I cannot find the right words that would allow me to comment on this video due to my desire to not use Marine language on my blog. My wife, several other women, and even some kids read my blog. So, if you do decide to comment, which I hope you do, please be careful of four letter words. Sorry but you will have to copy and past. I believe this video says something all of us already know too well. Let me hear from you.
Update regarding our scum sucking Swamp corporation Coke. From the horse’s mouth; their earnings report. Come on gang, let’s make them hurt this next quarter. Spread the word, and remember they make more than just Coca Cola e.g., Sprite.
Dow member Coca-Cola Company (KO $54) reported Q1 earnings-per-share (EPS) of $0.55, topping the $0.50 FactSet estimate, as revenues rose 5.0% year-over-year (y/y) to $9.0 billion, exceeding the Street’s forecast of $8.7 billion, and its organic revenues—excluding acquisitions, divestitures and foreign exchange—grew 6.0%. The company noted that global unit case volume was even, while it saw growth in concentrate sales and its price/mix was higher. KO said that its operating margin expanded driven by effective cost management, partially offset by currency headwinds.
The company said it lost value market share in total nonalcoholic ready-to-drink beverages as an underlying share gain in both at-home and away-from-home channels was more than offset by negative channel mix due to continued pressure in away-from-home channels, where it has a strong share position. KO noted that Q2 performance will be impacted by currency tailwinds and it reaffirmed its full-year earnings and revenue forecasts.
LOL, check out this FOX report on the back pedaling of COKE regarding the CEO’s dumb comments. Let’s HURT THEM big time!
First of all, I did some search to get a photo of the Minnesota State Flag for this post and WOW! t appears they are in the process of redesigning it. I could not believe some of the submissions, albeit I was expecting to see one honoring George Floyd, maybe it’s coming?
Folks, if you live in MN or know someone who resides there, you may want to share this post with them. I can tell this much, if I lived there, which would be akin to living in the real cesspool of politics, yes you guessed it, ILLINOIS, and I had school aged children, you can bet they would not be attending the public school system. Wait till you read this garbage
Vladimir Lenin said:
“Give me just one generation of youth, and I’ll transform the whole world.”
Well, this country is working on that generation right now and before our eyes. And MN is leading the way. Question: Do you know what’s being taught to your children? Do you ask them at the dinner table every night what they learned in school that day? Well, if you don’t, than I happen to think you are part of the problem!!!
Minnesota’s New Social Studies Curriculum Would Racialize First-Graders, Teach High Schoolers About The Evils Of ‘Whiteness, Capitalism, And Christianity’
The Minnesota Department of Education released a draft of its new social studies curriculum standards, which place a new emphasis on diversity, equity, and gender.
The social studies curriculum is up for state-wide review during the 2020-21 school year as part of Minnesota’s 10-year cyclical curriculum review. The Department of Education’s standards committee has dubbed the new framework a “more inclusive approach to social studies education.”
According to a copy of the standards, the committee wants to begin social studies classes with a land acknowledgment. Land acknowledgments tell students that they are learning on land that was conquered by Americans, though once belonged to Native Americans.
“Minnesota is the contemporary and ancestral home of the Anishinaabe and Dakota peoples, and social studies education on this land will acknowledge and honor their contemporary and historical voices,” the draft reads.
Under the new standards, learning about social justice curriculum begins in the first grade. Six and seven-year-olds may be taught about systemic discrimination and how groups have fought against such discrimination.
“[Students will] learn to recognize unfairness, stereotypes, and bias on the individual level (e.g., biased speech) and injustice at the institutional or systemic level (e.g. discrimination),” the curriculum reads. “[Student will] explore how individuals and groups in the past have fought against bias and discrimination through social justice movements.”
The standards insist that fourth-graders investigate how race, ethnicity, gender, age, religion, and geographic location shape the opinions of people.
In fifth grade, students are asked to “investigate how groups (example: women, religious groups, civil rights groups, indigenous peoples, LGBTQ) have advocated for access to greater rights.” Fifth-graders must also learn about the ongoing debate about renaming buildings following the death of George Floyd and the resurgence of the Black Lives Matter movement.
