Gene Kearns wrote:
Generally, I disregard, via filter, this OT crap, but I've cut the
filter off for a few days to diagnose some network issues and this one
caught my eye, as it singles out my profession, and is egregiously
incorrect and biased.

"Academia is a collective term for the scientific and cultural
community engaged in higher education and research, taken as a whole.
(1)" and is, by definition, a general term.

I hold degrees in the Social Sciences and in Technology and I can tell
you from experience that those Liberal Arts teachers tend to be, uh,
well, liberal..... and those tending to the technical subjects tend to
be more conservative. There is no one *academia* that can be dissected
for the one and true belief system of "academics"..

Agreed. A very good point.



The preponderance of my co-workers are retired military. Guess where
they fall on you alleged continuum?

Actually, this is a case of stereotyping too. I know a large number of
retired military quite well; many of them are conservatives, some are
liberal... one trend I would state with some confidence is that pretty
much all the liberals dislike President Bush, about half the
conservatives think he's doing a poor job running the country but prefer
him to any possible liberal, and they *all* seem to despise Vice
President Cheney. So, one cannot over-generalize even on the basis of
core political beliefs.


Posting straw-man foolishness merely serves to promote trolling and
other venues of ignorance and hate.

Well said. Please observe that in my OT posts, a recurring theme is that
people should be HONEST in their statements. A political belief and/or
religion which cannot withstand collision with the facts is too flimsy
to work out in the real world.


Tell me about your boat......


They say a picture's worth a thousand words...
http://community.webshots.com/album/63279185YQtgSA

Unlike most people on this NG, I don't have an outboard and don't fish.
It's my excuse for posting too much about politics.

Regards
Doug King

The preponderance of my co-workers are retired military. Guess where
they fall on you alleged continuum?

Actually, this is a case of stereotyping too.


Gene Kearns wrote:
Oh, not really.... what you read was in the mind of the beholder,
since I made no declaration..... however....


True, true... I was assuming I knew what you would have said next; but
have been in the same place a fair amount of the time & and have
probably made a lot of the same observations.


Damn nice boat..... and Oriental is a neat place to be. If you know a
local Viet Nam era spook by the surname of "Carter," he and his better
half have been asking me to visit the area. I might just do that
during the upcoming holidays....


I b'lieve I have met the gentleman; Oriental is a changing place...
former working town becoming (in the final stages of becoming) a retiree
& tourist spot. It's kept a lot of it's charm though. If you come up to
Oriental and/or New Bern, please let me know and we'll be glad to
welcome you, maybe go for a boat ride.

Fair Skies
Doug King

Argyle wrote:
... A pro Life Christian I am.


Maybe you can answer this question for me then... Would Jesus lie about
WMDs to start a war so his *former* company could rake in hundreds of
millions of drachmas, or bezants, or denarii?

Maybe He would do so in order to share this wealth with the poor?


Take it or leave it, I don't give a dang what you think. You Canadians have
gone off the deep end in my opinion that is shared by the vast majority of
people in my state.


Another question if you don't mind... is 51% a "vast majority"?

DSK

Argyle wrote:
And your proof of that statement can be found where?

Proof of what 'statement'?

I asked a question.

Bush won by 51%. I wasn't referring to that. Marriage was defined as a union
between a man and a women by 61% of the voters of my state. That is a large
majority.

Uh huh... and it is a "vast majority'? Furthermore, does an 11% majority
justify demonizing all who disagree?

Do you support the 'law of the land' where it concerns abortion?


Just a bit of advice. Don't invest in a home on beautiful beachfront
property. You may lose it to the Donald Trumps of the world thanks to
liberal judges that "legislate from the bench".


Why do you call conservative justices "liberal"? Do you think so little
of Reagan's appointees?

But you appear to support "legislation from the bench" when it is
anti-gay and anti-abortion?

DSK

Argyle wrote:
I must have misunderstood something you said, if so, it was unintended.


OK, want to try again?

Who would Jesus bomb?


Uh huh... and it is a "vast majority'? Furthermore, does an 11% majority
justify demonizing all who disagree?

I try not to demonize but feel strongly about it. Just as I would demonize
those that do not believe in racial equlity.

