Ron DeSantis signs bill to limit tenure at public universities

[Santander]

Academic tenure is one of the most important foundations of a research university. Effectively getting rid of tenure would be a death sentence for the University of Florida. No serious academic would want to work there if they had options anywhere else. If anything, dragging them in front of a board every 5 years will only increase "ideological orthodoxy" or whatever he wants to call it.

Yeah but the loss of prestige of UF and FSU won't happen overnight, so it's a problem for (and that can be blamed on) DeSantis's successors.

Scott Walker did the same thing :

https://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/scott-walker-college-professor-tenure-120009?_amp=true

Scott Walker did immense damage to the once-great University of Wisconsin. Invoking him weakens your point.

Still great. Just damaged.

[OSR stands with Israel]

The reason I specified hard science is cause they unlike social science are not as political

[Person Man]

The reason I specified hard science is cause they unlike social science are not as political

Ummmm.... they are too? Evolution? Global Warming? Artificial Intelligence? Stem Cell Research/Trials? Gene Editing? GMOs?

Beyond opposing aggressive counter-terrorism and police tactics, 100% supporting science was the bedrock of my political ideology.

I've always supported Education, Civil Rights, and a world that is safe for Democracy.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Btw you guys think I’m super right wing on this issue , but whenever these types of issues get discussed with my parents and other family members I usually am the most liberal member in the group on these types of issues .

 That is an absolutely idiotic comparison. No one here save yourself gives a rat's ass whether you are more  Or less liberal than your parents. If it's a far right and above all stupid policy, then The In fact some of your family may be even more right wing and/or stupid proves nothing.

OSR has implied in the past that he's the only person in his immediate family who doesn't have a full MUSLIM AND CHRISTIAN GENOCIDE BEST DAY OF MY LIFE perspective on Indian domestic politics, so I don't see any reason to believe his relatives are a worthwhile point of comparison on American domestic politics, either.

In any case, he's doing a valuable service for the forum by dramatizing the sheer idiocy of the "climate change is bad but the state doing anything about it would be even worse" mindset. Also, vanity spaceflights like the ones Elon Musk is known for dump more greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere in one go than whole fleets of cars do in months.

First of all this is not happening at all so please stop with outrageous attacks such as this one .
Second of all Modi and the BJP are literally India’s version of Likud so again please stop with all this hyperbole you guys make about them .




 

[Santander]

Btw you guys think I’m super right wing on this issue , but whenever these types of issues get discussed with my parents and other family members I usually am the most liberal member in the group on these types of issues .

 That is an absolutely idiotic comparison. No one here save yourself gives a rat's ass whether you are more  Or less liberal than your parents. If it's a far right and above all stupid policy, then The In fact some of your family may be even more right wing and/or stupid proves nothing.

OSR has implied in the past that he's the only person in his immediate family who doesn't have a full MUSLIM AND CHRISTIAN GENOCIDE BEST DAY OF MY LIFE perspective on Indian domestic politics, so I don't see any reason to believe his relatives are a worthwhile point of comparison on American domestic politics, either.

In any case, he's doing a valuable service for the forum by dramatizing the sheer idiocy of the "climate change is bad but the state doing anything about it would be even worse" mindset. Also, vanity spaceflights like the ones Elon Musk is known for dump more greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere in one go than whole fleets of cars do in months.

First of all this is not happening at all so please stop with outrageous attacks such as this one .
Second of all Modi and the BJP are literally India’s version of Likud so again please stop with all this hyperbole you guys make about them .

I don't think you know what "literally" means. More importantly, what makes you think people are uncritical of Likud?... Even ignoring policy, their leader is literally under indictment for corruption.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Btw you guys think I’m super right wing on this issue , but whenever these types of issues get discussed with my parents and other family members I usually am the most liberal member in the group on these types of issues .

 That is an absolutely idiotic comparison. No one here save yourself gives a rat's ass whether you are more  Or less liberal than your parents. If it's a far right and above all stupid policy, then The In fact some of your family may be even more right wing and/or stupid proves nothing.

OSR has implied in the past that he's the only person in his immediate family who doesn't have a full MUSLIM AND CHRISTIAN GENOCIDE BEST DAY OF MY LIFE perspective on Indian domestic politics, so I don't see any reason to believe his relatives are a worthwhile point of comparison on American domestic politics, either.

