Tag Archives: racism

The Insanity Continues

Posted on by

I live in North Carolina. I live in eastern North Carolina–generally speaking the conservative end of the state. When I look at what is going on in some other areas of the state, I truly wonder if peace with all of our neighbors is possible.

On Tuesday, The New York Post reported:

Duke Medical School claims it is “white supremacy culture” to expect people of color to be on time in a strategic plan for creating an “anti-racist workforce.”

The medical school said its goal is to “catalyze anti-racist practice through education” in a 2021 plan titled “Dismantling Racism and Advancing Equity, Diversity and Inclusion in the School of Medicine.” The guide — praised by the school’s dean — called out what it deemed “white supremacy culture,” with its purported nitpicking about being on time, dress code, speech and work style. It also contains a series of negative terminology vis-à-vis white culture.

“White supremacy culture is the idea (ideology) that White people and the ideas, thoughts, beliefs, and actions of white people are superior to People of Color and their ideas, thoughts, beliefs and actions,” the document stated.

The document stated that America is rigged for the interests of white people, who get privileges, i.e., the “unquestioned and unearned set of advantages, entitlements, benefits and choices bestowed on people solely because they are White.”

If you don’t provide a standard for people to adhere to, they won’t adhere to it, and everyone will work at a less efficient level. If you arrive at work at 8:30 instead of 8 am, should you be paid for a full day? If you show up inappropriately dressed, should you meet with customers or clients? If you use improper English, do you expect people to assume you are educated and know what you are talking about? Do you expect the engineers you hire to be on board with the idea that two plus two equals four? Setting a standard lets everyone know what the rules are and where the boundaries are. It provides a more efficient workplace and a more pleasant workplace. If the same rules apply to everyone, everyone is more likely to be contented with the rules.

The Whoppers Of 2023

Posted on by

On Thursday, The New York Post listed twelve of the most outrageous lies told by politicians and the media during 2023. Please follow the link to the article for the details, I will simply post the  list.

This is the list:

#1

“The Middle East . . . is quieter than it has been for decades.”

— National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan, Foreign Affairs, November/December (print edition)

#2

“We ended cancer as we know it.”

— President Biden, July 25

#3

“Age jokes can’t diminish Biden’s unrivaled experience and wisdom.”

— The Hill, Dec. 11

#4

“Israeli Strike Kills Hundreds in Hospital, Palestinians Say

— The New York Times, Oct. 17

#5

“Let’s always take a moment to also see what we have achieved thus far, while we clearly see the moment that we are presently in. So we have achieved a lot.”

— VP Kamala Harris, June 23

#6

“In the Hanukkah story, the Jewish people were forced into hiding. No one thought they would survive.”

— Second Gentleman Doug Emhoff, Dec. 11

#7

“Floods, fires and deadly heat are the alarm bells of a planet on the brink.”

— The Washington Post, July 13

#8

“We have seen the effectiveness of our approach [to the border].”

— Homeland Security boss Alejandro Mayorkas, May 10 

#9

“We have been [in Israel] for more than 1.5 million years.”

— Palestinian National Council President Rawhi Fattouh, May 22

#10

“There would be no climate crisis if there was no racism.”

— Jane Fonda, May 27

#11

“People Are Getting Real Heated Over a Gas Stove Ban That Isn’t Even Happening.”

— The New Republic, Jan. 12

#12

“Biden is extremely well-liked.”

— MSNBC co-host Mika Brzezinski, Feb. 10

Reality is merely a state of mind.

 

When Racism Failed As A Weapon

Posted on by

Generally speaking, the political left can shut down any argument or win any legal case by claiming ‘racism.’ However, that is getting old, and many people are using common sense and good research to fight back against the bogus charge.

On Wednesday, The Gateway Pundit reported the following:

Officer Byron Evans and seven black Capitol Police Officers sued Brandon Straka and several Trump supporters under the KKK Act for “racist” attacks on him and seven other police officers on January 6, 2021.

Officer Evans sued Brandon Straka and Roger Stone who was not even at the US Capitol that day along with leaders of the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys and others.

Brandon Straka released video on Wednesday of Officer Byron Evans admitting he was watching the January 6 protests on a TV in a room in a secure location.

Please follow the link to read the entire article. It includes screenshots of a number of tweets from Brandon Straka explaining the actual source of the lawsuit and the research they did to discover the actual facts surrounding the events.

Integrity Isn’t Racist!

Posted on by

On Tuesday, The Daily Caller posted an article about Princeton University’s Honor Code.

The article reports:

A Princeton University student argued in a Sunday night opinion article that the school’s Honor Code unfairly impacts racial minorities, citing parallels to the U.S. criminal justice system.

The Ivy League school’s Undergraduate Honor Code lays out standards for student conduct that all undergraduate students must abide by and prohibits students from plagiarizing or cheating, according to its website. Emilly Santos, author of the op-ed and Princeton University student, likened the code to the United States criminal justice system to propose that it “disadvantages” minority students.

If all students are required to adhere to the standards of the Honor Code, how is it racist?

The article continues:

“Princeton’s Honor Code, tasked with holding students accountable and honest in academic settings, mirrors the criminal justice system in its rules and effects,” Santos wrote. “It is harmful to the entirety of the Princeton community: the fear it instills in students fosters an environment of academic hostility. But it is often most damaging for first-generation low-income (FLI) students — students who also often belong to racial minorities.”

Honor Code violations include “tampering with a graded exam,” “claiming another’s work to be one’s own” and obtaining a exam materials prior to the examination date, the website reads.

Students who violate the Honor Code may be reprimanded, suspended, placed on probation or expelled, according to the university’s website. Students who are suspended for a semester are not eligible for university financial aid for the repeated semester, according to the university, however Santos argues this harms FLI students who rely on financial aid and would be plunged further in debt.

If you are that easily intimidated by ‘academic hostility’, maybe you should go to a less expensive school where you are under less pressure to achieve. We used to teach children that cheating was wrong. I would hope that we will continue to do that.

Do Laws Actually Mean Anything?

Posted on by

The source of this article is a Legal Insurrection post of August 5th. The article is about the lawsuit filed by Gibson’s Bakery against Oberlin College charging that the college had engaged in false accusations of racism against the bakery. When a black Oberlin College student was caught attempting to steal wine from the Bakery, the bakery clerk who tried to stop him was assaulted by the thief and two of his friends. The students were arrested and plead guilty to the charges against them. At that point, students at the college erupted in protests, citing racial profiling. When the case came to trial, it was reported that the jury found that the former dean of students, Meredith Raimondo, attended the protests and handed out a flyer that said, “This is a RACIST establishment with a LONG ACCOUNT of RACIAL PROFILING and DISCRIMINATION.”

