Thursday, April 12, 2012

Lying Black Leaders Tout Highway to Hell

American Clarion ^ | April 12, 2012 | Gina Miller

The Father of Lies is really whipping up his hordes lately, and this week we have heard the most despicable, lying words out of the mouths of these people under Satan’s sway who hate their own country and their fellow American citizens.

We are still seeing the most ridiculous reaction to the killing in Florida of the black teenager, Trayvon Martin, by the neighborhood watchman, George Zimmerman, who claims to have been acting in self-defense. The disgusting overreaction by race-baiting black leaders is grossly irrational, because these people are calling for violence and working their followers up into a senseless frenzy over this single incident of what does appear to be legitimate self-defense by Zimmerman, while at the same time they ignore the epidemic scourge of black on black murders that plagues this nation.

This past week, Jesse Jackson, Jeremiah Wright and representatives of the New Black Panther Party all contributed to the polluted discourse of the communist Left. In the case of the New Black Panthers, we are dealing with seriously deranged people who have the sickest of minds and the most diseased of spirits. They are calling for violence in our streets, but the racist Justice Department under Barack Obama (or whatever his name is) does not lift a finger to hold them accountable for their reprehensible, even criminal, words—words which could be said to have inspired recent black on white violence, such as the terrible group of blacks beating and robbing a white man on St. Patrick’s Day in Baltimore, or the black, animal punks who viciously beat a 78-year-old white man in Toledo while yelling, “This is for Trayvon!”

The New Black Panther audio from last week features Michelle Williams of the Tampa chapter of the New Black Panthers and Chawn Kweli, a national New Black Panther spokesmouth on a conference call with their fellow traveling idiots.

Here is a sample of what they said, courtesy of The Blaze,

Williams: I just want to say to all the listeners on this phone call, that if you are having any doubt about getting suited, booted, and armed up for this race war that we’re in that has never ended, let me tell you somethin…the thing that’s about to happen these honkies, these crackers, these pigs, these people, these [m- f-s]…it has been long overdue.”

Kweli: “Ya, what she said was right– we got to suit up and boot up…and get prepared for the war that we’re in…this stuff got to boil over, and all your [greats] talked about that happened to be bloodshed involved with revolution- true revolution means some bloodshed, so there’s blood being spilled because there’s a new life that is beyond this bloodshed. There is a new reality that is built upon your original African principles and spiritualities and values and norms that is beyond this bloodshed. But we gotta go do it.

“And as the Scripture said, you gotta to cross it. We gon’ have to cross the Red Sea….I know y’all thought it was talking about some sea in some Middle Eastern part of the world- hell no. We’re talking about some blood. You’re gonna have to cross some blood, and go through some blood and some battles.

“And there are those who wish they could stand in this hour, to see the destruction of the devil’s world and the devil’s society- and I‘m ain’t talking about no dude underneath the ground with a pitchfork and pantyhose. I’m talking about that blonde haired, blue-eyed, sometimes brown-eyed, Caucasian walkin around with a mindset, a demonistic mindset, and a nature to do evil and brutality.”

That is more than enough to give you an idea of the evil minds of these degenerate vegetables. They go on to declare that they are also at war with capitalism itself, because they blame capitalism for all their woes—well, capitalism and “white” people, that is. How typical of the radical Left to try to blame others for their own problems which result from their own bad behavior and their own bad choices.

These maniacs on that conference call are ranting about black people being under attack by racism. Apparently they would not know real racism if it bit them in the face, since they seem unable to see it staring, glaring back at them from their own mirrors. Yes, these vicious racists are enemies of their own country, the country in which they were blessed to be born, even though they are too blinded by their mindless hatred to see the gifts that God has given them.

The same is true for Jesse Jackson and Jeremiah Wright. Jackson abused Scripture to push the Left’s insane class warfare platform when he slandered Jesus with the moronic claim that Jesus is just like the Occupy loons, because he says Jesus was a class warfare proponent—a damnable lie.

