In that time, I know, for a fact, that I served with gays. They were forced to hide it, but most of us knew, and nobody really cared. (Most of the people who would have cared were too damned stupid to figure things out anyway.)
Now, during Clinton's era, he passed "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (DADT) as an idiotic compromise. (The fact that the GOP hated it at the time, and were, more recently, rabidly trying to protect it, isn't the slightest bit funny. Not at all...)
Now, with DADT repealed, we have brain-dead idiots in Brokeback Mountain jackets telling us how sad it is that gays can serve openly in the military.
But, you know something odd? DADT was repealed, and the military didn't collapse.
It was only last year that the Marine Corps Commandant, Gen James Amos, said that the repeal of DADT would be a "risk." Now, three months after it was shot down, he's singing a different show tune.
Marines across the globe have adapted smoothly and embraced the change, says their top officer, Gen. James F. Amos, who previously had argued against repealing the ban during wartime.It really isn't an issue. You want proof?
"I'm very pleased with how it has gone," Amos said in an Associated Press interview
Two women share first kiss at US Navy ship's returnAnd, amazingly enough, the world didn't end. Society kept on going. It's weird. It's like it hardly even mattered, in the big picture.
A Navy tradition caught up with the repeal of the U.S. military’s "don’t ask, don’t tell" rule on Wednesday when two women sailors became the first to share the coveted "first kiss" on the pier after one of them returned from 80 days at sea.
Petty Officer 2nd Class Marissa Gaeta of Placerville, Calif., descended from the USS Oak Hill amphibious landing ship and shared a quick kiss in the rain with her partner, Petty Officer 3rd Class Citlalic Snell of Los Angeles. Gaeta, 23, wore her Navy dress uniform while Snell, 22, wore a black leather jacket, scarf and blue jeans. The crowd screamed and waved flags around them.
"It’s something new, that’s for sure," Gaeta told reporters after the kiss. "It’s nice to be able to be myself. It’s been a long time coming..."
Sailors and their loved ones bought $1 raffle tickets for the opportunity. Gaeta said she bought $50 of tickets, a figure that she said pales in comparison to amounts that some other sailors and their loved ones had bought. The money was used to host a Christmas party for the children of sailors.
Because, guess what? It makes no real difference to the military. Despite what some morons want you to believe.
I hated C-130's as well. Damn things always smelled like a combination of leaking hydraulic oil and puke.
ReplyDeleteGreat post!
I seem to recall that the military didn't collapse after Truman integrated it either. Don't we have to agree that the argument wasn't really about dire effects on morale and morality but a smokescreen for a fear of gays that stems from motivations that some people are afraid to discuss?
ReplyDelete"If we allow A to happen, surely B will result." How many proclamations of this sort survive the happening of A without the resultant B? Nearly all of them I think. There are always new prophets waiting in the wings to rewrite the script when the actors ad-lib and ruin the message.
I wish it weren't human nature and that it could be only people like the Religious Right I could accuse of it.
Nameless,
ReplyDeleteGreat post. I think the substance of the issue is inversely proportional to the hysterical nonsense we've heard about it since the Clinton years. The arguments these guys use are a classic instance of the fact that "ideas" are often just a cover for primal anxieties, biases, and magical thinking.
Seems to me that most military people, unlike the fanatical religious right and their ilk, pretty much say, "well, okay ... guess it wasn't a problem after all" when they see and experience that something isn't a problem. For conservative and ultra-religious whack-jobs, of course, reality and experience make no difference at all.
Massachusetts didn't collapse either when it legalized gay marriages.
ReplyDeleteNot all conservatives are as you say, idiots. Some even get published in conservative publications defending gay rights.
Ah, RatNat, you're back.
ReplyDeleteIt's true. There are conservatives defending gay rights. Like our boy Newticles: "If that's the most important issue to you... then you should be pro-Obama."
Like the Log Cabin Republicans (motto: "Chickens say, vote for Harlan Sanders!")
Sorry, Ratty, but a gay Republican is much like a black Confederate soldier: there's a basic disconnect with company policy there.
Nameless - Tell that to someone who cares.
