Triad Today

Americans don’t agree on much of anything anymore. We seem to be sharply divided along party lines on every issue. We can, however, agree on one thing: Donald Trump is a polarizing figure who succeeds where others have failed. Love him or hate him, he is a force of nature who defied pollsters, pundits, and the odds by winning the White House, and he deserves credit where credit is due.

Like all of us, Donald Trump is flawed, but his flaws are, to use a Trumpian phrase, HUGE. For example, dozens of mental health professionals have concluded that he suffers with Narcissistic Personality Disorder, a disease for which the Mayo Clinic says there are twenty major symptoms, and Trump displays all of them.  He is ill-informed about policy matters and has little patience to learn about them. He is a bully who mocks people he doesn’t like, including disabled persons, POW’s, sexual assault victims, and even members of his own cabinet. His extemporaneous remarks at public functions are often rambling, incoherent, and inappropriate. Who else but Donald Trump would begin a major address to the United Nations by bragging about himself, or announce at a press conference that Chinese leaders say he has a “very large brain”. He is also a misogynist who once bragged about being empowered to grab women by their private parts. He also displays racist tendencies, saying that many of the White Supremacists at Charlottesville were “very fine people.”, and referring to an African American supporter at one of his rallies as, “My Black.” Trump lives in his own bubble, and believes that if he says something, it must be true. But this past February, Esquire’s, Tom Nicholson reported that Trump had told 3,001 lies in his first twelve months in office. Trump is also childishly vindictive. If you heap praise on him, then you are a great person, but if you disagree with him on something, you are either fired or denigrated. OK, so those are some flaws of Trump the man. But what about Trump the President?

Like it or not, President Donald Trump has had an extraordinary record of successes, and he hasn’t even been in office for a full two years. Here are just a few of his accomplishments:

According to TownHall.com, unemployment is the lowest in 16 years, we’ve had a 31% growth in the US stock market, and, thanks to Trump’s new tax plan and push to bring back jobs from overseas, companies are putting more money into our economy. For example, Apple is now paying an additional $38 million dollars in taxes.

According to WhiteHouse.gov, President Trump reduced the US debt by $100 billion dollars in his first 100 days. The manufacturing index has hit a 33 year high. Houses that used to take 85 days to sell, are now on the market for an average of just 45 days. Illegal immigration is down by 67%, we’ve cut funding for sanctuary cities, and the White House recently announced that next year, we’ll only allow 30,000 refugees into the country, as compared with Obama’s 80,000 in his last year as President. Trump has signed 30 Executive Orders in his first 90 days, and he has enacted 28 new laws in his first 100 days.

Internationally, Trump has stopped paying on the $230 million dollar package to rebuild Syria. He has normalized relations with North Korea and averted a potential nuclear conflict. He has negotiated a new trade agreement with Canada and Mexico which ends ridiculously high tariffs on US products, and he established friendly relations with China, while vowing to reduce the gravy train trade deficit that has put $500 Billion dollars in Chinese coffers each year. He has persuaded UN member nations to pony up their fair share of dues, and he moved the American embassy in Israel to Jerusalem.

Mr. Trump has had his share of personnel problems, but he’s also managed to hire a woman to lead the CIA (a first for that agency), and he’s placed two justices on the Supreme Court, while appointing 23 federal judges and 12 appellate judges.

It’s easy to see why Republicans are energized about the mid term elections, because their fearless leader has delivered on just about every radical promise he ever made on the campaign trail. Imagine that. A President who says what he’s going to do, then does it. If he were anyone else, we’d all probably be praising Trump for his many accomplishments, but his conduct keeps getting in the way of his message, and that may factor into the mid terms as well.

 
 

Watching Mitch McConnell, Chuck Grassley, Orrin Hatch, and John Cornyn standing side-by-side at a recent press conference was like looking at the Mt. Rushmore of misogyny. The message that they and other old white senators (including our own Richard Burr and Thom Tillis) have sent to women is clear: if you are sexually assaulted then don’t bother to report it because no one will believe you. If you DO report the assault you better do so immediately or else you are either lying, or conspiring with the Clintons. These old white men feel so entitled, are so drunk on power, and are so out of touch with reality, that they believe men who are accused of sexual assault are the real victims. Unfortunately, their warped view of justice is buoyed by a number of studies that point to the fact that some women do, in fact, lie about being raped and sexually assaulted.

But Dr. Christine Blasey Ford had no reason to lie about being sexually assaulted by Brett Kavanaugh. Neither did Deborah Ramirez. Moreover, it is absurd for old white male senators to say that Ford is part of some left-wing conspiracy to smear Kavanaugh. After all, there is written proof that she told her therapist and husband of her attack back in 2012, a full six years before Kavanaugh was even nominated for the Supreme Court. And yet, some old white senators say that poor Dr. Ford is just mistaken, while others argue that since she didn’t go to the police, then the attack never happened. Most disturbing of all, is that according to a recent NPR poll, 54% of Republicans say they would have supported Kavanaugh even if he DID sexually assault Dr. Ford.

