Triad Today

We journalists are naturally drawn to superlatives. Something is either “the first of its kind”, or it’s “the most comprehensive”, or it’s “the largest in the area”. It’s not surprising, then, that last year’s Las Vegas concert massacre was known as “the bloodiest mass shooting in our history”, and last week’s attack on Pittsburgh’s Tree of Life Synagogue was reported as, “the worst massacre of Jews on American soil.” No doubt those superlatives apply because they give us perspective, but sometimes we get so caught up in the horrors of large tragedies, that we lose sight of the smaller ones that seem to happen every week.

Last week two teenage boys got into a heated argument in a hallway at Butler High School in Matthews. Reportedly one boy had been bullying the other, but it isn’t yet known which student did the alleged bullying. Regardless, as 16-year-old Bobby McKeithen walked away from 16-year-old Jatwan Cuffe, young Mr. Cuffe shot McKeithen in the back, and killed him. Cuffe then admitted his crime and surrendered peacefully. Ironically, that same day, the US Agency on Healthcare Research and Quality, released a report on gun injuries involving children and teens. It couldn’t have been more timely.

According to the report, gun injuries sent 75,000 teenagers to hospital emergency rooms over the past nine years, and 6% of them died. But those numbers are deceiving. Authors of the AHRQ study admit that their data does not include gun victims who never made it to the hospital. Meanwhile the Bureau of Justice Assistance reports that 64% of juvenile arrests involve violent felonies, and a study by the US States Attorneys says that the number of juveniles under 18 arrested for murder is on the rise. In fact, nearly 18% of all serious violent crimes are committed by juveniles, and homicide arrests of kids ages 15 and over, is up by 24%.

Many of us in the media have advocated for a ban on assault weapons, but most gun-related injuries and deaths among children come from the use of handguns, so a ban on rifles won’t abate our current crisis. The gun problem is one of access and opportunity, so that raises the question, “How do we put a stop to school shootings?”

Let’s suppose that tomorrow the federal government banned the sale and manufacture of all guns. Would that stop kids from shooting kids at school? No, because they would still have access to guns that are already in circulation. According to a 2015 report by the Washington Post’s Christopher Ingraham, as of 2013, there were 357 million civilian firearms in circulation. That means there are 40 million more guns in America than there are people.

Don’t get me wrong. We still need to ban assault weapons, and restrict the sale of handguns and shotguns by requiring comprehensive background checks, and increasing the wait time between application and purchase. Local sheriff’s departments must be able to interface with FBI and ATF databases, and vice versa, so that local trouble makers, domestic abusers, patients treated for mental illness, and people who have been charged with, but not convicted of a violent crime, will be red-flagged by gun shop owners. We also need to put restrictions on the sale of ammunition because a gun without bullets is useless. But, again, as it stands now, a kid can still get his hands on a loaded gun by borrowing or stealing one. Such was the case with Jatwan Cuffe.

So how to do we keep guns out of schools? Very simple. Install metal detectors and have controlled entrances and exits. Local school officials will tell you that there’s no budget for installing a metal detector in every school, and that it’s impossible to have locked doors on school buildings. As for the latter, Joe Clark, the legendary New Jersey school principal proved that locked doors are feasible. As for the former, metal detectors are reliable, and yes, they are costly, but we can always find money for priorities. We hold referendums to pay for building upgrades, and we apply for grants to buy computers, so why not invest in security measures? It’s time for local, state, and federal officials to get serious about school safety, and that doesn’t mean just funding metal detectors. It also means hiring additional security personnel to monitor those detectors, and control who comes and goes through the main entrance throughout the day.

The NRA might have our elected officials hog-tied from banning certain types of weapons, but even the NRA can’t oppose legislation that would increase school security. New science labs, more computers, and re-modeled bathrooms are important, but they’re of no use if students don’t feel safe using them.

 
 

The last mid-term election we had was in 2014, and in that year, only 46% of registered North Carolinians turned out to vote, as compared to the 2016 election, when 67% of voters showed up at the polls. This year, Democratic candidates running in heavily Republican districts are hoping that normally apathetic voters will be energized by the #MeToo movement, or by a Congress that is controlled largely by white, misogynistic men, or by right-wing lawmakers in Raleigh, or by President Trump’s own disturbing behavior, and that they will show up at the polls in record numbers on November 6. Republicans, meanwhile, are hoping to hold on to power at the local, state, and federal levels. Given the space constraints of a newspaper column, I’m going to limit my focus to three congressional races, two state senate races, and two sheriff’s races. I’ll begin with the candidates for sheriff in Guilford and Forsyth counties.

