Susan Rice wants to get rid of all those “white, male and Yale” national security people and replace them.
We have a new level of division and bias coming from this administration – whites and men – the usual standbys, and now you can add “Yale” graduates to that.
Diverse is great but not at the expense of the best candidates though that is not the feeling of this administration.
And, we can see the profound importance of our diversity in the realm of foreign policy and national security.
To those who deride our diversity, my answer is: I see why it matters every day, in those who protect this country and grapple with the toughest global issues we face. I’m privileged to work with brilliant and dedicated professionals across our government. But we must acknowledge that our national security agencies have not yet drawn fully on the strengths of our great nation.
Minorities still make up less than 20 percent of our senior diplomats. Less than 15 percent of senior military officers and senior intelligence officials. Too often, our national security workforce has been what former Florida Senator Bob Graham called “white, male, and Yale.” In the halls of power, in the faces of our national security leaders, America is still not fully reflected.
Yep, you’re too white, too male, too Yale.
Why should we care? For starters, a diverse national security workforce enables us to unlock all of our nation’s talent. There are some 320 million people in the United States. Nearly 40 percent are minorities, and an increasing number of them are earning college and graduate degrees. As America becomes more diverse, so do our best people. The next Colin Powell or Madeleine Albright or Bill Richardson is out there. Our country—and our policies—will be stronger if we can bring them on-board.
It’s fascinating how this collectivist doesn’t want us to engage in “groupthink” but tries to make us all live under mass delusion.
By now, we should all know the dangers of “groupthink,” where folks who are alike often think alike. By contrast, groups comprised of different people tend to question one another’s assumptions, draw on divergent perspectives and experiences, and yield better outcomes. Whether we’re confronting ISIL or Ebola, cybersecurity or climate change, solving today’s multifaceted global challenges demand more varied viewpoints and experiences than ever. Intelligence analysts, diplomats and military officers who are native speakers may pick up subtle nuances that might otherwise go unnoticed. Diplomats who can read cultural cues may better navigate the political and social currents of a foreign nation. In sum, leaders from diverse backgrounds can often come up with more creative insights, proffer alternative solutions, and thus make better decisions.
Creativity will improve with fewer whites.
It’s a national security “imperative” to get rid of whites.
So, I’m not talking about a human resources issue. I’m highlighting a national security imperative. The presidential seal in the Oval Office and the Situation Room bears the inscription, “E pluribus unum”—out of many, we are one. That must always be the source of our success and our strength. Without tapping into America’s full range of races, religions, ethnicities, language skills, and social and economic experiences, we’re leading in a complex world with one hand tied behind our back.
Obama agrees. That’s a winner right there.
President Obama feels strongly about the need to make our national security workforce more diverse. So do I and many other national security leaders. In 2011, the President signed an executive order prioritizing diversity and inclusion throughout the government. As I speak, we are pursuing ways to recruit and retain more diverse national security talent.
She went on to “inspire” youth on climate change and other leftist agenda items.
We are in such trouble. These leftists take good solid principles of immigration and equal opportunity for all and make it into leftist race-baiting, disparate impact, entitlements and mass delusion.