Ethics Dunces: The San Francisco School Board [Corrected]

Rushmore 6

I was going to write an Ethics Dunce post about Jamie L.H. Goodall, a staff historian at the U.S. Army Center of Military History who wrote a truly stupid piece for The Washington Post headlined “The Buccaneers embody Tampa’s love of pirates. Is that a problem?” Goodall is triggered by the fact that the NFL’s now champion Tampa Bay Buccaneers carry a nickname that romanticizes pirates, who were bad people.

Of course, everyone knows pirates were (are, since there are more pirates operating now than back in the “Arrrgh!” days) bad, but they were scary and tough, see, and teams are named after scary and tough symbols, sometimes. Only people who have nothing better to do but to try to bend others to their will make the fatuous kinds of arguments Goodall does. ( “There is danger in romanticizing ruthless cutthroats…Why? Because it takes these murderous thieves who did terrible things — like locking women and children in a burning church — and makes them a symbol of freedom and adventure, erasing their wicked deeds from historical memory. These were men (and women) who willingly participated in murder, torture and the brutal enslavement of Africans and Indigenous peoples.” ) Oh yeah, we had to get the racist angle. I wonder how the good people of Pittsburgh managed to have a much-loved baseball team called “The Pirates” for more than a century without anyone, or any of their many, many proud African American and Caribbean players feeling that they were honoring raping and pillaging. Perhaps it’s because the team doesn’t and neither do “Treasure Island” and “The Pirates of Penzance (which I have performed in and directed).

The problem isn’t the Buccaneers; it’s the far too successful ongoing strategy of the oppressive Left, which seeks to keep anyone with normal sensibilities and an appreciation of history, literature, humor, whimsy and proportion constantly apologizing and retreating under a barrage of manufactured indignation and artificial moral superiority. The blunder has been that instead of responding to the power-hungry ideologues and their allies like Goodall who make these claims with the mockery and contempt they deserve, those under assault make the mistake, again and again, of saying, “Well, if it bothers you that much, okay. We’ll give you what you want. After all, it’s only a name.

But it’s not only a name. It’s a word, a street, a mascot, a flag, a logo, a book, a song, a movie, a statue, an artist, a leader, a President, a Founder, a culture, and a nation. The strategy and its purpose should have been obvious long ago, and it should have been fought against hard, right at the beginning, with all the fury and determination that goes into any other existential battle. Or a war.

As I said, I was going to write this post about Jamie L.H. Goodall, but her idiocy is already a cliche, and at this point, arguing over team names is a distraction. (Too bad, though, as I had a fun post ready explaining how almost every professional sports team name was vulnerable to woke attack.) But I realized that the recent action by San Francisco’s school board represents the metastasized end game in the totalitarian Left’s cultural bull-dozing plan.

The school board voted 6-1 to eliminate one-third of the city’s school names, including those honoring Washington, Jefferson,  Lincoln, James Madison and both Roosevelts (yup, there goes Mt. Rushmore!) , plus Presidents Monroe, McKinley,Herbert Hoover and James Garfield; John Muir, the naturalist and author; James Russell Lowell, abolitionist poet and editor; Paul Revere,  Robert Louis Stevenson (speaking of “Treasure Island”), Henry Wadsworth Longfellow,  Daniel Webster, and current California Senator and former city mayor Diane Feinstein.

Mostly, San Franciscans are upset about Feinstein.

Read (if you dare) the spreadsheet in which the board explains its  justifications for dishonoring so many individuals without whom the nation would literally not exist, Not only is the thing riddled with typos, misspellings, grammar mistakes and factual errors, it shows a group responsible for educating the city’s  children that itself lacks minimal critical thinking skills, historical perspective, and the sense God gave a lemming. There is no appreciation or understanding of the challenges facing real leaders, or real human beings for that matter. Race is everything, and if an individual of massive achievements and gifts to the nation and culture didn’t magically  comprehend ideas and principles that took generations to prevail in our society, well, they just should have, that’s all. Virtually every important American historical figure who lived before 1950 would fail the tunnel vision standards of this board of fools. Robert Louis Stephenson wrote a poem for children that was disrespectful of Inuits. Cancelled. Abraham Lincoln may have saved the nation and ended slavery, but the board disagreed with his wrenching decision to execute 38 Native Americans…because they don’t know what the hell they are talking about. I do. From the Ethics Alarms post on Lincoln’s decision:

It is a perfect example of how pure ethical conduct can become ambiguous, complicated and indeed impossible in the context of national leadership, and especially war. Those examining such difficult decisions long after they occurred are prone to do so using hindsight bias, and handicapped by various degrees of ignorance regarding the challenges of high-stakes leadership generally. It is certainly true that Lincoln was no lover of the Indians: he had fought against them in his only military experience, and like most men of his era, Lincoln was a believer in white superiority. Still, he deserves ethics praise and respect for taking the path of sparing as many as he thought would be politically palatable, recognizing the importance of his primary duty, winning the war, and his greater ethical mission of ending slavery. It was a great utilitarian challenge, and no President was better at navigating these than Abraham Lincoln.

