Posted on Aug 1, 2017
Justice Dept. to Take On Affirmative Action in College Admissions
10.5K
5
3
3
3
0
Justice Dept. to Take On Affirmative Action in College Admissions
1
President Trump and Attorney General Jeff Sessions have helped tilt the Justice Department to the right on civil rights issues.
DOUG MILLS / THE NEW YORK TIMES
By CHARLIE SAVAGE
AUGUST 1, 2017
WASHINGTON — The Trump administration is preparing to redirect resources of the Justice Department’s civil rights division toward investigating and suing universities over affirmative action admissions policies deemed to discriminate against white applicants, according to a document obtained by The New York Times.
The document, an internal announcement to the civil rights division, seeks current lawyers interested in working for a new project on “investigations and possible litigation related to intentional race-based discrimination in college and university admissions.”
The announcement suggests that the project will be run out of the division’s front office, where the Trump administration’s political appointees work, rather than its Educational Opportunities Section, which is run by career civil servants and normally handles work involving schools and universities.
The document does not explicitly identify whom the Justice Department considers at risk of discrimination because of affirmative action admissions policies. But the phrasing it uses, “intentional race-based discrimination,” cuts to the heart of programs designed to bring more minority students to university campuses.
Supporters and critics of the project said it was clearly targeting admissions programs that can give members of generally disadvantaged groups, like black and Latino students, an edge over other applicants with comparable or higher test scores.
The project is another sign that the civil rights division is taking on a conservative tilt under President Trump and Attorney General Jeff Sessions. It follows other changes in Justice Department policy on voting rights, gay rights and police reforms.
Roger Clegg, a former top official in the civil rights division during the Reagan administration and the first Bush administration who is now the president of the conservative Center for Equal Opportunity, called the project a “welcome” and “long overdue” development as the United States becomes increasingly multiracial.
“The civil rights laws were deliberately written to protect everyone from discrimination, and it is frequently the case that not only are whites discriminated against now, but frequently Asian-Americans are as well,” he said.
John Gore, the acting head of the Justice Department’s civil rights division, in 2014.
AMERICAN CONSTITUTION SOCIETY, VIA YOUTUBE
But Kristen Clarke, the president of the liberal Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, criticized the affirmative action project as “misaligned with the division’s longstanding priorities.” She noted that the civil rights division was “created and launched to deal with the unique problem of discrimination faced by our nation’s most oppressed minority groups,” performing work that often no one else has the resources or expertise to do.
“This is deeply disturbing,” she said. “It would be a dog whistle that could invite a lot of chaos and unnecessarily create hysteria among colleges and universities who may fear that the government may come down on them for their efforts to maintain diversity on their campuses.”
The Justice Department declined to provide more details about its plans or to make the acting head of the civil rights division, John Gore, available for an interview.
“The Department of Justice does not discuss personnel matters, so we’ll decline comment,” said Devin O’Malley, a department spokesman.
The Supreme Court has ruled that the educational benefits that flow from having a diverse student body can justify using race as one factor among many in a “holistic” evaluation, while rejecting blunt racial quotas or race-based point systems. But what that permits in actual practice by universities — public ones as well as private ones that receive federal funding — is often murky.
Mr. Clegg said he would expect the project to focus on investigating complaints the civil rights division received about any university admissions programs.
He also suggested that the project would look for stark gaps in test scores and dropout rates among different racial cohorts within student bodies, which he said would be evidence suggesting that admissions offices were putting too great an emphasis on applicants’ race and crossing the line the Supreme Court has drawn.
Some of that data, he added, could be available through the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights, which did not respond to a request for comment.
The Supreme Court most recently addressed affirmative action admissions policies in a 2016 case, voting 4 to 3 to uphold a race-conscious program at the University of Texas at Austin. But there are several pending lawsuits challenging such practices at other high-profile institutions, including Harvard University and the University of North Carolina. The Justice Department has not taken a position in those cases.
The pending start of the affirmative action project — division lawyers who want to work on it must submit their résumés by Aug. 9, the announcement said — joins a series of changes involving civil rights law since Mr. Trump’s inauguration.
In a lawsuit challenging Texas’ strict voter identification law, the Justice Department switched its position, dropping the claim that the law was intentionally discriminatory and later declaring that the law had been fixed. Mr. Sessions has also made clear he is not interested in using consent decrees to impose reforms on troubled police departments and has initiated a sweeping review of existing agreements.
