If you’re interested, Missouri GOP Chair John Hancock is now issuing the expected and inevitable statements denying Tom Schweich’s posthumous accusations that he spearheaded an anti-Semitic whisper campaign in order to derail Schweich’s gubernatorial candidacy in favor of the Rex Sinquefield-blessed Catherine Hanaway. Not a surprising move, although his terminology in an email sent to folks identified as “party-leaders” is interesting:

Many of you on this committee are aware of the issue, as it came up in several of our conversations during the past few months,” Hancock wrote, as quoted by the Post-Dispatch. “While those who know me understand I would never denigrate anyone’s faith, Tom had mistakenly believed that I had attacked his religion.”

This left me scratching my head. Nothing that I’ve read implied that Hancock had ever attacked Schweich’s religion. According to reports, Schweich was an Episcopalian and nobody to my knowledge is accusing Hancock of slandering Episcopalians. What folks are saying is that Hancock was falsely asserting that Schweich, who had a Jewish grandfather, was himself Jewish. And that Hancock was doing it in those Republican circles where that might make Schweich persona non grata – at least as far as raising money to finance his race against Hanaway.

There’s a difference. Maybe Hancock doesn’t understand that, or maybe he’s just a sloppy kind of guy when it comes to explaining himself. But what Schweich accused him of wasn’t attacking his religion, but of practicing the dirtiest type of very dirty politics. An accusation that derives a certain credibility from the fact that we all know Republicans are good at doing just that – as I pointed out earlier.

That impression is reinforced by Hancock’s efforts to discredit the motives of Post-Dispatch columnist Tony Messenger who had been made privy to what was on Schweich’s mind during his last weeks of life:

“Now, some political opponents-particularly liberal Post-Dispatch columnist Tony Messenger-are using this tragic incident as an opportunity to criticize me and to smear the Missouri Republican Party,” Hancock wrote, as quoted by the newspaper. “These attacks are not only disgusting; they are wrong.”

Hoowee! Hancock evidentaly belongs to that school of conservative thought that seeks to answer any accusation of wrongdoing by evoking that rightwing bugaboo – those damn “liberals.” Count on them to be “disgusting and wrong.”

Wrong in what sense, though? Does wrong here mean inaccurate or morally culpable? Does Hancock think Messenger made up Schweich’s claims? By his own admission, lots of folks knew that Schweich was getting hot under the collar about what he considered an underhanded and nasty effort to knock him out of the race for the governor’s mansion. So what’s disgusting and wrong, in either sense, about telling folks about the beliefs that had been driving Schweich prior to his death, especially since Messenger correctly ensured that his account of what Schweich said neither affirmed or denied the accusations. If, based on past experience, we’re inclined to take Schweich seriously, the onus should fall on those of Mr. Hancock’s partisans who paved the way for us.

By many accounts Schweich was a highly-strung individual; maybe he was magnifying a few garden-variety incidents of who knows what. But by all the same accounts, he was also a man of integrity who refused to countenance what he considered bad behavior; it is probably undeniable that if he had not taken an even more decisive action yesterday, he would have been making those accusations public himself. How is it wrong – or even “liberal” – for Tony Messenger to act as Schweich’s proxy? Wasn’t Messenger just practicing honest journalism?  Doesn’t Tom Schweich, whose last phone call seems to have been an effort to arrange an interview on the subject, deserve a little respectful and honest journalism on the day of his death?

 

On the topic of the alleged GOP whisper campaign against Tom Schweich:

The Post-Dispatch reports Schweich believed Republican Party chairman John Hancock, elected last weekend, was saying Schweich is Jewish to hurt him politically in the gubernatorial primary race, as many Republican voters are evangelical Christians.

So what are all these reporters trying to say about evangelical Christians? Think maybe they should broaden the target? Narrow it? Tell it like it is? You already know what I think.

After thoughts: Do you think saying evangelicals might not vote for a Jew is an effort to make anti-Semitism sound respectible? As if it’s just a crazy foible of the religious which is to be expected and tolerated?

Read Tony Messenger’s St. Louis Post-Dispatch editorial piece on the death today of State Auditor and gubernatorial candidate, Tom Schweich. It’s heartbreaking. If you don’t have the stomach for sad stories and righteous anger is more your thing, just read the excerpt that Michael Bersin posted below  

Messenger makes it clear that he doesn’t know the nature of the desperation that led Schweich to do what he did. What he does know: the chair of the Missouri Republican Party, who claimed neutrality in the primary race between Schweich and Catherine Hanaway, was, according to Schweich, planning to undercut Schweich through a “whisper” campaign. Schweich’s grandfather was a Jew and that seems to be sufficient to do damage among Republicans.

The use of a race-baiting whisper campaign is old-hat for Republicans. The Nation describes one of the more notorious examples:

Eight years ago this month [i.e.,  Jan. 2008], John McCain took the New Hampshire primary and was favored to win in South Carolina. Had he succeeded, he would likely have thwarted the presidential aspirations of George W. Bush and become the Republican nominee. But Bush strategist Karl Rove came to the rescue with a vicious smear tactic.

Rove invented a uniquely injurious fiction for his operatives to circulate via a phony poll. Voters were asked, “Would you be more or less likely to vote for John McCain…if you knew he had fathered an illegitimate black child?” This was no random slur. McCain was at the time campaigning with his dark-skinned daughter, Bridget, adopted from Bangladesh.

In his editorial article Messenger hones in on racism in Missouri:

Missouri is the state that gave us Frazier Glenn Miller, the raging racist who last year killed three people at a Jewish community center in Kansas City. It’s the state in which on the day before Schweich died, the Anti-Defamation League reported on a rise of white supremacist prison gangs in the state.

Division over race and creed is real in Missouri Republican politics, particularly in some rural areas. Schweich knew it. It’s why all week long his anger burned.

True enough. But from what I’ve been seeing over the past six years, this roiling racist frenzy isn’t just a Missouri phenomena, but the new defining characteristic of the Republican Party itself. Since Richard Nixon, Republican politicians have been attempting to generate and exploit white racial resentment. But it’s taken the election of an African-American president to rouse the tribal hysteria that we’ve seen in recent years.

