David Horowitz: Democrats are the party of hate

@layman,

Quote:

Nice try, cheese-eater. A "single instance," eh? Although there are millions of appalling anecdotes that can be told, there's no real need for that. Statistical facts tell the story.

Quote:
Liberal professors outnumber conservatives nearly 12 to 1, study finds

I love irony!

1 Reply

Quote:

Quote:
Liberal professors outnumber conservatives nearly 12 to 1, study finds

In soft subjects...

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

Quote:
Nice try, cheese-eater. A "single instance," eh? Although there are millions of appalling anecdotes that can be told, there's no real need for that. Statistical facts tell the story.

Quote:
Liberal professors outnumber conservatives nearly 12 to 1, study finds

I love irony!

Where's the "irony," fool?

2 Replies

@layman,

Look at what you wrote again and see if you see it (you might need to take off your partisan glasses). If you really can't see why I found this funny, I will tell you.

1 Reply

@layman,

You seem to be quite long on assertion and quite short on facts, Max. You project onto others what you routinely do. You are NOT well-informed. You simple deduce "necessary" conclusions, a priori, from your deeply embedded ideological premises, and call your conclusions "facts"

You bray out emotionial responses, but very seldom address the issues in any substantive way. Your credibility suffers greatly as a result.

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

Look at what you wrote again and see if you see it (you might need to take off your partisan glasses). If you really can't see why I found this funny, I will tell you.

More evasive posturing, as it quite typical from you.

No, spell out the "irony," fool Don't think that everyone else automatically adopts your senseless emotions and immediately "sees" exactly what you are talking about. No rational person does.

1 Reply

@layman,

1. You quote a headline from the Washington Times which say "Study says". That is an anecdote.

2. It is from the Washington Times (which is a far right partisan source).

3. The journalist starts off by saying "A new study confirms what even the most casual observer of higher education has long known...". That is simply funny.

4. The "study" is using party affiliation where the article uses the word "liberal" and "conservative".

5. People with Post-Graduate degrees are far more likely to be Democrats than Republicans. College professors almost always have a post graduate degree.

This whole argument is silly. And I am again making the mistake of getting into an argument with you where you are using the "argument by Google" tactic. You seem to be very good at the argument by Google. Maybe I should just concede.

Anyway, I found your comment to be funny.

2 Replies

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

1. You quote a headline from the Washington Times which say "Study says". That is an anecdote.

2. It is from the Washington Times (which is a far right partisan source).

3. The journalist who starts off by saying "A new study confirms what even the most casual observer of higher education has long known...". That is simply funny.

4. The "study" is using party affiliation where the article uses the word "liberal" and "conservative".

5. People with Post-Graduate degrees are far more likely to be Democrats than Republicans. College professors almost always have a post graduate degree.

This whole argument is silly. And I am again making the mistake of getting into an argument with you where you are using the "argument by Google" tactic. You seem to be very good at the argument by Google. Maybe I should just concede.

Anyway, I found your comment to be funny.

Heh, exactly what I thought. More transparent sophistry from you, which is your standard fare.

The Washington Post did NOT do this study.

It was published in a peer-reviewed academic journal and done by college professers from different universities.

Read it, fool, it's chock-full of charts and data:

Quote:

We looked up 7,243 professors and found 3,623 to be registered Democratic and 314 Republican, for an overall D:R ratio of 11.5:1.

You actually think that your pretentious, meaningless sneering can change the facts, don't you?

It's really pathetic.

1 Reply

@layman,

Quote:

We looked up 7,243 professors and found 3,623 to be registered Democratic and 314 Republican, for an overall D:R ratio of 11.5:1.

I accept this fact (I checked, and it seems that the study was well constructed).

I don't accept what you are alleging it means.

First of all, I do not accept that "registered Democrat" is a synonym of "Liberal".

Second of all, It is also a fact that more educated you are, the more likely you are to be a Democrat. This is also a fact. http://www.people-press.org/2015/04/07/a-deep-dive-into-party-affiliation/

Assuming that we our Professors to be the most educated people (and I do), if you care about the political affiliation of professors (which I don't); the only way to fix this problem is for conservatives to start getting educated.

I am not a knee-jerk liberal. I am fully willing to support conservatives when they are right and I am happy to argue against liberals. I am on record as doing so. I call them as I see them.

I think the conservatives have a point about what is happening on college campuses. However there are many professors and academics, including prominent liberals, who are speaking out about this.

The narrative that "Liberals are blocking free speech" is demonstrably inaccurate.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

1. You quote a headline from the Washington Times which say "Study says". That is an anecdote.

2. It is from the Washington Times (which is a far right partisan source).

Can you even begin to see how senseless such comments are, Max? You think you have somehow turned a very substantial academic undertaking to collect data into an "anecdote" BECAUSE it's existence was noted in a respected newspaper.

