Perhaps if there were to be a “White Studies Course” at Dook and other institutions of higher learning there would be more sensitivity to the plight of the privileged upper-class.

One might glean from such an exposure to the “White Culture” that we minorities are not all rich, arrogant, over–educated, responsibility-avoiding rapists. Unless, of course, you count a certain denizen of Chappaqua.

(I live in NY where being a White Male makes me a member of the minority. Being a Conservative White Male makes me an endangered species.)

It is fine for loose canon and likely Supreme Court Justice nominee under (oddly enough) a President Hillaoo Rotten-Clinton, Mike Nifong, to move the sidelines, suppress exculpatory evidence, create a climate of racial unrest and basically adhere to the liberal tenet: “Truth? We can’t handle the truth!”

One of the saddest parts of this railroading travesty of justice is no matter what the outcome, no matter if Nifong is removed from office (and with great hope is given the opportunity so spend quality time with a number of other citizens he provided a state-mandated vacation), if the unbalanced woman who proffered these ridiculous accusations is institutionalized, if all the other race-baiters who have made a cottage industry of this sordid event are sued to the hilt for slander and libel, no matter what, the three students will have the albatross of rape around their necks for the rest of their lives.

No amount of wealth or privilege can remove that mark, even given the fact that they are innocent! Just ask a Kennedy. (‘cept, the innocent part is generally optional and usually rare.)

God Bless, God Speed, Go Heels!
John

Congratulations to you Ms. Coulter for another wonderful commentary regarding the Duke University Lacrosse Players and their terrible character ruining experience related to these phony charges of rape. The D.A. in the case ought to be put up on charges for rushing to judgment and not vetting out the truth of the charges instead of going on the seriousness of the charges and a convenient manner in which there was a rush to judgment. Thank God the D.A. is not the judge jury and hangman because he sure acted like it and now he should be in trouble! In fact, he should be required to serve the sentences and pay damages to the falsely accused players. Their lives are ruined regardless of how they are able to be exonerated. I am outraged with his conduct and the conduct and the reaction of the faculty at Duke University. They deserve a good black eye for their rushing to press all their sanctimonious and holier than thou articles highlighting racial problems and raise tensions that only exist in their minds. Where is the accountability on both sides of this issue?

Ann - As usual, you've hit the bulls eye. When are these bleeding hearts going to stop with their condemnation of these students because they are young, white and wealthy and the accuser was a black female.
Just reading the language that was used by Cathy N. Davidson and Nancy Grace makes one realize that they consider themselves far superior to the rest of us. But, they are the "elites", are they not? Why would we question their opinions or judgements?
Keep on poking those sticks in their liberal balloons. Maybe they will someday come down to earth and see the light.

Thanks Ann...please keep this one going until wiser heads prevail and justice is done. There should be NO charges against these students. I have two sons who have faced discrimination over the years simply because they were white males...not black, not female, not black female?? - don't even bother to apply for that position - we have quotas to fill.

JMG - you are right on target! The district attorney should be held responsible for the lifelong damage done to these young men...by being disbarred and removed from office (I think it's too much to wish for that he would have to serve a little time at the expense of the state, though that would be very fitting in my opinion). The county and university should reimburse the families of the young men falsely accused for all expenses incurred.

If they are guilty of anything, it is that they were indeed foolish, by inviting a stripper to their party - which, I understand is not uncommon among college young men. Hopefully there will be lessons learned from this fiasco and young men in the future will think twice before chancing ruining their reputations for the rest of their lives because of such actions. And cannot the stripper be charged with false accusations or something along that line???

It is a sad day indeed when faculty members, all of whom have more "education" than I, cannot see the forest through the trees. "The Cause" is first and foremost on all liberals minds and I am getting very sick and tired of it!!!!!

To me this serves as a cautionary tale. Anyone who puts themself in the position these kids did is skating on thin ice and shouldn't be shocked if they fall through. Do they deserved jail time? Absolutely not (provided of course they are innocent of the charges). But maybe next time college kids will be a bit more circumspect about trips to the wild side.

To me this serves as a cautionary tale. Anyone who puts themself in the position these kids did is skating on thin ice and shouldn't be shocked if they fall through. Do they deserved jail time? Of course not (provided of course they are innocent of the charges)! But maybe next time college kids will be a bit more circumspect about trips to the wild side.

To me this serves as a cautionary tale. Anyone who puts themself in the position these kids did is skating on thin ice and shouldn't be shocked if they fall through. Do they deserve jail time? Of course not (provided of course they are innocent of the charges)! But maybe next time college kids will be a bit more circumspect about trips to the wild side.

