- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Sir, may I call you "Bill"? | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Jun 17 2008, 06:36 AM (1,016 Views) | |
| Duke parent 2004 | Jun 17 2008, 06:36 AM Post #1 |
|
One of my more boastful friends from the 1960s described his sexual prowess most amusingly: “When I screw ‘em, they stay screwed.” Hoping not to embarrass Bill Anderson, I can say without exaggeration that, regarding the targets of his affection, “When Bill skewers them, they stay skewered.” Anyone skeptical of this claim should read Bill’s latest contribution, "Two Angry Men or One Angry Leftist," to the Lew Rockwell website, (at http://www.lewrockwell.com/anderson/anderson215.html ) , which abb did link to in yesterday’s media and blog roundup. The unfortunate lump of meat here is Robert Perkinson, whose March 2008 review of Until Proven Innocent in The Nation gets the Anderson treatment in excelsis. Bill proves himself, once again, especially effective at unmasking those pretensions to sophistication so depressingly common among the critics of Stuart Taylor and KC Johnson. Here are just two examples: On Perkinson’s gravamen, Readable, informative, tendentious and ultimately unhinged, the book [i.e., Until Proven Innocent] tries its best to wring wider significance from this Southern tragicomedy. That it fails suggests Americans on opposite ends of the political spectrum are no more ready to hold a civil “conversation about race” – much less rape and race – than they were when Bill Clinton encouraged them to do so in 1997, Bill drops the bunker-buster, What Perkinson fails to point out is that the very reason this case exploded was that journalists and academics across the country decided to make this THE CASE about "white privilege" and nearly every other indictment that leftists want to make about American society these days. And to Perkinson’s purported illumination, Determined to repel each prosecutorial advance, the authors explain away every foible of the defendants. When a campus committee finds that the lacrosse players, who make up less than 1 percent of the student population, account for 25 percent of the school's disorderly conduct violations, the authors step over the data and emphasize "the report's highly positive major findings," that the players, who are overwhelmingly recruited from Northeastern prep schools, generally receive higher grades than other athletes, Bill simply punches the off button, [W]hat is instructive about that "25%" statistic is that only four students at Duke that particular year were charged, one being a lacrosse player. One should keep in mind that "disorderly conduct" is a catch-all charge and not exactly a Crime Against Humanity. But one-in-four is a lot different than the massive crimes that Perkinson is trying to insinuate. There is more, much more, in Bill’s article to bring the reader quickly to the conclusion that if Bill insists you call him “William,” you’ll soon be offering little resistance to stiff winds.  |
 |
 
|
| Deleted User | Jun 17 2008, 06:42 AM Post #2 |
|
Deleted User
|
Great post to a great article...We need to keep the pressure on the MSM going..... |
|
|
|
| Bill Anderson | Jun 17 2008, 06:44 AM Post #3 |
|
Hey, after compliments like that, you can call me anything you want!! (As long as it is not "Nifong.")
|
|
|
|
| Deleted User | Jun 17 2008, 06:49 AM Post #4 |
|
Deleted User
|
Outstanding article, Bill! Truly outstanding! But I could add...as always. |
|
|
|
| lec | Jun 17 2008, 06:59 AM Post #5 |
|
Great article Bill. Let me point out that Reharmonizer is trying again and mentions Perkinson in his latest blog entry. Not that you need any new targets or anything. http://reharmonized.an-earful.com/2008/06/professors-debating-badly/ In his review of KC’s book Until Proven Innocent (co-written by Stuart Taylor), Robert Perkinson does a fine job of separating KC’s constructive agenda from the thin-skinned, reactionary obsession with “reverse racism” and the rest of his culture-war baggage. I think the belated and marginalized good sense he credits the book with is even more marginal in DIW, and DIW has been the more influential and destructive of the two, since it shaped perceptions of the case for more than a year before the book came out. But Perkinson is worth quoting to get some perspective on KC’s priorities that, unlike Tyson’s, finds its mark: |
|
|
|
| Bill Anderson | Jun 17 2008, 07:54 AM Post #6 |
|
I'll take a pass on this one. The problem is that there is only one "permissible narrative" when something like this comes up: everything has to be framed in the terms of white racism towards blacks (and everyone else who falls into the "color" category). There can be no other framework of discussion. None. To try to work outside the permissible framework is seen as an act of racism itself. This framework has benefited a lot of people individually (it has made Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton very wealthy men) and it provides a large number of college faculty jobs and jobs for people in government. As to whether or not it actually benefits the country, or even blacks (and whites) in general is quite another matter. I leave the answer to you.
