Posted on Saturday, 19th July 2008 by Patrick Dorwin
Local lefty James Rowen has decided that Steve, at No Runny Eggs is a racist because he referred to Lee Holloway as a thug.
Milwaukee County Board Chair Supports A Sales Tax Increase: Does That Make Him A “Thug?”
That’s the only conclusion you can come to when “Thug” – - a word that worked itself into the local vocabulary following particularly violent crimes, and especially during former Ald. Michael McGee’s legal troubles – - suddenly becomes Holloway’s middle name, too.Apparently on at least one right-wing blog from the south Milwaukee suburbs – - and so far I’m not seeing anyone on the conservative side of the blogosphere take the race-baiter to task – - Holloway’s ‘crime’ was supporting a sales tax increase, in a public policy debate, at the Milwaukee County Board.
You see, Rowen has no real argument, so he throws out the “race card” in his feeble effort to silence opposition. For way to long, “the left” has used this false claim in an effort to intimidate people, knowing that no one likes to be called a racist… Especially when it is a false claim. And now Rowen is simply making up a claim that the word “thug” is in its self a racist term. The dictionary definition disagrees, but that doesn’t matter to Rowen.
From Dictionary.com
thug Spelled Pronunciation[thuhg]
–noun
1. a cruel or vicious ruffian, robber, or murderer.
2. (sometimes initial capital letter) one of a former group of professional robbers and murderers in India who strangled their victims.
[Origin: 1800–10; < Hindi thag lit., rogue, cheat]
I have used the word thug many times when referring to Lee Holloway, because he is a thug. This has nothing to do with his stance on taxes, as Rowen would have you believe. The fact, yes, facts are pesky things, aren’t they?… But the fact is, Lee Holloway has physically attacked fellow board members on two separate occasions.
Attack on Supervisor Roger Quindel
Supervisor Roger Quindel said Holloway stormed into his office after the Health and Human Needs Committee vote Wednesday, called him a liar and knocked him over backward onto his desk.
Attack on Supervisor Joseph Rice
When he entered the room, [Supervisor Paul] Cesarz said, this is what he found: “Immediately to my left is the chairman up against, facing Rice, who’s facing him. And the chairman has kind of got Joe pushed up against that filing cabinet and desk. . . . And they’re still yelling.â€Cesarz said he then played referee by trying to separate the two.
“I figured, ‘Oh, great, I’m wearing my zebra shirt, back to high school volleyball,’ †he said. “I slip my arm in between the two, forcibly, because they were pretty close, and I’m then grabbing the chairman. I’m face to face with this gentleman – he’s a big man – and I’m squeezing him pretty good to try to break the two. . . . He physically had (Rice) pushed up against the desk.â€
The first definition from the dictionary posted above: “a cruel or vicious ruffian.” If the shoe fits…
Holloway is also a slumlord, who makes his low income inner-city tenants live in deplorable conditions, that fits right in with being a thug in my book too. Am I a racist for making that statement Mr. Rowen?
James Rowen owes Steve an apology, but of course he will never get one, because a moonbat never admits when they are wrong… they just change the subject (read: find another conservative to attack).
Posted in Home | Comments (55)
55 Responses to “Liberal claims that “thug” is a racist term”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
July 19th, 2008 at 7:24 am
James Rowan is just another Democrat Verbal Hitman. Short on substance and long on hurtful words. Me thinks he needs a Liberal re-education camp experience to purge his hate speech from his psyche.
July 19th, 2008 at 7:27 am
Let’s not forget that the Mayor is a racist, by Rowen’s foolish definition, too.
July 19th, 2008 at 7:37 am
Patrick,
Barrett is a broken watch. Once in a while, he stumbles on the the right thing.
Too bad Barrett can’t say Alderthug.
July 19th, 2008 at 9:04 am
This is why it’s so difficult to debate with a liberal. They change the meaning of words as they go along. Everything is relative to their viewpoint.
July 19th, 2008 at 9:14 am
He has GOT to be kidding! No – he’s not, is he.
Now every other descriptive word we utter (to those who can understand English, that is), is turned into a “racist” word.