Elementary students are asked to “analyze how different perspectives influenced past decisions to name places and impact changing place names today.”
Middle schoolers may soon be exposed to learning about racism in relation to the criminal justice system in Minnesota, the evils of capitalism, and social justice activism.
The standards ask sixth-graders to “describe the goals, offenses, penalties, long-term consequences, privacy concerns of Minnesota’s juvenile justice system and evaluate the impact on Black, Indigenous, Person of Color (BIPOC) communities.”
Sixth-graders are also asked to assess the goals of activists in their “quest for their voice to be heard.” The standards specifically address the activism of anti-war, racial minorities, immigrants and refugees, women, LGBTQ, and indigenous people.
In seventh grade, students may be asked to describe how profit can be used as “an incentive for people to exploit others or the environment.”
High school students undergo the most intense social justice indoctrination. At one point in the curriculum, freshmen are taught about the evils of “whiteness, Christianity, and capitalism,” and asked to question the country’s founding documents.
According to the standards, ninth-graders must “describe the tactics used by the United States government to claim indigenous and Mexican land, including but not limited to an analysis of the ideology of Manifest Destiny and its relationship to whiteness, Christianity, and capitalism.”
The same students learn about how Euro-Americans allegedly used “whiteness” and traditional gender norms to keep people enslaved.
“Identify how Europeans and Euro-Americans developed new legal justifications for slavery and settler colonialism in the Americas by creating new racial categories (i.e. Whiteness), and new ideas about gender,” the curriculum reads.
Other lessons include an explanation of how “systemic inequity” created barriers to accessing credit, explain how race is a “social construction” used to “oppress people of color,” and learn to embrace gender ideology.
“[Students will] explain the social construction of race and how it was used to oppress people of color and assess how social policies and economic forces offer privilege or systematic oppressions for racial/ethnic groups related to accessing social, political, economic, and spatial opportunities,” the curriculum reads. “[Students will] develop a respectful awareness about how ideas and norms about gender have changed over time, and how members of the LGBTQ+ community have responded to persecution or marginalization by building coalitions in order to promote gender equality/equity.”
Instructors are told to teach about the failure and successes of the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments during the Reconstruction era. The curriculum asks teachers to “connect this history to persistent discrimination and inequity in the present.”
Ninth-graders must also question why the United States’ founding documents included only the voices of white people.
“[Students will] analyze the founding documents of the United States, including the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, as historical sources, asking who created them, whose voices were absent, and whose interests were articulated,” the standards read.
According to the Department of Education’s webpage, the committee will delay making a second draft until it has paid “full attention to issues of diversity and equity.”
During a virtual committee meeting, the department’s Assistant Commissioner for the Office of Teaching and Learning Bobbie Burnham said that the standards will be developed with an emphasis on the “lived experiences” of young, marginalized students.
“The committee has articulated the need to make standards and supporting benchmarks more meaningful by attending to the race, ethnicity, identity, and lived experiences of young people in relation to civic life and acknowledging voices and experiences of marginalized youth,” Burnham said.
A second draft is slated to be released in early June.
The Daily Wire is one of America’s fastest-growing conservative media companies and counter-cultural outlets for news, opinion, and entertainment. Get inside access to The Daily Wire by becoming a member.
Folks there is not one thing in this bill that even comes close to equality. It may be equality to the leftist progressive idiots in charge, but it sure does not spell equality to this patriot. I am beside myself and can’t even imagine what may come next. Please read on and do as Greg asks, write your elected officials NOW. This is absolutely insane. God, we need your help NOW.
UPDATE 2/26: Greg commented that since the Act has already passed the house, phone calls to your two senators are in order instead an email or letter. others to use. So how about some help?
Too often words are used to assuage reality. Verbiage and euphemisms can be useful in certain circumstances, but language should never be manipulated to camouflage wickedness.
The U.S. House is set to vote on the Equality Act. Sounds innocent enough. After all, what red-blooded American is against equality?
The Equality Act is terribly misleading and not only threatens religious liberty, but freedom of speech and rights of conscience. It would make gender identity and sexual orientation a protected class turning biological and biblical truth on its head.
