Ooobie on Everything

My Safe Space

You hear so many crazy things these days. I don’t know how I would keep up if I hadn’t already predicted most of them. Recent suggestions for a better America include the mass expropriation of property from lighter-hued humans for transfer to those of a darker shade. (At last, the home of my dreams is within reach!) The allocation of seized properties would be carried out honestly and fairly of course by a cadre of Super Humans who are above politics, greed and personal skin color, although all of them must be Democrats. In today’s America and elsewhere in our world, but only in progressive places, real-life whites not only wish themselves into blackhood, but are hired by (I am taking this on pure faith) genuine blacks to head the latter’s skin-based organizations. In today’s America, thousands and thousands of people from what used to be a bastion of learning (go Sox!) march militantly to silence Free Speech. They no doubt toast with chilled chardonnay afterwards, throwing their nasty little pink caps in the air like a psychotic Mary Tyler Moore fan club, smug in their day’s work of crushing the Constitution beneath their hob-nailed sandals.

Now we are debating whether or not we should rewrite parts of US history that are so shameful, so they say, that they should not be allowed to exist. Today that category of non-things and non-persons includes anybody who fought for states’ rights in the War against the North, anybody who owned a slave prior to the Civil War, or lived with a slave as husband or wife without openly marrying them and setting a good example — people like Thomas Jefferson, who treated his woman Sally with a dignity and stature unheard of in that time, a man who educated his half-African children. It means defacing and destroying and disappearing stupid statues whose names are covered in pigeon shit. (Reminds me of a sixth grade field trip to DC, sitting in a park, eating my bologna sandwich and looking at a statue of someone who was no doubt a war criminal of some kind, when a pigeon shat upon my hair. I try not to blame the statue, and these anti-statuary freaks would be well advised to do likewise.)

But what will be forbidden tomorrow? Perhaps whole classes of deplorable people you used to think of as ordinary Americans will be shipped off to reeducation camps, or invited to step onto the glorious Pathway, as invented by British socialists. And when will we start airbrushing out unpleasant presidents who weren’t someone you’d invite home to meet the parents? Taft was so faaat, ugh.  Or candidates who were a Big Fat Zero?  (Here’s to you, Hillary!) By eliminating outmoded and/or offensive aspects of our history, that fabled tale could then be rewritten by those whom I and others call “Gen Zero.”

One of my favorite concepts to be spawned from the vacuous minds of the left is that of the “safe space.” When I was a junior officer in the Foreign Service in Jamaica we had safe spaces that were closed off by rape gates. The gates gave you time to call in the troops before dying at the hands of home invaders armed with automatic weapons. But this new idea is galaxies and light years ahead of that simple idea. These safe spaces began their existence as proposals for the timid, if militant, Deviant Sexualists that have been churned out by our schools. In their “safe spaces” you were forbidden to be mean or refer to any deficits in the safe person’s psyche or body or dating partners. No fat jokes or sissy jokes. You were increasingly expected not just to tolerate but even be a proponent of sexual deviancy at risk of bursting through the safe walls of all the safe  bubbles in which the sensitive oddities were living. Now, of course, that seed of compassion has expanded (no weight pun intended!) to include anything that upsets anybody about anybody or anything else. Entering or violating the safe space by the offensive is a crime punishable immediately by the use of violence.

I’m sure you can see the problem with the concept of “safe spaces,” that being where does yours end and mine begin? If I feel happy in my safe space spouting out things you hate to hear, does that impinge on your happiness over there in your safe space? Does that mean you can pull a gun on me? Or set me alight with a make-shift molotov cocktail made out of a can of hairspray?