But they cancelled Lincoln anyway.

The names of San Francisco’s schools are a trivial matter: I attended Parmenter School in Arlington, Mass. for six years, and I still don’t know who Parmenter was. I do know that hack, semi-literate bureaucrats like those on the San Francisco school board are not fit to judge any of the towering intellects, public servants, artists and heroes they just presumed to erase from their city, and by evidence of their abysmal lack of logic and warped partisan judgment, are not fit to oversee the education of anyone.


Sources: NYT 1, NYT 2,

12 thoughts on “Ethics Dunces: The San Francisco School Board [Corrected]

  1. I’m sorry: I was hurrying to get this up before family duty called, and had to post it before doing the final proof-read. I got to it about 45 minutes later. Never a good idea to have typos in a post the mentions typos.

  2. Roberto Clemente. One of the most elegant baseball players who ever roamed the National League outfields or ran the basses. Died in a plane crash flying to help disaster victims. A Pirate. Doubtless a descendant of Caribbean African slaves. An icon. These people are idiots.

    • No, Goodall’s real problem, like literally everyone up in arms over the Buc’s win is that Tom Brady is a Trump supporter.

      That’s it.

      That’s the bottom line of all of this.

      Not race, not team names, nothing. It’s an extension of Trump Derangement.

    • Especially amusing given the era of counter-cultural history rewriters had LONG been working on rehabilitating pirates as progressive and ahead of their times in race-relations and having a “democratic” approach to naval hierarchy. Blah blah blah.

  3. Another one by Albert Mohler that is on this topic-

    No More Abraham Lincoln, George Washington . . . Dianne Feinstein? San Francisco School Board Votes to Rename Schools — Lots of Them
    History comes down to moral judgments. There’s no way around it. History is not just a matter of facts. It is not, as Henry Ford said, just one thing after another, bunk. History is indeed the way we tell our story, the way we tell the human story, the way we tell our national story, our civilizational story, the way we tell our own personal story. And because of the reality that we are moral creatures, our history is moral and thus the telling of our history is moral, and all history involves a moral reckoning.

    The Christian way of understanding history comes down in its simplest form to understanding that we simply have to take the good and the bad. We have to make historical judgments about where people are right and just, righteous, where they have been on the right side of the moral issues, where they’ve been on the wrong side, where we see history developed, where we see history, civilization, society struggling with big issues. When we deal with war, when we do what plague famine, when we deal with the building of a society, the establishing of a nation, we have to be making moral judgments.

    But one of the things we note right now in the midst of our cultural breakdown is that these moral judgments are now being made in a way that is being driven by the far left. It’s a moral judgment that comes down to saying that we’re going to have to rewrite our history by taking names out. Now there are numerous problems with this, but it comes down right now to ground zero as San Francisco, California. There’s a big surprise for you. The San Francisco School Board has acted in such a way as to change the names of 42 schools. Now we don’t yet know what they’re going to be named, but we do know what they were named before they were denamed, a process that is still ongoing. We’re talking about 42 schools.

    So what are we talking about here? Well, as Faith Pinho reports for the Los Angeles Times, George Washington and Abraham Lincoln are no longer suitable names for public schools in San Francisco. Explorers like Balboa are out too, as is Senator Dianne Feinstein. On Tuesday, the paper tells us, the San Francisco Unified School District Board of Education voted to change the names of 42 schools because of alleged associations with slaveholding, colonization or oppression. The story then goes on to say, “Those who supported the changes, which affect a third of the district schools, said names should reflect the values of a community.” Well, as we’re looking at this, we recognize this is a local action. It’s a local issue there in San Francisco, but it has not only national, but international ramifications.

    It really does raise the question as to how we do deal with history and how we should deal with history. Now, one of the things we need to note here is that this is being driven by a very aggressive agenda, and that aggressive agenda is to remove the names of those who are now in the verdict of those making these decisions in 2021 in San Francisco unacceptable to be honored or identified in this way.