And, Jeremiah Wright, Obama’s dear leader “pastor” of twenty years, said some of the most astonishingly ignorant words you can imagine. But, just like the Devil, Wright manages to weave a grain of truth into a big wad of lies as he declares in part,

The god of racists is not the God of righteousness. The god of the greedy is not the God of grace.

Of course God is not for racial hatred and greed, but then Wright steps back in it when he says,

Those are two different gods and I ain’t talking about Allah and Yahweh. Those are the same names for the same God.

Jeremiah Wright and Jesse Jackson both show themselves to be stunningly ignorant of the Word of God, or at least unable to discern its meaning. For Wright to claim that the God of Christianity and Judaism is the same god as worshipped by the Islamists shows a complete lack of understanding of Who God is, because if Allah exists, he is surely Satan, who long ago set himself up as an arch-enemy of God. And, for Jackson to say that Jesus has anything at all in common with the brain-addled, anarchist Occupiers is a display of profound ignorance of Who Jesus is.

Even the vicious New Black Panther goon invoked and misused Scripture when referring to crossing the Red Sea, which he twisted from the miraculous event of the Lord leading the Israelites out of Egypt ahead of the Egyptian army and through the Red Sea that had been freshly-parted by the hand of God. This vile man, Chawn Kweli, attempts to hijack that amazing, historic event and join it to an abominable, murderous crusade by his army of anti-American orcs.

These black leaders are touting the highway to Hell and nothing more. They are inspired by the enemy of God and mankind. Satan is full of senseless, murderous hatred for God and all of creation, and so are these people, his minions. What is their goal? Apparently it is the murder of “white” people and the death of mainstream American capitalism. Why? I am not sure, but it seems they mistakenly believe that if a large-scale race war ensues, and many people die in the streets of America, somehow their lives will suddenly be grand. Kill enough crackers, and all will be right with the world. I suppose that makes about as much sense as any other lie from the pit of Hell.

The question is, how much of this is our country going to take before those in authority crack down on these animals? I am not talking about silencing idiot speech, such as that by Jesse Jackson or the deranged Jeremiah Wright, but criminal speech, like what has been uttered by the New Black Panthers. In our nation it is against the law to make death threats. With impunity, these New Black Panther lunatics are making death threats and calling for violence. Do not doubt that there will be those who accept their challenges, as we have already seen.

How many people will have to die before America stands up and says, “Enough!” to these people making criminal threats and criminal demands for the capture “dead or alive” of a fellow American citizen and making calls for bloody violence to be visited upon their perceived “enemies”? These people must be stopped, and I am waiting to see who has the will to stop them.

Not only is Barack Obama a liar but he is a coward.

Neal's Nuze ^ | 4-11-12 | Neal Boortz
Not only is Barack Obama a liar but he is a coward. Yes, I will continue to call the Oval Occupier a liar so long as he insists on this asinine concept that the rich aren’t paying their fair share.
 
And I will also throw in the word “coward” because his focus on the evil rich and the Buffett Rule is two-fold: It is a distraction from the true failures of his presidency and it demonstrates his unwillingness to reform our “broken” tax code.
 
His own administration admits that it is “broken.” So their solution is the call for taxes on millionaires? If that was the fix to our behemoth tax code, then people wouldn’t be spending millions of dollars trying to come up with ideas on how to fix it.
 
If Barack Obama was truly concerned about America’s future he would cut this crap about “fairness” and the Buffett Rule and tackle entitlement reform and tax reform. But those aren’t sexy subjects when you have a re-election campaign to win.
 
Yes, Dear Ruler’s speech in Florida yesterday was every bit as absurd as you would expect.
 
Obama says, "Do we want to keep giving tax breaks to folks like me who don't need them? .... Or do we want to keep investing in those things that keep our economy growing and keep us secure?" There’s that “secure” word again. Obama believes that government is the only source of “security” for Americans. “Investing” is just a fancy way of saying “spend more to grow the size of government.”
 