And what would my own safe space look like? If I gave into my more nasty and brutish side, I’d prohibit anything other than hate speech directed at Hillary Clinton, anybody in the Democrat Party, James Comey, Robert Mueller, all left-wing Hollywood blowhards, and also, and especially, Harry Reid and John McCain. I would only allow specific news outlets into my air space, which means no “mainstream media” (and that’s a good one).  It probably doesn’t mean Fox News anymore, not since the Murdoch purges began. In my own safe space, there would be no entertainment beamed into my home filled with nudity, bestiality, and stupidity. Children’s cartoons would make them laugh, not serve up propaganda that makes them cry and worry about all the latest issues. No sex education pornography would intrude on young minds. No illegal immigrants would dare march or wave a foreign flag demanding the US do this or that. No novels could be written within five years of a major event concerning said event. Similarly, no movies could be made. All movies would require an actual plot and real actors. No more reality tv. No students who don’t study, no intellectuals who think comic books are philosophy. No politicized civil servants; no angry feminists; nobody who isn’t exactly sure of his or her gender.

But then I think, what would that make me if not just what those creeps I despise are? Narrow-minded, intolerant, and ignorant of our rights and obligations under the Constitution. So I think that my safe space would be a nation where schools were non-partisan and education was for learning and exploring and debating ideas. It would be a place where kids were almost always free from menace from their elders in their homes and in their neighborhoods, and where parents try to instill eternal values, like honesty and decency, not cultural myths. People could debate, without the use of obscenities or name-calling, or even with it, but without resorting to or threatening violence. A place where everybody knows that sometimes you win, and sometimes you lose. And that the two things aren’t the same.

In fact, my safe space looks exactly like the America I grew up in. Too bad today’s youth don’t know how that was.


At Last, a Wise Jury Decision

JuryKudos to the Philadelphia jury that convicted Kermit Gosnell on various counts of murder and assorted other crimes. A heinous felon, a man who had no love of life, who murdered with a vengeance, so to speak, Gosnell is paying for only a few of those he sinned against in his life’s work of maiming, torturing, and killing those most defenseless and innocent, the unborn and newly-born. Of course he never intended even one of them to be newly born, just newly dead, but a few escaped — only to be shot in the back fleeing, so to speak.

I sure hope he gets to enjoy the feel of the cool lethal injection as it flows to his heart and brain. It would be a shame to waste any money keeping him alive.


Murdering Babies for the Betterment of Mankind

a modest proposalJonathan Swift, an Irishman, wrote a famous satirical piece in 1729 entitled A Modest Proposal for Preventing the Children of Poor People From Being a Burden to Their Parents or Country, and for Making Them Beneficial to the Public. In this essay, Swift laments the sight of the destitute who spend their days going about with children hanging off their every limb, begging alms for sustenance. Mocking the day’s social engineers and their various hare-brained schemes for dealing with the poor, he offers an analysis of the problem and then proffers a solution:

It is true, a child just dropt from its dam, may be supported by her milk, for a solar year, with little other nourishment: at most not above the value of two shillings, which the mother may certainly get, or the value in scraps, by her lawful occupation of begging; and it is exactly at one year old that I propose to provide for them in such a manner, as, instead of being a charge upon their parents, or the parish, or wanting food and raiment for the rest of their lives, they shall, on the contrary, contribute to the feeding, and partly to the cloathing of many thousands…There is likewise another great advantage in my scheme, that it will prevent those voluntary abortions, and that horrid practice of women murdering their bastard children, alas! too frequent among us, sacrificing the poor innocent babes, I doubt, more to avoid the expence than the shame, which would move tears and pity in the most savage and inhuman breast…I have been assured by a very knowing American of my acquaintance in London, that a young healthy child well nursed, is, at a year old, a most delicious nourishing and wholesome food, whether stewed, roasted, baked,      or boiled; and I make no doubt that it will equally serve in a fricasie, or a ragoust…the [infants] may be offered in sale to the persons of quality and fortune, through the kingdom, always advising the mother to let them suck plentifully in the last month, so as to render them plump, and fat for a good table. A child will make two dishes at an entertainment for friends, and when the family dines alone, the fore or hind quarter will make a reasonable dish, and seasoned with a little pepper or salt, will be very good boiled on the fourth day, especially in winter… I grant this food will be somewhat dear, and therefore very proper for landlords, who, as they have already devoured most of the parents, seem to have the best title to the children.

