Wednesday, January 24: Hello fellow, Duke case followers. This post is closed to commenting. Resume the discussion at the latest post, Unnatural Selection on Both Sides?
Thursday, January 18: I’m not a big fan of John Podhoretz, but I recommend “Orwell University Duke Profs’ P.C. Travesty.”
Update (1/17 @ 6:12 p.m.): I’ll respond to provost Peter Lange’s statement about the Group of 88 later.
My surface-level reaction: Mr. Lange, vent some of your “free speech” concerns on Mike Nifong, who race-baited his way into a weak case and, hopefully, out of a job.
People are fired up, angry (for the record, I certainly don’t endorse sending people ad hominem-laced e-mail; it’s a shame that some professors are being personally attacked, but that, as I’ve been told, is life), and it’s on Nifong’s head. But bloggers are the ideal scapegoat for Duke’s “African American” professors who endorsed that idiotic and embarrassingly ignorant ad.
That act has consequences. Get it? Deal with it.
——————————————————————–
We are listening to our students. We’re also listening to the Durham community, to Duke staff, and to each other. Regardless of the results of the police investigation, what is apparent everyday now is the anger and fear of many students who know themselves to be objects of racism and sexism, who see illuminated in this moment’s extraordinary spotlight what they live with everyday. They know that it isn’t just Duke, it isn’t everybody, and it isn’t just individuals making this disaster…These students are shouting and whispering about what happened to this young woman and to themselves.
So begins the infamous ad displayed in the Duke Chronicle back in April and endorsed by 88 professors at Duke University, previously known as the “Group of 88 (now 87),” in the wake of obviously-phony-from-the-beginning accusations of gang rape by a black stripper against three white lacrosse-playing men at Duke. Read the whole ad.
[Update: The Johnsville News links to a PDF copy at the end of the post. Right-click on it, choose “Save As” and save it to your hard drive. To read, open in a photo viewing or editing program.]
Rewind: The “We Are Listening” Advertisement
Man. Victimologists and other liberals make my job too easy. There’s no challenge to it anymore. Oh, well. Duty calls.
The silly ad, a bunch of quotes uttered by anonymous, victim-minded black students, was a gratuitous, irrelevant, inflammatory piece of trash meant to inflame already high racial tensions and cast Duke’s lacrosse-playing white boys as predatory, drunken brutes who routinely brutalize black women…and look at big black men funny.
Note this very important point: the ad, purported to be about “racism and sexism” on campus, focuses mainly on perceived racism. It is not, as the Group of 88 likes to claim, a statement about violence against women. It’s about the perceived prejudice of whites toward blacks at Duke and black students’ feelings of inadequacy. When a microphone is thrust in their faces, some blacks will always, always drone on about subjective “racist” incidents that may have little, if anything, to do with race or might be legitimate reactions by whites.
The whole ad is maddeningly trite and disingenuous. For instance, check out this line, probably uttered by a black female student: “You go to a party, you get grabbed, you get propositioned, and then you start to question yourself.”
So is this chick trying to say that white boys grab and proposition her at Duke parties, or is she referring to what happens to her at parties attended mainly by blacks? My guess is the latter, but her out-of-context quote is meant to demonize the white male students, particularly the lacrosse players, which is the whole purpose of the ad and why a bunch of privileged professors with grudges against white males signed it in the first place.
The whole ad, the whole concept behind the ad, is a joke.
Fast Forward: Inane Statement #2
Now the very delicate professors are whining about how misunderstood they are, that we’ve “misinterpreted†their signed statement endorsing a gratuitous, irrelevant, inflammatory piece of trash ad. From the News & Observer (emphases added):
That ad has been a subject of heated debate on blogs, and its signers have received angry and sometimes racist e-mail messages…William Chafe, a history professor who signed both the ad and the letter, said the bloggers’ interpretation of the ad has become the version people accepted. And that’s wrong, he said. “We’re trying to simply set the record straight and clarify we never claimed the lacrosse players were guilty,” Chafe said.
The “bloggers” Chafe is referring to is none other than history professor KC Johnson, who started blogging about the case because of the professors’ endorsement. (Thanks!)
For more Duke coverage, see The Johnsville News, LieStoppers, Crystal Mess, and Forensics Talk.
Did the “Group of 88″ learn the first time? No. Instead, they issued another inane (and irritatingly undated) public statement, something else we can parse, mock, dissect, rip to shreds, and call them on. The professors’ new letter is overloaded with CYA, revisionist history backtracking. An excerpt from An Open Letter to the Duke Community (emphasis added):
The ad has been read as a comment on the alleged rape, the team party, or the specific students accused. Worse, it has been read as rendering a judgment in the case. We understand the ad instead as a call to action on important, longstanding issues on and around our campus, an attempt to channel the attention generated by the incident to addressing these. We reject all attempts to try the case outside the courts, and stand firmly by the principle of the presumption of innocence.
I’ll go ahead and call it as I see it: Bullsh**!
A woman levels serious allegations of gang rape against a group of men. The woman happens to be black, and the men white. Some black students decide to use the occasion to vent anger over petty or imaginary slights, and you, esteemed and vaunted “scholars,” thought it was a good idea to sign your names to it, innocently oblivious to the possibility that some people might think you were rushing to judgment against the men, inciting racial strife, and using the opportunity to verbalize your personal race and class envy issues? And you’re surprised by the reaction of rational people?
OK.
My Dearest Professors…
…by signing on to a public ad, especially one filled with unfounded accusations, you thrust yourselves into the public arena. If you can’t take the criticism, shut the heck up. Take it from a blogger who’s had more than her share of invective-filled e-mail. Once you hit “Publish,†you’re fair game. In fact, you, oh esteemed scholars, have a responsibility to be extra careful when making public statements about and endorsing public statements of Duke students, particularly when felony charges are flying around. 
One more jab before I go. In your new letter, you wrote, “The disaster is the atmosphere that allows sexism, racism, and sexual violence to be so prevalent on campus.” So where’s the proof of all this “sexism, racism, and sexual violence” on campus?
Answer: A bunch of embarrassing and juvenile statements, uttered under the cower cover of anonymity, by a handful of disgruntled black students.
I think I’m done here. I’m going for a walk…
Addendum: Can’t.Get.Out.The.Door. Law professor and blogger Ann Althouse notes that the professors dish it out but can’t take it. Bill Anderson, writer and LBC commenter, says this about Chafe, the group member quoted in the N&O:
On top of signing this inane statement, William Chafee declared last spring that the lacrosse team was akin to the two men who murdered Emmett Till in Mississippi in 1955. One should think about that statement, and then wonder why he even would want to teach at Duke if it is being overrun by murderous racists.
This is the mentality of these people. They use words like “genocide†and “rape†and have no idea what they are saying. Truly pathetic.
“There have been public calls to the authors to retract the ad or apologize for it, as well as calls for action against them and attacks on their character. We reject all of these.
As somebody else posted somewhere, being a tenured university professor means never having to say,”I’m sorry”.
Comment by Seahawk — 01.17.07 @ 12:31 pm
If they meant the original ad as they claim they intended, “as a call to action on important, longstanding issues on and around our campus, an attempt to channel the attention generated by the incident to addressing these”, then are we to understand that they were silent on these issues previously because………why??????? I think you are right about the anecdotal stories. If I were at a party where someone “grabbed me”, I know I would leave. I don’t think I would question myself and I know I would not wait around to be propositioned, as if being grabbed was propositioned enough. What a bunch of pig slop, those learned folks have put forth. La Shawn, BTW, I am betting that those fools read your blog and burn a new one, each and every time. Nice job with a response to them.
Comment by Belle — 01.17.07 @ 12:36 pm
I will agree with the professors with one huge caveat. THEY ARE THE PROBLEM.
They continue to talk about a racist culture at Duke. I agree with them but, THEY ARE THE PROBLEM.
They talk about women not being respected when they make rape claims. When people on their side do not properly investigate those claims before siding with them, THEY ARE THE PROBLEM.
When professors assume facts because of a person’s race or their background, THEY ARE THE PROBLEM.
Comment by Tim — 01.17.07 @ 12:44 pm
Special Prosecutor in Duke Case Has Ties to Embattled DA
One of the special prosecutors reviewing the Duke lacrosse sex offense case previously worked alongside Durham County District Attorney Mike Nifong, who requested last week to be recused from the high-profile case.
Mary Winstead, a special deputy attorney in the state Attorney General’s Office, is one of two prosecutors assigned to review the case against three lacrosse players. Winstead worked with Nifong for several years in the 1980s and early 1990s when both served as assistant prosecutors in Durham.
Some lawyers said that a former Nifong colleague was an unusual choice to help prosecute the case against three Duke lacrosse players — especially considering that Nifong’s handling of the case has become a flash point.
