CHILDHOOD SEX-CHANGE SURGERY IS CHILD ABUSE

A very small percentage of the population say they prefer being the opposite sex.  If an adult wants this and is able to pay the costs for doing it, so be it.  However, there are some children who think they really should be the opposite sex and their parents and/or teachers agree and want to support the child in this endeavor.  I believe that this is a very bad idea simply because, up until puberty (about 13-years old), children are almost gender-neutral.  They become a man or woman when their sex hormones rev up at puberty.  Up until then, plus a few more years for mental maturity (18-21 years old), children do not have the experience to know what they want. I worked with a total of about 500 boys as a Scout leader for 7 years and then as a camp counselor five years and therefore I know something about children.

Most of those who undergo transgender surgery eventually return to their biological gender, often with missing parts of their anatomy and lifelong regret. So what’s behind today’s push to Transgenderism?  Specifically, why do some politicians, school administrators, and children’s hospitals, as well as many others actually encourage it?  So who are the culprits behind knowingly destroying children’s lives through pre-maturely advocating sex-change surgeries?

Absent hard evidence, which of course there will never be in this matter, all I can do is speculate.  My conjecture, however, is seasoned with over 60 years of following politics, reading, watching, listening, voting for both major political parties as well as listening to subject-matter experts: children’s hospitals, some surgeons, physicians and pharmaceutical companies have a vested financial interest in Transgender hormone treatments and surgeries.  Childhood sex-change is currently a multi-billion dollar industry and projected to grow rapidly.  Please note, however, that many public school administrators, counselors and teachers are true believers in this insanity.

Finally, it is my firm belief is that the political Left has helped create another niche group and is cultivating it in order to have it vote for its political candidates.  The Democrat Party of the past would not do such a thing knowing some of its negative consequences.  However, today’s Democrat Party is controlled by the woke far-left, which has very different values than classic liberals that believed in free speech, civil rights for all,  was anti-war, etc.

Legislation is needed to prohibit childhood sex-change surgery.

 

BAN PARTIAL-BIRTH AND THIRD-TRIMESTER ABORTIONS

Wherever you stand on the abortion issue, partial-birth abortion is probably abhorrent to you, because after 6 months in the womb, there is no question that a fetus looks like and is a baby.  A baby not yet born does not have the protection of the law, however, this is only a technicality…it’s a baby!  If you don’t think so, look at a Sonogram of a baby in the womb and watch the little one move around with his/her heart beating, especially in the third trimester of pregnancy!

My knowledge concerning partial-birth abortion began with Robert Bork’s book, Slouching Towards Gomorrah.  One of the chapters in Bork’s book discusses partial-birth abortion and includes a gruesome description of the procedure.  This sounds like a straightforward issue so why the controversy and the politicization and why is it still legal in many States to abort a baby during the third trimester of pregnancy, especially since there are many couples waiting to adopt infants?  At the very least, partial-birth abortion is infanticide.

Over 61 million babies have been aborted in the U.S. since Roe vs. Wade was decided by the Supreme Court in 1973; over 1.5 billion babies were aborted worldwide since 1980…some of these were partial-birth abortions.  When Judge Bret Kavanaugh was confirmed by the Senate to sit on the Supreme Court, taking Justice Anthony Kennedy’s seat, the political left attempted to make the case that Justice Kavanaugh would try to overturn the Supreme Court’s abortion decision of 1973, Roe vs. Wade, although Kavanaugh referred to that decision as “settled law.”  However, once the Court became comfortably conservative, Roe vs. Wade was overturned via the “Dobbs” decision, which simply left the issue with each State.  Therefore, a ban on late-term or partial-birth abortions is still needed in many States.

The Democrat Party successfully attracts women to be part of its base using the abortion issue, which accounts for the gender gap between male and single female voters.  However, I believe that partial-birth abortion is detested by majorities of both genders and by majorities in both major political parties although it’s being used politically, but only if there are exceptions for rape, incest, and the life-of-the-mother.  The first four to six months of a pregnancy should be enough time for anyone to decide whether or not to abort a pregnancy, thereby rendering partial-birth abortions unnecessary. It’s time to end this horrific practice and forbid abortions after 16-20 weeks or so of pregnancy. Although it’s not everything that everyone wants, for now “half-a-loaf is better than nothing.”

WAR ON WOMEN?

For further information…

Is there really a war on women or is this simply political propaganda?

On June 24, 2022, the Supreme Court released its opinion on a Mississippi case (Dobbs v. Jackson) that restricted abortion to the first 15 weeks of pregnancy.  In its 60+ page opinion, Justice Alito detailed the rationale for overturning Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Court opinion that gave women the right to an abortion.  Basically, the Court argued that it never was a right in the Constitution.

