Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Moderate Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Glenn Petersen who wrote (14413)	12/5/2004 3:01:48 PM
From: redfish	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20773

"a national survey of more than 1,000 academics, shows that Democratic professors outnumber Republicans by at least seven to one in the humanities and social sciences" I don't think that should be surprising. I have never been very certain of what "social science" consists of, but as far as the humanities go, I am familiar with that and there is no way in hell that a significant number of them will ever be republicans. This is due primarily, imo, to the "moral majority" aspect of the republican party that has gone through several permutations (latest is "values voters") throughout the past couple of decades, but has been a consistent presence throughout. You really can't expect humanities professors to throw their lot in with those people. As there are only two real parties, these people become democrats by default. This is really a symptom of the failure of the two party system. I would love to be part of an effective national party that hasn't swallowed the diversity Koolaid, but such a party doesn't exist, so I'm a democrat by default, until I become so disgusted that I move the other way for two or three years, become disgusted with that party, and move back to where I started. We really should have more choices but the system is set up to benefit the status quo.

To: Glenn Petersen who wrote (14413)	12/5/2004 11:50:37 PM
From: cosmicforce	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20773

Thanks for the factual link, after all, the more one learns the more they are likely to shed a tear when another human suffers, or call out those that would silence pluralistic viewpoints. The academics should be our conscience and reminders that we are not all we could be. Hurray! The founding fathers were liberals in that sense, though they'd not recognize the degree to which their doctrine was successful. The media, as well, are not supposed to be the cheerleaders of the powerful. That is not their job. So, if they are biased, let the bias be revealed - I have no problem with that. The old fashioned conservative who like to get government off the backs of people and modern liberal are getting compatible these days. Cheers for that! Doctors may be biased against traditional medicine. That isn't a problem for me either if I have a tumor to be cut out. Probably more effective than waiving a dead chicken over me. There are plenty of angry political labdog voices to be heard - it will hard to not hear them. They control the airwaves of middle America. Even in the urban market there are plenty of syndicated hate radio stars just waiting to cry foul about how the liberals have destroyed our country. I sleep well tonight if I know there is some opposing fountain from which the curious can drink.