Thursday, May 24, 2007

DCU: "We're Listening"

The Duke Conservative Union has published a powerful advertisement today taking to task the Group of 88. The DCU says that it's "listening" to the Group for a justification of the professors' extreme statements and actions. It seems, however, that Group members who were so sensitive to students' opinions last spring no longer care to hear what Duke students have to say.

The ad is below; click on it to enlarge and read:


Chicago said...

They held back on the quotes. They could have used so more specific, blatant and direct comments of flat out racism by Holloway, Farred, and Lubiano. The ad is excellent. However, at the same time, I would have loved to see them give the even more obvious examples of cut and dry hate a few G88 members have displayed.

Anonymous said...

Sadly, the targets of this ad will see it as a badge of honor to be criticized by an organization with the word "conservative" in its name.

As far as these faculty are concerned, the term "conservative" is a label that obviates any need or expectation for rational discourse on their part.

Anonymous said...

Off topic, but this link will take you to an interview with Joe Alleva. Kind of long, but at one point the question is asked, (paraphrased) "What would you say now that you were not able to say over a year ago?" Basically, Alleva stumbled all over the place, said nothing, then said the university did a great job handling the situation.

Anonymous said...

its unfortunate they only thanked "conservative bloggers" cause it leaves out KC.. this matter was not about politics but about right and wrong and it would have been nice if they didnt take a not so subtle shot at non-conservatives

Anonymous said...

I left this in the last comment section, but here it is again...

KC - you were, and still are, a valuable free-speech source in exposing the abuses of individual freedom concerning the Duke Lacrosse case.

However, your concerns and comments against the "Duke 88" are nothing more than the same stuff "conservatives" have been saying about "academic" abuse for years.

There’s nothing you write here going change anything about the Duke “88.” Ward Churchill still has a job at Colorado, and that son of a bitch coward has actually slapped women, and brandished an assault rifle for photo opportunities. He gets away with it because of the “liberal” left-wing cowardice that you’re now one of the perceived “right-wingers” railing against.

Welcome to reality. We’re glad to have you.

- Rick

Gary Packwood said...

Well Written, Timely and Professional

I guess I am now a conservative.

My Father, a Roosevelt Democrat, would be horrified.

Anonymous said...

I also found it odd that this ad thanked "conservative bloggers." There's no doubt that the reasonable elements of the right have been, for the most part, on the correct side of this particular issue. However, the statements at issue are certainly not part of the mainstream left, but are instead the product of individuals who have gone severely astray. Personally, I think that using the ad or events in a "conservatives are right and liberals are wrong" kind of way smacks of the using an unfortunate event to advance your own agenda tactics that are the issue in the first place.

I've followed this blog closely have seen no evidence that KC Johnson should be labelled a "conservative blogger," but I guess if KC wants to let that go without comment, then that's certainly his decision.

A. Peter Allan said...

The ad casts the divide as a conservative-liberal one, which it is not. All of the 88 may be on the liberal side of the spectrum, but there are plenty of other liberals on the other side of the divide. It is also neither a Republican-Democrat, black-white, male-female, nor rich-poor divide.

My current best theory is that it's a left-brain-right-brain divide, with the Brodhead+88 coalition persuaded by hunches and notions, and those of us horrified by their continuing positions persuaded by facts and inferences. I await a good counterexample to sideline this theory.

bill anderson said...

One of the great things about the response of the blogosphere is that this case has united people across the political/ideological lines. I am a hardcore libertarian and I suppose few people would agree with my politics, but many who disagree with me elsewhere have been very supportive of what I have done on this case.

Unfortunately, many of the Duke faculty members who are being addressed are incapable of listening to anyone else. They are like Nifong.

Anonymous said...

The DCU was complicit all along because they took so long to take a definitive stance.

Just like all the others.

Anonymous said...

Does anyone now what the Durham City Council decided re: DPD investigation?

Anonymous said...

It's just become so ridiculous. We know the ad was indefensible, so why can't these 88 just admit that their ad was worded poorly and allow everybody to move on.

Don't they realize their reputations have taken enough of a hit? The longer they continue to defend this dog the worse and worse they look.

Anonymous said...

How come tha link to William L. Anderson isn't updated? Does this guy have anything more to say about the Duke case. I enjoyed and now miss his insights. Does anyone know what happened? Thanks.

Thor said...