By overturning Roe v. Wade, laws governing abortion revert back to the States and abortion is therefore dependent on the laws in the State where you reside.  If you don’t approve of the abortion law in your State, then you can do what you need to do legally to persuade the politicians in your State to change it (or you can move to a different State).  Was this part of a war on women, as some on the Left contend?

Beginning with Betty Friedan’s, The Feminine Mystique, I’ve been following the feminist movement and now follow many women’s issues.  I read Katie Pavlich’s book, Assault and Flattery, and now have a better understanding of how the Left has kept women down, while claiming that it is the champion of women.  Here are some interesting facts…

As far back as 1920, Democrat President Woodrow Wilson and the Democrat Party opposed women getting the right to vote.  Today the Democrat Party constantly fights against Second Amendment rights (the right to bear arms) which women (and men) need to defend themselves.

Democrat President Bill Clinton was an accused rapist (by Juanita Broderick) and the accuser was very credible.  Of course this was just one of many allegations made by women against him. In addition, Massachusetts Democrat Senator Ted Kennedy was a big philanderer and was responsible for the death of Mary Jo Kopechne at Chappaquiddick.  Then there’s Democrat President Kennedy who had numerous affairs while President.

You might reply, “you’re referring to their personal lives, not their policies.”  True, however I only cite these examples to show the hypocrisy of the Democrat Party.   Let’s look at Democrat Party policies.  The most significant example I can think of involves women receiving welfare.  There’s a provision in the welfare law concerning women with dependent children that requires that a man can’t reside in the house of the (female) welfare recipient, otherwise the woman would be removed from the welfare rolls.  This provision has the unintended consequence that led to 78% of African-American children, and about 30% of caucasian children, being led by only one parent.  This is very important because many of societal  pathologies stem from boys being raised without fathers in the home.  Although Massachusetts Democrat Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan studied welfare in the 60’s and reported on the problem, the Democrat Congress would not revise welfare to address it, for fear of  African-American voters (even though it caused havoc in many African-American communities).

Frequently, you hear feminists say that women make 77 cents for every dollar men make.  I first heard this statistic way back in the seventies so naturally I questioned whether it could still be that amount 50 years later.  I learned years ago that it really was due to the disruption in paid work-life that most women encounter because of child-rearing.  In addition, I learned that the gap has significantly narrowed and that black women now make more than white women with the same education and experience.

There are countless examples in Katie Pavlich’s book, Assault and Flattery and I believe its message is very clear: the Democrat Party, though claiming to champion women’s rights, has actually acted opposite of what it claims.

Since the publication of Pavlich’s book, the most significant assault on women’s rights has been transgender women  competing in sports with biological women.

 

 

LESSONS I LEARNED FROM MY FOLKS

The author at Shenandoah National Park in the Blue Ridge Mountains in Virginia (many years ago).

Do you remember how to do geometry and trigonometry from high school?  For most people geometry and trig are two of the subjects that they were required to learn in order to graduate, both of which most people will never need or use though, of course, they are important to engineers, mathematicians and others.   This article is about five important lifelong lessons I learned from my parents that I needed and used throughout my life but which are not taught in school.

 

THE FIVE LESSONS ARE:

  1. The world is a cold place without family and friend
  2. Help whoever and whenever you can
  3. Treat everyone fairly
  4. Get a good education
  5. Do the best you can

First lesson. I remember my mom telling me, “Michael, the world’s a cold place without family and friends.” My mom came from a very large family…9 brothers and sisters…and she had many friends…her neighbor friends, her work friends, and her poker friends. Why are family and friends so important…they’re the people that know you and care about you…so when you reach low points in your life or just need someone to talk to, they usually give invaluable emotional support…and of course you support them when they need it.  At my mom’s funeral there were about 500 family and friends who came to see her one last time and to pay their respects to her family. It was heartwarming and unbelievable.

Second lesson. “Help whoever and whenever you can.” I knew my father was a good person, helping anyone that needed help, but even I was surprised at his funeral when strangers came up to me and told stories about how my father had helped them. I worked at my father’s grocery store on weekends and during summers when I was a child. The store was located in a very poor neighborhood in Philadelphia and most of our customers were on welfare or Social Security. The children of the poorest families would come to the store every day for one of my father’s “free sandwiches.” As I got older my father would often send me to Philadelphia’s city hall and to Pennsylvania’s state office building with needy people to speak on their behalf in an effort to get them emergency aid. In addition, my father told me that his mother gave baskets of food to poor families during the depression…so I understand where he learned his compassion and helped whoever and whenever he could.

