Minnesota National Guard Pays 77K to an LGBTQ Magazine for ‘Recruitment’ – Opinion

In the months past, Senator Armed Services Committee listened carefully to the grim news about military recruiting at an all-time low. The Command Sergeant Major of Minnesota National Guard Recruitment said that, despite this dire forecast, he still believed he would find recruits.

“The more people that we can show what we do and what we’re about, the more people are going to take interest,” Command Sgt. Maj. Shawn Kor, of the Minnesota National Guard’s Recruitment and Retention Battalion, explained to WCCO. “Minnesota is a great state and Minnesotans are proud people and we offer them a way to give back to Minnesota and their country.”

Yeah, about that showing “what we do and what we’re about” part. Washington Free Beacon uncovered the true recruitment goals for Minnesota National Guard.

The Minnesota Army National Guard paid tens of thousands of dollars to advertise in an LGBT publication that has promoted transgenderism and “queer” identities among children.

The National Guard, which operates through the Department of Defense, between 2019 and 2022 awarded $76,951 to Minneapolis-based Lavender magazine, paying for advertising campaigns in an effort to “reach the LGBTQ community” and “lend credibility to the National Guard.” Between May 2021 and May 2022 alone, it paid $22,224 to the LGBT magazine, according to a federal government contract disclosure. The advertising campaign appears to be related to the Minnesota National Guard’s “LGBT Special Emphasis Council.”

That’s a lot of money dumped into advertisement to one specific group. They may as well have lit it on fire, because frankly, it’s already failed on the credibility front. While the LGBTQ Plus, Plus, Plus community might feel that the Minnesota National Guard has more credence, among the caliber of people who the military would normally attract, it is clear the National Guard — and the entire military apparatus — has already lost credibility. Why would they have recruitment issues?

Command Sergeant. Maj. Kor waxed enthusiastic about his recruitment goals for CBS News. It seemed that he believed the advertising campaign would be a success. The type of youth who were built to serve in the military are not interested in inclusion or diversity, and they also don’t believe that the military should be promoting WOKE and vaccine restrictions.

“Be All That You Can Be,” and “Army Strong,” has sadly devolved into “What’s Your Pronoun?” and “Gender Flexible, Guns Optional.”

If the military keeps this up, they won’t only have a recruitment problem, but a readiness one.

Maybe that’s a part of the plan.

Jeff Charles (my colleague) also reported on this subject with the military. He had these to say:

Interviews with experts and members of the Armed Forces revealed the difficulties they have in recruiting new troops. Retired Army Lt. Gen. Thomas Spoehr, who heads the Heritage Foundation’s Center for National Defense, told the news outlet that he believes this is a “systemic, long-term recruiting drought that is not going to ameliorate anytime soon.”

He added: “People I talk to say this year is bad, 2023 is going to be worse, and there’s no saying that 2024 is not going to be worse still.”

Buzz Patterson was my colleague and wrote it a few months ago.

Do you want to be a part of a military which puts political goals above patriotism and success? Who wants to serve senior leaders who don’t understand or embrace the traditional meritocracy of the world’s once greatest military force? Not many.

Nope. During the Senate Committee hearings, while the military heads of the Army, the Navy, the Air Force, and even the Marines weaved a song and dance about obesity, drug use, criminal history, and other physical problems among 16-21-year-olds which makes them unfit for military service, it doesn’t account for the fact that when asked in a Department of Defense poll: “How likely is it you will serve in the military?” only 11 percent responded in the affirmative.

Multi-generational families are losing the desire to preserve their military lineage. It is no longer the military that their grandfathers and dads served in.



So, I think among the 16-21-year-olds who would qualify for the military, there’s a bigger problem. The young people want a sense that they have a purpose in life and a meaning to their lives. The military was once a symbol of something. The military used to represent a sacrifice, and an exclusive brotherhood and sisterhood. The minute your purpose becomes inclusion of anyone who feels like they want to play soldier, and pronoun adherence, you’ve kind of lost the argument. It is not unique anymore; in fact, the military has lost much of its originality.

About Post Author

Follow Us