Tuesday, April 10, 2007

Mindboggling

To give a sense that the Group of 88's mindset is hardly confined to Duke:

This morning, I ran across a post from Claire Potter, a history professor at Wesleyan, where she teaches such courses as "Queering the American State." Potter's post strongly, and appropriately, criticized Don Imus' slur against the Rutgers women's basketball team. But she then decided to turn her interests southward:
I think the comparison of this to the pattern of media representation that we saw as the the Duke men's lacrosse team scandal unfolded over the last year is instructive. When it became clear that Durham prosecutor Michael Nifong had run roughshod over the investigation, and that the exotic dancers may have made charges that were untrue or inaccurate, those nitwits down at Duke who have been wearing the "Innocent" bracelets claimed that their faith in the players was vindicated. This view has been tacitly, if not explicitly, supported by the media as accounts of team behavior in general have dropped out of the news. But really -- although the lacrosse players may not be guilty of a prosecutable crime, that does not make them innocent. Many players who were under legal drinking age spent the entire day of the incident drinking (illegal); the dancers were, it is clear, physically if perhaps not sexually assaulted; and this behavior was part of a pattern of ingrained, anti-social behavior that repeatedly led to people being targeted by team members for violence, either on the streets or at team parties (and do we think that women have not been raped at Duke lacrosse team parties? that women under the influence of drugs and alcohol have not been coerced to have sex without their explicit consent? Think about it.) The ethical culture of this lacrosse team was so out of touch that many players who were not involved in this incident, and who did not do anything wrong, still refused to speak about what had happened, in the misplaced belief that loyalty to one's friends is a higher virtue than treating people who aren't on your team with respect. And in the face of all this unethical behavior on the part of the lacrosse team, a great many people at Duke -- most prominently, the women's lacrosse team -- still insist on characterizing these profoundly screwed up young men as "innocent." . . .

That these male lacrosse players at a private university, almost all of whom are white, have not been repeatedly identified -- in jest or seriously -- as the semi-criminal youth gang that they appear to be; and that C. Vivian Stringer's squad of public university scholar-athletes, almost all of whom are black and who have consistently carried themselves with dignity and grace, are slandered on national radio, ought to tell us something about selling race and sex in Amerika [spelled as in original] today.
Potter, who appears to adhere to the far-left neo-prohibitionism that the Duke case has spawned, might be correct that the Rutgers women's basketball players are all part of the roughly 20 percent of American college students who don't drink alcohol, and therefore are worthy of her praise as those Duke lacrosse players who drank beer are worthy of her condemnation.

As for her other comments, mindboggling is the most charitable adjective that can describe them.

[Update, 1.20pm: In Group of 88 fashion, Potter has added an item to her post claiming to have received "intimidating e-mail." (She also describes DIW as the work of "someone out there cruising for postings on the Duke lacrosse team controversy who has created a blog to host them.") She has provided no evidence for her question, "Do we think that women have not been raped at Duke lacrosse team parties?"]

132 comments:

Anonymous said...

Does she have nappy hair?

D'oh - two weeks off for me - woohoo!

Certainly her logic is fuzzy. And I don't mean like the opposite of predicate logic, it is just not logical.

Must have been all those girl studies classes she took. Makes me all semiotic and non-contextual just thinkin' about it.

Anonymous said...

JLS says...,

The lacrosse players were guilty for being male, white, rich etc before the party in the eyes of peoople like this, so are you surprised that the lack of a crime does not make such people view them as innocent now?

Think about who you associate with Professor Johnson. The GOP has long ago been forced not to seek votes or accept financial donations from bigots who might be described as on the right. [It is a misnomer because the GOP is the party for those that believe in freedom now.] The Democrats on the other hand actively seek the votes and financial support from bigots like this. Only recently was John Edwards forced to fire one or two such bigot from his campaign staff.

Dodi said...

I guess if students take a class entitled Queering the American State, then they can expect to hear this kind of nonsense. After all, if the students wanted to really learn something, then they would take another course. Nevertheless, I think that we do have to wonder why any college would hire a professor like this. At least we know that Duke is not alone...

Anonymous said...

I am not a Imus fan. Imus was inappropriate in his remarks However, watching the press conference at Rutgers - they want to kill him. The coach has been going on "forever" - always the overkill. He is even quilty of original sin,

Georgia Girl said...

KC, I had a different take on Potter's comments:

Maybe her intent was to describe the overall mindset of a fraternity or team environment, while acknowledging that the lax 3 did NOT rape CGM.

Potter mentions a "misplaced belief that loyalty to one's friends is a higher virtue than treating people who aren't on your team with respect". I mean god forbid if any single individual should break the veil of silence.

Chicago said...

So letme get this straight, she feels certain that other women have been raped at party's by the lacrosse team at duke and that if they did not rape CGM and Kim they at least beat her up. Unreal, this is total slander and defamation of character.

Anonymous said...

I see that Claire is part of the black supremacist culture that insists on capitalizing "Black" while keeping "white" lower-caste (pun intended).

Anonymous said...

"the dancers were, it is clear,
physically if not sexually
assaulted..."

Really? After she states that
they "may not be guilty of a
prosecutable crime?" I thought
assault was prosecutable.
Silly me.

Potter is just like others you'll
find in similar institutions,
revelling in their enlightened
states of being, extolling the
virtues of being virtuous...
much like Citizen Robespierre
and his Committee.

Mac

Anonymous said...

I trust that the players' lawyers have alreay been made aware of this.

Anonymous said...

Are you sure Professor Potter is not a member of the English Department at Vanderbilt University?

Much like Houston Baker, she chooses to simply make up facts. She wrote, " this behavior was part of a pattern of ingrained, anti-social behavior that repeatedly led to people being targeted by team members for violence, either on the streets or at team parties" then goes on to say that she knows the team has raped other women in the past. Unbelievable.

So, I guess it's fair to say that Professor Potter is a pedophile.

If she can just make up slanderous facts about others out of thin air it's competely fair to do the same about her.

Gayle Miller said...

There's a whole lot of assuming going on in that piece and none of it is based on simple FACTS.

What has been happening in this case is wholesale violation of the CIVIL RIGHTS of Reade, Finerty and Seligmann. Does this not bother anyone at what is SUPPOSED to be an institution of higher learning or the majority of the media? They have been CONVICTED without trial, rather than receiving their constitutional guarantee of INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY IN A COURT OF LAW.