Last week, in order to placate a few swing votes in the Senate, McConnell agreed to let the FBI investigate all allegations against Kavanaugh. But the so-called investigation was so restrictive and so rushed, that dozens of key witnesses were never interviewed, including twenty people identified by Deborah Ramirez, who could speak to Kavanaugh’s behavior on the night that he exposed his private parts to her, and rubbed them against her face. In all, only nine people were interviewed by the FBI, and all but two of them were old drinking buddies of Kavanaugh. According to the FBI, the Bureau has 13,412 special agents on staff, and yet there was only enough time to interview seven frat boys, one victim, and one friend of a victim.

Old white male senators say the FBI report proves that Brett Kavanaugh is innocent, and that Ford and Ramirez were just trying to ruin the reputation of a good man, a man who came unhinged during his confirmation hearing. Call me crazy, but if I’m interviewing someone for a job, and he screams at me, accuses me of conspiracy, cries at the drop of the hat, lies about his drinking problem, and lies about the sex games he and his buddies perpetrated on girls, I’m not going to hire that person. Of course, it’s no accident that the eleven Republicans on the Judiciary committee are all old white, entitled men, so it’s not surprising that they would stand behind another white, entitled man.

Clearly the dynamic must change in the Senate and elsewhere, so that women and minorities in this country don’t continue to be judged by a bunch of old white men. I’m an Old White Man, and I don’t know what’s best for women and minorities. I don’t even know what’s best for me most of the time. I’m an Old White Man, and I don’t know what it’s like to be sexually assaulted. I’m an Old White Man, and I don’t know how it feels to testify in front of a bunch of people who don’t look like me. What I do know is that we need more women and minorities in Congress and serving as judges on the local, state, and federal levels. But that’s only going to happen if you vote for change in the upcoming elections. If you don’t vote, then don’t complain that everybody in power looks like me.

 
 

Fraternities (aka Greek Letter Organizations) have been around in America for more than two centuries. They were originally established as secret societies within a college or university, but secrets are hard to keep once a police report is filed. That’s what happened last month when two sexual assaults were alleged to have happened at the Delta Kappa Epsilon house on Polo Road in Winston-Salem. Wake Forest University acted quickly in temporarily suspending DKE from engaging in any fraternity activities. It was the frat’s second suspension in two years, the first having come after charges of hosting unregulated parties.

It should also be noted that other DKE chapters around the country are no strangers to disciplinary action. In 2011, for example, Yale instituted a temporary ban on DKE after its members went around chanting, “No means yes. Yes means anal on grounds.” Those chants came as no surprise to Yale Daily News reporters Hailey Fuchs and Britton O’Daly, who wrote that DKE was “an organization notorious for disrespecting women.”

Reporting on fraternities in general, the Guardian’s Jessica Valenti wrote that men who join fraternities are three times more likely to commit rape. In that same article, Valenti noted that in 2014, a Georgia Tech frat brother distributed an email guide entitled, “Luring Your Rapebait.”

Valenti also reported that while she was a student at Tulane, fraternities were “hotbeds for all sorts of risks beyond sexual assault…including alcoholism and dangerous hazing incidents.” That’s something Deborah Tipton knows all too well. In March of 2012, her son Robert, then a junior at High Point University and a member of Delta Sigma Phi fraternity, died from what police said was a drug overdose. But Ms.Tipton told the Greensboro News & Record that the autopsy report showed that Robert had, “purple bruises on his face, around his neck, and on his legs and buttocks, as well as a jagged gash on his head.” Tipton is convinced that her son’s death was frat-related, so she tried to sue the national fraternity and HPU, but a judge ruled that the university “did not have a duty to protect Robert.”

I suppose Penn State didn’t have a duty to protect Timothy Piazza either. He died after his Beta Theta Pi brothers made him drink 18 alcoholic beverages in less than 90 minutes. Or how about LSU student Maxwell Gruver. He died after his Phi Delta Theta buddies forced him to drink 12 “pulls” of 190 proof liquor. Andrew Coffey and Matthew Ellis met similar fates during frat parties at Florida State and Texas State University respectively. All four deaths occurred last year.

