Friday, November 30, 2007


I was going to write about today's NY Daily Snooze double-page spread on the GOP YouTube debate, which didn't mention the "plant" situation once (the Post was sold out at two stores). Instead, I'm publishing this rambling rant, on the wider story.

For those who don't know, more than 4 of the question videos that CNN selected were from open supporters of Democratic candidates, and the story's still breaking. One, Keith H. Kerr, is on Hillary's LGBT steering committee in California. He was flown into CNN studios, to ask follow-up questions. He looks like a "plant," but it's growing into what Michelle Malkin calls "foliage." (Read her lead story for all the updated details)

Edwards, Obama, and Richardson supporters also were selected, as evidenced in their own YouTube profiles, in some cases. One guy participated in the Democratic YouTube debate, so they had to know his political affiliation. We're talking overwhelming bias, that can't be called a "random oversight." Why would CNN have Democrats asking questions of candidates in a Republican primary race; especially committed supporters of specific Democratic candidates?

I hate to digress, but didn't all of the Dem candidates boycott the Fox News/ Congressional Black Caucus debate, under the flimsy excuse of "political" bias? What if CNN had been found to have Romney, Giuliani, and McCain supporters' questions asked of the Dems, back in the July YouTube debate? Would this be a bigger story, and wouldn't heads roll at CNN? These are fair questions.

I've read alot of commentary about "who knew what," most of it absolving Anderson Cooper. I agree with that, but the producers of this debate should be held to account, and how these people got selected should be exposed. This is not asking too much, in light of the sensitivity over media "bias" these days.

I only watched a few minutes of the debate, but the people I saw seemed to be "extreme" right wingers. I saw a guy with a gun, who asked what kind of guns the candidates own! I have to admit I laughed out loud, but what kind of question is that, for a presidential primary debate? CNN has proved again how "in the tank" they are for the Democrat/liberal political agenda, with their selection of video questions.

CNN does no service to the Dems, with overt support like this. People are skeptical of the media already, and CNN is just playing into this storyline. As I listen to, and read partisan leftists "rage on" about Fox News, the NY Post, and the Daily Sun, among other News Corp. media, I have to laugh. All that liberal drivel is now biting CNN in the butt, as they get caught exhibiting bias to a higher degree than they often accuse Fox News of.

The facts are that the NY Post blasts Republicans as often as Dems, proportionately, when they screw up; there are just more Dems to bash in NY. Further, Fox News asked tough questions of the Republicans, when they hosted debates. Finally, Bush gets raked over the coals as much as anyone, though he gets praise for his accomplishents, from both of these "fair and balanced" news outlets, even in their editorial and analysis pieces.

As for CNN, Glenn Beck should be in charge of their whole network, if they want to turn their overall ratings around. He was honest enough to interview Michelle Malkin about this controversy, which brings up a final question: Is it political bias, or bias against integrity and honesty, that keeps Glenn on CNN "Headline News" channel, instead of CNN?

Maybe both.

Monday, November 26, 2007

ACLU Opposes Firefighters' Reporting Terrorism Suspicions

Hat tip to STOP THE ACLU and Weasel Zippers.

What to make of this?

WASHINGTON (AP)Firefighters in major cities are being trained to take on a new role as lookouts for terrorism, raising concerns of eroding their standing as American icons and infringing on people’s privacy.

Unlike police, firefighters and emergency medical personnel don’t need warrants to access hundreds of thousands of homes and buildings each year, putting them in a position to spot behavior that could indicate terrorist activity or planning.

But there are fears that they could lose the faith of a skeptical public by becoming the eyes of the government, looking for suspicious items such as building blueprints or bomb-making manuals or materials.

The American Civil Liberties Union says using firefighters to gather intelligence is another step in that direction. Mike German, a former FBI agent who is now national security policy counsel to the ACLU, said the concept is dangerously close to the Bush administration’s 2002 proposal to have workers with access to private homes — such as postal carriers and telephone repairmen — report suspicious behavior to the FBI.