But apparently - if it happens to someone PERCEIVED (not necessarily proven to be) to be white, upper middle-class, and reasonably affluent, then it's okay to heap gross injustice on their heads? Apparently to assume that these boys were drunk, or groping someone or just generally behaving badly WITHOUT A SCINTILLA OF EVIDENCE is perfectly fine and not actionable? I think not! All of this kind of thinking is such palpable nonsense that it makes me want to retch.

Chicago said...

note that Ms. Potter's e-mail is "tenured.radical." She is basically flaunting her tenure as if to say, "I can say what I want to." What arrogance.

Anonymous said...

If I were a lawyer for a Duke lacrosse player (any of them; not just the "Duke 3"), I would have a letter mailed to Claire Potter by this afternoon. The letter would state that if she wants to avoid a libel lawsuit, she needs to immediately redact the libelous parts of her posting and I need to have a certified check from her for damages to my client's reputation by Friday. That would just be for my player-client; the others could do as they wish.

Anonymous said...

". . . . the dancers were, it is clear, physically if perhaps not sexually assaulted; and this behavior was part of a pattern of ingrained, anti-social behavior that repeatedly led to people being targeted by team members for violence, either on the streets or at team parties . . . ."

These are very serious charges. How about offering up a few actual facts to support them? Other than the thoroughly-discredited accuser, I'm not aware of any account from any person at the LAX party (including Kim Roberts, who certainly had no love for the LAX players) that spoke of any physical assault against either one of the dancers. In fact, the only physical assault I recall being mentioned was an account of Kim Roberts slapping one of the LAX players in the face after he had made a remark she did not like. Seems that if there was any physical violence at the LAX party, it was committed against the players, not by them.

Also, I've read the Coleman report (with which this woman appears to be totally unfamiliar) and I don't recall any mention of the LAX players committing acts of violence against anyone. In fact, the Coleman report said that the players were not racists, that they were good students, and that they were active in community works. Hard to believe that these are the same vicious thugs depicted in this woman's article.

There certainly have been a lot of "nitwits" who have chosen to comment on this case, but none of them are on the women's LAX team at Duke. No, they are sitting in front of computer screens, typing up ludicrous blather like this woman. They completely bought in to a drunken stripper's gang rape fantasy, and even though it's long since been revealed as a lie and they've been exposed as gullible fools, they just can't let it go.

Gandalin said...

That's Wesleyan UNIVERSITY in Middletown, Connecticut, not Wesleyan COLLEGE in Macon, Georgia.

Anonymous said...

What is clear is we have many Nitwitts teaching in our Universities.

Anonymous said...

I think that idiots are getting involved at this late stage because they know the end of the hoax is near and they want to offer some air cover for their 88 buddies.

This disingenuous focus on underage drinking and claims that "they're not choirboys" is an attempt to smear the players with something (anything) to escape the inevitable humiliation that is coming the way of the identity politics set.

Lacrosse player innocence = gang of 88 guilt

PS - No Imus for two weeks . . . . excellent!!!!

jamil hussein said...

Another North Carolina left-wing activist university:

University of North Carolina discrimination

First Amendment Retaliation. Simply put, the university has taken multiple actions against me after they became aware that I was no longer atheist and liberal but instead Christian and conservative. Since 2001, I have been -- among other things -- falsely accused of a felony, falsely accused of libel, been instructed to stay away from department meetings, had stricter standards applied to my own conduct than applied to my colleagues, and -- ultimately -- denied a promotion for which I was eminently qualified

bill anderson said...

I was wondering when Mike Adams would be turned down for promotion.

As for the "mindboggling" piece, all I can say is that we are being treated to the "new" meta-narrative. There was no rape at the party, but everyone is guilty, anyway.

Gee, sounds like Burness.

Anonymous said...

The civil suits should rain from the heavens and take on everyone of the mindless idiots who dare write such slanderous material against the lacrosse team. In fact, if Duke had the guts, they would not tolerate the slander against one of their athletic teams and step up to the plate and put a stop to it. Oh I forgot, they are to busy covering their own ass to think of anyone else.

Anonymous said...

***Think about who you associate with Professor Johnson. The GOP has long ago been forced not to seek votes or accept financial donations from bigots who might be described as on the right.***

Thats because of the hard work of super-popular and powerful political commentators such as Ann Coulter and Rush Limbaugh, going great lengths to ensure that the GOP doesn't cross into "racist" or "bigot" territory. Strom Thurmond, up until the very end, was also an advocate for freedom and a warrior against bigotry. They took his noble lead.

***[It is a misnomer because the GOP is the party for those that believe in freedom now.]***

Indeed. They not only were vehemently against the brainchild of the Democrap party, the so-called "Patriot Act", which clearly limits freedoms, the GOP also refuses to support (or become intimately involved in business affairs) with oppressive regimes like Saudi Arabia and Iran (Cheney made sure Haliburton never had any clandestine business deals with used loopholes in the laws to do business with this charter member of the "axis of evil"). Finally, gays don't count as people, so the seemingly bigoted belief that they are going to burn in hell, which is held by so many Evangelicals, doesn't make them bigots.

***The Democrats on the other hand actively seek the votes and financial support from bigots like this. Only recently was John Edwards forced to fire one or two such bigot from his campaign staff.***

Once again, you hit it right on the head. Whereas there are some small, insignificant groups out there that politicians chase, the population of tenured college professors is so significant these days, that they just might sway the vote.

Further, it is quite clear that it is a great campaign strategy to have radical physcos from the fringes of your party at the fore-front of your campaign. Whereas the John Edwards blogger thing was only the beginning of what I'm sure to be so many vitally important discoveries in this regard, Republicans would never, ever bring on a physchotic preacher like Ted Haggard to sway the vote amongst their base.

There you have it folks, not only is this ridiculous professor from a notoriously ridiculous school the new face of the "Democrat" party, she is also a fair and accurate representation of the politicians, and Democrat voters as well (which, by sheer statistics, means that she represents the majority of Americans).

Nice work, and expect a rather short bus to be picking you up forthwith.

Clarencedarrow said...

I have to say that I am getting very agitated at the State of North Carolina dragging their feet on dropping the balance of the charges. Every single day means additional legal expenses. Until this is accomplished, nothing else can move forward. Does anyone have any known reason for the delay? The delay also enboldens those who have an agenda. Once the charges are dropped, you will see absolute silence from the enablers (unless they are horribly stupid). North Carolina is again looking like a big fool in all of this.

jamil hussein said...

these angry studies depts make me angry. Why don't we have white studies? Or drunken irish studies? How about Lindsay Lohan or Britney Spiers as a professor of Party Studies investigating how "partying america" is important aspect of semi-normatory whiteness "addyoufavouritetermhere" in the context of "addyoufavouritetermhere"

Anonymous said...

jamil hussein:

LOL. That was sarcastic, funny, and enlightening.

