file photo by Boyd Loving
Let’s just hope that residents don’t fall into the slumber again that allowed these shysters to get where they did. We’ve all learned a valuable lesson that taxpayers get screwed far more at the local level than at the Federal level.
“Let’s just hope residents don’t fall into the slumber again”…that’s pretty funny. Aside from the usual social gadflys that rattle about everyone else is and will always be in a slumber. Don’t you get it? That’s exactly the way the union thugs want it and 90 % of the dopes in Ridgewood are more than happy to oblige. Nobody cares….
Do you need a coloring book or some play dough?
Is ‘Shyster’ Anti-Semitic?
Daniel J. KornsteinBy daniel j. kornstein, New York Law Journal
share
print
reprints
Is ‘Shyster’ Anti-Semitic?
Sometimes the most common terms mean different things to different people. Meaning depends on context, as we lawyers well know. After all, interpretation is a large part of what we do. The New York Observer, for example, recently (April 21) complained about the National Review’s use of the word “shyster.” According to the Observer, “shyster” is a “deplorable and demeaning word,” “not acceptable in polite company,” “offensive, redolent with prejudice and hatred.”
The part about “prejudice” threw me for a moment, but the Observer explained that “shyster,” “has traditionally been loaded with anti-Semitism.” To the Observer, it has “bigoted associations” because people who use the epithet are “talking about Jewish lawyers who in their minds are no different from the scheming, devious Shylock.”
Get it? The first syllables are the same: Shy-lock. . . shy-ster. It is as if the sounds to the ear become equivalent to the mind. And of course lots of lawyers are Jewish.
In recent past the word thug has been receiving quite a lot of attention, following its use to describe rioters, looters, and occasionally, non-violent protesters in Baltimore last year. Thug has been poked and prodded, argued over ad nauseam, and written about quite extensively. At issue is the question of whether or not it has become a euphemistic code word for people of color, generally men, used in place of another, more outright racist, word.
It wasnt an accident that word was used regarding Paul, Roberta, etal.
Try and stay on-topic, folks. The article is about how Ridgewood taxpayers were lulled into inattention by not participating in the electoral process, and we ended up with a voting majority of tax-and-spend shysters, who were channeling the spending towards vested interests. The low voter turnout at local elections is exactly why we get this kind of government at local levels all across this State. We get all fired up when we participate at the Presidential level, but most of us barely know the name of who’s running locally.
A lot of us would stay on topic if the original poster would not refer to people as ‘Shyster’ and ” Thugs” No class what so ever. There are may ways the poster could have gotten their message across without using those terms. Just goes to should their state of mind.
All the comments above are a classic example of what’s wrong with Ridgewood. Instead of responding to the issues of out of control government and union thieves these self centered residents of Pluto would rather engage in the proper use of specific verbiage and then of course, like good liberals, get the racial hook in there as well. It’s 8:30. Take another Xanex