Contact Form

Name

Email *

Message *

Tuesday, March 16, 2021

Who Is The Boss?

 


This Is What Segregation Looks Like. Hypocrisy?

 

Major University Holding Separate Graduation Ceremonies Based on Race, Income, Sexual Orientation

MeweSharePShare

When Columbia University in New York City holds its virtual graduation ceremonies for the Class of 2021, it wants to be sure that there are separate ones for certain identity groups.

“Complementing our school- and University-wide ceremonies, these events provide a more intimate setting for students and guests to gather, incorporate meaningful cultural traditions and celebrate the specific contributions and achievements of their communities,” the Ivy League university said in announcing a series of graduation ceremonies designed for those groups Columbia has deemed special.

The ceremonies begin with one for Native Americans on April 25.

Next comes what is called “Lavender Graduation” to spotlight the “LGBTQIA+ community” on April 26.

On April 27, the university will hold a ceremony for Asian students, followed by one for low-income students and those who are the first generation in their family to graduate from college.

TRENDING: Law Professor Fired for Racism After Saying Some Black Students Do Poorly in Her Class

The series of racially profiled ceremonies continues April 29 with one for Hispanic students — billed as “Latinx Graduation” to reflect current liberal language — and concludes April 30 with a ceremony for black graduates.

Among the trinkets given out at such a ceremony are what the university calls Multicultural Affairs Graduation Cords.

Columbia’s website says those will be bestowed upon students who “have demonstrated an outstanding commitment to inclusion, global diversity, social justice and multiculturalism through Multicultural Affairs, campus leadership, activism, community involvement, academic endeavors and/or personal dedication.”

Do you think separate graduation ceremonies are a good idea?
3% (39 Votes)
97% (1247 Votes)

“Worn in the various graduation ceremonies, the graduation cords are also a powerful visual symbol of our new graduates’ ongoing commitment as alumni in continuing and sharing the office’s mission of supporting personal development, advancing the strength within communities, acknowledging diversity in the different aspects of their lives, working toward social justice, honoring our different and intersecting legacies of struggle and survival and building meaningful coalitions across different identities,” the university says.


In a column for The College Fix in 2019, Dion Pierre wrote that race-based ceremonies are wrong.

The Hofstra University alumnus said he graduated before the fad — which has now become part of the graduation experience at more than 175 colleges — began, but he would not have gone if such ceremonies were in vogue when he was in college.

“I went to college to get a liberal education, not a black education, and even then I wanted nothing to do with the new forms of Jim Crow-esque separate-but-equal,” he wrote.

RELATED: Lone Dissenter: Chief Justice Roberts Enraged Over 8-1 Win for First Amendment Advocates

Pierre said segregated gatherings are not real-world diversity.

“Actual diversity is the everyday experience of getting to know people who differ from you. Skin color and the ‘black experience’ are at most a small part of it,” he wrote.

“Segregated commencement ceremonies are the tip of the iceberg of racial segregation on campus. They are part of colleges’ racial spoils system in which minority student groups shakedown college administrators for special accommodations,” Pierre said.

“[N]ewspapers and their friends in the diversity regime gaslight college trustees, donors, taxpayers, and most of all — students — into thinking these programs improve race relations. But the history of segregated programs and the statements of neo-segregationists show that they have widened the breach between the races,” he wrote.

“College seniors, regardless of race, should walk the stage together on graduation day,” Pierre said. “They will have to work in the same office spaces, seek office in the same Congress, and work to sustain the American project.

“As students prepare to enter a world that is truly diverse, colleges should be giving them a history lesson Americans have learned painfully before: separate can never be equal.”

Would The Military Like To Stop Freedom Of Speech? Appears So!

 Pentagon’s Bizarre, ‘Woke,’ Totally Wrong and Very Dangerous Attacks on Fox News Pundit Tucker Carlson

  

Opinion – In an unprecedented, thoroughly unprofessional, and dangerous move, this weekend the U.S. military suddenly stopped worrying about China and Russia, Iran, and all other critical threats to the U.S., and aimed their biggest guns at an American TV news pundit. The threat?

Tucker Carlson bashed the Pentagon’s new leftist ‘woke’ politics, mocked pregnant women in combat and decried the feminization of the U.S armed forces. However, he never criticized women in the military, just the Pentagon’s obsession with catering to their every whim, in order to recruit more.

Tucker said, as quoted by The Hill: “So we’ve got new hairstyles and maternity flight suits. Pregnant women are going to fight our wars. It’s a mockery of the U.S. military,” adding, “While China’s military becomes more masculine as it has assembled the world’s largest navy, our military needs to become, as Joe Biden says, more feminine, whatever feminine means anymore.” 

For that, the U.S. military’s retort against a U.S. citizen expressing his Constitutionally protected right to free speech was furious, fast, and frightening.

Rogue nations can threaten the U.S. with nuclear weapons or assassination against our president without a response, but in today’s America a TV news commentator can’t criticize the Pentagon’s increasingly bizarre obsession with leftist social engineering, without a full nuclear counterstrike by our nation’s top military leaders.

CNN reported on this unprecedented domestic barrage by Pentagon brass which targeted Tucker by name:

Pentagon spokesperson John Kirby said the Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin shared the same “revulsion” that many military leaders have expressed about the comments Carlson made.

Kirby said the military still had “a lot of work to do” to become “more inclusive, more respectful of everyone — especially women.”

“Women lead our most lethal units with character. They will dominate ANY future battlefield we’re called to fight on,” tweeted the Sergeant Major of the Army, Michael A. Grinston. “@TuckerCarlson’s words are divisive, don’t reflect our values.