And don’t forget that magic word “need.” Obama really loves to talk about all of these evil people trying to keep money they don’t “need.” Just remember who first popularized this little saying. It was a guy named Karl Marx. No .. not from The Communist Manifesto (though Obama borrows from that as well), it’s from a Marx writing titled “Critique of the Gotha Program.” Here’s the full quote; notice how it starts out:
In a higher phase of communist society, after the enslaving subordination of the individual to the division of labor, and therewith also the antithesis between mental and physical labor, has vanished; after labor has become not only a means of life but life's prime want; after the productive forces have also increased with the all-around development of the individual, and all the springs of co-operative wealth flow more abundantly—only then can the narrow horizon of bourgeois right be crossed in its entirety and society inscribe on its banners: From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs!
This is Obama’s governing principle. If you need something the government will provide it to you. If you have more than you need it is the government’s purpose to take it from you and give it to the people who do need it. Obama’s philosophy is stated in the opening seven words of Marx’ quote.
Obama also says, "What drags down our entire economy is the growing gap between the ultra-rich and everyone else.” Yeah .. those successful, innovative, hard working entrepreneurs are really dragging down our economy. The fact is, when you divide our economy into five segments, with the rich on one end, the poor on the other, and the middle class in the center, the numbers show that the people in the lower brackets are actually moving up. The higher income brackets are getting larger, the lower income brackets shrinking. Hmmmmm.
What drags down our economy, Dear Ruler? Parasites. It’s the parasites, leaches and moochers that are dragging down our economy with their incessant demands for more and more of someone else’s money. Our economy is also being dragged down by your penchant for hyper-regulation. The costs of just the regulations thrown at our economy during your junta is in the billions of dollars. Gas prices? Now there’s something with a negative affect on our economy – and your solution? Well, somehow you think that if you raise taxes on the evil oil companies gas prices will come down. That’s economic demagoguery, and it’s dragging down our economy as well.
The achievers are dragging down nothing.
The fact is that raising taxes on the rich is also a tax increase on job creators who pay taxes through individual tax returns. The money that Obama so emphatically insists on taking is money that could otherwise be spent on investing in news businesses or expanding existing ones with equipment or employees. This will do nothing but slow job growth. A recent study from Obama’s own Treasury Department shows that 90% of businesses that pay taxes through the individual income tax code and employ workers would pay the higher taxes under Obama’s plan.
In the grand scheme of government spending, how much money are we talking about from this Buffett Rule? In terms of debt reduction, it would reduce the debt in Obama’s budget by about 1 ½%. Or another way to think about it … asking every federal agency and department to get by with 99% of what it received last year would generate six times the savings of the Buffett Rule.

Obama is trying to define this race in November. He wants the Buffett Rule to act as a sort of Litmus Test, distinguishing those who buy into his horsesqueeze from those who refuse to step in it. Don’t let Obama define the parameters of this election.

The election needs to be about his failures and the future of freedom in this country … not about “fairness” and the evil rich.

Rejecting the Buffett Rule and Fighting Obama’s Class Warfare!

Townhall.com ^ | April 12, 2012 | Daniel J. Mitchell
I’ve already explained why Warren Buffett is either dishonest or clueless about tax policy. Today, on CNBC, I got to debate the tax scheme that President Obama has named after the Omaha investor.
 
One of my big points was that the United States already has a self-destructive set of tax laws for investment. As such, it would be very foolish to increase the double taxation of income that is saved and invested.
 
Mitchell on CNBC
Dan Mitchell Debating the Buffett Rule on CNBC
And my closing point, which I snuck in before they could go off air, was that the left should want lower tax rates if they want more revenue from the rich. It’s called the Laffer Curve.

Top Teachers Union Organizer Self-Declared Socialist, bin Laden Apologist

Townhall.com ^ | April 12, 2012 | Kyle Olson
It’s been said you can judge a person’s character by the company he keeps. The same can be said of organizations. That’s why it’s so troubling that a national teachers union – the American Federation of Teachers – continues to employ such radicals.

The latest example is Shaun Richman, the deputy director of organizing for the AFT. It was first reported at EAGnews.org.

Richman’s previous organizing experience? The Socialist Party-USA. In 2001 he was quoted discussing the party’s plans to run candidates for office and in 2005, he was running the party’s national convention. In 2006, he was producing the party’s magazine. He’s a socialist true believer.

