[Cincinatus' Wife]

Mr. Pitts should reflect further on the destructive aspects of affirmative action.

_____________________________________________________________

Florida blacks eye boycott over graduation exam ***"These kids have done what they are supposed to do," he said. "They have gotten the credits they need. They have done community service work. This test is damaging kids psychologically, because there is too much weight to it."…………………. The students being supported by the activists have been given six chances to pass the test with a passing test score of at least 40 percent, but have failed at least one element.

But no matter how many chances are given to pass, a single test should not determine a student's future, said Adora Obi Nweze, president of the Florida NAACP.

"There is more to education than writing an answer," she said. "You have students that can do so many other things, and all should be used to determine if they should be promoted."***

[Jeff Chandler]

Pitts left out a few inconvenient facts, such as the reporter's work being horrendously inferior for years, while his presence was touted as a positive for diversity, after which he was promoted to FRONT PAGE REPORTER. It sure looks as if he got preferential treatment in the name of political correctness.

[ricpic]

"Yet somehow, it's [the Times] editors allowed themselves to be snookered by a 27-year-old."

Two key words in this sentence: somehow and allowed.

Somehow: The entire liberal culture of guilt (white and economic) that these editors are thoroughly steeped in.

Allowed: Follows from the somehow. What else could they do. Call a young and up and coming, potential "role model" black professional, on his clearly fraudulent and incompetent performance? That would make them harshly judgemental. And dare we say it.....even racist?

No. Best to look the other way, and hope he.....improves.

[MarkL]

No, the problem is that the reporter was simply incompetant. He never finished his jounalism degree, was constantly being corrected, and was known to be submitting erroneous and even false reporting. The simple fact is that he was incompetant.

The problem is that he was being brought along using the "Dilbert Principle," which pretty much states that the more incompetant you are, the higher you'll go in an organization. In this case, the driving factor was "affirmative action."

The "sin" wasn't the reporter's. The sin belongs to the NY Times. They should have never have hired him. Then, they should have done what all newspapers do with new reporters or writers. Bring them along slowly. Writing obituaries or ad copy. Then give them one or two small stories to see how they do. Give them time to mature and become a good reporter, or at least see if they might be capable of becoming one.

Because of affirmative action, the reporter was thrown into an environment that he clearly wasn't prepared for. Now, whether the innacuracies, lies, and shoddy reporting were just his way of trying to keep up with his position, or if it was simply because he has no morals or values, the primary blame for this belongs to the NY Times. This in no way excuses the reporter for what he did, but it was the Times that put him in the position to be able to get published. And the fact that management and the editorial staff was aware of the problem but ignored it proves that the Times wasn't concerned about truth in reporting. Of course, anyone who's the slightest bit conservative, or cares about "the truth" has known that for years.

Mark

[Freee-dame]

bump

[Zipporah]

You can't have it both ways.. first the black leadership wants special priviledges.. they when it goes awry, they won't pin the blame on affirmative action. Geesh.

[PLK]

a black celebrity accused of killing his white wife becomes the fulcrum of a national debate on race. Not domestic violence, mind you, but race.

Pitts has forgotten that the race card was first played by OJ and his attorneys, and no one else. They played it to the hilt in order to sway a jury and lead them to believe that jury nullification was not only O.K., but their duty to poor, oppressed blacks the world over. What a sham, and what a stupid statement on Pitts' part! Ugh!!!!!

[mhking]

Blair was wrong, period. Didn't matter that he was black. The secondary crime in this (yes, there's more than one!) was that he was treated with kid gloves because he was black. Everyone keeps trying to make the two into one. They are mutually exclusive of each other.

What Blair did was just plain wrong. No one disputes that. It wouldn't matter if he was black, white, red, green or blue. It still would have been wrong.

The secondary issue was not Blair's fault. That fault lies directly with the editors and publisher of the Times. As opposed to treating Blair with the same aplomb and impartiality that they do with anyone else, they chose to treat him with politically correct kid gloves. The result is the birds they released coming home to roost.

No, I can't fault Blair for being black - which is what so many folks are going out of their way to do. But I can fault Howell Raines and his cronies for patronizing Blair, and by extension, insulting all the hard-working, well-educated and obviously far more intelligent black journalists and columnists out there.

Blair's name will be the one that goes down in history. Blair will bear the brunt of the ire of people talking about this. But the other culprits will get away with it, as they do every day. The Raines of the world; the politically correct liberal editors will continue to patronize blacks, and look down their noses, oblivious to the larger damage they do every day to black America in general, and black journalists in particular.

If anything, this should be a wake-up call. This should force blacks in America to demand better treatment from the press; it should force blacks to see leftists for the race-baiting scum that they are. The National Association of Black Journalists should be screaming from the rooftops.

But all we hear is more silence. It's so much easier to blame the right as the "Big Bad Boogieman" that seeks to "oppress" black America.

And in a quiet room, as he sips from a cup of coffee while reading about the Boogieman, Jesse Jackson smiles knowingly.

---

Black conservative ping

If you want on (or off) of my black conservative ping list, please let me know via FREEPmail. (And no, you don't have to be black to be on the list!)

Extra warning: this is a high-volume ping list.

[longtermmemmory]

The problem was that the left did not see the lying and cheating and plagerizing as a problem because it was advancing a political agenda. (the race was the exuse to give him the 50 strikes)

[RAT Patrol]

And if you don't think the weight of that is felt by every black woman and man in the newsroom, you're kidding yourself. Just Wednesday, the managing editor of The Times, who is black, had to defend himself against charges he had mentored Blair. Mentored.

I've frequently said that to be a black professional is to be always on probation, every day expected to prove that you belong. People always ask me what I mean. This is what I mean. This, exactly.

And affirmative action is to blame. Without it, Blair's race would not be a factor. Pitts wants the benefits of racial distinction without the accountability. Shame on him.

[Copernicus]

Posted to *CCRM List

[Timesink]

Schadenfreude

This is the New York Times Schadenfreude Ping List. Freepmail me to be added or dropped.

[martin_fierro]

Ecce homo

Leonard Pitts