(Page 9 of 19)
Annette Cwik /p> p> I must not have gotten enough sleep last night or, could be I am just not insightful enough, but I seem to have missed some point Mr. Reiland was trying to make in his piece today. Regarding Governor Perry however, that was very interesting reading. br> -- Roger Ross /p> p> And your point is? The last two paragraphs don't conclude logically to make the point in your title or premise in what would otherwise be a good article even if it is somewhat "Frank" and condescending. I would give it a B- if I were an English professor. br> -- unsigned /p> p> May I with tongue in cheek give a big SPOT ON. Agree with all you have said. The nice part of this is the Democrats just keep talking and turning off more voters. br> -- Elaine Kyle /p>This article hits the nail squarely upon its head in many respects. This, it seems to me, is precisely the origin of the Reagan Democrats that voted heavily Republican in 1980 and 1984. It is quite clear that the world of academe, from pre-school to the highest graduate schools, is completely dominated by the socialist elite that took over the Democrat Party after the train wreck of the 1968 Democrat convention. They have taken over and dominate the entertainment industry, except perhaps the country music genre. Yes, I agree that the MSM is similarly dominated, as is the industry of governmental bureaucracy.
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
The speech our President should make.
A noted economist fires back.
How political can you get?
You might have missed it, but it was boomed in January.
Farcical feminism is a decades-old phenomenon, as George Will's essay from 1970 reminds us.