Legislating Underwear
Often, to counter that nagging "is it just me?" feeling that comes from living here as close as I do to the center of the anti-reality-based forces in our country (i.e., Washington, DC), it's useful to have a voice from the heartland (where I was born and raised, I'm happy to say).
Here is the Peoria [IL] Journal Star editorializing about recent legislative silliness in nearby Virginia:
Meanwhile, in another state capital, legislators have given up on another weighty effort, passage of a bill making it illegal to show off one's underpants (while wearing them, of course). The legislation was aimed at the low-riders popular among young people.
The Virginia House passed the bill two weeks ago, but a Senate committee quickly killed it, claiming that the publicity had made the state a laughingstock. Hard to believe that, especially when one considers the high-toned nature of the debate.
Pro: "Underwear is called underwear for a reason."
Con: "Please let these kids express themselves.'
Pro: "Virginia does want to set an example of what character should be."
From sleepless in Springfield to beltless in Richmond, being a lawmaker is sobering work these days.