Tag Archives: political correctness

Political Correctness out of control

by Jim Emerson,  staff writer

The physical demands of combat positions make for jobs that only a few men and even fewer woman are capable of performing. In a headlong rush to satisfy the utopian stupidity of political correctness, the Washington establishment insistence that women be allowed in combat positions will only emasculate the military that protected this country since its founding.

This week the Marine Corps announced that fewer than half of female recruits were capable of meeting the minimum standards required for combat jobs. These requirements are the same for males and females in basic training. In an effort to conform to political correctness, the Marine Corps delayed implementation of the minimum requirements for women, fearing that they might lose female recruits and those already serving who cannot meet standards. These standards just happen to apply to men as well, some of whom are also not fit for infantry training. (1)

The debate
This news rekindled the debate about whether women have the physical strength for a front line combat position. The delay of standards for combat-ready troops is an indication that the overwhelming majority of women are simply not capable of serving in front line units. President of the Center for Military Readiness, Elaine Donnelly told the Associated Press that “Awarding gender-normed scores so that women can succeed lowers standards for all. Women will suffer more injuries and resentment they do not deserve and men will be less prepared for the demands of direct ground combat.”

The culture war to diminish the status of military services attempts to erase the biological differences between men and women. Hard work is no longer appreciated, just as the role of education today is to castrate male students. (2) Camille Paglia told the Wall Street Journal “This PC gender politics thing—the way gender is being taught in the universities—in a very anti-male way, it’s all about neutralization of maleness,” and  “Masculinity is just becoming something that is imitated from the movies. There’s nothing left. There’s no room for anything manly right now.”  Men are no longer allowed to be men and women will no longer be allowed to women. The integration of women into combat is the latest step towards the general wussification of America.


1.    http://www.myfoxdc.com/story/24349599/marines-delay-female-fitness-plan-after-half-fail#ixzz2pHPCzD2K
2.    http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303997604579240022857012920

Cowards making military policy

by Jim Emerson,  staff writer

Retired Lt. Col. Robert Macginnis’ book DEADLY CONSEQUENCES: How Cowards Are Pushing Women into Combat, presents the facts, studies and the history of why women should not be allowed into ground combat units. Despite the modern perception of the military fighting a high tech, Nintendo-type war, any prolonged action will require face to face encounters with the enemy. The experienced infantry officer argues with facts that women should not be placed in situations where they may have to fight in close quarters or serve in Special Forces.

And “society at large” doesn’t have a clue. The political correctness, bovine excrement crowd believe that women can fight on the front line as efficiently as any man.  In order to appease the liberal forces of Congress and members of an Obama White House staff who never served a day in their life in the American military, the Armed Services will be compelled to weaken physical standards in order to allow women to serve in front line situations and in special forces.

Unfortunately, this is not an opinion but a fact. General Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has admitted as much. In a press conference announcing the rescission of the 1994 rule excluding women from ground combat units Dempsey said, “If we do decide that a particular standard is so high that a woman couldn’t make it, the burden is now on the service to come back and explain to the secretary, why is it that high?” (4)

Military readiness should never be compromised to serve the ends of political correctness or appease its cowardly proponents. And that is what so many of these people are–cowards. Spare me the ever-present anecdotes from people who “served in the military.” Fewer than ten percent of those who served have been on the ground, in-country and up close with the enemy. If any soldier, regardless of sex, can’t satisfy the same physical demands as the war fighter in a unit they need to be moved to a support position. And that is certainly nothing to be ashamed of.

The greatest insult to someone on the front line is being questioned or second guessed by a REMF (Rear Echelon Mother F’r). Today we have REMFs in Washington D.C. who believe that they are so damn smart they can dictate policy for the entire military based on theory. Yes, women can shoot a weapon and kill but the Col. argues that women lack the killer instinct needed to kill the enemy in squalid situations for a sustained combat operation. (2) “The Joint Chiefs have stopped being soldiers and are now just well-trained ‘yes men’ to whatever administration occupies the White House.” (1)

England and Russia experimented with women in combat. Low information cowards may argue that Russians had success with female combatants during World War II. Well then why, as Macginnis points out, did the Soviets stop using women in combat units after the Second World War? The British Army recently came to the conclusion that women do not work well in combat situations. (1)  As Col. Maginnis points out it has everything to do with a natural deficit of physical capabilities; a potential that is limited by the nature of their sex.

