The Salvation Army Declares All White People Racist – (They even have a manual)

The Salvation Army recently published a mini handbook titled: Let’s Talk About….. RACISM

It was a rather depressing read.  Since I was a small child, I have loved to run up to the hanging buckets and put my extra change in.  This was my good deed for the holiday.  When you’re not even a teenager yet, you think you have made great strides in making someone’s life better for the season.  As an adult, for about 6 years in a row, I was one of the bell ringing volunteers.  I even got my sons involved.  

Imagine my disgust when I discovered they are just another major organization involved in a discriminatory, anti-White, and blatant racist position and wants White people to agree to it.  

S.A. definition of racism: the prejudiced treatment, stereotyping or discrimination of POC (people of color) on the basis of race.  Racism also refers to the system of social advantage and disadvantage or privilege and oppression that based on race.  Racism is a marriage of racist policies and racist ideas produces and normalizes racial inequities.  

Essentially, they, The Salvation Army, are making their own definition to suit their propaganda.  They then expend it to discuss individual racism.  Ok, I agree, individuals can be racist.  No need to hash out the definition.  We all know a racist person when we hear one / read one.  

Then they define institutional racism.  They say policies that result in inequitable outcomes for Whites over POC are racist.  Then they admit that these institutions never mention any racial group, but the intent is to create advantages.  So, they make a definition to suit their own needs while the rest of the world realizes there is no such thing as institutional racism.  An institute is not a thinking, planning, scheming, racist entity.  It’s not even a building.  It’s a name of an organization.  As such, it cannot be racist.  I do need to point out their definition is an attempt to make sure all outcomes are equitable.  Not equal.  Here’s the difference.  If you gave a learned artist and I the same paint brush, the same paint, the same canvass, the same room to paint it, the same model, etc. you have treated us both equal.  However, the results WILL NOT BE EQUAL.   But these people want the results to be equal – as crazy as that is.  So, they treat us equitable.  As such, they are going to make the learned artist paint with his non-dominant hand, in the dark, with one eye closed and they are going to give me a tutor.  Guess what, the results are still going to be unequal.  

I might be able to get on board with their definition of a “racist policy”.   We all can.  If an organization initiates a policy that is clearly discriminatory against someone for whatever reason, that’s a racist policy.  You know, sort of like businesses having a person of color candidate who clearly struggled during the interview and a white male candidate who clearly knew what he was talking about and hiring the person of color because the company likes to diversify their hiring results.  

The Salvation Army program ends with a section on repentance.  That is, simply, demanding that all White people apologize for the crimes and prejudices of their ancestors.  People generations removed from their birth.  People they have never heard of nor have any affiliation with.  And, under the assumption that their ancestors acted with racist intent!!!  In other words, if you’re White, you’re a racist.   

As critical race theory starts seeping into every corner of our lives, we, as White people, need to recognize when we are being discriminated against and then organize to respond.  With that said, we, as White people need to make sure our thoughts, our actions and our spoken word is not racist.  Period.  

Insurance Commercial for Special People

There is a very good and very popular insurance company that’s running, what is meant to be funny, commercials that have hit a nerve with the regular “Joe”.

In the first commercial a former football star is trying to convince the insurance company’s call center employee that he would like to be insured by their company. The representative points out the services are only available to members of the armed services – and that’s what makes the company “special”.

Then the football star introduces himself as a former member of a Superball Championship team and doesn’t that make him “special”?

In the second commercial the same athlete is speaking with a former member of the armed services and trying to get him to use his influence to get the athlete accepted as a customer by asking, “Don’t you think I deserve to be a member”?

And there it is. The constant reminder that these overpaid, over glorified, self importance touting athletes believe they should able to do what ever they want just because they “won a Superbowl”.

It is somewhat relieving that in both commercials the insurance company’s employee and customer make it clear to the athlete that he is simply “not that special”.

Hopefully, more companies and regular “Joes” will keep sending the same message.

Parents Speaking Out at School Board Meetings are Domestic Terrorists

What??? !!!! Today, October 5th, 2021, there is talk about getting the United States Department of Justice, a Federal Agency, involved in local school board meetings. That, in and of itself, is not allowed by Federal Law. But, let’s put that aside for a moment.

School Board members are complaining parents are threatening them with bodily harm, following them home from meetings and harassing them, standing outside their homes and scaring their children. They don’t like parents challenging the decisions they make on curriculum and health and safety protocols.

Frankly, I agree. Those are illegal activities. I refer to harassment and threat of physical harm. But, they are not items for the Feds to be involved in. Those are local crimes to be investigated, processed and prosecuted by local law enforcement authorities. But, let’s put that aside too.

The two critical issues facing school boards today are masking kids while they are in school and the attempted assimilation of our children into a Marxist / socialist mindset via the application of Critical Race Theory. Trying to teach kids, especially white kids, that they bare the sins of white bigots who they were not related to nor even knew. Trying to teach kids of color that they are inferior to white kids and therefore need exemptions to school discipline rules and grading because they don’t have the intelligence to keep up nor the moral and ethical ability to follow rules. Trying to convince parents that treating children equally is racist and that children need to be treated with equity is infuriating.

Parents, of all races, have had enough. And, their recourse is to present their concerns and opposition to such policies at school board meetings. Is anything I’ve written so far false? Please point it out. I’ll save you time and effort. It’s not false and it’s not a political slant. That’s what’s going on.