Please skip my first two comments above which contain certain typographical errors. (Can anyone tell me how one removes one's postings?)

Armadillo:

Please let this serve as a cautionary tale.

There is no way to remove a posting once the “post” button is hit. Ideally, one would check for typos, punctuation and other errata prior to committal. On the one hand, it is refreshing to see one care about the way ones thoughts are presented. On the other hand, one must be more circumspect with respect to posting.

All kidding aside, I do not condone nor sanction the actions, even if benign, by the students. Yet, wealth and privilege notwithstanding, college students of any of the popular genders are wont to do, try, experiment with activities while in college that they may regret or find abhorrent later in life. The likelihood of said students being 100% committed to schoolwork at the expense of everything else is virtually nil.

It has been said that we learn by our mistakes, perhaps this will serve a noble purpose to others as you intimate. But, ought that be the case, I would be in Guinness’s Book of World Records for being the smartest man in the world based solely on past indiscretions. (I have no chance for election to public office based on my honesty.)

The true downside is that some college students continue with their antics even after they are elected to Congress from Massachusetts.

God Bless and God Speed
John

There is an excellent book written by the great sociologist Kai Erickson entitled Wayward Puritans. Part of Erickson's premise, which is developed quit well in the book, is that society will invent "demons" in order to delineate the moral "boundaries" in a society if real or legitimate "demons" no longer exist. After the Indians were pushed deep into the woods, the Puritans no longer had a real or true evil to use as an example to express their moral boundaries. So, they invented witchcraft as the new evil or demon to hold up to their society as an example of where morality stops and what will happen if one exceeds the moral or social boundaries. Erickson very convincingly showed how our society tends to continue to do what the Puritans did in order to keep the people apprised of the social and moral boundaries and the consequences of immoral behavior or crossing the "boundaries."

The incident at Duke is a splendid example of Erickson's theory except for the obvious political aspect the Duke situation. Our society has been so void of legitimate and flagrant acts of racism, liberals are starting to invent them similar to how the Puritans invented the witches. The Duke incident is, for the most part, a holding up of a phony or invented case of racism to remind society that this is where one steps over our social boundaries with respect to white boys vis-à-vis poor black girls. In liberal’s warped mind, it doesn't matter if it really happened or not. It just serves as a reminder for white college-aged boys that the moral and social boundaries are still there even though it has been a long time since our society has had a true or legitimate example to show them. Just like the witches, there is absolutely no sympathy for the invented "demons." It doesn't matter if they are innocent or guilty. To the liberals, it has to be periodically done (Example: Tawana Brawley.)

It's ironic that liberals are acting much like the Puritans, a group they would loathe if they still existed.

Dear John:

I appreciate your comments and stand chastised for sloppiness. Don't get me wrong, I'm a huge fan of Ann; I just think the 'moral of the story' has been given short shrift by all commentators in the matter.

All the best! (and here's hoping for the same as I prepare to POST...)

Tom:

You make a most excellent point with: “In a liberal’s warped mind, it doesn’t matter if it happened or not.” That is a perfect extension to the “I tried” mantra of the liberals. To the libs, perception is reality and if they “try,” in their minds, that is their “moral” equivalent of actually “doing.”

Libs are less concerned with truth or accuracy than they are with satisfying their own hate-filled, guilt-driven agenda. This case is a perfect example of that and the Tawana Brawley case is the exact same thing. Excellent point.

Even now their turpitude is evident with Iraq. For months the democrabs have been screaming that we do not have enough troops in Iraq. W decides to send more. Now we have too many and are threatening to block any further deployment.

The lib’s best offense/defense is of the “do you still beat your wife?” ilk. Either way you are dead in the water.

Armadillo:

You made a valid point and I agree, as I suppose most of we “right-thinking” people do. I am heartened that you did not take any offence to my well meaning, and in my mind, humorous comments. If you have read any of my postings prior you would know that is just my acerbic style. God Bless and welcome aboard!

God Bless and God Speed
John

Dear Miss Coulter, Are you in love with me? You beat up my enemies, tickle my ears and give me the low down on these events that I don't get from others. Yours truly,
The United States of America.

Great posts, Jaksavin. I hope "any of the popular genders" isn't copyrighted, because I intend to steal it.

Now, about your tendency to use the nominative case when the objective case is called for ("as I suppose most of we 'right-thinking' people do"), well, tch, tch.

