*
The caller used a New York Times investigation about the airline crash in DC as a false rationale to blame DEI. He proved himself to be devoid of critical thinking.
The caller lies about DEI causing the DC crash
Watch Politics Done Right T.V. here.
Podcasts (Video — Audio)
Summary
On his KPFT 90.1 FM program, progressive host Egberto Willies fields a caller who tries to link a January Washington, D.C. mid-air collision to “DEI hiring,” claiming the helicopter pilot was an unqualified lesbian who ignored instructions. Willies cuts the call, then uses the incident to illustrate how right-wing narratives distort Diversity, Equity & Inclusion: DEI widens the pool of competent applicants, he argues, while opponents rely on prejudice, not evidence, to scapegoat women, LGBTQ people, and people of color for complex systemic failures.
- The caller blames the D.C. crash on a “DEI pilot,” asserting that identity-based hiring takes precedence over competence.
- Willies interrupts, refusing to let his platform amplify fact-free bigotry or misinformation.
- He reframes DEI as a mechanism that adds meritocracy, excellence, and intelligence by ensuring fair access to opportunity.
- Willies notes the vast majority of aviation accidents historically involve white male pilots—undercutting claims that diversity threatens safety.
- He urges listeners to combat reactionary narratives, support independent progressive media, and share accurate information on DEI’s benefits.
The exchange spotlights a broader conservative tactic: weaponizing identity politics to divert attention from under-funded regulators, lax safety rules, and corporate cost-cutting. By exposing the caller’s flimsy reasoning, Willies affirms that true public safety—and true meritocracy—depend on dismantling discriminatory barriers, fully funding oversight agencies, and championing policies that let every qualified person thrive.
Premium Content (Complimentary)
The caller who tried to pin January’s catastrophic mid-air collision over Washington, D.C., on a so-called “DEI pilot” offered a textbook case of how the right weaponizes identity politics to mask the real, systemic causes of tragedy. A thorough review of the record reveals that the allegation collapses under the weight of the evidence, highlighting why diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs strengthen, rather than weaken, public safety.
First, the facts of the crash. On the night of January 29, 2025, an Army UH-60 Black Hawk, flying a routine evaluation hop along the Potomac River corridor, strayed into the glide path of an American Airlines regional jet landing at Reagan National Airport. Moments later, both aircraft plunged into the river, killing all 67 people aboard. A Washington Post timeline reconstructed from radar data and cockpit audio demonstrates that air-traffic controllers warned the helicopter crew twice, and that the crew—already hundreds of feet above its 200-foot altitude ceiling—failed to act in time. Last month, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) cited an “intolerable risk” in that narrow corridor and urged the Federal Aviation Administration to ban most helicopter operations there. In short, investigators identify a confluence of route design, altitude violations, and air traffic short-staffing. not affirmative-action hiring—as primary factors.
Yet within hours of the accident, Fox News personalities, Tucker Carlson’s podcast, and assorted YouTube influencers promoted an alternate story: the pilot in command, Captain Rebecca Lobach, was a “DEI hire” who ignored instructions because she was a lesbian, a woman, or both. The smear gained traction precisely because it fits a broader right-wing narrative that any failure in a diverse workplace must flow from lowered standards. The father of one crash victim countered that narrative—painfully—when he told CBS that no one gets into the Army’s Black Hawk program without clearing a punishing series of merit-based thresholds.
The data back him up. According to the FAA’s 2022 Women in Aviation Advisory Board report, fewer than 10 percent of U.S. pilots are women, and the share of women or Black, Latino, and Indigenous pilots remains stuck in the single digits. In other words, aviation’s gatekeepers already limit entry so severely that people from marginalized groups must exceed, not dilute, prevailing standards to earn a seat in the cockpit. That inequity, not imaginary hand-outs, drives federal efforts to diversify candidate pipelines. When DEI expands access to flight scholarships, preparatory STEM courses, and mentoring networks, it enlarges the talent pool and raises the bar for everyone.
The caller’s anecdote also ignores history. From Tenerife in 1977 to Buffalo in 2009, the deadliest crashes in U.S. or allied airspace have involved overwhelmingly white, male flight crews. Those tragedies turned not on race or gender but on training gaps, human-factor misjudgments, and regulatory failures—precisely the kinds of structural issues DEI opponents never mention. The Reagan National route, where January’s collision occurred, saw 85 close calls between 2021 and 2024, yet the FAA failed to act until 67 people were dead. That lapse reflects chronic under-staffing and budget austerity, political choices advanced by the very lawmakers who now rail against DEI.
Progressives, therefore, argue that the anti-DEI crusade amounts to misdirection. By blaming a lesbian pilot, demagogues erase the bipartisan neglect of the FAA, the privatization of air-traffic control training, and the broader deregulatory mindset that privileges corporate cost-cutting over public investment. If the right truly cared about safety, it would join Democrats in demanding full funding for the FAA’s hiring plan, modernizing its 1990s-era surveillance radars, and implementing long-delayed fatigue rules for controllers. Instead, the culture-war script offers scapegoats while lobbyists block every tax increase that would finance real fixes.
There is another, more profound lesson. DEI programs exist because discrimination is measurable, persistent, and harmful. An intersectional lens reveals how barriers compound: aspiring pilots of color face higher student loan burdens, fewer industry mentors, and subtle bias in flight school evaluations. When the FAA’s newest task-force report notes that “some demographic groups remain disproportionately under-represented in the cockpit despite equivalent aptitude,” it does not call for shortcuts; it calls for transparency in flight-school pricing, broader scholarship access, and standardized evaluation rubrics—a recipe for better, not worse, talent.
Captain Lobach’s misjudgment—if investigators confirm it—will not excuse her from accountability. But holding her accountable does not require slandering the entire DEI project. The progressive view insists that society can demand excellence and equity simultaneously, because the latter builds the pipeline that sustains the former. As the caller’s host observed, a workplace that values diversity tends to screen more rigorously, evaluate more objectively, and reject the old-boys shortcuts that once let unqualified insiders slip through.
Ultimately, the DEI scapegoating around the D.C. crash reveals less about aviation than about a political movement desperate to divert outrage away from its policy failures. The way forward is clear: invest in science-based safety reforms, fund the FAA, and apply DEI principles in good faith so that every qualified candidate—regardless of gender, race, or orientation—can help keep America’s skies safe. That agenda not only honors the 67 lives lost but also embodies the progressive conviction that a more just society is, by definition, a safer one.
Viewers are encouraged to subscribe and join the conversation for more insightful commentary and to support progressive messages. Together, we can populate the internet with progressive messages that represent the true aspirations of most Americans.
