I am a former Chairman of the Tidewater Libertarian Party and was the 2007 LP candidate for the 14th district VA Senate. Previously, I was the Volunteer State Director for the FairTax. I am married 50 years with two grown children and 5 grandchildren.
View all posts by Don Tabor
Published
56 thoughts on “Inclusion”
I saw the story about this this morning and was pretty much sickened by wjhat happened. BUt not only TO Judge Duncan, but also his repsons to one of the questioners.
…”should fire its Dean of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, disband her department and burn the building to the ground.”
Firing with some training on REAL diversity before getting another position any where.. But disbanding the department and burning down the building is a bit over the top. Even for you.
“What actual purpose does such a department serve?”
It is a counterweight to traditional white privilege. Elite schools are overpopulated with “legacies” – the children of wealthy white people most of whom could not come close to admittance on their own merits. The legacy rate at Stanford is nearly 20%. For the Ivy League it is from 20%-35%.
What’s wrong with that? Is there a “correct” legacy percentage?
If you are a hypocrit, there is nothing wrong with it.
But if your hair is on fire because someone from a disadvantaged background gets a little preference but it is not on fire when someone from an advantaged background gets a lot of preference then you are a hypocrit.
“You mean the whole question boils down to my personal and private qualities as a human being?”
Try reading with a little more understanding. I did not say – in this instance – that you were a hypocrit. It was a classic counterfactual construction . . . “If you are a hypocrit then . . .”
“To me, hypocrisy is boasting of your concern for the downtrodden while enacting the policies that crush them.”
Yeah, what could be more “crushing” than making sure every child has food to eat, clothes to wear, a place to sleep, and access to medical care when they need it!
“Boasting?” I have not heard anyone “boasting.” Expressing opinions you don’t share is not “boasting.”
The hypocrisy that you exhibit on many issues has been noted countless times. The beginning of wisdom is to know thyself. People are trying to help you advance in your journey towards wisdom.
“I am wise enough to see where socialism always ends.”
I see little evidence of any wisdom in what you post. Nor do I have any problem identifying numerous countries that you would label “socialist” that are doing very well, thank you very much.
Fascist dictatorships built on lies and hatreds always end badly. Maybe that is what you have in mind?
“Sounds like they need to get rid of the legacy system, not trying to balance it with other students who couldn’t make it on merit.”
Sure, but the entrenched wealthy people who donate and sit on their boards are there so that their kids and grandkids will get an edge and they like it that way.
It is hard to know who can make it on merit when 20-30% of the admissions are out of the running.
And who has more “merit” – a kid from a public school in the ghetto who scores 1450 on the SATs or a rich kid who spent an extra year in a prep school who scores 1500? These are not clear cut decisions.
RE: “Sounds like they need to get rid of the legacy system…”
I dunno. I think it is is kinda neat when children go to the same colleges their parents and grandparents went to.
To me, the far more important question concerns the quality of education the students receive. From the looks of it the students at Stanford are not being well served.
“I think it is is kinda neat when children go to the same colleges their parents and grandparents went to.”
I do too, but the point is they should get their on their own merits. There is no need for admissions officers to know about parents and grandparents connections.
Like me, my daughter went to Dartmouth. I believe she would have earned a place there based on her academic achievements – Valdictorian by a mile at Oscar Smith while taking every AP course on offer, brilliant writer, and 1600 (perfect) on the SATs. But, with legacy favoritism in play, her achievement in gaining admission is a little bit tarnished.
“OMG. Out [out!] damned spot. The whole East Coast hurts for you.”
Well, excuse me for trying to respond to you as if you were a sentient adult. What triggered you – my mentioning one of my very successful children? Hit some sort of nerve for some reason?
I hardly expressed “mortification.” I was making the same point that you people constantly make about affirmative action – if any advantage is given or beleived to be given it sows doubt that the position was not earned – even if it was. It was a generally friendly, non-adversarial comment and not too hard to follow. I should have known better.
This exchange reinforces my opinion of your intellect and character. I will simply say that if I expressed those opinions you would be offended.
RE: “I was making the same point that you people constantly make about affirmative action – if any advantage is given or beleived to be given it sows doubt that the position was not earned – even if it was.”
Sure.
I scoff at your virtue signalling. Maybe we should all look up to you ad a man of sincere and rational values because you denigrate your own daughter. After all, if you would do it to her, it is OK for you to do it to anyone.