ReplyDeleteAs to Newtie, well I've said my piece elsewhere. No need to repeat it or defend it here.
Gay rights is not the most important issue to me. Principles are.
For a progressive I would have imagined you would be against stereotyping. However, you do a damn right fine job of it.
Your tolerance is impressive. Indeed... impressive.
One of the great thinks about not carrying water for any party is that you get to ignore the PC crap. Because you don't give a rat's a*s what the power folks think.
Something about being independent, you don't bend or break because of increasing winds. When others don't understand, well, it's really of little concern to the independent minded.
So, in closing Nameles One, have A Merry Christmas and A Happy New Year. Or, if you prefer Happy Holidays.
Sixty years ago, that would have been "Rights for the Negro people aren't the most important issue to me. Principles are." You should probably keep up with the times.
ReplyDeleteI don't need to support stereotyping when the GOP is busy living up to every one of them.
You wanna go check the official platforms of each candidate to see which one doesn't feel that gays should be beaten to death with sticks? Ron Paul is the only reasonable front-runner, and he has so many idiotic ideas that the country would be better off with Zombie Jeffrey Dahmer in charge.
(OK, admittedly, Mittens has expressed some support for gay rights, but he's swung a complete 180 on that, like on so many other issues. If he believed that a plurality of people supported stoning witches, he'd be right out front with the rocks.)
And tolerant? Me? Go look up the meaning of "cynic," will you?
"it's really of little concern to the independent minded."
ReplyDeleteThen why do you act so snooty and superior as if your sore and swollen ego weren't so much larger than your cerebral cortex? Tell it to someone who gives a flying shit about you or your "principles." You're not independent, you just don't want to get pinned down by your smug, condescending statements, so might I suggest you go away where you won't be challenged?
And enough of that lying little "happy holidays" shit or is sniffing up the butts of the 'war on Christmas' Fox News Jesus mafia part of being independent?
Merry fucking Christmas, asshole and may Santa shit down your chimney.
Nameless - Thank you for your response. Perhaps I am the most cynical in the room.
ReplyDeleteCapt. - Did I hit a nerve? My apologies if I offended you. It seems sometimes like the only ones who are welcome here are those that walk a particular line. Not something I do well. Sorry.
ReplyDeleteIt is because of my respect for Octo after having a few exchanges that I come to this site.
I'm sure you couldn't give a rats ass about me or my principles. That's okay, because neither do the republicans give a rats ass about principles. Specifically, and especially the power structure that is bolstered by the wacky religious right.
I appreciate your comments, I really do. But as to how I phrase my responses, well that remains in my domain, at least it did the last time I checked.
For those who view my responses as you do, that is perfectly fine with me. I'm good with it. You see I've been around a long time and have developed thick skin.
As to a swollen ego, well, perceptions are just that. Perceptions colored by a particular view or position. Some can differentiate between perceptions and objective reality. That's how I got to know Octo and feel comfortable with him. I dropped my preconceived perceptions and actually started focusing on the realities of what he says. Funny thing, I actually found myself agreeing with him once in awhile.
I can do the same with most everyone. However, when people resort to crude, vulgar, and inappropriate language making it personal, it is much harder for one to make the effort.
I'm still game if you are Capt. Lets just try to refrain from insults.
PS: I don't sniff up the butts of anyone or anything, particularly "the war on Christmas folks", or mafia as you so eloquently phrase it. You see, I am an atheist. However I respect the right of those who find special meaning in Christmas, or Hanukkah, etc. Their faith does not frighten me.
I'll save you the trouble, neither am I frightened by the faith of peaceful Islam or the Muslim's in their faith either. I've been exposed to the peaceful and liberty loving Muslim people and their faith in a very personal way. One I'm guessing you haven't. We'll save the rest for a later time.
Good day my fine Capt. No disrespect felt, no disrespect meant.
One more thing, I'm in a remarkably big hurry right now as I must go shopping for my wife. No time to proof read my comments. Please overlook and forgive any typo's
A nerve? I don't know if it's all that unusual to dislike being talked to as a 'typical' member of a group invented solely for purposes of derision. You've shown precious little respect and evidenced little to explain the appearance of condescending from some great Olympic height.