As the outgoing president of the Duke Conservative Union and primary author of the advertisement, I've been interested to read what previous commenters have said about the "conservative bloggers" term. In fact, I would like to speak for our use of it. Rest assured that it was meant in no way to cast the case as a "Left vs. Right" issue, nor was it meant to diminish the excellent work for justice of others in the blogosphere who are across the political spectrum. Rather, like the ad itself, it was a parody (and probably should have been in quotation marks) of the very statements of the Group of 88. In nearly every story where a member of the Gang "defends" themselves, they attack the "conservative bloggers." The term was meant, rather tongue-in-cheek, as a thank you to the very people the Duke faculty were vilifying so viciously. You can find more about the ad and our reasons for publishing it at our blog at
-Pete Magnuson

Anonymous said...

Labels are worthless. The true Liberal, of which KC is a shining example, despises the crap that "Liberals" spout today. A true Conservative isn't too pleased with what passes for "Conservative" thought today. Why don't we deep-six these labels and simply call ourselves Americans Who Care?

kenb said...


Actually, I think it is more a cerebral cortex - reptilian brain divide.

Anonymous said...

It's a "common sense" versus "moron" divide.

Anonymous said...

The longer the "88" remain silent without admiting that they were wrong in their rush to judgement and the longer they wait to do the right thing and apologize, the more their lack of character is exposed.

It would seem that they are educated fools. On that note consider these words:

"It takes a great deal of character strength to apologize quickly out of one's heart rather than out of pity. A person must possess himself and have a deep sense of security in fundamental principles and values in order to genuinely apologize."
Stephan Covey

Michael said...

I know the types of liberals who are cited in the
statement. Not only will they never apologize and
NEVER admit that they were wrong, they will lash
out at the Duke Conservative Union with extreme
harsh rhetoric -- mark my words, that's how they
will respond.

Anonymous said...

Actually, it is great to see the union republicize these comments. Free publicity! What generosity! Their ad has the impact of reissuing the important statements of this debate. Up front and for all to figure out once again. And this time, nobody had to figure out how to pay for it. Hats off guys--great collegiality!

Anonymous said...

It's too late for apologies. Nothing less than ACTIONS signifying GENUINE contrition can now be accepted as as STARTING point for bringing the faculty back to a place where it deserves the trust of Duke students.

Anonymous said...

Congratulations Duke Conservative Union. That you exist is a testimony to modern day miracles. Continue to shine the light of truth on the 88 bastards who put ideaology before truth. You make real Dukies proud.

Anonymous said...

Are the G88 members and Ms Sebring potential targets for civil suits? If so, is there a university liability umbrella that protects them financially? Ostracization simply isn't enough. These lowbrow, miscreants need to suffer.

Gary Packwood said...

-Pete Magnuson 6:00 said...
...The term (conservative) was meant, rather tongue-in-cheek, as a thank you to the very people the Duke faculty were vilifying so viciously.
You are most certainly welcome.

And I for one will stay right with you as we help Duke get back on its feet.

Don't worry about the conservative tag. I am probably old enough to be you parent and when I compare your mess at Duke with the 'police action' in Southeast Asia when I was young... Well, I'm not sure what I am anymore.

I just hope my generation did not accidentally unleash these extremists on you guys.

Have a great summer and ...Never let the bastards grind you down.

Anonymous said...

Mr. Magnuson, I agree with you that you probably should have put the term "conservative bloggers" in quotes in your ad for all those who did not get your tongue-in-cheek reference. As I'm sure you appreciate, many of us who have been writing and/or commenting on this case for the past year or so are not "conservative" by any stretch of the imagination. I am female, an attorney, pro-choice, and pro-gay rights. I can't imagine anyone (other than perhaps some ignorant, racist professors at Duke) who would classify me as a "conservative" anything. I believe in common sense, personal responsibility, fairness, and the rule of law. I've never considered those to be "conservative" values; I've always considered them to be 'American' values.

Anonymous said...

"Conservative bloggers," my ass.

Lloyd said...

The Group of 88 are so far out left, that most anyone else looks conservative by comparison. And from comments that I've read by members of the group, they pretty much term anyone conservative who doesn't agree with their version of "reality". And why should they apologize with nothing will happen to them if they don't? It's unlikely Reade, Collin, David and their families want to go through a multi-year drawn out trial only to see them weasle out on bankruptsy. And no way will the Duke administration stand up to them. Broadhead, his underlings, and the board of trustees are scared to death of the "vast political power" of the Group of 88. As long as the mainstream meadia are so blatantly biased to anyone crying discrimination who is black, a women, or who claims to support black and women's rights, I don't see anything happening to these bozos.

