Maggie's Farm

With the final outcome of the Duke rape idiocy, it is finally and fully apparent that the Duke faculty and administration have made fools of themselves. And so did the race-monger shake-down artists, who, like the vultures that they are, smelled fresh meat. And so did the MSM with their rush to judgement.

Indeed, the "America is Satan" crowd gets so fired up by rare examples of blatant racism - real, contrived, or imaginary - mainly because they are so rare. And they want it to be true so badly, to support their view of the world and their raison d'etre, that facts and truth go out the window. (Abu Ghraib is another example: The exception that proves the rule.) We usually term such distortions of reality "propaganda."

(The total lack of interest in last week's college rape story proves my point. Who is rushing to support these girls? Where are the feminists? Where's Jesse? Where are the pomos? All AWOL, because the story doesn't fit "the narrative." And "narrative," of course, is a term applied to fiction (and a concept applied to legal case-building).)

It was obvious to normal people without an agenda a year ago that there was something fishy about the Duke story.

As a loving grandparent, I would not contribute one penny for one of those kids to attend such a loony, misguided place - regardless of the quality of Duke's basketball (or lacrosse) teams.

Eat your heart out, Duke.

An addendum by Editor "Bird Dog":

In a piece this week entitled PoMo Contradictions, David Thompson concludes:

If one’s ‘work’ is based on being oppositional – or being seen to be oppositional - against capitalism, racism, sexism, imperialism (real or imagined), white male patriarchy, etc, then liberties can, and probably will, be taken. Attempts to fathom truth, or to be consistent, meaningful and accurate, can, and probably will, be dispensed with in order to advance The Great Cause. (Or The Great Oppositional Posture, depending on one’s scepticism.) And it’s worth noting that in Criticism and Social Change, the left-wing theorist, Frank Lentricchia, announced that the postmodern movement “seeks not to find the foundation and conditions of truth, but to exercise power for the purpose of social change.”

Achieved, one might suppose, even at the cost of truth.

That says it all.

I'd also add that I believe the villain of the story to be Mike Nifong, who sold his soul to get elected. By her reported behavior, the accusing woman appears to be mentally unstable, not very bright, and sounds alcoholic and/or drug addicted and, despite the unbelieveable destructiveness of her actions, deserves some pity. If she sobers up, and if she has a conscience, she will never get over the wrongs she has done.

And about "Pomo".  Isn't it always the most humble and curious kid in the class who asks the dumb question nobody else wants to ask? They are the best. Got an email asking "What is Pomo"? Abbreviation for "post-modern," usually applied to people with a political or world-view agenda for which truth is irrelevant. No, I would go further: for which truth is considered a reactionary maneuver - and they gladly admit it. Pomo is as old as the Appalachian Mountains: it's also called "political lying."