Yale University has finally achieved the academic version of Nirvana, a state of perfect peace and enlightenment. A recent study found that the faculty had finally purged every Republican donor from its ranks. While 98 percent of the political donations went to Democrats, not a single professor could be found who gave to a single Republican candidate. The complete lock for Democrats is in a country that is split evenly between Republicans and Democrats.
The Yale Daily News reviewed more than 7,000 Federal Election Commission filings from 2025 listing Yale as the employer: “Of 1,099 filings that included ‘professor’ in their occupation, 97.6 percent of the donations went to Democrats, while the remaining 2.4 percent went to independent candidates or groups,” the student newspaper reported Jan. 14.”
The study reinforces the recent Buckley Institute report, which found that, of the 43 departments surveyed, 27 entire departments contained zero Republican professors.
Even if the study missed a couple of donations, the radical imbalance is a reflection of the lack of diversity at the school. It is not a perfect point of comparison. There can be a conservative or libertarian faculty member who does not make donations and does not register with any party.
Moreover, those of us who have criticized the lack of diversity have not argued for partisan criteria in faculty appointments. Rather, these are metrics that help show the lack of diversity. Many scholars prefer to dismiss these criticisms as speculative or unproven. However, the problem has long been obvious and these studies reinforce what critics have said for years.
One professor is quoted as acknowledging the apparent problem. Carlos Eire, a history and religious studies professor, said, “It’s true, there is very, very, very little intellectual diversity at Yale and at most institutions of higher learning when it comes to politics.” Professor Eire added,“Academics in the US, Canada and Europe have been leaning left for the past three or four generations. And this is something that shows no signs of being corrected or correcting itself anytime soon.”
He is correct.
I was asked by the president of a top-ranked university how he could reverse this problem. He was convinced that the lack of intellectual diversity was causing lasting harm to higher education. I told him that one thing is clear: you cannot rely on faculty members to restore diversity.
I was at a dinner not long ago with a Harvard Law Professor who told me and others that he could not be expected to vote for a faculty candidate with whom he disagreed. Two of us objected that we do that all the time to reinforce intellectual diversity. He was entirely unapologetic and unyielding that he would not vote for faculty candidates who embrace conservative views of the Constitution that he considers wrong.
Faculty members have privately acknowledged for years that they have largely eliminated conservatives and libertarians, but rationalize their records on not finding “intellectually promising” conservative candidates. If the imbalance involved race or gender, a court would crush arguments that the lack of diversity is some unintended consequence of the applicant pool.
University presidents must create enclaves of diversity outside these departments, through institutes and centers that faculty members do not control.
Take Harvard.
As I discuss in my book “The Indispensable Right,” Harvard is not just an academic echo chamber. It is a virtual academic sensory deprivation tank.
In a country with a majority of conservative and libertarian voters, fewer than 9 percent of the Harvard student body and less than 3 percent of the faculty members identify as conservative.
For years, Harvard faculty have brushed away complaints over its liberal orthodoxy, including purging conservative faculty. It has created one of the most hostile schools for free speech in the nation, ranking dead last among universities in annual studies by the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE).
Only a third of students at Harvard feel comfortable speaking on campus despite being overwhelmingly liberal at an overwhelmingly liberal institution. (The percentage is much higher for the small number of conservative students).
Some faculty are more honest than others.
Not long ago, I debated Professor Randall Kennedy at Harvard Law School about the lack of ideological diversity at the school. I respect Kennedy and I do not view him as anti-free speech or intolerant. Yet when I noted the statistics on the vanishing number of conservative students and faculty in comparison to the nation, Kennedy responded that Harvard “is an elite university” and does not have to “look like America.”
Of course, the problem is that Harvard does not even look like Massachusetts, which is nearly 30 percent Republican.
Yale, however, is now a perfect echo chamber where moderate, libertarian, and conservative students (if they can make it into the school) are left to self-censor and avoid backlash for their views.
Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the author of the forthcoming “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.”
“I was at a dinner not long ago with a Harvard Law Professor who told me and others that he could not be expected to vote for a faculty candidate with whom he disagreed.”
Disagreed about what? The best flavor of jelly on a peanut butter and jelly sandwich or whether women could make a decision without the sign-off by their eldest male relative?
It’s a typical conservative trick to make some vague statement and let the sheep fill in whatever they can dream up.
Much like the MAGA movement that has never been given clear definition. Which, exactly, “Great” is “Again?” Unemployed steel workers imagine the furnaces firing up again, coal miner want to climb into tiny elevators to get to the seam face. And White Christian Nationalists alternate between “Jews Will Not Replace Us” and wanting “Colored Only” signs to go back up.
So, what level of disagreement is on offer. The implication is that it’s over some vague notion of how society should be run, when it is more likely about the heinous proposals from the right and unyielding demands about the control of half the population.
Notice what just happened.
Instead of engaging the point, that a faculty member openly admitted he would not support a colleague because of ideological disagreement, you substituted caricatures: jelly sandwiches, Taliban patriarchy, Nazis, and race laws. That’s not clarification. It’s evasion.
If the disagreement were over “heinous proposals,” it would be easy to say so. The fact that it isn’t specified is precisely the problem.
When entire categories of ideas are treated as morally disqualifying before they’re even articulated, hiring ceases to be academic judgment and becomes ideological enforcement.
This isn’t a “conservative trick.” It’s a documented pattern: views on natural rights, limits on administrative power, originalism, free speech absolutism, colorblind equality, all routinely treated as beyond the pale in elite academia. No goose-stepping required.
As for MAGA, you’re doing the same thing: refusing definition so you can project the worst imaginable motives onto millions of people. That may be emotionally satisfying, but it’s intellectually lazy.
A university confident in its ideas doesn’t need straw men.
It lets arguments be stated clearly and then defeats them on the merits.
What you’re defending here isn’t academic rigor. It’s preemptive exclusion justified by moral panic.
It was Turley, involved in the conversation, who doesn’t elaborate or investigate, just takes a quote out of context, if it is a quote at all.
Then the Republican minions rush to fill that gap with whatever manure they have on hand.
I did engage the point. Turley offered no specifics for his strawman argument. Talk about evasion; that Gish Gallop of a response on Turely’s behalf (I suppose that OLLY is now a spokesman for Turely) is quite the distraction from the lack of specificity about which disagreements were sufficient. Turley paints it as every possible disagreement, no matter how slight. It’s the Little Endians vs. the Big Endians all over again.
Olly
What the left are expert at is removing the context and/or circumstances surrounding any argument. They use race, social status, religion and gender as fissures to insert into every argument. They spin any controversy to fit into one of their very own political agendas as a basis to steer the ignorant masses to chaos. It’s what they do, that’s why facts and logic don’t matter anymore.
It’s a typical conservative trick to make some vague statement and let the sheep fill in whatever they can dream up.
Ah! It’s the stench and text footprints of X, a final late night posting, cleverly using his alternate “Anonymous” persona. Nobody will EVER notice his style of deception, dismissal, deflection, derision and defence when he does that. Pure Democrat neo-communism on display.
