Higher education hypocrisy

Why is it when an incoming Boston University professor by the name of Grundy tweets, "white masculinity is THE problem for america’s (sic) colleges" gets to retain the position for which she was hired?

Even though the university president issued a statement supposedly condemning the language, Grundy is still being hired.

If the situation involved a white professor negatively commenting upon black Americans, it most assured that he/she would need to find employment elsewhere.

Inflammatory, racist commentary carries responsibilities for those uttering it. Grundy's reported comments fail to grasp the seriousness of her transgression or take responsibility for them. “I regret that my personal passion about issues surrounding these events led me to speak about them indelicately," Grundy said. "I deprived them of the nuance and complexity that such subjects always deserve."

Boston University in this case displays the growing higher education hypocrisy plaguing the nation.

Walking the Wall

Before taking office, every elected and appointed federal official should be made to walk the length of the Vietnam Memorial in Washington, DC.

They should be made to slowly walk along the Wall, looking at the engraved names, and thinking about the human cost of war.  Every member of Congress, every cabinet member, the Vice President, the President, and all the appointed officials requiring senate confirmation should be made to walk the Wall.

From the Wall, they should be transported to Arlington National Cemetery and made to walk the headstones.

Require the so-called leaders of our nation to reflect on the impacts of their comments, debates, votes, and decisions that send the members of our Armed Forces into combat.

   

Disconnect between military and society

The flap about the Under Armour t-shirt (http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2015/05/18/under-armour-sorry-iwo-jima-band--ballers-military/27505837/) is very revealing about the disconnect between the military and general society.

Several aspects of this story are very troubling.  First is that the individual who thought of the design failed to understand the importance and sanctity of any design emulating the rising of the flag on Iwo Jima by Marines during World War II.  (Perhaps we can lay blame on public schooling for this abject ignorance.)  Second is that the "artist's" supervisor failed to halt the process, displaying ignorance of the military honor, service, and sacrifice conveyed by the iconic photo, and also ascribed to any representation of it.  grasp the similar significance.  Third is that production managers failed to grasp the significance.  Finally is that we can conclude the company does not hire veterans, because an average veteran would have spoken up about the inappropriateness of the design.  Alternatively, perhaps the company does hire veterans and did not listen when concerns were voiced.

In this instance the disconnect was apparent in the actions of Under Armour who, by the way, goes out of its way to sell military logo merchandise at military bases.  If a major company with military business dealings makes such a drastic mistake, it communicates  that society at large is woefully disconnected from its military, from the men and women who volunteer to serve and go in harm's way.  

Since only one-half of one percent of our nation serves in uniform, it is distressing that incidents such as this happen all too frequently.    

The aging Vietnam veterans

Currently several hundred patriots are in the midst of traveling by motorcycle from California to Washington, DC.  They are participating in the 27th Run for the Wall, riding in honor of all American POWs and MIA: riding for those who can't.  They will arrive in Washington to join the Rolling Thunder procession over Memorial Day weekend.

The overwhelming majority of the participants are Vietnam veterans.  A generation of veterans that is aging.

They ride as the mistreated, maltreated, ignored, and aging warriors from a war decades past.  Justifiably angry and bitter at the treatment received from the nation they served, coming together for Run for the Wall is one way they seek healing.  The peer-to-peer camaraderie of support given and gotten.  A healing of sorts, which begins by greeting one another.

The most often overheard greeting was, "Welcome home, brother."  Giving each other a symbolic greeting that their fellow citizens failed to provide.  This steadily diminishing portion of our national population remembers and honors the POWs and MIA from their war.  They remember the more than 58,300 fallen.  

They didn't get the welcome home from their battlefields that our current warriors have received, as they came back from Afghanistan and Iraq.  In fact, it was the Vietnam generation leading the way in making damned sure our young warriors were properly greeted.