At one time, Greek fraternities might have sought to simply provide their members with a private haven for collegial fun, but increasingly, many fraternities are becoming better known for sexual assaults, binge drinking, and dangerous hazing. With all due respect to the many fine institutions of higher learning who have dealt with fraternity problems by handing down temporary suspensions, they should grow a spine, and follow the lead of Oberlin College, Brandeis University, Guilford College and others whose policy is “No fraternities allowed. Period.” A permanent ban on Greek Letter Organizations across the board will save lives and promote equality among all students, and that’s no secret.

 
 

The on-going controversy surrounding Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh and Christine Blasey Ford has brought to the fore a number of issues. For starters it’s about alleged sexual misconduct, and when it’s appropriate for a victim to come forward. It’s about alcoholism and the effects that drinking can have on one’s behavior and memory. It’s about politics, as GOP senators tried to rush through Kavanaugh’s appointment, just in case the Democrats should take over both chambers after November. It’s about protecting the President who, with Kavanaugh on the high court, would likely never have to answer a subpoena, or be indicted for anything. It’s about keeping women like Professor Ford in their place, the same way an all-white male committee did with Anita Hill in 1991. It’s about women’s rights because Kavanaugh’s appointment to the Supreme Court could spell doom for Roe v. Wade. It’s also about the rise of #MeToo, and how that movement tends to automatically believe alleged female victims even absent of any proof. But more than anything, it’s a story about entitlement. While the media was quick to harken back to Anita Hill for a comparative narrative, they should have been looking at why Ford allegedly found herself at the mercy of Kavanaugh to begin with.

Just as Ted Kennedy felt entitled to lie about leaving Mary Jo Kopechne to die in a stream, and Bill Clinton felt entitled to lie about his relationship with Monica Lewinski, 17-year-old Brett Kavanaugh might have felt entitled when he allegedly threw 15-year-old Christine Blasey onto a bed, held her down, attempted to undress her, and nearly suffocated her as she tried to scream for help. In his book, “Wasted: Tales of a GenX Drunk”, Mark Judge (who was a witness to the Ford incident, but says he can’t recall it), writes that Georgetown Prep was a hotbed of drunken parties. In fact, in his account of those prep school days, Judge wrote of a classmate named “Bart O’Cavanaugh”, who often got drunk and once threw up in a friend’s car. So perhaps Brett Kavanaugh felt entitled to lie about his involvement with Blasey Ford 36 years ago. After all, it was Kavanaugh who, in 2015, told a group of students, “What happens at Georgetown Prep stays at Georgetown Prep, and that’s a good thing for all of us.”

But even if Kavanaugh did what Ford alleges, there are apologists who say that no one should be judged for what he did as a teenager. I disagree for the simple reason that what we do as a teen informs who we become as an adult, and that brings me back to entitlement. Some men do whatever they want, because they don’t have to be held accountable. That’s why if you’re looking for a parallel storyline to the Kavanaugh/Ford saga, don’t focus on Anita Hill. Just look at Mitt Romney.

As a high school senior Mitt had a sense of disdain for homosexuals and non-conformists, so much so that one night he and four of his preppy buddies spotted a gay student with long hair and Mitt became enraged, saying, “He can’t look like that.” Mitt and his gang proceeded to grab the gay boy, hold him down, and shave off his hair. When this story surfaced during the 2012 presidential campaign, Romney’s buddies came forward and apologized for the assault, while Mitt who led the attack, had his spokesperson issue a statement, which said, “Governor Romney has no memory of participating in this incident.” As with the Kavanaugh/Ford incident, many people chalked up Romney’s assault as a youthful indiscretion. I’m sorry, but cutting off a gay boy’s hair or holding a teenage girl against her will, are not youthful indiscretions. One is a hate crime, and the other is kidnapping.

If we learn nothing else from the Kavanaugh/Ford saga, it should be that character matters, and, going forward, we should be assured that the character of both accuser and accused is fully vetted before we appoint or reject someone for high office. The American people are entitled to no less.

 
 

I think it’s safe to say that Alan Alda is the only thespian to ever be sponsored by a school of nanoscience. Surely whoever printed the ad for Alda’s upcoming lecture at UNCG must have made a mistake. After all, aren’t acting and science two incompatible cultures? Not in Alan Alda’s universe. In fact, his success in the former led to notoriety in the latter, sort of. As a boy, Alan spent much of his time watching from the wings as his father performed on stage, so acting was in Alan’s genes. But he also had an interest in science at an early age, as I discovered during a conversation we had recently.

 

---

JL: When did you first acquire an interest in science?

AA: I was always curious about everything. When I was six years old I had a card table that I would do experiments on, like mixing my mother’s face powder with toothpaste, and trying to see if I could get it to blow up (laughs). I was also an amateur inventor at age ten.

JL: Tell me about one of your childhood inventions.

