The Dish

An insightful letter to Michigan State University’s campus newspaper on racial preferences in academia:

I have two younger brothers. One is white, related to me by blood, and the other is Guatemalan, related to me by adoption. Both were raised in the same house, by the same parents, taught the same morals and values, and both are exceptionally bright. They have always been treated equally. However, when they try to get into college, my Guatemalan brother will have a leg-up over my white brother because his skin is brown…

Striking home, no? What if the white kid was given the advantage? Would any “liberal” hackles rise?

Some feedback:

“The only time I was ever really intimidated in class for my political beliefs, though, was in a Spanish class. The professor told us that there are no more dictators in Latin America. When I asked about Castro, I was informed that you cannot take the word of the defectors; they are the worms who want to live off the labor of others rather than having solidarity with the workers. What about the persecution of homosexuals? Well, we persecute homosexuals in the US too. When he asked what I wanted to do with my degree, I told him I was considering joining the Air Force. The next class began with him telling how disappointed he was in one of his students who had gone into the Army a few years earlier, supporting rather than criticizing the foreign policy of our horrible government. I have never been so eager for a term to end. I know he was the exception, but that doesn’t excuse it.”

Another case, this time pure misandry:

“From 1983-1987 I was a graduate student in European History at the Univ. of Mass. I was, very nearly, the lone ‘conservative’ and witnessed then and afterwards dozens of instances of left wing bias both in teaching and in the hiring of teachers for the Academy. The one that stands out, I suppose for humorous reasons, is the following: I had a good friend who was taking a class in the Women’s History department on advertising and women. I sat in quietly during one of the classes and noticed that it was a fairly well-attended class of around 25 women and one man (not including me.) It was about 2/3rds of the way through the semester and they were thick in the process of presenting to the class their research projects for the semester. The teacher was scheduling these for the next few sessions and she would call on each student by name and schedule their day to present. Eventually, she got to the lone male in the class at which point she asked … ‘What is your name again?'”

Ouch. This one struck a nerve as well:

“I’m a doctoral student in English Literature at a large southeastern University, and I also work as a research assistant for a professor who works in a rather trendy area in Theory. In a welcome change, my professor asked me last week to read a biography about apartheid South Africa and help her discuss the book with one of her undergraduate students. The notion arose in our discussion that once peoples previously separated by fear and stereotypes actually met individually, they were often able to put aside these fears. As an example, my professor put forward the abstract idea of meeting Republicans and trying to understand them as people. Misreading the consternation on my face, she quickly noted that she didn’t personally know any Republicans and, anyway, there could be NO justifiable excuse for being a Republican. Now, this professor is a lovely and amiable person, but she felt more than comfortable making this comparison in front of two students whose political leanings she assumed were her own. Considering our discussion of apartheid, I said nothing but savored the delicious irony all day.”

But I’m sure all these institutions are dedicated to the cause of “diversity.” If only they had a clue what it really means.

GOOD NEWS ON HIV: A promising new avenue for eradicating the virus entirely emerges – thanks to U.S. research. And infection rates in San Francisco are stable and even declining somewhat – yet again. No vast new epidemic, at least so far as we can tell.

I cannot verify the authenticity of the letter from al Qaeda murderer Abu Musab al-Zarkawi. But most authorities regard it as legit. If you doubt that we have made real progress in the war on terror, if you buy the idiocy that tackling Saddam somehow made tackling al Qaeda harder, then read this document. It’s alternately terrifying and deeply encouraging. We are winning this war. And only we can choose to lose it.

“It isn’t just Duke. I just wanted to pass along this anecdote from my days attending Indiana University. It was the fall semester of 1994 and it was also the evening of the midterm elections which brought the Republicans to majority status in the House. My prof strolled into class (a class on the Beatles) and began to spew left wing hate in all directions. He said he could not belive a country was so naive as to elect the Nazis (how I tire of this comparison) to head the House of Representatives. Then, as an aside, he smiled and winked at the class, and said, “well, at least I know no one in here contributed to the end of America as we know it”. I wanted to stand up and scream, “I did!! I am bringing about a revolution in American governance and I am damn proud of it”. But, feeling a little ostracized, I did not. I am not one who normally gets “offended” by other people and the things they say but, I have to say I was on this occasion.” Readers are hereby invited to send in any reminiscences – past or present – of blatant professorial political bias in today’s academia. Not just expressions of opinion, but attempts to intimidate or exclude opposing opinions.

She’s fine, looking somewhat pleased with herself. One of the “incidents of marriage” should surely be the joint cleaning up after sick pets or children. I second this reader sentiment:

“Beagles are the exemplars of ‘clever but not smart.’ Although grad students may compete for that title…”

Quite.

