One of my pet peeves is politics is the idea that you can’t be tough on a woman in a debate or candidate forum. I’ve seen questions and commentary for years where people go after men for being too tough on a woman during a debate, in an attack ad etc etc etc.

This just drives me nuts. If a person is competing for a political position, they are competing for a position, not as a “man” or a “woman” but as a citizen. I expect any candidate running for public office to be able to take it. This isn’t beanbag, a public office is a public trust and nobody is going to hold your hand when the going gets rough.

You can either serve in the office or not, you can either take the heat or you can not and if you can’t then do something else.

(BTW the quote above is from an issue of the Justice League from the 80’s. There was a character called Booster Gold who was from the future. During one of the fights of heroes vs villains, a female villain is cornered by Booster Gold, strikes a very feminine pose and asks: “You wouldn’t hit a woman would you?” He says, well you see… the next panel is the word BAM and the third panel is him giving that explanation in the title to the now floored villain who groggily answers: “Thanks for explaining that to me.”)

Actually I don’t wonder at all. It has broken through to the MSM and this is going to have a bigger effect on the Arizona immigration story than any things Barkley or Smith or Webber might say. If I was leading the political charge in favor of the Arizona law I’d call up that principal to get his position. Live oak high school has already felt the need to put a message on their site over the uproar.

Still waiting to see if they will advocate for Free NBA admission for all, and a rule prohibiting kicking out people who sneak in. I also haven’t heard back from the Sun’s publicity people yet.

I think the NBA and MLB are really risking themselves on this in terms of bottom lines. There are simply too many choices out there and it’s too tight an economy to be going against your customer base.

CNN is asking people to comment on this. I’d consider going here to do so.

The latest Fox new poll on the subject shows the public believes Arizona acted correctly by 61% to 27%. By 64%-15% They believe the law should be given a chance rather than trying to stop it. This is going to backfire so huge on these guys it’s not funny, at 64% say to see how it works while only 15% say they should stop it.

NBA get a clue.

Update: Called the Live Oak High School and attempted to get the principal’s office or the switchboard to request an interview. They aren’t answering the phone and all the mailboxes are full. What a surprise!

Update 2: Apparently the Mexican student’s walked out of school yesterday marching on the district “demanding respect“:

The group – mostly high school students – walked out of school this morning after the story of four students who were sent home because they wore American flag T-shirts went viral on TV and online. Many wear red, white and green and two large Mexico flags can be seen at the front of the line.

The students say they want people to know they’re proud of their heritage and they believe wearing red, white and blue on Cinco de Mayo is disrespectful.

Many of the students are from Live Oak High School, who left school around 11 a.m. this morning and decided to march to the school district headquarters just north of Tennant Avenue. When they arrived, they were told to leave.

That’s going to look great on the evening news. I wonder what democrats running for election around the country have to say about this issue and about the Mexican American students walking out of school and marching. Won’t it be fun to find out?

…because the potential suit from this case is going to be the easiest money they will ever earn:

Galli says he and his friends were sitting at a table during brunch break when the Vice Principal asked two of the boys to remove American flag bandannas that they wearing on their heads and for the others to turn their American flag t-shirts inside-out. When they refused, the boys were ordered to go to the principal’s office.

“They said we could wear it on any other day, but today is sensitive to Mexican Americans because it’s supposed to be their holiday so we were not allowed to wear it today,” Daniel Galli said.

The boys said the administrators called their t-shirts “incendiary” that would lead to fights on campus.

“They said if we tried to go back to class with our shirts not taken off, they said it was defiance and we would get suspended,” Dominic Maciel, Galli’s friend, said.

Hey lets ask the NBA if they back this school district too.

Via Sissy Willis on Twitter.

Update: Michelle Malkin and Zombie pick up the story. Zombie has a particularly salient point concerning “racism”:

Even worse, fearing violence from Hispanic students, the administrators solve the crisis by banishing the “offensive” items, rather than warning students that any violence will be severely punished. In other words, the racist administrators insultingly assumed that their Hispanic students would erupt in violence at the sight of an American flag, and the only way to prevent this is to cower at the presumptive violence and preemptively cave in to the mob’s demands that American flags be banned from campus.

