General observations on just about anything.
If it passes I have a new name for it...
Published on May 31, 2010 By Nitro Cruiser In Politics

...but first some background.

Disclaimer: I'm really uninterested in another persons sex life (other than my wife that is), that's their business. Also having spent half my life in the military, I fully realize that gays have and are serving their country in that capacity, thank you (and all folks, past and present) for your service. I don't dislike people personally for their lifestyle. I'm sure most serve(d) honorably, and a few were trouble makers, just as their heterosexual counter parts.

What does concern me is the total disregard of the people currently serving in the military today. Not that it was sneaked in on a Friday, prior to a long weekend (again, a reoccurring theme with this administration). Not that it was sandwiched in with other more pressing items  and $$$ goodies for the military (it was). The Pentagon was to have its finding (consultation with military members) complete by December. This administration, for political expedience, couldn't wait that long. They have showed their total disregard for our military folks opinion, just as they have for the American peoples opinion on other recent issues. They are willing to force an issue without regard for cost (there always is a cost) or plan to implement.

Why the rush? Were the people that shouted Obama down, at the recent Boxer fundraiser, on the issue anxious to enlist in the military. Hardly. Why is this important to gay activists? Are they that concerned about our military? No. They realize the way to "normalcy" is through the military. Their means to an end, their agenda. It worked for minorities and it worked for women, so it will work for gays, right? Well being a minority or a woman is pretty much an inalienable fact, with little room for interpretation. It doesn't involve personal tastes in lifestyles (I can hear the disagreements now). What will be the next "oppressed" group after this one? Time, and anyone's guess, will tell.

If this passes, this will be the first time in history that a protected "special" group of people will be treated differently in the military. Different how? They will not have their own facilities, so they will cohabitate with the sex they are physically attracted to, with only their own sense of discipline as a guide.  The finial vestiges that "helped" people consider their actions (Don't Ask Don't Tell) will be gone. Rest assured, some deviants will be attracted that might not otherwise be. Is it worth even one unwanted incident? What if it is your family member? IMO, to utterly dismiss the sexual aspect of this issue is shortsighted and unrealistic. If someone told me that I would be living in close quarters, uninhibited, with women when I enlisted as a young man at the tender age of 17, I would have thought that was a benefit!

Whoa...hold your horses you say, men and women aren't allowed potential intimate contact on a daily basis in the military. That would be correct, but if that concept bothers you, why the double standard? How would you feel having some guy live in your wife or daughters (or a woman with your husband or son) military dorm room or barracks, shaving his face while she shaves her legs in the shower? I could tell you probably nothing would happen 90% of the time (there is fraternization now, and it is punishable), but there would be problems. Jealous spouses have left their soldiers, sailors, and airman just on suspicion. The opposite is also true. I understand that gays can be afflicted with these emotions, real or perceived, too. I don't foresee men's, women's or other's facilities on the horizon anytime soon.

What else can be exploited? Well let me give an example that many can relate too. When the presidents critics voice their opposition a bit too loud, what is one of the first counter accusations? Racism. And make no bones about it it is effective and used often (read some blogs and see for yourself). So what if a gay person doesn't like his/her evaluation? "My marks are low because you hate gays". Someone harasses you, you're just making the complaint up because you don't like gays. Do I believe this will be the norm? No, but it will happen and when it does it affects the effectiveness of a command.  The military is mired heavily in PCness lately the way it is. We can't afford this additional intrigue IMO, especially during two ongoing wars.

For any of its flaws, Don't Ask Don't Tell applied to everyone, straight or gay. IMO it protected both. This is decision is best left up to the personnel serving, not the politicians, not the activists. If this is something the bulk of our service people can adapt and handle effectively, I would humbly concede to them and the issue is done. Would the gay activists do the same? Can the folks asking for tolerance show some as well?  If it passes without military input, "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"(DADT) will become "Look, But Don't Touch" (LBDT).

Remember, you heard the term coined here first.

UPDATE 05/24/2017

Since this post in now locked for 2 years for whatever reason (most likely due to its longevity). I wanted to add the (sort of) conclusion of the Bradley, now Chelsea, Manning story that erupted in the comments. As you may or may not know Manning was pardoned of his espionage 35 year sentence by departing President Obama. With the current leftest push for clamping down on claimed foreign involvement in US affairs, I find the leniency they provide proven traitors they sympathize with, fascinating. Anyway, now Manning is free to live his/her live with military medical benefits for the rest of his years, on your dime of course. More here.


Comments (Page 6)
16 PagesFirst 4 5 6 7 8  Last
on Sep 16, 2010

There are cartoons that mock Reid its called 'Harry's Office' or something like that and these cartoons are HIGHLARIOUS!

You should check out Day By Day!  I think you would like it. It is very sarcastic.

on Sep 17, 2010

http://thehayride.com/2010/09/harrys-office/ 

Here you go!  Harry's Office, I think the second one was funnier.

on Sep 17, 2010

Doc, do you mean the cartoons drawn by Chris Muir? 

 

on Sep 17, 2010

the_Peoples_Party
Doc, do you mean the cartoons drawn by Chris Muir? 

 

Yes!  So she has another fan here?

on Sep 17, 2010
Reid has scheduled a vote next week to repeal the DADT law. It's attached as an amendment to the Defense Authorization Act.

