Thursday, May 31, 2012

President Obama Ignores Poland to Tend Shop at Store.BarackObama.Com

President Obama is making it very clear that he doesn’t feel the need to issue an official, Poland-approved apology to the European nation for how he accidentally called a Nazi concentration site a “Polish death camp.”

This just happens to be something Poland is very touchy about, as we’re finding out firsthand.

Yesterday, I touched on the international incident that arose, expressing my uncertainty that it was such a big deal in the first place while still pointing out that this latest embarrassment couldn’t have happened to a more deserving guy.

But while Poland is agape at his gaffe and I’m on the fence about it, President Obama seems completely nonplussed judging by White House spokesman Jay Carney’s insistence that the administration “regret[s] the misstatement, but that is what it was.”

Translation: Get over it, Poland.

One has to wonder whether Obama would be so dismissive if the country he had offended was, say, Middle Eastern or Muslim-dominated.

Then again, maybe that’s unfair speculation. Maybe the President is just really, really busy right now working on his Store.BarackObama.Com site, which features LGBT t-shirts proudly pronouncing “I’m Out For Obama” and cat collars claiming “I Meow For Michelle.”

It’s understandable that he has to stoop to such drastic, capitalistic tactics to raise any money. Judging by continuing polls and re-election rally turnouts, his base is either severely depressed or severely apathetic.

MoveOn’s desperate appeal to its membership base is just the latest example of how Barack just ain’t cuttin’ it no more with the American people.

Begging everyone to donate at least $5, the liberal lobbyist group explained in an email that it just doesn’t have enough money to simultaneously support Elizabeth Warren’s campaign in Massachusetts, Obama’s reelection attempt, and the recall vote to depose Scott Walker in Wisconsin.

“It’s like picking which of your kids you love the most,” the email read. “I just can’t do it. If we can’t increase our budget, we might have to dramatically scale back or pull the plug on some of MoveOn’s most important election efforts this year.”

Considering how misbehaved most of MoveOn’s “kids” are though, it might be best for everyone if they all get one giant time out in the corner or maybe a good old fashioned spanking.

That way, they’ll learn that they have to think about people outside of themselves every once in a while… and the rest of us can enjoy a better, brat-free environment in the future.

Wednesday, May 30, 2012

President Obama Insults the Whole Entire Country of Poland


President Obama just officially managed to insult a whole entire country the other day when he posthumously awarded Jan Karski the Medal of Freedom – the highest civilian honor bestowed by the U.S. government – at a ceremony in the capitol.

During his time, Karski courageously spread the news of exactly what was happening under Hitler to the outside world. So Obama naturally brought that up in his accompanying speech.

Unfortunately, he used apparently inflammatory language while he did, calling one particular Poland-based Nazi detainment facility a “Polish death camp,” thereby potentially pointing blame at Poland instead of Nazi Germany for the disgusting and inhumane acts that took place there.

Poland, which has apparently been quite vigilant about trying to eliminate such language, immediately demanded an apology. So Tommy Vietor, the National Security Council spokesman, issued a statement expressing the administration’s regret over the “misstatement.”

But it would seem that Poland wants something a bit more blatant… And it has absolutely no problem saying so.

Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk says he is “convinced that our American friends can today allow themselves a stronger reaction than a simple expression of regret from the White House spokesman – a reaction more inclined to eliminate once and for all these kinds of errors… Today, this is a problem for the reputation of the United States.”

He added that his country “can’t accept such words… even if they are spoken by a leader of an allied country. Saying Polish concentration camps is as if there was no German responsibility, no Hitler.”

And Polish Foreign Minister Radolaw Sikorski commented on his Twitter account: “The White House will apologize for this outrageous mistake. It’s a shame that such a momentous ceremony has been overshadowed by ignorance and incompetence.”

Really, it seems to me to be an honest mistake, and Poland does seem to be overreacting a bit. I’m quite sure that President Obama and his speechwriters were only referring to Poland as a geographical location in this case, not as a slur of any kind.

