Another Four Star General, another dead black kid

Like peanut butter and jelly, you just can't have a dead black kid without some poster boy for white privilege standing before microphones in all their four star glory.

The latest General with a self-awarded rank higher than that of Founding Father and President George Washington, is Sheriff Joseph "I outrank Grant and Lee" Lopinto.

Now, while most stolen valor posers will don the four stars on each shoulder - or each side of their collar - like the real men of the real military does, this baby boy, unsure as to how real men dress themselves in our armed forces, went for the overkill.

And thus you behold him in all his SIXTEEN STAR glory, as this ignorant poser has donned four stars on his left shoulder, four stars on his right shoulder, and in case you didn't notice them, another four stars on this left collar and another four stars on his right!

Pity his poor wife who has to pin those on to his shirt each morning after starching and ironing his Superman underoos.  I give him credit, though.  The bath towel cape he is without a doubt wearing is well tucked in, and unnoticeable in his pretty white faux military attire.

But what of the death of the black kid?  Oh, his name was Keeven Robinson.  Why, does it matter what his name was?  He was found with "significant traumatic injuries" that were "consistent with asphyxiation".  Had he been white, this would be called "murdered by strangulation".  This happened while he was in the custody of four of the General's white soldiers.  Er, I mean, four of the Sheriff's deputies who happened to be Caucasian.  

But really, must we dwell on that death?  I mean, it's not like anything is going to be done about it.  The mealy mouthed coroner already assured the press that "homicide by medical diagnosis" is not the same as "legal homicide", so really, it's not like there's a crime here.  I mean, what part of "black kid" don't you understand?

The General, when asked by our "free press" if chokeholds were used (because they're not supposed to be, given how they cause death so routinely) answered, "Well, golly now, we don't tell our deputies to use bricks, but if they're under attack and defending their lives, and a brick is laying about, then sure, you use a brick."  I paraphrase, but besides it being expressed a bit dumber, that was the jist.

Cop-ese for "Yes, we routinely use strangleholds on crack addicts, crazies and coloreds, because we can.  Had he had the sense to be born a white girl or rich man, this non-tragedy could have been averted."

Well, let us pray our thanks tonight that Jefferson County, Louisiana is guarded not by some mere officer of the law, but by this sixteen star Generalissimo.  And that he had four husky armed soldiers to "defend" we the people against that unarmed black youth who - in fairness - did have a gun in his car 200 yards away.  

And you know how quick they can run and jump, eh?  Yeah.

In the end, the only important thing is that those "men" got home safely.  And they did.  And it's not like they've not been punished.  Each of them is drawing full pay while sitting at a desk telling jokes about watermelons and fried chickens, so really, justice has been done, eh?

At least such "justice" as is to be found in General Lopinto's America.  

Who do you have to kill to get a statue around here?

Hey, folks, it's Nidal Hasan pictured here, the United States officer who betrayed his oath to the Constitution he had sworn to defend against  all enemies, foreign and domestic, and turning traitor, treasonously killed 13 fellow American soldiers at Ft. Hood!

He's upset with Robert E. Lee, the United States officer who betrayed his oath to the Constitution he had sworn to defend against all enemies, foreign and domestic, and turning traitor, treasonously killed 600,000 fellow American soldiers.

Why is he upset?

Because Lee gets all these statues, and Hasan only gets a prison cell.

"But...but...Amicable Anarchist, Nidal Hasan was fighting for the cause of Islamo-fascism!"

Yeah.  So no statue for him.  Because now all of a sudden you don't mind there being no statues, you figure that history and heritage can get by without monuments when it's an Islamic guy.

But Lee was fighting for the cause of chattel slavery, so how was that better?  And before you cry out "State's rights", yeah, he was fighting for State's rights.

The State's right to legal slavery.

And no, this is not about the "slippery slope" of us getting rid of $20 bills because a slave owner is on them.  Andrew Jackson was known for other things, the "slave owning" was an incidental.  He's on there for being a President, not a slave owner.

Robert E. Lee is LITERALLY in the position of Nidal Hasan.  He is not truly known for anything but his treason against the United States and his facility in killing far more U.S. soldiers than even Hitler managed to.  It's not like he invented corn, but oh yeah, then had some slaves.  Nope.

Nor is Nidal Hasan known for anything but his treason against the United States and his facility in killing 13 soldiers.

Both did so for reasons of "conscience", as if they wrestling with their pwecious-wecious consciences excuses them from their honor and their oath and the law!  Both did so for causes clearly unpopular at the time.  Both did so for causes that were at war with the United States of America.

So why Lee?  Why him and not Hasan?  Is it because Lee killed 599,987 more young men?  Is it because he married into his money and bungled his father-in-law's estate?  Is it for his not freeing his father-in-law's slaves and when some tried to run off, capturing them, jailing them, then selling them to a slave trader that would "have them do their duty" with "firmness" for his financial benefit?

Is it for how prettily he spoke, no doubt with a tear in his manly eye, about how his "honor" compelled him to slaughter so many American teens upon the alter of that supposed "honor"?  An "honor" defined by oath breaking and treason, mayhem and murder?

Ahh, what a darling little martyr Lee was!  How thickly did he lay it on with a war torn nation that would swallow anything for peace!  The slave-owner who opposed slavery, the man of honor who had none, the loyal patriot who betrayed his oath, the lover of his countrymen who killed more of them than any in history!

Does someone wish to pipe up - after a hasty google search - with some over-inflated account of him having participated in our interminable skirmishes and wars with Mexico?  99% of you not knowing of any of those at this moment?  Good luck.  Apologists in vain try to make him of some note before the war, when in truth he was of no such note.

The key difference in the men boils down to two.  Lee killed FAR more men for his "honor" than Nidal Hasan did.  Lee's cause was that of blacks being slaves, Hasan wanted all to be slaves to Allah.

Which then are we giving Lee the statues for?  That he killed more poor American teens, or that owning blacks is moral?

Or are we, after all, going to be told that it was for his great triumph in marching from Veracruz or mapping parts of Florida?