I've been called a raving right wing nut job and a kneejerk conservative. In fact, I'm neither. I do lean to the right, but many of the positions of the extreme right completely turn me off.
As an example, let's talk about gays in the military. I'm for it. I see nothing wrong with gays in the military.
But GOC, what about the "unit cohesivness" argument? You know the fact that the heterosexuals will be uncomfortable around gay people.
That's funny. That's the same argument that was used about integrating the armed forces. Sure, there was some racism, but it passed or was snuffed out. I'm not saying it was completely wiped out, but if someone is shooting at you I don't think you really give a shit if the guy next to you is black or prefers to get it on with other guys.
Anyway, this also gives me a chance to do one of my favorite things: Clinton bashing.
It turns out, that in the race to smear as many presidents as possible in a vain attempt to create some sort of legacy for Blowjob Clinton, we now see that Harry Truman may have been quite the racist. Nevertheless, that didn't stop him from doing the right thing and integrating the armed forces. I'm no big Truman fan, but that took a lot of courage. It was the right thing to do and he did it. Remember it was Truman who had a sign on his desk that said, "The buck stops here".
Clinton, on the other hand, is a coward. He ran all over the world apologizing for every thing that this country did, but never apologized for anything he did. He had a chance to make a difference in the military, but cowardly took the path of "Don't ask, don't tell". Yeah, it would have taken guts to do that, just like it took guts for Truman to do what he did. Truman had courage. Clinton didn't.
You can see his cowardice throughout his presidency. Clinton didn't want to be president to make a difference, he wanted to be president just to be president. He could be the most powerful man in the world. He could ride in the helicopter. He could ride in Air Force 1. He could bang the babes, or get blowjobs from a chubby airheaded intern.
He stabbed his fellow Dimocrats in the back on NAFTA (A good thing) and on welfare reform (Another good thing) to get reelected. He didn't really care if these were good policies or not. He took some polls, convened some focus groups, and told the people what they wanted to hear and pissed off a whole shitload of Dimocrats (Another good thing). In some ways, Clinton was a pretty good Republican president. On the downside, he did emasculate the CIA and fuck up morale in the armed forces. And for all you liberals who like to scream "Quagmire!" , how come we're still in Kosovo? We were only supposed to be there for a year.
Back to gays in the military.
But GOC, what about the gays coming on to the straights? Or what about the gays boinking the other gays.
I was in the Navy for four years and I'm sure I must have served with some closet homosexuals and none of them ever came on to me. As for the boinking problem, where it's against the rules for dudes to be boinking babes make it against the rules for dudes to be boinking dudes or babes to be getting it on with other babes.
In Wednesday's Atlanta Urinal and Constipation they published this op-ed by Leonard Pitts. I don't agree with Leonard too often, but I do this time. An excerpt:
As Exhibit A, I refer you to a little-noticed news item from last month. It was about three retired members of the U.S. military who disclosed that they were gay. What made it noteworthy is that these were not just any three grunts, but two generals and an admiral.Specifically, they were U.S. Army Brig. Gens. Keith Kerr and Virgil Richard and Coast Guard Rear Adm. Alan Steinman, who collectively represent nearly nine decades of service to the nation.
That service includes intelligence work, duty in Vietnam and important research into maritime medicine, none of which would have been possible had their sexual orientation been known.
Exactly. Talent is talent regardless of sexual orientation.
Last month, they acknowledged what has long been obvious: ''Don't ask'' is bad policy. Bad as a practical matter because it costs us valuable men and women like the nine gay linguists, specialists in Arabic and Korean (think there's any call for their services these days?), who were given the boot in 2002.
What about "in your face" homosexuality?
It would be against the Uniform Code of Military Justice. I mean you're not gonna see some guy wear a button on his uniform that says "I'm queer and I'm proud". A person can be openly gay without rubbing it in your face. Like I said, I work with gay people. Their sexual orientation is none of my business and they don't make it my business. They don't run around with signs saying "I'm gay". It's not an issue and it shouldn't be.
Don't ask, don't tell is a stupid policy. It should end. Unfortunately Bush will not be the president to do it.
Too bad.