Judge Duncan is a “Christian” activist judge who has used his position to promote the Trump agenda. But more importantly he has been an active opponent of LGBTQ rights. He has opined that the Obergefell decision “imperils civic peace” ( a threat of violence) and that the decision “raises a question about the legitimacy of the court.”
If you are a member of a group that this fellow would exclude from the civil rights, privileges, and obligations available to the people he approves of, you would be inclined to shout him down as well. With that said, it would have been a better response to spread his atavistic views and encourage a boycott.
“Why do you excuse efforts to silence him instead?”
Some ideas are offensive, even “divisive” or hadn’t you heard?
I did not “excuse” the efforts to silence them. I explained where they were coming from. And I did not advocate silencing him. I advocated sharing his ideas but not attending his speech.
Not the way you people use the word. It has a meaning. A meaning you choose to completely ignore.
“woke : aware of and actively attentive to important societal facts and issues (especially issues of racial and social justice)”
Since you people are on the wrong, selfish, bigotted, unChristian, and/or anachronistic side of just about every issue of racial and social justice you use it as a perjorative. Knock yourselves out. As you have done in the past, you overplay your bullshit until the voters get sick of it. IMHO, of course.
Sefl serving definitions notwithstanding, what Woke really is are intolerant virtue signaling tyrants unwilling to meet those who disagree in the marketplace of ideas so they seek to cancel then so they cannot be heard.
I seem to recall an observation years ago that etiquette is the non-legal way to encourage civility among people. Or something like that.
I think we have tossed etiquette into the trash bin and now we are stuck with incivility and little recourse. I still compare Buckley/Baldwin debate at Cambridge in 1965 as a benchmark of student civility. The subject was controversial and remains so today: “The American Dream is at the expense of the American Negro”.
Yet the packed audience of students were eager and willing to listen without catcalls, objections or any other modern day tactics. This debate was in the heat of our civil rights legislation efforts. And I recall the world wondering if we might have a serious problem with race.
Sadly, that is no longer in the realm of possibility. Woke is not the cause, as this intolerance by students has been going on for decades and we may be reaping what we sowed.
We are so clearly divided by parties now, that until there is some reconciliation among the national leadership, resolution seems improbable for now.
In my opinion, it is hard to legalize civility and tolerance, but I do empathize with those on the margins economically and culturally. The waiting game can seem interminable, even King said the arc of justice is long.
For now, of course, “woke” in all its ramifications and, yes, misunderstandings, will be a political football. Sad, because we have many issues that are ignored in favor of culture wars. If a politician thinks he can elected by attacking “woke” without even knowing the details, then that is what we will hear.
We will see, but your track record predicting massive vindication of Trumpism at the polls does not bode well for your predictions. Historically, truth will out. It sometimes takes a while but there always has come the “Have you no decency?” moment. DeSantis is rapidly getting there with his bragging to MAGATS and his childish glee at dumping desperate immigrants in other states. And then here is a tee-shirt being sold to raise funds for MTG. Making fun of sick people – no one can accuse her of being “woke.”
You can drop this “marketplace of ideas” baloney. Yours is the party of censoring “divisive” ideas and actual history. You don’t see Democrats registering journalists, publishing prohibited book lists, or banning AP History courses.
Woke? There is that word again. The more you use it, the less meaning it has. Kind of like Liberal, Socialist, and whatever stupid buzzword the Right comes up with instead of meaningful debate.
“Yeah, just like German Jews, circa 1930. What does that make you?”
It does not make me anything. It makes you a clueless dope with your puerile and insulting equivalency. There is a world of difference between what people CHOOSE to be and what they are born to be. This judge is an adult who CHOOSES to push a “Christian” theological agenda in our secular courts. I don’t think he should be doing that. That does not make me a Nazi. Duh!
There is ZERO equivalency to that statement. And I am disgusted by your attempted use to equate RADICAL CONSERVATIVE judges who interpret the law to their religious beliefs to people who were put to deaht.
I get it. Judge Duncan refuses to play fantasy land with men pretending to be women in his court. A court is a legal atmosphere that requires truth and facts not fantasy and lies. No wonder he is loathed by the left, good for him.
Isn’t it exactly why you and those students hate him and was the gist of that weird speech by the Dean of DEI? Attempting to white wash and cover up your agenda isn’t working and never will.
Tidewater News and Opinion Forum 
I saw the story about this this morning and was pretty much sickened by wjhat happened. BUt not only TO Judge Duncan, but also his repsons to one of the questioners.
…”should fire its Dean of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, disband her department and burn the building to the ground.”
