The new letter, signed by 87 faculty and posted at www.concerneddukefaculty.org, refuses to apologize for the ad and reiterates concerns about issues of race and sexual violence on the Duke campus. It says the so-called "Group of 88" ad published in the Chronicle last April has been grossly misinterpreted. That ad has been a subject of heated debate on blogs, and its signers have received angry and sometimes racist e-mail messages.Poor babies! It seems THEY are the victims of racism! This is typical of the liberal mindset. Only when threatened with ruination will they issue one of their gutless apologies. They aren't REAL apologies. They usually begin with "If anyone was offended by my remarks," and instead of saying they are sorry, they say they "regret" what they said or did. Liberals truly believe they are incapable of making mistakes. They are the anointed. They are smarter than the masses. They are never wrong. I guess it's a sort of defense mechanism. I mean, who could stay sane if he knew he was 100 percent wrong all the time about everything.
Wednesday, April 18, 2007
Being Liberal is Never Having to Say You're Sorry
North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper has found the three Duke lacrosse players innocent of rape. Now what? DA Mike Nifong will receive a well-deserved pummeling for abusing his power for political reasons. Hopefully, the investigation and the punishment will extend to the cops who manufactured the case. And, of course, all the people who condemned the three before they even went to trial will apologize. Pffft, yeah that'll happen.
What this boils down to is naked racism. A black woman makes an accusation against white men and that means the white men MUST be guilty. It's Tawana Brawly all over again. Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, the New Black Panthers, the NAACP, the ACLU, the National Organization of Women and the 88 Duke professors who took out an ad lambasting the three students, the liberal news magazines, TV networks, talk show hosts, Newspapers who ganged up on these guys have slunk back into the woodwork.
Not a peep of contrition.
In fact, the Duke professors have taken out a new ad explaining why they refuse to apologize for ruining the lives of three families.
Dozens of Duke professors have posted "an open letter to the Duke community" on the Web, explaining an ad last spring that has been widely criticized as a condemnation of lacrosse players.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
It's come to the point where I'm suspicious even if they say "I'm sorry." I assume they're saying it just to get out of trouble. Ha.
LR, as a newsman, I have a question for you. Your points here are well taken, but what about the pesident of Duke University, which includes a very prominent law school?
Did the president of Duke University, which (I repeat) includes an eminent Law School either cheerlead or bespeak the scurrilous sentiment of 88 Duke faculty members (decidedly "liberal bent") to deny the white suspects the presumption of innocence? If they were summarily suspended from Duke University for any related reason, was not their right to "due process" denied?
If so, was that right denied based upon race? Curiously, after the latest finding of prosecutorial overeaching by N.C.'s Atty. General, the Commandant of the United States Naval Academy expelled a certain quarterback (found innocent of rape).
Does anyone else see a politically sympathetic connection in the Commandant's legally dubious and individually assassinatory action?
Does it follow that presumption of innocence is subservient to the "seriousness of the charges"?
Time for Tonto to weigh in, please.
Though he asked people not to prejudge the criminal case, President Brodhead took action against the team. He accepted the coach's resignation, canceled the rest of the season, and when three players were indicted for rape, sexual assault, and kidnapping, he suspended them from school.
But to be fair, Brodhead was between a rock and a hard place.
He was under pressure both from the lynch mob mentality of radical lefty students and a media sharks who smelled blood in the water and went into a feeding frenzy. All things considered, his actions were prudent, although he is now accused of being too harsh. Although he is called president, the real power is in the hands of radical students. The inmates are running the asylum. And they have been since the '60s.
I am not sure I can answer what you are asking but...are you asking did the President of the school deny those players "due process" by expelling them?
If that is what you mean, then no the president of Duke did not deny them due process. Due process can only be denied by the government and regarding only those rights afforded us all under the BILL OF RIGHTS.
A private school can do what it wants but the school may have procedures that should have been given those students the school may have not given them...like maybe a proper investigation. Who knows?
But I think the LaCrosse Players can get a good lawyer and can sue the school for defamation and possibly for intentional interference with their education and win a lot of damages. Because the school's actions and statements were not TRUE and WILFUL...they did it on purpose and with total disregard for the the impact on those players' lives.
Oh they will be settling this one and real soon. Likely very hush hush and I am sure no one involved will be allweod to talk about it but I bet they get at least a free college education out of it and a little spending money for each of them in exchange for their silence about the settlement and to seek no lawsuit against the school.
This is just the worst example of political correctness I have seen.
Give a voice and credibility to a black woman who hundreds of years ago never had it without any regard to integrity.
Also the players can definitely sue the DA and police officers and get damages for time lost at school and paid for each day they were in jail if they were because they were denied Due Process of Law.
Perhaps no one should ever apologize for anything. Apologies that are demanded, forced, or otherwise coerced are not sicere, anyuway.
Likewise, if someone, say--an Al Sharpton-- demands an apology from someone else, and receives it, he doesn't accept it anyway.
It doesn't undo the damage caused in the first place, so why bother apologizing at all?
If it isn't sincere and isn't accepted, it is an exercise in futility.
Post a Comment