Well, the problem with Horowitz and many of the right-wing people on that lecture circuit is this: They usually connect with conservative student groups against the faculty of a given campus. His support often comes in the form of bashing our liberal colleagues, which then leaves us (the right-wing professors) stuck. We cannot in good faith goad students against other professors, nor do we want to close ranks with liberal colleagues against conservative scholars from outside who are agitating against us.

In One Party Classroom, also, Horowitz gets too nasty, writing scathing personal attacks against helpless graduate students whose names turned up on his roster of leftist instructors. He bashes leftist professors by quoting outdated codes of academic conduct, and Horowitz often does not understand the research principles of the fields he is trying to deconstruct. One repeated mistake he makes is to claim that any professor who expresses a liberal opinion is violating academic codes and oppressing conservatives. But if that’s the case, am I not also in violation if I express a conservative view? Many subject areas are impossible to teach without introducing some liberal content, but Horowitz sometimes pretends that perfect political neutrality is possible or desirable.

When I mean support for conservative professors, I mean there should be more research money for sabbaticals, grants, and conferences. That’s a tall order, and it’s tough because there isn’t a lot of conservative academic money. But I think it’s good to focus one’s efforts in that direction rather than always bashing liberals. Liberal-bashing starts to get tiresome and boring to everyone involved.

Also, recruiting bright conservatives is one of my big priorities. Many right-wing students do not want to enter the academy, so they need prodding and help. It would be great, for instance, if groups like Young America’s Foundation focused not only on students but also on mentor-student pairings for their conferences and seminars. CPAC should offer discounts to professors who can bring entourages of students. Just some ideas.

Sorry to write a novel, but I live with this tragedy every day at my job!

http://www.isi.org

ISI published the college guide that I cited, with introduction by Walter E. Williams, prof’r of economics at George Mason Univ. in Virginia. Horowitz is one of the many speakers / scholar lecturers who are offered by ISI. The ISI guide rates Harvard and Stanford yellow, Brown and Columbia red, and Northwestern and Princeton green.

You may also find this article helpful or at least of interest:

http://government.georgetown.e.....ts/WSJ.pdf

And I have a hunch that you might like this blog:

http://patrickdeneen.blogspot.com

Isn’t that interesting.

More indication that next to nothing has been publicized about the creature, and what has been publicized is lies.

Another interesting tidbit from Rusty’s link is that he wasn’t the first “black (6.25%)” editor of the Harvard review either. A real black man preceded him by 60 years, but they change the name of the title, so he gets to lie about it.

(I don’t like Horowitz that much, because I think he oversimplifies things, but he does offer a lot of good data.)

In One Party Classroom, Horowitz summarizes several studies of political affiliations in the academy. If you include business schools and all vocational schools, then the faculty nationwide is liberal by a ratio of about 4 to 1 (roughly 80% leftist). But if you look strictly at the humanities and social sciences, the ratio rises to about 10:1 (about 92-93% leftist.)

At elite schools like Harvard, however, the imbalance is most extreme. Researches looked through the faculty at Harvard, Brown, Columbia, and Princeton and were unable to find one single humanities or social sciences professor who was registered Republican or otherwise identifiable as conservative. Two schools that had a healthier balance were Stanford and Northwestern, each wtih the L:R ratio approaching 4:1. I have to go back and check on the specific numbers.

In my field, English, I have met 4 other conservative literature professors. Mind you, I belong to the MLA, which has about 30,000 members. I think even the studies Horowitz quoted understated the imbalance in favor of the Left.

My view, however, is that Horowitz makes the situation worse because he doesn’t offer much support to conservative academics. There are some of us in the university system. It’s worth it to nurture us sometimes, instead of just condemning the whole of academia for the imbalance we struggle to counteract each day.

Mr Lamb’s blog: http://kennethelamb.blogspot.c.....thnic.html

See he’s not the “first african-american” anything. He’s our first ARAB president.

And the telling excerpts from his research:
————————————————
[quote]
I must pause very briefly to note usage of the word Negro in what follows: In all academic studies of race, the proper scientific word for the ethnic composition I discuss is Negro. For any who scream racist at its mention, I say take it up with the scientific community. It’s not my word, it’s theirs. I am using it in its proper scientific context.

Why is the fact that Mr. Obama is only 6.25% African Negro not reported?

Because to acknowledge it is to report this devastating truth about him: Mr. Obama is not legally African-American. It is impossible for him to be, in truth, America’s first African-American president.

Federal law requires that to claim a minority status, you must be at least 1/8 of the descriptor, but for the sake of this article, I’ve converted it to a decimal fraction for easier comprehension. You must be at least 12.5% of the racial component you claim for minority status. Mr. Obama, claiming to be African-American, is half the legal threshold.

Mr. Obama is 50% Caucasian, that from his mother. What those who want Mr. Obama to write history by becoming “America’s first African-American president” ignore is that his father was ethnically Arabic, with only 1 relative ethnically African Negro – a maternal great-grandparent (Sen. Obama’s great-great grandparent, thus the 6.25% ethnic contribution to the senator’s ethnic composition.).

That means that Mr. Obama is 50% Caucasian from his mother’s side. He is 43.75% Arabic, and 6.25% African Negro from his father’s side.

[end quote]
————————————————-

Steve: I apologize if this missive does not adhere to your posting caveats – please delete if you feel the need.

p.s. an anecdote, re: Vernon Forrest: “He has a son, you know?” Gatti said about Forrest. “Someone is going to be raised without a father because somebody wanted to rob someone.” So sad. So sad…

Really???

Bwa-hahahaha … omg that’s jive-larious!

Spot on.

The English Puritans who settled in the New World feared the loss of their cultural heritage, and they were industrious in founding public schools and colleges such as Harvard to conserve this heritage. But today these schools no longer encourage an appreciation of Western culture and values. Rather, they actively find ways to turn the minds of our children––even our very young children––away from their heritage.

According to the ISI catalogue “Choosing the Right College” (2008-9), Harvard is known for “a faculty that consists of the cream skimmed off the best universities in the world,” research and library facilities that are second to none, and a highly selective admissions process. But Harvard is also known for “its destructive love affair with leftist politics, curricular laxity, and the anti-Western cult of ‘diversity.’”

The multicultural studies departments (e.g., African and African-American studies taught by Gates) as well as religion, social studies, and language departments are “heavily infused by postmodern ideology.” One professor says the social studies department “indoctrinates the best of the students with multiculturalism.” One alumnus calls the classics department “ideologically obsessed and useless” and thoroughly politicized. One senior professor says “many departments, especially in the humanities, are very politicized. There are a number of egregiously bad courses.”

There is a strong pro-gays bias and intolerance of straight attitudes at Harvard. “Undergraduates face a gamut of gender-neutral language requirements, sexual harassment policies, humorless affirmative-action and sex tutorials, and sensitivity training sessions.” Affirmative action is heavily overdone to the point that it creates stress.

Gates did not make David Horowitz’s list of the 101 Most Dangerous Academics in America. “The Professors” (2006). But it was probably not for want of trying.

No wonder! They’re both racist phony’s!