Republican politicians and their media counterparts on Fox television and rightwing radio routinely engage in the type of racist innuendos and slurs that would have been enough to have ruined careers a decade or so ago had anyone dared say out loud what is now par for the course. I could give examples, but there’s so many it’s hard to choose – and you already know what I mean. Take for instance,  this list of the ten most racist moments at the last GOP convention. It’s even disturbed some Republicans. Charlie Christ left the GOP because “‘I couldn’t be consistent with myself and my core beliefs, and stay with a party that was so unfriendly toward the African-American president.” Hmmm, unfriendly. Politicians are politic, but the gist is clear.

As for anti-Semitism, remember Eric Cantor? You know, the Jewish guy who used to be House Majority Leader – and the only Republican Jewish member of the House of Representatives? Prior to his defeat, which many attributed to anti-Semitism, Cantor essentially admitted that racism and anti-Semitism was a problem in the House GOP caucus. And you all know about the history of anti-Semitism in the leadership of the American Family Association (AFA), the group that has given its heart, soul and financial support to the Republican Party – which reciprocates by regularly regularly sucking up in the AFA’s direction.

Of course rightwingers become apoplectic when they hear that other R word coupled with Republican, not to mention anti-Semitism. Not Islamophobic though – they seem to like that epithet. And it’s not just the denial; there’s all the projection too. Wingers are always on about how liberals are the real racists. Sadly, though their outrage is far too shrill and contrived; their red-faced conniption fits ultimately just make the rest of us laugh.

But I’m not laughing now. Folks who have a chance of adding control of the executive branch of our state to their legislative branch trophies, are accused of waging an anti-Semitic whispering campaign against a fellow party member. It’s going to be hard to escape the fall-out from this latest, local evidence of Republican moral rot. Or at least it ought to be.

*Phrase added in next to last paragraph.

I just read about a tiny town in France called “La Mort aux Juifs,” which translates to “Death to Jews” (h/t DailyKos). And the mayor is firm that the name won’t be changed despite demands by the Simon Wisenthal Center: “Why change a name that goes back to the Middle Ages or even further? We should respect these old names.” He also claims that “no one has anything against the Jews,” evidently missing the actual point?

Does this situation sound familiar? Remember the Washington Redskins? Responding to suggestions that they change the team’s name, the team’s owner poohpoohed the hurt feelings or embarrassment it might engender, appealing to tradition to explain why he will “never” change the teams name :

After 81 years, the team name ‘Redskins’ continues to hold the memories and meaning of where we came from, who we are, and who we want to be in the years to come, […].

I respect the feelings of those who are offended by the team name. But I hope such individuals also try to respect what the name means, not only for all of us in the extended Washington Redskins family, but among Native Americans too,”…  

It’s hard to fault such cluelessness. What, indeed, does the name mean, especially to those it designates? What, in the larger picture, does it say about where we as Americans come from? It might just be those very considerations that prompted calls for the name to be changed.

In Wildwood, here in Missouri, the justification for retaining a disturbing street name, ‘Old Slave Road,’ was, you guessed it, history. In spite of proposals to rename the street after a former slave born on the plantation that had occupied the site of Old Slave Road, and who later, as a free man, fought in the Union Army’s Colored Infantry during the Civil War, locals and “outsiders” were not satisfied, and felt that they would be sacrificing “historical significance.”

All of this deference to history and tradition sounds nice, but begs the question about why these particular, rather nasty historical precedents and traditions need to be preserved in ways that suggest that they are now neutral. Nor does changing these names in any way whitewash the historical record; it would simply signal that there has actually been a change in human sensibilities and that it’s possible for us to rectify past errors and behave with sensitivity and civility in the public sphere.

The name “Mort au Juifs” certainly suggests the long European history of persecuting Jews, an historical record that also dates back to the middle ages, finally, horrifically, culminating in Hitler’s Final Solution. But, hey, the town’s name has always evoked genocide so why change it now.

As for “Redskins,” before it was a sports team, it was a triumphalistic term used by European Americans to denigrate Native Americans after nearly wiping them out. No doubt about who had their feet on who’s throat here, no sporting teams I know about are called “palefaces.”

And here in Missouri, we had quite a history of “old slaves,” although it’s difficult to understand why anyone wants to enshrine that fact. Actually, recent events suggest that it’s quite possible that the fallout from the Missouri’ past as a slave state isn’t confined to history.

In the last couple of days there have been heated protests in the St. Louis metro city of Ferguson. A young, unarmed black man, stopped for the monstrous crime of walking in the middle of a street, was shot multiple times by a police officer. The population of Ferguson is 65% African-American, yet 50 of its 53 commissioned police officers are white. Since the city refuses to release the name of the police officer involved, its possible that Michael Brown was shot by one of the three African-American officers, but that’s not really the point. As TPM’s Josh Marshall observes:

It’s easy to be reductive about these things. No single incident can be tied to this kind of disparity. And there are instances of black cops taking a shoot first and ask questions later approach to policing with black civilians. But at a minimum, when you’ve got police bringing out armored vehicles, tear gas and rubber bullets (in addition to the old-fashioned metal kind), it’s an extremely incendiary factor to have an almost exclusively white police force squaring off against an overwhelmingly black community, venting outrage at the shooting of an unarmed kid who was two days away from starting college.

When incidents of this type are still taking place regularly, can you really tell me that it’s all right to take pride in living on “Old Slave Road”? While Native Americans are struggling to recover from our sad, shared history, can you tell me that a few sporting fans can’t take a name change in stride in the name of human civility? As for “Mort aux Juifs,” I have nothing more to say, the name says it all, and like the other two examples, time has not rendered it meaningless.

Slate’s David Weigel seems to have just discovered St. Louis’ Dana Loesch whom he designates his temporary, “accidental nemesis.” Today he is taken by the alacrity with which the right-wing St. Louis scold has jumped on the trumped-up claims of anti-Semitism in the Occupy movement that are currently being worked up by the right.