“She may not be investigating Mike, but she’s investigating Mike’s work,” said attorney Alex Charns, who represents an unindicted Duke lacrosse player. “(Nifong’s) conduct is part and parcel of this prosecution. There’s no way to untangle that.”
Comment by Tate — 01.17.07 @ 12:47 pm
The 88 have each exchanged the function of their mouth and their nether orifice.
Comment by al_miller — 01.17.07 @ 12:49 pm
Oops! I meant to include the link from WRAL.com
http://www.wral.com/news/state/story/1168988/
Comment by Tate — 01.17.07 @ 12:49 pm
I’ve read the statements by the ‘Group of 88′ several times. I’m really not sure who they’re speaking for. My Af-Am son at Duke has not run into any “major” prejudices moreso than life itself offers. He is very in tune with his blackness and was raised in a predominantly black neighborhood. I did try to raise him to get along with all people and recognize that there are prejudices very real in the world but there are also people of all races exactly the opposite. My son joined a predominantly white group at Duke and actually had a good time in it (won’t say what it is since only 2 blacks were in the group) - he’s president of two other ‘club type’ activities — he’s enjoying his college years — his roommate is white and they get along just fine. One thing I have come to learn from my working at a major Univ in my area is that just because someone has a “higher” degree does not mean they are sensible.They may be good in the subject they’re trained in but when you remove them from that specific topic, these are some of the dumbest people I have ever met in my life. They have minimal common sense. I’m thinking this group of 88 falls in that category.
Comment by gail — 01.17.07 @ 12:56 pm
Disgusting beyond belief. They are so arrogant, they can’t even apologize when they’re clearly in the wrong.
Comment by Walt Schulte — 01.17.07 @ 12:57 pm
On top of signing this inane statement, William Chafee declared last spring that the lacrosse team was akin to the two men who murdered Emmett Till in Mississippi in 1955. One should think about that statement, and then wonder why he even would want to teach at Duke if it is being overrun by murderous racists.
This is the mentality of these people. They use words like “genocide” and “rape” and have no idea what they are saying. Truly pathetic.
Comment by Bill Anderson — 01.17.07 @ 1:07 pm
“I’ll go ahead and call it as I see it: Bullsh**!”
LOL! I love that woman! I’m in tears over here from laughing so hard Lashawn.
My sentiments exactly!
Comment by Jerry McClellan — 01.17.07 @ 1:11 pm
La Shawn, what I’d like to know is who is the “smart” one? You know, the one who didn’t sign this ad. I’d like to know who and why.
Comment by Belle — 01.17.07 @ 1:12 pm
Here you have a group of arrogant elitist professors who refuse to admit they were wrong and are trying to cover their behinds. The media won’t buy this. They’re just digging a deeper hole.
Comment by dianne — 01.17.07 @ 1:30 pm
Without knowing the race or gender of the “88/87″ my impression is that they are probably predominately African-Americans (male and female) and females whose area of expertise is in Women and Gender subjects. The over emphasis on racism and women abuse simply continues the program that brought them to prominence where they are tenured at what was regarded as one of the fine universities in the western world. If society accepts that our race and gender problems are fairly controlled by appropriate statutes, which are being utilized to control the excesses of what is largely considered to be aberrant behavior, then the possibility is that the use of valuable academic hours on a non-problem would hardly be contemplated by the curriculum planners. This group has to beat the drum, sound the alarm, wake the sleeping, to keep alive their importance. But, someone once pointed out: You can fool some of the people all of the time, you can fool all the people some of the time, but you can’t fool all the people all the time. One of these days even the liberal minded that lead great universities are going to sense that they have been “played”, as the expression is used in the streets.
Comment by Harry Taft — 01.17.07 @ 1:38 pm
Harry, are you saying it’s all about JOB SECURITY? I think you’ve hit the nail on the head. They know their 15 minutes of fame is over and so they are doing all they can to resurrect it.
Comment by Belle — 01.17.07 @ 1:57 pm
Well, Belle,
We know who one of the smart ones were: James E. Coleman, Jr.
Comment by Tate — 01.17.07 @ 2:02 pm
“We’re also listening to the Durham community . . . who see illuminated in this moment’s extraordinary spotlight what they live with everyday.”
They have to live everyday with drugged up prostitutes who try to avoid the drunk tank by making false accusations of rape?
Comment by Midwest — 01.17.07 @ 2:07 pm
Of course the whole charge was based on unproven accusations! In my university work, I find that students in the social sciences are specifically exempt from documenting allegations of racism against whites out of “sensitivity” to the accusers. Of course, all the “research” comes out to prove that whites are hopelessly, intrinsically racist.
So much for truth, due process, and intellectual courage.
Comment by Patricia — 01.17.07 @ 2:17 pm
to bill anderson @1:17PM
Bill you used the wrong “M” word. It isn’t “mentality” it’s mendacity.
Mike in Spring, TX
Comment by Mike Rayfield — 01.17.07 @ 2:32 pm
First, let me just say how infuriated I am with the accuser (for lying) and Nifong (for obstruction of justice and ruining the reputations of these men).
But… I don’t think you should make this an issue of “liberals” and conservatives. I consider myself liberal politically but I am disgusted with the 88 professors, Nifong, and the “victim”.
Both Nifong and the accuser deserve to be haunted by guilt and shame — and they will be
– Pat
Comment by Patrick Casanova — 01.17.07 @ 2:42 pm
When the Duke incident was first reported, I saw tv footage of a number of groups of students sobbing. When queried, they all stated that they felt so bad for any “victim of rape” and were crying for Crystal’s pain. Huh? If that was the case and they were genuinely crying in sympathy over the pain of another, one would assume that they cry over ALL rape victims. Not the case, of course.
As for the Duke 88 faculty, I am appalled and disgusted. For sure, they should never be allowed to inflict their warped and hideous views upon students who have been entrusted to their care. This notion that it is perfectly acceptable to bash and crucify a group of students, prejudge them as guilty, and publicly denounce their humanity because they have committed the sin of being white males (and worse, white males with money, however little or much), is an indication of their corrupted mindset.
Comment by jan — 01.17.07 @ 2:42 pm
The “noble lie” is at the heart of the so-called Duke Group of 88 minus 1. These taxpayer-fed bozos did not care if the charges were true - they only saw an opportunity for political gain and took it.
And it is obvious the Duke Group of 88 minus 1 cared nothing for the truth. By their own words they condemn themselves: Regardless of the results of the police investigation… Pathetic is not the correct word here. Evil is. This was an attempt at mob justice, and these ivory-tower fascists were the ones trying to whip the mob into a frenzy.
Comment by Mwalimu Daudi — 01.17.07 @ 3:02 pm
The only racists I see are the 88 professors. I imagine most Americans also see them as that. However, being “professors” seems to give them the right to say whatever they want without being held accountable for their words.
Unfortunately, they will continue to hold their jobs, will continue to indoctrinate young minds, and will continue to be filled with intolerance and hatred for anyone who disagrees with their view.
The damage comes about with the impact of the next generation. There will be a number who accept such garbage as truth, and will continue to be bitter, hate filled bigots. Only the gospel of Jesus Christ will change those hearts.
Comment by David — 01.17.07 @ 3:07 pm
Something around 3% of the faculty at Duke signed onto this idiotic ad campaign about racial and sexual turmoil on the campus.
Hopefully, there will be a few stout-hearted fellows in the faculty senate and the Provost’s office who will give them an old fashioned “dutch rub” for confusing their politics with their obligations as ethical mentors.
Perhaps the Duke 88 have some political explanation as to why 11% Af-Am of the undergraduate student body of 6,244 drops to 6% Af-Am of the graduate and professional student body of 6,844.
Comment by Heliotrope — 01.17.07 @ 3:12 pm
God Bless you Lashawn!
Let us not forget money here. Over 70% of the African American Studies “professors” signed this BS. Why?
They need to justify their department. We need an AA department to fight racism, even if we manufacture it. Sort of like ginning up a hoax.
Oops, I guess I’ve figured this out. Racism MUST exist, so our department Must exist, and as they say at the football games.
“We MUST protect this HOUSE”
Lies all lies and the sad thing is these people have no shame or pride, it is all about keeping their jobs.
Sorry, as an economist, I always say, FOLLOW THE MONEY.
Not gone yet!!
Kemp
Comment by kempermanx — 01.17.07 @ 3:12 pm
Belle,
About a third of the original 88 signers dropped out, BUT they picked up some more idiots to get to 87. Stuck on Stupid?? SO SAD.
Kemp
Comment by kempermanx — 01.17.07 @ 3:15 pm
A third congressman has now joined in the call for a federal probe :
http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/new…egion-apnewyork
Rep. Peter King, whose Long Island district includes relatives of one of the accused students, Collin Finnerty,* urged Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez to begin an investigation into Mike Nifong, who asked last week to be recused from the case.
