Political Correctness: When the Absurd Becomes Dangerous
Will Malven
May 24, 2008
Political Correctness is one of the most absurd, offensive, and now dangerous concept in America. What used to be laughable, the idea that some words and ideas should be quashed because someone in society might be offended, has become the battle cry for an Orwellian - Stalinist/Maoist - attempt to control all thought and ultimately the freedom, long enjoyed by Americans, to say anything they wish about any subject without fear of government repression or suppression.
We're talking about the First Amendment here folks, not some silly law passed by a bunch of corrupt politicians, but the first statement of protected rights in our nation's founding document.
It has become increasingly obvious over the past two decades that the Political Left, armed with such nebulous concepts as "fairness" and rights made up out of whole cloth, such as "the right not to be offended," neither of which can be found in our Constitution, is on a campaign to control what may and may not be said and ultimately, thought.
It’s very reminiscent of North Korea today, or of Maoist China and Stalinist Russia; societies in which simply using the wrong words could send you to a Gulag or your friendly neighborhood death squad.
In this atmosphere of absurd concepts, Liberal Democrats are increasingly attempting to control what may or may not be said...by those whom they oppose...while embracing any and all offensive and threatening words directed at their opponents as simply exercising their right of free speech.
What results is a bizarre mixture of socially enforced rules of speech culminating this week in the instant and insane rebuke of Hillary Clinton (once the darling of the Left) by the Obama camp and the Left in general for simply invoking the assassination of Bobby Kennedy in explaining her choice to pursue the presidential nomination in spite of all of the calls from the elite Left, in the press and in the Democrat Party, to step aside.
What Hillary said was neither threatening, nor likely to invoke a desire to kill Barack Insane Obmouse by any Hillary supporter. Yet one would have thought from the reaction within the Obama camp that Hillary had called for an assassination squad.
This kind of hypersensitive over-reaction to speech is one of the gravest threats we face in an Obama victory. Liberals love to throw verbal bombs at their perceived political enemies (and in some cases, say Obama’s close friends, William Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn for example, they throw literal bombs) yet they are, like a little spoiled child, surprised and outraged when their opponents return the favor.
They react to those “in kind” responses by crying out in rage that somehow unlike they, who are merely indulging in their constitutional right to free speech, the other side is using "hate-speech" or is, in some strange twist of (I hate to use the word logic or reason as Liberals lack any of either) understanding, being “unfair.”
Thus we return to the Hillary - Bobby Kennedy story. There is some delicious irony in all of this hoopla surrounding Hillary's run for office and the attempts by those on the Left to portray her as, what we on the Right have known her to be for almost 20 years, an insufferable, intolerant, imperious, hypocritical, hateful bitch.
One might say that the Clintons are being hoisted on their own petard...settle down Liberals…I said "petard" not "retard," so don't get your P's and C's in an uproar. If you don't know what "petard" means, look it up in your dictionary...assuming you have one. Don't be niggardly (better look that one up as well) in your use of your dictionary
The problem with all of this nonsense is the far more serious implications associated with this laughable concept of political correctness. These run the gamut of possible consequences, from costing you your job because some co-worker has been offended by what you said, whether the insult was intended or not, to the far more dire concept of "hate crimes" in which the legal system has proclaimed themselves capable of determining not just guilt or innocence, but what the perpetrator was thinking as he was committing the crime, and that some murders are worse than others because some form of social bias was involved.
Simply hating the victim does not qualify the murder as a hate crime; go figure.
However, if the victim was a member of one of the specially anointed (by the Liberal social agenda) groups, i.e. he was gay, he was black, or he was (a fill-in-the-blank social designation), then and only then is it a hate crime.
The, very much to be enjoyed, castigation of one of their own, Hillary Clinton, by the Illuminati of the Left, while fun to watch, is a dire warning of what our society could become should they, Liberals, actually gain control of our nation's government.
Liberals routinely indulge themselves in what they would call hate speech when discussing those with whom they disagree. They may call President Bush "Chimpy," "dumb," ”a liar,” "a murderer," "a terrorist," "a Nazi," or any hateful thing they choose; they may make fun of his daughters, his wife, his father and mother, his siblings, and members of his cabinet. All political enemies are fair game for the most hateful and derogatory descriptions and implications.