A few highlights of the bill include how religious medical professionals would have to participate in unrestricted tax-funded abortions or lose their licenses. They would have to provide gender-transition treatments to children who would be able to change their gender without parental consent. Faith-based adoption and foster care agencies would be required to place children with gay couples or lose their licenses. Men will be able to claim the rights of women who would have to share all facilities with biological men while competing with them for athletic scholarships. Such an arrangement will also allow pedophiles unrestricted access to children. Churches that rent their facilities for outside events would be required to do the same for gay marriages and other LGBTQ events or face loss of their tax-exempt status, fines, and possible closure. It would prohibit the Knights of Columbus and other Christian non-profits from community block grants unless they accommodate the LGBTQ guidelines including hiring practices. Provided Christian schools do not adopt LGBTQ policies they would face decertification as the act would prevent appeal to the Religious Freedom and Restoration Act (RFRA).
Despite its name, there is no balance of LGBTQ rights with traditional religious rights. The bill should be renamed: The Cancel Culture Enabling and Enforcement Act.
The LGBTQ movement has successfully hijacked the Civil Rights Act, while specifically denying exemptions for religious freedom granted under the RFRA – a bill passed with overwhelming bipartisan support sponsored by then Congressman Chuck Schumer. Today, relying on now Sen. Schumer to safeguard religious liberty is like trusting the dog to find who stole the steak off your plate.
The Equality Act would suppress the Constitutional rights of 97% in the name of the other three percent. Anyone who disagrees or questions is cancelled as a hate filled bigot.
A Christian ecumenical pushback is brewing and is the only way to protect our rights and be the catalysts for a spiritual and moral awakening. The hour is late, but not over. Contacting your Congressional representatives in both houses is a must.
“The Equality Act is, without a doubt, the most radical assault on religious liberty, the right to life, and privacy rights ever packaged into one bill,” Catholic League President Bill Donohue. Andrew Walker of the Southern Baptist Convention, “The Equality Act represents the most invasive threat to religious liberty ever proposed in America and effectively turn Billy Graham into Jim Crow.” President of Family Research Council Tony Perkins called it the “Inequality Act” saying, “It is an attack on parental rights, women’s sports, but to the millions of people of faith in this country, it is an egregious attack on the freedom to believe and live according to those beliefs. It would position the government to lord over churches and other faith-based institutions … for not falling in step with a view of human sexuality that directly contradicts orthodox biblical teaching.”
No institution or person of faith will escape the Orwellian reach of the Equality Act and what everyone will learn is when equality comes before freedom, we get little of either.
Your president plans to fulfill his campaign promise to pass the bill in his first one hundred days and with Democrats controlling Congress prospects are favorable. However, given the Senate’s fifty-fifty partisan split, it would only take one Democrat to break ranks, while any tiebreaker is decided by Vice President Harris. Sure, but what about the seven Rhinos who voted to impeach President Trump? How will they vote?
The Equality Act is another sterling example of how chaos and ignorance reigns when biblical truth is vanquished by a morally and financially bankrupt government. Leftists, blinded by their pride, cannot see how they are rushing headlong into destruction and taking the rest of us with them.
Is this the legacy we want our children to inherit?
Have you made your call to your senators Washington office yet????
This country has lost its collective mind! If we, as Americans, don’t finally say enough is enough and take some action, our children will end up misfits, much like the latest generation that grew up during the height of the participation trophy heyday. Actually they are the ones who are pushing this equality equals participation garbage.
I attempted to find the 13 states who allow males to complete against females, but let me merely say, it is a highly muddied topic. I was able to identify a few who do so. Of course, at the top of the list is CA, then came MI, MA, NY, OR, WA, and PA. However, others have very confusing criteria that I could not ascertain their stand on the issue. I was shocked to see so many states who attempted to pass laws against transgenders playing in their newly adopted gender sports, but did not pass or the Governor vetoed the law.
What is your state’s rule of law? I do know that in my state those assigned female at birth may participate in boys’ and men’s sports, but those assigned male at birth may not participate in girls’ and women’s sports. Thank you Gov DeSantis.