Weigel’s point, which is that all new social movements attract a few looney-tunes,  is illustrated with a video of David Duke endorsing the Tea Party. I admit that I’m still not convinced that a healthy dose of Duke’s KKK-type philosophy does not animate at least some segments of Tea Partydom. This opinion was reinforced after I read Colin Woodard’s recent article in the Washington Monthly on the geographic distribution of the Tea Party, which notes that its area of greatest strength corresponds to what we traditionally think of as the South – where the conflict over issues of race may be more hidden than in the past, but arguably still run very deep.

Be that as it may, I think Weigel misses the real silliness of Loesch’s comment:

They have the blessing of Nancy Pelosi. They’re also endorsed by the Nazi Party of the United States. They’re also endorsed by Communists. These are things that we did not see with the tea party movement.

Weigel deals very effectively with the Nazi and Communist endorsements, but he ignores the presence of Nancy Pelosi on this list. Dana Loesch is evidently either so ignorant or so blinded by right-wing rhetoric that she thinks that Nancy Pelosi’s support for Occupy Wall Street is the equivalent of a lot of hot air from Nazis. We’re talking about the Nancy Pelosi who is the House Minority Leader, the first female Speaker of the House, and a respected California politician who was elected to office over and over again during the past 24 years. If you ask me, Loesch is trying to hit two birds with one  stone, both the Occupy movement and Nancy Pelosi, an outspoken and proud progressive.

Bear in mind that Loesch is paid by CNN to express her opinions in a public forum. Does this fact leave you feeling as embarrassed about the state of public discourse as I do right now?  

Missouri Lt. Governor Peter Kinder (r) via Twitter:

… Anti-Semites does quite simply NOTHING 2 refute the astonishing explosion of lefty Jew hatred. Conservatives stoutly defend Israel, Jews     about 6 hours ago  via UberTwitter  

“Lefty Jew hatred”? Oi vay.

@Patricialicious THE big trend of last decade: explosion of anti-semitism from the Left and left-wing academics. Evangelicals defend Israel     about 13 hours ago  via UberTwitter  in reply to Patricialicious

#HelenThomas despicable, hate-filled outburst illustrates an important point: great prevalence of virulent anti-Semitism from the Left #pdk     7:53 PM Jun 6th  via UberTwitter  

All that “lefty Jew hatred” over the last decade obviously explains why John McCain and Sarah Palin did so well with the Jewish vote in 2008, right?

Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life

A Look at Religious Voters in the 2008 Election

February 10, 2009

….And if you look at the exit polls, Obama got 78% of Jewish voters — that’s actually slightly better than Kerry did and it’s about where Gore and Clinton were….

Never mind.

…The fool, or the fool who follows him?

This is the fiftieth post in an ongoing series as we file Missouri Sunshine Law (RSMo 610) requests and investigate the non-renewal of the contract of University of Central Missouri President Aaron Podolefsky. Links to previous coverage are below the fold. BG and MB

As reported in today’s print edition of the Muleskinner, the student newspaper at the University of Central Missouri, on February 25th in open session the University’s Board of Governors unanimously approved the content of a letter to be sent to Benoit Wesly concerning their opinion of the on air radio comments by Greg Hassler:

February 24, 2010

Mr. Benoit Wesly

[….]

Dear Mr. Wesly:

The Board of Governors is responsible for the governance of the University of Central Missouri, and in that capacity has enacted rules, regulations, and policies that clearly specify that discrimination is forbidden at the University. The Board reviewed the matter of the statement attributed to the radio announcer and does not believe the content of the statement was discriminatory, nor was it intended to be discriminatory.  The [text obscured] has been advised that Mr. Hassler made a public statement thereafter, stating that he meant nothing discriminatory and apologized for any controversy caused by his comments….

….Mr. Hassler is not an employee of the University of Central Missouri and is not authorized to issue any statement on behalf of the University. It is indeed unfortunate that what was apparently an innocent comment has been blown out of proportion. The Board takes claims of discrimination very seriously, but it would appear that the remarks were not of any negative impact upon this university, and frankly drew no attention or comment whatsoever until following the orchestrated release of your first communication and subsequent communications about the statement.

The Board is regretful that you have chosen to to take the word of whoever is providing you information over the efforts of the Board and Board President to rationally review this situation. We thank you for your past contributions to the University. It is unfortunate that you have further chosen to withdraw future support of this institution and its students. You certainly have the right to your opinion to do so, and you have exercised that right because you disagree with the Board. This matter is deemed to be closed. We will find a way to keep the institution and its students from being disadvantaged.

Sincerely,

s/

Weldon Brady, Secretary

UCM Board of Governors

“…Mr. Hassler is not an employee of the University of Central Missouri and is not authorized to issue any statement on behalf of the University…”

Uh, his radio station (he’s a minority owner) has an exclusive ten year contract [pdf] with the University to broadcast its sporting events. And he’s certainly a ubiquitous presence in the University’s athletic program publicity.

“…has been advised that Mr. Hassler made a public statement thereafter, stating that he meant nothing discriminatory and apologized for any controversy caused by his comments…”

Here’s the on air “apology” from December 10, 2009:

…Greg Hassler: …But there’s another blogger out there that has taken some things that I have said, eh, out of context and has spun them around and at, attacked me on blogs, calling me a racist, a bigot, which I’m not. They’ve also called me anti-Semitic, which I’m not. I love all people of all religions, I do. I’m not anti-Semitic.

other voice: I would agree with that.

Greg Hassler: You know what I am?

other voice: What are you?

Greg Hassler: I’m a big Mules and Jennies basketball fan, [laughter] that’s what I am….

…Hassler told The Kansas City Star that his remark “was spun out of context” and he apologized on the air in December.

“I said that is not what I meant,” Hassler said. “I have nothing against anybody at all. I am not anti-Semitic.

“Did I actually say I was sorry? No, but I think that could be considered an apology. The whole thing is just silly…”

Ah, yes, a silly non-apology apology. That would work for a governing board, I’m sure.

“…The Board is regretful that you have chosen to to take the word of whoever is providing you information over the efforts of the Board and Board President to rationally review this situation…”

That’s a recurring theme. Not too concerned about the comment, but certainly are concerned about the exposure.

….You are several thousand miles away from Warrensburg while I am fifty miles away yet you have information I do not have….