Women in the military perform their duties professionally and honorably.  But to lower standards and thereby risk the lives of soldiers fighting on the front line does a disservice both to those females who will be made to look incompetent and to those males who might be killed as a result.   



1.    http://www.humanevents.com/2013/07/28/book-review-deadly-consequences/
2.    http://video.foxnews.com/v/2572699266001/how-cowards-are-pushing-women-into-combat/
3.    http://freebeacon.com/new-book-examines-role-of-women-in-combat/
4.    http://nation.time.com/2013/07/25/the-cowardly-push-to-get-women-into-combat

Science, Mathematics, Education, Religion and “Progressivism”

by Gerald V. Todd,  staff writer

Former Obama czar and now Harvard genius Cass Sunstein is lamenting over the lack of American students’ interest in science and math. Sunstein is right in noting that kids arrive in college with poor preparation in the sciences – I might add in bad physical shape because their high school PE programs were cut, their corpus collosi challenged because their right brain development in music and art programs were cut to make room for the political correctness of phony racial diversity, gender equality, sexual proclivity and hate America themes. And they expect kids to be motivated to subject themselves to real disciplines?

I think what Sunstein and the rest of the “progressive” crowd miss is the attitude base of today’s education process. Students are hammered with all the evils of American hegemony and destroying the earth with our technology. Schools under guidance from DC promote Godless political correctness in all its evil forms, including youthful guilt trips. The clergy-discoverers were likely motivated by God’s command in Genesis – “subdue the earth – be fruitful and multiply…” That doesn’t mean beat it to death, it means search, discover, refine, apply and bring forth the fruit of products, processes and opportunities for all to expand their horizons by creativity and service – giving glory to God – the only entity that can handle it! That’s called Stewardship – the opposite of EPA regulations written by ignoramuses!

These are the “progressive solutions” – see a challenge – centralize it. See it isn’t working, throw money at it. See it still isn’t working – throw more money and write new draconian rules and regulations, ad nauseum.  If that isn’t insanity for the sake of power, just what is? Of course, its also job security for non-performers expecting cushy perks for the rest of their lives – until their idiot-run cities like Detroit and Stockton go bankrupt.

Why would a student become fired up about science and technology when his education process has laid a guilt trip on him for even thinking about it? At the world famous Bakersfield Relay For Life, I fell in to walk with a young black woman and her son. She, like me was a cancer survivor. I asked her son what he wanted to be when he grew up. A nice, well-mannered kid, his answer shocked me. He said, “I want to become a lawyer so I can sue corporations!”

As an engineer, I’m a lousy structural designer, but a pretty good innovator currently holding forth some very fine “green” technologies for water, energy and environmentally pure applications. These are “very fine” because they actually reduce costs and eliminate the kind of chemical hazards that require a safety shower nearby in case a worker gets soaked with iodine or acid. Do we get an ounce of encouragement from the environmental gurus on government payrolls? Hell no! It falls right back to good old free enterprise, salesmanship and problem solving.

When President George H. W. Bush promised to shut down the Department of Education then caved to the “progressives” of both parties, he missed his chance for true greatness. The education process would have been returned where it belongs and competence and competition are the highest – to the parents and the local community. Now we’re stuck with three major messes all brought on by the Federal Government interfering where the Constitution forbids it to go: Health, Education and Welfare – the playground of eugenicists and totalitarians.

“Times they are a’changing!”

Media silence on race makes things worse


By Derrick Hollenbeck, staff writer

Since America is more than seventy percent White, an honest media would present lots of stories about minorities, especially Blacks victimizing Whites even as they demand more money from them; but of course they don’t. The media doesn’t concern itself with the truth about Black on White crime. It has become virtually axiomatic that stories about violent crimes omit the race of the perpetrator even when it is known and would be helpful in capturing him.