    The vote was really clear. It was six to one there in the school board of San Francisco. You’re talking about a very clear decision by the panel. As The Washington Post reported, “The panel voted six to one to approve the plan, which calls for removing from schools names of those who “engaged in the subjugation and enslavement of human beings, oppressed women, committed acts that led to genocide or who otherwise significantly diminished the opportunities of those amongst us to the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”

    Now, there’s so much irony just in that particular statement. Consider this: the language, the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, doesn’t come out of a vacuum. It comes out of history. It comes out of American history. It comes out of American history in the founding era. It comes out of the contribution made to this country and to this experiment in ordered liberty by some of those whose names are now coming off of the schools in San Francisco. Now that language of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is cherished by Americans because it goes right back to the founding promise of this nation, as was articulated by the Declaration of Independence, in the Declaration of Independence, which didn’t emerge silently and anonymously. It emerged from a process and the primary authorship was Thomas Jefferson, who became, of course the third president of the United States.

    But Thomas Jefferson’s name is coming off of Jefferson Elementary in San Francisco. On the spreadsheet that was provided to the panel making this decision, the cause for removing the name is simply one word. Slave owner. Was Thomas Jefferson a slave owner? Yes, he was. Was he complicit in white supremacy and slavery? Yes, he was. Did he also author the Declaration of Independence? Did he contribute many other good things, necessary things, to American history? Did he make contributions without which this nation would not have been founded? Well, the answer to that is, yes, that too. But you’ll notice on a spreadsheet like this, an individual is simply reduced, in the case of Thomas Jefferson, to one word. Slave owner. Now, he was a slave owner and that is reprehensible. Race-based chattel slavery is one of the greatest horrifying evils ever to have marked humanity. But as we’re looking at this, we recognize that the moral issues at stake can’t be reduced simply to a spreadsheet, certainly can’t be reduced to one word.

    As a matter of fact, the words used to judge Thomas Jefferson in this case are the words that were actually written by Thomas Jefferson. Now there’s not just irony there, there’s a lack of historical acknowledgement there. Where do we get the idea of the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? Well, when you look at other names to be taken off, they include the first president of the United States, George Washington, who was identified as both a slave holder and a colonizer. Now, in what sense was George Washington a colonizer? Well, in the most important sense, I presume, because he was a part of the colony of Virginia before it became a part of the United States of America, largely under the leadership, by the way, of George Washington. But as you’re looking at this, you recognize that there are several code words which are absolutely central to the moral concerns of this panel.

    One of them is colonizer. Now, the entire process of colonization is indeed morally complicated. It has to be. Human beings are a mixture of good and evil and everything we do, including what’s taken place and what’s defined historically as colonization is actually a mix of good and evil. But these days to the left, it is entirely evil. Now, we need to note something here, even as you look at this decision that’s been undertaken by the San Francisco Unified School District Board of Education, you’ll notice the ironies here are just rich, and so are the hypocrisy. Now, when we look at hypocrisy we need to recognize we are perfectly capable of hypocrisy ourselves. That’s why we need to talk about these things out loud. We need to hear ourselves talk. We need to make certain we are not talking hypocritically.

    A Reckless Erasure from History . . . Based on a Spreadsheet? San Francisco School Board Plays Reckless Game with History
    As you talk about, for example, the people on this list, you recognize that it’s not just the people on this list. It’s not the 42 schools that will be renamed or denamed here. It’s an entire assault upon the civilization which we know as the United States of America, an assault upon the entire culture, the experiment in ordered liberty, American constitutionalism. It is as if reduced to a spreadsheet here, the people who are now being denamed or whose names were to be taken off of these schools are people who are deemed by the school board by a six one vote in the panel to have come up short morally.

    There are several presidents on the list. Also to be denamed is Herbert Hoover. He’s identified as a racist president who was a defender of white supremacy. Also, Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Roosevelt’s name is to come off of a school because of his involvement as president and the internment of Japanese Americans. Also on the list it says he refused to support an anti-lynching bill.

    Now what’s not mentioned, of course, is the fact that it was under his leadership that World War II was won. Also not mentioned or many of the contributions and achievements of Franklin Delano Roosevelt and I say that as an American conservative who does not consider FDR a hero. But in an historical reckoning, we have to recognize that he played a very important role in American history, and especially as you understand how he orchestrated the opposition to Nazi Germany and to Imperial Japan and World War II, you recognize that if he had not been successful, American history would have been very different indeed.

