The Al Frankenstien picture is really bad, speaks a thousand words. Where do his hands go in pictures 2, 3, 4, 5 & 6 while she sleeps? .....— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 17, 2017
Lawprof Laurence Tribe tweeted:
Was it an accident that Trump had to override autocorrect to come up with the one distinctively Jewish spelling? Freud would say it was at least subconsciously antisemitic. I’m inclined to agree. https://t.co/hMhUr24EiT— Laurence Tribe (@tribelaw) November 18, 2017
All right, this has us rereading and highlighting the hilarious, mean, and thought-provoking things Trump crammed into his little tweet. He's got the memorable, powerful nickname for Al Franken, connecting him to the famous monster. Yeah, it's obvious and Franken himself has done it...
... but it's lodged in our head now. And Trump successfully raised an issue that I hadn't thought of, that the photographer would have taken bursts of images and the one we are seeing is the one Franken himself chose to give to Leeann Tweeden to inform her of the prank, so he must have thought he looked rather impishly cute. What about the other pictures?
But let's concentrate on the misspelling. Why would Trump do that? Laurence Tribe is presumably serious when he says he wants us to believe that he thinks Trump thought the "Frankenstien" spelling would convey anti-Semitism. What other reason is there to spell the word wrong? Well, first, there's a simple mistake, perhaps influenced by the "i before e" rule.
Tribe — who must know about Occam's Razor — tries to exclude the simple mistake by stating that "Trump had to override autocorrect," but I opened a compose window in Twitter and typed "Frankenstien" and it did not autocorrect. I tried another "i before e" mistake and wrote "recieve" and it autocorrected, so I know how Twitter autocorrect works, and it doesn't reject "Frankenstien."
So Tribe just sounds ridiculously conspiracy-theory-oriented. Why didn't he test autocorrect before making that assertion? I'm so careful about things like that that I feel the need to say right now that maybe Tribe's Twitter experience, perhaps in a different browser, works differently from mine. And I'm not spreading scurrilous hate by calling somebody anti-Semitic.
I'm so embarrassed for Tribe, dipping into this kind of crap. I wonder where his hands go when he's typing out tweets that he chooses not to publish to the world? This is what he thinks is impishly cute or brilliantly smart or importantly alarming??
And the dumbest part of it is, who thinks of "Frankenstien" as "distinctively Jewish" in a way that "Frankenstein" is not? There are many Jewish names that end in "-stein." If anything, the "-stein" ending might cause me to think Jewish. But of all the names that end in "-stein," the last one I'd think of as Jewish is "Frankenstein." Who thinks of the Frankenstein monster as Jewish? Here's the full text of Mary Shelley's novel, and there isn't one reference to Jews or Jewishiness or Judaism.
But if the subject is on your mind, perhaps you'd get the idea that misspelling the familiar name would be a way to make it seem Jewish, but who thinks about "-stien" as being Jewish? I've never even noticed that name before and have no association with it. I don't think it's familiar enough for Trump to have thought the old e-i switcheroo would trigger something anti-Semitic in his readers. I had to look up the name, and I'm still not seeing it as Jewish. Ancestry.com calls it a "Norwegian: habitational name from any of numerous farmsteads." I looked up my own last name on the same website and got "Americanized form of German and Jewish Althaus," which surprised me, as that was the first time in my life I'd seen the name called Jewish. But that shows that Ancestry.com doesn't hold back from calling a name Jewish.
I can't believe the badness of that Laurence Tribe tweet. Maybe the idea is something like: Trump's bad tweets work for him. Bad is good. You've got to tweet badly.
You're putting me on.
ADDED: If anything here seems anti-Semitic it's jumping to call something "distinctively Jewish."
Posts
306 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 306 of 306@Unknown:
“The British music publicist who arranged a meeting between Donald Trump's inner circle and a Russian lawyer who claimed to have damaging information on Hillary Clinton has insisted he was a merely "useful idiot" who became inadvertently embroiled in the scandal.