AA: I invented a Lazy Susan for the refrigerator so you wouldn’t have to reach way back inside to get the catsup. You could just swing the turntable around and get it. Funny thing, two years later a company actually put out a refrigerator with a Lazy Susan in it, but a year after that, they stopped making it, I presume because there were bottles of catsup flying out of the refrigerator (laughs).

---

 

Though he never did invent any more kitchen aids, Alda would eventually return to the world of science after a long and distinguished career in films and television, which began with a cameo on The Phil Silvers Show in 1958. Fourteen years later he became famous for another military comedy, playing Capt. Hawkeye Pierce in M*A*S*H, which ran from 1972 to 1983.

 

---

AA: I’m proud of what we did, but I didn’t want to keep doing the same thing over and over again. I was pretty much the main reason for the series coming to an end because we were still at the top, but there were signs that we were running out of steam.

---

 

Following M*A*S*H, Alda’s film career flourished (The Four Seasons, Crimes & Misdemeanors, et al), and his face was one of the most recognized in America. Not surprisingly, in 1993 the producers of Scientific American Frontiers asked him to host their new series on PBS.

 

---

JL: Did PBS come to you because you were so recognizable, or because they knew you had an interest in science?

AA: They came to me because I played a doctor on TV. They didn’t know I was interested in science, so much so, that I told them I just don’t want to say ‘Hello’, and then read a narration off camera. I would only do it if I could spend a day with the scientists, talking to them on camera. I thought I would learn a lot and I did. It was like eleven years of graduate school.

---

 

In doing the PBS series, Alda pioneered a new role for TV hosts by participating in experiments, and, at the same time, helping scientists to communicate their work to viewers on a more human level. That approach, in turn, led Alan to a career as a communications guru for scientists and medical professionals. In fact, his Center for Communicating Science, at Stony Brook University in New York, has helped over 12,000 doctors and scientists improve their communications skills.

 

---

JL: Give me an example of how you’ve helped medical doctors.

AA: We have helped them relate to their patients in a much more personal way, to develop empathy and to act on it. There was a study done that showed patients who thought of their doctor as empathic were 19% more likely to follow their doctor’s orders.

---

 

Alan knows something about following doctor’s orders. As a child he was stricken with polio, and three years ago, he was diagnosed with Parkinson’s.

 

---

JL: How did the pain of the polio treatments inform who you became?

AA: I don’t know if it stems from that or not, but I do have a tendency to keep plugging on in spite of all the evidence that I should stop.

JL: And with the Parkinson’s, it seems like you’re plugging along quite well, even taking boxing lessons.

AA: Same thing. I don’t regard it as a death sentence. I want people to be aware of the symptoms, get diagnosed, and then get to work on it early. If you start a regimen of exercise, that can hold off the symptoms for years, or maybe forever.

---

 

At 82 years young, Alda probably has another twenty years left to communicate and experiment, and maybe even figure out how to finally make toothpaste explode.

Alan Alda will speak about the art and science of communicating at the UNCG Auditorium on Friday, Sep. 21 at 8pm. Following the lecture he will sign copies of his latest book, If I Understood You, Would I Have This Look on My Face?. Tickets are still available by calling (336) 272-0160.

 
 

Once upon a time, a group of women who had lost their fathers and husbands to war, raised enough money to erect a statue in honor of their fallen loved ones. That group was the Daughters of the Confederacy, and, over time, their statue of a rifle-bearing soldier affectionately became known as “Silent Sam”. Sam was a different kind of Confederate memorial. His sole purpose was to honor members of the UNC family who had been killed in a not so Civil War. Sam was not a lionized General, or a cruel slave master. He was a benign figure who even became part of a humorous legend around the Chapel Hill campus. As the joke went, if a virgin ever walked past Sam, he would fire his rifle (he never had to). Humor aside, though, the statue was to have been a quiet reminder of lives cut short. But Sam’s 1913 dedication was marred by the vile remarks of Julian Carr, a Confederate veteran who, in his speech, bragged about flogging a female negro slave. The text of Carr’s shameful remarks was re-discovered in 2009, and, ever since then, Silent Sam went from being a well-intentioned memorial, to a hated symbol of white supremacy.

And so, as an increasing number of Confederate statues have been defaced or removed this year, it was just a matter of time before Silent Sam would be targeted by protestors. That time arrived on Monday, August 20, when a gang of UNC students toppled Sam from his perch. YouTube videos of the angry mob put me in mind of Iraqi citizens who toppled a statue of Saddam Hussein in 2003, or Parisians who took to the streets and defaced portraits of Hitler after WWII.

One can argue that the 5% of American Southerners who owned slaves were as bad as Hitler and Saddam, and that beatings and lynchings were no less shameful than firing squads and gas chambers. But the privileged young people who toppled Silent Sam last month were not celebrating the death of a recently deposed tyrant. There was no sense of immediacy to their actions, nor would their destructive behavior end racism. If anything, their violent act only gave rise to violent reactions.