ReplyDeleteIf you're not arguing with a straw man, why then the references to the phony war on Christmas, which of course as an infidel I celebrate only as a secular holiday -- and of course I never take offense at anyone wishing me a happy one or calling what after all is a holiday, a holiday. If someone says Eid mubarak to me, I respond in kind -- I don't snicker "or happy holidays, if you prefer" as though "those liberals" were waging war on Eid al-Adha. Why the hell, by the way, would you assume I was afraid of Muslims if you weren't inventing me instead of talking to me?
Are you insinuating that because I think Medicare is legitimate and Social Security is legitimate and necessary that I must then adhere to some rote catechism titled "PC" or that I'm some ignoramus to be patted on the head or some indigent looking for a handout?
Is that any different than snarking about watermelon stealing to a black man or greed to a Jew or laziness to a Mexican? More offensive indeed if the black man is a millionaire or the Jew a philanthropist or the Mexican works 80 hours a week to support his extended family.
Finally, it's so commonplace to find that the pose of independence is a cover for intransigent bias of the Starboard kind that I discount it and would rather stick to the facts of some specific matter rather than playing stereotype dodgeball. No one is without some bias, no one likes to be accused of it, to have a rational argument dismissed because of a bias without evidence and particularly one that is opposite in kind to one's true feelings.
Keeping in mind that mockery is the only defense of the loser, one should be a bit circumspect about surfing in on the same wave carrying the mewling mediocrities making themselves feel good by mocking the credentialed - a category from which I must exclude myself if we're talking about academic things - but like anyone, I would far prefer that someone refute me than insult me or talk down to me.
@ Capt... "I must exclude myself if we're talking about academic things - but like anyone, I would far prefer that someone refute me than insult me or talk down to me."
ReplyDeleteOn both of your quoted points I find myself in the same shoes in agreement.
Good Day...
You are correct Capt. everyone comes with certain biases. it;'s the nature of the beast I guess.
ReplyDeleteI'm quite sure no one is capable of totally escaping it.
As to Newtie, well, I've said my piece [sic] elsewhere...
ReplyDeleteNobody with any money or a computer has enough time to look that up. And Newt has nothing whatsoever to do with any discussion on civil rights. Yet allow me to state my peace in regards to said American monster. Newt Gingrich was the primary architect of the impeachment of Bill Clinton. Impeachment for no other reason than that Bill was a horndog and there must have been some way of getting him on that if only to force him to lie. (I am not admitting that Clinton lied.) More egregious and to-the-point today, Newton is the founder of the obstructionist, teh crazy, tea party movement that has killed our system of government as it once was known. The author of the government shutdown. The powerless idiot who now inspires Boehner to exercise his powers of obstruction over constructive good. Little wonder that his own party rejected him as speaker. He is poison and anathema to reasoned governance. There is a reason he does not currently hold office. He should never hold office again. Simply put, he is exactly what is worst and most wrong with the republican party today; and about a hundred million times more horrible. Granted, many republicans are stubborn enough to find this trait endearing.
Because Newt does love his own weenie, I offer this tribute to him. May he rest in peace.
I put on my clothes; They make me look dull;
I don’t think about it; I don’t think at all;
I dress high class; It makes me look high paid;
You know I'll do it baby, ‘cause I wanna get laid.
I’m just a slave to my dick!
It really makes me, sick!
I lied to myself and to my friends too;
And if I want your girl, I'll lie to you too.
I'll play stupid games, Do whatever it takes;
‘Cause I’ve gotta have a bomb and the time’s getting’ late.
I’m just a slave to my dick!
It really makes me, sick.
Well I live in the bars; I live in the pubs;
My mind is a blank from drinkin’ in the clubs;
I do a lot of talkin’ but I don’t say much;
I can’t be real ‘cause I’m such;
You know, I’m such a slave to my dick!
It really makes me, sick!
As a dino-p.s. meant only to provoke thought and not humans themselves, I'll add the following:
ReplyDeleteFor me, the bottom line on the concepts "liberal/conservative" is that the latter term has, unfortunately, been stripped of its meaning by the scowling savages and pitchfork-bearing mobs who currently impel the Republican Party to ever-new heights of insanity.