General Paul Funk, head of Army Training and Doctrine Command tweeted that “thousands of women serve honorably every day around the globe.”

“They are beacons of freedom and they prove Carlson wrong through determination and dedication,” Funk added.

The senior enlisted leader at the US Space Command, Marine Corps Master Gunnery Sgt. Scott H. Stalker, called Carlson’s show “drama TV” and said he wished to “remind everyone” that Carlson’s opinion was “based off of actually zero days of service in the armed forces.”

Tucker then fired back at the ‘woke’ DoD leaders with more ridicule, as reported by The Hill, rebuking the “woke generals” for their attacks, saying he and his supporters were not “rattled”: 

We were almost rattled. Then we realized if the woke generals treat us like they’ve treated the Taliban, we’ll be fine. Twenty years later, the Taliban are still here. Maybe we ought to promise the Pentagon that we’ll get rid of traditional gender roles on this show. Change the pronouns, defeat the patriarchy, and all that. 

While Tucker took the Pentagon’s attacks in stride, all Americans should be deeply concerned. When the U.S. military, arguably still the world’s most powerful force, aims its rhetorical guns at a well-known U.S. citizen for simply expressing his opinion, when can they point those same massive guns at any one of us?

 

 

  

Paul Crespo

Paul Crespo is the Managing Editor of American Defense News. A defense and national security expert, he served as a Marine Corps officer and as a military attaché with the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) at US embassies worldwide. Paul holds degrees from Georgetown, London, and Cambridge Universities. He is also CEO of SPECTRE Global Risk, a security advisory firm, and President of the Center for American Defense Studies, a national security think tank.

Monday, March 15, 2021

Didn't Even Re-Type It!

 


Is This All?

 


How Much Longer Before We See The Damage Being Done In Washington?

 

Biden Asks For EEOC Attorney's Resignation. She Refused. Here's What Happened Next.

Leah Barkoukis
|
|
Posted: Mar 15, 2021 5:56 AM
Biden Asks For EEOC Attorney's Resignation. She Refused. Here's What Happened Next.

Source: AP Photo/Evan Vucci

President Biden fired Equal Employment Opportunity Commission general counsel Sharon Fast Gustafson on Friday after she declined to resign under pressure from the White House. 

“At the time I was nominated, I was asked if I would commit to do my best to fulfill my four-year term, and I answered yes,” Gustafson said in a letter to Biden. “Unless prevented from doing so, I intend to honor that commitment. I have confidently given this advice to countless embattled clients of the last 25 years: hold your head high, do your best work, and do not resign under pressure. In solidarity with them, I will follow that advice.” 

Gustafson was appointed in March 2018 by former President Trump and was confirmed by the Senate in August 2019 to a four-year term, which Biden wanted cut short. The EEOC is an independent agency within the federal government. 

"So far as I know, no previous General Counsel has been fired for being appointed by the wrong political party," Gustafson wrote.

Andrea Lucas, who was also appointed to the EEOC by Trump, blasted the White House’s decision.

"I find the action taken today by the White House against our independent agency to be deeply troubling, a break from long-established norms respected by presidents of both parties, an injection of partisanship where it had been absent, and telling evidence of what 'unity' actually means to this President and his Administration," Lucas tweeted.

"That, however, does not seem to apply to Sharon Gustafson.  And if such a principle does not apply to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission—the very agency charged with preventing and remedying discrimination and retaliation—where else does it apply?" she continued. "In the days leading up to the President’s decision to fire Ms. Gustafson, a report and related materials dealing with religious discrimination were removed from the EEOC’s website shortly after inauguration." 

At the beginning of that report appeared letters from Lucas and Gustafson. In it, Lucas said she was “deeply concerned that today, religious liberty has become a disfavored or second-class right in many areas of our society and culture.”

On Twitter, she said the administration's move "proves" her point. "The actions taken by this Administration are quite telling as to their priorities . . . and one can safely assume that combating religious discrimination—or retaliation, frankly, given Ms. Gustafson’s firing—is not one of them," she pointed out. "Instead, it appears that this Administration intends to achieve unity through uniformity by removing all dissenting actors, thought, and content from the federal government, the public square, and the marketplace."

Though Biden’s request offered no reason for wanting her to resign, Gustafson had been known for being a strong defender of religious liberties. 

“Your request that I resign provided no reason for the request, and I do not know which of your advisors recommended that you make the request,” she said. “But please be aware that there are those who oppose my advocacy on behalf of employees who experience religious discrimination and on behalf of constitutional and statutory protections for religious entities. I would like to continue my work on the EEOC’S mission to prevent and remedy illegal employment discrimination.” 

In response, Gautum Raghavan, the deputy director of the Office of Presidential Personnel, told her that she would be terminated, effective by the close of business on Friday. 

Republican Congresswoman Virginia Foxx blasted the White House’s decision.

"This is a pattern. President Biden calls for the end to 'partisan warfare,' only to turn around and demand that Senate-confirmed officials resign so he can make room for his left-wing friends," she said in a statement. “President Biden should take a note from General Counsel Gustafson, who stuck to her commitment and refused to cave to partisan pressure. This unprecedented firing of an honorable public official which occurred just hours after she was asked to resign is unwarranted and should be immediately rescinded. General Counsel Gustafson should be reinstated so she can complete her four-year term, independently and free from undo political influence.”

Biden pulled a similar stunt with Peter Robb, general counsel of the National Labor Relations Board. Like Gustafson, Robb was in a Senate-confirmed position to serve a four-year term at an independent agency when Biden fired him.