The Squad is racist, but not President Trump!
(Racism: Part 2 of 3)

Rashida Tlaib, Ilhan Omar, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, and Ayanna Pressley - The Squad

So, it's an act of racism for a White man to make a negative comment about the "political ideas" of four women of color, really? Hum. Okay. So, in today's politically-correct-social-media-driven-world, a person is racist even if they never imply, write, or say nigger, peckerwood, spic, wetback, dago, kike, honkie, redneck, chink, wap, homo, lesbo, cunt, bitch, bastard, or any other blatantly demeaning word, right? Hum. Okay. So, it's not an act of racism for a White man to make positive comments about the "political ideas" of four women of color, right?
So, let me get this right, it's okay if President Trump were to say, "The social and political ideas expressed in the films A Man Called Adam (1966), Sounder (1972), The Autobiography of Miss Jane Pittman (1974), and Roots (1977), which all starred Cicely Tyson, were great!" Conversely, it's not okay if President Trump were to say, "The social and political ideas expressed in the films Boyz n the Hood (1991), Malcolm X (1992), What's Love Got to Do with It (1993), and How Stella Got Her Groove Back (1998), which all starred Angela Bassett, were not great." Therefore, President Trump is, what, racist if he slams four films made by Angela Bassett? Really??
I'm Black, and I don't give a crap about the squad. These four women of color do not represent me, and I don't believe they represent the overwhelming majority of Black people, because their "presentation" reeks of individual "political" ambition instead of community service dedicated to their immediate electorate. They should be ashamed. I have absolutely no interest listening to racial rhetoric from Ilhan Abdullahi Omar, a Johnny-come-lately-foreigner who didn't become a U.S. citizen until 2000, and was lucky to get elected to Congress on January 3, 2019. Why am I not interested? I'm Black, and I was actually born in the United States. I possess an extremely robust, fact-based knowledge of the Black experience in the United States, and what it actually means to be a Black person in the U.S. right now. Equally important, I hold vivid memories of my parents and grand-parents telling me about and showing me the written legacy of our family's origin on the R.J. Reynolds tobacco plantation, and the immediate impact of slavery on our family. Representative Omar is NOT Black, she has no dog in my fight as a Black man seeking fairness and justice here in the United States. She needs to shut the hell up. Omar's an African from Somalia, and she has absolutely no first-hand knowledge of my life experience as a Black person in the United States, or the bigger picture of the entire Black history and existence in these United States of America. Frankly, Black people in Minnesota's 5th District should be upset, because they are NOT being represented by one of their own, a real "Black" person. It's a disservice to citizens of Minnesota, especially Black residents, for Omar to constantly pursue her own agenda, to give more lip service against pro-Israeli groups, Palestinian issues, and immigration than to address the fact that unemployment among Black Minnesotans is double the state average!	"And if you think America is a leader on inequality and suffering and grieving How come there so many people coming and so few leaving?" "Being A Black American" by Smokey Robinson Def Poetry, Season 5, Episode 3
At President Trump's second press Cconference on the Neo-Nazi rioting in Charlottesville, Virgina he was correct when he said "there are good and bad people on both sides," because most of the people on both sides of the rioting in Charlottesville pray, go to church or temple or synagogue, and were Christian, Jewish, or Muslim, believe in God, and support various charities and fundraising activities. Unfortunately, the hypocrisy of all organized religions is the on-going failure to get followers to actually practice the egalitarian principles that exist as a cornerstone of their religious dogma; which is not reported by the media, and constantly ignored in motion pictures, as in "Blackkklansman (2018)." In this regard, there's a wealth of religious hypocrisy available to Spike Lee and others who condemn President Trump in, "The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews: Volume 1 and 2," published by the Nation of Islam. QUESTION: Isn't it blatant hypocrisy to defend the existence of statues and other commemorative symbols of the eight-(8) U.S. Presidents who actively owned slaves [George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, James Monroe, Andrew Jackson, John Tyler, James K. Polk, and Zachary Taylor], but to condemn statues of confederate leaders who actively engaged in the exact same practice? Well? Do you really think the slaves who were bought and sold, had their families divided, beaten, whipped, raped, castrated, burned, and murdered by the eight-(8) slave-owning U.S. Presidents would know the difference? Well?? Do you??? Omar and her colleagues in the "Squad" did not become media darlings because of their political acumen, or business acumen, but ONLY to spur their collective political ambitions via a pronounced hatred for Donald Trump; and more importantly, the need for the media to propel "binge-worthy chaos and sensationalism" into a perpetual news cycle. President Trump is right, if Omar doesn't like the U.S., she should pack her bags and go back to Somalia, but she won't do that, oh no, because Omar came to the United States because she and her family are blatant opportunists, and in Somalia she'd never make the $174,000 annual salary she receives as a member of the U.S. House of Representatives! I welcome your feedback. Trip Reynolds trip.reynolds@yahoo.com

Racism at iHeartMedia
(Racism: Part 1 of 3)

This is the first in a series of three editorials about racism. Some people willl have you believe racism no longer exists, and functions only as something contrived from legendary images from old films like "Gone With the Wind (1939)." Racism endures, especially at iHeartMedia's Omaha flagship station, NewsRadio 1110 KFAB. Here, take a look at the play-by-play.

06-05-19

On Jun 14, 2019, at 3:02 PM, Voorhees, Scott <ScottVoorhees@iheartmedia.com> wrote: Trip, While it’s not normal to insult the station for which you want to work by implying racism, you certainly got my attention. While we don’t currently have an open 30 minute window in our schedule, I’m interested in hearing an audio sample of your style, and some idea of the topics you’d discuss if given an opportunity. Thank you, and have a nice weekend, --Scott Voorhees NewsRadio 1110 KFAB Program Director / Host: 9-11am https://kfab.iheart.com/featured/voorhees LIKE US ON FACEBOOK: http://www.facebook.com/1110kfab iHeartMedia | Omaha, NE 5010 Underwood Ave. Omaha, NE 68132 o 402-561-2030 America’s #1 Audio Company Reaching 9 out of 10 Americans Every Month

From: trip.reynolds@icloud.com Subject: Re: A show on KFAB Date: June 14, 2019 at 5:04:01 PM CDT To: "Voorhees, Scott" <ScottVoorhees@iheartmedia.com> Hello, Scott: Thank you, very much, for responding. Most respectfully, I did not insult KFAB; point of fact: 1. I detailed skewed and racially insensitive broadcast content conveyed on Tuesday, June 4, 2019 between 5:30 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. by Chris Baker (Note: I was insulted!); and 2. I raised two questions: (a) “What card does KFAB’s lily-White on-air talent roster represent? (b) "Is KFAB afraid of a little color? Scott, you’ve heard this before, "If it looks like a duck, if it walks like a duck, if it quacks like a duck, it’s a duck." Frankly, if KFAB’s on-air talent elects to convey skewed and racially insensitive content, shouldn’t KFAB expect feedback from members of your broadcast audience who wield much greater subject matter expertise and significantly more diverse work experience than KFAB’s on-air talent? Well? Simply put, as a subject matter expert in all human resource disciplines, including AA/EEO/ADA and diversity, the easiest way to avoid “anyone" from implying racism, as a direct result of KFAB’s broadcast content, is by not broadcasting racist content, and by hiring and promoting a qualified and diverse staff, duh! YOUR COMMENT: I’m interested in hearing an audio sample of your style. RESPONSE: For the past several years, I’ve focused more on writing editorials (click here and here) than on producing audio/video content. Consequently, the wealth of my audio/video content is not readily available. Nevertheless, here are a few samples: Open Letter to Citizens of Omaha regarding the Omaha City Council https://youtu.be/B5hm9qKFm1g The Ward Connerly Interview http://www.reynos.com/CTI22/CTI22-VIDEOS/MP4/WARD%20CONNERLY%20INTERVIEW.mp4 Doing a voice over https://youtu.be/-wh_-bJgjso YOUR COMMENT: and some idea of the topics you’d discuss if given an opportunity. RESPONSE: TOPIC 1: 2020 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION - As validated by my editorials, I thoroughly support President Trump. Unfortunately, based on the 2016 presidential campaign, it’s highly unlikely print, broadcast, and internet-based media will objectively and accurately collect and report candidate data. Plus, it’s unlikely print, broadcast, and internet-based media will moderate objective political debates. As an on-the-air talking point, I’ve created an interactive template for both print, broadcast, and internet-based media that is blatantly objective and accurate, advertiser friendly, and I’d like to enlighten KFAB’s broadcast audience accordingly. TOPIC 2: THE REPUBLIC OF LAKOTAH - Why has the U.S. Federal Government ignored the Republic of Lakotah (https://youtu.be/8tEuaj4h8dw) while constantly giving preference to illegal aliens from south of the U.S. border? Equally important, why have all of the presidential candidates ignored this issue (http://www.republicoflakotah.com/steps-to-sovereignty/158-year-stuggle-for-justice/). My interest is not to be confrontational, but to establish a dialogue with key stakeholders, especially residents of Nebraska, to prioritize Native American rights over the rights of illegal aliens. TOPIC 3: WHAT HAPPENED TO JAPAN - Back in 1989, Japanese statesman Shintaro Ishihara wrote, “The Japan That Can Say NO” to champion Japan’s might as world political, economic, and military power and the second highest GDP; and that, in the wake of WWI, Japan no longer needs to cower to the U.S. Unfortunately, China has usurped Japan’s prominence, and it’s highly unlikely Japan will be first among equals ever again. I’m prepared to discuss the subject in great detail, with quests, and acquiring original advertising/sponsors from both China and Japan. YOUR COMMENT: we don’t currently have an open 30 minute window in our schedule RESPONSE: If you have on open-end (at-will, 30-day notice, etc.) broadcast contract for some of your content, and if I provide advertisers/sponsors to generate greater revenue than your current on-air talent, will a 30-minute or 60-minute window become available? I welcome your feedback! Have a great day! Trip Reynolds FaceTime / 402-418-8424 Skype / tripoetry http://www.reynos.com/bio.htm This entire communication is copyright © 2019 by Trip Reynolds, except where noted. This communication, including all attachments, is confidential and is intended only for the use of the intended recipient(s), and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, and is proprietary and legally privileged for the sole use of intended recipient(s). Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. Unauthorized recipients please contact the sender by reply e-mail and acknowledge destruction of the original message, attachments, and all copies. No part of this communication may be reproduced in any form without written permission from the copyright holder. Any attempt to obtain commercial gain can result in civil and/or criminal prosecution.

From: trip.reynolds@icloud.com Subject: Re: A show on KFAB Date: June 18, 2019 at 5:57:08 PM CDT To: "Voorhees, Scott" <ScottVoorhees@iheartmedia.com> Hello, Scott: By the way, here’s a link to the original letters I sent to the Omaha City Council: http://www.reynos.com/CTI22/letters.htm YOUR COMMENT: and some idea of the topics you’d discuss if given an opportunity. RESPONSE: The recent article, “Omaha City Council considers 3-minute time limit on public speaker; hearing postponed” by Omaha World Herald’s Aaron Sanderford failed to address the “big” point of Omaha City Council politics. It’s the history and practice of Omaha City Council to limit, circumvent, or curtail input from citizens. Note the following facts: 1. The City of Omaha and Cox Communications strategically planned the destruction of community/public access television in Omaha; reducing the number of community/public access channels from 8 to 6 to 4 to 1, and then limited the length of all broadcast content to 30-minutes of pre-screened/pre-approved content. 2. Remember a city called, Elkhorn, NE? Annexing cities has been a very effective method for the City of Omaha to strategically reduce or eliminate public comment and civic involvement. 3. Most importantly, it’s the demonstrated practice for the overwhelming majority of members of the Omaha City Council to blatantly avoid any kind of regular, sustained interaction with the public. Here’s proof: http://www.reynos.com/CTI22/letters.htm PROJECTION: Frankly, the citizens of Omaha should be thankful the Omaha City Council allows any kind of public speaking at any council meeting. In the future, citizens should expect a council ruling that anyone wanting to speak before the Omaha City Council must complete “Form 123XYZ” and submit it, thirty-(30) days in advance, for pre-approval, before a regularly scheduled once-a-month "public" council meeting. ASSESSMENT: In summary, the Omaha City Council makes the rules, and the Omaha City Council defines if and when it will allow any exception to its rules. Despite being elected to “represent the people,” it’s the practice of the Omaha City Council limit, circumvent, or curtail any dissension from the “public,” and the Omaha City Council does not want the “public” involved in its business. Sad, ironic, but true. As Omaha’s premiere steward of broadcast radio in metro Omaha, here’s a golden opportunity for KFAB to address the real reason for potholes (discussed by Chris Baker at 4:50 PM today) in Omaha - which is the failure to the Omaha City Council to effectively plan and manage city government. Unlike your current on-air staff, I know exactly how street and sanitation and public works departments should be staffed to effectively and promptly maintain city streets. [The amount of equipment, supplies, materials, time required to make repairs, and the size of a street crew assigned to make repairs is a finite, zero-based budget calculation. So, why doesn’t the Omaha City Council plan accordingly?] How can your on-air staff hold "public figures” accountable when they lack subject matter expertise in public/private sector, profit/non-profit, union/non-union, multi-site/multi-state, and international environments, including aerospace, public education, financial services, health care, gaming, IT, retail, manufacturing, municipal government, property/casualty insurance, and yes, even broadcasting? Yes, there’s value in surrounding Chris Baker, and other on-air talent, with support staff who primarily function to add fluff to the broadcast, but “intelligent” fluff that’s strategically designed to empower critical thinking and positive civic involvement by the broadcast audience mirrors and truly validates KFAB’s Nielsen ratings. Likewise, given that the City of Omaha has historically understaffed and underfunded street maintenance, the conveyance of sound business acumen in direct contrast to the City of Omaha’s negligent management will also validate KFAB’s prominence within the business community. Again, I welcome your feedback! Have a great day! Trip Reynolds FaceTime / 402-418-8424 Skype / tripoetry http://www.reynos.com/bio.htm This entire communication is copyright © 2019 by Trip Reynolds, except where noted. This communication, including all attachments, is confidential and is intended only for the use of the intended recipient(s), and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, and is proprietary and legally privileged for the sole use of intended recipient(s). Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. Unauthorized recipients please contact the sender by reply e-mail and acknowledge destruction of the original message, attachments, and all copies. No part of this communication may be reproduced in any form without written permission from the copyright holder. Any attempt to obtain commercial gain can result in civil and/or criminal prosecution.

From: trip.reynolds@icloud.com Subject: Re: A show on KFAB Date: June 18, 2019 at 7:55:31 PM CDT To: "Voorhees, Scott" <ScottVoorhees@iheartmedia.com> Hello, Scott: Most respectfully, the language I’ve used is very specific. I did NOT call you and your co-workers racists. A single act of apparent racism does not necessarily define someone as racist (again, I proudly support President Trump), however, I clearly conveyed the comments and vocal characterizations used by Chris Baker were racist. There’s a "big" difference, but unfortunately, it appears you do not see this distinction. Most respectfully, you would greatly benefit by meeting with me face-to-face so I might enlighten you (and your broadcast staff) with some cultural and ethnic sensitivity. As I stated in my original correspondence, “I really detest when people “play the race card,” but instead of addressing Chris Baker’s racist diatribe, you’ve elected to “personalize” only certain aspects of my previous email upon yourself, and you’ve elected to ignore other detailed aspects of my previous email. My "issue” is the “broadcast content,” not the person. Scott, as with KFAB’s on-air talent, you do realize there are no "people of color" on iHeartMedia Executive Leadership team, right? Oh, but you want Native Americans, Latinos, Asians, and Black people to believe racism does not exist, despite the perpetual existence of the “glass ceiling,” really? Regretfully, iHeartMedia and KFAB are just unable to find any qualified, literate, capable, educated, experienced, and talented people of color with subject matter expertise and related proficiencies in broadcasting, right? Oh, but you’re looking and you support “diversity,” right? Ha! Ha! Ha! Oh, we’re (people of color) supposed to keep waiting for “change” to occur. Or, even better, we (people of color) should start our own broadcasting companies, which is a great idea until White owned companies (as usual) intentionally, strategically prevent or limit our access to markets, real estate, and technologies. Scott, this is old news; I’m not whining, I’m not complaining, I’m simply stating what is. As you stated, “I’m a big boy,” so deal with it. The real deal? As with all mid-size and major market, White-owned and controlled radio and television broadcast media, KFAB’s commitment to on-air diversity is confined to it's perpetual search for a suitable, “Obama-like” but overtly conservative broadcast talent, and yes, I understand, because I’m a big boy, too! Unfortunately, too many White people have wrongly adopted a “politically correct” mantle that “racism no longer exists, or that sexism no longer exists; that we’re all equal now, yada, yada, yada . . .” Wake-up, Scott!!! Equality never happened, just ask the Republic of Lakotah, and in the absence of significant change, equality will never happen. YOUR COMMENT: As a first step here, I’d like to find a news-based reason to have you join me on the air some morning soon between the hours of 9 and 11. - when you find something you’re especially passionate about you’d like to share with KFAB’s listeners – please let me know. RESPONSE: Prior to meeting on-the-air, at your earliest convenience, let’s have a casual face-to-face meeting, which is much better than email-based communications. As validated by my posted editorials I have an interest in many subjects. For example, I’d like to discuss the size of the democratic presidential candidate pool and how the print, broadcast, and internet-based media fail to provide objective and accurate information about candidates; that we (voters) should be able to evaluate how candidates stack up at a glance, but that media intentionally refuse to make the “assessment process” easy. Back in 2015, I sent a proposal to the Republican and Democratic Headquarters, and the national broadcast networks, to prompt them to provide a much more linear, fact-based approach to the presidential debate. I received absolutely no feedback. KFAB’s broadcast audience will greatly benefit from my simple tool which I’ve updated for the 2020 presidential campaign. In summary, when might I meet with KFAB staff to discuss cultural and ethnic sensitivity? Plus, when might we meet for a casual face-to-face? Again, I welcome your feedback. Have a great day! Trip Reynolds FaceTime / 402-418-8424 Skype / tripoetry http://www.reynos.com/bio.htm This entire communication is copyright © 2019 by Trip Reynolds, except where noted. This communication, including all attachments, is confidential and is intended only for the use of the intended recipient(s), and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, and is proprietary and legally privileged for the sole use of intended recipient(s). Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. Unauthorized recipients please contact the sender by reply e-mail and acknowledge destruction of the original message, attachments, and all copies. No part of this communication may be reproduced in any form without written permission from the copyright holder. Any attempt to obtain commercial gain can result in civil and/or criminal prosecution.

From: trip.reynolds@icloud.com Subject: Presidential Debates and Broadcast Media are Stupid? Date: July 2, 2019 at 6:14:29 AM CDT To: "Voorhees, Scott" <ScottVoorhees@iheartmedia.com> Presidential Debates and Broadcast Media are Stupid? http://www.tripoetry.com/Letters/reynoldsrap.htm#debate Your thoughts? Trip Reynolds 402-418-8424 tripoetry.com/editorials

From: trip.reynolds@icloud.com Subject: For Your Information Date: July 11, 2019 at 8:00:14 AM CDT To: "Voorhees, Scott" <ScottVoorhees@iheartmedia.com> FYI In summary, I’ve asked you several questions, but you’ve elected not to respond except to erroneously personalize my communications and declare yourself a victim. Conversely, I’ve responded to all of your questions, but again, I’ve received no feedback. Accordingly, I’m providing the attached document as a professional courtesy, and I will not contact you again. Why is it necessary for KFAB's racially-and-sexually-skewed broadcast practices to ultimately fall prey to public scrutiny by the FCC, social media, your sponsors, vendors, cultural and civil rights organizations, elected officials, and the general public, which will be counterproductive to KFAB's business and fiscal operations? There’s no need to respond. Have a great day! Trip Reynolds 402-418-8424 This entire communication is copyright © 2019 by Trip Reynolds, except where noted. This communication, including all attachments, is confidential and is intended only for the use of the intended recipient(s), and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, and is proprietary and legally privileged for the sole use of intended recipient(s). Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. Unauthorized recipients please contact the sender by reply e-mail and acknowledge destruction of the original message, attachments, and all copies. No part of this communication may be reproduced in any form without written permission from the copyright holder. Any attempt to obtain commercial gain can result in civil and/or criminal prosecution.