If “conservative” just meant something like – I’m being cursory here since I’m tired -- “government should do only what’s needed to promote liberty, encourage opportunity, and maintain security without sacrificing humanity or compassion,” I would find that a respectable starting point. Somebody really needs to redeem “conservatism” from the disreputability into which it has fallen.
As for what the so-called GOP is about these days – many of the miserable bastards in it never met an ordinary man or woman they didn’t want to kick to the curb or a power-mad tycoon they didn’t want to bow down to without demur.
Compassion makes them retch publicly; they will have nothing but religious fanaticism, flat-earth stupidity, and social policy that would put Scrooge to shame. What’s that Yeats line or two about the danger besetting Ireland’s most ardent revolutionaries? I believe it’s “Too long a sacrifice / Can make a stone of the heart.” Yet today’s American Right apparently conceives of life as nothing but precisely such a field of struggle and sacrifice – let the strong thrive and the weak perish in their misery and desolation. Those who see life that way are, in my view, responsible for much of the unnecessary suffering in this world. Their bullshit realist rhetoric doesn’t fool me – they are nothing if not the High Priests of the Denial of Death that makes so many human beings act like such compassionless, flinty-hearted slaves to what they falsely term “necessity.”
I wouldn’t say liberals are angels of light, but the more thoughtful among us understand that capitalism is neither all-sufficient nor even likely to prove self-sustaining over long periods of time, at least not if we value humanity over the systems by which they live and to which they are subject. That insight is worth something, in my view. It is a capitalist society’s best hope of remaining viable in the long run, its best hope of ensuring that it’s a livable system for the human beings who make it go. If we listen to the siren song of neoliberal economics, we will go to our destruction without ever understanding why the axe is about to fall on our necks.
FJ - Well my piece certainly wasn't as poetic. I believe I said something like he is a facist and we ought be very afraid should he ever be in a position of power.
ReplyDeleteI don' t usually do coarse language well.
Gee whiz, what the hell is wrong that people cannot accept that labels don't necessarily tell you all there is to know about a person? No, I don't want to debate this. I'm just sick and tired of the constant need to trade insults based on whether one labels oneself as a conservative or a liberal. Yep, I have friends who are conservatives. Decent people, intelligent people with whom I don't agree on a lot of issues. Nonetheless, I respect their consistent effort to communicate, to share their beliefs and to listen to mine as we seek some common ground, I don't want to fight wars with people; I want to find common ground where we can promote what is best for people. No, I don't think that all conservatives are worth my time but when someone makes an effort to join in the conversation it's just damn rude to continually insult that person instead of making thoughtful responses. Grouping all conservatives under one umbrella is no more reasonable than the converse of grouping all liberals as being the same.
ReplyDeleteAdults should be able to discuss or debate controversial issues without resulting to name calling and slinging insults and basically telling some people that they aren't welcome to the discussion.
I don't know Rational Nation, but I've visited his blog. I know what I believe and I'm not afraid that RN will infect me with conservatism. If he says something with which I don't agree, I'll tell him loudly and clearly. However,I will not insult him because he is a conservative.
Sheria,
ReplyDeleteTo whom do you address your comment?
My own comment doesn't condemn all conservatives, nor does it insult particular individuals. The point is a straightforward one: the term "conservative" has been hijacked by a fair number of people who probably couldn't define it to save their lives -- aside, of course, from spouting latent or manifest racist nonsense and regurgitated, uncomprehended lies about economic theory.
It's unfortunate because liberalism needs an honorable opponent, not just cynical frauds or crackpot peddlers of failed notions. A school of thought that never gets challenged intelligently eventually falls prey to its own worst tendencies, and its advocates will become lazy.
The remarks do, however, condemn the current conduct and ideology of the Republican Party and, frankly, anybody who would wholeheartedly pledge allegiance to such actions and thinking. Condemnation like that is entirely deserved, as I think we can see just by watching the daily news -- some of what the GOP has been up to lately amounts to a declaration of contempt for ordinary Americans.
RatNat:
ReplyDeleteThose were pretty obviously lyrics. The Subhumans - a Canadian punk band.