So he’s a socialist – what radical union staffer isn’t, right? But it gets much worse. He’s also an apologist for Osama bin Laden. In a 2008 article, CNSNews.com reported:


“The Socialist Party-USA does not believe that bin Laden is responsible for the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on the United States.

“’I refuse to believe that Osama bin Laden...is behind all of these things he's been accused of,’ said Shaun Richman, the co-vice national chairman of the Socialist Party USA.”



"’Most of the people who planned it (Sept. 11 attacks) died in the execution of it,’ he said.

"’At best, there were a couple of fly-by-night meetings between representatives of al Qaeda and these terrorists,’ Richman contends. ‘There certainly is no smoking gun connected to Osama bin Laden, at least from what's been presented.’”

Van Jones, call your office! You have someone else to add to your Truther petition!

So what is the socialist teachers-union organizer doing today? He’s trying to unionize charter schools.

And what does one get paid to do such a thing, given his staunch socialist beliefs? A cool $212,746, and there is no evidence that he’s sharing his handsome income equally with his fellow comrades. How capitalist!

Obama: Thank You For Not Asking About My Tax Hikes on Families Making Less Than $250,000!

ATR ^ | 2012-04-10 | John Kartch

Stumping for his “Buffett Rule” tax increase in Florida today, President Barack Obama said the following:
 
“For those people who make under $250,000 a year – like 98 percent of American families do – then your taxes don’t go up.” – Barack Obama, April 10, 2012
 
But since taking office, President Obama has signed into law at least seven new or higher taxes on families making less than $250,000 per year.
 
President Barack Obama’s central campaign promise – a “firm pledge” against “any form of tax increase” on families making less than $250,000 per year – was shattered when he signed the Affordable Care Act into law. The healthcare law contains at least seven tax hikes that unquestionably violate Obama’s pledge. Documentation of Obama’s promise is as follows: Speaking in Dover, New Hampshire on Sept. 12, 2008, candidate Obama said:
“I can make a firm pledge. Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes.” [Video]
During a nationally televised Vice-Presidential debate in St. Louis on Oct. 3, 2008, candidate Joe Biden said: “No one making less than $250,000 under Barack Obama’s plan will see one single penny of their tax raised whether it’s their capital gains tax, their income tax, investment tax, any tax.” [Transcript]
In an address to a joint session of Congress on Feb. 24, 2009, President Obama restated the promise in forceful terms:
“If your family earns less than $250,000 a year, you will not see your taxes increased a single dime. I repeat: not one single dime.” [Transcript] [Video]
During a White House press briefing on April 15, 2009, spokesman Robert Gibbs was asked if Obama’s tax pledge applied “to the health care bill.” Gibbs replied: “The statement didn’t come with caveats.” [Transcript] [Video]
Yet Obama’s commitment to the American people was thrown out the window when he signed the healthcare bill into law. The seven Obamacare tax increases that break his “firm pledge” are:
 
1. The Obamacare Individual Mandate Excise Tax: Starting in 2014, anyone not buying “qualifying” health insurance – as defined by Obama-appointed bureaucrats -- must pay an income surtax according to the higher of the following:





