Why higher Ed produces brainwashed liberals

February 10, 2018

American parents want to ensure a solid future for their kids and a degree from a prestigious college is seen as the key component to prosperity.

But consider what the university setting inspires in a field where a majority of professors identify as liberal. A request to grant extra credit to students who attend an upcoming guest lecture by Fox News commentator Katie Pavlich at Kennesaw State University on the subject of “Fake News” and liberal media bias has drawn the ire of one professor.

In an email exchange with the event’s student organizer, Business Law and Ethics Professor Neil Wilkinson agreed to give his 225 students extra credit if they attend, — in accordance with school policy — but also encouraged them to go after Pavlich like a “mad dog in a meat store.”

The event, slated for March 7, is hosted by Young Americans for Freedom and aims to “celebrate women’s month by hearing from speaker Katie Pavlich as she discusses the ways in which media is being used as leftist propaganda,” This is taboo subject, and one worthy of inciting violence against Pavlich.

This survey is dated by four years. Given increasing campus trend towards liberalism, chances are today’s numbers are even more skewed to the left. In 1990, according to survey data by the Higher Education Research Institute (HERI) at UCLA, 42 percent of professors identified as “liberal” or “far-left.” By 2014, that number had jumped to 60 percent.  In colleges across the country, far-left professors now dominate disciplines such as English literature, sociology, and history. Few have anything positive to say about capitalism, the Constitution or the United States in general.

This could explain why college age Americans supported Socialist Bernie Sanders for U.S. President even though he was old enough to be their grandfathers and with whom they had little in common, though the lure of free tuition was irresistible.  It’s impossible tot be motivated to cherish, protect or defend a nation in which its citizens are steeped in moral relativism and  there is an appalling lack of understanding of America’s superior system of liberty and freedom based governance.

In a 2016 poll conducted by Harvard, 51 percent of Americans between 18 and 29 rejected capitalism, and a third said they supported socialism, a system based in Marxism, which older Americans understand is destructive to individual rights.  A Pew poll in 2011 showed that the same age bracket had more positive views of socialism than capitalism. Young people who are taught the USA is a flawed nation and believe, as Barack Obama does, in the failed policies of redistributing wealth will eagerly toss our freedoms to the wind and have no desire to protect the rights contained in our founding documents.

Barry Bluestone, a Northeastern University professor was caught on tape telling his students he “wouldn’t mind seeing President Trump dead.” If he had said that about Obama, he’d be charged with inciting  murder. The double standard is indefensible, but the lack of education in America’s educational institutions is far worse.

Advertisements

Shockingly low bar for teacher certification exposed

January 1, 2018

We hear a lot about underpaid teachers. There are news articles and televised reports detailing the massive problem. Teachers protest and school districts hold budget overrides and bond elections to “get more money into the classroom” —- eduspeak for into teacher’s salaries. A major premises of passing the Arizona Lottery in 1980 was that money from ticket purchases would make its way to schools.  

Passage of ballot propositions — 301 in 2001 increasing the state sales tax and 123 in 2016 a grab from the state land trust — ensuring more money are never enough.

But there are problems that appear endemic to the schools of education from which the teachers graduate and, consequently, the teachers as well, that have nothing to do with money. Sample certification test questions are included in Dr. Walter Williams’ column, with Arizona represented.

Dr. Williams’Educational Rotis recommended reading for the first day of 2018. Reading it will make you as least as smart as your kid’s teacher, and you won’t have to join and pay dues to liberal teachers unions.

Williams also presents a sound solution, well worth considering.


List of 2017’s most annoying words & phrases released

December 30, 2017

Marist College notes “Whatever” loses ground but still ranks

The Marist College Institute for Public Opinion recently released its annual list of most annoying words or phrases used in casual conversation.

In the opinion of SRAZ, 2017 was a bonus year in terms of inanities. A few of our favorite misuses of the English language and general dopey words and phrases are listed below. We invite our readers to add their personal (un)favorites to our list.  Make it a fun Saturday.  Oops, there we go. Fun is a noun not an adjective. Or is it?

Topping our list is the now ubiquitous, touchy-feely “reached out,“ replacing contacted, called or asked. It has become a staple in news reports written by ASU Cronkite Journalism School student reporters now toiling for the Arizona Republic as its staff continues to dwindle through more layoffs. Example: “The investigator reached out” to (the crime victim}. 

