Chris Stigall: The University Of F.U.
by Chris Stigall - 06/01/12 -
It's a real struggle to define the importance of college as it relates to President Obama and his supporters. We just came off a month of college campus pep rallies extolling the virtues of taking on thousands of dollars of "low-interest" loan debt in that ultimate quest for a degree. Yet, we know so little about the college experience of the man leading the rallies – President Obama.
Oh, I know what you're thinking. "Oh, no Chris. You're not one of THOSE people, are you?" If you're not thinking that, then you're one of "THOSE people" who, like me find it more than a little peculiar that one of the "greatest intellects" ever to grace the Oval Office has provided not a trace of evidence to back up said greatness.
Columnist and commentator George Will and fellow Romney supporter Donald Trump got into a bit of a back and forth over the holiday weekend. Will wondered aloud why Romney would be caught dead near a guy like Trump who he suggested was all money and no brains. (My paraphrase, not Will's actual quote.)
The comments came in response to the question from "This Week" host Jake Tapper wondering why Romney would continue to be seen with Trump if Romney wishes to be "taken seriously."
Trump, you see is not a serious man say pundits like Tapper and Will. Why? Is it because he hosts a popular game show? Is it because his every move is over-the-top bluster, bravado, and showmanship? The divorces? The bankruptcies? The commercialism?
If those were their reasons for dismissing Trump as "unserious" or not credible, I might see their point. But those things aren't what draw their ire over Trump.
It's that he has the brazenness to continue to demand a full vetting of the President of the United States.
"The word is, according to what I've read," said Trump, "that he was a terrible student when he went to Occidental. He then gets into Columbia; he then gets to Harvard. ... How do you get into Harvard if you're not a good student? Now maybe that's right or maybe it's wrong, but I don't know why he doesn't release his records."
It's important to note Romney's camp isn't officially leaving their wholly appropriate message of "it's the economy, stupid." Romney doesn't want to challenge the character or history of the President, no matter how valid.
Most agree it's the best strategy for Romney. But that Romney would dare be seen with Trump have many in a panic as they view this as questioning President Obama's by association.
This is where I, like millions of Americans get pretty irritated. Shouldn't we WANT to know our president's history?
Those of us who were paying close attention to the 2008 campaign sat through the unveiling of Obama's America-hating preacher of 20 years, his domestic terrorist buddy, his own admission to cocaine and aggressive pot use, and his support for infanticide in the Illinois Senate – and those are just appetizers served up by talk radio and new media.
By and large, the traditional American media just couldn't bring themselves to vet the man we now call President. You can assign any motives for the dereliction of duty you wish, but by the press' own admission (see NY Times Ombudsman Arthur Brisbane's April 21st column "A Hard Look at the President") they didn't vet this man.
Now, we're all supposed to stay quiet and focus on his poor job performance today. His past and our total lack of access to it are of no consequence or relevance any more. Even something as standard as college transcripts and questioning the proof of his shear brainpower, we're to just shut up and take it as sold.
Anyone who suggests or questions that the President may not be the brilliant academic we've been told he is will now be dismissed as a "transcripter." The L.A. Times created this pejorative to play on the term "birther" – those who believe President Obama's birthplace is a foreign land, thus disqualifying him from office.
The Times went on to defend the President from the "transcripters" claims that Obama many not be as smart as advertised:
"That rationale may strike some as a little flimsy, given that Obama was president of the Harvard Law Review, taught constitutional law, has two bestselling books to his credit and is, at the moment, leader of the free world."
So there you have it. He won an election in college, he wrote two books, he taught a college course, and won another couple of elections. No WAY he's not smart! And no WAY could he have done those things but on his own merits.
This would also be an excellent time to point out he's never managed or CREATED anything but two books about himself, versus years of Romney's private sector accomplishments, but that's for another column.
College kids are constantly being told how important a college degree can be when searching for a job. Most applicants to almost any job will confirm the employer's desire to fully vet your resume, your experiences, your grades, and your character.
I never got a job obfuscating my past while calling my potential boss names for wanting to know more. That's why I won't elect to rehire a President who treats his bosses that way.
