It's for The Children™:

Boxer Seeks to Ratify U.N. Treaty That May Erode U.S. Rights

[off]No problemo', as long as the parents are no longer fiscally/legally responsible for their children's actions. The Left is really showing their true identity, which might make all the damage they do (till the mid-terms) worth it in the end.

I hope such a law won't apply to tummy parasites! May the State forbid such an action!

Hopefully we can make it clear that children who are granted such protections from their knuckle-dragging parents must be of denunciation age (they must be able to point to class enemies and speak before a People's Tirbunal) and that they have at least attended one year of Pre-K.

Great, now I have vomit on my keyboard.

Darling Babs wrote:"Children deserve basic human rights ... and the convention protects children's rights by setting some standards here so that the most vulnerable people of society will be protected," Boxer said.

How I love Babs.

Let's note the technique. State something utterly uncontroversial, and then claim that what you want will get it done. Anyone who disagrees is therefore wicked.

Darling Babs wrote:...so that the most vulnerable people of society will be protected," Boxer said.

Does this mean that she's pro-life now?

Dr., <i>for shame</i>. You will be punished for this. I tremble when I think of the horrors that Pinkie will visit on you. She'll get out her old carborundum-tipped shovel with the graphite handle. Now that's anger. I've seen it and I still turn white.

The most vulnerable people are the girls who will be forced to wait <i>an entire 24 hours</i> before they can have the abortion. Getting a hotel room is considered, by Darling Babs, to be undue hardship.

[ off ]Quite literally true.

I, of course, meant pro-life of minorities and women, or, in other words, "the most vulnerable people of society." However, can I still have Pinkie beat me with her shovel? You promised! Please?!

Personally, Dr., I have been thinking. I think that the most vulnerable in our society are the leaders of the UAW. What would happen to them if the Big Three died? They would--gasp--have to get honest work and not live off forced union dues. They are vulnerable to the world economy. And to their own union policies.

Now I ask you. If you have led a union in making demands so exorbitant that no company can survive competition, doesn't that mean that you're just taking care of the brothers and sisters in the union? Right? And it's only fitting that you should be recompensed in the style that you like--Krug champagne an so forth--for your efforts, right?

And it's not <i>your</i> fault that you drove the companies into the ground, is it?

So you're the most vulnerable part of society.

I'm sure that Pinkie can work you in for a slight whack on the head. Underneath that smiling exterior is a leftist with the heart of a dyspeptic kimodo dragon.

I thought driving companies into the ground was the point. How else will we achieve social justice?

Dr., I charge you with excessive lucubration. To suggest that these people had as their aim driving the companies into the ground suggests a long-range strategy more than "get as much money as possible right now and tomorrow is another day. And someone else will handle it."

Really, Dr., I do worry about you. There are signs that the little gray cells are working between your ears. I do think that you ought to report to Jifi-Lobo(tm) for treatment. This week buy one, get another one of equal or lesser value for free.

The lesser-value lobotomy is performed by trainee lobotomists, who are just learning the skills to keep motor skills unimpaired.

Jifi-Lobo(tm) makes no claim about the continence of its clients after treatment.