Sunday, May 27, 2007

Trustees, Dartmouth, and the AP

The Duke case has provided a good example of how Boards of Trustees, by taking an excessively passive approach to their oversight role, can cause significant harm to an institution.

But Duke is hardly alone. The Dartmouth administration also made a name for itself by supporting a combination of political correctness and hostility to athletics that would make Orin Starn proud. Unlike Duke, Dartmouth allows alumni to elect some of its trustees, and in the past three years, four insurgent candidates have been elected. All four have called for:

  • an increased emphasis on athletics;
  • abolishing speech codes;
  • returning the college to a platform of research and teaching excellence.

One of the trustees, Todd Zywicki, lamented that "Dartmouth has drifted from its core mission in recent years,” often by diverting funds to "programs of questionable educational value.” He also celebrated the intricate link between teaching and research.

In short, the insurgent Dartmouth trustees could be called the anti-Group of 88.

As the insurgents have prevailed, Dartmouth has kept changing the rules to make it harder for candidates not approved by the administration to prevail; yet last week, the latest insurgent, University of Virginia law professor Stephen Smith, won.

Here is how an astonishingly slanted AP article covered Smith’s triumph:

  • It suggested that while Dartmouth had in recent years tried to “make the campus more welcoming to women, minorities and scholars,” Smith “appreciated the old Dartmouth,” characterized by “rowdy fraternities—such as the one that inspired the movie ‘Animal House.’” Yet nothing in Smith's platform suggests that such a description is accurate.
  • It contended that Smith opposed “codes regulating hate speech,” even though, as any glance through the annals of FIRE would reveal, these codes have a chilling effect on all speech.
  • It implied that Smith, who is African-American and attended Dartmouth, opposed the “cultural shifts at campuses that were previously all-male and nearly all-white.”
  • It reported that defenders of the administration “said Smith was not forthcoming about his conservative background, including a clerkship with Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.” (In fact, Smith’s website says, “After law school, I worked for two federal judges. The first was Judge David B. Sentelle on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. The second was Justice Clarence Thomas at the Supreme Court of the United States.”)
  • It claimed that Smith’s opponents embraced “mainstream” ideas.

The article then closed with a quote not from the victorious candidate but from Dartmouth president James Wright, who remarked, “For those people who don't like goals that include diversity, that don't include faculty doing scholarship, I'm sorry, but I think those are the best traditions of Dartmouth.”

The AP coverage of the lacrosse case, coordinated by Aaron Beard, has been among the best. And in general, the AP’s stories are characterized by a no-nonsense, facts-only approach. The CNN website doesn’t identify the author of the AP piece on Dartmouth, but that such a biased story would come from the AP is disturbing.

47 comments:

Anonymous said...

How funny is it that the most important attribute Dartmouth's president looked for in an academic institution is "diversity."

Anonymous said...

Professor,

What's the deal with Orin Starn?

Checked out his credentials--he's a total lightweight.

Anonymous said...

Good of you to bring that up. One of the things these 88 clowns did not expect was anyone checking their CV.

Anonymous said...

The Associated Press has become a wire-service version of the nation's most left-leaning newspapers. Its body-count reporting out of Iraq is another example.

Anonymous said...

Lord help me if counting bodies coming out of Iraq is left-leaning.

Anonymous said...

I did a google search on the title of the story, and came up with the version published by the Concord Monitor who identify the writer as KATHARINE WEBSTER, a writer for the Union Leader.

Anonymous said...

Jules Crittenden explains:

http://www.julescrittenden.com/
2007/05/27/happy-memorial-day/

Anonymous said...

Why doesn't either the AP or even CNN demand that the writer put their name on these articles.

Anonymous said...

KC,

It's hard not to suspect that your own liberal-Democrat leanings make you think that "in general, the AP’s stories are characterized by a no-nonsense, facts-only approach." Did you read anything by AP "reporter" Scott Lindlaw during the 2004 presidential campaign. Lindlaw's anti-Bush prejudices were well-known; and he reportedly said his "mission" was to see that Bush was not re-elected. AP reporter Jennifer Loven was (and is) even worse, which is rather widely known.

