Tuesday, May 12, 2015

Is that not a spade I see over yonder?

Can the excuse-making on behalf of criminals and the bad behavior that turns fatherless boys into dangerous men on behalf of the Left get any more insane than the manufactured debate over the word "thug"?
This is a word that we can apply just as equally to white skinheads as well as black gang-bangers. I thought this word—in an exceedingly perverse way, mind you—was the ultimate expression of equal opportunity and of color blindness.
But, no. Because the word is a very handy way to describe those who went on a wrecking spree throughout the city of Baltimore, then we must naturally be racist by referring to them as thugs.
"Thug" is the new "n"-word, you see. The progressives running—or would that be ruining?—this country will stop at nothing in their attempt to smash the police and let lawlessness completely swamp poor neighborhoods.
Obama called the rioters "criminals and thugs". To give the Prez the credit he's due, he did not take it back.
Baltimore mayor Stephanie Rawlings-Blake did apologize for her use of the word, saying that she uttered it while under stress. On April 27, Rawlings-Blake said at a press conference that Baltimore was being "destroyed by thugs who in a very senseless way are trying to tear down what so many have fought for". Nothing wrong—or inaccurate—about that statement. Two days later, on Twitter, the liberal mayor said she was sorry using the "t"-word. (More accurately, the "th"-word, but never mind.)
"I wanted to clarify my comments on 'thugs.' When you speak out of frustration and anger, one can say things in a way that you don't mean," Rawlings-Blake wrote. "That night we saw misguided young people who need to be held accountable, but who also need support. And my comments then didn't convey that."
Baltimore City Councilman Carl Stokes opined on CNN that calling "our children" thugs was akin to calling them "n"-words. "These are children who have been set aside, marginalized, who have not been engaged by us. No, we don't have to call them thugs," Stokes squealed. Violins and tissues, anyone?
Reverend Jamal Bryant, yet another jaded human megaphone hiding under the guise of knowing what God wants, like Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and Jeremiah Wright, opined that to call the "children" (i.e., the looters, the arsonists, those committing assault and battery) thugs is insensitive as they "are upset and frustrated".
"You don't call six police officers who kill a man without probable cause 'thugs'," Bryant sniffed. Yeah, Jamal, Earth to Jamal? Because we didn't know all the facts of the case surrounding Freddie Grey at that time. You want to prosecute officers of the law just because, before any concrete facts have trickled in, but the "children" can chimp out and destroy all they like and they should never be expected to atone or take responsibility for their behavior or their complete ignorance of the social contract that declares looting, arson or grevious bodily harm unacceptable. This is the world the "good reverend" Bryant wants us all to live in.
In fact, the murder charges filed against the cops involved—three of whom are black, I thought I'd mention—may be dropped because the findings regarding Grey's death do not fit prosecutor Marilyn Mosby's case. Mosby, incidentally, appeared on stage during a concert by Prince in memory of Freddie Grey.
Is it just me or are attorneys supposed to treat cases objectively? Perhaps you're not expected to abide by normal court rules when you're an affirmative action beneficiary? The crackers made the rules, so only the crackers should follow them.

"I don't gotta follow rules, y'all. Who do you think I is?"

On MSNBC, Brittney Cooper attempted to convince whatever audience she had that the bile-filled fantasy place she lives in exists in the real world. When asked by Alex Wagner about "thug," Cooper replied that the word is "rooted in a racialized understading of black people."
Actually, "thug" is derived from thuggee, a criminal network of assassins that terrorized India for six centuries, beginning around 1356 A.D. Their name came from the Hindi word for "thief".
That, of course, is not the end of Cooper's madness. She later asked, "[W]hen are we going to have a language to talk about the systemic violence that white folks do in the name of anti-blackness and white supremacy in this country? We don't have a language for that."
We don't have a language for Brittney Cooper's systemic anti-blackness violence by white people because it doesn't exist. End of.
Here's the truth: The issue of the word "thug" is yet another attempt to not just dampen the concept of law-and-order and responsibility, but to stifle free speech. To use a word that correctly identifies the type of people running amok as they burn a city to the ground and harm their fellow Americans is a thorn in the side of the liberal agenda. So just equate "thug" with the "n"-word and lecture the average American, for the fifteen-thousandth time, that they're racists who should be ashamed of themselves, steal words and expressions, and cloak the agenda, and presto! Debate is stifled, dissension is dead.
Don't let these airheads control you. "Rev." Bryant says that "'thugs' is the 21st-century word for the "n"-word." Well, calling a thug a thug is the 21st-century version of calling a spade a spade.

1 comment:

goddessdivine said...

This is all just a distraction from the real issue: Criminals destroying a city. Criminals who should be hunted down and prosecuted. (But of course, what do we expect when the mayor states that she felt it important to give these people "space to destroy"?)

This whole thing reeks of incompetence, political correctness, agenda-driven malarkey. Liberalism at its finest.