The Brain-Eaters: Our Predatory Justice Dept.

Image result for images of man-eating lion

St. Peter likened Satan to “a roaring lion [that] walketh about seeking whom he may devour” (I Peter 5:8). He might have aptly applied that description to various agencies of our federal government.

Like for instance:

The University of California at Berkeley made available a wide assortment of free college courses online, accessible to anyone who had a computer and wanted to take the courses. We are amazed when a university does anything good, and astounded when it does anything for free.

But instead of being applauded, Berkeley found the Loretta Lunch Justice Dept. smashing down on them for…ahem… violating the Americans With Disabilities Act. ( )


Well, hey, if a course doesn’t have closed-captioning, it “discriminates” against the deaf. If its video doesn’t have a sharp enough color contrast, it “discriminates” against the color-blind. See, the ADA forbids any and all “discrimination” against any imaginable kind of “disability.” It leaves the door open for all kinds of fanciful interpretations and is a cornucopia for trial lawyers–because the JD is full of maniacal “change agents” who are always on the lookout for another ADA case to prosecute.

So they made Berkeley shut down a lot of the free courses–and also pay damages to those who were “discriminated” against. Ka-ching, ka-ching!

Under the guise of protecting us, leveling the playing field, fundamentally transforming us, creating a utopia on earth, blah-blah-blah, the federal government punished people for doing something good, took away a benefit that many people were receiving at no cost, and helped absolutely nobody but some greedy shyster lawyers: and I guess they made themselves feel like they’d accomplished something.

This is what happens when liberals and other Democrats are permitted to have power.

They’ve all got to go.

3 comments on “The Brain-Eaters: Our Predatory Justice Dept.

  1. I am beginning to think that PC thinking will be the end of our civilization. Everything we do, in some way or another, could be interpreted as being offensive or inconsiderate of some tiny demographic. If I go for a walk could that be an insult to those unable to walk? You get the picture.

    Spell checkers and auto-correct are becoming less and less useful every day because they include every proper name known to mankind. I don’t know how many times I’ve had words auto-corrected to a name commonly used in places far, far away; but they can’t leave any name out or the software maker will be accused of discrimination.

  2. You know, what you said about walking being offensive? I actually experienced that very thing several years ago. I had rental property in town, and wrote an ad saying the apartment was within walking distance to grocery shopping, drug store, bank and post office. The ad was rejected on the basis that those unable to walk would be discriminated against. I was flabbergasted, but to run the rental ad, it had to be changed. I think that even the handicapped would have understood my meaning, but noooo,
    that would not do.

Leave a Reply