All the best,
Dick

Dick:

Thanks, as always, for your kind words and attempt of a corrigenda with respect to my grasp of our common language. In the absolute strictest sense, mayhap, there is a scintilla of support for your contention. However, in the vulgate, (second definition, not third) one would find mine a more acceptable usage than others. Perhaps it was the good brothers and sisters who made efforts to educate me that my stilted prose evolved to it’s present form. On careful inspection, Dick, one would find my usage is neither nominative nor objective but akin to ablative, as it descriptive of a manner.

Good try, strike two.

Please, Senator Biden, feel free to crib the “any of the popular genders” line, or, for that matter, anything I post. I consider it an honor and only serves to support the “50 monkeys/50 typewriters” postulation.

I do not know where your deli might be. But if your attention to the arts culinary reflect that with respect to the English language, I am sure you are doing a land office business!

God Bless and God Speed
John

Wonderful column, Ann! Bulls-eye!

This entire case is centered on “privileged” whites being accused by a poor black woman who must strip for a living therefore, the whites are guilty.

Since monetary restitution for slavery never amounted to much, it’s now time for retribution instead.

Even though there is absolutely no evidence (the DNA didn’t match, period – no case), it’s the liberal mantra of “it’s the seriousness of the charge – not the evidence (or lack there of) that matters.”

These boys are obviously guilty even though there is no evidence, and yet O. J. is innocent even though his DNA had been found everywhere.

It’s obvious that it’s now OK for poor blacks to falsely accuse whites, ruin their lives, and then not be held accountable.

Not one of the Duke Lacrosse players raped the stripper or is even claiming the sex was consensual - in other words, they REALLY didn’t have sex with that woman. But, let any one of them get caught in something inconsequential during the investigation and they’ll be prosecuted to the hilt. Whites MUST be found guilty of SOMETHING, even though the original charge is completely false!

How come when it comes to the death penalty, liberals are against it using the excuse that an innocent person may be put to death, yet, these boys are innocent based upon the DNA evidence, or lack of DNA evidence to be exact, and no liberal organization is worried or cares if these boys spend 30 innocent years behind bars?

It’s based solely upon the color of everyone's skin – the alleged victim is black and the alleged perpetrators are white – and THAT is discrimination.

Lynn posits some very accurate points and levels some very serious allegations with respect to race, race baiting and outright racism. The sad part is that she is spot on the money.

No one wants to see the guilty walk on a technicality or see the innocent do time. Ours is a good, fair but imperfect system of jurisprudence. We do get it right most of the time but there are times we don’t. Sometimes it is a result of undiscovered exculpatory evidence, recanting a pressured testimony or advances in technology that permits us to right a wrong after the fact.

But is it really as bad as it seems?

Or is it worse?

Is this Tawana Brawley redux? Well, Al $harpton and Je$$e Jack$son were in attendance at some of the rallies of the clan that supported the alleged rape victim. Nifong seems to be going out of his way to pull the curtains closed as he operates the levers and valves of the face of the Great Oz, AKA “Institutional anti-white racism.”

Perhaps someone can explain to me how railroading white, black, brown, yellow, red, plaid, for gosh sakes, people can do ANYTHING to improve race relations.

Or, is that exactly the point?

Linkage: Liberals can not be honest. Liberals can not handle truth. Liberals, as a result of a genetic defect, have to embrace any cause that makes them look like they are kind, caring people, regardless of the intents and actions of those whom they support. (Witness the queue formed by American lawyers rushing to defend Saddam. Is Lynn Stewart is a great American? You do the math.) But, nonetheless, despite the caterwauling of the left that the right are horrid, reprehensible and totally uncaring they are guilty of far more egregious crimes. They are willing to sacrifice any number of white college students in order to express their solidarity and their understanding of the plight of the minority. Right on. Except, they are 100% wrong, as always.

But the linkage comes to fruition in an odd and unexpected way.

By the liberals driving a wedge in the already sizable chasm of race relations, they are stretching the rubber band of acceptance tauter and tauter. And I am almost out of bad metaphors.

There are any number of millions of illegal aliens who have invaded America. The liberals would have us turn a blind eye to this wave of criminals citing that we have too much for ourselves and it is incumbent upon us to share. (Do not get me wrong, a good Christian principle, but not at the expense of breaking the law of the land.) The liberals, inadvertently (or not? Hmmm???), by fanning the flames of racism or reverse racism will eventually cause the good people of America to be more and more (in)sensitive to those whose palette (2nd definition) does not match ours. Could this be a grand canard by the birkenstockistas to rid our country of these criminals by highlighting and exaggerating the differences between races and cultures?