Parents are so frustrated, so at the end of their wits, feeling so helpless that they have to take a stand and sometimes these board members are so entitled, so “above the parents” and so insistent in their cultural Marxist leaning that personal threats are the only way to make it clear this needs to stop.

I believe there is NO place for personal threats, harassment, and confrontations outside the meeting room. However……

Similar to regular politicians, school boards are voted in to represent the desires of PARENTS as to the curriculum taught to their children. As such, warning a board member to either do what the parents want or, “I’ll do everything I can to get you voted out” is not a threat of domestic terrorism. It is a statement of cause and effect leading to a voting preference. Is voting now an act of terrorism?? If I don’t vote to keep you in office, is disagreeing with a school board something I should be arrested for??

No, but the attempt to silence parents with arrest when they speak out at school board meetings IS terrorism. It’s political terrorism. You know, similar to what they do in Marxist / Socialist / Communist countries.

The New York Times – paper of record, Needs to Stick to the News, not Political Comment

See “How the N.Y.P.D. Is Using Post-9/11 Tools on Everyday New Yorkers”, by Ali Watkins, a news article turned political commentary turned advocacy.

The article describes the post 9/11 surveillance, facial recognition and other technologies being converted from anti terrorist surveillance to anti crime surveillance. Much similar to England, France, and oh ya, the rest of the world.

She comments New Yorkers are now subject to near constant surveillance – a burder that falls more heavily on people of color.

WHAT??? Are she suggesting the cameras can distinguish race or creed and turn themselves off when a white person walks by?

It is this type of journalism, or lack there of, that turns people off to the NY Times. Rather than being the paper of record it should be, it is viewed as a liberal woke propaganda daily.

She goes on further to cite Amnesty International’s comment that a person protesting on the public streets from Washington Square Park down to Sixth Avenue would be viewed / recorded on the NYPD’s cameras for about 80% of the time they were marching. Let’s examine that. If you ARE IN PUBLIC you DON’T HAVE PRIVACY. As such, I am missing what the complaint is here. Is she suggesting the cameras on in place to spy on people? To what end? To me, the cameras are much like radar. They are deterrents. If you know someone is watching, you are less likely to smash windows and steal merchandise, etc. Am I missing something?

She ends her piece with this quote, “But without the proper checks and balances, anything that’s good can also be used for bad reasons.”

You mean sort of like news reporting and journalism.


Politicians are NOT Soldiers

There was an interview with General Norman Schwartzcopf shortly before he died. He was originally hesitant to accept the role as commander in chief of the forces involved in the Desert Storm (the 1st Gulf War). Eventually, he came around and told Colin Powel he would take the job but “he would call them when it was over”. Essentially, he already lived through the nightmare that was Vietnam when the day to day minutiae of fighting a war was coming from the Whitehouse. He said all he needed was the general orders – what did they want him to do. Nothing more. He wasn’t going to run the war from a telephone cord back to Washington D.C.

When you think about it, it is a very concrete philosophy. How can some clown in a blue suit, sitting on a sofa in Washington D.C. understand what the soldier sitting in a humvee, in 122 degree heat, facing hundreds of the enemy needed to do?

More recently, during the Obama Administration, we had the full hands on mess that was Bengazi. Another example of too much hands on and not enough listening to the folks in the field.

And now, we have the absolute waste of a loss of 13 soldiers during a pull out because the day to day orders were coming from Washington D.C. by a bunch of people who never served, who had no clue as to what the ground situation was or simply didn’t believe it, had no tactical skills what so ever, had no experience in military pull outs, and (we’ll find out in years to follow) either didn’t listen to the intelligence during the daily briefings, or simply disregarded it.

Lesson: tell the military what to do in terms of your goal and then get the fuck out of the way.


So, this is what we got….. The Arizona GOP, in the “course of its audit” OF AN ELECTION is seeking data from the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office. It wants this data sent to their “independent auditor”. Why does it need information regarding ongoing investigations; interactions with other law enforcement agencies; access to equipment and passwords – let me emphasize that for clarity, PASSWORDS. Sounds rather Nazi Regime-like to me.

We should wonder – what do LAW ENFORCEMENT RECORDS have to do with a ballot audit? Is the GOP worried that former felons were voting? Perhaps. Even if true, I wonder how many actual former felons actually voted or tried to vote. Let’s be generous – 100?? Wow, there’s the smoking gun we’ve all be looking for. Let’s review Biden: $1, 027,269 and Trump 980,494. Let’s take away those 100 from Biden, I’ll even go better, take them from Biden and give them to Trump. Guess what, TRUMP STILL GETS HIS ASS KICKED.

What should I and all the rest of you be afraid of? First of all, although my record is spotless, I have occasion to have interacted with Deputy Sheriffs over the past 17 years. All have been great encounters but my name is in the system as a complainant for a variety of reasons: locating 4 escaped prisoners from a van and reporting it; calling on behalf of an abused neighbor; finding a 2 year old toddler in an empty parking lot; assisting in a DWI arrest on the highway, etc. The point is now anyone who was on the adverse side of those complaints now has my personal information. Now, how about those less fortunate citizens who were on the wrong side of a 911 call. Now their “personal issues” are exposed to the public for gawking and criticism.

For all you GOP stalwarts who are big into privacy issues and “keep the government out of my business”, you need to now stand up and say something. Otherwise, you’re just full of shit.