Political Ratings of Colleges

College Search & Selection
61

<p>Georgetown's conservative? That's odd, because I heard the officials at Georgetown once tried to halt military recruiting on campus in response to the Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy against gays. I mean, I know that's only one issue, but you'd think they're pretty liberal if they're going to try something like that. But then again, it is a Jesuit, which I've heard is the more conservative sect of Catholicism. I dunno, I'm not claiming to be a theologian or anything. </p>

<p>Anyway, about MIT - I'd assume they're very liberal. Especially since Dr. Noam Chompsky teaches there.</p>

<p>Perhaps a reason why professors generally tend to lean toward the left is because liberal ideals seem to value education the most, especially public schools. I don't exactly know why. It's the same about arts & culture; I notice they tend to be more liberal too (I'm not just talking about Hollywood). </p>

<p>Berkeley is for the most part more liberal. I was reading an article on the school's website, and they mention how they do have a very vocal conservative minority there. But then again, the whole "liberal" and "conservative" labels can be overused at times. It seems like issues Berkeley students are most renown for being "liberal" on is war, economy, and civil rights. Nonetheless, most of the students there are against affirmative action (probably due to the high percentage of Asians there), and fairly balanced on the death penalty.If you're looking for a conservative university, it all depends on what spectrum of conservative beliefs you're the strongest on. Although the three main areas: economic, social values, and foreign policy do intertwine, there are more focused areas. All of the military service academies are overwhelmingly Republican, and mostly because of foreign policy. Then, a lot of religious universities such as BYU are probably conservative based on social beliefs. And many business colleges of universities are economically conservative.</p>

<p>That's all from what I've heard, though. I'm not claiming to be an expert. I don't go to college yet, but I do try and read up on these things.</p>

<p>Princeton Review has a top ten list of the most politically conservative colleges on their website. </p>

<p>Even so, I don't think even politically biased professors of either side are going to affect you too much. As long as you don't go to Sarah Lawrence College or Reed College, you're fine as a conservative.</p>

62

<p>anonymous: yeah, but if you saw all of what trump said, it is because the economy is failing. overall, bush and trump see eye to eye on whats important in life (money).. trump just has a ruthless approach, saying he would fire somebody if they arent productive. </p>

<p>but anyways, i think a lot of conservatives would agree that bush is a dumbass.. fortunately, most of them are comforted by the fact that he isnt really calling the shots, and they can dismiss his retarded comments (internets, anyone?) as nice little foibles.</p>

63

<p>sourapplz:
As of today (5/8/05) Georgetown is one of the featured "free" college reviews posted on the ISI website---so you can read their take on Georgetown, and get a sense of what their reviews are like generally. <a href="http://www.isi.org%5B/url%5D"&gt;www.isi.org&lt;/a> (Click "College Guide" at the top in the gold band).
I would urge any others interested to check it out, rather than rely on ID's dog-eared old 1999 "Salon.com" article (no agenda at Salon.com, I'm sure.) There's a great deal of information about the organization, and those involved in it, which was founded over 50 years ago, and had William F. Buckley as its first president. Of course it's funded by conservatives. A conservative point of view was, you know, the whole idea!</p>

<p>At the risk of helping ID turn yet another thread into a dissertation on the greatness of Swarthmore, I have to point out that the ISI guide "Choosing the Right College" was highly complimentary of Swarthmore, despite noting that Swarthmore does not agree with ISI on the importance of "Core Curriculum." In fact, anyone reading the 2001 edition (the one I have), would conclude that ISI at that time thought that Swarthmore, despite its clear leftist tendencies--was significantly superior to its top LAC rivals--which were dealt with rather harshly. They were also far, far kinder to Swarthmore than the disgruntled '98 Swarthmore alum that ID cites every time the subject of ISI is raised.</p>

64

<p>hillsdale = ultra conservative</p>

65

<p>I hate the terms "conservative" and "liberal" because of how those terms link leanings in different issues. Just because I can't stand socialism, support free market principles, and am pro-life doesn't mean I can't disagree with this administration's foreign policy and support gay rights.</p>

<p>Students going to colleges shouldn't be afraid of party labels. When presented with objective information, we should be able to form opinions on our own, whether or not someone else labels these opinions as "conservative" or "liberal." And moreover, if we have beliefs we stand by, we shouldn't be afraid of a college changing our minds. Because the only reason someone would change their opinion is if they were enlightened to a fact they didn't know about.</p>

66

<p>I hate those terms because the right has given the word liberal a negative connotation ie dissmissing people by calling them liberals but i also hate the words right left</p>