With that said, considering Obama’s party and personal smear tactics, it does seem rather fitting that his words would be twisted and thrown back in his face so dramatically.

The American people already know how well he takes the tables being turned on him. It’ll just be interesting to see how he ultimately handles it on an international scale…

Tuesday, May 29, 2012

Bill Ackman Declares: “We’re Ultimately Animals Motivated by Sex”

This morning, I turned to Business Insider after the Drudge Report failed to deliver any news stories I particularly cared about.

Sure, there was MSNBC host Chris Hayes’ apology for saying he was “uncomfortable” about calling fallen soldiers “heroes.” But I figure that my fellow conservative bloggers have addressed that subject enough, leaving me very little to say on the matter.

Hayes was wrong. He was stupid. He apologized. Moving on.

That’s why I instead found an article about the highly successful hedge fund manager, Bill Ackman, who believes that “We’re ultimately animals motivated by sex.” He speculates that, “People don’t like to admit it but it’s the primal driver.”

If that’s true, that’s incredibly sad.

Now don’t get me wrong, because I think that sex is a very important motivator and intrinsic part of life. However, the most important part? Seriously?

What about God? Or family? Or personal pride? Or dreams and goals? Or mutual respect?

But apparently not. Apparently, sex is all that we are and the highest thing that we can achieve.

Boiled down so basically (albeit erroneously), life seems rather pointless, considering how little sex humans – even the most lusty, lucky co-eds out there – actually achieve in the end.

Essentially, it is far too fleeting an activity to base an effective and lasting worldview or identity on. Yet, even so, there’s no denying that people do try to do just that all the same.

It’s the kind of focus that has led to our society crumbling around us, with 12-year olds getting pregnant, fathers abandoning their children in order to more freely get their kicks, mothers focusing more on sexual fulfillment than raising their children right, STDs, and the mass debasing of femininity.

And that’s not to mention the intellectual toll it has taken. When sex becomes the only thing worth achieving, intelligence goes out the window just about as fast as basic morality and common decency.

With all due respect to Bill Ackman (which doesn’t appear to be very much), he is very, very wrong. Human beings were never designed to be animals; we are created to be a complicated and beautiful mixture of physicality, spirituality, emotions and intellect.

Try to take one away, and we instantly lose out. America is living proof of that today.

Friday, May 25, 2012

The Democrat Party’s War on Women

For all of the blah blah blah boohooing Democrats do over gender inequality, a decent number of them – women included – apparently don’t really practice what they preach.

Yeah, I know: Yawn. But as unsurprising as that observation might be, it’s still noteworthy.

The Washington Free Beacon reports:

“A group of Democratic female senators on Wednesday declared war on the so-called ‘gender pay gap,’ urging their colleagues to pass the aptly named Paycheck Fairness Act when Congress returns from recess next month. However... Of the five senators who participated in Wednesday’s press conference—Barbara Mikulski (D., Md.), Patty Murray (D., Wash.), Debbie Stabenow (D., Mich.), Dianne Feinstein (D., Calif.) and Barbara Boxer (D., Calif.)—three pay their female staff members significantly less than male staffers.

“Murray, who has repeatedly accused Republicans of waging a ‘war on women,’ is one of the worst offenders. Female members of Murray’s staff made about $21,000 less per year than male staffers in 2011, a difference of 35.2 percent.

“That is well above the 23 percent gap that Democrats claim exists between male and female workers nationwide. The figure is based on a 2010 U.S. Census Bureau report, and is technically accurate. However, as CNN’s Lisa Sylvester has reported, when factors such as area of employment, hours of work, and time in the workplace are taken into account, the gap shrinks to about 5 percent.”

That last point about “factors” could very well apply to the ladies (used in the loosest sense of the word) of the Senate, who might actually pay their workers based on seniority, responsibilities and other logical factors. But even if we afford them that possibility, they still stand out as two-faced liars since they quote one fact for the public and utilize another for themselves.