Last week, the Justice Department, without being asked, filed a brief in a private employment discrimination lawsuit. It urged an appeals court not to interpret the ban on sex-based discrimination in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as covering sexual orientation. The Obama administration had shied from taking a stand on that question.
Vanita Gupta, who ran the civil rights division in the Obama administration’s second term and is now president of the liberal Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, noted that the briefs in the Texas voter identification and gay-rights cases were signed only by Trump administration political appointees, not career officials, just as the affirmative action project will apparently be run directly by the division’s front office.
“The fact that the position is in the political front office, and not in the career section that enforces antidiscrimination laws for education, suggests that this person will be carrying out an agenda aimed at undermining diversity in higher education without needing to say it,” Ms. Gupta said.
The civil rights division has been a recurring culture-war battleground as it passed between Democratic and Republican administrations.
During the administration of George W. Bush, its overseers violated Civil Service hiring laws, an inspector general found, by filling its career ranks with conservatives who often had scant experience in civil rights law. At the same time, it brought fewer cases alleging systematic discrimination against minorities and more alleging reverse discrimination against whites, like a 2006 lawsuit forcing Southern Illinois University to stop reserving certain fellowship programs for women or members of underrepresented racial groups.
In 2009, the Obama administration vowed to revitalize the agency and hired career officials who brought in many new lawyers with experience working for traditional, liberal-leaning civil-rights organizations.
Follow Charlie Savage on Twitter @charlie_savage.
1COMMENT
RELATED COVERAGE
1
President Trump and Attorney General Jeff Sessions have helped tilt the Justice Department to the right on civil rights issues.
DOUG MILLS / THE NEW YORK TIMES
By CHARLIE SAVAGE
AUGUST 1, 2017
WASHINGTON — The Trump administration is preparing to redirect resources of the Justice Department’s civil rights division toward investigating and suing universities over affirmative action admissions policies deemed to discriminate against white applicants, according to a document obtained by The New York Times.
The document, an internal announcement to the civil rights division, seeks current lawyers interested in working for a new project on “investigations and possible litigation related to intentional race-based discrimination in college and university admissions.”
The announcement suggests that the project will be run out of the division’s front office, where the Trump administration’s political appointees work, rather than its Educational Opportunities Section, which is run by career civil servants and normally handles work involving schools and universities.
The document does not explicitly identify whom the Justice Department considers at risk of discrimination because of affirmative action admissions policies. But the phrasing it uses, “intentional race-based discrimination,” cuts to the heart of programs designed to bring more minority students to university campuses.
Supporters and critics of the project said it was clearly targeting admissions programs that can give members of generally disadvantaged groups, like black and Latino students, an edge over other applicants with comparable or higher test scores.
The project is another sign that the civil rights division is taking on a conservative tilt under President Trump and Attorney General Jeff Sessions. It follows other changes in Justice Department policy on voting rights, gay rights and police reforms.
Roger Clegg, a former top official in the civil rights division during the Reagan administration and the first Bush administration who is now the president of the conservative Center for Equal Opportunity, called the project a “welcome” and “long overdue” development as the United States becomes increasingly multiracial.
“The civil rights laws were deliberately written to protect everyone from discrimination, and it is frequently the case that not only are whites discriminated against now, but frequently Asian-Americans are as well,” he said.
John Gore, the acting head of the Justice Department’s civil rights division, in 2014.
AMERICAN CONSTITUTION SOCIETY, VIA YOUTUBE
But Kristen Clarke, the president of the liberal Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, criticized the affirmative action project as “misaligned with the division’s longstanding priorities.” She noted that the civil rights division was “created and launched to deal with the unique problem of discrimination faced by our nation’s most oppressed minority groups,” performing work that often no one else has the resources or expertise to do.
“This is deeply disturbing,” she said. “It would be a dog whistle that could invite a lot of chaos and unnecessarily create hysteria among colleges and universities who may fear that the government may come down on them for their efforts to maintain diversity on their campuses.”
The Justice Department declined to provide more details about its plans or to make the acting head of the civil rights division, John Gore, available for an interview.
“The Department of Justice does not discuss personnel matters, so we’ll decline comment,” said Devin O’Malley, a department spokesman.