One Spook said...

For individuals who wish to have more information on the Trustee elections at Dartmouth, they can go to the Powerline Blog and search "Dartmouth." This subject has been extensively covered by the Blog's authors, three attorneys who are all Dartmouth graduates.

Dartmouth's trustee election system is rather unique among American colleges and universities and, as KC mentioned, the Board of Trustees has attempted, however mostly without success, to dilute the power of alumni to elect nominate and elect candidates not supported by the existing Board.

Because of its unique trustee election system, there is hope for Dartmouth to not fall victim to a complete takeover by the ilk that resembles Duke's Group of 88+.

And, like Dartmouth, Duke has to compete vigorously in the endowment marketplace (figures from 2005).

At the extreme end of the endowment spectrum is Harvard, a virtually self-sustaining institution, where the Anger Studies and rabid, shrieking PC crowd eliminated President Larry Summers and replaced him with his most vocal, agenda-driven critic from its own faculty.

That crowd now controls Harvard, not its Trustees.

Unlike Harvard, Duke, like Dartmouth, must compete in the marketplace and because of that, might have a reason to listen to its alumni and supporters.

The lacrosse incident and the resulting exposure of the perfidy, duplicity, and jive of the Group of 88 should serve as a wake-up call to the trustees and supporters of Duke.

Trustees and similar boards are odd groups, to say the least. They have a difficult job in balancing all of the various needs and aspects of a complex major educational institution.

Since this problem of radical agenda-driven PC clods housed in various Anger Studies departments is so pervasive throught our country's educational system, I have often thought that boards and trustees merely humor these phonies with a little money and a few titles and then pray they won't embarrass or damage the institution too much.

The good professors who value teaching, perform research, and publish haven't the time nor the inclination to become "activists." Regrettably, they allow this evil to grow by doing nothing.

The looney bins emblematic of the Group of 88+ do not teach anything of value or publish in any credible source, but they agressively pursue an agenda-driven activism that clearly is and should be an anathema to a great, traditional university.

The Duke situation is an excellent example of the fact that these faux academics will not only embarrass and damage a great university, they may well destroy it.

One Spook

Anonymous said...

The AP coverage of the lacrosse case, coordinated by Aaron Beard, has been among the best. And in general, the AP’s stories are characterized by a no-nonsense, facts-only approach. The CNN website doesn’t identify the author of the AP piece on Dartmouth, but that such a biased story would come from the AP is disturbing.


Excuse me while I laugh.

If K.C. really believes what he wrote in the quoted paragraph then he obviously did not follow the "Jamil Hussein" story that was pushed by the AP last year.

Anonymous said...

PROGRAMS OF QUESTIONABLE EDUCATIONAL VALUE (or: What Professor Smith failed to mention about how to save big bucks at Dartmouth)

According to the article, "insurgent" trustee candidates have emerged that advocate the following:

--increased emphasis on athletics
--abolishing speech codes
--returning college to a platform of research and teaching excellence

One of the "insurgents," a Professor Smith who holds an endowed chair at the University of Virginia Law School, is a curious cultural phenomenon. While he holds a prestigious chair at an elite law school, he seems to lack the credentials to "sit" in it. Affirmative action? You bet. His publishing is laughable--no books; 2 "pending" articles, and this: "Cultural Change and Catholic Lawyers," published in (guffaw) Ave Maria. Yep, just the guy I'd want as trustee at an elite university!

Professor Smith, isn't it better to ask: What is the COST (financial, educational) of having demographics affect academics at Dartmouth?

I cyberprowled around Dartmouth's site, Professor. Behold:

1. Your Office of "Diversity" employs ELEVEN full-time administrators--how much money is that annually, Professor? Is that money well spent? Their benefits alone must be an astronomical cost. Yet you are silent. Why?

2. The cost of AAAS, women's studies, queer studies. There are 15 faculty in AAAS. Why? There is a course in AAAS entitled Masterpieces of Literatures of Africa in the comparative lit dept, Professor. But there exist no masterpieces from this geography. The best it has is "Things Fall Apart," a rather conventional novel indeed. Yet there are no courses on the great Asian writers. Why? That doesn't concern you? We see that Gordon Parks and Cornel West are being studied in the English dept. Why? Both are mediocrities.

