Last Updated:September 30 @ 07:52 pm

New combat policy ignores biological realities

By USA Today

Outgoing Defense Secretary Leon Panetta's decision to open virtually all positions in the military to women, including those in infantry and front-line combat units, is the wrong policy, adopted for the wrong reasons and implemented the wrong way.

It was adopted in the wrong way because such a significant change in longstanding military personnel policy, with potentially serious implication for the effectiveness of the fighting force, should not be made without holding congressional hearings in advance to explore all the issues involved.

It was adopted for the wrong reasons because it was driven by political and social considerations. Some women have complained that their chances of career advancement within the military are hampered by their exclusion from ground combat positions, and the American Civil Liberties Union has filed a lawsuit on their behalf.

The Obama administration probably does not want to be in the position of arguing against expanded opportunities for women. However, the Supreme Court has always granted great deference to Congress and the military in the operation of our armed forces. Maximizing combat effectiveness, not career opportunities, must always be their top priority.

It is the wrong policy because it ignores fundamental biological differences between the sexes, and the natural implications of those differences. While much is made of new "high-tech" forms of warfare, we have seen in Iraq and Afghanistan that ground combat still requires levels of sheer physical strength, speed and endurance that are relatively rare among women. If current physical standards are maintained, few women will be able to meet them, and there will be demands that they be lowered. If those standards are lowered, the effectiveness of the fighting force will be directly compromised.

In addition, troops in ground combat are often in sustained operations for extended periods. Their living conditions offer no privacy for personal hygiene functions or sleeping. This places an undue burden on small-unit leaders to find ways to provide privacy for the separate sexes during high stress and dangerous operations.

Women in the military already serve with courage, putting their lives on the line. However, it is neither in their interest, nor the country's, for them to serve in front-line combat positions.

Retired lieutenant general Jerry Boykin, executive vice president of the Family Research Council, served in the Army for 36 years. He was an original member of the Delta Force and a Green Berets commander.

(c) Copyright 2013 USA TODAY, a division of Gannett Co. Inc.

---

A service of YellowBrix, Inc.

VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
Rate this post:
Rating: 9.0/10 (134 votes cast)
New combat policy ignores biological realities, 9.0 out of 10 based on 134 ratings





Don't leave yet! Add a comment below or check out these other great stories:

116 Comments

  1. capricorn1Comment by capricorn1
    January 26, 2013 @ 7:22 am

    when the realization sets in that those flag drapped coffins are filled with american moms and daughters along with fathers and sons who will be patting leon panneta on his back and saying good job leon?
    the democrat and rino politician have turned our gubment into a laughing stock.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.7/5 (65 votes cast)
    • peletierComment by peletier
      January 26, 2013 @ 1:00 pm

      Please let American know as soon as Michelle Obama, Ms. Panetta, Hillary and Sebelious, join the Marines expeditiionay force…

      Then, American familieds will think about following this idiotic and stupid order from Pannetta and Obama…

      Before his stupid announcement, many Americans had respect for Leon Pennetta. Since, he is just another Obama poppet.

      HAVE FAITH. THEY WILL NEVER GET AWAY WITH IT.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.7/5 (35 votes cast)
    • xman3Comment by xman3
      January 26, 2013 @ 1:40 pm

      As the article stated (and the news media doesn’t): “Troops in ground combat are often in sustained operations for extended periods. Their living conditions offer no privacy for personal hygiene functions or sleeping. This places an undue burden on small-unit leaders to find ways to provide privacy for the separate sexes during high stress and dangerous operations.”
      That is my concern. How many ladies will willingly live under these conditions? I don’t know any. Ladies in support rolls are doing a fine job. I don’t buy into the argument of lack of ‘career advancement’. On the other hand, as Hillery said “What difference does it make?”

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.9/5 (26 votes cast)
    • wumingrenComment by wumingren
      January 26, 2013 @ 3:23 pm

      xman3, imagine what it is like when the guys on the front run out of toilet paper, even though it is an item that can easily be supplied just on head count alone. Now, figure what will happen when the women run out of tampons and kotex. How do you resupply units with varying numbers of females. What a friggin’ pain in the rear. Also, I’ve known a few women whose time of the month was pure hell for everyone, including the woman especially. How is a woman who is on the rag and raging, unable to function, going to deal with buggin’ out under enemy attack? Putting women on the front lines is stupid beyond belief.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.7/5 (22 votes cast)
    • mysticComment by mystic
      January 26, 2013 @ 4:57 pm

      That’s where my head went Wumingren. The American public doesn’t understand the living conditions on ‘most’ of these temporary ‘outings’ (which can last indefinitely in many present cases)…and it’s no picnic to be sure for either gender.

      It’s not the a woman…or some women can’t do the job…it’s a mixed bag when you put both men and women within the theater of battle that causes the headaches…for everyone. Not just the battle field alone, but the day to day requirements of living within the theater of battle that becomes more than difficult to manage. In my opinion, this causes one more brick on the backs of our military units that simply does not belong there. Are troops are over burdened as is and don’t need more put on them.

      Women in our forces are an asset. Plain and simple. Many are well suited for the various non combat positions they hold. Many have moved into flight combat, which we are finding they are well suited for. Take each gender and then each unique person for their natural abilities and talents and use them to the advantage of the ‘team’. When did this thinking go by the way sides in favor of ‘social and political’ PC’ism?

      God bless all those who serve with their life blood and heart. No force on the planet has the dedication, training and guts that our armed forces does. Take Washington out of the mix and allow those who not only understand an armed unit…but understand already what does and does not work.

      ~M

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.6/5 (18 votes cast)
  2. bodrupinhammerComment by bodrupinhammer
    January 26, 2013 @ 9:20 am

    To use the words of according to many of the congressmen and women and distinguished media personalities, all of them progressives, the most accomplished Secretary of State. “What difference does it make.”
    Women in combat? What difference does it make. With the rules of engagement the military has it theater. Dictated by the DOD. It does not matter much who or what you have on the front lines. The possibility of getting shot are the same. You may engage the enemy if they are posing a threat to you or any of those directly associated with your operation, and you can return fire only after you have been fired upon.
    What difference does it make.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 3.9/5 (28 votes cast)
  3. fabianComment by fabian
    January 26, 2013 @ 9:46 am

    If performance standards are kept the way they are I don’t see a problem. If they are lowered to accommodate some political vision then we have a problem. But I bet you that they are going to lower the standards, give it 10 years; 10 chin ups? No 2 are enough. When do you do chin ups in combat anyway?

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.0/5 (38 votes cast)
    • Jota_Comment by Jota_
      January 26, 2013 @ 10:16 am

      “If performance standards are kept the way they are I don’t see a problem” – fabian

      The problem will never be performance standards. It will be the bigoted, biased men who want to oppress women and keep them down (real and imaginary, mostly imaginary)

      Any way that is how it has played out across America for the last forty years. Failing to meet the standard it had to be someone else’s fault. So the outcome was rigged to achieve the desired results.

      Which has caused some of the individuals to occupy a position they were not qualified to hold. The problem is knowing which one, so one suspects them all.

      The other problem and it could be worse. If standards are maintained then there will become two classes of women.

      Hardly the thing of a democracy (we all pull our weight) or a republic (represented by someone like you, who wants to be represented by someone not their equal)

      What will be the end result. Individuals holding positions because of who they are or some individuals having greater rights because of who they are

      Neither of which resembles a republic

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.0/5 (24 votes cast)
    • sumitchComment by sumitch
      January 26, 2013 @ 12:02 pm

      Something that Panetta doesn’t know and probably doesn’t care is that Israel tried this several years ago and it failed. And it will fail for us for the same reasons. I don’t think that anyone can mark Israelis as trying to hold women down, cowards or unpatriotic.

      Why did it fail? Because it is the natural instinct of men to protect women. It’s in their blood so to speak. It’s as natural as breathing. How much more chauvinistic can you get? (Incidentally, the word Chauvinistic comes from the French and it is a love of country. My statement is a weak attempt at sick humor).

      Rather than reinforce or supplement our military and benefit our country, this will put more of the military in harm’s way. I understand that some women see their exclusion because of men not wanting the competition and they believe it. Personally I’ve never encountered it in sixty years of work. We know that a lioness will die to protect their cubs and feel the same for the females in our lives. Most men cry when their mothers die. Rarely do they when it is their dads (it’s not manly we were taught) Never-the-less, I’m sure that they are some few that will act on this feeling. Many more have far different and perhaps noble reasons. Call it macho if you wish. I’m also sure that there are women that can outperform some men on the battlefield. I’m sure that females can be as patriotic as any man and for the same reasons.

      OK, I’m a chauvinist. I prefer to think of it is being a gentleman because I was raised to honor and respect the ladies. I open doors, light their cigarettes and walk on the curb side of the street. I’d throw my cloak over a pool of muddy water if the occasion ever came. So shoot me. Respect for women is taught in the military (at least in the officer corps).

      Jota, keeping women off the front lines is the highest compliment that men can pay women. We place them above our own lives. We already place you on a pedestal, not because we fear the competition but because we count you as among our greatest treasures. I’m diagreeing with you not to be argumentive or just male. I ‘m a pig I guess.

      A female’s life lost in combat is not worth any political gain.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.9/5 (50 votes cast)
    • nhpollackComment by nhpollack
      January 26, 2013 @ 1:18 pm

      sumitch,

      Apparently you and I either benefited, or suffered, from the same upbringing. We’re close in age, I’m 67 and like you, am a confirmed knuckle dragging chauvinist pig. I’m such an oppressive monster that I won’t let my wife wash the dishes, scrub the pots and pans, maintain the ceramic stove top, carry 300lbs. of water softener salt down to the basement every two months, schlepp the 50lb. bags of birdseed, sharpen the cutlery, maintain the outdoor maintenance equipment, plumbing, electric, heating, general home infrastructure, shine her shoes and don’t let her cook more than two or three times/week (I only made her sick once. The fragile creature can’t tolerate chili dogs).

      She works a straight job four days/week and I work from home so it just seems to be more efficient and sensible. Besides, this way she doesn’t have to “trouble her pretty little head and get all tired out”. I’m sure you understand the advantages of them not getting too tired, don’t you? I do, however, let her clean her own firearms as I believe in constant reinforcement of familiarity with all defensive tools, not just fangs and claws.

      I realize that by doing these things, I’m consigning her to a submissive and subordinate role and keeping from being all she can be, but she seems to appreciate it. She may just be faking it to bolster my fragile male ego though. One never knows, do one?

      I too, open doors, used to light cigarettes when I knew women who smoked, walk on the curb side and even, literally, threw down a coat for one to prance across a puddle (I love watching them prance, don’t you?).

      I consider women to be G-d’s art, love everything about them, even the things I hate, and would put myself between she who I love, honor and cherish and any threat.

      I only hope that one day they get to be truly equal so we have a fighting chance in the constant struggle between the Venusians and the Martians.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.2/5 (20 votes cast)
    • navywifeComment by navywife
      January 27, 2013 @ 10:42 am

      I find myself disagreeing and agreeing… My dad (a Marine) gave me a great example of how a gentleman treats a lady. When I was single, I refused to give any man a second date if he didn’t open doors for me. That said, my dad always cleaned my guns for me. He taught me how, and when I was on my own, I cleaned them. But after a day of shooting together, he would always clean all the guns. And he shined my shoes. My husband hates shining shoes, but he takes them to the cobbler for me!

      A good (male) friend once said women have the power to completely change to world. If we would insist on men behaving as gentlemen, they would. It is incumbent on us ladies to hold men to a higher standard.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 3.6/5 (7 votes cast)
    • nhpollackComment by nhpollack
      January 27, 2013 @ 3:21 pm

      navywife,
      Your dad was a great deal more “liberal” (if you’ll excuse the Anglo-Saxon expletive) about your dating. I don’t have any children, but if I had a daughter, she’d be shipped out to a convent in the Aleutian islands upon puberty and be release a year after menopause. M

      y wife jokes about how things might have gone if I had a daughter, but she’s pretty much a hard liner herself and we go back and forth about it. I think I would vacillate between the convent idea and being permanently wrapped around “daddy’s little girl’s little finger”.