Is X in the room with you right now? The website owner will see that the IP address is entirely different.
I know it is inconceivable that people who aren’t ditto-heads would understand that similar facts lead to similar conclusions by independent people, but maybe Trump will get Steve Bannon to explain it all to you.
I’m quite confident Mr Anonymous is at the forefront of Minnesota rallies apoplectically screaming at ICE agents to remove their masks (while he insists upon anonymity for himself here)
“Disagreed about what?”
You’re a dishonest hack.
That Harvard prof made the “what” very clear:
“. . . faculty candidates who embrace *conservative views of the Constitution* that he considers wrong.” (emphasis added)
What can be done about it?
trump bullied a woman for her Nobel Peace Prize.
The orange god wins, at any coast.
Actually she it trying to smooze Trump into making her the next president of Venesuella.
Given the significant risks Minnesota politicians are taking to thwart federal law enforcement it seems plausible to think that the only thing worth those risks is the need to conceal nuch greater crimes.
See “OT – Is this what they’re covering up in Minneapolis?” below.
Spot on!
They’re sacrificing their own citizens to provide cover for their own corruption. Much like terrorists use innocent human shields.
Republicans died in 2016. What’s your point JT?
https://endlessurgency.com/p/they-think-were-stupid
Mike Nellis has been open about his personal struggles with mental health and weight loss and is a former Senior Advisor to Vice President Kamalala Harris, former girlfriend of and salad maker for Brother Willy “Married With Children” Brown, her “mentor,” if you know what I mean.
Well, no wonder!
OT – Is this what they’re covering up in Minneapolis?
__________________________________________________________
Homeland Security Department officials told Just the News that Transportation Security Administration officers tracked and flagged about $136 million in bulk cash in outbound luggage at the passenger checkpoints at John Glenn Columbus International Airport since November 2023.
The cash movements were made by U.S. citizens of Somali origin who flew out of the Columbus airport en route to either the airports in Minneapolis or Atlanta, and the couriers always declared the cash as legally required on documents, officials said.
“Typically, when they go to Minneapolis, they drop off the cash and then a subsequent courier travels abroad from Minneapolis to Dubai through Amsterdam,” one official familiar with the investigation told Just the News on Tuesday, speaking only on condition of anonymity.
Just the News reported exclusively last week that TSA detected nearly $700 million in cash in luggage leaving the Minneapolis airport in 2024 and 2025, frequently headed on a route to Amsterdam and then Dubai where U.S. officials lost the tracking.
– Just The News https://justthenews.com/somali-suitcase-stash-feds-says-130-million-moved-ohio-airport-minnesota-way-overseas
Modern so-cslled conservatives are not Burkian. Of course one would have to actually read Edmund Burke’s opi to know what that is.
Correct – american conservatism has always been more libertarian than Burkean.
While Paine leaned farther to the left and fawned over the french revolution until it degenerated into bloodshed,
Paines “The Rights of Man” particularly the first book is a rebutal to Burkean conservatism and an accurate characterization fo the differences.
Further conservatism generally – not specific to Burke or america is NOT an ideology. It is the logical recognition that most new ideas FAIL,
that the one institution that must not fail is government and therefore new ideas should not be tried in Government until they have proven themselves.
Most libertarians are also conservtive.
MAGA is an ideology – distinct from libertarianism as well as either Burkean or traditional american conservatism.
It is possibly the least conservative of “right wing” or Republican ideologies, ideologically it is only slightly right of center, and it is only moderately conservative, and moderately libertarian.
It would not likely be nearly as successful except that democrats have fallen off the left edge of the planet ideologically.
John Say,
“It would not likely be nearly as successful except that democrats have fallen off the left edge of the planet ideologically.”
What you mean is that the Democrats didn’t toe the line and become mindless Republicans. Trump is in because of a 20 year campaign to paint every Democrat as an enemy of conservatism, even though such as Hillary Clinton were to the right of Nixon. Democrats would not vote for Republican-Lite and Republicans would not vote for a hard-right Democrat.
Fix your side of the aisle and stop moving it past Stalin.
“What you mean is that the Democrats didn’t toe the line and become mindless Republicans.”
What you REALLY mean is that if Republicans won’t become as mindless as Democrats (who devoutly believe that if they self identify as women they will menstruate), then they’re just not dumb enough to be accepted by Democrats and their Furry Trannies like yourself.
Shave that bloody beard before your next attempt to convince us you’re actually a woman.
A trip to the chop shop to remove those giveaway dangling naughty bits would help as well.
Your move, Ms. Tovarisch…
ATS
Again – conservatism is not an ideology.
it is merely grasping the INEVITABLE reality that nearly all change FAILS
If you are going to bet – Always bet that the future will be better than the present.
But if you are going to bu on SPECIFIC changes – always bet AGAINST them.
It nearly always take MANY tries to get things right – alot of failure before success,
And even after you mange to succeed you have to be actively on top of things – success is fleeting.
Since Wilson the Democratic party has been the party of big government.
since FDR it has been the party of socialism – or atleast socialism lite.
It is only a question of time before either or both of those fail.
The difference between Venzeuala and Sweden is that the more dramatic embrace of Government and socialism resulted in more rapid failure.
We are fighting politically over Healthcare right now. Medicare was supposed to fix Helathcare – instead it made things worse.
Obama care was supposed to fix it – instead it made things worse.
Socialism ALWAYS fails – it is just a question of time.
Big Government – even if not socialist always fails – also just a question of time.
Bill Clinton and New Gingrich – no love lost there – still manage to work together to “end welfare as we know it”
Balance the budget. Clinton was a foreign policy disaster – but domestically he tried to out conservative conservatives and was very successful. But for Bushes even worse foreign policy – exactly the opposite of what he promised as a candidate, and pretty much the same from Obama, The national debt would be gone, Welfare would be temporary – if it existed at all. Growth for the past 25 years would have been 3.5-5% our standard of living would be double what it is right now. Nobody would be bit**ing about healthcare costs – because with double the standard of living we could easily afford them – and of course if we had not stupidly mess ed healthcare with ObamaCare we would not ONCE again be looking to do something stupid to fix the problems that socialism lite Caused.
The above has very little to do with Trump – Except that Post Clinton and particularly Post the 2013 Woke explosion the US left went bat$hit crazy.
I would note that DESPITE the socialist lite failures of democrats in the 20th and early 21st centuries, The portion of Liberalism – that is the liberalism of Derschowitz and Turley not the modern left.
The portion of liberalism that was actually about individual liberty was VERY successful
Util the 2013 progressive Woke nonsense exploded into our institutions liberals had W
ON what is typically called the culture war – though it is bigger than that.
For 50+ years liberals were the champions of free speech. They were the champions of greater individual rights in myriads of areas.
Birth control, racial cultural and sexual mixing – the actual American “melting pot”.
