Right on!

I love Paul Krugman. Today's article explores the "tyranny" of "liberal bias" at American universities.

Scientific American may think that evolution is supported by mountains of evidence, but President Bush declares that "the jury is still out." Senator James Inhofe dismisses the vast body of research supporting the scientific consensus on climate change as a "gigantic hoax." And conservative pundits like George Will write approvingly about Michael Crichton's anti-environmentalist fantasies.

Think of the message this sends: today's Republican Party - increasingly dominated by people who believe truth should be determined by revelation, not research - doesn't respect science, or scholarship in general. It shouldn't be surprising that scholars have returned the favor by losing respect for the Republican Party.

Conservatives should be worried by the alienation of the universities; they should at least wonder if some of the fault lies not in the professors, but in themselves. Instead, they're seeking a Lysenkoist solution that would have politics determine courses' content.

His premise is baically that academia has turned it's back on conservatism because conservatism has turned it's back on academia. I'll go one step further, and say that anyone who is serious about pursuing knowledge (like, oh, say a college professor) will find that there aren't always easy, black-or-white, right-or-wrong, yes-or-no answers to every question. And this, of course, if directly at odds with most contemporary right-wing conservative "thought."