      Your male friend is absolutely right as women really do rule. Insisting on gentlemanly behavior would get you gals pretty far down the road, but you have much stronger bargaining options vis a vis “sexual politics”, tears, pouts, etc. I don’t mean to imply that you employ those tactics. My wife never did and looks with disdain at those who do, but, when all else fails, I’ve known a pout accompanied by some discrete batting of long eyelashes to work wonders.

      If your nom de plume is accurate and your husband is in the Navy, I could see where he’d be delegating the shining of shoes to someone else. That would probably make him less than a Captain, I guess, or he’d have his aide doing it.

      Thank him for his service and thank you for keeping the home fires burning while he’s defending our country. I can’t imagine how tough it is for you if he’s away for a year or more at a time.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.5/5 (2 votes cast)
  4. nhpollackComment by nhpollack
    January 26, 2013 @ 10:06 am

    capricorn1,
    I’m with you 110%.

    bodrupinhammer,
    Kipling said, “The female of the species is deadlier than the male”, and any guy who has experience with the dear, frail creatures would never dispute it. While their ability to fight and kill is undisputed, their ability to hump 50-75lbs. of personal gear, ammo and assorted materiel over rough terrain at double time is questionable. They’re built differently and, while they generally have equal or better lower body strength, they don’t have the upper body strength.

    More importantly, it’s horrible enough seeing a man writhing around on the ground screaming in pain and calling for his mother with his entrails lying on the ground next to him, legs blown off and body covered with burns from an IED, Willy Peter round or any of the other weapons of war, but to see our wives, sisters, daughters in that same state would drive any sane, sentient man around the bend. While it would cause uncontrollable rage, it would reduce the ability to think clearly and fight effectively. Women are biologically designed to protect and nurture young; men to protect women. It would be a hard wired distraction in combat as the men would instinctively want to protect the woman fighting next to him whereas he’d normally believe the man fighting next to him would be able to take care of himself.

    This is the worst idea since allowing cross dressing in the ranks.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.6/5 (55 votes cast)
  5. brian0phillyComment by brian0philly
    January 26, 2013 @ 10:32 am

    Ignoring biological differences?

    Now I get it – the big fight by the left against “don’t ask, don’t tell” a few years back was all about saying to our soldiers, it’s OK if the government compels you to live on station in close quarters with guys who are obsessed with public acceptance of their sexual identity, and might be attracted to you just because of your gender.
    No need for separate facilities.
    No need to reign in their lusts and proclivities.
    Go ahead and sleep in the same room.
    Share the same toilet.
    Use the showers together.
    All just soldiers, right? OK?

    That battle was last year.
    This year, welcome to the infantry, ladies…

    Operational effectiveness takes another hit from stupid, blind social engineers who apparently have no respect for the purpose of a strong military force.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.9/5 (47 votes cast)
    • missmarpleComment by missmarple
      January 26, 2013 @ 11:49 am

      You forget that we have been in the services for years. While there have been problems, they will be taken care of as they have been in many other countries.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 1.5/5 (33 votes cast)
    • bna42Comment by bna42
      January 26, 2013 @ 12:03 pm

      missmarple, Are YOU in the service? Is so, are you agreeable to serving in a combat unit? Do you expect the military to accommodate you with private rooms, private bathroom facilities, etc?

      Are you ready for ALL women to visit their post offices and register with Selective Service when they turn 18 years of age?

      Your comment about “While there have been problems, they will be taken care of as they have been in many other countries” makes me wonder WHY you are willing to compare our military with that of those “other countries”? Do you realize that it is our military that has had to carry the load for most of those other countries because their military forces are not as well trained and combat effective? Will you support the ACLU after they file suit against the military because they refuse to lower their training standards in order to accommodate the women who can’t physically meet the requirements? How have “other countries” taken care of the problems you referred to?

      Will your attitude change when a woman steps on an IED, her clothing is shredded, she is lying there half naked and seriously injured and a male medic or corpsman is afraid to touch her because he fears he might be subjected to a sexual harassment charge if she survives?

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.7/5 (42 votes cast)
    • nhpollackComment by nhpollack
      January 26, 2013 @ 1:20 pm

      Big Red One,

      Hooah!

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 3.5/5 (6 votes cast)
  6. shafawnComment by shafawn
    January 26, 2013 @ 10:43 am

    This is just another way to ensure that Americans won’t want to get involved in another war for any reason no matter if we should or should not. Lower the population of the military and put women on the front line. What a bunch of cowards. World balance is hanging by a thread and all it takes is one flake from the middle east now to cut that thread and the middle east is FULL of flakes.

    OBAMA and his ilk do everything they can to destroy America from the inside out and we sit around with our thumbs in our .. noses thinking how wonderful we are that we have a black man in the white house.

    When are we going to get over that? This man is a socialist man… FORGET about his skin color.

    He is DESTROYING America!

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.9/5 (48 votes cast)
    • missmarpleComment by missmarple
      January 26, 2013 @ 11:46 am

      “This is just another way to ensure that Americans won’t want to get involved in another war for any reason no matter if we should or should not.”
      You know. or maybe not, that was exactly the same argument used about giving women the vote. We are kinder, gentler and less aggresive… BEESWAX! we are just as likely to approve war as men are. Look at history.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 1.3/5 (27 votes cast)
    • shafawnComment by shafawn
      January 26, 2013 @ 11:56 am

      I’m a woman marple.. get off me. I have a right to believe whatever I believe and I believe putting women on the front line will have a psychological effect on the country. That psychological effect will cause Americans not to want to get involved in anything in the world unless our own borders are at risk…
      Which is EXACTLY what the socialists want. That is the whole aim and goal.

      Thus the socialists can ensure Americans won’t get involved in corruption and manipulation of freedom in other countries.

      This is how the centrifugal force of freedom on the earth will be suppressed and move towards totalitarianism and new dictatorships will suddenly emerge and flourish.

      When it is understood that the United States is a toothless lion corruption in all parts of the earth will strengthen and turn and tear us to bits.

      Corruption

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.8/5 (35 votes cast)
    • missmarpleComment by missmarple
      January 26, 2013 @ 12:05 pm

      shafawn. Of course you have the right to believe whatever you want no matter how inconsistent with reality it is. We already have women on the front lines. In an asymetrical war like Afghanistan, women are always at risk. The psychological effect will be as it is now, ZERO.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 1.5/5 (23 votes cast)
    • missmarpleComment by missmarple
      January 26, 2013 @ 12:11 pm

      bna42, no, I’m not in the service. The fact we take the load for other countries doesn’t change the fact that women have been integrated in to the services of other countries for years and IT WORKS. They fought in WW II in the Russian army, in the French Maquis, in the the Yugoslav guerillas, in the Israeli army and on and on. We just need to get used to the idea.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 1.5/5 (24 votes cast)
    • bna42Comment by bna42
      January 26, 2013 @ 12:19 pm

      “They fought in WW II in the Russian army, in the French Maquis, in the the Yugoslav guerillas, in the Israeli army and on and on. We just need to get used to the idea.”

      missmarple, I don’t need to “get used to the idea” because I have already completed my time in the military including combat tours. My opinion: Women in combat roles will create more problems than you can imagine. I also believe that putting women in combat is another attack on the efficiency of our military just like putting homosexuals in the military is a detriment.

      I refuse to “get used to the idea” because I know what happens when troop morale hits bottom, and I am certainly glad that my service time is done. I notice you didn’t comment on any of the questions I asked you about the problems that can be expected by women in the military. Are you afraid to discuss the issues?

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.4/5 (29 votes cast)
    • shafawnComment by shafawn
      January 26, 2013 @ 12:26 pm

      Right Right and you are probably of the persuasion that Comrade Clinton did a glorious job as Secretary of State and all questions to the Benghazi SHAME were perfectly answered and questions to her culpability put to rest.

      You probably have an Obama sticker on your car. haha Feminism has lost what made it feminine. At this point Feminism is a trashy socialistic ideal to make insecure women feel superior to men. If that’s what you want I don’t care sweetheart.. go for it. Feel gooooooood

      But the psychological effect of putting women on the front line WILL be felt and the result will be America will be less inclined to get involved with the loss of freedom and or murderous acts against innocents in other countries.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.6/5 (18 votes cast)
    • missmarpleComment by missmarple
      January 26, 2013 @ 1:24 pm

      BNA42 “Are you afraid to discuss the issues?” No, I didn’t discuss them because they show your lack of knowledge. We have a Congresswoman whose legs were blown of by an IED. We have women soldiers killed and wounded in just as gory a manner as men. Go visit Walter Reed if you don’t believe me. The idea that a medic (male or female) worries about about a sexual harassment charge when treating a wounded soldier is ludicrous, demeaning and insulting to all medics. No, I wouldn’t support the ACLU if they wanted to lower standards any more than I did when tried that, unsdccessfully, with Fire Department standards. Women soldiers have met and will continue to meet the physical standards demanded of men. They do so in the sevice acadamies and in basic training. Look, women are not weaklings. They can build themselves up to meet the average strength of men. You were in the service. You must have seen how male weaklings were able to meet the standards after training, and those who couldn’t, washed out. The same is true for women. I could meet those standards today at my age because I have always been fit. Not all women could meet the standards, but many, if not most, could. Okay?

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 1.4/5 (18 votes cast)
    • FrogmanComment by Frogman
      January 26, 2013 @ 1:46 pm

      Sorry missmarple the standards are already different. I am prior service and spent most of my time in special operations. My girlfriend of 7 years is active duty and I can tell you that the standards are different for women than they are for men. They don’t have to perform the same excercises nor the sae amount by age. Not to mention the weight standards are skewed differently. I’ve seen women that have ***** that look like a bag full of cats that still pass weight standards if it were a man they’d be on the bubble to get into standards or, get booted. Distraction gets people killed and combat units simply don’t need the added distraction.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.8/5 (21 votes cast)
    • bna42Comment by bna42
      January 26, 2013 @ 1:53 pm

      “No, I didn’t discuss them because they show your lack of knowledge”

      When you can’t discuss the obvious issues, you accuse me of a lack of knowledge. How typical! If you want to talk about a lack of knowledge, look at yourself. You are not in the military and you don’t even understand that as Frogman said earlier “The standards are already different for men and women. Women do modified exercises and are not required to do as many say pull ups etc… as men.”

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.7/5 (17 votes cast)
  7. recce1Comment by recce1
    January 26, 2013 @ 10:49 am

    The reason for the change is the progressive hope that when people start seeing quite a few women coming home in coffins they’ll demand that our military not be sent in harm’s way and that it be radically downsized. Then the funds can be spent on other social endeavors in order to expand the welfare state. This has been a goal of the progressive/socialists for over a generation.

    Some forty years ago while attending my brother’s wedding reception I sat beside a young woman where the discussion got to politics and somehow the issue of women and gays in the military came up. Perhaps it was because I was an Air Force officer in uniform. We all know the type that liberals were so wont to attribute as being Vietnam returnees who were drug using baby killing murdering rapists.

    To this young woman, the military was all about social experimentation. As such she believed in opening up all fields to women and gays, including combat specialties. To her, it was all about making the military less “militant,” not more effective. She wanted a gentler more feminist military. The concept that the purpose of the military was to win wars was incomprehensible to her. By the way, her name was Gloria Steinem.

    We’re extending our troops too thin for too long, canceling weapons that will be more effective, often not allowing our troops to carry live ammo, asking them to be social workers, giving them nebulous missions, letting their enemies know when they’ll have to withdraw, and generally setting them up to be labeled as losers and threats to our own country when they return home.

    Sadly, I don’t see that the views of the progressives have changed any over the last 40 years.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.8/5 (36 votes cast)
    • bna42Comment by bna42
      January 26, 2013 @ 12:35 pm

      “By the way, her name was Gloria Steinem.”