It's just the truth that few, if any, of the above would be included in an elite curriculum if Dartmouth refrained from pandering to African Americans. Am I wrong here, Professor?

Polanski

Gary Packwood said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Gary Packwood said...

Dartmouth Trustees Peter Robinson, a former Ronald Reagan speechwriter and fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution ...wrote in a Wall Street Journal op-ed piece last fall.

To "the establishment" at every college and university, he declared:

"The alumni are coming. But they won't sack your institutions, just reconnect them with American life."

Primary Reference: The WSJ
(Online Subscription Needed)

Secondary Reference: http://www.boston.com/news/local/
articles/2007/04/03/
college_trustees_clash
_on_key_values/
::
GP

One Spook said...

Anonymous said...
Lord help me if counting bodies coming out of Iraq is left-leaning.

May 27, 2007 8:40:00 PM


While this is off-topic, the point isn't that "counting bodies coming out of Iraq is left-leaning." What is left-leaning is that "counting bodies" is the ONLY news coming out of Iraq.

Here's some news from Iraq that you have never and will never see in the left-leaning mainstream media whose pabulum the AP contributes to in spades.

One Spook

Gary Packwood said...

Polanski 9:35 said...

...Your Office of "Diversity" employs ELEVEN full-time administrators--how much money is that annually, Professor? Is that money well spent? Their benefits alone must be an astronomical cost.
::
Good catch!

There is the problem. A bloated bureaucracy that is tripping over itself and can't get anything done.
::
GP

One Spook said...

Polanski writes at 9:35:00 PM

"Professor Smith, isn't it better to ask: What is the COST (financial, educational) of having demographics affect academics at Dartmouth?

I cyberprowled around Dartmouth's site, Professor."


Maybe you should have "cyberprowled" Professor Smith's website where he states that:

"A major problem is that the College overinvests in bureacracy to the detriment of core academic and athletic programs. Monies that could’ve gone to more important uses that would directly benefit Dartmouth students and faculty–by reducing class sizes, expanding the curricular offerings available to undergraduates, increasing faculty pay, and improving athletics–are instead lavished on administrators, whose numbers and salaries keep growing.

The “McKinsey Report” bears this out. On April 25, 2006, McKinsey & Co., a management consulting firm retained by President Wright, issued a report concerning the state of administration at the College. The report leaves little doubt about the growth of administrative bureaucracy at the expense of academics.

The report finds that, over the last five years, administrators within the College have come out ahead of the Arts and Sciences faculty (who teach the bulk of Dartmouth students). Over that period, the College added “111 new positions” to the College administration ranks for a “net gain of 86 full-time equivalents.” The number of administrative jobs added (which would’ve been higher if new administrative positions outside of the College were included) was literally double the number of faculty positions added in Arts and Sciences, where students regularly complain that classes are often oversubscribed and filled above capacity. As the report notes, the “College-only administrative growth . . . compares to an increase in Arts and Sciences faculty of 50 new positions.”

I believe that if you "cyberprowled" a bit more, you'd find Professor Smith generally agrees with you, Polanski.

One Spook

Anonymous said...

The faculty and administration at Hamilton College in NY makes the G88 look like amateurs. They managed to put the kibosh on a $3.6 million donation from an alumnus/board member for the proposed Alexander Hamilton Center because they couldn't subvert the wishes of the giver: "to promote excellence in scholarship through the study of freedom, democracy and capitalism as these ideas were developed and institutionalized in the United States and within the larger tradition of Western culture."

Anonymous said...

Please, your work has been beyond excellent, BUT to suggest surprise that the AP was not fair and objective is naive, to say the least.

Anonymous said...

I believe that if you "cyberprowled" a bit more, you'd find Professor Smith generally agrees with you, Polanski.

One Spook



The horror!

You do realize that Professor Smith is black, don't you?

Anonymous said...

