Bullying = Gun Volence? No! Try Lack of Parent/Teacher Cooperation

Anyone who thinks this anti-gun movement is anything other than politically driven has been brainwashed into believing.

Go back a step to bullying being the cause of a lot of gun violence. Of course so does the lack of a father figure, a broken home, kids making fun of you or so perceived and being forced to eat oatmeal for breakfast.

Go back another step to what leads to bullying.  It has been around as long as I can remember.  Kids can be incredibly cruel to one another.  I experienced my share of it from older girls on my street. And I'm ashamed I dished out my own fair share. I have never been able to pin point why I have that particular flaw.

That being said, it was considered misbehaving.  When found out I was duely punished and believe me, my parents had a way of finding out.  When I was on the receiving end I talked with my Mom.  She always made me feel better about myself.  It does drain your confidence and hurts terribly.  She told me to just stay away from them.  In time I was able to do just that - with her support and encouragement.  She knew it wasn't easy for me. But she was always there for me.

On into school there were the usual cliques.  Mine was the band kids - most of us were nerdy at the time but we stuck together and did our thing.  Made music. Frankly, most of those oh so popular kids were popular for a reason.  Of course they were pretty or cheer leaders or football players but they were mostly pretty nice kids and they too had parents who cared.

There was, too, always the loner. They were strange to the rest of us and caused the teachers consternation. I never remember them being violent or unusually angry.  Just sullen.  But they coped and so did the rest of us.

The foundation for the majority of my high school acquaintances was sound parenting reinforced by teachers more than willing to work with both parent and student.  That's what the PTA  (Parent Teachers Association) was all about.  Do they still have them today?

I'm thinking if more emphasis was put on cooperation between teachers and parents in identifying problems and finding solutions for them, kids would be better served than after the fact prayer vigils and protests.

Nope.  Kids just aren't given the basics for coping.  Safe spaces, running to authority figures when someone looks at them funny or makes a snide remark doesn't cut it. A restructuring or elimination of time on social media would certainly help but again, that involves parenting and cooperation with teachers.

Don't have time to parent?  Don't have kids.  Don't know how?  Common sense is a good place to start.  My Mom didn't have a study guide either yet she and my Dad did a pretty darn good job.  They were both there for me, gave me a fair shot at an explanation for wrong doing while also listening to a teacher or another parent.

Isn't this the crux of it?  Back to the basics?  Guns are a last ditch cry of anguish, not the cause of it

A Bully Is A Bully - Indeed!

There is a lot wrong with the David Hogg scenario  when he shrugs off Laura Ingraham by stating, "A bully is a bully."

Now to put my thinking into some sort of perspective, I think most of the talking heads on TV, regardless of channel, are bullies.  They go to great length to tout their guests as being expert in this or that then proceed to talk over them if they dare try to defend an opinion other than the host's.

That being said, it seems to me young Mr. Hogg, in his new found fifteen minutes of fame, is no different.  He has a point of view, not shared by all of his classmates by any stretch, and woe be the ones who don't see things his way.

Somehow I cannot help but think many of his words have been written for him.  Much like the time the youngster took a "science project" to school that looked like a bomb than screamed "foul" when school authorities and the police took punitive action.

Mr. Hogg has taken the whole gun control argument beyond the edges of credibility because I believe his advocacy is new found and barely researched what-so-ever.  It's no more than a knee jerk reaction that lacks discussable substance.  Not that he wants to discuss anything of substance.  Only his point of view.

Even more disturbing than this barely likable young man spouting off to who ever will have him, what is wrong with Ingraham's advertisers that have acquiesced to his demands to drop their advertising from her program?  Please!

What is he, seventeen?  Maybe eighteen?  That his dictum's must be obeyed?  What's next? These personal assaults from the under informed really should stop while we still have some semblance of common sense in this country.  Small as it may be.  When the inmates start running the asylum we're in real trouble.  Not because of the inmates nearly as much as the administrators of said asylum for allowing themselves to be so intimidated.

FOX, stick by Ingraham.  Advertisers, stick by FOX just as you do CNN, MSNBC and all the others who are just as snarky, mean spirited, and often down right wrong.

Man, this country scares me these days. We worry about artificial intelligence taking over.  I wonder if it can be worse than the lack of intelligence we are now experiencing.

So Sue Me

Most of the time I take the side of the LGBT community but not this time, not in the Arizona case where they want to be protected against those who don't want to do business with them.  I also have a problem with those who hide behind their religion as an excuse.

 First of all, as a society we sue too much over too little.  So perhaps someone can enlighten me.  For something as important and as memory making as a wedding, why would anyone want someone who doesn't like them for whatever reason, want to force them into doing business.

