WhatFinger


Cyberbullying, bullying prevention plans

Bullies to tackle bullies



In Tuesday morning’s Boston Herald, “Pols vow to get tough on bullies”. Granted, we live in a different day, complete with non-judgmentalism, thus a lack of conscience or shame. But who are politicians to talk when it comes to addressing the problem of bullying?

Support Canada Free Press


The Herald article cites numerous, horrific instances of bullying. Things as children we’d never think of doing to another human being, but when it comes to succumbing to the “do something”, knee-jerk mentality that is election year politics, is this a case of the wolves minding the hen house?
“This is an urgent situation. I had one case where young boy was set on fire at another kid’s home," said state Rep. Paul Donato (D-Medford), co-sponsor of new anti-bullying legislation. "This has got to be addressed, and it’s got to be addressed quickly." Donato’s bill would force school districts to create bullying prevention plans and guidelines for punishing students who torment their peers. It would also require administrators to focus on increasing instances of “cyberbullying” in which students use text messages and online images to harass and humiliate their classmates.
So, “Donato’s bill would force…. It would require….” Is this not bullying? Shouldn’t the state representative’s quotes end with a verbal and not implied “or else”? When I was a child in second grade, I was hassled by the class bully. I guess my days as a persuasive writer began when I began to master the art of talking him out of the idea of whuppin’ my butt. I got real good at it. Then again, there were no text messages in those days, complete with promises that he’d find me again tomorrow. But as we watch the election cycles evolve every two years, we see bullying rise to an art form by politicians, as well as goading from paid pundits who justify and sometimes applaud the manner (and success) in which one candidate bullies another. Politicians don’t just bully each other. They bully us too, and easier. They dictate just how much money they’ll take from our wallets every week. They hold our businesses hostage with proposed fines and regulations, regardless how they may affect the bottom line. They threaten us with their versions of behavior modification, while using the power of their offices to insulate themselves from the very rules they impose on us. How many police officers have pulled over a drunk and/or speeding politician, only to be asked “Do you know who I am?” While in the Navy (this is a true story), our carrier paid a port visit to the Philippines within a week of the Ferdinand Marcos-Corazon Aquino election in the late 80’s. We were told not to talk politics while on liberty. This election had the potential to be quite explosive, and it was wise to stay out of it. I heard stories about people who spoke out against Marcos (or campaigned for Aquino) disappearing in the dead of night. I guess it would be accurate to assume they didn’t play games in Philippine politics. But those kinds of things surely don’t happen here in America, right? Did you know there are places where American citizens, voters, are actually afraid to vote against an incumbent? I always thought your vote was a private matter once in the booth. Apparently, that’s not the case. Somehow politicians can find out who voted for them, and who had the nerve to vote against. With that, there is genuine fear in some to vote against an incumbent, regardless if it’s in their best interest or not. And if politicians can bully, why stop there? According to a website comment,
Funny thing is most of the politicians have the children who are most spoiled and most likely the ones doing the bullying. They wont admit they're bad parents so it wont be hard for the lobbyist to get attention to this. That’s what politicians love. A way to put the blame off themselves.
Most politicians have great kids. They understand the high-visibility position they’re in, and act accordingly. But if a politician is a conceited, no-conscience bully, just what do you think their kids are like? And should their kids decide to run for the seat after their parent retires from office, would voters fear voting against that punk (or punkette)? There are two reasons why possible criminal penalties against bullying are nowhere to be found in the Herald article. ONE. Bullying, until you cross that fine line into “terrorist threats”, is constitutionally protected free speech, like it or not. Proving intent is the issue. Not that he would, but John McCain could say he’s going to kick Hillary or Obama’s #. Now, he obviously would mean that in an electoral, symbolic sense. The Secret Service may raise an eyebrow, but no one would really take McCain literally. If Hillary started swinging during debates, that would be another thing. TWO. If bullying were somehow outlawed, how would politicians exempt themselves from such rules? Any law they passed would have some kind of misdemeanor or criminal penalty attached. There are few elected officials that would purposefully write a law that could ensnare them for just being who they are. If bullying legislation is written, it will only target our kids and us. The bullies who write that legislation will be absolved of all personal responsibility as to not infringe on their right of free speech. Either way, we’ll still have reason to fear the very people who should be at the center of the bullying controversy. Bullying, when kids do it, is a bad thing. Bullying, when the elected do it, is called “politics as usual”.


View Comments

Bob Parks -- Bio and Archives

Bob Parks is a is a member/writer of the National Advisory Council of Project 21. Bob’s websites are Black & Right and youtube.com/BlackAndRight


Sponsored