….I remain curious in trying to understand how and why a person or persons would share this with you….

….you know, this Wesly guy who lives in Denmark, this, you know, he’s Dutch, lives in Denmark. How does he even hear about this from a little radio station in Warrensburg, Missouri….?

Which fool is leading?

Shining the light of day on anti-Semitism can get uncomfortable, especially when one is on the receiving end of the public scrutiny.

“…We will find a way to keep the institution and its students from being disadvantaged….”

The immediate resignation of the board members who approved such a disingenuous letter would be a good start in achieving that shared goal.

Apparently the Board’s opinion doesn’t hold complete sway in the community. There was a letter to the editor in yesterday’s Warrensburg Daily Star-Journal:

….What is difficult to understand is why the board tolerated Hassler’s attacks. They certainly did not need Hassler to help them select a new president. So what, really, was Hassler’s role?

My personal perspective is that the board and Hassler have a hidden agenda. Some day that will all come out.

An agenda? Really?

And which fool is leading? Greg Hassler or the University of Central Missouri Board of Governors?

…Who’s the more foolish: The fool, or the fool who follows him?

Our previous coverage of the issue:

Three steps behind, and to the right (January 25, 2008)

Three steps behind, and to the right, part 2 – a microcosm of our universe (September 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”? (October 15, 2009) (transcript of a portion of the live radio broadcast)

It wasn’t just about a tree (October 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: I heard it on the radio (October 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: let’s not get cut out of the will (October 22, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: $87.75 will get you one sheet of paper (October 23, 2009)



“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: They’re not playing hardball, they’re playing cat and mouse  (October 23, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: a cola and some scoreboards (October 24, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: a few more pieces of the puzzle? (October 28, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: your silence means consent (October 29, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: let’s not get cut out of the will, part 2 (October 30, 2009)

Old media irony impairment (October 30, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: I heard it on the radio, part 2 (October 31, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: where everybody knows your name (October 31, 2009)

Methinks that someone is paying attention! (November 2, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: Bond, Stadium Bond (November 4, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: where everybody knows your name, part 2 (November 4, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: I heard it on the radio, part 3 (November 5, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: nothing succeeds like success (November 6, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: your Friday news dump (November 6, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: nothing exceeds like excess (November 7, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a grade for Accounting 101 (November 7, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: there ought to be a law (November 8, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: there’s gotta be a contract around here somewhere (November 9, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: there ought to be a law, part 2 (November 10, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: Garbo speaks! (November 12, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: the Kansas City Jewish Chronicle (November 13, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”? Follow the money and it reveals the timeline (November 14, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: the new president search consulting contract (November 18, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a march on a cold and rainy day (November 18, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: raise their voices (November 19, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: great moments in radio reporting (November 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: Oh, my! (December 3, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: It’s simple, really… (December 5, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: I do truly care about the success of our students (December 6, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: “…a wonderful relationship there we’re really proud of…” (December 7, 2009)

Oh brother, it’s time to convene another panel on blogger ethics… (December 8, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a lesson on how not to attempt damage control (January 26, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a lesson on how not to attempt damage control, part 2 (January 28, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: welcome to the party… (February 1, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: welcome to the party, four months late, part 2 (February 2, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: those people from Denmark, you know, the Dutch (February 3, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a conversation with the Muleskinner (February 6, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a simple question (February 8, 2010)

Find the Non-Employee Game! (February 8, 2010)(NYCMule)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a different choice of phrase would have made it all better (February 11, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: never mind the facts, here’s right wingnut talk radio (February 13, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: and we should give weight to your opinion… (February 18, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: fools for spin (February 20, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: fools rush in… (February 21, 2010)

…because you’ve always demonstrated an affinity for accuracy and facts, right?

This is the forty-seventh post in an ongoing series as we file Missouri Sunshine Law (RSMo 610) requests and investigate the non-renewal of the contract of University of Central Missouri President Aaron Podolefsky. Links to previous coverage are below the fold. BG and MB

Today Greg Hassler, part owner of KOKO radio and erstwhile tree decorating critic, opined on presidential searches at state universities:

…Greg Hassler: …Good morning Woody.

Marion Woods: How-dee.

Greg Hassler: You know, there’s two things.

Marion Woods: Uh, huh.

Greg Hassler: That I’ve always kind of hung my hat on. [crosstalk]

Marion Woods: What’s that? [crosstalk]

Greg Hassler: I’ve always had two theories in life that were always pretty good, Number one, you’re never gonna see a shut out in basketball. [laughter] And number two, if you apply for enough jobs eventually you’re gonna get one.

Marion Woods: Think so?

Greg Hassler: I’ve never seen a shut out in basketball, but Aaron’s rolling, pretty getting close. He’s getting close. Didn’t get the Youngstown State deal.

Marion Woods: Yeah.

Greg Hassler: Buffalo State’s still out there.

Marion Woods: Yup.

Greg Hassler: He applied for Florida Atlantic. Just got that information, uh, late last night.

Marion Woods: Oh, really?

Greg Hassler: With forty-one other people, so, I don’t know. Throwin’ those darts, eventually one sticks on the board.

Marion Woods: Yeah.

Greg Hassler: But then again, maybe not. I also like your story on, uh, the Board of Governors coming out saying that it’s not gonna be a, uh, public search. Smart.

Marion Woods: That’s a great idea.

Greg Hassler: Very smart. You don’t want to, you know, you want to bring a quality guy in. You actually need leadership at this University, it’s been a while. And, uh, you gotta bring a good guy in, a sitting president, not someone, you know, looking for their first gig. And you don’t want to jeopardize their job ’cause, uh, the guy’s gonna, or gal, whoever it is gonna be good. And whoever, wherever they leave is gonna really miss ’em. And you don’t want to get the, the cat out of the bag so to speak.

Marion Woods: Well, they jeopardize the current job.

Greg Hassler: That’s exactly right.

Marion Woods: Yeah.

Greg Hassler: And you don’t want to do that.

Marion Woods: No.

Greg Hassler: How about those games last night?…

Let’s see, expertise and accuracy in dendrochronology. Check.

