I’d like to say that I was surprised to read that the genocidal regime of Sudan is being elected to the Human Rights Council at the United Nations, but I can’t.  The U.N. has long been a debate club for dictators and murdering kleptocrats, and my shocked face is starting to cramp up after years of watching its shenanigans.  Honestly, the election of any bad actor to a place of power and prestige at the U.N. fails to surprise me anymore.

But really, what’s next?  If you’re going to put a government whose leader has been indicted for war crimes and crimes against humanity on the U.N. board that looks after human rights, where do you draw the line?

• Is Jerry Sandusky going to be given a high level position at UNICEF?
• Is the Lord’s Resistance Army going to be given a place at the table on the commission that is looking into the problem of child soldiers?
• Are the geniuses at the U.N going to put Bill Clinton and Larry Flint on a woman’s rights committee?
• Maybe Paul Helmke could be a voting member of the committee trying to draft the next small arms treaty?
• How about we get Michael Vick on the job to advise the animal welfare working group?
• You know, Ben Bernanke would make a perfect chairman for the fiscal reform commission.

If any of these questions offended you or you think I’m using hyperbole, congratulations, you’re doing it right.  All of these are indeed ridiculous and a bit offensive, but so is putting a dictator, who used gangs of men to ethnically cleanse his country through rape and murder, on a human rights commission.

Honestly, if the African states want to get one of their own on the human rights commission, then couldn’t they have come up with a better candidate?  Is there no regime on the entire continent with a decent human rights record, or at least doesn’t have its dictator up on warrants from the I.C.C?

Against my own better judgement, I signed up for Facebook a while ago.  It took my wife, several family members, and a plethora of friends to convince me that I needed to “connect” with everyone.  To be honest, it’s been a good place to exchange pictures of the kids and exchange pithy but non-consequential comments.  I’ve refrained from using it to play games and annoy people, but I’m aware of the many applications available.

I’ve also restricted the amount of information I give Facebook, because a wise man once told me that if I’m not paying to use a service, then I’m not the customer, I’m the product.

But you do have to give a few things, like name and location.  I gave those so that family would be able to find me on the service, but now I’m starting to regret not doing a bit of fibbing.

You see, in their infinite wisdom, Facebook is allowing a company to mine the information on Facebook so that the Democratic Party can figure out who they can bother looking for donations.  The way it works appears to be that people can allow the company to download their list of ‘friends’ and their locations, compare that list to the list of people already donating to the party, then hit the ones with more sense than to give money to the Democrats up for a donation.

So, let me say this:  Don’t any of you individuals with a sick sense of humor even consider it.  I swear, if I get a single phone call from a Democratic operative looking for me to open my wallet, I will find out who clued them to my existence, and I will find you.  You’ll be lucky if I just get you drunk and leave you naked and penniless in Tegucigalpa.  If I’m feeling charitable, I might not write “Your mother’s a whore” in Spanish on your forehead before I leave you in that drainage ditch.

What would induce someone to give their list of friends to a political spammer?  Just when I think I can’t be surprised anymore, this kind of thing climbs out of the sewer of slime to kick me in the butt.

Gerald Molen, the co-producer of such movies as “Schindler’s List” and “Jurassic Park”, was trying to do a good thing the other day.  He travelled to the high school in Ronan, Montana, to give a talk to seniors about their potential and how they can exploit it to make their lives better.  Instead, he was met by the school principal and denied entry to the school.  You see, the school had received calls from parties unknown expressing concern that Mr. Molen, a conservative and outspoken critic of President Obama, ought not to be addressing students.

Ladies and gentlemen, this is a prime example of the basic tactics of the ideologically motivated zealots on both sides of the political spectrum.  By not allowing those with whom they disagree an opportunity to have any part of the public square, they seek to manipulate all discussion toward their own talking points and message.  Be it when a conservative movie producer is prevented by an agent of the state from addressing a group of students about their potential or when a gay rights activist is prevented from giving a speech about bullying and discrimination, it’s wrong.  The freedom to have your own speech and beliefs is also the freedom to have other people say or believe things that piss you off.  If you can’t deal with other people swimming in the community pool of ideas, go back to the wading pool with the other intellectual and emotional toddlers.

Should Mr. Molen give a political speech to high school students, no matter what his views?  Probably not.  Political indoctrination by either side doesn’t belong in our schools.  But that wasn’t his plan that morning.  The people who called the school, if they even exist, had no idea what he was going to say, but they acted to prevent someone with whom they disagree from voicing any opinion, and they used an agent of the government to do it.  The principal of Ronan High School should be ashamed.  I’m sure that somewhere in his school there is a copy of the Constitution.  Maybe he should read it and see where he fits into it when he is doing his job, and how it limits his actions as an agent of the state.

As for those who deny someone else their time to speak, all I can say is that there are ports of entry along the Canadian and Mexican borders, and the nation is dotted with international airports.  Maybe they ought to use them if they don’t want to allow others to exercise the same rights they enjoy.  I love the fact that people disagree with me without fear of reprisal, but either learn to live with the fact that other people don’t always agree with you or leave.  If you want to live in an ideological monoculture, there are plenty of places around the world that you might find more to your liking.