Blair on Blair

Jayson Blair tells The New York Observer that he's at least as smart as Stephen Glass, and the victim of racism besides. The interview is so bizarre that you have to wonder if it's, you know, real. Did Blair really say:

"I don't understand why I am the bumbling affirmative action hire when Stephen Glass is this brilliant whiz kid, when from my perspective -- and I know I shouldn't be saying this -- I fooled some of the most brilliant people in journalism."

"Anyone who tells you that my race didn't play a role in my career at the New York Times is lying to you. Both racial preferences and racism played a role. And I would argue that they didn't balance each other out. Racism had much more of an impact."

"So Jayson Blair the human being could live, Jayson Blair the journalist had to die."

Comments

[holger viking]

is it a coincidence that this story is right next to one entitled "suicide solution"?

[Cracker's boy.]

"Anyone who tells you that my race didn't play a role in my career at the New York Times is lying to you. Both racial preferences and racism played a role. And I would argue that they didn't balance each other out. Racism had much more of an impact."

Racial preferences IS racism.

[Douglas Fletcher]

If the feds find some way to screw this guy based on obstruction of justice in the sniper case, I would guess he wouldn't be able to make any money at all based on his story, because of the 'Son of Sam' law.

Any comments?

[joe]

Cracker, if you think racial preferences, as practiced by the NY Times, is anything like actual racism, you need to get out of the house and talk to a black person. It isn't in the ballpark; it isn't in the same league; it isn't even the same sport.

That isn't to say there is nothing wrong with modern hiring/acceptance practices. But equating AA with actual racism is like equating Israel's checkpoints with the Final Solution. You're stretching a facile metaphor beyond recognition in order to score some sympathy that you have no legitimate claim to. And in the mean time, you're trivializing the injustice suffered by those who had to put up with the real deal.

Slavery. Poll taxes. Literacy tests. Jim Crow. Separate drinking fountains. Lynchings. Being refused a hotel room. Your whiny ass doesn't get to lay claim to these just because someone realized that an all-white newsroom is a bad idea.

[Cracker's boy.]

Joe... huh?

So... you don't think that Racial Preferences is Racism?

Racism, whether it be in the form that you don't like (perhaps exhibited by that previously discussed Nazi), or in the form of Racial Preferences, that you obviously do like, is still racism. If it was bad before (ie. Slavery. Poll taxes. Literacy tests. Jim Crow. Separate drinking fountains. Lynchings) then it's bad now (Affirmative Action, et al).

Racial preferences IS racism. ibid

[joe]

You've done nothing but make an assertion. Does AA maintain one race's power over another? No, in intent and effect, it reduces imbalances in racial privilege. Does it keep races apart and reduce common experience and identity? No, it brings races together, gives members of those races common experience, and helps them forge a common identity. Not the same at all.

You remind me of pacifists, who claim that using violence is always wrong. No, using violence against innocent, peaceful people is wrong. Using it to stop evil is not wrong. Do you think shooting the man who is raping your wife is the same, morally and in terms of society's well-being, as shooting a stranger at random? Yet this is your position on racial preferences - that making sure there are a decent number of black freshman is the same as banning them from the school.

You use the phrase "that you like," as if a preference for racial equality over racist oppression were simply a matter of taste. I am not going to pretend that a situation where racial minorities have equality with the majority - real equality, in their actual experience, not just before the law - is morally equivalent to one in which there is widespread racial injustice.

The effectiveness of certain AA programs is certainly open to debate. But don't pretend that a kid who goes to UConn instead of Yale has suffered from anything comparable to what minorities experience in a racist society.

[Anonymous]

Re: "You're killing Independent George"...

Other George-isms that could apply:

"It's not a lie, if you believe."

"I'm a great quitter. I come from a long line of quitters. I was raised to give up."

"I can't carry a pen, I'm afraid it'll puncture my scrotum."

[JDM]

joe,

It's apparent from your comments that you are a racist yourself.

From the American Heritage dictionary:
(Pay attention to the second part.)

1. The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.

2. Discrimination or prejudice based on race.

Maybe you need to see a definition of discrimination too...

Your posts have been a fascinating look into your collectivist PC groupthink mindset. Cracker merely points out that AA is racist based on the commonly understood definition of the world and you launch into a sermon about who is allowed to claim victimhood status for what.

[JDM]

er...
..commonly understood definition of the *word*...

[dc]

actually blair didn't fool anyone for very long. People at the NYT knew pretty early on (if you trust the news reports) that he was a liar and a fabricator. It's just that - owing mostly to the color of his skin - he was given 2nd, 3rd, 4th chances. So, Steve Glass was a lot better at fooling people than Blair.

[VH]

Have we all had enough of this journalistic navel-gazing yet? I find it extremely amusing that a gross lack of integrity at a major newspaper is "news" to the journalism profession. This gets my vote for "Biggest Non-Story, 2003".