The Supreme Court has ruled that the educational benefits that flow from having a diverse student body can justify using race as one factor among many in a “holistic” evaluation, while rejecting blunt racial quotas or race-based point systems. But what that permits in actual practice by universities — public ones as well as private ones that receive federal funding — is often murky.
Mr. Clegg said he would expect the project to focus on investigating complaints the civil rights division received about any university admissions programs.
He also suggested that the project would look for stark gaps in test scores and dropout rates among different racial cohorts within student bodies, which he said would be evidence suggesting that admissions offices were putting too great an emphasis on applicants’ race and crossing the line the Supreme Court has drawn.
Some of that data, he added, could be available through the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights, which did not respond to a request for comment.
The Supreme Court most recently addressed affirmative action admissions policies in a 2016 case, voting 4 to 3 to uphold a race-conscious program at the University of Texas at Austin. But there are several pending lawsuits challenging such practices at other high-profile institutions, including Harvard University and the University of North Carolina. The Justice Department has not taken a position in those cases.
The pending start of the affirmative action project — division lawyers who want to work on it must submit their résumés by Aug. 9, the announcement said — joins a series of changes involving civil rights law since Mr. Trump’s inauguration.
In a lawsuit challenging Texas’ strict voter identification law, the Justice Department switched its position, dropping the claim that the law was intentionally discriminatory and later declaring that the law had been fixed. Mr. Sessions has also made clear he is not interested in using consent decrees to impose reforms on troubled police departments and has initiated a sweeping review of existing agreements.
Last week, the Justice Department, without being asked, filed a brief in a private employment discrimination lawsuit. It urged an appeals court not to interpret the ban on sex-based discrimination in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as covering sexual orientation. The Obama administration had shied from taking a stand on that question.
Vanita Gupta, who ran the civil rights division in the Obama administration’s second term and is now president of the liberal Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, noted that the briefs in the Texas voter identification and gay-rights cases were signed only by Trump administration political appointees, not career officials, just as the affirmative action project will apparently be run directly by the division’s front office.
“The fact that the position is in the political front office, and not in the career section that enforces antidiscrimination laws for education, suggests that this person will be carrying out an agenda aimed at undermining diversity in higher education without needing to say it,” Ms. Gupta said.
The civil rights division has been a recurring culture-war battleground as it passed between Democratic and Republican administrations.
During the administration of George W. Bush, its overseers violated Civil Service hiring laws, an inspector general found, by filling its career ranks with conservatives who often had scant experience in civil rights law. At the same time, it brought fewer cases alleging systematic discrimination against minorities and more alleging reverse discrimination against whites, like a 2006 lawsuit forcing Southern Illinois University to stop reserving certain fellowship programs for women or members of underrepresented racial groups.
In 2009, the Obama administration vowed to revitalize the agency and hired career officials who brought in many new lawyers with experience working for traditional, liberal-leaning civil-rights organizations.
Follow Charlie Savage on Twitter @charlie_savage.
1COMMENT
RELATED COVERAGE
Justice Dept. to Take On Affirmative Action in College Admissions
Posted from mobile.nytimes.com
Education
Rights
Racism
DOJ
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 2
2
2
0
if you read the article in full and divert your attention to where the program is being run out of and by whom then maybe you might change your mind a tad bit. I will say that no, it's not what you think
(2)
(0)
SSgt Boyd Herrst
I can see where you are going with this Sgt.(VTS)... maybe if both of those sections worked together on the project ?.... I would go along with both those sections equally importing questions and decisions and imparting discourse into the matter.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
That would be most welcome!
Back when I was overseas in PACAF(AF pacific arena) I had tested for SSGT. and earned it first go around.. Performance Report points on top, TIS, TIG not so much so.. even with the short time in Reserves... They looked at my score and took into consideration other factors(mentoring my fellow Airmen, job knowledge: actual on the job skill.. not just food preparation but administrative knowledge of AF Food Svc forms, Regulations .. They’d mentioned in my APR (Airman Performance Report) my mentoring of even Senior Cooks to myself ..and how I was able to break them of some short-cuts that actually under-mined the food value(texture, appearance, reduction of vitamins the food offered).. Short-cuts are nice but when they undermine the offerings the food product gives and becomes just a stomach filler.. when a Airman(used in general, like soldier or seaman, regardless of rank) goes back to duty section, they will not perform as needed because all the food did was fill a spot.. minimal vitamins derived. They promoted another SGT. also .. fairly good worker, did his work.. Uniform maintenance(minimum at best/ this includes haircut and hygiene). We had a guideline that we had a backup uniform in our locker.. s’times accidents happen where s’body knocks into s’one carrying s’thing and product gets spllled..