Third lesson. “Treat everyone fairly.” My parents felt strongly about treating everyone fairly. Both had friends from other races and nationalities. They sent me to a junior high school that was 50% minority to help me learn how to get along with people who were different from me. My dad constantly asked me about my Federal agency’s (US Department of the Interior) dealings with Native Americans and my mom frequently quoted pearls of wisdom and common sense from her African-American girlfriends at work.

Fourth lesson. “Get a good education.” My parents believed in their children getting a good education, and although I only wanted to be a forest ranger, even that required a college degree. So when the time came, my mom went to work for a meat-packing company making sausage in a cold, refrigerated room in order to pay for my sisters, brother and I to go to college.

Fifth lesson. “Do the best you can.” My first semester at Penn state was a failure. When I came home for spring break, my parents tried to comfort me with, “Michael, as long as you did the best you could, you have nothing to be ashamed of.” Well, I wasn’t doing the best I could…playing ping pong until 3 am in the morning the night before my midterm exams, but I heeded my parents words and knuckled down and did the best I could…and consequently got good grades. Eventually I received my bachelor’s degree from Penn State and my master’s degree from the University of Pennsylvania.

In conclusion, my folks taught my brother, sisters and me many practical lessons, just five of which I just shared with you.  But unlike courses like geometry and trig, they are lessons that are useful throughout your lifetime.  Now, when I encounter a tough situation, I ask myself, “What would my parents advise?” Their advice has resulted in my usually making better decisions. So “Mom and Dad, wherever you are, thank you for teaching me the lessons I needed to live a good life.

PROUD TO BE AMERICAN

With attacks to nationalism and patriotism coming from all sides, I thought it appropriate to provide some of the reasons why Americans should be proud that they are Americans, especially since our public schools usually teach the misdeeds of the U.S. but none of its numerous great achievements and countless acts of kindness and heroism.  A recent survey showed that only 16% of generation Z were proud to be American.  Americans, however,  have many reasons to be proud, a few of which I cite below. Before I do, let me first debunk the allegation that the U.S. is racist from its very beginning because of slavery.

Our founding fathers were initially reluctant to secede from England, but after repeated failed attempts at reconciliation, decided to do so.  They explained their reasons for secession in the Declaration of Independence. Since slavery was legal and prevalent in America under British rule, America inherited it and had to keep a limited form of it in order to have the Southern States ratify the Constitution and join the Union.  Seventy-five years after the Constitution was ratified by the 13 Colonial states, the  U.S. fought a Civil War to rid itself of this evil.  It cost the U.S. 650,000 lives, including that of President Lincoln, who was assassinated shortly after the war was over.  Had President Lincoln lived, reconstruction in the South would have been much easier.  In fact, there  remained significant systemic racism in the U.S. until the 1960’s and  the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended.  Despite this, America survived, overcame its problems, and prospered.

The United States helped save Europe from Hitler’s Nazi Germany in World War II.  In addition, it saved about a million Japanese and American lives through its judicious use of the atomic bomb, which significantly shortened the war.  After that war, in the Cold War, the U.S. prevented the Soviet Union from instilling tyrannical communism throughout the world (with all of the poverty and suffering that accompanies it). These examples are not anomalies…the U.S. has come to the rescue of peoples throughout the world to liberate and assist them.  To be sure, America has made mistakes, but its intentions were usually good.

There are countless examples of the United States helping other countries and peoples throughout its history.  In addition, its medical and technological advances have made life easier for everyone on the planet.  A useful way to look at it is to imagine a world without the United States (see Dinesh D’Souza’s movie, “America, Imagine a World Without Her”).  The U.S. military has no equal and as such many would-be evildoers are kept at bay, knowing full-well, that if the U.S. got involved, it would destroy them.  Aside from the greatness of America, its people are the most generous in the world, so when disaster strikes anywhere in the world, Americans run to their checkbooks and credit cards and give.

From its inception, America has stood for liberty and freedom around the world.  Our Statue of Liberty is recognized all over the world as a symbol of freedom.  It was given to the U.S. by France because America stood for freedom and was a role-model for France, as described in Alexis de Tocqueville’s book, Democracy in America.  A simple measure of the desirability of the United States is to see that millions of people from all over the world  immigrating to it, some legally, some illegally.

America is and has been an exceptional nation, but if the Far-Left prevails, and it currently is, America will cease being exceptional.

WHY AMERICA’S RECENT (2021-present) HUGE INCREASE IN CRIME?

Crime has increased dramatically in the past two years in America’s large cities and is spilling over to the suburbs and towns.  In order to stop the increase and even reverse it, we must understand what is causing it.  Politicians say it’s the frustration caused by the Covid pandemic: others look at where the crime is occurring and the policies being pursued in those localities and conclude it stems from bad policies that were enacted in the past year that encouraged crime.  This post attempts to find the root causes of our crime-wave in order to offer viable solutions.

