In the academic world, the subversion of grants and gifts remains a problem, even when the benefactors are alive and kicking.
Articles By: Malcolm A. Kline
The professors who tell you that “Everything is relative” probably fail to relate how destructive an idea that is.
Believe it or not, the Nobel Prize authorities and the academic elite lionize a writer who denounces both communism and feminism. That’s because they honor her for the opinions that she held before she changed her mind.
Critics of the Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week (IFAW) events that author and activist David Horowitz presented last month should have actually attended some of the IFAW lectures.
Like cashiered anchorman Howard Beale in the cinematic classic Network, an increasing number of Southern Baptists are mad as Hades about the content of public education and not going to take it anymore.
Students who protested at the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund a couple of weeks ago may not be on the side they wanted to join.
What do controversial mouthpiece-of-terrorist-suspects Lynne Stewart and the Law Students for Life have in common? Not much, it turns out, including the right to funding by Hoffstra University.
Many years ago—16 to be exact—Saturday Night Live broadcast a sketch called Community College Bowl in which slow-witted contestants slowly answered simple questions normally asked of grade school students. The writers of that sketch may have been way ahead of their time.
Academics like to cultivate an image of themselves as cutting edge. Actually, while they may be more up-to-date than flat-earth theories, they are frequently not quite as far ahead of the curve as earth shoes.
It contains more useful information than any journalism textbook we have seen but don’t expect legendary reporter Robert Novak’s memoirs to become required reading in communications classes anytime soon.