Maybe we all just need to take a vow of silence. No one can speak aloud. Then no one can “offend”. Stupid is as stupid does…
July 19th, 2008 at 9:36 am
The fact that Mr. Rowan equates “thug” with “minority” is more a revelation of his own inner-racist than anything…
-jjg
DailyScoff.com
July 19th, 2008 at 9:36 am
Newspeak
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Newspeak is a fictional language in George Orwell’s novel Nineteen Eighty-Four. In the novel, it is described as being “the only language in the world whose vocabulary gets smaller every year.” Orwell included an essay about it in the form of an appendix[1] in which the basic principles of the language are explained. Newspeak is closely based on English but has a greatly reduced and simplified vocabulary and grammar. This suits the totalitarian regime of the Party, whose aim is to make any alternative thinking (“thoughtcrime” (crimethink, in the newest edition of Newspeak)) or speech impossible by removing any words or possible constructs which describe the ideas of freedom, rebellion and so on. One character says admiringly of the shrinking volume of the new dictionary: “It’s a beautiful thing, the destruction of words.”
The Newspeak term for the English language is Oldspeak. Oldspeak was intended to have been completely eclipsed by Newspeak before 2050.
The genesis of Newspeak can be found in the constructed language Basic English, which Orwell promoted from 1942 to 1944 before emphatically rejecting it in his essay “Politics and the English Language”.[2] In this paper he laments the quality of the English of his day, citing examples of dying metaphors, pretentious diction or rhetoric, and meaningless words — all of which contribute to fuzzy ideas and a lack of logical thinking. Towards the end of this essay, having argued his case, Orwell muses:
“ I said earlier that the decadence of our language is probably curable. Those who deny this would argue, if they produced an argument at all, that language merely reflects existing social conditions, and that we cannot influence its development by any direct tinkering with words or constructions. â€
Thus forcing the use of Newspeak, according to Orwell, describes a deliberate intent to exploit this degeneration with the aim of oppressing its speakers.
July 19th, 2008 at 9:41 am
Vow of Silence. You are so right Jeni!
July 19th, 2008 at 10:05 am
Big T is correct. Just like Al Gore unilaterally closing down the debate on non-existant global warming, Rowen has decided that since he cannot win the war of idea’s he’ll just change the definition of words, slime his opposition and declare victory.
It’s more of the same liberal tolerance.
July 19th, 2008 at 10:08 am
Thanks, Diana!
This “PC” thing is getting so bizarre.
“Hello” – interesting info on the “Newspeak”. Did a little Googling and found http://www.newspeakdictionary.com/ – incredible.
I didn’t know whether or not to laugh or cry at the Politically Incorrect Dictionary. Guess they need to update that bugger so we know “Thug” now means racist. Would be fascinating to see how this one is justified.
And check this one out: Girlfriend/Wife – Replaced by Unpaid sex worker – excuse me, but the latter sounds far more offensive IMHO.
Had a sign once that said, “I’ve been beaten, choked, raped, lied to, swindled, taken advantage of and laughed at. The only reason I hang around is to see what happens next”.
Sounds applicable to following politics today, doesn’t it.
“Illegitimis non carborundum.” (Don’t let the bastards grind you down – Gen. Joseph Stillwell)
July 19th, 2008 at 10:35 am
Just a few days ago, the Journal Sentinel Editorial Board said:
And about a month ago, Eugene Kane said:
July 19th, 2008 at 10:44 am
Oh no, what was I thinking when I called these white people thugs? (1 – 2) I guess I forgot that this was a term only used for minority scum.
July 19th, 2008 at 11:28 am
Thanks Patrick.
July 19th, 2008 at 11:54 am
Jeni – The politically correct crowd are those folks who will ask you to pick up a turd by the clean end.
July 19th, 2008 at 11:56 am
The Morning Scramble – 7/19/2008…
This one’s dedicated to a local lefty who has no clue what words mean…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UDZvP7T3B30
Patrick explains the actions that make Lee Holloway a thug.
