The rich Richwine whine continues all over the ugly-right, but it now has a supporting chorus among the nattering academia community which seem to be upset that a dissertation is being attacked.

I think focusing attention on the Richwine dissertation as opposed to the the totality of Richwine’s work and those who support him (and I see one of National Review’s long-term racists, Charles Murray, has chimed in after almost a year absence from publishing an article on their website) is chasing after a bouncing ball.

The WaPo is being credited with drawing attention to the dissertation and causing the stir, but that is to ignore all the brouhaha that started as soon as Heritage released the report.