May 13, 2018
"Maybe the question isn’t what happened to Alan Dershowitz. Maybe it’s what happened to everyone else."
I'm quoting the most obvious line in "‘What Happened to Alan Dershowitz?’/How a liberal Harvard professor became Trump’s most distinguished defender on TV, freaked out his friends and got the legal world up in arms" by Evan Mandery in Politico.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
237 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 237 of 237Artists who think they deserve more in life because of their talents tend not to do very well.
Like Kathy Griffin
(Denmark and the Netherlands have a lower link between generational wealth or poverty transfer/transmittal than America does. Explain that one.
Perhaps they count only citizens.
That's tantamount to saying that he built and accomplished nothing in his life since his father died. That's just your spite talking.
It's fucking reality. Listen to you... is anyone angrier than Trump himself? If you were capable of detecting facial expressions you would notice how odd it is that he never smiles or laughs.
As for his so-called accomplishments, it's a fact that his net worth since Fred Trump died grew slower than the economy as a whole. Fact. It's a fact that after the Taj Mahal went belly up he was saved by the bankruptcy courts by relegating him to a marketing man whose value was simply in his name as a brand, not in any executive management expertise. These are facts. You are blinding yourself with his shiny wealth (or whatever net value he inflates himself to) and reading worship and adulation into it rather than reality. People don't have to hate him to be objective about him... (even if he is a totally unpleasant blowhard personally). They just have to not, you know, as I said... worship money. Take off your love goggles and look at his life and so-called accomplishments objectively. I doubt you can even list any that you can defend as such... which is why you'll just sputter and break down and go.... "but he has money!" Yes, so did Al Capone.
Hate to break the news to you but people are people no matter how rich or poor they are.
Perhaps they count only citizens.
When you decide to stop getting all snitty/snotty? and decide that you actually want to start looking at the data, give me a call.
There is not much hierarchy in academia - basically tenure or lack of tenure. Positions above that are few and tend to rotate around.
This ignores the whole grant-writing/funding process. Some departments and fields are immune to this I gather.
"There is not much hierarchy in academia - basically tenure or lack of tenure."
Right. But incredibly vicious internal politics,backbiting,ridicule, the sharpest elbows,way more cutthroat than corporate life. As someone said the politics are so fierce because the stakes are so low.
"You people need to inject some reality into your theory"
You should do the world a favor and inject an entire 80 bag of fentanyl into your va-jayjay and take a permanent dirt nap.
Take off your love goggles and look at his life and so-called accomplishments objectively.
I'll be amused when Elizabeth Warren turns to Trump in a 2020 debate and says "You didn't build Trump Tower."
As someone said the politics are so fierce because the stakes are so low.
My PhD advisor had that one tacked to his bulletin board.
If you wanted someone here to defend academia I hate to tell you I'm not your guy. I'm not one of the droids you're looking for.
I'm glad that some system of research and education and publication exists but yes the process is one too weird and dehumanizing for me to want to have much to do with.
I had some publications as an undergrad but realized that 6 years learning to narrow all focus to one thing and then a lifetime of that much overspecialization was not for me, anyway. So luckily there were things that selected me out of an interest in it before learning of its other personal pitfalls - let alone whatever social failures it's producing in the humanities and the PC grievance industry. Diversity of research topics and humanities-based interests is important but the grievance industry is out of line.
I think it can self-correct, though. Colleges have become a glut because of America's abandonment of manufacturing and the trades. I've said it a million times. Fix that problem and the colleges will become a little less self-important and ridiculous.
The best researcher I ever met was prolific and (collegially) promiscuous as hell. He didn't know everything but didn't have to. He knew how to collaborate with anyone, and his publication numbers proved it. It was then that I realized that even science could be political, in a sense. Not necessarily a bad sense... but just in the sense that social skills were just as important to success in that as in anything else.
I'll be amused when Elizabeth Warren turns to Trump in a 2020 debate and says "You didn't build Trump Tower."
Yeah, but that's predictable and that's you.
I'm more perplexed at why people (inc. apparently people like you) feel a need to worship such towers of Babels as the ones his name alone financed.
"the colleges will become a little less self-important and ridiculous."
You should take your own advice, you insipid, pretentious twit.