|
|
|
|
| foxglove | Jun 17 2008, 08:41 AM Post #7 |
|
Bill's article is excellent! Well worth reading to set the record straight. |
|
|
|
| Baldo | Jun 17 2008, 09:40 AM Post #8 |
|
That's our Bill! The 88 subscribe to "White Entitlement." It an excuse, an explanation to continue programs which favor their beliefs and jobs. They profit from entitlement programs. The populace don't like those programs. They can see the door shutting to quotas. So you create the big bogeyman to keep children in their beds. |
|
|
| DMom | Jun 17 2008, 09:52 AM Post #9 |
|
An excellent article. All should definitely read it! Thank you, Bill Anderson. |
|
|
|
| Deleted User | Jun 17 2008, 10:17 AM Post #10 |
|
Deleted User
|
 To Bill, for his usual clear thinking and well written analysis. His students are truly blessed. I hope they appreciate what they have in him.
|
|
|
|
| striker | Jun 17 2008, 10:52 AM Post #11 |
|
A question to the lefties? When the sons and daughters and grandsons and granddaughters of these leftist asshats enroll in Harvard or Yale or Duke or Columbia and during the summer they go on long voyages from Woods Hole and get to stay drunk all summer on capital hill as an "assistant" to some jackass, what do they call that type of priviledge. when they get into the law schools, business schools, medical schools and political science schools then what is that priviledge? "Priviledge with morality, or priviledge without sports, or priviledge with a conscience"? When their children are sucessful then what should that be called? When their children "get in" then what shall we call that type of manipulation? They are deserving, but children of others are not as deserving? Is that because they are more enlightened than the rest of us, they are more moral and wonderful than the rest of us. They are disgusting dogs! |
|
|
|
| Sydney Carton | Jun 17 2008, 01:35 PM Post #12 |
|
Congratulations,Bill,on your most thoughtful and analytical Duke article thus far.Do send a copy to our mutual feminist acquaintance in the Frostburg English department. It should choke her. |
|
|
|
| Bill Anderson | Jun 17 2008, 02:15 PM Post #13 |
|
Hey, I want to keep my job!! Bill |
|
|
|
| Carolyn says | Jun 17 2008, 03:19 PM Post #14 |
|
"What happened in Durham in 2006 and beyond is little different than what happened in Scottsboro, Alabama, in the early 1930s. The difference was that the races were reversed. However, to understand this point is also to admit that despite their having suffered many injustices, blacks in a position of power are just as capable of perverting justice as the worst of Jim Crow whites." Bill has given us the whole problem. It is not the truth but the Will to admit it's the truth that matters. And the curse of the Duke hoax was that Brodhead, the NC NAACP, Nancy Grace, the New York Times, etc. did NOT possess then and do NOT possess now the Will to admit this. And, as Perkinson has just proven, neither does he. This lack of Will is the same thing that scared me in the OJ murder trial, in the Duke hoax, and that scares me now as Barack ("Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn about 'God DAMN America') Obama wins the Democratic nomination is this terrifying Will of so many to NOT admit the truth. Facts make no difference, common sense, honesty, etc. Only ideology. Ideologically blinded people admit only to is that which justifies their blindness. Pile the mountains of evidence up to the heights of the Himalayas - it makes no difference. The ideologically blinded will merely walk past it, tapping their white canes and see nothing. Bill nailed it. It is not the truth, but the WILL to admit the truth which matters. If that Will turns its back on the truth and goosesteps off in the opposite direction, we can not make them see they're wrong, we can only see to defending ourselves against that wrong. And to warning the world, as Bill has just done, to that wrong. Warning that that Will is powerful - and, if we do nothing, say nothing, it will triumph. (But, of course, Leni Riefenstahl's film could tell you that.) Edited by Carolyn says, Jun 17 2008, 03:19 PM.
|
|
|
|
| darby | Jun 17 2008, 03:32 PM Post #15 |
|
"exactly the wind he needed to push (as Perkinson calls) his 'Pequod' along" ahh yes, a silent tribute to our beloved Payback. Great article Bill.... |
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · DUKE LACROSSE - Liestoppers · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
5:10 PM Dec 8