1 Adult


2 Adults


3+ Adults


2014


1% AGI/$95


1% AGI/$190


1% AGI/$285


2015


2% AGI/$325


2% AGI/$650


2% AGI/$975


2016 +


2.5% AGI/$695


2.5% AGI/$1390


2.5% AGI/$2085


2. The Obamacare Medicine Cabinet Tax: This tax took effect in January 2011 and prevents Americans from being able to use their health savings account (HSA),flexible spending account (FSA), or health reimbursement (HRA) pre-tax dollars to purchase non-prescription, over-the-counter medicines (except insulin).
3. The Obamacare Flexible Spending Account Cap – aka “Special Needs Kids Tax”: Starting in January 2013, Obamacare imposes a cap on FSAs of $2500 (now unlimited under federal law). There is one group of FSA owners for whom this new cap will be particularly cruel and onerous: parents of special needs children. There are thousands of families with special needs children in the United States, and many of them use FSAs to pay for special needs education. Tuition rates at one leading school that teaches special needs children in Washington, D.C. (National Child Research Center) can easily exceed $14,000 per year. Under tax rules, FSA dollars can be used to pay for this type of special needs education.
4. The Obamacare "Haircut" to the Medical Itemized Deduction from 7.5% to 10% of AGI: Currently, those facing high medical expenses are allowed a deduction for medical expenses to the extent that those expenses exceed 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income (AGI). Beginning in January 2013, this new Obamacare provision imposes a threshold of 10 percent of AGI.
5. The Obamacare HSA Withdrawal Tax Hike: This provision, which took effect in January 2011, increases the tax on non-medical early withdrawals from an HSA from 10 to 20 percent, disadvantaging them relative to IRAs and other tax-advantaged accounts, which remain at 10 percent.
6. The Obamacare Tax on Indoor Tanning Services: Since July of 2010, Americans using indoor tanning salons face a new 10 percent excise tax.
7. Obamacare Excise Tax on Comprehensive Health Insurance Plans: Starting in 2018, this provision imposes a new 40 percent excise tax on “Cadillac” health insurance plans ($10,200 single/$27,500 family). Higher thresholds exists for early retirees and those in high-risk professions.
None of the above tax increases contain any exemption whatsoever for families making less than $250,000 per year.
Read more: http://atr.org/obama-thank-tax-hikes-families-making-a6834#ixzz1rqIoTU3p

Jobless Claims Rise 13,000, Weather Warms and IMF’s Lagarde Has Her Hand Out for More USA Gruel

Confounded Interest ^ | 04/12/2012 | Anthony B. Sanders
April 12 (Bloomberg) — More Americans than forecast filed claims for jobless benefits last week, a sign the pace of improvement in the labor market is slowing.
Jobless claims increased 13,000 in the week ended April 7 to 380,000, the highest since Jan. 28, the Labor Department reported today in Washington. The median forecast in a Bloomberg News survey called for 355,000 claims. The number of people on unemployment benefit rolls and those receiving extended payments declined.
 
On a non seasonally adjusted basis, oops!
 
On the positive side, continuing jobless claims dropped on a SA basis.
 
As my friend Rebel Cole at DePaul will undoubtedly be commenting, it has been a warmer than usual winter. Here is the weather abnormality for March 2012. So, hiring may have been overheated (pardon the pun) compared to previous years because of the warm weather. Has the labor market used up its slack?
 
The IMF’s Christine Lagarde is in the USA saying that the austerity in the Eurozone is painful and the USA needs to pony up big bucks so big spending Socialist countries don’t have to pay for their policies. She is trying to raise $400 billion (of which the US will have a large share).

“Mr. Obama, may I have some more gruel, sir?”

The Tea Party Is Not Over

American Spectator ^ | 4/12/2012 | R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr.
Don't write it off just yet, at it continues to add candidates to this year's mix.
 
WASHINGTON -- All is bleak. All is woe! I speak of the Tea Party movement, the movement of 2009 and 2010 that was the hot news story of those years, and led to the Republican rout of the Democrats in 2010. Now the Tea Party movement is according to reports in the media in decline.
Was it extremist? Was it racist? Distinguished Americans like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton said it was. Yet their evidence when it came under objective scrutiny kept falling apart, as so many of their hoaxes over the years have fallen apart: Ms. Tawana Brawley, the 1979-1980 Atlanta killings supposedly by local cops who spent their leisure hours in the Ku Klux Klan. I cannot think of another couple of hucksters who have adduced so much evidence of heinous behavior by the American majority only to have the evidence go poof! The Tea Party movement was neither extremist nor racist. In fact, it was what Americans look like when they suddenly become alive to politics: somewhat amateurish, terrifically enthusiastic, and eventually quite serious about practicing the political arts at the local level, in Madison, Wisconsin; in Waco, Texas; in Tucson, Arizona -- all locales far, far away from Washington, D.C. Though I have reason to suspect that the Tea Partiers may return to Washington, D.C. after the November elections. Read on.
The Washington Post related an interesting finding in another dolorous story with hints of an obituary about the Tea Partiers. According to a Washington Post/ABC News Poll, 44 percent of the American people supported the Tea Partiers, 43 percent opposed them. I saw polls like that going back to 2009.
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...