I hate to be difficult here, but if the thief and his friends were found guilty, how can you claim racial profiling? They did the crime. What difference did it make what color they were?

The article at Legal Insurrection reports:

The historically liberal Oberlin College, located in Oberlin, Ohio, is still refusing to pay up for defaming Gibson’s Bakery as racist in 2016.

The college, which is financially underwater, has now asked the Ohio Supreme Court to halt the multi-million dollar judgment while it appeals the decision for the second time. Earlier this year, the Ninth Ohio District Court of Appeals upheld a jury’s finding that Oberlin committed libel, slander, and interference with business relationships against Gibson’s after it encouraged student protests over a bakery employee’s pursuit of a black student who had shoplifted.

For delaying making the payment, Oberlin has added on $4 million in interest to the original judgment of $32 million, raising the cost to $36 million. Handing over the $36 million will have enormous ramifications for the financially struggling institution, which had a deficit of $44.7 million in 2020 and whose monetary woes stem back years. The college also had a deficit in 2017, which forced it to institute a rescue plan.

The president of Oberlin, Carmen Twillie Ambar, has been defiant in the face of the judgment and has continued to deny any fault on the part of Oberlin. Unwilling to accept the jury’s decision, Ambar said in 2019, “This is not the final outcome. This is, in fact, just one step along the way of what may turn out to be a lengthy and complex legal process.”

I believe the strategy here is to delay the payment until the bakery goes out of business and there is no one left to collect the payment. Hopefully someone in the legal or law enforcement community will step forward and prevent this from happening.

The Current Culture Wars

Posted on by

On Sunday, The Blue State Conservative posted an article listing six key cultural battles currently going on in America.

Here is the list:

#1: The political science might have determined Covid is no longer useful, but that doesn’t mean half of this country can easily escape their brainwash.

#2: The effort to instill wokeness on every level in our military continues, and the consequences are dire.

#3: The participation of female swimmers and presence of a crowd at the NCAA women’s swim finals proves most people are either cowards, idiots, or both.

#4: The left continues trying to expand what is considered ‘racist,’ but Americans aren’t buying it.

#5: Women demand equality when it suits them, and only when it benefits to identify what a woman is.

#6: Resistance is building against the left’s sexual and gender values being taught in schools.

Americans are beginning to wake up to the war against the American family and traditional American values. Just for the record in case anyone is reading this who has doubts, racism is NOT a traditional American value.

Please follow the link to read the entire article. All Americans need to get involved in the cultural war that is going on now in our country. If you are a parent or grandparent, pay attention to what your children or grandchildren are learning in school. Our future as a nation depends on involved parents.

Losing A Legacy

Posted on by

On Aug. 28, 1963, at the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, Martin Luther King, Jr., said the following:

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

Unfortunately there are many Americans who have chosen to ignore the wisdom contained in that statement. Martin Luther King, Jr., preached forgiveness and non-violence.

Today we are dealing with leaders in the black community preaching division and racism.

Yesterday The Daily Signal posted an article about Critical Race Theory–something the government encouraging to have taught in our public schools. The premise of the theory is that all white are racist and all blacks are victims. Teaching the theory has a very negative impact on our children.

The article reports:

This week, the U.S. Department of Education announced that officials are preparing to use taxpayer money for K-12 schools to advocate the idea that America is systemically racist, and anyone who thinks differently, children included, are part of the problem—whether students know it or not.

Since members of Congress reintroduced a legislative proposal this year to create national civics standards, the Education Department’s new rule would help shape the content of those standards around the intolerant ideas of critical theory.

In a proposed rule released April 19, federal education officials outlined new priorities for federal grant awards to K-12 educators for use on history and civics education in schools.

The content of these standards does not prepare or encourage children to become productive Americans.

The article reports:

The agency would prioritize grants that use critical theory, a worldview that says racism is everywhere and anyone who disagrees is oppressing other people. The Education Department’s announcement highlights The New York Times’ 1619 Project and civics content that the National Museum of African American History and Culture created as exemplary material for educators to use.

Yet the proposal does not mention that the Times’ editors issued a correction to the 1619 Project after high-profile criticism from scholars who said the project’s claims about colonists fighting the American Revolution to protect slavery were wrong. Nor does the federal register say anything about how project editors refused to correct other factual inaccuracies after criticism from Pulitzer Prize-winning researchers.

The federal proposal is even more problematic for parents and teachers who want children to learn attitudes and behaviors that will help them to be good parents, neighbors, employees, and community members when they grow up.

The announcement highlights educational material from the Smithsonian’s National Museum of African American History and Culture without admitting that museum officials had to withdraw some content after widespread complaints over the museum’s message.

Last summer, the museum released an infographic describing “white culture” as oppressive, and said ideas such as “hard work” and efforts to “be polite” are evidence of systemic oppression.

Students should not be taught to “work before play” or “plan for the future” because these ideas represent systems of power, according to the museum. Museum officials issued an apology and removed the document in July.

I wrote about that exhibit last July (article here).

The article concludes:

Biden issued an executive order during his first week in office that is consistent with this latest proposal from the Education Department. If approved, the federal education agency’s new rule would ingrain critical theory in the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, the law governing federal actions on K-12 schools.

Washington is bringing critical theory’s prejudice to your child’s classroom, and whether or not you are a parent of a student, we all should reject the notion that the next generation should be trained in bigotry.

We are ruining the legacy of Martin Luther King. Jr. Let’s go back to raising children who respect authority and don’t judge people according to their race.

 

Fighting Back

Posted on by

The Epoch Times is reporting the following:

America First Legal (AFL) is seeking to pursue a lawsuit to stop critical race theory (CRT) training, according to Stephen Miller, a former adviser to then-President Donald Trump.

“We’re also looking for plaintiffs—if we can find them—who are willing to stand up and file suit on critical race theory,” he said during an interview with Fox News.

Critical Race Theory essentially teaches that all white people are racist and that all people of color cannot achieve success because of racism. It is divisive and damaging to our children–why should a child try to excel when they know that because of their race, they cannot be successful?