If a group of, say, Hells Angels came into my place of business with their tattoos and piercings and leathers, I'd not be interested in doing business with them either.  No matter what my business may be. I would also not expect to be sued. Neither would have a thing to do with my religion either since I basically don't have one.  It would be personal preference and I should be allowed that choice. Otherwise I'm the one being discriminated against. Bullied, actually.

Bakers, florists.  It's not like there is a shortage of them.  Find someone else who would be happy to work with you.  You'll get a better end result or will you also sue if the job isn't up to your expectations?

The current administration is slowly but surely bringing gay marriage around to the point of nationalizing the legality of it under the faulty guise of Constitutionality no matter what individual states and the people within want. If you want acceptance, which with these actions makes it hard to swallow as is, stop with the frivolous suits.

I'd like to see the day everyone feels free to be themselves no matter what orientation that might be, orientation including race, religion and politics too. I'd like to see the day your community blends in so well no one would think of asking, "Are you?" Is it really necessary to shout out "I'm gay! Accept me or else!"

Do you really think your orientation has more to do with your acceptance than how you handle it? If so, how sad. And if so, it's time to understand its a large part of why others want to steer clear.  

The Hunk Vs. The Chunk

Ken Krause, a self-proclaimed anti-obesity crusader, got himself in hot water for daring to e-mail a La Crosse news anchor commenting on her long time  battle of the bulge, how it hadn't changed for years and how her current appearance certainly isn't a good role model for the young, especially girls. Plus the fact it was unhealthy.

My goodness, you'd have thought he'd posted photos of her like you often see of the lovelies who shop at Wal-Mart!  He was even invited to go on air and discuss his "hatred for people who are a bit overweight."

  Jennifer Livingston , the anchor, decided to read the e-mail on air and turn it into a case of bullying since this is Anti Bullying Month. Okay, I may be on the wrong side of this one, but I'm going to defend Mr. Krause.

Ms. Livingston complained that he didn't even know her nor what the causes of her obesity may be.  She claimed it was unfair to judge her on her appearance and that what he had done was akin to bullying.

Remember now, we have a First Lady who is so concerned about overweight youngsters she's changed the face of school menus to the point the kids are complaining about being hungry all the time.  The mayor of New York has legislated a limit on the size of soda you can buy.

Ms. Livingston is a public figure.  Forgive the pun.  In a business where image is everything.  As is often the case with smaller TV markets, the on air personalities don't present the level of professionalism in either demeanor nor dress you expect to see on the networks and bigger cable outlets.

I live in such a market and often have problems with how the locals appear on air.  Especially the women.  I wonder if some know they can get their hair trimmed and can comb it before going on.  I wonder if they know they can buy jackets that don't make them look like stuffed sausages or that a show of cleavage really isn't necessary to the news. Role models?  Hardly.  If anything it gives young people the idea there are no standards to which one should aspire.

Granted, I've never sent any of them e-mails on the subject though I've often thought about writing their management. Would that be considered bullying?  If I wrote them directly and the topic was anything other than weight would it be considered bullying?

Ms. Livingston reminds us she knows she's overweight and that she has struggled with it ever since she started having children.  So have a lot of others.  I too have a struggle with weight and have to be constantly vigilant to not let it get out of hand.  It's hard.  Darn hard.  But I do so because I care about how I look, how I appear to others, even if it's only the neighbors much less a television audience.

Frankly, I think all the venom directed at Mr. Krause by women commenters is misguided.  What he did is not bullying in my opinion.  If he had flooded her mailbox with diatribes and insults on the matter it would be different.  That doesn't appear to be the case.  If it is it certainly doesn't appear to be part of the story.

It seems to me she may be looking for acceptance and a sense of self she doesn't have because of her problem.  She was the topic of conversation on The Talk where she was given
a thumbs up by the hosts.  She's to get a shot on Ellen.  Wow.  That's one way to keep the issue alive isn't it?

I don't particularly enjoy looking at fat people.  I certainly don't enjoy being overweight myself.  Should I consider my doctor is bullying me when he says a few more pounds would be good?  Or if my husband says I have a ways to go before those slacks really fit well? I don't think so.

Obesity is a problem in this country.  A huge problem.  Again, pardon the pun.  A news anchor is a role model as is any other public figure.  Words pointing out she could be an even better one are not cruel, but fact.  If she has a health issue, state it.  But don't think for a minute Mr. Krause is the only one who finds her appearance less than desirable for a woman in her position. She's fortunate her management is willing to overlook it.

She chose to go public with the e-mail.  Why?  Nothing in it as I read it was cruel, certainly not bullying or what one reporter called bullying creep.  Is she consumed by guilt and looking for a scapegoat?  I don't know.  As she points out, none of us know her, but none of the commenters nor she herself know Mr. Krause either.

Is Ellen going to give him a shot to tell his side of it?  I doubt it.  I'm just thinking the delete key is well marked and the fat lady didn't have to sing. As for Mr. Krause trying to impart some constructive criticism, bully for him!