Owen calls that local lefty a “political thug”. I …
July 19th, 2008 at 12:24 pm
I think I found the correct term for Rowen, per http://www.dictionary.com:
Douche
a jet or current of water, sometimes with a dissolved medicating or cleansing agent, applied to a body part, organ, or cavity for medicinal or hygienic purposes.
2. the application of such a jet.
3. an instrument, as a syringe, for administering it.
4. a bath administered by such a jet.
–verb (used with object) 5. to apply a douche to.
–verb (used without object) 6. to use a douche or douches; undergo douching.
July 19th, 2008 at 1:06 pm
I believe this would also be an accurate portrayal Lester.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yvR2qiQFVRY&feature=related
July 19th, 2008 at 2:06 pm
Why use thug when criminal would describe the same person. The use of the word thug triggers a particular vision in a person’s mind of the physical description of a person. More importantly it exist in the local lexicon but not outside of it. Did anyone call the Crandon murderer or the Joel Marino’s killer a thug? No because thug has racial context when used only to describe black criminals. I don’t remember anyone using thug to describe the hispanic male who killed that sheriff. He was called a murderer or killer or monster, but never a thug, which unless you were aware of his racial background leaves race neutral in media info.
July 19th, 2008 at 2:52 pm
TheIdealVoice makes a good point.
July 19th, 2008 at 3:37 pm
TIV, that is such BS, I called Corey Hosni a thug, he wasn’t black.
I called cop killer Ezequiel Lopez-Quintero a thug, he wasn’t black.
I called the Sheboygan Police Chief David E. Kirk, City Attorney, Stephen G. McLean and Mayor, Juan Perez thugs, None of them were black.
I called hundreds of state employees thugs, most of those weren’t black.
I called this 17 year old molester that was stabbed by the mother a thug, he wasn’t black.
I called the thug gang banger that shot and paralyzed a boy in front of Supervisor Peggy West’s house a thug, I don’t believe he black.
I called communist dictators thugs, none of them were black.
The Washington Post called Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad a corrupt thug, I agreed, but he isn’t black.
I called Saddam Hussein a thug, he wasn’t black.
I called Jim Doyle and his political hacks, thugs, they aren’t black.
I have praised President Bush when he called out the thugs and dictators of the world, most of them aren’t black.
I called Kim Jong Il a thug, he wasn’t black.
I called a Department of Natural Resources warden a thug, he wasn’t black.
I called the doctors that murdered Terri Schiavo thugs, I don’t think any of them were black.
I called “the Jude cops” thugs, none of them were black.
As I said on Rowen’s blog:
July 19th, 2008 at 3:40 pm
Theidealvoice doesn’t pick the words we get to use. The term thug is descriptive.
Like liberal.
Could you Stalinist please give us a list of words that we can’t use, but you can use if you choose to.
July 19th, 2008 at 4:05 pm
crim·i·nal
–adjective
1. of the nature of or involving crime.
2. guilty of crime.
3. Law. of or pertaining to crime or its punishment: a criminal proceeding.
4. senseless; foolish: It’s criminal to waste so much good food.
5. exorbitant; grossly overpriced: They charge absolutely criminal prices.
–noun 6. a person guilty or convicted of a crime.
[Origin: 1350–1400; ME < AF < LL crÄ«minÄlis, equiv. to L crÄ«min- (s. of crÄ«men; see crime) + -Älis -al1]
—Related forms
crim·i·nal·ly, adverb
—Synonyms 1. felonious, unlawful. See illegal. 6. malefactor, evildoer, transgressor, culprit, felon, crook, hoodlum, gangster.
—Antonyms 1. lawful. 2. innocent.
So your description seems a little strong for many of the people up there,who have never been convicted of an actual crime. Now if you use thug only for this people and for Jim Rowen(which asshole or bully probably would have worked better for you guys) thats one thing, it is entirely different when used with people who have committed crimes, because criminal would do just as fine. else you set yourself up for things like: “Jason Kendall was thuggish in his defense of homeplate” So Jason Kendall defend home plate like a murderer or robber would?
July 19th, 2008 at 4:28 pm
Criminal – A general term used to describe unlawful activity.
Thug – A specific term used to describe someone who injures or intimidates a person, and it doesn’t have to be unlawful.