On Jul 11, 2019, at 8:10 AM, Voorhees, Scott <ScottVoorhees@iheartmedia.com> wrote: While I apologize for letting our conversation fall through the cracks during my two weeks of 14-hour-days with people on vacation, followed by the long Independence Day weekend and the ensuing catch-up, I do agree with you on one point: This will be the end of that conversation. Good luck to you, Trip. --Scott Voorhees NewsRadio 1110 KFAB Program Director / Host: 9-11am https://kfab.iheart.com/featured/voorhees LIKE US ON FACEBOOK: http://www.facebook.com/1110kfab iHeartMedia | Omaha, NE 5010 Underwood Ave. Omaha, NE 68132 o 402-561-2030 America’s #1 Audio Company Reaching 9 out of 10 Americans Every Month

From: trip.reynolds@icloud.com Subject: Re: For Your Information Date: July 11, 2019 at 10:11:36 AM CDT To: "Voorhees, Scott" <ScottVoorhees@iheartmedia.com> There was no need to contact me, but nevertheless, you make excuses, excuses . . . you make excuses. Sad. This entire communication is copyright © 2019 by Trip Reynolds, except where noted. This communication, including all attachments, is confidential and is intended only for the use of the intended recipient(s), and is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, and is proprietary and legally privileged for the sole use of intended recipient(s). Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. Unauthorized recipients please contact the sender by reply e-mail and acknowledge destruction of the original message, attachments, and all copies. No part of this communication may be reproduced in any form without written permission from the copyright holder. Any attempt to obtain commercial gain can result in civil and/or criminal prosecution.

iHeartRadio is supposedly committed to diversity. https://www.iheartmedia.com/Diversity

There are no people of color on iHeartMedia's Executive Leadership Team https://www.iheartmedia.com/about/our-team   BOB PITTMAN CHAIRMAN AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER RICHARD J. BRESSLER PRESIDENT, CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER WENDY GOLDBERG EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT AND CHIEF COMMUNICATIONS OFFICER     PAUL MCNICOL EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT AND GENERAL COUNSEL GAYLE TROBERMAN EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT AND CHIEF MARKETING OFFICER JOHN SYKES PRESIDENT OF ENTERTAINMENT ENTERPRISES           STEVE MILLS GLOBAL CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER

Let's recap:

1. I detailed skewed and racially insensitive broadcast content conveyed on Tuesday, June 4, 2019 between 5:30 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. by Chris Baker.

2. KFAB elected not to address my concern about comments made by its on-air staff.

3. KFAB elected not to respond to my concern about its lack of cultural and ethnic diversity, or its lack of sensitivity to a diverse broadcast audience.

4. Despite online posturing of an alleged commitment to diversity, neither KFAB or its owner, iHeartMedia employ people of color in a senior leadership role.

Again, I really detest when people “play the race card,” but what card does KFAB’s lily-White on-air talent roster represent; what card does iHeartMedia's lily-White senior leadership team represent?

If it walks like a duck, smells like a duck, looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and defecates like a duck . . . it's a . . .

I welcome your feedback.

Trip Reynolds
trip.reynolds@yahoo.com

Presidential Debates and Broadcast Media are Stupid
. . . and as deceitful, manipulative, and racist as Kamala Harris!

Like many people, I watched the recent presidential debate featuring democratic candidates. To qualify for the first debate held last week in Miami, which played out over two nights, candidates had to fulfill one of two criteria: either get 65,000 donors to their campaigns, with at least 200 donors in 20 different states, or obtain at least 1% in three polls recognized as legitimate by the debate committee. Twenty-(20) of twenty-five-(25) democratic contenders qualified for the first round of debate. With so many qualifiers, the candidates were split into two groups across two consecutive nights totaling four hours, with ten candidates randomly chosen to appear on each night.

According to the overtly left-leaning NBC News, which hosted the debate, candidates' podium placements were "based on polling," which is where, how, and when NBC news began this deceitful, manipulative, and overtly bias broadcast that functioned not as a true debate, but as a classic example of both broadcast and political manure.

BROADCAST MANURE

So, have you ever watched a professional football (NFL), basketball (NBA), or baseball (MLB) game, boxing, UFC, golf, or a NCAA Division I football, basketball, baseball, volleyball, or track and field meet on television? Of course, you have. Then, you've clearly noticed the extremely powerful on-screen graphics that immediately showcare the statistics of individual players and entire teams, including: biographies (birth, parents, sibliings, family history, etc.); alumni; win-loss record; season average; career average; anecdotal comments; human interest spots; fan commentaries; audio and video spots; and extremely interactive on-screen graphics and analytics that enable the "color commentary" hosts to use "on screen" graphics to draw attention to (highlight) player movements, errors, missed calls, and more. That's right, the broadcast networks populate their "sports data base" with literally millions and millions of gigabytes [a unit of information equal to one billion (109) or, strictly, 230 bytes] of data spanning the entire existence of an athlete (Bob Cousy to John Havlick to Bill Russell to Larry Bird, etc. - from amateur to professional to retirement), or team (Boston Celtics, Los Angeles Lakers, Chicago Bulls, etc.). This data is housed on the (video) computer servers of CBS, NBC, ABC, FOX, etc. You've seen this data appear instantly on your television screen, right? Of course, you have.

But, no, our broadcast networks are just way too dumb, stupid, and lazy to take time to build, prior to the televised debate, an on-screen "political data base," that mirrors the character and scope of their sports data bases, with robust profiles of every presidential candidate, which would / should include:

Published statements from each candidate on all major topics to be discussed during the debate; to instantly appear on-screen to convey the candidate's official position, and to validate or challenge the veracity of each candidate.

Video content from each candidate on all major topics to be discussed during the debate; to instantly appear on-screen to convey the candidate's official position, and to validate or challenge the veracity of each candidate.

Provide candidates with the option to present an opening statement and/or closing statement via a thirty-(30) to sixty-(60) second PowerPoint or video presentation to showcase the uniqueness of their candidacy.

Plus, as an active member of the electorate (voter), I'd like to know which candidates share the same opinion or position on an issue, which is a simple on-screen display. I'd like to know which candidates are supporting the pseudo-rights of illegal aliens while completely ignoring the rights of the sovereign Republic of Lakotah, and again, that's a simple on-screen display. I'd like to know the "bottom line" total projected cost-to-taxpayers for each candidate's first term as POTUS, and again, that's a simple on-screen display. None of the aforementioned happened.

POLITICAL MANURE

Yes, the networks could use their existing technology to better inform their broadcast audiences, to convey the candidate's official position, and to instantly validate or challenge the veracity of each candidate. Instead, as with all previous televised pseudo-debates, the broadcast was/is designed as a "popularity" contest to see which candidate scores the most "zingers" against other candidates, such as the Johnny-come-lately hypocrisy of Kamala Harris to slam Joe Biden while intentionally ignoring the fact that her good friend President Barack Obama vetted Joe Biden's entire political history, including Biden's voting record and position on racism, and found him to be 100% worthy to be his vice president for eight-(8) consecutive years, and if necessary, to be sworn in as POTUS! Should Harris become the presidential nominee for the Democratic party, you can expect President Donald Trump to seize on Harris' blatantly opportunistic, Johnny-come-lately hypocrisy of playing the "race card" only when it suits her. What's next for Harris? She'll probably play the #ME TOO movement "sex card" and blame Biden for problems with her vagina. Oh yeah, let's go there too!

And, you really wonder how Donald Trump became president, really? The personality-driven "paradigm" used for televised debates, which is not about "issues," is an advantage for Donald Trump and he knows it ("Crooked Hillary" for Hillary Clinton, "Wild Bill" for Bill Clinton, "Lyin' Ted" for Ted Cruz, "Pocahontas" for Elizabeth Warren, "Crazy Joe" for Joe Biden, etc.); which is why President Donald Trump will likely be re-elected in 2020. When it comes to repeatedly and successfully throwing around political manure, none of the Democratic presidential candidates possess the acumen of Donald Trump.

 

HOW TO BROADCAST AND MODERATE AN OBJECTIVE POLITICAL DEBATE?

That's simple, just use common sense and be fair.

So, there were ten-(10) Democratic presidential candidates on stage. Before beginning the first round of questions, I foolishly expected each candidate would be allowed a brief thirty-(30) second spot to introduce themselves. That didn't happen. Instead, moderators jumped right in and asked questions, but:

not in alphabetical order by the candidate's last or first name;

not in chronological order by the date the candidate filed to run;

not in physical order from stage-right to stage-left or vice versa, and not from center-stage working outward to stage-left or stage-right.

Nope, nothing so linear and blatantly objective. Instead, at the expense of all other candidates, front-runners Elizabeth Warren and Joe Biden were frequently tossed the first set of questions and then targeted for immediate follow-ups - typically before other candidates even had their first opportunity at an open microphone. That was not fair!

As represented by the following graphic, broadcast networks could easily adapt the technology used for sports programming to accurately and promptly convey (report) the political platforms of each candidate; to easily compare and contrast candidates; and most importantly, instead of pushing personality-based diatribes ("zingers") designed to produce emotional responses, the debates could/should focus on "intellect-based" solutions for serious political problems.

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE

NewTek's TriCaster, numerous video servers, and similar broadcast hardware and software technologies can easily be populated with the aforementioned graphics and a robust database of candidate data; I know, because the above graphic is based on my actual, working template.

Additionally, according to NBC, candidates were supposed to be limited to 60 seconds to answer questions and 30 seconds to respond to follow-ups. That didn't happen. Candidates frequently talked well beyond the established time limits, which was easy to prevent, because the program director (in the control room) can easily turn-off any microphone at any time. You've seen acceptance speeches at the Academy Awards® abruptly ended for this very reason, and the subsequent stupid look on the faces of actors/actresses when they realize their microphone is off.

Sadly, broadcast networks and the political parties do not effectively and professionally "manage" these "popularity" contests, which is why issue-driven political content is not important; again, the candidate scoring the most "zingers" against other candidates wins! In this regard, comedians Don Rickles, Rodney Dangerfield, and Eddie Griffin, Jr. would be great politicians. It's a waste of time to watch any more of these presidential debates, because the "zingers" will be broadcast repeatedly during the post-debate news cycle.

In summary, when it comes to repeatedly and successfully throwing around political manure, none of the Democratic presidential candidates wield the acumen of Donald Trump, which is why President Donald Trump will likely be re-elected in 2020. Deal with it.

I welcome your feedback.

Trip Reynolds
trip.reynolds@yahoo.com

The "Big Picture" and Donald Trump

Teflon is a tough synthetic resin made by polymerizing tetrafluoroethylene, used to coat nonstick cooking utensils and to make seals and bearings. You got that? So, with the release of Mueller report, at least one thing is perfectly clear, at least to me, President Donald Trump continues to be a helluva lot smarter or a hulluva lot dumber than the overwhelming majority of Repbulicans, Democrats, and mass media (print, broadcast, and social media). The following is taken directly from page five-(5) of the four-hundred-and-forty-eight-(448) page Mueller report:

RUSSIAN CONTACTS WITH THE CAMPAIGN (page 5, to download the report, click here)

The social media campaign and the GRU hacking operations coincided with a series of contacts between Trump Campaign officials and individuals with ties to the Russian government. The Office investigated whether those contacts reflected or resulted in the Campaign conspiring or coordinating with Russia in its election-interference activities. Although the investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the Campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts, the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.

Given the presumed superior intellectual prowess of our so-called elite economic, political, business, educational, civic, and cultural leaders (re-read the previous phrase), it's disappointing these "intellectuals" ignore or are unable to comprehend either the genius or stupidity of President Donald Trump.

The "Genius" of Donald Trump

Trump blatantly manipulated the overwhelming majority of print, broadcast, and social media into giving him "free" publicity decades before announcing his 2016 presidential campaign, and throughout his 2016 presidential campaign, and of course, continuously after being elected POTUS.

At his press conference on the Neo-Nazi rioting in Charlottesville, Virgina President Trump was correct when he said "there are good and bad people on both sides," because most of the people on both sides of the rioting in Charlottesville pray, go to church or temple or synagogue, and were Christian, Jewish, or Muslim, believe in God, and support various charities and funding activities. Unfortunately, the hypocrisy of all organized religions is the on-going failure to get followers to actually practice the egalitarian principles that exist as a cornerstone of their religious dogma, which is NOT reported by the media, and constantly ignored in motion pictures, as in "Blackkklansman (2018)." In this regard, there's a wealth of religious hypocrisy available to Spike Lee and others who condemn President Trump in, "The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews: Volume 1 and 2," published by the Nation of Islam.

Isn't it blatant hypocrisy to defend the existence of statues and other commemorative symbols of the eight-(8) U.S. Presidents who actively owned slaves [George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, James Monroe, Andrew Jackson, John Tyler, James K. Polk, and Zachary Taylor], but to condemn statues of confederate leaders who actively engaged in the exact same practice? Well? Do you really think the slaves who were bought and sold and had their families divided, raped, castrated, and murdered would know the difference? Well?? Do you???

Trump has blatantly, skillfully, deftly, and strategically used both language and facts to achieve his objective. Trump intentionally says and does things to distract you and the media. Oh, this is nothing new, so don't blame Donald Trump because he's better at fabricating something out of nothing than you. Creating a "public persona" began well before "Hollywood" hired press agents and engineered media relations campaigns to "distort reality" and to promote or make actors and actresses appear as something other than the truth, to hide whatever (marriages, pregnancies, sexual preferences, divorces, bankruptcies, criminal records, etc.). For example:

Rock Hudson was gay.

Lucille Ball dyed her hair red.

Frank Sinatra wore lifts.

Judy Garland was a full-breasted seventeen-(17) year-old young woman when she made "The Wizard of Oz" in 1939; so, to make Garland appear more "preadolescent" the studio made Garland wear a very tight-fitting bra to flatten her breasts.

Kirk Douglas' real name is Issur Danielovitch Demsky, and despite his blonde hair and blue eyes, Douglas has always been Jewish.

President Abraham Lincoln didn't give a crap about racial equality: "I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the White race." Abraham Lincoln Speaking in support of the Illinois Black Laws; Charleston, Illinois; Saturday, September 18, 1858

"Everything is better with Blue Bonnet on it!" is not true! It's just a commercial.

 

The "Stupidity" of Donald Trump

Hum . . . what?

Just like Teflon, crap doesn't stick to Donald Trump, and it's not because he's stupid. So, do you get the "Big Picture" of Donald Trump?

I welcome your feedback.

Trip Reynolds
trip.reynolds@yahoo.com

The "Evils" of Homosexuality

Gotcha!

If you thought this editorial is actaully about the "evils" of homosexuality, then your wrong. You just got pranked. Likewise, if you think this editorial is about the "joys" of homosexuality then you're also wrong. Is this editorial about homosexuality? Yes, absolutely, and I'll focus on two very specific areas: homosexuality in religion and homosexuality in business, which in each case automatically includes "politics."

RELIGION:

I'll make this linearly simple:

	There's absolutely nothing wrong with believing in the Abrahamic religions of Judaism (seventh century BCE), Christianity (first centruy CD), and Islam (seventh century CE), which were ALL created from and/or derived from ancient Black civilizations. Re-read the previous sentence.
	There's absolutely nothing wrong with believing in religious scripture as documented in the Bible (Christians), Torah (Jews), or Quran (Muslims). Re-read the previous sentence.
	There's absolutely nothing wrong believing that religious scripture as documented throughout the Bible (Christians), Torah (Jews), or Quran (Muslims) literally represents the actual "Word of God." Re-read the previous sentence.

Given the aforementioned, there's absolutely nothing wrong believing that God has NEVER made a mistake, that God does NOT make mistakes. Therefore, due to the blatant disobedience of God's word by man (Adam) and woman (Eve), all aspects of humanity are guilty, even the unborn cannot claim innocence, and are intentionally and perpetually hexed and condemned by God. Clearly, every aspect of humanity, including "free will," whether perceived as good, or bad, or ugly is God's intent.