One of the many factors that drove the Woke explosion in 2013 is that the most important areas of conflict over “equal rights” in the broadest sense had been won. America was not perfect – but it was the least racist, sexist, homophobic, etc. that it or any other nation had ever been. The generation coming of age in 2013 had everything, had a bright future and there were no big social causes to fight for.
But after drowning in marxist nonsense through 16 years of public education with too much time and too easy a future and nothing big left to accomplish they had to Create something. At the very moment when we LEAST needed to fix anything socially or culturally they declared EVERYTHING corrupt, and shifted from Equal rights to hierarchies of past oppression as their core value.
Which even more so that socialism and big Government is absolutely doomed to fail disastrously – as it has.
Political parties ALWAYS try to paint the other party negatively – that is nothing new.
It is one of Alynsky’s rules for radicals – YOUR playbook.
All that has changed in the last “20yrs” is that Democrats have gotten far worse at it, and republicans have gotten better.
Part of that is because by the end of the 20th century there was really nothing of consequence left for government to do – except fix the problems of its own creation.
Real conservatism – “Take a great deal of care before you start changing things that are not broke”, is inevitably stronger the higher our standard of living gets.
Republicans have gotten better at messaging – because Trump is incredibly good at it,
and because democrats have gotten worse, and because as noted – all that is left to fight for is fixing the mistakes that the socialist/big government side of democrats made along the way here.
Regardless, democrats get to make their own choices as to what they stand for – as individuals and as a party.
And they have made very bad ones.
Do republicans paint Democrats as the enemy ? Absolutely.
Do democrats paint republicans as the enemy ? Absolutely.
Today the message of democrats is resonating with an ever smaller and ever more radical portion of the country.
That is your problem.
Was Hillary to the right of Nixon ? Absolutely. Nixon was hated by democrats for the same reason that Bill Clinton was hated by Republicans. He stole their polices. Nixon is possibly the most progressive republican ever elected, and Bill Clinton the most conservative Democrat.
Why do you think the Nazi’s hated the communists so much ? Because they were fighting over very nearly the same ideology.
We see the same in the left today – Outside of a few bastions of left wing lunacy you can NOT get canceled for being a republican or a conservative. Frankly inside the bastions of left wing lunacy it is very hard to get canceled for being a republican or conservative.
But if you are on the left – and you deviate from dogma, you will be pummeled into submission or extreme ostracism nearly instantly.
Some – like Derschowitz and Turley are capable of keeping their principles when everyone they thought were their friends turns on them.
Most can’t.
Hillary did not get elected in 2016 for 3 big reasons
She was a corrupt and everyone knew it.
She was viewed as a continuation of Obama – and people did not want 4-8 more years of Obama’s slogging economy.
In 2016 the ONLY candidate that was MORE neocon – more of the endless war that people were tired of was Lindsey Graham.
Hillary was the Lindsey Graham of the Democratic party.
Trump only narrowly beat her – but ANY other Republican would have thumped her.
No one wanted Hillary – nor do they now.
Is Hillary to the right of Nixon ? Certainly – Obama is to the right of Nixon. Dukakis was to the right of Nixon, Clinton was to the right of Nixon, Kerry was to the right of Nixon.
“Fix your side of the aisle and stop moving it past Stalin.”
Republicans are not “my side”
One of the reason that you are lossing the messaging war – and the american people is because – it is the left that is headed towards Stalinism.
Name a single policy of Trump’s that is to the right of Reagan ?
Republicans are not headed towards fascism – democrats are – Republicans are headed towards the center.
Another John Say Gish Gallop from FSB headquarters. Great job comrade.
ATS – Do you have an argument ?
I provided alot of facts and claims.
If you had an argument – you could make it rather than lobbing personal insults.
All you are doing is making it clear there is nothing I have written that you are capable of disproving
So instead you lob vague insults.
Ano
Fix our side?
Dude, you fools can’t even tell us what a women is.
David B. Benson: giving us a demonstration that he actually read and tries to implement the tactics of his Democrats’ favorite American communist, Saul Alinsky and his life’s crowning achievement: “Rules For Radicals”. Give Davey a Big Red Soviet Red Reset Button!
His defense is he isn’t COMPLETELY communist in the Karl Marx sense. Devout Democrat Marxists build their foundations in the study of Marxist theology.
. Minnesota has gone rogue but is evading fraud charges. This is truly ill. Impeachment vote for Walz is coming forward. We’ll see.
Cutest-little-piece-in-shoe-leather Noem is the one who should be impeached. Godiva
Walz is likely to be impeached when pigs fly.
He will probably end up indicted which is even better!
The atmosphere is such that a faculty member would not admit to being a Republican or donating to Republican candidates for fear of it leaking to their colleagues. I know–I used to be on the faculty of another Ivy League university.
. Cowards? That’s plausible as courage is a gift.
So universities are supposed to produce intelligent citizens. Instead, Yale produces communists. The American Founders established a nation of freedom wherein intelligent people could “pursue happiness,” flourish, and create wealth. Yale produces the purveyors of Karl Marx’s arbitrary and irrational “dictatorship of the proletariat (i.e., hired help),” which failed abjectly in Russia after 75 years of existential trauma.
How will this national and human tragedy ever be reversed and corrected?
__________________________________________________________________________________
“If not us, then who? And if not now, when?”
– President Ronald Reagan
I was at a dinner not long ago with a Harvard Law Professor who told me and others that he could not be expected to vote for a faculty candidate with whom he disagreed.
He sounds like a very boring person. And with an adolescent temperament. Perhaps he needed trigger warnings for opinions he didn’t fully endorse. It’s hard to imagine students learning anything useful from a professor like that.
Hmmmm!!
JD Vance is now out there trying to justify the shooting of Renee Good, by saying that the ICE agent was reacting to a traumatic experience 6 months ago when he was dragged by a car.
Vance argued that Ross’s prior experience made him “sensitive” to being rammed by a vehicle, suggesting his past trauma influenced his reaction during the January 7, 2026, shooting.
The use of deadly force is judged by what is happening in the moment.
Reacting to the past instead of the reality of a current situation is not reasonable force.
It is unlawful.
Vance is making a convincing case that the ICE agent, Jonathan Ross, acted unlawfully in his response to the situation on January 7.
The agent, lawfully executing his duties, was injured and threatened by a perpetrator who willfully defied lawful police orders, obstructed justice, and interfered with official duties—actions that independently constitute criminal offenses.
The agent was not injured and did not respond in a way that could possibly have avoided or reduced injury.
Well, you’ve convinced the entire audience to believe you.
Vance consulted with Usha and that’s what she said.
Anonymous: Try not to go FULL RETARD on this blog. This area should be for adults who can relate thoughts that are comprehensible to other adults. What do ya think there partner? Can you avoid making stupid comments?
Good one… are we done for today? Because I’m hot for another session with you in the sauna – I brought that new Furry suit that really got you moist on our last Grindr date!
Good’s shooting is justified by the facts and the law.
It is not even a close call.
The shooting would have been justified even if the officer did not get struck or nearly struck by the SUV merely by the fact that Good drove off with another Ice Agent partly inside her vehicle trying to open the door to physically remove her when she resisted arrest.