Again, yes, that’s less than newsworthy, considering how this is the party of notorious womanizer Bill Clinton, who seems to consider any attractive woman his personal porn star, rather like the ones in his recent impromptu photo-op at a fundraising event. Like Mikulski, Murray, Stabenow, Feinstein and Boxer, Clinton is all too willing to use women on his terms.

The same goes for Hustler’s Larry Flynt, who makes a living off of de-intellectualizing women into mere physical props. After making the news earlier this week for photoshopping a phallus into conservative commentator S.E. Cupp’s mouth due to her politics – the hardcore Democrat went on to gush that “President Obama has overperformed” and “done a marvelous job.”

Bottom line: The Democrat Party bigwigs care about women only so far as we can carry them. After we’ve outlived our usefulness – either individually or as a group – we might as well don our high heels and negligĂ©es and chain ourselves to the bedpost… if they don’t have us there already.

Thursday, May 24, 2012

In a Liberal World…

In a liberal world, down is up, backwards is forwards and sheer stupidity is utterly brilliant.

This isn’t news of course, considering that there’s enough reliable data on the subject to rival the law of gravity. But it’s still worth pointing out when so many people somehow still fail to understand it.

First on today’s list is the standard liberal line to just “be yourself,” just as long as “yourself” is homosexual, black or female. Not so much, however, for the obese. ABC’s Good Morning America took a line right out of Michelle Obama’s playbook by favorably portraying the latest high-cost fat camp, which forces kids onto strict diets, grueling exercise routines and severely restricted phone time (a mere 10 minutes with their parents twice a week).

Next up, we have the green movement or, more specifically, global warming. The subject is so important to the likes of the Black Eyed Peas’ Will.i.am that he arrived at an Oxford University climate change debate in his own private helicopter. Judging by the picture of the massively-sized aircraft, it’s state-of-the-art expensive, not to mention a major gas guzzler.

But liberals don’t care when they break their own ridiculously restrictive rules; only when anybody else does. Their behavior is always above board, even when it’s blatantly not. This includes misogyny, a term they’ll lob at Republicans for blinking wrong around a woman. But a fellow liberal like Hustler's Larry Flynt can publish highly offensive photoshopped pictures of conservative women like S.E. Cupp and it’s just no big deal. As Cupp herself commented, “They have… this belief system that my political views, my being pro-life… make this kind of behavior OK. It justifies it and I essentially deserve it.”

Incidentally, speaking of women, it’s liberals who produce nitwits such as Lauren Odes, a New Jersey woman trying to claim wrongful termination at her job when she really got fired for dressing too provocatively too many times. I thought feminism was supposed to push women to great heights, not to pathetic lows?

But low is like totally the new high. And driving the country off of a fiscal cliff is really a highly coveted form of fiscal responsibility. Just ask President Obama, who congratulated himself at a re-election campaign fundraiser in Denver, Colorado the other day for keeping federal spending in check. He, of course, didn’t mention Obamacare, an expense that will skyrocket the national deficit in years to come. And failed crony capitalism ventures such as Solyndra didn’t make it into the speech either.

Honestly clearly means about as much as common sense does to Obama and his pals. But that’s a liberal living in a liberal world for you. And knowing liberals, they’ll give us even more examples of their anti-logical outlook on life soon enough.
Stay tuned…

Wednesday, May 23, 2012

A Very Harsh but Rather Deserved Commentary on the American Education System

Just because it’s harsh doesn’t make it untrue. And sometimes the truth is exactly what we need to hear, even when it’s harsh.

Between my experience at Yale University on Monday, previous run-ins with the American education system, and the news stories that somehow don’t get covered up by the mainstream media, it’s safe to say that our schools are a wreck. It’s also safe to say that we could use a dose of reality and actually hear it how it is instead of how we want it to be.