But the Vietnam generation is aging and death is taking its toll.  As these vets pass away, so does the strong patriotism they provide.  Unashamed of their love of country, each morning before the Run for the Wall begins, these noble men stand and recite the Pledge of Allegiance.  They stand and salute during the playing of the National Anthem.  They ride with flags mounted on their motorcycles.  They wear American flag patches on their leather vests.  As they ride across the country, their infectious patriotism brings out the best in the nation.  People waving flags on freeway overpasses as the riders rumble by.  Small towns turning out to provide a donated meal.  Mayors and local beauty princesses line up and shake their hands.  Service organizations stand holding American flags to welcome them to town.  Pastors lead bowed heads in prayer.  Maybe parts of the country are working to atone for the abysmal treatment from decades earlier.  The vets are both honored and humbled.  

They also remain resolute in their brotherhood, even as their numbers get smaller day-by-day.  With less than one-half of one percent of the nation serving in the military today, these vets are becoming an even tighter brotherhood, if such a thing is possible.  Instant acceptance awaits the veteran, from whatever generation.  Active duty members are celebrated, though decades younger.  Current war heroes and wounded warriors are supported.  The Vietnam veterans make sure the younger warriors know their service and sacrifice are recognized and appreciated by those who have gone before them.

Sadly, as the Vietnam generation ages, a critical part of our nation loses a bit of soul.

  

The day has arrived

After months of planning, the day has arrived and departure time is close.  The Harley is prepped, gear staged, and soon I'll be on the road to Ontario to join up with Run for the Wall 2015 (RFTW2015).

The main goals are:

• Finish research for the article on RFTW, including Interviewing younger (post Vietnam era) veterans
• Experience RFTW
• Participate in the first leg of the ride on the southern route

Though completing considerable research, including talking to the founder and several of those leading the mission, what will be encountered in somewhat unknown.  Reading the logistics guidance was impressive, though I'd expect nothing less than detailed planning from military veterans.  Will I encounter other folks I know, but haven't seen for a long time?  What new friends will I make?  What emotions will arise?  What humor and camaraderie will jump out?  Will it whet my taste for a subsequent "all the way" undertaking   What personal stories will be the most impressive?

Like with all new adventures, military experience in planning and adaptation of the planning are crucial.  Plan in detail, knowing that when the first shot is fired, the plan must be adapted.  One modification has already occurred, as a fellow Marine with whom I served from 1990-1992 called to explain he has to cancel from his planned participation.  An unexpected emergency arose and couldn't be pushed back.  So now I have a spare rack in a room in Phoenix on 13 May, so I'll work with the organizers to see if someone needs a rack for the night.

Well, the planning has been completed and soon it will be time to cross the line of departure.

Urraahh!
  

What are you doing today, this week, this month, and next month?

As the subject line reads, what are you doing for the next several weeks?  

Will it be physically demanding?  Will it be grueling?  Will it be repetitive?  Will it be outdoors?  Will it be undertaken with five comrades?  Will it involve self sacrifice?  Will it require utmost determination?

For the vast majority of us, myself included,the answers will indicate a rather comfortable few weeks.  Perhaps monotonous routines at work.  Maybe some quality time with family.  Or maybe just the routine that defines our lives.  Suffice it to say, for six individuals, these weeks will be anything but routine.

For six veterans (Anne Dios – Army; Anthony Jaramillo – Army; Sharon Smith – Air Force; Eric Sorensen – Army; Joshua Staggs – Army; and Stephen Thomas – Marine Corps) anything but routine is defined as hiking the Pacific Crest Trail, all 2.650 miles of it.  Mexico to Canada.  They are "walking off the war" as members of the Warrior Hike Program.  (Look up Walking Off the War on the Internet to learn its history.)

As the recent wars in Iraq and Afghanistan depart national consciousness, so will the men and women of our military.  Volunteers all, they are seeing the active duty force precipitously shrunk, weapons systems costs explode, benefits and pay eroded, retirement threatened, health care manipulated for political purposes, and training reduced.  Concurrently, unlike what some elected officials say, danger in the world is increasing.  Sadly, the service and sacrifice of these six vets are being taken for granted by those who haven't the faintest clue as to what they mean.

Veterans under the age of 35 make up less than one-half of one percent of our nation.  I can't think of another minority group that is this small.

Sadly, only other veterans and their families fully recognize and appreciate what service and sacrifice mean.  As these six vets continue their hike, I wish it were possible for fellow citizens to comprehend what it means to put on the uniform of a soldier, sailor, airman, or Marine.  Sadly, that won't be the case. 

