Let’s just clarify. Instead of writing a biography or a novel about the President he writes a book to fact-check against a memoir written 13 years before the President ran for President, and 19 years ago. “Dreams for my Father” was one of the most inspirational stories I have read, but I like everyone should know that memoirs are inherently stories not unlike tales from the fishing trip, meaning they can be exaggerated and sometimes completely fabricated because that is how the mind works. I challenge anyone out there to write a book that can’t possibly be contradicted. It honestly won’t work that way. We have learned that from (yes Stephen Fry) as well as David Sedaris, Augusten Burroughs, and numerous other memoirists who have admitted to some fictionalization for the purpose of selling a book. Everyone does it. My point was not that it was wrong to write a book about the President, nor is it wrong per se to lie in history books, all of them being based on theoretical hearsay and blatant biases, since only so many things can indeed be proven. No I thought it was just sort of lame to write a book to discredit another book, and rather juvenile. There was never really a public argument about how Obama felt as a young man, nor can we truly read the mind of any man. Maybe it’s all that public school that I experienced, but a man does not need to be hosed down in Birmingham, or lynched in order to experience racism. Nobody can read the mind of another. All of these books just line the shelves alongside other circular arguments. There will always be disagreement about a political figure, if anything we should be arguing about “The Audacity of Hope” which came later in Obama’s political life, and perhaps presents more valid information for any book written during the tenure of said President. And can we please type out President of The United States instead of these Secret Service codes. Our culture is losing enough content through Lol’ing and OMFG’s here and there. It just weakens public discourse. Let’s talk about how Obama still hasn’t used executive orders to legalize Gay Marriage, something that goes against states rights, which Obama discusses in “The Audacity of Hope” where he speaks of the power of Congress being greater than that of the President and that said powers must be understood as such. Congress would first need states to agree, one by one before it would be fair to amend anything…which is beside the point. Attack a man’s politics as he is in office, that is to be expected. America is great because of that. Looking into a man’s past while he is running is great. That is to be expected though in this world of Facebook, none of the current generation will be able to be infallible and we will all soon understand the humility of humanity. Looking into a man’s past while he is already in office is only valid if there are any impeachable offenses. Those cannot be found in looking into information only as fresh as 17 years, give or take edits and delays in final printing, and you can have nearly 20 years of space in which new things might come up. My point is simply that we need to understand our place in history if we keep shooting dead horses. -End of rant.
Please validate your account to contribute content.
Preview Your Response
Good rant. I think that Obama has added to his mystique by being tight lipped. Also I think the lack of vetting prior to his election adds to the thought of “What’s he hiding?” He hasn’t released his college records where prior condidates have. Is it really pertinent? Probably not but it plays into the conspiracy theorists out there. Which becomes tiresome for all of us. I agree I’d much rather have a discussion on how can he tell an agency to ignore the law and issue work permits by him just saying so, not even by executive order. I’ll be interested to see how that plays out.