Firing with some training on REAL diversity before getting another position any where.. But disbanding the department and burning down the building is a bit over the top. Even for you.
LikeLike
What actual purpose does such a department serve?
LikeLike
“What actual purpose does such a department serve?”
It is a counterweight to traditional white privilege. Elite schools are overpopulated with “legacies” – the children of wealthy white people most of whom could not come close to admittance on their own merits. The legacy rate at Stanford is nearly 20%. For the Ivy League it is from 20%-35%.
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: ” The legacy rate at Stanford is nearly 20%. For the Ivy League it is from 20%-35%.”
What’s wrong with that? Is there a “correct” legacy percentage?
LikeLike
0
What’s wrong with that? Is there a “correct” legacy percentage?
If you are a hypocrit, there is nothing wrong with it.
But if your hair is on fire because someone from a disadvantaged background gets a little preference but it is not on fire when someone from an advantaged background gets a lot of preference then you are a hypocrit.
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “If you are a hypocrit, there is nothing wrong with it.”
You mean the whole question boils down to my personal and private qualities as a human being?
Forgive me, but it sounds pretty stupid to say that legacy admissions are wrong because Todd Roberts is a hypocrite.
LikeLike
“You mean the whole question boils down to my personal and private qualities as a human being?”
Try reading with a little more understanding. I did not say – in this instance – that you were a hypocrit. It was a classic counterfactual construction . . . “If you are a hypocrit then . . .”
LikeLiked by 1 person
Uh, I think it was a you as in general, not Todd Roberts.
LikeLiked by 2 people
RE: “It was a classic counterfactual construction”
Yeah. And my response was a classic reductio ad absurdum.
LikeLike
“Yeah. And my response was a classic reductio ad absurdum.”
No it wasn’t. That is just plain silly.
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “Uh, I think it was a you as in general, not Todd Roberts.”
Yeah, I got that. Me in general is a hypocrite. That’s what’s important.
LikeLike
” Me in general is a hypocrite”
Thank you for finally admitting it. Now, can you get Don to agree also. 😇
LikeLike
To me, hypocrisy is boasting of your concern for the downtrodden while enacting the policies that crush them.
LikeLike
“To me, hypocrisy is boasting of your concern for the downtrodden while enacting the policies that crush them.”
Yeah, what could be more “crushing” than making sure every child has food to eat, clothes to wear, a place to sleep, and access to medical care when they need it!
“Boasting?” I have not heard anyone “boasting.” Expressing opinions you don’t share is not “boasting.”
The hypocrisy that you exhibit on many issues has been noted countless times. The beginning of wisdom is to know thyself. People are trying to help you advance in your journey towards wisdom.
LikeLike
I am wise enough to see where socialism always ends.
LikeLike
“I am wise enough to see where socialism always ends.”
I see little evidence of any wisdom in what you post. Nor do I have any problem identifying numerous countries that you would label “socialist” that are doing very well, thank you very much.
Fascist dictatorships built on lies and hatreds always end badly. Maybe that is what you have in mind?
LikeLike
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/uk/uk-health-service-nhs-nearing-collapse-heres-what-chancellor-jeremy-hunt-warns/articleshow/95491543.cms
https://www.cnn.com/2022/08/24/energy/energy-crisis-uk-cost-pandemic/index.html
And that’s with us carrying the bulk of their defense costs.
The chickens are coming home to roost.
LikeLike
Sounds like they need to get rid of the legacy system, not trying to balance it with other students who couldn’t make it on merit.
LikeLike
“Sounds like they need to get rid of the legacy system, not trying to balance it with other students who couldn’t make it on merit.”
Sure, but the entrenched wealthy people who donate and sit on their boards are there so that their kids and grandkids will get an edge and they like it that way.
It is hard to know who can make it on merit when 20-30% of the admissions are out of the running.
And who has more “merit” – a kid from a public school in the ghetto who scores 1450 on the SATs or a rich kid who spent an extra year in a prep school who scores 1500? These are not clear cut decisions.
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “Sounds like they need to get rid of the legacy system…”
I dunno. I think it is is kinda neat when children go to the same colleges their parents and grandparents went to.
To me, the far more important question concerns the quality of education the students receive. From the looks of it the students at Stanford are not being well served.
LikeLike
“I think it is is kinda neat when children go to the same colleges their parents and grandparents went to.”
I do too, but the point is they should get their on their own merits. There is no need for admissions officers to know about parents and grandparents connections.