There’s really no positive way to spin:
Examples like those are why Bill Bonner’s piece, published first by The Daily Reckoning and reposted by Business Insider, is well worth the read. Titled, “Sorry, Graduates, But Most Of What You Learned Is Useless,” it attacks the American education system at its weakest (i.e. pretty much everything about it) and exposes the farce that it really is.

It’s harsh, yes. But that doesn’t make it untrue. The following is just a snippet…

“Herewith, we offer an alternative graduation speech. An honest address to the class of 2012. One we will never be invited to give:

“I see you before me. Arranged in alphabetical order. From Mr. Aaron from Alexandria to Mr. Zyman of Richmond. You are all suited up…wearing the ancient vĂȘtements that have marked men of learning for hundreds of years. And in a few minutes you will move the tassels on your funny little hats from the right side to the left, indicating that you have been awarded a bachelor’s degree. This signifies that you have joined the few…the elite…the learned.

“But how many of you really are learned? How many are imposters? How many are capable of writing a simple essay? How many can decline a Latin verb? How many have mastered calculus and quantum physics?

“You’ve heard about the group of men at the old English club. The waiter comes up and asks if they would like some hock. One of them cleverly says ‘hic, haec, hoc.’ So the waiter comes back with drinks for all of them except him. When he asks why, the waiter replies: ‘But sir, you declined the hock.’

“How many of you got that joke?

“I only ask the question because I am suspicious. Many college grads of today could hardly be called intellectuals. Many have hardly used their brains at all. Some have merely spent the last four years learning a few tricks and the latest jargon of a trade. Marketing, for example. Or journalism. Marketing evolves so fast that whatever you learn here will be mostly obsolete by the time you get a job. If you ever get a job. Besides, the important points could be picked up in a few weeks on the job anyway.

“As to journalism, there are a few skills you need to know, which you could pick up in an afternoon; the rest is undifferentiated. You look. You ask questions. You think. And you tell the world what you come up with. No college necessary. In fact, college may hinder you. Instead of using your own eyes and your own brain, and developing your own way of looking at things, you spent your best years in class absorbing the claptrap du jour of the mainstream media.

“Others among you have read popular novels or a few history books. You think you know something. Maybe you call yourself a historian. Or perhaps a literary critic. My advice is to keep that to yourself. You have paid a lot of money for something that millions of other people — just as smart as you are — do for a hobby or past-time. There’s not much real knowledge in either of those things…just opinions and ideas which are more vanity and entertainment than genuine learning.

“Same thing for those who have spent years studying ‘politics’ or ‘economics.’ Drop the pretense that you know something. You don’t. All you have is a full plate of opinions…most of them preposterous…and most of them indigestible by a thoughtful person.”

The rest is well worth a read for anybody interested in hearing the truth, harsh though it definitely is.

Tuesday, May 22, 2012

My Impression of Yesterday’s Yale University Commencement Speech

Just yesterday, I had the privilege of seeing one of my dearest friends graduate from one of the prestigious Yale University’s graduate programs with her Nurse Practitioner’s certification.

That was amazing, and I am so proud of her for all of her accomplishments. What wasn’t so amazing, however, was the commencement speaker at her academic field-specific graduation ceremony.

Because it was set up to recognize just the nursing graduates, the speaker was naturally a nurse herself and, I believe, a member of the faculty. This woman seemed very nice and very dedicated.

She also seemed like an idiot of the first degree.

Her speech was titled something along the lines of “being the change,” but she seemed to focus the first half of it on her own accomplishments alone. While she didn’t come across as particularly arrogant – only passionate – she still wasted the attendees’ time by rattling off one personal triumph after another with little if any connection to the larger message that she was supposedly trying to convey.

Aside from her general lack of cohesion – or central theme in general – she also made some rather ridiculous and preposterously presumptuous political statements including:

“And we’re all breathlessly awaiting the Supreme Court verdict on the healthcare mandate.”

and

“Yes, we can!”