It is a tragedy.
It is a tragedy of Goods making.
Good chose to violate the law and interfere with Law enforcement.
Your opinion of the morality of a law is irrelevant – if you violate the law – you can expect to face FORCE in the form of Law Enforcement.
Good Choose to disobey the lawful order of an LEO to “get the h311 out of the car”
That escalated the situation and required even more FORCE on the part of law enforcement.
Good then recklessly backed her vehicle, and immediately shoved it into drive – threatening Everyone arround her.
While it is now clear she actually struck the Officer HARD, that does not matter – even if the officer managed to jump out of the way – she was Still Dangerously Reckless. She was a threat to the officer in front of her vehicle, to the officer trying to open the door of her vehicle and to the public generally. Had she not been shot – there would have been a dangerous high speed chase.
But the law is not determned by our emotions.
Many on the left rant that Police should descalate – and to the extent that is possible – that is true.
But what actually drives escalation ALWAYS is failure to comply with Law enforcement.
Our laws are meaningless if not enforced.
No one would pay a parking ticket but for the fact that if they do not “It will get worse”.
That is true Every step in the process.
If you fail to comply with the law even a minor one,
Then MORE force MUST be used or law and government collapse.
If we are not going to enforce laws, there is no purpose for government.
over a decade ago Eric Garner was killed in NY for failing to comply with a law against selling loose cigarettes.
Garner was willing to escalate until the Police killed him.
That is tragic. And the law Garner violated should not exist.
But his death like Goods is the consequence of his own actions.
If you do not like the law – take that up with the legislature.
Not law Enforcement.
. John Say, why haven’t the autopsy report and forensics of body and car been released?
^^^ I’ll answer, it’s 8 to 10 weeks before coroner’s release says Google.
Civil suit filed before report? All that happens now are protests and lawsuits. Fast riches. There were tort lim8ts once upon a time in the land of yore.
Disclaimer: I deny any affiliation with this world known and unknown.
What you think Autopsies get released ion a couple of days ?
My father died and there was an autopsy – it took 9 months to get it.
Why would the car be released – it is evidence..
What is it that you think these reports are going to show ?
Do all you left wing nuts buy 10000:1 bets all the time ?
Another John Say Gish Gallop.
You open the door for killing people over parking tickets?
This is NOT bout me – this is literally the way govenrment works.
Government is FORCE – PERIOD.
It exists to FORCE those people who will will use violence to get their way to conform.
As to parking tickets.
Don’t pay then – what happens ? Do they go away ?
Does government tear them up ?
Nope. Often it takes a long time, but eventually they come after you.
Only now the consequences are greater.
First the cost increases
So don’t pay that.
Then a judgement is issued against you – and your wages are garnished
or a sherriff is sent to confiscate and auction your property.
So do not let him in.
Then your door gets broken down.
So physically stop him from taking your property.
Then you get arrested.
So don’t let him arrest you.
Then the LEO uses FORCE – violence to arrest you.
So use violence back.
The LEO uses more violence.
so use more violence back.
Once you escalate to aggravated assault,
The officer is likely to shoot you.
You can modify the above scenario but all modifications involve one of two things.
You choosing to comply.
The Officer using more FORCE that you can resist – to the point of killing you if your resistance reaches the point of being a threat to his life or that of others.
Never Forget that Government is FORCE.
If you do not want people killed for violating a law – DO NOT MAKE THAT LAW.
This is not ideology – it is reality.
And we are seeing it in Minneapolis right now.
We have Immigration laws – ICE is enFORCING them.
People are resisting.
ICE uses even MORE force to overcome resistance.
At some point this becomes violence.
Yesterday two people came after ICE with a shovel beating an officer.
When other officers came for them they barricaded themselves in their apartment.
Eventually they agreed to come out and were arrested. They Surrendered before things got even worse.
But if the continued to resist eventually deadly force would have been used.
FORCE is always used to compel compliance with ANY law – if you do not do so voluntarily.
The more you resist complying with the law – ANY LAW, the more the use of FORCE increases.
How could it not factor into his actions? It would me. That doesn’t change the fact that she was the one in the wrong and it led to her loss of life. In case anyone wants to call me names, I said the exact same thing about the woman shot and killed on Jan 6. You put yourself in those situations with law enforcement, you take responsibility for what happens.
JD Vance is now out there trying to justify the shooting of Renee Good, by saying that the ICE agent was reacting to a traumatic experience 6 months ago when he was dragged by a car.
That’s a lie – and when Democrats aren’t lying, they’re denying, deflecting and distracting. Vance’s primary lecture for rabid Democrat violent rioters is that driving your vehicle towards ANY law enforcement has a high probability of getting you shot. After that, he pointed out that in a previous attempt to murder a federal ICE agent, a more successful felon hit and dragged him, causing several weeks of hospitalization.
Weird how the day before Good’s unsuccessful suicide mission to protect violent criminal Illegal Aliens, Democrats were celebrating another federal officer shooting and killing an unarmed woman while she was sprawled across the opening of a window, defenseless and assaulting nobody. A day later, another federal officer shoots a woman as she rams her two ton vehicle into him – and now it’s not celebrated, it’s murder.
Democrats like this one are making an airtight case for the fact they should never be given positions anywhere near those of federal power.
Let them elect their heroes like their war veteran, Command Sergeant Major “Tampon Tim” Walz – the one so knowledgeable about firearms because he repeatedly carried an AR-15 close bitter combat in Afghanistan.
Yes they teach discrimination and Antisemitism. Parents send their chiildren there??? Hooo Boyyy
. It’s payback for the years of white man only. Notice how wonderful it is now.
It’s meaningless except people have perished, are perishing and will perish. Thanks for making white man’s opinion true. 😏
“[We gave you] a [severely restricted-vote] republic, if you can keep it.”
– Ben Franklin
_________________
“[We gave you naturalization laws that admitted only ‘free white person(s)’ to become citizens in America.]”
– The American Founders
_____________________________
You couldn’t.
You didn’t.
You fully deserve the shame that is on you.
“[We gave you] a [severely restricted-vote] republic, if you can keep it.”
– Ben Franklin
The missing part from the carefully selected additions by Anonymous/George/X: [a severely restricted-vote with no Confederate commie Democrat party buying the vote of begging Democrat Welfare Kings]
We should have banned the Confederate Kluxxer Democrats after their war of insurrection failed. We could have. But we didn’t.
The overwhelming singular failure of the American republic rights and freedoms experiment has been voters allowing the continued existence of the vile and violent, seditious DNC and their equally vile members like X, The Racist Democrat Communist Formerly Known As George.
Now we have a Democrat DEI hire female justice on SCOTUS – claims she can’t define what a woman is even after a squint into her panties… but sitting on the current trial where justices are determining what is and what isn’t a woman.
Yale constitutes an attack against America.
Begin the opposition to the teaching of unconstitutional, un-American, anti-constitutional, and anti-American communism at Yale by doxing the parents et al. who fund the student’s tuition.