As they trek along, what will you be doing?

   

40 years ago

This past Friday I joined with dozens of other bikers as we escorted the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund replica, The Wall That Heals, from a local VFW Post to the USS Midway Museum for display.  The timing of the display on the Midway is deliberate, because it has been 40 years since Operation Frequent Wind (the fall of Saigon) in which the Midway participated, helping to rescue a reported 3,000 refugees.

  

I clearly remember the spring of 1975, as I was a Marine stationed on Okinawa and had been due to rotate back to CONUS after a 13 month tour of duty.  One afternoon all the officers were called into the ready room, where the CO came in to inform us we were on alert to go into Vietnam, all rotations were cancelled, and those effected were involuntarily extended.  The next several days were hectic, as one might expect.  When the final orders were posted, I was not among those scheduled to deploy.  I pleaded my case, asking to be assigned to the mission, even offering to extend a full six more months.  Regrettably, it wasn’t to be, and other Marines from our squadron deployed.  

Well beyond the original rotation date, I eventually received the travel orders for home.  After boarding an aircraft at Kadena AFB, we taxied out to the runway.  Almost immediately the aircraft returned to the terminal and we were directed to deplane.  After reentering the terminal we were amazed to see the aircraft roll out and launch, taking our gear and leaving us.  We were put up in a variety of places for the next several days (I can't remember the exact number), under orders that we couldn’t leave our rooms, because we’d be leaving “soon.”  We had just the uniforms on our backs and whatever we'd carried on to the aircraft.  It wasn’t until days later, when we finally were aboard an aircraft and airborne that I learned the original aircraft had been diverted (along with almost every other plane in WestPac) to carry refugees who had been delivered to the Philippines onward to California, where a large Vietnamese refugee camp had been established at Camp Pendleton.  

Finally I arrived in Portland, Oregon, where my wife had been staying and held my eight month old son for the first time.  

So I remember 40 years ago.

Missing the military

On three walls around the desk in our home office are a variety of innocuous, though important to me, items.  The plaques, pictures, framed memorabilia, medals, and the like combine to form the self-congratulating reflections on a military career.  Or “I love me” walls as we Marines refer to them.

Definitely self-admiring, the only items that do not directly refer to or present my military career are a frame containing two pictures, one of my wife and me taken 44 years ago and a picture of us taken during a motorcycle ride around Lake Tahoe (she’s beautiful in both): my father’s Bronze Star Medal from World War II: a picture of my grandfather’s outfit, prior to shipping out to Europe during World War I; and a 1950s era picture of my father’s National Guard platoon.

Each and every one of the items on display has been carefully and deliberately chosen.  Lord knows there was a plentiful collection from what to choose, as attested to by the military footlockers stored in the garage and filled with countless similar items.

In the man cave of our home office, I often reflect on what has changed in our nation since I was sworn into the United States Marine Corps in 1970, the year before our marriage.  Much has changed for the better, but way too much has changed for the worse.  I retreat to this man cave during periods of introspection and reflection, looking for solace and reinforcement.  The memories evoked by the wall hangings offer relief from the day-to-day, plus reinforce those values I hold to be imperative. 

As a military officer with 30 years of active duty behind me, I worry about our nation.  Politicians lying with impunity.  Free speech under assault.  Christianity attacked from multiple sides.  “Big” money corrupting sports.  Immature students seeming to run universities.  “Social justice” forced down the throats of average citizens.  I could go on and on.  But I won’t.

The military wasn’t perfect, but it was far better than the general society I observe today.  My Marine Corps experience irrevocably shaped me and perhaps that is why I relish the times spent with fellow veterans (and bikers).  Maybe that’s why I wear USMC logoed shirts and sweatshirts (much to my wife’s dismay) as testament to belonging to something more important than the piss ant crap about which the liberals whine and complain.  And definitely that’s why I can speak with veterans from any era and establish an immediate bond of brotherhood.

While in uniform, I knew I could trust the Marine on my left and my right to protect me, just as they knew I would be there for them.  If the situation required, I knew they’d lay down their lives for me, as I would for them.  Tragically, you can’t say that about general society.  