Anonymous said...

Carolyn says:

Arrogant defiance.

The university world is so infested with this that now the chore is to find out who isn't.

Locomotive Breath said...

Linky no workie.

A search for "Imus" reveals no posts. Gone bye-bye? That didn't take long.

retiredLEO said...

"although the lacrosse players may not be guilty of a prosecutable crime, that does not make them innocent. Many players who were under legal drinking age spent the entire day of the incident drinking (illegal); the dancers were, it is clear, physically if perhaps not sexually assaulted; and this behavior was part of a pattern of ingrained, anti-social behavior that repeatedly led to people being targeted by team members for violence, either on the streets or at team parties (and do we think that women have not been raped at Duke lacrosse team parties?"

So what is it exactly, guilty or not guilty, she is a walking contradiction of terms. Where did she get her "law degree" and in which states is she licensed to practice law?? They are guilty of assault, does she know the definition of "libel and slander"? How can you make these statements without any evidence whatsoever, even Nifong had no evidence. Maybe she has a "crystal ball"? None of the players spoke up, simply because there was nothing to say, since nothing happened. Had she been at a party and someone claimed they were raped, but it never really happened, what would she tell police, nothing happen or lie and say it did, because of her personal agenda? She should be directing her anger at the police, DA Nifong and the false accuser, who didn't want to go into a drunk tank that night.

Anonymous said...

Looks like this site has gone the way of OHW and Laxuality and the "listening statement"

Gone, but not forgotten!

Anonymous said...

Locomotive Breath said...
Linky no workie.

Two weeks in the tank for you - no racial blasts allowed. Really!

Anonymous said...

Carolyn said:

***The university world is so infested with this that now the chore is to find out who isn't.***

I agree. I mean, professors are so hugely important in society today that we must "find out who isn't".

After all, the most relevant people in modern history were obviously radical college professors. Theres that Ward Churchill guy, and a few others I heard about on O'Reilly. These guys/gals are nuts! They're destroying America!

If not for their voting block, the Dems would have lost by a landslide!

-Cheney/Rumsfeld '08

jamil hussein said...

her "law degree" and in which states is she licensed to practice law??

Clearly, she is qualified to work as a Durham DA. Maybe that's the vacancy she is after?

Anonymous said...

This site is a joke. It is purportedly a site that is about the Duke case, the despicable acts of Nifong, the university, etc., and it has become a place for people to vent about all things minority, far-left, etc., that bothers them.

Its incredibly stupid. Remember that guy Polanski? Although he seems like a real idiot, he proved to be a really cool guy when he talked about reading the passages from Barack Obama's book "The Audacity of Hope" at parties.

Now that sounds like a lot of fun!

redcybra said...

Oh no! Pro-Duke lacrosse posts have "intimidated" poor Prof. Potter:


Update: How interesting is this?

Apparently, there is someone out there cruising for postings on the Duke lacrosse team controversy who has created a blog to host them: his name is KC Johnson, and he is a Professor of 20th c. political history at Brooklyn College. The blog is called Durham in Wonderland. My posting was picked up minutes after I put it up, after which followed a barrage of intimidating e-mails. How do I know who these people are? Because of the trusty sitemeter, I picked up multiple anonymous comments from Duke, which them led me back to Johnson's website. And of course I have ISP's for all the computers. Since I am now temporarily turning off the anonymous comments function because I think we have a full range of fulminations from those defending Duke's honor, you'll have to go to Johnson's website to get the rest of them.

But isn't it interesting how, when you ask a question like this, not only has my whole point been lost in a renewed, shrill effort to demonstrate "innocence?"


Her point wasn't lost. I think everyone got it all too well.

jamil hussein said...

-Cheney/Rumsfeld '08

Karla, day-off from dailykos?

Anonymous said...

1:22

Polanski - once again, sneaking back in here and pumping yourself up is not cool. No matter which part of your enormous schizophrenic brain thinks so.

Anonymous said...

Jamil, yeah totally. You got me by calling me Karla! I'm totally her, man. Score one for the brainiac!

Also, its quite original, as I haven't yet seen people who disagree with some of the more idiotic posters here called "Karla" before!

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

retiredleo said:
"Maybe she has a crystal ball?"

Did the writer forget to capitalize
"Crystal" and to add the hyphen?
And apparently, as far as that goes -
(judging from the extractable
evidence thus far obtained from
said complainant) - one wonders:

Who in Durham HASN'T had a Crystal-ball?

I don't believe in laughing at victims, but so far, the only victims we've found are those
who are (still) being relentlessly
pursued by the State of North
Carolina and Durham...and the 88s...
and now, apparently Missy Potter.

Sorry for the implied vulgarity,
but the rape of justice is the
ultimate vulgarity.

Mac

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...


Update, 1.20pm: In Group of 88 fashion, Potter has added an item to her post claiming to have received "intimidating e-mail."


It is clear that women generally don't want to play with the big boys.

There seems to have been an epidemic of female writers and bloggers who hide behind claims that they have received "intimidating email" or "death threats" whenever they get some criticism for what they have written.

Anonymous said...

the last sentence in Potter's own profile posted on her site by her reads, "Comments made out of sheer cattiness or venom toward me or anyone else will be deleted."

So, apparently she doesn't allow others to post comments that contain "venom" toward anyone, but she is free to spew her venom towards the players.

Can you say hypocrite?

Anonymous said...

Clarification: the Duke LAX
players are the victims. The
others mentioned - including
Miss Potter - are the victimizers.
CGM - who set this all in motion -
is also a victimizer. In a sense.
she's one of the real rapists,
as far as the rape of justice goes.

Mac

Georgia Girl said...

12:18, the 3'ers are not guilty of rape, and the 2 remaining charges will be dropped. Of course the emotional scars will remain with them forever ... a terribly unjust situation for sure!

However, I feel the Coleman report is irrelevant, since rapists, too, can be "good students and active in the community". You see, a college rapist, a seemingly fine young man, can easily fit into the Coleman description.

Anonymous said...

Georgia Girl -
Have you been watching
too many Christian Bale movies?
(just kidding...)

Mac

Anonymous said...

Georgia Girl, smart post...

Just kidding!

redcybra said...

