A certain someone noticed that Charli mocked his pretensions of professionalism in her anniversary post:
[W]e sometimes blog to take partisan positions in political debates affecting national or foreign policy, using our credentials as academics to lend an air of authority to what are essentially personal opinions. This is what a certaine right-winge bloggere who shall not be namede does almost exclusively, for example.
He took exception to her characterization of him:
I don’t much care about lending “an air of authority” to my blogging. Frankly, I’d rather people not know I’m a professor[.]
Sure he doesn’t. That profile is automatically generated by the Great Google. He has no choice but to inform the world what he does for a living — and that’s probably for the best, considering how difficult it would be to tell otherwise. I mean:
I don’t follow Spanish politics, but I know the British monarchy is the key to that country’s historical continuity. Britain’s also the birthplace of parliamentary democracy.
Not sure about Spain. But still, it’s a bloodthirsty anti-monarchy push for the left.
Where do you even begin with this drivel? The initial confession of ignorance? The non-sequitur in the next clause? The non-sequitur in the next sentence? The second admission of ignorance? Or the confident statement of fact about what is really going on with the thing he twice-professed he knows nothing about?
Academics would love it if The Donalde quit claiming to be a member of their ranks — no one wants to be the colleague of someone who believes two professions of ignorance and two non-sequiturs can function as premises to anything resembling an argument. So it’s probably for the best that The Donalde never mentions that he’s a professor –
My college is roughly 50 percent Hispanic, and when students write their semester news analysis notebooks, the view that illegal immigration is just “immigration” is almost uniform among that demographic. Virtually all of my Latino students have a close relative or a friend who is illegal.
I said: it’s probably for the best that The Donalde never mentions –
LBCC is ranked 53 among the state’s community colleges, with 89 students transferring to a UC campus in 2012-13.
I said: it’s probably for the best that –
Longtime readers will recall that I took my Ph.D. from UCSB, and I lived in Santa Barbara for seven years.
I give up. He talks about being a professor all the time and, as Charli noted in her post, especially when doing so lends an air of authority to his semi-literate ramblings. Case in point:
I have not read the article at the Atlantic, “The Case for Reparations.”
If an actual academic wrote that sentence, it could only function as a prelude to a non-statement. I don’t even think I have the right to talk about anything I haven’t read in the past five years, much less something I’m admitting to have never read. Not so with The Donalde:
The “case for reparations” is just recycled race-baiting far-left hatred and recrimination. Ta-Nehisi Coates is a mountebank and a huckster.
No respectable academic would follow the claim “I have not read X” with “This is what X is.” But The Donalde is no respectable academic. He desperately wants to remind you that he is an academic irrespective of what sort of academic they are:
I saw the ad online yesterday while teaching.
He did not see the ad in his office before class. He did not see the ad on his iPad on the way to class. He saw the ad while he was teaching. While.
Don’t get me wrong — I’m glad he stopped sharing his soft-core pornography collection with his students — but I wonder how much his students appreciate paying good money to watch their professor read The New York Times during class. I take that back — I’m sure watching him read is highly preferable to having to listen to him talk.