In any case, he's doing a valuable service for the forum by dramatizing the sheer idiocy of the "climate change is bad but the state doing anything about it would be even worse" mindset. Also, vanity spaceflights like the ones Elon Musk is known for dump more greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere in one go than whole fleets of cars do in months.

First of all this is not happening at all so please stop with outrageous attacks such as this one .
Second of all Modi and the BJP are literally India’s version of Likud so again please stop with all this hyperbole you guys make about them .

I don't think you know what "literally" means. More importantly, what makes you think people are uncritical of Likud?... Even ignoring policy, their leader is literally under indictment for corruption.

Being critical of a party is different then accusing them of genocide . Now the far left does that too but I don’t think posters like Nathan do . Yes I know that Netanyahu is under indictment for corruption,  but I wasn’t talking from a personal aspect here and there obviously are corrupt BJP politicians too .

[Ferguson97]

Second of all Modi and the BJP are literally India’s version of Likud

Why would you think this comparison would make us like Modi more?

[OSR stands with Israel]

Second of all Modi and the BJP are literally India’s version of Likud

Why would you think this comparison would make us like Modi more?

Cause nobody outside far left lunatics would call Likud a “genocidal party”.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

The reference to genocide was a reference to an old-as-the-Stone-Age 4chan meme, but sure, the BJP is not literally genocidal. Just pogrom-happy when it suits.

[Dr. Arch]

Just wait until a FL governor tries to force biologists to teach creationism.

[OSR stands with Israel]

The reference to genocide was a reference to an old-as-the-Stone-Age 4chan meme, but sure, the BJP is not literally genocidal. Just pogrom-happy when it suits.

What’s your opinion on Likud then

[OSR stands with Israel]

The reason I specified hard science is cause they unlike social science are not as political

Ummmm.... they are too? Evolution? Global Warming? Artificial Intelligence? Stem Cell Research/Trials? Gene Editing? GMOs?

Beyond opposing aggressive counter-terrorism and police tactics, 100% supporting science was the bedrock of my political ideology.

I've always supported Education, Civil Rights, and a world that is safe for Democracy.

Difference is hard science is objectively true while social science is not so the latter has much more chances of poltical bias too . Also we have seen for example when many of their research is used in fields such as education and international relations, it ends up being massive massive failures so there clearly has to be some reform first .

[Badger]

Btw you guys think I’m super right wing on this issue , but whenever these types of issues get discussed with my parents and other family members I usually am the most liberal member in the group on these types of issues .

 That is an absolutely idiotic comparison. No one here save yourself gives a rat's ass whether you are more  Or less liberal than your parents. If it's a far right and above all stupid policy, then The In fact some of your family may be even more right wing and/or stupid proves nothing.

OSR has implied in the past that he's the only person in his immediate family who doesn't have a full MUSLIM AND CHRISTIAN GENOCIDE BEST DAY OF MY LIFE perspective on Indian domestic politics, so I don't see any reason to believe his relatives are a worthwhile point of comparison on American domestic politics, either.

In any case, he's doing a valuable service for the forum by dramatizing the sheer idiocy of the "climate change is bad but the state doing anything about it would be even worse" mindset. Also, vanity spaceflights like the ones Elon Musk is known for dump more greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere in one go than whole fleets of cars do in months.

First of all this is not happening at all so please stop with outrageous attacks such as this one .
Second of all Modi and the BJP are literally India’s version of Likud so again please stop with all this hyperbole you guys make about them .




 

You're not exactly helping your case here, but that happens that every time you post

[Person Man]

The reason I specified hard science is cause they unlike social science are not as political

Ummmm.... they are too? Evolution? Global Warming? Artificial Intelligence? Stem Cell Research/Trials? Gene Editing? GMOs?

Beyond opposing aggressive counter-terrorism and police tactics, 100% supporting science was the bedrock of my political ideology.

I've always supported Education, Civil Rights, and a world that is safe for Democracy.

Difference is hard science is objectively true while social science is not so the latter has much more chances of poltical bias too . Also we have seen for example when many of their research is used in fields such as education and international relations, it ends up being massive massive failures so there clearly has to be some reform first .