They do this with impunity as the dying Mainstream Media says nothing. They will object to none of it and, in fact, will encourage it by describing such behavior as "Liberals exercising their First Amendment rights."
Yet any comment, however benign, they can construe in any way (no matter how convoluted their thinking) as hateful toward one of their sacred few, becomes a rallying cry for their lynch-mobs. They will leave no stone un-turned to destroy that targeted source of that objectionable statement.
The fate of former Virginia Senator George Allen serves as an object lesson for all Conservatives. His career and his Presidential aspirations were destroyed by a controversy constructed entirely out of whole-cloth by the Left and the mainstream media.
The Alphabet networks, ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN act as cheerleaders, repeating their baseless allegations again and again until what was created out of whole cloth seems to be a statement of fact.
That is the danger in what would be normally considered the uproariously funny way in which Hillary Clinton is now being treated by the press and her Liberal colleagues.
This is the "dream" that Liberals offer America, a society of skulking finger-pointers yelling "Hate speech!" or "Bigot!" and ultimately the dreaded "J'accuse!" of the police state.
This maybe the society for which Liberals yearn, but it is not my "American Dream."
Therefore, as much as I detest the Clintons and the havoc they have wreaked on our society during their ascendancy, I must defend her against this ravening mob.
Words are words. They may be variously inspiring, dispiriting, depressing, offensive, enlightening, entertaining or simply boring, but they are ultimately just words. The only power they hold is that which we ourselves give them.
Today we live in a society in which it has become fashionable for one to take offense anytime anyone says something they don't like. We have become a society of hypersensitive wimps, unable to deal with anything unpleasant, likely to take offense at nothing more than what we imagine is being said about us, incapable of dealing with opposing opinions without being offended by them.
The ultimate response to Obama's much (some would say overly) praised response to the comment that his campaign was just based upon "words and hopeful ideas" and that he lacks the "substance" that would enable him to be an effective leader (an undeniable and profound truth if I ever heard one) when he interspersed the phrase, "Just words?" while spouting quotations from some of the great leaders in our nation's history, is "Yes Senator Obama, just words."
Words alone have no power. Words don't feed the hungry, stop a bullet, or put gasoline in the car. They don't solve the world’s problems and quite often they exacerbate them.
Yes words do have the power to inspire, but that is only a good thing when the cause to which they call people to rally is a worthy cause. Like Obama, Hitler too was a great orator. Many Leftist dictators are great orators, but only fools and the un-educated can be entranced by their words.
Hillary is a distinctly unsympathetic figure, but in this case she is being given the bum’s rush simply because she is bucking the Democrat Illuminati and interfering with their agenda.
Someone, maybe George Soros, maybe some even more nefarious figure (Chavez?, Bin Laden?, Ahmadinejad?) is behind the Obama train pushing it forward with astounding force even though the candidate himself is absurdly unqualified for the office he seeks. To whom does he owe “special allegiance” for his meteoric candidacy?
The idea of Obama as President is laughable. The Liberals and Democrats made fun of George W. Bush as unprepared and unqualified for the office of President of the United States, but compared to their anointed one, George W. Bush is a political and intellectual heavy-weight.
What President, then candidate Bush, lacked and still lacks is Obama’s glib speech and easy style. On substance there can be no comparison. Obama falls short in every conceivable category.
Have you ever wondered why Obama, who is every bit as white as he is black, is being advertised as a black candidate?
Why is it that race is only a legitimate topic for Liberal Democrats, who kept blacks oppressed for over a century and not Conservative Republicans who fought to free them for just as long?
Why is it still the Liberal elite of the Democrat (and Republican) Parties who seek to classify, quantify, and judge people according to their race and the Conservatives who seeks to free all Americans from categorization and any restrictions?
Why is it that the first piece of information of interest to Liberals about a person is how they can be classified?
Why have these elitists turned their backs on the words of one of Black America's greatest leaders, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and his dream that his
Long Live Our American Republic!!!
