The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

Complete Decadence

Posted on | January 24, 2013 | 58 Comments

“You can kill half of your young men and repopulate your country in relatively short order. . . . But when you kill your young women . . . your country has no future.”
Roxeanne de Luca, “Really, Leon Panetta? You want Sandra Fluke in combat?”

Have Americans become so decadent that they have lost all instinct for their preservation as a people? Well, 55 million abortions in the past 40 years would certainly seem to indicate this. And remember that a key issue in 2012 was Sandra Fluke’s “right” to free contraception, because it’s such a horrible thing when sex results in pregnancy. So this shouldn’t really surprise anyone:

Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta is lifting the military’s official ban on women in combat, which will open up hundreds of thousands of additional front-line jobs to them, senior defense officials said Wednesday.

Oh, did you hear about the 11-year-old transgender who “transitioned” in kindergarten? This is the future America voted for: No future at all.

 

Bookmark and Share

Comments

  • http://evilbloggerlady.blogspot.com/ Evi L. Bloggerlady

    That can happen now.

  • http://evilbloggerlady.blogspot.com/ Evi L. Bloggerlady

    As Hillary Clinton says: Does it matter how it happens? (As Andy at Ace and SooperMexican noted).

    Thanks to Secretary Hillary: This is going to be my new answer to any question.

  • http://evilbloggerlady.blogspot.com/ Evi L. Bloggerlady

    It is called female empowerment through stripping and prostitution. Oh wait, the left already went there years ago.

  • http://evilbloggerlady.blogspot.com/ Evi L. Bloggerlady

    Spot on generally. I completely agree with your description of the left and Darwinism.

    But while I share your concerns, I think you are over reading this particular decision (at least so far). I suspect very few women (in the immediate future) will be on the front lines. We need to monitor this closely to see how it plays out.

  • DaveO

    While this is simply a payoff for money and votes, there is a question to be addressed: if women can not be Chiefs of Staff/Chief of Naval Operations, and Chairwoman of the JCS because they are not combat arms officers, why not change that requirement?

    A CNO/CSA and CJCS is a manager operating at the strategic level, not a trigger puller, and is like 10 years from last having had to carry a sidearm.

    Too much emphasis on the Ranger tab and aviator’s wings, not enough strategic thinkers and managers with the political acumen to always put the Constitution and the Nation first and second.

    Women don’t want combat, they want power over men. Even this won’t satisfy them, but let their surrogates feel the weight of the deaths of their subordinates, magnified by rank and scope of responsibility. Which, giving the increasing number of females seeking mental health services from the VA, they are feeling.

  • DaveO

    150 million is inaccurate. How many are too old? How many are too young? How many are physically incapable of breeding? How are many are philosophically/religiously/politically opposed to breeding?

    I don’t think 150 million is accurate. 5-10 million. But it takes them birthing how many children each in order to bring in the tax receipts necessary to keep the Obamanation going? 5-10 children each?

    And, having gotten a grip during war, human nature is what it is. See also: pregnancy rates in combat units (such as ships) prior to and during deployment.

  • Wombat_socho

    The recent comment by the CJCS that physical requirements would be reviewed for “appropriateness” is not a good sign. Standards are going to be lowered, mark my words – it wouldn’t be the first time.

  • Wombat_socho

    If you’re going to stubbornly refuse to learn from other countries’ experience in this area, nothing I can say will convince you.