With the abortion language and the repeal of 'don't ask don't tell, Senators Wicker and McCain won't vote for this bill. Gonna be an interesting filibuster effort.
on Sep 17, 2010

Lula, that's what makes people sick about government, there are always stings attached. If a Bill is a winner it should need to be attached to another. One Bill one issue, this is what is screwing up this country and the politicians don't seem to get that.

on Sep 18, 2010

that's what makes people sick about government, there are always stings attached.

Absolutely true. It's a sad state of affairs that's been going on for a long time.

The fix is to get transparency in and corruption out of government.

 

on Sep 20, 2010

Got this "take action" email today....

URGENT: Senate votes Tuesday (Sept. 21) on homosexuals in military

Call your senators immediately: Do not repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"

September 20, 2010


The United States Senate will vote tomorrow (Tuesday) on a bill which will overturn the law that currently prohibits open homosexuals from serving in the U.S. military.

If passed, this bill will introduce sexual tension into the intimate living quarters military members share. This will be devastating for military readiness, retention, and recruitment.

It also will likely mean the end of military careers for conservative officers and chaplains who have deeply held moral and religious convictions that homosexual conduct should not be promoted in the armed forces.

The clear and present danger this bill poses to religious liberty is confirmed by this quote from Lt. Gen. Thomas P. Bostick, who is the deputy chief of staff in charge of personnel matters for the U.S. Army (emphasis added):

"Unfortunately, we have a minority of service members who are still racists and bigoted, and you will never be able to get rid of all of them. But these people opposing this new policy will need to get with the program, and if they can't, they need to get out." (Source: Washington Times, 9/17/10)

Over 1,100 retired flag and general officers have signed a letter expressing their resistance to any change in current law, saying it will severely compromise the mission of the United States military and "impact leadership at all levels."

Additionally, 66 retired chaplains have signed a letter expressing their conviction that overturning current law will likely mean the end of conservative chaplains in the U.S. military.

To make matters worse, this bill will also turn every U.S. military hospital in the world into an abortion clinic, and will guarantee amnesty and a path to citizenship for certain illegal aliens.

Take Action

Click Here NOW to find the direct telephone numbers for your two senators along with suggested talking points for your call. It is urgent that you call your senators immediately. We need to burn up the phone lines into Washington, D.C. to say that this must not happen on our watch.

on Sep 21, 2010

Looks like the Bill was defeated. Now the debate will be was it DADT or the "Dream Act" that killed it. No matter what I believe it was a travesty to include these attachments to a Bill our troops need to continue their job. Harry Reid likes this tactic very much, just not so sure it is going to work for him this time. This boy has cried wolf once too often.

on Sep 21, 2010

it was a travesty to include these attachments to a Bill our troops need to continue their job.

One Bill one issue

I personally don't have a problem with gays in the military (anybody willing to go out and kill and/or die for the rest of us automatically deserves some respect, in my book, even if, in their spare time, they choose to use their digestive tract in a way nature never intended), but I agree with the above statements completely. If they want to repeal it, send it up by itself. Like you said, if it's a winner, it'll pass. All this attaching unrelated things to bills is absolutely ridiculous--and it's normal. "It's how we do things in Washington."

As far as DADT goes, instead of repealing it, they should extend it to heterosexuals, and then extend it further out into the civilian workplace. At least leave enough of it intact to where it's like, "If I don't ask, please don't tell me."

on Sep 22, 2010

For all we know the "Dream Act" (back door amnesty for certain illegals) that killed it. It was a political ploy that was it. I would still like to see the DoD's report out first (due in Dec.) to get their opinion, because that's what matters to me, the military position. Why should those that don't have to deal with the issue have a say? If I were still active I wouldn't like it, but if the military wants it then they are the ones that have to deal with it now. I just hate to see people used as pawns in a much larger (if you can believe it) arena than the military. Gay activists are attempting to make their life-style mainstream via military adoption. The thing is the military isn't supposed to be about life-style or sexual preference, they have a defined mission. Serving hetero and homosexuals can keep their private lives private. Does everything have to be political fodder?

on Sep 22, 2010

Serving hetero and homosexuals can keep their private lives private.

Bingo.

on Sep 24, 2010

I would still like to see the DoD's report out first (due in Dec.) to get their opinion, because that's what matters to me, the military position. Why should those that don't have to deal with the issue have a say?

Right! The Report does matter--bigtime and even the four military chiefs have asked Congress not to vote for this before the Pentagon relaesed it's position on what repeal would mean.  

It's very important to this issue, but Harry who is trying to get re-elected would NOT wait.

 

 

 

 

on Sep 24, 2010

Gay activists are attempting to make their life-style mainstream via military adoption.

Right. Think about it...they are working their way into all the main institutions. One step at a time is how the homosexual juggernaut operates. 

 

The thing is the military isn't supposed to be about life-style or sexual preference, they have a defined mission.

Ya, but you are a common sense person and there doesn't seem to be much common sense out there in the public square anymore.

 

on Sep 24, 2010

Gay activists are attempting to make their life-style mainstream via military adoption.

Right. Think about it...they are working their way into all the main institutions. One step at a time is how the homosexual juggernaut operates.

I believe their goal is to co-opt what blacks went through during the desegregation of the military in the late 40's. The problem there is how can one compare a sexual preference with skin color? The military is there to fight not find a sole mate or discuss sex, race is obvious as is gender.

BTW is was progressive Democrat Woodrow Wilson who segregated the military in the first place, setting it back almost 30 years.

16 PagesFirst 4 5 6 7 8  Last