      I really expected you to say her name was “Miss Marple”.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.4/5 (16 votes cast)
    • recce1Comment by recce1
      January 26, 2013 @ 1:17 pm

      bna42, well… No, it wasn’t missmarple but I think she thinks in the same vein although she claims to be a conservative. But I liked you comment.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.3/5 (12 votes cast)
    • shafawnComment by shafawn
      January 26, 2013 @ 1:20 pm

      Marple doesn’t seem conservative to me.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.6/5 (14 votes cast)
  8. tncdelComment by tncdel
    January 26, 2013 @ 11:13 am

    This is one issue I, as a Conservative, will break from the fold on. Sorry, but I’m not buying that “biological differences” excuse. If a woman wants to fight on the frontlines, she should be allowed to do so. Women in the Israeli and Russian armies are quite capable. Why can’t ours be as well?

    Either give women equality all-across-the-board, or send them “back to the kitchen where they belong.” That pick ‘n choose **** is why I have no respect for PC feminists. Let’s not as Conservatives become hypocrites as well.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 1.8/5 (13 votes cast)
    • shafawnComment by shafawn
      January 26, 2013 @ 11:36 am

      Because women from Russia and Israel don’t live in the most powerful country in the world which is expected from time to time to step in to defend or keep peace in other countries.

      When women are on the front line the only way you can sleep good at night is knowing they are there to defend their own children and families. You put women on the front line and send them to some foreign country to preserve the peace over there … over issues that seem confusing to you and you will freak out when Betty Sue comes home in a body bag.

      Thus the socialists can ensure Americans won’t get involved in corruption and manipulation of freedom in other countries.

      This is how the centrifugal force of freedom on the earth will be suppressed and move towards totalitarianism and new dictatorships will suddenly emerge and flourish.

      When it is understood that the United States is a toothless lion corruption in all parts of the earth will strengthen themselves and turn and tear us to bits.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.6/5 (14 votes cast)
    • bna42Comment by bna42
      January 26, 2013 @ 12:39 pm

      “You put women on the front line and send them to some foreign country to preserve the peace over there … over issues that seem confusing to you and you will freak out when Betty Sue comes home in a body bag.”

      Not to mention the fact that she could not be depended on to have her unit’s back in tough times. How many 120-lb women do you know that can pick up and carry a wounded 200-lb man loaded with equipment to a safe area? How many troops might lose their lives because the women in their unit weren’t up to the job?

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.6/5 (20 votes cast)
    • recce1Comment by recce1
      January 26, 2013 @ 12:41 pm

      Tncdel, it’s a myth that Soviet or Israeli women soldiers served as front line combat troops. Many Russian women soldiers served very near the front but they did so as medics. Israeli women soldiers are trained in combat due to the fact front lines could change very rapidly.

      That is becoming more true today for US women soldiers. we’ve had women captured because of that.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.7/5 (14 votes cast)
  9. L.A.RoseComment by L.A.Rose
    January 26, 2013 @ 11:24 am

    Since many women today have no problems with aborting their innocent unborn babies, why shouldn’t they be given the opportunity to abort themselves on the battlefield? It angered me when women first demanded to go to West Point and other male military schools, and demanded to be sent to war, but if they really want equal rights, then they should be put on the front lines like any other soldier and die like any other soldier. No one should ever join the military if they don’t want to die on foreign soil as a soldier in battle sometimes does. It’s the risk one takes when they sign on the dotted line.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 3.1/5 (15 votes cast)
  10. FlyboyComment by Flyboy
    January 26, 2013 @ 11:30 am

    I served in the US Army from 1978 to 1984. I did my basic training at Ft Knox Kentucky and my AIT at Ft Rucker Alabama since I was in combat aviation and a crew chief on Huey Helis. While at Ft Knox, not having begun training yet, and still in “Reception Station” there was a young man in my platoon who was somewhat less than overjoyed at being there. I was sitting under a tree outside a building where our personnel files were being put together. This guy flopped himself down next to me like a sack of potatoes with a disgusted grunt.

    I asked him, “What’s the problem?”, to which he answered, “I hate this place, I’m getting out of here, I’m going AWOL.” I looked at him somewhat incredulously and asked again, “We haven’t even started training yet and you’re talking going AQOL? What they hell is wrong with you? Did you think was a 2 week summer camp for elementary school kids?” A few days later he was picked up by MP’s about a 1/4 mi down the road with his duffle bag while thumbing for a ride. Come to find out he was among the last people that had been given a choice by a judge for having been in trouble with the law. His choice was Go to jail or go in the Army. Well he wound up in jail (The Stockade) anyway, probably facing harder labor for a longer period of time than what he would have faced in basic training. This was another government policy gone awry.

    While in Germany, Our battalion was among the first to be “Integrated”. Women were thrown into the mix in units through out the battalion. We received 3 women. All 3 women were of a pretty decent sort but unfortunately, almost immediately, caused major problems among a number of the men in the unit. It was through no fault of their own, mind you, but just the fact that they were women. Like a bunch of “dogs in heat” these guys were nuts over trying to get the womens attention. I was on CQ (Charge of Quarters) duty the night that one of the ladies came pouring through the barracks front door with one of they guys from the armament platoon. It was about 2 am.

    Well within a few weeks of that time guess what? The young lady turns up pregnant. This was apparently no accident, since she used the pregnancy to get a discharge from the service. I don’t know how many times this scenario of events took place through out the battalion or the Army in general. I’m sure quite a bit. So, as you can see, the combining of the sexes in any military unit, front line or not, has what should be fairly predictable consequences.

    It is unfortunate that the military has been and will continue to be the governments ground of experimentation with regards to these kinds of things. Ill conceived, poorly thought out and even more poorly executed ideas of rectifying imagined social injustices. For all the reasons cited in the above article and more, this policy of women occupying positions in front line units, in the thick of combat is ludicrous.

    Beyond the “normal” dangers of everyday life in the trenches, women are uniquely positioned, for no other reason than their gender, to be on the receiving end of torments that no man would ever face. Think of that precious young woman who, after a few weeks into our offensive against Sadaam Hussein in Iraq, who was captured, tortured and repeatedly raped. If not for a truly compassionate Iraqi man, who walked several miles to reach an Army unit to advise them of the situation which resulted in her rescue, this young woman would surely have died the most ignoble death we could imagine.

    I guess I’m too “Old School”. I see a woman as something precious, something special. A person to be guarded, protected, loved and provided for. I see her for her strengths to be sure. I know that just knowing my wife is here with me is a great source of strength to me, and her loving ways, from her touch, to her kiss or a hug is what I live for. She has all the strengths for all my weaknesses. We’re a perfect match, at least for me and I must admit, as I’m sure most honest guys would, that I came out much better in this deal than she did.

    I must also take notice of the fact that if the ACLU is involved in any way in these policies, it will be disastrous.
    Again, the whole issue of “Social Injustice” when it comes to female involvement in front line combat operations is a sham.. Unless we’ve lost that paradyme altogether of what is proper and what is improper for a woman to be subjected to. Under Chairman Mao Tse Tung in China, the line between the sexes was wiped out. Men and women wore the same uniforms, served in the same units, etc. They’re womanhood was erased, at least on the surface. Is that what we’re trying to do here? Blur the lines if not completely erase them? I guess women with career ambitions in the military don’t see a problem with this. But again, involvement in the military, whether it be men or women, should not be concerned primarily with career advancement.

    Remember all the hubub over the first female Citidel cadet? Oh she was discriminated against and shunned by the “guys”. Rejected and isolated. Boo Hoo. I’m sure the biggest factor in the washout, in her specific case, was her innate inability, as a female, to endure the same physical and psychological rigors as the men. I believe, that to a great extent, her complaints were contrived as a cover for her other deficiencies. Please don’t get me wron. I’m not trying to sound like a “Sexist ***” as I’m sure some reading this comment would assume. I’m just offering my opinion, which based on the facts of this and countless other cases, I believe to be the truth.

    Let’s look at women right here in my home town. A few years ago there was another big hubub made over a few womean who wanted to become fire fighters. The local news covered it, and were trying to be a supportive as possible of their efforts. However, the evidence was clear. A single woman (that is one woman by herself), was unable to handle the hose end nozzle to direct against flames due to the hight pressure and velocity of the water. They were whipped around like a rag doll. Again they could not scale a wall with all their fire fighting gear.

    Try as they might and cry as they might, it was finally determined, that unless a woman signing up for the position was a woman of “Amazonian” proportions, it would be unwise and detrimental for them to serve in the fire department on an actual fire fighting crew. As in combat, fire fighters have to to be able to count on each other in different situations that may develop in a fight to pull one of their buddies “Bacon from the fire” so to speak, no pun intended.

    Oh well. That’s my $20.00 bucks worth. Take it for what it’s worth. If, after reading this comment, you feel it’s worthless, sexist, bigoted and just outright neandrathal, then I guess you’re a good product of liberal indoctrination. If you agree with my comments, bully for you!

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.9/5 (39 votes cast)
    • missmarpleComment by missmarple
      January 26, 2013 @ 11:59 am

      It’s not even 2 cents worth. There are women firefighters who hold a hose with the best of men, there are women cops and there are women soldiers who are just as tough as their male comrades. This is reality, not liberal indoctrination. I’ll match my conservatism with yours any day of the week and not only that, I’m probably stronger and in better shape than you are and with my Akido could beat your pants off! (Although that would be a pretty disgusting sight.)

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 1.4/5 (18 votes cast)
    • recce1Comment by recce1
      January 26, 2013 @ 1:05 pm

      missmarple, there’re indeed women who are good firefighters and police officers, but they’re the exception, not the rule.

      As for liberal indoctrination, the idea that men and women are equal in all respects is just that, indoctrination. Each has their strengths and weaknesses.

      However, combat is far different from firefighting and police work. Many of the problems don’t involve physical prowess or skills. They involve unit cohesion, fraternization, psychological stress, and political will.

      Can the problems be overcome? Maybe, but that’s not the goal of the progressives.

      Their goal is to further weaken American resolve and strength by creating situations where the public will react emotionally to seeing women coming back in great numbers in coffins. The MSM used emotional shock very effectively by bringing the Vietnam War into our living rooms and thereby brought about a political defeat despite our military victories. We didn’t lose to the Viet Cong or the NVA, we lost to the American liberal press.

      As for your braggadocio, it’s simply puerile and indicative you’d likely be unsuitable as a combat soldiers.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.7/5 (23 votes cast)
    • nhpollackComment by nhpollack
      January 26, 2013 @ 1:37 pm

      Flyboy,

      You hit all the notes and in depth. If I weren’t so enamored with reading my own prose, I’d quit writing and just let you carry the flag.

      Consider this the other 999 5 star ratings I wanted to give you.

      Thanks,

      US Army vet, RVN, ’67-’69

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.7/5 (14 votes cast)
    • missmarpleComment by missmarple
      January 26, 2013 @ 1:43 pm

      Recce1, They are already coming home in coffins. I’m sorry about my braggadocio, but in the classes I teach, I can beat every one of my students and many of my male teachers.

      And to all those who doubt my conservative credentials you have to realise that no where is it written in Conservative beliefs that women are not entitled to equality with men. On the contrary, some of our best spokesmen are women, Sarah Palin, Phyllis Schlafly, Michelle Malkin to name a few and whether we agree or not everything doesn’t alter our basic philosophy. I was one of the original Tea Party, so don’t give me that, “She’s a liberal, socialist, bra burning, femnazi garbage”.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 1.5/5 (16 votes cast)
    • nhpollackComment by nhpollack
      January 26, 2013 @ 1:47 pm

      missmarple,
      Give that Aikido **** and the rest of your attitude a rest. I’ve been in and out of the martial arts of one form or another for over 50 years and I’m an Army vet with two tours in RVN. I don’t know what your dojo experience or street experience with Aikido is and, frankly, don’t care as it takes more than technique when it comes down to an out and out fight that may be a life and death situation. There’s always a point in a match when it turns into a fight and that’s when the bigger, better, meaner participant wins. Were you to get mugged on the street by someone who blindsided you with a 2×4 and you survived, you’d be running back to your sensei, after you were released from the hospital and demanding a refund.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.8/5 (16 votes cast)
    • nhpollackComment by nhpollack
      January 26, 2013 @ 1:56 pm

      recce1,
      I’d just like to supplement your comment on losing the Viet Nam war to the American liberal press. The final straw was Eddie Adams photo of General Nguyen Ngoc Loan executing a Vietcong prisoner, Nguyen Van Lem, on a Saigon street during the opening stages of the Tet Offensive and Walter Cronkite after Tet ’68 telling the American public that the war was lost. According the Viet Namese, it was the worst defeat they’d suffered in the whole war.