Today it’s a crime to fly the American flag; an aspirant for the highest office in the land is a serial, congenital liar; LGBT activists demand that I accept their views; a member of Congress sent photos of his privates to others; other members of Congress get rich on questionable dealings; activist judges defy the  will of the people; “pro-choice” activists claim abortion is not killing the unborn; and I am expected to provide countless tax dollars to support the lazy, the illegals, and the corrupt.

Please!
 

I’ll just retreat to my office, look at the military memorabilia, and recall the outstanding Marines with whom it was my privilege to serve, some of whom now rest in peace.  Sergeant Major Warren.  Sergeant Hancock.  Sergeant Bollinger.  Corporal Nerida.  Captain Knapp.  Chief Warrant Officer Griggs.  Lance Corporal Albones.  Lieutenant Colonel Storey.  Captain Willis.  Master Sergeant Ojeda.  Sergeant Major Didas.  Colonel Wright.  Sergeant Ebersole.  Colonel Del Mauro.  Captain Winter.  Lance Corporal Sauer.  Major General Livingston.  Captain Cyr.  Lieutenant Colonel Melton.  Colonel Dockery.  Corporal Condit.  Lieutenant General Smith.  Corporal Cornelio.  Captain Wallace.  Colonel Nance.  Gunnery Sergeant Dehaven.  And many, many more.  I knew I could count on them…any time…any place.

Damn, but I miss the military.    

Streets named after them all over the world

There are streets all over the world named for the left's particular brand of free speech:

When it suits them, he left certainly likes to press the envelope on free speech matters, such as supporting university students trampling the American flag.  However, when it does not fit their narrative or suit their likes/dislikes, free speech is condemned an anti-"whatever they call it" or inflammatory or disrespectful or unkind or slurs or racist/sexist/fill in the blank -ist.  

The progressives demand the exercise of free speech for themselves, but actively work to deny it for others whose views do not align with their liberal agenda.  For example, in the case of the veteran who took action to remove the American flag being trampled by university students, it just can't be that waving the flag is acceptable free speech.  In another example, the courts held that wearing T-shirts emblazoned with the American flag on Cinco de Mayo is not protected free speech.  In another case, the exercise of free speech by displaying the American flag was cause for an apartment complex to demand a Houston man remove the flag, because it was a threat to Muslims.  A similar situation occurred in McClean, Virginia where a Marine Corps veteran was also directed to take down the American flag.

Apart from flags, there was the California case in which a university professor removed and destroyed pro-life display materials, because she was allegedly offended.  Of course, she took no action pro-choice displays.  Once again, the left's definition of free speech is conveniently one-way.

Just because someone is offended by or disagrees with the expressions of free speech by others doesn't mean they have the right or standing to demand the cessation of said free speech.  Unfortunately, the one-way culture of the progressives (particularly on university and college campuses) demands adherence to their dogma.  Like students at a university voting/demanding to cancel speeches by conservatives, remove businesses, reject the flying of the American flag, or other manifestations of self-defined intolerance.

In other words, liberal free speech is what the left defines it to be.  Conservative free speech, however, is decried by liberals amid demands that it be curtailed.

So, as the nation marches along, day by day, conservatives beware of the streets named for the liberal view of free speech.

  

Inappropriate speech

Have you noticed the inappropriate speech pattern exhibited by POTUS?  He presumes to use individuals' first names for people he has either never or only moment earlier met.  For example, during today's comments about the deaths of Al Qaeda hostages:  "As president and commander-in-chief, I take full responsibility for all our counterterrorism operations -- including the one that inadvertently took the lives of Warren and Giovanni."

Mr. Warren Weinstein and Mr. Giovanni Lo Porto were accidentally killed during a reported drone strike on an Al Qaeda target.

To presume familiarity by first name use of two deceased men he had never met, let alone established any relationship, is wholly inappropriate.  And this is not the first time this speech pattern had occurred.  During official ceremonies awarding the Medal of the Honor, our nation's highest award for combat valor, POTUS has referred to the recipients by their first names during his comments.  Again, inappropriate and, in my view, disrespectful.  When presenting the Medal of Honor, POTUS should refer to the individual by military rank (Corporal, Sergeant, etc.) and last name.  Doing so is both proper military etiquette and respectful of the extraordinary achievement of the soldier, sailor, airman, or Marine being honored.

