new

Welcome to the Honest Society, be it ever so briefly, Mr. President. If I may quote the controversial one on Marc Moran’s “WTF” podcast recently:

“Racism, we are not cured of it. And it’s not just a matter of it not being polite to say nigger in public.”

Well, there you have it. The Honest Society is a rather large and growing club, clan if you will, that is not afraid of speaking honestly without fear of politically correct word nazi’s going berserk.

Along with President Obama and my hero Richard Pryor, we join Howard Stern, Johnny Cochran, Mark Furman, O.J. Simpson, Kid Rock, James Brown, the mighty Funkbrothers, Al not so Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, Louis Farrakhan, Malcom X, Kanye West, Fifty Cent and pretty much every black rapper and hip hopper on earth, Chris Rock, Eddie Murphy, a few thousand NBA, NFL, MLB sports stars, legions of famous and not so famous musicians, actors, politicians, media personalities and assorted celebrities of every color, creed, ethnicity and walk of life, along with a few million others around the world who have used and continue to use the word nigger at one time or another.

The dishonest referencing of the word by its first letter is the epitome of political correctness gone mad.

For those who have chosen terminal denial and have completely lost touch with the real world, the word nigger has historically been used in a powerfully positive way when describing the proud heritage and history of deeply respected, even revered “blackness.”

For my entire life, whenever I performed my most soulful and emotional guitar playing, I received the greatest compliment a musician could ever dream of when the word was used to describe my Motown touch.

The word is used constantly across America in a friendly, even tribal greeting and salutation with no hint whatsoever of negativity nor hostility.

It is foolish and dishonest to discuss a given word, or language overall for that matter, by not saying the word and sheepishly referencing it by a letter.

Does anyone truly believe the title “WTF” of Mark Maron’s podcast doesn’t stand for vulgar street slang? Does the swapping of the universal F-word colloquialism with the term “freakin’” really absolve one from vulgar language?

Like the ever resonate “MF” word, it can be used in every imaginable way possible. There is a difference when someone assaults you with a knife, demanding “Turn over your wallet MF’r!” and the ultimate compliment given to anyone performing to the absolute best of their ability when praised as a “stone cold MF’r!”

Anybody not get that? Anybody not aware of that? Anybody so insulated, ignorant and disconnected to claim otherwise?

Semantics is one thing. Context something else altogether.

For our society to dare claim that any and every use of the word nigger is hateful and wrong is just plain dishonest, foolish, denies the truth and only hurts those we wish to protect the most.

As blacks blow away blacks in record numbers in Chicago and other urban hellzones each weekend, does anyone have the audacity to believe that words play any role in this insane widespread criminality?

Who thinks if certain words could be eliminated that any lives would be saved?

What sort of politically correct zombie could actually believe that the elimination of a word or a flag would reduce the evil of racism?

What sort of goofball could possibly believe that certain words are OK for one group of people but forbidden by others?

That, by the way, is the definition of racism.

When discussing hate and criminally evil behavior, could it possibly matter what words are uttered or symbols are displayed when an innocent life hangs in the balance?

The president’s use of the word as stated was honest and useful. His statement, this time, should be respected and learned from.

Everybody knows that Richard Pryor’s use of the word in his award winning-comedy recordings and routines and in his “Blazing Saddles” movie was honest, harmless and clearly funny beyond belief. The iconic artist was rightly honored with the Mark Twain Award at the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, all knowing how he used the word nigger in a non-threatening, non-racist way throughout his personal and professional life.

Until we as a people break free from the shackles of political correctness and honestly admit that words and context have meaning, we will continue to focus on nonsensical symbolism instead of meaningful upgrade.

I for one would rather save lives, not worry about hurt feelings.

Among the more shrill allegations voiced by constituent subgroups of the political left is that the opposition (Republicans, conservatives and Christians) would gladly kill them in a great purge if only they had the practical capacity to do so. During the 2004 campaign season, iconic pop singer and self-described “fag hag” Cher (urbandictionary.com: A woman who enjoys hanging out with gay men) publicly proclaimed that George W. Bush would ship homosexuals off in cattle cars to death camps were he re-elected.

I suppose Cher reasoned (if indeed she does reason) that doing this had somehow slipped Bush’s mind during his first term.

I’ve heard the same charge leveled with regard to ethnic minorities, that right-wingers would just love to re-institute slavery or segregation; in their perfect world, they could simply wipe out those nasty darker-skinned people altogether. Naturally, this presupposes that all right-wingers are white.