Go

DEFORMITY IS "GOD's" PLAN	WHY DO HUMANS DEFY GOD'S PLAN?
Since God is never wrong, why do humans defy God's will and literally re-design, rebuild, or actually destroy God's work (deformities, death, destruction, etc.)? Clearly, prior to and at the moment of conception, an omniscient (all-knowing), omipresent (everywhere), and omnipotent (all-powerful) God planned - at the genetic level within the deepest recesses of DNA - the "deformity" of Godfrey Baguma and the conjoined births of Lexi and Sydney Stark. Re-read the previous sentence. Therefore, since God does NOT make mistakes, we must acknowledge - again, at the genetic level within the deepest recesses of DNA - some males were intentionally born with a mental and/or physical predilection to be sexaully attracted to males; likewise, some females were intentionally born with a mental and/or physical predilection to be sexually attracted to females. Therefore, homosexuality is clearly intentional, predetermined, and authorized by God, and as such, homosexuality is not a "deformity" or a sin, but exists only as a "difference," and such predilection is, in fact, the natural order of things. To disagree with this blatantly linear assessment of religious theology is to contest God's will, which would be a sin, right? THE SOLUTION TO THE "HOMOSEXUALITY PROBLEM" IN ORGANIZED RELIGIONW Notably, all religious scripture as documented in the Bible (Christians), Torah (Jews), or Quran (Muslims) define homosexuality as an abomination, destestable, contemptible. For example: Leviticus 20:13 (KJV) 13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. But here's the thing about religious scripture, it's all contrived as a direct result of negotiations between elite and powerful White men. Accordingly, religious scripture is NOT the word of God, but exists as man's (no women were involved) interpretation or idealistic belief to manipulate how the word of God should be perceived by the masses. History consistently documents and validates how elite and powerful White men literally stole the creation of the Abrahamic religions [Judaism (seventh century BCE), Christianity (first centruy CD), and Islam (seventh century CE)] from ancient Black civilizations. History consistently documents and validates how White religious leaders, politicians, and people of "wealth and privilege," have always disagreed on the authenticity of the so-called "inspired word of God" as a tool to indoctrinate and unilaterally control, manage, and organize followers of the Christian, Jewish, and Islamic religions. How did these elite and powerful White men resolve this dilemma? They met and unilaterally decided what "they" wanted the "word of God" to mean to the masses. Click the following links: First Council of Nicaea - AD 325 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Council_of_Nicaea Second Council of Nicaea - AD 787 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea Then, nearly 1300 years later, with the separation of the Church of England from the Roman Catholic Church, the King James Version (KJV) was begun in 1604 and finally completed in 1611. The King James Bible (KJB), is an English translation of the Christian Bible for the Church of England. James gave the translators instructions intended to ensure that the new version would conform to the ecclesiology and reflect the episcopal structure of the Church of England and its belief in an ordained clergy. The translation was done by 47 scholars, all of whom were members of the Church of England. Plus, the scope of religious disagreement on the "inspired word of God" is not confined to the Old and New Testaments, but also to the original biblical apocrypha that were created before, during, or as an appendix to the New Testament. To review the original books of the Bible, click the following link, then scroll (all the way) down and review the charts. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Books_of_the_Bible Conversely, for the Islamic religion, the Quran mentions by name at least three main Islamic scriptures which came before the Quran. 1. Tawrat or Torah 2. Zabur: The Book of Psalms 3. Injil or Gospel or New Testament 4. Here are all of the books (Surahs) of the Quran https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_surahs_in_the_Quran Bottom line, "heterosexual" followers and practitioners of the Abrahamic religions have every right to believe whatever they want about religious scripture and God's word. As clearly defined in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. So, anyone can start a religion, and anyone can write a Bible. Conversely, many Black people and Native Americans believe the Bible is NOT the word of God, because of the social, economic, political, and religious hypocrisy of the overwhelming majority of White people who preached the word of God while concurrently engaging in genocide, slavery, rape, lynching, oppression, and discrimination of Black people and other people of color. As clearly defined by the Doctrine of Discovery that unilaterally established a paradigm of White privilege and White supremacy, many Black people believe organized religion indoctrinates and enforces White Privilege, and all religions exist as one of the most racist institutions in the U.S. and around the world. You profess to believe “that, of one blood, God made all nations of men to dwell on the face of all the earth,” and hath commanded all men, everywhere to love one another; yet you notoriously hate, (and glory in your hatred), all men whose skins are not colored like your own. The existence of slavery in this country brands your republicanism as a sham, your humanity as a base pretence, and your Christianity as a lie. What to the Slave is the Fourth of July? by FREDERICK DOUGLASS July 5, 1852 To download the entire speech, click here. James Baldwin on the Dick Cavett Show June 13, 1968 Keep in mind, not all White people are racist, nevertheless, as independently and objectively validated in yet another research study reported in the June 2014 issue of “The Atlantic” magazine, the overwhelming majority of White people (religious and non-religious, heterosexuals, gays, lesbians, etc.) have continuously ostracized Black people during 250 years of slavery, 90 years of Jim Crow, 60 years of separate but equal, 35 years of state-sanctioned redlining; AND the social and economic status for the overwhelming majority of Black people has NEVER changed. So, it's stupid to demand, coerce, provoke, manipulate, or expect equality from your oppressor who refuses to deviate from a perpetual status quo to retain privilege and supremacy. Likewise, attempts to coerce, provoke, or manipulate heterosexuals through "political correctness" to change their religious dogma by embracing diversity and inclusion is, well, just as pointless. Plus, given the First Amendment, it's a stipud attack on an individual's freedom of religious belief. More importantly, just like the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (mormon.org), there's absolutely nothing to prevent people who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, intersex, bigamist, polygamist, pedophiles, (LGBTQIBPP) etc., from joining forces to write and publish their own religious scriptures, their own Bible. The Queen James Bible is an example, but unfortunately, this document does not go nearly far enough to capture the robust character and scope of religious theology that will benefit the greater global LGBTQIBPP community. Given the tactics used by heterosexuals to define the character and scope of religious dogma, isn't it about time the LGBTQIBPP community held its own "Council of Nicaea" to create its own Bible, its own church, etc.? Consider the following facts: Although no longer owned by Black people, nevertheless, Black people created BET Television because White people refused to provide Black people with access to broadcast television enabling Black people to tell their own stories. Lessons learned. Although no longer owned by Black people, nevertheless, Black people created Motown Records because White people refused to provide Black people with access to and control of their own musical talent and business acumen. Lessons learned. John Wesley, an English cleric, theologian, and evangelist launched the Methodist Church in the United States of America with a group of slaves as an offshoot of the Church of England. John Wesley was also an abolitionist, and in 1774 he wrote, "Thoughts Upon Slavery," and said, "Liberty is the right of every human creature, as soon as he breathes the vital air; and no human law can deprive him of that right which he derives from the law of nature." Nevertheless, before, during, and after the U.S. Civil War, the Methodist Church openly practiced racism, discrimination, and separatism. Fact, nearly two-hundred-(200) years ago, thousands of Black people left the Methodist Church in 1816 to create the African Methodist Episcopal Church (A.M.E.), and the exodus of Black people continued in 1870 when more Black people left to escape the blatant racism and hypocrisy of "White-privilege-based-religion" to create the Christian Methodist Episcopal Church (C.M.E.). Beginning in 1784 to this very day, the Methodist Book of Discipline establishes and defines all church law, policy, and procedures, including the well-documented policy and practice of racism, discrimination and oppression. Lessons learned. On May 17, 1954, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the doctrine of separate but equal. "Segregation of children in public schools solely on the basis of race . . . deprives the children of a minority group of equal educational opportunities," the justices ruled in Brown v. Board of Education. No matter, the Methodist Church continued its "separate and unequal" practice to intentionally divide congregations by race. In fact, overt racial discrimination, as defined by the Central Jurisdiction of the Methodist Church, continued until 1968, for another fourteen-(14) years after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the doctrine of separate but equal. Lessons learned. As reported in the Mohave Valley Daily News, the predominately lily-White 22,000-member Church of the Resurrection, UMC’s largest church with four locations in the Kansas City area, is supporting LGBTQIBPP by temporarily withholding half of the $2.5 million that it normally would have paid to the UMC’s head office - money earmarked to fund both domestic and international charitable and philanthropic work. Its lead pastor, Adam Hamilton, said of his church “We’ll ultimately pay it,” Hamilton said, “But we want to show that this is the impact if our churches leave.” Conversely, Hamilton and his congregation have NEVER withheld any porition of the $2.5 million in response to the perpetual and blatant racism, discrimination, oppression and the hypocrisy of their "White-privilege-based-religion against people of color, which fostered the creation of and sustains the independence of the A.M.E and C.M.E. from the United Methodist Church. At best, the United Methodist Church has thrown a bone to minorities through "ethnic programs" such as Black Methodists for Church Renewal (BMCR) and Ethic Minority at the Local Church (EMLC), etc., but as expressed (above) by Frederick Douglass on July 5, 1852 and one-hundred-and-sixteen-(116) years later by James Baldwin on the Dick Cavett Show Dick Cavett Show on June 13, 1968 a "separate but equal" caste system continues to exist within the United Methodist Church. Lessons learned. It is what it is. As clearly posted on the Church of the Resurrection's web site, which is consistent with the stereotypical "do-gooder" mantra of many White folks, Hamilton and his congregation present a pseudo-egalitarian image by posting the church's domestic charitable initiatives in Omaha, Nebraska and Columbus, Ohio and Corpus Christi, Texas and its international charitable initiatives in Costa Rica, Haiti, and Honduras - but there's absolutely no reference or commmitment to end the incarceration of Native Americans at the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation - the poorest county in the United States, or to end the active genocide and oppression of the sovereign people of the Republic of Lakotah; plus, as historically and consistently validated by both independent and government research studies, there's absolutely no acknowledgement by Hamilton and his congregation that the typical Black household has NEVER and will NEVER make as much as the typical White household, and there's no commitment from Hamilton and his congregation to address this perpetual inequity. Why is that? Instead of withholding half of the $2.5 million in pseudo-martyrdom to LGBTQIBPP, why not donate $2.5 million to the poorest people, Native Americans, in the poorest county in the United States? Historically, again, such "indifference" and denial by White Methodists prompted the creation of the African Methodist Episcopal Church (A.M.E.) and the Christian Methodist Episcopal Church (C.M.E.). Lessons learned. Recently, the United Methodist Church voted to adhere to the traditional teachings of the Bible and the Book of Discipline of the Methodist Church, which clearly do not support homosexuality. Again, there's absolutely nothing wrong with believing in the Abrahamic religions of Judaism (seventh century BCE), Christianity (first centruy CD), and Islam (seventh century CE), but if you believe, then re-writing history or policy to fit the LGBTQIBPP paradigm is an act of blatant contempt, disobedience, disbelief, even blasphemy. There's a colloquialism born out of track and field, "Stay in your lane," which essentiallly applies to any organized activity. Athletes are immediately disqualified if a runner steps outside of his or her lane at any Olympic, IAAF, or NCAA Divsion I track and field championship. Why? In the absence of rules, some athletes would likely cross into other lanes to obtain an advantage, or use equipment of varying weight, length, height, timing systems, etc., which would be an advantage to some and a disadvantage to others. Simply put, to eliminate any misunderstanding, including multiple interpretations that create confusion or derision or inequity, and to ensure consistency in assessment and evaluation, the same rules apply to everyone. Likewise, an attorney will be disbarred and prohibited from practicing law for not adhering to state sanctioning requirements. Members of sororities and fraternities are expelled for failure to adhere to membership requirements. Employees are terminated for failure to adhere to employer polices, practices, and procedures. Citizens and military personnel are arrested, convicted, incarcerated or even worse for violating local, state, federal, or miliatry law. Simply put, people who own or control organizations make the rules (laws) and all exceptions to the rules, it's their organization or company, they own it, and they can unilaterally "pick and choose" the character and scope of administration and compliance. People who refuse to "play by the rules" are appropriately disciplined, or expelled, or terminated, or defrocked, etc. Again, re-writing history or policy to fit the LGBTQIBPP paradigm is an act of blatant contempt, disobedience, disbelief, even blasphemy. It's a mistake to confuse the politically-correct-jump-on-the-band-wagon-idealism of "inclusion" with "equality," because these are two completely different non-linear concepts. For example, when discussing American professional football it's correct to "include" the National Football League (NFL), and the Alliance of American Football (AAF), and the XFL, and the Indoor Football League (IFL), and the Champions Indoor Football (CIF), and the Legends Football League (LFL), but these American professional football leagues do NOT share or operate under the same ownership, rules, seasons, venues (indoors or outdoors), schedules, personnel, or even gender. Any effort to coerce or require all American professional football leagues to ignore individual differences and preferences, and collectively embrace "inclusion" to establish a oneness of "equality" would be met with immediate rejection, because as clearly defined by the Declaration of Independence, the United States Constitution, and States rights, in the United States of America individuals, organizations, and employers have the right for self-determination. So, again, given the tactics used by heterosexuals to define the character and scope of "their" religious dogma, isn't it about time the LGBTQIBPP community held its own "Council of Nicaea" to create its own Bible, its own church, etc.? Again, just like the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (mormon.org), there's absolutely nothing to prevent LGBTQIBPP from joining forces to collectively write and publish its own religious scriptures, its own Bible. So, LGBTQIBPP what are you waiting for?

BUSINESS:

The following are anecdotal events that involved the discussion of homosexuality in the workplace:

	While employed in the mid-1980s in Dallas, Texas as a human resource program manager by the City of Dallas, a White (mid-20s) female co-worker came over to my work station and said: Donna (lesbian White female): So, Trip, what do you think about what people are saying about me? Trip was aware Donna was standing at his work station, but he continued to work. Donna (lesbian White female): Trip, did you hear me? Trip (straight Black male): What, Donna? Donna (lesbian White female): What are people saying about me? Trip (straight Black male): I don't know. I don't go around listening to people. No one has said anything about you to me. Donna (lesbian White female): Really? You're serious? Trip (straight Black male): Yes, I'm serious. Why? What happened? Did you do something? Donna (lesbian White female): No one said anything to you about me being gay? Trip (straight Black male): What? You're gay? Really? Donna (lesbian White female): Come on, Trip. You mean you didn't know? Trip (straight Black male): (Laughing) How am I supposed to know? Is it something I should be looking for? Plus, why would it make any difference to me personally or professionally? Donna (lesbian White female): You can't be that naive, Trip. Surely, you knew. Come on. Trip (straight Black male): No, Donna, I didn't know, and I don't care. Hum, when I was in college this Black guy, a student, thought I was gay because I didn't "hang out" with anyone. I later discovered he was gay; I guess he was trying to make his move on me. As always, I'm just minding my own business; again, I don't care what other people are saying. Donna (lesbian White female): Trip, you're unbelieveable. Donna shakes her head, turns away from Trip, and leaves his work station.
	Eventually, months pass and Trip and Donna become good friends, and Donna invited Trip to her home to have dinner with two of her friends, lesbians, Kay and Kay's partner. Dinner is over, and Donna bluntly asks Kay . . . Donna (lesbian White female): So, Kay, what do you think about Trip? Kay (lesbian White female): I think he's like most Black guys, just waiting for an opportunity to screw a White girl, and he doesn't give a crap about you being a lesbian. Donna (lesbian White female): Well, that's not gonna happen. Nope, not with me. Trip (straight Black male): (Laughing, he looks directly at Donna and says . . .) I didn't know screwing you was on the agenda! Donna (lesbian White female): It's not, Trip, and it never was, and never will be. Kay (lesbian White female): I disagree, he's gonna make his move, because that's what men do. The world would be a much better place if there were fewer men, or if men didn't own and control everything. You're lying to yourself, Donna, if you think Trip is any different. Donna (lesbian White female): (smiling) Well, Trip, you got something to say to that? Trip (straight Black male): (Looking directly at Kay) Kay, again, screwing Donna has never been on my agenda. (Trip looks back at Donna and then turns to look directly at Kay) But, you clearly have an agenda, and I've known people with agendas just like you! For example, some people believe the world would be a much better place if everyone had a gun - just ask the NRA. Some people believe the world would be a much better place if all Black people were dead, just ask the KKK. Some people believe the world would be a much better place if all White people were dead, ask Elijah Muhammad of the Nation of Islam, because White men AND White women have clearly demonstrated their contempt for people of color through genocide of Native Americans, enslavement of Black people for 400 years, and White people drag other White people into their shit thereby killing everyone and everything in sight as validated through two World Wars and the ethnic cleansing or Holocaust or genocide of White people called Jews. Kay, extremists like you are the real problem. It's not my practice to lean too far to the left, or too far to the right, because everyone wants to have some sense of freedom and independence to live their life. Instead of being extremists, humans should spend more time and energy finding ways to accept each other, to work together, positively. Of course, you can believe whatever you want to believe, but you don't appear to be very accepting or egalitarian. Donna (lesbian White female): (smiling) Well, Trip, I guess that about says it. Kay frowned at Trip, and said nothing in response. Dinner was over. By the way, Trip and Donna NEVER shared a kiss or had sex.
	While employed in the mid-1990s in Denver, Colorado as vice president of human resources at a credit union, a White (late-20s) male Teller Supervisor came over to my work station and said: Dave (gay White male): Trip, we gays guys have it just as bad as Black people. I mean, when people find out someone is gay they treat us so differently, badly or worse. Trip (straight Black male): Dave, what you just said is racist, sexist, and insulting. You're wrong to use the perpetual misfortune of others to achieve some skewed advantage for your agenda. Let me make this clear: everytime, again, everytime you walk into any room filled with one person or a crowd of people, the only image people see is a White man. Every time. As a White man you automatically get to walk in, to look around, to sit down, to do whatever you want. As a White man, you can even walk into a women's restroom with some sense of authority because, again, you're a White man, and perhaps you're the plumber or facility manager or owner of the building, because all of the aforementioned are typically White men - and White men have always held privilege over everything in this country. Conversely, the very second I walk into any room filled with one White person or a crowd of White people I'm immediately subject to blatantly overt or subliminal discrimination, which sadly, I've had to deal with my entire life. White people, like you, have told me to my face, "We don't want Black people working here." Or, "We don't want Black people living in this apartment complex." Or, "We don't have Black people in our graduate program at Northen Illinois University and we're not going to start with you!" Likewise, the minute women walk into a room filled with one man or a group of men, they're often perceived as nothing more than tits and ass, and if you're a woman of color your value is even less. I had absolutely no say-so in the selection of my race, color, or gender. None. Nevertheless, many White men, like you, and many White women, have absolutely no problem discriminating against me for factors I never held any control over. You have absolutely no idea what it means to know that the overwhelming majority of White men and White women will NEVER provide me with an opportunity to present my intellect, creativity, or business acumen because they refuse to see me as anything but a Black man. No one knows if you're gay, or what you do with your penis unless you open your mouth and tell them, which you frequently do here at the credit union. Why do you continue to do that, Dave? So, again, let me be clear, I'm not telling you to hide your "sexuality," but you're the one who keeps bringing this subject up. As with many people, I would not know you are gay unless you had told me. More importantly, absolutely no aspect of your job involves the use of your penis. As clearly defined by your essential job functions and your job standards, your job performance is not measured by how well or how poorly you use your penis. So, please, get back to work. Dave turned red in the face, apologized to Trip, and went back to work.

Except for the adult film industry, when a candidate shows-up for a job interview the first thing recognized by the employer is the perception of the candidate's race (color or ethnicity) or sex (gender). If a male candidate arrives in full "homosexual" regalia wearing a dress, extreme facial make-up, wig, etc., then the candidate is intentionally forfeiting their candidacy, because employers have every right to adopt, communicate and enforce a "dress code" that ensures employees comply with standards established for customer relationship management. Employers do NOT want to alienate potential or existing customers (revenue streams) by hiring candidates and retaining staff who are pushing their own personal agenda (homosexuality, politics, racism, global warming, "Save the Whales," etc.) instead of selling company products and/or services. The single most important "thing" for an employer or company is to sell "stuff," its products, services, etc., and "politics" do not sale soap!

Except for the adult film industry, where women and men actively engage in a wide variety of heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, transgender, beastiality and other kinds of sexual encounters, or when routine background check reveal candidates or employers are convicted sexual offenders, employers have absolutely no need to know what the candidate did or does with his/her penis or vagina. Again, as clearly defined by the essential job functions and job standards for the overwhelming majority of positions, job performance is not measured by how well or how poorly employees use their penis or vagina! Plus, given the #METOO movement, it's clearly in the employer's best interest not to focus on a candidate's or employee's penis or vagina or any aspect of their sexuality, but to focus (reward and discipline) on employee job performance - period. There's a wealth of employment laws that address all forms of discrimination in the workplace, but unfortunately, with extremely few exceptions, White men (heterosexual and homosexual) make the rules (laws) and all exceptions to the rules; it's their country, they own it, they control it, and they have, can, and do unilaterally "pick and choose" if and when they'll adhere to whatever rules, laws, and contracts they establish. Yeah, it is what it is. Remember the previous sentence the next time you vote!

To sum things up, there's absolutely nothing evil about homosexuality. Re-read the previous sentence. More importantly, it's absolutely wrong for the LGBTQIBBP community to limit its religious outlook based on the tactics used by heterosexuals to define the character and scope of their religious dogma. Likewise, it's absolutely wrong for sexuality (heterosexual, homosexual, etc.) to be an issue in the workplace, because the focus for both the employee and the employer should be the work, it must be job performance. Homosexuality is not the problem, but the failure of employers to hire, promote, discipline, and reward based on the actual, validated proficiency of job performance is the problem.

People are routinely, often immediately assailed and discriminated against for the obvious - for being Black or another minority, for being a woman, for being disabled, for being too old, because these "images" are blatantly obvious, and not hidden behind or beneath the zipper, skirt, or panty-line of a LGBTQIBPP. For example, Apple’s President/CEO Tim Cook is a gay White male, but such was unknown to the masses until his self-proclaimed catharsis to "come out of the closet" and reveal himself. Nevertheless, as with the overwhelming majority of White male heterosexuals and homosexuals, as usual, the clear majority of Apple’s employees and management team are White (see graph below). White men and White women already have "White privilege," and the LGBTQIBPP movement does NOT correct the everlasting racial inequity between White people and racial minorities. And as clearly validated throughout U.S. history, it’s perfectly okay for White people to do whatever the hell they want! Yeah, again, it is what it is.

SOURCE: Ebony Magazine / Ebony.com

CLICK ABOVE IMAGES TO ENLARGE

According to Apple, "In the past year we hired over 11,000 women globally, which is 65 percent more than in the previous year. In the United States, we hired more than 2,200 Black employees — a 50 percent increase over last year — and 2,700 Hispanic employees, a 66 percent increase. In total, this represents the largest group of employees we’ve ever hired from underrepresented groups in a single year." In summary, it wasn't until last year that Apple finally decided to actually, seriously commit to hire Black people. What the hell has Apple been waiting for?

On a personal note, I've managed human resources in the public/private sector, profit/non-profit, union/non-union, multi-site/multi-state, and international environments, which includes broadcasting, aerospace, public education, financial services, health care, gaming, IT, retail, manufacturing, municipal government, and property/casualty insurance - rarely, again, rarely have I found employers who actually conduct recruitment and selection in compliance with the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection or even common sense. Instead, the going practice is to pseudo-examine a candidate's experience at previous employers and/or to embrace consultant-driven behavioral based assessments that have absolutely nothing to do with the actual essential job functions to be performed. Even worse, given the perpetual existence of the "glass ceiling," and the racist and sexist dogma of all organized religions, and the constantly increasing wage gap between people of color and White people, there's no hope in sight for a truly egalitarian future. Of course, you're welcome to disagree with my fact-based linear assessment, but I'm not interested in your opinion, only respond to this editorial with facts.

In the absence of being struck down by God for engaging in an abomination, or being terminated for cause for using your genitalia in non-compliance with an employer's business objectives, whatever "consenting adults" do with their genitalia is their own personal business, and it's not evil.

I welcome your feedback.

Trip Reynolds
trip.reynolds@yahoo.com

 

Steven Spielberg vs. Netflix

The Atlantic published an article on March 11, 2019 by David Sims, "Steven Spielberg vs. Netflix." Spielberg believes content from Netflix should not be considered for Academy Awards, and he's mounted a campaign against Netflix in this regard. I wholeheartedly support Mr. Spielberg, and I wrote the following response to Mr. Sims.

Hello, Mr. Sims:

I’m responding to your article, “Steven Spielberg vs. Netflix.”

By the way, I’m not an employee or member of the film industry. However, I’m an extremely well-informed consumer and a very objective fan of the film industry.

That said, I’m in complete support of Steven Spielberg’s position that film content from internet-based providers should be restrained from consideration for Academy Awards and similar recognition. Why?

The “theatrical” release of film is and should be “self-explanatory,” it means films are actually EXHIBITED in a motion picture theater. There’s an enormous difference between the “theatrical experience” of motion pictures versus the “broadcast” of a film on television or via the internet, social media, or platforms specifically designed for “personal or individual” access via personal digital assistants and related computer-based devices. To compare the theatrical distribution of motion pictures versus "personal or individual" computer-based platforms is, most respectfully, ridiculous or worse, just stupid. Here’s why:

1. Unlike television, smart phones, desktop and laptop computers, and home theater systems, only theatrical exhibition offers no distractions between the viewer and the motion picture screen, which additionally, is intentionally large (30 to 90 feet wide by 10 to 30 feet tall or larger) to capture the "audiences" undivided attention.

2. The film’s director, writer, and other film industry professionals (sound, lighting, production design, etc.) intentionally craft a film using various cinematic techniques, including color and/or black and white, film noir, bird’s eye view, worm’s eye view, wide shot, 3-D, stereo, wide-angle shot, horizon shot, close-up, special effects, etc.) to tell-the-story in such a manner as to prompt “audience" involvement in the story.

3. As originally intended by legendary “Hollywood” studio executives, the “theatrical exhibition” of motion pictures is the absolute closest thing to the “theatrical experience” of watching a Broadway play, which like a stage play, or going-out-to-dinner, or attending an athletic event (football, basketball, soccer, baseball, track and field, golf, etc.) is intentionally an external “audience” event outside the home.

4. Theatrical film exhibition as successfully practiced since the dawn of the film industry (and effectively managed by the National Association of Theatre Owners) is strategically designed to provide an “audience” with the absolute best SOUND and VIDEO experience to accurately convey the creative intent of a film’s director, writer, and other film industry professionals. In fact, the film industry is overwhelmingly responsible for more technological achievements in sound, cameras, film processing, digital film production, make-up, special effects, computer science, etc. than any other media, especially television! For example, you do realize, don’t you, the film industry is solely responsible for the wide screen format, not television. You do realize, don’t you, the film industry is solely responsible for stereo sound, not the recording industry.

5. Most importantly, there’s a significantly greater financial risk to produce and distribute a "theatrical motion picture" for diverse U.S. domestic “audiences” and international “audiences” than to produce a “video" product for narrowly defined vertical product pipelines established for television, direct-to-video, or Netflix. In this regard, Netflix wants the recognition of the Hollywood system and the Academy Awards® but without incurring the financial risk of releasing its product in actual exhibition theaters where “audiences” of people go to see motion pictures. That’s blatantly disingenuous, deceitful, cheap, and even lazy.

The key word above is “audience,” not convenience. Theatrical film production is akin to an “entertainment or sporting event,” that literally involves leaving home and going “out.” The “convenience” provided by Netflix for “personal or individual” access via personal digital assistants and related computer-based devices (again, television, smart phones, desktop and laptop computers, and home theater system) does not establish equivalency. Simply put, a frozen TV dinner (Netflix) is not equivalent to dinner at the Olive Garden Restaurant (theatrical film exhibition).