Last week, the UNC Board gave Carolina’s Chancellor until November to come up with a resolution regarding the disposition of Silent Sam, and I hope that resolution will include putting Sam back where he was, and erecting an additional statue nearby that honors the struggles and achievements of African Americans. Of course, regardless of what UNC decides, we should all recognize that statues are only symbols, and every moment we spend arguing about them is time we could be spending on the fight to repeal racist policies designed to disenfranchise minorities. In other words, getting rid of Silent Sam won’t help us get rid of gerrymandering.

Last month’s UNC mob broke the law. Even worse, they failed to understand that removing history doesn’t change history. Instead, it just delays the lessons we must learn, and the challenges we must face in order to affect real change. The fact is that Silent Sam has a lot to tell us, if we’ll just listen.

 
 

Political pundits keep telling us that there will be a blue wave in November, and that Democrats will take control of the House of Representatives. Given Donald Trump’s erratic behavior, vitriolic tweets, and questionable policy decisions (think trade war with Canada), it is quite possible that the upcoming mid terms will be a referendum on Trump himself. But for Trump haters, the big prize isn’t taking back the House in 2018, rather, it’s taking back the White House in 2020. To do that, Democrats must put up a strong candidate who can relate to us common folk, and assure us that our jobs are secure, our healthcare premiums are low, and our prescription medicines won’t bankrupt us.

Democrats must also learn how to appeal to moderate and conservative voters of all races who are easily angered by divisive social policies and obtrusive social initiatives. For example, an African American professor in California once told me that after Obama and Biden came out in favor of gay marriage, that Black church-goers became skeptical of Democratic candidates, and stayed home in droves on election day. Today, another social issue is catching fire, and Democrats have their hands squarely in the flame. The controversy involves transgender rights in public schools.

Several weeks ago, Judge Marco Hernandez ordered that public schools in Oregon must allow a boy who identifies as a girl, to share locker room, bathroom, and shower facilities with biological girls. Hernandez also told angry parents that his ruling does not violate the privacy rights of their daughters, and that if they didn’t like the idea of boys and girls showering together, they could put their kids in private school. I hate to name call, but Hernandez is an idiot. Even worse, he’s an arrogant, unfeeling idiot who doesn’t understand the startling impact his words are having on thousands of parents. First of all, no parent wants their 15 year old daughter undressing in front of, or showering with a 15 year old boy, even if he thinks he’s a girl. Second, only a small percentage of parents have the means to send their kids to private school.

Let’s be clear. None of the major Transgender rights court cases that have taken place over the past few years have focused on kids who have already gone through gender re-assignment surgeries. Instead these cases have been driven by a handful of misguided and misinformed parents who have been pushing their young children into believing that they should identify with the opposite gender, in some instances, as early as age 4. Additionally, their cause has been championed by a handful of ultra liberal judges like Hernandez, who have determined that it’s Ok for a boy with male equipment to shower with a girl who has female equipment.

And if you think parents are disgruntled in Oregon, just pay a visit to Oklahoma, where, last week, one school district had to shut down for two days because of violent threats being made against a 12 year old boy who thinks he’s a girl. The “boy” has been using the girl’s bathroom and parents with daughters have lit up social media with vile comments and threats. One parent had a twitter meltdown, and even encouraged other parents to take a sharp knife to the boy, and turn him into a girl.

Parents of all ages and races are angry, confused, and frightened about this gender-neutral, co-ed trend, and that brings me back to the 2020 election. The other day I was approached by an African American woman who happens to be the single Mom of a teenage daughter. She told me in no uncertain terms that even if Donald Trump says he is a racist, she would vote to re-elect him if his Democratic opponent thought it was OK for a teenage boy who thinks he’s a girl, to shower with her daughter. Democrats need to wake up and realize that their base is comprised of hard-working Moms and Dads who want a decent wage, affordable healthcare, and, above all, they want to protect their children. If the Democratic party doesn’t get a handle on the Transgender issue facing our public schools, then Donald Trump won’t just win in 2020, he’ll win in a landslide.

 
 

Teenagers have always displayed risky behavior. In the 1950’s they did stupid things in and on their cars. They stood on the hood, they mooned other cars, and sometimes they engaged in make-shift drag races. By the end of the decade, cramming into phone booths was all the rage on college campuses, and during the free love 1960’s, some teens felt empowered to smoke weed and disrobe at rock concerts. In the 1970’s and ’80’s, self-administered body piercings became a sign of rebellion, and, according to a Harvard University study, in the early 1990’s binge drinking became the nation’s number one health problem among college students. Clearly, these kinds of activities presented a risk to health and safety, but for sheer stupidity, none can hold a candle to some of the things kids have been doing in recent years.