This stuff isn't hard to look up. Really, it isn't.
Welcome to the Information Age.
Sheria, my dear friend,
ReplyDeleteYou know, I posted something on another blog yesterday. Something about how people were being made angry by the fake "war on Christmas" and how others were making a good living by making it into a holiday of hate; deluding people into thinking their cherished traditions were being made illegal by those commie-pinko-secular-humanist-athiest-Jew bastards -- you know, the trash about how you "can't say Merry Christmas any more."
Well you can, and I did, and yet some child of an angry god, just barely able to type sentence fragments, called my a loser and an "asshat" with no further elaboration.
Perhaps I should have welcomed him into the "discussion" but of course there was no discussion to welcome him into, and odds are, at least to my hyper-masculine, hormone driven way of thinking, that the fellow who tosses a brick or a lighted bottle of gasoline through your window isn't really expecting a learned dialogue.
I deleted him. What should one do with someone looking to disrupt discussion; looking so much like a night-rider, a brown-shirt trying to turn a mob against some group? Some thousands of years worth of group experience has taught me, or at least I think so, that one does not crawl away or ignore without encouraging more of it.
I believe in confronting such people and I believe it's necessary to confront them and I believe that there is no other way to stem recurrences of that age-old evil-mindedness.
As to our current visitor, I think I may have misjudged someone who seems to use the slogans and weapons of the dark side but perhaps with a different intent and you'll read, I hope you will read, that I've tried to make a separate and tentative peace so that a productive dialog may ensue.
It's all too human to judge people by what they seem like when filtered through our prejudices. I hope you agree.
Merry Christmas.
Sheria - Thank you. As I tip my hat to you.
ReplyDeleteLike you, I am not afraid of opposing views, they in no way threaten that which I believe. I also welcome opposing views as they require {or at least should} one to think outside the box.
An active mind is a good think. Much better (at least to me)than either a closed or open mind. An active mind is a thinking mind.
Again, thanks.
Nameless Cynic - You'll have to forgive my apparent ignorance. But I just don't do Canadian Punk.
ReplyDeleteI'm more an American Jazz, blues, rockin roll (circa 50's, 60's, and early 70's) disco, classical, and dance music ype of dude. :)
Capt - I tip my hat to you as well. Coming from another (that would be me) masculine hyper active testosterone driven individual I appreciate your remarks.
ReplyDeleteYou said Capt.... "I deleted him. What should one do with someone looking to disrupt discussion; looking so much like a night-rider, a brown-shirt trying to turn a mob against some group?"
Might I say, use it against them. Rise above the situation, staying rational, calm while exposing the person for what they are. Win the exchange through reasonableness. Reasonable people can see the difference.
You also said Capt.... "As to our current visitor, I think I may have misjudged someone who seems to use the slogans and weapons of the dark side but perhaps with a different intent and you'll read, I hope you will read, that I've tried to make a separate and tentative peace so that a productive dialog may ensue.
It's all too human to judge people by what they seem like when filtered through our prejudices. I hope you agree."
I am in full agreement. Perhaps that is why I find the republican party, and their ultra right wing faction has left me. Need I say more?
In closing, Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays to all at The Swash Zone!
RatNat:
ReplyDeleteTwo things.
1. You don't to "do" Canadian punk (or any kind of punk, really) to google a lyric. This is the 21st Century, what they prematurely began to refer to as the "Information Age" back in the 50s (or thereabouts). It's not that difficult.
2. Have 'ya noticed how many column inches you're throwing up on the various pages? If you want to engage in a battle of wits, perhaps you should remember its soul.
Nameless Cynic - Yes, it isn't that hard. Had I wanted to.
ReplyDeleteSo noted.
