Wednesday, February 16, 2011
The subject is taboo
Pepe thought in action: In magical thinking, safety and good come to those who obey taboos, and in the multiculturalist world, there is no taboo more powerful than the one that forbids acknowledgment of realities not in keeping with the progressive vision.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
15 comments:
One could hope that a publicized trial here would awaken the public to the stupidity that is political correctness.
Or maybe not. So much of society benefits from the false pieties and redistributional corollaries that it may be in the interest of a majority to keep sniffing at how evil righties are.
Time will tell, but I don't have my hopes up.
About right. But you forget one thing -- which the article states right away, and which I brought up here before, and you dismissed out of hand.
Namely that, for all their faults, Merkel, Cameron, and Sarkozy acknowledged at long last that the multiculti cult has failed their respective countries. Not a 1/10 of a/100th of a peep in that respect here. Not even from the DoD, after one man that they cuddled and pushed up despite obvious signs, turned around and did what he bragged he's gonna do all along: not a word of acknowledgement that the Pinko Gods have failed the soldiers slaughtered by Hassan.
Sorry I didn't acknowledge your POV but I think there's plenty of fight against PC in the US, but the fight is different.
In Europe, the PC crap is about foreigners. In the US it's about legal citizens that are even less accepting of the social contract than most of the Euro foreigners.
WTF to do? One can't rail about a possible elector.
My "POV"? I was linking to the news, ie., reports on those guys speeches. And those are not just random people, they are the powers-that be in the 3 major countries in Western Europe.
Exit question: could a Hassan have made his way up in Euroland? I sort of doubt it, but I'm not quite sure. And, would his dastardly deed have been shoved under the rug to the extent it has been done here? You don't seem to want to confront such questions.
I dismissed something out-of-hand? I don't remember. Anyway, you see where I am at; we have a rotten electorate and pulling the plug on PC means shutting off voters with a vested interest. Here you'd cut off a mess of Turks and Africans that can't vote anyway and are looked upon with more suspicion than our immigrants are (legal or illegal).
Also, because the voters are a smaller and more homogeneous group, there seem to be narrower divisions among the folks here. They fight some atrophied ideological fascism vs. communism bs all the time, but never seem to hit an issue that matters.
France will be different, buddy.
As to Hasan, I dunno if he could have gotten in the army here, even...
About shoving things under the rug, uh, there's a big article on Hasan in the WSJ today.
Shoved under the rug by the-powers-that-be, not by WSJ. C'mon, Her Rot, make an effort to follow the logick.
Tecs, I know that there's this fun little fiction about the MSM's being monolithic and all, but it's hard to imagine any media outlet less "powers-that-be" than the Wall Street Journal!
The most common car owned by the readership of that paper is a Porsche less than two years old. Turbo.
Look up the definition of powers-that-be in the Constitution. As far as I recall, there are precisely 3 of them: the Executive, the Legislative, and the Judiciary. To which of these 3 branches does the WSJ belong?
You recall wrong.
The phrase is more general.
If you want to talk about the govt, then we can, but you should like hint that that's what we're talkin about.
Hey, when you coming? Boston sucks, don'tcha know?
Here is some magical thinking.
If no one cares about the Palis but the pinkos in the Sociology Dept., then why were the "jubilant" crowd screaming "Jew" while they attacked Lara Logan?
Hmmm.
Reading is essential. I kept referring -- both in previous posts and this one -- to Merkel, Cameron, Sarkozy. What part of "powers-that-be" is not clear in this context? The equivalent here in the US would the the POTUS (not the WSJ). Have you heard him give any remotely equivalent speech?
I say, stop diggin'. And pay up.
Go ahead and stop digging. Pay up, too. But how much is Tecs Scalia going to pony for claiming the Constitution is from 1526?
It seems only right that you'd pay 1526 bottles of VCP.
Let's make that the first installment on your tab.
1526?? Man, oh man.
Got to make the punishment fit the crime, Tecs. It's in the Constitution.
[Powww!!]
Post a Comment