Random Pixels humbly suggests…. a new State Motto:
A Personal Blog
by Michael Froomkin
Laurie Silvers & Mitchell Rubenstein Distinguished Professor of Law
University of Miami School of Law
My Publications | e-mail
All opinions on this blog are those of the author(s) and not their employer(s) unelss otherwise specified.
Who Reads Discourse.net?
Readers describe themselves.
Please join in.Reader Map
Recent Comments
- Brooks Fudenberg on I Voted
- Jermaine Chad Ingram on Some Thoughts about the Downballot (Voters’ Guide Part II: Judicial Retention Elections)
- C.E. Petit on I Voted
- Jane Moscowitz on I Voted
- Ally Figueroa on Some Thoughts about the Downballot (Voters’ Guide Part II: Judicial Retention Elections)
Subscribe to Blog via Email
Join 52 other subscribers
Managed to catch this right before going to sleep. Let the nightmares begin.
I thought we WEREN’T supposed to make fun of how people look… It’s just so confusing keeping up with what liberals think is cool.
It would be just as true without the photo. Now, if I were being evil, I would have linked to how Rick Scott became Gollum instead.
You’re better than this, Professor.
Maybe we should make anybody that doesn’t suit your aesthetic sensibilities wear a little yellow star on their clothing. That way we’ll all know whether you have approved them or not.
Ah, so the holocaust was about aesthetic sensibilities. Now I understand.
Thanks Vic.
It would be funny if it weren’t so true.
Don’t kid yourself Keith. The Holocaust was NOT a simple response to religion, it was the wholesale emphasis and blaming of various “others” (whether Jews, homosexuals, and others deemed “genetically inferior”) – and it was largely based on the existance or lack of Germanic traits among those groups. Racial characteristics, based on aesthetics, was a huge factor. The Nazis produced charts and tables to tell a German from an “undesirable” by the shape of their skull, etc. It was about singling out those who were different enough to be singled out, and making a scapegoat of them. When you NEED a scapegoat, it helps if someone can be easily identified as “not you.”
It’s a basic feature of totalitarian societies to engage in such nonsense to one extent or another, and one would have hoped that among those in the U.S. that pride themselves on their post-racial, open-minded, and egalitarian views on people, that such belittling of those who are different, based solely on that, would be passe. That was my point.
Disagree with Scott’s viewpoint all day if that’s what you want to do (I don’t particularly like him either), but when you decend to making fun of how he looks you just show ignorance and pointless hate that is no different than hating someone for simply being black or Jewish. Not to mention, even as humor, it’s at about a 1st grade level.
Don’t kid YOURSELF Vic.
I completely agree with your assessment of the Holocaust. I can also agree that, even as humor, this was at about a 1st grade level. However, an arguably juvenile joke is about all it was.
You’ve taken a seriously wrong turn when you start analogizing (1) a private citizen calling someone creepy-looking, and (2) a government forcing an ethnic group to wear identifying yellow stars in preparation for systematic genocide.
As a side note, if we’re being honest, I think we can all agree that he is a little creepy-looking.
I find the suggestion that a private citizen making a comment about the governor-elect of his state could in anyway be analogized with a state attacking a racial, religious or ethnic group to be so weird as to almost defy belief.
As for our Governor-elect, the creepiness only really got to me once he got elected. (I wasn’t much looking forward to four years of looking at Alex Sink either, but for different reasons.)
On reflection, though, I may have been unfair to Texas. Their governor is pretty creepy too. Oh, and maybe Louisiana? (We’ll leave out the outgoing Governor of South Carolina, as being past master.)
If you don’t see the analogy, which unfortunately is typical for you Michael, then I can’t help you. You are just too far gone in your fantasy life. Once again you demonstrate for all the world (or at least the 20 people that read this blog) that fairness, open-mindedness, and judging people on their merits rather than looks, is all just talk for you. You have nothing substantive to say other than “he’s funny looking.” Gee, thanks for the amazing insight. I hope you go deeper in your real job.
Maybe you should put up a picture of you so we can all note what animal you look like, or see if you actually look intelligent. Maybe I’ll even stop reading this blog if I know what you look like! Isn’t that how we SHOULD judge others?
My photo can be found at my homepage. Have at it.
You’re better than this.
No, he’s really not. As he is actually DEFENDING his making fun of how someone looks. It’s kind of sad really that someone in his position still finds that acceptable and defensible. I wonder if he whistles when he sees a woman in a short skirt?
The ridiculousness continues …
I urge everyone to lighten up.
Anyone running for office that blows off all major newspapers in the state has my vote… and yes most of the media is liberal – bleeding heart bias. Must be a nice view from the academia ivory tower, Michael. That “tenure” guaranteed job must be nice. Easy for tenured law profs to preach liberal economic policy when they’ll always have a paycheck coming in – regardless of their terrible performance. Wish we all had jobs like that, but the reality is that those of us with real jobs must produce. Then when we produce, the government takes a large chunk…. and then I have to watch the guy in front of me at the grocery checkout line use food stamps to “pay” for food…