Dino, I was making an observation about the general feeding frenzy whenever Rational Nation shares a comment on this public blog. I haven't found any train of thought that he has initiated to be offensive or insulting even though I don't necessarily always agree with his observations. However his simple observation (an accurate one) that not all conservatives are idiots nor are they all anti-gay was met with insults, rudeness, and derision. I'm interested in people who don't adhere to a lock step belief in what is commonly held to be conservative ideology. Quite frankly, when such people open the door a little, I'm like a Mormon boy on his mission or a Jehovah's witness on a Saturday morning--I see a potential recruit to the progressive team. If you have never engaged in such behavior, then my comments weren't addressed to you. Frankly I was so appalled at the utter rudeness of some of the comments that I didn't really focus on those comments that were not of that ilk. To make it perfectly clear, I was referencing the snarky comments from Fogg and Nameless. BTW, Nameless, I have no idea what Canadian Punk is and I don't consider my education to be the less because of it. I didn't recognize Junior's offered lyrics either and I bet that I can offer material that you wouldn't recognize the source or the genre either. Punk isn't my taste in music. I suspect that RN doesn't care much for it either.
ReplyDeleteCaptain, are you making a sincere point or just pulling my leg? I never said that you had to make nice with everyone and include everyone in the discussion. I merely pointed out that judging someone on the basis of a group to which they may belong or have belonged to instead of on what it is that the person says is tacky and tasteless. I never waste my time trying to discuss anything with someone who appears to be incapable of engaging in discussion. However, that does not apply to the the very specific circumstances regarding our current visitor. By the way, don't we want people to visit this blog and do they have to agree with us fully in order to enter the discussion? If so, that sounds a lot like some of the worst of the right wing blogs out there. I see nothing in their behavior that merits copying.
I believe in confronting such people and I believe it's necessary to confront them and I believe that there is no other way to stem recurrences of that age-old evil-mindedness.
I fully agree with the above statement. I think silence is tacit agreement and encourages the continuance of bad behavior. However, I said nothing to suggest otherwise in my previous comment.
My point was simple and consistent: "I'm just sick and tired of the constant need to trade insults based on whether one labels oneself as a conservative or a liberal."
The insults are childish and serve no purpose. I did like the following: I hope you will read, that I've tried to make a separate and tentative peace so that a productive dialog may ensue. That is a far more worthy reflection of the person that you truly are.
Just so that we're clear, I'm not a huge fan of punk music: been there, done that, not so much worried about it any more.
ReplyDeleteAt the same time, when something is presented that is obviously in lyric format (and therefore, not likely to be the direct words of the poster), I have a hard time with anybody getting pissy about the content without having checked the original.
It's like quoting Gravity's Rainbow and then taking crap because people couldn't be bothered with the most basic of research before burning your butt on a pile of unread freshman college paperbacks. It's just sad.
You don't get to bitch about somebody quoting anther source. You can argue the source, you can quote alternative sources, but you can't complain just because someone's taste is more eclectic than yours.
Sheria,
ReplyDeleteJust this once, I wasn't pulling your leg. I thought I saw a troll, much like one of the series of trolls who have circled me like vultures since the late 1980s when I began to write on-line. I did not detect much more than free floating empty insults looking for a target. Rote robo-rhetoric about the evils of Medicare in this case. Perhaps you can forgive someone who has been under fire for so long from being quick on the trigger?
I decided, upon advice from beneath the sea, that perhaps there was a willingness to talk and so I closed the bomb bay doors, put the guns on safety and called for a Christmas truce which may yet hold for a while.
I've a long history of trying to talk to right wing operatives, many of which were getting payed half a buck per insult and failing completely. I've been chastised over and again for trying to explain things to people who were only looking to insult and run away and hadn't the brains to understand in the first place. Perhaps I can be forgiven the itchy trigger finger this time and of course one doesn't like to be confused with a group, whether or not one belongs to it or whether or not that group actually exists. That's why I held my tongue and did not post for quite a while after I had to hear about how only men are violent rapists and unable to communicate with any degree of nicety to the dismay of the fragile damsels of the Zone.
If, as I said ad nauseam, you can't apply group statistics to an individual, should I be surprised to be hearing it used here? If you aren't answerable for the Spanish Inquisition, and I'm willing to consider that, then I'm not responsible for Jack the Ripper.
I'm willing to consider that RN might not be one of the turd-flinging trolls that have deliberately ruined discourse in America, but if one does not fling back one eventually finds oneself up to the eyeballs in turds -- and of all the dung that has been flung here, I think we've been mostly on the receiving end.