      If you haven’t already, be sure to see “Inside the Viet Nam War” as it is one of the most comprehensive documentaries I’ve seen.

      Here’s a link to the devolution of our armed forces:

      http://craniorectalectomy.com/new_military.htm

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.6/5 (9 votes cast)
    • sumitchComment by sumitch
      January 26, 2013 @ 2:11 pm

      MissMarple, I offered reasoning that is sound, reasonable and factual, even complimentary. Maybe not cast in stone, but not insulting, not a challenge to go outside and settle it man to man. Many in here have done the same. We’ve said that it is true that there are some women equal to or better than some men in virtually any field. But in many cases, that is the exception, not the rule. You’re willing to beat your chest(s) and put the lives of others in danger simply to satisfy your feminist campaign, not to benefit the firefighters, military or any other field.

      In-so-far as your tough girl Aikido training goes, don’t let your alligator mouth (or keyboard) overload your feminist butt. Get the chip off your shoulder and do something for someone else rather than satisfying your own inferiority complex.

      Many in here have been polite, even complimentary and tried to have a discussion and present points that do not agree with yours. So what do you do when people have different opinions? Try to pick a fight, the last ditch effort of the whipped. Your challenge is nothing but bravado.

      Trying to be polite and reasonable to you is like trying to butt down a concrete wall with your head. You’re wrong. Enough of your pitiful feminist reasoning. Go burn your bra.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.8/5 (17 votes cast)
    • missmarpleComment by missmarple
      January 26, 2013 @ 2:35 pm

      sumitch, just as you say, you are a chauvinist. Your last comment shows that you are also not a gentleman.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 1.4/5 (16 votes cast)
    • shafawnComment by shafawn
      January 26, 2013 @ 2:41 pm

      Marple..”you are also not a gentleman.” Really? You’re gonna pull that out NOW?

      How do gentle men fit into your world of ungentle women? Should men be meek little creatures and stand in awe of the lowered military standard because it would be ungentlemanly to recognize it for what it is?

      Exactly WHAT about you is conservative?

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.7/5 (14 votes cast)
    • sumitchComment by sumitch
      January 26, 2013 @ 3:46 pm

      MizzMarple, you missed my point on Chauvinism (no large surprise). It was a compliment to females, so thank you for your kind response. And I am a gentleman when dealing with ladies. In your case that does not apply.

      If you think I’m going to watch some bra burner strut around shooting off her mouth with no consideration for anyone but herself and even less knowledge of what she is talking about, making your asinine challenge with your Aikido skill and claim the benefits of being a lady, you’ve got another think coming. Welcome to equal to treatment. You wanted the man’s world, live in it.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.6/5 (10 votes cast)
    • nhpollackComment by nhpollack
      January 26, 2013 @ 6:30 pm

      shafawn,

      I gotta tell ya, I’m glad as hell I’m an old spent piece of used jet trash who’s terminally married to a jealous and vengeful goddess ‘cuz if I wasn’t I’d be dying of a broken heart knowing we’d never get to meet.

      You remind me of my wife who, aside from her other stellar and many attributes, has the rare quality of being a standup gal, calls them exactly as she sees them, tells it as it is, assumes responsibility for her words and deeds, walks the talk, doesn’t pull any of that passive-aggressive girly c**p and, if you’ll excuse the expression which is voiced with the utmost respect, is so cool she could be a guy. I know it might not pass muster as a compliment as there are as many guys who don’t stand up when things get tough as gals, maybe even more, but I’m talking about the best qualities of the best men and women and you have them in spades. I bet you’d be hell on wheels in a firefight and I’d share my last two rounds with you knowing you’d put yours where it would do the most good.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.3/5 (6 votes cast)
    • shafawnComment by shafawn
      January 26, 2013 @ 6:47 pm

      Wow nhpollack
      Thank you! Huge compliment and very honored I’m sure :)
      That made my day :) Kudos to you and your wife sir

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.3/5 (6 votes cast)
    • nhpollackComment by nhpollack
      January 27, 2013 @ 2:08 am

      shafawn,

      You are quite the firecracker and I dearly hope that some guy in close proximity to you realized it a long time ago and buys you flowers, spoils hell out of you and does all the heavy lifting.

      Power to We the People!

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.0/5 (4 votes cast)
    • recce1Comment by recce1
      January 27, 2013 @ 4:58 am

      MISSMARPLE, you claim to be such a great Tea Party conservative type, so tell me why you’re so aliterate and prevaricate so much. It’s much like your implication that you served in the military. Are you actually a progressive agent provocateur?

      Tell me where I ever that, “She’s a liberal, socialist, bra burning, femnazi garbage.” Tell me where I even call you any of the single words you put in your outright prevarication. Don’t try to set up a false straw man to knock down. Your response is so much like that of progressives.

      Show me where I said or implied women weren’t coming home in coffins. They have in all our wars from the Revolutionary War on. What I clearly said was, “…women coming back in GREAT NUMBERS in coffins (emphasis mine).” Do you want to deny I wrote that? If not, then why are you being so aliterate? By the way, please look up the meaning of the word “aliterate,” particularly the more archaic use of the word, before you make a fool of yourself, again. Let me give you a hint, you might need to get a Princeton University unabridged dictionary to find the word.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 3.7/5 (3 votes cast)
    • recce1Comment by recce1
      January 27, 2013 @ 5:16 am

      nhpollack, I remember the photo well as well as the liberal lies that the Tet Offensive was a great communist success. Well, actually it was a great success in that it got American socialists and communists to convince the American public the war was lost though we never lost on the battlefield.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (3 votes cast)
    • nhpollackComment by nhpollack
      January 27, 2013 @ 10:38 am

      recce1,
      Whoa dude! “aliterate”? That’s a new one to me. At first I thought it might have been a typo on the root of alliteration, but hadn’t noticed any of that in marple’s discourse so I looked it up before continuing to try to analyze it. If it wasn’t so early for me, I would have just kept on and figured aliterate, apolitical, areligious, amoral, etc.

      You’d probably enjoy reading “Empire of Illusion: The End of Literacy and the Triumph of Spectacle” by Chris Hedges, if you haven’t already.

      On that photo, the media never presented the rest of the story about how Nguyen Van Lem had just been apprehended, red handed, after murdering either South Vietnamese National Police officers, the police officers’ families or Gen. Loan’s deputy’s family.

      It did immortalize the S&W Bodyguard though.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 3.0/5 (2 votes cast)
    • recce1Comment by recce1
      January 27, 2013 @ 12:03 pm

      nhpollack, the word “aliterate” refers to a person who can read and write, which obviously missmarple can do quite well, but who CHOOSES not to understand what they read lest they learn something that upsets their preconceived notions. It’s perhaps a more archaic use of the word.

      Missmarple wrote that, “Recce1, They are already coming home in coffins.” However what I wrote was, “…women coming back in great numbers in coffins.” I believe she intentionally misunderstood my point so as to not have to admit that once again progressives were trying to play on Americans’ emotions so as to weaken the military and America as the leftist press did in Vietnam.

      In addition she wrote, “so don’t give me that, ‘She’s a liberal, socialist, bra burning, femnazi garbage.’” As I never wrote that or even implied it I’ll just have to assume she deliberately and aggressively lied.

      By the way, here’s a little alliteration I think you’ll enjoy. Why are those who think themselves so literate actually showing themselves to be semi-illiterate when they imply that those who use the word aliterate are illiterate, and I’m being alliterate. Of course the grammatically correct last word should be alliterative but I use some poetic license.

      I often use this with progressives as I find they tend to ignore inconvenient facts in order to support socialism. Your example of the story behind the photo is a good example that progressives love to ignore or claim it’s not true, even if you point them to a liberal web site that proves it.

      By the way, I had some friends who had a few stories about MSM reporters in the Saigon Hilton Hotel bar. But that’s another story.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 3.0/5 (2 votes cast)
    • nhpollackComment by nhpollack
      January 27, 2013 @ 1:01 pm

      recce1,
      I definitely got it once I looked the word up. Their use of rhetorical tricks, traps and trains of thought (a little alliteration back at you), are designed to obfuscate the kernel of the message, but if one listens carefully, is informed, locked, loaded, ready on the left, ready on the right and ready on the firing line, it generally results in them calling their adversary a “poopy-head” and storming off. The lethal crossfire apparently scared miss marple back to her lair.

      You’re an intelligent, well informed fellow and we’re on the same side of the wire so I hate to be critical, but I think in your example you were confusing consonance with alliteration. Alliteration usually describes beginning consonants while consonance describes repeating consonant sounds in any position in the words. Your poetic license is valid and in good order though.

      I’ve presented well documented facts and gotten arguments based on belief rather than knowledge with no support. At that time one can only think of Lincoln who said, “If you debate somebody who does not agree that two plus two equals four, you probably can’t win the argument because facts make no difference.”

      Reminds me of the time I was getting a new ID card and put dark brown for hair color. The NCOIC told me to change it to black. I told him it wasn’t black but dark brown as black only occurs in Orientals and Indians and shows blue highlights, I was neither and my hair, while dark, showed slight red highlights. He asked me what color his boots were and I responded, “black, sergeant”. He said, “Then your hair is black”. I told him I wouldn’t sign the ID card because it wasn’t accurate. He called a Lieutenant over and asked him what color my hair was and the Lieutenant said it was black too, so he said, “The Lieutenant says it’s black, so it’s black”. We went back and forth for a while, it ended up dark brown and I signed it. Some don’t suffer fools gladly, I don’t suffer them at all. I can deal with ignorance, but won’t deal with stupidity.

      The Army and I had an interesting relationship and they were glad when I left. When I got to DEROS/ETS, my CO and XO called me into the office and I couldn’t figure out what was going on as they looked uncomfortable and were hemming and hawing. Finally, the CO said, “Well soldier, we don’t suppose you’ll be reenlisting, will you?” I shuffled my feet a little, pretended to think, watched them squirm a little and put them out of their misery by responding in the negative. I got out E-5 after 31 months with a full honorable discharge. When I walked out the gate at Oakland, I could swear I could hear a sigh of relief and the sound of a lock snapping shut.

      I don’t have any info on the MSM reporters over there, but do have some on donut dollies, nurses and WAC officers bartering a certain commodity that only they had to officers O-4 and above for favors, gifts and cash.

      Did you ever see “Flags of our Fathers” which described how one picture could win or lose a war? The second flag raising on Mt. Suribachi helping win WWII and the picture of Gen. Loan shooting the VC helping to “lose” the VN war?

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 1.0/5 (1 vote cast)
    • recce1Comment by recce1
      January 27, 2013 @ 4:49 pm

      Generally speaking your use of the term alliteration is the common one with an emphasis on the first syllable. But as I mentioned, I often use archaic terms and definitions. Maybe it’s because I’m a curmudgeon.

      Thus according to the Merriam-Webster dictionary alliteration can be “the repetition of the same sounds or of the same kinds of sounds at the beginning of words OR in stressed syllables.” So “See the seashells on the shore” or “the Pied Piper picked a pocket full of petals” are alliterations even though they doesn’t rhyme. But according to the rule LITERATE, aLITERATE, ilLITERATE, and alLITERATE are also alliterations as the all stress literate in them.

      In any event, the word aliterate and the ditty are good to use on progressives because it drives them crazy when they find out they’re not a smart as they often haughtily think they are.