July 19th, 2008 at 5:27 pm
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=771649
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=770324
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=769989
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=97852
July 19th, 2008 at 7:26 pm
Don’t inner city blacks refer to the “Thug Life”?
I thought that great American sociologist Tupac Shakur had it tattooed on his belly. I suppose he was racist too.
July 19th, 2008 at 8:41 pm
“Thug Mike”: http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=765181
July 19th, 2008 at 9:25 pm
If this idiot thinks Steve is a racist, he’d better stay completely away from MY blog…
Thug?? Racist?? What a moonbat…
July 19th, 2008 at 9:35 pm
Good finds, Glenn – so are we looking at a double standard here? Sure looks that way.
Boy Patrick, me too – I use that word “thug” a lot and more often than not in reference to a “whitey”.
And Gannett journalists use it, too. Just one from the Sheboygan Press:
ID: shb33738413: U.N. does nothing to improve our world; “Where are the annual casualty figures of other countries where the armed thugs are killing…”
big_hairy_bubba Said:
Jeni – The politically correct crowd are those folks who will ask you to pick up a turd by the clean end.
LOL!
July 19th, 2008 at 10:23 pm
All this time….defending, defining and trying to disprove racist intent and “code” words. All because a racist leftist decided others are racist.
The debate has been defined by lefty Rowen.
Why is there even a debate. Who died and made some libtard like Rowen the referee?
It’s the Al Sharpton principle, and the left has learned it well.
Slime, accuse, defame, and claim the high ground. Then as those you’ve slimed defend themselves, move forward to the next dishonest accusation.
It’s older than bald tires.
And when the smoke clears, we’re left (no pun intended) with milque toast observers who are willing to dignify the slimy accusations, and find some common ground with the accuser liberal.
It’s called “the OFFENSIVE”.
And Republicans fall for it every time.
The fear of being branded, trumps the principles that people once stood for.
Think about it people. THUG is now off limits. It’s a CODE WORD.
July 19th, 2008 at 11:03 pm
Oren-Don’t ever ever ever ever call me a stalinist. That is 50 million times worse than me being called then N-word. Furthermore I don’t use the word thug, i just say criminal or see below.
BigT-wouldn’t bully or asshole or jerk or douchebag or idiot all work just as well if you guys have a problem with Rowen?
July 19th, 2008 at 11:22 pm
Idealvox, you are a Stalinist. You don’t get to censor me Josef. Furthermore, you are free to pick and choose which words you use. At least for now Idealvox.
How about a truce? You use your freedom of speech, I use mine, and those who call thugs….thugs…use theirs??
How about, we don’t censor others choice of words. Rather if we should disagree, we use our freedom and our words to refute words and speech with which we disagree with or find offensive?
Why do you get to decide which terms BigT, me or anyone else gets to use?? How have you become the arbitor of truth and syntax??
How about you don’t try to set the terms of debate?? How about free speech means we are ALL free to express our opinions, without you or anyone else, deciding which words or books need to be burned??
O.k?
And should I disagree with you, I say so without you restricting me??
July 19th, 2008 at 11:59 pm
Lets not forget about the time that Lee Holloway was stopped for impersonating a police officer. If I remember correctly it was several years ago, he was with his daugher and there was some incident where he got into it with someone else and he pulled out his county supervisor’s badge (yes, apparently they have metal badges) and displayed it and claimed he was the police. The incident did take place, if I am off on the facts I apologize.
Dale
July 20th, 2008 at 12:34 am
gus-because you are calling me a stalinist I don’t feel like I have to respect your wishes or more importantly you. Clearly you are one of those so called in the know conservatives who think you always have someone’s number and know exactly what they are. Why waste my type refuting that classic conservative bull(plus your own government had no problem backing Stalinists when it benefited their imperialist goals). Like I stated to Patrick he was using the term out of place of the definition he presented! You cant change the definition, or attack the definition I presented myself, that of criminal. If you use thug all the time, it stops meaning anything to anyone.