This was not a political rally: It was a celebration of individuals… Individuals whom the speaker mindlessly assumed fit neatly into a single demographic, thereby attempting to strip them of their individuality altogether.

Considering where I was, I wasn’t surprised by her lack of intellectual consideration. Most universities are bastions of liberal idiocy, after all, and Yale – for all of its prestige and impressive history – is just as bad as the rest of them in that regard, if not worse. Though I do have to say I was a little startled that a Yale professor and commencement speaker couldn’t string her thoughts together a little more coherently.

Then again, maybe I shouldn’t be surprised. The speaker was quite obviously the product of the American education system, a liberal propaganda machine that churns out good, liberal clones who honestly seem to believe that, if it’s liberal, it’s automatically intelligent.

Judging by just yesterday’s Yale University commencement speech, however, nothing can be further from the truth.

Friday, May 18, 2012

Justice Is Taking a Backseat to Race and Other Liberal Banners in Our Courts


Back when I was a fresh-faced college graduate, I got called to jury duty down in Philadelphia.

It was a federal case, since many of the alleged crimes had happened across state lines, and the defendant, Andre Henry, was a black man. That last detail shouldn’t matter, but it very obviously did during jury selection and then again while we deliberated over the verdict.

I was selected for the jury because, in a pool of people 40-years and older, my 24-year-old self was clearly the youngest in the room… and as such probably racially indoctrinated to see all minorities as victims. I could see all of the stereotypes and their implications play out in the [white] defense attorney’s slimy smile, and I’m sure that he regarded the three black women and one black man who ended up on the jury in the same exact way.

It turned out that he was right about them though, of course, he was dead wrong about me. And, to this day, I still wonder why I didn’t look him dead in the eye and tell him “I’m a Republican and I believe in the death penalty.” That would have knocked me off of his must-have list in a heartbeat.

In some ways though, I’m happy that I didn’t.

That way, I got to sit in on a federal trial involving some 23 counts of varying crimes, including the attempted murder of a grand jury witness, who happened to also be his baby mama. I got to hear nearly three weeks’ worth of evidence laid out in front of me by the prosecution and a mere hour or two by the defense, the latter of which literally revolved around the claim that “my twin brother did it,” even though Henry didn’t actually have a twin brother. And I got to see otherwise decent people – my fellow jurors, who I got along very well with – acting with an appalling lack of intelligence and self-dignity.

By the end of the trial, there was absolutely no doubt in my mind that Andre Henry was guilty on every single count. His alibi was preposterous, his attitude cocky, and the evidence against him overwhelming, with witnesses identifying him and a wiretap catching him trying to make deals to kill his ex-girlfriend.

Like I said: Overwhelming.

Yet for all of that, the three black women still had to look at photos of him and his “twin” brother before they were ready to declare him guilty. And the black man kept us “deliberating” for the rest of the day, the following day and the next morning before he finally caved to the obvious… all because he didn’t want to put another black man behind bars.

He didn’t do it to waste his fellow jurors’ time, or burn through unnecessary tax dollars that didn’t need to be spent , or make a mockery out of the legal system. But he did all of that because he was too focused on race rather than justice.

So it’s not surprising to hear that the George Zimmerman trial “has been such a contentious case that even the evidence is being disputed,” all because he shot a young black man, Trayvon Martin. It’s tragic and it’s terrifying, but it’s not surprising.

We’ve been teaching modified history and modified ethics and modified logic to the public for decades now. So it’s really no surprise then that we’re now getting modified justice.

Wednesday, May 16, 2012

Another Study Rips into another Food Group Right before Bathing Suit Season


Bathing suit season is right around the corner, leading to many a mirror-induced panic attack, lowered self-esteem and a sudden urge to believe every new food study to hit the news.