“I am deeply disappointed by your apparent decision to defer a decision whether to investigate Mr. Nifong’s prosecution of this case,” King wrote to Gonzalez, arguing that the FBI launch an investigation into whether the prosecutor may have violated Finnerty’s civil rights, including the right to due process under the law.. .
King, the top Republican on the House Homeland Security Committee, is the son of a New York Police Department lieutenant.
Pete.King@mail.house.gov
* I think the paper has this wrong, since Congresswoman McCarthy (who also supports a federal probe), has likewise been identified
as having the Finnertys as her constituents).
Comment by Seahawk — 01.17.07 @ 3:16 pm
And all they have done is fanned the flames of whatever racism was there. The best way to have handled it would have been to have been reserved, then for black groups to come out rabidly anti-Nifong, in solidarity with the lacrosse students.
It’s like Jewish groups that never learn from history and support big government and gun control. I mean, WTH?! These groups, in living memory, have been on the receiving end of corrupt, violent and abusive government. Did they never learn their lessons, or did the just forget them the night after they learned them?
Comment by MikeT — 01.17.07 @ 3:27 pm
Helio;
Thanks for remiunding us that the $#@%% signers represent only 3% of the faculty. It’s easy to lose site of the “idiocy” proportions.
Comment by jan — 01.17.07 @ 3:27 pm
“Both Nifong and the accuser deserve to be haunted by guilt and shame — and they will be”
Dream on. Give it a year. Both of them are going to be icons on liberal campuses. If I am the accuser, I am letting this whole thing settle down and then I am hiring a publicist and writing a book about how I was raped twice, first by the Duke LAX team and then by the media and blogs in particular. Facts mean nothing to these people. Give it time and the accuser and Nifong will be heroes on campuses all across America and have so many speaking dates, they will have to turn them down.
Comment by John — 01.17.07 @ 3:30 pm
I agree this isn’t a question of liberal vs conservative. This is a question of decent vs vile, fair vs biased. The Group of 88/87 obviously belongs in the latter category, panting to burnish their bona-fides by inciting racial/sex anxiety at Duke. Shame on them, and shame on those that follow, defend or sympathize with this loathsome band.
Comment by Jeffersonian — 01.17.07 @ 3:46 pm
Dear La Shawn,
It’s never our fault.
Sincerely,
The Liberals
Comment by Tracey — 01.17.07 @ 3:56 pm
LaShawn,
It is all about Corruption of Blood. Holding the sons responsible for the sins of the fathers.
Comment by M. Simon — 01.17.07 @ 4:13 pm
Here’s what these “intellectuals” declared 10 months ago:
“To the students speaking individually and to the protestors making collective noise, THANK YOU FOR NOT WAITING and for making yourselves heard.”
Here’s what they say now:
“We reject all attempts to try the case outside the courts and stand firmly by the principle of the presumption of innocence.”
These people (Group of IQ 88-1) are simply liars. Brazen liars empowered and enabled by years of getting away with it because people of true talent, ability, and work ethic have let them get away with it. Shame on us all.
- Jim Curry
Comment by jc — 01.17.07 @ 4:26 pm
I wonder what sort of grade these professors would give a paper that reached conclusions that were unsupported by the evidence presented? I should probably change that to “conclusions that were contradicted by evidence that was suppressed?”
If the subject were, for example, mankind’s role in global warming…
I can only conclude the 87/88 are incompetents, or cowards.
Comment by MarkD — 01.17.07 @ 4:27 pm
Duke Group of 88 Issues Another Inane Statement
We are listening to our students. We’re also listening to the Durham community, to Duke staff, and to each other. Regardless of the results of the police investigation, what is apparent everyday now is the anger and fear of many students who know the…
Trackback by Anonymous — 01.17.07 @ 4:45 pm
But Harry (# 13) don’t you know that we should NEVER ever stereotype people by their words & deeds?
Unfortunately for these nutty professors, the ‘racial-profiling’ shoe fits.
To wit, go to
http://crystalmess.blogspot.com/2006/09/dear-cowards.html,
then go to
http://www.duke.edu/cgi-bin/phcgi.pl
to open up Duke’s phonebook search page.
As you go enter most of the names, you’ll get as much as you need to know that the shoe really fits. It’s too funny, almost like shooting dynamiting fish in a barrel.
ROTFLOL. The best way they can contribute to the healing is to resign fortwith and promise to seek a new profession that doesn’t involve AA studies.
Comment by Andy — 01.17.07 @ 4:46 pm
Tenure. Has. Got. To. Go.
Thank God I majored in a “hard science” rather than all that squishy arts, sciences, and humanities crap. At least in the hard sciences, 2+2 still equals 4 and you have to prove what you say. Perceptions. Realities. Feelings. All subjective bullsh**.
Comment by Letalis — 01.17.07 @ 4:49 pm
There is a bit of irony in this second CYA posting by the ‘gang’. My understanding is that Duke is one of those campuses that require their entering freshmen to receive ‘diversity training’ from none other than the Black Studies Department. Its a credit hour course if memory serves.
Yet this new posting of which many members are from the BSD, at least in my mind, infers that the coursework is ineffective. I mean, if after the cousework, the campus environment is awash in sexual misconduct, fear and racial mistrust then me thinks that maybe there ought to be an audit of the CV of the course in general, the professors associated with the program and possibly the dept as a whole as being the nexus of all the fear.
They have required this cousework for several years. You would think by this point that it would have an intended effect of reducing tensions. Maybe some students are due a rebate for their diplomas?
Comment by John McGinnis — 01.17.07 @ 5:29 pm
Maybe we need a Lebon prize (reverse of Nobel) for most un-insightful, “lost in the woods,” stupid, behavior by supposed bright professors.
These 88 (or 87) have got an inside track on the first Lebon prizes.
As a payor of Duke tuition, I should write in to ask for a refund of a token amount, say .3 percent, as a Duke acknowledgment that the Duke 87/88 had a right to free speech, but what they said was unquestionably wrong and stupid (both times).
Comment by cfw — 01.17.07 @ 5:45 pm
What I find most humorous about this whole business is that professors (e.g. academic professionals) are supposed to be aware of and expect peer-review of their publications. One would think that the faculty at a premier university would be able to stay the slings and arrows of review and if the claims they make had a lick of truth to them, would be able to back those claims up with facts and sources.
That the Duke faculty who signed these letters are having such difficulty dealing with this type of peer-review makes me wonder what standards Duke has for hiring faculty and evenmoreso what the validity of the Duke faculty’s publication record might actually be. Sounds to me that the Duke name may be giving the faculty at large a pass across all spectrums and it is now spilling out into the public realm with an expectation that we will swallow whatever they say without any sort of analysis.
I think I would definitely think twice about sending any child there. My faith in Duke’s teaching and research mission is sorely shaken.
Comment by Chad Wayne — 01.17.07 @ 5:47 pm
Duke Provost, Peter Lange, has posted a long “victim” lament about the vile bloggers in the universe who are creating a hostile environment for liberals who wish to spout their vituperative comments unimpeded.
Provost Peter Lange on ‘Free Speech and Speaking Freely’
http://dukenews.duke.edu/2007/01/lange.html
Comment by jan — 01.17.07 @ 6:00 pm
Do you think the group of 88 smells a civil lawsuit in the air?
Comment by garrett — 01.17.07 @ 6:07 pm
Jan, sounds like he is feeling the same way the LaCrosse players must have felt. Oh well, BTB!
Comment by Belle — 01.17.07 @ 6:08 pm
Racism and Sexism at Duke University
With Mike Nifong’s and Crystal Gail Mangum’s attempted lynching of the Duke University students continuing to unravel, a mob of activist University professors accidentally becomes right. Ann Althouse, Durham in Wonderland, Instapundit, and La Shawn …
Trackback by tdaxp — 01.17.07 @ 6:14 pm
“Blah blah blah….the anger and fear of many students who know themselves to be objects of racism and sexism, ”
Right now that would be the three white male students who were looking at being lynched by the local government.
“The whole ad, the whole concept behind the ad, is a joke. ”
It’s not a joke when people stand to go to jail over this sh**.
“Perceptions. Realities. Feelings. All subjective bullsh**.”
Wishing won’t make it go away. Perceptions and feelings are a form of behavior, and behavior is an observable phenomenon. These feelings and perceptions have to be analyzed, exposed and denounced - in public - because they have real world consequences. Too bad if this yields data more complex and contradictory than observations about inert matter, but they are real enough to require real action.
People like Gail must just be grinding their teeth over this kind of crap. Here she and everyone like her are trying to raise young men and women to be decent human beings, in a society that still has real racism here and there, which should be recognized and dealt with, and along come idiots like this who discredit all that. These racists are the KKK’s dream, because they discredit any complaint about real racism, as this accuser discredits real accusations of rape.