July 20th, 2008 at 7:45 am
The problem with the Ideal Voice and other liberals can be summed up in the remarks of Jim Smith, an Oneida tribesman in this thread:
http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?category=PluckForum&plckForumPage=ForumDiscussion&plckDiscussionId=Cat%3ae15df72a-8aa8-47a6-8f43-a6aa0a3f6045Forum%3a64ab95ef-3897-44cb-bc10-461bee6e293dDiscussion%3a3fd0443e-e883-4257-97ad-b62569a88230&plckCategoryCurrentPage=0
how absolutely priveliged of you all to have had everything go so well in your lives that hard work alone has you apparently set for life. yes yes yes…any regular in these threads ALREADY know thanks to hundreds and hundreds of posts of the small but vocal “i got mine crowd” and ya know what?…thats perfectly fine but stay out of the way of the rest who do care about this community and ALL its people…on more than one occasion ive seen POSSIBLE, good forums pecked to death by your little roost of hens. if you really got the balls and the superiority to step up to validate your self centered whimperings about taxes that we ALL pay while bllindly ignoring 600 million plus/ year that big business snuck out of this state so you can keep stroking big business, at least post a real clear pic of yourselves or some decent profile info. hahaha mabeye even a real name….i been stopped 4 times since the new profiles became available by strangers here and there asking me if im the jimsmith from the press gazette and i HAVE LOOKED them in the eye and “yup, thats me” (for your poll watchers, 3 like what ive said on some subjects, one was just thought it was cool they recognized me)
i dont remeber anything written in the formation of the united states that says its basis is for the right to make my money and keep it regardless of the condition of my neighbor….i thought the main reason for this countries formation was to escape the tyranny of elitest, usless, overbearing “i got mine” crowds from dictating how equal men and women where to act and keeping in place oppressive work, govenment, and social ideas and institutions. looks like some are tryng to move this country toward that full circle.
I’d like to highlight the first sentences of the first and second paragraph. They sum up the dysfunctional thinking of many of the Wisconsin Democrats
July 20th, 2008 at 9:00 am
A little Stalinist thug is trying to twist the use of the word “thug” into something racist. What a shock.
“Your government…” “You can’t change the definition, or attack the definition I presented myself…”
Maybe when TIV gets that moisture behind his ears dried up, he’ll realize what a buffoon he makes himself out to be.
July 20th, 2008 at 9:24 am
How’s this one grab you TIV? (I want to make it very clear that both Hegerty and Schunk greatly distorted the reasons I wrote the memo and that then Asst Chief Les Barber told me that it was HE – not Hegerty – who made the decision to transfer Lutz. I also want to make it perfectly clear that I attempted to schedule a meeting with Hegerty immediately and was told by her then Chief of Staff Daniel Alexander that she was “out of town on vacation and wouldn’t be back for at least a week. Quite obviously the little weasal didn’t exactly tell me the truth as she made her appearance at a press conference only two days later. What I didn’t realize then was that “out of town” meant Colgate Wisconsin – her real residence.)
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=194335
Then there was this from the Journal Sentinel editorial board (essentially the same people who had no problem using the word “thugs” in their subsequent editorials which I have posted above): http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=197047
And, of course, the reaction of a couple aldermen and media selected “community” spokesperson Diane Wilson, a pillar of society, who was later charged by the D.A.’s Office with Obstructing (and “spared” by E.Michael McCant who withdrew the criminal charge for the sake of “community harmony”) for lying about what she saw when Lutz shot Nabors: http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=194096
(In fairness to alderman Hines, he has since changed his position 180 degrees and has publicly said that I was a very effective Commanding Officer during my time as Captain of District #3.)
My use of the word thug in this memo was twisted by a couple of on the ropes aldermen (Gordon and Pratt) who subsequently were voted out of office because of their own shortcomings; by an anointed Police administrator who was in way over her head and shamelessly failed to discuss the matter with me or publicly recognize my successful accomplishments at turning a failing Police District into a leading crime fighting District with 2 consecutive years of significant reductions in major crimes; and by a liberal media who failed to get the facts before lynching me. All because it was what they wanted to believe, and when the facts started to come out that my memo was not written to challenge Hegerty but rather to try to stimulate some of my Officers who were discouraged by the transfer and needed an explanation and encouragement to continue to fight crime, the media (with the exception of Charlie Sykes and one or two others in talk radio and columnist Mike Nichols of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel) simply buried their mistake and went out looking for their next victim to lynch. (Gina Barton found one a couple years later and did the same thing to him without so much a blurb in the “Laurels and Laments” when her Sunday front page accusations went down the shitter after the allegations by her convicted criminal sources and ultra liberal cop-hating attorney source were proven false.)