That is racism. Apparently the administrators consider their Mexican students so violent, so unable to control themselves that it was necessary to remove American flags from the student minority. Astounding!

…is considered offensive by a local Blogger:

Fitchburg Massachusetts:

The Massachusetts state commission on Indian Affairs is being described as “horrifically offensive” by local blogger DaTechGuy and he suggests that it be changed.

The local Blogger fresh of his visit to CPAC expressed his views after reading this Fox 25 story this morning where the commission decided that the Massachusetts State Seal was “patently offensive” and suggested to replace it.

The Blogger deplored the ignorance of the state commission which seems to be unaware that the seal was first introduced in 1780 by John Hancock long after local Indian wars were over. It also ignores that the sword represents the the motto at the bottom “By the sword we seek peace, but peace only under liberty”.

The Blogger suggests that given the timing of it’s introduction (1775) by the provincial congress it clearly refers to the battle with the English from who we obtained independence and that the general court’s official adoption of the seal in 1885 does not represent any attack or offense on the American Indian.

The blogger deplored the attempt by the commission to find offense where none existed and the attempt to re-write the history of the state for the sake of a politically correct agenda. Said blogger suggests that instead they focus on actual Indian issues concerning land and/or conditions rather than “make work” changes to the sake of their own self worth.

Material from the web site NetState was used for this blog post.

About 50 years ago CBS ruled the roost with a series of shows that appealed to rural audiences such as Petticoat Junction, ,Beverly Hillbillies, Mayberry R.F.D., and Hogan’s Heroes. Around 1971 these shows were canceled in what was called the Rural purge. They were all still popular, all still successful but generally paned by urban critics.

These shows continue to make money in syndication.

Fast forward to 2009 and it looks like comedy central has decided CBS had a point:

Achmed the Dead Terrorist has been all but buried on Comedy Central. Press representatives for the network said on Tuesday that its hit series featuring that contentious puppet — not to mention Jeff Dunham, the man with a hand up his back — will not be picked up for a second season, confirming a report that appeared in The Hollywood Reporter.

Well it isn’t like the old days with only three networks, a specialty network like comedy central has to cater to the shows that bring in the absolute highest ratings not just red state stuff…oh wait:

The decision comes as a bit of a surprise given that “Jeff Dunham’s Very Special Christmas Special,” a performance shown on Comedy Central in 2008, is that channel’s most-viewed broadcast ever, drawing 6.6 million viewers, and the premiere of “The Jeff Dunham Show” was watched by 5.3 million viewers.

Well ok it had millions of viewers a whole lot more than the entire MSNBC lineup, but it’s not as if it was in response to the decisions of urban critics…oh wait again:

A widely read post on the Web site videogum.com declared, “‘The Jeff Dunham Show’ Is the Worst Thing in the Entire World.” In The New York Times, Neil Genzlinger wrote, “Offensiveness is a mutable thing, especially on television, where everything is interchangeable: a Lewis Black joke could be a Jay Leno joke could be a Jeff Dunham joke.”

So bottom line a niche network chooses to cancel a show that still brought in millions of viewers after critics pan it.

I guess comedy central isn’t immune to PC.

Update: Welcome Salon readers, I haven’t quite figured out what this post has to do with the article that linked me but welcome just the same. Feel free to check out my weekend Amazon Reviews. Read a Massachusetts Republican’s take on the Brown Coakley race. Check out my Dr. Who End of Time rant and read my poetic answer to Al Gore.

The Jawa Report gives us an interesting postscript to the Rifqa Bary story:

In a stunning development in the ongoing legal saga of Muslim-turned-Christian convert Rifqa Bary, the parents’ attorney, Omar Tarazi, filed a motion with the Franklin County courts last week moving to ban on all Christmas cards being sent to Rifqa through her attorneys, and demanding the seizure from her of all Christmas cards that she might have already received. And yet her parents still make representations to the media that they intend to honor and respect her Christian faith, while their attorney files sealed motions stating that Christmas cards are “dangerous to her health and safety”.

Am I surprised, yes and no. Yes I’m surprised that Jawa scooped Atlas on this and no I’m not the least bit surprised by CAIR’s actions. They are Islamists in sheep’s clothing. And that clothing is only convincing to those who want to believe.