[Explorer89]

Disconsonant
Thesaurus Entries

absonant, atonal, cacophonous, conflicting, cracked, diaphonic, discordant, discrepant, disharmonic, disharmonious, dissonant, flat, grating, harsh, immelodious, incompatible, incongruent, incongruous, inconsistent, inharmonic, inharmonious, musicless, nonmelodious, off, off-key, off-tone, out of pitch, out of tone, out of tune, raucous, sharp, shrill, sour, strident, tuneless, unharmonious, unmelodious, unmusical, untunable, untuned, untuneful

from: http://wordlist.com/disconsonant.htm

It is possible that I made up my usage, I do that sometimes. I don’t think It was incorrect, however. I think that discordant would have been a better choice.

To the topic at hand, Holder’s droppage (I did make that word up) of the Panther charges gave a signal that misbehavior (mild, I know) would be tolerated. Obama chose to speak out against a perceived racial injustice against his friend, Gates (the police acting stupidly) yet remains strangely silent on the topic of the feral youth. They don’t fit his narrative unless he can find someone else to blame.

[kearnyirish2]

These “groups” are just silly posturing, probably by off-duty gubmint workers with a camera.

They can’t even deal with the Hispanics, who are displacing them in the workforce, the cities, even prison. When some Hispanics killed those kids in a schoolyard in Newark a few years back, where were these black toughs? The Hispanics would have taken them apart.

Many cities have seen their last black mayor, and the first of several Hispanic ones.

[Steel Wolf]

For one, I think your use of disconsonant was very appropriate. There's something about the violence that is hard to pin exactly on Obama. The authors attempt to do probably resonates more clearly with a liberal or a recently converted conservative audience, one more accustomed to emotional thinking.

Here is the distinction in more concrete terms. Obama sees himself as a revolutionary. He's an agent for change who is singularly blessed to operate from within the beast he intends to tame. His heart is with the people in the streets. His ability to make his sympathies known is vast, directly and indirectly. It would be very easy for him to lend that street agitator credibility as a stabilizing force. He chooses not to.

In a very fundamental sense, he thinks that American society has to be transformed, and what we live in now is a profoundly unfair and immoral existence. He wants class envy. That's why he stokes it. He wants government control of industry, to support those workers who support his vision. He doesn't trust the police. His view of the justice system is as a weapon, not an establishment of stability.

In countless ways, he's taking the spirit of our times, and channeling it down a very selfish and shortsighted path. This path appeals to his emotional vanity, and the vanity of rich, guilty liberals and poor, dependent folk. As far as that goes, he really is a man for our time, to a great many Americans. Buyers remorse aside, I still know people utterly transfixed by him, as an agent for societal change.