B. U. G. S.

LibAnon says:

Your main point is that PC is an established religion and that professors comprise its priesthood. Aside from all of the usual problems with established religions, they happen to be illegal in this country. That is a brilliant insight, and I still agree with it. I believe that alone justifies what you were trying to do on Capitol Hill.
When I have trouble on this Blog, it’s usually when brilliant insights like these degenerate into garden-variety Reaganism. In this particular post, you seem to be lapsing into particularly vintage Reaganspeak, along the lines of “The State of California has no business subsidizing intellectual curiosity.”
Yes, I do happen to be a liberal in that I don’t believe education is at all like a “product” that is sold to “consumers”, exactly like paper clips. But that’s not my point here. Instead, my point is that YOU are, in this particular post, wandering off the main point and getting into the liberal vs. conservative weeds. The ESSENTIAL point, I think, is that PC is a religion and for THAT reason, the taxpayers shouldn’t be funding it. “PC is a religion” is a mantra we can win with. “Education is like paper clips” is not.

Comment by LibAnon

MY REPLY:

The ONLY important thing here is that LibAnon is sticking to the POINT.

In a crisis, the ONLY important point is how does our cause win, not how goes the debate?

I was the one who saved the Space Telescope, so I certainly would be the last to be able to say that I opposed government’s paying to satisfying intellectual curiosity, though I am absolutely mystified as to what that has to do with social science.