While You Vacationed By: G. Maresca
Once school was dismissed back in June, the U.S. Department of Education, another federal bureaucratic dinosaur that has outlived its function if it ever had one, published 700 pages of gratuitous regulations concerning Title IX.
Title IX is the civil-rights law that bans discrimination on the basis of gender in any educational program funded by the federal government. When Title IX was enacted in 1972, it was to safeguard access for women in education and said nothing about athletics. That soon changed as Title IX remedied the dearth of women’s sports teams especially on college campuses with the purpose of equalizing the field of play.
A plethora of athletic scholarships soon followed.
It is no understatement to say that Title IX has become one of the most far-reaching and controversial laws of our time. In essence, it has turned a benevolent ideal into an Orwellian flummox.
Title IX’s latest changes are being touted by the National Education Association as a great victory. Such a blatant overstatement raises it share of red flags. Allow me to hoist a few.
Celebrating its 50th anniversary Title IX is showing its age in a pathetic attempt to jump on the transgender bandwagon. As the Child and Parental Rights Campaign website clarified among those 700-pages, gender identity is now defined as transgenderism where one’s biological gender means nothing. Schools are to support transitioning children without parental consent. This is already happening in California.
Schools have no right to usurp parental authority in directing the education and medical decisions for their children.
Outright dismissed is the mutilation done to children’s bodies. It was in July that the FDA admitted how puberty blockers can cause brain swelling and loss of sight, while hormone treatments can result in sterilization. Then there are the inestimable emotional scars.
Allowing male transgenders to compete against women handcuffs women’s athletics. The left does not comprehend that Title IX was never meant to allow males to compete against female athletes all the while violating their locker room privacy.
Fairness in competition is underscored in boxing. No one wants to watch a fight between a featherweight and a heavyweight, as it is simply unfair. So, too, is a competition between a transgender male and a biological female.
In sports, biology certainly matters; it is why women’s sports exist. When biological reality is dismissed, women pay a hefty price. With women losing to transgenders who are biological males under the auspices of Title IX has to be the greatest of ironies as it makes a mockery of women’s athletics.
You can thank Obama’s administration when Joe Biden was vice president that decided Title IX should also safeguard sexual orientation and gender identity. The Supreme Court then mitigated the legal meaning of both placing women’s sports in a free fall back to their starting line.
In its wake the Title IX phenomenon has advanced the development and growth of the nation’s college sports industrial complex that begs the question of how much true intrinsic value does it bestow upon higher education. The administrative state on college campuses has metastasized under the auspices of Title IX, where an army of bureaucrats waving the flag of diversity, equity and inclusion have been hired to ensure all regulatory requirements are adhered to.
Athletic competition for women was established because physical differences between the genders should not prevent any woman from competing. Once upon a time in America if you took such an opportunity away from a woman, you were a misogynist. In Biden’s America, it is called equality.
Title IX was meant to correct sex discrimination, not enforce it.
Thirty-seven states have enacted protections to preserve women’s athletics. These Title IX proposed federal changes will challenge all prior state legislative decisions.
Before reality is turned on its head, you can make a difference.
Statements are being accepted through September 12 at the Federal Register and must be original as scripting of comments (cut and paste) are not acceptable because any identical comment will be counted as just one. The Child and Parental Rights Campaign website does provide ideas in their “comment starter letters” section.
Exercise your right to be heard as the future of America’s children lie in the balance.
Greg Newbold is one of the smartest, most professional Marines with whom I ever had the pleasure of serving. We were Captains together in the Ninth Marines at Camp Schwab, Okinawa 1977-78. Even among us captains, we all had a sense that Greg was destined to become a flag officer.
Captains Tad Curtis and Greg Newbold outside the BOQs, Camp Schwab, Okinawa, 1977. Tad was my suite mate.
Knowing him as I do, it comes as no surprise that Greg has been one of the few flag officers of any branch who have come out against the travesty besetting our military today. He never was one to mince words, and no one could exchange verbiage with him. I remember a story going around from years ago about, a “word war” ensuing between Greg and his boss. As I recall, Greg was two-star and at a press conference he used the word eviscerate. Later his boss, a pompous Air Force three-star “tried” to make fun of Greg by saying he didn’t know Marines were smart enough to use such big words like eviscerate. Greg started using words at press conferences that the news reporters didn’t know their meaning. The three-star lost the war.
