Random news you may have missed

I have a new addition for your collection of arguments that you can’t believe were made with a straight face (or straight keyboard).

But first some educational definitions from a ruling by a federal judge in Nevada: adult interactive cabarets (AICs) and AIC performers are “commonly known as strip clubs and strippers.”

Some performers (aka strippers) and one of their customers sued the city of Reno over a minimum age restriction for their line of work. It’s not entirely clear what the customer was suing over. Denial of access to underage AIC performers?

Not surprisingly, the customer was denied standing. The performers were, too — because by the time the suit got to court, they were all over 21.

So why were they still in court?

“Plaintiffs argue that dancers over 21 have standing … ‘since the lack of under 21 year olds at an AIC will decrease the size of the audience who can be solicited into buying dances from those dancers over 21.’”

No one’s going to give those old hags a chance if there aren’t any sexy kids around.

Don’t look at me. I just report this stuff.

Read the room. More evidence that humor is a dangerous thing and should only be wielded by professionals. A Texas appellate court panel has ruled that a school principal could be suspended for two years whether he was joking about shooting teachers or not.

There’s no room for hyperbole in Texas — the state where everything is bigger.

It seems the principal was having a meeting with an “instructional facilitator” and, at one point, said he “wished he could just shoot people.”

I’m guessing there was no smiling involved because the facilitator claimed that principal’s “demeanor did not appear to be one of humor.”

The facilitator complained, the State Board for Educator Certification suspended the principal, a trial judge reversed the suspension, and the appeals court reinstated it, saying that state law doesn’t require a finding that you really meant anything.

The principal, by the way, said he was kidding, doesn’t own a gun, and is against violence — none of which apparently matters.

It’s your typical she-said/he-was-only-kidding dispute.

I have no idea whether the principal was kidding or not, but I’m guessing that much of the two-year suspension is going to be spent in courts.

You’ve got to take joking seriously.

Narrow free speech. The fight for free speech — meaning free speech only for people we agree with — continues apace.

A group that you can tell is right-wing by the pictures of spokespersons on Newsmax and use of the terms “Soros-backed” and “Soros-funded” on its website has submitted “testimony” to the Florida Legislature backing some free speech.

But, of course, not all free speech.

The group, which calls itself the National Police Association, was supporting a proposed Florida law that would prevent homeowners associations from banning flags that contain “the same emblems and proportions utilized by the United States flag, regardless of the colors used, without any additional emblems or text.”

Coincidentally, that description includes the Thin Blue Line flag that the group likes, which is the U.S. flag in grayscale but for one bright blue stripe.

No other flags of any kind deserve state protection.

I’m surprised they’re not asking for those flags to be required in front of every house. Maybe I shouldn’t give them this idea….

Categories / Op-Ed