It’s tough being a conservative at this university, and presumably at all major public universities.

Just two weeks ago, noted neoconservative author and political activist David Horowitz was on the Tempe campus claiming that the University’s “politically radical” liberal professors were indoctrinating students and that a “left-wing agenda” runs rampant at ASU.

Daniel Klein, an economist at George Mason University, found that “registered Democrats vastly outnumber Republicans among faculty in the humanities and social sciences at American colleges and universities.” We can assume that this pattern could be matched in virtually all areas of study.

Professors are predominantly liberal in ideology, but other research has shown that this doesn’t necessarily affect student beliefs. In a New York Times article by Patricia Cohen titled “Professors’ Liberalism Contagious? Maybe Not,” she noted that “three sets of researchers recently concluded that professors have virtually no impact on the political views and ideology of their students.”

These same studies found that family tends to be the main source of ideological formation. This is in the same arena as religion in the sense that whatever your family raises you to believe, you believe it at least until you go to college.

I think this is what philosopher Richard Rorty was getting at when he stated that universities should “arrange things so that students who enter as bigoted, homophobic religious fundamentalists will leave college with views more like our own.”

Fundamentalism and conservatism have different meanings but are often coexistent. This particular fundamentalism that is the foundation of the Republican Party is arguably attacked in the American public university setting.

The problem is not that beliefs are challenged, but an “us versus them” mindset has been created. This is likely because of the fact that your favorite sports team, nationality, ethnicity, religious conviction and political party are easily lumped into the same profiling category and are treated as such.

Andrew Sullivan, one of America’s most-read bloggers who happens to be Catholic, conservative, gay and pro-Obama, said that one of his goals was to “turn Christianity against the fundamentalists.” As a politically diverse voice claiming to have no particular leanings, he may offer some enlightening advice here.

Maybe the best way to actuate real change and initiate substantial progress is not through attacking the other side, but instead attacking ourselves. It’s easy to negatively scrutinize the flaws of the other side, rather than admit, identify and change our own.

I think this is why Obama hits home with a lot of people; he has a certain self-critical honesty that makes us believe his promises for change are real.

In his book “The Audacity of Hope,” he made it clear that he thought America disliked partisanship, and I think we like him for thinking that.

Reach Houston at hfriend1@asu.edu.