New York State fires 200 because of their race?

Is this true?

Buried way down in Dicker’s piece, starting at the 19th paragraph, we learn:

“During the first five months of this year, with the Senate under the control of its first African-American majority leader, [State Senator Malcolm] Smith, top Democrats bemoaned the lack of minority Senate staffers.

But instead of trying to recruit new hires, they fired nearly 200 almost exclusively white workers and replaced them with a large number of minority employees, many of whom were seen by their fellow workers to be unskilled at their new jobs.

This kind of thing can go on for 5 months without drawing national attention? I know that if 200 black workers were fired because a State Majority Leader didn’t like having so many of them around we’d have heard about it in days and we’d still be hearing about it these 5 months later. I have no real reason to doubt the reporter’s story, I guess, but I’d love some corroboration of this before we go nuclear.



  1. No reason? “Dicker’s piece” is an op-ed in the NY Post, a notoriously right-wing rag, and Dicker is the state news editor. Anyone in the industry will tell you that there are two major areas of a newspaper’s staff visible to the public: opinion and journalism. The two don’t share staff, and frequently don’t share goals. You would have *every* reason to doubt the statement, particularly as it lacks corroboration. I have hunted around, and haven’t found any, but that may say much or little. If you find any, let us know. Until then, I have to assume that the statement is unsubstantiated partisanship, at best.

  2. You ever going to get around to denouncing the New York Times and Washington Post as unbelievable because they’re notorious left-wing rags? (And yes, they are.) However, just because someone occupies the opposite side of the political spectrum from me isn’t sufficient reason to think that every single word they utter is a lie.

    Stories are always broken by someone first at which point there’s no corroboration. I was explicit in saying I’d like to see some before anyone goes ballistic but I also won’t dismiss the report out-of-hand, especially given what’s been going on up there in New York. Now that the story’s been broached, perhaps we’ll see some more information. Surely you wouldn’t condone such an act by the New York legislature if it turns out to be true, would you?

    If it’s completely bogus information then the reporter’s credibility is completely shot and he ought to be fired. I hold that opinion regardless of the news outlet involved.

Comments are closed.