Suppose for a moment that "a Russian lawyer" provided material to the Trump campaign that was politically damaging to Hillary Clinton. What law would that break?
BTW, Fusion used Hillary money to pay Putin's spy for dirt. That is a matter of record. It doesn't matter though, because Hillary used shell corporations so all sins are washed away!
Forgot to mention:
"Don't wonder why in the future I won't be responding to you." Of course, I won't wonder, I already know why: because you always run away like a whiny child when you're called on your baldfaced lies and everyone can see you've lost the argument.
@Unknown:
The claim all along, the reason why there’s talk of impeachment, the reason why there is a special prosecutor, the reason why people want to see Trump and his associates criminally prosecuted, is because of the claim that they committed crimes by colluding with the Russians with regard to the hacking. That’s what Harry Reid has always said. That’s what John Podesta has always said. That has always been the Democratic claim. This newest evidence doesn’t in any way suggest that. What it suggests instead is that Donald Trump Jr. was told that the Russian government had incriminating evidence about Hillary Clinton and wanted to give it to him. And he said, “Well, I’d love to get it. I’d love to have it.” Now, I guess there’s some sense that it’s wrong for a political campaign to take dirt on your adversary from a foreign government. I don’t think it’s illegal at all to do that, but there’s a claim that it’s somehow sort of immoral.
And here’s what I don’t understand. The Steele dossier that everybody got excited about, that claimed that the Russians had incriminating videos of Trump in a Moscow hotel and other dirt on Trump, that came from somebody who was getting first paid by Republicans and then by Democrats, going to Moscow and getting dirt about Donald Trump from Kremlin-affiliated agents in Moscow. In other words, he went to Russia, talked to people affiliated with the Russian government and said, “Give me dirt about Donald Trump,” and then, presumably, got it and put it in the memo. Similarly, there’s an amazing Politico article from January of this year that describes how allies of the Clinton campaign, including somebody being paid by the DNC, met with officials of the Ukrainian government, which was desperate to help Hillary Clinton win and Donald Trump lose, and get information incriminating about Trump from Ukrainian officials. In other words, Ukraine was meddling in our election by giving Democrats incriminating information about Trump.
-Glenn Greenwald: Donald Trump Jr.'s Emails Aren't a “Smoking Gun” or Evidence of Criminal Collusion
It's different when Hillary pays for dirt from one of Putin's spies than when the Trump campaign sets up a meeting because REASONS! PEEEPULL! REASONS!
One is conspiracy to get a Republican elected, and the other is the highest form of patriotism!
The Obamacare gap, including the born-alive penalty (individual mandate), redistributive change (e.g. recharacterization of Medicare funds), and cost shifting (Medicaid expansion), is one solution to inflated costs. Single-payer or monopoly financing a la Fannie/Freddie debt debacle is another. Both create progressive, unsustainable exclusions and burdens. The monopoly solution ("single-payer") fails to address causes and effects, bur rather treats symptoms, and will/has (e.g. Medicare payment directives) forced dislocation and adjustment (e.g. decadal recessions) that we have come to accept as normal.
@tim in vermont:
We seem to be on the same wave-length, posting the same points within a minute of each other. Obviously you and I are Putin stooges ;)
“Suppose for a moment that "a Russian lawyer" provided material to the Trump campaign that was politically damaging to Hillary Clinton. What law would that break?”
If the information being peddled was gleaned from hacking, the Trump campaign, accepting such information, would be party to this crime.
“The conversation about emails is possibly a critical piece of evidence, legal analysts said. That is because one charge that investigators might try to substantiate against those higher in the Trump campaign is a conspiracy to violate the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act.”
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-mueller-potential-charges-20171031-story.html
@Unknown:
Do you believe that media outlets who published materials leaked by Bradley Manning or Edward Snowden were parties to their crime and should be federally prosecuted?
