There are plenty of examples, but here are just a couple real head scratchers. A subheading for this post could be “Unintended Consequences of Unchecked Liberalism.”
Democratic Florida Rep. Joe Garcia — fresh off being caught eating his own earwax on camera — was caught red-handed (or is it yellow-fingered?) in another gaffe this week, claiming that low crime rates in border cities with lots of federal immigration workers is proof that “Communism works.”
Garcia made the comment during a Google hangout he convened last week to talk about comprehensive immigration reform with supporters. The Democrat attempted to point out how, for all their talk about limited government, many Republicans are fine spending loads of government money on border security.
“Let me give you an example, the kind of money we’ve poured in,” he said. “So the most dangerous — sorry, the safest city in America is El Paso, Texas. It happens to be across the border from the most dangerous city in the Americas, which is Juarez. Right?”
“And two of the safest cities in America, two of them are on the border with Mexico,” Garcia continued. “And of course, the reason is we’ve proved that Communism works. If you give everybody a good government job, there’s no crime.”
Oh, man. Really? How much has changed in half a century! This guy seems to think that with the government running everything and providing for everyone, there will be no crime; as such, Communism is a screaming success! He is not only missing the actual core of Communism, but he doesn’t even seem to get that crime still exists in Communist countries. Maybe the ear wax has clogged up his brain.
Citing concerns about the “exclusive nature” of the annual honors night at Archie R. Cole Middle School, school officials have decided to scrap the tradition.
Instead, students who would normally be recognized at the annual spring tradition will be honored during team-based recognition ceremonies and graduation.
The notice was sent to parents over the weekend in an e-mail signed by School Principal Alexis Meyer and Assistant Principal Dan Seger.
“Members of the school community have long expressed concerns related to the exclusive nature of Honors Night,” the email stated.
By having the recognition ceremonies during team-based ceremonies, it will “afford us the opportunity to celebrate the individual and collective success of all students and their effort, progress and excellence.”
Resistance is futile! We are the Collective! We must conform!
So much for encouraging students to work hard and do well, huh? Fortunately, sanity did eventually prevail:
Honors Night at Archie R. Cole Middle School is back on the table after school officials got a wave of feedback — much of it negative — in response to a decision to cancel the tradition citing concerns about it being too exclusive.
School officials on Tuesday afternoon sent a message to the school community announcing there has been a change of heart and that “we have decided to honor excellence as we had planned.”
I’m sure you don’t need me to ramble on about how this is yet another indicator of socialism dragging everyone down rather than building everyone up, nor do you need me to tell you that insanity like this in our schools is becoming an increasingly problematic issue. Still, it does boggle the mind, does it not?
Alarmed by reports of teen suicides, elected leaders in Carson are moving to outlaw bullying.
Under an ordinance that will go before the City Council next week, it would become a misdemeanor in the small Harbor-area city to cause anyone from kindergarten through age 25 to “feel terrorized, frightened, intimidated, threatened, harassed or molested” with no legitimate purpose.
Wow. There’s a lot to unpack there. First of all, the idea is nice and noble. Of course we don’t want bullying. But is this really the right solution? To make illegal the very act of making someone feel bad? What if we inadvertently make someone feel bad…is that illegal, too? And what is the legal criteria for determining how bad someone feels? Is it simply the offended person’s opinion that counts, or is there some objective standard by which said badness will be measured? What if they just feel slightly bad? Is that worth throwing someone in jail, or does it have to be a full-throated I-feel-really-bad infraction that results in a trip to the slammer? And what’s with that last clause, “with no legitimate purpose?” Does this mean that it’s okay to make some one feel bad if you actually want to be a jerk, and then it’s suddenly legal? What if someone accuses someone else of being mean (with no legitimate purpose) but is actually lying? Does a Kindergartener know what a reasonable threshold is — or even have the ability to properly express it — in a way that is legally actionable?
This is a terrific example of how you simply cannot create legislation for everything, and certainly not for ethereal feelings. You can’t legislate stupidity, you can’t legislate meanness, and you can’t legislate hurt feelings. There’s simply no way to do it. This law cannot possibly be applied fairly and equally to all citizens, and is going to cause far more harm than benefit.
The really crazy part of all this is that these things are happening all the time, all over the country. There is a madness catching fire here, and it’s built on liberal political correctness changing the definitions of words, reversing centuries of tradition, and setting up an unfathomable series of tiered protected classes, all grinding one or more particular axes in a scramble to claim the title of the most aggrieved victims and therefore should get their way.
Madness, I tell you. And it must stop if sanity is to be restored in this nation.
There’s my two cents.