Speaking of crimes, how does one “go missing”? What happened to “disappeared”? Go or went missing sounds as if a missing person had a plan, compete with a map, when in fact they may have been kidnapped or otherwise a victim of criminal activity — all too often the case. Go missing falls into the same new English language learner category as, “Throw Mama from the train, a kiss.”

Another strange word usage is the word “so,” now frequently used in beginning a response to a question. As an example, “How did you meet you wife?” is answered with, “So, we were sitting across from each other in Starbucks.”  What was your first job might well be answered with, “So, I worked behind the counter at McDonalds.”

Another routine bungling of language is the misuse of the pronoun “myself” when the speaker intends to say me and isn’t sure whether the correct usage is “me” or “I.”  Myself is always reflective on the speaker, as in “I went to the store by myself.”  “Myself” didn’t go to the store.

“Contact Joe or myself,” is wrong. “Contact Joe or me” is correct.

Overly descriptive teen favorites “amazing” and “awesome,” now co-opted by their parents and grandparents head the dopey list. The response to, “I’ll see you at noon,” is “awesome!” Suddenly, most grandparents have “amazing” grandchildren. What the dimpled darlings do to amaze is up to dispute. Remember when kids were simply cute or said thedarndest things“?

Give us your best shot adding to the Marist list. This could be funner than you thought.

 


Calif. learns what AZ already knows about Janet Napolitano

November 27, 2017

As conservatives who chafed under the heavy hand of Janet Napolitano, we were gratified to see that she is finally being outed for her ruthlessness and corruption. Here in Arizona, Napolitano was known for hamhandedly pushing through leftist issues.

Emily DeRuy, writing for the Mercury News reports University of California President Janet Napolitano is under fire for interference in a state audit, and has been forced to apologize for her actions. At least one Bay area lawmaker is calling on Napolitano to resign.

“From what I’ve seen, I really do think it’s time for the UC system to make a break from President Napolitano,” Republican Assemblywoman Catharine Baker, vice chair of the Higher Education Committee. She has not taken full responsibility — and she has not been completely forthright with the committee.”

But the Board of Regents that oversees the 10-campus system unanimously decided Thursday that Napolitano should remain at the helm, even as some regents expressed outrage at her actions.

According to the report, Napolitano has faced blistering criticism from lawmakers on both sides of the aisle for her handling of the audit, which showed her office failed to disclose $175 million in funds in a secret account even as it paid executives hefty salaries and prepared to raise tuition. This is the letter sent by the California Auditor General to state political leaders detailing the deception.

Rather than showing her the door, the spineless Regents merely requested Napolitano apologize for her office’s interference — which she did, expressing “regret” for her “mistake.”  She was hired at a $570,000 yearly base salary as of 2013 and has likely had raises since. This palatial estate is part of her benefits package.

A new law, AB 562, has been enacted to deal with Napolitano-style deception in the future. Even far leftwing California Gov. Jerry Brown has expressed disappointment, saying he will withhold $50 million from UC until it implements a series of reforms recommended by the state auditor.

Know this: Janet Napolitano is not prone to apologies. Her “mistake” was getting caught. Napolitano’s modus operandi is to dig in her tasseled Gucci loafers. Somehow this liberal Democrat who left the Arizona governor’s office midterm to join the Obama administration as the ineffective Secretary of Homeland Security, and boogied from that post to become president of the University of California college system — manages to land on her feet. Arizonans have known her since she carpet-bagged into the state, where Bill Clinton appointed her U.S. Attorney. From there she was elected as Attorney General,  which she used to spring-board to the governor’s office, where she was known as “J-No” for her unprecedented penchant for wielding a veto pen and for her statement against providing security along Arizona’s southern border: “You show me a 50-foot wall and I’ll show you a 51-foot ladder at the border. That’s the way the border works.”

Napolitano was integral to the attempt to “slime” Clarence Thomas as he was put through a brutal hearing prior to his confirmation to the U.S. Supreme Court.  Napolitano represented Anita Hill.

As Homeland Security chieftain, she issued this publication warning that returning U.S. military personnel posed a “rightwing extremist” threat since they possess combat skills.

The actual danger is arrogant liberal Janet Napolitano.