I'll grant you the existence of this study was probably suppressed by the typical left-wing rag. And, of course, for a cheese-eater like you, if it wasn't reported in a left-wing rag, it didn't happen--or, if you're forced to concede that it did happen, then it's prima facie false, because Pravda didn't report it.

1 Reply

@layman,

Quote:

I'll grant you the existence of this study was probably suppressed by the typical left-wing rag. And, of course, for a cheese-eater like you, if it wasn't reported in a left-wing rag, it didn't happen--or, if you're forced to concede that it did happen, then it's prima facie false, because Pravda didn't report it.

Actually it wasn't suppressed by the "typical left-wing rag". Good news sources often explore ideas from different political perspectives.

http://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/article/2016/12/20/liberal-professors/

Of course, this is a nuanced take.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

Second of all, It is also a fact that more educated you are, the more likely you are to be a Democrat. This is also a fact. http://www.people-press.org/2015/04/07/a-deep-dive-into-party-affiliation/

Heh.

1. Your own study says: "The Democrats’ edge among those with college degrees or some post-graduate experience (49%-42%), and those with less education (47%-39%)."

49-42 it NOT 12 times as many, eh? It aint twice as many. It aint 1.5 times as many. It's less than 20% more. That is, about 1/60th of a 12 to 1 margin. Your "argument" is merely proving the opposite of what you're trying to suggest.

You're fallaciously trying to suggest that the reason that there are 12 times as many liberal professors is because there are 12 times as many out there on the streets to choose from, and it's all "random," eh? Nice try, cheese-eater.

2. Those indoctrinated as children to believe in sharia law are more likely to be devoted to sharia law than those who aint. College students who are indoctrinated from day 1 turn out to be (slightly) more inclined to adopt the indoctrination they're subjected to than those who don't attend college. Again, you're proving the argument you're trying to attack.

1 Reply

@layman,

I didn't recall making any argument about Sharia law.

You seem to have problems distinguishing between fact and ideological narrative.

That there are 11.5 more registered Democrats working as professors than Republicans is a fact. You have shown me a reputable source that has been peered reviewed, and I accept that you are correct. I have no trouble admitting when you are right, and on this fact you are right.

However this is the only fact that you have proposed. The rest of the stuff is just ideological nonsense that you are making up. You seem to be asserting that your ideological narrative counts as fact. It doesn't.

2 Replies

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

Actually it wasn't suppressed by the "typical left-wing rag". Good news sources often explore ideas from different political perspectives.

http://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/article/2016/12/20/liberal-professors/

Of course, this is a nuanced take.

Hahahaha!

1. If your liberal rags are reporting it, then why did you choose to try to dismiss the whole study because the Washington Times ALSO reported it, eh? You know, what you called a "far-right wing source" (or something like that).

Hmmmmm?

2. More "nuanced," eh? More accurate, maybe, sure. The headline reads: How Liberal Professors Are Ruining College

My source didn't make a single claim about what was good or bad, or what was being "ruined" like yours, which starts out by saying: 'In New England, they outnumber conservatives 28 to 1. Why that’s bad for everyone.'

Do you ever feel embarrassed by your own self-contradiction and inconsistency, I wonder, eh, Max?

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

I didn't recall making any argument about Sharia law.

You seem to have problems distinguishing between fact and ideological narrative.

No, Max, but you clearly have trouble understanding the most elementary logic (and it's implications). Leave it to you to completely miss a very clear point and respond with some total non sequitur in an attempt to evade/confuse the issue. Typical, sho nuff.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

You seem to be asserting that your ideological narrative counts as fact. It doesn't.

I'll remind you once again, Max. You cited the Boston article as a "good news" source. It's headline says: How Liberal Professors Are Ruining College

Best go talk to your cheese-eating liberal homeys about how nothing they say "counts," eh?

0 Replies

@layman,

Quote:

. Leave it to you to completely miss a very clear point and respond with some total non sequitur in an attempt to evade/confuse the issue. Typical, sho nuff.

Other than than your assertion that I am an inaccurate, inconsistent, sneering, uninformed, cheese-eating, ignorant, braying, self-contradictory liberal fool...

... what is your point again?

I think this thread is about how Democrats are the party of hate.

1 Reply

I've seen two-year olds who think you can no longer see them if they put their hands over their eyes (because they can no longer see you). I've also seen them believe that if they say "no," that makes their negation objectively true.

That's just kinda the way it is with humans who have yet to develop any sense of objectivity or logical ability, ya know?

1 Reply

@layman,

Keep it up Layman, you are on a roll.

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

what is your point again?

On this topic, my point is that your sophistical attempt to dismiss Horrowitz's claim as being emotion-driven and based on a "single instance," was pure crap. You have proved that YOU, not Horrowitz, are the one guilty of this.

Try to keep up, eh, Max?

0 Replies

David Horowitz: Democrats are the party of hate

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know