Comment by Jim — 01.17.07 @ 7:03 pm
Belle;
Tis truly amazing, isn’t it? Here is a leader at a huge university talking about the need to “understand” and “freely communicate” and “be tolerant.” Yet, he virtually ignores the multitude of staggering transgressions of these concepts by his own university, those on the left, the town of Durham, etc.. An innocent group of his students are enduring the fight of their lives and he can only see the “bad bad bloggers.” Well, they say that one reaps what one sows…
Comment by jan — 01.17.07 @ 7:10 pm
Spring is not that many weeks away and it is time for Duke “to take the bull by the tail and face the situation.” (W.C.Fields)
=There are the 88 nitwits: the ebony and ivory keyboard of existential psychobabble.
=The Pres. who acted in haste to cover his (flank) and fired the coach, suspended the team, and hosed down the accused with academic Lysol. He sure has some ’splainin’ to do.
=The 97% of the faculty who looked the other way and whistled past the graveyard.
=The MSM who were in it for the racial turmoil and a possible riot, but who skulked away when their preferred scenario went South.
So, come spring, the President of Duke and the Provost need to take on “new challenges” elsewhere. The “nitwit 88″ should be assigned “sensitivity training” of the type that some students are forced to endure when they call people “water buffaloes” and the like. The remainder of the faculty should be instructed (by coercion) on how to stand up for what it right and decent.
Ah, Spring! Renewal is in the air. Or not.
Comment by Heliotrope — 01.17.07 @ 7:43 pm
Question:
First: Why it is that so many who promote the notion that sex is nothing more than “recreation” express such outrage when students treat it as a recreation…
Second: in the world of liberated women, why are males stripping for Chip ‘n’ Dales fun/fine while a female stripper is deemed to be a victim?
Comment by jan — 01.17.07 @ 7:43 pm
“the ebony and ivory keyboard of existential psychobabble” Oh my, but that is exquisite…
Question:
Students in universities are taught in a variety of subtle and not so subtle ways that sex is nothing more than a recreation. Why are those same universities appalled when students treat sex like a recreation?
Comment by jan — 01.17.07 @ 7:49 pm
Sorry ’bout dat (double posting).
Comment by jan — 01.17.07 @ 7:50 pm
Lemming (Previously Duke) 88
Welcome, dear reader. You’ve come to hear the tale of Aquaville, no doubt. A place where blue and green people live in relative harmony and where all the buildings are painted a sparkling, bright nondescript color.
Well, almost all. A small numbe…
Trackback by Java Zen:Thinking Out Loud — 01.17.07 @ 8:43 pm
Jan that was some good Sh*t.
Where have you been? We need cut to the chase comments, the rest of us dance a little too much.
Kemp, not gone yet!!
Comment by kempermanx — 01.17.07 @ 8:56 pm
Hey folks,
Tune into “Hannity & Colmes,” on FOX. It’s on now (9:00 pm EST).
One of the topics of discussion: “Liberal Duke Professors Won’t Accept the Truth”
Comment by Tate — 01.17.07 @ 9:06 pm
Kempermax;
In the stratosphere of compliments, yours is way up there and I am so smiling.
As for where have I been…Cruising on LaShawn Barber enjoying the commentary of all.
Comment by jan — 01.17.07 @ 9:09 pm
Jan,
Ah, shucks thanks, keep posting!!
Kemp
Comment by kempermanx — 01.17.07 @ 9:48 pm
First I’d like to say I think teaching Af-Am lit to students is important and is an excellent subject in the curriculum. But could someone tell me the purpose of a University having an entire department for this? My friend’s daughter went to Harvard in this field and she said she knew it was a ‘nothing’ degree - she just wanted a degree from Harvard. Maybe I’m missing something here.
Comment by gail — 01.17.07 @ 9:59 pm
Great piece, La Shawn. One way to get out of a “pity party” for yourself is to come out of the blue funk with fists swinging. I find at least 53 folks have agreed with you by the time Carolina beat Clemson by 22 at 9 tonight, so I’m taking that as evidence you’ve got us bloggo’s checking your site out first whenever a new “something Duke case inane” hits the mainstream press. As Kempx has noted, you’ve even got “jan” back into the fray!!
As for the “Still Stuck on the Bandwagon of 88 less 1″, a lot of the previous posts have made the same point that first struck me when I saw the news of the 87’s signature ad today — there remains the same rant about widespread racism and sexism, as if these are indisputable given facts, and yet there’s no credible evidence offered in support of the “facts”. We are again expected to “accept the premise” without question, and if questions are raised by us to inquire whether the premise is flawed, well, then to those who posed the premise, we’re dolts and are just as much of the problem!
I’ll agree with observations that the “prejudices on display” aren’t necessarily “conservatives v. liberals” prejudices in the truest sense, but it’s worth noting that the behavior of the 88/87 professors fits the “liberal template” behavior… a premise is announced, and the truth of the premise is accepted as the PC premise of the day. Then, allegations are made that fit the premise, and the allegations are accepted without question as “truth”. Woe be unto the person or persons who haven’t embraced the “truth”.
What if, instead of the premise being “rampant racism and sexism”, the announced premise had been “There are monsters under all the beds at Duke!!”? If stated with an appropriate amount of pompous certitude by 88 Duke professors, I’m sure there would be an appropriate number of “monster haters” aroused to passionately decry the existence of monsters under their beds — and they wouldn’t even question whether there was any credible evidence of a monster or two under any of the beds at Duke.
I think I’ll go back to read today’s ad by the New Gang of 87, and everywhere the terms “racism and sexism” are used, I think I’ll substitute “monsters under the bed” — this could make a fun read, especially if I grab a glass of Kempx’s value rite vodka — shaken, not stirred –first!!
TaterCon
Comment by TaterCon — 01.17.07 @ 10:01 pm
Tulia.
Illinois when it was determined that 50% of people on Death Row were not guilty of the crimes for which they were convicted and placed on Death Row.
Where was the similar outrage?
In fact, on this very blog, some commentors said that if a person is wrongly put to death as a result of the death penality, if they are right with God, it is not a worry.
Comment by DarkStar — 01.17.07 @ 10:10 pm
Was blogging totally in vogue during Tulia…cuz from where I sit, the outrage in the Duke case has been primarily confined to the blogosphere. Meanwhile, I’m having a hard time hearing the “outrage” of the MSM, Duke, the group of 88, Durham, and the left, though to be fair, some in this stellar group have acknowledged their faux pas….
Comment by jan — 01.17.07 @ 10:23 pm
>> Dream on. Give it a year. Both of them are going to be icons on liberal campuses.
Comment by Patrick Casanova — 01.17.07 @ 10:44 pm
oops. My comment didn’t go all the way through
I was going to say, “maybe the guilt and shame will come in the next life ;)”
Comment by Patrick Casanova — 01.17.07 @ 10:45 pm
DS said; “In fact, on this very blog, some commentors said that if a person is wrongly put to death as a result of the death penality, if they are right with God, it is not a worry.”
I am incredulous enough about this extraordinary claim that I need a cut and paste.
While I can envision someone saying; “If a person is right with God, death is not a tragedy, but rather a time to rejoice” or variations upon that theme.
What you have conveyed is that folks don’t think it is a problem to put innocent people to death. Quite frankly, I have never heard anyone suggest that, though I am willing to be persuaded that such an abberant human exists. There are serial killers, after all.
Comment by jan — 01.17.07 @ 10:49 pm
Interestingly, visiting professor Kim Curtis is on both statements. In a recently-filed lawsuit, she was credibly alleged to have accused a student of being an accomplice to rape, and then flunking him in her class. Because he was on the lacrosse team.
Not necessarily the ideal signature to solicit for this we-wuz-misunderstood whinge. But that’s just me.
I suspect that discovery is not something that Curtis, others of the 88, or Duke’s administrators should be looking forward to.
Comment by AMac — 01.17.07 @ 10:54 pm
DarkStar:
If 50% of the Death Row inmates in Illinois were provably innocent of the crimes for which they stood convicted, that WOULD be an outrage. Do you have any citations/links? How many people are you talking about?
Comment by SteveDinMD — 01.17.07 @ 10:56 pm
Proof positive that one can be highly “educated” and still be a total idjit!
Comment by Insomniac — 01.17.07 @ 11:05 pm
“As somebody else posted somewhere, being a tenured university professor means never having to say, ‘I’m sorry’.”
A very early Second City routine (from the 60s) has this bit of dialogue (the second line is spoken by someone who is a satiric depiction of a University of Chicago professor):
“You’ll become king! Think of the power! Think of the glory!”
“I don’t need power and glory. I’m a full professor!”
Comment by Jim C. — 01.17.07 @ 11:40 pm
The responsible members of the Board of Trustees of Duke, and surely there are a few, are fortunate that this group of misfits have, once more, provided a list of their names for consideration when Duke alumni realize that this President, faculty and staff need a reality check. It might come as a surprise to most of this faculty that the overwhelming majority of whites in this country feel no post-slavery guilt and are fed up with blacks making a career of it.