Frankly, in my view, the overwhelming majority of films seen on Netflix are not worthy of theatrical exhibition, because most function as “TV” (grab the remote, hit pause, and I’ll come back to it) movies - period. Yes, sadly, there are several theatrically released films that also function more like “TV” content than as a film we must-leave-home-and-go-see-it-at-the-movie-theatre-ASAP! Nevertheless, it’s counterproductive to combine these two platforms. If Netflix wants its “product” to be considered akin to feature films then it must release such films “theatrically” as required for all films released via the theatrical motion picture platform.

Just because a Chevrolet (Netflix) has four-(4) wheels, heating, bucket seats, air conditioning, cruise control, power steering, power brakes, etc., does not mean it’s equivalent to a Mercedes-Benz S-Class Sedan (Disney). In fact, Disney clearly recognizes this fact, because theatrical exhibition is the exclusive platform to launch its extremely successful (Mercedes S-Class Sedan) Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) content (i.e., Iron Man, The Avengers, The Hulk, etc.); conversely, Disney confined its "Chevrolet” MCU content such as Luke Cage, Iron Fist, Punisher, The Defenders, Daredevil, and Jessica Jones to Netflix, or to ABC-TV (Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.), or to Hulu (Runaways), or to Freeform (Cloak & Dagger). It’s just that simple.

Again, the key word above is “audience,” not convenience. Theatrical film production is akin to an “entertainment or sporting event,” that literally involves leaving home and going “out.” The “convenience” provided by Netflix for “personal or individual” access via personal digital assistants and related computer-based devices (again, television, smart phones, desktop and laptop computers, and home theater system) does not establish equivalency.

Again, simply put, a frozen TV dinner (Netflix) is not equivalent to dinner at the Olive Garden Restaurant (theatrical film exhibition). Steven Spielberg is correct that film content from internet-based providers should be restrained from consideration for Academy Awards and similar recognition.

I welcome your feedback.

Trip Reynolds
trip.reynolds@yahoo.com

Share the Wealth? That'll never happen.

THE PAST "Four-(4) percent of the American people own eighty-five-(85) percent of the wealth of America; and over seventy-(70) percent of the people of America don't own enough to pay the debts they own." Huey Long, December 11, 1935 Huey Pierce Long Jr. (August 30, 1893 – September 10, 1935), self-nicknamed "The Kingfish", was an American politician who served as the 40th governor of Louisiana from 1928 to 1932 and was a member of the United States Senate from 1932 until his assassination in 1935. Long denounced the wealthy elites and the banks. Long supported Franklin D. Roosevelt during his first 100 days in office, but eventually found Roosevelt's "New Deal" policies did not do enough to alleviate the issues of the poor. Consequently, Long developed his own solution: the "Share Our Wealth" program, which would establish a net asset tax, the earnings of which would be redistributed so as to curb the poverty and homelessness epidemic nationwide during the Great Depression.	THE PRESENT One-(1) percent of Americans hold nearly 50% of the wealth, topping even the levels seen just before the Great Depression in the 1920s (Davies, Sandstrom, Shorrocks, & Wolff, 2009; Keister, 2000; Wolff, 2002). Building a Better America - One Wealth Quintile at a Time, Michael I. Norton and Dan Ariely
	Calculating wealth should be simple, but it's not. Economists Emmanuel Saez at Stanford University and Gabriel Zucman at the University of California-Berkeley revealed in their study the wealthy owned a little more, and the rest of the population owned a little less than the Federal Reserve group found. Using administrative income tax data, Saez and Zucman (2016) estimate that the top 1 percent (by wealth) had a wealth share of 42 percent in 2013, up from 29 percent in 1992. Conversely, the Survey of Consumer Finances (SCF), which combines administrative and survey data, shows less than half the increase in the top 1 percent wealth share, rising from 30 percent in 1992 to 36 percent in 2013.

Here's the bottom line, eighty-four-(84) years later, the more things change . . . the more things stay the same . . . or they become worse. Or, after watching this interview of Andrew Yang, isn't it about time for real economic change?

'Nuff said.

Trip Reynolds
trip.reynolds@yahoo.com

The Walled Republic of Aristocracy?

Physical and non-physical (political, emotional, spiritual, religious, legal, etc.) walls, barriers, borders, boundaries, and restrictions of any kind have always been welcome in the United States of America – just ask Native Americans, such as the sovereign Republic of the Lakotah, and they’ll gladly tell you of physical and non-physical “walls” of imprisonment they continue to endure.  Walls work, both physically and programmatically.  

Here take a look:

1. Throughout history, walls have been used to keep people in or to keep people out. Most importantly, the U.S. continues to support countries that also use walls, barriers, and restrictions to intentionally regulate and discriminate against their citizens and/or illegal immigrants.

PHYSICAL WALLS

GREAT WALL OF CHINA	BERLIN WALL	ISRAEL WEST BANK WALL

PROGRAMMATIC WALLS

GET WITH THE PROGRAM	GET WITH THE PROGRAM	GET WITH THE PROGRAM
	GET WITH THE PROGRAM
Clearly, even in 2016, you can't keep a good "separate but equal" idea down!

2.  The “Glass Ceiling,” is a wall, a barrier that has always existed in the United States, and it’s very effective at preventing people of color and women from access to positions of executive management, or control, or ownership of U.S. companies. Plus, let's not forget that local, state and the federal government has and continues to use “walls” to prevent people of color from voting and running for elected office.

3. As validated by the EEOC, the Justice Department, and countless public and private sector research studies such as the June 2014 issue of “The Atlantic” magazine, in the United States 250 years of slavery, 90 years of Jim Crow, 60 years of separate but equal, 40 years of state-sanctioned redlining have always functioned as and remain as effective walls or barrier to prevent, to deny equal opportunity to Black people.  

Instead of appreciating President Trump for his honesty and for offering a "usual and customary" solution to illegal immigration, some people are really upset about President Trump’s commitment to build a wall, as if building a wall is alien (pun intended; get it?) to the “free spirit” of the American Dream.  Wake up, this country was built on and remains built on walls, barriers, and restrictions.

WHO	WHEN	WHAT (FACTS)	OUTCOME / STATUS
BLACK PEOPLE	Slavery, Racism, and Oppression - 1620 to Present: 250 years of slavery, 90 years of Jim Crow (lynching, racism, discrimination, incarceration, etc.), 60 years of separate but equal, 35 years of state-sanctioned red-lining. – Total so far: 395 Years and counting. Source: “The Atlantic” Magazine, June 2014   NOTE: HITLER GOT THE IDEA FOR JEWISH PRISON CAMPS AND THE HOLOCAUST FROM THE GENOCIDE OF BLACK PEOPLE THROUGH THE EUGENICS MOVEMENT AND IMPRISONMENT OF NATIVE AMERICANS ON RESERVATIONS.	ENSLAVED BLACKS AND ROBBED THEM OF THEIR CULTURE AND CONFINED THEM TO PLANTATIONS AND THEN TO GHETTOES TO THIS VERY DAY More Black men are incarcerated than are in college; which represents no change since before, during or upon ending state-sanctioned slavery.     Most Black Middle Class Kids Are Downwardly Mobile - 7 out of 10 Black Americans born into the middle quintile fall into one of the two quintiles below as adults; even Black Americans who make it to the middle class are likely to see their kids fall down the ladder. Source: Brookings Institution     The rate has consistently been twice as high OR HIGHER than the white unemployment rate for 50 years! Source: Marc V. Levine University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Center for Economic Development, January 2012	Many U.S. school systems remain highly segregated (walled) by race and economic status: Black students make up 16 percent of the public school population, but the average Black student attends a school that’s 50 percent Black. As reported by Jonathan Rothwell, the average Black student also attends a school at the 37th percentile for test score results whereas the average white student attends a school in the 60th percentile. Nebraska is ranked 49th of 50 states for the lowest Black male graduation rate. Source: Brookings Institution
WHO	WHEN	WHAT (FACTS)	OUTCOME / STATUS
NATIVE AMERICANS	1492 to Present – It’s difficult to determine exactly how many Natives lived in North America before Columbus, estimates range from a low of 2.1 million (Ubelaker 1976) to 7 million people (Russell Thornton) to a high of 18 million (Dobyns 1983). Source: Wikipedia	SLAUGHTED AND ENACTED GENOCIDE UPON NATIVE AMERICANS AND CONFINED THEM TO RESERVATIONS TO THIS VERY DAY Each of the 326 Indian reservations in the U.S. are associated with a particular Nation. The U.S. has only recognized 567 tribes (there are more) and not all tribes have a reservation - some tribes have more than one reservation, some share reservations. s.	On 8 September 2000, the head of the United States Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) formally apologized for the agency's participation in the "ethnic cleansing" of Western tribes. Now, 523 later, Native population in the U.S. as of 2010 is only 2.9 million. Source: Wikipedia
WHO	WHEN	WHAT (FACTS)	OUTCOME / STATUS
LATINOS	1776 to Present - After the Mexican-American War (1846–1848), the U.S. annexed much of the current Southwestern region from Mexico, and Mexicans who remained were subject to discrimination. During the Great Depression (1929 and 1939) over 1,000,000 Mexicans were deported, including U.S. citizens. Between 1954 and 1962 “Operation Wetback” deported	ROBBED LATINOS (I.E., NATIVE AMERICANS) OF THEIR CULTURE AND THEN CONFINED THEM TO BARRIOS TO THIS VERY DAY At least 597 Mexicans were lynched between 1848 and 1928 (conservative estimate dues to lack of records for many reported lynchings). Mexicans were lynched at a rate of 27.4 per 100,000 of population between 1880 and 1930, second only to the lynchings of Black people during that period of 37.1 per 100,000 population. Between 1848 to 1879, Mexicans were lynched at an unprecedented rate of 473 per 100,000 of population. Source: Wikipedia.com	Voters of Fremont, Nebraska (pop. 25,000) passed an ordinance (06/23/2010) to prevent illegal immigrants from renting property or getting a job in the community. The measure requires businesses to verify citizenship of all workers, and renters to obtain a license from the local police department. Source: theweek.com 7/8/14
WHO	WHEN	WHAT (FACTS)	OUTCOME / STATUS
ASIANS	February 19, 1942 to April 1946 – 4 Years	ROBBED ASIANS OF THEIR CULTURE AND CONFINED THEM TO CONCENTRATION CAMPS AND THEN CAST THEM AS "ACCEPTABLE" MINORITIES. Click the graph above to enlarge. Between 110,000 and 120,000 people of Japanese ancestry were forcibly relocated and incarcerated during World War II. Sixty-two percent of the internees were United States citizens. President Roosevelt ordered the Incarceration of Japanese Americans during World War II, shortly after Imperial Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor.	In 1988, President Ronald Reagan signed the Civil Liberties Act, which apologized for the internment on behalf of the U.S. government paid $20,000 to each individual camp survivor. The legislation admitted that government actions were based on "race prejudice, war hysteria, and a failure of political leadership." The U.S. government eventually disbursed more than $1.6 billion in reparations to 82,219 Japanese Americans who had been interned and their heirs. George Hosato Takei (born April 20, 1937) is an American actor, director, author, and activist. Takei is most widely known for his role as Hikaru Sulu, helmsman of the USS Enterprise in the television series Star Trek. He also portrayed the character in six Star Trek feature films and in an episode of Star Trek: Voyager. In 1942, the Takei family was forced to live in the converted horse stables of Santa Anita Park before being sent to the Rohwer War Relocation Center for internment in Rohwer, Arkansas. The family was later transferred to the Tule Lake War Relocation Center in California. He and his family returned to Los Angeles at the end of World War II. Source: Wikipedia
WHO	WHEN	WHAT (FACTS)	OUTCOME / STATUS
MUSLIMS	Monday, December 7, 2015 Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump called for barring all Muslims WHO ARE NOT U.S. citizens from entering the U.S. until “our country's representatives can figure out what is going on," a campaign press release said. Source: CNN.com	HISTORY REPEATS - Trump previously called for surveillance against mosques and establishing a database for all Muslims living in the U.S. Plus, in the wake of a deadly mass shooting in San Bernardino, California by ISIS sympathizers, presidential candidates Ted Cruz and Jeb Bush said they’d prohibit Muslim refugees, but allow Christians; and Marco Rubio would close all places where Muslims meet. Source: Democratic National Committee 12/08/15	Based on past practices, the (inevitable) planned and forced relocation and incarceration of Muslims.

Again, it’s the well-documented history and on-going practice of White people in the U.S. to openly or clandestinely, legally or illegally, intentionally or unintentionally to discriminate against Black people and other people of color.  Most importantly, the overall plight of Black people has NEVER improved to a point of economic, social, or educational parity with White people under any President of the U.S., including President Obama.  So, why expect anything different from President Donald Trump?  The “business as usual” practice of White privilege only means “more excuses and more promises” and the mediocrity of the status quo.

Of course, not all White people are racist or have a predilection to kill, incarcerate, or steal land from people of color; neverthless, it's the history and on-going practice for the clear majority of so-called "innocent" White people to do nothing but bury their heads in the sand whenever the blatant realities of their peers, and past and current acts of racism are thrust into open discussion. People of color did NOT conceive, engineer, and execute the above acts of "inhumanity" (separatism, oppression, etc.) against themselves, because people of color were not and have never held the power, control, or "privilege" to do so. Clearly, only White people held and continue to hold exclusive "privilege" to unilaterally "build walls" to determine the fate of people of color. Some people believe "White Privilege" does not exist, and that most Black people, Native Americans, Latinos, and Asians have as much opportunity, in the past or now, to be as successful as most White people. Okay, if you believe this, here's a very simple . . .

QUESTION 1: Given that race-based genocide, oppression, and discrimination against all people of color began prior to the inception of the United States of America on July 4, 1776 and continued uninterrupted thereafter, on what specific year and date did White people relinquish their ill-gotten wealth, power, and control to enable people of color with "fair and just" access to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? When? (That's right, it never happend!)

"No nation can enslave a race of people for hundreds of years, set them free begraggled and penniless, pit them, without assistance in a hostile environment, against privileged victimizers, and then reasonably expect the gap between the heirs of the two groups to narrow. Lines, begun parallel and left alone, can never touch." "The Debt: What America Owes to Blacks" by Randall Robinson

Plus, you do realize, don't you, that the overwhelming majority of White people do NOT want to live near or be governed by people of color? You know that, don't you?

Separate and Not Equal Works for the Majority of White People.

Home ownership for the majority of Black people is a joke. Even after holding constant all variables, including credit history, White men were denied credit 26% of the time compared with 68% of Black men and 52% of Black women. Source: The Wall Street Journal, November 23, 1999 by Josha Harris Prager and Paulette Thomas; Professor Ken Cavalluzzo, Ph.D, Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania.

As documented in "The Story of the Contract Buyers League," [https://youtu.be/YxPX_uJ36bg] discrimination against Black people and other minorities is not just history but it remains the practice of White people to openly discriminate against Black people and other minorities in home ownership. As documented in, “The Persistence of Segregation in the Metropolis: New Findings from the 2010 Census” prepared for Project US2010 (Brown University and Florida State University):

The average White person in metropolitan American lives in a neighborhood that is 75% white (or more). Despite a substantial shift of minorities from cities to suburbs, minorities have often not gained access to largely white neighborhoods. For example a typical Black person lives in a neighborhood that is only 35% white (not much different from 1940) and as much as 45% black. Diversity is experienced very differently in the daily lives of Whites, Blacks, Hispanics, and Asians.

In 367 metropolitan areas across the U.S., the typical White person lives in a neighborhood that is 75% White, 8% Black, 11% Hispanic, and 5% Asian. This represents a notable change since 1980, when the average Whites’ neighborhood was 88% white, but it is very different from the makeup of the metropolis as a whole.

The experience of minorities is very different. For example, the typical Black lives in a neighborhood that is 45% Black, 35% White, 15% Hispanic, and 4% Asian. The typical Hispanic lives in a neighborhood that is 46% Hispanic, 35% White, 11% Black and 7% Asian. The typical Asian lives in a neighborhood that is 22% Asian, 49% White, 9% Black, and 19% Hispanic.

QUESTION 2: CAN'T WE ALL LIVE TOGETHER?

RESPONSE: IF WHITE PEOPLE ARE INVOLVED, ABSOLUTELY NOT.

The message here, which is also validated in the book, "Searching for Whitopia: An Improbable Journey to the Heart of White America (2009, Rich Benjamin)" is very simple; unlike other "people" White people intentionally chose to live and restrict the establishment of businesses in neighborhoods with decidedly low minority representation, and the majority of White people will leave, typically called "White Flight," rather than interact with minorities. For the most part, White people are not as likely to "accept" minorities living in their neighborhoods; conversely, minorities are more likely to "accept" White people living in their neighborhoods. Clearly, the United States of America has always functioned as a "walled" republic of aristocracy, and that's not going to change with or without Donald Trump as POTUS.

Cracking the Codes: Joy DeGruy, "A Trip to the Grocery Store"

For proof, here's a map of (racist) Omaha, Nebraska As respresented in the graph above, just like St. Louis, Missouri, Omaha is one of the most racist cities in the United States. Black and Latinos live in neighborhoods with high minority representation, and relatively few White neighbors. Asians have much smaller populations in most metropolitan areas, and consequently, live in neighborhoods where they are dispropotionately represented. On the other hand, reflecting the continued rapid growth of Hispanic and Asian populations through immigration and increasing numbers born in the U.S., having learned first-hand from the separatist and racist tactics of their White peers and oppressors, these groups have also become on average more isolated.

Again, the United States of America has always functioned as a "walled" republic of aristocracy, and that's not going to change with or without Donald Trump as POTUS.

So build the damn wall and let's move on.

Trip Reynolds
trip.reynolds@yahoo.com

 

Is Teaching Vastly Over-rated?

Having been immediately responsible for all employee compensation, including teachers, at the 35th (Denver, Colorado) largest public school district in the U.S., and having worked in administration at an elementary school at the 3rd (Chicago, Illinois) largest K-12 public school distrist in the U.S., okay, I get it. Any discussion about K-12 public school teachers often becomes an emotional subject for some, for many people. Why all the emotion? Let's not be sexist and blame estrogen, because most of the teachers within a K-12 public school environment are female. Oh, no, that's ridiculous. Sadly, far too many people give K-12 teachers the same kind of reverance stereotypically given to some first-responders (police, fire and rescue, etc.), veterans, (some) clergy, social workers, etc. Sadly, far too many people become overtly emotional about K-12 teachers and are unable to take a totally objective assessment of this profession. In this regard, consider the following linear, fact-based assessment.

There's a really good reason why thousands of K-12 public school teachers leave their profession; and no, it's not because teachers are underpaid. Actually, given the "actual market value" of the character and scope of actual "work" teachers perform, teachers are adequately paid or overpaid. Yeah, I said it, teachers are overpaid. Of course, you can ignore my assessment, but why don't you conduct a linear, objective, fact-based assessment of a typical K-12 public school teacher using the same point-factor "job evaluation" tool common to human resource professionals?

First, as posted at Omaha Public Schools, here's the (extremely poorly written) job description for a Teacher, Elementary K-6:

Position Purpose: Plans for, teaches, and facilitates learning for all students. Creates a positive learning environment. Maintains academic progress, records, and discipline. Works collaboratively with students, parents and staff to provide and implement classroom education to meet the needs of all students.

Knowledge, Skills, and Abilities:

1. Education: Minimum of Bachelor’s degree in education from an accredited college or university.
2. A valid NE Teaching Certificate or the ability to obtain one with appropriate endorsement(s).
3. A demonstrated philosophy that all students can and will learn.
4. Excellent attendance record.
5. Excellent communication skills oral and written.
6. Demonstrated knowledge and understanding of Best Instructional Practices.
7. Positive interpersonal skills.
8. Professional verification of successful classroom teacher performance and/or student teaching experience.
9. Evidence of the willingness and the ability to comply with the standards for ethical and professional performance established by the State Board of Education.
10. This individual will exhibit skills pertinent to foster positive human relationships and the ability to work effectively with students, staff, parents and the community.
11. A willingness and demonstrated abilities conducive to a continuous quest for quality education.
12. Developing students’ cognitive capacity and respect for learning.
13. Positively fostering students’ self-esteem.
14. Working with and understanding a diverse student population.
15. Integration of leadership, technology, and communication in to the curriculum.
16. Planning for and guiding the learning process to help student achieve program objectives.
17. Maintaining an atmosphere conducive to learning. Implementing useful diagnostic and progress assessment measures.
18. Selecting and using effective instructional methods and learning materials.
19. Establishing a cooperative relationship with all assigned students.
20. Maintaining open lines of communication with parents, guardians and staff.
21. Engaging in professional growth activities through an ongoing program of job related knowledge and skill development.
22. Working collaboratively to achieve the overall purpose of the school’s program and support the District’s vision, aims and goals.
23. Integrating the themes of leadership, technology, and communication with a diverse population.
24. Performs other related tasks as assigned by the Principal and other central office administrators as designated by the Superintendent.

Equipment: This position may require the ability to use SMART boards and iPads in addition to basic office equipment such as computers, copiers, scanners, and fax machine. Must always comply with OPS’s guidelines for equipment use.

Travel: Limited travel may be requested.