      I’ve never seen “Flags of Our Fathers” although I should. But you’re correct about the power of pictures. By the way, my father never told me about those nurses or WACS in the Army nor did I meet them in the Air Force. Oh well.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 3.0/5 (2 votes cast)
    • nhpollackComment by nhpollack
      January 27, 2013 @ 7:22 pm

      recce1,
      As a fellow curmudgeon and a lover of the language who appreciates a well turned phrase, I’ll give it you ungrudgingly as words, usage and definitions change. I will however look it up in my OED to trace the etymology just for my own elucidation. You definitely did a masterful job of defending it and the dog does hunt. One of the things I like about German is that it’s perfectly legal to create compound nouns for what that’s worth

      Anything that drives the Left crazier is always worthwhile and I’m definitely adding aliterate to my vocabulary as it’s a word that can replace a long explanation.

      “Flags of Our Fathers” was directed by Clint Eastwood and, if you’re a fan, you won’t be disappointed. If you see “Inside the Viet Nam War” you’ll also see the reactions of the troops to the Cronkite narrative.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 3.0/5 (2 votes cast)
    • sumitchComment by sumitch
      January 27, 2013 @ 8:51 pm

      Flyboy, I think you are the first person I’ve known (typed with) that knew the Chinese curse “May you live in interesting times”. When I first read it, it took me a while to catch on to the jest of it, but I’m pretty sure I’ve got it right. Basically, may your peace and quiet be interrupted frequently is my catch on it. Sure has been interesting since the mid 60’s, eh?

      Seems like you and I were in the same country at about the same time but in different places. I was a bit away from you to your southwest. The closest I got to you would have been Can Rahn Bay right after TET II when we “borrowed” some Marine trucks and motored there for supplies. The local longshoremen where on strike when we got there and they refused to load us, even after we told them that we’d do it ourselves. They still refused until we explained that we’d had about all of Vietnamese problems we could stand for a while and unless they wanted to learn more about the M16 1A1 high speed, level trajectory bullet launcher, they might want to reconsider. I guess the dirty tiger suits and un-shined boots disgusted them so much they left us to do the work ourselves. And bless the Lawd above, we found Beaucou cases of beer, the drink of the gods.

      On the way back, being a good officer, always with the best interests of his men foremost in his mind, I thought it would be best that I sample the golden beverage to insure that it wasn’t tainted. It wasn’t. The rest of the trip back is mostly vague and a testament to G I stupidity. Just a remembrance of sunnier days.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (1 vote cast)
    • nhpollackComment by nhpollack
      January 27, 2013 @ 9:49 pm

      sumitch,
      Ahhh, an officer. That explains the confusion between Flyboy and nhpollack. Good grief, sir, I hope you remember the name of your cheerleader or you are going to be SOL in the LUV department.

      At least you got the old Chinese curse right, but damn sir, I hate not getting credit for my occasional ability to dredge something clever up. I described my mind once as a wind tunnel with infinite scraps of paper, each with something on it. Kinda defines the computer term RAM (Random Access Memory) and like you, mine gets more random as the older I get, the better I was.

      When you first mentioned Tet II, it stirred a glimmer of one of those random scraps of paper. I just looked it up and it was May ’68? I was still on my first tour then and must have participated to some degree. I got over there end of July ’67, Tet was January ’68 and I decided to extend my tour, partially for the 5 month early out and partially because the thought of, essentially, a lame duck term of stateside duty after the Viet Nam experience was unthinkable. I had a special leave back in the states in August and saw the Democratic Convention in Chicago on TV. I thought the world had been turned upside down and wanted to get back to RVN where it was safe!

      Whoa! I think I’m getting it. My M-60 and I were assigned to the embassy, the Palace, some gov’t. office building or something. Had me up on a fire escape or wrought iron stairway just hanging off the side of a large two or three story building with zero cover. It was not a comfortable situation at all.

      Now you and I both know that a good officer sees that his men are all fed before he eats so are you telling me that you got drunk before you let your men get drunk and they didn’t roll you off the side of the truck? You must have gotten them backstage passes to see Raquel Welch to make up for that.

      Cam Ranh Bay was quite a bit away and I didn’t get too far from the Saigon/Cholon/Tan Son Nhut area so while we were there at the same time, I probably never screwed up your pay, but if I knew that you weren’t seeing to your EM’s right to intoxication, you would have had your pay records accidentally shipped to Turkey and would have been living on partial pays for the rest of your tour.

      Not just a testimony to GI stupidity, but to the existence of a tolerant deity who watched over most of us. Glad we both made it back and are still around to tell war lies to each other and anybody else who will listen.

      Back to the important stuff; when’s that date of yours again? Besides being courtly and chivalrous, I hope you’re going to sing to her. I found that, even if done badly, they kinda get all goosey about that. Still works with my wife after almost 30 years.

      On a final note, what do you think is going to happen vis a vis the gov’t. trying to curtail our 2nd amendment rights?

      Welcome home brother.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 3.0/5 (2 votes cast)
    • sumitchComment by sumitch
      January 27, 2013 @ 10:42 pm

      My most abject apologies nhpollack. Sometimes I get so enamored with what I am typing that I forget who I’m typing at. I’m sure both of you fine fellows are find fellers but I get confused now and then. My only excuse is to advise one and all to not stand between two 155 S P’s with the chamber evacuators aimed at your ears. Apparently when both are fired simultaneously it not only messes up your hearing, but rattles the brain muscle some. Uncle Sam has given me a fine pair of hearing aids and for some reason I don’t understand but will not question, a small pension. I never put in for the purple dude as I was too embarrassed why I should get one.

      Pay? There was pay? They never tell butterbars anything. I’d have had a more funner R&R in Bangkok had I know that. I did hear a story when I was at Benjamin Harrison for CBR School that a finance type in payroll thought that when he was REFRAD he was home free, so he had the fort commanding general’s pay sent to Hawaii. Bad move if true. Again, the story I was lied to about said he was re-activated and sent to scenic Fort Huachuca for a little fun in the sun. It’s my experience, even thought I only met one (General George B. Underwood, CINC US Air Defense, as I recall) that generals have a very limited sense of humor. I guess that’s why I never advanced beyond battery level. I can find something funny with road kill if I put my mind to it.

      I never thought I’d say it, but I’d do it all again if I could go back and shed this 70 year old frame.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 3.0/5 (2 votes cast)
    • nhpollackComment by nhpollack
      January 28, 2013 @ 1:23 am

      sumitch,
      Confused? That is a mild description of the function of what was once a pretty good tool. I can be having a conversation with someone and then draw a blank on the word that I wanted to say next. I can’t even do a charades kind of thing like “two syllables”, “sounds like” or like that. Sometimes it comes to me five minutes later and I blurt it out like somebody with Tourette Syndrome or not until hours later. Golden years my ***!

      There was actually pay, but we tried to keep it a secret. We wanted all you guys to think that you had to pay to be there, but since you were all such party animals we were going to comp you the room and board. We had a little ditty to the tune of “Green Berets”.

      “Fighting soldiers in their chairs,
      On their chests they have no hairs.
      A thousand men will come today,
      But only three will get their pay.

      Put finance brass on my sons chest,
      Make him one of admin’s best.
      First in combat ‘cuz we’re so surly,
      First in the Px ‘cuz we get paid early.”

      My only experience with the really big ones was when I was hitchhiking back from Bien Hoa after my special leave (I was with a real full service unit). I was standing by the side of the road not having realized there was a really, big artillery piece behind me. If went off and between the noise, shock waves and reflexes, I was on the ground. I could see if you’re doing that on a regular basis, it might tend to slosh things around in the brain bucket.

      When were you at Fort Ben? The best I can remember counting on all twenty digits was April-May ’67. Seems the newly commissioned 90 day wonders had a real funny way of saluting. We used to lie in wait outside the mess hall and salute them just to get them to do it when they’d have like an apple in one hand and a banana or something in the other. Talkin’ about finding humor in anything.

      I tell you what, I agree with you about doing it all over again. When I saw the events of 9-11 on TV, I got so worked up about those miscreants doing this to MY country I wished I were about 50 years younger so I could take it to them.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 1.0/5 (1 vote cast)
    • recce1Comment by recce1
      January 28, 2013 @ 7:19 am

      nhpollack, let me know what you find out about the word “aliterate” in your etymological search for my elucidation also. I’m always fascinated by language that can express long concepts in a few words.

      By the way, I took German while in elementary school in Germany and one year in college, but sadly my brain, now lacking a few marbles, acted like a sieve. I guess that also is a biological reality we all have to face. ;-)

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 1.0/5 (1 vote cast)
  11. arwenusaComment by arwenusa
    January 26, 2013 @ 12:05 pm

    Perhaps this is tied to Agenda 21′s goal to severely reduce the human population.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.6/5 (11 votes cast)
  12. FrogmanComment by Frogman
    January 26, 2013 @ 12:13 pm

    This is just another liberal pipe dream. As far as women in the military and I’ve been there done that on nearly every continent in the world and all kinds of nasty stuff in between. The standards are already different for men and women. Women do modified excercises and are not required to do as many say pull ups etc… as men. Combat units and especially special forces have all together different standards. Now that they have decided this there will be all kinds of women that think they can make it to these units to prove a point. I had plenty of interaction with females and have weapons trained many alot were in excellent shape when I was in and I know of not a single one that I can think of that would make it through a forward operating units training regiment much less special forces training. It will just bog things down and they will be taking someones spot that could have made it. And I’d bet because of the failure rate they like they are now will lower the standards. I won’t even get into all the hygeine issues but, put it this way I’ve been deployed and didn’t see a shower many times for over a month. Not to mention jammed into armor and aircraft having to pee into your water jug or poo in a bag in front of your team mates. Then theirs the distraction issue sorry but, in my old job distraction gets people killed. As for you blow hard females that have posted on here until your out there with men hit and down and bullets whizzing over your heads you really should take the 5th because quite frankly you really know nothing. This is going to definately cause problems and weaken the forces all to be PC. I’m glad I got out when I did.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.6/5 (19 votes cast)
  13. rustypatComment by rustypat
    January 26, 2013 @ 12:18 pm

    I’ve had guys in service with me that I wouldn’t trust to have my back in combat any more than I trust Obama. I’ve had gals in service with me that I would give my life for, and would entrust mine to in a combat setting.

    I have a daughter serving our country, and if she wants to serve on the front lines, or SEALS … AS LONG AS SHE CAN DO THE JOB AND PASS THE REQUIREMENTS … it is reasonable to CONSIDER. But … DON’T LOWER THE REQUIREMENTS. Her brother’s 200+ pound body still weighs 200+ pounds and she better be able to drag him out of harms way when called upon to do so.

    Now, onto the psychological aspect of combat with the gals on the front lines … guys have NATURAL tendency to be concerned for the gals welfare and a NATURAL tendency to be concerned over their ability to perform. If you LOWER the standards for the gals … you are REINFORCING THOSE CONCERNS and legitimizing them. That bullet, mortar and mine don’t care what sex you are … it only cares if you can get out of its way, or how you can deal with it if you didn’t.

    Lowering standards is absolutely foolish. There are women firefighters than can do the job better than I … they can pass the performance requirements, I can’t (old fart here) and thus they should not be denied based on sex … but the demands of the job still require the ability to PERFORM.

    Don’t lower the standards … there is a job to be done. You can either do it or you can’t. Making allowance for those who can’t (some can, some can’t) meet the requirements for the purpose of social/political/career agenda is dangerous to the individual, their colleagues and much more. This doesn’t even begin to address the issues of combat cohabitation being an additional distraction, but before one starts to address such issues … you gotta be able to do the job. If you can do the job, great … you can be on my team on this mission. If not, you can still be on my team, but maybe not this mission. It’s not about guys vs. gals … its about getting the job done.

