Yes, I know, the idiocy of the Left ought not to surprise me so much. But occasionally even I am taken aback by the reality-defying notions they manage to dredge up out of their anal cavities. Remember, one paragon of Leftist Social Justice stupidity thought reality itself was racist, and that it was bad enough to somehow ruin the experience of playing Pokemon (like it needs help in that regard).
As Europe falls victim to Islamic terror attacks on a daily basis, the latest of which is an apparent mass stabbing (but muh gun control!), SJWs are desperate to stop Trump, and his rhetoric surrounding a ban on Islamic immigration. Americans, you see, might fail to see the benefits of importing millions of Muslims into their country, which include bombings, stabbings, shootings, an attack with a cargo truck, and a greater propensity to live on welfare.
So for the DNC, SJWs managed to dredge up a Muslim who died in the service of America, and then rattle off some stats about how some others did, also. I wonder if they included the Fort Hood shooter in that calculation… Anyway, let’s be fair to Humayun, the man who died. Let us assume that he was everything the Democrats claimed he was, and that he was a good Westernized, American Muslim.
Okay. So if all is true, then we can appropriately honor that man, and speak no ill of the dead. But this brings up a few interesting sidebars. Does this exempt his parents from political criticism? If you go to a political convention, and speak there, and insult the opposing candidate, is it wrong for the candidate to respond? Is it wrong for him to insult you, in turn?
No, I’m sorry. If you stick your dick in a hornets’ nest, expect to get stung. The service of your son is not an unlimited shield against this. Remember St. Cindy and her crocodile tears of doom during the Bush years? This is merely weaponized empathy in the service of the Clinton agenda. If anyone has made a mockery of the death of this man, it his own parents. Maybe his son was a better man, I don’t know, but his parents are fools, and pawns of the Clintons.
But then we find that the father ran an Islamic immigration website, and was a lawyer involved in these matters (the site has since supposedly been deleted). So what we have here is a lawyer, politicking for the Left from the DNC in favor of a matter he personally profits from, insulting the opposing candidate, and expecting that he will endure no counter-attack. There’s a word for that: moron.
Beyond all this, though, we have to look at why the Left does this shit. Take a look at this little gem I found on Fecalbook this morning:
You know, my libertarian instincts make me pretty damn wary of police myself, at times. And I’m no fan of this trend of micromanaging the civilian populace. But if you barricade yourself in your apartment with a shotgun, and then shoot at the cops… well, your chances of being shot yourself skyrocket. That ought to be common sense. Then SJWs moan that she got shot… I mean read that headline again and see if it gives you an aneurysm.
This is Leftist logic, that somehow quid pro quo is wrong. They have rewritten the Golden Rule thusly:
We can do whatever we want to you, but you must treat us with the utmost respect all times. What we do to you, you cannot do to us. We may insult you, but you can say nothing back. We may shoot you, but you cannot shoot back. Any dirty tactic we use against you cannot be used in turn against us.
Turnabout, apparently, is NOT fair play. I remember one Black Lives Matter activist proclaiming on Fecalbook that “Black Lives Matter even when we shoot first.” Translation: you can shoot as many cops as you like, but cops can’t shoot back.
Going back to the Islamic issue, we are faced with a contradiction. The West must be tolerant, multicultural, and bend over backwards for Islam. But Islam is not required to do anything in return, not even make a meaningful attempt to curb the terrorism they tacitly support. If a Christian country sent migrants to Saudi Arabia, and asked the Arabs to pay for them, and to accept some increase in terrorism, and to build them churches and make citizens of them, the Saudis would laugh… and then probably kill the whole lot of them.
But, at a minimum, they practice none of the tolerance they demand of us.
The Left has one set of rules for the themselves and their favored special interest groups. And a very different, and far more stringent set of rules for everyone else. This selective rule-making falls just short of law, so as to give them a thin veneer of deniability.
But as the Khans found out after the DNC, and one Korryn Gaines found out after barricading herself and shooting at the cops, quid pro quo is the default operating status for most humans, and all the bleating of useless SocJus sheep in the world won’t change that. The time is rapidly approaching when terror will result in retaliation, where burned churches will result in burned mosques, where dead priests will be met with dead imams, and when Leftist snarky contempt will be met with the same.
An eye for an eye, as it were.
I don’t smile at this, nor desire it. Much of my political musing has been expended trying to take us off the path that would lead to this end. But my desires are irrelevant. We’re talking about human nature here, and so the backlash is inevitable. Somehow, I suspect SJWs would not like to be treated in the fashion they have treated us.