Physical and Mental Demands, Work Hazards: Must be able to respond rapidly in emergency situations Must have organization, time management, communication, and interpersonal skills Work in school building environments

Interrelations: Contact with personnel within the district and other stakeholders Will be working under the direct supervision of the building administration in order to complete day to day tasks Will be working with a diverse population requiring the ability to handle all situations with tact and diplomacy Must understand and respond appropriately to stakeholder needs and maintain a positive attitude with all Expected to interact with all internal and external stakeholders in a friendly, professional manner and provide quick, responsive service

Employee Punctuality and Appearance In order for schools to operate effectively, employees are expected to perform all assigned duties and work all scheduled hours during each designated workday, unless the employee has received approved leave. Any deviation from assigned hours must have prior approval from the employee’s supervisor or building administrator. All employees are required to report to work dressed in a manner that reflects a positive image of Omaha Public Schools and is appropriate for their position.

Terms of Employment This position is treated as a full-time exempt certified position. The terms of your employment will be governed by applicable state laws regulating employment or teaching in a Nebraska public school and Board of Education policies, as those laws and policies may change from time to time, and the Teacher Contract. If your position is represented by a collective bargaining representative, then your employment will also be governed by a negotiated agreement between OPS and that collective bargaining representative.

Terms of employment are contingent upon: Verification of a valid Nebraska Teaching License or other required license. A background check which demonstrates background is acceptable for the position sought and working with or around students. Verification of U.S. Citizenship or legal authorization to work in the United States. Successful completion of a tuberculosis skin test (if required by federal law for your position). Execution and delivery to OPS of a Teacher Contract presented by OPS.

Perhaps, you're impressed by the aforementioned, but for an objective assessment you must ask the following question, "How does this "job" compare to the great diversity of "jobs" in other industries of less or greater complexity? Likewise, how does this job compare to similar jobs that also perform teaching, training, or instruction, but without:

[1] representation of a local and/or national bargaining group (union);

[2] a national lobbying organization (N.E.A., AFT, etc.);

[3] a state-mandated attendance requirement that ensures a captive audience (customers);

[4] an unlimited revenue source (homeowner taxes, sales tax, utility tax, bonds, etc.), and

[5] a vocation that perpetuates the status quo of its existence through an incestuous bureaucracy and by prohibiting independent thinking to achieve targeted business unit objectives?

Second, for the sake of consistency, we'll objectively "evaluate" the Teacher, Elementary K-6 position using the following generic factors common to most "non-management level" point-factor job evaluation plans: education; experience; scope of decision making / job complexity; financial complexity; impact of errors; communications; responsibility for others; and working conditions. In a point-factor evaluation system, numerical points in red brackets [ ] below, of increasing value are assigned to each level within the hierarchy, and "all" positions are evaluated under the same hierarchy.

	FACTOR	POINT VALUE HIERARCHY
1.	EDUCATION	1.   No formal education is required. [6] In Nebraska, on your Parent or Guardian Form (Form A), you must indicate that you will provide instruction in language arts, mathematics, science, social studies, and health, and that you, as the parents, are satisfied that the instructor(s) are qualified to monitor instruction in these skills. Nebraska does not require any specific qualifications to teach these subjects other than the parents’ satisfaction. 2.   Special, short-term training lasting no more than 6 months. [8] 3.   High School (HS) Diploma, GED or graduation/certification from a vocational school. [27] 4.   HS/GED and approximately 1 year (+/-) of specialized training. [40] 5. An Associates Arts (A.A.) Degree is required; or Journeyman license, vocational/technical certification/licensure. [80] 6. A Bachlor of Arts (B.A.) Degree is required; or Masters license, vocational/technical certification/licensure. [120] As posted, work performed by a Elementary K-6 classroom teacher requires a Minimum of Bachelor’s degree in education from an accredited college or university. However, the "work" performed by teachers is clearly not that "complex," because "teaching" is routinely performed in "home school" environments throughout the U.S. by parents (and legal guardians) who do not possess a Bachelor’s degree in education from an accredited college or university and/or a state-mandated teaching certificate. The requirement of a B.A. in education and/or a state-mandated teaching certificate is incestuous to academicians and their unions and lobbyist, and functions only as a barrier to employment. 7.   A Master of Arts or Masters of Business (M.A. or M.B.A.) Degree is required. [150] 8.   A Doctorate (Ph.D, J.D., etc.) Degree is required. [175]
2.	EXPERIENCE	1.   No work related experience is required. [10] Work performed by a Elementary K-6 classroom teacher is confined to a highly structured, highly scheduled, and well-documented curriculum, and compliance to such establishes little risk of error. K-12 classroom teachers who deviate from curriculum are immediately subject to disciplinary action for insubordination and/or termination. Nebraska does not require any specific qualifications to teach other than the parents’ satisfaction. 2.   Less than one (1) year. [40] 3.   One (1) to three (3) years of work related experience. [65] 4.   Three (3) to five (5) years of work related experience. [90] 5.   Five (5) to seven (7) years of work related experience. [120] 6.   Seven (7) to ten (10) years of work related experience. [155] 7.   Ten (10) or more years of work related experience. [170]
3.	SCOPE OF DECISION MAKING / JOB COMPLEXITY   KEEP IN MIND: FLSA Exempt Auto Claims Examiner I's have more responsibility for decision making and job complexity than an Elementary K-6 classroom teacher.	1.   No independent decisions are required. Work process and procedures are largely predetermined. Minimal problem-solving is necessary. [31] • Little possibility of loss. Errors are easily detected. • Minor loss.  Very easy to replace. • No technical proficiency required; on-the-job training (OTJ) is readily available.   Work performed by a Elementary K-6 classroom teacher is confined to a highly structured, highly scheduled, and well-documented curriculum, and compliance to such establishes little risk of error. K-12 classroom teachers who deviate from curriculum are immediately subject to disciplinary action for insubordination and/or termination. 2.   Frequent minor decisions are required.  Work requires planning a sequence of operations where standard, generally applied procedures are available.  Some infrequent problem-solving, defined within the scope of the position, is necessary. [62] • Easy to avoid errors, that might not be detected, but work is subject to occasional spot-checks. • Moderate loss.  Replaceable. • Minor technical proficiency required; incumbent may receive or initiate OJT.   3.   Decisions require considerable initiative and judgment.  Requires planning unusual or difficult work where only general operational methods exist.  Routine, regular, consistent problem-solving is necessary to resolve general to complex situations.  Ability to recommend, and when approved by superiors, authority to implement policies, procedures, methods and practices. [124]                                                                     • Periodic close attention is required to avoid errors.  It is fairly difficult to maintain acceptable accuracy.  Work is subject to routine spot-checks. • Fairly heavy loss.  Difficult to replace. • Demonstrated general knowledge and technical expertise to complete or resolve work activities.  OJT is not readily available.   4.   Decisions are required under widely varying conditions where considerable initiative, ingenuity and judgment are required. Requires planning work of a highly complicated nature where only general operational methods exist. Complex thinking to resolve unique, unstructured and original situation(s) is required.  Authority to establish or revise policies, methods and procedures that impact the incumbent’s (this position) and other departments. [217] • Close, skilled attention is routinely required to avoid errors.  It is difficult to detect errors and to maintain acceptable accuracy.  Work is subject to general quallity control measures, techniques, etc. • Heavy loss.  Very difficult to replace. • Demonstrated thorough knowledge and technical expertise to complete or resolve work activities.  OJT is not available.   5.   Decisions are produced solely and completely independent of any prior review, input, immediate feedback, or evaluation from direct or indirect management.  Wide discretionary thinking to resolve complex, constantly unique, unstructured and original situation(s) is required. Requires planning work of an extremely complicated nature where general operational methods do NOT exist.  Authority to establish broad policies impacting any department, subject only to approval/denial by a department head, Cabinet member, or the Board of Education. [280]                                                                          • Constant, close, skilled attention is required to avoid errors.  It is extremely difficult to detect errors and to maintain acceptable accuracy.  Work is subject to specific quality control measures, techniques, etc. • Disastrous loss.  Impossible to replace. • Demonstrated extensive technical expertise; proficiency with complex activities, applications, processes, systems or functions requiring highly specialized skills, knowledge and abilities.  OJT is not available.
4.	FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY & COMPLEXITY   KEEP IN MIND: FLSA Exempt Accountant I's have more responsibility for financial work than an Elementary K-6 classroom teacher.	1.   No financial work is performed. [0] Solely at the discretion of the principal or school distirst, a Elementary K-6 classroom teacher may have assess to a limited budget for pre-authorized equipment, materials, supplies, and services. K-12 classroom teachers who deviate from an established budget are immediately subject to disciplinary action for insubordination and/or termination, and if appropriate, criminal prosecution. 2.   Work is repetitive, requiring no changes in format. [6] 3.   Work is repetitive, requiring few changes in format. [23] 4.   Work is repetitive, often involving coordination of money or financial data, requiring minor changes in format or calculations. [41] 5.   Work is repetitive, often involving coordination of money or financial data, requiring moderate and routine changes in format or calculations. [59] 6.   Work is repetitive, often involving coordination of money or financial data, requiring major and constant changes in format or calculations. [77] 7.   Work is occasionally and moderately diverse, often involving large sums of money or financial data, requiring occasional changes in format or calculations. [95]  8.   Work is routinely diverse, involves regular changes in format, calculations, and input of similar accounting and financial data, financial applications, spreadsheets, operating systems, and proprietary financial systems. [118]  9.   Work is very diverse, involving frequent changes in format, calculations, and input of similar and dissimilar accounting and financial data, financial applications, spreadsheets, operating systems, and proprietary financial systems. [148] 10. Work is extremely diverse, involving constant and major changes in format, calculations, and input of similar and dissimilar accounting and financial data, financial applications, spreadsheets, operating systems, and proprietary financial systems. [180]
5.	IMPACT OF ERRORS KEEP IN MIND: FLSA Exempt Software Engineers have a greater risk of error AND greater difficulty locating and correcting errors (including cost impact) than an Elementary K-6 classroom teacher.	1.   Essential duties can be performed with little chance of error. [8] Work performed by a Elementary K-6 classroom teacher is confined to a highly scheduled and well-documented curriculum, and compliance to such establishes little risk of error. K-12 classroom teachers who deviate from curriculum are immediately subject to disciplinary action for insubordination and/or termination. 2.   Errors might have moderate impact but are easy to avoid through routine spot-checks. [15] 3.   Errors might have significant impact and require constant spot-checks to avoid. [33] 4.   Errors have significant impact and accuracy is fairly difficult to maintain. [43] 5.   Errors have major impact, accuracy is difficult to maintain, constant close attention is required to avoid errors. [50]
6.	COMMUNICATIONS   KEEP IN MIND: FLSA Exempt HIPAA Compliance Specialists have greater responsibility for critical inquiries, complaints, confidential information, and actual negotiations, than an Elementary K-6 classroom teacher.	1.   Essential duties can be performed with minimal internal/external communications.  No confidential information is at risk. [10] 2.   The routine giving and receiving of information is required.  Confidential information is at minimal risk and can be secured through routine security and spot-checks. [35] The character and scope of communication for a Elementary K-6 classroom teacher is primarily confined to on-site interaction with students, and scheduled communications involving the exchange of routine student-related information with parents (or legal guardians). Communications do not involve unilateral authority to independently conduct complex negotiations. 3.   Handling, coordinating, or performing as a liaison to specific inquiries, complaints, confidential information, and maintaining goodwill is required.  Confidential information is at moderate risk and effective controls must exist or be created to limit access to sensitive information. [65] 4.   Resolving critical inquiries, complaints, negotiations, confidential information, and developing and maintaining effective relations is required.  Failure to limit access to information and maintain confidentiality might result in controversy or litigation. [90] 5.   Resolving major inquiries, complaints and negotiations which have, are or will result in media controversy or litigation is required.  Maintaining confidential information is absolutely critical and is a high priority. [120]                                            120
7.	RESPONSIBILITY FOR OTHERS   KEEP IN MIND: There are literally thousands of FLSA Exempt positions directly responsible for regular customer or client contacts involving more than 21.6 clients per day, including Nurses, Long-Term Care Specialists, Nutritionists, Physical Therapists and Occupational Therapists, Sales and/or Service Representatives, HR Specialists, Personal Bankers, Accountants, and many, many more positions that have greater responsibility for others than an Elementary K-6 classroom teacher.	1.   Position (employee incumbent) is responsible solely for their own work. [3]    2.   ­­­­Indirectly responsible, by providing technical direction or guidance, for the work of one (1) to three (3) subordinate employees or peers.  [5] 3.   Directly responsible for supervising/managing the work of one (1) to three (3) subordinate employees. [11] 4.   Indirectly responsible, by providing technical direction or guidance, for the work of four (4) to ten (10) subordinate employees or peers. [16]  5.   Directly responsible for supervising/managing the work of four (4) to ten (10) subordinate employees.  [24] 6.   Indirectly responsible, by providing technical direction or guidance, for the work of eleven (11) to forty (40) subordinate employees or peers.  [27] 7.   ­­­­Directly responsible for supervising/managing the work of eleven (11) to forty (40) subordinate employees. [34] As reported by the National Center for Education Statistics, the average class size for K-12 teachers in self-contained classes is 21.6 students. 8.   Indirectly responsible, by providing technical direction or guidance, for the work of forty-one (41) to one-hundred (100) subordinate employees or peers.   [37] 9.   ­­­­Directly responsible for supervising/managing the work of forty-one (41) to one-hundred (100) subordinate employees.  [45] 10. Indirectly responsible, by providing technical direction or guidance, for the work of one-hundred and one (101) to five-hundred (500) subordinate employees or peers. [53]                                                                                                                  11. ­­­­Directly responsible for supervising/managing the work of one-hundred and one (101) to five-hundred (500) subordinate employees.   [66]     12. Indirectly responsible, by providing technical direction or guidance, for the work of over five-hundred (500) subordinate employees or peers.   [72]                  13. ­­­­Directly responsible for supervising/managing the work of over five-hundred (500) subordinate employees. [80]
8.	WORKING CONDITIONS   KEEP IN MIND: FLSA Exempt Product Managers are immediately responsible for product marketing and routinely works inside-office and outside-office activity, which may include frequent domestic and international travel, well beyond the scope of an Elementary K-6 classroom teacher.	1.   Normal inside-office environment.  When compliant to general safety guidelines the position is subject to, at worst, minor cuts or injury.  Position is not responsible for the general service and repair of equipment. [10] K-12 teachers work a traditional classroom environment, with no exposure to overt dust, fumes, or other disagreeable elements. 2.   Normal inside-office environment, with occasional exposure to slightly dirty conditions, including: dust, fumes or other disagreeable elements which might cause some discomfort.  When compliant to general safety guidelines the position is subject to, at worst, minor cuts or injury.  Position may be responsible for the general service and repair of some equipment. [21] 3.   Duties are performed in both inside-office and outside-office environments, with regular exposure to disagreeable elements which might cause some discomfort, including: sitting at a work station, operating vehicles including providing transportation, noise, odors, exposure to chemicals, kneeling, squatting, crouching, stooping, crawling, standing, climbing (which may involve excessive height), bending and lifting up to 100 pounds to stack, store supplies or various office equipment, as directed. Compliance to security and safety procedures, including use of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), is required, to avoid injuries which may result in possible lost time due to accidents of occupational diseases. [30] 4.   Duties are performed in an outside-office environment, with regular exposure to disagreeable elements which cause significant discomfort, including: rain, snow, cold, heat, noise, odors, exposure to chemicals, operating various vehicles including equipment used for service and repair, kneeling, squatting, crouching, stooping, crawling, standing, climbing (which may involve excessive height), bending and lifting up to 100 pounds to stack, store supplies or various office equipment, as directed. Compliance to security and safety procedures, including use of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), is required, to avoid injuries which may result in possible lost time due to accidents of occupational diseases.  [40]

ASSESSMENT: K-6 public education provides more socialization (cultural, racial, gender, class, etc.) than typically provided by "home schooling," but this socialization occurs at a much higher cost-benefit ratio and with significantly less return on investment. Question: Given the job evaluation assessment above, is the role of a K-6 classroom teacher equivalent to nothing more than state-sanctioned, institutionalized "baby sitting"?

1. When evaluating the actual character and scope of work performed by a K-6 public teacher: (a) the work is consistently procedural and repetitive; (b) the work requires very little decision-making skills; (c) the work is not complex; (d) the work does not involve work-related hazards; (e) the work does not involve unilateral financial authority or related monetary loss; (f) the occurrence of risks or errors is highly unlikely; and (g) internal and external communications are confined to the routine exchange of information with no authority to independently conduct and resolve high-level negotiations, as such authority is always retained by higher level academicians.

2. Although the overwhelming majority of work performed by K-12 public schools teachers is consistently procedural and repetitive, nevertheless, throughout the U.S., K-12 teachers are provided a "planning period," ranging from an hour to as much as an entire day, to prepare lessons plans and other materials for their students. These "planning periods" are "free time" totally absent of any immediate contact with students or parents. Keep in mind, although some teachers (not all) might work an eight-(8) hour day, most K-12 students do not work an eight-(8) hour day, because most students are typically on-site from only 7:30 to 3:30 p.m. or less. Simply put, unlike many professions where the employee must be immediately available to service their clients 24/7/365 including weekends via "on-call" or as routinely scheduled (such as nurses, employee relations specialists, building engineers, etc.), the K-12 public school teacher does not and cannot service their "customer" (student) 24/7/365, because their customer walks-out-the-door sometime before or after 3:00 p.m. every day. Plus, per bargaining unit agreement, teachers who "elect" to work past their scheduled hours "to perform other related duties (football coach, debate coach, etc.)" must receive a "stipend" or additional pay.

The overwhelming majority of 8-to-5 FLSA non-exempt (eligible for overtime) employees who work in retail, hospitality, healthcare, and services industries have immediate and continuous contact with hundreds of customers on a daily basis but they DO NOT get a "planning period." Likewise, FLSA exempt employees (not-eligible for overtime) who are paid a salary which does not increase no matter how much time they work a 24/7/365 on-call schedule, do NOT get a "planning period." Conversely, outside of K-12 public education, employees are required to "perform other related duties, including special projects, as required or requested," but without extra pay. Employees who refuse to perform such additional dutes are subject to immediate disciplinary action, including termination.

3. If the "idea" of teaching is to truly educate students to be the most intelligent and the most talented, then K-12 public education should NOT hire staff based on an overtly archaic and incestuous system designed to sustain academicians and empower their unions and lobbyists.

Millions of people outside of public education have as much or more subject matter expertise on any given subject than a K-12 public school classroom teacher, but they are prohibited from conveying their expertise within a K-12 classroom environment because they lack a state-mandated teaching certificate and other requirements. Instead, K-12 public education should hire the "best minds" to this industry, and provide competitive compensation to achieve strategic business unit results. Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, and thousands of "forward thinking" men and women abandoned education because it failed to meet their intellectual and vocational needs.

4. There's absolutely no such thing as "equal education" in the United States of America, because the curriculum used in each state and the curriculum used between cities within each state is not the same. "States Rights," as established by Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, empowers each state to govern public education with sovereignty, which is why a K-12 public education in New Mexico is considerably less "valuable" and than a K-12 public education in the affluent Weston School District in Connecticut. You're a fool if you think all high school diplomas from every school in every state are equivalent. As admission counselors at Harvard, Yale, and other elite colleges and universities will tell you, you're just damn stupid if you think the educational prowess of all K-12 public schools is equal.

There's absolutely no desire to share the wealth in this country, and likewise, there's absolutely no desire to establish a truly egalitarian educational system in the U.S. that provides equal access to the same knowledge, the same curriculum, the same materials, equipment, and technologies, and the same opportunity to achieve academic success. It's not an accident that "everyone" doesn't get a chance to go to Harvard.

5. Teachers are in the "business" of assessing (student) performance, but throughout the U.S. teachers (and their bargaining units) routinely resist or block any effort to have their performance assessed. Why? Teachers claim "it's not their fault if little Johnny can't read," because there are too many intangibles.

In the private sector, "training and development" departments employ instructors, trainers, and other educational professionals to perform in a very similar capacity to K-12 teachers, but with a big difference. If they fail to train staff to meet predetermined performance standards these "instructors and trainers" face immediate disciplinary action and/or termination. To claim, "It's not my fault the waste water engineer didn't know how to run a separte line to avoid contaminating the drinking water supply!" won't circumvent the media frenzy showcasing citizens who died and the resulting litigation for civil and criminal liability and negligence.

6. The overwhelming majority of K-12 public school teachers are White and female (let that ruminate for a minute): Over 50% of Black males do not graduate from high school, with so many Black males retained (held-back) from promotion or graduation, with more Black males being suspended from school or placed in "special education programs, and with so many Black males becoming incarcerated, the educational opportunities for Black males has been "inhospitable," as stated by Christina Hoff Sommers, author of "The War Against Boys" (2000, Simon & Schuster). As validated by the following exhibit, Nebraska has next to the lowest graduation rate for Black males in the U.S.

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE

Source: Schott Foundation for Public Education http://blackboysreport.org/national-summary/state-graduation-data/

7. At Omaha Public Schools everything is inequitably defined by race, especially student enrollment, faculty, and school boundaries (real estate).

LB 1024 – The Nebraska Legislature created permanent boundaries for school districts in metro Omaha who, prior to this law, would have been absorbed by OPS as the city itself grew. The law guarantees that all the districts in the fastest growing and wealthiest parts of Omaha have permanent boundaries. These districts are over 90% White, as compared to the whole district of Omaha, which is over 50% minority. LB 1024 created racially isolated districts throughout the city - minority districts in the former OPS and White districts everywhere else. Although LB 1024 was eventually repealed and superseded by LB 641, nevertheless, the "elephant" of racially-defined school districts for metro Omaha remains intact. Source: U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, September 8, 2006 - https://www.usccr.gov/pubs/docs/OmahaFinal.pdf

QUESTION: Given the endless cycle of Black poverty and oppression, and that White people have consistently been in complete control (governance, funding, location of schools, resources and materials, selection and certification of teachers, curriculum, etc.) of the formal education of Black students, and that NEVER in the history of the United States (243 years) has the educational performance of Black student ever equaled the educational performance of White students, what justification is there that White controlled school districts are truly capable of educating Black students? ANSWER: There is no justification (or evidence) that White controlled school districts are truly capable of educating Black students.