The article notes the origins of the theory:

Critical race theory—which espouses the idea that race is not natural, but socially constructed to oppress and exploit people of color—is an offshoot of the Karl Marx-influenced critical theory social philosophy that was promoted by the Frankfurt School of thought.

Trump signed an executive order banning CRT training in federal agencies in September 2020 with the White House describing it as “anti-American propaganda.”

However, this socialist ideology has been embraced by President Joe Biden and his administration. He reversed Trump’s September 2020 executive order right after he came into the White House and pushed CRT training on all fronts.

The article reports:

In an April 27 letter, Reps. Doug Lamborn (R-Colo.) and Jeff Duncan (R-S.C.) warned Education Secretary Miguel Cardona about pushing CRT in the education system.

“Simply put, the teachings of Critical Race Theory want to reject the principles established in our Constitution and our individual God-given rights, and instead divide individuals into competing racial identity groups while doing little to help minority students advance,” they wrote in the letter.

If President Biden truly wants to be a President who unites Americans, encouraging the teaching of Critical Race Theory is not the path his administration should be taking.

Not Dr. Seuss!

Posted on by

Yesterday The Daily Wire reported that Loudoun County Public School Board in Virginia has concluded that Dr. Suess’s children’s books contain “racial undertones” that are not suitable for “culturally responsive” learning.

The article reports the announcement made by the Board:

“Realizing that many schools continue to celebrate ‘Read Across America Day’ in partial recognition of Dr. Seuss’ birthday, it is important for us to be cognizant of research that may challenge our practice in this regard,” the announcement reads. “As we become more culturally responsive and racially conscious, all building leaders should know that in recent years there has been research revealing radical undertones in the books written and the illustrations drawn by Dr. Seuss.” 

Learning for Justice was formerly known as “Teaching Tolerance,” which has promoted radical views on teaching “social justice” and “racial justice” to students as young as five-years-old. Learning for Justice is the education arm of the left-wing Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC). 

In a magazine article titled, “It’s Time to Talk About Dr. Seuss,” Learning for Justice cites a study from St. Catherine University that claims Dr. Seuss’s children’s literature is rife with “orientalism, anti-blackness, and white supremacy.”  

The researchers surveyed 50 Dr. Seuss books and concluded that there is not enough diversity in the children’s books, many of which were written in the 1950s. 

In case your missed it, Learning for Justice is the education arm of the left-wing Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC). That explains a lot.

The researchers identified what they considered the problem:

“Of the 2,240 (identified) human characters, there are 45 of color representing two percent of the total number of human characters,” the study reads. Of the 45 characters of color, 43 “exhibited behaviors and appearances that align with harmful and stereotypical Orientalist tropes.” 

Learning for Justice alleges that many of the non-white characters in Dr. Seuss’s books were men and were “subservient” to the white characters in his book.

The article concludes:

Learning for Justice claims that anyone who defends Dr. Seuss’s problematic work is a racial “apologist” and is making excuses for why “bigotry doesn’t matter.” 

The education group also tells teachers to directly discuss Dr. Seuss’s “racist” past with older students, though “older students” remains an undefined category. Teachers were asked to explain to students how racism shows up in places and people they may least expect. 

“You can address these arguments directly, discussing the degree to which cultural norms excuse biased language or actions, how harmful stereotypical representation can be and whether — and how — a person can make up for hurtful mistakes.” 

This is getting ridiculous!

Equal Outcome vs. Equal Opportunity

Posted on by

Yesterday The Washington Examiner posted an article that provided a preview of the direction the Biden administration is headed in the area of civil rights. We are no longer going to be concerned about equality, we are going to be concerned about equity. This is totally opposite of everything the civil rights movement of the 1960’s represented.

The article notes:

On Tuesday, six days into the Biden administration, it became clear why Susan Rice, hitherto a foreign policy specialist, was named director of the Domestic Policy Council. Rice, unconfirmable for a Cabinet post after her unembarrassed Sunday show lies about Benghazi, ventured into the White House press room to preview President Biden’s “equity” initiative.

With one possible exception, the specific policies announced were less important than the word “equity,” invoked 19 times by Rice and nine by Biden. Ending federal private prison contracts, “strengthening” relations with Indian tribes, and combating “xenophobia” against Asians and Pacific Islanders are small potatoes as federal policies.

Not so, perhaps, the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing initiative, started under Obama, repealed under Trump, and now due for a spirited revival. The idea is for the feds to reverse local zoning laws and plant low-income housing in suburbs deemed insufficiently diverse.

Actually, racial discrimination in housing has been reduced since the 1968 federal Fair Housing Act, to the point that in metropolitan areas from Washington to Atlanta to Los Angeles, most blacks now live in suburbs, not in the central cities to which they were tightly confined in postwar America.

The article explains the difference between equality and equity:

But for Rice and Biden, “equity” requires not equality of opportunity, but equality of results. That’s one of the fundamental tenets of the critical race theory training that Trump’s administration banned and Biden’s reinstated on Day One.

A lower-than-population percentage of blacks in any desirable category, explains critical race theorist Ibram X. Kendi, must be the result of “systemic racism,” a term Rice used twice and Biden five times on Tuesday. If you don’t agree, you’re guilty of “white fragility” and must be a “white supremacist.”

As Andrew Sullivan trenchantly observes, “to achieve ‘equity,’ you first have to take away equality for individuals who were born in the wrong identity group. Equity means treating individuals unequally so that groups are equal.”

This is exactly contrary to the central thrust of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It could easily be judged, in particular cases, to violate the 14th Amendment. Individuals discriminated against might have standing to go to court.

Please follow the link above to read the entire article. Reverse racism is still racism. Racism in any direction for any reason is not a good path for America to follow. Hopefully a few well-placed lawsuits will put an end to this nonsense.

This Is Becoming More Obvious

Posted on by

Yesterday Breitbart posted an article about a group of black pro-life people who have filed a lawsuit against Planned Parenthood charging the organization with racial discrimination.

The article reports:

According to an announcement released last week at Christian Newswire, the National Black Pro-Life Coalition filed the racial discrimination claim with the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) at the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services (HHS).

Catherine Davis, president of the Georgia-based Restoration Project, said in a statement:

Systemic racism and abortion intersect at the door of Planned Parenthood, an organization that has targeted Black women and their babies for almost five decades. These intentional actions violate the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which made it illegal for recipients of federal assistance to discriminate on the basis of race.

The article notes:

Walter Hoye, founder of the Issues4Life Foundation, observed abortion has become “the leading cause of death for Blacks,” an outcome that has led to a 1.8 fertility rate, less than the 2.1 rate needed to replace the population.

