A LOSS OF PERSPECTIVE

 

Let me begin by betraying a bias: the consequences of some acts are irredeemable. Among those acts is the unlawful taking of someone’s life. Although society and the law may forgive and forget, the stigma surrounding murder should never be rewarded or celebrated. A person who serves a sentence for murder and is released should never be allowed to do more than survive in the shadowy fringes of our society. The ascendency of the radical left in this country is no more evident than in academia where a university, in response to national exposure and PC pressure, fires a basketball coach who uses gay slurs and bounces basketballs off his players while no one except the families of her victims express any concern over Columbia University’s employment of convicted murderer and terrorist, Kathy Boudin. While Rutgers University’s firing of its basketball coach is probably justified, although it’s motives for acting after a public outcry are questionable, Columbia University’s continued employment of Boudin and worse, her status as a “scholar in residence” at the NYU school of law, is an outrage. For those of you too young to remember, Boudin drove the get away car on October 20, 1981 after she and fellow radicals from the People’s Liberation Front and the Weatherman Underground robbed a Brink’s armored car, killing the driver and two police officers. Evidence revealed that while Boudin claimed she was just the driver and fired no fatal shots, she lured the police officers into a shoot out in which they were mercilessly gunned down. She served 22 years in prison. She now teaches at Columbia where her background is conspicuously absent from her school bio. In her defense, after Fox News and other right leaning news organizations picked up on the story, the left leaning site, News Hounds, an anti-Fox predator argued that Fox and others on the right were condemning her because she is, in their words, “a former left wing radical.” Whatever some news organizations motivations are in revealing this story, the point is not that Boudin is a left, right or any other kind of radical. The point is she is a convicted murderer. Unlike her other co-defendants, she hired a lawyer and got a lesser sentence than her fellow murderers who are still in prison. As the outraged families of her victims note, she robbed them of their husbands and fathers. To put it in perspective, would we really want Timothy McVey, had he survived and served some sentence for his act of domestic terrorism resulting in the deaths of innocents, teaching at a so-called prestigious university? Would we forgive a mass murderer like McVey simply because he served a prison sentence for his crime? While rehabilitation is an admirable aim in our criminal justice system, all too often, we are left with the uneasy feeling that criminals’ public pronouncements of remorse are nothing more than self serving attempts to mitigate public sentiment against them so they can benefit economically. Like continuing to play pro football in the case of scumbag Michael Vick or teaching college like Boudin. Worse, that doesn’t even seem to be an issue for Boudin who, like her fellow terrorists, Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, themselves associated with academia, have never publicly reached out to the victims of their violence or shown any real remorse for their lawless actions. When an administrator for Columbia University defends their employment of Boudin by arguing her students like her, we’ve lost our sense of perspective to the detriment of our society. 

SHORT TAKES

1. Contrary to what some on the religious right believe, just as genetics has now established there is a “math gene,” it is also true that sexual preference, hetro or homo, is also determined by genetics.

2. Religion is not a dirty word and the secularists attacks on religion are misplaced and disrespectful.

3. The best managed states and those with the highest employment rates are “red states” with Republican governors. The worst managed states with the highest unemployment rates are “blue states” with Democratic governors.

4. Those with conservative beliefs and opinions are not, as the Left often tries to portray them, stupid, ignorant or bigoted. Black conservatives are not “oreos,” “uncle Toms,” or “tokens.”

5. Gun control measures being forwarded by the Democrats, whether you agree with them or not, are an infringement on the Second Amendment.

6. This administration has no cohesive foreign policy. The continuing revelations about Benghazi confirm “gate” is an appropriate addition to the word.

7. No one with any semblance of intelligence should care what Lindsey Lohan is doing.

8. Like many other young boys of the era, my first crush was on Annette.  She will be missed.

  1. Memo to Janet Nepoolitanna: the border is not secure.

  2. Memo to Alaskan congressman: the word “wet backs” is no longer an appropriate name to use whether it was used in the past or not. The “N” word was used in the past as well but no rational person would argue that it should be used today.

11. Congrats to the Louisville basketball player who survived a devastating leg injury for adopting that wonderful breed of dog: the American Pit Bull Terrier.
12. And congrats to David Abrams, a local Butte author, whose novel, Fobbit, based on his service in Iraq, was selected as a notable book of the year by the NY Times. 

IN DEFENSE OF THE PRESIDENT

While it is obvious to those who regularly read my blog that I am no fan of this President, I find myself coming to his defense after he was criticized by the politically correct types for including a reference to a woman’s beauty while otherwise extolling her professional virtues. Having seen the lady in question, California’s attorney general, I would have to agree, she is a very attractive woman. It seems that we may have reached the point in our society where no man is allowed to compliment a woman’s beauty without being accused of being sexist. As men, we are supposed to ignore the fact that a majority of women still spend what many men consider an inordinate amount of time primping in front of the mirror, carefully applying expensive makeup, bathing their bodies in expensive lotions, creams and perfumes, hanging out at the spa, spending oodles of dough on perms, dye jobs, hair pieces, not to mention those who partake of “enhancements” and “augmentations.” I think that if we guys are to be constrained for complimenting women who successfully complete the process, it is only fair that you gals give up all these efforts to look your best. As males, we will no longer be lured into leering at you if you simply get up in the morning, leave your hair all askew, forget the eye liner and lip stick, dress in a gunny sack and wear flip flops. I promise we won’t have any thoughts let alone the temptation to compliment you on how you look. Of course, you might consider the devastation that will be visited on all those industries that depend on your current drive to look your best and, of course, fair is fair, so God help you if you express an opinion that one of us looks good.