1 Spook,

Have to disagree with you. First off, real managers get SPECIFIC real fast. Smith is platitudinous--of course admin expenses are a problem--they're a problem in the private sector as well. What you need to determine, if you are a manager with any kind of vision, is which academic programs are worth administering. Follow?

Polanski

Anonymous said...

The most cpmplete site to find out about the many daily battle successes in Iraq is www.mnf-iraq.com. None of this appears in the MSM.

Sweetmick

Anonymous said...

Let me rephrase the "problem" of "diversity":

Assume you're addressing a simple business problem.

CASE STUDY: Polanski wants to create a new university that will not be politicized at all.

Polanski wants to hire a genius architect--regardless of "celebrity," etc.

Does Polanski bean count, or does he do the hard research and make a decision based on talent?

It's as simple as that.

Talent seems to be at the lower rung of the ladder to success at a lot of elite American universities.

That is ridiculous.

Polanski

Anonymous said...

KC , I think you must have your head stuck in a dirty hole called Durham. The AP is horribly biased.

Honey West said...

The AP is a cooperative, and different news outlets pick and choose which articles to run, and even which parts of the articles to run. Look at a recent AP piece by Rachel Zoll Angry Atheists are Hot Authors
This AP story was picked up by several news outlets, but each outlet used only the parts of the piece that suited their respective ideologies. The original version is rather sympathetic to the atheists, but when the conservative Richmond Times-Dispatch ran it, they removed more than half of Zoll's original content and created a version that was sympathetic to the believers: Atheists Hitting Back In Books. So you have to consider the source when reading an AP piece.

Silverhammer said...

Note that Duke alumni elect 12 of the 37 members of the University Board of Trustees. 12 Trustees are elected by the North Carolina Conference of the United Methodist Church and 12 Trustees are elected by the Western North Carolina Conference of the United Methodist Church. The President serves in an ex officio capacity as the 37th Trustee.

Duke1965 said...

Duke, like many other modern universities, is a collection of tribes. There are the PC tribes, the jock-frat tribes, the Alumni tribe, and the very large group of "unaffiliated" tribes, simply there for the educational and career opportunities. Historically, these tribes have lived in a tenuous peace, with occasional attacks by one tribe against another. For years, the PC tribes and the Jock-frat tribes have been antagonistic toward each other, with the Jock-frat tribes hosting "Execs and Secs" parties, and the PC tribes tearing down the party announcement posters. In general, the PC tribes have been viewed by the vast majority of Duke students as a somewhat loopy yet harmless sideshow to the Duke experience. Small wonder that Pres. Broadhead’s main role has been to act as a mediator/broker among the various tribes; that’s his de facto job description.

That equation has now changed dramatically. The G88, smelling blood, fired the first salvo with the “Listening” ad. At first, the attack seemed successful. However, fourteen months later, the poster boys for the Jock-frat tribe turn out to be decent human beings who showed tremendous class in an unprecedented miscarriage of justice; the Lacrosse players have become cult heroes. The Alumni tribe is beginning to flex its muscle, as shown at the “Conversations” road show initiated to mollify the alums. Who knows where all of this will lead, but I wouldn’t be surprised if the basic decency of the vast majority of Duke students and alumni will ultimately prevail…. At least, that’s my hope for Duke’s future. While Professor Coleman is probably much too intelligent to accept the post, he would be a perfect candidate for Duke’s next President, not because he was right about the lax case, but because he’s shown intelligence, courage, and an unorthodox willingness to look at the facts before venturing a candid, balanced opinion.

Anonymous said...

A welcome reminder that the trends already far advanced at Duke are far advanced elsewhere too. I teach at Dartmouth, where you can see the same pattern: "progressive", liberal Administration and faculty on one side, "reactionary" conservative Alums on the other, and students somewhere in between. That's the "correlation of forces" at most pvt colleges/universities where I've taught.