“At this rate, by 2050 the total Black fertility rate will be 1.3 or lower, a rate that is irreversible,” he said.

In recent months, some Planned Parenthood employees have accused the organization of a racist environment in some workplaces.

Alexis McGill Johnson, the CEO of Planned Parenthood, said in response to the accusations of “misconduct, abuse, racism and more, do not align with Planned Parenthood’s standards or our values.”

“We are taking steps internally to address” the allegations, she added. “[O]ur country is in the middle of a racial justice reckoning – one that includes Planned Parenthood.”

As you consider this lawsuit, there is something you need to keep in mind.

According to the Britannica website:

Planned Parenthood traces its beginnings to the birth control movement led by Margaret Sanger and her colleagues, who opened the nation’s first birth control clinic in 1916 in a poverty-stricken neighbourhood of Brooklyn, New York. Created to free women from the “chronic condition” of pregnancy and the dangers of self-induced abortion, the clinic was shut down by police after only 10 days. Sanger and the others were imprisoned for violating the anti-obscenity Comstock Act of 1873. Sanger’s continuing efforts led to the foundation of both the American Birth Control League in 1921 and the Birth Control Federation of America in 1939, which became Planned Parenthood in 1942.

Please investigate the writings of Margaret Sanger. The foundation of Planned Parenthood is based on her work and writings. Even a slight glance at her writings reveals a woman who believed that White, Anglo-Saxon Protestants in America were racially superior to other races and that other races should be limited in their right to reproduce.

This lawsuit has been a long time coming, but at last someone has decided to take action against racism in its most obvious form.

Do You Remember Scholastic Magazine?

Posted on by

It seems like propaganda has become a way of life for American education. I remember fondly when Scholastic Magazine would arrive in the classroom, and we would all read it to find out what was going on in the world at a level we could understand. The magazine still exists, but its purpose seems to have changed drastically.

Yesterday John Hinderaker at Power Line Blog posted an article about the current state of Scholastic Magazine.

The article reports:

This is what our children are being told about President’s Trump’s position on “Racial Justice”:

The long history of unjust treatment of Black people in America is a major focus of this election.

This past spring, in the wake of police killings of Black Americans, huge protests erupted across the country in support of the Black Lives Matter movement. Meanwhile, the coronavirus pandemic has seriously underscored the widespread problem of racial inequality in the United States. Data show that people of color are contracting and dying of the virus at the highest rates, largely because of the wealth gap that exists between white people and people of color. Many Americans of all races are now demanding an end to police violence and other injustices toward Black people in this country.

That’s the preface. This is an issue, according to Scholastic Magazine, on which there is only one possible perspective.

In June, President Trump signed an executive order encouraging police departments to change how they train officers and use force. But overall, he has defended law enforcement…

As well he should!

…opposed protesters’ calls for reforms, and taken an aggressive stance against the largely peaceful demonstrations.

“Largely peaceful,” the Democrats’ weasel phrase.

In July, for instance, he sent federal police to Portland, Oregon, to break up rallies there. Local officials say those officers illegally detained protesters and sparked violence.

This is outrageous. What was happening in Portland was not “rallies.” It was rioting, arson, crime and violence. The idea that the presence of federal officers “sparked violence” is a far-left trope that is totally at odds with the facts. The violence long preceded, and succeeded, any federal involvement.

Many people see the president’s response to the protests as part of a pattern of racism.

“Many people.” The most dishonest trick of the left-wing journalist.

He has repeatedly made racist statements and at times shown support for people who promote white supremacy.

This is a lie. It is intended to poison young minds against the president, his party and his supporters.

Please follow the link to read the rest of the article. It is disturbing. It’s time to take a stand against the garbage our children are being taught in school. Pay attention to School Board elections. Your future could depend on them.

I spent part of my day today handing out campaign literature at the polls. I met a very sweet, but very misled young lady who told me that socialism didn’t deserve the ‘bad rep’ it has. It’s really a good thing. God help us if the people she supports ever get in power.

Unfortunately Lies Are A Part Of The Campaign Season

Posted on by

Yesterday Breitbart posted an article about some recent lies told by Kamala Harris. The Senator told the lies to back up her accusation that President Trump is a racist. Even a casual look at President Trump’s actions before running for President show that the charge is false, but the Democrats keep making the charge anyway. Just as an aside, I would like to point out that President Trump literally fought city hall to assure that his luxury resort in Florida would allow blacks and Jews to join. That doesn’t sound very racist to me.

The article lists the lies told on “60 Minutes” by Senator Harris:

(1) [Birtherism] Trump questioned Obama’s eligibility to be president. He did the same with Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), who was born in Canada (and later produced evidence of his mother’s U.S. birth). Trump applies the same standard to everyone. (Proof.)

(2) [Charlottesville] Trump never said the neo-Nazis were “fine people.” In fact, he said they should be “condemned totally.” Harris knows that she is lying, because Vice President Mike Pence told her the truth to her face at their debate earlier this month. (Proof.)

(3) [“Mexicans”] Trump did not refer to Mexicans as rapists and criminals. He was referring to people who entered the U.S. illegally, making clear that he was not even talking about all illegal immigrants: “And some, I assume, are good people.” (Proof.)

(4) [“Muslim ban”] Trump never imposed a “Muslim ban.” He restricted travel from terror-prone countries identified under Obama. Most Muslim states were unaffected, and the ban was upheld at the Supreme Court. Non-Muslim countries are on the list.

Unfortunately none of these lies will be acknowledged as such by the mainstream media.

Facts vs. Lies

Posted on by

There were some very misleading lies told in the Presidential Debate last night. I would like to highlight a few of them. Unfortunately, many of those lies were told by the moderator Chris Wallace. It is also true that those lies painted a negative picture of President Trump. I do not believe that Chris Wallace was a neutral moderator. These lies are not necessarily in any particular order. This is the link to the transcript.

Lie number one:

Chris Wallace: (19:34)
You talk about the economy booming. It turns out that in Obama’s final three years as president more jobs were created, a million and a half more jobs, than in the first three years of your presidency.

The facts:

When President Obama took office in January 2009, the workforce participation rate was 65.7. When President Obama left office in January 2017, the labor participation rate was 62.8. That was the rate when President Trump took office. The labor participation rate before the coronavirus was 63.4 (February 2020). With the lockdown, the rate dropped to 60.2. At the end of August it was 61.7.