Since he never had a back-up, we had to send him back to bks to get changed and come back.. it seems like it got timed that way frequently near the last hour of shift..
his quote; “it was so close to end of shift(45 to 30 min), I didn’t think I needed to come back!” Even if we only had 20 minutes left we could of had s’thing he could do.. all he did was load more on fellow workers to do.. so by having that extra uniform he could get changed in a few minutes(unless he got burned, injured)... he could do things fairly fast but was sloppy.. so the clean’g up from being sloppy wasted the time he got it done fast .. in the end he got the stripes
Because they needed one more minority to get promoted.. Even peers of his own
Ethnic group were not comfortable with his promotion.. they even felt he caused their own promotion to be devalued when he got promoted with minimal points.. on E’thing in his jacket.. It was kind of a shame only one person in his ethnic group congratulated him and it was s’body that was still a A1C.. even that one I thought to be shallow at best because I worked with(mentored) that Airman and I felt he was a much better worker performance wise, appearance in and out of uniform.
I will admit even I congratulated(shallow) him with not much enthusiasm.. just said congrats .. and went back to work, it was a de facto sitrep.. put on a facade.. I acted like I was in a hurry to get my work done and interrupted it momentarily to make the gesture.. I thought over what I did.. realized I was wrong.. maybe(?)... I went to him and said I would be there to help him to perfect his skill as a Cook.. “what you mean by that, I’m even faster than you ! “ he replied.. “only by a few minutes, and it’s lost because you are a sloppy cook all around.. the time you ‘think’ you save is wasted by cleaning up your mess !” “we always clean up at end of shift!”..: he replied ... “ What do those signs all around the kitchen and in your CDCs say every 3 or 4 pages... “CLEAN AS YOU GO!”... you make one mess over another ! I’m going to help you change how you work.. NO I’m not going to be your lackey and clean your mess for you !”
I didn’t yell, I tried keeping it between us two... I’d go over to his bungalow and get him.. look him over.. “didn’t you wear those yesterday ?” I asked of him.. “come on , you got 4 pair of Clean uniforms hanging In your locker.. pick one and get it on and bring one to put in your locker at work !”... Week by week I worked with him to slow a little bit and be neater about his work... he was getting there ! and we covered other areas mentioned way above-^... Other of our fellow NCOs asked me why was I taking an interest in helping him... I said look in your PME Book about what it said about helping fellow NCOs to be better... maybe not exactly in those words(read between the lines sometimes...). Too many just skim and don’t get the full meaning of the words, sentences, paragraphs.. they just pick out main words.. I skim too. Underline key items.. But I go back and find the heart of the messages in the book... I like to even read from leadership books for other services.. we all have a goal(s) and that’s to achieve completion of an assigned sit-rep/ mission. As there always is we have on-going sit-reps that never have an end..
Some can be completed and go back to them again, new sit-rep, different day.. that’s how it is in my Career field.. new menu item, different day.. maybe it was featured a few weeks ago? So how can I do this job in a better way? Better results.. S’times We got to tackle head-on .. So I’m trying to work with my fellow
NCO and teach them a better way that will benefit just me but all of us that have to work with him and see him day by day..
I caught up with him and he was headed to get his haircut.. oh boy, this will be fun !
We got there and I observed the cutting and the order they were going.. (I was watching the barber.. the first one done gets the next up.. there were only 2 barbers that day .. another Airman came in .. “SSGT. Joe, give this man your number ..”. “Say wha ?” “Give him your number !” So Joe swapped numbers..
That guy got the barber Joe would have gotten... my fave barber called Joes number... “number 47!” Sadeep called..
Joe got in the seat and joe described his cut... and Sadeep cut and cut and cut some more.. Got the rake and raked Joe’s cut and cut some more all around... sprayed it. And patted it .. all done ! Sadeep asked joe how he liked it... Joe freaked ..” My ‘fro is gone !” SSGT Joe exclaimed.. he got his own rake and worked it.. Sadeep had it cut down to within regulation.. even at it’s max height,
Joe’s cut Met AF standsrds(Sadeep was the Wing and Base Cmdrs fave barber.. and both barber’s were of Joes ethnicity..
