I don't think you know what the definition of non-profit is...Non-profit means there isn't money going to share holders. The money that comes in, goes back into developing the non-profit.
The point is that the non-profits are making large sums of money, consuming resources and doing every thing that corporations do (except give money back to the investors) but not contributing what most liberals would consider their "fair share" of taxes.
And, to expand on my point there are liberals, including some that work for universities who feel that colleges should pay taxes (or at least make larger payments in lieu of taxes).
For example, getting back to Cornell and its chicken nuggets:
Cornell is located in Ithaca, New York. Ithaca is a relatively small city. Cornell is one of, if not the biggest, landowner in the area. But Cornell is largely untaxed, despite consuming a large chunk of the city's municipal services.
Many of the liberals who work there are also active in local politics (sitting on city council and the county legislature for example). Some have even run on trying to extract taxes or PILOTs from Cornell.
Yet, they still work there, despite the fact that the university does things that contradict with their stated beliefs.
I'm sure that the same is true for other universities and their faculties.
So? Ah, I see. You're confusing liberals with Communists.
Liberals don't have a problem with Captialism. Unbridled unethical Capitalism that destroys things, yeah, liberals don't like that.
But, so what if the those scholarships are given based on skill. Many of those kids who get scholarships based on skill may not have been able to go to college without it. Still sounds like a good liberal thing.
I'm surprised you believe that services and resources should be expended on the theory of contract and not charity while people who can't contribute should go without. When did you become such a heartless conservative?
For starters, those donations come from corporate profits. The same corporate profits that some of these self same liberals are calling unfair and demanding be taken away through taxation.
That would seem to be what you refer to as "irony."
So, we've established that liberal professors working for private colleges are, using your logic, working for institutions that operate in ways that contradict those professors' belief systems.
Now, onto a few of your other, slightly off topic, points:
According to both the liberal
Huffington Post, and conservative
Students for Academic Freedom, Ivy League faculties are overwhelmingly liberal.
some professors are paid a lot of money? And the sky is blue. Good for them I say. But, the question is, do they think they should be paying more taxes? I don't know. You'll have to ask....
Professors call for extension of millionaire's tax: the tax to which they refer would be on households' making over $250,000 per year, which clearly applies to the professors we were talking about.
Liberals like money. They think everyone should have money!
Which they typically want "everyone" to have in part through a scheme of government taxation...which taxation should more heavily tax people (they say) in their own income brackets.
Now, here's the thing. There's absolutely nothing stopping them from paying higher taxes right now.
The U.S. Treasury has a program that allows people to donate whatever they want to the federal government. If someone thinks they are undertaxed they can voluntarily pay extra taxes.
Every single college professor (or other "rich" liberal) who supports the millionaire's tax, or any increased tax on people in their own income bracket, could pay those increased taxes today.
How many of them do?
Not many, I'd wager. And those that don't are arguably at least as hypocritical as someone who already paid into a system and would now like the money they were "promised" given back.
Good one. 