…The Podolefskys say that after Hassler’s comments became a cause celebre, they checked and found that there had been a cedar tree in the front yard that was decorated with lights in years past at Christmas time, but that it was removed five years before they arrived…

[emphasis added]

Demonstrates superior grasp of the intricacies of international geography. Check.

…you know, this Wesly guy who lives in Denmark, this, you know, he’s Dutch, lives in Denmark….

Pays attention to detail and has a memory like a steel trap. Check.

…It, it was a great show…

(23:24) Darla Jaye: …the guy, the Dutch entrepreneur is, uh, from Holland. Holland is Dutch, sorry about that… (23:28)

With a record like that the University of Central Missouri Board of Governors is bound to offer the presidency to Greg Hassler.

…Greg Hassler: And you don’t want to do that.

Marion Woods: No….

Yeah, they’re right about one thing.

Our previous coverage of the issue:

Three steps behind, and to the right (January 25, 2008)

Three steps behind, and to the right, part 2 – a microcosm of our universe (September 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”? (October 15, 2009) (transcript of a portion of the live radio broadcast)

It wasn’t just about a tree (October 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: I heard it on the radio (October 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: let’s not get cut out of the will (October 22, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: $87.75 will get you one sheet of paper (October 23, 2009)



“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: They’re not playing hardball, they’re playing cat and mouse  (October 23, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: a cola and some scoreboards (October 24, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: a few more pieces of the puzzle? (October 28, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: your silence means consent (October 29, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: let’s not get cut out of the will, part 2 (October 30, 2009)

Old media irony impairment (October 30, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: I heard it on the radio, part 2 (October 31, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: where everybody knows your name (October 31, 2009)

Methinks that someone is paying attention! (November 2, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: Bond, Stadium Bond (November 4, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: where everybody knows your name, part 2 (November 4, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: I heard it on the radio, part 3 (November 5, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: nothing succeeds like success (November 6, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: your Friday news dump (November 6, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: nothing exceeds like excess (November 7, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a grade for Accounting 101 (November 7, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: there ought to be a law (November 8, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: there’s gotta be a contract around here somewhere (November 9, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: there ought to be a law, part 2 (November 10, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: Garbo speaks! (November 12, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: the Kansas City Jewish Chronicle (November 13, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”? Follow the money and it reveals the timeline (November 14, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: the new president search consulting contract (November 18, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a march on a cold and rainy day (November 18, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: raise their voices (November 19, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: great moments in radio reporting (November 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: Oh, my! (December 3, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: It’s simple, really… (December 5, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: I do truly care about the success of our students (December 6, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: “…a wonderful relationship there we’re really proud of…” (December 7, 2009)

Oh brother, it’s time to convene another panel on blogger ethics… (December 8, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a lesson on how not to attempt damage control (January 26, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a lesson on how not to attempt damage control, part 2 (January 28, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: welcome to the party… (February 1, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: welcome to the party, four months late, part 2 (February 2, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: those people from Denmark, you know, the Dutch (February 3, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a conversation with the Muleskinner (February 6, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a simple question (February 8, 2010)

Find the Non-Employee Game! (February 8, 2010)(NYCMule)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a different choice of phrase would have made it all better (February 11, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: never mind the facts, here’s right wingnut talk radio (February 13, 2010)

This is the forty-sixth post in an ongoing series as we file Missouri Sunshine Law (RSMo 610) requests and investigate the non-renewal of the contract of University of Central Missouri President Aaron Podolefsky. Links to previous coverage are below the fold. BG and MB

On Monday night, February 1st Darla Jaye on KMBZ radio in Kansas City devoted air time to the story. Later in the week Greg Hassler heaped effusive praise on the content, stating that KOKO radio would rebroadcast the show:

…It, it was a great show, uh, we are going to replay that show here on fourteen-fifty KOKO, it’s from an outsider, a third party that knows nothing about the University of Central Missouri, knows nothing about how Aaron Podolefsky did not get his contract renewed by the Board of Governors. Doesn’t know anything about me, doesn’t know anything about Wesly, and her thoughts and her comments on what she read in the newspaper and callers in the Kansas City area. It’s probably gonna be tomorrow once we get that whole show put together. Her producer has e-mailed it, uh, to us…

Of course, we commented:

…Because people who don’t know anything or any of the facts always have the best insights on the issues of the day…

The show was rebroadcast on KOKO radio, we received audio of that rebroadcast, and we weren’t disappointed in the Olympic scope of the show’s fact challenged presentation.

Darla Jaye started the show apparently reading the Kansas City Star version of the story. Unfortunately for anyone interested in actual, you know, facts, the Star’s version is the least coherent. The Kansas City Jewish Chronicle and the Muleskinner have much more comprehensive and understandable coverage.

[7:03] Darla Jaye: …And maybe he’s blaming it on this because, look, people do feel bad that there are no longer Christmas trees. If the president of the university, and they’re, they say that diversity is very, very important there, doesn’t want to have a Christmas tree in his front yard because he’s Jewish, so be it. But isn’t that somebody’s right to say, boy, I wish the Christmas tree was still there? It’s been there for years, now it’s gone, he did that. How is that anti-Semitic? [crosstalk] He didn’t say, uh, you know, this Jew, or this or that, he didn’t say that at all. It seems to me that he was looking for an excuse to pull his money and, of course, he has that right. But to blame it on this radio host, I kind of feel sorry for this guy. He didn’t say anything that wrong. Did he? Or do you see something racist or anti-Semitic in a remarks about taking down the Christmas tree?…[8:05]

[note times are approximate and indicate the point in the approximately 30 minute KOKO radio rebroadcast]

Darla Jaye did not quote a more substantial portion of the transcript of Greg Hassler’s remarks. Hasslers’s remarks from the October 2009 KOKO broadcast:

Greg Hassler: …The University of Central Missouri. End of an era.

Marion Woods: Uh, huh.

Greg Hassler: Aaron Podolefsky. Out. We’ve talked about it for a long time….

….The, the thing that really upset me, that kind of got [garbled] going originally was, for years there was a Christmas tree lit at Selmo Park. Remember that?

Marion Woods: Yep.