I have quoted so extensively from Swift because his satire is so cutting and so well-done, but also because his words remind me that today we have people who call themselves family planning experts whose true vocation is encouraging the murder of unborn children and, as we have learned, even children brought into the world alive.

Alisa Laport Snow, a lobbyist for Florida’s Alliance of Planned Parenthood Affiliates, told all the world in a Florida legislative hearing the other day that the matter of whether to snuff out the life of the unfortunate child who survives an initial attempt at murder through abortion (and we are talking obviously of late-term abortions) is no business of the State, but is one to be decided strictly between the so-called mother and her so-called physician. The inescapable conclusion is that not only does the infant have no rights when trapped inside the uterus, but none either if it manages to escape. And I would remind you that this is exactly the same position taken in the Illinois State Legislature by the bonehead now adorning the office of the Presidency.

abortionThis contemptible position raises so many questions that one hardly knows where to stop. A friend of mine and I were discussing those questions only yesterday: can you wait until the child is entering grade-school to decide that you don’t want him and then offer him the Kool-Aid? How about teenagers, a group almost every parent can agree is the very worst in terms of cuddliness, joy-giving and manners? A quick blow to the back of the head will put an end to their smart-alec ways, their drain on the family treasury, and their dirty rooms. And when one is facing the expense of sending Junior to college, or he plans to marry the wrong girl, is it too late to fix the problem or will a quick jerk of the head to the left or right be an acceptable solution?

Tell us, please, at what age does life start? Because it is entirely logical, starting from the premise that life does not start at conception, to assume that the matter of when it does commence is entirely a matter of opinion or of choice. If you can say the first division of embryonic cells does not signify life, then you can say the nine-month fetus, or the live-born, or the grade-schooler or the teen is not really alive either. If it is all a matter of progressive legislation and cold calculation rather than scientific fact, I think we can logically accept that murder of our own children at any point while still under our control is not murder at all.

And as Swift mockingly proposed, we would be doing society in general and the parents in particular a very big favor by doing away with these social parasites, who contribute nothing and take a great deal. That is precisely what today’s leftist, progressive, self-satisfied murderers, the legitimate inheritors of Margaret Sanger’s racist theories and her Social Darwinism, want us to believe. And they are certainly not one whit better as human beings than she was or than allegedly progressive thinkers were in the time of Swift.

In fact, I propose that those who would extinguish the life of the innocent and helpless, in utero and ex utero,  are not living creatures at any age and exhibit not a single redeeming feature that would justify their continued existence. It is our duty (and our pleasure) to bring them to a merciful end via lethal injection or perhaps dismemberment, as they support doing to the unborn. What a boon for society their deaths would be!

 

 


The World is Too Much With Us

william wordsworthThe world is too much with us; late and soon,
Getting and spending, we lay waste our powers;
Little we see in Nature that is ours;
We have given our hearts away, a sordid boon!
This Sea that bares her bosom to the moon,
The winds that will be howling at all hours,
And are up-gathered now like sleeping flowers,
For this, for everything, we are out of tune;
It moves us not.–Great God! I’d rather be
A Pagan suckled in a creed outworn;
So might I, standing on this pleasant lea,
Have glimpses that would make me less forlorn;
Have sight of Proteus rising from the sea;
Or hear old Triton blow his wreathed horn.

William Wordsworth, The World is Too Much With Us, 1807

England’s Poet Laureate wrote his famous sonnet lamenting the state of his nation in 1807, in particular its growing materialism and the loss of something more valuable than all the world’s gold, something intangible, its soul.