Hard science is liar sometimes, too.

[Badger]

Second of all Modi and the BJP are literally India’s version of Likud

Why would you think this comparison would make us like Modi more?

Cause nobody outside far left lunatics would call Likud a “genocidal party”.

It's true that they don't at least implicitly if not more so support pogroms, notwithstanding there are decidedly heavy-handed policies in the West Bank and Gaza. Thus, only a complete Nimrod would claim that the BJP is simply India's version of Likud.

[OSR stands with Israel]

Second of all Modi and the BJP are literally India’s version of Likud

Why would you think this comparison would make us like Modi more?

Cause nobody outside far left lunatics would call Likud a “genocidal party”.

It's true that they don't at least implicitly if not more so support pogroms, notwithstanding there are decidedly heavy-handed policies in the West Bank and Gaza. Thus, only a complete Nimrod would claim that the BJP is simply India's version of Likud.

Literally false again , and the main example you guys use for this was one where liberal domianted courts cleared him off .


Things like the CAA are not at all what the liberal media claimed . It actually is a good example of how the media treats the right all across the world now and Modi like DeSantis is extremely adept at responding to BS narratives

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

The reference to genocide was a reference to an old-as-the-Stone-Age 4chan meme, but sure, the BJP is not literally genocidal. Just pogrom-happy when it suits.

What’s your opinion on Likud then

Extremely negative.

[T'Chenka]

Things like the CAA are not at all what the liberal media claimed . It actually is a good example of how the media treats the right all across the world now and Modi like DeSantis is extremely adept at responding to BS narratives

LOL, the media is too easy on the right wing, if anything. Especially in the USA.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Things like the CAA are not at all what the liberal media claimed . It actually is a good example of how the media treats the right all across the world now and Modi like DeSantis is extremely adept at responding to BS narratives

LOL, the media is too easy on the right wing, if anything. Especially in the USA.

Muh horse race.

This might be less the case in India, where my understanding is that the BJP is genuinely at odds with the country's institutional structure in a lot of ways, but in the US the media absolutely bends over backwards to present the Republican Party as absolutely anything other than the increasingly far-right gang of thieves and killers that it's become over the past few decades.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Conservatives have been attacking universities for decades, what else is new?

And no surprise that the usual suspects think this is a good move.

This boils down to the fact that right-wingers are just terrified of dissent. That's why they hate universities so much, because it gives their children the opportunity to think for themselves instead of just parroting back what mom and dad have taught them.

No but there should be less grants given out for non hard science research

Frankly, nonsense like this is why there are so many problems with our society. Do you sincerely believe that social sciences and the arts don't produce anything of societal value?

If the social sciences departments were comprised of a truly diverse group of people with a wide spectrum of perspectives, then, yes, that would be the case.  That's not what the Social Sciences in our universities is about today; it's about people with various leftist perspectives performing research to justify their own viewpoints with data, while demonizing opposing conculsions. 

Imagine the flak a Social Sciences Professor would receive for producing research that shows clearly that the Traditional Nuclear Family produces (unquestionably) better outcomes for children, both in childhood and throughout life.  Imagine the criticism a professor would receive if they questioned the wisdom of out-of-wedlock births, easy divorce, etc. by showing outcome data, and by pointing out that the paradigm of our society has shifted from a focus on the well-being of children to a focus of the happiness and personal choices of adults.  How would they be received?

That was Barbara Dafoe Whitehead in the 1990s.  Now imagine a Social Sciences professor doing longitudinal research and finding out the results of the outcomes of children growing up in not just single parent households, but in gay/lesbian households, trans households, etc.  Just what would be the response to data which showed the outcomes of children raised in such homes to be less optimal than children raised in two-parent biological families.  Would this research be received well, or would the research be suppressed, the researcher systematically discredited?  Which would happen in today's environment?

Now I don't know what honest longitudinal research into a topic like this would show.  What I do know is that much of academia is not prepared to be open-minded into all sorts of assertions as to what social norms should be.  Let's not pretend that Social Science departments of universities are stocked with open-minded objective researchers. 

[Person Man]

Conservatives have been attacking universities for decades, what else is new?

And no surprise that the usual suspects think this is a good move.