H/T to valued reader and commenter Conservative Since Birth


D.R.E.A.M. Act morphs into dreamy amnesty, Part II

November 8, 2017

Illegal’s impossible to verify claims set stage for nightmare rather than dream

If you’re looking for support of amnesty or full-blown citizenship for illegal aliens who have invaded the United States, The Periódico de la República de Arizona (AZ Republic newspaper) never disappoints. The editorial board would feature this issue on a daily basis if other national and local priorities didn’t occasionally raise their pesky heads.

The most recent foray comes packaged as a demand to congress. “Enough politics. Pass the Dream Act now.” The only item missing is a declarative exclamation point. Let’s begin with the soft word “Dream” contrived to induce warm sympathetic responses to what is now estimated to be about a million illegals claiming they were brought here as young children by their invader parents.  There is no way to accurately verify their claims. The Dream Act is toothless and requires incomprehensible naiveté on the part of those being asked to condone its provisions.

There is no need for SRAZ to reinvent the wheel where this Democrat Party expansion lunacy is concerned. For the best response, we’re reprising a previous post written after the Nov. 2016 presidential election, but prior to Donald Trump‘s inauguration. Please  reacquaint yourself with these truths:

Once upon a time — in 2001 — we first heard of something known as the D.R.E.A.M. Act. The acronym stood for Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors. It was introduced as S.1291. The 2002 bill was drafted before the speech police ruled the words “illegal” and “alien” unacceptable, so they were used extensively throughout the bill.

The D.R.E.A.M. Act was a liberal dream come true, a warm and fuzzy piece of legislation lacking any means of verification while permanently swelling the ranks of the Democrat Party.

Those applying for the gift of U.S. citizenship need only affirm they were 16 years of age or younger when they initially entered the United States and are currently 35 years of age or younger. They have to declare that they have been persons of good moral character since initially being brought to the U.S. as children by their parents — illegally. Verifying how many came as babes in arms or ably propelled themselves over the border last year at age 34 is impossible to substantiate.

Along the way those hoping to access the overly generous provisions of the D.R.E.A.M. Act, simply became known by the sympathy provoking term, “Dreamers.” They are no longer “alien minors,” but merely those requiring compassion. There are consequences to this massive scale manipulation and the victims are not the illegals, but our own American citizen children.

The so-called “Dreamers” represent a dual assault on law-abiding, taxpaying American citizens and legal immigrants, since public universities grant illegals in-state tuition. American parents who send their children to out-of-state colleges have to pay higher tuition than illegals.

Most importantly, this scam results in illegals taking the limited number of spaces available for students at public universities, crowding out deserving American students and eventually competing with them in the job market.

Any illegal who claims they entered the U.S. before they were 16 years old and have lived here for at least five years can gain legal residence and ultimately citizenship merely by graduating high school, attending two years of college or entering the military. But even those requirements can be waived if they would cause “hardship.”

The biggest winners of this reckless lunacy will be the millions of illegals whose status is legitimized, and universities striving to enhance their numbers of Hispanic undergrads to 25 percent in order to qualify for a $1 billion fund set up by the Department of Education forHispanic Serving Institutions.” Over a dozen Arizona schools are on the notorious list.

President-elect Donald Trump has stated he will terminate DACA, (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals), an executive action signed into law by Obama in 2012. It provides an exemption from deportation and a renewable two-year work permit. 

Let’s be clear. ‘Dreamers’ are dreaming of one thing: Stealth Amnesty. They are being aided and abetted by the Arizona Board of Regents and the Phoenix Union High School District, funded by citizen’s tax dollars while creating impediments to our own kids.


AZ Teachers want 20% raise — Great. Earn it

October 24, 2017

Good teachers are worth their weight in gold and their pay should reflect that, but facts are part of the equation 

After it was reported that Gov. Doug Ducey gave promotions and accompanying raises to numerous staffers, Arizona’s teachers are now demanding salary increases.

Speaking for the teachers was their Arizona Education Association union boss, Joe Thomas, who said, “Everybody deserves a healthy pay raise and  I think our teachers were counting on that.”  Thomas described  the teachers, whose emotions ran the entire gamut, as “disappointed, angry and outraged,” that their pay bump was only one percent compared to the governor’s staff who received larger increases.