When Wordsworth wrote his mournful and angry words, the wheel of the Industrial Revolution was just beginning its long slow turns, bringing changes both good and bad. I would venture that Wordsworth reacted strongly to the price of progress precisely because the changes were still so few and so visible and it was possible to make the connection between what was gained and what was lost. Today it is not a wheel, but a grindstone of technological innovation turning faster than the human mind can grasp and crushing our society beneath its relentless weight. But the changes it brings are so many and so varied that we find it impossible to see the bigger picture. We know what we gain, but can barely begin to assimilate all that we are losing in exchange for our daily miracles. And yet, if we cannot chronicle precisely this process, we can feel the cumulative result. We can feel that things are precariously off-center and sense a gaping emptiness under all the power and glitter and technical wizardry.

There are of course, excellent things that our modern technology brings to us, but for every good there is an evil. The development of life-extending devices and medications gives to us much longer life-spans than those living a century ago. It allows us the hope that we will be around to see not only our children grow to maturity, but their children and, perhaps, their grandchildren. But if we now have some expectation of a reasonably long life, medical technology has failed to give us the things that made our younger years so enjoyable — vigor and optimism and a feeling of well-being. How lucky the few who remain robust, mentally alert and happy until the day they meet their Maker. Most of us are more likely to be among those for whom an extended life means years of loneliness and depression as our friends and loved ones pass on, leaving fewer and fewer who share our memories. And the miracles of our mobile society that have allowed the young to go wherever they want to find their own place and follow their dreams have largely destroyed the family that once welcomed elders as valuable members with something to offer and something to teach. Now the old are far more likely to be relegated to assisted living facilities where the major topic of conversation is the day’s catalog of aches, pains, and incapacity that are only partially alleviated by the wonder drugs.

The internet, that vast and mysterious world, allows millions of us to share our thoughts on the meaning of our lives and the state of our world, to rally against injustice or for a cause, and to make our voices heard by those who would ignore us. But it also opens a million doors to pornographers, murderers, child molesters, smugglers of human beings and aspiring terrorists who secretly communicate in real time to spread their spiritual rot. The jets that whisk us from one continent to another to enjoy the wonders of the world’s varied cultures also transport germs and diseases, paving the way to global plague that could one day destroy millions of human beings in a short space of time.

And advanced audiovisual  communication in high-def and 3-D, ipods and ipads and GameBoys and televisions and the big screen have livened us up quite a bit. It keeps us mesmerized, staves off boredom and gives instant access to information and news. But for all the positive it brings, at the same time it has created untold woe. People are now glued to their tv sets, over-identifying with made-up characters living make-believe lives and facing issues that most of us will never know. We have become a population of the unmoving, unhealthy, and largely unthinking.

The young are at particular risk from the messages conveyed through the pervasive media. They are under virtual mind-control by an infotainment complex that bombards them with images of everything they don’t need to know and shouldn’t be exposed to or pushed toward: high-speed car chases, drug use, and sex and murder in every imaginable form. If the media moguls and their creative artists aren’t filling kids’ heads with images of mayhem or behavior best not promoted among our most impressionable and most vulnerable, they are conveying their own peculiar political and social messages, embedding them in everything from cartoons to tv series starring young role models that the young can identify with.

Most young people will move on with their lives unscarred (but not uninfluenced). Unfortunately, the chances are much higher now than at any other time in our history that some percentage of youths, fueled by actual mental illness or just deep anger and confusion, will be moved to act out the exciting fantasies offered by the panderers of dysfunction. These are the children of a new, but not a better society: no more Mom or even Dad at home to oversee their upbringing and keep an eye on undesirable developments. Homes where the father often is missing altogether, either because the mother, spurred by a culture that encourages it, has opted to have her children out of wedlock, or because the father, freed from obligation by easy divorce, has fled the coop. The single parent may be working longer hours to support the family, or just because they are chasing a career; or they may be living off the state handout, ignoring their children’s needs and quite inadvertantly teaching them a lesson — that there is no such thing as personal responsibilty.