67

<p>


</p>

<p>Hey, did you see the report this past friday about how the air pollution of the world is at a 100 year low? Well yes, this seems to be what the "chemists and geologists and biologists" are complaining to Bush about. But wait! The report also says that because the air is so CLEAN, that GLOBAL</a> WARMING IS GOING TO INTENSIFY WITH THE THINNER AIR!!! Woah! So what should we do?</p>

<p>Sorry, just a little plug for how those that may be intensely educated at the nation's top colleges aren't always right.</p>

<p>I want to go to Rice, you get an Ivy-quality education without all of the liberals, and it's in Houston. Mmmm.....</p>

68

<p>ISI is about as nonpartisan as michael moore. Sure they arent officially part of the republican party, but the site is nothing but republican talking points about radical liberals on college campuses (stolen from David Horowitz, most likeley) disguised as a friendly, professional service to help you decide. If your conservative ass cant back yourself up or admit it when a professor knows more about a subject than you do, go to bob jones, you have no business holding a B.A. </p>

<p>As for georgetown and the jesuits.. I do know this: they were founded by a mercenary, so they still have that kind of mentality. BUT the jesuits were the only catholic order to defend Galileo. So the geocentric, flat-earth, anti-evolution wing of the republican party (these are the people concerned with too many "liberals" in academia, may have a problem with them still. </p>

<p>Then again, as ISI, David Horowitz, and, I'm assuming, all the conservatives on this board, would endorse, we should still be educating people about the geocentric universe, how the earth is flat, and black people are an inferior race, because there are two sides to every issue, and just because the liberal Ph.D.'s have degrees and do studies on these things doesnt necessarily mean that know more than some idiot on the beltway with a bible.</p>

69

<p>Both words have been given a negative connotation. "Conservative" connotates uneducated, religious extremist hicks now. "Liberal" connotates stuck-up, latte-drinking, Godless socialists.</p>

70

<p>The economy is not failing at all. If you didn't see the new jobs report, it was 100,000 more than projected. And they also revised each of the previous two months up 100,000 jobs. </p>

<p>Anybody who believes Trump about the economy is severely mislead. He will tell you he is worth billions of dollars, but he won't tell you that he is also billions of dollars in debt. If he can't even get his own finances straight how is he supposed to know what's good for a country of over 250 million people?</p>

71

<p>He's all talk, no substance. Reflects how he fires contestants on his show by their performance in the board room, rather than in what they actually did. He always says he wants someone who defends themselves to the end, even if they're wrong (ironically, not unlike Bush).</p>

72

<p>UC-benz, the best way to calculate employment in america is to subtract the percentage growth in population from % growith in employment opps</p>

<p>I think the pat four years have seen a job growth rate too slow to match population, but we can't make any overall assumptions about Bush's policies until a few years</p>

73

<p>i dont think trump ever pretended to be a real economist. the quote about bush being fired was practically a joke in the interview. His whole career is based on him being a caricature of himself, so relax all. </p>

<p>uc benz, can we please stop arguing about the economy. when the jobs reports were down, conservatives said that jobs reports are unreliable and misleading. now that theyre up, your using them to make your point. the bottom line is, the economy is far too complex for either of us to really understand what is going on. </p>

<p>as per global warming... you all may be having a good chuckle at the fact that scientists disagree about the causes of, nature of, and results of, or perhaps even the existence of, global warming. But you are only fooling yourselves to believe that whatever we do will have absolutely no impact on the future of the environment. Isnt personal responsibility all about seeing the consequences of our actions? You cant really, honestly tell me that all the smoke and chemicals we pour into the air every day will not have an impact on something. Scientists may still be arguing over how soon we will see the impact, how it will unfold, and such, but among scientists, there has never been any disagreement over the fact that we will have an adverse impact.
The only people who want you to think that pouring chemicals in the air and releasing higher than ever amounts of carbon into the atmosphere will not have an impact are... suprise, the people who are making lots of money making cars and oil and coal power plants. </p>

<p>For republicans to demand that universities fill themselves with shill scientists who will produce a small amount of inconclusive research which suggests that there isnt yet an impact, or that they cant tell when the impact will come, is the same as demanding that universities fill themselves with an equal amount of flat-earthers and historians who will produce a small amount of evidence that the holocaust never really happened.</p>

74

<p>Driver:</p>

<p>Of course ISI likes Swarthmore. It's one of the most conservative, old-school colleges in the country. </p>

