August 18, 2017

We can infer that Kanye West, Russell Simmons, and Sean Combs declined to talk to the NYT about Donald Trump.

I'm reading "Circling the Square of President Trump’s Relationship With Race" in today's NYT.

First, let me get this out of the way. What's with "Circling the Square"? The standard expression, referring to an ancient geometry problem, is "squaring the circle." That's a used as a metaphor for something you just can't do. I'm seeing "Circling the Square" as a book title, referring to the Egyptian Revolution, where there were demonstrations in a square — Tahrir Square. The title seems to be a play on the the old expression "squaring the circle." In this NYT article, however, there's no square to form the basis of a play on the old expression. I think it's just a weird mistake.

Now, let's get to the meat of this article. It seems apparent that the NYT set out to find out if there's any evidence that Trump is a racist. Read the article. They found strong evidence that he is absolutely not any sort of a racist. The headline ought to come out and celebrate his excellent record.

The article begins with Kara Young, a "biracial" model who went out with Trump for 2 years and says “I never heard him say a disparaging comment towards any race of people." (Young, like Barack Obama, had one black parent and one white parent.) The only seemingly negative thing the NYT got out of her was that he noticed the high number of black people in the crowd at the U.S. Open when Venus and Serena Williams were playing.

But this is what really struck me:
Beyond dating a biracial woman, [Trump] made outsize efforts to hang out publicly with African-American celebrities: the boxing promoter Don King, the hip-hop impresarios Kanye West, Russell Simmons and Sean Combs, and celebrities as big as Muhammad Ali, James Brown and Michael Jackson.
Kanye West, Russell Simmons, and Sean Combs are all still alive. Do they not take phone calls from the New York Times? I've got to assume they were called and they all refused to talk. I'm going to guess that they all would give a good report but won't speak because they'd be savaged economically if they spoke well of Trump. But they don't have to speak. The inference is so strong that the silence is enough.

But let's see what these men may have said about Trump elsewhere. Here's something from 2 days ago: "Kanye West deletes all tweets defending Trump meeting." The tweets were from last December, and the deletions happened this past Sunday or Monday.

Russell Simmons has an open letter to Trump, published just this afternoon in The Daily News (perhaps in response to his name coming up in the NYT article). He talks about "the Donald I called friend... the Donald I know," who had great relationships with black and Jewish people, and asks "Where is he now? I have to believe he is still in there, somewhere." He implores Trump to change and "begin to feed the light":
The racist, bigoted movements you are feeding now are gaining power by your words, actions and refusal to hold people accountable for the destruction they are causing in your name....

Scripture tells us the Donald I knew — or an even greater Donald — is still there inside you, sleeping. It is time to wake him the f--- up.
As for Sean Combs, it seems that the last relevant thing we've heard from him was back in June, when he said that black people "don’t really give a fuck about Trump, because we're in the same fucked-up position... The tomfoolery that’s going on in D.C., that’s just regular everyday business to black folks."
“We’re turning CNN and all that shit off because we’re trying to get ourselves together,” he said. “That’s what I’m about. I’m like, ‘Turn that shit off, let them deal with all that shit. We gotta start dealing with us.’ So my thing is, I gotta keep showing the dream. I gotta keep magnifying that and keep it focused on that self-love that we need to give our race.”

91 comments:

rehajm said...

Circle gets the square. Paul Lynde to block.

Sebastian said...

"The headline ought to come out and celebrate his excellent record." You are so fair and sensible, but this is America. Sorry.

Kevin said...

The headline ought to come out and celebrate his excellent record.

How is that going to lead to his impeachment?

Jupiter said...

Maybe they could ask Ben Carson what he thinks. Of course, he doesn't celebrate criminal behavior, so he's not really black.

Michael K said...

You could do worse than blog about Kim Strassel's column today about staffers in the administration are being harassed.

But in today’s anti- Trump “resistance,” that counts for nothing. The left lost the election, lost the argument, and is losing President Obama’s precious legacy. Its response is a scorched-earth campaign against not only EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, but anyone who works for him.

