It is transmitted by hot air, a consequence of global warming
(caused by deadly carbon emissions)
not complained of by well known Climatologist St. Al the Gored.
Libruls are the principal carriers and are also the most susceptible.
Political correctness (also known as rhetorical cowardice) involves being less than candid, not only about various protected classes but also about unprotected classes. Protected classes include some but not all members of racial (Black, Latin American and American Indian but generally not Oriental) and religious (e.g., Muslim) minorities, gender specific (Feminist and “gay”) and ideological (Librul) groups. Unpleasant truths must not be tolerated. Pleasant truths sometimes are not tolerated — although unpleasant untruths are encouraged — as to members of unprotected (conservative) religious groups (e.g., Jewish, Mormon,
holy rollers and Evangelical) as well as otherwise protected racial (Black and Hispanic) and female (anti-abortion) groups.
Unprotected classes generally include Whites, particularly rural Whites (“red necks,” “crackers” and those who “cling to their guns and bibles”) and conservatives generally. This definition of tolerance fits right in:
Tolerance (n,v): The acceptance of all left-leaning ideas regardless of any hint of radicalism or moral corruption. Right-leaning ideas, however, are not to be tolerated. Rather, conservatism is labeled as “bigoted.” (Synonym: Intolerance)
Please note the parenthetical observation that “tolerance” and “intolerance” are synonyms.
Libruls are, of course, more politically correct than others. However, most members of the political class have to be politically correct to varying degrees, even though they may not want to be, in order to appeal to as many voters as possible.
Although political correctness has various causes beyond global warming induced hot air, two causes in particular come to mind: the desire to be highly regarded by one’s peers and indifference to its consequences. The latter is also an effect and is therefore more socially damaging than a mere cause.
Effects of political correctness
The Stacey Dash phenomenon, as it initially developed, is likely one effect of political correctness. However, as the story spread even some in the “Principled Media” suggested that it had gone too far. Ms. Dash had the audacity to tweet her support for Governor Romney, saying “Vote for Romney. The only choice for your future.” The result?
One charmer, @WilliamEllisPhD; apparently a doctor and politically active Democrat in Washington D.C., re-tweeted Dash’s post, adding “kill yourself.” Another lefty tweeted, “kill yourself, you old hag.” And there was also this: “You’re an unemployed black woman endorsing Mitt Romney. You’re voting against yourself thrice, you poor beautiful idiot.”
CNN’s Piers Morgan was not amused. He invited Dash on his program and expressed his disgust with the vicious responses to her tweet.
Dash explained to Morgan that she “chose [Romney] not by the color of his skin but the content of his character.” That’s still ok, isn’t it?
Crystal Wright, a Black conservative who sometimes writes for the Washington Post, noted Ms. Dash’s “that’s still OK, isn’t it?” and stated,
When a black person steps out of the black Democrat box that liberals have assigned them to and most blacks have accepted, personal attacks ensue. “Sell-out,” “Oreo,” or “You think you’re white,” are just a few examples of the name-calling they must endure. I’ve never laid eyes on this “black memo” that warns blacks they must vote Democrat, but like Dash I have received a heap of hate mail mostly from other blacks questioning my authentic blackness because I choose to be a Republican.
Engaging in this gutter level name-calling aimed at black conservatives makes other blacks look ignorant, particularly of their history. A friend told me it’s not worth writing about the history of blacks and the Republican Party because that’s old news. I disagree.
. . . .
After being barraged by what can only be described as a rain of insults and ignorance, Dash tweeted, “My humble opinion… EVERYONE is entitled to one.” Yes, all Americans, even black people, are entitled to different political opinions. Maybe if more blacks start examining Obama’s record, they would realize they, too, have a choice.
An article at CBS Local in Los Angeles noted,
not all of the reaction to Dash’s tweet has been critical. Conservatives on Twitter have thrown their support behind the actress, creating the hashtag #ISupportStaceyDash. Women’s rights activist Sandra Fluke also tweeted her support of Dash’s right to her opinion.
Good grief! What would be the reaction if a better known Black celebrity supporter of President Obama — Oprah Winfrey for example — were to come out of the closet to favor Governor Romney? Would she be seen as having gone over to the dark side? The
white light side?
We are rarely reminded of unpleasant facts such as these except by conservative pundits — often Blacks, because for Whites to do that would be even more racist than for Blacks:
The breakdown of the black family is the root cause of blacks’ economic slide downward, something Romney wants to fix by encouraging marriage. In 1964, about 23 percent of black babies were born out of wedlock; today, as cited by The New York Times, it’s 73 percent. According to The Wall Street Journal, fifty-five percent of all federal prisoners are black. Half of murder victims are black, and of those 85 percent are black males. These are grim statistics for a race that represents only about 13 percent of the population.