Just as Wordsworth, many of us are dismayed by the price we are paying for technology. Today it has brought us far too closely together with every other corner of the earth, with every other human being no matter how base a character, with ideas good and evil, with news relevant or useless, inspiring or depressing. It is a rapidly evolving technology that makes it possible for those over whom we have no control to beam their ideas and their fantasies into our most private spaces, day and night. Technology is making it easy for the rest of us to abdicate responsibility for the ideas that create a society or destroy it, to substitute amusement for thought, and to fall victim to the desires and aims of those who control the technology.

And so today we can truly say that the world is too much with us. We cannot escape it. Is there a defense? I suppose there is one, and that is to turn the technology to our own purposes. Let us try to use whatever technological means available to proselytize our own concepts and to defend against the ideas that harm us and our future generations.

If the world is too much with us, let us try to turn the tables and be too much with the world.

 

This blog was linked at Nebraska Energy Observer — thank you!

 


Land of the Freak, Home of the Depraved

what am I

 

The Wall Street Journal of March 4 writes of a new law in the People’s Republic of Massachussetts that foists on normal girls and boys the obligation to go wee-wee in the same bathroom or undress in the same locker room as someone of the other sex who says a resounding NO to its genitalia.  If I were a sexual predator I would energetically insist that I was what I wasn’t just for the chance to hang around and watch my prey at their most vulnerable — sitting on the can or bending over to pick up their clothes. Whoops, I guess that wouldn’t be possible, since the law also says that transgender feelings must be sincerely held. I bet somebody is already working on a “sincerometer” to accurately measure the genuineness of stated beliefs, otherwise there wouldn’t be any protection at all against perverts of ill intent. I say that because the law also stipulates, in case anybody gets any ideas, that objecting to the presence of Other in the bathroom or locker room is not worthy of consideration and under no circumstances trumps the rights of Other.

cross dressersIt seems to me that the law was enacted merely to satisfy the smug superiority of  social nihilists in the People’s Republic, as it will infringe the rights of 99.5 percent of humans currently resident in that workers’ paradise to please and encourage the other 0.5 percent. Such an impression is bolstered by the news that there was little to no evidence of “widespread discrimination” against such seriously confused persons. Hence, like modern American warfare, the law assumes a preemptive character, taking out non-existent offenders in advance of any misstep. The law is an official raspberry to those who feel discomfited, embarrassed, disgusted or angry about having to go way beyond tolerance to an affirmative embrace of deviancy. The dinosaurs who object to the law should be grateful that the day of witch trials is over, as the same sick minds that brought us Salem continue their campaign to terrorize the public — only today it is the witches taking a torch to everybody else.

The law in question runs to 11 pages, which makes it about 11 pages too long. Here is a taste of what its drafters have stuffed it with:

… [the law allows] transgendered and gender-questioning students to use the bathrooms of their choice or to play on sports teams that correspond to the gender with which they identify. Schools are directed to eliminate gender-based clothing … and gender-based activities…

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323884304578328833607775790.html?mod=opinion_newsreel

transgenderOn the face of it, this sounds like the kind of mind-twisting absurdity we’ve come to expect from the far left. On the other hand…perhaps this law is just a tad ahead of its time. Champions of sexual deviancy in states like California, New York, Massachussetts and Illinois have embarked on a program of brainwashing for pre-schoolers that will ensure that the perverts have a chance to shape children’s minds and sexuality before the parents can get in there and ruin everything. In fact, it is misleading to call what they do sex education. It really is sex-reeducation or sex-molding. While most little kids are still pulling down their panties and wondering what all that stuff is, the freaks at the blackboard are advising them not to be fooled by appearances. In fact, today our teachers of miniscule IQ and zero knowledge are doing their best to churn out gender-questioners in ever larger numbers. And thank God for the pedagogical corrupters, because otherwise those little kids would never have access to such creepy ideas outside of Sesame Street, HBO and a host of other media productions. Thanks to those brave souls willing to offer the public service of helping our kids identify their real sex or possibly sexes, we could be facing a huge future wave of sexual deviancy. But that isn’t right, is it? Because by then the real deviants will be the poor, benighted kids (the recalcitrantly untransgendered) who think their genitals correspond to their sex. It is they who will need the special protection and special schools proposed by the Massachussetts legislation to protect them from discrimination.