I think what Prof. Potter found "intimidating" were the many posts bluntly pointing out the possibly slanderous or libelous content of her diatribe against the Duke lacrosse players. One of those "freedom of speech for me but not for thee" types, I guess.

Gary Packwood said...

We need to give the students more credit.
Whatever Clair and Imus have...you can't catch ...it.
The students know that.

Chill

Anonymous said...

12:05

re Claire Potter being part of black supremacist culture

That may be true, but I think she's white. Writes too well to be black.

(Oh, was that racist?)

retiredLEO said...

Mac 1;31PM
I just meant crystal ball, sorry I wasn't thinking about the metaphore, until after I posted it. Your point Crystal-Ball is well taken.

Anonymous said...

Gagrl,

We liked it better when you were too busy or tired to comment. Altho' your chick fight with Debrah was pretty hot...

Anonymous said...

Truly mind boggling that a professor could write something about the lacrosse team that is so misinformed, so devoid of facts. Clearly she did not care at all to do any research about the case or even look into the facts in even a superficial way.

I am familiar with Wesleyan University though, having grown up in Conn. It has always attracted a left leaning radical student body, so I'm sure Ms. Potter has her fans that enjoy her rants, devoid of fact as they are. I was recruited with an offer of a full academic scholarship, but was not even interested in applying..I don't wish to insult anyone, but it's a very small school, very isolated and insular and Middletown, CT. makes Durham look like a cultural hotbed. To give you an example of the social scene at Wesleyan they have a student group called the "Queer social committee" dedicated to producing the best queer social events, and I kid you not.. the c**t club, dedicated to celebrating vaginas. Wonder if Professor Potter is a member? Check their web site if you think I am making this stuff up.
This is the kind of place she teaches at, so you can only imagine what kinds of ideas go unchallenged there. The fact that this woman is comfortable with the
article that she wrote suggests what passes for scholarship in her institution.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

Yes, Wes U is a joke, and every other NESCAC school mocks them for having a "naked dorm" and so forth, and being the model for the movie "PCU".

Yes that professor is ridiculous.

Yes this is a boring theme and is incredibly insignificant.

Anonymous said...

Frank Herbert once said:

"Respect for the truth comes close
to being the basis for all
morality."

So many immoral people in this
Hoax!

He also said:

"Whan I am weaker than you,
I ask for freedom because that is
according to your principles;
when I am stronger than you, I
take away your freedom
because that is according to my
principles."


Potter, Wanheema, the entire
cast and crew of the Crazy 88s...
well-represented in this quote.
Hypocrites, all.

Mac

Anonymous said...

1:56

And yet you manage to make it through all the comments and post yet another one. Take your ennui and go have a nap.

Anonymous said...

"Don't comments on the fact that my post is almost pure fabrication. You are disrupting my new and improved meta-narrative, which I plan to use to gain admission into the "History of Consciousness" department soon to open at a prestigious University located to the south of here."

Anonymous said...

Mac, not so fast lumping Wahneema and Potter

I Googled Potter--she's written some impressive books, published by, among others, Johns Hopkins Press. Wahneema, on the other hand, is stupid and undistinguished.

Anonymous said...

Wow, you made a liberal professor change her email address because you didn't like what she said about the Duke hoax.

Not only will this likely change her mind, but the vast majority of Americans await your next moronic attempt to harass those who disagree with you... even if the hoax was perpetuated in Durham and this professor teaches at a small liberal arts college in CT with a student body of approximately 1,800 students.

CYBER HIGH-5!!!

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Shouting Thomas said...

So far, only Howard Stern has had the courage to tell the truth about the Imus fiasco. You can find his comments and read them yourselves.

You are making a mistake here, Professor Johnson, in your unhesistating condemnation of Imus. Hell, he won't even defend himself.

Imus' jokes were very tame in comparison to those routinely delivered by Dave Chappelle and the Mind of Mencius guy. The issue here is whether a white guy has the same freedom to make ethic and racial jokes as a black or hispanic guy.

Does a white comic have the right to make a living in the same way as a black or hispanic comic?

Evidently, your answer is a resounding "No."

Anonymous said...

2:03

Callous disregard for truth -
no matter how well-educated
the purveyor - is still mush.

However, I take your point.
Which impressive books by
the way? And on what subjects?
Did her material require more
cogent research than she bothered
to compile before she added her
blathering bile to the malodorous
merde oozing from the Nifongnista
crowd?

(See? Even a hack like me can
write like an intellectual,
given enough keys, time and
chimpanzees! Wonder how many
she has?)

Mac

Anonymous said...

Who cares about the liberal idiots at Wesleyan? While I see no need to defend their idiocy, I also find it humorously irrelevant in the grand scheme of things.

KC Johnson may have the new world record for wasting time, barely beating out hardcore video-gamers and soccer fans.

Shouting Thomas said...

Whoops, and I forgot to say:

This nutjob of a professor made the connection between Imus and the Duke hoax immediately, didn't she?

What the Duke players are guilty of is violating PC. And, this lunatic is asserting that they need to be strung up solely for that. Just like Imus.

By your enemies shall you be known.

Anonymous said...

This just in:

KC Johnson to create blog about paint drying, right after he is done donating a year of his time to the fascinating topic of grass growing and water boiling!

Anonymous said...

2:10:

You must - like Potter -
be somewhat challenged in the
area of reading comprehension.
If I read the post (2:06) right -
(and I think I do) - people were
sending email to the wrong
Professor Potter.
I don't think the offensive Prof.
Potter actually changed her email.


Mac

Anonymous said...

to Shouting Thomas

The reason Imus is getting pilloried by MSM is because there's a certain amount of truth in what he implied.

The offending phrase was "nappy-haired whores." "nappy haired" is white code for unattractive black women. hos is code for undesirable black women.

So, are these basketball players unattractive and undesirable?

Absolutely. I still think Imus should be condemned because he was telling an ugly truth, which is worse than being a bully.

Remember, no one on this site would have called a moron like Wahneema stupid unless said moron decided to "make herself heard."

Anonymous said...

I see the students of Queering the American State have found this blog. Welcome all.

2:10-the penalty for lying about something on the web is that if you leave a comment section on your blog, you will be called on it. Sorry, it's tough. Nothing crueler than the truth.

2:11-I can bowl a 130, does that make me better than Prof. Potter? Holloway?

Anonymous said...

2:15pm

Go eff yourself. KC is doing God's work.

Anonymous said...