How much from middle east donors? OH gee
Domestic dox. Foreign dox.
Without counterpoint, dialogue does not exist.
Without dialectical exchange of arguments and ideas, reasoning does not exist.
Without testing of new and different propositions (hypotheses), the scientific method does not exist.
— Yale’s purging of counterbalance, their new “Nirvana,” is just another word for academically DEAD.
Wiffout Affirmative Action and Public Assistance in various and sundry forms and figures, Diana Bec does not exist.
Are you a believer that NAMBLA should be recruiting in nursery schools? If not, then you are not entirely honest about counterpoint and dialogue.
Reasoning doesn’t require taking an opposing position, just one that is not perfectly aligned. Scientific progress in making an estimate of the Earth’s diameter 3,000 years ago was not balanced by saying the Earth was flat, but by giving a different method for estimating. Conservatives at the time wanted the flat Earth model. In fact, conservatives have historically opposed scientific progress as unnatural or against the will of some god or another.
In a society that likes peaceful existence, is it required to have people throwing bombs as a counterbalance?
More than that, is it required to have whatever is imagined as counterbalance over every square inch of the planet? That would seem to suggest that men and women should share public bathrooms, locker rooms, gym showers, and so on; not a position that conservatives seem to favor.
Which is it? Balance everywhere and NAMBLA hosting meetings in day cares or some more reasoned approach.
What are you two bone-headed ANOMINI talking about?! Affirmative-action??? NAMBLA???
NOWHERE in Dianna Bec’s post is there any hint of the perversity and extreme-liberality your unreasoned and ignorantly interpreted rants imply….
The desire to fully-misunderstand and then to mis-cast the simple argument against the expelling of conservative thought, thus the destruction of fair and logical collegiate REASONING, is profoundly fallacious and weak:
The comment about dialectic reasoning: “counterpoint and balance,” was made to highlight the fact that the extreme-left’s inability to entertain or suffer any other views or angles (than their own leftist prejudice), as evidenced in Yale’s biased control of Academic freedom and fairness, is the downfall of Academic integrity.
Off Topic: on Free Speech
Australia social media ban hits 4.7 million teen accounts in first month
SYDNEY, Jan 15 (Reuters) – Social media companies have collectively deactivated nearly five million accounts belonging to Australian teenagers just a month after a world-first ban on under‑16s took effect, the country’s internet regulator said, a sign the measure has had a swift and sweeping impact.
The eSafety Commissioner said platforms had so far removed about 4.7 million accounts held by under-16s to comply with a law that went live on December 10. Some platforms had said they would start closing affected accounts in the weeks before the deadline.
By: Byron Kaye; Editing by Kate Mayberry – Reuters ~ January 15, 2026
https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/australia-social-media-ban-hits-47-million-teen-accounts-first-month-2026-01-15/
Australians shouldn’t mind these “reasonable restrictions” in the slightest. After all, their parents are the ones who approved the government prohibiting, confiscating, and destroying millions of legally purchased and owned firearms. What do they tell each other in Oz? “Sauce for the goose is good enough for the gander” or something like that?
THE next phase is a global blackout social media ban of those whom are 55 and older.
Think it as the opposite of those 55 and older communities where Kids are not allowed.
There will be Peace & Quite once again.
We keep using terms like left and right but I feel like anymore, the correct terms are reality-based vs. fantasy-based. I don’t know that the split is along party lines although obviously if leftists had any kind of grasp on reality they would not be leftists. I find it interesting that Harvard, which is supposed to be the mecca of American intellect, is increasingly and unapologetically untethered from objective reality, and I find it even more interesting that they can still find people who want to go there.
“I am pro-choice in every respect”. Quote by Donald Trump in 1999 being interviewed by Tim Russert.
In the 1960’s while Trump largely supported Democrats, Hillary Clinton was a Rockefeller Republican (basically a Lincoln Republican). Hillary Clinton was a more genuine Republican than most members of Congress in 2026.
Following the 1960’s Civil Rights Act, the racists moved from the Democratic Party to the Republican Party. And likewise, Hillary Clinton moved to the Democrats since racists took over the Republican Party.
Today in 2026, Hillary is still more of a Lincoln/Rochefeller Republican than almost any Republican serving in Congress in 2026.
Bottom Line: Labels without any substance mean nothing!
What a bunch of mambo-jahambo, and off-topic too. All that HRC switcheroo, just because you say so?
The good “republican” HRC was instrumental in the Watergate investigation and intended prosecution (impeachment) of Nixon.
Abraham Lincoln was the leader and defacto founder of the Republican Party. Republicans in 2026 are about 180 degrees opposite of what Republicans actually stand for.
So you claim. The dems turn the wacko side
DustOff,
Wacko side is right.
ATS – Pretty sure thee is not a single member of the republican party that is pro slavery.
Nor are there any republicans seeking to secede from the Union.
Democrats today remain Racist – and as we see in Minnesota still secessionist.
Trump is looking alot like Lincoln and Democrts are looking alot like Jefferson Davis.
Of course Republicans aren’t pro-slavery. Owning slaves means providing housing and some clothing and food and sufficient medical care. None of these are things Republicans want to provide to anyone. Instead they stand firmly against minimum wages and limits on child labor to get the benefits of slave labor without having the overhead of slave labor.
“Of course Republicans aren’t pro-slavery. Owning slaves means providing housing and some clothing and food and sufficient medical care. None of these are things Republicans want to provide to anyone. Instead they stand firmly against minimum wages and limits on child labor to get the benefits of slave labor without having the overhead of slave labor.”
If you provode all those things for others – they are dependent on you and owing you – you are OWNED – a slave.
Democrats manufacturing rights that require theft to deliver is just a more benign form of slavery.
Just to be clear – I am libertarian – not republicans. Republicans are at best less bad than democrats at most of these things.
A man said to the universe:
“Sir, I exist!”
“However,” replied the universe,
“The fact has not created in me
A sense of obligation.”
You are free to give what is yours to someone else – no strings attached, or with whatever strings you want.
They are free to take it or not.
BTW Child labor is dead. AZLIke most of the regulations that the left fawns over – those issues go away as standard of living rises.
For 99.9999% of human existance the moment a child was able too it was put to work. The end of child labor is a luxury afford by affluent people. Today most of the world is affluent enough that child labor has ended. In most of the world that occured without the passage of any laws.
Minimum wage laws were created by southern democrats as a means of making the cost of unskilled labor high enough no one would hire blacks. They were OVERT about that.
It still works in the same way.
If you flip burgers at McDonalds you will get paid the value of the task you perform – no more.
Gaining some experience improving your productivity might increase your pay – but there is a limit to how productive a burger flipper can be. If you try to force businesses to pay people more than they are worth – instead of hiring more low skilled people, they will hire fewer high skilled people. Or they will automate.
WE rant about the fact that agriculture is heavily dependent on underpaid illegal immigrants.