The DNC should be handing their servers over to the FBI any day now to be examined!
J. Farmer:
first paid by Republicans and then by Democrats... In other words, Ukraine was meddling in our election by giving Democrats incriminating information about Trump.
- Glenn Greenwald: Donald Trump Jr.'s Emails Aren't a “Smoking Gun” or Evidence of Criminal Collusion
Wow, that's incredibly honest. There may yet be hope for America's dueling wings to reconcile our differences. It may also explain why the government has not been shutdown by the unhappy establishment, "Deep State", and mainstream press. The truth is out there... in bits and pieces, scattered among the diversity/multitude.
Why did the Clinton campaign call the 10 million dollars they gave to Fusion GPS "legal expenses" when in fact it was opposition research?
“Payments by a campaign or party committee to an opposition research firm are legal, as long as those payments are accurately disclosed,” Fischer said. “But describing payments for opposition research as ‘legal services’ is entirely misleading and subverts the reporting requirements.” - from FEC complaint against Clinton and the DNC
What do official Democrats have to say? Well Debbie Wasserman "Sgt." Shultz says "I know nothink!" No really she said this:
A spokesman for Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., who led the DNC at the time, told Fox News on Wednesday that, “She did not have any knowledge of this arrangement.”
What did the DNC say? "I see nothink!" No what they really said was this:
Responding to the controversy, a DNC official stressed that current Chairman “Tom Perez and the new leadership of the DNC were not involved in any decision-making regarding Fusion GPS, nor were they aware that Perkins Coie was working with the organization.”
Would the Democrats have used information obtained from a Putin spy?
I personally wasn’t aware of this during the campaign,” [Clinton’s former campaign spokesman Brian] Fallon said in a statement, adding: “The first I learned of Christopher Steele or saw any dossier was after the election. But if I had gotten handed it last fall, I would have had no problem passing it along and urging reporters to look into it.”
Yes, COLLUSION! Like I have said many times, the Democrats look like they are simply using their standard tactic of accusing the other side of wrongs they are committing themselves to muddy the waters and as part of a general attack strategy.
Unknown is just a useful idiot repeating the crap the Democrats and the Clinton covering news media are feeding him. What else are they covering for the Democrats?
I’m going to say something that might be anti Semitic. Isn’t a successful people, Jews, immune to minority status abuse? Like white Americans?
I’ve never understood antisemitism.
@n.n:
Wow, that's incredibly honest.
I certainly have my disagreements with Greenwald. He's basically a Western European social democrat, but he has a healthy loathing of elites that I certainly relate to and admire, and he does not appear to be under foolish partisan delusions that it's just "the other side" who are bad, and once we get enough people with the right letter after their name, everything will be great.
Robert Cook:
An assertion is interesting, even cute, but unproductive. So, where do you disagree?
Isn’t a successful people, Jews, immune to minority status abuse? Like white Americans?
Or gay men, for that matter.
Fish gotta swim
Birds gotta fly
Democrats gotta throw lying accusations of racism and bigotry.
Just the way the world works.
In July, the Fox News ticker misspelled Jared Kushner's name as Jared Kosher. That's probably anti-Semitic.
Althouse said: "If anything here seems anti-Semitic it's jumping to call something "distinctively Jewish."
You can't even call a circumcised cock 'distinctively Jewish'.
I am Laslo.
@Lem:
I’ve never understood antisemitism.
Hannah Arendt's classic The Origins of Totalitarianism does a decent job describing it in her reflections on the so called Dreyfus Affairs. She relates it to the common pattern of the Jewish diaspora in Europe often being seen simultaneously as social outcasts and social upstarts.
and once we get enough people with the right letter after their name, everything will be great
Religion/moral philosophy to keep honest people honest, and competing interests to prevent others from running amuck. We need people of good character and competitors in kind.
The Trump Twitter account destabilizes folks on the Left.
@n.n:
We need people of good character and competitors in kind.
