I wanted to share an example of discourse from a recent Huffington Post headline Obama Birth Certificate Released where I decided to use reason, civility and facts instead of my usual posts consisting of snide, irreverent and sarcastic comments. I have tried former strategy in the past on similar message boards but was met with a barrage of name calling, ad hominem attacks and unhinged comments that could only have come from keyboard translator machines with monkeys banging away at the other end. I found out long ago that both the hardcore left and the right are like spoiled 4-year olds- you cannot reason with them, they will not listen to your logic and eventually they will perform the literary equivalent of throwing a tantrum.
I have no love for Obama but have blogged many times that I do not want him to fail- fail at a second term, of course, but not to fail as the President of (what was once known as) the most powerful country on the planet. The headline article peaked my interest and I knew there were going to be some battles, in fact over 4000 comments (as of this post there are 45k +) were left before I even read the article. I read some very well written comments by both sides and decided to try once more to write with a civil tone devoid of mockery and disdain. The following transcript of my comments and readers's replies follows.
Obama Birth Certificate Released By White House
TK: This was never an issue for me as there are plenty of other things that cast doubt on Obama's legitimacy to hold the position of President of the United States. What is sad, even after listening to 9 minutes of bumbling to get to the point, is that there will still be people who will focus on this asinine birth certificatI think that is a well written comment with just a hint of displeasure towards Obama and his inability to just come out and say something. Without a teleprompter he fumbles for words like George Bush but with the oratory condescension of John Kerry. My last sentence was supposed to show my balanced viewpoints of the issue but sadly the jackholes who read my post never made it past my first sentence.
e issue regardless of facts.
schildpad: Oh really? And what are these other things, pray tell?Barring the sarcastic overtones with the "pray tell" idiom, I was interested that the writer decided to go with the legalities of becoming president, completely missing the spirit of my original post. He must have thought I was a hardcore "birther" and that the birth certificate was a fake- despite my last statement condemning such a thought.
ions for presdident :
No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constituti
on, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty-fiv e years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States. - US Constituti on, Article II, Section 1
TK: I was thinking more along the abstract lines of his lack of experienceNot equipped to handle reason and logic, schildpad desperately tries to assert his own.
, for starters. Little things that really qualify someone to hold the position, regardless of the laundry list of official qualificat ions you present. Nice citation, by the way
schildpad: Unless they're up for a second term, no one has actual experience qualifying them for the office.
TK: That is an asinine conclusion and you insult your own intelligen
ce. You do not need to have experience as the President of the United States in order to be qualified to hold the position, however there are things that you can do that parallel the same type of experience a candidate should posess. This can be said about any new position someone is applying for - Not all CEO's were CEO's before they were promoted. They worked their way up in similar positions.
Obama was a Senator for 2 years and did nothing noteworthy beforehand to prepare him for the Office he currently holds. McCain has decades of experience leading in politics. UnfortunatI can tell when someone is getting to the end of thier rope when I read the address in the next reply- snookie?:
ely, he chose a V.P. who did have experience in politics but was a complete idiot. To be fair, I suspect McCain would not have accomplish ed anything noteworthy during his presidency - much like Gerald Ford.
schildpad: Snookie, my conclusion is based on the simple fact that no other job in the world is like being president of the united states - and as you say, like Ford, McCain - for all his "experiencI like the "fact" this person states, typical of someone who does not have the capacity to actually research anything related to their position. Schildpad must have taken some lessons in "making shit up to support my position" from Senator John Kyl (R-AZ). He is really taking a page out of the liberal play book by using "snookie" and other tolerant, mature phrases like birther and tea bagger.
e" would likely not have accomplish ed much. Take a closer look at our past presidents , we have had quite a few with little or no government experience . Eisenhower was one of our greatest presidents (ever, in my opinion) and had he ever been in government ? Not exactly. Look at Lincoln - state legislatur e, one term in the House and two failed senate tries. Not a whole lot of experience there either when you get right down to it.
I had the last word in this thread and never heard from schildpad again- either by the limitation imposed by HP comment structure or, what I believe, being bested by comments which caused him to curl up in the fetal position while watching marathon episodes of Bill Mahar.
There was a very revealing comment directed to me by someone who clearly cannot take any criticism of his President and jumps to irrational and absurd conclusions by people who make those criticisms. It was made right after schildpad's first comment but has since been removed. It went something like "What, that he's black? Nice hood."
Oh well. I tried.