Just when you thought Politcal Correctness couldn't get any more stupid....

[Oddball]

Now, "at risk" and "disadvantaged" are "negative labels".

SEATTLE - Decades ago, poor children became known as "disadvantaged" to soften the stigma of poverty. Then they were "at-risk." Now, a Washington lawmaker wants to replace those euphemisms with a new one, "at hope."

Democratic State Sen. Rosa Franklin says negative labels are hurting kids' chances for success and she's not a bit concerned that people will be confused by her proposed rewrite of the 54 places in state law where words like "at risk" and "disadvantaged" are used.

At hope kids better than at risk?? - Life- msnbc.com

Oh, brother!

 

[bodecea]

Oh brother indeed. Stupid is Stupid.

 

[Navy1960]

Now, "at risk" and "disadvantaged" are "negative labels".

SEATTLE - Decades ago, poor children became known as "disadvantaged" to soften the stigma of poverty. Then they were "at-risk." Now, a Washington lawmaker wants to replace those euphemisms with a new one, "at hope."

Democratic State Sen. Rosa Franklin says negative labels are hurting kids' chances for success and she's not a bit concerned that people will be confused by her proposed rewrite of the 54 places in state law where words like "at risk" and "disadvantaged" are used.

At hope kids better than at risk?? - Life- msnbc.com

Oh, brother!

Okay first question would be is the State of Washington in financial trouble and if so, this might be a good reason among many as to why it got that way. It's called using your legislative time on the mundane or useless. I have a better way to erase the labels, make a speech that says. when you see the words and they bother you erase them!!

 

[MIPS]

Now, "at risk" and "disadvantaged" are "negative labels".

Agreed apparently vacuousness no knows bounds in the ranks of our dearly beloved elected officials and assorted species of American talking heads.

What's the next label gonna be "income challenged" ?

No wonder so some many Americans cannot speak or write coherent English, these idiots keep changing the language just for the thrill of it.

 

[Zander]

The idiocy of this PC crap never ceases to amaze me.

 

[masquerade]

I should put in a set of rolling eyes as well.

So much for accountability with the parents or legal guardians of these 'at risk' kids. Self-esteem starts in the home. But of course we also have to take into consideration the 'disadvantaged' parents who have no clue how to raise a child with good self-esteem. The type of parents who really have no business reproducing.

 

[manifold]

I can only speak for myself, but I've been conditioned to never assume that political correctness cannot get any more stupid.

Have you never met Ravi?

 

[blastoff]

Now, "at risk" and "disadvantaged" are "negative labels".

SEATTLE - Decades ago, poor children became known as "disadvantaged" to soften the stigma of poverty. Then they were "at-risk." Now, a Washington lawmaker wants to replace those euphemisms with a new one, "at hope."

Democratic State Sen. Rosa Franklin says negative labels are hurting kids' chances for success and she's not a bit concerned that people will be confused by her proposed rewrite of the 54 places in state law where words like "at risk" and "disadvantaged" are used.

At hope kids better than at risk?? - Life- msnbc.com

Oh, brother!

Rosa, go fuc...er, I mean have sexual intercourse with yourself.