I am not so sure how corrective that would be. As far as I could tell, George W. Bush and Barrack Obama were both "people of good character," and yet both pursued disastrous policies for the American polity.
and he does not appear to be under foolish partisan delusions that it's just "the other side" who are bad
I see value in each argument, but I do have a bias. In principle, I prefer the Republicans as custodians of the American State, the People, and our Posterity. Let's see if they can live up to their principles. They haven't, but I am forced to judge them, first, individually, on their principles (character), and, second, on the consensus, the outcome.
Lem said...
I’m going to say something that might be anti Semitic. Isn’t a successful people, Jews, immune to minority status abuse?
Historically, obviously, this is not true. At this particular point in time it is largely true. The concern is that historical norms reassert themselves.
and yet both pursued disastrous policies for the American polity
How would you optimize an imperfect machine in a chaotic state?
AReasonable[sic]Man accuses Big Mike of seeing things only through partisan blinders. Can anyone see the irony in this?
@n.n:
How would you optimize an imperfect machine in a chaotic state?
I haven't the slightest idea. As I am known to say from time to time, I think America is doomed. And I think our fate was likely sealed when the fateful decision was made to import a large number sub-Saharan Africans as slave laborers. And we only compounded the problem by throwing open the immigration floodgates in the 1960s. A nation-state cannot function without a coherent nation, and the American nation has been systematically diluted for decades now. We are witnessing today the fruits of those labors, where a statement, "It's okay to be white" is now being regarded as a hateful admission of white supremacy.
and yet both pursued disastrous policies for the American polity
I think you will acknowledge that the formula was incompletely realized. There is sufficient overlapping and convergent interests, perhaps even common interests, that preclude an environment where competitors will check each other's divergent ambitions. Although, it has been sufficient to curb their most extreme impulses. Also, while people of good character may have the same end in mind, the means may diverge wildly. What would you suggest is a third leg, the missing ingredient?
"And the dumbest part of it is, who thinks of "Frankenstien" as "distinctively Jewish" in a way that "Frankenstein" is not?"
Dunno..methinks the dumbest part of this is ignoring the elephant in the room, Jared Kushner.
Clearly Trump is hell bent on keeping the Jews down.
But then..if you're going to paint someone as Hitler, ya gotta jump the shark big-league.
Can anyone see the irony in this?
I know of one person who can't. He says he's reasonable, so he must be, just like AntiFa must be anti fascist, not fascist. It's right in their name! Same with the Affordable Care Act! It's right in the name!
" Don’t wonder why in the future I won’t be responding to you."
How do I join that queue ?
The silliness here is growing by leaps and bounds.
@n.n:
To be honest, I find your construction difficult to follow and engage with. You seem to prefer talking in broad abstract ways that I have never been particularly good at. If there is something more concrete and grounded in the actual world we live in, I would be more than happy to discuss it with you. But honestly, I don't even know "What would you suggest is a third leg, the missing ingredient?" is asking.
A nation-state cannot function without a coherent nation
A nation-state, a legal jurisdiction, a community... a family.
I can imagine some good in destroying or suppressing the mob mentality often associated with these artificial and natural organizations, but I am also aware of the bad that follows with their antithesis and the fiction of universal systems and solutions in a diverse (individual) world with finitely available and accessible resources, and egos that range from sadistic to masochistic to delusional.
"Trump said there were some “very good people” among that group." I note that you mean That Group. Hmm.
Don't be silly.
He said there were some very good people among the group that was protesting the removal of statues, and there are many good people who believe trying to hide the past does not auger well for the future.
“Dunno..methinks the dumbest part of this is ignoring the elephant in the room, Jared Kushner.
Clearly Trump is hell bent on keeping the Jews down.”
I only disagree to the extent that I would put Ivanka Trump Kushner and their kids even higher. But I do agree about her husband. You just have to remember the photos of Trump and Kushner at the Western Wall in Jerusalem. Of Kushner being the only American standing right by Trump when they were given their tour, etc. Everyone else stood back. I saw it as Trump honoring both his son-in-law and his Jewish faith.