    Obama-Nation is an abomination.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.5/5 (14 votes cast)
    • missmarpleComment by missmarple
      January 26, 2013 @ 1:51 pm

      Right on Rustypat. If they can cut the mustard, they can meet the muster. It is performance that counts.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 2.0/5 (9 votes cast)
    • rustypatComment by rustypat
      January 27, 2013 @ 12:17 am

      Before you get too excited that you think I’m in favor of the gals in combat … keep in mind that the physical requirements for women in the military are NOT the same as that for the guys. This has been predicated upon the concept that they would NOT be serving in combat, thus the standards could be different to allow for the gender variances.

      Thus … there are essentially no women in the military that have been required to MEET the standards for COMBAT positions … only the requirements for non-combat duties. Unless things have changed since I last checked, the gals are allowed a greater amount of body fat, don’t have to do “full” push-ups and don’t have to do as many or run as fast to pass their physical training requirements. Until such time that the gals are required to perform the same as the guys to be “combat ready” … then they aren’t combat ready. Passing the current “standard” for women, is not the same as passing the standard for combat.

      Change the criteria for completing basic training for all women to be the exact same as that for the guys … THEN, we MIGHT start talking about combat readiness. But, as soon as you would change that requirement … they’d start crying foul because that would restrict many from passing basic training because of the differences between men & women. You can’t have it both ways.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 3.7/5 (6 votes cast)
    • recce1Comment by recce1
      January 27, 2013 @ 4:45 am

      MISSMARPLE, if you’re such a great Tea Party conservative then why are you so aliterate and prevaricate so much? Is it like your implication that you served in the military? You post as if you were a progressive agent provocateur.

      I never gave you that, “She’s a liberal, socialist, bra burning, femnazi garbage.” I didn’t even call you any of the single words you put in you’re outright lie. So your retort is so progressive.

      Furthermore, I didn’t say or imply that women weren’t coming home in coffins. What I distinctly said was, “women coming back in GREAT NUMBERS in coffins. (emphasis mine).” Do you deny that? If not, then why are you so aliterate? And please look up the meaning of the word aliterate, particularly the more archaic use of the word, before you go progressive on me again. Of course you may need to get a Princeton University unabridged dictionary to find the word. By the way, that’s a hint.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 1.0/5 (1 vote cast)
    • wumingrenComment by wumingren
      January 27, 2013 @ 7:18 am

      Rustypat, the feminists do have it both ways. Take abortion for example. If a woman wants to have an abortion, it’s not homicide for her to kill her unborn child, but if she wants to keep the unborn child and someone kills her or the unborn, intentionally or otherwise, then it is anything from manslaughter to murder. They get it both ways. They expect to get it both ways in every issue they choose. It’s pro-choice for the woman, but not for the man. If the woman isn’t “ready to be a mother,” she can get an abortion, but if the man isn’t “ready to be a father,” he cannot demand an abortion, nor can he avoid paying child support. Feminism is one reason why I didn’t marry an American woman.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 1.0/5 (2 votes cast)
  14. profchuckComment by profchuck
    January 26, 2013 @ 12:33 pm

    The only legitimate function of the military is to kill people and break things and the threat of using that force is a powerful incentive for peace. If adding women to the front lines will strengthen that mission then I am all for it. Otherwise it is only an exercise in political correctness and can only weaken our military ability to be victorious on the field of battle.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.4/5 (10 votes cast)
  15. thedoveComment by thedove
    January 26, 2013 @ 12:44 pm

    Okay, I’m 75-plus, so that makes me old school, and that means I put women up on that pedestal we’ve all heard about.
    But, putting that aside, I’m also a disabled vet, and I can guarantee if you’re lying on the ground watching your blood soak into it, the last thing you want to see is a 110-pound person–male or female–with poor upper body strength coming to try to carry you to safety. Yes, I have no doubt there are women who could sling me over their shoulder and run 50 yards (I do watch the Olympics, after all), but I dare say they’re few and far between. I fear, having watched women fail the physical rigors of training or, worse still, having watched them pass because of a second set of standards, many men would lack confidence in the females in a combat unit; and lack of confidence in your teammates spells disaster for front-lines work. Find a way to allow members of the military branches to advance without combat experience; weakening the military in order to enhance women’s advancement is not the solution to that problem.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.7/5 (14 votes cast)
    • bna42Comment by bna42
      January 26, 2013 @ 12:58 pm

      “Find a way to allow members of the military branches to advance without combat experience”

      I thought there were already ways to do that. About a year ago I was talking to an Army lieutenant. He was wearing a CIB and I asked him where he had served. He told me that was not known as a CIB so I asked him what it was and found out that he had “earned” it through some type of classes and “book learning”.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.4/5 (8 votes cast)
    • FrogmanComment by Frogman
      January 26, 2013 @ 1:29 pm

      This per my bud who is an active Army 1st Sgt who recieved a bronze star. The only way to recieve a CIB is the following, You have to hold an infantry mos, be assigned to an infantry unit (brigade or lower), and “close with and engage an armed enemy of the US by use of fire and maneuver”

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 5.0/5 (6 votes cast)
    • bna42Comment by bna42
      January 26, 2013 @ 2:04 pm

      Frogman, I am fully aware of of the criteria for earning a CIB. I served in combat and was awarded the Bronze Star twice along with a Purple Heart, but even though I was with an infantry unit I was not allowed the CIB because my MOS was artillery and I served as a liaison sargeant. As I stated in my post, “He told me that was not known as a CIB” but it was the same medal referred to by a different name, and the point I was trying to make was that military awards can now be earned by “classroom” activities. It’s just another way of marginalizing the military when people who have never served outside the U.S. or in a combat environment can wear “look-alike” awards.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.4/5 (9 votes cast)
    • nhpollackComment by nhpollack
      January 26, 2013 @ 2:33 pm

      Big Red One,

      I had a similar experience. It’s a long and convoluted story, but here’s the short form: I finished infantry AIT and got an 11B10 MOS, I then ended up in clerk school and went on to finance school where I got a 73C20 MOS. I spent close to two years in country where I was a finance clerk and spent many evenings in an IH Scout with a 12ga. following buses around the streets of Saigon to deter sappers. During Tet, I was out defending the perimeter of Tan Son Nhut with an M-60 (qualified as Expert and was the only person in the unit that knew how to operate it) for over a month.

      I’m dealing with VA about some issues and threw the CIB into the mix while I was at it. According to the requirements, it could go either way, but I had the MOS and was in the field doing the job.

      On another note, our company clerk cut his leg on barbed wire while carrying a case of C-rats, went to the dispensary to get treated, got put in for a Purple Heart as it was a wound suffered during combat, got it and accepted it. The opening action of Tet in our area was when 16 friends of mine from Charlie company 716 MP Bn. turned down a street in Saigon to change the guard and got taken out with an RPG. The charred and twisted hulk of the deuce and a half was hauled back and the only thing left of my friends were pieces of flesh no bigger than a fist, body fluids and scraps of equipment. The point I’m getting to is that each of them were awarded Purple Hearts and Bronze Stars. The Charlie company clerk was award a Bronze Star for “working long and arduous hours”. John Kerry received three Purple Hearts.

      Back to the CIB the non-combatant received, are you sure it was a CIB as there’s also an Expert Infantryman’s badge which is just the rifle on the blue background without the wreath?

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.2/5 (6 votes cast)
    • sumitchComment by sumitch
      January 26, 2013 @ 4:29 pm

      bna42 and nhpollack, as you imply, there is more than one way to get the CIB and have the wrong MOS.

      Initially I was an 11 Bravo, but made the cut and went to OCS at Ft. Sill (artillery lends a little dignity to what would otherwise be a vulgar brawl). The OCS assignment got me out of Nam, but with the CIB awarded (TET II, ’67/’68 SF O P 60-10, Se Dec, Delta on the river) and some pretty ribbons of various types, but not the purple heart.

      After OCS with that MOS, they needed missile officers and they told us that they had pulled the missiles out of Nam. So on to Ft Bliss for missile school and further assignment to 6/65 HAWK missile battalion, Key West, Florida (Don’t laugh. We didn’t get invaded on my watch). There was however that Russian Mig 23 incident (1969?)when a Russian defected from Cuba but luckily we had turned it over to Homestead where he landed next to AF 1 with tricky Dicky inside.

      Made Battery Commander of Bravo battery and when they told me I would be seeing orders for Korea, I cashed it in. I can stand just so much fun and then I have to take a little R & R. I also earned the Jungle Warfare and the Phoenix Project patch (soon to be unauthorized) plus airborne wings. I wish I had never gotten out.

      I loved the order. discipline and respect, not to mention what the retirement pay is now for an 0 5 over 20 and maybe even an O 6 if I didn’t screw up or get dead. But the wife at the time said she would divorce me if I stayed in. I should have taken her up on it.

      After all this typing, I just wanted to verify that there are ways you can wind up with the CIB and not have the MOS.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 3.3/5 (3 votes cast)
    • nhpollackComment by nhpollack
      January 26, 2013 @ 5:13 pm

      sumitch,

      I got drafted in ’66, decided it was worth another year to get “choice not chance” and enlisted for Admin so I wouldn’t get sent to RVN. After the initial battery of tests, due to my high scores they talked me into OCS and I went along with it figuring I’d be a brown bar in Germany, have a Porsche and hustle Frauleins for a couple of years and do okay.

      Sent to infantry AIT to wait for my class date which, surprise of surprises, was for the Queen of Battle and declined the honor. There was absolutely no way that, at 21, I wanted to be responsible for the lives of 50 men most of whom would probably be about my age. The getting shot at wasn’t the issue, but having people, for whom I was responsible, die on my watch was something I wasn’t prepared to do.

      Company commander said that since I had the MOS, I was going right to RVN. I told him I had a contract with the gov’t. and if I went over, he was going to jail. Next day I was in clerk school, typing, drinking coffee and schmoozing the WACs. Life was better than it was in infantry AIT. Toward the end of the course, four of us were called out and asked if we wanted to go to finance school at Ft. Ben Harrison in Indianapolis. Sure, why not?

      After all that I got stationed permanent party at Ft. Devens and after a couple of months had had enough of the chickens*** and the treatment we were receiving from the anti-war public from coast to coast; refused service in restaurants, ignored, called names, etc. Put in for a transfer, had a short leave and off I went.

      Stationed mostly in the Tan Son Nhut/Saigon/Cholon area as a finance clerk, part time duty following buses around Saigon in an IH Scout with a 12ga. to keep the sappers away and machine gunner when necessary. Toward the end of my tour and after Tet ’68 they were offering early outs if one had 150 days or fewer on ETS so I extended, got a 30 day special leave back home, came back for almost a year and got out an E-5.

      A few years ago, after seeing “We Were Soldiers”, I started thinking that had I applied myself in high school, I could have tried to get an appointment to West Point, continued to apply myself and gotten to be O-4 maybe O-6, commanded a battalion and possibly, just possibly could have done some good in the world on behalf of oppressed people who couldn’t do it on their own. Who knows, maybe next time?

      Doesn’t get much better than getting out an O-6 over 20-30 other than momma would have taken a hike and your liver would have been pickled from all those 4 martini lunches in the O Club though.

      Welcome home brother to you and bna42 and everyone else here who was there. Hooah!

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.0/5 (4 votes cast)
    • sumitchComment by sumitch
      January 26, 2013 @ 9:10 pm

      Shafawn, I wish I had said what you did at 10:43, 11:56 and 12:26. I’ll bet there are several of us pigs in here that would love to have a beer (or a strawberry soda) with you. And we’d check your coat and pull back the chair for you and probably let you pay your share if you insisted, but we’d be embarrassed inside by it. It’s the right thing for men like us old coots to do and the fact that it makes us feel good about ourselves is an added bonus.

      I’m flying down to Lake Chapala, Mexico to meet and enjoy a few days with a lady that I went to high school with. She was (and is) top shelf and I was a motorcycle riding greaser. I doubt we had three words the whole time we were in school together. We met up because of our 50th reunion and kept each other company during it. I still can’t believe it when she recently said to me “You don’t know how long it’s been since a man held the door for me”. She appreciated it and I felt special for doing it.

