Okay One Last Try Then I'll Let Everyone Go Back to Their Emotional Spiraling

The idea seems to be out there that Trump espied this Swarthy Latin Type from across the room and said, "Ah-ha! This man has a dusky hue to his skin. Ergo, he could never possibly do his job with objectivity!"

I admit, if that is what had happened, of course that would be the definition of racism, as Jake Tapper said.*

And the liberals and their #NeverTrump valkyries sure talk as if this is what happened, that Trump just saw this guy, detected a Hispanic heritage, and decided he must be bad at his job.

But of course that isn't what happened at all.

Trump's been dealing with this guy for a year. Trump thinks this guy is biased because of his decisions -- Trump has inferred bias from his decisions, not his race.

Does anyone think that if this judge were ruling Trump's way he'd be bringing this up?

Obviously not. This is about his rulings in the case -- which Trump, shock of all shocks, finds unfair and totally biased against him, man.

Now, having concluded the guy is biased the question naturally arises: Then what biased him?

Well, there's nothing tangible to go on (that is, no actual bias, but this is Trump, after all) so he casts about for a reason for the bias.

Having already decided the guy is biased (as he previously decided a white journalist named Megyn Kelly was biased) he now guesses at the reason for this bias: Well, guess it's gotta be that he's Hispanic, and I'm hated by Hispanics.

Megyn Kelly algorith:

She's biased, because she said mean things.

Why is she biased then?

Conclusion: She must be pro-Establishment. Or, she's a Feminist. Or both.

Similarly, the algorithm here goes:

This judge is biased, because he won't do all the things I demand of him.

Why is he biased then?

Conclusion: He must be biased because, like 85% of Hispanics (as the media tells me every day), he's opposed to my candidacy.

Now, that is a lot different from prejudging someone as biased based on race.

Also note that in Megyn Kelly's case -- his bullshit was true. Kelly is very pro-Establishment, and frequently devolves into You Go Girl feminism bromides.

This process finds bias first, and then only comes across race as a backwards-explanation for a conclusion already reached.

Racism goes from race to conclusion about the person.

This algorithm went from a conclusion about the person first -- the judge is biased! -- and then seeks a premise to support it.

Very different thing.

If I looked at Toure on MSNBC and without hearing a word from him said "This guy is a black radical! I can tell! Just look at him! He'll never give white people a break!" that would indeed be racist.

On the other hand, if I listen to Toure for a show or two and detect what is very evident -- that he is an ultra-leftist of the black nationalist bent -- and ergo is biased, that is not "racism."

That's simply fact.

Even if I then speculate "You know, based on Toure's black radicalism in college, it seems likely he'll always trash the conservative white people."

I've already detected his flaw -- bias. I am justified in speculating about the reason.

Who hear is going to claim I'm wrong about Toure?

Now people might object and say "Well Trump is wrong, this judge isn't biased."

But so what? Trump does not stand accused of being merely wrong, but of being racist, the greatest sin in the American Political Lexicon.

I assume Trump is wrong about all things he speaks of.

To say he's wrong about the judge being biased is to absolve him.

Calling him wrong is not a useful back-up position for the #NeverTrumpers. Your job is to prove he's the thing that really matters -- that he's racist. Not to fail at proving he's racist, back into your Secondary Argument that he's wrong, and then call yourself victorious on the day.

I'm a bit shocked that people on the right who routinely say that people cannot or at least do not overcome their political bias in government and the media are willing to place their hands upon a stack of one thousand Bibles and swear that of course, all Hispanics must be able to put aside political bias -- apparently only white people like Lois Lerner and Candy Crowley can succumb to putting political agenda over objectivity?

Or not?

What am I missing here?

Why am I allowed to say that any white journalist can fail at being objective and put her politics first, but the moment I say that about a Hispanic (or black, etc.), it's suddenly the most outrageous thing to even whisper about?

If they're human -- and I assume they are -- then they can be biased. Like all other humans.

I accept that women are my equals, and minorities are the equals of any whites.

What I won't accept is that they're superior, and somehow immune to the biases that sometimes infect white, male minds.

Anyway I give up.

As someone who finds bias in people 20 times per day, I'm shocked to learn there are entire genders and races deemed, even by fellow conservatives, to be innately immune from any political bias.

BTW: I gotta say, it's bullshit like this that drives people to abandon the Establishment types and support Trump.

It's like the Establishment is always looking for ways to give apples to their Liberal Teachers.

The Liberal Teachers teach the Republican Establishment, and then the Republican Establishment acts as the wolves-in-sheeps-clothing inflicting this bullshit on the rest of us.

That is a major cause for the rejectivism you're seeing right now.

Maybe don't rush to agree with Liberal Teachers once in a while, huh?

(Jake Tapper continues not to reply, however, when asked what the point was of noting that a "white" jury acquitted Officer Daryl Wilson. Either race-based bias is a permissible topic in the American conversation or it is not -- I'm done-zo with the double-standard.)

Also note that commenters object to my declaring this hypoethetical being plainly "racist," as racism is an ideology of racial superiority, and this would just be lower-order racial stereotyping.

Okay point taken. But it would be a case of racial stereotyping, which isn't racism, but of course everyone, especially liberals, takes it as such.

posted by Ace at 07:11 PM

| Access Comments