This boils down to the fact that right-wingers are just terrified of dissent. That's why they hate universities so much, because it gives their children the opportunity to think for themselves instead of just parroting back what mom and dad have taught them.

No but there should be less grants given out for non hard science research

Frankly, nonsense like this is why there are so many problems with our society. Do you sincerely believe that social sciences and the arts don't produce anything of societal value?

If the social sciences departments were comprised of a truly diverse group of people with a wide spectrum of perspectives, then, yes, that would be the case.  That's not what the Social Sciences in our universities is about today; it's about people with various leftist perspectives performing research to justify their own viewpoints with data, while demonizing opposing conculsions. 

Imagine the flak a Social Sciences Professor would receive for producing research that shows clearly that the Traditional Nuclear Family produces (unquestionably) better outcomes for children, both in childhood and throughout life.  Imagine the criticism a professor would receive if they questioned the wisdom of out-of-wedlock births, easy divorce, etc. by showing outcome data, and by pointing out that the paradigm of our society has shifted from a focus on the well-being of children to a focus of the happiness and personal choices of adults.  How would they be received?

That was Barbara Dafoe Whitehead in the 1990s.  Now imagine a Social Sciences professor doing longitudinal research and finding out the results of the outcomes of children growing up in not just single parent households, but in gay/lesbian households, trans households, etc.  Just what would be the response to data which showed the outcomes of children raised in such homes to be less optimal than children raised in two-parent biological families.  Would this research be received well, or would the research be suppressed, the researcher systematically discredited?  Which would happen in today's environment?

Now I don't know what honest longitudinal research into a topic like this would show.  What I do know is that much of academia is not prepared to be open-minded into all sorts of assertions as to what social norms should be.  Let's not pretend that Social Science departments of universities are stocked with open-minded objective researchers. 

So certain questions are to be forbidden because of an unactualized fear that a single question will be forbidden?

[Fuzzy Bear]

Conservatives have been attacking universities for decades, what else is new?

And no surprise that the usual suspects think this is a good move.

This boils down to the fact that right-wingers are just terrified of dissent. That's why they hate universities so much, because it gives their children the opportunity to think for themselves instead of just parroting back what mom and dad have taught them.

No but there should be less grants given out for non hard science research

Frankly, nonsense like this is why there are so many problems with our society. Do you sincerely believe that social sciences and the arts don't produce anything of societal value?

If the social sciences departments were comprised of a truly diverse group of people with a wide spectrum of perspectives, then, yes, that would be the case.  That's not what the Social Sciences in our universities is about today; it's about people with various leftist perspectives performing research to justify their own viewpoints with data, while demonizing opposing conculsions. 

Imagine the flak a Social Sciences Professor would receive for producing research that shows clearly that the Traditional Nuclear Family produces (unquestionably) better outcomes for children, both in childhood and throughout life.  Imagine the criticism a professor would receive if they questioned the wisdom of out-of-wedlock births, easy divorce, etc. by showing outcome data, and by pointing out that the paradigm of our society has shifted from a focus on the well-being of children to a focus of the happiness and personal choices of adults.  How would they be received?

That was Barbara Dafoe Whitehead in the 1990s.  Now imagine a Social Sciences professor doing longitudinal research and finding out the results of the outcomes of children growing up in not just single parent households, but in gay/lesbian households, trans households, etc.  Just what would be the response to data which showed the outcomes of children raised in such homes to be less optimal than children raised in two-parent biological families.  Would this research be received well, or would the research be suppressed, the researcher systematically discredited?  Which would happen in today's environment?

Now I don't know what honest longitudinal research into a topic like this would show.  What I do know is that much of academia is not prepared to be open-minded into all sorts of assertions as to what social norms should be.  Let's not pretend that Social Science departments of universities are stocked with open-minded objective researchers. 

So certain questions are to be forbidden because of an unactualized fear that a single question will be forbidden?

There is not any true "academic freedom" on campus nowadays.  I'm old enough to recall when academic freedom was a liberal issue, but that was before all the 1960s radicals grew old as Senior Faculty in almost all of our universities.  The 1960s radicals because the college Presidents; now, they're retiring and their leading graduates are taking their places.  Higher Education has been radicalized from top to bottom; it has happened before our very eyes, and it has happened even as the nation became more Republican.

