[Cordova Belle]

Perhaps there is hope yet.

Bump for a later, more thorough read. Thanks for posting!!!!

[widowithfoursons]

Those photos are terrible. They look like a bunch of Nazis. Just what the photographer and writer wanted. The kids should have demanded final approval for any photo used in the article.

[heleny]

When the Bucknell conservatives assemble for their weekly meetings, they look like a typical, if all-white, sampling of American undergraduates

The sentence seemed to imply that the Bucknell conservatives either appealed only to white American undergrads or only allowed those to join. Also, the pictures chosen were unflattering. So, I looked up Bucknell University and found that only about 13% of their student body belong to a racial minority, so it is easy for a small club not to be "representative" of the races, emotional states, or anything else.

[Brad’s Gramma]

You are NOT alone ping!

[Under the Radar]

Bump for later.

[victim soul]

Perhaps there is hope yet.

Thanks for posting!!!!

I love stories about right wing college kids!!!

[LdSentinal]

It's too bad they had to show only white young Republicans on the cover. It's also a shame this article comes out during the Memorial Day weekend when a lot of the readers of this putrid newspaper are on vacation.

As a right-wing college Republican myself, two of my lower grades (B and a B+) came from professors when I challenged their indoctrination of their students. I deserved A's in both classes

[Tex_GOP_Cruz]

This article (past the NYT bias) is awesome. Thanks for posting it. Anyone who has attended CPAC knows that we young conservatives are numerous, are as committed as anyone, maybe even more so, and that we shatter society's stereotypes of conservatives. Our generation has seen the failures of liberalism as it became campus orthodoxy, and we see through the shallow logic and destructive outlook of its rhetoric.

Several obervations, mostly random:
1. faded Reagan-Bush '84 poster
That must look sweet; what I really want is an original Reagan Country poster from 1980. In 2000, my politically apathetic roommates mercifully let me cover the quad-facing windows of our dormroom with Bush/Cheney signs and signs for the local GOP congressional candidate. Really ticked off the libs. I also got a lot of surprised, "You, of all people, a Republican!" Hehehe.

2. overrun by groupthink liberalism and pious political correctness
This is what opens many young people up to conservatism. The mindset of South Park and the Simpsons understands the total whiny bravo-sierra tripe that define most liberal arguments these days.

3. His dorm-room bookshelf holds no less than four Reagan biographies
Yeah! I've got the autobio, the Morris one, the American Experience minibio, the D'Souza, the Deaver, Reagan In His Own Hand, RR's Abortion and the Conscience of a Nation. I still need the Cannon and Noonan bios. Also notably on my bookshelf among other things: first-print copy of Goldwater's With No Apologies, two Newt books, Dan Quayle's autobio, and for bipartisan "balance" and b/c it's darn great prose the hefty Caro LBJ series.

4. Many of those Reagan-era conservatives announced their politics on campus with their dress and grooming, the men sporting aggressively conservative Clark Kent haircuts, blue blazers, red ties, loafers; the women tended to wear skirts and heels -- openly adopting the uniform of the Youth for Reagan army.
Saying that conservative dress has completely disappeared among young conservatives is kind of a misrepresentation in my opinion. Obviously on campus the dress code is casual, but at certain events the attire is appropriately dressy. I do agree with the assertion that young conservatives can and do "look" and dress like any other young person -- including piercings, gothness, etc. at times.

5. I recall several old postings on FR which also capture the essence of College Republicanism/Conservatism:
A. UCLA CRs Affirmative Action Bakesale (hilarious)
B. College Republicans Shock and Awe Berkeley Link 1 and Link 2

[Drango]

As with college conservative movements in the past, the recent wave has been fueled and often financed by an array of conservative interest groups...

I love the tone of the article in several places suggesting a VRWC. Yeah right!

Howcome they don't do a real in-depth look at ANSWER and the anti-war crowd? Massive busses to the rallies. Signs commercially printed in 4 colors. Organized phone banks...

[Stone Mountain]

Many members of the Bucknell conservatives club, for instance, endorse same-sex unions. Corey Langer recently wrote a Counterweight article supporting gay marriages. This is a far cry from D'Souza's day, when gay males were termed ''sodomites'' in The Dartmouth Review. In part, the Bucknellians' openness to gays and lesbians can be attributed to the strong streak of libertarianism that runs through the club -- a conviction that the government should stay out of any and all aspects of life, including the bedroom. But you can't hang out long with the Bucknell Conservatives and not form the opinion that their tolerance on issues like homosexuality goes beyond libertarianism.

So will they be accepted by mainstream social conservative Republicans? Or will they be viewed like the Log Cabin gang?

[Richard Kimball]

Bump for later.

[MattAMiller]

These stories come out every couple of years. Only a New York Times reporter could be shocked that there are Republicans who don't throw rocks at gay people.

[GOPJ]

Life is good.

