To "progressives", diversity is only skin-deep. To these deep-thinkers, the color of one's skin determines identity, and a colorful mix of such within your social strata insures you the greatest accolade any liberal can be granted - that of "multiculturalist".
But do diversity of ideas matter? If it does, then Princeton University is the most single-tone dogmatic University in New Jersey; and likely tops in the nation. The Daily Princetonian reports thusly:
All Princeton faculty members who have given to 2008 presidential candidates so far have donated to Democrats, according to federal records of donations to presidential campaigns from Princeton University employees. Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) is the runaway favorite candidate among those donors, having received $12,050 from Princeton employees. Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) drew the second-highest total contributions from Princeton faculty and staff with $5,600. Other donations have gone to candidates including former Sen. John Edwards (D-N.C.), Gov. Bill Richardson (D-N.M.) and Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.).
Princeton employees' overwhelmingly high support for Democratic candidates — 90 percent of donors who listed the University as their employer gave to a Democrat, and no professors donated to the GOP — outpaces its peers. The Harvard Crimson reported that 86 percent of Harvard professors' contributions went to Democrats, while according to Georgetown's student newspaper, The Hoya, 75 percent of the donations made by the school's employees went to Democratic candidates.
Why Obama is the clear favorite of the ivory-tower types (the race thing again? Or the willful ignorance of those whom enjoy a sheltered academic existence about how the outside world actually works) is something that would take more space (and time and effort and research) than I can afford. But it is this type of moral blindless and close-mindeness that leads to horrors such as this.
Which of course makes it no suprise that Congressman Rush Holt (D-NJ), one of the most off-the-cliff liberals in the House, is an old Princeton hand himself. It also explains why the the latter link provides us with goodies like this:
Representative Holt supported the interests of the Americans for Democratic Action 100 percent in 2005.
According to the National Journal - Liberal on Economic Policy's calculations, in 2006, Representative Holt voted more liberal on economic, defense and foreign policy issues than 91 percent of the Representatives.
That's what you get when you elect a Princeton alum...living in a gilded cage does not qualify one to govern the birds flying free. Because you will find that what they really want is for you to get into the cage as well....all for your own good, of course.
4 comments:
Princeton may be heavier to the left than most universities, but 90% liberal-contributing is not far from Havard's 86%, and so on. It's all bad, and represents an ideological conformity that is at odds with the free thinking and intellectual growth that should be at the heart of the collegiate experience.
Regarding Rush Holt, well - I guess that any Ivy-league position holder such as he should be questioned much more heavily regarding his feality to the PC code that their employer enforces. We rake politicians over the coals for actions they may have taken while working in the private sector; why is Holt and his academic type any different?
Unfortunate, though, that so may elections come down to a choice between a Havard man or a Yalie !!
Well said, Anonymous.
The question asking why Holt and other academics running for office are held up to less media scrutiny is a good one. Perhaps the best answer to that is to look at the journalistic class itself - many of which are a product of the same institutions. Having drank from the moral cup poffered to them by these very same academics, it is no wonder that they may refuse to see any shortcomings in their backrounds or makeup.
Just a possibility.
Is there a sociologist in the house?
Tufts was the leader at 100%.
The glimmer of good news is that, once in a while, Princeton produces a TigerHawk.
You are right, Jim, and perhaps when I said "Princeton Alum" I was painting with the proverbial broad brush. Justice Samuel Anthony Alito is one as well, of course...
My concern is with the possibility of more university "lifers" going into politics, without proper vetting by a media awed by their ivory-tower credentials.
Most of them have a tenuous grip on "outside reality" as it is - academic lifestyles generally being confined to halls of learning - and are perhaps uniquely unqualified to legislate in the public's name.
Rush Holt, alas, can be a dictionary definition...
Post a Comment