"@Cookie -- enjoyed your link the other night about your commuter bicycle. Some impressive engineering in that machine."
Fabi, thanks! It is a great bike and rides really well.
J. Farmer:
Well, there are individuals (character), or, say, atoms. There are groups and interactions, or, say, forces. You could character the human system as a physical system. The third leg is a binding, reconciling force, the dark matter... Perhaps that's it. It's dark matter and energy, uncharacterized, unobserved, misunderstood, yet necessary to balance the equations. What could that be? An extra-universal entity, perhaps? A universal entity with superhuman knowledge and skill? Or maybe a terrestrial entity that emulates those qualities.
You seem to prefer talking in broad abstract ways
I play an engineer in real life. And a philosopher in the virtual world.
Still, I think abstractions can be useful. They may help to overcome "missing the forest for the trees" problem. However, in practice, in the real world, both mindsets are necessary to characterize and address problems sets. In an earlier life, I also dabbled in mathematics.
How about this three-legged construct: reconciliation. rehabilitation. revitalization.
"Who thinks of the Frankenstein monster as Jewish?"
Tracy Morgan and Donald Glover in the lyrics to 'Werewolf Bar Mitzvah'. http://lyrics.wikia.com/wiki/Tracy_Morgan_%26_Donald_Glover:Werewolf_Bar_Mitzvah
Trieb is full of shiet.
Who would say there are very fine people among white supremacists? Trump or Obama?
Neither, you lying jackass. Trump referred to some of the people protesting, but most CERTAINLY wasn't referring to white supremacists. If you had an inkling of honesty in your entire body, you'd have the stones to admit that.
“How do I join that queue ?”
The best way would be to not address me or any of my comments. You’re welcome.
"An assertion is interesting, even cute, but unproductive. So, where do you disagree?"
Ok.
"The self-loathing Jew substitutes faith in mortal gods for God." I disagree.
"The self-loathing Jew substitutes secular religions for God's religious/moral philosophy." I disagree.
"The self-loathing Jew calls herself feminist (i.e. chauvinist), liberal (i.e. divergent), progressive (i.e. monotonic change)." I disagree.
"The self-loathing Jew will read the myths (i.e. recorded and spoken history) out of context and feel compelled to apologize." I don't know what you're talking about.
"The self-loathing human will deny individual dignity and embrace diversity." I disagree. (Embracing diversity, btw, exemplifies embracing individual dignity.)
"The self-loathing human will deny lives deemed unworthy, inconvenient, or profitable and adopt the Pro-Choice religion (e.g. political congruence or '=')."" I disagree, to the degree I can glean what you're saying here. I have no clue what your parenthetical means.
They are desperate to change the narrative back to something, anything, anti-Trump.
Of course Unknown is a liar:
Blogger Unknown said...
“This is the same "Unknown" that a week ago was brushing off criticism of Bill Clinton on the Lewinsky issue by saying that she still loved him, then a couple days later, it was "now that we don't need him anymore, Bill should have resigned years ago!"” [ Tim in Vermont]
Either you are outright lying or you have problems with recollection. Or you are nuts.
The problem with the internet is that the stuff you say one day is still there the next:
Blogger Unknown said...
Was Monica coerced? He was powerful, but she said yes and meant it, it seems from her memoirs. Not so in the case of Weinstein and Louis CK.
Followed up by:
Blogger Unknown said...
“At the age of 22”, I fell in love with my boss.” -Monica Lewinski
She said yes.
He is here only to disrupt. End of story.
Nonsense like this erodes the credibility of Democrats. They are a parody of a political party. We don't need comedians anymore, we have leftist pundits like Tribe to laugh at.
"Maybe Trump isn’t an antisemite but some of his supporters certainly are."