Lie number two:

Chris Wallace: (25:43)
No, less than you have. Let’s please continue on. The issue of rice(sic). Vice-President Biden, you say that President Trump’s response to the violence in Charlottesville three years ago, when he talked about very fine people on both sides, was what directly led you to launch this run for president.

This is a Democrat talking point. The quote is taking totally out of context. This is the exact quote:

You know what? It’s fine, you’re changing history, you’re changing culture, and you had people – and I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists, because they should be condemned totally – but you had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists, okay? And the press has treated them absolutely unfairly. Now, in the other group also, you had some fine people, but you also had troublemakers and you see them come with the black outfits and with the helmets and with the baseball bats – you had a lot of bad people in the other group too.

Lie number three:

Chris Wallace: (32:21)
This month, your administration directed federal agencies to end racial sensitivity training that addresses white privilege or critical race theory. Why did you decide to do that, to end racial sensitivity training? And do you believe that there is systemic racism in this country, sir?

Breitbart notes:

Trump banned a specific kind of racial insensitivity training, which involves “Critical Race Theory.”

…Critical Race Theory is the idea that the major institutions of the United States are tainted by slavery and racism because they were founded when slavery was still legal in parts of the country. According to the late Derrick Bell, who founded Critical Race Theory, the very institution of private property is tainted by racism because of slavery. Even the Civil Rights movement was regrettable to some extent, Bell believed, because it created an illusion of racial equality. Only a massive redistribution of wealth, driven by the creation of socioeconomic rights, can cure American society of its systemic racism, the theory holds.

On a practical level, Critical Race Theory teaches that social interactions are guided by “white supremacy,” and that society is corrupted by “systemic racism,” according to which black Americans must always be victims — even if unconsciously so. Critical Race Theory is the ideology animating the Black Lives Matter movement that has brought unrest to America’s cities.

These are just some of the issues. One of the other things that really bothered me was the comparison between the Trump children and Joe Biden’s son Hunter. There has never been any evidence that the Trump children are guilty of anything. There is significant evidence that Hunter Biden has continually been involved in questionable business dealings.

 

If The Facts Get In The Way, Just Make It Up

Posted on by

The seeds for the division we now see in the country were sown years ago. Some were sown during the Obama administration when lies were told about the way the police treated different races. The seeds of division were sown when people like the New Black Panthers were not charged after intimidating voters at a polling place in Philadelphia despite a video showing the events. The seeds were sown when the IRS treated certain groups differently when they applied for 501c3 status. One of the biggest lies that has been told that has sown division is the misquoting of a statement made by President Trump after the riots in Charlottesville, Virginia.

Ann Althouse reminds us of this lie (and the fact that it has continued) in an article on her blog.

She notes:

Biden put up that tweet last night after the speech. This post is to look at the transcript of the speeches that Biden and Harris gave at their event yesterday and to pull out the Charlottesville quotes

We have a racial justice crisis Donald Trump seeks only to inflame it with his politics of racist rhetoric and appeals to division. Today’s not only the day I’m proud to introduce Senator Kamala Harris as the vice presidential nominee of the Democratic Party. It’s also the third anniversary of that terrible day in Charlottesville. Remember? Remember what it felt like to see those neo-Nazis, close your eyes, and those Klansmen, white supremacists, coming out of fields…

Real Clear Politics posted the real President Trump quote:

“Excuse me, they didn’t put themselves down as neo-Nazis, and you had some very bad people in that group.  But you also had people that were very fine people on both sides.  You had people in that group – excuse me, excuse me, I saw the same pictures you did.  You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down of, to them, a very, very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name.”

This is the quote that is being ignored:

“I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and white nationalists because they should be condemned totally.” 

Joe Biden is either lying or he is misinformed. Neither one is a good look for a presidential candidate.

Please follow the link to the article by Ann Althouse that is linked above for the whole story.

Taking The Tools To Success Away From People Who Need Them

Posted on by

Like it or not, people judge you by the way you speak. There is also a link between vocabulary and success. (See article here). So why has Rutgers University declared that proper English grammar is racist?

On July 24th, The Washington Free Beacon reported the following:

The English department at a public university declared that proper English grammar is racist.

Rutgers University’s English department will change its standards of English instruction in an effort to “stand with and respond” to the Black Lives Matter movement. In an email written by department chairwoman Rebecca Walkowitz, the Graduate Writing Program will emphasize “social justice” and “critical grammar.”

Walkowitz said the department would respond to recent events with “workshops on social justice and writing,” “increasing focus on graduate student life,” and “incorporating ‘critical grammar’ into our pedagogy.” The “critical grammar” approach challenges the standard academic form of the English language in favor of a more inclusive writing experience. The curriculum puts an emphasis on the variability of the English language instead of accuracy.

“This approach challenges the familiar dogma that writing instruction should limit emphasis on grammar/sentence-level issues so as to not put students from multilingual, non-standard ‘academic’ English backgrounds at a disadvantage,” Walkowitz said. “Instead, it encourages students to develop a critical awareness of the variety of choices available to them [with] regard to micro-level issues in order to empower them and equip them to push against biases based on ‘written’ accents.”

Additionally, the department said it will provide more reading to upper-level writing classes on the subjects of racism, sexism, homophobia, and related forms of “systemic discrimination.”

Our universities are supposed to be training the future leaders of industry and of our country. These leaders will need to be able to communicate effectively to do their jobs. Like it or not, correct English is the best way to communicate in the American corporate and political system. You can call that racist if you choose, but it is how things work.

Our education infrastructure has forgotten its responsibility to educate a person to become a contributing member of society. The decision by Rutgers not to teach basic grammar skills will limit the success of their graduates. The tuition at Rutgers is approximately $15,000 per year for out-of-state students. That’s an awful lot of money to pay for an education that fails to teach you the basics you need to succeed.

Sunlight Is The Best Disinfectant

Posted on by

Yesterday I posted an article about a chart on The National Museum of African American History & Culture (NMAAHC) website. The chart was essentially an accusation that the things that form the foundation of American culture are racist. Things such as a work ethic, the family unit, manners, respect for authority, self-reliance, delayed gratification, etc. Denigrating those values is not helpful to our social framework, nor is it a good thing to put in front of our children as fact. I wasn’t the only person upset that this chart was totally inaccurate and paid for with taxpayer money. Evidently someone was upset who knew how to get results.