To begin, we need to see just how much crime there was in prior years to determine if it’s as bad as the press says it is.  Of the sixteen American cities where homicides have vastly escalated, 15 are run by Democrat mayors and city councils.  This is important because those policies affecting the criminal justice system in 15 are very similar and therefore may be the cause of the very large spike in homicides.  The policies we’re referring to are: 1) defunding the police, 2) not prosecuting robberies where the dollar amount of the stolen merchandise is under a specified amount, 3) city district attorneys not requiring cash bail for criminals who are then let free until their court date, 4) double standards for not prosecuting crimes against some groups (BLM, Antifa), 5) etc.

The aforementioned policies are absurd, however, for those that believe they are good, I submit the following:

  1. Defunding the police does not make police more careful about not violating civil rights.  Prosecuting bad policemen is part of the answer.  Training is another part.  Less police mean less enforcement.  Less enforcement means more crime.
  2. Not prosecuting robberies of under a certain cost inevitably leads to many more robberies because criminals know that will get away with it.
  3. District attorneys not requiring cash bail leads to many more criminals being free and on the street until their court dates.
  4. When some groups (BLM, Antifa) get away with rioting and destruction of businesses, but other groups are held to a much higher standard (January 6 protesters), faith in the fairness of  American Justice is lost (and tells people on the Left that they can get away with arson, looting, and mugging).

All of the above seem self-evident…it’s not rocket science to conclude what I concluded.  Therefore, why would such policies ever be adopted? There are some people that believe our justice system is unfair to minorities and the poor; however, courts offer free legal representation to anyone who can’t afford it.  While it may not be ideal, it does significantly help.  The criminal justice system policies being advocated and used by the Far-left have unintended consequences for law-abiding citizens that are intolerable.  Politicians and District Attorneys that advocate such policies need to be voted out of office and their destructive policies reversed.

MORE GUNS, LESS CRIME!

Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

The 2008 Supreme Court decision, District of Columbia v. Heller, ruled that the Second Amendment actually conferred an individual gun ownership right.

Are you pro-Second Amendment or anti-Second Amendment or somewhere in-between?  Are you for reasonable restrictions on gun ownership?  Where you stand on the gun issue really doesn’t matter much because most of the dialog surrounding this issue is simplistic and/or deceitful and/or political.

Why?  Because most of the measures which have been discussed and adopted have proven to be ineffective.  John Lott, author of the book, More Guns, Less Crime, is the very best authority on what works and what doesn’t, but have you heard his name even mentioned in the gun debates.  His research over more than a decade is explained in his book and should be the foundation of gun laws, not the political posturing that is going on around the country aimed at voters and guaranteed to do nothing except make matters worse.  Most people are not expected to know who knows what they’re talking about and who doesn’t, but the media is expected to know, but it either doesn’t or it doesn’t want to.

The Second Amendment to the Constitution allowing an armed citizenry was adopted by the Founding Fathers as a safeguard against government tyranny.  They wanted this because democracies eventually morphed into dictatorships, and with a standing army in the United States, this was a real possibility.  Fear of a dictatorial government is just one reason why emotions are so high surrounding the issue, especially with Venezuela  becoming a dictatorship, having banned guns to the general public in 2012.  Not many politicians will admit it because it sounds unbelievable, however, this is the heart of the issue: big-government Democrats want as much control of guns as possible, and limited-government Republicans want the minimum amount of control possible.  The major reason for many gun owners to have guns is the capability guns provide in protecting oneself and one’s family.  Other reasons are hunting and target shooting.

I bought my first handgun while living in downtown Washington, DC.  Washington banned even owning a handgun when I lived there.  However, I decided to break the local law and purchase a PPK (James Bond’s gun) after a close friend and neighbor had his head busted open by four hoodlums. Not too long after this I was attacked by three hoodlums just outside of my apartment.  Consequently, my wife and I moved to a safer neighborhood where I didn’t need a handgun.

We subsequently moved to a mountaintop in Colorado, located about one hour southwest of Denver.  While working in front of my property one day a motorcycle gang drove past me which got me to thinking that I could not protect my wife and I for the one hour it took for the sheriff to find and get to my home.  Consequently, I purchased a shotgun, a semi-automatic rifle, and a larger handgun.  Since we had no children and neither I nor my wife ever became hysterical, I kept all of my guns loaded and ready to use.  I considered them insurance and they made me feel much better about my ability to protect my wife.