Nah, just kidding. The libs would sooner throw every good American under the bus to give some criminal everything our forebears worked for and achieved.

But, it is food for thought.

In Vino, Veritas.

God Bless, God Speed
John

The problem is that liberal Democrats NEED racism; they NEED scared old people – hell – they NEED a scared populace; they NEED homophobia; they NEED failure; they NEED uneducated people making minimum wage; they NEED open borders because they NEED illegal aliens; they NEED global warming; they NEED high gas prices; they need EVERYTHING that is divisive - otherwise, they have nothing to talk about and nothing they can act like they are actually trying to fix - over 20-30 years I might add. They NEED a dependent and scared society.

They need constant and unending problems so they have an excuse to throw more of the taxpayer’s hard earned money at these problems knowing darn well that that is not the solution – which keeps the problems alive and well and is an excuse to raise your taxes.

Why haven’t we won the supposed “war on poverty”? Or, is it that we have? I’ll bet that the American poor persons’ dogs are eating better and are treated better than what the people of Iraq had under Saddam. Yet, according to liberal Democrats, the Iraqi people were better off under Saddam (rape rooms, torture rooms, intermittent water and electricity, no justice and mass murder was much better than constant running water and electricity, no rape and torture rooms, a justice system – go figure).

Notice we haven’t heard anything about Social Security as of late. This was an issue all through the 1980’s, the 1990’s and early 2000.

All of a sudden, with no change to the program at all, it’s no longer an issue. Liberal Democrats accused Republicans of trying to scare old people (which is exactly what the liberal Democrats were doing, not the Republicans), that there really was NO problem with Soc-Security (the exact opposite of what they spouted all through the 80’s and 90’s during every election for 20 years) and all Republicans were trying to do was take Social Security away from senior citizens by privatizing it so they would starve to death.

That’s because we had a Republican president that was actually going to solve the issue for once and for all.

Mark my words. The Social Security issue is going to re-surface because liberal Democrats are going to need to scare grandma and grandpa again to ensure their votes in the next presidential election.

Since liberals have no values, no substance, no beliefs, no plan, no desire and no intention of fixing or solving anything, they need divisiveness. They need warring factions. Even where there aren’t any, they manufacture something.

If anyone were to ever compile what liberals are for and what they are against, all you would see are inconsistencies, flip-flops, ambiguous positions, and flat out lies to keep people scared and warring with each other.

Liberal Democrats supposedly want lower gas prices for the hurting middle-class and poor families (and don’t forget “the children”) but, according to them, higher gas prices would stop people from driving so much and stem global warming. So, which is it?

We weren’t supposed to build the Alaskan pipeline because it would endanger the caribou and cause environmental damage yet no environmental damage has occurred and the caribou are thriving due to the warmth of the pipeline, which in turn is causing more vegetation. The caribou flock to the pipeline for food.

If we ever had a “kumbaya” society, liberal Democrats would disappear and they know it. This is why they need to keep racism and every other “ism” and phobia alive and well yet make everyone believe they are after “kumbaya”.

Lynn

Truly, how do you really feel? Don’t hold back now!

You are reading my mind, or at least previous posts, when you make such allegations. Of course you are spot on and even a cursory look at the Democrat Class of ’06’s election promises and actions of the “First 100 Hours” only serves to expose their mendacity.

(BTW, “100 Hours?” For some reason I would have expected them to be in a row, not an hour here and an hour there. It is the 15th, for goodness sake, and they are still on their 100-hour timing. Note to Pelosi, Reid and others: you were elected for 2 or 6 years. Despite how you try to run the clock for 100 hours, that will not change your elected terms.)

Keep an eye on these buggers, you have not even seen the beginning of the evil they will attempt to foist on us!

God Bless and God Speed
John

John,

"Truly, how do you really feel? Don’t hold back now!"

ROTFLMAO!!!! (Rolling On The Floor Laughing My Ass Off - for those that don't know the IM short cut!)

In appreciation for interviews I used to do at a company I worked for (no one liked doing interviews so it was hard to find people who would actually do them and take them seriously), the company took the few of us out to dinner in appreciation and gave each of us a goofy gift. Mine was a book called Learn How To Speak Your Mind (or something like that). They put a post-it note on it that said, "Lynn, tell us what you REALLY think!!!" It was hysterical!