***I see the students of Queering the American State have found this blog. Welcome all.***

Lets be super-straight together and watch that Alpha Male John Gibson whine for months on end about the War on Christmas. That stuff is not only fascinating and very real, it is also so tough to care about. I mean, after all, it is clearly a WAR!

Its almost as tough as Billdo O'Reilly pointing his splotchy hand at a high-ranking military official, accusing her of being anti-American.

But hey, the majority of Americans are not trending more liberal, so I guess the "manly minority" will have to make due.

Anonymous said...

to 2:11
Wesleyan superior to Duke?
Well high school applicants certainly don't think so, and none of the statistical rankings support that conclusion. Wesleyan had 7241 applicants for the class of 2010, of which 2005 were accepted, a raw rate of 28%. That's to fill a class of 722. only 36% of accepted students chose Wesleyan. That's not even in Duke's league as far as acceptance or yield. The mean SAT's of accepted students are also significantly lower than at Duke.
If you are talking about general scholarship, I don't think you have much to back that up either.
Nobel laureates... Duke 7 Wesleyan 0.
And by the way, c**t does not stand for clit.

Greg said...

All, I wrote the following very respectful letter to Professor Potter:


Professor Potter,


According to KC Johnson, you wrote the following recently about the Duke Lacrosse team:



The ethical culture of this lacrosse team was so out of touch that many players who were not involved in this incident, and who did not do anything wrong, still refused to speak about what had happened, in the misplaced belief that loyalty to one's friends is a higher virtue than treating people who aren't on your team with respect.



http://durhamwonderland.blogspot.com/2007/04/mindboggling.html



I’m no apologist for white male anti-social behavior but as a lawyer (and a parent) I can assure you that it is completely understandable that those Lacrosse players not accused of a crime do not to speak to anyone about the incident. It does not reflect upon their ethics or the ethical culture of the team. It surely does not indicate a misplaced loyalty to their friends. To the contrary. Their silence is completely selfish. Given the nature in which this investigation has been carried out, it would have been easy to conclude early on that any player was a target of a criminal indictment. While it is unlikely that other players will become targets of a criminal investigation at this late date (although that can never be excluded as a possibility), there remains the more likely possibility that the accuser and her friend might file lawsuits to recover damages from any one or more of the players. It is much easier to establish civil liability than crimes. A player’s mere presence at the party may result in his being joined as a defendant in a civil action. If you are a parent, you no doubt understand that protecting your child from accusations that might lead to a criminal indictment, loss of freedom and/or civil liability is infinitely more important than the needs of others. Respect for strangers is an important virtue but it pales in significance when one’s own freedom is jeopardized by the false witness of another.


(I am not a Duke alumus, I have no college age children and I am not related to nor do I know any of the Lacrosse players or any of their friends or family).

Anonymous said...

2:29-I see the students of Queering the American State have found this blog. Welcome all.

Absolutely hilarious!!! I love the posters who take the time to write how boring DIW is and yet they are the 150th post in a 2 day old thread. Evidently it's so boring that you just had to add to the comments list!!!

Comical!

Zimri said...

Mike Adams should have been expelled long ago.

I can't speak for his scholarly output or his classroom banter. I can however speak for his work outside the classroom. Among that is this piece from 9 Feb 2004, which encouraged his students to disrupt biology classes with the antiscientific propaganda of Behe, Johnson et al.

When called on his obscurantism and disruption (of which this is just one example), he claims that this betrayal of the mission of the university is "Christianity"; when punished for it, he plays the martyr.

Adams is a disaster for his university, for his politics, and for his God. "If your right hand causes you to sin.."

Anonymous said...

I see that some people who
have nothing to say about
the real issue -(the framing
of three innocent student-athletes)-
have shown up to
expose themselves (gross, huh?)

The site (KCs Blog) has, over time, exposed so many relevant points that MSM folk have missed,
it's hard to see why anyone would criticize his efforts.

It's no wonder that the quote from
Frank Herbert I posted earlier
is ignored by such posters as
anonymous 2:13:

"Respect for the truth comes
close to being the basis for
all morality."

To moral relativists, truth
and morality are anachronisms,
better left with dead Europeans
in their graves.
Following that:
Truth and morality have no meaning
for people who support the Hoax.

Mac

Anonymous said...

***I see that some people who
have nothing to say about
the real issue -(the framing
of three innocent student-athletes)-
have shown up to
expose themselves (gross, huh?)***

Yeah. Totally. I mean, the posts here haven't been taken way beyond the case of these 3 boys or anything. Yep, that was all me today. Certainly, the matter hasn't shifted to larger issues like liberals in general, and attacks at Democratic strawmen. Nope, this is all my fault, I'm the only one. Riiiiight.

Anonymous said...

2:34-What is your major malfunction? What blog do you think you have stumbled onto? John Gibson, war on Christmas, O'Reilly talking to someone from the military? As far as I know, you are the first to bring up any of these non topics to the comments section of this blog. Do you have a point for those of us here not impaired with your unknown affliction?

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
huesofblue said...

It's interesting that Potter knows so much more about Duke LAX parties than the Duke women LAX players who have actually attended those parties.

Potter may find this shocking, but 20 year old college students don't need to be coerced into sleeping with wall street-bound elite athletes at a top school. Crazy as it sounds, many women (gasp!) choose to go to parties and hook up with the guys throwing them. Even more shocking, those funnels aren't for forcing women to drink; these same women often *choose* to drink on their own. Some even show up already intoxicated.


Seriously, I don't understand this Tipper Gore lieralism that frowns so heavily on 20 year old kids partying.

Anonymous said...

Carolyn says:

KC, you naughty "cruiser", you!

There was little ole Professor Potter in her tiny little university in front of her tiny little class babbling, swaying and swishing her beads and feathers of self-righteous attire - only to look up and discover you'd hauled in a whole bunch of strangers on the back of your internet bicycle to stand in the doorway and stare at her naked stupidity!

Goodness, the little dear has certainly ducked for cover awfully fast! I guess those flimsy beads and feathers just won't cover her ugly butt out in the open.

Honey, maybe you could lend her your bow tie?

Anonymous said...

2:55 and 2:58

Well, actually, this was
mostly about Potter's goofy
take on things.
What have you got to say
about Potter's perspective?
I would really like to hear
what you have to say about
what she wrote!

Mac

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

Dear Mac:

I disagree with Potter and think she is a complete idiot.

I do, however, get highly annoyed when people overstate the horrible ramifications of college professors tending to be liberal caricatures.

They mean nothing. They don't sway opinion. They annoy college students. College students are retarded (necessarily).

Anonymous said...