I’ve never met Danny Rogers and know very little about him, except that he has ten years of law enforcement experience, and has allegedly been embroiled in some financial and legal problems. What I do know is that BJ Barnes has been an outstanding sheriff in Guilford County for the past 24 years, and beyond that I just like the man. I disagree with 80% of his conservative Republican politics, but I am a 100% fan of his ethics and honesty. A former Marine, BJ Barnes is both tough and amiable, and he deserves another term as sheriff.

I have similar feelings about the sheriff’s race in Forsyth where Democrat Bobby Kimbrough is challenging Republican incumbent Bill Schatzman. Kimbrough appears to be a serious man who, as he told the Kernersville News, believes that “leadership saves lives.” Schatzman, a former FBI agent, has served as sheriff for 16 years, and during that time he’s been accessible to citizens and has tackled the county’s drug problem head-on. As with my pick in Guilford, I support Bill because I respect the job he has done.

All 50 of our state senate seats are up for grabs on Tuesday, and Democrats must pick up an additional six of those seats in order to break the GOP stranglehold over Governor Cooper’s veto power. I’m hoping that two of those net gains will come in the 27^th and 30^th Districts. Republican incumbent Phil Berger of Rockingham’s 30^th District is the big dog in Raleigh. Since becoming Senate President Pro-Tem, Berger’s handprint has been on every major piece of legislation, and on every major issue, from voter suppression to transgender rights. Who but Phil Berger could stall and frustrate the courts by continuing to offer re-drawn districts that are gerrymandered for either race or party. Who but Phil Berger could pull an end run around the Supremes by crafting Voter ID into a Constitutional Amendment after the court had rejected it as a bill. Berger has to go, and perhaps Jen Mangrum is the person to show him the door. Mangrum is a college professor at UNCG [full disclosure: I am a UNCG grad and member of the Alumni board], so education and workforce development are important issues to her, as is accessible, affordable healthcare. Berger is a solid favorite thanks to gerrymandering, but if Jen can inspire large numbers of women and young people to turn out, then she might upset the incumbent.

While Berger is drunk on power (that’s a figure of speech), those who do his bidding can be just as dangerous. One prominent politician described 27^th District Republican Trudy Wade as someone who,”carries water for Berger”. In return Phil gives Trudy the latitude to introduce some really wacky, partisan legislation. Her attempt to re-align the structure of Greensboro City Council was described by former Governor Pat McCrory as “legislative overreach”. After all, state lawmakers aren’t supposed to meddle in local politics, but Trudy didn’t get that memo. Fortunately her ploy to stack City Council with Republicans, and muzzle the mayor, fell short, but that didn’t stop her from using her office to get revenge on another Greensboro institution, the News & Record. Though she has denied any vengeful motive in introducing legislation that could cost the GNR and other local papers to lose tons of money, the fact remains that Trudy’s so-called pilot program to allow counties to bypass the print media and post all legal notices on county websites actually targets only Guilford county newspapers who have never endorsed her. Voters may not care about the plight of local print media, but they should care about abuse of power, and cast their vote for Wade’s Democrat opponent Michael Garrett.

Last week, on my Triad Today television program, I moderated discussions with candidates from three congressional districts. The 30-minute Voter Education Special included a solo interview with 5^th District Democrat DD Adams (incumbent Virginia Foxx declined to participate), and debates between 6^th District Rep. Mark Walker and his Democratic challenger Ryan Watts, and between 13^th District GOP incumbent Rep. Ted Budd and his challenger, Kathy Manning.

DD Adams is a member of Winston-Salem City Council and a dedicated public servant who advocates for affordable healthcare, and who believes that term limits are needed for Congress. Virginia Foxx is a hard-worker, but she has been in lock-step with every hare-brained policy put forth first by George W. Bush, and now by Donald Trump. Also, Foxx is the first one who misled voters into thinking that passage of Obamacare would create death panels for seniors. That was not only a false narrative, it was a cruel joke to play on the most vulnerable among us. Virginia has served seven terms, and it’s time for her to let someone else give it a try.

Ryan Watts is a business consultant from Burlington who favors more gun controls including a ban on assault weapons. He also favors a less restrictive immigration policy, and he supports a Public Option for healthcare. While I agree with most of Ryan’s positions, and Lord knows I think we need more Democrats in the House, I’m not sure he’s got the gravitas to survive in D.C. just yet. On the other hand, two-term incumbent Mark Walker, a former minister and missionary, entered Congress with highly developed people skills which served him well in building coalitions with members of both parties. Mark is also a great listener who has acted on constituent input to re-work legislation. Mark is a true, compassionate servant of the people, and he deserves a third term in Washington.

