New Posts
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

"Thug"

It's an uncomplicated question in regards to whether it is a racist word, or not.
It really is dependent upon the context. Since you asked the question only to provoke some sort of right v left virtual fisticuffs, I doubt you are interested in my response; however, not every question lends itself to a simplistic answer. Bumper sticker thinking is easier, but thoughtful consideration is more productive - not to mention more interesting.
 
Definition from Merriam-Webster:
thug
Full Definition of THUG

: a brutal ruffian or assassin : gangster, tough

He assassinates by drone

Speaking of drone strikes....don't EVER touch a cell phone that seems to be just lying around unattended, like somebody lost it.....if you see one, RUN!!!!!

The U.S. government reportedly is ordering some drone strikes based on the location of terror suspects' cell phones -- without necessarily confirming the location of the suspects themselves -- raising concerns about missiles hitting unintended targets.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...g-drone-strikes-based-on-cell-phone-location/
 
It really is dependent upon the context. Since you asked the question only to provoke some sort of right v left virtual fisticuffs, I doubt you are interested in my response; however, not every question lends itself to a simplistic answer. Bumper sticker thinking is easier, but thoughtful consideration is more productive - not to mention more interesting.

Are you psychic? A mind reader?

No, I am not being provocative. It's a question, plain and simple.
 
Context is everything. But I admit that understanding context does take more analytical capacity than some can bring to bear.

indeed, and particularly if you're one who's long palled around with (and more) racist "thugs" whose rhetorical offenses efforts like this seek to diminish.

apparently some racists think it is a worthy substitute for the "N" word http://crooksandliars.com/2014/02/florida-man-proclaimed-i-hate-thug-music

context indeed

You can't force people to like you. If you are a good person that is their loss not yours. If a racist makes you feel bad that is your problem more than it is theirs.
 
Are you psychic? A mind reader?

No, I am not being provocative. It's a question, plain and simple.

It's hard to keep up with these "new meanings" of old words, isn't it? I mean, we've been using certain words for YEARS, and suddenly, some dopey liberals decide that those words don't mean what we thought they meant, but something completely different....

Odd.
 
More mytzylbabble....

yes, we all understand that anything more complex than the babbling of your "dawlin" the dawg, or more complex than 1+1=2, is what you declare babbling in an effort to avoid challenges in which you haven't a prayer of prevailing.

but by all means, please continue in making this more clear and evident for the readers.

meanwhile, Bobby's point about context, and mine about how it is racist-lovers and enablers love this kinda stuff due to their interest in minimizing their guilt, as well as a likely effort to infer that the racism charges are exaggerations, remain unaddressed and certainly unrebutted.

and neither ever will be by the likes of you
 
Are you psychic? A mind reader?

No, I am not being provocative. It's a question, plain and simple.
Alrighty then, my answer stands - it depends upon the context. Your earlier question asking if calling C. Rice a "watermelon seed spitter" is racist? yes it is. However, if you were sitting around with your children and they were eating watermelon and having a contest to see who could spit a seed the farthest and you commented in praise of the winner "you are a watermelon seed spitter!" it wouldn't be racist. That's how context makes a difference.
 
yes, we all understand that anything more complex than the babbling of your "dawlin" the dawg, or more complex than 1+1=2, is what you declare babbling in an effort to avoid challenges in which you haven't a prayer of prevailing.

but by all means, please continue in making this more clear and evident for the readers.

meanwhile, Bobby's point about context, and mine about how it is racist-lovers and enablers love this kinda stuff due to their interest in minimizing their guilt, as well as a likely effort to infer that the racism charges are exaggerations, remain unaddressed and certainly unrebutted.

and neither ever will be by the likes of you
Racism charges have become exaggerated and I can no longer hear them for the width and breadth of them.
 
yes, we all understand that anything more complex than the babbling of your "dawlin" the dawg, or more complex than 1+1=2, is what you declare babbling in an effort to avoid challenges in which you haven't a prayer of prevailing.

but by all means, please continue in making this more clear and evident for the readers.

meanwhile, Bobby's point about context, and mine about how it is racist-lovers and enablers love this kinda stuff due to their interest in minimizing their guilt, as well as a likely effort to infer that the racism charges are exaggerations, remain unaddressed and certainly unrebutted.

and neither ever will be by the likes of you

meanwhile, Bobby's point about context, and mine about how it is racist-lovers and enablers love this kinda stuff due to their interest in minimizing their guilt, as well as a likely effort to infer that the racism charges are exaggerations, remain unaddressed and certainly unrebutted.

and neither ever will be by the likes of you

WTF????
 
It's hard to keep up with these "new meanings" of old words, isn't it? I mean, we've been using certain words for YEARS, and suddenly, some dopey liberals decide that those words don't mean what we thought they meant, but something completely different....

Odd.

I had an Eggo with butter, PB & J on it for breakfast...Uh oh!

As I said before: liberals toss out the word racist because they are intellectually lazy and cannot deal with anyone disagreeing with them.

However, the race card has been overplayed way too many times and the accusation is bogus, just like they are.
 
yes, we all understand that anything more complex than the babbling of your "dawlin" the dawg, or more complex than 1+1=2, is what you declare babbling in an effort to avoid challenges in which you haven't a prayer of prevailing.

but by all means, please continue in making this more clear and evident for the readers.

meanwhile, Bobby's point about context, and mine about how it is racist-lovers and enablers love this kinda stuff due to their interest in minimizing their guilt, as well as a likely effort to infer that the racism charges are exaggerations, remain unaddressed and certainly unrebutted.

and neither ever will be by the likes of you

 
yes, we all understand that anything more complex than the babbling of your "dawlin" the dawg, or more complex than 1+1=2, is what you declare babbling in an effort to avoid challenges in which you haven't a prayer of prevailing.

but by all means, please continue in making this more clear and evident for the readers.

meanwhile, Bobby's point about context, and mine about how it is racist-lovers and enablers love this kinda stuff due to their interest in minimizing their guilt, as well as a likely effort to infer that the racism charges are exaggerations, remain unaddressed and certainly unrebutted.

and neither ever will be by the likes of you

So, of these statements, half are racist?

George Bush is a thug.
Obama is a thug.

George Bush is lazy.
Obama is lazy.

George Bush doesn't have any boys, only girls.
Obama doesn't have any boys, only girls.
 
Back
Top