"Americans universally abhorred that idea," German said. (we do?- ed.)

One would hope that anyone who sees something suspicious would alert the authorities. Of course, the ACLU doesn’t see it that way. I am reminded of the rapper that said he wouldn’t rat out a terrorist, even if he lived next door. It would conflict with his “don’t snitch” philosophy. Disgraceful.

Let's get one thing clear: even the ACLU acknowledges that firemen, or any official with "warrantless" access to a person's home must report any criminal activity they witness. They are also required to report any hazardous or unsafe conditions. Would training them to be alert for known terrorist tools and M.O. be a bad thing?

Still, read the whole AP piece. It has more details about the sharing of intelligence between FD's and the feds; why it is already going on, and probably will expand. Take that, ACLU.

Wednesday, November 21, 2007


Gov. Spitzer has a serious credibility problem permeating the core of his administration, beyond the looming "dirty tricks" scandal. This problem stems from the attitude he instills in his appointees, and how "hands on" he manages their bullying tactics. I will relate three stories that illustrate either a lack of control over his administration, or direct control over shameful tactics, and policies.

The same day that Spitzer flipped on his license plan for illegals, he killed a proposed tax on internet sales in NYS, that would have gone into effect just in time for Christmas shopping season. The interesting thing was that it hadn't been publicly "proposed" anywhere, until they announced it's cancellation. Spitzer now claims that he just found out about the tax, and cancelled it. The NY Post has two Op-eds that are worth excerpting. First, from "The Grinch & the Gov."

Alice in Wonderland has nothing on Eliot in Albany: The latest Spitzer administration trip down the rabbit hole comes courtesy of state Budget Director Paul Francis.

Francis is the putative author of the Grinch tax - a bizarre proposal intended to impose new Internet-shopping taxes just in time for the Christmas rush.

Even the astonishingly tone-deaf Gov. Spitzer seems to have recognized the PR disaster lurking in that little gem, for it died a swift death shortly after news of it leaked to The New York Sun.

But the Grinch tax wasn't a tax at all, complains Francis: "It's only a tax increase to the person who is paying."

Could he possibly believe that?

Does Spitzer believe that?

Or maybe Spitzer wasn't in on the scheme. Francis also told the newspaper that the Grinch tax was so secret the governor wasn't even told about it.

Now, this is the same governor who says he wasn't apprised of the plot to sic the State Police on Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno - so, we suppose, anything's possible.

If so, though, it's a little unsettling to learn that the state budget director - in the final analysis, an unelected numbers-cruncher - feels free to hit New Yorkers with new taxes without telling the boss.

Or anybody else, so it seems.

The second explores wider tax policy, and another Spitzer appointee. It's titled "The Tax Man Grabbeth":

Gov. Spitzer's Grinch Tax, floated and withdrawn in a trice last week, raised some disconcerting questions:

* Just who is making policy at the state tax department?

* What other mischievous schemes are overzealous underlings in his adminstration plotting for New Yorkers?

* What does the Grinch Tax have in common with the Yankees' Derek Jeter?

The answer to that last question may well be one Robert Plattner - an Albany lawyer and a deputy commissioner at Spitzer's Department of Taxation and Finance who apparently has dedicated himself to scooping up every last penny Albany thinks it has coming...

...Plattner may not be the fellow who ginned up the Grinch Tax, or who actually put the arm on Jeter - but it's pretty clear that he's a key intellectual force behind a super-charged collection policy.

According to the publication State Tax Notes, Plattner announced that Albany would launch a tax "compliance campaign," with "increased enforcement."

He said the state was considering "a more expansive approach" for both corporate-income and sales taxes.

Indeed, it turns out that Plattner - the author of several New York tax handbooks - has long boosted a dubious interpretation of "use tax" laws, like the one at the heart of the Grinch Tax.

He knew he was pushing the envelope: "One strategy," he said - in an item from 2003 posted at - is "extending" states' use-tax authority "to the outer boundary of existing constitutional limitations." (Translation: Really never give a sucker an even break - ever!)

Plattner went on to call for stretching the "definition of 'independent sales representatives' " to include Web sites that direct shoppers to online retailers, like Those retailers would then have to collect taxes.

Which is just how the Grinch Tax would've worked.

I think I can safely say that Gov. Spitzer supported this idea, which would have hit every NY'er shopping online, at a time when everyone is trying to stretch their personal budgets. The "lack of knowledge of it" excuse smacks of clear deceit, after reading the second excerpt. Apparently, he prefers an air of ignorance to embracing unpopular policies his own people came up with. This goes to an old Rush quote, "Democrats can't be who they are, and get elected." They always run for cover when their agenda is exposed.

There is also Spitzer's problem with temperment, which has bled down into his administration to an amazing degree. This is not a good thing, and is a huge factor in his current situation. Spitzer's people treat any opposition harshly, as shown in this article, 'Eliot's Bully' Made Threat: Insider:

A top aide to Gov. Spitzer involved in the Dirty Tricks Scandal angrily threatened to "professionally kill" a top utility executive for opposing the governor's energy policies, sources have told The Post.

Spitzer Policy Director Peter Pope said he was "going to kill" Gavin Donohue, the head of the Independent Power Producers of New York, an association of private energy companies, in a bitter clash early last summer over the governor's efforts to block the construction of nuclear-power plants and more than two "clean coal" plants in the state, the sources said.

"He was really threatening Gavin. It was unbelievable. It was shocking," said one of the state's best-known lobbyists.

"Pope was screaming and threatening to get him fired with his bosses and jabbing his finger in Donohue's face," added another source, who claimed Pope had also threatened several lobbyists over policy disagreements.

"He was yelling at Gavin, 'You're working against us! You're trying to hurt us! You have to pressure [Senate Majority Leader Joseph] Bruno to get with us on this!'

"When Gavin tried to explain why he opposed the governor's plan, Pope said he didn't want to know about the substance of the issue. He just wanted to close down [pass] the governor's bill," the source continued.

"I have never been treated so unprofessionally in my whole life," he told associates.

Donohue kept detailed, written notes of the clash, one associate said. Contacted by The Post, Donohue said he'd had "intense negotiations" with Pope. But when asked whether he had been threatened, he responded, "I have no comment."

Again, who is the man pulling this guy Peter Pope's strings? Gov. "Steamroller" Spitzer. It's tough to keep up with all of the negative stories coming out, since he came out with his illegal license plan. As I mentioned in several posts and comments, the greater attention he brought to himself did little to distract people from his underlying serious flaws and scandals. Rather, it has brought on more scrutiny.

A parting gift, from PAGE SIX:

Give Us Pataki!

November 18, 2007 -- EVEN in the staunchly Democratic bastion of the West Village, there's no love for Eliot Spitzer. Former Gov. George Pataki, who's now with environmental consulting firm Pataki-Cahill, was celebrating wife Libby's birthday at the Waverly Inn last week when he was greeted by admirers. Pataki, leaving the restaurant with his former economic-development chief Charles Gargano and a crowd of family friends, was approached by a man on the street who started shouting, "Bring Pataki back, Spitzer sucks." A spy laughed, "This went on for like 15 minutes."

To quote Cindy Adams: "Only in New York, kiddies. Only in New York."

PS: I still dislike PaTAXi more than Spitzer, for now. He was supposed to be a Republican, not a sellout.

How Gov. Spitzer Was Elected, and How It's Coming Back To Haunt Him

I was recently asked a few questions about Gov. Spitzer: How was he elected by such a large margin? What was his platform? What was his reputation in NY before becoming Govenor?

The answers to all of these are intertwined, but I'll try to answer them with some context here. Spitzer, as the NYS Att'y Gen., was known as "the sheriff of Wall St." He "prosecuted" many high-profile CEO's and corporations, also making some forays into the richly corrupt area of NYS Medicaid fraud. I put "prosecuted" in quotation marks, because of the lesser-known stories, one of which has resurfaced of late. Spitzer is being hit with a lawsuit for $75 million, accusing the former AG with fraudulent prosecution. Here's an excerpt from Alex Ginsberg, reporting in the NY Post:

The lawsuit, filed last week in Brooklyn federal court, charges that Spitzer, who in 2006 was the attorney general and the Democratic front-runner in the primary battle for governor, was getting slammed as being soft on Medicaid fraud - and found a convenient fall guy.

Read the whole article for the particulars, but this was typical of Spitzer's style as AG. Often, he made decisions based on media exposure, instead of the facts, or law. What he did on Wall St. was called a "shakedown," by some, with good reason. It was less costly for many of these firms to settle than fight in court. He aslo strangely overlooked some high profile CEO's (Bob Rubin of Citibank, for one), prosecuting the lower-level employees instead. These were the unreported storylines, unless you're a regular NY Post reader (the Wall St. Jornal editorial page was another exception).

On the other hand...

It was a NYers dream come true, if you watched the MSM, or read the NY Times or NY Daily News. He made a national reputation as an anti-corporate crusader, and became very popular with not just rank-and-file Democrats, but many disaffected Republicans in NYS. He ran on this slogan: "Day one, everything changes," and promised to end "pay for play" politics.

This fed into many people's hope that he would turn his zealous prosecutorial skills on the pit of corruption that is Albany. It overrode all other issues of his "platform," because every NY pol, of either party, gives "lip service" to the typical liberal issues. After three terms, it was Republican Governor Pataki's turn to be mired in corruption, so deep that he flirted with running for President, while gracefully declining to run for re-election. This is apparently becoming a tradition in NY, with Spitzer replacing Pataki as "coming in on a white horse," much as Pataki did when he beat Democrat Gov. Cuomo twelve years earlier.

Alas, it's not the Governor's job to clean up the system that got him elected. The dashing of those hopes explains his unprecedented crashing poll numbers. Gov. Spitzer is a complicated man, or at least has complicated scandals to explain. He used the media in his political quest for the governorship, and made alot of enemies along the way. This lawsuit, while a minor story now, highlights how the people he stepped on can return the favor. The media may help destroy him, as well, if it sells. I hope this answers the three questions, with some context.

PS: It's important to note that NY is deep "blue" country, with Dems outnumbering the GOP signifigantly. The NY Republican party was (and still is) pretty much a "shadow organization," among rank-and-file Republicans, which made them easy pickings for Spitzer's media machine.

Gideons Keep Out of North Carolina’s Elementary Schools!

Crossposted from Stop the ACLU! Written by Jay

Gideons Keep Out of North Carolina’s Elementary Schools!

A North Carolina school district is putting an end to the donations of Bibles to elementary school kids.

The Cumberland County school system says state law limits the practice strictly to high schools and has issued instructions banning it at 54 elementary schools in the metro Fayetteville area.

The move comes after a parent complained about the stack of Bibles left in her son’s classroom earlier this month. The same parent filed a complaint with the American Civil Liberties Union.

The Fayetteville Observer said that while a 1998 court decision allows outside groups to make Bibles available to high school students, the ACLU contends it doesn’t apply to elementary kids who might see the practice as promoting Christianity over other religions.

The Bibles came from the Gideons, the group best known for supplying Bibles to hotel rooms.

Gideons be warned. The ACLU are likely to jail you if you try to share the gospel to kids. What? You thought the Constitution protected freedom of religion? Not according to the ACLU’s version. Maybe you should try pro-Palestian, or pro-Communist propaganda. Or maybe install some footbaths to accomadate Muslims. The ACLU seem to think these are protected speech.