What does it say to the state of colleges and universities when conservative lecturers are shouted down routinely to the point where their even being given a platform on campus is cause for discord and disturbance?  Certainly, it says something for the college administrators and faculty that are OK with this.  Academic Freedom has been replaced by Leftist Conformity, and in a way that is almost prison-like.  Students not only have to conform to the Leftist leaning of professors for grades, they hve to conform to the leftist leanings of their fellow students to not be ostracized.  The "Convict Code" on campus.  DeSantis's bill is long overdue, and so is the assessment of the societal value we receive for the immense investment in Higher Education our society makes.

[Mr. Smith]

Conservatives have been attacking universities for decades, what else is new?

And no surprise that the usual suspects think this is a good move.

This boils down to the fact that right-wingers are just terrified of dissent. That's why they hate universities so much, because it gives their children the opportunity to think for themselves instead of just parroting back what mom and dad have taught them.

No but there should be less grants given out for non hard science research

Frankly, nonsense like this is why there are so many problems with our society. Do you sincerely believe that social sciences and the arts don't produce anything of societal value?

If the social sciences departments were comprised of a truly diverse group of people with a wide spectrum of perspectives, then, yes, that would be the case.  That's not what the Social Sciences in our universities is about today; it's about people with various leftist perspectives performing research to justify their own viewpoints with data, while demonizing opposing conculsions. 

Imagine the flak a Social Sciences Professor would receive for producing research that shows clearly that the Traditional Nuclear Family produces (unquestionably) better outcomes for children, both in childhood and throughout life.  Imagine the criticism a professor would receive if they questioned the wisdom of out-of-wedlock births, easy divorce, etc. by showing outcome data, and by pointing out that the paradigm of our society has shifted from a focus on the well-being of children to a focus of the happiness and personal choices of adults.  How would they be received?

That was Barbara Dafoe Whitehead in the 1990s.  Now imagine a Social Sciences professor doing longitudinal research and finding out the results of the outcomes of children growing up in not just single parent households, but in gay/lesbian households, trans households, etc.  Just what would be the response to data which showed the outcomes of children raised in such homes to be less optimal than children raised in two-parent biological families.  Would this research be received well, or would the research be suppressed, the researcher systematically discredited?  Which would happen in today's environment?

Now I don't know what honest longitudinal research into a topic like this would show.  What I do know is that much of academia is not prepared to be open-minded into all sorts of assertions as to what social norms should be.  Let's not pretend that Social Science departments of universities are stocked with open-minded objective researchers. 

So certain questions are to be forbidden because of an unactualized fear that a single question will be forbidden?

There is not any true "academic freedom" on campus nowadays.  I'm old enough to recall when academic freedom was a liberal issue, but that was before all the 1960s radicals grew old as Senior Faculty in almost all of our universities.  The 1960s radicals because the college Presidents; now, they're retiring and their leading graduates are taking their places.  Higher Education has been radicalized from top to bottom; it has happened before our very eyes, and it has happened even as the nation became more Republican.

What does it say to the state of colleges and universities when conservative lecturers are shouted down routinely to the point where their even being given a platform on campus is cause for discord and disturbance?  Certainly, it says something for the college administrators and faculty that are OK with this.  Academic Freedom has been replaced by Leftist Conformity, and in a way that is almost prison-like.  Students not only have to conform to the Leftist leaning of professors for grades, they hve to conform to the leftist leanings of their fellow students to not be ostracized.  The "Convict Code" on campus.  DeSantis's bill is long overdue, and so is the assessment of the societal value we receive for the immense investment in Higher Education our society makes.

It suggests that Regressives and Reactionaries have nothing to stand on actually except to  work in bad-faith and stir the pot aimlessly, which only results in what one would expect.

[Ferguson97]

If the social sciences departments were comprised of a truly diverse group of people with a wide spectrum of perspectives, then, yes, that would be the case.  That's not what the Social Sciences in our universities is about today; it's about people with various leftist perspectives performing research to justify their own viewpoints with data, while demonizing opposing conclusions.

If the biology departments were comprised of a truly diverse group of people with a wide spectrum of perspectives, then there would be more doctors out there who believe in healing crystals and essential oils.