Greg does a great job of laying it out in simple terms for everyone to read and “hopefully” understand. Of course the arrogant, know-it-all, Woke generals of today in every branch, including our current CMC, aren’t smart enough to truly understand about which Greg is speaking. Sad. None of them could hold a candle to this Officer of Marines. Read and be informed by someone who has been there , done that!
Many Americans, particularly our most senior politicians and military leaders, seem to have developed a form of dementia when it comes to warfare. The result is confusion or denial about the essential ingredients of a competent military force, and the costs of major power conflict. The memory loss is largely irrespective of political bent because all too many are seduced by a Hollywood-infused sense of antiseptic warfare and push-button solutions, while forgotten are the one million casualties of the Battle of the Somme in World War I, or the almost two million in the Battle of Stalingrad in World War II.
This “warfare dementia” is a dangerous and potentially catastrophic malady, because the price for it could alter the success of the American experiment and most assuredly will be paid in blood. The condition is exacerbated and enabled when the most senior military leaders — those who ought to know better — defer to the idealistic judgments of those whose credentials are either nonexistent or formed entirely by ideology.
The purpose of this essay is to explain the fundamental tenets of a military that will either deter potential enemies or decisively win the nation’s wars, thereby preserving our way of life. What follows are the tenets of Critical Military Theory:
1. The U.S. military has two main purposes — to deter our enemies from engaging us in warfare, and if that fails, to defeat them in combat. Deterrence is only possible if the opposing force believes it will be defeated. Respect is not good enough; fear and certainty are required.
Relevant Wisdom: “If we desire to avoid insult, we must be able to repel it; if we desire to secure peace, one of the most powerful instruments of our rising prosperity, it must be known that we are at all times ready for War.” George Washington.
2. To be true to its purpose, the U.S. military cannot be a mirror image of the society it serves. Values that are admirable in civilian society — sensitivity, individuality, compassion, and tolerance for the less capable — are often antithetical to the traits that deter a potential enemy and win the wars that must be fought: Conformity, discipline, unity.
Direct ground combat, of the type we must be prepared to fight, is only waged competently when actions are instinctive, almost irrationally disciplined, and wholly sacrificial when required. Consensus building, deference, and (frankly) softness have their place in polite society, but nothing about intense ground combat is polite — it is often sub-humanly coarse.
Relevant Wisdom: “We sleep soundly in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to do violence on those who would harm us.” Attributed to George Orwell, possibly originally from Richard Grenier.
3. There is only one overriding standard for military capability: lethality. Those officeholders who dilute this core truth with civil society’s often appropriate priorities (diversity, gender focus, etc.) undermine the military’s chances of success in combat. Reduced chances for success mean more casualties, which makes defeat more likely. Combat is the harshest meritocracy that exists, and nothing but ruthless adherence to this principle contributes to deterrence and combat effectiveness.
Relevant Wisdom: “I shall see no officer under my command is debarred….from attending to his first duty, which is and always has been to train the private men under his command that they may without question beat any force opposed to them in the field.” The Duke of Wellington
4. A military should not be designed to win but to overwhelm. In baseball, you win if your total score is one run better than your opponent’s. In war, narrow victories incur what we call “the butcher’s bill.”
Relevant Wisdom: “But these things do not belong to war itself; they are only given conditions; and to introduce into the philosophy of war itself a principle of moderation would be an absurdity.” Carl Von Clausewitz.
5. Wars must be waged only with stone-cold pragmatism, not idealism, and fought only when critical national interests are at stake. Hopes for changing cultures to fit our model are both elitist and naive. The failures of our campaigns in Iraq and especially in Afghanistan confirm this.
Relevant Wisdom. “They enjoy playing poker with someone else’s chips.” B.V. Taylor
6. A military force’s greatest strengths are cohesion and discipline. Individuality or group identity is corrosive and a centrifugal force. Indeed, the military wears uniforms because uniformity is essential. The tenets of Critical Race Theory – a cross-disciplinary intellectual and social movement that seeks to examine the intersection of race and law in the United States, but which has the unfortunate effect of dividing people along racial lines – undermine our military’s unity and diminish our warfighting capabilities.