Maybe Hillary/Pelosi/Schummer/Warren are not murderers/rapists/pedophiles/racists, but some of their supporters certainly are.
Well they certainly are tarred by THAT brush, right?
Or is "so what?" appropriate?
Typical Lefty: "The best way would be to not address me or any of my comments. You’re welcome."
Seeks safe space where he/she cannot be criticized: CHECK
"Maybe Trump isn’t an antisemite but some of his supporters certainly are."
Same Democrats who want felons to vote. As noted upthread, it was felons who got Franken elected.
“This is the same "Unknown" that a week ago was brushing off criticism of Bill Clinton on the Lewinsky issue by saying that she still loved him, then a couple days later, it was "now that we don't need him anymore, Bill should have resigned years ago!"” [ Tim in Vermont]
“Either you are outright lying or you have problems with recollection. Or you are nuts.”
“Blogger Unknown said...
Was Monica coerced? He was powerful, but she said yes and meant it, it seems from her memoirs. Not so in the case of Weinstein and Louis CK.
Followed up by:
Blogger Unknown said...
“At the age of 22”, I fell in love with my boss.” -Monica Lewinski
She said yes.”
Just how can you possibly assert that I said that Lewinski said she STILL loves him? Liar. I said that in a memoir she said yes because she loved him at the time. He didn’t coerce her, he used his power to attract her. She said yes and meant it. You seem to not understand the difference.
I don’t know what you think you’re proving. I didn’t say anything that contradict my other statements, despite you desperately trying to spin it this way. And I’ve never brushed off criticism of Bill Clinton. Liar.
So could somebody get Larry to ask Sigmund for a quick diagnosis
of the comment section of this blog.
I feel sorry for the ex-psych nurse, Inga.
She is both stupid and delusional with a lot of time on her hands. She has always been a nut, but has more time to express it now that her "real doctor" husband has passed.
Let's be kind.
I feel sorry for flunky psychologists that are more obsessive over certain commenters than their patients would be.
"The self-loathing Jew substitutes faith in mortal gods for God." I disagree.
... I disagree.
... I disagree.
The principles and practices of Judaism under oversight of God, with what followed.
Diversity as a progressive concept embraces color, sex, ethnicity, race, and other classes to discriminate and divide people. Diversity is antithetical to judge people by the "content of their character", and since it is derived from incidental features, it is wholly incompatible with individual dignity.
Pro-Choice (e.g. political congruence or "=") is selective, unprincipled, and opportunistic. It is exclusionary. It is trans-human in its most extreme realizations.
Anyway, unproductive. Progressively cute.
I am struck by Tribe's reference to Freud. Freudianism is, of course, an utterly discredited pseudoscience, as crackpot as phrenology or astrology. But Tribe finds it useful to describe Trump's supposed anti-semitism as "subconcious", since this means that there can be no effective defense; to deny the accusation is to confirm it. This sort of scientism has become popular with the academic left. They will soon be able to detect your prejudices even when you are asleep. "It floats! It's a witch!"
Okay, let's play. Who, what, where, when, why, and how do you disagree?
“Freudianism is, of course, an utterly discredited pseudoscience, as crackpot as phrenology or astrology.”
I agree! Psychologists seem to love it though.
"It floats! It's a witch!"
This is the age of babies, baby trials, and baby hunts... and Storks.
This man was always going to be the next liberal justice, but the smug dopeyness of this tweet demonstrates why that's unlikely now.
Inga: "He didn’t coerce her, he used his power to attract her."
That is PRECISELY the scenario Clinton and his followers (like you) said was ALWAYS harassment due to the power imbalance and Clinton signed legislation precisely to that effect.
But I get your confusion since, as a lefty, there is always the presumption that laws the left passes will never apply to the left.
Ever.
Not all who voted for Hillary did so because they love how her incontinence undergarments fill out her pantsuits, but they're in the same basket as those who did.