      It took me 70 years, but I’ve got a date with a cheer leader.

      Hooah !

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 3.9/5 (7 votes cast)
    • shafawnComment by shafawn
      January 26, 2013 @ 10:40 pm

      Thank you! That put a smile on my face Sumitch I hope you have a great date with your cheerleader friend. It’s never too late to live in the moment, forget the past and trust God for the future :)

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.3/5 (6 votes cast)
    • nhpollackComment by nhpollack
      January 26, 2013 @ 11:16 pm

      sumitch,

      You have the best time anybody in the world has ever had and I hope she puts a permanent grin on your face. You deserve it!

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.0/5 (4 votes cast)
  16. retiredcwoComment by retiredcwo
    January 26, 2013 @ 12:52 pm

    Well, miss marple, you certainly seem to have ALL the answers. Therefore, please indulge the rest of the world as to when all women aged 26 and younger and all those arriving at the age of 18 will be mandated to sign up with the Selective Service. Yes, that will make All Women eligible for the coming Draft. A Draft, you say. There will never be another Draft. Gays will nver be allowed to serve openly in the military either. Women will never be allowed to attend West Point (or any other Service Academy). Blacks will only be allowed to serve as cooks and drivers. A black man will never be in the White House. The only thing that Gloria Steinem ever got right was that politicians with nothing to lose will – and have – used the military as a social experiment to bolster their standing with voters. If you are REALLY excited about women serving in all segments of the armed forces, then get them registered so we know where they all are. Because, when the liberals finish hollowing out the military, when the true leaders have been pushed aside and out, and when we have to refill our forces quickly because some dummy or wacko somewhere in the world decides to do something entirely stupid that we have to defend against, there is no reason that EVERYONE shouldn’t have to respond alike: men, women (mothers, too), sons, and, of course, daughters. Now, am I against women in the military: No. They have served – and will continue to do so – well and bravely. Do we need female Infantry companies (or derivations thereof): Again – No. Do we need a women to volunteer for specific missions: Yes. Such are the Female Engagement Teams (FETs) in Afghanistan. That’s my nickel’s worth – and don’t you dare say that women don’t need to register along with everyone else. Either you open Pandora’s Box or you don’t!

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.5/5 (14 votes cast)
    • rustypatComment by rustypat
      January 26, 2013 @ 1:29 pm

      +1 @ Can’t have it both ways.

      If you cry foul @ draft for women because of the physical, psychological, social impact difference, then don’t cry unfair @ combat that agrees with such differences.

      I’m fine with “no draft” for women. There is a NATURAL difference between men & women. Does that mean that I’m a sexist … on the issue, not likely … check with my daughters who are actively serving our country this very day. But even my daughters are put off by women in the military that want to have extra consideration given to them because of being female.

      Mine feel largely as I do … either you can do the job, or you can’t … pretty simple. Do my daughters want a “fair shake” at the opportunity to prove they can do the job, the same as their brothers … you betcha. But, if they can’t do it as well as their brothers, then they aren’t sore losers about it crying that it is unfair and the standards should be lowered. They are team players that want the best performers getting it done for our team … be that themselves or others better than they.

      This isn’t T-Ball or church camp, where it is kinda important to instill self-esteem boosting, no hurt feelings, everyone gets to play attitudes … this is life & death, national security, all’s fair cause the other side cheats and wants you dead, demoralized and defeated war we are talking about here. A true Commander-in-Chief would understand this … a true leader would understand this. My daughters understand this … maybe one day they’ll be Commander-in-Chief. Today would not be too soon, given the un-American fraud that currently is supposed to be holding the position.

      Obama-Nation is an Abomination

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.6/5 (11 votes cast)
    • missmarpleComment by missmarple
      January 26, 2013 @ 2:02 pm

      retiredcwo, Of course women would have to register if there was a draft. If we want equality in the services, we should have the same responsibilities as men.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 2.8/5 (5 votes cast)
    • nhpollackComment by nhpollack
      January 26, 2013 @ 7:32 pm

      retiredcwo,

      I agree with everything you say and you said it well, but you left one thing out. Even if they become subject to the draft and were ultimately drafted, they still have the trump card or joker in the deck of getting pregnant. Would that result in a court martial, DD, trip to the stockade or what? Obviously, they can’t be pregnant and out in the field on operations and the military isn’t going to demand an abortion so what would the ramifications of that be. With all the conversation on both sides, until men can get pregnant or women get tubal ligation as a requirement of military service this dog just won’t hunt.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 3.4/5 (5 votes cast)
  17. bg155Comment by bg155
    January 26, 2013 @ 1:20 pm

    Wait until someone walks into the Post Office, and sees the Selective Service poster stating that men AND women, 18 to 26 years of age, must register. Then wait for the next big shooting war, where your sisters & daughters are shipped off, with no choice and no say in the matter. Will they induct young mothers? If not, that is a biological difference where the roles of men and women are NOT equal. I am not trying to diminish the roles that women have played and are playing in our Armed Forces. I am just saying, be very careful what kind of equality you wish for. Right now, our Services are all volunteer. We will see what the likes of Rosie O’Donnel, Cindy Sheehan, and the gals of Code Pink have to say then.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 5.0/5 (13 votes cast)
    • rustypatComment by rustypat
      January 26, 2013 @ 2:00 pm

      Put Rosie on the front lines and see how fast she can dodge a bullet. Then ask her girlfriend what she thinks about it after the funeral.

      It’s one thing to “jack your jaws” in front of a microphone or TV camera … it’s quite another to get “jacked up” by the enemy.

      I don’t go around giving my advice/opinion about how to be a lesbian, because I have no qualifications to do so. Rosie has no qualifications to say squat about combat, because she’s never been there. Until then, Rosie should ****.

      Combat decisions should be made by those with combat experience … not “let’s be fair” politicians, so-called celebrities and lawyers with their own agenda. Also, don’t forget about POW & torture that comes along with death & dismemberment, psychological trauma and a host of other issues. This is what people are saying is good/fair for women … idiots. Absolutely total freakin’ idiots.

      Obama-Nation is an Abomination.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.6/5 (11 votes cast)
  18. mpemby59Comment by mpemby59
    January 26, 2013 @ 1:30 pm

    Ask the wives and girlfriends of serving members of the infantry, artillery, and armor branches of the US Army and Marine Corps for their opinion. They would know what is at stake, and what the consequences will be.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 5.0/5 (8 votes cast)
  19. wmaggComment by wmagg
    January 26, 2013 @ 2:51 pm

    The only reason this was done at this time was to weaken OUR military. This has been to goal of this administration all along “to destroy from within” This **** and his administration could care less who dies for this country just as long as they die, male or female, Career advancement is not the goal of military enlistment, securing OUR nation and it’s freedoms and upholding our constitution is the only function OUR military should be concerned with.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.6/5 (9 votes cast)
    • sumitchComment by sumitch
      January 27, 2013 @ 12:01 am

      And now he’s come back with the military paying for their own insurance, or part of it. He tried this the first month of his first term and it got slapped down. His rationale is that the military is all volunteer so they should pay. If volunteering is the test, how about him, his cabinet, his czars and Congress toss in a couple of bucks to pay for theirs? Oh hell no. We’re special.

      Everything he does weakens our country and the military which is exactly what he wants. I can just imagine the cost of the insurance premium for a grunt. Probably have to borrow money to go with your entire paycheck to pay it. Oh yeah, I forgot to mention. The unions still get theirs free. And he’s sending MBT 1’s and F16’s to Egypt who took billions of our dollars to rid themselves of a dictator then did a sharp right turn, spits in our face and rolls out the red carpet for Al Qaeda. I wonder why? Could it be to surround Israel and wipe them out?

      He’s buried us with Obamacare, increased taxes on medical devices, bailed out his union buddies with GM and Chrysler with our money, printed trillions in monopoly money, took the call at 2:00 am and ran his mystery amnesty down our throats, bypassed Congress who knows how many times with his Executive Orders, got our taxes raised with his “Over the Cliff” save, is working to ruin our oil and coal energy industry with taxes and regulations to save the world from global warming, which is BS, involved us in a war in Libya without Congressional approval, lies to us on a regular basis, doesn’t read his daily security papers (much less attend the meeting), is allowing women on the front combat lines and is coming after our guns which the Supreme Court has said at least twice that the second amendment applies to individuals. Where does he find the time for so much golf and vacations with all that on his plate?

      When is or how do we get Congress off the dime and start impeachment proceedings on this slug? It’s impossible (well improbable) that they are all so stupid as to not see what they are letting him get away with. They are letting him destroy the United States.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.3/5 (6 votes cast)
    • shafawnComment by shafawn
      January 27, 2013 @ 10:17 am

      His rationale is that the military is all volunteer so they should pay.~Sumitch

      Our military is all volunteer that’s WHY they SHOULD NOT pay.

      Make men pay to take out the bullet they volunteered to step in front of for you?

      Every time I bring up impeachment I’m told that has to come from the Senate and you know that’s not going to happen in the socialist controlled Senate we have.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 3.7/5 (3 votes cast)
    • nhpollackComment by nhpollack
      January 27, 2013 @ 7:28 pm

      sumitch,
      Congress isn’t “letting” him, they’re aiding and abetting him. We no longer even have the semblance of two political parties, just one and it’s the government which will be called, “The Party” as in some other countries. There isn’t a politician I can think of who has more in common with his/her constituents than with all the other politicians.

      I think it might come down to the government as one party and the NRA as the opposition.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
  20. bizzybuzzerComment by bizzybuzzer
    January 26, 2013 @ 3:30 pm

    All the ugly combat wounds, sounds, killings, murders in the wars here in America and then overseas were not quite as well pronounced or portrayed. Now with the INTERNET, digital photos, computers the communications are giving us instant and colorful images as if we were just there. Now, some of our leaders play copy-cat to Hitler. They want to do what Hitler did but not make the mistakes he made. To keep the heart beating he kept turmoil within the ranks. Fact is that Hitler was a sorry Commander in Chief and so is ours. So, we’re looking at Insanity or Ignorance. From which hand do you want to die ?

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 3.9/5 (7 votes cast)
  21. Mort_fComment by Mort_f
    January 26, 2013 @ 4:03 pm

    In college I was a 157 pound member of the wrestling team, my physical state was excellent, both strength and stamina. Could I carry a 200 pound dead weight? I doubt it. Could I be even considered a candidate for SEALS, Rangers, Green Berets? No way Jose, I am legally blind without my glasses. I paid my way to learn to fly at 16, could I become a combat pilot of any sort? Again, No Way Jose. But I would have easily passed the qualifications for a combat infantryman.

    As for the Russians. In WWII there were the Night Witches, women flying old biplanes over German lines. There were Russian women fighter aces. There were Russian women flying and crewing Stormovik tankkillers. No, they were not Amazons.

    I suspect that chauvinistic principles might even enhance our military effectiveness, Allowing women in combat brigades will feed the chauvinistic principle to ‘protect’ the women in the unit.

    Working for the Air Force, one of the captains was so blind that he could not pass the annual gun qualification. I offered to take it for him. All officers in the Air Force are ‘combat’ personnel.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 2.3/5 (6 votes cast)
  22. Pingback: New combat policy ignores biological realities - Military News | Military News

  23. gma214Comment by gma214
    January 26, 2013 @ 5:25 pm

    Women in combat is nothing but more stupid socialist social engineering for NO GOOD REASON.

    *The Reality That Awaits Women in Combat
    A Pentagon push to mix the sexes ignores how awful cheek-by-jowl life is on the battlefield.
    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323539804578260132111473150.html

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 3.2/5 (5 votes cast)
  24. rzraickComment by rzraick
    January 26, 2013 @ 5:47 pm

    I would like to add something to the discussion. Before I do, I want you to know that I support equality of rights to all persons regardless of sex, race, age, sexual orientation, and class, as a matter of principle.

    I have been a supporter of the feminist movement since it came into existence. That being said and at the risk of being attacked, I just saw a documentary which presented a very compelling argument, that the “feminist movement” was promoted by the Communist factions in our country as a way to undermine the family structure, which was an important goal to them, to lay a foundation for Communism in the U.S.

