Bullies | Eastern North Carolina Now

    Publisher's Note: Jim Bispo's column appears in the Beaufort Observer.

    We are hearing a lot about bullying lately. Its in our schools. Its in our work places. Its on the roads. Even our government does it (which sometimes makes us wonder if it really is "our" government). Its everywhere. And it seems as though the more it happens, the less prepared we are to deal with it.

    There seem to be increasing numbers of "bullying" incidents in our schools. In the schoolyard we are told to walk away when someone starts to bully us. We are told to report the bully to the school authorities. We are even told defend ourselves form bullies; fight back. So which solution is the correct one?? Likely, it's all of them - at one time or other - depending on the individual circumstances.

    You walk away. It is a sign of weakness. You get chased and you are right back where you started. You report the bullying to the school authorities. You are called names: the bullying continues. You fight back and chances are you get beat up. (Are there any among us who believe that a bully would "bully" someone they thought could beat them up?? I doubt it.) In the olden days, we were told to "push back" and that worked - sometimes. Sometimes, because it is no more than a variant of "fight back" which also works sometimes..

    So what are we to do?? Simple. Hire a lawyer and obtain a restraining order against the bully. The other day I saw a news report to the effect that an elementary school student had been granted a "Restraining Order" against another student who had reportedly been "bullying" him. Elementary school?? Restraining Order?? Yes to both. Good Grief!!

    In hearing the report, I thought it was a "first". It sounded as though it was a "first". I was wrong.

    To get an idea of the degree to which lawyers have latched on to "restraining orders" to keep themselves busy, click here. It likely isn't as lucrative as class action law suits, but it's a living... Hmmm...

    It's scary. It's scary at a couple of levels.

    First, whether or not the "legalities" will solve the problem remains to be seen. In the meantime the lawyers continue to ring the cash register....

    Second, the lawyers seem to be controlling more and more of our lives. Soon they will control everything. It is not difficult to envision the day when the totality of our activities will be controlled by lawyers. We seem to be heading in that direction, and the slope is slippery. I even heard a political ad the other day to the effect that the incumbent Senator (who apparently is not a lawyer) should not be reelected because we needed to have a lawyer representing us in the Senate. There are a lot of folks who believe that we would be a lot better off if there were fewer lawyers in the Congress (and in the world) than there already are. That would surely improve the chances that it would be "our" congress instead of "the" congress. It would also save a lot of paperwork at our doctor's office. Hmmm...

    If you don't think the lawyers are controlling more and more of our daily existence, just look at all the papers you are required to sign before you are admitted in to see your doctor. Do you suppose all those forms are for the convenience of the doctors?? If you do, I have a bridge to sell you. All that rubbish is there at the behest of the doctors' lawyers and is intended to help reduce the probability that some "ambulance chaser" (that's what we used to call them) drags some poor unsuspecting doctor into court for an alleged failure. . In the olden days the ambulance chaser appellation was fairly commonly used to describe the same kinds of lawyers who today advertise on TV for clients who may qualify to be part of a "class action" law suit - or for just a run of the mill malpractice suit. I suppose we are all loath to admit our age, but I can remember when the legal profession was against advertising - much less "trolling" for clients or trying to generate a class action suit. There were heated arguments in the legal community against advertising... guess who won... So much for the "Law" as an honorable profession.

    But I digress...

    Our intolerance of school yard bullying is one thing. Our tolerance of bullying after we have departed the school grounds is something else.

    For some reason, we frown on bullying when it is perpetuated by kids on other kids, but we accept it when we are "bullied" by adults (at least they are of sufficient age to be considered adults)??

    We allow ourselves to be bullied by adults. When we hear the voice of Jesse Jackson, or Al Sharpton at the national and even the good 'Ol Willie Barber at the state level you can be sure that we are being bullied. Face it. These skin merchants have been bullying us for a long time and it does not seem to be letting up at all.(If anything, I seems to be getting worse.) And we don't seem to be very interested in "pushing back". It's not clear why anyone would care being called a "racist" by these (or any other) skin merchants. It's their stock in trade. You push back against their slurs and you are a racist. You try to ensure honest voting and voting rolls and you are called a racist. No matter what you do short of strict adherence to, and compliance with, all their demands, you are a racist. Their tirades against us are "freedom of speech". Our replies to those tirades are "racism". What is a real puzzlement is how we have let them get away with it for so long. Ignore them and soon the only audience they have will be those attending their Sunday services. (Those Revs. do have "congregations" and Sunday services, don't they??) Hmmm

    And now in a grand demonstration of sophistry, we are told by Mr. Marc Morial, President of the National Urban League, that the post recovery job market is leaving blacks behind. According to an AP article in the Tampa Tribune (4/3/2014) "The National Urban League is pushing for several economic measures, including an increase in the minimum wage." If we "cave" to this sophistry we will be caving to more bullying by a skin merchant. A more sophisticated bullying than we get from Jackson or Sharpton or Barber, but bullying never the less. The Urban League claims that the high unemployment rate experienced is the result of racism. Surely it has nothing to do with the outlandish numbers of black Americans who don't

    even bother to finish high school. Surely it has nothing to do with the outlandish out of wedlock birthrate among black Americans. Surely it has nothing to do with the number of one parent households. The list goes on... We can only wonder why, if they really care about black unemployment, the League isn't "taking on" those problem instead of pushing for something that will only exacerbate the black unemployment situation (i.e. increasing the minimum wage). The numbers I have seen look like there will be about 16.5 million folks who will get more money in their pay checks as the result of the Anointed One (unilaterally) increasing the minimum wage.. The rest of the story is that the increases will be at the cost of about one half million minimum wage jobs. Why haven't we heard what color most of those folks will surely be and what becomes of those five hundred thousand folks??

    And, by the way, do you suppose all those "Obamaphones" (i.e. free cell phones) which were justified largely on the basis that they could be used for job hunting have really helped improve the employment situation. Of course, I suppose we could always claim that but for those free phones (which surely are not used for anything other than job hunting and emergencies) the unemployment picture would be even worse. That sounds an awful lot like a "Heads, I win: Tails, you lose" argument. More bullying...

    D'ya Think??