You can see that my interest in guns has to do with protection.  The Second Amendment gives Americans that Right.  If you’d like to learn about the statistics that prove that more guns mean less crime, read John Lott’s, More Guns, Less Crime, and you’ll have the information you need to decide what needs to be done to help control gun violence. Other great books defending and justifying gun ownership are Dana Loesch’s, Hands Off My Gun, and Dennis Henigan’s, Guns Don’t Kill People, People Kill People. 

MUGGED: racial demagoguery

I read Ann Coulter’s book, Mugged, and learned a lot of new information from this lawyer and best-selling author.  None of the information surprised me but it was insightful reading Ms. Coulter’s relentless array of facts.

Basically, Coulter contends that very few of the racial incidents in the last 50 years have been racist (civil rights battles were mostly won before the seventies); instead, they were racial hoaxes, perpetrated by demagogues for various reasons and motives.

One of the most important facts that Ann Coulter shows in her book, Mugged,  is that all segregationists were Democrats and that the Democrat Party fought against Civil Rights legislation for 100 years going way back to Abraham Lincoln’s time when Lincoln and his Republican Party ran on an anti-slavery platform.  This is not news to us who know American history but it is big news to millions of Americans that have been brainwashed and now believe the racist propaganda politicians spout off.

Another very important and horrific fact brought to light in Ms. Coulter’s book is the fact that a major consequence of every racial hoax is the slaughter of whites by young black hoodlums seeking revenge for what they hear and believe to be true about the (phony) racial incidents (Google: “Blackout Game,” “Polar Bear Hunting,” “Flash Mobs”).

Why do I believe the aforementioned to be true?  First, because I trust Ann Coulter in accurately portraying the facts.  Second, because I not only worked for many years assisting minorities in combating discrimination as a Federal collateral-duty EEO Counselor and then as a Federal collateral-duty Hispanic Employment Program Coordinator, but also have closely followed many racial incidents, including Trayvon Martin and Michael Brown.

“Mugged” gives the details of many racial incidents, such as the Tawana Brawley rape hoax with Al Sharpton’s involvement.  I believe that some racism still exists, but there are many politicians and race hustlers exploiting race simply to get your vote, and use the very toxic “Critical Race Theory” (which contends that all whites are oppressors and all blacks are victims) and the”1619 Project” (which contends that America was really founded to further slavery, contrary to what the Declaration of Independence says).

CONCLUSION

Ann Coulter’s book, Mugged, ends with Barack Obama.  The United States has made fantastic progress since it left British rule in 1776, which back then had slavery.  Eighty-seven years later President Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation which freed the slaves (in 1863).  One hundred and thirty-seven years after the slaves were freed, the U.S. elected its first African-American President (Barack Obama in 2008).  In the 1960’s, significant Civil Rights laws were passed to help combat discrimination.  Today, many politicians are unethically using race to create racial strife to further their political agendas.  It’s no coincidence that 90% of African-Americans vote Democrat, though Democrat Socialist policies are preventing them from achieving their dreams.

 

DEFENDING AGAINST THE KNOCKOUT “GAME”

There’s a very dangerous so-called “game” being “played” by young men in America.  It has maimed hundreds and killed dozens of people.  The object of this vicious “game” is to knock out someone with one punch to the face or head.  Most of the perpetrators are young black males and most of the victims are  white men and women of any age.  Racist?  Obviously!

What’s behind this brutal “game”?  Some say that fatherless boys are being initiated into a gang.  Others quote the perpetrators (perps) as saying they just wanted something to do.  So who and what is really to blame?  It’s complicated with lots of blame to go around.  But to even begin solving this problem, we must first understand it.  Let’s begin with the blame:

1.Single mothers can do a good job in raising their girls and boys up until they reach puberty (about 12-13).  After puberty is usually too late for boys but even then a good man in the house is essential to serve  both as a role model and a disciplinarian to boys.

2.Fathers who don’t stick around to be fathers to their children, especially to their sons.

3.Boys without fathers either join a gang or the Boy Scouts.  In poor socioeconomic areas, gangs and single-parent homes are prevalent.

4.The Welfare System, which provides financial incentives for single-parent families and encourages, through its policy of providing financial assistance to mothers only if there is “no man in the house.”

5.The News Media for not reporting on incidents of the Knockout Game so that people are forewarned and know that they need to be more alert, vigilant, and careful when walking around, especially at night.

Okay, so what can be done to stop the carnage?  First and foremost is that the Media do its job of reporting all incidents of the “Knockout Game” so that the elderly and women will know what situations to avoid.  I’ve only seen reporting of the Knockout Game on Fox News and therefore I believe that most people have not even heard about it nor know what it is, and therefore are especially vulnerable.

The second thing that can be done depends on politicians and government officials.  In no government program should a “man in the house” prevent a woman from receiving welfare payments…because a good man in the house is usually needed in order to raise sons to become good men.