Dispute erupts over GSA spending scandal price tag

By Dana Bash and Alan Silverleib, CNN
 
STORY HIGHLIGHTS
  • House Republicans say GSA conference cost dropped nearly 20% from 2004 to 2006
  • The White House says GSA conference cost in that time jumped about 250%
  • Democrats are trying to deflect blame for details of a lavish 2010 GSA conference in Las Vegas
  • Former GSA chief Martha Johnson recently resigned because of the scandal
Washington (CNN) -- House Republicans released new documentation Thursday designed to undercut administration claims that the cost of past General Services Administration conferences increased at a far greater rate under President George W. Bush than under President Barack Obama.
A memo drafted by a GOP-controlled House committee -- citing figures that investigators say come from the GSA itself -- says that the cost of the GSA's biannual Western Region Conference actually declined by nearly 20% from 2004 to 2006. Figures released by the White House last week showed the cost of the conference climbing by nearly 250% over the same time period.
An administration source said the White House is examining the discrepancy. The source noted, however, that even under the GOP's tally, GSA conference costs rose dramatically from 2006 to 2008 -- the last two years of Bush's tenure.
The dispute over conference costs for a normally obscure federal agency has become politically toxic after reports and video clips of the lavish 2010 conference in Las Vegas were released. The revelation has prompted taxpayer indignation, embarrassed the administration and put a spotlight on wasteful spending by the GSA, which acts as a real estate agency for the federal government.
Democrats have called the spending spree unacceptable, but have also said that GSA conference spending increased more dramatically during the Bush years.
Congressional Republicans say that GSA conference costs dropped from roughly $400,000 to $324,000 between 2004 and 2006. Democrats at the White House say that conference costs jumped from roughly $94,000 to $324,000. Both sides agree that GSA conference costs subsequently rose to approximately $655,000 in 2008 and $820,000 in 2010.
Even under the GOP's estimate, the overall percentage increase in conference spending is higher in Bush's second term than in Obama's first. The question is one of magnitude.
A recently released inspector general's report detailing the excesses of the 2010 conference resulted in the resignation of GSA chief Martha Johnson and the dismissal of several other high-ranking agency officials. Congressional investigators have also accused the GSA of violating its employee gift limit with rewards of iPods, digital cameras and other electronics.
Acting GSA Administrator Dan Tangherlini said in a video released this week that the agency has already taken several steps to prevent future wasteful spending. He said the 2010 conference "violated rules of common sense, the spirit of public service, and the trust that America's taxpayers have placed in all of us."

Biden: Al Franken is a 'leading legal scholar'!

examiner ^ | 4-2012 | Gehrke

Vice President Joe Biden described former Saturday Night Live comedian, Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn., as a "leading legal scholar," presumably in the Senate, today.
 
"He has been one of the leading legal scholars," Biden said of Franken today, according to the pool report. He also said that Franken "is deadly serious" as a senator. He made the comments while recalling concerns that then-candidate Franken could not be taken seriously as a Senate candidate given his SNL work.
 
Franken's comedic spirit got him in trouble on Washington. "This isn't ‘Saturday Night Live,’ Al," Minority Leader Mitch McConnell had to remind the freshman senator after Franken made faces while McConnell spoke during the Supreme Court nomination process for Elena Kagan.
 
Kagan is now regarded as an able defender of Obamacare, which could be struck after oral arguments last month seemed to indicate that five of the nine justices regard it as unconstitutional.

Slightly Irregular Dummies

Do You Remember?

Housing Market

All Bush's Fault

Campaign Strategy 2012

Titanic Struggle

How Much He Cares

Contaminated

Media Slogans

Leftist California Professors "Corrupt" Higher Education!

Townhall.com ^ | April 12, 2012 | Larry Elder
"I don't know any polite way of putting this -- but he's lying," said professor John Ellis, president of the National Association of Scholars' California division. Ellis was reacting to a critic's characterization of the NAS's damning report, "A Crisis of Competence: The Corrupting Effect of Political Activism in the University of California."
 