*Meant to say "College students are NOT retarded", meaning they are capable of recognizing how ridiculous their professors are.

Anonymous said...

I cannot support Imus on this one he blew it. On the other hand if a two-week suspension is the appropriate punishment for the amount of harm he did (little), then isn’t firing the appropriate punishment for the group of 88 and their ilk for the amount of harm they did?

Anonymous said...

her comments are regrettably predictable...her comments amount to the statements of a fascist regime:
"you are all guilty of crimes against the state, simply because of who you are."

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

To Georgia Girl-

You may be informed by KC's article this past Sunday re: an interview with 2 former LAXers who give insight into what they have gone through. You said: "I mean god forbid if any single individual should break the veil of silence." I belive that is a stereotype (a form of discrimination). If my children know they are victims of a false accusation against the backdrop of a race-baiting DA, racist and vocal faculty, faulty due process, and a school president who facilitates the above - then they BETTER be silent. For you to lay that to a team's "wall of silence" is WAY off base.

What do you think of Porter's comments versus Imus' remarks, and how one is a national news story and the other will never be? That is the primary issue addressed in KC's article.

Liberals (I don't know your ilk) tend to be VERY offended by almost anything and then spew their own venom and (apparantly) don't realize they are exhibiting the same behavior that they (and the willing media) condemn in others. It's a clear double-standard (also discriminatory). Amazing!

BB

Deklan Singh said...

Claire Potter is correct! There is something that we can learn from the comparison of the Duke Lax and Don Imus scandals, but it is learned indirectly. The lesson is that Claire Potter is either intentionally misrepresenting the truth or she is a stupid person. In her own words...

But really -- although the lacrosse players may not be guilty of a prosecutable crime, that does not make them innocent.
Actually, that's exactly what that makes them.

Many players who were under legal drinking age spent the entire day of the incident drinking (illegal); the dancers were, it is clear, physically if perhaps not sexually assaulted; and this behavior was part of a pattern of ingrained, anti-social behavior that repeatedly led to people being targeted by team members for violence, either on the streets or at team parties (and do we think that women have not been raped at Duke lacrosse team parties? that women under the influence of drugs and alcohol have not been coerced to have sex without their explicit consent? Think about it.)
Underage drinking is a prosecutable crime. So, she's contradicted herself in back to back sentences. Also, who as been targeted by the lacrosse team's anti-social behavior, and why haven't those people come forward? Are these people merely being considerate while everyone with primary knowledge of the lacrosse players rushes to tell anyone who'll listen what upstanding and outstanding young men they are.

The ethical culture of this lacrosse team was so out of touch that many players who were not involved in this incident, and who did not do anything wrong, still refused to speak about what had happened, in the misplaced belief that loyalty to one's friends is a higher virtue than treating people who aren't on your team with respect.
Of course, their silence had nothing to do with the no-wrong-answer lineup or the prosecutions willingness to change the theory of the case exclusively and continually in order to adapt to alibis and evidence that only support the innocence of the accused! Sure, Ms. Potter, your explanation is perfectly reasonable if you are a completely unreasonable person. Seriously, your writing would seem to indicate that you're a very obtuse person. You should stop embarrassing yourself.

And in the face of all this unethical behavior on the part of the lacrosse team, a great many people at Duke -- most prominently, the women's lacrosse team -- still insist on characterizing these profoundly screwed up young men as "innocent." . . .
Since all of your accusations against the lacrosse team, save the underage drinking which you said yourself wasn't a "prosecutable" offense even though it was, seem to be exclusively a concoction of your own imagination, why don't you just imagine that everyone else lives in your imaginary world as well? You truly seem insistent on straddling the line between reality and fiction.

That these male lacrosse players at a private university, almost all of whom are white, have not been repeatedly identified -- in jest or seriously -- as the semi-criminal youth gang that they appear to be; and that C. Vivian Stringer's squad of public university scholar-athletes, almost all of whom are black and who have consistently carried themselves with dignity and grace, are slandered on national radio, ought to tell us something about selling race and sex in Amerika [spelled as in original] today.
Still referring to your imaginary world, Ms. Potter? Is there anything besides the underage drinking that you'd like now to accuse the lacrosse players of? Don Imus made a slanderous comment, and it is getting vast media attention. The evidence of the act is recorded and unimpeachable. He should be fired. A Durham area prostitute made an accusation of rape for which no evidence or corroborating testimony exists and for which mountains of exculpatory evidence and testimony exists. The charges should never have been brought and the prostitute should be prosecuted.

Enjoy your imaginary world, Ms. Potter.

jamil hussein said...

almost all of whom are white,

ok, the core of her rant is here. They are white (and therefore, guilty by definition). Welcome to the wonderful world of Gang88.

Anonymous said...

Georgia Girl is a real dud.

Anonymous said...

BB:

I agree that liberal PROFESSORS tend to get offended by everything. I find it comical, really.

But outside of the academic realm, you really think liberals get offended more easily than conservatives?

Look at the Islamic world (a bastion of religious conservatism). They sliced nun's throats because some Dane drew a cartoon of Muhammad.

Thats clearly an extreme example, so how about Christians in the US going apeshit because someone says "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas".

How about the fact that religious people are the ones who hate potty language?

How about the fact that I could care less what you make statues of, but conservatives are the ones who won't even allow a chocolate statue of Jesus to be displayed without spontaneously breaking into a protest?

Anonymous said...

4:03

You wrote "how about the fact that I could care less what you make statues of".

Well how about that - if you could care less, then feel free to do so.

It all depends upon whose ox is being gored. Oh great - now we can talk about global warming! Yay!

Anonymous said...

Also, does your generalization about people being thin-skinned and crybabies fit in with the political affilations of the creators of of shows like South Park, and fans of comedians like Chris Rock, George Carlin, Bill Maher, etc.?

Because when I think of those people, and their massive fan bases, and how insulting they are (to everyone, including blacks)... for some reason, I don't picture Christians standing together at brunch after church talking about those shows/what those comedians said. By golly, they'd be... INSULTED by such language and the things those awful men say!

Anonymous said...

KC,

I don't know if or how often you listen to Imus but he has made remarks like this, about everyone, for years. No one is spared. Mexicans, Jews, women, white men, Catholics, President Bush, Congress and so on. He even calls his wife a green ho. Give me a break, put the comment in perspective.

Just as the boys did not commit a crime, Imus is not a bigot. Just as the boys used poor judgment in throwing a party with underage drinking and stripers, Imus used poor judgment in his remark.