Comment by Henry Butler — 01.18.07 @ 12:27 am
Alan over on Liestoppers posted a teriffic summary of the Group of 88’s nonsense:
“The real kicker is the G88’s endorsement of the protests. The protesters were not seeking a solution to the G88’s disaster. The protesters were seeking a railroading. Some of the protesters were advocating castration. By endorsing the protesters without endorsing the right to a fair trial, the G88 made themselves a gang of high-sounding pious hypocrites.”
Comment by Sundance — 01.18.07 @ 12:34 am
You can’t make this stuff up
LaShawn, on Duke again.Althouse on the Duke fiasco. They are making the old "fake but accurate" case. She quotes the NYT here:Critical race theorists, who are on the faculty at almost every major law school and are producing an ever-growing body
Trackback by Maggie's Farm — 01.18.07 @ 7:21 am
La Shawn, I followed the link and read Peter Lange’s letter and the one thing that I took from it, was that the internet attacks (i.e., emails and blogs) on the Gang of 88 were racially motivated against those 88 professors. Although I am sure that that was true to some extent, I for one didn’t know they were black, in fact I had naively assumed that they were Old Hippies, upper middle class spoiled old white kids.
Comment by benm — 01.18.07 @ 8:02 am
Duke Group of 88 is back in the news. They have issued an open letter to the Duke community stating that they stand by the We’re Listening ad. La Shawn Barber smacks them down so hard that I have little to add.
Pingback by Carnal Reason — 01.18.07 @ 8:32 am
I distinctly recall observing on television a young male student at one of these protests declaring that even if the Duke Lacrosse players did not commit this crime, they should still be found guilty to make amends for historical white aggression against blacks. Why doesn’t the group of 88-1=87 find that offensive? Apparently, that does not offend their sense of fairness and balance. It seems that the only people they are finding fault with now are those that disagree with their public OPINION! Notice they have no comment on the Black Panthers, either. Someone needs to tell these chumps they need to pedal harder and faster.
As far as the nasty emails they claim to have received, that is indeed a bad thing, however, that does not and should not mean that people are not free to comment on their public ad. Notice they do not comment on the terrible things that have been said about and to the lacrosse players. It seems to be all about them.
Comment by Belle — 01.18.07 @ 9:33 am
I have been reluctant to comment on this issue but here goes: I believed the accuser at first and based on what has happened I don’t believe her now. She is a liar.
It is very unfortunate that these young men have been put through the wringer. It is unfair. However, I STILL do believe had these young men been black they would have still been locked up until this very day. And I still believe that the only reason that folks give half a damn is because the young men are white. Had this happened at North Carolina Central U across town, with a black man or men raping a black woman, all of you commenters in such an uproar wouldn’t give a sh*t.
I’m sure I’ll get flamed but I really don’t care.
I hope the young men are able to somehow put this beind them, make some better choices in the future and move on with their lives.
Comment by Tiffany in Houston — 01.18.07 @ 10:44 am
Tiffany, you are wrong about people not caring about a black woman being raped by black men. Everyone I know would be outraged about any woman being raped. The issue here is that certain people in leadership positions chose to push this particular case to the forefront to further their own agendas, regardless of the facts. If these same people chose to push a particular case of rape to the forefront that involved black on black, then I think you would find the overwhelming majority of all people outraged. Especially if the accuser was obviously lying. But that is not what happened here. Where are all these people when a real rape occurs? I have never seen this much attention given to any rape case. Why did these leaders give so much attention to this particular case? Why didn’t they focus on other rapes that occur with regularity in Durham? What caused these leaders to give so much attention to this case instead of other rape cases? Was it the so called rape or was it something else? I believe that they used this case for their own personal gain and by doing that have caused a whole different outrage in the community because it was so transparent. There was case not too long ago involving a gang rape of a NCCU student. I don’t recall seeing an ad denouncing that crime in the paper. What people need to do is ask these leaders where their outrage was then. What is so different about the Duke case that made them take a stand? I am not flaing, here, I just think you are incorrect about people not caring.
Comment by Belle — 01.18.07 @ 11:22 am
EEKS! Sorry La Shawn! The second one was supposed to be the one posted. ;(
Comment by Belle — 01.18.07 @ 11:23 am
Welcome back, Tiffany. I remember your comments from earlier threads several months ago. Thanks for listening and observing since then, and thanks for joining the many who are now thoroughly convinced the accuser is a liar.
I’m not going to “flame” at you for the rest of your comments — your perceptions and opinions are recognized as yours and you’re free to offer them up for our consumption. With your hypothetical, however, you’ve hit on a point that’s already been made recently by La Shawn — the lack of care that might be seen had this been an occurrence of “black on black” crime. (See the LBC posts earlier this month on black on black and Hispanic on black crime.) If I interpret your point correctly, you’re critical about the lack of care we Caucasians would be likely to express. My response is that we Caucasians wouldn’t be heard, wouldn’t receive an audience, and can’t make much of difference at all when the black leaders are silent on such events as well.
Oh, wait. Bill Cosby broke the silence a bit ago. Do I recall correctly he was “flamed” for speaking out? Do I recall correctly La Shawn, Larry Elder, Thomas Sowell and nearly all other black conservatives struggle to have their conservative viewpoints heard?
Comment by TaterCon — 01.18.07 @ 11:25 am
Timing is everything. Any of those Group 88 statements coming out some time other than right after the “No Incident”, nobody would have paid any mind. But coming out when they did, they supported the lying accuser. Why didn’t they come out against playing the race card - something that hurts us all? Have they ever, in their great wisdom, collectively acknowledged that?
Comment by Akilah Russell — 01.18.07 @ 11:40 am
The sad part of this story is the poor quality of education at Duke. If 87 Professors are this narrow minded and bigoted how can they be allowed to teach the next generation of leaders.
Comment by Frank — 01.18.07 @ 11:48 am
“For instance, check out this line, probably uttered by a black female student: “You go to a party, you get grabbed, you get propositioned, and then you start to question yourself.â€
So is this chick trying to say that white boys grab and proposition her at Duke parties, or is she referring to what happens to her at parties attended mainly by blacks?”
To answer your question, LaShawn, if this woman is a black student, she’s referring to black males propositioning and grabbing her at parties. Duke is famously self-segregating (I know, I graduated from Duke), and except for the occasional rare brave soul, black students attend only black parties.
My freshman-year roommate was black (I’m white) and we were good friends, but after that first year she had been indoctrinated and rarely spoke to me again. My boyfriend’s black roommate who refused to self-segregate and stayed friends with whites was ostracized by other black students and openly called an “oreo.”
I didn’t understand that behavior then, and I still don’t. We were told “it’s a black thing, you wouldn’t understand.” When I asked my black friend what the ideal race relations would be, she said that everyone should be color-blind. But how does that jibe with that strange racist self-segregation? How does that jibe with black students being told they’d lose their “black card” if they didn’t join a black fraternity?
The indoctrination in race that students receive at Duke is the opposite of color-blindness. Instead, it teaches black students to define themselves first and foremost as black, leaving white students with few or no real friendships with blacks. So much for diversity.
I’m glad my boyfriend’s roommate decided to risk losing his “black card.” He later became my husband’s best man, and we’re godparents to his son. But had the black students at Duke had their way, he would’ve stopped speaking to us years ago because of the color of our skin.
If the Duke faculty wants to condemn a real “social disaster,” they should start with what’s going on right in front of them.
Comment by Jen in Durham — 01.18.07 @ 2:50 pm
I just think they saw an opportunity to get some attention for some of their gripes (and I don’t dismiss them out-of-hand. for all I know, there could be some serious problems). It sounds like, however, that they probably had that statement in a file-cabinet somewhere. they may have several- kind of like a mad-lib book of statements.
Comment by Nelson Guirado — 01.18.07 @ 3:37 pm
Hmmm. White racists would not hire a black stripper.
Trey
Comment by Trey — 01.18.07 @ 4:10 pm
Jen in Durham -
Why is it a problem when black students choose to self segregate?? Why is it racist for blacks when white students do the exact same thing? Are the white students racist too?
And as far as the Duke faculty condemning a “social disaster” I certainly hope you are referring to all Duke students and not just the black ones. Surely, they aren’t the root cause of all Duke’s issues.
I’m not trying to be a smart ass, I’m just curious.
Comment by Tiffany in Houston — 01.18.07 @ 5:23 pm
Because Tiffany, it is racist when whites self-segregate
Comment by john harland — 01.18.07 @ 5:57 pm
Tiffany said;”Had this happened at North Carolina Central U across town, with a black man or men raping a black woman, all of you commenters in such an uproar wouldn’t give a sh*t.”
Actually, no one was raped in the Duke case (unless it is the Duke lacross players), and THAT is why there is such an uproar.