Greg Hassler: Drive by. He stopped that. I mean I think every religion should be able to celebrate, uh, in their own way, but, I mean we do live in Warrensburg, Missouri. This is America. You know. Let’s bring that back. How ’bout that?

Marion Woods: Wasn’t that the Christmas tree at the quadrangle?

Greg Hassler: No, there was also one at Selmo Park.

Marion Woods: Oh, okay.

Gregg Hassler: In the, in the yard, area there, so. I mean, I don’t know, it’s jus… It, it was a bad fit from the get go. It’s, it’s over…

[15:53] Darla Jaye:…a, a Danish entrepreneur, a Dutch entrepreneur funded scholarships at the University of Central Missouri. A radio host who does play by play for University of Central Missouri sports mentioned that the Christmas tree was gone at the president of University of Central Missouri’s, uh, residence, and he said he stopped that, I think every religion should be able to celebrate in their own way, but we do live in Warrensburg, Missouri, this is America, you know. Let’s bring that back. Let’s bring the Christmas tree back. What’s wrong with that? Why is that anti-Semitic?… [16:35]

[16:43] Darla Jaye:…Talkin’ about this story about, um, Radio Host Remarks Cost University of Central Missouri a Big Benefactor. Um, I just find it difficult to believe that this guy pulled all of his money after giving money to the University of Central Missouri for however, twen, twenty some years because a host said I wish the Christmas tree was back on the, the president’s property on, the University of Central Missouri. And saying that’s anti-Semitic. It just doesn’t make sense to me… [17:14]

There’s the matter of that one pesky fact:

…The Podolefskys say that after Hassler’s comments became a cause celebre, they checked and found that there had been a cedar tree in the front yard that was decorated with lights in years past at Christmas time, but that it was removed five years before they arrived…

[emphasis added]

It appears that like Greg Hassler, Darla Jaye didn’t bother to do any basic research. Apparently reading from a single newspaper article will suffice.

It gets even better:

[17:56] Darla Jaye: …Well, it is, and, and, you know what, I mean I think that Christmas trees have been pulled off lots of campuses. I mean, this is a, is a bigger issue. They’ve been pulled off lots of campuses and haven’t been on campuses for years because somebody, one person is offended. Uh, it, it’s just a tree. I mean, it’s something pretty to look at, and you’re right, it is a retail representation of, of Christmas, but, it’s something that means a lot to a lot of people. So, I just don’t understand what the big deal is and I, I feel for this radio guy because, you know, he said, he said something on the air and now he’s getting blamed for losing millions of dollars for the university. Come on… [18:36]

And why would a Christmas tree not be appropriate on the grounds of a campus of a state university in Missouri?:

Missouri Constitution

Article IX

EDUCATION

Section 8

Prohibition of public aid for religious purposes and institutions.

Section 8. Neither the general assembly, nor any county, city, town, township, school district or other municipal corporation, shall ever make an appropriation or pay from any public fund whatever, anything in aid of any religious creed, church or sectarian purpose, or to help to support or sustain any private or public school, academy, seminary, college, university, or other institution of learning controlled by any religious creed, church or sectarian denomination whatever; nor shall any grant or donation of personal property or real estate ever be made by the state, or any county, city, town, or other municipal corporation, for any religious creed, church, or sectarian purpose whatever.

Facts are really pesky things, especially when you’re a right wingnut radio talk show host.

[19:39] Darla Jaye: …So, we’re talking about the Radio Host Remarks Cost University of Central Missouri a Big Benefactor. I just have a hard time believing that this man, whose brother died in the holocaust, who lives in, uh, if you’re Dutch you live in Denmark, right? I think. Yeah. Okay. [laugh] How stupid was that? I know. [laughter]  I know, I was tryin’ to figure that out, too….[20:03]

Apparently, Greg Hassler has studied under the master.

As we pointed out:

…1. Dutch people are from The Netherlands. The city of Maastricht (you know, the tower thingy on campus, next to the football stadium) is in the Netherlands. Benoit Wesly is from the Netherlands. Benoit Wesly is Dutch.

2. Denmark is a different country than The Netherlands. They don’t even share a border. People who didn’t sleep through all of their classes tend to know that….

[23:24] Darla Jaye: …the guy, the Dutch entrepreneur is, uh, from Holland. Holland is Dutch, sorry about that… [23:28]

Okay, she caught it and sort of corrected it within three minutes.

What’s really funny is that Greg Hassler stated that he listened to the show, thought it was great, and yet continued to exhibit his ignorance, this after one of Darla Jaye’s callers reiterated “The Netherlands” on her show.

[26:43] Darla Jaye: …Well, the guy is entitled to his opinion, and entitled to say, boy I sure miss that Christmas tree that’s been up there for fifty years and now it’s gone. The new president took it down… [26:53]

No, as we pointed out, the new president didn’t take it down. It wasn’t called a Christmas tree. And the tree in question was cut down five years before the Podolefsky’s came to Warrensburg. I believe in actual journalistic circles that kind of error would call for a correction. I don’t think anyone is gonna hold their breath while they wait.

On Darla Jaye’s show a caller pointed out that it was the president’s private residence and he’s Jewish:

“Private Residence” – the sign at the entrance to Selmo Park.

[28:38] Darla Jaye: …Uh, it’s the university residence, it’s not his personal residence. If you’re the president then you, uh, get provided a residence. So, uh, is he just the president for the Jewish students, or is he the president for all the students? Perhaps he could have put the menorah in his window and left the Christmas tree in the front yard. And then he would show that the university is, is dis, diverse, as everybody always says it is. I mean, if we care about diversity, shouldn’t we care about all diversity? Or, because the majority of people that live in the country are Christians, they don’t matter? Only the minority matter. Right? Let me get that right because I, I guess I, I just didn’t realize that….[29:23]

Ah, the right wingnut cult of the oppressed majority because they can’t impose their religious beliefs through the state on everyone else. That pesky Constitution establishment clause, let’s get rid of it. How ’bout that?

Darla Jaye spent some time on her show feeling sorry for Greg Hassler. Let’s take a look at the evolution of Greg Hassler’s statements on this issue over time.