Most vicious has been the retribution against Mr. Pruitt for his work to undo Obama-era climate rules. Environmentalists and Rhode Island Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse have ginned up an investigation at the Oklahoma Bar Association into whether Mr. Pruitt lied during his Senate confirmation.


This is scorched earth and she seems to be doing the reporting for the WSJ. Peggy Noonan is just mouthing generalities.

rehajm said...

We know Kanye talks to Trump. We know Kanye hugs Trump..

Ann Althouse said...

"Circle gets the square."

That can't be the reference. How would tic-tac-toe be the relevant metaphor? And when "circle gets the square," there's no circling of a square. The circle goes inside the square, not around it.

Ann Althouse said...

That might explain the mistake -- 2 things are mixed up.

Ann Althouse said...

"Maybe they could ask Ben Carson what he thinks. Of course, he doesn't celebrate criminal behavior, so he's not really black."

They do talk to Carson and quote him, but basically he doesn't count.

Rob said...

If anybody knows about self-love, it's Puff Daddy, P-Diddy, whateverthefuck he's calling himself now.

Matthew Sablan said...

Circling the Square.

As in, circling the wagons around the square [the lame dude]?

That's all I got, and it ain't very good.

Matthew Sablan said...

Also... is that the best picture they could find of the two of them?

Bay Area Guy said...

God Bless Althouse -- reading the NYTimes so we don't have to.

Hmmm. Let's see - Kanye West, Russell Simmons, Sean Combs. Yes, they are definitely celebrities. The article is about race, so it makes sense to, well, mention black folks.

Net Worth:

Kanye West -- $160 Million.

Russell Simmons -- $340 Million

Sean Combs -- $820 Million

It would be nice, politically, to nail the "Racist" label to Trump. But, the NYT could have easily written about "multi-millionaire" angle if it wanted.

Some of my best friends are....multi-millionaire celebrities.

Paddy O said...

"That might explain the mistake -- 2 things are mixed up."

This pretty much describes most media political reports in the last couple years.

Kevin said...

So the NYT has now run an article showing how sexist Trump was before the election, which only served to prove otherwise. And now they've run an article to show how racist he is after the election, which only served to show otherwise.

Next up, Trump hates gays!

Thank goodness the headline writers can put whatever they want at the top of the article.

Matthew Sablan said...

Did I miss it, or did they go a whole "Is Trump racist?" article without mentioning him working to desegregate a country club?

---

Also, this is just a funny line: "Ms. Young, who would not give her age but said she was roughly two decades younger than Mr. Trump, began dating him around 1997."

n.n said...

Hopefully, he will reject both forms of racial bigotry: color diversity and color supremacy. Color blocs are also noxious when they are used to exploit or subordinate other color blocs and the silent majority.

PB said...

One-by-one, the left will find anyone of substance that supports Trump or doesn't adequately disown him and work to ruin their lives if they don't cow-tow to the radical leftist line.

I'd bet the 90% of people at Google who gave to Democrats have likely been checking public political donation records to determine the 10% in the company that didn't give "appropriately" and are actively working to limit their careers. They'll probably move on to those that didn't give at all. Then they'll probably focus on the employees that didn't give enough.

tim maguire said...

I'd be a lot more supportive of the criticisms of Trump for not calling out the racists if I thought his critics cared about any of the things they are calling him out over, but I don't.

I've criticised his response online and in life for not haming names (all the names!) in Charlottesville right out of the gate and that's good enough. I feel no urge to keep doing it day after day.

Ralph L said...

Circling as in vultures

Where did Combs get all that money?

n.n said...

Hopefully, he will reject both forms of racial bigotry: color diversity as in "selective-child" (a Pro-Choice doctrine), and color supremacy as in "one-child". Color blocs are also noxious when they are used to exploit or subordinate other color blocs and the silent majority.

tim in vermont said...