Alas, Dartmouth is unlikely to be the start of a general fight back by Alums who want to save the institutions they love from the politically correct agendas of Admin/faculty. That's because most institutions appoint Trustees, who become their creatures. Dartmouth is an exception in having elected members, much to the annoyance of the Admin. The latter is scrupulously politically correct in the manner of Brodhead, and bangs on the great "diversity" drum loudly, incessantly and with pious determination. Under similar circumstances, Dartmouth would have reacted in exactly the same fashion as Duke did. Alas, that will come as little consolation to Duke.

One Spook said...

Polanski:

Of course, as a good manager you have to determine which programs are to be cut, and Smith's specific positions remain to be seen. It is doubtful that any trustee candidate would be conversant with and campaign on very specific programs ... show me any campaign anywhere that could not be described as "platitudinous."

However, you indicted him without recognizing that he is aware of the adminstrative bloat, and your comment suggested that he was oblivious to it, and that is not true.

I'll agree with you that the jury is still out on which programs he'll vote to cut.

He also admits to being a benefactor of AA programs and any reasonable person should recognize that certain programs have produced excellent results and have value at some level of funding.

Any reasonable person should also recognize that many of those programs now are grossly overfunded, have lousy results, and are infiltrated with extremist loonies, too ... as we can clearly see at Duke.

One Spook

Anonymous said...

11:04

Your "tribes" analogy begs the question: Who pays for the less intelligent tribes' useless curricula?

re who should be president of Duke: someone who:

1. has impeccable taste and a high IQ

2. balls balls balls

3. good manager

Coleman lacks all 3 of these qualities.

Polanski

Anonymous said...

"Small wonder that Pres. Broadhead’s main role has been to act as a mediator/broker among the various tribes; that’s his de facto job description".

Well, if that's so, then he failed miserably in his role. Brodhead is no "honest broker" between these "tribes". Surely that's not even in dispute.

Anonymous said...

Smith and his three "rebels" on the Dartmouth Board of Trustees are still far outnumbered by the rest. And the College has shown itself determined to do what needs to be done (fairly or otherwise) to put a stop to this incipient rebellion. "Enlightened" despotism must not be impeded by such upstarts.

Anonymous said...

Check out John in Carolina's site; he continues to point out the Raleigh News & Observer's role in the early days of the cold-blooded frame of the lacrosse players. Joe Neff did a great job later, but the N&O's late March 2006 coverage was appallingly bad:

Sunday, May 27, 2007

INNOCENT: N&O Lax Cover-up - 5/27/07
"... these three individuals [David Evans, Collin Finnerty and Reade Seligmann,] are innocent of these charges."

North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper, Apr. 11, 2007
______________________________________________________
From Merriam-Webster Online: cover-up -- a device or stratagem for masking or concealing.

The Raleigh News & Observer continues to work hard to cover-up its role in launching and sustaining the public witch hunt and framing of the white Duke students on the school’s 2006 Men’s lacrosse team.

In today’s N&O reporter Ben Niolet’s story ( "Lacrosse case leaving marks in court" ) begins:

The judicial system has a hangover. Call it the Mike Nifong effect.

In North Carolina and across the country, prosecutors with upright reputations are having to make assurances that they don't break the rules. Judges and lawyers have taken to using Nifong's name and the outcome of the sexual assault case against Duke University lacrosse case players as a shorthand for all manner of prosecutorial outrages. The case has made it harder for prosecutors nationwide to get funding or laws changed. …
I don’t doubt that all true.

But in the middle of Niolet’s story, he says:
Nifong led the charge against the lacrosse players. He denounced them to the news media while trying to build a case in spite of nonexistent and contrary evidence. …
And that’s not true, as Niolet and his editors know.

Nifong didn’t begin speaking publicly about the case until March 27, 2006.

The charge against the lacrosse players was led by The Raleigh News & Observer when it “broke the Duke lacrosse story” with a March 24 story in which the N&O seven times called the accuser “the victim” or referred to her with the possessive “the victim’s.”

Thus, in the first Duke lacrosse story the public read, the N&O repeatedly told readers the accuser was the victim thereby framing the lacrosse players as her vicitmizers.

