Replies

You seem to believe that campus racism against whites is OK,

You're ridiculous. You know you're losing a debate when you start using the "you seem" method of debate, ascribing motives and actions to people without proof, and frame every single fact-set in the terms of victimhood, again straight out of the Victimology handbook. You're race hustling with the best of them.

The one time you actually use my real words, you proceed to argue an assertion of fact without substantiation.

You haven't established either that (1) the University administration is defending Takeem's retention in office, or that (2) they're doing so because of race.

If you want to build a case, take small steps and establish your foundation.

I'm not wasting any more time on this. Let's agree to disagree on everything under the sun. You may now proceed to Step 2 in the Victimology Handbook, ad hominem.

I have stated clearly what I believe. Equal rights and equal treatment under the law. You want to "agree to disagree". Fine with me.

What exactly do you stand for?

I do agree - I have no evidence that the University is defending Takeem. I also see that the university president felt he had to address a joke in bad taste in writing, but as far as I know did not directly address the presence of the thief in student council. I take this as evidence of his priorities, supported by the reaminder of the race based initiatives and systems on campus.

By the way - I was trying to be kind with the "you seem" quote. Evidently you are uncomfortable with your position, and now you want to turn this into a name calling contest - "You're ridiculous" - "go check your facts" - "race hustling with the best of them" - setting my arguments in the format of "the Victimology handbook" etc.

Your post appears (seems)as if you are angry - could this be because someone has not taken the position that the white man is automatically wrong in a case such as this? Or not accepting that it is a heinous crime to call attention to the poor performance of a black man? Or is it my challenging the assumption that only whites can be racist? Or that freedom of speech is not contingent on some PC filter approved by the ultra sensitivity of the leaders of a race based special interest group?

Is it racist to question a black man? Is it racist to question an institution that formally and publicly treats people differently based on race? Is that not the definition of racism?

Does every joke in bad taste need a written response from the President of the university?

I do grant after some research that Penn State has recently been sort of a racial hot bed - though of course none of the "hate crimes" reported have ever been substantiated even after review by the FBI. Given the credibility of the Black Caucus leadership, and the FBI, I will wait for real evidence.

Here are a few very loosely researched facts for you - I can't investigate every school and every program (I will not chase facts for you) - and I will grant that my sourcing is weak. However - they also are completely consistent and logical given the state of current higher education.

Easy one - the fact that the Black Caucus exists and is recognized by the school is racist. By definition. No research required. Do you have trouble understanding that? Why do you think they exist?

"At Penn State University, black students who manage a C average get cash rewards of $550. Blacks with a B average or better get $1,100. Whites of course, get no such handouts." "American Renaissance", 1991.

"The state of Pennsylvania recently set up what it calls the Pennsylvania Graduate Opportunities Tuition Waiver Program. Thirty of the state's 133 universities have agreed to offer complete, graduate-studies scholarships to blacks. Sixteen have made the offer to any qualified black, in any field of study he chooses. Race, not financial need, makes students eligible.The state is raising $15 million to pay for the program," American Renaissance, 1991.

In The Closing of the American Mind, Allan Bloom wrote of the "shadow of university life" in which blacks operate at Cornell University: (Agreed - not PSU - but to me it seems he is describing the same culture).

". . . permanent quotas in admissions, preference in financial assistance, racially motivated hiring of faculty, difficulty in giving blacks failing marks, and an organized system of grievance and feeling aggrieved. And everywhere hypocrisy, contempt-producing lies about what is going on and how the whole scheme is working?"

I think the black face was a joke in bad taste, and certainly don't think it was a good idea. It has already been apologized for. And that is all it was - a joke in bad taste.

As for victimhood and victimology, I will leave that to the expert members of the Black Caucus.

And I continue to find racism wrong in any forum. I do not think that racial hyper sensitivity on college campuses is doing anyone any good. If that is "race hustling" you must be using a different dictionary than I.