For these offensives the MSM, Black leaders and white liberals have crucified both. This all stems from PC and has nothing to do with right or wrong.

If it did why isn't the media outraged about the drugs at the Black fraternity party where a white girl was allegedly raped by a black male? And why isn't the media all over the rape music of black artist which call white people names a whole lot worse than nappy hair hoes.

No, I am not a bigot but I am cursed with saying what I think is correct even if it is not PC.

memomachine said...

Hmmm.

Is any of this stuff actionable? Are these nitwits opening themselves up to lawsuits because of this?

I'm hoping the answer is "yes".

Silliness like this deserves quite a bit of pain in return.

Georgia Girl said...

3:47, of course you're right with regard to the lax team.

But how do you feel about other men's groups in general? Do you believe an individual in any fraternity, athletic team, or street gang would "rat" on another member even if that member was guilty?

You asked me to compare Imus' remark to that of Potter's comments.

Potter's general comments made sense to me until she put her foot in her mouth with references to the innocent 3.

Imus' stupid comment was harmless. Actually I'm still laughing. So call me a racist :)

Joe Bingham said...

Cc:

Ms. Potter,

Apparently, you do not read the Chronicle of Higher Education. You would then have heard of Professor Johnson, one of the most accomplished young history professors in the country. If you read DurhamInWonderland, the blog he has kept as he has written his book on the Duke Lax case, you would also be acquainted with case's facts, of which you are apparently unaware.

We all make quick, thoughtless blog posts sometimes, I am afraid, on subjects about which we are ignorant. However, you're in something of a different position: blogging as yourself, citing your credentials, and claiming to accurately portray public events.

I encourage you to undertake a more comprehensive education of the topics of which you pretend so nice an understanding, and I wish you the best in that effort.

Sincerely,

Joe Bingham

Anonymous said...

Wow - is this fun or what? I originally posted at Claire/s site under Annonymous - just posted again and now site requires a name. I have no problem with that-they can have my email address and contact me. I am not the unibomber.I am a simple American trying to help right a wrong to these boys,

Anonymous said...

Georgia Grrl - we don't have to call you a racist, you have admitted that yourself. You are self identified as such, and according to you, come from a long, proud line of racists.

But this is still not about you experience, and you can keep banging on this case all you want, but it will never be about you - start your own blog already.

scott said...

In re: Potter? Consider the source. That she teaches at Wesleyan says it all.

Georgia Girl said...

anon 4:45, my goal is to drive you ballistic. I wanna be around when your head explodes from all that gristle.

Anonymous said...

Remember that the people saying Imus should be fired, are the same people that called the Jewish section of NYC, himeytown or still believes in the Tawana Brawley case. They have a lot of nerve to condemn someone else for violating radio ethics.

Georgia Girl said...

5:07, can we say his name? Initials are JJ ... I think in reference to affluent Jewish people living in the northern berbs?

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Art Deco said...

I can't speak for his scholarly output or his classroom banter. I can however speak for his work outside the classroom. Among that is this piece from 9 Feb 2004, which encouraged his students to disrupt biology classes with the antiscientific propaganda of Behe, Johnson et al.

He recommends reading Phillip Johnston's Darwin on Trial, and says it will help students formulate questions for their biology professors.

Dr. Behe has been a professor of biochemistry for about twenty years now. How does he qualify as 'anti-scientific'.

How do Dr. Adams reading recommendations (there being about ten books on that list) render him a 'disaster'? Why should he be dismissed from his job because of them?

Anonymous said...

http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/1267316/

Seligman arrives at RDU.
Speculation that tomorrow is the day.
National media converges on Durham. KC I hope you'll be there!

Anonymous said...

I was in the car a few minutes ago. On a talk radio station, a guy named Jerry Doyle is playing a tape of Sharpton saying, "How long are they gonna be Jewin' the numbers up and down?" It was a reference to some recount in a close election.

But we know that Sharpton is a moral avatar worthy of judging Imus. At least we must pretend to believe that (or possibly lose our OWN jobs) as long as the "meta-narrative" that Potter and the Gang of 88 peddle remains unchallenged.

Georgia Girl said...

look out folks, his lid is about to pop!

okay, to everyone else... sorry, I couldn't resist. Even I can be rude at times lol

Georgia Girl said...

course I was referring to 5:25 :)

Anonymous said...

Gagrl

Rude at times and stupid forever. You go!

Anonymous said...

Joe B - Thanks for some thoughtful insight among the trash writing I had skip through to get to a real post.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
rod allison, detroit said...

The Wesleyan broad's post used a rhetorical technique that's almost universal for people of her political stripe.

Its kind of a proxy moral superiority.

If your side on an issue is in a weak factual and moral position, take a side on another issue that gives you a strong moral position (assume your opponents take the other side). Pump yourself up full of moral pretensions, and bring in the first issue. Use the moral posture you derived from the from the second issue to argue both issues.

Issues like James Byrd and Mathew Shephard are used over and over as the moral high ground acquiring issue to argue a whole host of other issues.

The Duke case itself was at first used as a moral high ground acquiring issue to be used in other fights. Now it fell apart, so Whatshername, still bitter that it was a hoax, has pounced on the Imus case to reclaim the high ground, from which she now feels confident enough to say whatever crazy stuff she wants to say about the Duke case.

These people can only argue from a position of assumed absolute moral superiority, and their arguement is not based on facts logic or reason, but on moral superiority. Normal people don't (and shouldn't)recognize their moral superiority, and thats why they come across as so stupid and conceited to normal people.

Anonymous said...

I think before anyone can condemn the players for drinking alcohol while underage and/or for serving alcohol to underage partygoers they should be forced to answer a few questions:

1. Have you ever consumed alcohol while underage?

2. Have you ever attended a party where alcohol was served to underage people?

3. Do you believe that underage drinking is wrong because it's illegal or wrong because it violates some larger moral rule?

4. If the latter, what moral rule makes drinking at 20 years & 364 days bad while drinking at 21 years ok?

5. What evidence do you have for the proposition that underage drinking is more common among male lacrosse players than female basketball players?

6. What evidence do you have for the proposition that underage drinking is more common among athletes than non-athletes?

The point here is that this anti-drinking stuff is a sham: no one actually cares about it, but they think it's a convenient makeweight.

Gary Packwood said...

rod allison, detroit 6:19

Great comment.
I offer one more point.
Why not just smile when you hear the "party line" and say Thank You or just nod appreciatively.
Just don't say WHAT?
That is the response they want.
And... never ever respond if you are tired or stressed or into any more than one sip of a drink or beer.
Just like watching over six graders.
Never let them see you sweat!

