Courts and Political Correctness

It's all over now and I can vent. Last November, my son was the sole survivor of a triple fatality accident. Three minority males died when their car crossed lanes and struck my sons' truck at 87 mph. (he was doing 55 mph in his own lane, in a 45 mph zone)) Both cars rolled and were totaled. My son was wearing a seat belt. The deceased were not. Their car had an unlicensed driver, no registration, and no insurance.

Initially the press salivated, reporting very slanted stories and headlines. Why? Because my son, following the accident, "blew" a .09, just BARELY over the legal limit. One headline read; "Three Die in Accident; Drunk Driver Arrested." For ten days we waited for the official accident report. When it came, exonerating my son completely, the press and media gave it barely a passing mention. For many days he had gotten death threats and blanket media coverage (including front page photos) as the "killer".

After three days in jail (unheard of for a first time, clean record, misdemeanor DUI) my son was bailed out at $7500 (normal for DUI is $1000). The trial was a farce. The first judge exceeded all guidelines, sentencing him to ONE YEAR in jail with all but thirty days suspended. Of course we appealed. At the second trial my son received the standard sentence, as he should have the first time; thirty days, ALL suspended, $250 fine, substance abuse class ($300), restricted license.

We were never looking for a "break", just the NORMAL sentence. But this case had "political" ramifications and the first judge "played" to a certain constituency. Thankfully, the second judge applied the law. Repeatedly he had to shut down the D.A. who kept trying to interject the "fatality" issue, which, of course, was irrelevant. "But three people died, your honor" etc. The judge actually had to point out to the D.A. that my son was ALSO a VICTIM, through no fault of his own.

It took seven months but justice did prevail. Ever had a similar situation as the victim of "P.C."?

Are Illegals "Persons"?

Are Illegals "Persons"?

The U.S. Constitution should not be changed for frivolous reasons. However, it is my view that we should rethink and modify Amendment 14. It's purpose was, in 1868, to guarantee certain rights to FORMER SLAVES. The concept of illegal immigrant did not even exist at the time. There were no restrictions on immigration until many years later. Things have changed. I suggest that we replace the word "persons" with "citizens." We have changed our constitution 27 times. It takes several years, but it's doable.

I am not suggesting that we treat illegals as slaves. I would grant them CERTAIN due process rights, but I would also alter the provision of "jus soli" or citizenship by birth. There would be NO entitlements for illegals. Illegals (whose children are automatic citizens under the current constitution, if born here) are costing taxpayers $90 BILLION a year. In five years that's half a TRILLION. We need to fix a problem that the founding fathers must be excused for not anticipating.

ACLU; What's the "A" Stand For?

I THOUGHT the "A" in ACLU stood for "American." I guess I was wrong. Is it just me, or does it seem that the ACLU works overtime to sabotage Americans and American values? Illegal aliens are NOT Americans. Why does the ACLU concern itself with them? Islamic terrorists captured on the battlefield, are NOT Americans. Same question. I am not suggesting some sort of white supremacist jihad. It just seems to me that the ACLU might devote more of its time, money, and assets to defending the rights and interests of AMERICANS, or maybe change its name. One question I love to ask of my students; "Are you an American first, or a citizen of the world first.?" You would be amazed at the response.

Please! Don't Vote

You've heard or read the statistics. In the U.S., the HIGHEST voter turnout is in presidential elections, at about 52%. Yes, in France it's in the upper 80's, in Australia, about 90% (but in Kiwi Land, you get fined for NOT voting), and in Great Britain, mid 70's. In our last local election for city council, turnout was about 18% of those who COULD vote. Know what? That's wonderful in my view. I was one of the 18%.

The last thing we need is an increase in the turnout of ignorant people. Please stay home. You are less dangerous watching American Idol. The quality of a democracy has NOTHING to do with percent turnout. We don't need bodies, we need informed voters. If you can't name either of your U.S. senators, PLEASE stay home. It's not complicated.

Anerican Assoc. of Greedy Old People

Don't get me wrong. I HOPE to be an old person some day, but I HOPE I won't be a greedy old person. I saw this commercial today. This obviously well-to do senior citizen was lamenting the possibility that her assets, including a million dollar home, might go to long term care rather than to her kids. She appeared to be WAY past 70, which is the point at which SSI is OTHER people's money, not yours. A lawyer broke in and assured viewers that there was a way to "hide" assets so that the taxpayers would pick up the bill for this wealthy old woman's' health care and she could leave her expensive home to her kids. Is it me, or is there something wrong with this "picture."? It's not complicated, at least to me.

Hiring Ugly People

It's not complicated. It really isn't. Ugly people, just like morbidly obese people, scare away customers and hurt the "bottom line." Would you want to be forced to hire a morbidly obese receptionist for your "Curves" studio? How about being forced to hire Madelyn Albright as a receptionist for your cosmetic surgery practice? (They'd be thinking; "Why couldn't he fix THAT?") "Google" a photo of her if you're clueless.

Many years ago when I moved to my present community, I randomly chose a bank. This was before ATM's, so one usually needed to go inside. What a TREAT! It turned out that ALL the tellers were drop-dead gorgeous women. (No accident, I'm sure). The bank went through several mergers over the years and service suffered, but I stayed. WHY? Finally, it got so bad that I switched, but I still miss those women. The branch manager knew what he was doing when he hired people. Beautiful women were/are GOOD FOR BUSINESS.

Not that I would do so, but shouldn't employers be allowed, without fear of civil suits, to honestly say "Sorry, but you are just too ugly/fat to work here. My business would suffer." Personally I would find a more kind and superficial reason to not hire that person, like Abercrombie and Fitch which allegedly hires only "beautiful people" from the right colleges. But wouldn't it be nice to not have to play that game?

Special Breaks for Special Students

OK. First things first. Do physical and mental disabilities deserve special consideration? Yes. As a kid (heartless) I made and laughed at jokes about "cripples." Stupid, but I was a kid. (is that redundant?) I am old enough to pre-date "barrier-free" construction. When I first began teaching in the mid-seventies, wheelchair-ridden students could not TAKE many courses because they could not negotiate the steps. That was horrible, and that problem was fixed. It wasn't complicated. But how far will we take this?

Back in the sixties, I had a college English professor (PhD.) who had been blind from birth. I KNOW what the handicapped (challenged?) are capable of. I do not sell them short. Every semester I get several "special needs" students. The disabilities vary, but the requests for considerations don't. Unlimited time on tests, to be taken at the students convenience. (granted) Endless one-on-one meetings with these students to review their notes. (granted) Requests to actually go through the ENTIRE TEXT and underline the important points. (denied) Requests for copies of my notes.(denied; I don't USE notes, and if I did, I would not share them).

I wonder how long it will be before I am required to have Braille versions of all handouts for the visually impaired, or required to learn sign language for the hearing-impaired. Don't laugh. I laughed about email classes once. I wonder just how these students will fare in the "real world" if and when they graduate. I wish them well. I really do. But I wonder. They will not ALL be "Steven Hawkings." Might we actually be doing these students a disservice? What do you think?