I also want to add that in my final days on the job Asst. Chief Monica Wray ( a black female for you ultra libbers who may need that qualifier to put this into perspective) approached me and told me that she knew that I had been treated wrong by Hegerty and that “the black community knows you were acting with a good heart and not referring to everyone when you wrote the memo”. That sentiment was also conveyed to me by many Officers of all ethnic persusions but mostly the black Officers who had worked for me.
And now years later we have an ultra liberal “white guilt” nutbag like Rowen (and there are others out there) who wants to impose on us his standard of “code words” to identify racists. I don’t expect any examples I have posted on this thread will change the minds of the fanatical exremists, but the logic is clear for those who have the capacity for reason.
July 20th, 2008 at 3:00 pm
Fascinating. Thank you, Glenn, for sharing.
July 20th, 2008 at 4:48 pm
Uh, oh, Glenn, you used “lynching.”
Don’t you know that’s a racist word?
Where’s the Ideal Voice to provide some re-education?
July 20th, 2008 at 5:19 pm
I am the thug Captain. I can say whatever I want. I may not always be right, but I am never wrong!
July 20th, 2008 at 5:20 pm
Can we call them dumb wild animals?
How about that?
July 20th, 2008 at 6:37 pm
I am aware of what happened to you Glenn(one of my relatives worked on your staff during your time at district 3), and thats too bad, because while we disagree often, I have grown to respect you, Patrick and Bruce. As for the rest of you, I will take the high road. I am not sure what you are talking about John Smith but I am certainly not in the I got mine crowd. I have worked for everything I own since I was 15, no silver spoon here. Prosqtor, the history of the word lynch is actually rather amazing seeing how it was used for oppressive judicial actions against loyalists during the War of Indpendence. It later became a weapon against the anti-slavery movement and it’s supporters(Since 1812, legislation was offered to make it illegal, but apparently all those great heroes you all look up to didn’t think it was that bad) Lynching became common place not only with blacks, but other foriegners. In fact the worse lynching in the US was of Irish immigrants, and numerous lynchings against Jews, Italians, Chinese, Mexicans and the Irish took place between the late 19 century and early 20 century. So in U.S. history it is in fact a term to describe a punishment without due process, of extreme manner. Historically it was in fact used against races and groups that “civilized” Americans thought less of.
July 21st, 2008 at 8:25 am
Yes. As an Irish American, I demand an apology, but more importantly, reparations!
July 21st, 2008 at 10:56 am
Idealvox, I understand your inability to debate me. You simply aren’t up to it. It’s nothing new. A liberal (you) decides by fiat. Once that fiat is questioned, you squeal like a pig and run for the tall grass.
July 21st, 2008 at 11:43 am
“You all?” What do you mean by “you all?”
You are a racist.
Mr. theideavoice, I may not like what you say, but I will fight to the death to preserve your right to say it. Your government plays a role in picking the time and place sometimes.
If I want to say thug, lynch, stalinist, liberal, progressive, moonbat,or asshole, I will pick the time and place. If you are losing sleep over the context I choose, too bad.
July 21st, 2008 at 12:17 pm
Let me try this from a different angle…
I have two teenage sisters-in-law who are black living in a town where there are very, very few.
Last summer one was invited to a sleepover at a friend’s house. But when the friend’s grandmother found out she was black, she voiced her “disapproval” by indicating she wished to disinvite my in-law.
Again, BECAUSE SHE IS BLACK.
This is chosing to judge someone based entirely on the color of their skin. It had nothing to do with how she behaves, if she’s a good student, if she ever gets in trouble at school or how in any way she may be a bad influence on this woman’s grandchild. The only reason she didn’t want this girl in her home was BECAUSE SHE IS BLACK.
