As their logic goes, if you oppose discrimination in all forms based on race, creed, color, or national origin - then of you must be a racist. Because you refuse to see race in everything, you are a racist.
Much of that comes from the toxic environment the Diversity Industry has created - and environment that does not allow anything but strict adherance to diktat. The AGOTUS thinks we are cowards in discussing race. He is closer than he thinks, and in a fashion I agree with him. The reason is that the Diversity Cult does nothing but smear and attack without any checks and balances. As a result, we have gone from promoting equality and equal opportunity (good) to promoting discrimination and equal outcomes (bad) - and good people who have families to support keep their heads down and push through hoping that it won't affect them.
From the TelegraphUK, talking about the politics of it well - I think this is an accurate observation.
So what happened to treating people not "by the colour of their skin but by the content of their character"? Ironically, Martin Luther King Day will be marked across the country tomorrow but this dream of King's is not being fulfilled.It isn't just politicians. It is everywhere. Even in the Navy - even with the Chaplains.
American politicians have got themselves into a real bind. They have to fret constantly about race but cannot talk honestly about it.
We focus on race so that it trumps all - even if it has nothing to do with anything.
The deputy chief of chaplains is being denied a second star and assignment as chief of chaplains and will instead retire after the Navy’s inspector general found that he “reprised against” his former executive assistant during a captain’s selection board.As we all know - to survive an accusation like that can only result because the claim was bogus and unsubstantiated to the point the complaint was deemed baseless. Otherwise - the second part of the story would never take place.
In March 2007, that officer — who is black, but a gender was not provided — made an equal opportunity and hostile work environment complaint against Baker.
Rear Adm. Frank Thorp, chief of information, would not describe the complaint in any detail, and said he did not know the two chaplains’ religion.
Thorp said the unnamed officer, Baker and several others in the office met because of the complaint, after which Baker signed a memo stating he’d be fair during any selection board hearings regarding the accusing officer.
Because of his comment at the selection board 11 months later, “The Naval Inspector General concluded that during board deliberations, Rear Admiral Baker had violated the Military Whistleblower Act,” Thorp said.OK .... and what does his race have anything to do with the comments in question? Well, from all reports I have heard, nothing. Perhaps he did something wrong, but race had nothing to do with it - except to those who use race in everything.
CDR B was not one of the eight O 5 chaplains selected for promotion.
Thorp said the officer was later informed by someone present at the selection board that Baker had made a comment regarding leadership ability.
A summary of the Navy IG report states, “One unrestricted line board member stated that she recalled being ‘taken aback’ by a comment that RDML Baker made “concerning leadership in connection with the record of an African American officer” who worked for him.
So, why does his race even get mentioned - twice? Simple - it can be - and when it is; everyone goes silent.
According to the CNO’s memo, CDR B was subsequently selected for promotion to captain by the fiscal 2010 selection board.Mission accomplished. As always, if I am wrong - email me the details.