    James Garfield is on the list. President Garfield comes off because of concerns about his treatment of the Indians. William McKinley, because of his treatment of the Philippines. James Monroe, he’s identified simply as a slave owner.

    And it’s not just presidents. You have figures such as Francis Scott Key, the author of the national anthem, the Star-Spangled banner. He’s identified here as a slave owner. Paul Revere, and you might wonder how well he got on the list. It is because there are accusations that go back not to 1776 and the War of Independence, but rather back to 1779, and what was known as the Penobscot expedition. That was an effort that was directed by the government against the Indians. He’s identified as colonizing and, thus, his name comes off. You also have the Earl of Clarendon. Yes, no kidding. The Earl of Clarendon in Britain has his name taken off of a school because after all he was involved in colonizing South Carolina. Environmentalist John Muir’s name is coming off of the school because he’s identified as racist, and with the theft of native lands, General William Tecumseh Sherman and General Philip Sheridan, both famous from the Civil War, on the union side, we should note, they have their names taken off of schools because of later encounters with the American Indians and mistreatment of which they are alleged.

    The Spanish Explorer Balboa, his name is coming off of a school because he was, by definition, a colonizer. Literary figures are also on the list, most importantly Robert Louis Stevenson. His name is being taken off of Robert Louis Stevenson Elementary because he wrote the poem Foreign Children. It’s explained, “A cringe-worthy poem that begins by asking little frosty Eskimo or Japanese children, “Oh, don’t you wish you were me?” Now, no doubt that poem deserves to be judged and as the poem is judged also the poet, but when you’re talking about Robert Louis Stevenson, are you actually going to reduce the entire corpus and impact of his literary contribution to that line in a spreadsheet?

    James Lick is on the list. He was a very wealthy man in San Francisco history. His name has been on James Lick Middle School, but it’s coming off. Why is Mr. Lick in trouble? Well, it’s because the spreadsheet says he financed the racist early days statute, which is now in storage in San Francisco. Here’s the thing about Mr. Lick. He had long been dead when his money was used to build the statue. He simply left funds. They were used for that purpose. He had nothing to do with it, but that doesn’t change anything. James Lick name is coming off of James Lick Middle School because long after he was dead, somebody did something with his money that the school board now doesn’t like.

    A lot of attention is given to the fact that Abraham Lincoln’s name is now coming off of a school in San Francisco. The spreadsheet says that he is not much of a hero to many American Indian nations and native peoples of the United States. Interestingly, it blames Lincoln for the Pacific Railway Act that led to the development of the transcontinental railroad and that’s identified here with the loss of land and natural resources.

    Of course, the ironies here are not only rich, they also demand our attention. When you’re talking about Abraham Lincoln, is this really how you would summarize his life? When you’re talking about Abraham Lincoln after all, when you’re talking about one of the most important figures in all of American history, when you’re talking about the man who, whether you appreciate everything about him and no one actually does, but in the scheme of history, without him, you might not have even the survival of the union as the United States of America. The reality is when you’re looking at Abraham Lincoln, you are looking at a figure who in himself recognized the tragedy of American history. He understood his own life as a part of the tragedy of American history, but he believed that the American experiment in liberty was so important that it was worth defending. Of course, he himself died by an Assassin’s bullet and the assassin was opposed to his leadership of the war to hold the union together.

    Now, when you’re talking about debates over Abraham Lincoln, there is a lot to debate. When you’re talking about viewing and evaluating Abraham Lincoln from the perspective of 2021, rather than say 1860, well, that’s a very important conversation to have. But can you tell the American story without Abraham Lincoln? No, you can’t. Can you tell about the arc of America’s understanding of justice and human equality without Abraham Lincoln? No, you cannot. The founders of this nation were involved in slavery or the defense of slavery, or at least a compromise with slavery. The founders of this nation, well, many of them explicitly held to some form of white supremacy, but this has to be addressed in a moral context. Now I’m not saying that these realities do not need to be addressed. Of course they do. And because of our knowledge of slavery and of white supremacy and its part in American history, we can never speak of George Washington as if those things are not true.

    We can never speak of James Madison or James Monroe, whose names are also coming off of schools, without the same kind of reckoning. We can never speak about Thomas Jefferson without that kind of reckoning, but this isn’t a reckoning. This is simply an elimination of history. The other thing we need to note is that the changing of these names, the denaming of these schools in this way, according to this rationale, it will do nothing to help the children of San Francisco. It will do nothing to improve their education. Furthermore, it doesn’t change history. It doesn’t even have a material impact on how history is going to have to be taught in the United States, because there will be no way to reckon with that history or to tell that history without the names that are now being taken off of the schools in San Francisco.

