B. U. G. S.

Our established religion of Political Correctess has a docrtine of infallible that makes Papal Infallible look like minor league stuff.

Liberals have stopped talking about many of their silliest declarations, but they NEVER admit that thoss doctrines were dead wrong. They just don’t discuss them any more, and any conservative who wants to be on national media never reminds them of their nuttsiest statements.

A conservative who remembers what liberals once required people to believe to get a college profesaorship. Liberal dogma that could not be denied on campus has been quietly forgotten.

If liberals were reminded of their track record they would laughed off the public airways.

So any conservative who reminds liberals of their track record loses his respectability and his livelihood.

A professor who does that loses his livelihood. The token conservatives on campus are as carefully respectable as media conservative spokemen.

One example of PS Doctrinal Infallibilty appears inteh New York Times and then in all the local newspapers belonging to national syndicates regularly. It goes like this:

“Crime has dropped dramatically, BUT the prison population keeps rising.”

This shows that the idea that punishment is a cure for crime is wrong.

What if New York Times in 1950 said, “Deaths from infectious diseases have dropped dramatically, BUT the use of pennicilin keep rising.”

Even a lot of the brain-dead reader/worshippers of the New York Times would have laughed at that.

No respectable conservative would have, of course.

Obviously the growing rate of incarceration is the REASON crime is dropping.

Years ago some of us noticed that most crimes were committed by career criminals. When a store was robbed or a child murdered, the news story would recite the violent acts the perpetrator had commited previously.

So we said, “Lock the career criminals up and throw away the key.”

Liberals denounced locing them away and throwing away the key as “simplistic.” They said that the only way to reduce crime was “to get at the root causes of crime.” They said that the cure for crime was the same one Political Correctness has for ALL social problems” more expensive programs planned by professors.

Professors recommended this so the New York Times accepted it without question. “Getting to the root causes of crime” was the doctrine, and any professor who disagreed put his job in danger.

But there is on consistent theme here. Political Correctness, as backed solidly by professors, ALWAYS demands that the policy adopted be the produce of professors and give power to the professors.

So the New York Times and all its little mental satelites insist that if you “get to the root causes of crime,” both crime and the number of prisoners will decrease. The fact that you dealing with crime by punishment obviously WORKS means nothing to them

As the Pope said about Galileo, heretics CANNOT be right, no matter what the facts are.

This is exactly like an