Diversity of Everything but Thought

Do you have a link to that? Not because I don't believe it, but because I don't remember it.

And also because if you concede that, then you have no argument whatsoever! I mean, if you concede that kids aren't being 'Liberalized' by thier profs, then what the hell is your problem with the way things are, anyways?

Cycloptichorn

Nothing escaped me, and certainly not the paranoid statement highlighted above. If it weren't made so ridiculously easy to accomplish, there might be a lot less of it. Hoist on your own pétard ninety-nine times out of one hundred. It is deliciously amusing in conjunction with the sneer which ends the quote above.

Frankly Cyclop I don't care what you believe as I believe you have had this pretty much 100% wrong from the beginning. If you want a link go look for it. I requested we keep this discussion civil and on point and free of personal attacks. If you do not care to do that it is your prerogative. I won't order you to leave the thread as you ordered me to leave your thread earlier this week, but I will ask that if you participate you follow the guidelines of TOS and respect the intent of the thread. I will ask the same of Setanta.

There is not a scintilla of personal attack in what Cyclo just posted. Once again, Fox equates any refutation of a her ridiculous thesis with a personal attack--simply formulated, the principle is: "Agree with what i say, or you are guilty of a vile slander against me."

To quote Fox: "But that is not unusual nor unexpected."

No, both Cyclop and Setanta regularly misrepresent and misreport, if not flat out mistate what I say and what the think I intend. And both obviously have no intend of allowing a civil discussion in this thread. And that is unfortunate.

So is your intent the same as your proposition, FF? Or something different?

Could you at least clarify what it is you are intending to prove. Or intent on proving.

~~~~~~~

You're a very fine digresser, FF. If you want people to respect your "intent", you need to do so as well. You've wandered off-topic (at least as far as you've suggested your intent might be) as rapidly as other posters here. Very few innocents to be found.

Fox, how can we mis-represent what we THINK you INTEND? We're not psychic and you do a damn poor job of making your intentions clear!

You may notice that EVERYONE besides you is HAVING a civil conversation with each other, regardless of position. Think on this.

Cycloptichorn

Nonsense. I don't think anyone has said that students are either dominated or entirely unaffected by the general tenor on university campuses today. There are undoubtedly influences in both directions resulting from the evident biases of the faculty and the political cant that pervades the institutions. I make no guess about their net effect on the political views of the students. The essential point in the George Will piece is that eventually both students and the general public become immune to the cant of the media and the academic elites. That fact, however, doesn't in any way excuse the bias and the mindless conformity of thought that does inded pervade these institutions.

I was intending to have a discussion ehBeth as I posted only a short time ago. I had no intention of proving or disproving anything from the beginning. What I have proved, nevertheless, is that intolerance for diversity of thought is alive and well.

Indeed it is . . . the right proves that every day.

The left shows their intolerance for diversity in the courts--refusing to allow any judges who aren't pro-abortion to even stand for an up or down vote.

Yeah, yeah, whatever. You surely at the time had a huge problem with the blocking of Clinton-era judges, then, correct?

Cycloptichorn

We were just trying to even it up.

They have too many.

So in a sense of fairplay lets offer the idea that Dems get 1/3, repubs get 1/3 and (in reality) independents get 1/3. Works for me, how about you?

I'll take it.

groovy, and now I offer we add, just a few, actual liberals. (ok and a couple christian fruitcakes)

No.

They are not invited.

fox

You are effectively impossible to talk with in this discussion. No amount of reasoning, no matter how detailed and careful, moves you when it leads to conclusions you do not wish to conclude.

Horowitz demonstrates NO ideological balance in anything he is involved in - but to you, that must be factually wrong or it must be justifiable.

Horowitz says things or writes things, and anyone who is fond of democracy and transparency and honesty of intent shudders at what he is saying - but for you, that can only mean Horowitz must have been taken out of context.

Etc etc.

And then you turn on the victim tears because everybody (except those few who also need to find the same conclusion you need to find) gets pissed at you for your absolute inability to let go of your lousy thesis. As if you are the only one who has put in hours and hours reading and writing and thinking and discussing. I have had it up to HERE with you so many times since we first met that I have sworn off trying god knows how many times. I'm sure you are a very nice person, which is probably why I end up trying again and again. But you are caught up in ideology and partisan allegiance on certain matters so thoroughly that speaking with a wall would be as rewarding.

Blatham, in all due respect, how difficult is it to discuss a concept instead of the person offering it? I don't have any problem doing that. Why do you?

Edited to add: And I'm sorry but I don't accept a 'victimization' role though you and others try to pin that on me when I object to how I am characterized. I feel frustrated when some...you?....absolutely seem incapable of understanding a thesis or a simple request for courtesy. Victims are for those on the left and they play that role to the fullest. I don't feel sorry for myself and I don't have much sympathy for those who do. If I am not clear to you, all you ever have to do is ask what my meaning or intent was and I will give my best shot at an answer. Your almost consistently erroneous conclusions of my intent or meaning are wearying and there is no point in responding to them. I just accept what your friends say: be tolerant. He can't help it.

Please forgive me, I was only able to digest the first page of this silly thread so my comments may be slightly uninformed. Instead of worrying about how many liberals or conservatives are involved in discussions, why don't we take a minute and examine what is going on in the rest of the world. I know it's hard, tearing yourself away from the television (desperate housewives, jerry springer, all the reality shows) but take a look at some of the rest of the worlds views on the US. I'm not saying they have it straight, but at least they follow what is going on here. If we keep worrying about abortion, gay marriage, Bill Clinton's BJ's as if it is the only thing that defines us as Americans......give a thought to what it would be like to live under Chinese/Pakistan/Middle East/ former USSR rule. At least some of you can still bellyache over the fact that universities are a hot-bed of learning. I think you should get on your knees and thank God for the opportunity to live in a country that allows diverse opinion (well at least for the time-being). And if anyone thinks that bring back school prayer will solve our problems, I will agree as long as the prayer is "The Hail Mary". I know that the folks reading this who are able to think for themselves will realize that is a satirical remark, for all the others, abandon all hope.