[Anonymous]

Actually, the "Biggest Non-Story Award" should probably go to "what some random anonymous commenter thinks is the biggest non-story of 2003" story...

[omnibus bill]

What a self-pitying, pathological liar he is.

He does have a point though; if the Times' reporters are the world's most brilliant journalists, and he "fooled" them, it speaks really, really poorly of the paper of record.

Get this jerk off the stage. His 15 minutes should have ended about 14 minutes ago.

[j.c.]

"He does have a point though; if the Times' reporters are the world's most brilliant journalists, and he "fooled" them, it speaks really, really poorly of the paper of record." I don't know of many reporters who were fooled. It seems that even back in high school, his peers recognized him as an ass-kisser. It was the fine brains in management who were fooled...

Not that we're agreeing NYT reporters are the most brilliant journalists.

[twistedmerkin]

"So Jayson Blair the human being could live, Jayson Blair the journalist had to die."

I think he made the wrong choice.

[Anonymous]

"You're killing Independent George!"

[Justin Slotman]

Oh god--he's got RICKEY HENDERSON DISEASE! The poor man....

[Luca Brasi]

>>>"You're killing Independent George!"

[Jough being serious]

The editors should have corrected the spelling in his first nayme...

[Hank]

The man is a retard. 'Nuff said. NEXT!

[Anonymous]

RS,

How does "That isn't to say there is nothing wrong with modern hiring/acceptance practices." and "The effectiveness of certain AA programs is certainly open to debate." (From two of my earlier posts) turn, in your mind, into "...he has no need to objectively look at a policy?"

Funny, I always hear libertoids and cons complain that anyone who questions affirmative action policy is labelled a racist, and that their decency is called into question because they're looking for a better policy. Then, when I dare to suggest that people denied admission to Harvard don't get to compare themselves to Emmitt Till, I get called a racist, and have snide little pipsqueeks like yourself launch into fantasies about my personal relations with black people. You know nothing about me, other than the fact that I don't buy into your party line on affirmative action; don't presume to judge my character.

Frankly, I'm open to ideas on how to fix affirmative action. But the argument that desegregating institutions (real desegregation, not just neutral legal language) is akin to crossburnings is inaccurate and offensive. We have a real race problem in this country. We need to face it in a forthright manner, not stick our heads in the ground and hope than everything turns out ok.

[RS]

Joe, anyone able to says things like "you need to get out of the house and talk to a black person..." obviously views blacks as a monolithic group that he has some superior deep understanding of. Wait a second. OK, done - I just spoke to a black person and darned if Joe's not right. Oops, sorry another black guy just gave me a different story. And that Nigerian-American keeps getting really pissed when I suggest he should be given preferential treatment and accepted to that particular university even though his scores are too low. Does it really help black people if we lower admissions standards for them so they can go to a school above their level and flunk out? And is it really going to change the mind of the white kid who was raised racist if the black kid sitting next to him in class isn't as bright as the other kids in class, because well, he isn't.

"Anyone who understands the dynamics of race in our society" knows that a good black student will have no problem finding a school that will accept him with open arms. Is there a lot of racism in our society? Absolutely. Are masses of highly qualified blacks being refused admission to colleges because they are black. No.

"If you were genuine in your commitment to fighting racism and achieving equal opportunity," you would find a better target for your energy than creating false opportunities based on racial preference and lying to individuals about their abilities. Stop insulting and misleading young people. You want to get into school - hit the books.

[JDM]

"Free association?" Cracker mentions that AA is racist, and you claim he's trying to compare himself to Emmitt Till. I point out that your response doesn't follow from his post and you tell me I've learned all I know about race relations from a dictionary.

[Cracker's boy.]

Joe - "You've done nothing but make an assertion."

Cracker's Boy - Correct. I am asserting that Racial Preferences are racist in nature.

Joe - "Does AA maintain one race's power over another?"

Cracker's Boy - Yes. By implication that one race is incapable of "making it" without special assistance (Affirmative Action) from another race, AA reinforces one race's power over another.

Joe - "No, in intent and effect, it reduces imbalances in racial privilege."

Cracker's Boy - Actually, it's intent is to create imbalances in racial priviledge. It does this by allowing special priviledge to one race.

Joe - "Does it keep races apart and reduce common experience and identity?"

Cracker's Boy - Yes and yes.

Joe - "No, it brings races together,"

Cracker's Boy - Now who is making an assetion?

Joe - "gives members of those races common experience, and helps them forge a common identity."

Cracker's Boy - What common experience is being shared by a white kid with a 3.9 GPA having to go to Community College because he can't get into Harvard, and a black kid with a 3.8 who can, because of Affirmative Action?

Joe - "Not the same at all."

Cracker's Boy - Yes it is.

Joe - "You remind me of pacifists, who claim that using violence is always wrong. No, using violence against innocent, peaceful people is wrong. Using it to stop evil is not wrong. Do you think shooting the man who is raping your wife is the same, morally and in terms of society's well-being, as shooting a stranger at random?"

