Democrat Culture/Military Shock

This quote from the Heritage Foundation, November 6, 1997, has been used in this corner before, but it bears a mention:President Clinton's assistant secretary of the Navy, Barbara Pope, has averred that "We are in the process of weeding out the white male as the norm. We're about changing the culture." Changing the culture, indeed! A few years before, Clinton, by executive order, attempted to change the culture of the military not by tampering with the “white male as the norm;” rather, he attempted to change the culture by making it tolerant of practicing homosexuals. Even though he had both a Senate and House that were solidly democratic, he couldn’t pull that off.

Times have changed, not their least important aspect being the hassle since then throughout the states about “weeding out the heterosexual male/female as norm” in favor of eventual acceptance of almost anything up to and including “zoo arrangements as the norm.” Some label one part of this “culture change” as same-sex marriage, an impossibility by definition, while others call it “perversion.” Also, not least important is the takeover of Congress by the democrats this year, thus setting the stage for a warm-fuzzy “messing with the norms,” as the social engineers take over.

A resolution has already been introduced (or will be) in Congress that would force the military to tolerate homosexuals whether that makes any sense or not. At present, they are discharged honorably when outed either by themselves or in other ways. Some military types have been lined up to describe their fitness, notwithstanding the perverted behavior of the homosexual, not surprising since political correctness has damned both the military and the nation for three decades now. This is not even to consider personal agendas by some politically correct military folks and others.

Though it’s politically incorrect to bring up the subject, militant feminism – or just ordinary feminism – has so impacted the country now that men, almost gallantly, seem to have stepped aside to an extreme that makes one wonder about the nature of even the short-term culture, let alone long-term, particularly relative to its survival. Consider: Less than one-fourth of the Congress is made up of people who have had military experience, easily the most important consideration of government at this time of worldwide terrorism as the weapon of choice by the Islamic fundamentalist maniacs. This is due in no small part to the fact that there are 90 women in Congress, 17% of its roster, a potentially large bloc by any measure in politics. This has nothing to do with the mental abilities of women (equal to or surpassing men’s), but everything to do with the collective psyche necessary to secure national defense, an exercise often calling for the breaking of things and the killing of people, things men are much better equipped both to do and tolerate.

Of the seven announced democrat candidates for the presidency in 2008, none have had military experience, though Senator Dodd put in some years in the Army Reserve, during much of which time he attended law school in Louisville, Ky. Of the five announced republican candidates, only former fighter-pilot John McCain, a graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy, has had military experience – 22 years, five of which were spent as a POW in Vietnam. During the last 62 years, every president except William Jefferson Clinton, on the record as loathing the military, has been in the military. Like McCain, both President Bush and former defense secretary Rumsfeld were fighter pilots, though not in combat.

Back to what Ms. Pope said in 1997…is the feminization of the country inherent in doing away with the “white male as the norm” (a bit discriminatory on her part) the way to go? Clinton loathed the military, so it is not surprising that an assistant secretary of the navy would say that, even though by that time the Congress had turned republican. Fifteen percent of the military is currently made up of women, an increase of 500 percent since 1973.

The democrats won the Congress last year by promising to pull the troops out of Iraq, screaming for a “new plan” to do so, and have whined incessantly about the “surge” that is the new plan. They have no stomach for the blood-and-guts approach needed in today’s world to battle the cutthroats whose major claim to strategy is the wholesale slaughter and maiming of women and children, thus terrorizing entire nations into submission, as is the case currently in Sudan. As the social engineers in Congress tamper with profound danger, one wonders what is in store in terms of security. This is not a disparagement of the distaff; it is merely a reminder that too much is at stake to leave the nation in the hands of either feminists or democrats in Congress.