Last night, Fox News reported that the chart had been removed from the website.

The article reports:

The National Museum for African American History and Culture (NMAAHC) has removed its controversial chart on whiteness from one of its webpages, telling people on Thursday that it didn’t contribute to a “productive conversation” about racial issues.

“Since yesterday, certain content in the ‘Talking About Race’ portal has been the subject of questions that we have taken seriously. We have listened to public sentiment and have removed a chart that does not contribute to the productive discussion we had intended,” the museum said in a statement.

Fox News reported yesterday that some described the chart as racist since it categorized things like “decision-making” and “delayed gratification” as part of whiteness.

The museum’s graphic broke the “aspects and assumptions of whiteness” into categories such as “rugged individualism” and “history.” For example, under “future orientation,” the graphic listed “delayed gratification” and planning for the future as ideas spread by white culture.

The article continues:

For instance, that information includes potential microagressions that could be committed by White people. “Acts of microaggressions include verbal, nonverbal, and environmental slights, snubs or insults toward nonwhites. Whether intentional or not, these attitudes communicate hostile, derogatory, or harmful messages,” the site reads.

It also tells readers that “if you are white in America, you have benefited from the color of your skin.” The website also maintained a video from “White Fragility” author, Robin DiAngelo — whose book has been touted as a go-to in the wake of protests against racism ignited in part by the death of George Floyd.

According to DiAngelo, white people have a hard time admitting their privilege. The portal reads: “Dr. Robin DiAngelo coined the term white fragility to describe these feelings as ‘a state in which even a minimum amount of racial stress becomes intolerable, triggering a range of defensive moves.’ Since white people ‘live in a social environment that insulates them from race-based stress,’ whites are rarely challenged and have less of a tolerance to race-based stress.”

So according to this, if I encourage a child of another race to do better in school, that is a microagression, but if I encourage a white child to do better in school, that’s okay. Can you see where this is going? This was a probe. Had the chart not been exposed, the museum would have pushed its racist (yes, this is racist) agenda even further. The message in this chart (dismissing the value of the family unit, dismissing the value of a good work ethic, dismissing the idea of self-reliance, and delayed gratification) if followed will lead to a life of poverty and dependence. Consider the fact that the key to Democrat political victories is a permanent underclass that will continue to vote for the promises made be Democrats.

I am glad that the chart was taken down. I am saddened that there are people in leadership positions that believe the ideas expressed in the chart. The chart is a recipe for failure–not for success. It is not a message we want to teach any of our children.

The Cancel Culture Is Beginning To Cancel Their Former Heroes

Posted on by

The New York Sun posted an article yesterday about Princeton University’s decision to remove the name of Woodrow Wilson from its school of public affairs. This reverses a decision made four years ago when the topic was also brought up.

The article reports:

…That was in 2016, when Princeton’s trustees, reacting to concerns within the school community and given impetus by Black Lives Matter, appointed a committee to appraise the 28th president of America, decided to continue to honor him.

At issue then was “the position he took as Princeton’s president to prevent the enrollment of black students and the policies he instituted as U.S. president that resulted in the re-segregation of the federal civil service.” Wilson’s name was on not only the School of Public & International Affairs but also a residential college. The board followed the committee’s recommendation to keep Wilson’s name. It issued what seemed to be an important statement.

“Contextualization is imperative,” it said. “Princeton must openly and candidly recognize that Wilson, like other historical figures, leaves behind a complex legacy with both positive and negative repercussions, and that the use of his name implies no endorsement of views and actions that conflict with the values and aspirations of our times.” As the cancel movement spreads today, that plea for context seems even more important.

The article concludes:

So where does that leave us? Writing in 2016 of Wilson’s views on race, scholar David Kennedy said that “We can wish that he had possessed qualities of imagination and empathy that would have liberated him from those views, but he did not.” Kennedy concluded that “In a world where there is no shortage of evil, it surely seems perverse to highlight the imperfections, rather than the positive accomplishments, of those who tried to do their best.”

Four years after echoing Professor Kennedy’s judgment, Princeton has suddenly zeroed in on Wilson’s imperfections. Whether that will serve the cause of racial understanding at the university remains to be seen. How sad it would be were one of two Princeton graduates to lead America and Princeton’s only Nobel laureate in peace — not to mention the coiner of the motto “Princeton in the Nation’s Service” — confined to the margin of the university’s institutional memory.

We seem to have lost the concept of viewing history in its context. Slavery and racism are part of America’s past, but slavery is gone and racism is not the acceptable order of the day, as it once was. Renaming things and tearing down statues will not change what was. It is time instead to deal with what is and work to make it better.

Now They Are Coming For My Ice Cream

Posted on by

The politically correct movement has reached new heights lately. Aunt Jemima, Mrs. Butterworth, the pretty young Indian lady on Land o’ Lakes butter, and Uncle Ben have all disappeared or are about to disappear. Now they are coming after Eskimo Pie.

Yesterday The Washington Examiner posted an article about the attack on Eskimo Pie.

The article reports:

Eskimo Pie is the latest brand to change its packaging amid calls for corporations to participate in the fight against racism.

The chocolate-coated vanilla ice cream bar will be changing its name and axing the cartoon image of an Alaska Native child that is featured on its packaging to reflect Dreyer’s commitment to racial equality.

“We have been reviewing our Eskimo Pie business for some time and will be changing the brand name and marketing.” Elizabell Marquez, head of marketing for Dreyer’s, told the Washington Examiner, adding that Dreyer’s is “committed to being a part of the solution on racial equality, and recognize the term is derogatory.”

The term “Eskimo” is considered derogatory because it was given to the indigenous peoples of Alaska and Canada by non-Inuit people and was said to mean “eater of raw meat.” The name, however, is thought to come from the French word “esquimaux,” which means “one who nets snowshoes.”

I am sorry if the indigenous people of Alaska and Canada are offended by Eskimo Pie. I suspect that the offense is not on their top ten list of priorities. If changing the name makes the manufacturers happy, so be it, but I really believe that this is much ado about nothing.

Is The Destruction Related To The Cause?

Posted on by

Destruction of other people’s property is not constructive, whatever the cause. In recent weeks we have seen total insanity in terms of the destruction of our history. It really doesn’t accomplish much–it simply gives vandals a chance to vent their general anger. We all agree that the killing of George Floyd was awful. Most of us don’t agree with much of what happened next. Protest is legal. When the first brick is thrown or the first person attacked, it is no longer a protest.