Comment by jan — 01.18.07 @ 9:19 pm
#73 Tiffany,
You hit on an essential point of much the anger in this soapopera, even if it’s not put in the racial terms you suggest.
The essential outrage for me is ‘what if these guys COULDN’T afford decent counsel’? That’s what is so scary here. Nifong would still be hiding evidence and putting on a show trial playing the race card.
Are there other corrupt DAs in America today? For sure. THIS one was caught. But rather than draw race lines in this story (or Conservative / Liberal lines), let’s all celebrate the unmasking of a corrupt DA. That’s in all of our best interests.
As to the racial aspects of this case, it saddens me to think that with an all black jury, Nifong might have had a chance. Certainly OJ did.
One would have hoped that race relations in the USA had progressed beyond the point that the color of a man’s skin helped to determine his guilt.
The statement of the 88 and now the 87 would strongly suggest that such is not yet the case.
Comment by RebelPOW — 01.18.07 @ 9:41 pm
Here is an article discussing it:
An article from CNN
Illinois Gov. George Ryan on Monday imposed a moratorium on the state’s death penalty. All lethal injections will be postponed indefinitely pending an investigation into why more executions have been overturned than carried out since 1977, when Illinois reinstated capital punishment.
“We have now freed more people than we have put to death under our system — 13 people have been exonerated and 12 have been put to death,” Ryan told CNN. “There is a flaw in the system, without question, and it needs to be studied.”
…
One of the 13 exonerated Illinois inmates, Anthony Porter, spent 15 years on death row and was within two days of being executed before a group of student journalists at Northwestern University uncovered evidence that was used to prove his innocence.
Try looking up conservative commentators who had anything to say about this that mentions possible prosecutorial misconduct.
Comment by DarkStar — 01.18.07 @ 9:50 pm
Sorry, here is the link.
Comment by DarkStar — 01.18.07 @ 9:51 pm
Darkstar;
Always marking yur scorecard…You say;”Try looking up conservative commentators who had anything to say about this that mentions possible prosecutorial misconduct.”
Well, where was the outrage about the quarterback at Utah St. and the backup quarter at USC who were charged with rape at the time the Duke case was unfolding? Where was the outrage when Chicago Bears cornerback Ricky Manning savagely beat a kid at Dennys while lobbing F%$# Jew and so on at him?
The reality is that the Duke case had many visceral elements; in particular, a community, a university, a prosecutor, and a media that were willing to crucify a group of kids simply because of their color and their class (whose much vaunter “privilege” did nothing to spare them from this three ring circus)
Americans are a heck of a lot more fair than you might imagine…most of them, that is.
Comment by jan — 01.18.07 @ 10:37 pm
DarkStar:
The article you cite does not say, nor does it imply, that anywhere near 50% of Death Row inmates in Illinois have been provably innocent. It only states that since 1977 12 people have been executed in the state while 13 had their sentences overturned for whatever reason. In fact, only in the case of Anthony Porter was it specifically mentioned that an inmate was exonerated. We don’t know how many of those whose sentences were overturned were innocent, and we don’t know how many have been sentenced to death since 1977. For all we know the actual percentage of innocent people sentenced to death in Illinois might have been infinitesimal. We need more data before we can draw any conclusions. As an aside, the total of 12 executions in 30 years in a state as populous as Illinois strikes me as ridiculously low. It would seem that either there’s an immense Death Row backlog or Illinois prosecutors are extremely relucant to seek the death penalty.
Comment by SteveDinMD — 01.18.07 @ 10:48 pm
What do the Gang of 88/87 have to say about other cases - ones supported by actual evidence - of brutal sexual violence involving victims/perps of different races (happy to supply some links for them). Obviously this case, however vaporous, being right under their nose is a terrific opportunity for grandstanding, but what cases involving actual attacks are on their “watchlist”. Is this it? What does it say about the Gang of 88, the race baiters and the femnazis that this farce is the BEST case they can come up with to rally around? There are plenty of REAL cases out there that deserve outrage…..but of course all of those cases fail to support their agendas and beliefs. Real racial and sexual violence cases occur every day, but the Duke Hoax is a once in a lifetime picture-perfect opportunity to take the only case they can find in recent history that, if it were true, would so perfectly fit the script they would have written themselves. If Houston Baker wants to see some real “farm animalsâ€, he should stop looking at his students and start reading the news in his new home state - starting with the Channon Christian case.
The 88 judged the lacrosse players based on their perceptions and prejudices about a group of people, rather than relying on the content of their individual characters.
They are shining examples of what NOT to do to make the world a better place.
Comment by LisaM — 01.18.07 @ 10:50 pm
La Shawn, I thoroughly enjoyed your smartly written blog above. You summarily sliced, diced, and dispatched the 88’s insipid arguments that attempt to exploit (false) claims from a pitiful black stripper (by-the-way, what’s her name) that she was raped by three privileged white boys. Their confusing ad and non-apology fail to advance their racist agenda. Their goal is to split Americans. They’re hate mongers.
Comment by O. — 01.18.07 @ 10:50 pm
Always marking yur scorecard
This isn’t about a score card, this is about an observation.
With the Tulia case, MANY people spent time in jail because of the actions of an “eye witness” and the actions of prosecutors who had good reason to believe the witness was lying: 2 or 3 people the “witness” claimed he brought drugs from, were able to prove they weren’t in town at the time. From that point, the “witness” shouldn’t have been considered credible.
It’s only NOW where the issue of prosecutorial misconduct is being taken up by conservatives commentators and I find it sickening.
The stability of our justice system depends on the idea of fair trials, yet it has been widely known there are problems with the system, but, in general, it has been conservative commentators who have willfully turned a blind eye to it. These are the same people who claim “law and order” is the rule of the day.
But when people were put on death row who were innocent of the crimes, where were the conservative commentators? They were mostly silent.
Sickening.
Comment by DarkStar — 01.18.07 @ 11:12 pm
DS, I don’t think anyone has an issue with using DNA tech, unavailable at the time of conviction, to test and prove the innocence of death row inmates.
Therein lies the rub, the stats you relate only refer to deathrow. How many people in the Il system rightly deserve capital punishment, or at least deathrow, but were punished via long to life sentences? Rerun the %s by combining those two groups and odds are that the rate of erroneous imprisonment drops substantially, thus negating the argument against death penalty.
I also wonder to what degree the rates are skewed by the gotcha in our system where to plead innocent can get you on deathrow, yet to cop a plea, you get a shorter sentence. In that case, an innocent insists on pleading his innocence has truly crapped out in the game of justice.
That’s certainly the case here where Nifong expected his victims to cop a plea rather than fight him and now he’s been snakebit by his own loaded dice.
The outrage here is that the DA, having found that DNA exonerated the suspects, chose to suppress it, in order to continue the prosecution. If Nifong can do it, how many other DAs are denying others, even blacks, currently languishing in prison on bogus charges all over the US?
I’ve certainly heard of cases where DAs refuse to reopen a case in spite of the exculpatory DNA evidence, a perverse invocation of ‘fake but accurate’ conviction.
That is a bigger outrage than one innocently & tragically executed for want of DNA exoneration. In the big scheme of things, it’s akin to one dying from a disease prior to its curability — tragic, but c’est la vie.
Why the 88/87 fail to grasp this truth is beyond me. Yet, time & time again they gallantly ride in to ‘rescue’ excreta such as the Africa Cult out of PA, Jumal, OJ, Shakur, Took & Twana - obviously and completely guilty, but eminently useful for race-baiting and railing against whitey.
Comment by Andy — 01.18.07 @ 11:30 pm
Has there EVER been a white gangrape of a black woman? Seriously.
A well-known media commentator asked me to do some research on interracial rapes for an article that s/he was considering writing. I found from FBI statistics that there are 20,000 black-on-white rapes a year, every year, in the U.S. However, the figures for white-on-black rapes is always indicated by an asterisk, with an explanation that the sample size is too small for extrapolation. And GANGrapes? About 3,000 white women a year are gangraped by blacks, but I was unable to find a single instance of a black woman EVER being gangraped by whites.
If anyone can point us to evidence of ONE real black woman who was raped by a gang of white men, I’d love to see it.
Comment by WhyteRain — 01.18.07 @ 11:41 pm
Therein lies the rub, the stats you relate only refer to deathrow. How many people in the Il system rightly deserve capital punishment, or at least deathrow, but were punished via long to life sentences? Rerun the %s by combining those two groups and odds are that the rate of erroneous imprisonment drops substantially, thus negating the argument against death penalty.
I used that as an example because of the lack of outrage from the same group of people who are outraged now. I’m sorry, but I see a BIG and dangerous, IMO, inconsistency.
The outrage here is that the DA, having found that DNA exonerated the suspects, chose to suppress it, in order to continue the prosecution. If Nifong can do it, how many other DAs are denying others, even blacks, currently languishing in prison on bogus charges all over the US?