Demonizing the opposition is a pretty standard tactic for the Christian
Right movement. Maybe you should try to get them to tone it down a bit.



Why do you call conservative justices "liberal"? Do you think so little
of Reagan's appointees?


Who appointed them is not a concern. Their decisions are.


Maybe, after careful study & deliberation, their decisions are wiser
than you give them credit for. Many people criticise Justice O'Connor
for her unwillingness to overturn 'Roe vs Wade.'


But you appear to support "legislation from the bench" when it is
anti-gay and anti-abortion?


No, I don't.

Well, that's good. Maybe you'll be a good influence when discussion
turns to the upcoming battle over Robert's nomination.

DSK

"DSK" wrote in message
...

Maybe, after careful study & deliberation, their decisions are wiser than
you give them credit for. Many people criticise Justice O'Connor for her
unwillingness to overturn 'Roe vs Wade.'

Sounds to me like she trusts MOST people to make the right decisions for
themselves, with the least amount of government "help". Wait...that sounds
familiar. Isn't that a pillar of conservative thinking?

"Argyle" argyle@nospam wrote in message
...
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 20:21:37 GMT, in rec.boats you wrote:

On 20 Jul 2005 11:14:39 -0700, wrote:

Why are academics so liberal?


Generally, I disregard, via filter, this OT crap, but I've cut the
filter off for a few days to diagnose some network issues and this one
caught my eye, as it singles out my profession, and is egregiously
incorrect and biased.

You seem to always pop in when a liberal position is being criticized.
Seems
as though your filters are set to let liberal posts go through and
conservative posts blocked. Anything anti-liberal catches your attention.

Go back to your academia world. Leave the "real world" to us. We know
better.


Regards,
Argyle

In fairness to Gene, and as he pointed out in his reply to you, he does not
normally partake in OT discussions. Your criticism of him is not true and
is unfair Argyle.

"Gene Kearns" wrote in message
...

and now am
able to enjoy my first love... teaching. For me, academia is a choice,
not a station of last resort.

11 beers for you. :-) Teachers who like to teach are a precious asset. What
do you teach?

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"DSK" wrote in message
...

Maybe, after careful study & deliberation, their decisions are wiser than
you give them credit for. Many people criticise Justice O'Connor for her
unwillingness to overturn 'Roe vs Wade.'

Sounds to me like she trusts MOST people to make the right decisions for
themselves, with the least amount of government "help". Wait...that sounds
familiar. Isn't that a pillar of conservative thinking?


You have put your finger on an important point. Most of today's
"conservatives" are not really conservative. Traditional conservative values
include

- Fiscal responsibility.
- Reluctance to send troops overseas unless really justified.
- Competence.
- Honesty.
- Individual responsibility.
- Individual freedoms and rights.

How do the Bush administration and supporters fare on these measures?

Fiscal responsibility: Rather than "tax and spend" they borrow and spend,
driving deficits and national debt to record levels while providing billions
is tax breaks to the super-wealthy and corporations..

Reluctance to send troops overseas unless really justified: Start an
unjustified and illegal war in Iraq based on a tissue of lies and bad
intelligence. 1700+ American troops dead, untold thousands maimed, more
terrorists now than ever before.

Competence: An astounding degree of incompetence in planning and executing
the "war on terror". Incompetents such as Rice, Wolfowitz promoted.

Honesty: An endless stream of distortions, misrepresentations, and outright
lies on everything from the war, terrorism. the prescription benefit,
climate change - the list goes on and on.

Individual responsibility: Thinks government should be able to tell people
how to run their private lives when it comes to reproduction, medical
marijuana, choosing a spouse, etc.

Individual freedoms and rights: Thinks it's fine to torture people. Thinks
it's fine to arrest American citizens and deny them all constitutional
protections.

Score? 0%. As left-of-center moderate I am ****ed enough at the Bush cabal.
If I were a conservative I would be livid.


Peter Aitken

Doug Kanter wrote:

"Gene Kearns" wrote in message
...

and now am
able to enjoy my first love... teaching. For me, academia is a choice,
not a station of last resort.

11 beers for you. :-) Teachers who like to teach are a precious asset. What
do you teach?


Hey Doug, did you ever teach your punk son to sober up?