The ACLU have a long history of going after the Gideons, but talk about splitting hairs. I thought their argument was based on public schools being government funded. Whats the difference between Elementary and High Schools on that basis? A biased loophole is all. Once again the ACLU lives up to its reputation as America’s number one religious censor.

Conservative Belle:

I wonder if parents of an elementary school student in NC could sue the state now and claim there is age discrimination by only allowing Bibles for teenagers. They seemed to be the ones now discriminated against. The ACLU is once again picking and choosing their ridiculous battles.

Lobo emails this article on it as well and says:

“The ACLU also argued that the case did not support Bible distribution in elementary schools. >>>Those students are impressionable<<< and would likely think that the school was promoting the Bible by making it available, said Katherine Lewis Parker, the legal director for the ACLU of North Carolina."

Is the ACLU admitting that students are "impessionable" when it comes to the Bible but NOT when it involves teaching and advocating Islam in our schools? Or homosexuality? etc.

Friday, November 16, 2007

The Arafat Legacy (of Death) Continues...

Crossposted, with permission, from Sweet Spirits of Ammonia, by BobG:

Yasser Arafat's legacy of death is still bearing its rotten fruit in the Middle East. At a rally in Gaza City to commemorate his death, at least six have died from gunfire.

The opponents are the secular Fatah and Isalmist Hamas. Hamas has banned opposition rallies since its takeover of Gaza. However, stopping a ceremony to honor Arafat would not have been possible. So great is the Palestinian worship of this devil's spawn, it crosses all factions.

The demonstration became chaotic as Hamas security began shooting. Hamas officials said they fired toward Fatah protesters for throwing stones at the security compounds. Others said the shots were fired when the crowd began taunting Hamas security forces, accusing them of serving the interests of Shia ruled Iran. The crowd chanted the word "Shia" repeatedly. That's enough to get you shot by Isalmomaniacs.

And we want these lunatics to have their own country?

UPDATE: According to The Jerusalem Post there are seven dead, eighty five wounded and 400 arrested.

Wednesday, November 14, 2007

Gov. Spitzer Update: Crossing Hillary, Backtracking, and the Return of Spygate

It's been awhile since I updated everyone on my Governor, Eliot Spitzer. His "illegal license" plan has been causing quite a stir in the democratic primary race, but that's all been in the news. My last Spitzer post was about his retaliation against his political opponents, in the form of funding cuts to the poor. He's been busy as a bee since then, and not all of it has been widely reported.

Gov. Spitzer was reeling from the Spygate scandal, when he released his policy. It caught many of his political allies off guard, including Hillary Clinton, showing it for the political distraction ploy it was. It did distract the media, but became too big a story, focusing much negative attention on Spitzer, from both sides of the political aisle. One can only guess how Hillary's campaign expressed their displeasure.

The story, as all NY political dramas do, gets more convoluted. Spitzer is backtracking on the license policy, and one of his former top aides may have lied under oath in the Spygate investigation. His poll numbers continue to plummet, and people are pushing NYC Mayor Bloomberg to run against him, in 3 years (if the Gov. lasts that long in office).

Here's a roundup of stories, with the particulars, from the NY POST. I start from the earliest, so look at the bottom for the latest installments, and this only scratches the surface of their Spitzer archive. (link to complete index here)


November 2, 2007 - For the first time, Mayor Bloomberg yesterday flatly came out against Gov. Spitzer's plan to allow legal immigrants to obtain driver's licenses - as Hillary Rodham Clinton took fire from both...more


November 2, 2007 - THE ISSUE: Sen. Clinton's refusal to commit to a position on granting driver's licenses to illegals. This week's debate spelled trouble for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton as her continual...more


November 3, 2007 - WASHINGTON - In a pair of new Web ads, Hillary Rodham Clinton came under searing attack from rivals in both parties yesterday over her slippery position on whether to give driver's licenses to...more