Agriculture is one of the hardest jobs to automate – but go check out John Dear or Sperry New Holland or …
Over the past 40 years Agriculture is being massively automated – why ? Because farmers can not reliably depending on immigrant labor as politics change, and because Farmers do not wish to face steep fines and possibly jail for hiring illegals.
The other choices is we can just ship the job to China – or Mexico or as China and mexico’s standard of living and wages rise – we can ship it to Bangeledesch or someplace else where there is lots of cheap labor.
Regardless, Minimum wages are a stupid idea that harms the very people it tries to help.
If you wish to be paid more – make yourself more valuable.
If you can not do that in your current job – find a different one, or create your own job.
No one ever gets paid more than they are worth for very long.
But the wisest people work to save and invest – and they let their money work for them and that is how you actually become rich.
Political Pole Shift
Lincoln has NOTHING to do with your twisted version (LIE) about HRC’s “good republican” history: there is no such history!
HRC, a recent Yale grad in 1973, as an attorney on the House Judiciary Impeachment Inquiry, reported to John Doar in the impeachment inquiry of Richard M. Nixon, introduced in Congress as an “unindicted co-conspirator in the Watergate cover-up.”
HRC, the so-called “good Republican” attempted to use the very same Watergate playbook in her email-scandal directly connected to her Russia Collusion false dossier.
JEZZZZZZZZZZZ Give it up
Silly comment
Cool story – but the democrat party’s history is rich in racism, as it is today. You are a textbook example of “indoctrination” and its destructive impacts on our Republic.
“If destruction be our lot we must ourselves be its author and finisher.”
– Abraham Lincoln, Lyceum Address, 1837
_______________________________________________
Lincoln was the author and finisher.
America was a self-governing democratic republic with elected representatives.
All Lincoln and all of those opposed to slavery had to do was vote slavery down in Congress and then obey the law.
Instead, he destroyed the Constitution and America.
All Lincoln and all of those opposed to slavery had to do was vote slavery down in Congress and then obey the law. Instead, he destroyed the Constitution and America.
Oh yeah – if not for Lincoln, today’s racist Democrats from Warren Wilson through FDR, Johnson, Carter, Clinton, Obama and Biden wouldn’t be the racists that they are!!!! X is tag teaming today, flashing back and forth between posting under “X”, and his Confederate Kluxxer alternate identity, “Anonymous”. The name changes, but the tone and the writing don’t.
The overwhelming singular failure of the American republic rights and freedoms experiment has been voters allowing the continued existence of the vile and violent, seditious DNC and their equally vile members like X, The Racist Democrat Communist Formerly Known As George.
In the history of the US the politician HRC is most similar to is Lindsey Graham. Not Lincoln or Rockefeller.
Trump is most similar to Rust Belt Democrats from the 60’s and 70’s or later those like Joe Manchin.
Racist did not take over the Republican party.
Republicans incredibly slowly defeated southern racists.
Southern Racist Democrats remained in the house and Senate will into the 21st century
Sen. Byrd was a KKK leader.
Democrats controlled the house and Senate when the CRA was passed – still it Required supermajorities of Republicans in the house and senate to pass – because large numbers of democrats opposed.
Those Republicans that opposed did so because it was unconstitutional, not because they were racist.
Following the 1960’s Civil Rights Act, the racists moved from the Democratic Party to the Republican Party. And likewise, Hillary Clinton moved to the Democrats since racists took over the Republican Party.
The hapless old Democrat defensive lie. I’ll play: name the specific Democrats who changed party affiliation to the GOP. That should be easy for you, given your deep investment in Democrat racism – name the traitors!
Can you provide enough names to need more than two fingers on one hand?
We know two of those racist Democrats that didn’t flip, still Democrats when Obama took over that racist party:
Young Democrat Senator Joe Biden, who told Americans he didn’t want those jungle bunny Darkies in the school his pure-bred children were in.
And of course Democrat Senator and Grand Kleagle, Robert Byrd – passionately eulogized by his young protegee Joe Biden and that seasoned old Democrat racist, Bill Clinton.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_party_switchers_in_the_United_States
Partly:
1850–1899
1855 – Reuben Fenton, while U.S. representative from New York (1853–1855 and 1857–1864), later governor of New York (1865–1868) and U.S. senator from New York (1869–1875)
1856 – Simon Cameron, while U.S. senator from Pennsylvania (1856–1861 and 1867–1877) and United States secretary of war (1861–1862)
1856 – Galusha A. Grow, while U.S. representative from Pennsylvania (1851–1863 and 1894–1903), later 28th speaker of the United States House of Representatives (1861–1863)
1856 – Hannibal Hamlin, while U.S. senator for Maine (1848–1861 and 1869–1881), later governor of Maine (1857) and 15th vice president of the United States (1861–1865)
1856 – Glenni William Scofield, while U.S. representative from Pennsylvania (1863–1875)
1860s – Ambrose Burnside, later Governor of Rhode Island (1866–1869) and U.S. senator from Rhode Island (1875–1881)
1860s – Benjamin Franklin Butler, later became U.S. representative from Massachusetts (1867–1875 and 1877–1879) and governor of Massachusetts (1883–1884)
1860s – James M. Hinds, later U.S. representative from Arkansas (1868)
1864 – Thompson Campbell, former U.S. representative from Illinois (1851–1853)
1865 – John A. Logan, while U.S. representative from Illinois (1853–1862 and 1867–1871), later U.S. senator from Illinois (1871–1877 and 1879–1886)
1865 – Knute Nelson, later U.S. representative from Minnesota (1883–1889), governor of Minnesota (1893–1895), and U.S. senator from Minnesota (1895–1923)[1]
1867 – John Adams Dix, former United States secretary of the treasury (1861) & U.S. senator from New York (1845–1849); later governor of New York (1873–1874)
1869 – David P. Lewis, later governor of Alabama (1872–1874)
1870 – James Lawrence Orr, former speaker of the United States House of Representatives (1857–1859) and U.S. representative (1849–1859), later governor of South Carolina (1865–1868)
1893 – James A. Walker, lieutenant governor of Virginia (1878–1882), later U.S. representative for Virginia (1895–1899)
1896 – Irving W. Drew, former New Hampshire state senator, later U.S. senator from New Hampshire (1918)[2]
1900–1949
1904 – Harry M. Wurzbach, later U.S. representative from Texas (1921–1929 and 1930–1931)[3]
1911 – Octaviano Ambrosio Larrazolo, later governor of New Mexico (1919–1921) and U.S. senator from New Mexico (1928–1929)[4]
1933 – Raymond Moley, adviser to President Franklin D. Roosevelt[5]
1939 – Wendell Willkie, later Republican nominee for president in 1940[6]
1940 – Jack Porter, challenger to Lyndon Johnson in the 1948 Texas Senate elections[7]
1946 – Rudolph G. Tenerowicz, former U.S. representative from Michigan (1939–1943)[8]
1947 – John Aspinwall Roosevelt, son of President Franklin D. Roosevelt[9]