    Now, is it a moral act to put a name on a school or any institution? Of course it is. Is it a moral act to take that name off? Of course it is. It comes with all kinds of moral significance, but what we’re looking at here is simply reckless denaming to serve a current ideology. There were some in San Francisco who understood exactly what was going on. Gerald Kanapa, the identified as the father of a kindergartner at a San Francisco school that wasn’t on the list, he said, “This is a bit of a joke. It’s almost like a parody of leftist activism.” Lopiat Junior, identified as vice president of San Francisco’s George Washington High School Alumni Association, was also angry with the decision made by the school board. He said, “We feel that whether socialist, conservative or independent, if you honor truth in history, politics needs to be set to the side. We don’t want to erase things.”

    But erasure isn’t exactly what’s going on here. Joe Eskenazi also pointed out that what the school board is supposed to be about, which is educating children, is actually relegated to a lesser responsibility. He wrote about what he called the historic travesty of the action taken by the school board. He wrote this. “One day after that seven hour discussion and vote to defrock Lincoln and 43 other namesakes, including George Washington, Paul Revere, and even El Dorado and the mission, parents of public school children received an email from the district with the anodyne and innocuous subject line, ‘Considerations and Preparing for In-Person Teaching.'” He writes, “Tucked away into the third paragraph of the email’s third section was this causal declaration: ‘It is unlikely that we’ll be able to offer most middle and high school students the opportunity for in-person learning this school year.'”

    Oh, yeah. About that. He also noted that the school board acted in extreme haste to dename these schools, but it doesn’t act in much haste about much of anything else. “This remarkably flawed process combined with the relative expediency the district has demonstrated in moving to change some one-third of its school names stands in stark contrast to the sclerotic nature of nearly every other SFUSD related matter.”

    As I mentioned with namesake James Lick, there also seems to be a lack of understanding about the basic facts and at least some accusations have been made that the same thing was true of others, with at least one person pointing out that the school board seemed to be acting upon information from a Wikipedia entry when it came to one of the names and actually read the Wikipedia article wrongly.

    Carl Naulty, writing an article for the San Francisco Chronicle, that’s right there in San Francisco itself, pointed out that there’s an illogic to this. As he wrote, “To follow the board’s logic to a logical conclusion, this city is due for a new birth of name changing. We should start with the name of the place. San Francisco was named by missionaries for a Roman Catholic,” saying, “Clearly that fits the guidelines for a new name. Washington, Jackson, Clay, Stockton, Columbus, Mission, Portola, Sutter, Vallejo, Valencia, Junipero Serra, Palau Polk, Larkin, Mason, Taylor, Grant, and any street name for a military officer has to go. The Presidio of San Francisco should be renamed. Besides the school, there are two streets and a park named for Lincoln. Think of all those streets in the western part of the city. Anza, Balboa, Cabrio, honoring colonist or conquistadors in alphabetical order to Yorba. I don’t know who Yorba was, but it sounds suspicious.”

    Well, indeed, on the list of those names that have to come off are anything that has to do with what the school board identified as colonization, and that includes all of the historic Roman Catholic missions that were established by Roman Catholic missionaries in what we now know as California history. That’s a part of imperialism, they say, that’s a part of colonialism. The names have to come off. But as Mr. Naulty points out, you have to start with the name of the city itself, and that just points to the rest of this. This is a feel good effort driven by a leftist ideology. It comes down to a form of neolism masquerading as historical judgment. This isn’t a responsible historical judgment. A responsible historical judgment couldn’t be done in this length of time, couldn’t be reduced to a spreadsheet and couldn’t be so predictable.

    But as we try to think about this, and as Christians, we have a particular, very weighty responsibility when it comes to history. In the Bible, we have a lot of evidence of how we are to, on biblical terms, judge history, how we are to think of the individuals whose stories and lives are revealed in scripture. We come to understand that historical reckoning is something we are called to do, but ultimately the reckoning is going to come by the judgment of God. But even as Christians, when we understand the moral weight of history, we also understand it falls on us as a matter of stewardship and responsibility, a very important, a very urgent responsibility. A complex responsibility, a responsibility that has to take into account the Providence of God in history, that has to take into full account the depravity and sinfulness of humanity. A reckoning that has to take into account what it means to look at world history in the context of century by century, millennium by millennium, what it means to make judgments that we know we will incur judgment for ourselves.