But hold off for a minute, girls – and guys – before you dive into the mumbo jumbo of the highly politicized world of nutrition. Just because you read it doesn’t mean it’s actually true.

Take the latest diet-related study to come out of the University of California Los Angeles, which indicates that eating too much sugar can affect your brain’s ability to function correctly.

If they’re to be believed, that means we can add sugar to the long list of other food dos and don’ts, right alongside of coffee, eggs, carbohydrates of just about any stripe, pork, salt, aspartame,  coconut oil, soy, water… etc., etc., etc., etc., ad nauseam.

The only problem with that lengthy list is that there are no real conclusive studies proving which is which. It seems that every other day, there’s some new research claiming to be all-inclusive and conclusive about what we should and should not eat.

Yet just give it a few years or even a matter of months before some other study supposedly disproves it. Back and forth and back and forth and back and forth they go until it becomes fairly clear that these so-called nutritional experts are either incompetent or they’re getting paid off by the various food industries and/or the government.

So this is my personal non-bribed conclusion on the matter: Forget the studies and use common sense instead.

That way, chances are that bathing suit will fit nicely in no time and you’ll still have the brain power to enjoy it properly.

Tuesday, May 15, 2012

Let’s Get the Issue of Who President Obama Is and Isn’t Straight Once and for All


According to Newsweek this month, Obama is the “First Gay President.”

Except, of course, that he isn’t.

Nor is he the “First Female President,” as Martin Linski wrote during the 2008 campaign and the Washington Post’s Kathleen Parker echoed in 2010. Similarly, New York magazine, AFP and Geraldo Rivera all respectively got it wrong too, since Obama isn’t “The First Jewish President,” the “first Asian-American president,” or the “first Hispanic president” either.

(Incidentally, thank you to The Atlantic Wire for compiling all those titles, complete with amazingly snarky commentary.)

Obama is the first black president. That’s it. And that’s more than enough for a solid mention in U.S. history books.

Just because he says he supports gay marriage doesn’t make him gay. Just because he talks about women issues doesn’t make him female. Just because he’s sat down with the Israeli Prime Minster once or twice doesn’t make him Jewish. Just because he’s done something – Anything? – with Asia doesn’t make him Asian-American. And just because he’s made a few speeches in support of the DREAM Act doesn’t make him Hispanic.

Artistic license only goes so far, and the liberal media with its desperation to make Obama all things for all voters left those natural bounds a very, very long time ago. Really, it’s high time we all stop with the silly semantics and call Obama what he really is…

An extremely poor electorate choice.

Monday, May 14, 2012

Michelle Goldberg Likens Ann Romney to Stalin and Hitler on MSNBC


On Thursday, May 10, Ann Romney, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s wife, wrote this at USA Today:

“Cherish your mothers. The ones who wiped your tears, who were at every ball game or ballet recital. The ones who believed in you, even when nobody else did, even when maybe you didn’t believe in yourself.

“Women wear many hats in their lives. Daughter, sister, student, breadwinner. But no matter where we are or what we’re doing, one hat that moms never take off is the crown of motherhood.

“There is no crown more glorious.”

Personally, I think the piece starts out cute enough, though perhaps a bit on the cheesy side. And from an editorial perspective, I could criticize the second paragraph for its logical progression and the last line for its archaic feel.

But that’s because I’m a snobby word-critic who knows she could write the sweet sentiment in a less silly sounding way. Newsweek/Daily Beast Senior Contributor Michelle Goldberg, on the other hand, really doesn’t have a leg to stand on for her own biting commentary of the thought and its source.

Appearing on MSNBC’s Up with Chris Hayes, she expressed her opinion that: “It can’t only be me that maybe initially saw Ann Romney as maybe a sympathetic or neutral figure but who is increasingly seeing her as someone who is kind of insufferable because of the way she’s milking this thing,” i.e. motherhood.