 The pay issue raised some questions. Randomly picking a central Phoenix school district, we downloaded its Aug. 7, beginning and May 23, ending school days for the current 180 day calendar year. There were eleven days that were listed as “Half Day Schedules” and “Early Release Days.” Ten holidays were listed, totaling 29 days. Easter and Christmas have gone by the wayside, replaced by Spring (6 days) and Winter(12 days) Breaks. A 5 day Fall Break is in addition to a 2 day Thanksgiving Break. Teachers Planning Days are half days for students and no teaching is done on state testing days. “Teacher Collaboration Time” factors in as an Early Release Day.

State employees in Arizona have ten holidays off. They work full days and have no time set aside for collaboration with their co-workers. Unlike teachers, they don’t get the summer off. State workers are not members of a union. Employees can be fired at will since they have no guaranteed employment protection as do tenured teachers. State workers have to show they are performing to standard, turning out a quality work product. Teachers’ pay based performance standards should be high achieving students, but such sensible markers are vigorously opposed by the unions.

Without teaching to a specific test, teachers should have student achievement markers tied to salary increases, just like the rest of us.  There is a reason many parents are choosing alternatives to public schools.

And how is it that “underpaid” teachers are able to send dues specifically earmarked to fund mostly liberal politicians?  These are the people who spend more time influencing American students than their parents do. Consider why Leftist Barack Obama and Socialist Bernie Sanders cornered the youth vote.

Open Secrets/The Center for Responsive Politics shows the $ millions the National Education Association (NEA) and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) lobbying arms give to leftist elected officials. The AFT gave not one thin dime to Republicans.

We’ve all seen the intended to be humorous video clips of students strolling their university campuses, who are unable to answer the most basic questions regarding American history, geography or politics but know the latest celebrity trivia. They are pathetic rather than funny. Yet they spent years in classrooms, graduating with enough on their educational resume to gain admittance to a university.


AZ AG Brnovich sues Board of Regents over tuition hikes

September 9, 2017

On Friday Attorney General Mark Brnovich filed a lawsuit against the Arizona Board of Regents (“ABOR”) for dramatically and unconstitutionally increasing the price of base tuition and mandatory fees at Arizona’s public universities by more than 300 percent since 2003. The Arizona Constitution requires that “the university and all other state educational institutions shall be open to students of both sexes, and the instruction furnished shall be as nearly free as possible.”

“Every Arizonan dreams of being able to send their kids to college,” Brnovich stated. “Within the last 15 years, Arizona went from having some of the most affordable public universities to having some of the most expensive. We believe the Board of Regents needs to be held accountable and answer tough questions for Arizona’s skyrocketing tuition rates.”

The State alleges that ABOR has adopted unconstitutional tuition-setting policies, has abandoned its duty to serve as a check on the university presidents, and has ceased deriving tuition rates from the actual cost of instruction. According to the lawsuit, ABOR has misinterpreted its “nearly free” mandate to mean whatever the market rate is for peer institutions and made itself as the arbiter of “affordability” for Arizona’s students and families.

Intertwined with these price hikes, ABOR has also refused to comply with Arizona law prohibiting state subsidies for students “without lawful immigration status.” ABOR is causing the illegal expenditure of public monies and the failure to collect tuition in direct contravention of clear and established Arizona law

The 20-page lawsuit can be read here.

Seeing Red AZ has been writing about the ongoing tuition and fee hikes for years, as well as the excessive salaries, bonuses and perks ASU President Michael Crow and his wife Sybil Francis receive. These are just a few of the posts going back to 2007 — the year of the launching of this blog.

Sept. 30, 2014: Gifting ASU’s Prez with $95K raise+benies = one helluva deal

Apr. 22, 2014:  AZ higher education: As nearly free as possible? & Update

March 7, 2013: ASU’s Crow backs lower tuition for illegals — again

Feb. 8, 2013:   Michael Crow, Sybil Francis: A$U’s pricey duo

May 7, 2011:   ASU’s Crow tackles budget reductions by raising tuition – again

Feb. 2, 2011:   ASU’s overpaid Crow warns of tuition increase as stimulus ebbs

Apr. 11, 2009: “Economic recovery surcharges” hit AZ university students

March 6, 2008: Disputed scholarships for illegals revived

Nov. 23, 2008: AZ universities feel students’ pain as tuition spirals and money dries up

Apr. 26, 2008:  ASU’s overpaid King Crow issues threats

Nov. 17, 2008: ASU’s Crow in cash glut while economy tanks and tuition rises

Sept. 8, 2007:  ASU’s Michael Crow subverts intent of law