Recruit training teaches close order drill and the manual of arms (drill with weapons) not because they still have relevance to maneuvers on the field of battle, but because they instill a sense of how conformity creates efficiency and superior group results. Upon a firm foundation of cohesion, imaginative leaders can spark initiative and innovation. But when we highlight differences or group identity, we undermine cohesion and morale. Failure results.
Relevant Wisdom: “Four brave men who do not know each other will not dare to attack a lion. Four less brave, but knowing each other well, sure of their reliability and consequently of mutual aid, will attack resolutely. There is the science of the organization of armies in a nutshell.” Colonel Ardant du Picq.
7. “The enemy gets a vote.” An objective lens for military theory is how the nation’s foes regard our martial ethos; after all, that is what constitutes deterrence…or lack of it. Ferocity, not sensitivity, prevails.
Relevant Wisdom: “We will not fight them. They are not normal. When we shoot at them, they run towards us. If we fight them, we die. They are worse than the sons of Satan.” Taliban radio intercept after engaging U.S. forces.
8. Infantry and special operations forces are different. The mission of those who engage in direct ground combat is manifestly distinct, and their standards and requirements must be as well. Not necessarily better, but different. For direct ground combat units, only the highest levels of discipline, fitness, cohesion, esprit, and just plain grit are acceptable. Insist on making their conditions and standards conform to other military communities, and you weaken the temper of steel in these modern-day Spartans.
Relevant Wisdom: “It is fatal to enter a war without the will to win it.” General Douglas MacArthur.
9. Those who enlist in our military swear an oath to carry out dangerous, sometimes fatal duties. We call it “being in the service,” because it’s service to others….selfless sacrifices when the other option was often more comfort, freedom, individuality, and higher pay. Those who occupy the most senior ranks of the military must repay this selflessness with courage that is even rarer — moral courage. Civilian control of the military is indisputable, but its corollary is the ordinary principle that advice is sought, offered, and seriously considered before crucial decisions are made. My personal experience provides examples — the willful exclusion of military judgments in the build-up to the Iraq War with the attendant consequence that the invasion force was too shallow (thereby creating a vacuum which the insurgents quickly filled), and the decision to disband the Iraqi Army (the single most unifying institution in that country) after the collapse of the Baathist regime. A more recent example worth considering involves the Afghanistan withdrawal.
Relevant Wisdom: “There’s a great deal of talk about loyalty from the bottom to the top. Loyalty from the top down is even more necessary and is much less prevalent.” General George S. Patton.
So what’s the problem? The problem today is one of both priorities and standards. We signal a dangerous shift in priorities (as just one example) when global warming, not preparedness to defeat aggressive global competitors, is considered the greatest problem for the Department of Defense and headquarters and rank inflation blossom out of control to the point that the support element greatly diminishes the ground combat element that wins wars. A problem of standards when every service and the Special Operations community dilute requirements based purely on merit in favor of predetermined outcomes to favor social engineering goals, and when new training requirements crowd out expectations and measurements of combat performance.
This principle is the most clearly and frequently violated in our current military environment. Although the examples are many, the most egregious sidestepping of scientific evidence occurred when the U.S. Marine Corps’ lengthy examination of the effects of integrated (coed) ground combat performance was refuted and ignored (often by those who hadn’t read it). This brings to mind the verbiage used in another context: “inconvenient truths.”
The critical tasks outlined above may omit some essentials, but these serve as a starter and perhaps as a wake-up call. We have witnessed extraordinary and sacrificial service by our Armed Forces — too good to squander by confusing our military’s purpose with those of individuals who don’t pay in blood for their errors. And too good for a foe to misjudge our intrinsic toughness. In any case, these are not Critical Military Theories; these are Critical Military Facts.
Greg Newbold is a retired Marine Corps Lieutenant General who commanded at every level from platoon to division. His last assignment was as Director of Operations for the Joint Staff in the Pentagon. In retirement, he operated a science and technology think tank, and co-founded a private equity firm and consulting group. He has been a director on a dozen non-profit and for profit companies.