1948 – J. Thomas Watson, former Florida Attorney General (1941–1949)[10]
1949 – Joseph A. McArdle, former U.S. representative from Pennsylvania (1939–1942)[11]
1949 – Rush D. Holt Sr., former U.S. senator from West Virginia (1935–1941)[12]
1950–1959
1951 – John Tower, later U.S. senator from Texas (1961–1985)[13]
1952 – Alphonzo E. Bell Jr., later U.S. representative from California (1961–1977)
1952 – Henry Hyde, later U.S. representative from Illinois (1975–2007)[14]
1955 – Ben Adamowski, later Cook County State’s Attorney[15]
1956 – Johnston Murray, former governor of Oklahoma (1951–1955)
1958 – Phil Ferguson, former U.S. representative from Oklahoma (1935–1941), Republican nominee for Governor of Oklahoma in 1958
1958 – Odell Pollard, later chair of the Arkansas Republican Party
1960–1969
1960 – Robert Daniel, later U.S. representative from Virginia (1973–1983)
1960 – Claude R. Kirk Jr., later governor of Florida (1967–1971)[16]
1960 – Arthur Ravenel Jr., South Carolina state representative, later U.S. representative from South Carolina (1987–1995)
1960 – Marion Hartzog Smoak, later Chief of Protocol of the United States (1972–1974)
1961 – Jack Cox, former Texas state representative
1962 – Jim Gardner, later U.S. representative (1967–1969) and lieutenant governor (1989–1993) of North Carolina
1962 – W. Don MacGillivray, California state representative
1962 – James D. Martin, later U.S. representative from Alabama (1965–1967)
1962 – David L. McCain, Florida Supreme Court justice
1962 – Ronald Reagan, while an actor and former Screen Actors Guild president,[17] later 33rd governor of California (1967–1975) and 40th president of the United States (1981–1989)
1962 – Floyd Spence, South Carolina state representative, later a U.S. representative from South Carolina (1971–2001)
1962 – Dave Treen, later U.S. representative from Louisiana (1973–1980) and governor of Louisiana (1980–1984)
1963 – FitzGerald Bemiss, Virginia state senator
1963 – James H. Boyce, later chairman of the Louisiana Republican Party
1963 – M. Patton Echols, Virginia state senator
1963 – Burnet R. Maybank Jr., former Lieutenant Governor of South Carolina (1959–1963)
1963 – Stanford Morse, Mississippi state senator
1963 – Rubel Phillips, former Mississippi public service commissioner
1963 – Edward Lunn Young, later U.S. representative from South Carolina (1973–1975)
1964 – Arthur Glenn Andrews, later U.S. representative from Alabama (1965–1967)
1964 – Iris Faircloth Blitch, former U.S. representative from Georgia (1955–1963)
1964 – Howard Callaway, later U.S. representative from Georgia (1965–1967) and United States secretary of the Army (1973–1975)[18]
1964 – William Dickinson, later a U.S. representative from Alabama (1965–1993)
1964 – John Paul Hammerschmidt, later U.S. representative from Arkansas (1967–1993)
1964 – Charles W. Pickering, later Mississippi state senator and judge of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi (2004)
1964 – Clarke Reed, later chairman of the Mississippi Republican Party
1964 – Strom Thurmond, while U.S. senator from South Carolina (1954–2003)[19]
1964 – Faith Whittlesey, Pennsylvania state representative
1965 – Arthur R. Outlaw, mayor of Mobile, Alabama
1965 – George Yarbrough, Mississippi state senator
1966 – Fred Connors, South Carolina state representative
1966 – Henry Grover, Texas state representative
1966 – Jerome Hughes, South Carolina state representative
1966 – Reid Moore Jr., Florida state representative
1967 – Bill Archer, Texas health commissioner, later a U.S. representative (1971–2001)
1967 – David L. Brower, Florida state representative
1967 – Thad Cochran, later a U.S. representative from Mississippi (1973–1978) and U.S. senator from Mississippi (1978–2018)
1967 – Jerry H. Geisler, Virginia state representative
1967 – Jack B. Ray, State treasurer of Georgia (1965–71)
1967 – Ronnie Thompson, mayor of Macon, Georgia
1968 – Grailey Berryhill, Tennessee state representative
1968 – James L. Bentley, Comptroller General of Georgia (1963–1971)
1968 – Jim Caldwell, Arkansas state representative
1968 – Phil Campbell, Commissioner of Agriculture of Georgia (1955–1969)
1968 – Sanford Charron, former Michigan state representative
1968 – William E. Dannemeyer, former California state representative and later U.S. representative from California (1979–1993)
1968 – R. Earl Dixon, Florida state representative
1968 – Alpha A. Fowler Jr., member of the Georgia Public Service Commission
1968 – Gordon McLendon, radio broadcaster and frequent political candidate in Texas
1968 – Curtis S. Person Jr., Tennessee state representative
1968 – Crawford Pilcher, member of the Georgia Public Service Commission
1969 – Guy O. Farley Jr., Virginia state representative[20]
1969 – Raymond R. Guest Jr., Virginia state representative
1969 – Donald Hazelton, Florida state representative
There is no solution to modern academia but to stop sending your kids or to burn it to the ground and start over. Even kids with the *best* upbringing, in the reddest of places, are still churning out students who have been indoctrinated at least a little. A modern college degree is worth about what you pay for a coffee. the debt is absurd. But, Obama basically said that if you don’t go to the indoctrination centers, you might as well not exist in 21st century society.
Modern college is a catastrophe and a very bad joke, I don’t care which university or even community college, and the posters here saying theirs are ok in their conservative enclaves aren’t paying attention, just as they don’t pay attention to primary education, and I am no leftist, but i have never seen babying of kids like I have in a conservative place; you could mistake a son for a mom’s boyfriend such is the babying. Accept that the, ‘bringing the teacher an apple’, days are not just dead, but fully incinerated. Charters and privates are no better as the teachers are going to the same universities.
My wife mentors teachers, and this is literally everywhere, metrics be damned. You no longer get candidates that haven’t been mislead, period, anywhere in America. It would really, really, behoove us to address this. It will indeed bear fruit in the coming years.
James,
Well, young people are questioning the value of a degree considering they are paying for indoctrination and the exorbitant cost, saddling the student with debt that could not be paid off for decades. Enrollment is down.
Then there is grade inflation, which brings us the question, did they really master the material in college or just get passed along and to keep the metrics of appearing to be a top tier school, inflate that grade!
Managers whom have hired recent college grads in some cases have fired them a few months later. College is not preparing these young people for the work place.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/yourmoney/consumer/article-13886905/bosses-firing-gen-z-workers-record-time.html
There is some good news as some states and companies are getting rid of the college education requirement.
In the beginning, college was supposed to produce a well rounded individual with an expertise in a given major. With the soaring costs of college, we have to ask are all those general education requirements really necessary? Are DEI mandates really have any value added? Streamline college to courses directly related to a given major and college costs could be halved. Saves on time too.
Does a pre-med student really need to take Art Appreciation or LBGwhatever studies?
