The story is full of the double-speak and bizarre assumptions so common among the liberal media:
1. The mayor "partly" blames the NRA for the death of this child, when everything leading up to that death involves things the NRA loudly opposes - criminals possessing guns; underage gang members with guns; young children playing with loaded guns without adult supervision. This bizarre stance by the mayor is accepted as perfectly reasonable.
2. A collection of government agencies spent over $300,000 in a single year intervening with this one family, to apparently no positive effect. Yet the professional social workers all are quoted talking about the successes they claim to have achieved - all of them completely subjective. The mother was "responsive" - the surviving 15 year old brother is "bright". Is that what we spend money on, so that social workers can delude themselves?
Perhaps it's even worse. These same social workers are the ones who arranged for this dysfunctional and crime-ridden family (mom with criminal record, once charged with stabbing the dead boy's father in the abdomen; multiple "fathers" of the mom's kids all criminals; the children committing crimes) to remain together:
Despite Liquarry's death, caregivers involved with the family say they see something worth saving in Gadson and her children. As a result, prior to Liquarry's death, the state Department of Social Services didn't take the children into custody even when they witnessed or took part in violence.
These folks see "something worth saving" so they keep this dysfunctional group together... why? So they can continue to be dysfunctional and continue to demand high amounts of services that these same folks are then paid to deliver?
3. When the dead boy's father (with a friend) breaks into an apartment and beats and stabs the occupant to death, it's described as a "tragedy...involving his relatives". No, the tragedy involved the dead neighbor. It was a horrific crime of violence that involved his dad as the perpetrator. Oh, but to the liberal media the killer suffers too - the killer is even more of a victim than the victim.
4. The social worker Carrie Clausen describes the incredible collection of mutual assaults and other crimes - from the dead boy's father beating his mother in the face with a barbell to the oldest child apparently keeping a loaded gun where his young siblings (ages 13, 8, and 2) could find it - as among "a whole lot of ... awful things that happened to the family."
No, these things did not just happen "to" the family. But that's the sort of criminal-as-victim, projection of powerlessness that one expects from the pimps of the welfare state. No wonder nobody ever expected any member of this family to behave responsibly. The idea of responsible behavior is foreign to them, social workers and reporters alike.
No comments:
Post a Comment