William C. Dowling, tenured professor at Rutgers, is strongly opposed to the University's transformation into high-stakes athletics that was brought on by their football program's recent success. His frustrations reached newspapers this week.
"If you were giving the scholarship to an intellectually brilliant kid who happens to play a sport, that's fine," Dowling said. "But they give it to a functional illiterate who can't read a cereal box, and then make him spend 50 hours a week on physical skills. That's not opportunity. If you want to give financial help to minorities, go find the ones who are at the library after school."
Rutgers athletic director told local newspapers that Dowling's comment was "a blatantly racist statement."
Dowling, who was arrested in the 60's for being a civil right's activist, defended his statement by calling Rutgers president racist for running an athletic program that exploits minorities. Dowling was quoted as saying,"None of these kids would have been able to get into Rutgers if they hadn't been able to throw something or kick something or slam dunk something."
Now, I was on Don Imus' side when they pulled the race card for the nappy headed hoe-down, which you might disagree with. However, for the athletic director to call Dowling's comment blatantly racist is beyond me. There might be racial implications, but looking into Dowling's past, he clearly is not a racist.
It is sad that we live in a country that is so overly sensitive and politically correct that often times the truth is masked, and even ignored. Why is racism assumed in our country? Even Don Imus' case was assumed racism. It was more name calling than racist. I agree 100% with Dowling on this one, and the media and Rutgers need to put the race card back in their liberal pockets.