The third action that would help thwart the Knockout Game is to do everything possible to keep young men occupied…working, if possible.  Because raising the minimum wage to $10+/hour is estimated by the Congressional Budget Office to cost from 500,000 to 1,000,000 youths to lose their jobs because their employers could no longer afford to pay them, that idea should be shelved for now (or raised only a $1/hour for now).  Minimum wage jobs are entry-level jobs…About half of those minimum-wage employees are making more than that after 6 months on the job.  Many youth will never get that first job if the minimum wage is raised too high.

Since the Media refuses to do its job, clergy need to talk about it in their churches.  This is not ideal, but it would get the word out (forewarn) to many potential victims so they can take appropriate actions (avoid potentially-dangerous situations).

Politicians’ constantly beat the drums alleging racism/sexism behind everything, and agitate Women, Blacks, Latinos, Native Americans, etc. for political purposes and mainstream media will therefore probably never report insightfully and analytically. Politicians need to stop the “race-baiting.”

Local police and local judicial systems must fairly and justly put the perps away for a long time.

Everyone needs to keep distance between themselves and individuals  and small groups of young men.

The barbaric “Knockout Game” may never completely go away but hopefully it will diminish to the point where it won’t hurt or kill many people.

 

MADAM CHAIRWOMAN (of the Crow Nation)

This true story is about the most charismatic person I have ever met, seen or heard.  She was the chairwoman of the Crow Nation from 1990 to 2000, Clara Nomee.  I first met and heard Chairwoman Nomee speak while attending an all-day meeting in Crow Agency, Montana in 1991 and was so impressed with her awe-inspiring way of speaking from the heart that I’ve never forgotten my encounter.

It’s often said that “adversity builds character.”  Perhaps that accounts for Chairwoman Nomee’s charisma.  Up until 1976, Mrs. Nomee had a problem with alcohol.  During that winter both of her parents died within 3 months of each other.  Consequently, her drinking increased to the point where she reached a crossroad and asked the Lord to “take my life or change it.”  For all of the following years she didn’t have a drink.

In 1985 she married Carlton Nomee, who a year later became vice-secretary of the Crow Nation.  In 1988, Mrs. Nomee ran for the Office of Tribal Chairperson with only a few supporters.  While she did not win that position, she was elected Secretary of the Tribe.  As she became more insistent and questioned how the Tribal government operated, she was phased out of her job.  Because she had little money, her furniture and car were repossessed and her electricity was turned off.  Because she had been unjustly branded a trouble-maker, when she attended church, people walked out; and when she drove down the street, children threw rocks at her car.  Her dog was shot, the windows of her home broken, and her life threatened.  But Mrs. Nomee prayed every morning for the strength to persevere as she looked out over the Big Horn Mountains from her home. After praying, she cared for her brother, Rayphael, who had been paralyzed from the neck down from an accident 28 years earlier.  In addition to praying every morning, she attended every political gathering and eventually became the spokesperson for many.  Finally, in May of 1990, with the blessing of many tribal elders, she was elected tribal chairperson of the Crow Nation after a bitter battle between contenders.

Although it was not the first elected office Mrs. Nomee had held, it was the first time that the position of Crow Chief or Tribal Chairperson had been held by a woman.  Mrs. Nomee wanted to follow in her father’s footsteps, Chief “Henry Pretty-on-Top;” as well as other famous Crow chiefs, such as Chief “Sits-in-the-Middle-of-the-Land,” Chief Plenticoup and Chief Robert Yellowtail (see the photo).  As chairwoman, Mrs. Nomee became a role model for Indian women and was an excellent example of how someone turned her life around.

The challenges she faced daily in attempting to obtain jobs and much-needed public facilities for her people mandated that she have all of her wits about her all of the time.  As Tribal Chairperson, she was in a position to do more good than at any other time in her 55 years.

She was instrumental in having a hospital built on the reservation and having the Crow Tribe once again authorized to negotiate its own contracts.  She planned to have the old, small  hospital renovated into a nursing home and worked hard to develop jobs for the large number of unemployed on the reservation using the Jobs Training Partnership Act.

Just as life was hard for Mrs. Nomee, it had been hard on the Crow and other Native Americans as well.  A hundred-and-fifty years ago the Crow Reservation had covered 40 million acres.  Now it’s down to a mere three million.  The Crow served as scouts for the U.S. government over 150 years ago but have not had there loyalty rewarded.  Native Americans in the East taught American settlers how to grow corn, tobacco and cotton.  Native Americans on the Plains saw their food supply disappear in the mid-1800’s: tens of millions of buffalo were slaughtered by pioneers and settlers for their tongues and hides.  Many millions were killed for “sport” from trains that traveled through the West.  As their hunting grounds became settled and taken from them, the way of life of Native Americans was destroyed by forcing them to become dependent on the U.S. government, which shattered their self-esteem.