POTUS does and says many things that exhibit aloofness and haughtiness.  The aforementioned speech pattern is but one.     

Questions for Hillary

I would like to put the following questions to her:

• Mrs. Clinton, what were your specific accomplishments, listed in order of major to minor importance, while Secretary of State?
• Mrs. Clinton, what were the specific pieces of legislation you crafted, sponsored, or co-sponsored, listed in order of major to minor importance, while a member of the Senate?
• Mrs. Clinton, this is a multiple part question related to your voting record in the Senate:  How many votes were called during your time in the Senate?  Of the called votes, how many times did you vote YEA?  Of the called votes, how many times did you vote NAY?  Of the called votes, how many times did you vote PRESENT?  Of the called votes, how many times were you absent?
• Mrs. Clinton, what was the singularly most important vote you cast while a member of the Senate?
• Mrs. Clinton, what was the singularly least important vote you cast while a member of the Senate?
• Mrs. Clinton, while a member of the Senate, of the days the Senate was in session, how many of the days were you present and absent?
• Mrs. Clinton, how can you desire to be viewed as an advocate for women's rights and equality, when you remain in the marriage to a serial philanderer and adulterer?
• Mrs. Clinton, how can you expect the electorate to accept that you are truthful, when you have lied multiple times, such as falsely claiming during your 2008 campaign to have landed "under fire" during a visit to Bosnia?  
• Mrs. Clinton, how can you stand for the importance of an individual's character, when you supported Anthony Weiner?
• Mrs. Clinton, regarding the loss of American life in Benghazi in 2012, which of your direct actions before, during, and shortly after the tragedy did make a difference?
• Mrs. Clinton, why did you refuse to appear on the Sunday news programs in the aftermath of the loss of American life in Benghazi in 2012? 
• Mrs. Clinton, what is your specific view on the sanctity of marriage vows?
• Mrs. Clinton, what specific organizations and businesses were you directly responsible for and did you personally lead?
• Mrs. Clinton, what funds did you solicit from foreign entities while serving as Secretary of State?
• Mrs. Clinton, what was the largest number of individuals you have personally directed and supervised at any one time?
• Mrs. Clinton, what was the largest budget you personally prepared and supervised?
• Mrs. Clinton, what were the greatest examples of bipartisan consensus for which you are directly, fully, and personally responsible?
• Mrs.Clinton, what are the meaning and requirements of the oath of office for the presidency?
• Mrs. Clinton, for what action or actions should a member of the White House staff be fired?
• Mrs. Clinton, for what action or actions should a member of Congress be involuntarily removed?
• Mrs. Clinton, since there is a two term limit for the office of President, why shouldn't there be a two term limit for the members of Congress? 
• Mrs. Clinton, what are the five main tenants of your national security policy?
• Mrs. Clinton, what is the most important responsibility of the President of the United States?

Is there any doubt?

If Russian hackers penetrated White House and State Department systems (http://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/238127-white-house-state-dept-cyberattacks-linked), is there any doubt they accessed the Clinton private server?

Should we trust the President?

“Not even a smidgen of corruption,” in reference to the IRS scandal.

“Transparency and rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency.”

“If you like your healthcare plan, you can keep it.  Period.”

"We have been very clear to the Assad regime, but also to other players on the ground, that a red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized.  That would change my calculus. That would change my equation."

Based on the above quotes from the President, why should we take him at his word regarding the agreement for a framework of a “deal” with Iran?  Can we trust him?  He has clearly stated his belief as a candidate and policy as President that Iran cannot be allowed to obtain nuclear weapons.  For example from the second debate in 2008, "We cannot allow Iran to get a nuclear weapon. It would be a game-changer in the region. Not only would it threaten Israel, our strongest ally in the region and one of our strongest allies in the world, but it would also create a possibility of nuclear weapons falling into the hands of terrorists. And so it's unacceptable. And I will do everything that's required to prevent it. And we will never take military options off the table."  And, “So let me be absolutely clear -- we remain committed to preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons" from May 2011.  And from the 2012 State of the Union address, "Let there be no doubt: America is determined to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon, and I will take no options off the table to achieve that goal."