U.S. public school systems remain highly segregated by race and economic status: Black students make up 16 percent of the public school population, but the average Black student attends a school that’s 50 percent Black. As reported by Jonathan Rothwell, the average Black student also attends a school at the 37th percentile for test score results whereas the average white student attends a school in the 60th percentile:

As researched and published by the Brookings Institution, there are significant race gaps in nearly every conceivable social and economic dimension, including: incarceration, early learning, parenting, schooling, attitudinal racism, employment – and more! At best, progress has been extremely limited or non-existent.

In summary, given the actual "value" of the character and scope of work in the marketplace, the overwhelming majority of K-12 teachers are overpaid. Of course, you can disagree, but keep in mind, as your property taxes continue to increase to fund school construction and maintenance, and your taxes increase to raise teacher pay, etc., a traditional "home school" environment or an online home school is achieving the same (or better) result for free or at considerably less cost.

Given the constant growth in technology, eventually, there'll come a time (soon) when your "care giver" will insert a datachip "containing all human knowledge" into your child's brain, perhaps at birth. Clearly, this action would negate the need for K-12 public education as we know it now, and relegate public education as nothing more than a social activity. Think about it.

Yes, people who desire a more challenging work environment should leave the K-12 public school teaching profession, because K-12 public education is vastly over-rated.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

1. As ruled by the U.S. Supreme Court, "Separate but equal" does not work, it's illegal, and was overturned; discontinue the archaic racist and sexist educational practices sustained by State Rights governance of K-12 public education.

2. Establish a federally mandated educational "congress," composed of members from all fifty-(50) states and all U.S. Territories. Its mission: To create a synergy of uniform curriculum and eduational standards for all K-12 public schools, with the objective to provide equal access to the same knowledge, the same curriculum, the same materials, the same equipment and technology, and the same opportunity to achieve academic success.

3. Establish that the U.S. will consistently lead the world in student educational performance. As reported by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the U.S. spent an average of $16,268 a year to educate a pupil from primary through tertiary education versus the global average of only $10,759. Sadly, the average US student is almost a year to 3.5 years behind the average OECD student in math. Clearly, the U.S. spends more on education, but (again) at a much higher cost-benefit ratio and with significantly less return on investment.

4. Establish that teacher compensation is entirely based on student educational performance. Period.

	Given that teachers cannot deviate from the established curriculum, that teachers in all grade levels must teach the same curriculum, and perform the same character and scope of work, why are teachers paid differently? In the clear majority of public school districts, teachers are compensated through salary schedules that reward teachers based on (a) the kind of educational degree (BA, MA, Ph.d, etc.) they hold, including the total number of semester hours (i.e., BA+15, BA +30, MA +15, MA +30, etc.), they have acquired; and (b) their total number of years of teaching experience. How well or poorly a teacher performs is NOT a routine consideration for advancement of teacher pay. FACT: Teacher performance (actual success at achieving student educational objectives) is NOT a consideration for advancement on teacher salary schedules.; Therefore, why are teacher salary schedules rewarding teachers for factors (individual continuation of education and longevity) that do NOT and can NOT have any impact on the educational performance of students? Equally importantly, should better performing teachers, even though they teach the same subjects (curriculum), at the same grade level, with the same amount of experience, be paid similar to lower performing teachers? Is that . . . fair? There's absolutely no correlation between student educational performance and teacher compensation.
	Even after obtaining a formal degree in the appropriate educational subject matter, and having obtained a teaching license/certificate (with all appropriate endorsements) issued by individual states or other regulating bodies, any additional education acquired may have personal value to individual teachers, but this additional education (newly acquired knowledge, materials, equipment, books, teaching methods, etc.) can NOT be used to modify the established curriculum - even if it is better. Again, teachers cannot deviate from the established curriculum. So, why are teachers paid differently? There's absolutely no correlation between student educational performance and teacher compensation.
	No matter how much education (degrees, credit or semester hours) a teacher acquires, they are NOT permitted to deviate from the authorized curriculum. Teachers are subject to disciplinary action, including termination, if they elect to teach curriculum that is NOT authorized by their school district. The intellect, the educational acumen of teachers should not be restrained; instead, teachers should be empowered to use whatever tools and resources available to achieve strategic (business) educational objectives that are aligned to job standards and corresponding compensation structures.
	In addition to teacher compensation not being based on student performance, due to non-existent or pathetically designed performance management systems, at many school districts not all teachers receive annual performance reviews. There's absolutely no correlation between student educational performance and teacher compensation.
	Even in public school districts under a pay-for-performance (PFP) system, compensation begins by first placing teachers at "fixed steps" on salary schedules that are NOT aligned with student performance. There's absolutely no correlation between student educational performance and teacher compensation.

5. Establish that anyone (without a criminal history, record of child abuse, etc.) with validated professional expertise in a designated area of approved curriculm and related educational standards can be a "teacher."

6. Establish that a teacher is NOT defined as someone who acquired a state-mandated teaching certificate or functions as a member of an incestuous group of academicians and their unions and political lobby, but a teacher is someone who can consistently meet or exceed objectives for student educational performance.

7. Establish "hierarchical performance standards" with corresponding market-based competitive financial incentives.

So let it be written. So let it be done.

Trip Reynolds
trip.reynolds@yahoo.com

G.O.A.T.
Greatest Of All Time

G.O.A.T. is a contemporary acronym for the "Greatest of all Time." This designation is frequently bestowed upon someone for displaying exemplary or extraodinary service, talent, ability, or skill. This designation is typically subjective and the word "arguably" is inserted before "G.O.A.T." because in the absence of conducting an empirical, fact-based assessment, such declarations can only function as blatantly subjective opinions.

It's my practice to convey oral or written statements only when paired with facts that validate the veracity of my conclusions; consequently, I have no need to insert "arguably" with my designation of someone as G.O.A.T. Most respectfully, if you disagree with my linear, fact-based analysis, then prove me wrong with facts, because your naked opinion only conveys an absence of intellectual acumen. With enlightenment, I welcome an opportunity to change my assessments.

	G.O.A.T. NFL Running Back
	G.O.A.T. NBA Basketball Player
	G.O.A.T. Entertainer

G.O.A.T. NFL Running Back

The problem with determining a G.O.A.T. for any sport is the skewed, no, the ridiculous act of comparing apples to oranges, such as comparing players who do not play the same position, like comparing a running back to a wide-receiver. These positions perform differently, both offensively and defensively. Another problem is comparing players who did not compete under the same rules; the current NFL season consists of 16 games played during a 17-week period, but in 1935 only 12 games were played during the entire NFL season. So, how do we accurately and objectively determine which NFL running back is the G.O.A.T.? Simple, we compare apples to apples.

For decades former NFL running back Jim Brown has been referred to as the G.O.A.T., but when some running backs passed Brown's career rushing total some people no longer considered Brown the G.O.A.T. Again, we need to compare apples-to-apples, because Brown played for only nine-(9) years versus an average NFL career of 12.20 years for his peers. The apples-to-apples graphic below provides a year-by-year assessment of the career achievements of the top twenty-five-(25) NFL running backs.

YELLOW = Most yards rushed in that year. BLUE = Total yards rushed after 9 years that surpassed Jim Brown.

R A N K	PLAYER (Years Played)	YARDS RUSHING YEAR 1	YEAR 2	YEAR 3	YEAR 4	YEAR 5	YEAR 6	YEAR 7	YEAR 8	YEAR 9	9 YR TOTAL	CAREER RUSHING TOTAL	YRS 10+	CAREER YRDS AVE	# YRS RUSHING TITLE
1	Emmitt Smith (15 Years)	937	1,563	1,713	1,486	1,484	1,773	1,204	1,074	1,332	12,566	18,355	5,789	4.20	4
2	Walter Payton (13 Years)	679	1,390	1,852	1,395	1,610	1,460	1,222	596	1,421	11,625	16,726	5,101	4.40	1
3	Barry Sanders (10 Years)	1,470	1,304	1,548	1,352	1,115	1,883	1,500	1,553	2,053	13,778	15,269	1,491	5.00	4
4	Frank Gore (14 Years)	608	1,695	1,102	1,036	1,120	853	1,211	1,214	1,128	9,967	14,642	4,675	4.40	0
5	Curtis Martin (12 Years)	1,487	1,152	1,160	1,287	1,464	1,204	1,513	1,094	1,308	11,669	14,101	2,432	4.00	1
6	LaDainian Tomlinson (11 Years)	1,236	1,683	1,645	1,335	1,462	1,815	1,474	1,110	730	12,490	13,684	1,194	4.30	2
7	Jerome Bettis (13 Years)	1,429	1,025	637	1,431	1,665	1,185	1,091	1,341	1,072	10,876	13,662	2,786	3.90	0
8	Eric Dickerson (11 Years)	1,808	2,105	1,234	1,821	277	1,011	1,659	1,311	677	11,903	13,259	1,356	4.40	4
9	Adrian Peterson (11 Years)	1,341	1,760	1,383	1,298	970	2,097	1,266	75	1,485	11,675	13,132	1,457	4.70	3
10	Tony Dorsett (12 Years)	1,007	1,325	1,107	1,185	1,646	745	1,321	1,189	1,307	10,832	12,739	1,907	4.30	0
11	Jim Brown (9 Years)	942	1,527	1,329	1,257	1,408	996	1,863	1,446	1,544	12,312	12,312	0	5.20	8
12	Marshall Faulk (13 Years)	1,282	1,078	587	1,054	1,319	1,381	1,359	1,382	953	10,395	12,279	1,884	4.30	0
13	Edgerrin James (11 Years)	1,553	1,709	662	989	1,259	1,548	1,506	1,159	1,222	11,607	12,246	639	4.00	2
14	Marcus Allen (16 Years)	697	1,014	1,168	1,759	759	754	831	293	682	7,957	12,243	4,286	4.10	1
15	Franco Harris (13 Years)	1,055	698	1,006	1,246	1,128	1,162	1,082	1,186	789	9,352	12,120	2,768	4.10	0
16	Thurman Thomas (13 Years)	881	1,244	1,297	1,407	1,487	1,315	1,093	1,005	1,033	10,762	12,074	1,312	4.20	0
17	Fred Taylor (13 Years)	1,223	732	1,399	116	1,314	1,572	1,224	787	1,146	9,513	11,695	2,182	4.60	0
18	Steven Jackson (12 Years)	673	1,046	1,528	1,002	1,042	1,416	1,241	1,145	1,045	10,138	11,438	1,300	4.10	0
19	John Riggins (14 Years)	769	944	482	680	1,005	572	203	1,014	1,153	6,822	11,352	4,530	3.90	0
20	Corey Dillon (10 Years)	1,129	1,130	1,200	1,435	1,315	1,311	541	1,635	733	10,429	11,241	812	4.30	0
21	O. J. Simpson (11 Years)	697	488	742	1,251	2,003	1,125	1,817	1,503	557	10,183	11,236	1,053	4.00	4
22	Warrick Dunn (12 Years)	978	1,026	616	1,133	447	927	672	1,106	1,416	8,321	10,967	2,646	4.10	0
23	Ricky Watters (11 Years)	0	1,013	950	877	1,273	1,411	1,110	1,239	1,210	9,083	10,643	1,560	4.10	0
24	Jamal Lewis (10 Years)	1,364	0	1,327	2,066	1,006	906	1,132	1,304	1,002	10,107	10,607	500	4.20	1
25	Thomas Jones (12 Years)	373	380	511	627	948	1,335	1,210	1,119	1,312	7,815	10,591	2,776	4.00	0

	Only Emmitt Smith, Barry Sanders, and LaDainian Tomlinson rushed for more yards during their first nine years of play, but Brown's career average rushing record at 5.2 yards is still the NFL record.
	Brown held the NFL rushing title eight-(8) times, which is twice as many times as his nearest competitor.
	Brown held the NFL rushing record for nineteen-(19) years, which is still longer than any other running back. Walter Payton held the record for eighteen-(18) years, and Emmitt Smith has held the record for the past sixteen-(16) years.

Putting all "emotion" aside, Jim Brown achieved significantly more while playing fewer years, and remains the greatest running back of all time.

G.O.A.T. NBA Basketball Player

Who's the greatest NBA basketball player of all time?

Bill Russell, with 11 NBA Championships, has more rings than any other player [that's right, more than LeBron (3 rings), Michael Jordan (6 rings), more than Kobe Bryant (5 rings); Russell is a 5x NBA Most Valuable Player; 12x NBA All-Star; 4x NBA rebounding champion;

Kareem Abdul Jabbar, a 6-time NBA Champion, used his "Sky Hook" as the greatest offensive weapon in NBA history, and scored more points (38,387) than any other NBA player; 19x NBA All-Star; 10x All-NBA First Team; 2x NBA scoring champion;

Michael Jordan, a 6-time NBA Champion, 14x NBA All-Star; 9x NBA All-Defensive First Team; 10x NBA scoring champion; 9x NBA All-Defensive First Team; 10x All-NBA First Team.

Kobe Bryant, a 5-time NBA Champion, 2-time NBA Finals MVP; 18x NBA All-star; 2x NBA scoring champion; 9x NBA All-Defensive First Team; 11x All-NBA First Team;

LeBron James, a 3-time NBA Champion, 14x NBA All-Star; 1x NBA scoring champion; 5x NBA All-Defensive First Team; 12x All-NBA First Team;

Wilt Chamberlain, a 2-time NBA Champion, set and continues to retain more NBA records than any other player. Chamberlain is the only player in NBA history to average 40 and 50 points per games for an entire season, score 100 points in a single game, and grab over 2,000 rebounds in a single season. Chamberlain holds 72 NBA records, 68 by himself. Chamberlain averaged a record 22.9 rebounds for a career, 50.4 points per game in a season, 55 rebounds in a single game, scored 65 or more points 15 times, and 50 or more points 118 times. Chamberlain also won seven scoring, nine field goal percentage, and 11 rebounding titles in addition to an assist title; seven years into his NBA career Wilt intentionally stopped scoring aggressively because he was embarrassed by scoring too much, and his new coach (Bill Sharman) wanted him to transition to more of a defensive game like Bill Russell; 13x NBA All-Star; 7x All-NBA First Team; 7x NBA scoring champion;

Top-10 single-game point records in NBA history:

Player (Team)	Points	Date
Wilt Chamberlain (Philadelphia Warriors)	100	March 2, 1962
Kobe Bryant (Los Angeles Lakers)	81	January 22, 2006
Wilt Chamberlain (Philadelphia Warriors)	78	December 8, 1961
Wilt Chamberlain (Philadelphia Warriors)	73	January 13, 1962
Wilt Chamberlain (San Francisco Warriors)	73	November 16, 1962
David Tompson (Denver Nuggets)	73	April 9, 1978
Wilt Chamberlain (San Francisco Warriors)	72	November 3, 1962
Elgin Baylor (Los Angeles Lakers)	71	November 15, 1960
David Robinson (San Antonio Spurs)	71	April 24, 1994
Wilt Chamberlain (San Francisco Warriors)	70	March 10, 1963
Plus, Chamberlain continues to singularly hold the record for the most consecutive games with 50 or more points, the most games with 40 or more points in a season, the most consecutive games with 40 or more points, the most consecutive games with 30 or more points, the most consecutive games with 20 or more points, most career rebounds (23,924), and the most points in one half (59).

For professional basketball players in the NBA the rules have changed so frequently that apple-to-apple comparisons are extremely difficult. For example, the league did not always track blocked shots, the league did not adopt the three-point shot until the start of the 1979–80 season, and the number of regular season games has significantly increased since the league was first formed on June 6, 1946. Nevertheless, the NBA continues to compile records as if all games were played under the same rules; coaching was entirely different back then and now; and players are measured, in error, against a constantly moving finish line. That's not only unfair to legendary players, but such skewed recordkeeping falsely inflats the value of current players.

For decades former NBA player Wilt Chamberlain has been referred to as the G.O.A.T., but when a few players passed Chamberlain's career point total some people no longer considered Chamberlain the G.O.A.T. Instead of being objective and looking at the "big picture," some people began giving too much credit to up-and-coming "johnny-come-lately" athletes who clearly had or have talent, but lacked the robust skills and demonstrated record-setting performance of Wilt Chamberlain. The apples-to-apples graphic below provides a year-by-year assessment of the career achievements of the top ten-(10) NBA scorers of all-time.

Note: Chamberlain and Jordan share the record for most career points per game, but Chamberlain achieved this record by playing without the benefit of a 3-point shot, by playing fewer games, and by playing fewer seasons than Jordan.

RANK	PLAYER	YEARS PLAYED	NUM CHAMP TITLES	POS	MOST POINTS SCORED	TOTAL CAREER POINTS	GAMES PLAYED	POINTS PER GAME AVERAGE	FIELD GOALS MADE	3-POINT FG MADE	FREE THROWS MADE	TOTAL CAREER POINTS MINUS 3PT
1	Kareem Abdul-Jabbar	20	6	C		38,387	1,560	24.60	15,837	1	6,712	38,386
2	Karl Malone	18	0	PF		36,928	1,476	25.00	13,528	85	9,787	36,843
3	Kobe Bryant	20	5	SG	81	33,643	1,346	25.00	11,719	1,827	8,378	31,816
4	Michael Jordan	15	6	SG		32,292	1,072	30.10	12,192	581	7,327	31,711
5	LeBron James	15	3	SF/PF		31,803	1,170	27.20	11,561	1,675	7,006	30,128
6	Wilt Chamberlain	14	2	C	100	31,419	1,045	30.10	12,681	0	6,057	31,419
7	Dirk Nowitzki	20	1	PF/C		31,187	1,471	21.20	11,034	1,918	7,201	29,269
8	Shaquille O'Neal	19	4	C		28,596	1,207	23.70	11,330	1	5,935	28,595
9	Moses Malone	21	1	C	51	27,409	1,329	20.60	9,435	8	8,531	27,401
10	Elvin Hayes	16	1	PF/C		27,313	1,303	21.00	10,976	5	5,356	27,308

	Although Chamberlain played for only fourteen-(14) years versus an average NBA career of 18.20 years for his Top 10 scoring peers, he still holds the record(s) for: 1. Most points, season - 4,029 in 1961-62 and 3,586 in 1962-63 2. Highest average, points per game, season - 50.36 in 1961-62, and 44.83 in 1962-63, and 38.39 in 1960-61 3. Most points, rookie, season - 2,707 in 1959-60 4. Highest average, points per game, rookie, season - 37.60 in 1959-60 5. Most points, rookie, game - 58 on 01-25-60, and 58 on 02-21-60 6. Most consecutive seasons leading league, points - 7 times (later tied by and then surpassed by Michael Jordan) 7. Highest scoring average in an NBA Season - The highest scoring average in an NBA season is 50.4 points per game by Wilt Chamberlain (USA) for the Philadelphia Warriors in the 1961-62 season. In his career, he scored an average of 30.1 points per game, taking into account his total of 31,419 for Philadelphia Warriors 1959-62, San Francisco Warriors 1962-65, Philadelphia 76ers 1964-8 and Los Angeles Lakers 1968-73. He scored 50 or more points in 118 games, including 45 games in 1961-62 and 30 in 1962-63. "When a man like Wilt, who was a freak of nature, records 52 pts, 32 rebs, 24 blks, 11 stls and 14 asts in a single game, then how can you tell me he isn't arguably the greatest ever? The man could do anything he wanted to do on the court and still to this day way ahead of his time. I never judge a player by how many rings since its a team accomplishment, I go by skill set and what facets he brings to the table as he was the complete package." Tyler Hingleton If an athlete with the Most NBA Championships is the G.O.A.T., then 6-time NBA Champion Michael Jordan cannot be the G.O.A.T., because there are nine-(9) NBA athletes with more rings than Michael Jordan!!! Rank Player Position Seasons Played Total Championships 1. Bill Russell C 13 11 2. Sam Jones G 12 10 3. Tom Heinsohn K. C. Jones Tom "Satch" Sanders John Havlicek F / G 9 8 G 9 8 F 13 8 F / G 16 8 7. Jim Loscutoff F 9 7 Frank Ramsey F / G 9 7 Robert Horry F 16 7 Therefore, the measure of "greatness" cannot be confined to only the number of NBA Championships. How and what did an athlete do to clearly define his prowess above and beyond all others? Again, as represented by the graphs below, here's how Wilt Chamberlain set the standard way, way, way beyond the reach of Michael Jordan (not listed), Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (not listed), and LeBron James (not listed). Chamberlain had more consecutive games (515) averaging 40 points-per-game than the combined total (98) of the next four-(4) highest NBA players. It's not even close. Putting all "emotion" aside, Wilt Chamberlain achieved significantly more while playing fewer years, and remains the greatest basketball player of all time. It's not even close.
	Michael Jordan tied Chamberlain's record for highest points per game, career average at 30.10 points; but deleting Jordan's 3-point shots drops Jordan's career point average to 29.58. To be fair to all players (past and current), the NBA should establish two-(2) separate recordkeeping systems: (A) one database for all games played BEFORE the 1979–80 season and the adoption of the 3-point shot; and (B) one datebase for all games played AFTER the 1979–80 season and the adoption of the 3-point shot. There's amble justification for the NBA to create two-(2) separate recordkeeping systems. 1. In track and field, on 1 April 1986, the men's javelin (800 grams (1.76 lb)) was redesigned by the governing body (the IAAF Technical Committee). They decided to change the rules for javelin design because of the increasingly frequent flat landings and the resulting discussions and protests when these attempts were declared valid or invalid by competition judges. The world record had also crept up to a potentially dangerous level, 104.80 m (343.8 ft) by Uwe Hohn. With throws exceeding 100 meters, it was becoming difficult to safely stage the competition within the confines of a stadium infield. The javelin was redesigned so that the centre of gravity was moved 4 cm (1.6 in) forward. In addition, the surface area in front of centre of gravity was reduced, while the surface area behind the centre of gravity was increased. This had an effect similar to that produced by the feathers on an arrow. The javelin turns into the relative wind. This relative wind appears to originate from the ground as the javelin descends, thus the javelin turns to face the ground. As the javelin turns into the wind less lift is generated, reducing the flight distance by around 10% but also causing the javelin to stick in the ground more consistently. In 1999, the women's javelin (600 grams (1.32 lb)) was similarly redesigned. The resulting designs, which made flat landings much less common and reduced the distances thrown, became official for men starting in April 1986 and for women in April 1999, and the world records (then 104.80 m by Uwe Hohn, and 80.00 m by Petra Felke) were reset. The current (as of 2017) men's world record is held by Jan Železný at 98.48 m (1996); Barbora Špotáková holds the women's world record at 72.28 m (2008). 2. In addition to Wilt Chamberlain, the career achievements of many legendary NBA athletes, such Oscar Robertson, are also being skewed, distorted, or supressed by the leagues one-size-fits-all recordkeeping system that includes "soft" changes in NBA rules such as no hand touching, 3-point basket, more regular games per season, etc. In the graph below, keep in mind, Robertson and Jerry West retired from the NBA in 1974, which was five-(5) years before the NBA adopted the 3-point shot, which inequitably augmented the career points of LeBron James. Archibald retired in 1984 and rarely shot the newly adopted 3-point basket. (C) given the NBA's decision to deviate from the "purity of the game" and to evolve the game to focus on novelty shots and high point scoring, the NBA should borrow from B3 Basketball and not only create 4 and 5 point shots, but create shots worth up to 100 points as graphed below. CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE
	Chamberlain retired from the NBA in 1973, which was six-(6) years before the NBA adopted the 3-point shot, which inequitably augmented the career points of Kobe Bryant, Michael Jordan, LeBron James, and Dirk Nowitzki.
	The thousands and thousands and thousands of shots blocked by Chamberlain throughout his 14 year NBA career were never recorded, because the NBA did not officially track "blocked shots" until the 1973-74 season. Again, Chamberlain retired from the NBA in 1973.