As I mentioned at the beginning of my story, I was very impressed when I heard the Chairwoman speak.  In addition to hearing Mrs. Nomee that day, I heard other Crow officials speak at that meeting.  Listening to them was a moving experience for me.  I had never heard a people so open, honest and considerate of others.  Though they had good cause for being very angry at some in my agency, they not once raised their voices.  Although my testimony as a technical expert, who had prepared extensively and was ready to make fools of the managers in one of our regional offices and thereby handily win the day for the Crow, the Crow chose not to call on me because it would have certainly meant, at the very least, my getting into big trouble with my Office.  Later, when we broke for lunch, the Crow honored me by insisting that I sit at the head of their table.

Although the Crow have many problems, as do many Native-American nations, Mrs. Nomee made a difference.  Unemployment on the reservation ranged from 60-80%.  According to a local authority, 85% of Crow deaths were related to alcohol abuse.  Consequently, you may want to consider donating to some of the many Native American charities.  Most of my donations are to these charities.

My experience with the Crow renewed my faith in humanity.  As I flew back to Denver from Billings, I thought of all I had seen and heard.  I concluded that the openness and honesty that I witnessed was how God meant people to be and I was fortunate indeed to have seen and heard the Chairwoman, a person of integrity, conviction and love for her people.

UNDERSTANDING SEXUAL HARASSMENT

What do  governor Andrew Cuomo, mogul Harvey Weinstein, former Senator Al Frankin,  and Jeffrey Epstein, all have in common?  All have been accused of sexual harassment!  From hearing victims’ sexual harassment stories, I believe it’s very important to first clearly define exactly what sexual harassment is.  Having done Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) counseling collateral-duty (part-time), while working full-time as a program analyst with a bureau in  the U.S. Department of the Interior, I’m familiar with the clear definition of sexual harassment by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, at 29 C.F.R. 1604.11, as follows:

Sexual Harassment is conduct in the form of “unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature” when such conduct has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual’s work performance or creating an intimidating, hostlite, or offensive working environment.” 

Except for its legal implications, it’s not important to someone who feels harassed, frightened, or intimidated, whether s/he has been technically and legally sexually harassed. The following very relevant quote is taken from an article by Mortimer Zuckerman that appeared in the May 23, 1994, issue of US News and World Report:

“That sexual harassment exists is unquestionable, but that many acts of sexual misconduct are overdramatized is also true.  To avoid trivializing those who suffer the real thing, we must reject the idea that any unwanted advance or remark constitutes harassment.  There is a difference between an unwanted encounter, which may upset a woman, and pressure applied — such as threatening a woman’s job security — or ongoing demeaning treatment.  Those wrongly accused have their own ordreal in trying to prove a negative.”

When I was working for a U.S. Department of the Interior bureau in Denver, I also belonged to a public speaking club where someone accused me of “inappropriate behavior.”  Moreover, even before hearing my rebuttal, the club voted me out, whereupon I hired a lawyer to help me get my “due process” rights that were listed in the club’s charter.  In working through the details of the case, my accuser could not cite any examples of what I did that was inappropriate.  I sought advice from many people on how to handle the incident.  The psychiatrist I consulted advised that, since the woman had recently gone through a horrible divorce,  she was taking out her anger on me.  I also read many books on communication problems between the sexes, including the excellent, You Just Don’t Understand, by Deborah Tannen in order to make sense of why she accused me.

CONCLUSION

Both men and women need to learn how to deal with sexual harassment.  Men need to understand that women can destroy their lives and therefore they need to be more considerate of women’s feelings and perceptions and educate themselves on how and when many women become uncomfortable with some of their actions, such as using foul language, coming on too strong, and being too aggressive.  One of man’s basic evolutionary roles was to protect women; it’s wrong to harass them.

Women need to educate themselves on sexual harassment and how to handle various situations in a manner that eliminates the problem with a minimum of anguish.

Finally, for those trying to judge what the truth is in a potential sexual harassment encounter, remember to not completely believe anyone because of his/her gender; just listen to all sides and follow the evidence.

 

 

POLICE BRUTALITY?

The beating of Tyre Nichols in January 2023 in Memphis Tennessee demonstrated severe police brutality.  We saw the video of Tyre Nichols being beaten so we know that it was true.  In Minneapolis, Seattle, Portland, Chicago, Atlanta, etc., police were charged with racism and brutality.  Are the police brutality charges for the other cites true?  Many businesses were burned down around the Nation. In Portland, there was over 60 nights of attempts to burn down its Federal Courthouse.  Many policemen were seriously injured and three were even blinded. Some cities reacted insanely to Mr. Floyd’s murder by defunding their police departments.  Some thankfully outlawed chokeholds by police.