I was just watching a move called "The Exception," it was about when the Nazis took the Netherlands, and sent a guard to watch the Kaiser in exile. The instructions to the guard were to observe the Kaiser, and note any criticisms he had of Hitler, and also to not the times he didn't agree loudly enough in praise of Hitler.

It's like the guy who was shot in some worker's paradise somewhere for being the first to stop clapping.

wildswan said...

"On a phone call with a longtime friend a couple of days after the election, Hillary was much less accepting of her defeat. She put a fine point on the factors she believed cost her the presidency: the FBI (Comey), the KGB (the old name for Russia’s intelligence service), and the KKK (the support Trump got from white nationalists).

Allen, Jonathan. Shattered: Inside Hillary Clinton's Doomed Campaign (p. 394). Crown/Archetype. Kindle Edition."

If we accept this statement then we can see that events in DC and mainslime news coverage for the last ten months has been driven by Hillary trying to prove that had there been real coverage of the real factors driving the 2016 election, she would have won. In her mind these real factors are FBI (Comey letter), KGB (Russian collusion), KKK (Trump the racist). For the last ten months Hillary has been trying for a do-over. Two of her main reasons, Comey (FBI) and the Russians (KGB), have collapsed. The third, Trump appealed to racists (KKK), is now trying out. The mainslime media is going along (Why? But they are.) It will pass because

The issue is this:
Things have changed in America since 1945 when we were the greatest energy, manufacturing and military power. Our manufacturing was sold to Mexico and China, climatistas closed down much of our sources of cheap reliable energy and Obama ran down our military. Unemployment and death from opioids was rampant. Identity politics splintered us. The new situation demanded new solutions. Only Donald Trump analyzed the American situation in that way: new situations demanded new solutions. The others did political reruns (KGB! KKK! - for God's sake!) - and still are. The others aren't trying to get jobs for Americans. They act as if Americans have jobs and the main issue is the need to force bloated manufacturers to disgorge profits and treat workers fairly.

No. In 2017 the main issue is to get a manufacturer to come into your city or state and supply jobs. That won't happen in cities and states that express a determination to prevent profits from happening (and to keep energy expensive which creates a need for cheap workers) Non-college-educated Americans, i.e. workers, the largest group in America, at last understand this - as do many others. It is a point of intersection creating Trump's voters.

Therefore only Donald Trump can keep going despite being human because all his enemies - in the long and short run - are costing people jobs without noticing or caring - just the way French aristocrats in their carriages used to run over the poor who didn't move out of the way fats enough. And then the bloody wheels of globalization move on while inside sit dreamers thinking sensitive thought about trannie bathrooms and putting a rope on the neck of a statue of Robert E. Lee and indulging golden dreams about winning in 2018. Winning? You? Oh, yeah.

tim in vermont said...

All the. socialisms are the same at root. They demand complete loyalty to the group.

Achilles said...

Another leftist narrative falls.

Wont be hearing much about the Russians anymore either.

Caligula said...

"Did I miss it, or did they go a whole "Is Trump racist?" article without mentioning him working to desegregate a country club?"

Reading the New York Times is like reading Pravda: the story is not in the text they actually print, but in what they choose not to print.

So in honor of Eclipse Day 2017, may we call these stories that illuminate by their absence the "emanations from the penumbras"?

Nonapod said...

Being a celebrity (pro-athlete, popstar, a-list actor) is a strange occupation. It's a career that's almost entirely dependent on how people *feel* about you, and almost nothing based on what you've actually done. Or at least, while your performance in a very narrow field plays into what people feel about you, it's less important over the long term. What's more important is curating an image that makes lots of people feel good about you.

There's a difference between how somebody "feels" about a person versus how they actually think about them and what they've actually done. It's why there can be a disconnect between approval ratings and voting results. For example: Obama was likable. Even when people didn't agree with his specific policies they still felt good about him as a person. There was this disconnect between the man and the policies. Conversely Hillary Clinton is not likable, but a lot of progs may have liked here policy ideas.

I suspect being a black celebrity means that you don't dare go against the general consensus of the black community. How people feel about you is far too critical to your career to risk ruining things by going against the grain.