May 24, 2008
Political Correctness is one of the most absurd, offensive, and now dangerous concept in America. What used to be laughable, the idea that some words and ideas should be quashed because someone in society might be offended, has become the battle cry for an Orwellian - Stalinist/Maoist - attempt to control all thought and ultimately the freedom, long enjoyed by Americans, to say anything they wish about any subject without fear of government repression or suppression.
We're talking about the First Amendment here folks, not some silly law passed by a bunch of corrupt politicians, but the first statement of protected rights in our nation's founding document.
It has become increasingly obvious over the past two decades that the Political Left, armed with such nebulous concepts as "fairness" and rights made up out of whole cloth, such as "the right not to be offended," neither of which can be found in our Constitution, is on a campaign to control what may and may not be said and ultimately, thought.
It’s very reminiscent of North Korea today, or of Maoist China and Stalinist Russia; societies in which simply using the wrong words could send you to a Gulag or your friendly neighborhood death squad.
In this atmosphere of absurd concepts, Liberal Democrats are increasingly attempting to control what may or may not be said...by those whom they oppose...while embracing any and all offensive and threatening words directed at their opponents as simply exercising their right of free speech.
What results is a bizarre mixture of socially enforced rules of speech culminating this week in the instant and insane rebuke of Hillary Clinton (once the darling of the Left) by the Obama camp and the Left in general for simply invoking the assassination of Bobby Kennedy in explaining her choice to pursue the presidential nomination in spite of all of the calls from the elite Left, in the press and in the Democrat Party, to step aside.
What Hillary said was neither threatening, nor likely to invoke a desire to kill Barack Insane Obmouse by any Hillary supporter. Yet one would have thought from the reaction within the Obama camp that Hillary had called for an assassination squad.
This kind of hypersensitive over-reaction to speech is one of the gravest threats we face in an Obama victory. Liberals love to throw verbal bombs at their perceived political enemies (and in some cases, say Obama’s close friends, William Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn for example, they throw literal bombs) yet they are, like a little spoiled child, surprised and outraged when their opponents return the favor.
They react to those “in kind” responses by crying out in rage that somehow unlike they, who are merely indulging in their constitutional right to free speech, the other side is using "hate-speech" or is, in some strange twist of (I hate to use the word logic or reason as Liberals lack any of either) understanding, being “unfair.”
Thus we return to the Hillary - Bobby Kennedy story. There is some delicious irony in all of this hoopla surrounding Hillary's run for office and the attempts by those on the Left to portray her as, what we on the Right have known her to be for almost 20 years, an insufferable, intolerant, imperious, hypocritical, hateful bitch.
One might say that the Clintons are being hoisted on their own petard...settle down Liberals…I said "petard" not "retard," so don't get your P's and C's in an uproar. If you don't know what "petard" means, look it up in your dictionary...assuming you have one. Don't be niggardly (better look that one up as well) in your use of your dictionary
The problem with all of this nonsense is the far more serious implications associated with this laughable concept of political correctness. These run the gamut of possible consequences, from costing you your job because some co-worker has been offended by what you said, whether the insult was intended or not, to the far more dire concept of "hate crimes" in which the legal system has proclaimed themselves capable of determining not just guilt or innocence, but what the perpetrator was thinking as he was committing the crime, and that some murders are worse than others because some form of social bias was involved.
Simply hating the victim does not qualify the murder as a hate crime; go figure.
However, if the victim was a member of one of the specially anointed (by the Liberal social agenda) groups, i.e. he was gay, he was black, or he was (a fill-in-the-blank social designation), then and only then is it a hate crime.
The, very much to be enjoyed, castigation of one of their own, Hillary Clinton, by the Illuminati of the Left, while fun to watch, is a dire warning of what our society could become should they, Liberals, actually gain control of our nation's government.
Liberals routinely indulge themselves in what they would call hate speech when discussing those with whom they disagree. They may call President Bush "Chimpy," "dumb," ”a liar,” "a murderer," "a terrorist," "a Nazi," or any hateful thing they choose; they may make fun of his daughters, his wife, his father and mother, his siblings, and members of his cabinet. All political enemies are fair game for the most hateful and derogatory descriptions and implications.
