Oh sure, they'll get just as involved as they can in what the fatty Schmidt eats at school. But don't look for any real equal protection under the law from them when it comes to the school bullies pounding "Dog" Schmidt down in the $hithouse when no one's looking. (Link to story at bottom).
First of all, I don't think the federal government has any business at all being involved in bullying problems at local school districts. If Michelle Obama wanted merely to do the normal First Lady-type thing and make bullying one of her core issues that she goes around talking about, I would be the first to applaud her. A great cause, frankly.
But, of course, that's not it at all. Instead, it's just a sham cause -- must like her school lunches crusade -- aimed at growing the federal government's power over local school districts just as large as can be done through coercive regulations and laws.
And it seems to nearly always be that way with the leftist 20 percenters: Nothing is ever as it seems. Strive always to use good causes, good intentions, crises and human suffering as jumping off platforms for new ways for the federal government to grow in size and to increase its power and influence in even the most local of issues and in even the most mundane aspects of our daily lives. But I digress a bit.
So now we have the federal government getting involved in the local issue of school bullying. I may not agree with such involvement, but I certainly don't think it's too much or so much for me to simply demand the following: If you're going to get involved in the issue, then do it in a color-blind, race-blind fashion that gives equal concern and protection to all bullied children. Am I asking for the moon over here?!
Apparently so. We have the linked story this weekend concerning the Obamas' Department of Justice (under the so-called direction of rather pathetic and hapless Attorney General Eric Holder) pursuing its new push to "hold liable school districts that fail to protect students that are bullied." But "here's the catch," writes Kerry Picket of the Washington Times (and yes, I am aware that the Times is a paper that slants to the right):
"DOJ will only investigate bullying cases if the victim is considered protected under the 1964 Civil Rights legislation. In essence, only discrimination against a victim’s race, sex, national origin, disability, or religion will be considered by DOJ. The overweight straight white male who is verbally and/or physically harassed because of his size can consider himself invisible to the Justice Department."
Boy, that's nice. But gone are the days where there's even any shock to this sort of stuff. This is the same Holder and Obama-led DOJ that has previously been accused (and frankly, there's little evidence to the contrary) of cultivating within the Department a culture of hostility towards pursuing voter intimidation prosecutions in cases involving a white victim and black defendant (second link at bottom).
Perhaps the worst part of all this ugliness to me is the fact that I don't think 20 percenter leftists like Obama and Holder have even the first clue that these types of race-based policies are even wrong. The 20 percenter leftist world view typically holds that if a white man is the victim of racial or gender discrimination or a race-based crime, then little or nothing needs to be done about it because that white male deserves it for all of the past transgressions and evils through history perpetrated by white American men. Sort of how we all just "got what we deserved" on 9-11. Yawn.
Of course, the leftists will rarely admit that this stuff is what they believe. That's one of my biggest gripes with the leftists: If you want to believe that line of crap, then knock yourself out (since we're still, at least at the moment, a free country), but don't go around trying to hide what you really believe like you're always doing. Trying to always hide your end-game and what you really want to accomplish.
Instead, let's just get it all out there, and then we can debate, on the substance thereof, what you really believe and what you really want to accomplish. The conventional wisdom, of course, is that they know such a debate would nearly always be lost, and regardless, they sure as hell wouldn't very electable if they told us what they really thought and wanted!
So we get disingenuous "moderate" routines from the likes of Obama in 2008 and 2011. You can certainly set your watch to these leftists, I will give them that.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/09/24/voting-rights-official-calls-black-panther-dismissal-travesty-justice/
Posts