What a swell place America has become, where the people who should be lined up against a wall and shot or locked up in jails or sent off to some desert island where they can freely and without impediment molest one another are instead making our laws, educating our children and choosing our president. A place where the only things important to our younger generations are free stuff, unlimited sex, preferably on tape so their Facebook pals can enjoy it along with them, and the color of one’s skin, as long as it isn’t white.

Home schooling never looked so good as it does in this Age of Treason.

One last word: if anybody reading this is offended by it — tough luck.

 

 

 

 


Teachers R Sick

Lolita 2First, allow me to clarify: not all teachers r sick. And to all those decent, hard-working teachers who aren’t trying to indoctrinate our children in marxist ideology or seduce them, thank you.

But it seems a lot of teachers are not worth the powder to blow them to hell. Their number includes the thousands and thousands of Marxist or Maoist or Trotskyite (and now we can add Obamist) pedagogues who want to brainwash our kids. Their ranks also include another sub-stratum of teachers: the satyrs and satyrettes that lurk in the hallways and classrooms, waiting for a chance to satisfy their need for attention and their libidinous urges with their young charges.

I’ve posted under Good Reads on this site an article from the Daily Caller about one such educator with an infantile personality and not an ounce of decency or morality. This 23-year old slut — that’s what we used to call women like her — used her Twitter account to boast about her nudity, her pot-smoking and her drinking. Apparently she was tweeting to students, since she wrote that one of them had called her “McCutie” and teasingly warned him that he was still jailbait. Still jailbait. Doesn’t that sound like a promise? Once you hit 18, here I am, babydoll. Would that somebody would arrest this woman and haul her off to jail. She  denied that she was the one behind the tweets (yawn)– it was really all the work of a friend of hers. Ms. McCutie is now on administrative leave, but I’m not holding my breath waiting for her to be fired. I’ll bet the teacher’s union is going to bat for her.

letourneauI can’t even keep track anymore of the deviants who are populating the teachers’ lounges in our public schools. It used to be the rare exception for teachers to engage in sexual congress with the students put into their hands by unsuspecting parents, but it seems that the number of sexual predators in our schools is growing by leaps and bounds. Remember Mary Kay LeTourneau, the 30-something woman who fell in love with a 12-year old and had a baby by him? Even though she was married with a family already? This seriously warped woman claims she looked into that boy’s eyes and saw her soulmate. Icky-poo. She went to prison for a stint and then that stupid kid married her when she got out. I wonder how happy that marriage is today (is Mary Kay longing for someone a bit younger?) and I wonder what the offspring of that bizaare coupling think of their mother. But at least in her case she was convinced that she “loved” the little boy. In most of the cases involving female predators, the entire business is about only one thing: showing how cool and desirable the teacher is. Pitiful, isn’t it? As if drawing whistles and hoots from horny adolescents is an accomplishment or speaks of their sexual prowess. These moral illiterates occupy their spare time hanging out in the make-believe world of the “social media,” posting provocative photos and sexual innuendo — no, I don’t think such societal slimebuckets do innuendo, more like cheap pornography.

I know immoral teachers are nothing new. When I was a high school senior in 1966, three of the teachers were having affairs with (or engaging in statutory rape of) students. In one case, the male chemistry teacher was carousing with his Lolita on the night his wife gave birth to their first child. Another lecher was the soft-spoken, charming (married) English teacher. And the third child molester was a woman, a 21-year old who developed a crush on a student and threw all caution to the wind. Her flagrant flirtation in front of the class led to her loss of authority and respect, which led to a complete breakdown of order in the classroom. The other boys openly ridiculed her, shouting out such things as “she’s got the hots for you!” To which insults the woman would blush and titter. This teacher cast the object of her affection as lead in a school musical even though the fellow couldn’t sing, act or dance. Ain’t love crazy? Of the three teachers, only the woman was fired and she was fired because she lacked the common sense to keep her transgressions in the realm of rumor and not proven fact. After she drove the “lead actor” home from rehearsal several nights in a row, some of the students decided to follow them. It turned out she was taking him home — to her’s, not his. The principal received a written report of the event and that was the end of the temptress’s teaching career. Her male colleagues, who were more circumspect (unlike the girls they were boffing), went unpunished.