    I believe the doco was titled “The Grinding Down of America”. It is worth a watch. It is something to consider. I would ask that you check it out for what it is worth.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 3.7/5 (6 votes cast)
    • nhpollackComment by nhpollack
      January 26, 2013 @ 7:08 pm

      rzraick,

      Interesting that you mention that as last night I saw a panel sponsored by National Review Online, with Genevieve Wood, Vice President of Marketing for The Heritage Foundation, Kellyanne Conway, President of The Polling Company, Mona Charen, columnist, political analyst and author and Kathryn Lopez, editor of National Review online.

      One of the things they mentioned was that due to the feminist movement, there are more single women and single mothers than ever before in our history and, if I remember correctly, they were approximately 50% of all American women. They, as independent and liberated as they were, almost exclusively voted for Obama as he was promising them security. So we have a group of independent, liberated women, many of whom “need a man as much as a fish needs a bicycle” as Gloria Steinem said before marrying serially and very well each time, but are voluntarily depending on big, impersonal government for their security instead of those useless, overbearing, chauvinistic, insensitive, knuckle dragging men a majority of whom probably revere women, put them on pedestals, work to support them and treat them with kindness and respect.

      As Ricky used to say to Lucy, can you ‘splain this to me?

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 4.3/5 (6 votes cast)
    • shafawnComment by shafawn
      January 26, 2013 @ 10:49 pm

      I have watched Grinding America down as well and I loved it and agree with it’s message completely.
      I think the feminist movement was meant to destroy our youth because they became latch key children coming home to an empty house. Nobody at home to care if they do their homework or if they have homework. Nobody to be accountable to or care how their day at school might have been.
      Instead those kids were given ‘things’ in place of parenting.
      They got ‘Barney’ so ‘Barney’ became love instead of love.

      And our country wasn’t hurting economically. People weren’t working their tails off to make ends meet.. they were working for more ‘Barney’ items. Computers and video games took over parenting where Barney left off.
      That’s just one of the glorious wonders feminism gave us.

      And the best point I have read here wasn’t mine.. The point about young girls signing up for the draft will be the final blow on the coffin of freedom because parents will not be able to handle that. I don’t mean to be negative. There is hope but that hope is in Jesus…
      not sending our women to the front line

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 3.7/5 (6 votes cast)
    • nhpollackComment by nhpollack
      January 27, 2013 @ 3:38 pm

      shafawn,
      I saw a forum on CSPAN the other night presented by National Review Online with Genevieve Wood, the Vice President of Marketing for The Heritage Foundation, Kellyanne Conway, CEO of The Polling Company,
      Mona Charen columnist, political analyst, author and Kathryn Lopez editor of National Review online. Kellyanne who is frighteningly knowledgeable and talks a very straight line said that approximately half the women in the country, due to the feminist movement, are single and/or mothers. They wanted to be “all they could be” and celebrated their independence by resisting “male oppression”. They almost unanimously voted for Obama who offered them government “security”. It’s not the nanny state for them, it’s the daddy state and I mean “daddy” every way one may interpret it, but particularly in the context of, “Who’s your daddy?”. Know what I mean Firecracker?

      Your mention of Jesus, who many consider their Father in Heaven, is being replaced by the government. While I don’t subscribe to religion, but have a direct and personal relationship with my G-d, I certainly believe that the increasing secularization of our country and abandonment of religious teachings, starting with the Golden Rule is one of the root causes of our decline.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)
    • shafawnComment by shafawn
      January 27, 2013 @ 5:50 pm

      I do know what you mean and I agree. The government has taken over parenting to adolescent adults who don’t understand what it means to be ‘independent’.
      The left is constantly spouting on and on about their precious education and science and statistics over religion and faith. Ok. Prayer was taken out of schools in 1962.
      Before 1963 sexually transmitted diseases among students were 400 per 100,000. Since 1963, they were up 226% in the next 12 years.
      Since prayer was taken out of schools 1963 single parent families are up 140%.
      Before 1963 divorce rates had been declining for 15 years. After 1963 divorces increased 300% each year for the next 15 years.
      Since 1963 violent crime has increased 544%.
      Seems pretty evident to me the answer is QUICK somebody run hold some prayer groups at every school if you REALLY and TRULY wanted to see these statistics reverse.. God is the one who can do that. But no..
      they don’t REALLY WANT the answer. They see these statistics too but they purposely ignore the truth.
      They want to disarm the American population so that only criminals have guns. Yep they are idiots.

      It only take 10 years after taking prayer out of schools to legalize abortion.

      Data from 1973 on indicate that black women’s share of abortions has consistently been at least twice their share of live births.
      Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,348649,00.html#ixzz2JDk2pYgd

      So where is all the warm fuzzy love for black people if Planned Parenthood Abortion Clinics (ironic name) are on the corners of government housing complexes across metropolitan cities?

      New York’s black abortion rate was almost 40 per cent that year, and the three Planned Parenthood facilities nearest the billboard poster reported almost 17,000 abortions in 2010.

      Statistics show that blacks make up about 13 per cent of the American population, and account for 36.4 per cent of terminations in America, the Daily Post reports.
      Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1360125/The-dangerous-place-African-American-womb-Black-politician-criticises-anti-abortion-billboard.html#ixzz2JDo8xcV5

      That’s almost 1 out of 2 black babies will be aborted! That is black genocide! And the liberal left democrats are the ones pushing that agenda! Where is the out cry from the media? Not a peep baby. They keep that stuff under wraps! And black people just follow along like sheep to the slaughter baaaaaaaa
      I don’t get it. Why? Will Americans really trade freedom for an Obama phone? Will we really give up our right to defend ourselves? Will we really allow our little girls to sign up for the draft? Where will it end? By the time Obama is finished we will all be broke, po and can’t take no mo.
      It’s like we are casting our pearls at the feet of fat pigs to trample and rend us. Take every blessing prayed over us at the foundation of our government and throw it to the wind!
      And if my conviction and passion to hold on to what is being ripped away by socialism brands me a firecracker then .. I guess I am because it absolutely breaks my heart and infuriates me to see us sit idly by and watch our amendments weakened and shredded. How many men have shed blood and lay buried in their graves having died with the satisfaction that they knew it was for the cause of freedom for the next generations? What will we tell them when we see them. What reason can we give that we in one generation lost American freedom to socialism?

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 3.7/5 (3 votes cast)
    • sumitchComment by sumitch
      January 27, 2013 @ 6:11 pm

      Shafawn, I almost think that a better usage of our tax dollars rather than to give folks in the hood an easy way to make contact with their favorite dealers would have been to give them some of those pro-po-elastics with a picture book on how to use them.

      Just a random thought.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 1.0/5 (1 vote cast)
    • nhpollackComment by nhpollack
      January 27, 2013 @ 7:42 pm

      shafawn,
      First, please sit down and take a deep breath, hold it, now let it out slowly. Repeat two or three times. I sure didn’t mean to wind you up there. When I called you a firecracker, it was meant as a compliment based on your boundless enthusiasm when you get going on something.

      On Planned Parenthood, have you read any of the founder, Margaret Sanger’s early work, particularly on “The Negro Project”? If you haven’t, here it is:
      http://www.citizenreviewonline.org/special_issues/population/the_negro_project.htm

      Don’t forget, long, slow, deep breaths.

      As the state of the Republic breaks your heart, I feel we’ve been living a nightmare since November ’08 and it almost brings tears to my eyes. My flag has been hanging upside down since the ’08 election and I was breaking out a new one that I was going to hang right side up when you know who lost this last time. Unbelievable!

      In spite of their holding $1T of our debt, the Chinese must have wished that ancient curse on us; “May you live during interesting times”. Even with the conformity, dullness and everything else from the Eisenhower era, I’d much prefer that to this.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 3.0/5 (2 votes cast)
    • shafawnComment by shafawn
      January 27, 2013 @ 9:00 pm

      Oh no you didn’t get me upset. Socialism gets me upset. They’ll have socialism all set up and rolling before they finally admit that’s what it is and we’ll be sitting around calling them liberals and progressives until we’re allowed to call it by it’s true name.
      It’s just frustrating. I write to my Senator and representatives frequently. I keep up with how they vote and who shows up to vote. I keep every letter I get in response. In spite of many of us doing the same thing.. the Republic is slipping away from us.
      You didn’t upset me though and firecracker is probably aptly named and didn’t offend me.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 3.0/5 (2 votes cast)
    • sumitchComment by sumitch
      January 27, 2013 @ 9:43 pm

      Shafawn, like you I write letters, send emails and call my Representative(who I like)and Senators (Cronyn has let us down lately. Cruz is too new, but I like what he’s been saying on the idiot tube) all the time and sometimes dignitaries from other states as well as his nibs in DC (funny, I’ve never received a response from him). I don’t think he speaks plain ‘Merican. What I do have is about a 6″ stack of form letters from various elected officials saying “I appreciate your message and it’s important that I hear from my constituents and know how you are thinking”. Then a canned paragraph that sometimes has something to do with what my message was, all signed by a machine. I know they can’t answer every communication they get, but something more than “Dear Sir. Right on. Best Personal Regards” would be nice. I’ll be happy to trade you a genuine Tom Coburn for a Paul Rand.

      I’m one of the four and a half million members of the NRA who is working overtime to protect our second amendment rights and I don’t even hunt anymore, so I guess I’ll be a charter member if they become a political party. I also have joined the ranks of NumbersUSA (not because I hate Mexicans) and Judicial Watch which I feel is doing a bang up job for us common folks. I was a minor officer of the local Republican precinct until I refused to sign in blood their oath of obedience a couple of years ago. I’ve only been to one state convention and learned that not only do they not care what I have to say but it’s far too expensive, again for us common folks. Besides, the movers and shakers have already prepared the plank and probably wish I’d just sent money and leave them alone. One nice thing about the Great Republic of TEXAS, among many is that you do not have to register to vote and join the ranks of a particular party.

      My paranoia has me convinced that the CIA (who I have some up close and personal knowledge of from the unpleasantness in Nam), the NSA and probably the Secret Service can tell you what color my shorts are and where I’m sitting at any given time.

      Speaking of Texas. There’s sure a lot of big words floating around tonight for us Texican red necks. But I do have my Funk and Wagnall’s out and am learning something, so I guess I’m not totally aliterate er whatever.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 3.0/5 (2 votes cast)
  25. trishywishyComment by trishywishy
    January 26, 2013 @ 6:36 pm

    I think it’s kind of strange that Obama would be pushing for women on the front lines. All wars are brutal, there is no doubt,now look who we are engaged with. Muslim terrorists who treat women like dogs in their regular lives, can you imagine what these animals would do to American women on the front lines. Any woman who thinks they can beat a Muslim terrorist in hand to hand combat should think twice. God bless them for trying but I think we need to be realistic, and stop this idiotic conversation.

    VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
    Rate this comment:
    Rating: 4.0/5 (8 votes cast)
    • nhpollackComment by nhpollack
      January 26, 2013 @ 9:44 pm

      trishywishy,
      Like we used to say when Clinton was in the Oval Office, “Nothing is more dangerous than a draft dodger with his own Army and Navy”. Obama was never in the military, hates the military and would have no problem sending every man, woman and child off to defend his kingdom. Essentially with women in combat, he’d be sending them to fight his battles while hiding behind their skirts and he got the majority of the single women’s votes. Go figure.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 3.4/5 (5 votes cast)
    • sumitchComment by sumitch
      January 27, 2013 @ 10:03 pm

      I hear you trishywishy. And all this last year or so he’s been telling the fairer sex that it’s the Republicans that are their enemy and that they are fighting, so they should vote for him. Talk about a Benedict Arnold.

      VN:F [1.9.6_1107]
      Rate this comment:
      Rating: 3.0/5 (2 votes cast)

Leave a Comment





Reference Pages

  • About
  • Network-wide options by YD - Freelance Wordpress Developer