Cracker's Boy - I can't help what I remind you of. Nor do I see it's significance here. Trust me, I am far from a pacifist.

Joe - "Yet this is your position on racial preferences - that making sure there are a decent number of black freshman is the same as banning them from the school."

Cracker's Boy - There's a disconnect here, but I will point out that AA has the effect of "banning a decent number of white freshman from the school". See 3.8/3.9 GPA reference above.

Joe - "You use the phrase "that you like," as if a preference for racial equality over racist oppression were simply a matter of taste."

Cracker's Boy - It is. I prefer racial equality over racist oppression. That is why I oppose Affirmative Action et al.

Joe - "I am not going to pretend that a situation where racial minorities have equality with the majority - real equality, in their actual experience, not just before the law - is morally equivalent to one in which there is widespread racial injustice."

Cracker's Boy - No need to pretend.

Racial preferences IS racism. ibid

[joe]

The Cracker's position makes sense, as long as you know absolutely nothing about American history, or the dynamics of race in our society. For example, " Actually, (AA's) intent is to create imbalances in racial priviledge. It does this by allowing special priviledge to one race." Puh-leaze. Are you aware that there are forces in our society other than the government and admissions offices, forces which privilege white people over racial minorities, and which affirmative action programs were designed to address? For your statement to even approach truthfulness, one would have to believe that Affirmative Action programs are the only race-related dynamic in our society.

The white kid going to community college (with a 3.9 - bullshit) is going to have the opportunity to interact with people of other races. But because of affirmative action program, the hundreds of thousands of white kids who attend top tier colleges are also going to have that opportunity. You argument here amounts to an assertion that increasing the number of black kids in an overwhelmingly white school results in less interaction among people of different races. Deep.

Sorry you didn't get the pacifist metaphor. Think hard.

But ultimately, your argument is based on your last couple of sentences, in which you deny that equal and integration are better than privilege and segregation. This sort of cuts the legs off your argument that your opposition to affirmative action results from a hatred of racial injustice, now doesn't it?

If you were genuine in your commitment to fighting racism and achieving equal opportunity, you would find a better target for your energy than reducing the number of black people that get into good colleges.

And no, I am not accusing you of being a racist. I just think you support lousy policies, because you don't understand the problem very well.

[joe]

Ah, the thoughtful nuance we've come to expect from JDM. All I can say is, that's the type of comment I'd expect from someone trying to understand how race functions in American society by reading a dictonary.

Once again, reducing black college attendance is a funny place to start for someone who assert's his opposition to racism.

[Hermetic]

Did anyone else read that interview and think that Blair's rehab obviously didn't take? He sounds like he was snorting lines during the interview.

[Cracker's boy.]

Joe - I suppose you are right that I "know absolutely nothing about American History and the dynamics of race in our society." I mean... how could I? After all, I'm a Western European Male... everyone's enemy. (Well, actually, depending on who's asking, I'm a Native American, since I was born here, my parents were born here and their parents too... I'm thinkin' that makes me a Native American. I've also recently decided that I'm African American, since, originally... we ALL started in Africa, didn't we? The only difference is when we left.)

When the topic is right, you can look forward to a post that I'm pretty sure will be titled "Who owes who what?" I'm thinking I might even turn it into a website. I don't think that you are going to like it.

Racial preferences IS racism. ibid

[JDM]

joe,

?

[joe]

It isn't your background that leads me to question your connection to reality; it's the fact that you think decreasing the admission of African Americans to college is an important step towards a just society.

Who brought up reparations? Who brought up white bashing? Your free associations about campus honkie bashing really have nothing to do with affirmative action policy.

[RS]

joe is a morally superior human being, one of the few who can truly understand the history of race in the US. Due to his highly developed empathy, he has no need to objectively look at a policy. Preference is preference no matter what you call it. Doing something "nice" for someone due to their race is still racist. I can imagine Joe's condescending treatment of minorities - I truly pity the minorities he works or socializes with.
As for AA, it has consistently been shown to be a failure. A main reason is that blacks are often accepted into schools which are above their level, leading to frustration and higher dropout rates. A black student who has the level to succeed at a medium level will probably fail if through the magic of AA he ends up going to a top tier school. As would anyone unless their grades and test scores were a fluke. You want to help people - don't do it through deception which only hurts them and continues judging them as inferior. Start at the bottom - like figuring out how to do something about inner city schools & the conditions of the kids' home lives.

[Mellquist Nils]

EMAIL: [e-mail]
IP: 62.213.67.122
URL: http://www.pills-for-penis.com
DATE: 01/25/2004 01:28:42
We are never truly sure of our beliefs.

[Wacowski Kat Gloor]

EMAIL: [e-mail]
IP: 209.161.84.71
URL: http://preteen-sex.info
DATE: 05/20/2004 05:01:37
A stopped car does not imply a dead driver.