<p>The fact that I agree with much of ISI's viewpoint and recommend that it's Guidebook is an worthwhile addition to the collection doesn't change the fact that it is a camoflauged mouthpiece for a conservative political group. </p>

<p>Part of being intellectually honest is to look for, and acknowledge, when an agenda underlies a group's writing. If were to recommend a Michael Moore movie (don't hold your breath), wouldn't it be intellectually honest of me to point out that it is agenda-driven film-making and that the viewer should be aware that the agenda may trump accuracy when it suits the filmmaker's (or college guidebook writer's) purpose?</p>

75

<p>interesteddad: thats exactly the point we all need to understand. Nobody can accuse ISI of being propaganda because at least they are somewhat forthcoming about their conservativism. The same way we shouldnt be lambasting moore as propaganda, because he never pretended to not have an agenda of muckraking and defaming the president. </p>

<p>To be honest, i think we would all benefit from using ISI as one source in our college decisions. As long as people understand that these people are judging things from a purely conservative viewpoint, and that if they want more balance theyll have to use other sources, we are fine.</p>

76

<p>
[quote]
UC-benz, the best way to calculate employment in america is to subtract the percentage growth in population from % growith in employment opps

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Wow, I'm glad you discovered the secret formula for calculating employment! Maybe you should share this to the economists who use the jobs report and inflation to judge the economy.</p>

<p>And TheCity, I never said the jobs reports were unreliable so I can use them all I want because I believe in them. </p>

<p>
[quote]
You cant really, honestly tell me that all the smoke and chemicals we pour into the air every day will not have an impact on something.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Yes, I can tell you that. Can you tell me that it will have an impact? If so, what makes your opinion more right than mine? No one knows whether the thinning of the ozone layer is a natural phenomenon or it is caused by us. It is impossible to tell because scientists have only been measuring the ozone layer since the '50's. Would you like to disregard the past billions of years of history to conform you theory so it's right?</p>

77

<p>
[quote]
The fact that I agree with much of ISI's viewpoint and recommend that it's Guidebook is an worthwhile addition to the collection doesn't change the fact that it is a camoflauged mouthpiece for a conservative political group.

[/quote]
How can you say that ISI guidebook "Choosing the Right College" has a camouflaged agenda? It has always openly professed to a "conservative" point of view. William Bennett wrote the introduction....Blurbs by Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, Dr. Laura Schlessinger, and John Silber. If you want to call that "camouflage," I don't want you designing uniforms for anyone I know. It was written for people like me, and perhaps the OP--anyone who wants to get a specifically conservative take on the various campuses. That's why it's worth reading...it's different!</p>

<p>I didn't see your post #57 as being anything like a "recommendation" of the ISI guide, and I doubt anyone else did either.</p>

78

<p>UC Benz: "Yes, I can tell you that. Can you tell me that it will have an impact? If so, what makes your opinion more right than mine?"</p>

<p>you ignored my entire point. "I" am not trying to tell you anything. My point was that scientists are saying that there is an impact. And there opinion is more righ than yours because theres is based in scores of scientific evidence, and yours is not. If your entire argument about global warming is "well, weve only studied it for 50 years"... i think most people would agree that its not a very scientific opinion, and has no place being taught alongside scientific evidence in a classroom.</p>

79

<p>check out "Choosing the Right College"</p>

80

<p>


</p>

<p>Then why is Global Warming taught in school like it is fact? And it's on the news like its the next global crisis that we all need to take part in fixing. And at museums and planetariums and Omnimax theaters they preach about how it's the human's fault that the earth is constantly warming up. If the scientists can't agree on it, then why is it assumed a fact by the rest of the world?</p>

<p>I have a .pdf on my laptop of a scanned article from a 1975 Newsweek issue that argues that with "global cooling," "the drop in food output could begin quite soon, perhaps only 10 years from now." If you want me to quote the whole article and put it on here, I will. But with this research, and a publication of it, we saw NOTHING, and in fact scientists apparently are claiming the opposite has happened with global warming.</p>

<p>


</p>

<p>Few will make the claim that there is absolutely no impact, but I would venture to say that since these smart liberal scientists can't make up their mind in three decades even the direction the temperature is going (cooling vs. warming), the short-term impact is so small that we shouldn't draw any conclusions and try to fix it just yet. Just like the link I showed in my last post, our actions to prevent something that we are not sure exists could actually have its own adverse affects. In other words, we can't do anything yet because it seems like any move we make right now has its own negative consequences, whether it be cleaning up the environment or polluting it again.</p>