Links: Obama finally stoops to acknowledge Trump, shows birth certificate
By David WarnerApril 27th, 2011, 7:08 pmComments (16)
No matter how ridiculous his claims are, no matter how half-baked his schemes turn out, no matter how shitty his hair looks, when Donald Trump speaks, people pay attention. But when what he says dictates what our President does, there is a clear problem. At best, Trump is vaguely important businessman and reality-TV star. In politics, though, he shouldn't even be an afterthought. Which is why today is a sad day.
In other birther jerk news: Jerome Corsi (Obama Nation and Unfit to Command) continues his string of unfounded-conspiracy-theory-laden books with Where's the Birth Certificate? It is set to drop in mid-May. Too bad we already found said document.
Abortion politics makes everybody crazy. So, imagine what the topic does to people who are already crazy. Take Pat Robertson, for example. On an episode of The 700 Club, Robertson claimed that liberals only support abortion to make lesbians feel better. You know, because it's impossible for them to have kids on their own. Yeah, I'm just going to let that one breathe.
And finally, to wind down a little bit, here are the ruminations of many a smart man on why the Rube Goldberg Machine should be set aside for a while. I'd tend to agree; we've pretty much worn that concept out (I'm looking at you, OK Go).
Commentarium (16 Comments)
Where's Trump's birth certificate? No fucking way did that hair originate in this country. And did everyone see that all of Mr. I-hate-China's line of clothing is all manufactured in China? What a douchebag.
Trump just plays whatever side can get him ahead. Just a couple years ago he was recorded as saying he was pro-choice and liked Obama. He wants to be president so he's suddenly acting like Mr. Ultraconservative to get on the Right's good side. He's a two-faced bitch.
Kudos to Obama for the masterful play. By "giving in" to Trump, the US Right will be forced to support him in the coming capaign. And he is totally unsupportable. Obama just doomed the Republicans.
The Republicans just got derped.
Huh?
And now, for an encore, Trump will try to disprove the Holocaust and the Apollo moon landings. Just curious, has anyone studied if birthers and Holocaust deniers are the same demographic?
NOW will these crazy "birthers" get over it? NOW will they finally move on to something that matters, like jobs, renewable energy, jobs, entitlement spending, jobs, etc.
You see where Trump is now claiming Obama was a "mediocre" student and shouldn't have been able to go to Columbia College and Harvard Law School? This "mediocrity" graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law School and was President of the Harvard Law Review. I wish *I* had been such a mediocrity.
I truly hope that someone will call Trump out on his racism and pressure NBC to dump him. This bigotry is disgusting and makes me ashamed to share a country with walking excrement like Trump.
But when similar charges were raised about G. W. Bush - mediocre student, got in to the Ivy League school due to his family name, etc, etc - that was valid criticism?
If a person receives favorable treatment due to race, it is NOT racism to question that treatment. Color blind treatment - both in public discourse and under the law - is crucial, even if it's currently out of vogue.
Interestingly, Bush, Kerry, Gore and (I think) Clinton all released their academic records. Why is Obama held to a different standard? Is it so that he may claim racism even when he is being treated like others?
The whole point is that you *may* have been such a mediocrity, were you black.
Also, it's not necessary to show your bona fides with ad hominem attacks; discuss the issues and leave the drive-by defamation out.
Overt racism like Trump's is one of the few times that ad hominem attacks are appropriate. Overt racists need to be called out. Others who, while well intentioned, express a view that reveals an unconscious or unreflected racist premise, do not deserve ad hominem criticism. And that's you, OhNoHeDidn't. The idea that color-blind treatment is appropriate ignores the historical de jure and de facto racism against African-Americans, a history that extends to the present in the "birther," "Muslim," and now "unqualified" attacks against Obama. "We're going to treat everyone equally" is a lovely thought, but it fails in reality because of that long-standing and on-going racism.
If you are a person of good conscience, and I have no reason to think you are otherwise, stop and think why criticizing George W. Bush and John Kerry for academic mediocrity (and, IIRC, they had mediocre records at Yale) is not racist, but criticizing a biracial man who graduated magna cum laude (based on blind grading of exams) as an academic mediocrity a) is a patently ridiculous claim, and b) can only emanate from a racist animus.
Finally, your line to the effect that I might have been such a mediocrity were I black simply makes no sense to me. (As an aside, why do you assume I'm *not* black? I'm not, but why do you assume it?) My grades in law school were not affected by the color of my skin any more than Obama's were. I didn't grade or write on to my school's law review, so I certainly wasn't its President or Editor in Chief. I ended up "merely" a cum laude graduate of a top 10 law school, was on the editorial board of a secondary journal and clerked for a U.S. Circuit Judge after graduation (at the time, there were about 300 applications for the three positions my judge had available, so I must have done something right academically). And yet, I have no problem saying Obama (who is more or less a contemporary of mine) was a MUCH better student than I was, and I reiterate, if Obama is a mediocrity, I wish I could have been as mediocre as he. Trump's accusations would be laughable if they were not so evilly racist.
@OhNoHeDidn't:
"If a person receives favorable treatment due to race, it is NOT racism to question that treatment."
If a person has no evidence at all that another person received favorable treatment due to race, it IS racism to claim that treatment happened.
Bravo, profrobert.
@profrobert - If you have a basis on which to base your criticism, it's not ad hominem; argue against the racism.
Apart from ad hominus, is the straw man you introduce. Can you show that the exams were "blind graded?" They may well have been, but I'll ask you to prove that. If such is the case, why not release the transcripts and shame any and all who raised the claim? In the case of GWB and JK (no idea what that simpleton's middle initial is and I'm too lazy to look it up), I believe it is more likely a case of ethnicism. It is perfectly acceptable to ridicule a man based on his identification of being of European descent. Note, for example, that you insinuate that merely making the comparison is "patently ridiculous."
Also, please review my earlier comments. No comparison that you claim was made. As you no doubt no from earlier postings. That I doubt your legal prowess is in no way germane to the point regarding BO's academic transcripts.
I am a raging birther.
Donald got my dog pregnant.
= Publius
= No, but thanks for playing.