Reading this blog is sometimes like stepping into an alternate reality. Ross Douthat complains that Sarah Palin's self-imposed political implosion sends the message that the old aphorism that anyone can grow up to be president is not true? That you apparently concur with this Justin is remarkable as we are now in the first year of the presidency of an African-American from a working-class, single-parent household. It really is an extraordinary wilfull blindness on your part. Of course, it's all about creating whatever fantasy supports your crusade.

>>the presidency of an African-American from a working-class, single-parent household

I'm still waiting to hear who in his "working class" high school paid for his Columbia and Harvard Law School tuitions.

Or did the funds come from his Kenyan government high level official father? You know, that openly communist guy? He was "working class" right?

Never mind, Tom. Pragmatist is creating a mythology. Even Obama referred to his mother as "middle class," so it's a sliding scale, as needed. At any rate, Obama's mother and father were college pals with a current Congressman from Hawaii. The boy went to private school and elite colleges, as you note. His mother has a Ph.D.

If Pragmatist had bothered to click through to the opinion that he calls me willfully blind for approving of, he'd have found this paragraph:

That last statistic is a crucial one. Palin’s popularity has as much to do with class as it does with ideology. In this sense, she really is the perfect foil for Barack Obama. Our president represents the meritocratic ideal — that anyone, from any background, can grow up to attend Columbia and Harvard Law School and become a great American success story. But Sarah Palin represents the democratic ideal — that anyone can grow up to be a great success story without graduating from Columbia and Harvard.

I'd actually dispute the "meritocratic ideal" characterization. At the very least, Obama proves a young-adult deadline on having broken through to the upper crust.

Pragmatist refers to willful blindness and creating fantasies to support your crusade – about Obama being an African-American from a working-class, single-parent household.

Seriously?

He’s half African-American which is well more than he is from a working class household. I’ve even seen where some liberal activists complain his rise is not significant because he was not disadvantaged growing up.

Anyways, just wanted to pile on Pragmatist for his misrepresenting reality in the name of partisan politicking not to mention obvious hypocrisy. I suggest a moniker change; ‘Pragmatist’ – about as much as Ann Coulter or Jesse Jackson are.

that anyone can grow up to be a great success story without graduating from Columbia and Harvard.

Quickest way to cause a 404 error in the brains of Democrat leadership.

By way of manufacturing disagreement over my post on the smoothing of life's barbs and its disparate effects, David comments as follows:

Why is it now that you come to these conclusions? There has always been an aristocracy in our political world. Can you explain Carcieri? It seems only when the political tide runs against you that you notice the power world of money and influence.

That is how you began, then this,

Prior to substantive response, I'd opine that this is not an accurate inference from my actual writing, but a convenient imposition in order to find some way of objecting to what I've recently said. Without digging through years of archives, I can testify that I've always had populist inclinations and have objected to the formation of elite circles and dynastic progressions.

The problem is that you never do get around to the promised answer to David. So counting this post it will be the second time he did not get an answer or as you say " a substantive response".
All he got was what I fertilize my garden with.

Pragmatist's comments to Justin prompted Justin to actually use Obama's name instead of his customary "The Obamanation". Progress? I don't think so.

Phil,

The paragraph after the last one you quote began my substantive response.

And I use Obama's name much more frequently than I use "Obamanation." The latter I use strictly to mean the movement that takes him as its focus and his leveraging of such; the former I use when writing about the man, himself.

Much more important than where you came from is what you do when you get there. No doubt in my mind that Obama will prove himself a champion of the underclass. If he doesn't he'll have disaffected so many voters that he would all but forfeit his chance at reelection.

Let's remember who's in and who's out, and how it got that way.

Phil,
Justin never answers questions. His hauteur won't let him. Justin's assertions are just that, assertions. He was wrong on the election, he is wrong in what passes for his analysis of the current political situation. He has one helluva negative track record.

OldTimeLefty

"Quickest way to cause a 404 error in the brains of Democrat leadership."

... very good, EMT.

Monique
Who needs brains when you've got pom poms.

OldTimeLefty

You are right. Justin rarely if ever answers questions when he knows there is no way that he can defend his tortured conclusions.
The Africans that were captured and delivered to slave labor across the ocean sometimes to places called plantations were treated brutally. The inhumane treatment included the stripping of their names, their African identities. Justin and others upset with the election results continue this practice by calling Barack Obama The Obamanation. But you are right. They do not hold the power now. They have become restive and surly. But they are still only N.Q.K..

You illustrate perfectly well with the past few comments what the process is. You bring up "Obamanation"; I clarify that I don't use it as a nickname for the man, but as a tagline for a movement; and rather than address that distinction, you proceed to cast me along tired and laughably inapplicable lines of racial oppression as if I hadn't responded to the accusation.

I answer few of the "questions" that you and others pose because your ill will and preference for belittlement over discourse prove you better ignored.

Congratulations, though, Phil. Sexism might just have given you the lead in the race to the bottom. Go pound your chest and scratch your groin.

>The Africans that were captured and delivered to slave labor across the ocean sometimes to places called plantations were treated brutally.

Yeah, and I'm half-Irish.

So somewhere in my family tree my ancestors were treated horribly by the British empire.

But I've better things to do than be bothered / offended by the fact that I speak "English."

GET A LIFE!

Phil nailed it. Monique is Little Sir Echo who does little more than wave pom poms. Her gender has nothing to do with the servile position she assumes in this blog. You are the one who twisted it into a sexist remark. IT CAME FROM THE CONVOLUTIONS OF YOUR OWN BRAIN. I don't know what sports events you have attended recently, but cheerleaders come in both sexes.

Justin, that you can't answer the questions posed is well attested to by the fact that you don't answer them.

Your furrowed brow always brings to mind Curly of the Three Stooges who once famously said, "I keep tryin' to think, but nuttin happens."
OldTimeLefty

I have no idea what you people are talking about. i thought the original post rather straitforward. Maybe I have to start reading things more carefully instead of enjoying them.

Thanks michael, you are right. This is comical.

We have OTL and Phil defending a dumb remark by Pragmatist by … not by any logic or reasoned statements but by name calling and identifying cases where Justin didn’t respond to a question. This while ignoring the reality that it is they who rarely respond to someone questioning their points (with usual good reason, hyperbole without substance tends to be difficult to defend).

I guess it’s more fun to high-five after a rhetorical-zinger than engage in rational discourse. What to expect next from them? Insults against ones parents … wait for it …

michael

Maybe you should remember who has your back here when the discussion turns to your profession.

Hello Phil,

I honestly am lost by this conversation, not taking sides at all. I read the original post once, found it interesting and moved on, just a little surprised at all the commentary about it is all. And your "having our back" is duly noted and appreciated.