A textbook at the University of South Carolina is typical of the prejudice and slander that we see in our colleges today. The book is called Introduction to Social Work & Social Welfare (ISW) and it is biased against conservatives like Ronald Reagan, and against Republicans.
This is no surprise because the colleges are biased to begin with, and since ISW is a text for “social work & social welfare” the book obviously supports the welfare state. Here are some excerpts from a foxnews.com article about the book with a Nikitas3.com comment after each:
Foxnews.com reports that the book says that Ronald Reagan’s main accomplishment were ‘cutting taxes, jacking up defense spending and “slashing” social programs.’ Nikitas3.com comment: Actually the tax cuts under Reagan produced the greatest economic boom in history, and the Democrat Congress then spent vast sums on social programs with all of the extra money that came into the federal treasury. On the other hand the economy is sinking under Obama and poverty is increasing rapidly. Meanwhile the military buildup under Reagan defeated Soviet communism which was a priceless victory for all freedom-loving people everywhere, but leftists worldwide are still angry about it.
Foxnews.com reports about ISW: Although (ISW) states that (Reagan) “ascribed to (women) ‘primarily domestic functions’ and failed to appoint many women to significant positions of power during his presidency,” history shows Reagan appointed the first woman, Sandra Day O’Connor, to the Supreme Court. Reagan also appointed the first woman ambassador to the United Nations, Jeane Kirkpatrick. And among some 1,400 women Reagan appointed to policy-making positions during his two terms in office were Secretary of Transportation Elizabeth Dole, Secretary of Health and Human Services Margaret Heckler and Secretary of Labor Ann Dore McLaughlin. The textbook makes no mention of any of these appointments… Nikitas3.com comment: Of course… who needs facts when you can give your opinion instead.
Foxnews.com reports: According to the book, Reagan “discounted the importance of racism and discrimination, and maintained that, if they tried, African-Americans, Hispanics and Native Americans could become just as successful as whites.” But the policies he implemented, which were continued by President George H.W. Bush, increased homelessness and the number of people living in poverty, according to the book. Nikitas3.com comment: Reagan was right. Anyone can succeed in America if they stop thinking like a Democrat, in defeatist tones, or acting like a Democrat. Many hispanics, for instance, refuse to even learn English so they are going to suffer by their own failure. Blacks often have too many illegitimate children, commit too much crime and have contempt for good education; that is their own fault and holds them down economically.
Foxnews.com reports: In the subsection of the text, titled “Conservatism,” the authors list three concepts as characterizing conservatives – As opposing change and prefer tradition due to the fact that, “They believe change usually produces more negative than positive consequence.” As usually having a pessimistic view of human nature. That they usually “conceive of people as perfectly capable of taking care of themselves.” The textbook also goes after wealthy people, arguing that they “find that having a social class of poor people is useful.
Nikitas3.com comment: Do conservatives believe that “change produces more negative than positive consequences”? No, not as a rule, but in some cases it sure does. Just look at the state of our economy today. It is horrible under Obama compared to the Reagan years, so that the “hope and change” that Obama promised has been bad. Do conservatives have a pessimistic view of human nature? No. In fact the epitaph at Ronald Reagan’s grave is this: “I know in my heart that man is good. That what is right will always eventually triumph. And there’s purpose and worth to each and every life.” On the other hand consider the end-of-the-world environmentalism coming from the Democrat left and that is about as pessimistic as you can get – that the whole world is doomed. This is why tens of millions of people are depressed, including many young people. Maybe this ISW book could consider ‘global warming’ alarmism as an assault on “social welfare”.
Then liberals think it is unimaginable for conservatives to believe that people “are perfectly capable of taking of themselves”. Well, most people are if you give them the chance, but Democrat policies deny them that chance. Just look at the real unemployment rate under Obama, which is 12% to 40% depending on how and where you are measuring it. These unemployed people can never take care of themselves.
In addition, most “wealthy people” today in America are Democrats – 8 of the 10 richest people in the US congress are Democrats. Almost all of the wealthiest congressional districts are represented by liberal Democrats like Nancy Pelosi in San Francisco and Mike Honda in Silicon Valley. The three richest men in America support Obama.
Foxnews.com reports about the ISW book: The book offers a much kinder assessment of President Clinton, saying whatever failures the two-term Democrat suffered were due to the GOP opposition. “Liberals had high hopes for Bill Clinton, but he had a House and Senate dominated by Republicans as early as 1994, so most of his proposals were squelched,” the book states. Nikitas3.com comment: Notice that this book doesn’t talk about Clinton being a serial sexual predator; or about communist Chinese money flowing into the 1996 Clinton re-election campaign; or Clinton’s neglect of terrorism for 8 years, leading to 9/11; or about all of the other scandals that Clinton has been involved in before, during and after his presidency. Meanwhile ISW defames Ronald Reagan when Reagan was an honest man with no scandals and no sexual assaults on women, who won the Cold War without firing a shot.
Now look at this: A guy name Michael Musto wrote in the radical-left publication Village Voice in New York City why some former child stars in Hollywood and in television have become conservatives (and then he names only 12 of them, which is probably the total in the last 50 years). Now look at how Musto determines how child stars became conservatives:
It’s got to be that either they came from that sort of background–people who want to deprive certain segments of rights are often the kind of folk who push their kids into show biz. Or that when the fame fell, these ex supernovas became desperate and sought some meaning to stay afloat, often finding solace in God (or Rush Limbaugh) and the oppressions that only He can seem to foster. (end of Musto excerpt)
Or maybe they are just rational people… This description by Musto is another example of thousands that you can read in the reactionary Liberal Media today. And if you look at how extremist and juvenile this thought is you understand the situation better. This Village Voice is read by lefties in New York City, mostly 20-somethings and others who have not graduated to a real newspaper.
Notice that Musto carefully avoids naming the overwhelming majority of child stars who have become liberals. Yet the same criteria would apply, wouldn’t they? Is this true about child stars who become liberals… It’s got to be that either they came from that sort of background–people who want to deprive certain segments of rights are often the kind of folk who push their kids into show biz. Or that when the fame fell, these ex supernovas became desperate and sought some meaning to stay afloat…
Meanwhile here’s a story about another Democrat that you won’t read in ISW. Former US congressman Mel Reynolds of Chicago, who is black and who resigned from his seat in 1994 after he was convicted of statutory rape, has been arrested in Zimbabwe on charges of possessing pornography, as well as on an immigration offense.
Now get this… Reynolds went to Harvard and was a Rhodes Scholar. And you can rest assured that a decent white student like a young Ronald Reagan did not get into Harvard and was not selected to be a Rhodes Scholar in order to make a spot for Rapist Reynolds on account of affirmative action. Meanwhile Serial Sexual Abuser Bill Clinton also was a Rhodes Scholar.
So there you go… another lawless Democrat. But you will never read about Reynolds in Introduction to Social Work & Social Welfare. Reynolds even was in Zimbabwe seeking to make economic deals while Zimbabwe is a black African nation that is one of the most radical and repressive communist countries on earth.
(Please bookmark this website. And please recommend this site to all of your friends via Facebook and any other means. Let’s make Nikitas3.com the #1 conservative site by word of mouth. And if you would like to contribute to Nikitas3.com, please click the link at the upper right where it says “support this site”. Thank you, Nikitas)