Like me, my daughter went to Dartmouth. I believe she would have earned a place there based on her academic achievements – Valdictorian by a mile at Oscar Smith while taking every AP course on offer, brilliant writer, and 1600 (perfect) on the SATs. But, with legacy favoritism in play, her achievement in gaining admission is a little bit tarnished.
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “But, with legacy favoritism in play, her achievement in gaining admission is a little bit tarnished.”
OMG. Out [out!] damned spot. The whole East Coast hurts for you.
LikeLike
“OMG. Out [out!] damned spot. The whole East Coast hurts for you.”
Well, excuse me for trying to respond to you as if you were a sentient adult. What triggered you – my mentioning one of my very successful children? Hit some sort of nerve for some reason?
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “Well, excuse me for trying to respond to you as if you were a sentient adult.”
As a sentient adult I find your mortification over the flaw in your daughter’s admission to Dartmouth astonishing.
LikeLike
More proof that honesty is just not something you can deal with.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“As a sentient adult . . .”
I hardly expressed “mortification.” I was making the same point that you people constantly make about affirmative action – if any advantage is given or beleived to be given it sows doubt that the position was not earned – even if it was. It was a generally friendly, non-adversarial comment and not too hard to follow. I should have known better.
This exchange reinforces my opinion of your intellect and character. I will simply say that if I expressed those opinions you would be offended.
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “I was making the same point that you people constantly make about affirmative action – if any advantage is given or beleived to be given it sows doubt that the position was not earned – even if it was.”
Sure.
I scoff at your virtue signalling. Maybe we should all look up to you ad a man of sincere and rational values because you denigrate your own daughter. After all, if you would do it to her, it is OK for you to do it to anyone.
LikeLike
“I scoff at your virtue signalling”
I did not “denigrate my own daughter,” you complete jackass. I shared a personal anecdote connected to the subject of preferential admissions.
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “Stanford University should fire its Dean of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, disband her department and burn the building to the ground.”
Someone should tell Arnold Schwarzenegger. Maybe he could make a video about it.
LikeLike
I could swear Arnold was talking to libs in the first place. I guess they weren’t listening.
LikeLike
Judge Duncan is a “Christian” activist judge who has used his position to promote the Trump agenda. But more importantly he has been an active opponent of LGBTQ rights. He has opined that the Obergefell decision “imperils civic peace” ( a threat of violence) and that the decision “raises a question about the legitimacy of the court.”
If you are a member of a group that this fellow would exclude from the civil rights, privileges, and obligations available to the people he approves of, you would be inclined to shout him down as well. With that said, it would have been a better response to spread his atavistic views and encourage a boycott.
LikeLiked by 1 person
If he is as bad as you say, it should be pretty easy to defeat him in the marketplace of ideas.
Why do you excuse efforts to silence him instead?
LikeLike
“Why do you excuse efforts to silence him instead?”
Some ideas are offensive, even “divisive” or hadn’t you heard?
I did not “excuse” the efforts to silence them. I explained where they were coming from. And I did not advocate silencing him. I advocated sharing his ideas but not attending his speech.
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “Judge Duncan is a “Christian” activist judge who has used his position to promote the Trump agenda.”
Got it. He’s a Jew in 1930s Germany.
LikeLike
“He’s a Jew in 1930s Germany.”
That makes no sense.
But I will state unequivocally that “Christian” activist judges should not be on the bench in our secular Republic. IMHO.
LikeLiked by 1 person
And equally, Woke activist judges should not be on the bench
LikeLike
Woke is an undefined term. Duh!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Like obscenity, you know it when you see it.
LikeLike
if you are on the Supreme Court.
And the only obscenity is the Right’s USE of a buzzword that loses meaning every time it is uttered.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Like obscenity, you know it when you see it.”
Not the way you people use the word. It has a meaning. A meaning you choose to completely ignore.
“woke : aware of and actively attentive to important societal facts and issues (especially issues of racial and social justice)”
Since you people are on the wrong, selfish, bigotted, unChristian, and/or anachronistic side of just about every issue of racial and social justice you use it as a perjorative. Knock yourselves out. As you have done in the past, you overplay your bullshit until the voters get sick of it. IMHO, of course.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It’s Woke the voters are getting sick of.
Sefl serving definitions notwithstanding, what Woke really is are intolerant virtue signaling tyrants unwilling to meet those who disagree in the marketplace of ideas so they seek to cancel then so they cannot be heard.
LikeLike
I seem to recall an observation years ago that etiquette is the non-legal way to encourage civility among people. Or something like that.