Those on the left routinely typify their opponents as intolerant, hateful and potentially violent. This has increased in volume and frequency under the Obama administration, which codified these mischaracterizations into Department of Homeland Security policy; DHS has designated pro-lifers, patriots, constitutionalists, Christians, amnesty opponents, gun enthusiasts, military veterans and other groups as potential terrorist threats.

In keeping with their hypocrisy and incongruity, leftists conveniently omit the fact that they have carried out more terrorism, pogroms, mass murders and genocide than any political group in history. As regular readers will be aware, projection of their antisocial character defects onto opponents is a hallmark of the left’s methodology.

Their objective is to convince as much of the citizenry as possible that their warnings are at least somewhat plausible. This way, when DHS Storm Troopers arrive in the wee hours to collect their neighbors, they will accept the cover story without protest: The detainees were involved in a terrorist plot to carry out large scale “hate crimes” against illegal immigrants, homosexuals, or some species of endangered grouse.

What we are in fact seeing is the political left, through deception, incrementalism and outright violation of the Constitution, insidiously maneuvering rational, law-abiding Americans into a position so untenable that at some elusive but inevitable point, violent civil disobedience – vigilantism – may be the only practicable response.

There are a few very sobering commentaries published recently that address the de facto criminalization of Christianity in the wake of Canada having legalized “gay marriage” in 2005. One is Lea Z. Singh’s “Same-sex ‘Marriage’ and the Persecution of Christians in Canada,” written for Crisis Magazine.

Previously, I identified an analogue between the process of abortion having become legal in the U.S. and the push for legalization of same-sex-unions. It’s a bait-and-switch, with the practice bearing little resemblance to the theory.

As Singh and other commentators have explained, the same tactic was used to secure “marriage equality” for homosexuals in Canada. Opponents of legalizing same-sex unions were given frequent and impassioned assurances that their religious liberties would continue to be protected. Singh writes: “The preamble to Canada’s Civil Marriage Act states that ‘everyone has the freedom of conscience and religion,’ and ‘nothing in this Act affects the guarantee of freedom of conscience and religion. —’”

This did not hold true, however, as the Canadian government, dominated by radical leftists, took it as license to legislate social norms. It is now illegal to express opinions on gender identity or preference that deviate from the new pro-homosexual, anti-Christian orthodoxy.

According to Ms. Singh, “It is not premature to speak of open discrimination against Christians in Canada.”

Canadian homofascists – with the imprimatur of the government – have established the baseless and biologically fallacious equivalency between interracial and same-sex relationships as conventional wisdom. Thus, “Christians who believe in traditional marriage are the modern-day equivalent of racists,” says Singh, “and warrant identical exclusion.”

This means that if you’re a Christian, or do not otherwise embrace the sodomite movement, it is legal and encouraged to deny you a job, a promotion, housing and engage in your being systematically disenfranchised.

Bear in mind that all of this is taking place in a country wherein 52 percent of the population opposed the “legalization” of same-sex “marriage” to start with.

Shortly, Singh writes, all public schools in Ontario will implement a new, mandated curriculum beginning in the third grade. This course of study introduces children to the perverse, patently idiotic concept that gender itself is a matter of choice, that “transgender desires are just as perfectly normal as homosexual leanings.”

And Canadian parents dare not oppose this, because it would make them quite literally subject to prosecution. As an effect of the Civil Marriage Act, the very concept of what constitutes a “parent” changed, so many parental rights were summarily negated.

Since the passage of the law, hate-crime tribunals began prosecuting Canadian Christians for publicly articulating biblical values. Homosexual activists have spies in churches, monitoring sermons for biblical passages considered to be “hate speech.” Pastors have been jailed, businesses fined out of business and individuals driven into bankruptcy.

So, how might American Christians react to such developments here? The reason I ask is because the wheels are already in motion. The satanic minions in our government absolutely must bring about these societal transformations in order to “kill off” God and establish the State as the ultimate arbiter of morality. Rending the family unit asunder will ensure that the State becomes the individual’s sole guide, instructor and authority from cradle to grave.

I’m not inclined to think that We the People will respond as submissively as Canadians did to a similar scenario transpiring here. In fact, when otherwise rational, law-abiding Americans suddenly realize that the last of their liberties have been legislated, regulated and executive-ordered away, their response just might make the left’s accusations in the opening paragraph a self-fulfilling prophecy.