Max Kellerman recently criticized Tiger Woods for saying people should respect the office of the presidency no matter who is in office. Per Kellerman, “[a]nd it either holds in contempt the intelligence of people who hear it or else it’s just a stupid thing to say. … To say you must have respect for the office – Tiger, be clear. Are you saying that the office, therefore, confers respect on to its present temporary occupant? No. Having respect for the office means principally, in my view, is the office holder should have respect for the office.”
Not only is Kellerman wrong, but his argument is also illogical.
Mr. Kellerman appears to be saying that if a person holding a particular position does not “respect” that position, the position itself is not worthy of respect. Following this line of reasoning, if a Supreme Court justice is disliked or is removed from the bench for misconduct (i.e., disrespecting the position), does that mean that the position that was previously filled by justice is not worthy of respect? Should we then not respect the Supreme Court in and of itself? If, hypothetically, several high-ranking officials in the FBI or Department of Justice have allegedly engaged in improper behavior and are subsequently terminated or charged with a crime, does the office of FBI or the Department of Justice not deserve our respect?
Read the full story from American Thinker
Want more BFT? Leave us a voicemail on our page or follow us on Twitter @BFT_Podcast and Facebook @BluntForceTruthPodcast. We want to hear from you! There’s no better place to get the #BluntForceTruth.