The military is one of the most popular institutions in America but one of the least popular on campus. This is a direct consequence of stacking faculties with people politically alienated from the society that surrounds them. If the campus repulsion to the armed forces seems so foreign to us it is because we are so foreign to the people teaching at these institutions. Read my NewsMax article detailing how two of the institutions most corrupted by the Left--academia and the courts--have combined to kick military recruiters off of law school campuses.

How is the military one of the most popular institutions in America? Who likes the military? Most see it as a necessary evil.
Mothers of sons drafted weren’t particularly fond of the military. Almost everyone who was drafted hated being there. In peacetime most everyone resented the military. Of course everyone loved and appreciated the soldiers but the actual military complex was at best tolerated. ROTC was always ridiculed by the students not the college administration. In the 50/60s many went to college or became teachers to avoid going into the military. And don’t forget the mountains of waste the military is notorious for. The military popular?
Give the right wing propaganda a rest.

Here's what I don't academia:

-- many colleges and universities accept federal funds for allowing military recruiters on campus,
-- yet some of these same educational institutions are trying to kick military recruiters off campus while keeping said federal funds.

I acknowledge the fact that colleges & universities do not have to allow recruiters on campus. I even agree that they should not be forced. However, THEY ARE ACCEPTING MONEY IN EXCHANGE FOR ALLOWING MILITARY RECUITERS ON CAMPUS! This is like John Doe giving me $1,000 for a car... and I take the money and refuse to give him the car.

Unfortunately, the courts recently said they can keep the money and disallow recruiters on campus... even though the administrations knew what they were getting into when they accepted the money.

I believe Harvard is one of thes universities.

A recent court ruling said that it is unconstitutional to withhold federal funding to a school because it does not allow the military on campus. The military does not pay for the right to recruit on campus unless it allowed to be there. The Military does not have the right to be on campus. Contrary to what Bill O’Reilly might say this is pretty simple stuff. This is not a liberal/conservative issue. Let’s not demigod this.

Correct, Robert: The military has no right to be on campus; it doesn't claim to. That's pretty simple. Likewise: the campus has no _right_ to the federal money. Why would it? That's pretty simple stuff, too. But you quote the court decision as if it were obviously correct. If a court says I have a right to federal funding of my cocaine habit, would you assume it's correct? I think not.

BTW 'demigod' is not a verb. And besides, I think you mean 'demagogue'.

If someone asks you if you're a god you say, YES!

Robert, you are correct. The military may only be on a college campus with the permission of the college. However, I disagree with the court's ruling. If a college or university accepts federal funding with the condition that they allow military recruiters on campus, they cannot kick the recruiters off at a later time. That's hypocritical. If they don't want recruiters on campus, they shouldn't accept funding with that type of condition attached.

I don't think they did accept the money with the condition of allowing military recruiters. That condition was added later.

As I understand it, The Solomon Amendment (which the court has struck down) was set up to compel colleges, if they accept federal funding, to also accept the military on campus. The court ruled that putting up that condition is unconstitutional. The ruling is logical and correct. The funding of universities should have nothing to do with anything not directly relevant to education.

Robert: Regarding your uninformed tantrum about the military not being "popular", take your liberal glasses off. Liberal alienation from mainstream US society is coloring your view of the obvious.

Some actual numbers might help. The Pew Reasearch Center found in its 2002 "What the World Thinks" Survey that 87% (87%!) of Americans said that the military had a "good influence" on the country. That's rather popular.

That rating is higher than it is for the federal government, the news media, or religious leaders. My question: what do you think might be more popular?

The military as a necessary evil. Interesting point of view. This "necessary evil" has kept us a free nation. It is all volunteer and those who serve, for the most part, do so with honor. You belittle those who have served and given the ultimate sacrifice by calling them a "necessary evil". Without them, do you think you'd have the freedoms you apparently take for granted? I am always amused at academia's disdain for the military. Many dictatorships in recent history started out by killing teachers. Necessary evil indeed.

Public school teachers are an UNnecessary evil.

The government has no business funding colleges/universities at all, it is an unconstitutional and wasteful expenditure.

If the government does fund something (which it shouldn't) then it can attach any requirements it wants to the money that it gives, just as I can require that a donation I give to a university only be used to pay for scholarships for jaundiced tree frogs if I want. If the school doesn't want tree frogs attending then they can refuse to accept the money.

Oh, and I dig on the military and hate hippies so you can put me down as part of the 87% in the Pew poll.

Harvard id privately funded. You have to be retarded if you think its publicly funded.

Retarded.

Its craaazy! Apuy id calling some one retaded!

And of course Harvard is partly publically funded. You have to be an Apu to think otherwise.

By the way, Apu: "its" is possessive of "it," while "it's" is short for "it is." In other words, don't call the people you disagree with retarded unless you want to get ridiculed.

Why would you think I don't know that Harvard is a private institution? I never even mentioned Harvard.

All I did is respond to the military as necessary evil that public school teachers are an unnecessary evil . . . I could have also said Lutherans, or IRS employees, or liberals, or whomever else was an unnecessary evil if I had wanted to insult them. Instead I singled out public school teachers for no particular reason other than the thought that as far as government employees go I value the underrecompensed military personnel far above the supposedly underpaid whiny public school teachers.

Note also that I separated my statement about public school teachers from my next statement about government funding of colleges, this separation indicates a new paragraph. A new paragraph very often indicates a change in topic or focus.

Retard. Wait, I want you to understand that insult, so I should write reetadr.

I was under the impression that the federal government was up front about the "military recruiter" condition to higher educational institutions accepting federal funding. I did not know (nor was I informed) that this condition was added after the fact. This makes a difference. Since it was after the fact, then I agree that colleges/universities have every right to protest such a demand. If the condition was given prior to acceptance of the money, then any college/university that accepted should "shut up" about allowing recruiters on campus.

I think Short circuited.

Actually Short both spellings can be used for both usages.