Bay Area Guy said...

The "Get Trump" Squad is ramping it up to 11.

So far, they've got scalps of:

- Michael Flynn
- Scaramouche
- Several staffers
- Steve Bannon
- Roger B. Taney's statue

At this rate, we will be in Monty Python/Black Knight territory by, say, 2023?

Michael K said...

Non-college-educated Americans, i.e. workers, the largest group in America, at last understand this - as do many others. It is a point of intersection creating Trump's voters.

I have three degrees and I also understand it.

Left Bank of the Charles said...

Trump is getting all those confederate statues pulled down, so there's that.

Jim at said...

Trump beat Hillary ... ergo, he's a racist. A bigot.
And he's really, really mean, too.

Bad!

Gahrie said...

I gotta keep magnifying that and keep it focused on that self-love that we need to give our race.”

Combs would be among the first to attack a White man for saying this.

tcrosse said...

Syllogism:
I hate racists
I hate Trump
Ergo Trump is a racist
QED

Murph said...

Perhaps the NYT should find some "real" people to ask their opinions about President Trump & the events of the past week. Y'know. *Those* deplorables out in middle America who voted for him. Apparently, they're not afraid to speak their thoughts, and have not changed their minds....

https://youtu.be/fkpK8ga4K_g

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2017/08/18/media-stunned-president-trump-support-stronger-than-ever-and-growing/

Dickin'Bimbos@Home said...

Trump denounced racism and white supremacists all week - but it wasn't enough for the hack-D Chuck Todd press.

It wasn't enough, especially after Trump also denounced hate and violence and anti-free speech streaming from the left. You cannot ever condemn the hard left. The so called soft left won't let it happen. Ask Chuck Todd.

Gahrie said...

I suspect being a black celebrity means that you don't dare go against the general consensus of the black community.

Ask Bill Cosby, Ben Carson or Justice Thomas about that.

Gahrie said...

Where did Combs get all that money?

Producing and creating rap music.

n.n said...

So, no reconciliation with descendants of the original deplorables is forthcoming. It will be Pro-Choice all the way down.

Also, no reconciliation of moral, natural, and person imperatives. It is either one-child or selective-child, and the silent majority voting for the baby, or what remains after miscarriage of social justice.

Hagar said...

I suspect being a black celebrity means that you don't dare go against the general consensus of the black community.

The "black community" does not run the MSM.

And that should be kept in mind whenever the "black community" is reported to feel this or that way.

Ron Winkleheimer said...

Nobody ever accused Trump of racism until he ran for the presidency.

n.n said...

Ask Bill Cosby, Ben Carson or Justice Thomas about that...

and Hermain Cain, and, frankly, Martin Luther King, Jr, who was pushed off the cliff in the pursuit of political progress and social justice.

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin (i.e. color diversity), but by the content of their character (i.e. diversity).

Craig said...

"Cruel neutrality," ha! The principles of interpretation that apply vary wildly based upon the subject and the object of the professor's reading.

Craig said...

Blogger Ron Winkleheimer said...
Nobody ever accused Trump of racism until he ran for the presidency.

---

That's false. People have been raising these issues for decades. Google will help you out here.

Birkel said...

UnknownIngaCraig is here to set us straight.

buwaya said...

"I was just watching a move called "The Exception," it was about when the Nazis took the Netherlands, and sent a guard to watch the Kaiser in exile."

An interesting episode - more on the Kaiser in exile -

His criticism is essentially that of conservatives against all the -isms of modern times. And of conservatives against modern culture.

http://www.oldmagazinearticles.com/pdf/Kaiser_Wm_and_Hitler.pdf

"“There is a man alone, without family, without children, without God....He builds legions but he doesn’t build a nation. A nation is created by families, a religion, and tradition: it is made up out of the hearts of mothers, the wisdom of fathers, the joy and the exuberance of children. [Of Germany under Hitler he says]....an all-swallowing State, disdainful of human dignities and the ancient structure of our race, sets itself up in place of everything else. And the man, who, alone, incorporates in himself this whole State, has neither a God to honor nor a dynasty to conserve, nor a past to consult....