John Hinderaker posted an article at Power Line Blog today about some recent actions by the rioters that simply betray what they claim is their cause.

The article reports:

So much for the idea that “Confederate monuments” are under attack. Last night in San Francisco, left-wingers pulled down a statue of Ulysses Grant, the man who did more than anyone except Lincoln to preserve the Union and abolish slavery. Grant also, as President, did all he could to enforce Reconstruction and protect blacks in the South. He sent the military after the Ku Klux Klan in South Carolina, worked to ensure passage of the 15th Amendment, and signed the Civil Rights Act of 1875.

Of course, the Left knows little and cares less about any of this. Leftists hate the Union and hate men like Lincoln, Grant, Sherman and Sheridan for preserving it. Slavery is only a pretext. The United States and our constitutional democracy are the targets.

The article notes that Grant at one point was given a slave and was so against the idea of slavery that he freed the slave within a year. It seems as if Grant would be someone they would approve of. The fact that they tore his statue down gives weight to the fact that the riots have a deeper purpose than protesting racism.

The article concludes:

Every four years it is said that the current election is the most important one in our lifetimes. This time, it is actually true. Not a single Democratic Party official, to my knowledge, has condemned the anti-American madness that is sweeping across the nation. Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi are fully on board with the extremist elements in their party–I am starting to wonder whether there is any Democratic Party apart from the extremist elements–and the Democrats’ presidential nominee is a senile nonentity who, in office, would be controlled by the radicals. It is absolutely essential to our country’s future that Donald Trump be re-elected.

Standing Strong Against The Mob

Posted on by

Hillsdale College is unique in many ways. Its students are required to study the founding documents of America and its Constitution. The College accepts no federal money and operates with only private funding. It also offers many free online courses dealing with American history and the founding documents of America. Yesterday The Federalist posted an article about the College that included some recent comments by the College administrators.

The article reports:

The nationally recognized liberal arts institution Hillsdale College has a history of defying political pressure in order to uphold what is good and true. Its recent refusal to give in to the demands of those who think a public statement is necessary to fight social injustice is just the most recent example.

Some of the college’s alumni publicly pushed their alma mater to comment on the recent controversies regarding the death of George Floyd and the ensuing protests and riots. When a petition began circulating calling on the college to release a statement, arguing that its “silence” supported violence, the college responded in an open letter.

“The College is pressed to speak. It is told that saying what it always has said is insufficient. Instead, it must decry racism and the mistreatment of Black Americans in particular. This, however, is precisely what the College has always said,” the letter says.

The letter signed by the college’s administration argues the institution’s steadfast devotion to fighting for the truth that all men are created equal is proven by its actions rather than empty words. Hillsdale was founded by abolitionists in 1844 and has, since its inception, pledged to educate all students, “irrespective of nation, color, or sex.” Such strong anti-discrimination practices were viewed as fiercely radical at the time, and made Hillsdale among the first in the nation to grant education to black Americans and the second in the nation to provide four-year liberal arts degrees to women.

This education produced students who care about the dignity and equality of all people. When the Civil War broke out, a higher percentage of Hillsdale students enlisted to fight for the Union than from any other college. It stood as an anti-slavery symbol during this time, such that the revered abolitionist Frederick Douglass came to deliver a speech on campus.

“The College founding is a statement — as is each reiteration and reminder of its meaning and necessity. The curriculum is a statement, especially in its faithful presentation of the College’s founding mission. Teaching is a statement, especially as it takes up — with vigor — the evils we are alleged to ignore, evils like murder, brutality, injustice, destruction of person or property, and passionate irrationality” the administration writes in the letter. “… And all of these statements are acts, deeds that speak, undertaken and perpetuated now, every day, all the time. Everything the College does, though its work is not that of an activist or agitator, is for the moral and intellectual uplift of all.”

The article concludes:

The college’s commitment to its principles has never wavered. In the 1970s when the federal government attempted to require the college to discriminate against potential students based on their race, the college refused. This meant the loss of all federal funding to its students as well as the institution. Hillsdale has instead generated private funding to continue its mission.

The college operates today as it always has, educating another generation of students to aspire to the great principles animating the Declaration of Independence and Bill of Rights. Statues of Douglass and Abraham Lincoln adorn campus as students study, reminding them of the virtues the college upholds.

While other companies are busy regurgitating statements capturing whatever ideas are trendy at the time, Hillsdale is busy fulfilling the same mission they set forth 176 years ago.

Actions speak louder than words.

I Guess They Really Are Not Interested In Tracing The Virus

Posted on by

Yesterday The Gateway Pundit posted an article about the people tracing the spread of the Covid-19 virus in New York City.

The article reports:

New York City officials are busy tracing those infected with COVID-19 and everyone they’ve come in contact with, but they have been ordered not to ask residents if they attended Black Lives Matter protests.

Avery Cohen, a spokesman for Mayor Bill de Blasio, told the website THE CITY that if people can volunteer such information, but “no person will be asked proactively if they attended a protest.”

De Blasio in in the process of hiring 1,000 people to map all the intersections in which a person testing positive for COVID-19 could have potentially infected others.

A slew of Democrats whined when Americans protested draconian lockdowns, but they are totally behind people rioting and looting in the days after George Floyd died on Memorial Day in the custody of the Minneapolis police.

De Blasio says the two instances are not the same, saying at a June 2 press conference that “400 years of American racism… is not the same question as the understandably aggrieved store owner or the devout religious person who wants to go back to services.”

Earlier this month, the city council’s health committee chairman, Mark Levine, tweeted, “Let’s be clear about something: if there is a spike in coronavirus cases in the next two weeks, don’t blame the protestors. Blame racism.”

This is about to get interesting. It has been three weeks since the protests began. The incubation period for the coronavirus is two weeks. Based on the theories that caused the country to lockdown to prevent the spread of the coronavirus, we should be at epidemic stages right now. Why isn’t that happening? Is it happening and the news is not reporting it? I suspect that we are about to find out that the coronavirus is not nearly as contagious or deadly as we have been lead to believe. Now that we have had three weeks of protest and no epidemic, it’s time to open up the country and get back to prosperity, which is what the Democrat mayors and governors have been attempting to avoid all along.

Three Things We Are Being Told That Are Simply Wrong

Posted on by

On Friday, Heritage Action posted an article titled, “Three False Charges Against America’s Police Officers.”