This is what racism is.
So you’ll have to excuse me when I have no tolerance at all for some fellow who cavalierly claims racism at the mere use of a word and has to go through great pains to explain it when examples of blatant racism are out there and being made meaningless by someone who hopes to throw the accusation about without seeming to have a true understanding of what it means. Rowen and anyone like him do a greater disservice to those they wish to “defend” and “protect” by inventing such controversy then they could possibly be aware of, otherwise their motivations must truly become suspect.
July 21st, 2008 at 12:58 pm
Dave Capser said….”Last summer one was invited to a sleepover at a friend’s house. But when the friend’s grandmother found out she was black, she voiced her “disapproval†by indicating she wished to disinvite my in-law.”
How would you possibly know this to be true.
July 21st, 2008 at 5:18 pm
Well, first off, grandmother’s feelings in a very small town were very open and quickly made it back to the in-law.
But that only served as confirmation, since the granddaughter herself let my in-law know personally.
Please don’t question actual racist acts when they happen, Gus. That’s just as bad as finding racism where it doesn’t exist. Calling a duck a duck, and nothing else a duck, is typically the best policy.
July 21st, 2008 at 5:25 pm
Dave, I’m not questioning actual racist acts. I’m questioning your story. It doesn’t pass the smell test. Honesty is the best policy Dave. Try it, you’ll like it.
July 21st, 2008 at 7:19 pm
Anyone who makes it unsafe for the good residents of his or her neighborhood to leave the confines of their homes is a thug. Period.
I suppose I now have to turn in my “liberal” card.
July 21st, 2008 at 7:19 pm
gus, why on earth would Dave make up a story like that? I’ve heard many similar stories and wouldn’t dream of calling someone a liar for merely sharing an experience that unfortunately, is still all too common in today’s society. That was very unfair. Dave merely showed a stark contrast between REAL racism in action and this pathetic attempt to play that card.
This story is a perfect example of one thing keeping it alive and it all points to the left and their lunacy. They decry racism and pretend to be for “diversity”, when just the opposite is true. When called out for what they are, they whine “Racism”! That just fuels the fires of racism, IMHO. All they accomplish is to create more division and derision amongst everyone, no matter their heritage. It’s pathetic.
The race card is old and stale. Past time to put it to rest.
July 21st, 2008 at 7:46 pm
Gus, you are apparently a perfect example of why people like Rowen should be more careful making accusations of racism. When it’s done too often, and particularly in cases when it doesn’t truly exist, people grow weary of it, and may be unwilling or unable to see it when it actually happens.
Thanks for helping me make my point.
I have no reason to make this story up. There are racists. I’ve encountered a good many of them. Heck, I could have done a quick search of the internet and found thousands of examples to cite in a matter of seconds to make the very same point.
And as for your “smell test,” might I suggest Benadryl? Works wonders. Try it, you might like it.
July 21st, 2008 at 8:06 pm
Nothing personal Dave, but your story of racism is no different than anyone else’s. You make a third person claim. You were not party to the act. So you really don’t know what happened. Do you?
I’m making your point better than you are.
Anyone can claim racism at any time. You did.
July 21st, 2008 at 10:53 pm
Whatever. Seems the conversation with you is pointless. But thanks for at least allowing me the opportunity to meet the polar opposite of all the people I typically disagree with.
July 21st, 2008 at 11:21 pm
Dave, you claimed an instance of racism. You claimed that others make false claims of racism that render your real racism less valid.
Your claim of racism was thin. You did not witness nor experience your own claim of racism. Yet you are willing to discount others claims of racism.
If racism is claimed, it is a powerful and often overwhelming accusation. Sometimes it’s true. Sometimes not. Your whole thesis was predicated on “your case in point” being “real” and others cases being “false/feigned/dishonest or made up”.
Your case in point/example, had no more—-nor more less proof or validation, than any other claim. You based your thesis on the readers assumption that you were honest and others are not. Yet you provided no tangible proof that your suggested case of racism actually occurred.
How presumtuous of you.
July 22nd, 2008 at 6:20 am
Our favorite attorney has a few comments: Skullthuggery