They do this with impunity as the dying Mainstream Media says nothing. They will object to none of it and, in fact, will encourage it by describing such behavior as "Liberals exercising their First Amendment rights."
Yet any comment, however benign, they can construe in any way (no matter how convoluted their thinking) as hateful toward one of their sacred few, becomes a rallying cry for their lynch-mobs. They will leave no stone un-turned to destroy that targeted source of that objectionable statement.
The fate of former Virginia Senator George Allen serves as an object lesson for all Conservatives. His career and his Presidential aspirations were destroyed by a controversy constructed entirely out of whole-cloth by the Left and the mainstream media.
The Alphabet networks, ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN act as cheerleaders, repeating their baseless allegations again and again until what was created out of whole cloth seems to be a statement of fact.
That is the danger in what would be normally considered the uproariously funny way in which Hillary Clinton is now being treated by the press and her Liberal colleagues.
This is the "dream" that Liberals offer America, a society of skulking finger-pointers yelling "Hate speech!" or "Bigot!" and ultimately the dreaded "J'accuse!" of the police state.
This maybe the society for which Liberals yearn, but it is not my "American Dream."
Therefore, as much as I detest the Clintons and the havoc they have wreaked on our society during their ascendancy, I must defend her against this ravening mob.
Words are words. They may be variously inspiring, dispiriting, depressing, offensive, enlightening, entertaining or simply boring, but they are ultimately just words. The only power they hold is that which we ourselves give them.
Today we live in a society in which it has become fashionable for one to take offense anytime anyone says something they don't like. We have become a society of hypersensitive wimps, unable to deal with anything unpleasant, likely to take offense at nothing more than what we imagine is being said about us, incapable of dealing with opposing opinions without being offended by them.
The ultimate response to Obama's much (some would say overly) praised response to the comment that his campaign was just based upon "words and hopeful ideas" and that he lacks the "substance" that would enable him to be an effective leader (an undeniable and profound truth if I ever heard one) when he interspersed the phrase, "Just words?" while spouting quotations from some of the great leaders in our nation's history, is "Yes Senator Obama, just words."
Words alone have no power. Words don't feed the hungry, stop a bullet, or put gasoline in the car. They don't solve the world’s problems and quite often they exacerbate them.
Yes words do have the power to inspire, but that is only a good thing when the cause to which they call people to rally is a worthy cause. Like Obama, Hitler too was a great orator. Many Leftist dictators are great orators, but only fools and the un-educated can be entranced by their words.
Hillary is a distinctly unsympathetic figure, but in this case she is being given the bum’s rush simply because she is bucking the Democrat Illuminati and interfering with their agenda.
Someone, maybe George Soros, maybe some even more nefarious figure (Chavez?, Bin Laden?, Ahmadinejad?) is behind the Obama train pushing it forward with astounding force even though the candidate himself is absurdly unqualified for the office he seeks. To whom does he owe “special allegiance” for his meteoric candidacy?
The idea of Obama as President is laughable. The Liberals and Democrats made fun of George W. Bush as unprepared and unqualified for the office of President of the United States, but compared to their anointed one, George W. Bush is a political and intellectual heavy-weight.
What President, then candidate Bush, lacked and still lacks is Obama’s glib speech and easy style. On substance there can be no comparison. Obama falls short in every conceivable category.
Have you ever wondered why Obama, who is every bit as white as he is black, is being advertised as a black candidate?
Why is it that race is only a legitimate topic for Liberal Democrats, who kept blacks oppressed for over a century and not Conservative Republicans who fought to free them for just as long?
Why is it still the Liberal elite of the Democrat (and Republican) Parties who seek to classify, quantify, and judge people according to their race and the Conservatives who seeks to free all Americans from categorization and any restrictions?
Why is it that the first piece of information of interest to Liberals about a person is how they can be classified?
Why have these elitists turned their backs on the words of one of Black America's greatest leaders, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and his dream that his
"four children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character?"Just a few questions for readers to ponder.
Long Live Our American Republic!!!
What do you think?
To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below
posted by Will Malven at 7:38 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home