George Floyd’s murder initiated anew protests against police brutality which then morphed into riots.  Mr. Floyd’s murder was used by the Far Left  to weaken police departments.  Since police brutality has been alleged in the past, I thought it was the appropriate time to examine it, determine how pervasive it is, and see what could and should be done about it, if anything.  But first, a reminder of how important this issue is, I’ll cite a quote from David Clarke’s book, Cop Under Fire, “Police officers have the overwhelming support of their communities.  Changing us into something we’re not will get cops and civilians killed.”  In fact, crime has skyrocketed when cities weakened their police forces.

I believe that the first most important and relevant fact to consider is how pervasive is police brutality.  The second is, “what is the best remedy for police brutality” if it, in fact,  is commonplace.  Thus far, the “defunding the police” remedy, being done by many municipalities, was worse than crazy, it’s goofy.  More training for police would be the best remedy.  In George Floyd’s case, however, the policeman  who killed him had previously been charged with many instances of brutality; therefore, he should have been fired or at least disciplined long ago.  Training, however, should be given on: when fellow policemen should step in and stop criminal police behavior.  Training is expensive and requires more money for police departments, not less.  More training is always a good idea, though I did not find police brutality to be pervasive.  I think national standards are in order.

Despite their pronouncements to the contrary and months of riots, looting and burning down of businesses indicate that Black Lives Matter and ANTIFA are not interested in the welfare of the African-American community or  of the United States; therefore anything that they support or advocate should be taken with a universe of salt, including their claims of police brutality and advocacy for defunding the police.

DRESS FOR JOB SUCCESS

In 1977 I read a book by John Molloy, called Dress for Success.  A few later I read Molloy’s The Women’s Dress for Success book.  In his books, Molloy explained his research on the relationship between clothing and effectivess at your job.   His research began with a small grant exploring whether how teachers dressed affected how much children learned.  His findings showed that a teacher dressing like the upper middle class led to children learning much more. Molloy continued researching, creating many innovative methods for determining the effects of clothing.  His books are based on his research, not on fashion, and are helpful to achievers in most fields of endeavor.

My awakening to this concept came one day while in the snackroom in the basement of the Federal Interior South building in Washington, DC.  While there, the assistant director of the agency I worked for came in to buy a snack.  When he saw me, his eyes and brows grew wide and he momentarily stopped in his tracks before saying hello.  I thought about this encounter and what might account for it.  This process included considering what I was wearing.  BINGO!  I wore red pants, a pink shirt, a white tie with pink polka-dots.  Walking home after work I stopped at a book store to find a book on proper attire, and found John Molloy’s Dress for Success.  I read it, underlined it, taught it in an adult education course, and slowly changed my work clothes to reflect Molloy’s research.

Despite half of my face being paralyzed and my gait being really messed up, I was able to still advance in my career.  So what exactly does Molloy say that can help you in your career?  The look to have is that of the upper middle class.  For men that usually means a blue or grey suit (solid, herringbone, pin-striped, glen plaid, hounds tooth) or navy blue or camel sports jacket, with a white or light blue shirt or a pin striped.  No facial hair is best . Ties should be conservative foulard, repps, solid, polka dot, or paisley.  Men’s jewelry should only be a gold watch, a cross pen, and a wedding ring, if married.  Dark socks and black or dark brown shoes.  For women that usually means a skirted suit, nothing too feminine, not much if any makeup if your under aboutmuch 40, sensible shoes with no high heels, very little jewelry.  The person in the news that has this look is the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Kirstjen Nielsen.  If you look closely you will see a very beautinful blonde woman who plays down her beauty and sexuality to emphasize her mind. No/little makeup, no/little jewelry, proper women’s business attire, sensible shoes, etc.  Secretary Nielsen knows what she’s doing.  It’s no accident that President Trump appointed her Secretary of Homeland Security.

On the other hand, there are some very beautiful and sexy women who achieve career success despite their dressing to attract a mate rather than depict their competence on their sleeve.  The person that comes immediately to mind is the White House Communications Director, Hope Hicks.  Ms. Hicks is only 29 years old and should not be wearing much makeup and should be wearing a skirted suit, though her pants suit in this photo with President Trump isn’t bad.  Compare her photo with that of Ms. Nielsen.

The look to achieve for maximum effectiveness in a professional work setting is that of the upper middle class.  Molloy’s books are currently about 40 years old but I have not seen anything that explains things as well.