And that is where Tulia, TX comes in.
Larry Elder, who USED TO WRITE about the war on drugs, didn’t touch an OBVIOUS example of government prosecutorial misconduct.
It has a lying witness, the prosecutors knowing the guy lied, throwing the hammer at people who fail to cop a plea and then using the results of the flawed convictions to get others to cop a plea.
The NC situation is foul. But, there are other examples as well.
Comment by DarkStar — 01.18.07 @ 11:43 pm
Andy,
And therein lies the problem. Well said, but particularly in your last paragraph. Thank you.
Comment by Tate — 01.18.07 @ 11:43 pm
Dark Star;
This situation and the outrage is about so much more than prosecutorial misconduct.
Further, the outrage has been mainly confined to the blogosphere until quite recently. Even now, the group of 88, the NAACP, NOI, much if the media, and the town of Durham are still out to get these kids.)
As a matter of fact, the outrage of the blogosphere has been a trickle relative to the deluge of sympathetic outrage for cop-killer Mumia.
Perhaps you are just selectively ignoring those cases.
Comment by jan — 01.18.07 @ 11:53 pm
Darkstar, you failed to back up your fifty percent charge. You can’t just balance thirteen exonerated against twelve executed. There are others who were on death row before the moratorium was announced. Those have to be in the computation.
Comment by Mark Folkestad — 01.19.07 @ 12:02 am
DS: “But when people were put on death row who were innocent of the crimes, where were the conservative commentators? They were mostly silent.”
Just as the blogosphere is riding herd on the MSM and the disemination of news, it will also change the prosecution of justice.
As someone pointed out already, Tulia was pre-blogosphere and you can be sure that if Nifong was prosecuting backl in that era, it too would have been a slam dunk against the LAX with minimal exposure for getting the truth out.
You wonder about the silence? The answer is easier and plainer than some Vast Whitey Conspiracy. Lack. Of. Means. And. Exposure.
Well now you have the means and yet you insist on dwelling on the past and beating us over the head with it. Hardly constructive, but definitely preferable to enduring rants on, say, redemption for Tookie.
History is replete with injustice, but avenging past injustices with 88/87-style justice will only move us further from racial/social harmony.
Back in ‘87, I had a co-worker that was killed by a cop on duty. The internal investigation was a slamdunk and cop was vindicated. Only problem was that the dude had a run-in with the same cop, off-duty, the weekend before at a party over a girl attended by other co-workers — all hear-say for me as I wasn’t there. It stunk, and those who witnessed the altercation had no recourse to set the record straight, cause the MSM/PD didn’t want to hear it.
If this incident had taken place within the last couple of years, I have no doubt that at least it would have been investigated more closely as the colleagues would have been able to tell their story uncensored by the DFW elites. C’est la vie and move on.
Then you write: “but, in general, it has been conservative commentators who have willfully turned a blind eye to it. ”
Again, where you see a VRWC, again the truth may be plainer. Was it a compelling story? Ultimately, what drives a lot of attention are the characters. If the so-called innocent is one with a long rap sheet, I for one will shrug and say to myself, “double lives take half as long and his sins caught up to him”.
Some may call it karmic justice. In any case, you simply aren’t going to get a lot of sympathy or support to free such from a particular & definite injustice, only to see him go out and kill again.
Later Dude.
Comment by Andy — 01.19.07 @ 12:21 am
Ms Barber
I’d be interested in your thoughts on an attempt, at wwwfirstthings.com on 1/17/07, to portray the Duke Administration’s & its faculty’s (other than the 88)actions & inactions as somewhat defensible.
Tom Comerford Dallas
Comment by Tom Comerford — 01.19.07 @ 12:36 am
When this group of 88 speaks of social disaster they don’t mean what every day people mean. It’s their sly way of couching a Marxist agenda into their social and political process. It’s right out of Animal Farm where George Orwell satirizes Stalinist Russia.
But in fact they are the disaster and become what they fear and hate. For total healing to occur and to bring back balance to the society, they all need to be pulled onto the carpet and vigorously chastised and probably re educated.
They are not innocent in the least as they claim. They helped spread an environment of hate as they committed their hate crimes. And that they are professors makes them stink worse then the pigs.
None of these 88 are capable scholars. They are people bent on surviving as lessor intellects and using their group machinations to manufacture an illusion of life that they wish to infect other people with. The poor Duke student who is trodden upon for any reason is their victim. In fact this is how cults recruit. If they were actually interested in the mental health and happiness of an individual we would see them trying to strive and survive in a merit and market system. But they can not. They are their own victims.
Comment by Jd — 01.19.07 @ 1:35 am
For the people worried that this issue is too white. Kobe Bryant was also railroaded. He was wealthy and popular and could buy his way out. Mike Tyson was also probably scammed by sex gone wrong. He wasn’t so popular and went to jail. They both could have used better legal systems. It’s not just falsely accused whites that stick in my head. There is also the young black man, Genarlow Wilson, in Georgia who is being hung out to dry by an empty political system. He needs as much help as the Duke Lax players if not more.
You have to wonder about todays leaders.
Comment by Jd — 01.19.07 @ 1:41 am
Aside from the extraordinary lack of empirical evidence, much of the reason the Duke case became so inflammatory is because of the comments by the group of 88, the reaction and non-reaction of the university, the despicable rhetoric by community leaders, and the stunning diatribes by many of the students on campus.
They were so blatant about condemning the team for being white and for being “privileged.”
If the condemnation was really about underage drinking, partying, and “animal house” behavior, half of all college students would be in the same boat if folks were honest.
Comment by jan — 01.19.07 @ 8:36 am
Jan said:
Tiffany said;â€Had this happened at North Carolina Central U across town, with a black man or men raping a black woman, all of you commenters in such an uproar wouldn’t give a sh*t.â€
Actually, no one was raped in the Duke case (unless it is the Duke lacross players), and THAT is why there is such an uproar.
I say:
Let me clarify since you obviously missed the point of the comment, and edit my sentence. Place ‘alledgedly’ right before the word rape in the sentence.
Does that help you now???
Comment by Tiffany in Houston — 01.19.07 @ 11:05 am
Tiffany in Houston said:
Jen in Durham -
Why is it a problem when black students choose to self segregate?? Why is it racist for blacks when white students do the exact same thing? Are the white students racist too?
Tiffany, thanks for the question. My point is that if any white student told fellow white students not to associate with blacks, they would immediately be openly and appropriately condemned as racist. And yet it’s somehow acceptable for black students to tar their fellow black students with terms like “oreo” merely for associating with other races.
My point is to condemn any racist behavior, no matter who’s responsible for it. Why do you say white students do the exact same thing? I went to school there for four years, and never once heard any white student suggesting anything of the kind. The only thing I heard from white students was the opposite–why can’t we all be friends? The white students did their best to tear that wall down, but were told “it’s a black thing, you wouldn’t understand.” And so the wall remains.
Comment by Jen in Durham — 01.19.07 @ 1:34 pm
I [heart] La Shawn Barber
Rant on, La Shawn!…
Trackback by it comes in pints? — 01.19.07 @ 3:26 pm
Jen- Point taken. Thanks!
Comment by Tiffany in Houston — 01.19.07 @ 4:23 pm
Ya know, it requires a little hammerin’ and the drivin’ of some nails to build a bridge.
I think Jen and Tiffany are getting one built.
It’s a cool thing to see.
TaterCon
Comment by TaterCon — 01.19.07 @ 7:32 pm
Re:104
Tiffany;
It goes without saying that you knew that the rape was merely alleged, and my post was intended to poke fun through absurdity.
I will leave you to determine what I found absurd. I am sure you will do it justice as you have a vivid imagination.
Comment by jan — 01.19.07 @ 7:56 pm
Apparently there is now a COURSE at Duke about the lacrosse case, in the women’s studies/feminism dept. :
http://www.aas.duke.edu/reg/synopsis/view.cgi?term=1190&s=04&action=display&subj=WOMENST&course=150
2007 Spring WOMENST 150-04
Bulletin Course Description
Title HOOK-UP CULTURE AT DUKE
Department WOMENST
Course Number 2007 Spring 150
Synopsis of course content
What is “hook-up culture� What does it have to do with power and difference? Is the concept useful for framing gendered, raced, classed, and sexualized experiences at Duke?
This course, designed as a direct result of events last year on campus, will give students a unique opportunity to examine and reflect upon gendered/ sexualized life at Duke in relation to contemporary life in the U.S. We will ask:
how has the history of university attendance in the US (in terms of race, class, and gender) impacted campus culture? . . .And finally, what does the lacrosse scandal tell us about power, difference, and raced, classed, gendered and sexed normativity in the US?