According to ListCrown.com, some of today’s more popular stunts include drinking a cocktail made of hand sanitizer and mouthwash. Another activity involves choking your partner until he or she blacks out. Then there’s the Cinnamon Challenge, where kids swallow large quantities of dry cinnamon powder. Sounds harmless, but according to GreatSchools.org, the National Institutes of Health says the Cinnamon Challenge can result in collapsed lungs. Another modern day teen pastime is the Tide Pod Challenge, where stupid kids put the detergent-filled pods in their mouth, then chew them up. This despite the fact that, according to the American Association of Poison Control Centers, ingesting Tide Pods can cause chemical burns, and induce seizures and coma.

And that brings me to the Kiki Challenge which went viral earlier this year. The Kiki Challenge requires the participant to jump out of a moving car, dance to the strains of Drake’s “In My Feelings”, then jump back into the moving car. On July 23, 18-year-old Anna Worden of Bettendorf Iowa, took the Kiki Challenge, and ended up in hospital with a fractured skull, blood clots in the ear, and bleeding in the brain. “I thought it would be fun,” she told a TV news reporter. That same week, a 19-year-old boy in Alabama took the Kiki challenge and was also seriously injured.

These and other dangerous activities have been on the rise over the past decade. For example, CBSNews.com reports that in 2013, an 18-year-old Georgia boy took a dare and drowned after he was tied to a shopping cart, then pushed into a lake. That same year a 19-year-old boy caused a multi-car accident when he fainted from holding his breath while driving through a tunnel in Portland, Oregon. There are a number of theories as to why such dangerously stupid behavior is so rampant. One is that older teens have been inspired by watching re-runs of MTV’s “Jack Ass” Another theory is that kids just want to be seen by millions of people on Youtube. But Dr. Katherine Ramsland, of DeSales University, believes it is more related to peer pressure. She told Psychology Today, “They [teens] look for novelty and are easily influenced by the latest trends, and by their need to belong to the in-group. They use dares to build their self-esteem.”

Clearly teen stunts have become decidedly and deliberately more dangerous than ever before. At the same time, 18- and 19-year-olds want to be treated like adults, but adults don’t eat detergent or jump out of moving cars. Instead, we adults do more mature things, like smoke cigarettes, over-eat, drive drunk, and get addicted to opioids. Come to think of it, I guess there’s no age restriction on stupidity.

 
 

Call it political correctness. Call it co-ed scouting, or a gender-blind experiment. Call it whatever you like, but Boy Scouts of America is now accepting girls into its ranks, and for the local Old North State Council, that means an opportunity to better serve families.

As a 64-year-old former cub scout, I was skeptical of BSA’s new initiative, which now allows girls from kindergarten to grade 5 to join gender-specific cub dens, while mixing with boys for family activities (older girls will join BSA in February). So I asked Old North State Council CEO Ed Martin to bring me up to speed on how the new inclusive arrangement will work.

 

---

Jim: Why should girls join BSA if a Girl Scout Council is accessible to them?

Ed: For many years, families with sons and daughters have been asking the Boy Scouts of America to provide one program where the entire family can participate together. Families today are busier and more diverse than ever. Many do not have the time nor capacity to take one child to one program location, and another child to another location. Also, the ability for boys and girls to participate in one program location is of great benefit to single-parent families.

Jim: What specific activities can a girl participate in through Old North State Council that she can’t participate in with Girl Scouts?

Ed: Both BSA and GSA are fine organizations that offer unique benefits to youth and families. However, there are many different program experiences offered within each organization. For example, the BSA has offered programs for young men and women ages 14-21 years since 1971 in Career Development (Career Exploring), and since 1988 in high adventure (Venturing). Some of the young ladies in these programs previously participated in the Girl Scouts and then determined that the BSA program was a better fit for their interests. Also, many young women have served on summer camp staff at Old North State Council properties for many years, and then decided to participate in Career Exploring or Venturing.

---

 

Last year when BSA announced its plan to recruit girls, Girl Scouts Carolinas Peaks to Piedmont CEO Lane Cook responded by talking about the benefits of a single-sex environment, telling me, “I hope girls will continue to choose Girl Scouts because we are the girl experts, and are dedicated to ensuring that girls are able to take advantage of a program tailored specifically to their unique developmental needs, not one tailored for boys and adapted for girls. Girls thrive in an all-girl, girl-led environment such as Girl Scouts, where they can take center stage, and where the constant message is that nothing can stand in their way. In Girl Scouts, girls can try new things, take risks, and take on challenging roles. Our girls follow their passions without worrying about what their male peers may think about them. Girls succeed in positions that otherwise might go to their male counterparts in a co-ed environment.”