Some people think Michael Jordan was the most astonishing leaper in NBA history, but he was NOT. Basketball rules were specifically changed because of Chamberlain's jumping ability! Chamberlain, was an accomplished 6'6" high jumper in high school, and while attending the University of Kansas he won the high jump at the Big Eight track and field championships three straight years! Chamberlain used his leaping ability to literally jump from the free throw line to dunk the basketball, but the shooter is not allowed to cross the foul line (where they take the shot) until the ball hits the rim. So, the NBA made a rule change, because of Wilt Chamberlain, and Wilt Chamberlain alone, because he was so big and so fast that if he missed a free throw Chamberlain could leap from the foul line to rebound his own shot and dunk it. Here again, there is absolutely no record of comparable or better performance by LeBron James, Kobe Bryant, or Michael Jordan, and therefore, no justification to usurp Wilt Chamberlain as the true G.O.A.T.

How great was Wilt? Even after completing his NBA career Chamberlain remained a dominant force. Here, watch this:

Again, putting all "emotion" aside, Wilt Chamberlain achieved significantly more while playing fewer years, and remains the greatest basketball player of all time. It's not even close.

 

 

G.O.A.T. Entertainer

TV Guide Magazine claimed Elvis Presley as the "Entertainer of the Century" on its cover issue dated January 1 - 7, 2000. I disagreed, and I wrote TV Guide a letter that objectively detailed the errors of their blatantly subjective conclusion.

In summary, by definition a "great entertainer" should be "great" and "multi-talented" in various artistic disciplines, such as singing, dancing, acting, impressions, film, stage, concerts, television, radio, painting, producing, directing, writing, etc., and such an entertainer should have received national and international awards and recognition as a great entertainer. In this regard, Sammy Davis, Jr. was universally acclaimed as "The Greatest Entertainer in the World," but Davis was noticably absent from TV Guide's rosters of greatest entertainers. Plus, the first major multimedia entertainer of the previous century who truly "did it all," in music, concert, film, television, and the entertainment business was clearly Bing Crosby, but he was also noticably absent from TV Guide's roster.

Most importantly, TV Guide also failed to establish objective measures that specifically captured the character and scope of "entertainment greatness," such as: [1] individual artistry; [2] musical success (vocal ability, musicianship, sales, awards, etc.); [3] film (acting, directing, producing, boxoffice, awards, etc.); [4] dance; [5] his/her own personal evolution; [6] impact of the artist on the business of entertainment; [7] impact of the artist on society; and (8) legacy. So, other than selling a bunch of records and acting in nearly two dozen films with essentially the same script, what did Elvis actually accomplish?

	We can easily dismiss Elvis' film career, because it was not even in the league of three time Academy Award nominated and one-time Best Actor Bing Crosby. Conversely, Frank Sinatra received three-(3) performance-based Academy Awards (Honorary, Best Supporting, and Humanitarian) and another three-(3) Academy Awards for Best Original Song (in 1954 for "Three Coins in the Fountain," and in 1957 for "All the Way," and in 1959 for "High Hopes"). And Elvis' film career quickly disappeared into mediocrity..
	According to German owned BMG which owns Elvis' label RCA, it's estimated that Elvis has sold over one billion records worldwide, more than anyone else in the history of the record business. But when it's all said and done, what single recording artist has been the most prolific, produced more recordings and has more product available than anyone else. Elvis? No. Sinatra? Yes. What recording artist has consistently charted new material in the top 100 from the 1940s through the 2000s? Elvis? No. Francis Albert Sinatra? Yes.
	Guess who has more albums in the 100 best-selling albums than any other artist? Elvis? No. Frank Sinatra. Yes! Source: Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) and 100 Best Selling Albums of the 50s by Charlotte Greig
	On January 26, 1980 at Maracanã Stadium in Rio de Janeiro, over 175,000 people attended the fourth-(4th) highest-attended single-artist's ticketed concert in history, which featured Frank Sinatra. Elvis has never been so ranked.
	When the Beatles, Rolling Stones, and other musical acts launched the British invasion in the early 1964s, who won the Grammy for Album of the Year? The Beatles? Elvis? No. Forty-five-(45) year-old Frank Sinatra won for "Come Dance with Me! (1960)," then fifty-(50) year-old Frank Sinatra won for "September of My Years (1966)," and then fifty-one-(51) year-old Frank Sinatra won for "A Man and His Music (1967)." Elvis never received a Grammy for any of this classic rock & roll songs of the 1950s or 1960s, but he did receive three-(3) Grammy awards for his gospel recordings. Where was Elvis?
	During his lifetime, Frank Sinatra raised in excess of one billion dollars for various charities worldwide! For example, in 1962, at his own expense, Sinatra traveled from Los Angeles to Japan, Hong Kong, Israel, Greece, Italy, France, Monte Carlo, and England performing concerts to benefit children's charities. Sinatra absorbed the entire cost of the tour so that all monies raised would go directly to the designated charities. Why? Sinatra replied he, "was an over privileged adult, who ought to help underprivileged children." Source: Sinatra: World On A String." Frank Sinatra's philanthropic work is legendary and continues after his death through the Frank Sinatra Foundation. And what did Elvis do in 1962?
	Way before it became fashionable to advocate for civil rights, even before he became pals with Sammy Davis, Jr., Frank Sinatra made a serious musical statement for ethnic equality. Let's not forget all throughout the 1940s, 1950s and early 1960s Black performers (Nat King Cole, Ella Fitzgerald, Duke Ellington, etc.) could not sleep in the same Las Vegas hotels where they performed, but Frank Sinatra refused to perform unless members of his band and performers like Sammy Davis, Jr. could sleep and perform in the same hotel. Frank Sinatra was a catalyst for change. The very first "music video" to receive an Academy Award® was presented to Frank Sinatra in 1945 for the following video, "The House I Live In."

Putting all "emotion" aside, Elvis Presley cannot be the "Best Entertainer of the Century," because: (1) Elvis did not produce a sufficient amout of work and receive award recognition for such; (2) the scope of work he performed was not multifaceted being limited to singing, some dancing, and some acting; and (3) his career was short-lived. Conversely, Frank Sinatra sang the best songs; sang with the best artists; performed at the best concert stages around the entire world; acted in and produced and owned films, television shows, and concerts; danced with Gene Kelly; was a humble philanthropist, and he did this and so very much more for sixty-(60) years (1935 to 1995)! So, here's the bottom line, the only performer to have successfully and repeatedly achieved continuous worldwide success as a "great" performer throughout the last century is Frank Sinatra.

Trip Reynolds
trip.reynolds@yahoo.com

 

 

Whatever happened to "real" bodybuilding?

There was a time, years ago, when bodybuilding was exactly that, bodybuilding. This was decidely a male sport where men actually took great time to strategically evolve their musculature to its physical limits. Women were not bodybuilders, but stereotypically participated in "beauty peagents," which involved evening gown competition, bikini competition, a personal artistic talent like singing, dancing, poetry, or a dramatic reading, and responding to a pseudo-intellectual question about world peace or whatever.

The true legends of bodybuilding did not use steroids, or tans, or wigs, or other parlor tricks. Instead, they did it the old fashioned way, they lifted weights, maintained a healthy and well-balance diet, and trained religiously, but not for sheer mass, which is the focus for most of today's male bodybuilders, but for muscular definition, balance and symmetry. Here, take a look:

STEVE REEVES
	Stephen Lester Reeves (January 21, 1926 – May 1, 2000) was an American professional bodybuilder, actor, and philanthropist. He was famous in the mid-1950s as a movie star in Italian-made peplum films, playing the protagonist as muscular characters such as Hercules, Goliath, and Sandokan. At the peak of his career, he was the highest-paid actor in Europe. From 1959 through 1964, Reeves went on to appear in a string of sword and sandal movies shot on relatively small budgets[2] and, although he is best known for his portrayal of Hercules, he played the character only twice: in the 1957 film (released in the US in 1959) and its 1959 sequel Hercules Unchained (released in the US in 1960). By 1960, Reeves was ranked as the number-one box-office draw in twenty-five countries around the world. Source: Wikipedia
LARRY "GOLDEN BOY" SCOTT
	Larry Dee Scott (October 12, 1938 – March 8, 2014), nicknamed "The Legend" and "The Golden Boy," was an American IFBB professional bodybuilder. He won the inaugural 1965 Mr. Olympia competition and defended the crown at the 1966 Mr. Olympia contest before retiring. IFBB Mr. Olympia 1965-1966, two consecutive times. Source: Wikipedia
SERGIO "THE MYTH" OLIVA
	Sergio Oliva (July 4, 1941 – November 12, 2012) was a Cuban bodybuilder known as "The Myth". This sobriquet was arguably given to him by bodybuilder/writer Rick Wayne but Oliva himself has doubted this claim. Supposedly Wayne had begun calling Oliva "The Myth" (because everyone who saw him at the 1967 Montreal World's Fair said he was "Just unbelievable"). IFBB Mr. Olympia 1967-1969, three consecutive times, 1968 uncontested and unchallenged. Source: Wikipedia

There was a time when, without regard to their race or color, men were proud and honest about they way they looked, and their on-stage appearance mirrored the veracity (truthfulness) of their training. Then, one day back in the late 1960s men's bodybuilding took a nasty turn, because as reported in Muscle & Fitness magazine and similar publications, some judges believed contestants like (Sergio Oliva, Serge Nubret, Albert Beckles, etc.) with darker skin (Black men) had an advantage (over White men) under the stage lights. Clearly, this was both racist and stupid because White men with or without tans (Dave Draper, Larry Scott, Lou Ferrigno, Frank Zane, Tom Platz, Reg Park, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Franco Columbu, Dorian Yates, etc.) won contests just as often as Black men (Albert Beckles, Ronnie Coleman, Shawn Ray, Serge Nubret, Sergio Oliva, Lee Haney, Phil Heath, etc.).

Keep in mind, most of the owners and judges of bodybuilding contests are White people, and they believed the separation of muscles and striations for Black men was more discernible, looked better, etc. So, since many if not most White people view their pale skin as objectionable - as validated by their constant need to tan (yeah, I said it), it became a practice for most White contestants to darken their skin by tanning in the sun (potential for skin cancer) or by chemical application (less likely for skin cancer) to hopefully improve their plight against people of color. Yeah, that's really sad, even pathetic. Here, look at the head of this White bodybuilder compared to the rest of his body below his neck.

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE

Is the self-esteem of White people and other light-skinned people so low, so distasteful that they resent or reject their natural pigmentation? As represented by the photo below and conveyed in an editorial by Strength Oldschool, "It’s hard to tell which bodybuilders are Black and which are White??"

QUESTION: Given our age of so-called enlightenment and political correctness, who the hell has the right to tell White people and other light-skinned people their skin color is NOT good enough, that their skin color is inferior, inadeqate, pathetic, unsatisfactory, terrible, lousy, or photogenically unacceptable? Is this message in the best interest of bodybuilding?

White skin is inferior? Really?

ANSWER: Absolutely no one has a right to tell you or anyone that your skin color is inferior, inadeqate, pathetic, unsatisfactory, terrible, lousy, or photogenically unacceptable! Prior to being born, we do NOT have the option to pre-determine our race, sex, or the hue and tone of our pigmentation. It's both obsence and racist for anyone to promote and sustain the racist, slavery-based paradigm of the dark-skinned field nigger versus the light-skinned house nigger.

OBSERVATION: Consider the irony, the contempt, and the hypocrisy of White bodybuilders and other light-skinned people to darken their skin to be "black-ish," but only to spurn and disdain their appearance as a permanent fixture.

So, like it or not, bodybuilding became and remains a racial issue. Frankly, the easy fix to eliminate tanning is to change the stage lighting to better capture musculature and striations of each participant. This is an easy fix, because competent photographers, videographers, and cinematographers do this on a daily basis. It's extremely easy for a competent photographer, videographer, and cinematographer to light the stage to capture any visual target with varying degrees of contrast - that's exactly what "we" do. Here, take a look.

Below is one-(1) photo treated with varying degrees of light, contrast, or darkness, and a competent photographer or stage manager can do the same thing in a "live" setting with spotlights, keylights, footlights, etc. Have you never heard of "film noir," dah?

COLOR ORIGINAL	COLOR DARKER	COLOR DARKEST
B&W ORIGINAL	B&W DARKER	B&W DARKEST

Unfortunately, the majority of professional and amateur bodybuilding organizations elected to play the race card instead of allowing or requiring athletes to present themselves "as is" or truly "all natural." It doesn't matter whether it's professional or amatuer, there's nothing "natural" about today's bodybuilding.

In fact, racism in today's pseudo-bodybuilding is so powerful that even Black people have been brainwashed (think Willie Lynch) to tan and darken their skin just like their White-skinned competitors. Clearly, the pyramid is upside down. Do White people and lighter-skinned (brainwashed) Black people hate their skin color so much that they must darken their skin to be competitive? Really? No, really?? Sadly, the pseudo-bodybuilders born from millennials, and Generation X, and the #Metoo generation either don't know the racist history of bodybuilding, or worse, they don't care.

Just like male bodybuilders, some women began to pile on muscle beyond their "natural" physical limits, which greatly distorted the bodies of some women so much that they looked more like men than women (such as Chyna, Nicole Bass, Julia Vins, Iris Kyle, Nataliya Kuznetsova, Rene Campbell, Brigita Brezovac, Alina Popa, Denise Rutkowski). But keep in mind, these are exceptions and not the norm for the overwhelming majority of female bodybuilders. Today, for the most part, women don't actually bodybuild; instead, they kinda body shape, which is especially true of amateur drug-free natural pseudo-bodybuilding events that only function as "beauty pageants or contests." What happened? In the beginning . . . the "ideal" female body was only slightly enhanced by muscle development, but . . . every woman's body is different, with varying degrees of potential, so the limits for mass, definition, balance and symmetry are also different.

Women began to put on more muscle, but Bev Francis, a former six-time world powerlifting champion, is the woman who changed it all. Bev Francis, and later Iris Kyle, really put on more muscle mass and much greater cut and definition.

Iris Floyd Kyle (born August 22, 1974) is an American professional female bodybuilder. She is currently the most successful professional bodybuilder ever, female or male, with ten overall Ms. Olympia wins and two heavyweight wins, along with seven Ms. International wins and one heavyweight win. She ranks as the best female bodybuilder in the IFBB Pro Women's Bodybuilding Ranking List. The final Ms. Olympia contest, which represented true bodybuilding for women, was held in 2014. Except for the Rising Phoenix World Championships there are very few bodybuilding events for elite athletes of Kyle's stature. Consequently, Kyle remains undecided about whether she would continue competing in professional female bodybuilding competitions. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iris_Kyle

It's called "bodybuilding" for a reason, and as represented by the photo (at right) of eight-time Ms. Olympia champion, Lenda Murray, elite women "bodybuilders" used their athleticism (intense weight training and aerobics) to manifest exquisite balance and symmetry, and outstanding clarity of each muscule group. Athleticism is required to be a bodybuilder. Athleticism is NOT required to be in a beauty pageant. A beauty pageant does not involve the actual manifestation of any athletic prowess, or physical acuity, or skill-based athleticism, and is NOT a competitive sporting event. Given the aforementioned, several organizations offer a "Bikini" division, and an "athletic" division, and a "figure" division which clearly have abolutely nothing to do with actual "body . . . building." As validated by the following photos, the physiques of Serena Williams, Gail Deavers, and Florence Griffith-Joyner clearly manifest more natural "bodybuilding" development than many if not most of the current crop of women engaged in professional and amateur bodybuilding. Unlike the bulk of today's crop of women's bodybuilders, these women are elite athletes.

ENGAGING IN A WEIGHT LOSS PROGRAM IS NOT THE SAME AS ENGAGING IN A BODYBUILDING PROGRAM

Again, the final Ms. Olympia contest, which represented true bodybuilding for women, was held in 2014. But now, bodybuilding for women has been castrated to specifically showcase significantly less muscle development, and far too often fake hair, fake breasts, fake skin, etc. Sadly, the only difference between a traditional beauty pageant and a bodybuilding contest is the omission of a talent segment for today's women's pseudo-bodybuilding. In summary, professional and amatuer bodybuilding organizations have established that Black bodybuilders and other people of color are pre-determined to win solely because of their color, and that White people and other lighter-skinned people, are therefore, unilaterally disadvantaged, because their pigment is inherently inferior. I challenge White bodybuilders and light-skinned Black, Latino, and other people of color to file charges of racial discrimination with the EEOC against all professional and amatuer bodybuilding organizations to prohibit the use of any artifical means to augment skin color.

Attention bodybuilders, this is supposed to be the #MeToo generation, and people should accept you as you are; so be PROUD to be YOU!

Trip Reynolds
trip.reynolds@yahoo.com

Marc Lamont Hill told the truth!

In summary, Marc Lamont Hill, professor of Media Studies and Urban Education at Temple University in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania and a contributor to CNN was fired by CNN on November 29, 2018 in prompt response to tthe following public statements regarding the ongoing, neverending, perpetual conflict between Israel and Palestine.

"Thou shalt not kill," or "You shall not murder," or "You shall not kill (KJV)," is a moral imperative included as one of the Ten Commandments in the Torah, and the Bible, specifically Exodus 20:13 and Deuteronomy 5:17; and in the Qur'an at 17:33. Accordingly, as represented in the graph below, isn't it about time Jews and Muslims stop killing each other in blatant defiance of their so-called religious beliefs?

At least 9,560 Palestinians and 1,248 Israelis have been killed since September 29, 2000.

CLICK GRAPH TO ENLARGE AND TO VIEW SOURCE

CLICK ABOVE IMAGE TO VIEW PROFESSOR HILL'S INTERVIEW ON "THE BREAKFAST CLUB"

QUESTION: Is the "situation" between the Palestinans and Jews any different than the "situation" between the Republic of Lakotah (and other Native Americans tribes) and White people who govern and control the United States of America?

ANSWER: Except for the fact of historical and ongoing acts of genocide to eliminate Native Americans, there's absolutely no difference between the ongoing, neverending, and perpetual incarceration and oppression of Native Americans. Here, take a look.

On September 8, 2013 I wrote President Obama that the plight of the Lakotah should take priority of his contemplation of responding to the Assad regime's alleged use of chemical weapons in Syria. In response, I received a "form letter" from President Obama that ignored my request and the Lakotah remain in a perpetual state of poverty and oppression.