That brings me to the contentious 13^th District race between first term Republican congressman Ted Budd and challenger Kathy Manning, an attorney from Greensboro. In past columns and on Triad Today, I have made it known that we need more women in Congress, and while I agree with Manning on almost every issue, she might not be the right woman at the right time for this district. Two years ago, Ted Budd wrested the GOP nomination away from a host of more seasoned candidates mainly because he had a half million dollars in D.C. PAC money at his disposal. Those funds allowed him to purchase lots of TV ads and build his name recognition in a way that his underfunded opponents couldn’t. Spilled milk. Ted, the owner of a gun shop and shooting range, is against a ban on assault-style weapons, and he is against Medicare-for-All. Yet, like Mark Walker, Ted is a personable, humble man, almost devoid of ego, who is willing to listen to opposing views. He also handles criticisms with a smile instead of a snarl. When it comes to policy, Ted and I are polar opposites on most issues, and yet I think it’s OK to support someone you disagree with, so long as he isn’t disagreeable. That’s why I’m endorsing Ted for another term in Congress.

In the end, my opinions might not count for much, but your vote does, so please show up and be counted next Tuesday.

 
 

Earlier this month, infamous TV personality Jerry Springer turned up at the Dixie Classic Fair, and was asked by a reporter from the Winston-Salem Journal what kind of food he liked. Replied Springer, “I like everything that’s not healthy.” It was a fitting response from the man who almost single-handedly turned television into a repository of raw sewage, and American society into a laboratory for dysfunctional discourse.

Springer came to national prominence in 1991 at a time when Merv Griffin and Mike Douglas had retired, and when traditional daytime talk shows featured entertainers, authors, and politicians who engaged in thought-provoking topics. It was a format that Phil Donahue and, later, Oprah Winfrey and Rosie O’Donnell would embrace. And though Donahue had his share of controversial guests, there was almost always something constructive to glean from his interviews. Not so with Springer, who didn’t just push the envelope of good taste, he tore the envelope open with unashamed aplomb.

It may be difficult for anyone under the age of 40 to fathom, but there was a time when certain things just weren’t discussed on television, or anywhere else for that matter, and we were emotionally healthier as a result. Jerry Springer broke those norms with topics like:

• “Bizarre Sex Jobs”
• “I Slept with 251 Men in 10 Hours”
• “I’m Pregnant by a Trans Sexual”
• “I’m Pregnant by My Brother”
• “Secret Sex Fetishes”
• “Bra-less Brawlers”
• “I Married a Horse”
• “Adult Babies: Grown Men Who Dress in Pajamas and Stay in a Baby Crib”
• “I’m Happy I Cut Off My Legs”
• “The Man Who Cut Off His Own Penis”
• “A Pimp Who Thought He Was the Pope”
• “Man Wants His Leg Back From His Mistress”

 

But it wasn’t just Jerry’s daily circus of freaks that had a negative impact on our collective psyche. It was also the way those dysfunctional folks communicated while the cameras were rolling. There was shouting, screaming, slapping, punching, kicking, and, of course, foul-mouthed cursing which was not very well disguised by Springer’s bleep machine. That kind of violent discourse gave rise to today’s angry Town Hall confrontations, and to pundits screaming at one another on cable news panels. It also sent a strong message to his viewers that it is OK to display loud, obnoxious behavior in restaurants, stores, airplanes, and other public venues.

Finally, we can thank Jerry for giving birth to every dysfunctional reality show on TV today, including every Kardashian, every desperate housewife, and every contestant who’s ever been naked and afraid.

Fortunately, Jerry Springer’s nationally syndicated show was cancelled earlier this year, but by then, he had already done incalculable damage. Taking Springer’s toxins off the air after 27 years and expecting Americans to be more civil to each other, is like giving up a five pack-a-day habit for the past 27 years, and hoping that your lungs will be free of scarring. The fact is we will never completely heal from the scars that Springer wrought because his disciples, descendants, and imitators are still around to re-open the wounds. And then there’s Jerry himself, who continues to do his thing, even if it’s not in front of the camera. Case in point, Springer’s recent visit to Winston-Salem, where he emceed micro wrestling matches at the Fair. Micro wrestling is the PC name for what used to be known as midget wrestling. “As long as it’s all taken in fun and people enjoy it, that’s cool with me,” Springer told the Journal. Yes sir, there’s nothing more fun and wholesome than a bunch of big people watching little people being tossed around. Maybe next year, Jerry will referee a bout between an adult baby and the mistress who stole her boyfriend’s leg. The three of them will deserve each other.

 
 

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.