But of course!
Blacks are 'over-represented' among looters. It would be racist to hold blacks to civilized standards of behavior because such behavior is not 'who they are.' Therefore, any use of 'looters' is racist.
Is that the 'reasoning'? I'm just asking. See here:
At the Los Angeles Times, for instance, an editor has said the word “looters,” which has been used many times in the paper, now has “a pejorative and racist connotation” and that anyone who is inclined to use the word should “talk to your immediate supervisor.” Translation: Best not use the word at all, if you want to stay employed. So what to call looters? Non-paying shoppers? That doesn’t quite tell the story: Ordinary shoplifters don’t usually bust up all the windows. How about self-appointed retail-justice-commandos? Revolutionary mass goods-redistribution agents?
'Liberals' can't think, but they are really good at associational slides. Their thinking is slurry and surreal and 'morphy' and muddled. One thing reminds them of another and morphs into it. Their 'thinking' is feculent, a byproduct -- of con-fusion. An intercranial crapstorm. Foolish and flushable.
'Blacklist' is another word the Pee-Cee Brigade wants to ban. But then what about 'white out' and 'red line' and 'brown nose' and 'Code Yellow'?
'Liberals' need re-education. We'll begin building the camps at the start of Trump's third term. He will no doubt get a third term by simply refusing to leave. Ask Nancy Pelosi.
Recent Comments