Now imagine a Social Sciences professor doing longitudinal research and finding out the results of the outcomes of children growing up in not just single parent households, but in gay/lesbian households, trans households, etc.  Just what would be the response to data which showed the outcomes of children raised in such homes to be less optimal than children raised in two-parent biological families.  Would this research be received well, or would the research be suppressed, the researcher systematically discredited?  Which would happen in today's environment?

Thanks, it's a lot easier when you guys just straight-up admit the truth like this: you're using your imagined oppression as an excuse to actually oppress people.

Now I don't know what honest longitudinal research into a topic like this would show.  What I do know is that much of academia is not prepared to be open-minded into all sorts of assertions as to what social norms should be.  Let's not pretend that Social Science departments of universities are stocked with open-minded objective researchers. 

Social sciences are, by definition, open-minded. Conservatism is, by definition, close-minded. So it's no wonder that those two things don't mesh well together. Same reason there aren't a lot of liberals at business school.

What does it say to the state of colleges and universities when conservative lecturers are shouted down routinely to the point where their even being given a platform on campus is cause for discord and disturbance? Certainly, it says something for the college administrators and faculty that are OK with this. 

It says that these college administrators and faculty value free speech, which protects the students' rights to shout down speakers. Freedom of speech is important to me. Is it important to you?

Students not only have to conform to the Leftist leaning of professors for grades,

No they don't.

They have to conform to the leftist leanings of their fellow students to not be ostracized.

So now your definition of "colleges have gone mad" is that nobody wants to be friends with conservatives?

[Fuzzy Bear]

If the social sciences departments were comprised of a truly diverse group of people with a wide spectrum of perspectives, then, yes, that would be the case.  That's not what the Social Sciences in our universities is about today; it's about people with various leftist perspectives performing research to justify their own viewpoints with data, while demonizing opposing conclusions.

If the biology departments were comprised of a truly diverse group of people with a wide spectrum of perspectives, then there would be more doctors out there who believe in healing crystals and essential oils.

Now imagine a Social Sciences professor doing longitudinal research and finding out the results of the outcomes of children growing up in not just single parent households, but in gay/lesbian households, trans households, etc.  Just what would be the response to data which showed the outcomes of children raised in such homes to be less optimal than children raised in two-parent biological families.  Would this research be received well, or would the research be suppressed, the researcher systematically discredited?  Which would happen in today's environment?

Thanks, it's a lot easier when you guys just straight-up admit the truth like this: you're using your imagined oppression as an excuse to actually oppress people.

Now I don't know what honest longitudinal research into a topic like this would show.  What I do know is that much of academia is not prepared to be open-minded into all sorts of assertions as to what social norms should be.  Let's not pretend that Social Science departments of universities are stocked with open-minded objective researchers. 

Social sciences are, by definition, open-minded. Conservatism is, by definition, close-minded. So it's no wonder that those two things don't mesh well together. Same reason there aren't a lot of liberals at business school.

What does it say to the state of colleges and universities when conservative lecturers are shouted down routinely to the point where their even being given a platform on campus is cause for discord and disturbance? Certainly, it says something for the college administrators and faculty that are OK with this. 

It says that these college administrators and faculty value free speech, which protects the students' rights to shout down speakers. Freedom of speech is important to me. Is it important to you?

Students not only have to conform to the Leftist leaning of professors for grades,

No they don't.

They have to conform to the leftist leanings of their fellow students to not be ostracized.

So now your definition of "colleges have gone mad" is that nobody wants to be friends with conservatives?

Colleges support your pre-determined conclusions of things.  Perhaps the "pre" part is when you were in college, and now you're a graduate, in which case, your viewpoints are the product of Leftist Engineering.

Can we stop pretending that Colleges are NOT Leftist bastions?  That they have become that way over time?  That conservative viewpoiints on campus, both amongst students and amongst faculty, are a minority viewpoint and endure varying degrees of disrespect?  That "Woke" ideology has thoroughly permeated mostly all public and most private universities and that sets the tone for college life in all aspects?

There are exceptions to this.  I would expect Liberty University to be more conservative, outwardly.  They are outliers, however.  Even traditionally conservative old-line universities such as Dartmouth and the University of Chicago have become notably Left.  Yale is as Left as Harvard.  In determining what to do about the issue of tenure, can we at least be honest as to what our public colleges and universities have  become?