I think we have tossed etiquette into the trash bin and now we are stuck with incivility and little recourse. I still compare Buckley/Baldwin debate at Cambridge in 1965 as a benchmark of student civility. The subject was controversial and remains so today: “The American Dream is at the expense of the American Negro”.
Yet the packed audience of students were eager and willing to listen without catcalls, objections or any other modern day tactics. This debate was in the heat of our civil rights legislation efforts. And I recall the world wondering if we might have a serious problem with race.
Sadly, that is no longer in the realm of possibility. Woke is not the cause, as this intolerance by students has been going on for decades and we may be reaping what we sowed.
We are so clearly divided by parties now, that until there is some reconciliation among the national leadership, resolution seems improbable for now.
In my opinion, it is hard to legalize civility and tolerance, but I do empathize with those on the margins economically and culturally. The waiting game can seem interminable, even King said the arc of justice is long.
For now, of course, “woke” in all its ramifications and, yes, misunderstandings, will be a political football. Sad, because we have many issues that are ignored in favor of culture wars. If a politician thinks he can elected by attacking “woke” without even knowing the details, then that is what we will hear.
IMO
LikeLiked by 2 people
“It’s Woke the voters are getting sick of.”
We will see, but your track record predicting massive vindication of Trumpism at the polls does not bode well for your predictions. Historically, truth will out. It sometimes takes a while but there always has come the “Have you no decency?” moment. DeSantis is rapidly getting there with his bragging to MAGATS and his childish glee at dumping desperate immigrants in other states. And then here is a tee-shirt being sold to raise funds for MTG. Making fun of sick people – no one can accuse her of being “woke.”
https://www.joemygod.com/2023/03/mtg-sells-t-shirts-mocking-people-with-monkeypox/
You can drop this “marketplace of ideas” baloney. Yours is the party of censoring “divisive” ideas and actual history. You don’t see Democrats registering journalists, publishing prohibited book lists, or banning AP History courses.
LikeLiked by 2 people
“It’s Woke the voters are getting sick of.”
It is nothing but a BUZZWORD. Go ahead and keep using it. it will go the way of the dodo.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Woke? There is that word again. The more you use it, the less meaning it has. Kind of like Liberal, Socialist, and whatever stupid buzzword the Right comes up with instead of meaningful debate.
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “But I will state unequivocally that ‘Christian’ activist judges should not be on the bench in our secular Republic.”
Yeah, just like German Jews, circa 1930. What does that make you?
LikeLike
“Yeah, just like German Jews, circa 1930. What does that make you?”
It does not make me anything. It makes you a clueless dope with your puerile and insulting equivalency. There is a world of difference between what people CHOOSE to be and what they are born to be. This judge is an adult who CHOOSES to push a “Christian” theological agenda in our secular courts. I don’t think he should be doing that. That does not make me a Nazi. Duh!
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “It makes you a clueless dope with your puerile and insulting equivalency.”
Apparently you CHOOSE to be a man who goes around calling other people clueless dopes. A brown shirt suits you.
LikeLike
“Apparently you CHOOSE to be a man who goes around calling other people cluseless dopes.”
Yeah, I tend to be quite blunt when some jackass calls me a Nazi.
LikeLiked by 1 person
There is ZERO equivalency to that statement. And I am disgusted by your attempted use to equate RADICAL CONSERVATIVE judges who interpret the law to their religious beliefs to people who were put to deaht.
LikeLiked by 1 person
As far as I am concerned, a pox on activist judges of all stripes.
Judges should interpret the law as it was understood by the legislatures that passed them. No more, no less.
LikeLike
I get it. Judge Duncan refuses to play fantasy land with men pretending to be women in his court. A court is a legal atmosphere that requires truth and facts not fantasy and lies. No wonder he is loathed by the left, good for him.
And yes, fire that patronizing huzzy at Stanford.
LikeLike
Your obsession with the Trans world is something you should have checked out at your local psych clinic.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Isn’t it exactly why you and those students hate him and was the gist of that weird speech by the Dean of DEI? Attempting to white wash and cover up your agenda isn’t working and never will.
LikeLike
It just gets weirder and weirder. Is Stanford running a law school or a kindergarten?
For Adam, note the primary cause of the childish “protest” was Duncan’s refusal to appease a man pretending to be a woman in his court.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.foxnews.com/media/hundreds-silent-masked-students-surround-stanford-law-dean-apology-heckled-federal-judge-eerie.amp
LikeLike