General education requirements ought to include civics and elementary logic.
Of course I thank those should be high school requirements…
Agreed David, Civics and elementary logic should absolutely be part of general education. And yes, they should be taught well before college.
The problem is that we’ve largely abandoned them everywhere. When students arrive at college without a working understanding of constitutional principles or basic logic, universities either remediate poorly or replace those foundations with ideology.
Civics and logic aren’t optional skills. They’re prerequisites for self-government. Without them, higher education can’t refine judgment — it can only shape opinion.
Restoring those disciplines, starting in K–12 and reinforced in college, would do more to repair education than almost any new program or mandate.
OLLY,
“Restoring those disciplines, starting in K–12,”
I agree.
“General education requirements ought to include civics and elementary logic.”
They used to before conservative leaders removed them from the curriculum.
“They used to before conservative leaders removed them from the curriculum.”
Hogwash.
The gutting of the *Western* curriculum began in the 20th century, when academics replaced Aristotelian logic with the mindless manipulation of symbols. And then in the 60’s, when they replaced Western civilization courses with “social justice” courses like: “The Beauty and Politics of Black Hair.”
The final gutting is modern. Academics “reimagined” entire subjects, e.g.,: “English Literature” now means Marxism.
I understand the anger behind what James is saying, but “burn it to the ground” concedes too much.
What we’re really seeing isn’t an inevitable collapse of education, but a loss of purpose. Higher education drifted away from forming citizens and competent professionals and toward credentialing, metrics management, and ideological conformity. When purpose erodes, everything downstream — cost, debt, grade inflation, and workplace readiness — follows.
Upstate is right that students are questioning the value proposition. They should. When employers decouple hiring from degrees, that’s a market signal, not a culture-war slogan. Grade inflation combined with lowered expectations helps no one — students least of all.
But the answer isn’t abandoning education wholesale. It’s restoring its mission.
College originally existed to do two things:
Form citizens capable of self-government.
Develop real competence in a chosen field.
When universities load programs with ideological mandates and irrelevant requirements, they inflate cost while diluting both goals. A pre-med student doesn’t need ideological coursework unrelated to medicine. Neither does an engineer or accountant. Streamlining to core competencies and genuine liberal education — reading, writing, reasoning, history, science — would cut costs and raise standards.
One important clarification: private institutions absolutely have the right to pursue alternative missions — ideological, religious, vocational, or otherwise. That’s freedom of association and should be protected.
But no institution, public or private, has a right to public funding if it abandons the principled public purpose that justifies that funding in the first place. Taxpayer dollars exist to advance civic formation and genuine education, not to subsidize ideological projects that undermine those ends.
We don’t need to burn education down.
We need to rebuild it around first principles.
If we fail to do that, then yes — degrees become overpriced credentials, and the republic pays the price in citizens unprepared for self-government.
Privatization! Last Century Already!
“Last century already” is not analysis. It’s intellectual drive-by commentary.
Either explain the principle you’re defending, or admit this is just a reflexive slogan.
College mainly existed to perpetuate the good-old-boys network. There was a major acceleration away from that when the Russians managed to get a manned space capsule into orbit while NASA was still setting fire to launch platforms. A full panic over the USA lagging behind Russia in technology trained workers led to pushing college as the American way.
Then came the gutting of the blue collar workers when profits no longer went to higher wages and instead went to investor pockets. The only way up was management and the only way to management was a college degree. Pretty soon everyone had a bachelor’s, so it became a requirement for advancement to have a Master’s degree in management, the overdone MBA. Then there were too many colleges meeting that demand and the market became over-stuffed.
Attempts to escape via JD degree also met with a logjam of too many people fighting for too few jobs.
The USA sold the foothold jobs to China. In Shenzen one can walk among a dozen companies that can do CNC work, circuit board work, injection molding, packaging; all in one day and get competitive bids. Anyone with a better mouse trap design can have a working prototype by the end of the week and a shipping container of finished product in slick boxes by the end of the month. That doesn’t happen in the US because all the little shops that did that sort of work are gone. Without those foothold jobs there’s no way to start up the ladder.
American capitalists sent American capital to build China. Those capitalists are puppeteering the Republican party.
All of this is explained in my book “The Right to Rage: How Billionaires Hired Millionaires to Convince the Middle and Lower Class to be Minions.”
“. . . did they really master the material in college . . .”
Yes, they did.
And therein lies the fundamental problem with academia — the *content* of the curriculum.
James, are conservative parents so weak they are unable to manage discipline of their children? Perhaps the problem for conservative children is their parents abdicating responsibility for raising them, that the parents are outsourcing the raising of their children to strangers.
Have conservative parents no hand-me-down bootstraps by which their children can lift themselves?
Chris Rock – How not to get your ass kicked by the police!
Change Police To ICE.
Change ICE to Police.
Change Immigration and Customs Enforcement to police? That doesn’t make any sense. ICE enforces federal law in every state and city in the U.S. “Police” in this case currently exist as the Minneapolis Police Department. You must be a hysterical and incoherent liberal leftist. Perhaps you mean to eliminate one of the jurisdictions—federal or municipal. Would you also suggest changing the FBI to police?
Actually, I would prefer ICE by abolished, and the old INS agency (Immigration and Naturalization Service) re-established. It worked perfectly well for 100 years.
Other than that, yes change ICE to Police.
*Police do not wear masks or carry military weapons. Police wear their name on their uniform and, for the most part, are proud of their profession and respected by the U.S. citizens they are sworn to ‘protect and serve’.
OK. Go do that, lawmaker; you may want to run for office first.
“It worked perfectly well for 100 years.”
Have you ever been to California and the Southwest?
It’s —-ing mexiafraasiarabia, most of them were and remain illegal and there’s barely an American left after your 100 years.
You support the invasion and conquista of America.
Do you also reject and forsake your family?
What a patriot!
“Actually, I would prefer ICE by abolished, and the old INS agency (Immigration and Naturalization Service) re-established. It worked perfectly well for 100 years.”
INS agents arrested and deported people, and patrolled the border.
I am not a supporter of the concentration of power in DHS, or even the existance of DHS.
But our immigration laws are going to be enforced – by men with guns if needed.
BTW ICE officers are “police” they have “Police” in large letters on their uniforms.
“Police do not wear masks”
No one wore masks until 2020.
Now lots of law enforcement does, Antifa does, protesters do.
“or carry military weapons.”
They have since the 60’s, regardless I will be happy to see the weapons of LEOs limited.
“Police wear their name on their uniform”
There are plenty of nonuniformed police as well as officers whose names are covered on their uniforms.
You will get to know who your arresting officer is when you are arraigned.
” and, for the most part, are proud of their profession and respected by the U.S. citizens”
Not by the left.
Minneapolis declared a riot yesterday, the MPD were dispatched and faced the same violence as ICE.
Officers in ICE are proud of that they do, and many citizens are proud of what ICE does.
“they are sworn to ‘protect and serve’
and enFORCE the law.