Crush Liberalism

Liberalism: Why think when you can “feel”?

Obama elected due to “affirmative action”

Arguably the best column I’ve ever read that dissects how an unaccomplished empty suit ever got elevated to the position of leader of the free world.  You must read it all, but here are a couple of excerpts to whet the appetite:

Years from now, historians may regard the 2008 election of Barack Obama as an inscrutable and disturbing phenomenon, a baffling breed of mass hysteria akin perhaps to the witch craze of the Middle Ages.  How, they will wonder, did a man so devoid of professional accomplishment beguile so many into thinking he could manage the world’s largest economy, direct the world’s most powerful military, execute the world’s most consequential job?

Imagine a future historian examining Obama’s pre-presidential life: ushered into and through the Ivy League despite unremarkable grades and test scores along the way; a cushy non-job as a “community organizer”; a brief career as a state legislator devoid of legislative achievement (and in fact nearly devoid of his attention, so often did he vote “present”); and finally an unaccomplished single term in United States Senate, the entirety of which was devoted to his presidential ambitions.  He left no academic legacy in academia, authored no signature legislation as legislator.

And then there is the matter of his troubling associations: the white-hating, America-loathing preacher who for decades served as Obama’s “spiritual mentor”; a real-life, actual terrorist who served as Obama’s colleague and political sponsor.  It is easy to imagine a future historian looking at it all and asking: how on Earth was such a man elected president?


True, Obama himself was never troubled by his lack of achievements, but why would he be?  As many have noted, Obama was told he was good enough for Columbia despite undistinguished grades at Occidental; he was told he was good enough for the US Senate despite a mediocre record in Illinois; he was told he was good enough to be president despite no record at all in the Senate.  All his life, every step of the way, Obama was told he was good enough for the next step, in spite of ample evidence to the contrary.  What could this breed if not the sort of empty  narcissism on display every time Obama speaks?

Again, read it all!

August 19, 2011 Posted by | affirmative action, bigotry, Obama | 3 Comments

UPDATE: Obligatory “Powell endorses Obama” post


Yawn!  This was hinted at back in August.  Is this a game-changer?  I doubt it.

I’m not going to knock Powell for endorsing the candidate of his choice.  What I am going to knock, though, is his candor, or lack thereof.  He claims that Obama’s race has nothing to do with his endorsement, and I think that is a bit disingenuous of a claim.

First of all, Powell is a big-time proponent of affirmative action.  He got on the stage at the 2004 GOP convention and defended AA with gusto.  That disappointed me, because that defense was basically implying that he got to where he did in his life and career as a result of AA, not on his own merits.  Clearly, he’s got a racial component to his worldview.

Secondly, Powell told a bunch of college kids at GWU last month how awesomely McAwesome it would be if we elected a black president.  “Electrifying”, to use his words.  Apparently, Powell feels that any black president, even a socialist one, would do.

Ace summarizes Powell thusly:

Colin Powell was never a Republican. He was a military officer who knew how to play the political game during a period dominated by Republicans. Of course he kissed Republican ass. Just as he kissed Bob Woodward’s ass to make sure he always came out smelling like roses in his books.

The Republican Party has always used Powell, just as he’s used us in turn. We have promoted this dubious figure as — let’s admit it — a bit of a token, proof that black people like us.

But he’s never been on our side. He’s always been a liberal, and, moreover, he’s always been on Colin Powell’s side.

Exit question, redux:  As was asked back in August, don’t you think it’s kind of funny that the same liberals who accused Powell of “lying us into Iraq” now embrace his endorsement?

UPDATE (10/20/2008 – 10:28 A.M. EST):  Brian Maloney thinks that the endorsement may backfire in that it revives the race issue, and that many Americans may resent Powell endorsing a gay simply because of his skin color.  I disagree: I think Powell is irrelevant, and that he will influence no one’s vote.

October 20, 2008 Posted by | affirmative action, bigotry, hypocrisy, Obama | 6 Comments

Victory for common sense

You may recall the story of Keith Sampson, a janitor (and student) at IUPUI (public university in Indiana) who was harrassed and punished by the P.C. thought police and university “affirmative action” department for…reading an anti-Klan book!  Not only was the book anti-Klan, but it was obtained at the university’s own library!

Well, I said I would follow the story, and so I have.  Details:

Mr. Sampson stood accused of “openly reading the book (aren’t books marginally tougher to read when they’re closed? – Ed.) related to a historically and racially abhorrent subject in the presence of your Black co-workers.” The statement, signed by chief affirmative action officer Lillian Charleston, asserted that her office had completed its investigation of the charges brought by Ms. Nakea William, his co-worker – that Mr. Sampson had continued, despite complaints, to read a book on this “inflammatory topic.”

Ludicrous harassment cases are not rare at our institutions of higher learning. But there was undeniably something special – something pure, and glorious – in the clarity of this picture. A university had brought a case against a student on grounds of a book he had been reading.

Savor that line for a moment: a university was attempting to punish a student for reading a book!  Students can read books from Lenin, Chomsky, and other noted leftists, but the minute a kid reads a book with a picture of a klansman (no word on if it was Sen. Robert Byrd) on the cover, an institution of “higher learning” suspends rationality in its rabid embrace of politically correct orthodoxy.  That the book was an anti-Klan book was irrelevant to the genius administrators at IUPUI.