For a few months I was inclined to believe in National Socialism. I thought of it as a necessary fever. And I was gratified to see that there were, associated with it for a time, some of the wisest and most outstanding Germans. But these, one by one, he has got rid of or even killed....He has left nothing but a bunch of shirted gangsters....

This man could bring home victories to our people each year without bringing them...glory....But of our Germany, which was a nation of poets and musicians and artists and soldiers, he has made a nation of hysterics and hermits, engulfed in a mob and led by a thousand liars or fanatics....”

================================================================================
Note
- "A nation is created by families, a religion, and tradition"

Which are all things that the modern American dispensation has an urgent need to eradicate.

- "an all-swallowing State, disdainful of human dignities and the ancient structure of our race, sets itself up in place of everything else."

Which is also the nature and program of the modern American state.

- "And the man, who, alone, incorporates in himself this whole State, has neither a God to honor nor a dynasty to conserve, nor a past to consult...."

And that is the effect of the state, to dissolve all institutions outside it, to leave a man alone, to destroy history and tradition so no man has a rock to shelter behind.

Kaiser Wilhelm was a critical player in the creation of the Great War. He played with forces far more powerful than he knew, and completely lost control of the situation. He was turned into a futile figurehead by the war that he regretted starting.

Craig said...

"They found strong evidence that he is absolutely not any sort of a racist."

---

This reads like the sort of language a law student writes when they really want their conclusion and just don't have the argument to get there. They insist rather than explain. I can agree that if the NYT wanted to show that Trump was a racist, the evidence they offer falls far short of that. I would also agree that the evidence the NYT offers can even tell against Trump's being a certain sort of racist. But neither is it strong evidence of that (given the mentioned and plausible competing explanations), nor is it evidence that he is "absolutely not any sort" of a racist. There are, as Professor Althouse surely knows, lots of accounts of what makes for racism, and so lots of accounts of racists. And the evidence here doesn't even approach being evidence against Trump's being some of those sorts of racists.

I'll apply Professor Althouse's sanctioned liberal-reading principles, and so I'll conclude that this is evidence that Professor Althouse is intentionally distracting us from thinking about the sort of racist that she does believe Trump to be! Sneaky, Professor Althouse!

Craig said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Craig said...

Blogger Birkel said...
UnknownIngaCraig is here to set us straight.

8/18/17, 4:12 PM

---

Not you. You're an idiot beyond all hope. I can't tell whether you're unable to read or respond to arguments, and so exegetically incompetent, or whether you're simply unwilling to do so, and just morally incompetent. Either way, I'm not trying to set you straight.

Michael K said...

Another blank profile troll appears.

Time for my book.

Hagar said...

It is all about the Benjamins.

KittyM said...

@Craig. I completely agree with your analysis of the Althouse post. Just FYI.

Craig said...

Blogger Michael K said...
Another blank profile troll appears.

Time for my book.

8/18/17, 4:25 PM

---

Just trying to make it easier and quicker for the laziest among you to ad hominem the argument. Also, does it really count as "another" when you've logged this very complaint against me in particular, under this name in particular, so many times? Ah, who am I kidding? If you're making this complaint, care in thinking is almost surely not one of your strong suits, doc.

Birkel said...

UnknownIngaCraig,

Nor are you attempting to set anybody else straight. You've said you disagree with Althouse. Congratulations. Now what?

If you wished to make a compelling argument you'd lay out your premises plainly instead of appealing to Goolag authority. The answer is out there if somebody would just listen to your Google Goolag, right? And yet here is the NYT trying to write the article you wished they would and failing to simply Google the important facts that you could show them with a few keystrokes.

That sounds like the likeliest answer. Run with it.

Birkel said...

UnknownIngaCraig, meet UnknownIngaKittyM.
UnknownIngaKittyM, meet UnknownIngaCraig.