While statistics about Black on White crime tell the worst of the story, most Whites have instinctively learned to stay off their town’s “Martin Luther King Boulevard” for their own safety.  Nevertheless, that strategy has its limitations. Large cities have seen their centers became minority enclaves and it is woe to those Whites who innocently and/or naively wander into such areas even during daylight.

A recent “Philly” magazine article talks about the dangers Whites face by merely attempting to conduct everyday business in Philadelphia.

The author found foreigners willing to speak freely about their observations of Blacks. A Russian student described Black rudeness and lack of ambition; a Panamanian talked about the “moral poverty” of the Blacks she met. Because neither grew up being intimidated into silence by America’s political correctness enforced by our media, they had no hesitation to speak freely of their observations of Blacks. 

Native born Whites who would comment expressed an “I should have known better” attitude about being the victim of Black on White crime.      

A White man told of being beaten and robbed but happy to get his wallet back. He described his attackers as Black, but quickly added “Not that that matters.”      

Another White man acknowledges he has grown to accept being offered drugs from 12 year old Black boys because they are “just trying to make some money.”

An 87 year old White man rattled off a list of crimes from petty thefts to a mugging committed against him by Blacks. He is resigned to the reality that things will never improve within his lifetime.

While most of these crimes are admittedly minor and uncomfortable in nature, if we are ever to improve race relations in our country we must begin by demanding an end to incivility and petty crimes perpetrated by Blacks. Serious crimes are always committed by those who have started from the bottom. How this can happen is a mystery because of a duplicitous media bent on papering over the truth to make itself feel better.  Not talking about it makes things worse.



The incredibly foolish Chief Charlie Beck


By Kevin “Coach” Collins

LA Police Chief Charlie Beck has made a bad decision.

Life is a series of decisions. No one should understand this more than Los Angeles Police Chief Charlie Beck. For obvious reasons, in any situation your ideal position is one of “win or break even.” Those who are in the public area, especially big city police chiefs, more often than not find themselves in the opposite position; “lose or break even,” but that’s part of the job.   

Since the “lose or break even” dilemma is virtually unavoidable as a rule, voluntarily placing yourself in one is especially foolish. When the best you can do is not lose you ought to not go there, but Chief Beck doesn’t seem to understand this simple logic.

Beck was in the unenviable position of overseeing the everyday functions of a big city police department AND supervising the most important manhunt in recent memory. But at the top of his “to do” list was finding Christopher Dorner, a hate filled mongrel who wanted to kill cops because he was fired from the LAPD in 2007.

As a rookie Dorner was judged to have falsely reported seeing his training officer kick a mentally ill man during an arrest. The evidence against Dorner was persuasive enough to get him fired.

So Dorner went on a killing spree aimed at getting even with those he believed responsible for his firing. He had already killed three people including the daughter of the police captain who unsuccessfully represented him in his hearing and her companion. A few hours later he ambushed two on duty uniformed police officers, killing one and wounding the other.

Clearly Beck had big problems, but he added to them by announcing he would review Dorner’s case. This was foolish beyond words! What could have happened as a result of that review? The firing could have been found to be unjust, but whether a correct conclusion or not, Beck would have looked like a sap and a weakling just at a time when his officers needed him to stand tall and strong.

If the review upheld Dorner’s firing, Beck would have gained nothing.  But more importantly, while men under his command were being killed by a monster and psychopath, Beck would have clearly made himself appear more concerned with the political correctness of a 6 year old internal review than with the lives of his officers. But apparently special allowances had to be made, Dorner being a black officer. After all, what if he were somehow justified in murdering those who had been “unfair” to him?

It’s bad enough that Beck voluntarily put himself and his department in a “lose or break even” box. Now every officer in the Department will wonder whether their Chief is more concerned with the safety of his men or the politics of the next life and death situation.

Beck might have caught Dorner, but he made his job one Hell of a lot tougher in the future.