There is good news:

And so the new letter to Mr. Sampson by affirmative action officer Charleston brought word that she wished to clarify her previous letter, and to say it was “permissible for him to read scholarly books or other materials on break time.” About the essential and only theme of the first letter – the “racially abhorrent” subject of the book – or the warnings that any “future substantiated conduct of a similar nature could mean serious disciplinary action” – there was not a word. She had meant in that first letter, she said, only to address “conduct” that caused concern among his co-workers.

What that conduct was, the affirmative action officer did not reveal – but she had delivered the message rewriting the history of the case. Absolutely and for certain there had been no problem about any book he had been reading. 

You know that you have lost any credibility when the ACLU, founded by a communist and a champion of affirmative action and other P.C. causes, fights you!

July 16, 2008 Posted by | affirmative action, bigotry, political correctness, public education | Leave a comment

Government school punishes janitor for reading a book

From the “hallowed” halls of IUPUI:

Keith John Sampson never thought he could get in trouble for reading a book, especially not on a college campus. But that’s what happened. Sampson is a man in his early 50s. He does janitorial work for the campus facility services at IUPUI, where he’s been gradually accumulating credits for a degree in communications studies. He has 10 credit hours to go.

At the time, Sampson was reading a book he had checked out from the public library. Notre Dame vs. the Klan: How the Fighting Irish Defeated the Ku Klux Klan, published in 2004, features a photograph of the University of Notre Dame’s famous golden dome on the cover. Its author is Todd Tucker, the publisher is Loyola Press of Loyola University in Chicago.

The book is about how for two days in May 1924, a group of Notre Dame students got into a street fight with members of the Ku Klux Klan. The Klan was meeting in South Bend for the express purpose of sticking a collective thumb in the eye of the country’s most famous Catholic university. Notre Dame vs. the Klan was a Notre Dame Magazine “Pick of the Week” and garnered an average customer review of 4.5 stars on In its review, The Indiana Magazine of History noted that Tucker “succeeds in placing the event in a broad framework that includes the origins and development of both the Klan and Notre Dame.”

Sampson recalls that his AFSCME shop steward told him that reading a book about the Klan was like bringing pornography to work (WTF? – Ed.). The shop steward wasn’t interested in hearing what the book was actually about (Remember, to the left, feelings trump facts! – Ed.). Another time, a coworker who was sitting across the table from Sampson in the break room commented that she found the Klan offensive. Sampson says he tried to tell her about the book, but she wasn’t interested in talking about it (Remember, to the left, feelings trump facts! – Ed.).

A few weeks passed. Then Sampson got a message ordering him to report to Marguerite Watkins at the IUPUI Affirmative Action Office. He was told a coworker had filed a racial harassment complaint against him for reading Notre Dame vs. the Klan in the break room. Sampson says he tried to explain to Watkins what the book was about. He says he tried to show her the book, but that Watkins showed no interest in seeing it (Remember, to the left, feelings trump facts! – Ed.).

Then Sampson received a letter, dated Nov. 25, 2007, from Lillian Charleston, also of IUPUI’s Affirmative Action Office. The letter begins by saying that the AAO has completed its investigation of a coworker’s allegation that Sampson “racially harassed her by repeatedly reading the book Notre Dame vs. the Klan: How the Fighting Irish Defeated the Ku Klux Klan by Todd Tucker in the presence of Black employees.” It goes on to say, “You demonstrated disdain and insensitivity to your coworkers who repeatedly requested that you refrain from reading the book which has such an inflammatory and offensive topic in their presence … you used extremely poor judgment by insisting on openly reading the book related to a historically and racially abhorrent subject in the presence of your Black coworkers.” Charleston went on to say that according to “the legal ‘reasonable person standard,’ a majority of adults are aware of and understand how repugnant the KKK is to African-Americans …” (Where do these morons get off telling anyone about a “reasonable person” when they’re being so incredibly unreasonable in this situation? – Ed.)

Sampson was ordered to stop reading the book in the immediate presence of his coworkers and, when reading the book, to sit apart from them.

“I feel like I’ve been caught up in a 21st century version of catch-22,” says Sampson, who has never been given the opportunity to officially face any of his accusers. When I tried calling the Affirmative Action Office, I was told their policy is to never speak to the media.

But, Sampson says, this episode could be an opportunity. He would welcome the chance to participate in a moderated forum that might use his experience for a larger discussion dealing with intellectual freedom on the IUPUI campus.

That’s a good idea. For Sampson’s sake, I hope ideas still count at IUPUI.

Ideas never count at public universities anymore. Feelings are more important.

By the way, this was at the end of the story:

Editors note: At press time we learned that Sampson received another letter from IUPUI’s Affirmative Action Office, postmarked Feb. 21. We will continue to follow this story.

How ironic that a program like Affirmative Action, which is based on discriminating against one ethnic group in favor of other ethnic groups, is complaining about discrimination!

March 4, 2008 Posted by | affirmative action, bigotry, political correctness, public education | 7 Comments