Lyle Smith said...

Der Spiegel's cover is out for next week

http://thehill.com/blogs/in-the-know/347101-german-magazine-cover-shows-trump-wearing-kkk-hood

Craig said...

Blogger Birkel said...
UnknownIngaCraig,

Nor are you attempting to set anybody else straight. You've said you disagree with Althouse. Congratulations. Now what?

If you wished to make a compelling argument you'd lay out your premises plainly instead of appealing to Goolag authority. The answer is out there if somebody would just listen to your Google Goolag, right? And yet here is the NYT trying to write the article you wished they would and failing to simply Google the important facts that you could show them with a few keystrokes.

That sounds like the likeliest answer. Run with it.

8/18/17, 4:30 PM

---

Man, you'd think this would be so much easier, but I guess I'll need to hold your hand:

1) In this thread, I've only said I disagreed with Professor Althouse's ultimate conclusion in one place, where I explained in moderate detail why, upthread. Otherwise, I simply charged her with not being loyal to the stance she claims to occupy, her supposed cruel neutrality. (Why do I do this? Because when she does stick to that stance, her writing is often really strong. When she doesn't, it makes this place a hotbed of rightwing paranoids and yelling and leftwing reactions. But these threads keep getting into the 400-plus comments, which is probably somehow making her $$$. Get yours, Professor, I suppose.)

2) You want links describing people accusing Trump of racism? It took me literally just a few seconds to find a bunch: http://www.metro.us/president-trump/trump-racism-history-abridged-timeline, https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-and-race-decades-of-fueling-divisions/2017/08/16/5fb3cd7c-8296-11e7-b359-15a3617c767b_story.html?utm_term=.1312e5150077, http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/features/trumps-long-history-of-racism-w497876, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-racism-examples_us_5991dcabe4b09071f69b9261, http://fortune.com/2016/06/07/donald-trump-racism-quotes/, https://theintercept.com/2017/08/15/donald-trump-has-been-a-racist-all-his-life-and-he-isnt-going-to-change-after-charlottesville/, https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/8/16/16155668/trump-history-racism-charlottesville.

Just to help you out: I'm not claiming that Trump is a racist, nor that those articles are right in everything they say. I'm only claiming that those articles give you lots and lots of evidence of people complaining (rightly or wrongly) about Trump's relationship with race prior to this most recent election. Above, it was claimed that there were no such complaints. That's false, here are the complaints.

3) You have no idea what article I wish the NYT would write. But continue to try to fantasize about me like that, dunce.

Craig said...

There is obviously no way Birkel, who obviously has a mammoth crush on Inga, can follow that last comment, so I'll do Birkel's responding work:

Inga Inga Inga you are Inga ha I got you I love you actually you are Inga.

Maybe someday you'll do better in responding to the substance.

Sally said...

Craig: Should Trump have to prove he is not a racist?

BGrear said...

"I'm going to guess that they all would give a good report but won't speak because they'd be savaged economically if they spoke well of Trump."

So how does this happen? Who specifically is doing the savaging? Why is it considered acceptable? Are we really just a country of mob rule now?

The MSM is part of it (includes FaceBook, Google, Twitter, etc.) - are they allowed to continue to destroy anyone who supports Trump? Are any Democrats speaking out against this behavior? Anyone in the MSM? Why not?

So much for tolerance and respect for differing opinions by the Left.

buwaya said...

"So how does this happen? "

Easy - from some other industry - if dealing with an F1000 company and you are a controversial fellow seeking contract work, forget it. It would be vastly worse in showbiz I would think.

"Are we really just a country of mob rule now?"

More like "1984"

Birkel said...

Sally,
Obviously President Trump must tell us when he stopped beating his wife.
Craig is WOKE!

Craig's #1: You disagree with a conclusion. This is not argument but assertion.
Craig's #2: Should I bow to your alleged authority from those links or discuss the one Althouse highlighted? Appeals to authority are weak arguments at best.
Craig's #3: Criticizing without presenting an argument is a fun game. Althouse presented the ideas she wanted to discuss. Now what?