I've never been accused of being vague!

Lynn

Nifong was apparantly hoping for a nitwit trial judge and a jury of intellectually undernourished blacks to compensate for the weakness of his case.

If Nifong tried to hide the DNA evidence his expert revealed to him, as was reported, he should be severely repremanded by the judge and the bar. If the judge is too weak to demand respect for the system, he should retire and become a shoe salesman.

John, I suffered a full 30 minutes, thinking you were accusing me of being a closet liberal before I remembered the ancient source of your Biden/plagarism reference. Then I L'd OL. If the good senator gets past IA/NH, I shall remember to re-proliferate this entertaining bit of history right along with that delectible deductible-hair-transplant item.

Almost as superannuated is my recollection of the ablative case, which I was sure was used only in Latin. But scintilla, posh...I claim a hunnerd percent: "Most" is the subject, "we" (should be "us") is the object of the preposition "of", and school's out. The brothers and sisters should have taught diagramming, as the public school teachers did in River City, Iowa. All the best,

Dick

______________________________________________

Reprobate: When you administer a knee in the groin, the other guy gets to return a poke in the eye. Then what? A rabbit punch? Knives?

Get it? Your nauseating ad hominem "jury of intellectually undernourished blacks" was so disgusting that it was difficult to take seriously anything you wrote thereafter.

Dick:

Glad you got my reference. It has been said that one must know one’s audience when floating such items. I dare say I am surprised it took you 30 minutes to suss it. Although, I all fairness, there is hardly a high-profile politician that does not have a bugbear, bete noire or Chappaquidick in their public/private lives. Biden just makes such an easy target of himself.

With respect to things Latin, you are correct that one would find the ablative case used in that language. While I am not sure that it is reserved for Latin only you are correct that it is not used in English. (While I think about it, declension is not, with thanks, employed in English either.)

Dick, the good sisters did, in fact, teach diagramming and parsing of sentences. But in my near dotage I posit that I have succumbed to the debilitating effects of “Kelly Bundy Syndrome.” Your “we/us” contention is temporarily obfuscated by other musings now residing in my once formidable gray matter.

I do enjoy your ripostes and do give me pause to reflect on how poorly many Americans use/abuse our language. As the maven you are, I defer. But in the interest of fairness and considering the competition, “scrotum non bustum.” LOL!

God Bless and God Speed
John

In case you have not been following the goings on of the fair, impartial, bi-partisan, just a bunch o’swells that have now taken the car keys to the government and are now hanging out at the 7-11 looking for someone to buy them beer, the Senate and to a lesser degree, the House, seem to be running a fire sale on the 1st Amendment.

The “McCain-Feingold Bill” was the shot across the bow of freedom of speech. Now, S-1 threatens all manners of speech. Do not be fooled that this bill. It is a canard purportedly to eliminate or mitigate earmarks, force disclosure of “lobbyists” and similar actions. It’s net result it that is could/would prohibit PACS, groups, organizations, clubs, gatherings, synods, symposia and in some cases individual private citizens from contacting their elected representatives in the attempt to make known their views on various and sundry legislation without severe constraints.

Not to be outdone, well-known also-ran for the top seat, Dennis Kucinich, is lobbying, ironically enough, to have the Fairness Doctrine reinstated. (If you are not familiar with this act, please do yourself a favor and look into it.)

This troika is putting the likes of all of us in great jeopardy with respect to speaking our minds. “LynnJG” would no longer be allowed to speak her mind. “Reprobate” would be prohibited from making remarks that others find offensive. “Dick’s Deli” and I would have to consider the vagaries of languages other than English and Latin with which we could entertain ourselves with our persiflage. But, if there were to be a bright side, “kevind” would need be countered on his every remark.

My friends and not, please take a moment and look into this bill. It is a travesty and even should it pass it most likely would be overturned by the Supremes. However, as “McC-F” was not, I would not assume that it would be a slam-dunk.

While you have the ability, I urge, exhort, beg you to become familiar with this slap across the face of every American and contact your senator to DEMAND that this bill is defeated!

God Bless and God Speed
John

John,

Hey, I like that!

From now on, whenever freedom of speech is being further restricted, we can now say "we're being McC-F'd" or “we’re being fed McC-F burgers”!

I wonder if McDonald's would want royalties!!!

By the way, I'm glad you are running out of bad metaphors. You haven't restocked have you?

Lynn

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

URL:
Remember me? YesNo

Comments: