I normally try to stay focused on a singular topic in my column, but this one will be different. Honestly, this may be the start of a new venture. Perhaps on Fridays I'll just start doing what I'm doing today – commenting on a handful of things from the previous week that I just don't understand. Maybe it will be cathartic.
We'll see, but for now, here are a couple things I've been paying attention to that I just don't get.
1. Let's start in my home state capital of Indianapolis.
Actor, author, and outspoken Christian Kirk Cameron recently held a children's book reading at a branch of the Indianapolis Public Library. The event drew attention because Cameron had requested approval in response to numerous library readings of highly sexualized content that had been permitted. A bunch of people came to Cameron's reading, but the library immediately disputed the high attendance figures.
To be clear, all the pictures I've seen don't show anywhere near the 2,000 people that some supportive tweets have mentioned. I don't know if Cameron himself has said as much, but why do people feel it necessary to embellish reality when they know it's falsifiable? How does it help your cause? Even if there were 2,000, what does that prove? That there are a lot of Christians that appreciate what Cameron is doing? That there are several people that are disgusted by the antics of progressive "public libraries" across the country? That all goes without saying.
But even worse than that is the library snapping back like they're playing Alan Colmes to their patrons' Sean Hannity. Why? Why isn't this library bragging and boasting about high attendance? Why aren't they the ones embellishing the numbers? Why aren't they snapping pictures like crazy to post to social media and show that the local library is a happening place to be?!
Look, I've been unfortunate enough to be inside a public library when they've held one of their "special readings." It's awkward beyond belief because it's usually attended by three or four rather odd people, at best. You feel almost pressured to participate and listen because you just feel bad that they organized a big event and no one showed up because people just have better things to do in 2023 than listen to a 60-year-old lady read to them.
And it's not just public readings. In the age of the internet, libraries are desperate to get people to come in their doors. But the IPL is apparently far more invested in left-wing politics than celebrating a well-attended event. Why? Why must politics ruin everything?
2. Next, let's go to El Paso.
One of the things I love most about the week after Christmas through New Year's is the fact that I can turn on the TV or radio at any given moment and find a football game to watch or listen to. I love it.
So, of course, I was watching the Duke's Mayo Bowl where the Maryland Terrapins outlasted the NC State Wolfpack. I tuned in on TV for this one because the sponsor of the game requires the winning coach get doused with gallons of mayonnaise instead of Gatorade at the final whistle. Since I was watching it, I didn't hear the radio broadcast of the game where the NC State play-by-play announcer Gary Hahn began running down the scores of other games going on at the same time. One of those games was the Sun Bowl in El Paso, Texas. Here's what happened:
Okay, I'm not playing dumb, but am I missing something here? The announcer referenced the game in El Paso and in so doing made an offhand acknowledgement of El Paso's trouble with illegal immigrants flooding across the border. Is that not true? Is it not happening? There's no other comment or remark other than that right there. He didn't make fun of illegal immigrants or their plight. It was an acknowledgement of what that area is now known for, like saying, "Amongst all the lumberjacks there in the Pacific Northwest…" or "Amongst all the millionaires in Martha's Vineyard…" or "Amongst all the gang violence of Chicago…"
Was it a necessary comment? No. Was it offensive? I'm trying to understand how, and to whom. We all know illegal immigration is a problem there. Are we supposed to just pretend otherwise? And if so, why? How does that help anything? How does suspending this guy help anything? If it's actually offensive to refer to illegal immigrants as illegal immigrants, then why blow this story up nationally so that more people hear the offensive words? A million more people have heard it now because someone decided to make this an issue. Why do we do that?
Any help on any of the aforementioned perplexities would be greatly appreciated.