Craig said...

Birkel: You're really, really bad at this, aren't you. It's cute. I don't think you know what arguments are, or what appeal to authority arguments are, and you're just flat-out wrong that appeal to authority arguments are weak at best. I would explain it to you, but... In any case, I'll give you credit for trying here, given your abilities.

Birkel said...

More argument by assertion. Excellent work.

Dr Weevil said...

I didn't bother to follow any of Craig's 4:42pm links alleging to show what a racist Trump is because I noticed that four of the URLs have dates right in them and three are from this week, one from June of last year. So all four were written after Trump decided to for president as a Republican, which means all four were written with an ax to grind. I'm guessing the others were, too. I've read that he has a shelf-full of civil rights awards, including two major ones from Jesse Jackson, all awarded before he came out of the closet as some kind of Republican, when it became necessary to depict him as a racist, whether there was any evidence or not.

It all reminds me of something I read years ago from someone who worked in the Nixon White House, who said that he'd lost count of the number of fellow Nixon staff members who had personally seen Richard Nixon walk on water before Watergate, and then after Watergate had equally vivid memories of Richard Nixon pulling the wings off flies.

Craig said...

" didn't bother to follow any of Craig's 4:42pm links alleging to show what a racist Trump".

You're an idiot. I didn't say Trump was a racist. I didn't say those articles offered evidence that Trump was a racist.

Dr Weevil said...

Gee, Craig, your 4:11pm post quoted Ron Winkleheimer saying:
"Nobody ever accused Trump of racism until he ran for the presidency."

You replied: "That's false. People have been raising these issues for decades. Google will help you out here." After dragging your feet, you posted a bunch of links at 4:42pm to prove that statement, and all four of the ones with links in their URLs were written after he started running for the presidency, which means (as I said) written by people with an ax to grind. Your evidence is utterly tainted, like your mind.

As the villain said in one of those Lethal Weapon or Die Hard movies, "Who is the dickhead now?"

Birkel said...

Of course not, Craig. Althouse analyzes an article and you offer those further articles for no good reason. Coincidental.

So you still have no point on offer? Just myriad assertions.

mockturtle said...

Try to imagine how little I care.

Night Owl said...

"The racist, bigoted movements you are feeding now are gaining power by your words, actions and refusal to hold people accountable for the destruction they are causing in your name...."

Trump has disavowed Nazis, but that isn't good enough. Trump is being condemned for having the temerity to suggest that not all the protesters on the "wrong side" in Charlottesville were wicked, evil people that need to be beaten to death with baseball bats.

Trump is acting like a president to all Americans; the good, the bad, and the ugly. He believes we should all be treated equally under the law. And people are losing their minds over that.

Michael K said...

"you've logged this very complaint against me in particular, under this name in particular, so many times?"

So, a sockpuppet, eh ?

On talk radio they call you "Seminar callers."

Ann Althouse said...

Please stop the personal back and forth. I don't like all this repetition of names. It's unreadable.

Ralph L said...

Der Spiegel's cover is out for next week
http://thehill.com/blogs/in-the-know/347101-german-magazine-cover-shows-trump-wearing-kkk-hood

Is there still a cemetery in Bitburg, or has the EU dug it up?

Jim S. said...

I read "circling the square" and immediately thought it was a reference to "circling the drain".

bgates said...

The only seemingly negative thing the NYT got out of her was that he noticed the high number of black people in the crowd at the U.S. Open when Venus and Serena Williams were playing.

How is that negative?

Renee said...

It feels the left is feeding these groups, not Trump. Other than that, I feel sick how the media is treating Trump. Poor America.

No disrespect for Heather, and her families lost.

Steve said...