Anonymous said...

These 88 morons continue to be and anchor around the neck of Duke as well as a real problem to the University at large.

And problems, once exposed to the light, are subject to corrective action in all well run organizations. To date - no corrective action at Duke.

So the question remains, when will the leadership at Duke be changed out with leaders that will manage according to standard business practices.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous @ 7:39 PM said...
"...[M]any of us who have been writing and/or commenting on this case for the past year or so are not "conservative" by any stretch of the imagination."

You seriously underestimate the imaginations of the 88ers & Co. Whatever they lack in intellect is more than compensated for by their capacity for "imaginations".

"...I believe in common sense, personal responsibility, fairness, and the rule of law. I've never considered those to be 'conservative' values; I've always considered them to be 'American' values."

Read what the 88ers & Co. write about "America" to understand what they think about such "American" values as you list.

R.R. Hamilton

May 24, 2007 7:39:00 PM

Anonymous said...

I guarantee the professors consider Professor KC and everyone else who disagrees with them to be a bunch of inbred conservative mouth breathers who aren't worthy of argument or deserving a response. When you're standing at the south pole, everything looks like north.

Ignorant, racist professors suck.

Jack Straw

Anonymous said...

5:12, The p[roblem with your theory is that it suggest left-brained people are evil, racist, Marxist,frauds. I don't buy that.

TruthHurts001 said...

Let's see...

A Democrat politician in campaign mode blatantly plays the race card in order to inflame and mobilize black voters...

Par for the course.
Standard Operating Procedure.

For those who say this case is not about Right vs Left...
Keep dreaming.

Anonymous said...

This is the state that was (mis)represented by Jesse Helms for years. Jesse had few peers when it came to race-baiting, just on the other side.

Anonymous said...

10:31 Inre: Jessee Helms. I lived in NC for several years and was always amazed how many people were quite vocal about their distaste for him, yet he won in landslides. Every time, in spite of a vicious press.

At first I thought it was a national balance issue. A conservative Senator to counter leftists like Wellstone and Kennedy.

Then I grew older, and realized he was right.

Anonymous said...

The DCU deserves to be commended for their ad. It is churlish and prickly to fuss about "conservative bloggers". Who cares? I don't see a "Duke Liberal Union" placing a similar ad parodying the Gang of 88...

Anonymous said...

Carolyn says:

The DCU and the lacrosse teams are proof that some decent, intelligent people still populate the campus of Duke.

Anonymous said...

Where are the 88 professors deploring the culture of prostitution in Durham? Where are the 88 professors expressing their anger that the Durham Police Department and DA were intent on framing three innocent students? If they were black students, the 88 would be screaming mad fighting such false prosecution. Where are the 88 professors showing personal responsibility? Wasn't one of the 88 affected by the AG's statement of innocence? It is almost too fantastical to believe that none of them has proclaimed their error. Is there not one among them able to do the right thing. Is their social agenda so all consuming that not even the truth matters?

Anonymous said...

I don't care for the 'conservative bloggers' part either, as it definitely does not come off as a parody. If you wanted to push the parody envelope, you should have said the ad was endorsed by official student groups of the psycholgy department, art & art history department, classical studies department etc.

Reaction to 'oficial' endorsement stated (when not actually given) would have shown the hypocrisy in teh university.

Anonymous said...

If you are a liberal and condemn Nifong, Gang of 88 et al, good for you. Well done. That's what liberals SHOULD do. Indeed, you can't be a REAL liberal and fail to do so. So take out an ad like the DCU and say so, but don't whine about the "conservative bloggers" bit.

mac said...

Notice that the statement
says something about "people
around the world who love
and care about Duke University."
Not too long ago, there were
people posting who asked
why anyone should want to
save Duke.
The ad - though parts of it
are tongue in cheek - says it
all. Fix it: don't burn it.

gwallan said...

Surely the answer to the question must come in the form of immediate dismissals of those principally responsible for the horrors of this spring moment at Duke. Coaches of the lacrosse team, the team itself and it's players(now all exonerated), and any other agents who silenced or lied about the real nature of events at 610 Buchanan on the evening of March 13, 2006.- Houston Baker.

Houston got himself out of the firing line but many agents remain.

Anonymous said...

Being innocent of a crime doesn't make you a good person.

Ralph Phelan said...