November 13, 2009

“…First of all let me say that I am not anti-Semitic, I love all people of all religions. I have never stated anything about anyone’s religion on or off the air. People have taken a comment out of context and have spun it for their purpose…”

December 10, 2009

…Greg Hassler: …But there’s another blogger out there that has taken some things that I have said, eh, out of context and has spun them around and at, attacked me on blogs, calling me a racist, a bigot, which I’m not. They’ve also called me anti-Semitic, which I’m not. I love all people of all religions, I do. I’m not anti-Semitic.

other voice: I would agree with that.

Greg Hassler: You know what I am?

other voice: What are you?

Greg Hassler: I’m a big Mules and Jennies basketball fan, [laughter] that’s what I am….

February 1, 2010

…Hassler told The Kansas City Star that his remark “was spun out of context” and he apologized on the air in December.

“I said that is not what I meant,” Hassler said. “I have nothing against anybody at all. I am not anti-Semitic.

“Did I actually say I was sorry? No, but I think that could be considered an apology. The whole thing is just silly…”

February 11, 2010

“…I am not an anti-Semite,” Hassler said. “Actually what I did was misspeak. I meant the tree on the quadrangle. I didn’t say it was because he was Jewish. I should have phrased it better….”

He meant the quadrangle? As we pointed out:

…You’d think a quick thinking media professional wouldn’t misspeak twice. And there’s that ‘religion’ thing…

Right, Darla Jaye?

The Darla Jaye show ended with:

[31:44] Darla Jaye:…Okay, my belief on this story is that the Dutch entrepreneur who funded the scholarships for twenty years, who doesn’t even live here, heard about the comments from, um, Greg Hassler, the part owner of KOKO AM from the Jewish president of the school. And, um, so when he heard those comments, the Jewish president of the school is losing his job by the way, so, who’s to say that, that mis, uh, Aaron Podolefsky, who’s losing his job as president of the University of Central Missouri, didn’t want to really jab it to the university? So he called his good friend Benoit Wesly in, um, Holland, right? Okay. In Holland, and he said, hey, guess what, this radio host said this and you should pull all your money, because they’re, they’re firing me. And, and, look, this guy wants to pull his money, that’s his prerogative, of course, but, I find it hard to believe that a man who went through the holocaust, the most horrible thing that has happened in this world, one of the most horrific times in our history, is so sensitive that a radio host in Warrensburg, Missouri, could upset him so much that he would end a twenty year friendship with this college because some guy on a radio said I wish they’d bring the Christmas tree back…. [33:23]

Yeah, “those people” stick together. It’s called the Internets, Darla Jaye, you should try it some time. I hear teh Google is really easy to use.

Our previous coverage of the issue:

Three steps behind, and to the right (January 25, 2008)

Three steps behind, and to the right, part 2 – a microcosm of our universe (September 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”? (October 15, 2009) (transcript of a portion of the live radio broadcast)

It wasn’t just about a tree (October 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: I heard it on the radio (October 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: let’s not get cut out of the will (October 22, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: $87.75 will get you one sheet of paper (October 23, 2009)



“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: They’re not playing hardball, they’re playing cat and mouse  (October 23, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: a cola and some scoreboards (October 24, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: a few more pieces of the puzzle? (October 28, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: your silence means consent (October 29, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: let’s not get cut out of the will, part 2 (October 30, 2009)

Old media irony impairment (October 30, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: I heard it on the radio, part 2 (October 31, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: where everybody knows your name (October 31, 2009)

Methinks that someone is paying attention! (November 2, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: Bond, Stadium Bond (November 4, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: where everybody knows your name, part 2 (November 4, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: I heard it on the radio, part 3 (November 5, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: nothing succeeds like success (November 6, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: your Friday news dump (November 6, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: nothing exceeds like excess (November 7, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a grade for Accounting 101 (November 7, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: there ought to be a law (November 8, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: there’s gotta be a contract around here somewhere (November 9, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: there ought to be a law, part 2 (November 10, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: Garbo speaks! (November 12, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: the Kansas City Jewish Chronicle (November 13, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”? Follow the money and it reveals the timeline (November 14, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: the new president search consulting contract (November 18, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a march on a cold and rainy day (November 18, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: raise their voices (November 19, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: great moments in radio reporting (November 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: Oh, my! (December 3, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: It’s simple, really… (December 5, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: I do truly care about the success of our students (December 6, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: “…a wonderful relationship there we’re really proud of…” (December 7, 2009)

Oh brother, it’s time to convene another panel on blogger ethics… (December 8, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a lesson on how not to attempt damage control (January 26, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a lesson on how not to attempt damage control, part 2 (January 28, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: welcome to the party… (February 1, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: welcome to the party, four months late, part 2 (February 2, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: those people from Denmark, you know, the Dutch (February 3, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a conversation with the Muleskinner (February 6, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a simple question (February 8, 2010)

Find the Non-Employee Game! (February 8, 2010)(NYCMule)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a different choice of phrase would have made it all better (February 11, 2010)

At least when Jake Blues came up with a desperate last minute excuse you could laugh:

…Honest… I ran out of gas. I, I had a flat tire. I didn’t have enough money for cab fare. My tux didn’t come back from the cleaners. An old friend came in from out of town. Someone stole my car. There was an earthquake. A terrible flood. Locusts. It wasn’t my fault, I swear to God…

This is the forty-fifth post in an ongoing series as we file Missouri Sunshine Law (RSMo 610) requests and investigate the non-renewal of the contract of University of Central Missouri President Aaron Podolefsky. Links to previous coverage are below the fold. BG and MB

The Muleskinner, the University of Central Missouri student newspaper, ran a front page article in today’s dead tree edition titled, Remark Under Fire: Debates arise over ‘anti-Semitic’ statement. They managed to get a quote from KOKO radio announcer and part owner Greg Hassler:

….Hassler has said on air and during interviews that he didn’t consider the comment anti-Semitic.

“I am not an anti-Semite,” Hassler said. “Actually what I did was misspeak. I meant the tree on the quadrangle. I didn’t say it was because he was Jewish. I should have phrased it better….”

What Greg Hassler said on the air in October:

Greg Hassler: …The University of Central Missouri. End of an era.

