I’ve always had a healthy skepticism for people who tell you how much esteem they hold for something but then are on a mission to fundamentally change such.
Take the new student body president at Texas A&M who is being fêted by the media statewide* for a role that normally gets no mention outside College Station and Aggie press organs.
One can surmise that A&M is a place new president Bobby Brooks longed to be and was worthy of great respect and admiration; he has said Texas A&M “has always had my heart.” But he told The Battalion student newspaper that his goal was to be increasing diversity and inclusion on campus.
Why is Brooks being celebrated by the state press? Because he’s the first proud-and-loud activist homosexual to be elected president by A&M’s student body. He’s a cause célèbre if you will because his position moves forward the anti-values agenda of the Left at a place the liberals in media wrongly perceive to be a bastion of old-fashioned American values.
Let’s set aside for the moment the troubling nature of people like Brooks who define themselves and their actions through the lens of their sexual preference; let’s ignore the inherent narrow-mindedness of such and the self-focus such reveals, and; instead ask questions that the election as student body president at A&M of homosexual Bobby Brooks beg:
- How did you, Mr. Brooks, while openly practicing homosexuality, become A&M’s student body president if inclusion is a significant problem on campus?
- How did A&M have your “heart” if it is place hostile to you and others who reject societal norms of morality and behavior?
- If you can be elected student body president, is there a really a problem, from your side’s point of view, that needs fixing?
I think the answer with Brooks is the same as in many of these cases, it is all about Mr. Brooks.