Of grave and profound concern is the President’s characterization of the potential “deal” with Iran.  On April 2 he said, “Today, after many months of tough, principled diplomacy, we have achieved the framework for that deal.  And it is a good deal, a deal that meets our core objectives.  This framework would cut off every pathway that Iran could take to develop a nuclear weapon.“  Then he said in a subsequent interview, “What is a more relevant fear would be that in Year 13, 14, 15, they have advanced centrifuges that enrich uranium fairly rapidly, and at that point, the breakout times would have shrunk almost down to zero.”  The statement in the Rose Garden contradicts the statement made during the subsequent NPR News interview.  The President has clearly stated it is inevitable that Iran will obtain nuclear weapons.

The President’s NPR News statement repudiates his earlier candidate beliefs and subsequent national policy statements regarding Iran and nuclear weapons.

Politics aside, the severity of the matter of a nuclear weapon armed Iran demands the utmost in honesty from our President.  Sadly, there is all too ample evidence that we cannot take the President at his word.  He has proven himself to be unworthy of our trust.

Therefore, our nation must not enter into a deal that fails to meet the President's earlier policy statements regarding preventing "Iran from getting a nuclear weapon."  We can neither accept nor trust the President's statement that "it is a good deal, a deal that meets our core objectives."  The probable consequences of this example of his being untruthful are simply too high to do otherwise.   

Saturday at El Cajon Harley Davidson

It is a sunny and warm Saturday in San Diego County.  This means bikers are out enjoying the freedom of the open roads.  And for many, the open roads led to El Cajon Harley Davidson, where General Manager Brett, Sales Manager Matt, and the crew are doing it right.  By the by, Brett and Matt are both veterans, Army and Marine Corps respectively.

While chatting with Brett at the entrance to the showroom, one gent came up to speak with him.  Sporting  a Harley shirt, he said he'd just driven across the United States four time, stopping in "a lot of Harley dealers along the way."  OK, I thought, he's just telling us about his travels.  Then he pointed out to Brett that his crew is the "friendliest" group encountered in all those travels.  

Remarkable, because this unknown biker wasn't under any obligation to let the boss know how good his employees are doing.  This is the kind of off the cuff, spontaneous comment that really resonates with a boss.  It means his guidance and leadership are positively effecting the performance of the staff.  

Frankly, I have to agree.  Since Brett and Matt came on board, the staff at El Cajon Harley Davidson have really stepped up the friendliness.

And the monthly tacos and music events are a small, but positive part of the overall environment they have created.

Another example

In another example of lowering or removing educational standards, it has been reported that some states are eliminating high school exit exams. As observed in one report, "Critics think exit exams are unnecessary and place too much pressure on students -- ultimately decreasing graduation rates."

A major purpose of K-12 education should be, through practice, teaching our youth how to deal with the pressure of seeking accomplishment against established standards.  By the time students arrive at high school, it is time to instruct them that accomplishment matters, that standards need to be met, and that they are responsible for meeting those standards.

Surely, the standards must be reasonable, but challenging nonetheless.  The public that funds education through their taxes has a right to demand value in return.  Minimum standards are a reasonable mechanism for determining that value.

The public needs to be wary of comments like the above, because such comments come from activist union educators who push against any testing or system of evaluating student performance, because they want to ensure no link to teacher performance.  In part, their approach rests on no externally administered evaluation, so the teachers are self evaluated or are judged by union friendly administrators.

More important, though, than the union aspect in all of this is the damage done to our students.  Students in high school must learn to deal with the reasonable pressures of taking and passing tests.  After all, life itself is one series of tests after another.  In particular, if the students are not held to the standards, then they may be passed on to graduation without the ability to demonstrate they have mastered the subject matter.  For those who clamor that individual class grades demonstrate such mastery, it is argued that grades have become so diluted as to be effectively neutralized.  Otherwise, why are the SAT and ACT administered?

Eliminating exit exam testing is just another example of how union educators seek to eliminate any significant measurement of student achievement that can or could be used to gauge teacher effectiveness.  In pursuing this union goal, our students are left without the invaluable experience of dealing with the stress of performing up to standards.