Moeller indicated he was positively giddy about the end of DADT:
Jim Moeller · Top Commenter · Friends with Brent BogerOf course, because people like Moeller know absolutely nothing about the military, since they think so little of their country that they wouldn't dream of serving it in uniform, this kind of political bullshit from fringe leftists is to be expected.
Finally, gay men and women can openly and proudly serve the country they love. Now, starting today they can serve openly with their comrades-in-arms and make us a stronger nation and a greater people. Of course, there will be those who will complain that this will be the "end of America" and that the military should not be used for "social engineering". Just as when they complained when President Truman racially integrated the military in the 1940's, their voices of discrimination will be drowned out by the exemplary service of gays and lesbians to their country and a nation that has grown weary of the fear mongering of the right-wing.
So, now that the final barrier to his own enlistment has disappeared, the obvious question is this:
When is Moeller going to get off his ass and enlist? So, here's my invitation to him.
Kage McClued · Owner/Writer at Clark County Politics Blog
So, Jim.... when are YOU going to sign up?
See, it's so easy for back-in-the-rear-area pogues like you to demand how others... others who bleed for us all... have to live. Now, nothing can keep YOU from signing up. So, when is THAT going to happen?
Besides never, I mean?
Here's your chance. Show us what you've got, instead of using that freedom that so many others have paid such a terrible price for to make more political points.
And to the idiot who chose this headline.... what did you expect? A huge wave of troops throwing down their rifles and deserting? This article is as idiotic as the fake "studies" proponents used to say the military was OK with this.... not that much different, come to think of it, than the fake studies showing the CRC rip off to be the "locally preferred option."
In time, we'll see the "wave." The wave of reduced enlistments. The wave of those getting out. The wave of sexual assaults. The wave of bogus "he's a bigot" allegations that end careers. The wave of reduced morale' and unit cohesiveness.
You wouldn't know about unit cohesiveness, would you, Rep. Moeller... because there's never going to be any chance that it's YOUR blood on the ground in Afghanistan, Iraq or anywhere else in the military.
So now that you and those like you have done your damage to our national defense, it's time to move onto the next mainstreaming project, eh?
See More Reply · Like· 5 minutes agoSo now, I fully expect Moeller and tens of thousands of others who wrongly believe their enlistment is a "right" to be beating down the doors of the local recruiting offices to get in.
After all, isn't that what they wanted? Get rid of these rules so THEY could enlist?
And about Moeller enlisting? That's a joke. That kind of thing requires a level of courage he will never know.
42 other countries allow homosexuals in the military, some for as long as 40 years, including Israel, one of the finest forces in the world. Are you saying that our military lacks the focus and discipline that these other countries have? What does that say about the confidence we should have in our military?
ReplyDelete42 other countries allow homosexuals in the military, some for as long as 40 years, including Israel, one of the finest forces in the world.
ReplyDeleteActually, I've never been one for the playground argument.
Correspondingly, around 150 countries around the world DON'T allow homosexuals to serve.
In short, that 42 are wrong is no argument that we should join them
And, when it comes to Israel, they have no choice. We do.
Taking it a step further, the Dutch military is unionized. Is that an example we should follow as well?
All of this shoves aside the absolute truth of the matter: there is no Constitutional right to serve.
Too fat? Short? Tall? Stupid? Color blind? Aids? Slow? Got kids and you're a single parent? Para or quadriplegic?
You ain't gonna be allowed to enlist... and each one of these reasons equates to "discrimination" as much as keeping homosexuals out, or forcing standards of conduct on them that they don't "like".
You see, Greg, no one is forced to enlist these days... and the argument might be stronger if we had a draft.
But the standards of conduct in the military are like the standards of conduct anywhere in the private sector: You don't like the some companies only hire, for example, non smokers?
Then don't work there.
But don't force that company to make a decision that will harm them through higher health care costs due to some nebulous "discrimination against smokers" rap.
To me, it's like teachers whining about how much they're paid, as if they had no idea what being a teacher paid while they were learning to do the job or before they signed on the dotted line to TAKE the job.
Don't like the pay? Don't take the job.
Don't like military policies or the war? Then for Christ's sake, don't join.
It's not that difficult, really.
Are you saying that our military lacks the focus and discipline that these other countries have?
I'm saying what I wrote. Putting words into my blogger mouth doesn't change any of them.
What does that say about the confidence we should have in our military?
It says that this unnecessary policy change to kowtow to a tiny political minority, done purely and entirely for political purposes in the middle of a fricking war will cause many more problems then it will solve.
And the Obama Administration damn well knows it, or they wouldn't have had to fake the bogus study that essentially falsely told America that the military was "fine" with getting rid of the ban.
Since you asked.