Yep !... “I’m not paying ! Look what you do to my cut !” And he walked out.. I pulled out a 100 baht note and paid the barber.. (it was worth it!).... Joe went to the base contractor’s liason Office. .. The clerk just got out the AF regulation about 35-10 standards.. the barber completed his end of the contract.. the cut met AF
Standards... Joe lost!... Joe went out, he wasn’t finished... to the I.G’s office.. (who happens to be the deputy Base or Wing Cmdr. First thing the Cmdr said was ; “Nice haircut, SSGT.... what can we do for you today?” He asked. Joe was speechless “Oh I”... he excused himself and left. He knew it was a lost cause.. kept his hat on as much as he legally could... He said it was my fault getting him to switch barbers.. I got cooking better, better clean-up after his prep. Staying clean.. All that cologne did was hide the B.O... Noe had convinced a shop off-Base to carry it... the exchange would not for some reason... even if they tried ..
Joe would be gone before they got it in on the shelf... So Joe just had to scrub harder in those spots.. Besides hard to discern the smell of the food with the odor from the cologne in the air.. and several other NCOs in our section commented on that and were of the ethnicity Joe is.. Joe and them were not of the same school of hygiene nor age group.. Everything else about Joe... he was getting better.. others seen what I was trying to do and they begin contributing to helping him... and that’s what it’s about ... like Gunny even said;((but a twist on words) “ that’s excellent,
I might even let you be a Airman in my outfit !”.. So with the help of other NCOs I helped SSGT. Joe become a Squared away NCO.. but couldn’t have if Joe hadn’t tried to help himself.. I don’t know where or what became of him after the AF.. I hope he did s’thing constructive with himself...
Back when I was overseas in PACAF(AF pacific arena) I had tested for SSGT. and earned it first go around.. Performance Report points on top, TIS, TIG not so much so.. even with the short time in Reserves... They looked at my score and took into consideration other factors(mentoring my fellow Airmen, job knowledge: actual on the job skill.. not just food preparation but administrative knowledge of AF Food Svc forms, Regulations .. They’d mentioned in my APR (Airman Performance Report) my mentoring of even Senior Cooks to myself ..and how I was able to break them of some short-cuts that actually under-mined the food value(texture, appearance, reduction of vitamins the food offered).. Short-cuts are nice but when they undermine the offerings the food product gives and becomes just a stomach filler.. when a Airman(used in general, like soldier or seaman, regardless of rank) goes back to duty section, they will not perform as needed because all the food did was fill a spot.. minimal vitamins derived. They promoted another SGT. also .. fairly good worker, did his work.. Uniform maintenance(minimum at best/ this includes haircut and hygiene). We had a guideline that we had a backup uniform in our locker.. s’times accidents happen where s’body knocks into s’one carrying s’thing and product gets spllled..
Since he never had a back-up, we had to send him back to bks to get changed and come back.. it seems like it got timed that way frequently near the last hour of shift..
his quote; “it was so close to end of shift(45 to 30 min), I didn’t think I needed to come back!” Even if we only had 20 minutes left we could of had s’thing he could do.. all he did was load more on fellow workers to do.. so by having that extra uniform he could get changed in a few minutes(unless he got burned, injured)... he could do things fairly fast but was sloppy.. so the clean’g up from being sloppy wasted the time he got it done fast .. in the end he got the stripes
Because they needed one more minority to get promoted.. Even peers of his own
Ethnic group were not comfortable with his promotion.. they even felt he caused their own promotion to be devalued when he got promoted with minimal points.. on E’thing in his jacket.. It was kind of a shame only one person in his ethnic group congratulated him and it was s’body that was still a A1C.. even that one I thought to be shallow at best because I worked with(mentored) that Airman and I felt he was a much better worker performance wise, appearance in and out of uniform.
I will admit even I congratulated(shallow) him with not much enthusiasm.. just said congrats .. and went back to work, it was a de facto sitrep.. put on a facade.. I acted like I was in a hurry to get my work done and interrupted it momentarily to make the gesture.. I thought over what I did.. realized I was wrong.. maybe(?)... I went to him and said I would be there to help him to perfect his skill as a Cook.. “what you mean by that, I’m even faster than you ! “ he replied.. “only by a few minutes, and it’s lost because you are a sloppy cook all around.. the time you ‘think’ you save is wasted by cleaning up your mess !” “we always clean up at end of shift!”..: he replied ... “ What do those signs all around the kitchen and in your CDCs say every 3 or 4 pages... “CLEAN AS YOU GO!”... you make one mess over another ! I’m going to help you change how you work.. NO I’m not going to be your lackey and clean your mess for you !”