"Left strew ... were ... the trust placed in the Duke faculty by the student body...."

This trust was clearly misplaced and undeserved. And until the "silent majority" of faculty begins to *actively* demand accountability for wrongs done, it remains unworthy of trust.

Anonymous said...

anonymous 9:41 apparently thinks politically motivated false prosecutions used to inflame racial tensions are ok, just as long as they are directed at someone who is not a "good person".

what a douchebag.

Jack Straw

Ralph Phelan said...

"I just hope my generation did not accidentally unleash these extremists on you guys."

Sorry, but it did.

Ralph Phelan said...

"Is their social agenda so all consuming that not even the truth matters?"

Yes. Welcome to the modern "elite" university.

Anonymous said...

Prior to this case I would have thought that not arresting someone without creditable evidence was more of a common sense issue as opposed to a political issue.

Additionally I thought that not commenting on a situation till enough evidence surfaced so that you could speak intelligently and back-up your opinions was again a common sense issue not a political one.

Live and learn.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said...
Being innocent of a crime doesn't make you a good person.

May 25, 2007 9:41:00 AM

How inciting!

My question for 9:41:00 AM:

Does being charged with a crime make you a criminal?

To quote the incontinent old G88er: "DEPENDS!!! (Oh, oh: I'm out of them)"

Anonymous said...

"Being innocent of a crime doesn't make you a good person."

Uh huh. Does falsely accusing someone of a crime make one a good person?

Anonymous said...

Anon 9:41 bloviated...

Being innocent of a crime doesn't make you a good person.

Showing grace under pressure when you've been falsely accused sure does. Adversity doesn't build character, it reveals it.

~Duke '91

Anonymous said...

I knew an African American grad student who told me his family always voted for Jesse.


His grandmother had been in a common-law marriage, and until Jesse's staff intervened, could not collect social security survivor benefits.

I knew a sociology graduate student whose family always voted for Jesse.


She had been in Egypt with her husband over the summer, spending time in his back-water family village when a State Dept employee showed up. None of her letters had reached home, and Jesse had dispatched an assistant ambassador to check on her well-being.

Sometimes constituent service trumps ideology.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 11:48

"a State Dept employee showed up. None of her letters had reached home, and Jesse had dispatched an assistant ambassador to check on her well-being."

So Jesse intervened in State Dept affairs, and essentially confiscated an assistant ambassador for a day to send him to and from a backwater village to check up on one of Jesse's supporters? Wow, interesting! Can you elaborate...

How much did Jesse pay in compensation to the U.S. taxpayers for hijacking their employee from his duties and creating travel expenses and obligations?

In what elected capacity was Jesse serving when he inserted himself into State Dept affairs to reprioritize their work and hijack their employees?

Also, how many potentially sexually-available women were involved whom Jesse may or may not have been impregnanting at the time?

Anonymous said...

In my view, the whole Durham thing is an outgrowth of modern liberal thought.

The endorsement of multiculturalism, except if your culture happens to be white Christian, the continued viewing of all issues through racial colored lenses, and the stoking of racial sensitivities all appear to me to be characteristics of the left.

Another characteristic of the left is a lower standard when applied to assertions deemed in support of minority claims.

Another characteristic of the left is the high degree of self-righteous anger they allow themselves. Think Howard Dean, Hillary Clinton, Group of 88.

In my view, denying these characteristics as liberal characteristics is ridiculous.

That's not to say all liberals are behind these facets of the liberal movement, just the same as not all conservatives endorse the latest pandering attempts by conservatives.

Anonymous said...

Jesse HELMS was acting in his role as US senator and vice chair of the Foreign Relations committee.

Part of the Foreign Service's duty involves looking out for US citizens' welfare when outside the US.

Anonymous said...

I was never a supporter of Jesse Helms. Mostly because of the way he was demonized in the media. I believed the leftist evaluation of him.
Then I talked to a very prominent guy who works on Wall Street and who is also black. He told me how efficient Helms' office was run in Washington.
Even those who did not share his political views sang his praises for being able to get things done and for his professionalism.
When you need to get something done ideology takes a back seat I guess.

Luantic said...

People need to make posters.

[photo of professor]

Post 'em on campus billboards, post 'em on campus walls, stick 'em under the wipers of parked cars. Blanket Durham in them. Shame them; or, if they're impervious to shame, at least make them notorious.

And pray, just pray, some of them try to sue for libel. Because when the court rules that it isn't libel,


will make a great addendum to the poster.