They’re trimming the segment. I’m trimmed. Reliable Sources was a little surreal. We had to discuss why we won’t mention the story that we weren’t discussing.

Rough night. Friends of ours – a couple from Chicago – were visiting and dropped by to leave their bags while we went to dinner. It’s Valentine’s Day and so a large amount of chocolate was brought and left in a bag on the floor. We have a beagle. You can fill in the rest. When we got back, there were wrappers all over the apartment, beautiful Godiva boxes ripped open, small little brown paper cups strewn on the bed. Major score for the beagle. But horrifyingly dangerous. The beagle – she’s called Dusty – was cowering and looking really, really guilty. Animal hospital? I took her out, got some emissions, gave her huge amounts of water and hoped for the best. A little while later, the puking began. Chocolate doggy-puke. Projectile vomited all over the place – couch, chairs, etc etc. I was relieved, actually. Probably saved Dusty’s life. But we were up all night. So if I’m a bit cranky today, give me a pass.

John Ellis gets it pretty much right about the Kerry story:

Let’s say this is a story about Colin Powell. Let’s say that there is a woman who has approached numerous media organizations and every Republican political opponent of Mr. Powell’s with a story. The story is that her “best friend” or her “close friend” (who used to be a reporter with the AP and at some point worked for Mr. Powell) had an affair with Mr. Powell and was shipped off to Africa when Mr. Powell decided to run for President. What is known about the source of this information is that she has a major axe to grind; she hates Powell. She really, really hates him. She is grinding the Mother of All Axes.
Publish her story or not?
The answer from “mainstream media” so far: “No.”
Good decision: “yes.”

Maybe this will be the first time that a true firewall is established between the web, the Brits and the rest of the media. Maybe I’m wrong and this won’t break out as a major story. That in itself would be a media milestone. (On the other hand, Drudge got 15 million hits in the past 24 hours – twice his normal traffic.) Can we all pretend we didn’t hear this and carry on as normal?

Kerry denies it on Imus. Why would he do that if it were true? He can’t be suicidal. Right now, you have to assume there is no truth to this. So I will. Meanwhile, the question of whether I’ve been “Moby’ed” arises. Was that highly polished email I received and posted yesterday, positing the possibility of a Republican plot … a plant? Jonah writes about a strategy openly discussed by Moby (one of my favorite musicians but a Bush-hater). Here’s what the techno-wizard told the Daily News:

“No one’s talking about how to keep the other side home on Election Day,” Moby tells us. “It’s a lot easier than you think and it doesn’t cost that much. This election can be won by 200,000 votes.”
Moby suggests that it’s possible to seed doubt among Bush’s far-right supporters on the Web.
“You target his natural constituencies,” says the Grammy-nominated techno-wizard. “For example, you can go on all the pro-life chat rooms and say you’re an outraged right-wing voter and that you know that George Bush drove an ex-girlfriend to an abortion clinic and paid for her to get an abortion.
“Then you go to an anti-immigration Web site chat room and ask, ‘What’s all this about George Bush proposing amnesty for illegal aliens?'”

So was I Mobyed? The email writer wrote me back again in the middle of the night – 4.57 am – to deny any wrongdoing. Here’s the text:

Dear Andrew,

I want to thank you for the compliment you paid me by posting my letter on your site, though in light of the day’s developments, including your brief exchange with Jonah Goldberg, I find myself regretting the decision to write it. It seems I did, indeed, jump the gun when I presumed the source of the rumor to be Republican. (It was a natural enough assumption, given that Drudge broke the story, but premature nonetheless.) At this point, I suppose I shall simply wait and see how the situation progresses.

As to your concerns that my letter may have been a plant and that I may be a Democratic activist in disguise, rest assured that I am not. I may be growing increasingly disenchanted with the Republican party, but if I decide to withdraw my support from them in November, I will likely just remain at home rather than transfer it to any of the lackluster crop of Democrats currently on offer.
In any event, I hope my earlier email did not cause you any unwarrented discomfort vis-a-vis your colleagues, and I thank you again for giving a wider voice to my concerns.

Sincerely,

Paul

It’s Krugman! Only kidding. Actually, there’s a HUGE qestion-mark hanging over this email, and that is its email address. I should have worried about that before. It’s from “disillusioned_conservative@xxxx.com.” (I’m not giving out a person’s email address in full. The writer could still feasibly be genuine; and people are innocent till proven guilty.) But how many people have an email address that reflects exactly the sentiments of one particular email? It is impossible to verify all letters. My general view is that if they make good points, I couldn’t care less who sent them. And then there’s human nature. I think I was Mobyed.