The human scroll bar seems full of energy today.
All negative, of course.
It's so nice that we get Michael Special K. to stop by on his daily rounds of hall monitoring duties.
"the colleges will become a little less self-important and ridiculous."
You should take your own advice, you insipid, pretentious twit.
Whoever wrote this is about as likely to be hired into a supervisory position as a death-row inmate is to be voted humanitarian of the year, so the advice is moot.
So much concentrated animus is interesting to observe.
The human scroll bar is jerking off for his daily dopamine rush.
Micheal said ... "As someone said the politics are so fierce because the stakes are so low."
If I remember correctly, Henry Kissinger was asked about leaving Harvard for the Nixon administration. He described university politics as "petty precisely because the stakes are so small."
From my experience and that of my fiancé, I have to agree. It can get ridiculous.
Blogger Michael K said...
"The human scroll bar seems full of energy today.
All negative, of course."
Drugs or booze. Take your pick.
Francisco D said...
The human scroll bar is jerking off for his daily dopamine rush.
Calm down, Francisco. Just because you fantasize to thoughts of me ejaculating all over your chest doesn't mean I'm actually going to do it.
I've never heard of Rawls before and I can't say what this passage may mean in its original context
It's merely a restatement of Kant's Categorical Imperative and Christ's Golden Rule, updated to incorporate modern sociological terminology.
The scroll bar makes these long threads that go nowhere.
I wonder that Ann tolerates but he is just barely smart enough not attack her.
Everybody else is attacked but not the hostess.
It's fucking reality. Listen to you... is anyone angrier than Trump himself? If you were capable of detecting facial expressions you would notice how odd it is that he never smiles or laughs.
Another lie, according to Google Images.
900 page book. "Merely."
False to boot.
Robert Cook wrote: "You're one of those people who thinks Lennon's "Imagine" is evil for...I don't wtf people object to in the song."
I won't get into good v. evil, but I think the song's message fails when it says, "I hope that some day you'll join us, and the world will live as one." It's saying that Lennon, et al. have the key to the future and don't have to compromise with others. Humility is a necessary component of songs of this sort.
One example would be from Ocean's "Put Your Hand in the Hand": "For the buyers and the sellers were no different fellas than what I profess to be, And it causes me shame to know we're not the people we should be." Another from "Put a Little Love in Your Heart": "Take a good look around, and if you're lookin' down, put a little love in your heart." In "Imagine," Lennon is looking down on those who disagree with him, and he expresses no inkling that he might not be quite the person he should be.
Everybody else is attacked but not the hostess.
Only if they attack me.
She doesn't attack me. Why should I attack her?
And why are you so lacking in basic socialization as to not understand that?
I hope that wasn't too long for you to understand, given your short attention span, human hall monitor.
"And why are you so lacking in basic socialization as to not understand that?"
Why are you so lacking the will to once and for all throw yourself in front of a speeding garbage truck and do the human race a huge favor?
Ritmo is an argument for capital punishment, if only for stupidity.
Not a single world leader would argue for clemency.
Only if they attack me.
Meaning they state an opinion you don't care for or understand. Otherwise delusional.
Oh look, Mommy! Three losers arguing in cyberspace about how a pseudonym is driving them all crazy! I don't think I've ever seen that, before!
Ritmo, go to bed. You are very tired.
I can tell because you make less sense than usual.
Perhaps the three of you could form a support group for each other.
There, there.
Michael K., you stroke HipsterVacuum's hair.
Michael, you stroke Michael K's chest.
HipsterVacuum, you can stroke Michael's temples.
I'm going to leave and shut the door now. When you're ready to give each other a happy ending, just make sure you clean up and show yourselves out of Ann's basement gracefully.
LOL!
Ignore the jester because it is unskilled, not because you don't like jesters.
ritmo is always the hero of his own stories.How did the world get on before ritmo?
"It's merely a restatement of Kant's Categorical Imperative and Christ's Golden Rule, updated to incorporate modern sociological terminology."
I don't know Kant's Categorical Imperative, but comparing it to the Golden Rule seems a fair analogy.
Robert Cook is ignorant of the best established moral theories. And loves socialism with all its murderous history.
Seems right.
Post a Comment