For his part, Ed Martin doesn’t see BSA and GSA as competitors, but rather as co-existing organizations that simply want to serve the needs of children.

“We realize there will be some young women and families that participate in BSA programs and then determine the Girl Scouts is a better fit for their interests or needs. We encourage families to visit us, the Girl Scouts, or any other youth development program that will best meet their interests or needs. The Old North State Council is proud to support all families that choose to join local BSA programs, and help make the dreams and desires they have for their children a reality,” said Martin.

Nationwide, over 3,000 girls have already signed up for BSA’s Cub Scout program, including 7-year-old Ruthie Bunthoff, who, last week, became Old North State’s first recruit. She comes from a long line of scouts, starting with her grandfather who was an Eagle Scout. Her mother Kathryn was also a scout, as are her male siblings. In an interview with the Greensboro News & Record, Ruthie said, “I want to be just like my brothers.”

Something tells me that Miss Bunthoff is going to make a great scout, and grow into a fine young woman. And I wouldn’t be surprised if someday, some little boy says, “I want to be just like Ruthie.”
 
 

Whether you like Donald Trump or not, you have to admit that the man loves to brag. He bragged about having the biggest electoral college victory (it wasn’t). He bragged about having a larger inauguration crowd than Barack Obama (it wasn’t). He bragged about being the toughest president on Russia (sorry, but that honor goes to Ronald Reagan). And, earlier this month he bragged about being the most popular president in history, even more so than honest Abe Lincoln. And while most of Trump’s boasts are about himself, he has, on occasion, directed them at other people.

Early into his presidency, Trump bragged that he had “the best people” working in his administration. He also bragged that his cabinet secretaries had the highest IQ of any presidential cabinet in history. I would have to argue that George Washington’s pick for Secretary of State is proof that Trump’s boast is unfounded, after all, Thomas Jefferson is widely regarded as one of our most brilliant political leaders. In fact, while speaking to a group of Nobel Prize winners in 1962, JFK remarked, “This is the most extraordinary collection of human knowledge that has ever been gathered together at the White House, with the possible exception of when Thomas Jefferson dined alone.”

So, is it true that Trump hires “the best people”? Here’s a run-down on a few of his appointees.

Michael Flynn: (National Security Adviser), was fired after he lied to Vice President Pence (and others) about his meetings with Russian officials during the transition. Flynn has since pleaded guilty to making false statements to the FBI.

Rob Porter: (White House Staff Secretary), was fired after both of his ex-wives publicly accused him of physical abuse. President Trump initially defended Porter based on information given him by his communications director Hope Hicks.

Hope Hicks,: (White House Director of Communications), whose previous experience consisted of promoting Ivanka’s clothing line, was perhaps Trump’s most trusted adviser. She was always by his side, often slipped him ad lib notes, and wrote some official statements for him to read, including one that supported Rob Porter. Hicks resigned after it was revealed that she was in a romantic relationship with Porter.

Kelly Sadler: (White House Aide), was fired for making fun of Senator John McCain’s terminal cancer, saying, “He’s going to die anyway.”

Dr. Ronny Jackson: (White House Physician), once told the press that Trump passed a psychological test with flying colors, and that he was the healthiest president in history. It was later learned that Trump wrote portions of his own medical report. Trump nominated Dr. Jackson to head the V.A., but his name was withdrawn when charges surfaced that Jackson had been intoxicated on duty, and had over-prescribed meds to White House staff.

Anthony Scaramucci: (White House Director of Communications) was fired after less than ten days on the job because he had publicly excoriated members of the White House staff in an expletive-filled interview with The New Yorker.

Sean Spicer: (White House Press Secretary) resigned six months into Trump’s presidency after taking constant heat for making misstatements to the White House press corps.

Scott Pruitt: (EPA Secretary) resigned just a month ago after a series of bizarre incidents, ranging from ordering his staff to go to Trump Tower and get him a mattress, to purchasing a $43,000 sound-proof security booth for his office, and two desks that cost a total of $70,000.

Rick Perry: (Secretary of Energy) is still on the job, but we’re not sure he knows what that job entails. Perry, who during a presidential debate said there were three agencies he wanted to abolish, but he could only remember two of them. The one he forgot was the Department of Energy. After being nominated to Trump’s cabinet, Perry admitted to the press that he wasn’t aware that DOE was in charge of our nuclear arsenal.

Dr. Ben Carson: (Secretary of Housing) is famous for his off-the-wall statements. He said being gay is a choice because prisoners who are raped come out gay. He also said that Jews could have prevented the Holocaust if they had guns. He must be qualified, though, because hanging in his home is a portrait of himself in which he is seated next to Jesus.