You can't square a circle because the basic mathematical unit of a circle is irrational, while making a square is rational....in math lingo. The two can never go together perfectly, and so you can never create a square that has the exact area of a circle. That the problem is so notorious and long-lived tells you something about human persistence to find a simple, perfect and complete solution when the irrational is encountered. Sometimes we just have to live with the irrational, accommodate it and not dwell on it endlessly. Politics is a way to live with the irrationality of things and people without resorting to violence. Those seeking ideological purity and rationality can't live with the irrational, with th necessary politics in life, and so end up being violent.
.

Craig said...

"The two can never go together perfectly, and so you can never create a square that has the exact area of a circle. "

---

That's not quite right. Imagine a circle with a radius of 1"/sqrt(pi). You can make a square with the same area as that circle--simply create a square with sides 1". Voila!

The problem has to do not with constructing a square that matches a circle in certain ways. It has to do with transforming the one into the other with finite, specific sorts of steps. For a more precise statement of the math problem, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squaring_the_circle.

Ralph L said...

The geometry class I had as a math major was all about proving theorems from basic axioms. Then as part of the (take home) final, we were supposed to show how to trisect an angle with a compass and straightedge, which was nothing at all like what we'd spent 10 weeks studying. But it's about the only thing I can remember from the course.

Big Mike said...

@Ralph, trisect an angle? Not possible. Bisect is easy. Trisect is proved to be impossible.

Ralph L said...

Don't ask me how, but I did it. 35 years ago.
Got a 100 on the exam.

Ralph L said...

Oh, it must have been a right angle. Senior moment.
My point was that we hadn't done anything like it in class. Pissed off half the class.

Jim said...

"Circling the Square" just captures the state of the media: they've heard something about circles relating to squares, don't comprehend what it means, but darn it if they aren't going to tell you all about it because they are the smartest people and you should be thankful that they are blessing you with their wisdom.

dada said...

This is the first time in my life there has been no peaceful transfer of power. The (D) party has pretty much guaranteed there will never be one again.

Steve said...

Circling the Square is a boxing reference. The boxing ring is square and boxers circle to get the feel of each other's fighting style and ability. Squaring the Circle is to get people to agree on the solution to a thorny problem. The NYT has no interest in that.

tim in vermont said...

I don't think you know what arguments are, or what appeal to authority arguments are, and you're just flat-out wrong that appeal to authority arguments are weak at best. I would explain it to you, but...

Yes, if we don't accept the pronouncements of our betters without question, then we are anti-intellectual.

SDN said...

Ron Winkleheimer said...
Nobody ever accused Trump of racism until he ran for the presidency.

8/18/17, 4:03 PM

Or anti-Semitism.

And Craig the liar can't provide a single cite otherwise.

YJLAW said...

Things got worse for African Americans under Obama and Democratic Control. If they get better under Trump, that could be it for their bulk loyalty to the Democratic Party. The media and Democrats cannot accept that or they're finished. They must scare them to staying on their plantation.

Derek Kite said...

Is Trump the only person in Washington who aren't afraid of the race hysteria? He isn't racist. He simply pushed back on a knee jerk hysteria. Everyone else seems to be either lighting torches or hiding under the furniture.

William Chadwick said...

I've always understood "squaring the circle" to mean trying to do violate formal logic's Law of Non-Contradiction. Which should make it very appealing to "liberals." Logic isn't exactly their thing.

Craig said...

Blogger William Chadwick said...
I've always understood "squaring the circle" to mean trying to do violate formal logic's Law of Non-Contradiction. Which should make it very appealing to "liberals." Logic isn't exactly their thing.

---

Squaring the circle is a problem in _procedural_ mathematics. It is not about the law of non-contradiction, except to the extent that many, many problems in many areas of mathematics are related to the law of non-contradiction.

Moreover, as those who study formal logics know, not all formal logics require acceptance of the law of non-contradiction. Lots of productive work in logic and lots of productive work in computer science has been done by thinking hard about whether we should accept the law of non-contradiction and its cousin, the law of the excluded middle. See, for instance, § 4 of https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/contradiction/.

Audrey said...

I generally just lurk here but may I suggest the use of KillFile? You'll never have to read a post from Inga/Craig/etc again. Helps the flow of conversation enormously.