President Obama isn’t serving up a great black agenda to address the problems keeping black Americans from advancing up the economic ladder. In fact, Obama’s policies have disproportionately harmed blacks. The black jobless rate at 13.4 percent is almost twice the national average of 7.8 percent.
On the rare occasion when others mention such problems, it is generally in the context of blaming Republicans. Indeed, until very recently any criticism of President Obama has been seen in the Librul camp as racist.
An author at The Daily Beast wrote,
As the Obama campaign struggles against powerful riptides of economic bad news, some of the president’s most fervent apologists have returned to the old habit of blaming all his political troubles on racism.
State Sen. Louise Lucas, one of the leaders of the official “Obama Truth Team” in the crucial swing state of Virginia, told a local radio show that Mitt Romney and his supporters won’t accept anyone “other than a white man in the White House.” She declared that she couldn’t conceive of any other reason that her fellow citizens might disapprove of the incumbent president. “All of the folks who are saying, ‘We don’t like Barack Obama,’ they can’t tell you any reason that they don’t…I absolutely believe it’s all about race, and for the first time in my life I’ve been able to convince my children finally that racism is alive and well.”
On a similar note, Huffington Post editor Howard Fineman condemned the Romney campaign for exploiting racial animosity to try to undermine Obama. “He is playing to, and has from the beginning of the campaign, playing to the kind of nativist base of the Tea Party,” he told the MSNBC audience of The Chris Matthews Show. “And by nativist I mean people who are in essence afraid of the world.”
Together with the host, Fineman agreed with Democratic consultant Bob Shrum that the GOP couldn’t cope with America’s transformation into a diverse, multiethnic society. “The Republican Party has become the vessel of the resentful, of the fearful, of the people who are anxious,” Shrum helpfully explained, noting with undisguised contempt that “Mitt Romney kowtows to them.”
The reluctance to criticize our First Black President — even by some with previously tingly legs — may be diminishing.
Might we be starting to have the “honest discussion of race” which Attorney General Holder complained that we weren’t having? Or perhaps he did not mean the sort of “honest discussion” that would make it acceptable to criticize President Obama for falling on his, er, face.
Unfortunately, the concept that criticizing President Obama is OK seems not to be trickling down very far. Lloyd Marcus wrote,
When our Rebuild America Defeat Obama tour bus rolled into downtown Dayton Ohio, the hostile vibe from blacks on the streets filled the air. A young black man called our team, Romney and Ryan “M-F-ers” before walking away. I went to find a restroom and passed a group of young blacks on a street corner murmuring about our tour buses. A young black staffer on our team said he thought he was going to have to break out his Chuck Norris skills.
Clearly, our team was at risk. I am grateful to report that the Lord had our backs and nothing serious happened. However, I could not help thinking, “This extreme racial tension and polarization is the fault of the irresponsible Chicago thug in the White House.”
One could argue that it would be the same if any other black were president. I think not. A responsible black president would discourage his supporters from using race to further his agenda and win reelection. A president worthy of the office would understand that national racial unity is fragile and precious; not something to be exploited to win policy issues or sacrificed on the reelection alter. But only a person of character would think such high thoughts. A minister said there is nothing worse than a small person in a big position.
Obama has proven himself to be a “small” man, lacking in character. Not only is Obama incapable of taking the higher ground to discourage racial cliches, he stirs the pot of racial stereotypes and false assumptions. Heck, Obama’s minions have made “race” the centerpiece of his reelection campaign. Their message is simple. Anyone not voting for Obama is a “hater” and a “racist”. Dear Lord, how did we as a nation come to expect so little in terms of the morality and character of our leaders? Obama runs America like a mob boss with young zombie blacks, his bully Justice Department and SEIU/ACORN thugs as his enforcers.
Think what the situation would have been if Mr. Marcus were a Black female. Still, might it be possible that the Stacey Dash phenomenon and the widespread reaction to President Obama’s
debacle debate performance last week are at least small steps out of the political correctness ghetto? Might there be a few additional slight movements off the Dependency Plantation?
We may not have many more hints until the second presidential debate next week; this week’s debate just involves a couple of White guys. But next week we will have opportunities to see the Librul reaction if President Obama screws up badly again. Will Chris Matthews really flip?