Tom Price: (Secretary of Health & Human Services) resigned following public disclosure that he had expended over one million dollars in DHHS funds for personal travel.

Betsy DeVos: (Secretary of Education) has remained in her job despite not having a grasp on the issues confronting public education. During her confirmation hearings, she was unable to answer a series of questions about such things as accountability, and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. My favorite DeVos response is when she said we need guns in schools to protect students from bears.

Abraham Lincoln’s cabinet was comprised of a so-called “Team of Rivals”. These were brilliant men who had often criticized and disagreed with the President, but whose counsel proved invaluable during the most perilous time in our nation’s history. Donald Trump, on the other hand, has assembled a revolving-door team of misfits. Even worse, the President doesn’t seem to heed the advice of the few team members he has who are highly qualified to serve in their capacities. Every president deserves to be surrounded by the best people, but just saying they are the best, doesn’t make them so.

 
 

In May of this year, comedian Roseanne Barr tweeted some racist remarks in a late-night rant, which she later blamed on having taken Ambien. (Fact check: Ambien makes you sleepy, not racist.) Regardless of her intent or her lame excuse, Roseanne’s tweet was inappropriate, and it set social media ablaze, with calls for ABC to fire their biggest star. Within hours, the network had sent Ms. Barr and her hit TV show packing.

Increasingly today, people write and do stupid things on Twitter, Facebook and Youtube, and when they do, there are often severe consequences, not just for big celebrities, but for us regular folk as well. Take the federal contract worker who gave President Trump the middle finger as his motorcade was passing by. She posted her dirty digit antic on Facebook, and was fired shortly thereafter. Or how about the North Carolina waitress who was recently fired for going on Facebook and calling out two customers by name for stiffing her on the tip. Then there was the Mecklenburg County teacher who tweeted to her friends how much she hated having to work in, “the most ghetto school in Charlotte.”(source: Business Insider) That teacher no longer complains about the school she works at because she no longer works at any school. Meanwhile, Lydia Price, a reporter for PEOPLE.com, recalls a man who went on a Facebook rant about immigrants, only to learn that the owner of the company for which he worked, was a recent immigrant. Not surprisingly the ranting man was fired. And, Rolling Stone magazine tells of a daycare worker in Newport News who was fired for going on social media and making fun of the kids in her care.

Whether it’s a mega-star like Roseanne, or a relatively unknown daycare worker, it is becoming more and more common for these kinds of insensitive people to lose their jobs because of social media. In fact, according to CareerBuilder.com, nearly 20% of employers say they have fired people for something they posted on social media. Clearly, these people have no one to blame but themselves, but there are cases where someone is fired by social media for something that someone else posted. Case in point, Adam Bloom, a caucasian executive with packaging company Sonoco, who also served as chairman of the Glenridge Neighborhood community swimming pool in Clemmons. As chairman, one of Bloom’s responsibilities was to make sure that only residents had access to the pool. Over the July 4 holiday, a white pool-goer reportedly asked Bloom to check on the residency status of Jasmine Abhulimen, an African-American woman who had been relaxing by the pool with her child. Bloom approached Ms. Abhulimen, who then began recording their verbal exchange. At some point, police were called, and the responding officer calmly resolved the situation. Among other things, the four-minute video reveals that Ms. Abhulimen was the only person singled out by Bloom that day, even though she was a resident of Glenridge and had a key card that had allowed her access to the pool in the first place. We also hear Jasmine asking Bloom to apologize for racially profiling her, but he refused. According to the Winston-Salem Journal’s Sarah Newell, the video went viral with approximately 5 million page views, and Sonoco was inundated with demands for Bloom to be fired. The social media crowd got what they wanted, and within hours, Bloom no longer had a job at Sonoco.

Clearly, mistakes were made at the Glenridge pool that day. For one thing, there was no sign-in protocol being used. For another, when Bloom was asked to check on Ms. Abhulimen’s residency, he could have gone around the pool and asked for an ID from everyone. Finally, he refused to apologize for embarrassing Ms. Abhulimen. Still, two questions remain. Is it fair for someone to lose his job because he showed poor judgement in handling an incident that occurred away from his workplace? And, should social media mobs act as judge, jury and executioner in deciding the fate of someone based on a short video?

I watched the four-minute video several times, and I didn’t like how Ms. Abhulimen was singled out. I’m also not sure what was in Mr. Bloom’s heart, or if he harbored any ill will toward Ms. Abhulimen. What I am sure of, is that a social media mob can’t know those things either. No doubt video postings can serve a valuable purpose when examined in the proper setting, but too often they only serve to incite. Bottom line? Before we help to take away someone’s means of support, he deserves a fair hearing, not just a social viewing.