Two weeks along, after her tidy, button down-style railroading by the City Council from a city commission for daring to make a politically incorrect statement, these should be the final words about Dee Seehusen.
After one of the two new gay members of the School Board announced his sexual preference — and hers, too — eight weeks ago, on Election Night, after the polls had closed, a nasty kerfuffle was triggered by virgin-pure comments subsequently uttered by Ms. Seehusen.
She wondered, innocently, why neither had acknowledged his or her sexual preference before the voters made their choices.
That is a creampuff of a question, said one of the candidates.
It was not important, he added.
As the father of two gay sons, I will tell you that response is steaming with disingenuity.
Sexual preference is the most important social question in contemporary America.
The Left says so.
The Left, which divides all Americans by class, by gender, by race, by pocketbook and most of all, by sexual preference, has demanded that their handmaidens in the media place the gay lifestyle at the top of the agenda.
And so, to quote God, it was.
Neither candidate mentioned his or her sexual preferences for a common-sense reason:
Chances are one or both would not have been elected.
Culver City is not Berkeley or Santa Monica, the only two cities I can think of where a gay person would dare mention his status.
The Left, which typically chooses emotion over rationality because it is dominated by anti-scholarly rabblerousers, has made support of gayness a litmus test.
If I were gay, I would have conducted my campaign exactly the way the two successful gay candidates did: Create a gulf between you and your gay preferences of at least five miles.
Why They Kept Mum
Only a fool would have waved a flag about his gayness, and the Board members ain’t no fools.
The question that will close the discussion is:
If sexual preference were, as you claim, of less significance than the color of your sox, why did you mention it at all?
This question, I assure you, will not be answered.
When I address an audience, I almost never disclose the shade of my sox or my sexual preference.
The Left has suffused the inviolable doctrine of political correctness with the harshest penalty available in America without using a weapon — damnation for life into the darkness.
They also have conditioned most American politicians to mouth the lines of political correctness they have been spoonfed, daily, by the Left-dominated media.
Bravely surrounded by voluble human cannons determined to turn any disagreeing souls into cannon fodder, the humorless, chronically insecure Left is celebrating the culmination of a decades-long, laser-focused campaign to corrupt our language.
They should rejoice. At least for now, they have won a huge victory.
Try calling a special needs child “crippled.” If there is a left-winger within earshot, he may flatten you.
When you publish your own dictionary, as the Left has, and maintain airtight control of America’s most influential media outlets, baby, you have earned the right to rejoice.
What is next? you ask.
After Democratic Sen. Max Baucus gave a slurred, drunken speech to colleagues this morning, I presume his lefty friends hereafter will forbid us to call the drunken bum a drunken bum. He is, more tastefully, a lover of libations.
Shall we drink a toast to the latest clumsy, dishonest corruption of our language?