Marion Woods: Uh, huh.

Greg Hassler: Aaron Podolefsky. Out. We’ve talked about it for a long time….

….The, the thing that really upset me, that kind of got [garbled] going originally was, for years there was a Christmas tree lit at Selmo Park. Remember that?

Marion Woods: Yep.

Greg Hassler: Drive by. He stopped that. I mean I think every religion should be able to celebrate, uh, in their own way, but, I mean we do live in Warrensburg, Missouri. This is America. You know. Let’s bring that back. How ’bout that?

Marion Woods: Wasn’t that the Christmas tree at the quadrangle?

Greg Hassler: No, there was also one at Selmo Park.

Marion Woods: Oh, okay.

Gregg Hassler: In the, in the yard, area there, so. I mean, I don’t know, it’s jus… It, it was a bad fit from the get go. It’s, it’s over…

[emphasis added]

You’d think a quick thinking media professional wouldn’t misspeak twice. And there’s that ‘religion’ thing.

And our intrepid radio professional on live radio on February 2, 2010? Not a word about misspeaking:

…Greg Hassler: I’m not the problem. No question about that. The problem’s gonna leave in June. That’s the problem. And it’ll be gone soon, we just have to wait. Okay…

Despite lame excuses the problem is not going to go away in June.

Update –  The University of Central Missouri Faculty Senate met yesterday afternoon and approved motions to send the following letters in their name:

February 10, 2010

Dear Mr. Wesly,

We, the Faculty Senate of the University of Central Missouri, are grateful for your twenty years of friendship with our university.  We are saddened that you feel the need to end your relationship with UCM over the anti-Semitic comment of a person who has a contract with the university.

The Faculty Senate does not endorse or approve the use of offensive language or comments.  In fact, we support the anti-discrimination policy in place at UCM.  That policy explicitly states a “policy of nondiscrimination  in regard to age, race, color, religion, sex, national origin, sexual orientation, marital status, Vietnam Era veterans and persons with handicaps and disabilities.”  Our community creed includes an item that indicates we strive to be “an open community, by creating and maintaining effective channels of communication and by accepting and respecting individuals whose values, beliefs, and life experiences may be different from my own.”

We want you to know that the Faculty Senate does not endorse or approve of comments that are offensive to any of the groups described above.  We are horrified that anti-Semitic remarks have been made, but more than that, we are appalled that our university has failed in our commitment to expressed beliefs.  Please accept our sincere apologies and understand that we will continue to work towards an open community.  We hope you will renew your long-term friendship with the university.

Sincerely,

The Faculty Senate of the University of Central Missouri

And after the letter to Benoit Wesly was approved by a unanimous vote, the following letter to Richard Phillips, the President of the University of Central Missouri Board of Governors, was approved with a few dissenting votes:

February 10, 2010

Dear President Phillips,

This letter is prompted by the following statement that appeared in the Kansas City Star on Sunday, February 7.

Board President Richard Phillips said Monday that the remark [by a local radio personality] should not have been made, but the university did not believe it was anti-Semitic.

There is no evidence to support this belief.  The remark has never been investigated by an inclusively representative university body.  No one, not even the President of the Board of Governors, has the authority to assert the university does not believe the remark was anti-Semitic.

Because it suggests a belief held by the entire Central community-students, staff, and faculty-we fear your statement will have a detrimental impact on recruiting and retaining good students, staff, and faculty.  More seriously, your statement about the beliefs of the entire university community says to the state, country, and the rest of the world that Central is a university that tolerates discrimination.

We, the Faculty Senate, respectfully suggest that you either clarify or apologize to the entire Central community for making a statement about the beliefs of the community that you have no evidence for and that is clearly wrong.

Sincerely,

The Faculty Senate of the University of Central Missouri

No, the problem is not going away in June.

Our previous coverage of the issue:

Three steps behind, and to the right (January 25, 2008)

Three steps behind, and to the right, part 2 – a microcosm of our universe (September 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”? (October 15, 2009) (transcript of a portion of the live radio broadcast)

It wasn’t just about a tree (October 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: I heard it on the radio (October 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: let’s not get cut out of the will (October 22, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: $87.75 will get you one sheet of paper (October 23, 2009)



“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: They’re not playing hardball, they’re playing cat and mouse  (October 23, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: a cola and some scoreboards (October 24, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: a few more pieces of the puzzle? (October 28, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: your silence means consent (October 29, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: let’s not get cut out of the will, part 2 (October 30, 2009)

Old media irony impairment (October 30, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement?”: I heard it on the radio, part 2 (October 31, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: where everybody knows your name (October 31, 2009)

Methinks that someone is paying attention! (November 2, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: Bond, Stadium Bond (November 4, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: where everybody knows your name, part 2 (November 4, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: I heard it on the radio, part 3 (November 5, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: nothing succeeds like success (November 6, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: your Friday news dump (November 6, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: nothing exceeds like excess (November 7, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a grade for Accounting 101 (November 7, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: there ought to be a law (November 8, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: there’s gotta be a contract around here somewhere (November 9, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: there ought to be a law, part 2 (November 10, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: Garbo speaks! (November 12, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: the Kansas City Jewish Chronicle (November 13, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”? Follow the money and it reveals the timeline (November 14, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: the new president search consulting contract (November 18, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a march on a cold and rainy day (November 18, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: raise their voices (November 19, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: great moments in radio reporting (November 21, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: Oh, my! (December 3, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: It’s simple, really… (December 5, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: I do truly care about the success of our students (December 6, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: “…a wonderful relationship there we’re really proud of…” (December 7, 2009)

Oh brother, it’s time to convene another panel on blogger ethics… (December 8, 2009)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a lesson on how not to attempt damage control (January 26, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a lesson on how not to attempt damage control, part 2 (January 28, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: welcome to the party… (February 1, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: welcome to the party, four months late, part 2 (February 2, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: those people from Denmark, you know, the Dutch (February 3, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a conversation with the Muleskinner (February 6, 2010)

“A Gentleman’s Agreement”?: a simple question (February 8, 2010)

Find the Non-Employee Game! (February 8, 2010)(NYCMule)