In 2002, I wrote Ariel Sharon, Honoralbe Prime Minister of Israeli, Yasser Arafat, Honorable Leader of the Palestine People, and George W. Bush, Jr., President of the United States of America to establish Palestine as a self-governing independent state, as part of a greater republic; not to be controlled, but as peers. I did not receive a response from Sharon, Afafat, or Bush.

Again, "Thou shalt not kill," or "You shall not murder," or "You shall not kill (KJV)," is a moral imperative included as one of the Ten Commandments in the Torah, and the Bible, specifically Exodus 20:13 and Deuteronomy 5:17; and in the Qur'an at 17:33. Unfortunately, the overwhelming majority of "religious" people have absolutely no interest to practice what they preach, which is why I wrote a Bible that mirrors the reality of our humanity. For CNN to condemn Marc Lamont Hill for speaking truth to power, for seeking equitable treatment for Palestinians while continuing to ignore the plight of Native Americans demonstrates the blatant hypocrisy of CNN; and looking at the "big picture," here again we see the true contempt the United States of America has toward real compliance to egalitarian principles.

Trip Reynolds
trip.reynolds@yahoo.com

Feedback:
"How This Will End" by Eliot A. Cohen  

Eliot A. Cohen's recent editorial in The Atlantic is yet another condemnation of President Trump that fails to assess the "big picture."   

True, President Trump has deviated from the mediocrity of previous incumbents, but that's a good thing.   

1.  Unlike President Obama and career politician and social worker Hillary Clinton, President Trump has polarized the United States to deal with its overt racism and sexism.  That's a good thing, because it has prompted conversation and change.

2.  Unlike President Obama and career politician and social worker Hillary Clinton, President Trump has polarized the United States to deal with its uncompensated position as "police" for the entire world while the world fails to pay the U.S. for its protection. That's a good thing, because it has prompted conversation and change.

3.  Unlike President Obama and career politician and social worker Hillary Clinton, President Trump actually met with North Korea's president. That's a good thing, because it has prompted conversation and change.

4.  Unlike President Obama and career politician and social worker Hillary Clinton, President Trump has dramatically spurred unprecedented business growth. That's a good thing, because it has prompted conversation and change.

5.  Unlike President Obama and career politician and social worker Hillary Clinton, President Trump actually negotiates trade and political agreements for what's in the best interest of the United States and NOT for what's best for other countries. That's a good thing, because it has prompted conversation and change.

6.  In the wake of President John F. Kennedy and President William Clinton, it's ridiculous to complain about President Trump's "morals" or womanizing, particularly when it's now "legal" for members of Congress to openly engage in homosexuality and marry!   Since religious tenets against homosexuality no longer matter, it's truly time to embrace John 8:7 - "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her."

7.  Donald Trump became a billionaire as a businessman, not as a politician. Conversely, Bill and Hillary Clinton becoming millionaires soley as a direct result of their political aspirations, and they used their "political offices" to generate millions of income and/or revenue for their so-called fundraising endeavors; so, it's ridiculous to complain about President Trump's business relationship with Russia or whomever or whatever. What's good for the goose . . .

8.  As reported by the New York Times, the richest 1% of U.S. citizens, which includes President Trump, hold about 38% of all privately held wealth in the United States, while the bottom 90% held 73% of all debt; and the richest 1 percent in the United States now own more wealth than the bottom 90 percent. Clearly, when it comes to "Making America Great Again" one size does not fit all, and President Trump has polarized the United States to deal with wealth inequality in the United States. That's a good thing, because it has prompted conversation and change, and change is necessary because:

FACT: The overall status of people of color, especially Black people (http://www.tripoetry.com/Black.htm) and Native American people, has NOT improved under any President of the United States. 

FACT: People all around world recognize the hypocrisy of American democracy (i.e., genocide, slavery, discrimination, internment camps, incarceration, wealth disparities, oppression, sexism, etc.) and how the hypocrisy of American democracy is sustained by White privilege (http://www.tripoetry.com/White.htm).  That's NOT a good thing, because genocide, racism, and discrimination continue to exist. Albert Einstein said it so clearly, “Insanity: Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” 

One size does not fit all, because the U.S. has never been an egalitarian nation with equal opportunity for everyone. The pervasive mediocrity of an impotent Congress and a castrated presidency has denied or confined the "pursuit of happiness" for the overwhelming majority of people of color, poor White people, and women. Like it or not, President Trump is a "change agent" to propel U.S. citizens to take action. Again, that's a good thing, because "change" was promised but did not occur with President Obama.

Again, one size does not fit all.   

QUESTION: So, Eliot A. Cohen, instead of charting the demise of President Trump why don't you spend more time charting specifically what President Trump can and should do to truly make America great?  

ANSWER: That would require having intellectual fortitude (business acumen, cultural awareness, and technological savvy).  Political scientist Eliot A. Cohen is yet another White male pseudo-intellectual with absolutely no tangible connection to the ongoing hardships, the perpetual challenges, and pervasive obstacles faced by people of color, poor White people, and women.    Ultimately, the greatest threat to the destruction of the United States is NOT President Trump, but the Doctrine of Discovery and the Thucydides Trap (http://www.tripoetry.com/White.htm#doctrine). Instead of writing yet another condemnation of President Trump, Eliot A. Cohen should "get smart" and advise President Trump on how best to make America Great!  

Trip Reynolds
trip.reynolds@yahoo.com

On August 8, 2018 Governor Ricketts unveiled his “Strategic Plan for International Engagement.”  As usual, Governor Ricketts and his incestuous business cronies configured a team of White people, apparently thirteen-(13) White men and four-(4) token White women to lead the Governor’s Council for International Relations. As historically and consistently practiced by all previous Governors for the State of Nebraska, Governor Ricketts ignored these facts:  

1.   White people account for only 16% of the World's population, but Ricketts’ “international engagement” team is 100% White.  

2.   Asia constitutes more than half the World's population, and China’s GDP (Gross Domestic Product) is predicted to overtake the US by 2030, but Ricketts’ “international engagement” team is 100% White.  

GDP is the market value of all final goods and services from a nation in a given year.

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE

GDP by Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) - PPP takes into account the relative cost of local goods, services and inflation rates of the country, rather than using international market exchange rates, which may distort the real differences in per capita income.

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE

3.   Like is or not, White people have an “affinity” for developing successful relationships with other White people; likewise, people of color have an “affinity” for developing successful relationships with other people of color, but Governor Ricketts’ Council for International Relations is 100% White.  

No, this editorial is NOT about playing the “race card.”  And no, this editorial is NOT purposed to prompt White people to feel guilty about slavery, discrimination, White privilege, oppression and all that manipulative race-based-guilt crap, oh no.  On the contrary, again, to hell with all that race-based guilt crap, this is about the here and now.  Let’s make this really simple.  

STATE OF NEBRASKA DOES NOT SHOWCASE DIVERSITY  

As defined in the Governor’s “Strategic Plan for International Engagement,” the targeted countries and regions for “engagement” include: Japan, Mexico, Germany, China, Korea, Israel, Southeast Asia: Australia, Indonesia, Vietnam, Sub-Saharan Africa, and South America: Argentina and Brazil.  

QUESTION 1: Are people of color citizens of Nebraska?  

RESPONSE: Yes.  

QUESTION 2: Are any of Nebraska’s people of color immigrants or first or second-generation descendants from any of the Governor’s targeted countries and regions for engagement?  

RESPONSE: Yes.  

QUESTION 3: Do Nebraska’s people of color (immigrants or first or second-generation descendants from any of the Governor’s targeted countries and regions for engagement) have more and/or better first-hand cultural knowledge, political knowledge, and business knowledge of the Governor’s targeted countries and regions for engagement than the lily-White members of the Governor’s Council for International Relations?  

RESPONSE: Yes.   

QUESTION 4: So, why did Governor Ricketts intentionally exclude people of color from his Governor’s Council for International Relations?  

RESPONSE: Well?  

Please note, as a subject matter expert in all human resource disciplines, I’ve always been totally against quotas, Affirmative Action, or hiring or promoting someone because of their race, or sex, or whatever.  It’s been my demonstrated practice to hire, promote, discipline or reward based solely on validated work-related proficiencies – period.  Oh, perhaps, to explain or justify Governor Ricketts’ lily-White Governor’s Council for International Relations you want to use that ole tag line frequently used by White folks, “We just can’t find any qualified minorities?”  Really?  

So, who made the decision to intentionally ignore all of the successful Vietnamese men and women who operate restaurants, food stores, and other businesses lined up and down 27th Street in Lincoln, Nebraska? Are these residents of Nebraska, all who have more first-hand knowledge about Vietnam – much more than all members of the Governor’s Council for International Relations simply not worthy of consideration and development?  

Given that Dr. Maorong Jiang, Associate Professor of Political Science and International Relations, and Director of the Asian World Center at Creighton University (or his designee) has much more subject matter expertise, and actual first-hand experience about all of Asia – more than all members of the Governor’s Council for International Relations, who made the decision to exclude Dr. Maorong Jiang as a member of or consultant to the Governor’s Council for International Relations?  

Who made the decision to exclude Minister Sánchez-Salazar, Consul of Mexico in Omaha, Nebraska and a career member of the Mexican Foreign Service with wide experience in the consular, bilateral and multilateral diplomatic fields (or her designee) as a member of the Governor’s Council for International Relations?  

Given that Omaha is home to more than 10,000 South Sudanese expatriates, and that Nebraska has the world’s largest population of Nuer (Sudanese) outside South Sudan, who made the decision to exclude members of the Southern Sudan Community Association or other Omaha-based Sudanese groups or individuals as a member of the Governor’s Council for International Relations?

Why should women and people of color spend time and money obtaining higher education degrees at the best universities only to be constantly rejected from consideration for the Governor’s Council for International Relations and similar "Glass Ceiling" opportunities?

STATE OF NEBRASKA DOES NOT SHOWCASE SUCCESSFUL BUSINESSES OF PEOPLE OF COLOR  

Instead of: (1) working with people of color to actually spur domestic and international economic development; and (2) showcasing the achievements of minority businesses, here’s what and how the State of Nebraska “showcases” people of color (as reported between 2008 and 2013 by the State of Nebraska’s Department of Health and Human Services):  

FACTS, as reported by Nebraska’s DHHS in 2008 for Black people:  

a.   The percent of unemployed civilian labor force among Nebraska Blacks or African Americans was almost four times as high as that of non-Hispanic Whites. About 11 percent of Blacks were unemployed in the civilian labor force, compared with about three percent of non-Hispanic Whites.

b.   A majority of Nebraska Black households, about 65 percent, lived in renter- occupied homes and about 35 percent lived in owner-occupied homes. In comparison, about 29 percent of non-Hispanic White households lived in renter- occupied homes and about 71 percent of non-Hispanic White households lived in owner-occupied homes.

c.     About 72 percent of Black or African American mothers who had given birth were unmarried, in contrast with about 20 percent of non-Hispanic White mothers who had given birth.  

QUESTION: The aforementioned data was from 2008; is there evidence anything has changed?  

RESPONSE: The social, political, and economic status of Black people in Nebraska has NOT improved.  This is the “picture” Nebraska is communicating internationally!  

FACTS, as reported by Nebraska’s DHHS in 2008 for Latinos:

a.   The poverty rate was higher for Hispanics or Latinos than for non-Hispanic Whites. About 21 percent of Hispanics were living below the poverty level in the 12 months prior to being surveyed, compared with about 9 percent of non-Hispanic Whites.

b.   About 13 percent of Hispanic households were families maintained by a woman with no husband present, compared with about eight percent of non-Hispanic White households.

c.    More than half (52 percent) of Hispanic males aged 25 and older had less than a high school education and nearly nine percent had a Bachelor’s Degree or higher education. Among non-Hispanic White males aged 25 and older, about eight percent had less than a high school education and about 29 percent had a Bachelor’s Degree or higher education.

QUESTION: The aforementioned data was from 2008; is there evidence anything has changed?  

RESPONSE: The social, political, and economic status of Latino people in Nebraska has NOT improved. This is the “picture” Nebraska is communicating internationally!

FACTS, as reported by Nebraska’s DHHS in 2013 for Native Americans:  

a.    Over 73% of American Indian and Alaska Natives, ages 15 to 50 who gave birth in the past 12 months were unmarried; this is over 3 times as many as non-Hispanic Whites.

b.    Over 3 times as many AI/AN (of all ages) as non-Hispanic Whites reported being below the poverty level in the past 12 months (36.4% and 9.5%, respectively).

c.     American Indians and Alaska Natives (12.8%) were over 3.5 times more likely than non- Hispanic Whites (3.6%) to be civilian unemployed. 

QUESTION: The aforementioned data was from 2013; is there evidence anything has changed?  

RESPONSE: Consistent with the genocide of many Native American tribes, and despite giving legal and cultural relevance to Ponca Chief Standing Bear that Native Americans are "persons within the meaning of the law" and have the right of habeas corpus, nevertheless, the United States federal government and the State of Nebraska intentionally and unilaterally terminated (eradicated) the existence of the Ponca Tribe of Nebraska in the 1950s; but after nearly forty-(40) years of appeals, it was not until October 31, 1990 that President Bush signed Senate Bill 1747 to restore federal recognition to the Ponca Tribe of Nebraska.

   

Given the refusal of the United States federal government and the State of Nebraska to recognize the sovereign Republic of Lakotah, and the continued use of Indian Reservations as a caste system and to perpetually imprison Native Americans - the social, political, and economic status of Native American people in Nebraska has NOT improved. This is the “picture” Nebraska is communicating internationally!  

FACTS, as reported by Nebraska’s DHHS in 2008 for Asians:

a.   In the 2006 population of Nebraska Asians, Vietnamese were the largest group accounting for nearly 31 percent of the Asian alone population. This is 19 percent higher than the national average; but Ricketts’ “international engagement” team is 100% White.

b.   The Vietnamese had a higher proportion of Asian-alone population in Congressional District 1 (about 58 percent) and in Congressional District 3 (about 36 percent); but Ricketts’ “international engagement” team is 100% White.

QUESTION: The aforementioned data was from 2008; is there evidence anything has changed?  

RESPONSE: The social, political, and economic status of Asian people in Nebraska has NOT improved. This is the “picture” Nebraska is communicating internationally!  

If Nebraska is truly committed to egalitarian principles, why are people of color routinely excluded from nearly all aspects of ”politicking” by Governor Ricketts?  

Again, if Nebraska is truly committed to egalitarian principles, why are people of color routinely excluded from nearly all aspects of ”politicking” by Governor Ricketts?  

AGAIN, GOVERNOR RICKETTS DOES NOT SUPPORT DIVERSITY  

What?  You still need more proof?  Well, take a good look at Governor Ricketts’ lily-(almost) White (male) cabinet:  

John Albin, Labor	Maj. Gen. Daryl Bohac, Military	John Bolduc, State Patrol
Byron Diamond, Admin Services	Courtney Miller, HHS Dev Disabilities	Darrell Fisher, Crime Commission
David Bracht, Energy	David Rippe, Econ Development	Ed Toner, Chief Info Officer
Scott Frakes, Corrections	Gerry Oligmueller, Admin Serv, Budget	Jason Jackson, Chief HR Officer
Jeff Fassett, Natural Resources	Jim Heine, Fire Marshal	Jim Macy, Environ Quality
John Hilgert, Vet Affairs	Kyle Schneweis, Transportation	Rhonda Lahmk, Motor Vehicles
Lauren Kintner, Policy Res Dir	Mark Quandahl, Banking	Matt Miltenberger, Chief of Staff
Matt Wallen, HHS CFS	Courtney Phillips, CEO HHS	Bruce Ramge, Insurance
Ronnie Mitchell, Trans Aeronautics	Sheri Dawson, Behavioral Health	Steve Wellman, Agriculture
Taylor Gage, Dir Strategic Comm	Tony Fulton, Revenue	Matthew Van Patton, HHS Medicaid & LTC
Dr. Tom Williams, HHS Dir Pub Health	Likewise, lookingback at (Governor) Pete Ricketts' private sector origins at T.D. Ameritrade, his executive board and leadership teams were and remain lily-White. So, it's foolish to expect anything different, especially the use of egalitarian business principles, from Governor Pete Ricketts.

OBSERVATION: Of course, women are "best suited" for care-taking and administrative office types of roles, so Ricketts' cabinet has women over health and human services, administrative policy, and motor vehicles. The good-ole-boy State of Nebraska embraces stereotypes.

THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT - One of the key responsibilities of any top executive is to develop one or more highly qualified successors and related staff. In the absence of a vibrant management succession program, it’s ridiculous for White people and people of color to complain there are not enough qualified people of color in senior level “decision-making positions.” 

As validated by the State of Nebraska’s EEO-4, 92.1% of all public sector employees who make over $70,000 per year are White; of which approximately 75.4% are White males and only 16.7% are White females.        Again, if Nebraska is truly committed to egalitarian principles, why are people of color routinely excluded from nearly all aspects of ”politicking” by Governor Ricketts?  

Observations:  

1.   Denial, ignorance, or negligence are no excuse for the constant occurrence of blatant racism as historically and constantly demonstrated by the State of Nebraska, and Governor Ricketts and his business cronies. Governor Ricketts knows or should know that 1 in 7 white families are now millionaires; conversely for Black families, it’s 1 in 50, but instead of building an egalitarian “international engagement team" to equitably explore and share international wealth building opportunities - the Governor’s Council for International Relations is 100% White.  

2.   Instead of conducting a truly objective search to solicit input and participation of Blacks, Latinos, Asians, Women, Native Americans, Disabled, and Veterans with immediate knowledge and subject matter expertise in the cultures and businesses of various foreign governments, Governor Ricketts used the same pool of “usual and customary” cronies (political contacts, business leaders, etc.) to populate his incestuous Council for International Relations.  Nothing changes.  

3.   Don’t give any importance to those obligatory photo ops of Governor Ricketts with any Nebraska-based minority groups, because again, before and after every photo op, the overall social, political and economic status of minorities in Nebraska has not improved.  

4.   As clearly demonstrated by U.S. relationships with China, Russia, Israel, Iran and hundreds of other nations, international relationships cannot be confined to only business, because culture and politics typically hold just as much importance.  Far too often, “image” is everything.  Accordingly, far too often, the “image” the United States is communicating internationally is one of violence and incarceration:

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE

Likewise, the “image” the State of Nebraska is communicating internationally is also one of violence frequently perpetrated by people of color, and conversely, privilege is frequently given to White people to exempt them from violence and incarceration:

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE

QUESTION: Instead of perpetually promoting images of people of color being overrepresented in prisons and jails, or unemployed, or poverty stricken, or with extremely low graduation rates from high school and college, why aren’t Nebraska’s people of color given the opportunity to showcase their business acumen to the world?  

RESPONSE: Because as consistently validated by EEO-1 (private sector reports) and EEO-4 (public sector reports) White owned and White controlled companies in Nebraska do NOT hire qualified minorities or qualified women in higher level professional, supervisory, management, and executive level (“Glass Ceiling”) positions.  

Those targeted countries and regions for “engagement” may not bring it up, but the failure of the United States, and the State of Nebraska to actually practice and enforce egalitarian principles is well known. The contradictions, hypocrisy, deceit, and the disingenuous nature of American politicians and businessmen are just as well known throughout the world.  Plus, many of these targeted countries do a better job at diversity than the U.S. and Nebraska.  Here, take a look:

As detailed in the above exhibit, there are a greater percentage of women in corporate and governmental boardrooms in Russia (42%), China (31%), Canada (28%), Australia (23%), Brazil (29%), Mexico (31%), and throughout other countries in Europe and Asia than in the United States (20%).   

Plus, looking closely at the “Glass Ceiling” chart below, how can any delegation of business leaders from Nebraska hold their heads up high when in 2017, the “world’s leader for freedom and democracy (United States of America)” was ranked 19th, "below average" when compared to other nations in the OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development) “World’s Glass-Ceiling Index.”   

NOTE: Women in the United States obtained the right to vote with adoption of the 19th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution on August 18, 1920.  Conversely, women did not obtain the right to vote in France until April 29, 1945 – and France is ranked 5th in the OECD “World’s Glass-Ceiling Index.”  It’s must be true, White French men care more (avec amour) about White French women than White U.S. men care about White U.S women.

In summary, only White owned and White controlled organizations are “worthy” of consideration to be on the Governor’s International Relations Council:

CLICK IMAGE TO ENLARGE

The Nebraska Hispanic Chamber of Commerce is not worthy.

The Nebraska Czechs of Wilber is not worthy.

El Museo Latino is not worthy.

The Urban League of Nebraska is not worthy.

The Asian World Center is not worthy.

The Vietnamese Golf Association of Nebraska is not worthy.

The Asian Community and Cultural Center is not worthy.

The Ponca Tribe of Nebraska is not worthy.  

Culturally-based “relationship building” organizations are intentionally excluded from the “good ole boys network” enshrined by the Governor’s International Relations Council for privileged White males.

THE SOLUTION: Simple. Configure an "International Relations Council" that mirror the egalitarian principles and demographics of the world’s leader for freedom and democracy!

If not, as with the Homestead Act and related laws or practices that established White privilege, in Nebraska, you MUST be White, and preferably a White male, to be considered and approved for any involvement in the Governor’s Council for International Relations.  Given the aforementioned, many people of color might say the only difference between Pete Ricketts and David Duke (former Grand Wizard of the Ku Klux Klan) is their home address.  

Is Pete Ricketts a racist?  If it walks like a duck . . .

Trip Reynolds
trip.reynolds@yahoo.com