(snip)
The goal of the course is two-fold: 1) to understand “hooking-up†at Duke in terms of larger frameworks of race, capitalism/consumerism, class, lifestyle, identity, (hetero)normativity, and power, and 2) to enable students to
critically assess both the nature of Duke hook-ups and the institutional setting of Duke itself.
Exams
None.
Term Papers
Final ethnographic paper/project: students will work on this project throughout
the semester.
Comment by Seahawk — 01.19.07 @ 11:34 pm
Oh my God… You’ve got to be kidding, Seahawk. La Shawn, what’s you’re take? Will the insanity ever stop?
Comment by Tate — 01.20.07 @ 12:08 am
Sounds like the professor needs to get hooked-ip with a severance check and shown the door.
Note to parents, this is what you’re going into hock on a second mortgage for Sally’s higher edumactaion — to fund tripe such as this. This will really prepare her for a professional career. [/sarcasm]
Comment by Andy — 01.20.07 @ 1:26 am
I thought hooking up meant a one night stand. Is this professor saying that those who hook up put a whole lot of thought into hooking up? Or is this professor saying that Lacrosse players hook up more?
Comment by Belle — 01.20.07 @ 3:12 am
Geez, Seahawk, you need to pass this one along to Leno … this is monologue material!!
Imagine the blank stares across America by one spouse when the other tries to convince him or her that she or he isn’t getting enough “sexed normativity”….
TaterCon
Comment by TaterCon — 01.20.07 @ 3:15 am
Excellent summary of the Duke academic culture by Charlotte Allen (with an honorable mention of our own LaShawn!) at :
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/013/190uejex.asp
There was a fascinating irony in this. Postmodern theorists pride themselves in discerning what they call “metanarratives.” They argue that such concepts as, say, Christianity or patriotism or the American legal system are no more than socially constructed tall tales that the postmodernists can then “deconstruct” to unmask the real purpose behind them, which is (say the postmodernists)
to prop up societal structures of–yes, you guessed it–race, gender, class, and white male privilege. Nonetheless, in the Duke lacrosse case the theorists manufactured a metanarrative of their own. . .
(snip)
Karla Holloway’s online essay was replete with imagery derived from this lurid antebellum template. She described the accuser and her fellow stripper as “kneeling” in “service to” white male “presumption of privilege,” and as “bodies available for taunt and tirade, whim and whisper” in “the subaltern spaces of university life and culture.”
(snip)
That story was ripped to shreds a few days later in Slate by Stuart Taylor Jr. of the National Journal. Taylor, along with Rush Limbaugh and a handful of bloggers–notably Brooklyn College history professor KC Johnson and La Shawn Barber, an African-American woman–were nearly the only members of the media to express skepticism about the accuser’s story from the outset.
Comment by Seahawk — 01.20.07 @ 7:59 am
La Shawn, I’m thinking that maybe the “right people” are reading your blog! And I don’t just mean your good ol’ “regulars”! In fact, I wonder how many people do read you, but would never admit it because they have their liberal reputations to protect!
Comment by Belle — 01.20.07 @ 10:49 am
Title HOOK-UP CULTURE AT DUKE;What is “hook-up cultureâ€? What does it have to do with power and difference? Is the concept useful for framing gendered, raced, classed, and sexualized experiences at Duke?…blah blah blah
Do you guys think that the teacher will be even handed in his/her approach and open to a multitude of ideas?
Do you suppose they will talk about the manipulative power that females often wield over men or will it be all about “men as brutes”? Do you think they will discuss FBI rape statistics and give an accurate rendering of the stats or do you think it will be all about “white man as oppressor”? Do you think that a student would be able to pass if they do not subscribe to the victimology template?
So many questions and so much well-placed doubt!
Recently, a college student told me that in one of her feminism classes, the teacher asked the white males in the class if they felt guilty about the heinous nature of their collective. Many of the students said no. The “professor” (and I use that word lightly) then said that she guaranteed that by the end of the class, they would be “in touch” with their guilt. What transpired next was quite shocking as the “professor” (again, I use that word very lightly) went on a white male bashing rampage. Sickening…
Comment by jan — 01.20.07 @ 12:00 pm
Jan,
Your post reminds me of the race sensitivity seminar I and everyone else at a major corporation had to attend in the early 90’s. I forget the man’s name, but he was African American, and we had to spend the night in a resort out in the sticks and have 3 days of sensitivity training, which was anything but.
All the white males in the room were ridiculed, abused, screamed at, and threatened. This man got in their faces and told they them they were racists, because they didn’t want their daughters dating black men, that they thought they were superior, on and on and on it went. We were also told that Jesus was black. And we had to endure this for three days.
White women weren’t immune, either. They were screamed at, too. But I was one of the lucky ones. This type of venue was counter-productive, and in the end only made things worse. The majority who attended these classes weren’t racist, but they were told they were even when they tried to defend their positions.
Thank God this type of barbaric “sensitivity training†isn’t being forced on corporate America anymore. Sensitivity training should not be threatening or in-your-face-teaching. No one learns from that; it only breeds resentment…
Comment by Tate — 01.20.07 @ 3:16 pm
Tate #118,
Been there, done that myself. And the sexual sensitivity training as well (the low point? ‘Is telling the receptionist that she looks good today sexist’? Apparently so…)
And what makes you think that this isn’t still being forced on corporate America today? Maybe in enlightened America, not so in Chicago.
What bothers me about the Duke case is that natural enemies should be united on this one, but failed to do so. Minorities SHOULD be hyper sensitive to false accusations, but were not in this case.
Liberals SHOULD be screaming for more oversight of DAs but were apparently not in this individual case.
The MSM SHOULD be screaming to the high heavens about the blatant political motivations in this case, but instead did much to enable it.
THIS case is almost solely about political correctness run a muck, and says much about the moral bankruptcy of the politically correct.
Comment by RebelPOW — 01.20.07 @ 3:29 pm
One other comment about the strangeness of this case.
WHO would have ever figured that the sole fair coverage by the MSM would have come from CBS via 60 Minutes?
Comment by RebelPOW — 01.20.07 @ 3:43 pm
I hear ya, RebelPOW. And I agree with you. These types of classes are still being forced on corporate America today. What’s no longer acceptable, however, is the “in-your-face, ridiculing, screaming” sensitivity training. There are other, more productive ways of molding new thoughts. If I’m wrong about that, please let me know.
If I’m ever forced to attend something like that again I’ll tell the person to go to hell and quit my job.
P.s. If someone told me I looked nice I wouldn’t have a problem with it (as long as your tongue wasn’t’ hanging out of your mouth when you said it :-))! Some women are TOO sensitive and take sexual harassment issues to extremes.
Comment by Tate — 01.20.07 @ 4:00 pm
Diversity training could be good, but what it usually is about is creating victim mindsets that then need to be nursefed. Victims are presented with the fact that they can’t get out of victimhood without a savior. Usually a white liberal that needs to avoid their own problems by focusing on someone they consider inferior. And get the state to pay for it. Again re read animal farm and substitute college professors and education adminstrators for the pigs. It’s one of the easier effective lessons around.
Comment by Jd — 01.20.07 @ 5:18 pm
Tate;
Now that the steam coming out of my ears over your story has cleared up (your seminar story was maddening), I would just note that I find it inordinately curious that anyone could think that they will foster sensitivity by demonstrating an appalling lack of sensitivity to individuals who have probably never committed a racist act in their lives.
The most damage to race relations is caused by the idiots (government included) who are certain that they know how to “fix” everyone and everything.
Comment by jan — 01.20.07 @ 8:15 pm
Jan, if you think Duke is bad, try living in Crapel Hill.
Comment by Belle — 01.20.07 @ 8:58 pm
Bell;
Until the Duke story broke, the only inkling I had that North Carolina was not paradise on earth was from Mike Adams’ columns. Of course, I live in Austin so what do I know?
Comment by jan — 01.20.07 @ 9:09 pm
Sorry Belle. I beg to differ. Durham is far worse than Chapel Hill. Try living there. It’s the butt crack of North Carolina…
Comment by Tate — 01.20.07 @ 9:31 pm
I heard earlier this week on TV that there is some black producer who made a film about the gangs in Durham, North Carolina. I thought it was supposed to be on TV this weekend or next week. I can’t find out anything about it. Does anyone know?
Comment by Tate — 01.20.07 @ 9:41 pm
Jan,
This man traveled all over the United States and made tons of money doing these seminars. I even recall seeing something about him on TV at one time. Of course his backing was liberal. I would say he reined about 3 years and then fell by the wayside. Haven’t heard a thing about him since. Sure wish I could remember his name…
I guess corporate America got wise and realized they were wasting their money. Duke students need to get wise, too, and not waste their money on ridiculous feminist, “hook-up culture” classes. I certainly hope the classes are optional, not required.
Comment by Tate — 01.20.07 @ 10:33 pm
Always marking yur scorecard…
<