Students are much more willing to write off something as 'liberal talk' -- oh, I don't need to think about that, that's just ideology -- as opposed to thinking, in a complex way, about all of the different ideas and evaluating them.'' Kim Daubman, a social psychology professor, concurs. Recently she taught a class in which she talked about the theory that news coverage of warfare in Iraq could lead to a rise in homicides in the United States. ''I could see the students rolling their eyes,'' she says. ''I could just hear them thinking, 'Oh, there she goes again!'''

[GOPJ]

bump

[wardaddy]

George Wallace was a populist Democrat aa well as a segregationist till his latter years ...hardly a conservative when compared to a peer like Barry Goldwater.

Thurmond was a pork barrel Dem who only moved right when social policies propelled him.

I'm glad to have these youngsters but it looks like some social engineering indoctrination has already taken hold unfortunatey.

The new face of Conservatism....social moderation and a strong power projection. Still in the swing of increments, the left is winning. I don't know that things will ever recover baring a war.

We all grossly underestimated the victory of the left institutionally in academia and media and the subtle signs of their victory there are everywhere and will last possibly into at least the latter part of this century. Engineered fiscal, social, and cultural egalitariansim and parity are here to stay.

[GOPJ]

bump

[McGavin999]

Soon, being right wing will be all the fashion. It'll be proof to the outside world that you are an independent thinker who can't be led around by the nose by overtly liberal professors who seek to destroy your ability to think.

Go get 'em kids.

[GOPJ]

bump

[jern]

great read, good article. It is funny I actually worked a Gore rally in the fall of 92 on campus, b/c I was swept up in the MTV excitement of CLinton/Gore. When I sat down and thought through the issues, I just couldn't vote for a draft dodger (my father served in Vietnam). Kids on college campuses can go either way, the more we have to push them our way the better.

[KittyKares]

Thought you might like to read a liberal's response to the article:

"2003.05.31 -- Right, left, and farther left
I've been giving some thought to a recent New York Times article about "Young, Hip
Republicans", and a few heated message board discussions I've seen in response.

(Let the political ranting commence...)

I consider myself to have a fairly radical political/social agenda, but I question the wisdom of
slapping a label on myself. I wouldn't do it but for a need to identify myself to others, to give
people a relatively good idea of what I stand for.

I do understand the phenomenon of "Young, Hip Republicans" - people want to align
themselves with what they perceive as the most powerful thing going at the time, and they don't
always give much thought to the ideology they're supporting. Hence, the Working-Class
Republican. And sometimes, aligning to one side or the other is a result of cultural influences or
upbringing - hence, the Trust-Fund Liberal.

It occurs to me that there's a lot of demonization of the left by the right, and vice versa, these
days. While I'm not convinced that the two can find much common ground, I think some
barriers would come down if we were willing to explore our perceptions of one another.

I can only speak to my own view of the right. The talk show hosts and columnists in the media
that align themselves with the "conservative" point of view seem always to be talking hate,
stoking anger, and perpetuating the myth of the Oppressed White Male. Do those guys really
speak for all conservatives, and if so, what am I supposed to think but that being a
conservative means advocating hate-mongering and racism?

I also get that the right stands for money and business over just about everything else - the
environment, the quality of human life. What else is that but greed?

That's not to say that the "left" isn't motivated by greed - if we're talking about left and right in
terms of political parties, the Democrats are as shady as the Republicans. I'm not even sure I
consider Democrats "left" anymore. The difference between the two parties is that the GOP is
open, even brazen about its greed; the Democrats just keep their deals on the downlow.

I always thought that the focal point of a conservative philosophy was the desire to see
government less involved in people's lives. In other words, government is not responsible for
taking care of its citizens - everyone fends for themselves.

But I do think that goal is callous and selfish. No one who advocates letting the "free market"
decide ever addresses how easy it is to manipulate the "free market", or discusses the damage
that the forces of the "free market" can do without regulation.

And while we're on the subject, how do members of the group with a "survival of the fittest"
philosophy still have an issue with evolution being taught in schools? :)

But the right-wing wish to see less involved government apparently only extends to financial
matters. Otherwise, conservatives seem pretty darn content to push a single moral code on
everyone else, and they're certainly not above attempting to use federal law to manipulate our
spiritual choices, or sexual choices, or our reproductive choices. And let's look at the actions of
the current administration when it comes to civil liberties - TIA and the Patriot Act seem to me to
be getting government pretty darn involved in my life.

Then there's that whole war thing. We don't want government involved in the lives of its citizens,
but the lives of other citizens, in other countries, that's okay? Even covert finagling with other
sovereign governments, that's okay?

It occurs to me that if conservatives truly believed in reduced government, they would have a lot
more in common with the Black Bloc than they would like to admit.

Sorry, I didn't mean for this to turn into a rant about the right. I really only wanted to point out
what conservativism looks like through my eyes, and why.

What I don't get is how conservatives view liberals. Why is it such a bad thing to be a "bleeding
heart"? Is it just that some of the goals of progressives seem unrealistic? Or is it a fundamental
spiritual difference - some people believe in "every man for himself", while others believe in a
common good? Am I going too far to associate the GOP with Christian fundamentalism? I'm
sure it's less black and white than that, but sometimes it doesn't seem that way."

From the following Web site:

http://www.bloodredrose.com/peace/