On March 25 the N&O ran on page one, above the fold, with five column wide headlines the “anonymous interview” story:
DANCER GIVES DETAILS OF ORDEAL

A woman hired to dance for the Duke lacrosse team describes a night of racial slurs, growing fear and, finally, sexual violence
That story presented the lacrosse players as a gang of drunken racists among whom were three rapists and their teammates who were covering up for them.

The N&O’s March 25 story sent "the Duke lacrosse story" national and international.

By March 26 thousands of news outlets were reporting the N&O’s story about about a night that ended in “sexual violence.” Many millions of Americans were convniced “the frightened young black mother” had been brutally raped by three privileged white guys whose teammates had formed “a wall of silence” to protect them.

The N&O’s charge against the Duke students was so savage and effective that when N&O news columnist Ruth Sheehan began her March 27 column, "Teams' Silence is Sickening" , with,
Members of the Duke men's lacrosse team,

You know. We know you know.

Whatever happened in the bathroom at the stripper party gone terribly terribly bad, you know who was involved. Every one of you does.

And one of you needs to come forward and tell the police.

Do not be afraid of retribution on the team,
most people, including many at Duke, applauded Sheehan's McCarthyite screed attacking the students for doing nothing more than following their parents' and attorneys' advice.

It was only later that day that Mike Nifong began speaking publicly about the Duke students.

I hold no brief for Nifong. He should be removed from office. What's more, his official conduct should be examined with an eye toward criminal prosecution.

But Nifong didn’t go public about the case until AFTER the N&O had poisoned the public’s mind against the players and inflamed the community.

Niolet and his editors know that.

I’ll send a copy of this post to the N&O’s public editor, Ted Vaden. He’s supposed to look out for the readers’ interest and hold the N&O to what he says are "the highest standards of ethical journalism."

I’ll invite his comment, and let him know I’ll share it with you.

I’ll also send copies of this post to N&O executive editor for news, Melanie Sill, and Niolet.

As with Vaden, I’ll let them know I’ll share with you what they say, if anything, in response.

posted by JWM at 9:40 PM |

Anonymous said...

One of the more delicious ironies of the Smith/Dartmouth case is that he is both conservative and black. For most Admin/faculty, this is embarrassing, as ideology trumps race. But a convenient rationalization is to hand: as a conservative, he can't really be considered black! Not REALLY. I've heard academic colleagues say as much.

Anonymous said...

11:30:00--

PLEASE! Can you keep postings to under 100,000 words!

Thanks.

One Spook said...

Polanski says:

"re who should be president of Duke: someone who:"

Damn ... I thought you were going to say, someone who is "a genius architect--regardless of "celebrity," etc."

One Spook

Gary Packwood said...

Dartmouth has an 18-member board and Duke has a 37-member board.

The last time I heard anything about huge boards of trustees is when the Red Cross almost went into meltdown.

It is difficult to compare an organization with an 18-member board of trustees with an organization that actually tries to corral a 37-member board.

Duke need to work on the size of that board and I recommend that about half of those members need to become a separate non-voting body ... perhaps a board of advisors or overseers.
::
GP

Anonymous said...

Duke, Dartmouth and other schools
are going to have to change sooner
or later. The "800 pound Gorilla"
that current University Administrator
ignore will ensure that chage.

At some point in the near future,
the best lecturers will start to
go indenpendent. Charging $1 per
lecture to students viewing over
the internet will gross them
tens, if not, hundreds of thousands
per lecture.

Indpendent testing organizations
already exist. And must surely be
swooning with the thoughts of all
those dollars they will take in
administrating fair exams.

The current 150 year old model will
eventually be gone with the wind.

Good riddance too.

Anonymous said...

Carolyn says:

KC, I love you but calling the AP 'biased' is too mild. Try out and out lying!

Just one of the lies the AP is currently committing concerns their news 'source' in Baghdad - a mythical person called Jamil Hussein whom no one has ever seen and whom even the AP can't prove exists. Yet the AP uses Hussein as a source for 'atrocities' that never happened to 'victims' who never existed. When the AP is confronted with their lies, they pull a self-righteous snit that would do the Gang of 88 proud.