Dr Weevil
As you have noted, the Trump haters resort to misrepresentation endlessly. I don’t just mean the ones here. Misrepresenting Trump is almost uniform everywhere you go. It’s like the thing Palin didn’t say about seeing Russia from her house. Most people believe she said that because the lie is so ubiquitous.
So here’s a rule of thumb for this blog. Unknown cannot be trusted, Chuck cannot be trusted. Only J Farmer amongst the reflexive Trump bashers is careful and honest.
That's funny Unknown. But never give an inch!
"Unknown cannot be trusted, Chuck cannot be trusted. Only J Farmer amongst the reflexive Trump bashers is careful and honest."
I agree. Arguments are mostly assertions of opinion around here but I agree Farmer is more reliable as to facts.
There are a few commenters, more than a few really, whose opinions are of real value.
The rest I try to scroll quickly pst.,
My twitter, running in Chrome, underlines Frankenstien as incorrect but not Frankenstein. I would never have thought of either spelling as Jewish.
Never trust anyone just because they agree with you. That’s pretty stupid.
"Only J Farmer amongst the reflexive Trump bashers is careful and honest."
Don't assume J. Farmer is a "reflexive Trump basher." He voted for Trump. Consider him a "considered Trump critic," to the extent he has offered specific criticisms of Trump.
Using the term Trump "basher" reveals the user's own bias and predisposition to reject any criticism of Trump as mere "bashing."
If I simply write that this is a great post by Althouse and that I agree with all of it, what will my Trump-supporting detractors say? Will I still be a "leftist"?
Chuck said...
"If I simply write that this is a great post by Althouse and that I agree with all of it, what will my Trump-supporting detractors say? Will I still be a "leftist"?"
I think it would simply be a gracious thing to say.
I am Laslo.
LLR Chuck: "If I simply write that this is a great post by Althouse and that I agree with all of it, what will my Trump-supporting detractors say? Will I still be a "leftist"?"
"If"
We'll never know.
Lol. It is exactly what I think; a terrific blog post by Althouse. No more; no less. Tribe deserved this response. Althouse did it beautifully.
And until I saw my posted comment at the bottom of more than 275 others, I hadn't even realized that before I commented, several of the usual fuckheads among the Althouse commentariat hard already seen fit to mischaracterize my true reaction.
So Tribe deserved this Althouse treatment. She gave it to him good. But where's Althouse when Trump mangles things the way that Tribe did here? AWOL. Althouse Without Linguistics.
And I'm not spreading scurrilous hate by calling somebody anti-Semitic.
Oh yes. Let's take a minute to look at the long litany of scurrilous hate spread throughout the centuries by too quickly pointing out and condemning anti-Semitism. What a historical lesson to take from that one. Too much identifying and condemning of anti-Semitism not enough condoning or absolving people of it. Whatever. Nice view in alternative reality land.
Ritmo's comments are some of those not worth reading.
Well a typo and an absurd, partisan response gets an energetic 282 responses.
America need some to get a life!
"This @POTUS is not just a pig but an evil ghoul. I don’t make a habit of wishing anyone harm, but if I did . . ."
That's from Tribe's Twitter feed. Read through for a few minutes and you'll see a man burning up with hate.
I don't understand it but Freud may have been on to something when he said:
“The unconscious of one human being can react upon that of another without passing through the conscious.”
Siggy should give a hat tip to Scott Adams.
Ritmo's comments are some of those not worth reading.
Yours aren't even worth thinking.
You really are triggered quite easily, aren't you? A single comment from one person you don't like and you pounce like a cat with a firecracker tied to your tail.
Time to tell the nursing home orderly to up the dosage of your bitch pills.
It really says something that Michael Mengele KKK isn't content just to avoid reading what he says isn't worth reading, but feels a need to make sure that others don't, as well. He's that afraid of what I write.
Don't go into the light, Michael KKK! Don't go into it!
Ken B said...