California taxpayers spend $2.8 billion to educate the more than 230,000 students at the 10 campuses that comprise the UC system. But the report says the UC system does not help students learn how to think, but rather teaches them what to think. And what they "learn" is that they are victims -- whether of racism, sexism, classism or discrimination because of sexual orientation. Liberal profs, says the report, turn the UC campuses into "a sanctuary for a narrow ideological segment of the spectrum of social and political ideas."
 
Nationwide, left-wing professors vastly outnumber conservative professors in the humanities. It isn't even close.
 
The report cites several studies, including political scientist Stanley Rothman's 1999 study: "Whether the question was posed in terms of liberals versus conservatives or Democrats versus Republicans, the margins favored the former by nearly 5-to-1 in each case, and in some departments the results were overwhelming. For example, in English departments the margin was 88-to-3, and in politics 81-to-2."
A different 2007 study, says the report, found the 5-to-1 margin between liberal versus conservative professors had become 8-to-1. Almost 20 percent of professors in social sciences and 25 percent of sociology professors self-identifies as "Marxist."
And things are getting worse. Younger professors tend to be even more liberal than older ones. Among UC Berkeley's associate and assistant professors, according to one study, registered Democrats outnumber registered Republicans by 49-to-1 in all departments -- including sciences. When Berkeley associates and assistants replace the older professors as they retire, the extreme 8-to-1 tilt in favor of liberal profession could reach 50-to-1.
UC Berkeley professor Robert Anderson, the critic whom Ellis accuses of "lying," called the report "short on facts, but long on innuendo and anecdotes." Is it? The 87-page report looked at course descriptions, books assigned, faculty's political party registration and self-identification of ideology, and student feedback.
Students are immersed in an education that emphasizes the wrongs done to minorities, women, gays and other groups. Gender, ethnic, religious and sexual orientation grievances are highlighted as representative of an imperial, racist, exploitative capitalist superpower that continues to engage in widespread racism, sexism, homophobia and worldwide domination.
"We wuz wronged" takes center stage over a basic understanding of economics, of the concept of federalism, and of the values that turned a struggling bunch of colonies into a political and economic superpower. Indeed, the very mission statements of many departments on UC campuses stress their commitment to activism for enacting social change, or to bring about social or racial or fill-in-the-blank justice.
Take the UC Berkeley history course that majors in that field must take, "The United States from Settlement to the Civil War." Its course description states its goals: "to understand how democratic political institutions emerged in the United States in this period in the context of an economy that depended on slave labor and violent land acquisition."
A conservative professor -- if there were any -- might offer an alternative version of American history: The British colonies defied the mightiest world power by demanding and then fighting for political and religious freedom. They conceived a radical document, the United States Constitution, born out of armed revolution, where for the first time in human history, the new, imperfect country said: "The people rule. Through our Constitution, which we have amended to ensure equal rights of blacks and women, we grant our government limited, non-intrusive powers. The rest is left to the people and to the states."
Why does this matter?
After all, students expect professors to give opinions. Surely students aren't potted plants, and can a) read about other points of view and b) freely disagree with professors without fear of classroom ridicule or lower exam grades.
But the report says many students complain that alternative viewpoints are discouraged, scorned or dismissed, sometimes derisively. Students' complaints to administrators are ignored.
What is the practical effect of this "corrupted" education?
Take today's debate over whom to "blame" for high gas prices. Without some understanding of supply and demand, voters buy into the patently ridiculous argument that the price of oil results from "manipulation" by oil executives or evil "oil speculators." Voters ignorant of Econ 101 support populist policies like the minimum wage, which actually hurts the job prospects of the poor -- the people minimum wage proponents purport to help.
NAS's Ellis says the answer is for the UC system to first acknowledge the problem. Then the UC system should stop ignoring its own regents' "Policy on Course Content." It states: "(Regents) are responsible to see that the University remain aloof from politics and never function as an instrument for the advance of partisan interest. Misuse of the classroom by, for example, allowing it to be used for political indoctrination ... constitutes misuse of the University as an institution."
Class is now in session.