Goldberg continued with “You know, yes, mother is beautiful. I found that phrase ‘the crown of motherhood’ really kind of creepy, not just because of its, like, somewhat, you know, I mean, it’s kind of usually really authoritarian societies that give out like The Cross of Motherhood, that give awards for big families. You know, Stalin did it, Hitler did it.”

Criticize Goldberg for her appalling lack of verbal cohesion. Mock her for her juvenile usage of the word “like.” Point out how far she’s reaching in order to derive genocidal maniacs from a generic Mothers’ Day reminder.

Go ahead, because it would all be valid.

But perhaps the worst part about her commentary is that she probably actually believes that she said something intelligent.

Friday, May 11, 2012

CBS Condones Chris Rock Calling Cameron Diaz a “Whore”

Big baby and so-called comedian Chris Rock called Cameron Diaz a whore the other day at the New York premiere of their shared movie, “What to Expect When You’re Expecting.”

The name calling happened when the much more famous (and probably better paid) Diaz showed up on the scene in the middle of Rock’s interview. Obviously a bit annoyed at the attention shifted away from him, he goes on to call his costar a “whore” at least twice to a bunch of media personnel, who all proceeded to laugh the comments off as if they were nothing at all.

That’s because, according to CBS News, it apparently doesn’t mean anything if a man calls a woman a whore (unless of course, that man happens to be Republican, in which case it’s automatically misogynistic and deplorable). The propaganda agency assures us that, “of course, it was all in good fun. Just moments later, the two were chummy in front of the flashing lights,” and titles its video clip of the encounter “Chris Rock drops ‘funny’ F-bomb on Cameron Diaz.”

Yeah, CBS, that’s hysterical. Sexist language and overinflated egos always are though, right?

Idiots.

Thursday, May 10, 2012

Court of Appeals Deems Internet Child Pornography Legal in New York


Viewing child pornography in New York is now legal, an obvious step forward for pedophile rights all across this nation of ours.

As Senior Judge Carmen Beauchamp Ciparick wrote in a majority decision for the New York Court of Appeals on Tuesday, “The purposeful viewing of child pornography on the internet is now legal in New York.”

Apparently, state law criminalizes the creation, possession, distribution, promotion or facilitation of child pornography. But it doesn’t specifically mention taking a peek or two, says Ciparick. [S]ome affirmative act is required (printing, saving, downloading, etc.) to show that [the] defendant in fact exercised dominion and control over the images that were on his screen. To hold otherwise would extend the reach of (state law) to conduct—viewing—that our Legislature has not deemed criminal.”

Surprisingly enough (Or maybe not?), there seem to be a lot of “normal” people in favor of the controversial decision. And they make some decent arguments to support their positions.

They point out how anybody can accidentally find pornographic images on the internet, which their computer memory automatically files away. Others argue that child pornography laws have condemned everybody from high school kids who “sext” nude pictures of themselves, to grandmothers printing harmless pictures of their naked baby grandchildren.

In other words, where’s it going to stop? How many innocent people (or at least people who don’t fit into the traditional definition of a “pedophile) are going to have to suffer that way?

But maybe – just maybe – that’s not the right question to be asking. Maybe, instead of looking at the small minority of actually innocent people who have been hurt by such legislation, we should think about all of the innocents who will suffer without that judicial deterrent.

Maybe, instead of making it easier for everyone – including child-molesters and molester-wanna-bes – to get away with accidentally or purposely viewing innocent or illicit images of naked children, we should be asking why there’s such a prevalence of child pornography at all.

Could it be because the political and social policies we’ve pushed over the last several decades have actually been promoting perversion, both of the intellect and of the conscience?

Is it because our culture has rotted so far that grown men and women actually crave the prepubescent bodies of little boys and girls instead of mature relationships? Is it because we’ve sexualized everything “normal” into boring insignificance, prompting people to seek out kicks in unconventional and frankly revolting ways?

Maybe it’s time we started addressing all of that before we go excusing anything else.