Dr Weevil
As you have noted, the Trump haters resort to misrepresentation endlessly. ...Only J Farmer amongst the reflexive Trump bashers is careful and honest.
11/19/17, 5:13 PM
J. Farmer is reasonably supportive of the President and tolerant of his limitations. I don't think he is a basher, probably more the "do what you said" type of critic.
where's Althouse when Trump mangles things the way that Tribe did here? AWOL.
You think maybe there's a difference between an innocent mistake or typo on the one hand, and a false accusation of anti-semitism? Tribe didn't "mangle" something. He manufactured an outrageous charge from nothing.
Way up thread Sebastian said: “‘I can't believe the badness of that Laurence Tribe tweet.’ Oh, no! You'd been doing great without the I-can't-believe-shtick! Anyway, we can all believe it. For progs, any smear goes.”
The thing is, back when I was in law school (mid-eighties), Tribe was pretty impressive. I attended the arguments in the Supreme Court for Bowers v. Hardwick. Tribe was amazing. Even if you disagreed with his politics and his views about constitutional interpretation, he was someone to be taken very seriously. How are the mighty fallen!
Blogger Chuck said..."If I simply write that this is a great post by Althouse and that I agree with all of it, what will my Trump-supporting detractors say?"
You could not even write a post that doesn't mention Trump without mentioning Trump.
Do we ever get any real news
https://nypost.com/2017/11/18/why-no-one-is-talking-about-trumps-game-changing-deal/
-https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2017/11/19/macron-and-trump-agree-on-coalition-plan-to-counter-iran-and-hezbollah-saudi-grand-mufti-forbids-killing-jews/plan-to-counter-iran-and-hezbollah-saudi-grand-mufti-forbids-killing-jews/
You wonder think this might be of interest, tribe was most recently taking mad hatter mensch piously.
Mr Cook does the common sneaky trick of dropping a modifier and then drawing an inference.
We are witnessing today the fruits of those labors, where a statement, "It's okay to be white" is now being regarded as a hateful admission of white supremacy.
Which is a perfect illustration of how absurd things have become. What scares me is the prospect that a majority of White people might just get angry enough to decide..."if the name of the game is identity politics....."
Greenwald is a guy I have a lot of respect for. He is very careful hunting down corroboration and quoting accurately. He has destroyed a whole raft of fakery in the past year. His judgment is often suspect, but with so few in the media even trying to be honest you have to acknowledge a guy who is.
Who is Ritmo? Is it Toothless, who just defended telling lies about people (the anti Semitic thing)?
Greenwald is a guy I have a lot of respect for. He is very careful hunting down corroboration and quoting accurately. He has destroyed a whole raft of fakery in the past year.
Ironic since his first claim to fame was for using sockpuppets.
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/11/a_fair_hearing_by_a_jury_of_his_pervs.html
The fakery has been more evenly distributed as you can see from the last link
It's a,gonzo world when Robert parry and glennwald make more sense than max boot and John schindler on this particular point
"Who is Ritmo? Is it Toothless,..."
Yes, one of his previous names.
Is this fool Jewish? I.e, Member of the Tribe? I hope not. I guess I thought better of Harvard law professors.
Are we still pushing the Trump is anti-Semitic, despite, you know, all the evidence to the contrary?
The "Frankenstien" spelling does seem to exist on the Internet, but it doesn't seem to be an accepted alternative spelling.
Like everyone else who has commented here, identifying "-stien" with Jews seems to be a complete hallucination.
The only other possibility I see, Assrat, is that Trump was supposedly anti-semitic for turning Franken into Frankenstein...because teh cray? Who thought Herr Doktor Victor von Frankenstein was Jewish? Oh, or maybe adding -stein to any name Jewifies it, Jews it up maybe, makes it more Jewy? Like Ann Althousestein or Ritmostein or Unknownstein? Dragostein? Ingastein? Fabistein?
Nah, not feeling it.
Post a Comment