November 5, 2007 - SOMBER Democrats are privately conced ing that Gov. Spitzer's controversial plan to give drivers' licenses to illegal aliens has done the impossible by reviving New York's long-moribund...more


November 7, 2007 - Upstate Republicans yesterday got an electoral lift from Gov. Spitzer's controversial plan to allow illegal immigrants to obtain driver's licenses. But the issue played a lesser role on Long...more


November 7, 2007 - ALBANY - One of the state's most prominent political figures confirmed yesterday that a top aide to Mayor Bloomberg had talked with a leading Republican strategist about Hizzoner running for...more


November 9, 2007 - ALBANY - Gov. Spitzer yesterday filed legal papers to quash subpoenas issued by a state Senate committee for documents pertaining to the Dirty Tricks Scandal. In exerting executive privilege, the...more


November 10, 2007 - ALBANY - The lawyer for the one-time aide to Gov. Spitzer at the center of the Dirty Tricks Scandal abruptly dropped his client yesterday as the Albany district attorney began a probe for possible...more


November 10, 2007 - Embattled Gov. Spitzer yesterday for the first time pointedly refused to rule out shelving his controversial plan to allow illegal aliens to obtain driver's licenses. Speaking to reporters in...more


November 12, 2007 - Gov. Spitzer's former communications di rector, Darren Dopp, asked another Spitzer aide to lie about the origins of the Dirty Tricks Scandal - including the governor's own allegedly extensive...more


November 13, 2007 - ALBANY - Albany District Attorney David Soares will interview a top aide to Gov. Spitzer later this week about the circumstances under which the aide and two officials helped prepare a sworn...more

This concludes my update on Gov. Eliot Spitzer. Now, I'll give a brief summary of the man that around 70 percent of NY'ers voted for. He is a typical failed politician, having made too many enemies on his way up. He seems to have an abrasive personality, even for a politician. It has all come back to haunt him. When NY'ers turn against someone the way they have with Spitzer, other political knives come out. "Et tu, Hillary?" Maybe, but no-one will ever know. "wink-wink"

UPDATE TO THE UPDATE: As I was writing this, Rob Port over at Say Anything (Hat tip) was posting a link to the NY Times, confirming that Gov. Spitzer is "abandoning his plan to issue driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants, saying that opposition is just too overwhelming to move forward with such a policy," to quote. This confirms a huge backtrack, which I believe Imentioned, earlier in this post. Thanks for the timely post, Rob, because I don't read the NY Times!

I did, however, click on the link to the Times' stories on Gov. Spitzer. Want to see their sympathetic coverage of Spitzer? Click HERE.

Saturday, November 10, 2007

Re-examining McCarthyism While Watching the Manchurian Candidate: I'm a McCarthyist!

In a strange, almost "karmic" co-incidence, I started reading Ann Coulter's latest column, "McCarthyism: The Rosetta Stone of Liberal Lies," at the same time that PBS was broadcasting "The Manchurian Candidate," Friday morning. I had never seen the movie, and was shocked to witness the very same historical liberal smears of Sen. Joe McCarthy that Ms. Coulter was writing about!

In the movie, released in 1962 (which was long after McCarthy's "fall from grace"), a fictional version of the senator is portrayed as totally subservient to his domineering wife, who is also a Communist agent (Angela Lansbury, in an outstanding performance). Here's an excerpt from Coulter's column that explains this in political terms:

Rather than own up to their moral blindness to Soviet espionage, Democrats fired up the liberal slander machine, which would be deployed again and again over the next half century to the present day. In hiding their own perfidy, liberals were guilty of every sin they lyingly imputed to McCarthy. There were no "McCarthyites" until liberals came along.

McCarthy was the target of Hollywood for obvious reasons, but there are parallels to the treatment given to the current administration, conservatives, and Republicans in general by our political opponents. In the movie, a "good guy" liberal senator calls the McCarthy character a "facist." That does sound familiar, doesn't it?