GP

Anonymous said...

THE FUTURE OF THE CASE

Once the boys are vindicated, I think KC will dispense of comment-moderation mode. Time to persecute the g88, et al.

Payback time, Wahneema!

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
HumboldtBlue said...

rod allison, detroit said...

It's called claiming the moral molehill, Rod.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Gary Packwood said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
DJ Stillwater said...

So let me get this straight..in Ms Poter's world she can create a blog, express her opinion, and then criticize those people who don't agree with what she's saying and then blame it all on KC and white male privilege. Interesting....

Cedarford said...

"Do we think that women have not been raped at Duke lacrosse team parties?"

Do we think Prof Potter has not beaten her lesbian lover grad student? That it is outside possibility, to question any statement she makes she did NOT have sex with a German Shepard from 1996-98 after another grad student left her? Think about it! Where is the evidence this did not take place???

All Potter is doing is laying out a classic "when did you stop beating your wife??" smear.

I love this Claire Potter bit of nonsense:

That these male lacrosse players at a private university, almost all of whom are white, have not been repeatedly identified -- in jest or seriously -- as the semi-criminal youth gang that they appear to be; and that C. Vivian Stringer's squad of public university scholar-athletes, almost all of whom are black and who have consistently carried themselves with dignity and grace, are slandered on national radio, ought to tell us something about selling race and sex in Amerika [spelled as in original] today.

Stringers "exemplary" teams have regularly been accused of thuggery, cheap shots, undue roughness, regular race-baiting, and excessive trash-mouthing. This reputation has followed them for years. Rap music talking bitches and 'ho's is regularly played at their basketball rallies.

Please!

Several players over the last 10 years have had criminal records for drug use, theft, drunk driving.

In fact, the reason why they have "an inspiring personal story" of young players with no starting seniors is that their senior forward, who had an extensive criminal record already, had a fight over drugs end up in assault, criminal restraint, and terroristic threatening charges over the summer and landed her in jail. (She fought with her roomate, punched her out, then threatened her roomates life with a knife she kept stabbing into the bed the bound woman was on, while she wrote curses and "gang tags" onto her roomate's body with magic marker. That went on for 4 hours.)

And that is just one incident that was so bad that it had to have made it into the public media once the woman was arrested and jailed. THe stuff "under the radar" awaits airing - which it will be aired if the Rutgers players and coach continue to play the pure, noble, upstanding sistah role models now "victimized by whitey" act.

Wait till Rutgers insiders (which actually is a far better school than their B-ball team suggests) weigh in on their "distinguished scholar athletes deeply traumatized by Rap lyrics and a Don Imus phrase..The antics of Don Chaney's lads at Temple (who Stringer started under) are notorious, same with Thompson's Georgetown days..

Anonymous said...

"The offending phrase was "nappy-haired whores." "nappy haired" is WHITE code for unattractive black women. hos is code for undesirable black women."

False statement. Completely false.

The only time I have ever heard the word "Nappy" was from a black person. Used to be the same for "hos" although that has entered the white lexicon.

Anonymous said...

KC, are all these posters from the deep south? Thankfully, these people were beaten down in the Civil War... otherwise, who knows where this country would be in terms of equality and freedom!

Earl Hofert said...

So some obscure middle-aged lesbian who teaches Mickey Mouse classes at a small liberal school (i.e., Claire Potter) slandered the Duke lacrosse team...so what? She's a nobody...KC just made her famous. What influence does she bring to bear...a personal blog post? She's reached the terminus of her career...she ain't goin' any further, and, outside of her classroom, she ain't in charge of nothin'. (Frankly, no one that matters will ever take a course like "Queering the Nation" or whatever the heck it's called.)

The charges have been dropped, and the rich white males have been vindicated. (The book gets a happy ending.) As for the nappy-headed ho accuser...well, let's all hope and pray that Reverend [sic] Jackson follows through on his promise to subsidize her future education.

AMac said...

Dear Prof. Potter,

I read your April 10th blog post Where Credit is Due: Rutgers Basketball, Don Imus and Drive Time Shock with some interest. As comments are disabled, I thought I might share some reflections via email.

Since I hold the "shock jock" genre of entertainment in disdain, I have no sympathy for Imus' self-inflicted woes. And yet, the context that's missing from most reports of this debacle would seem to be relevant. Apparently, Imus has made his career as an equal-opportunity dispenser of gratuitous insults and bad taste. And it is beyond dispute that many Urban Radio songs are laced with hateful, vile references to women, white women, black women, whites, and others. Once the politically-correct condemnation of Imus' latest choice of targets has run its course, perhaps a few social critics will bravely venture beyond their comfort zones. There are certainly larger issues for folks like you to address.

Meanwhile, the irony of Imus seeking a televised purchase of indulgences from The Right Rev. Al "Tawana Brawley" Sharpton speaks for itself.

It certainly says something that you chose this week to draw fanciful connections between a DJ's on-air stupidity and the tribulations of the three college students caught in the Duke Lacrosse Rape Hoax. Some in your regular audience seem to celebrate your bravery in sermonizing from the blog mount, even if you do so in a way that demonstrates your unfamiliarity with the facts of your chosen subject.

Other words might also come to mind.

Be that as it may, you may be comforted to know that you are not the first tenured-radical to walk this path. Perdue Prof. A.G. Rud has also blogged on the Hoax. It would be routine to refer you to his site, Moo2... except that he's chosen to airbrush his most interesting remarks, and his readers' responses to them. Fortunately (or not), they have been preserved at The Johnsville News, a site that attempts maintain a record of much of the commentary on the Hoax, fatuous as well as insightful.

I hope you offer your readership a second update to "Where Credit is Due: Rutgers Basketball, Don Imus and Drive Time Shock" once the Special Prosecuters report their findings, scheduled for this afternoon or tomorrow.

cc: D-i-W comments and the LieStoppers Board

Anonymous said...

New Jersey Lawyer.
When are people like Claire Potter going to look at the evidence before demonizing members of the Duke Lacrosse team? I also note that, unlike those who demonize the Lacrosse team, Imus will pay for his atrocious comments about the Rutgers Women's basketball team.

Anonymous said...

8:26 No - not all from the deep South. I am from Sin City .

Anonymous said...

Please return to Claire's blog and check her latest. She still doesn't get it. Her skin is way to thin to be a blogger of any merit. I wish her a long and prosperous life in the fantasy world she inhabits.