[conservatism_IS_compassion]

The professor worries that students are now more likely to suspect "that they are being indoctrinated" -- which sounds an awful lot like the development of intellectual skepticism. And how not to be skeptical when confronted by a social psychology professor who asks her class to discuss what Colapinto describes as "the theory" (no doubt the professor's own) that media coverage of the Iraq war might lead to an increase in homicides in the U.S.? "'I could see the students rolling their eyes,'" she laments. "I could just hear them thinking, 'Oh, there she goes again!'" In this case, intellectual skepticism is barely required; a functioning lunatic detector will do.

LOL! How obvious when stated!

. . . and the lunatic can bare her inner self to the intrepid Times reporter without fear of an 'Oh, there she goes again!' from him!

[driftless]

Colapinto's haughty dismissal of young conservatives is just sop for liberals. They are so contemptuous of conservative ideas that they never bother to examine their own error-ridded liberal thought excretions. They can never admit conservative assertions like less government is better government on face value. There must always be some sneaky, hidden agenda by conservatives who secretly plot to derail the constitution and throw all liberals in prison. Personally I believe liberals are afraid to closely examine conservative ideas for fear that they might be right, no pun intended. When liberals shout down conservative speakers at colleges it is the flip side of putting your hands over your ears and yelling lalalalal.

[Fzob]

bttt

[Mr. Bird]

he writes: "It can be disorienting to hear conservatism advanced as the ideology that frees women,

Once again, the Times editors let an incredibly slanted statement through their tight security apparatus. If you didn't, read that statement again. Unbelievable.

[niteowl77]

Comrade Colapinto relies heavily on subjectivity for someone who is writing in the prestigious Newspaper of Record®™©. This morning's thread containing John Derbyshire's observations of "journalists" is a very good companion piece to this.

[Paul_B]

I didn't find the Times piece nearly so negative as this article avers. There was a thread of condescencion, the idea that the college conservos were not operating at full political depth. But that's probably not without justification, and was a relatively minor part of the story.

[DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet]

and the doormat that features the caption "wipe liberally" with the image of Hillary Clinton.

Oh, man - I WANT ONE OF THESE. If anyone knows where to get one, please...

[SkyPilot]

"No taxes, no gun control -- but these days, blue blazers and gay bashing are not required."

Leave it to the NYT to find an angle for homosexuality in there....somewhere.

The Times, by its own admission, has become about as gay as The Advocate.

[Gritty]

Brock gives Colapinto the quote he needs: "They have a theory of getting them while they're young," he says of the conservatives. "This is what happened to me."

Help me out. I'm confused here.

Is Brock discussing with Colapina his political views or the origins of his admittedly gay sex life?