Posted by
Republiservative on Wednesday, August 05, 2009 10:44:23 PM
Back in 1984, someone by surname Bradley shot 30 diverse men, women, and children at a McDonald’s in California; despite Bradley being of some or no religious upbringing, all people, officials, and media said back then is that he was a loon, like say Charles Manson or the San Francisco Zodiac killer, who killed at least 60 total diverse people in the 1960’s and 1970’s.
Were "Squeaky" Fromme or John Hincley Jr. labelled "Qaedan prototypes" or "radical-inspiring" for shooting Presidents Ford and Reagan? Was America locked down and economically immobilized when actual Commanders-In-Chief were gunned down, on allegation some "alienated" type(s) might be involved and gosh, who knows how far it might it go?
On a less gruesome note, back in the 1980’s, one could easily have lively job and economic debate with African-American Congressman and later Chicago Mayor Harold Washington, and nobody said you were picking on him and not doing what he wanted because you were a racist or whatever (or appeasing liberal guilt if he had great ideas everybody liked); ditto African-American Roland Burris, in the early 1990’2 the Illinois Attorney General and later Illinois Comptroller (whom all but hardcore GOP liked).
See, before Clinton’s second term, it just wasn’t done to say that if you dare question someone, or if you’re parallel to a loon, you are an “-ist” indulging your “-ism” based on whatever psychologist du jour is making a limelight name for themselves; better, whole or large parts of populations weren’t compared to “-ists” and “-isms” just because they weren’t satisfied with some issue(s) results common to most people of every kind, or were in the same faith or IND/GOP/DEM party or economic situation as a loon.
So why is it, exactly, everybody must STILL watch the “P.C.” when assessing in normal, traditional ways the progress or lack thereof of elected officials?