Watching the conclusion of the movie, as the "McCarthy"- modeled character gets shot in the head (though not before the liberal senator does), I finally finished reading the column. The movie is an intricate conspiracy theory, which brings me back to another relevant Coulter excerpt:

Ironically, for all of their love of conspiracy theories -- the rigging of the 2000 election, vote suppression in Ohio in 2004, 9/11 being an inside job, oil companies covering up miracle technology that would allow cars to run on dirt, Britney Spears' career, etc., etc. -- when presented with an actual conspiracy of Soviet spies infiltrating the U.S. government, they laughed it off like world-weary skeptics and dedicated themselves to slandering Joe McCarthy.

Here we are, decades later, and "right wingers" are still being slandered as facists, or racists, or "the real terrorists," by a new crop of liberal idiots. Hollywood is having a revival of the "counter-culture" days, and the world is being told how awful we are by our own media.

The war on islamofascism is real, though somewhat more amorphous than the war on communism was, in several ways. The locus of islamofacism is spread among many nations; some are "our staunch allies," and some are "the axis of evil," to quote our President. The truth is that we know where this evil is coming from, and it includes some of our erstwhile "allies" in this war, as well as our obvious opponents.

It is an internal conflict for many of them, as it is for us. I stand as a McCartheist, opposed to the infiltration of our culture, and government, by those who sympathize with people who would destroy the very freedoms that make our way of life possible. I cite a movie from 45 years ago, to show how similar these "useful idiot" liberals of today are to the ones from the peak of the cold war. Don't let history repeat itself.

Saturday, November 03, 2007

Racism and Power: University of Delaware and Hazel Dukes' OTB

Let's take a look at another liberal folly exposed. First, from FNC's Special Report, the Political Grapevine segment:

The president of the University of Delaware has pulled the plug on that
controversial student diversity program we told you about Thursday.

Training materials for the program stated - "The term (racist) applies to
all white people ... living in the United States, regardless of class, gender,
religion, culture or sexuality. By this definition, people of color cannot be
racists, because ...they do not have the power to back up their prejudices,
hostilities, or acts of discrimination."

Students also complained about coercion on such topics as sexual
orientation, politics and the environment.

Thursday, university President Patrick Harker said, "Questions about the
program must be addressed and there are reasons for concern that the actual
purpose is not being fulfilled."

Indeed. This type of thinking is based in leftist ideology, not reality. People of every color have power in this country, and can abuse it, for any number of reasons, including racism. I cite Hazel Dukes, former NYS Off-Track Betting president, as well as former NAACP NY chairman. In the '90's, when she was appointed head of OTB by Gov. Mario Cuomo, she fired most of the white managers, if not all of them, and only white managers. There is little to be found online, but they did sue, and reach a settlement, as I remember.

There is no doubt that Ms. Dukes had the power, but did she abuse it for racial reasons, or just to put her friends in charge? It doesn't make a difference, because if the races were reversed, there would be no question in a liberal's mind (or in our courts) that it was racism. In fact, the overwhelming evidence forced the settlement. This refutes the theory underlying the "diversity" (read as liberal) propaganda they're shoving down student's throats at UD, and most colleges.

Because of the freedoms we enjoy in this nation, all minorities are free to speak about their different experiences, and viewpoints. Racism is a big problem, but it's not the exclusive province of white people, by a long shot. This "diversity" policy, at the University of Delaware, was biased on it's face, and didn't recognize racism as a worldwide phenomenon, not exclusive to the USA. This is a narrow, rather than comprehensive view of the subject.

As I said in the opening, another liberal folly exposed. Talking candidly about racism is the only way to deal with it. I hope this leads to a trend in re-examining policies on college campuses. I know that there's already a FIRE burning under their collective butts, but that's for another column. For now, I'm waiting to see what UD does next, as far as reforming their "diversity" program. Maybe they can get some views on "diversity" from conservatives?