Trust me - calling the AP 'biased' is like calling the Gang 'unfriendly'.

DrDon said...

Have you read AP material recently? Though Aaron Beard has done a fine job, AP material has deviated from the old "just the facts" approach that was the norm when I worked there from 1977-95. A lot of AP news stories now have a snarky attitude and definitely favor one side over another.

Gary Packwood said...

Anonymous 7:33 said...

...How funny is it that the most important attribute Dartmouth's president looked for in an academic institution is "diversity."
::
I need a good discussion about what this 'diversity' movement is all about.
Diversity as a term...moves around and means different things to different people.
How did diversity play a role in the problems experienced by the Duke 3?
::
GP

Anonymous said...

Silverhammer:
While you note, correctly, that Duke alumni elect 12 of the 36 elected board members, what I've read in recent months implies that
somehow individual alumni actually have no vote.
What actually seems to happen is that the Alumni Council votes in the name of the alumni.
Do any Duke alumni out there actually recall being solicited for a vote for board members?

Jamil Hussein, AP said...

al-AP is the perfect newsmedia for al-Qaida and left-wing Amerika.

Anybody remembers the story about Jamil Hussein, reporting fantastic (lies) about burned down mosques ans shias burned alive inside etc that all turned out to be false. US Army also arrested one AP reporter for planting IEDs (he was caught with other Al-Qaida terrorists).

This is the Associated (with Terrorists) Press. Dan Rather would fit perfectly there.

jamil hussein said...

breaking news: Big fish "Freedom fighter/terrorist" captured in Iraq:
Captured

Picture by al-Reuters and al-Ap.

Anonymous said...

"I need a good discussion about what this 'diversity' movement is all about.Diversity as a term...moves around and means different things to different people".

In its landmark affirmative action ruling (Univ. of California vs Bakke, 1978), the US Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of affirmative action in (public) higher education, although it forbade the use of quotas. The argument was based on the presumed educational value of diversity, including ethnic diversity.

Ever since, US public universities have, perforce, couched their AA regimes in terms of diversity. This is now the accepted idiom for defending the practice, in both private and public institutions. (Although only the latter are restricted to it.) It has become a mantra.

Amazingly, no link between diversity and pedagogical success has ever been proven. (The SC casually invoked the link without evidence.) Also, most "ethnic minorities" in the leading American colleges and universities such as Duke are themselves middle class, with backgrounds very much like their white counterparts on campus, and thereby unlikely to enhance the educational experience of most students.

Simply put, diversity is the key to justifying AA post-Bakke. It is crucial to the self-image of American higher education today.

Anonymous said...

Whites are afraid of stating the obvious: blacks are academic toddlers. No one wants to "deny" them access to anything.

It's got to end. Our growing low-IQ populations of Mexicans and Muslims will help the situation.

Anonymous said...

More on the AP from the MediaBusters site:

That there has been no love lost between the Associated Press and leading center-right blog Powerline for quite some time is not exactly a secret. The mutual distaste goes back at least as far as the 2004 presidential campaign, when Powerline caught AP reporter Scott Lindlaw telling others that his "mission" was to see that George Bush would not be reelected, and exposed the AP's Jennifer Loven's conflict of interest in reporting environmental stories while her husband was the Kerry campaign's environmental consultant.

So what happened when John Hinderaker at Powerline exposed yet another in a long line of stories about politicians' misdeeds that "somehow" didn't mention the offender's party is fascinating indeed.

The original story on the DWI arrest of (Minnesota)State Senate President James Metzen made no mention of his party affiliation. Its fifth paragraph read as follows (link is to abbreviated story; the original referred to by Powerline and Drudge was later revised; this ABC story has the original fifth paragraph but a revised sixth that indicates party affiliation):

Metzen, 61, a seven-term senator from South St. Paul, told officers he had three or four drinks, (South St. Paul Police Chief Michael) Messerich said.

It is virtually impossible that Bakst did not know that party James Metzen is a member of Democratic Farm Labor, the Gopher's State's version of the Democrats, when he wrote his original story on May 22. After all, Metzen isn't just another state politician, he's the President of the Senate....