This is the article:

Many of the events following George Floyd’s death have only perpetuated injustice and led to violence and crime. Thousands of rioters across the country have destroyed private property, looted businesses, attacked police officers, and have even taken the lives of innocent Americans.

Amidst the lawlessness, some on the left are using George Floyd’s death as an opportunity to push for extreme leftist agendas. Many of these agendas distort the truth about the role and efficacy of our nation’s police departments and propose radical “reform” measures that could potentially contribute to more crime and chaos in our country. These radical proposals from the left are based on lies and must be countered with truth.

Here are some of the fictitious claims liberals make against police officers… and the facts to counter them.

FICTION: “American police departments are systemically racist.”

FACT: Allegations of systemic racism are false and harmful.

While it is important to address grievances caused by the nation’s police departments, broad, all-encompassing accusations of racism completely disregard years of intentional training, diversification, and reform in police departments. Police are deployed based upon the location of crime, calls for service, and other data much of which is centered in minority communities. Additionally, research suggests that officers take longer to discharge their weapon when confronting African American suspects compared to confrontations with white or Hispanic suspects. Accusing the country’s police departments of inherent prejudice only feeds the extreme liberal narrative that police departments should be disbanded altogether.

Additional Resources

Policing in America: Lessons from the Past, Opportunities for the Future

Confronting Police Abuse Requires Shifting Power From Police Unions

Reform of Policing: What Makes Sense—and What Doesn’t

FICTION: “Police officers increase the likelihood of violence and crime against Americans.”

FACT: Simply put: the more policing there is, the safer America is.

Take the example of New York City which had its peak homicide rate in 1990 after several decades of pursuing a policing system which pushed officers into the background and relegated them to simply responding to crimes. In 1990, New York City had 2,245 murders. After switching to community-based policing with the goal of preventing crime, New York City has seen a dramatic decrease in both shootings and murders (down to 292 in 2017), resulting in a safer city. This is in large part due to officer training, increased police diversification, and improved policing methods. The fact is that American communities are overwhelmingly safer with police than without police.

Additional Resource

Cops Count, Police Matter: Preventing Crime and Disorder in the 21st Century

FICTION: “To stop police violence we need to defund the police.”

FACT: This argument is simply irrational. America needs police officers to maintain law and order.

Defunding our nation’s police departments would only lead to more crime and chaos and would directly harm the communities who disproportionately suffer the most. Additionally, defunding police departments will only lead to tighter budget constraints and less well-equipped police officers, making it even harder for police officers to do an already difficult and stressful job. However, in instances in which police officers use force outside the bounds of their training or even unlawfully, often union contracts stand in the way of appropriate discipline. Therefore, to stop unlawful police violence it is important that we reform the police union contract system.

I Really Do Wonder How We Are Going To Look Back On 2020

Posted on by

Yesterday The National Review posted an article about some recent statements by Boston Mayor Marty Walsh.

The article reports:

Boston mayor Marty Walsh declared racism a “public health crisis” on Friday, and announced a proposal to transfer funds from the police department’s overtime budget to social services.

Walsh said $3 million would be immediately transferred from overtime for city police to the Boston Public Health Commission. The mayor will also propose that the City Council divert 20 percent of the polices’s overtime budget, or around $12 million, to other programs.

Is there anyone who actually believes this is going to make Boston safer?

The article concludes:

However, Walsh also praised the city police department, noting that use of force complaints dropped by 50 percent from 2013 to 2019. Over the same period, the crime rate dropped by 30 percent and the number of arrests dropped by one third.

“They have made this progress…by lifting people up, not locking people up,” Walsh said. “They, too, want to be a part of the solution, and they continue to deserve our respect and gratitude.” 

Calls have grown to “defund” police forces across the country following the death of George Floyd, an African American man killed during arrest by Minneapolis officers. Massive demonstrations protesting Floyd’s death have spread across the country, devolving into riots and looting in some cities, including Boston.

At the same time, African Americans have also seen a higher mortality rate from coronavirus infections than in the general population.

This is pandering. The Mayor knows that moving the money away from the police department is not going to make anyone safer–in fact, it may put some neighborhoods in danger. This decision is bowing to the pressure of the mob that is currently running wild.

Would You Vote For This Person?

Posted on by

Yesterday The Washington Examiner posted an article about retired Air Force Col. Kim Olson, a Democratic candidate in a closely watched House race in Texas.

The article reports:

“What the hell you got snipers on the roof for in a peaceful march? Even if people loot, so what? Burn it to the ground, you know, if that’s what it’s going to take to fix our nation,” retired Air Force Col. Kim Olson said during a live digital event on Tuesday, shown in a clip obtained by the Washington Examiner.

“I don’t think people want me to say that,” added Olson, a Democratic candidate in Texas’s 24th Congressional District, which covers much of the suburban area in between Fort Worth and Dallas.

Olson, 62, made the comment during a several-minute answer to a question about what she thought about far-left calls to disband or defund police departments.

Olson started by saying that while “defunding” is a “tough word,” explaining that she supports prioritizing funding services such as rehab centers and social workers.

“You can’t just tackle the police, you’ve got to tackle some of the social injustice issues that are going on within our justice system,” Olson said. “You can’t train racism out of folks.”

The article provides some information about her military career that indicates that she would probably play the Washington game very well:

Her military career is a highlight of her resume — she was one of the first women to attend and graduate from military flight school — but it is also a potential liability. In the early 2000s, when she was stationed in Iraq, the Pentagon accused Olson of directing contracts to a private security firm that she helped operate. While Olson denies personally profiting from the arrangement, she pleaded guilty to charges that included creating the appearance of a conflict of interest, paid a $3,500 fine, and was permitted to retire with an honorable discharge. That history has not been a major issue in her campaigns or line of attack from her opponents.

There seems to be an inference in her statements that everyone is a racist. I object to that statement. There are some (ignorant) people among us who are racists. I have encountered a number of them in my life. I have no idea why they are racist. The best way to deal with them is to understand who they are and treat them accordingly. Keep them out of positions where they can exercise their racism. I don’t know whether the policeman who killed George Floyd was a racist or simply an out-of-control policeman. From the information coming out now, there was a personal vendetta involved that may or may not have included racism.

At any rate, burning down businesses solves nothing. It puts the people the rioters and looters care about at a disadvantage when stores in their neighborhoods refuse to reopen. The best thing we could do to fight racial injustice would be to improve our schools in neighborhoods with failing schools and set up mentoring programs for children without fathers in their homes.