    • Technically, are we not all colonizers at some level? Even those “Native Americans” migrated to North America. and displaced a prehistoric culture of homo sapiens. Polynesians migrated to the Islands of what is now the Hawaii Island chain. If we accept the science that Homo sapiens developed from early Hominids originated in Africa and then migrated out of Africa to Europe and beyond then every human being is a colonizer. I would argue that most major evolutionary advances of the human species led to the displacement of less capable indigenous populations or moved into unoccupied regions and took dominant control.

      Anytime one population displaces and takes political control over the minority population it has colonized that area. Most of America’s major cities north of Richmond saw massive migratory shifts of one population group into those cities that began when labor was needed in their factories for the war efforts in post depression America.

      Ultimately the European populations that dominated New York, Philadelphia, Detroit, Chicago, Baltimore and so many others were displaced or abandoned their ties to those cities. Some of this was less of a reaction to the new entrants but rather as an opportunity to move up economically and socially which resulted from increased mobility via the automobile and accelerated by the Interstate highway system. As southern blacks colonized and began to dominate those cities the transfer of political control to the colonizers was not always peaceful. Ironically the same people who espouse the idea that colonization is inherently bad do not seem to see that those advocating for non-discriminatory housing are promoting a form of colonization.

      Colonization is merely an avenue for those that wish to pursue life, liberty, and happiness in a new relatively resource rich area.

  4. The only difference between a Pirate and a Privateer is that the Privateer and the government were partners. Nothing has changed.

  5. “I had a fun post ready explaining how almost every professional sports team name was vulnerable to woke attack.”

    Even HS teams suffer from chronic Wokeism which prompted this well-intended missive to the Hurley, WI Iron County Miner (Published Weekly read Daily) two years ago as we speak:

    The developing “Hurley Midgets” mascot removal debacle suggests it’s necessary to begin ‘review processes’ for select other Wisconsin HS mascots: The Altoona Railroaders, Ashland Oredockers, Clintonville Truckers, and the Manitowoc Shipbuilders;

    Altoona Railroaders:
    -Railroads are made from steel, are powered by coal/gas/oil/electricity (torn from the bosom of Mother Gaia**), and carry coal/gas/oil**. They also symbolize sprawling western expansion, and displacing Native Americans.
    -A+: Post-modern Neo-Liberals think trains are the answer to, well, pretty much everything. (SEE: CA Bullet Train)
    -A++: They transport critically important commodities like Brie, Chablis, Wheat Grass Tea, and bicycling accoutrement.
    Ashland Oredockers:
    -Ships/Tankers (see: Manitowoc Shipbuilders) are made from steel/petroleum by-products**, are powered by evil coal/gas/oil/electricity** (sometimes EVIL Nuclear) and carry coal/gas/oil**. They also can be tied to the Slave Trade & U.S. Imperialism.
    -A+: If they’re involved in Eco-Tourism, they’re granted a pass.
    -A++: They transport critically important commodities like Brie, Chablis, Wheat Grass Tea, and bicycling accoutrement.
    Clintonville Truckers:
    -Trucks are made with steel/petroleum by-products**, are powered by gas/diesel/oil/electricity**, and carry coal/gas/oil**.
    -A+: Funny mudflap designs.
    -A++ They transport critically important commodities like Brie, Chablis, Wheat Grass Tea, and bicycling accoutrement.
    -A+++: They deliver the Iron County Miner!!
    Manitowoc Shipbuilders:
    -Ships/Tankers (see: Ashland Oredockers) are made from steel/petroleum by-products**, are powered by coal/gas/electricity**/(sometimes EVIL nuclear) and carry coal/gas/oil**, can be tied to the Slave Trade & U.S. Imperialism, and are loaded at (see: Ashland Oredockers)
    -A+: They employ Union workers that earn a living wage and vote democrat.
    -A++: They transport critically important commodities like Brie, Chablis, Wheat Grass Tea, and bicycling accoutrement.

    The woke must see these names are EVIL personified and **destructive to the ENVIRONMENT.

    As a pro-environment and woke citizen, I find these mascot names cruel and demeaning (still working on the racism angle). If I’m offended, everyone else that’s as nice as I think I am must be offended as well. They must be removed and replaced with something that won’t distress tender sensibilities

    Helpful alternatives include, but are not limited to:
    The Altoona “Save-The-Tunas.’
    The Ashland “Less-Ore-Is-More.”
    The Clintonville “Hillaryistas.”
    The Manitowoc “Ewoks.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.