I didn’t yell, I tried keeping it between us two... I’d go over to his bungalow and get him.. look him over.. “didn’t you wear those yesterday ?” I asked of him.. “come on , you got 4 pair of Clean uniforms hanging In your locker.. pick one and get it on and bring one to put in your locker at work !”... Week by week I worked with him to slow a little bit and be neater about his work... he was getting there ! and we covered other areas mentioned way above-^... Other of our fellow NCOs asked me why was I taking an interest in helping him... I said look in your PME Book about what it said about helping fellow NCOs to be better... maybe not exactly in those words(read between the lines sometimes...). Too many just skim and don’t get the full meaning of the words, sentences, paragraphs.. they just pick out main words.. I skim too. Underline key items.. But I go back and find the heart of the messages in the book... I like to even read from leadership books for other services.. we all have a goal(s) and that’s to achieve completion of an assigned sit-rep/ mission. As there always is we have on-going sit-reps that never have an end..
Some can be completed and go back to them again, new sit-rep, different day.. that’s how it is in my Career field.. new menu item, different day.. maybe it was featured a few weeks ago? So how can I do this job in a better way? Better results.. S’times We got to tackle head-on .. So I’m trying to work with my fellow
NCO and teach them a better way that will benefit just me but all of us that have to work with him and see him day by day..
I caught up with him and he was headed to get his haircut.. oh boy, this will be fun !
We got there and I observed the cutting and the order they were going.. (I was watching the barber.. the first one done gets the next up.. there were only 2 barbers that day .. another Airman came in .. “SSGT. Joe, give this man your number ..”. “Say wha ?” “Give him your number !” So Joe swapped numbers..
That guy got the barber Joe would have gotten... my fave barber called Joes number... “number 47!” Sadeep called..
Joe got in the seat and joe described his cut... and Sadeep cut and cut and cut some more.. Got the rake and raked Joe’s cut and cut some more all around... sprayed it. And patted it .. all done ! Sadeep asked joe how he liked it... Joe freaked ..” My ‘fro is gone !” SSGT Joe exclaimed.. he got his own rake and worked it.. Sadeep had it cut down to within regulation.. even at it’s max height,
Joe’s cut Met AF standsrds(Sadeep was the Wing and Base Cmdrs fave barber.. and both barber’s were of Joes ethnicity..
Yep !... “I’m not paying ! Look what you do to my cut !” And he walked out.. I pulled out a 100 baht note and paid the barber.. (it was worth it!).... Joe went to the base contractor’s liason Office. .. The clerk just got out the AF regulation about 35-10 standards.. the barber completed his end of the contract.. the cut met AF
Standards... Joe lost!... Joe went out, he wasn’t finished... to the I.G’s office.. (who happens to be the deputy Base or Wing Cmdr. First thing the Cmdr said was ; “Nice haircut, SSGT.... what can we do for you today?” He asked. Joe was speechless “Oh I”... he excused himself and left. He knew it was a lost cause.. kept his hat on as much as he legally could... He said it was my fault getting him to switch barbers.. I got cooking better, better clean-up after his prep. Staying clean.. All that cologne did was hide the B.O... Noe had convinced a shop off-Base to carry it... the exchange would not for some reason... even if they tried ..
Joe would be gone before they got it in on the shelf... So Joe just had to scrub harder in those spots.. Besides hard to discern the smell of the food with the odor from the cologne in the air.. and several other NCOs in our section commented on that and were of the ethnicity Joe is.. Joe and them were not of the same school of hygiene nor age group.. Everything else about Joe... he was getting better.. others seen what I was trying to do and they begin contributing to helping him... and that’s what it’s about ... like Gunny even said;((but a twist on words) “ that’s excellent,
I might even let you be a Airman in my outfit !”.. So with the help of other NCOs I helped SSGT. Joe become a Squared away NCO.. but couldn’t have if Joe hadn’t tried to help himself.. I don’t know where or what became of him after the AF.. I hope he did s’thing constructive with himself...
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google