lolita 1I would like to think that these criminally-stupid and irresponsible teachers are an anomaly, outside the pale, but I don’t. I think these abuses have become almost ho-hum to a public inured to sexual outrage and perversion by the steady stream of pornography masquerading as art from the world of entertainment. Today our children are immersed in corrupting sexual messages and images from kindergarden on, and then some of them go on to become teachers. They pay the corruption forward, to lift a phrase from our leftist pals.

Here are snippets from the Web about some of these cases:

Kinsley Wentzky, 34, a married South Carolina teacher was arrested on suspicion of having a sexual affair with a 17-year-old student at her home … she has been charged with sexual battery;
Elyse Cromwell, a 27-year-old New Jersey teacher, is accused of having sex with a 14-year-old student multiple times;
Jennelin Garcia-Calle, 28, a New Jersey teacher has been arrested and accused of having sex with a student …  she has been charged with sexual assault;
Abbie Jane Swogger, [a] teacher’s aide at Highlands Senior High School in Harrison, Pa., was arrested after renting a hotel room where police found beer, marijuana, an  open condom wrapper and at least four teenage girls and boys, including several  of her 15-year-old son’s friends;
Abigail Holloway, 33, [a] former gym teacher at a Christian prep school in  Sunnyvale, Calif., was arrested on charges stemming from an alleged  sexual relationship with a female student;
Adrienne Hockett [is] accused of having sex with a 16-year-old special-needs student in a Houston apartment she rented for the get-togethers … the boy has testified the pair would “have sex, drink beer and smoke weed”;
Tonya Flink, 39, had sexual relationships with at least four of her students, saying to one that she liked “young Hispanic kids” … [the] student told investigators that the relationship with the 39-year-old woman began when she stayed after school to help him with homework and evolved into sexual encounters where they did “everything you could imagine”;
Matthew Mickey Meckley, of Dover Township, is accused of having a sexual relationship with a student from May to June 2011. He is currently on leave from his teaching position…the charge he faces is a misdemeanor;
DaNita Wilson, a south Georgia high school teacher, is free on bond after being arrested for allegedly having sex with at least seven students;
Adrienne Laflamme, 60, science teacher at the Brevard County Juvenile Detention Center in Cocoa, Fla.,  was arrested for having sexual relations with an inmate-student, 17, within days of his release … the boy’s mother said the teacher  regularly picked him up from their home to have sex at her own residence … Laflamme had sex with the student at least 15 times, including one threesome  with a 14-year-old boy.
Okay, that last one is so revolting an image that I won’t list anymore. But the one thing that jumps out at me is that almost all the cases I found on the web involve female teachers — and that seems a little skewed. Or maybe it’s just another of the many benefits America is enjoying from the sexual revolution. Maybe people think it’s worse for a woman to seduce a child than for a man to do the same, but whatever the reason, it is the women who are drawing the most attention (and perhaps getting the most punishment). And we must assume that the cases we learn of are only the tip of the iceberg.
This is what parents get for their money these days: incompetent, immature, narcissistic, over-sexed teachers of no talent and no brains and no compunction about corrupting minors. For such teachers, it is all about themselves. It’s just part of the moral decay in our country and the prevailing attitude that “if it feels good, do it.”

But that’s just fine by the bozos running our country. As they work at a break-neck pace to reconfigure our country, our society and our lives, they need to keep the masses dumbed down and happy. What that means so far is all the sex you want, drugs to enhance your experience, and free birth control and abortion. If that doesn’t keep them from worrying about where the country is going, nothing will.