the best president of the past 40

years, the professors named Mr. Clinton as their top choice, at 26 percent.

Overall, 71 percent of the professors named a Democrat as their pick for

best president, compared with just 8 percent who named a Republican.


Asked their party affiliation, 3 percent of the faculty said they were

Republicans and 57 percent said they were Democrats * a strong contrast to a

recent nationwide survey showing slightly more Americans consider themselves

Republicans (37 percent) than Democrats (34 percent). Forty percent of the

professors support slavery reparations for blacks, compared with 11 percent

of the general public. Ivy League faculty strongly oppose (74 percent to 14

percent) a national missile-defense system, while the American public favors

such a system by 70 percent to 26 percent.


The professors oppose school vouchers 67 percent to 26 percent, while

Americans support vouchers 62 percent to 36 percent. Mary A. Burgan, general

secretary of the American Association of University Professors, questioned

the poll's methodology. "I really worry about a poll like this. That's got

to be a very small sample," said Miss Burgan, formerly an English professor

at Indiana University. Only 12 percent of the survey's respondents were

professors of business or economics, who she said tend to be more

conservative.


"The humanities, from my own experience, tend to be more left than right of

center, but I think that most of them are somewhere near the center," she

said.


But Mr. Horowitz, a former radical turned conservative activist, said the

poll shows "that our universities are less intellectually free than they

were even in the McCarthy era, when I was an Ivy League undergraduate

myself." "Students are being shortchanged," said Dan Flynn of Accuracy in

Academia, a conservative watchdog organization. "They pay $30,000 a year for

an education, but are exposed to only a small range of political and

cultural opinion."


Thor Halvorssen, executive director of the Foundation for Individual Rights

in Education, said the poll shows that while universities "are enamored of

the notion of diversity they really don't believe in the most important

diversity, which is diversity of opinion."


Copyright * 2001 News World Communications, Inc. All rights reserved

I don't think the poll gets at the real issue. There is no question that universities are left wing, but simple liberal v. conservative polling questions don't tell the story I don't think. Before giving you my views on a lot of crap in higher education, you might want to take a look at some of Ayn Rand's non-fiction stuff concerning problems in education. There are various collections of her articles. I think you will see her predicting a lot of the current problems you see. This was 30-40 years ago. Don't be scared away by negative preconceptions of her philosophy and see what she has to say about higher education.


The most disturbing thing in the poll was how highly Clinton was rated. Not even liberals can think this guy was a good president. What did he do? This leads me to wonder about professors' basic competence. Oh wait, I've been wondering about that since I went to college.


Also, the quote about diversity by the conservative guy was stupid. Not to sound like Sklansky, but can you see why?

So what's your point? Did you think Universities would be havens for capitalists and corporate raiders?


I'm not going to get into a pissing contest, but there is a lot of misinformation in this article. Since you are a student, maybe you should research some of the claims.

One would expect university professors to vote Democratic. People who are intelligent, highly educated and well-read, and who don't have a vested interest in Republican policies that line their pocketbooks would tend to vote Democratic.


As for Clinton being voted the best President in the past 40 years, look at the competition:


Kennedy: made Clinton's character look akin to that of Ghandi


Johnson: made Clinton's character look akin to that of Ghandi


Nixon: made Clinton's character look akin to that on Ghandi


Ford: played too many football games without his helmet


Carter: 18% interest rates, killer aquatic rabbits, a national malaise and brother Billy


Reagan: Sorry, but he was dumb before he was sick.


Bush Sr.: Read his lips


Anyway, the Washington Times and David Horowitz are hardly paragons of unbiased news. They are definitely right wing. Horowitz is a particularly ugly case.


As for the stupid quote from the conservative guy (is there any other kind?), I'll leave it for others to explain.

should be a haven for robber barons...go commodores...lol..gl

"Carter: 18% interest rates, killer aquatic rabbits, a national malaise and brother Billy "


Not to mention sister Ruth hanging out with Larry Flynt. Weren't the 70's marvelous?

Yeah, I had forgotten about Ruth and Mr. Flynt. Now it's just we poker players who cavort with Mr. Flynt. I note in his ad in Card Player that his casino is spreading a $2000-$4000 hold 'em game.


Many years ago I saw him in a $400-$800 7-card stud game when I was staying at the Dunes. I arrived mid-afternon Friday and he was playing. Saturday morning he was still in the game. Sunday morning he was still in the game. The floorman told me he had not slept and was stuck over $200,000.

In fact, we Liberals are suckers and gullible. We believe in th ehuman spirit more so than $$$. We err on th eside of humainty and are offen fooled. We are mentally weak, in a sense, but we prefer that to being cold, money grubbing selfish CEO's (Enron....any questions?)

because they play dead at home and always grt killed on the road.

This may stir it up. Another moderate post. From 1960-2000, best president is - Reagan in a landslide. Won the Cold War on his watch, in part due to his excellent military policies. Not many adversaries as bad as the Soviet empire have ever existed, and the ones who could compete for the title didn't have nukes. Reformed the tax code, which was a big first step away from socialism. Deficits ran high, but this was because wasteful social programs were continued by the Democrat congress when we were increasing necessary military spending. The groundwork for our balanced budgets and the '94 Republican victory (something about unimaginable 20 years before) was laid by Reagan. If we ever get to a reasonable tax rate instead of the awful 40% we have now, we can thank Reagan. Stupid or not he was a great President and will be so regarded eventually by historians.


I can't argue much on the others. Kennedy was horrible. Nobody who thinks Bush bought the White House should look at the 1960 election. Reckless in the White House. A miracle his immaturity didn't lead to nuclear war. Give him lack of character points for sleeping with commie spies instead of interns.


Johnson. I think you liked his Vietnam policy right Andy? Just kidding.


Nixon. I have a campaign button I might wear some day. But he's hard to defend even though his Vietnam policy was way better than Johnson's.


Ford. Blank.


George Sr, cratered after the Gulf War. Ran perhaps the worst campaign ever.


Carter. Dorky sweater, limp foreign policy. Let the military rot.


Clinton. All character defects. No accomplishments. Horrible China policy. (W may continue it though) Did let Bin Laden go when Sudan said they'd turn him over. Good call there.


And hey, there are plenty of good conservative quotes. Just the other day I heard Ashcroft say...:-)

an oxymoron...or is compassion a luxury of the wealthy???gl

scalf,


Or, as Eliza Doolittle's father said in My Fair Lady, "Morals! Can't afford them, Guv."


John

You are a perceptive conservative: you know I was trying to stir things up.


Got to run now, will be out of town until Saturday, but I'd like to respond then. We actually have some agreements, with the exception of Reagan and Nixon.


Political discussion if fun, but baseball is better.

Yeah, that Reagan sure was the best. He had great speach writers, and was a master at delivering them. Second only, of course, to Clinton.


But do the words Iran-Contra ring a bell?


His greatest achievement was embracing the religious right. In one fell swoop, he undermined the doctrine of seperation of Church and State, alienated half of the voting population (women), and reduced the Republican party platform to a single word: Abortion.

Labels are difficult. I'm not sure whether to call myself a liberal or conservative. I'm left of the National Review but right of the Nation. I guess that makes me a neo-liberal. (we're hated by both conservatives and paleo-liberals).