by Smitty

Via American Power, I guess some policy thing or other happened having to do with Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.

While I’m essentially done with my military involvement, I’m confident that my opinion is mirrored by a huge chunk, if not the overwhelming bulk, of people in uniform: we don’t care. Specifically, no one really cares about anybody else’s junk. Sure, we live and conduct personal hygiene in some relatively immodest ways. Yes, the transcript veers a bit into the graphic from time to time. Indeed, there was some historically reactionary attitude offered toward the alternative lifestyles crowd.

Yet the military is first and foremost about rounds on target in support and defense of the U.S. Constitution. It has never been about being a dating service. My personal interests, sexual or otherwise, have never been a priority. We’re walking back our liberty to behind a line drawn by the UCMJ so that, when the time is up, that liberty is preserved and maximally enjoyable.

I bear no ill will to anyone over their sexuality. Indeed, I have known some gay service members. It never passed the ‘so, what?’ test. The military mission just has no sexual component.

What I hope will be clear to all parties involved is that this was no military decision. It was a political decision, not pure and simple, but impure and complex. The alternative lifestyles crowd may or may not represent a significant constituency within the military (I doubt it, both for reasons of history and temperment) but they appear to contribute cash and work hours to Lefty causes.

Cynically, the Left has used sexual liberation to paper over its strangulation of liberty. In the manner of the thieving tart, the Left has stroked the public erogenous zones with the one hand, while picking the pocket with the other. This military drive-by on DADT is more of same.

My prediction is that, years on, this event shall have proven as meaningful as the President’s budget. The percentage of homosexuals serving in the military will probably hold constant, and the military bias favoring ‘form follows function’ shall be about what it’s always been. The Administration could as well have issued an Executive Order stating 2+2=5. Such thinking was confined to the budget, however.

Update: linked at Daily Pundit.

by Smitty

I have the utmost respect for Michelle Bachmann, but her fund raising minions are really irritating Commander-in-Chief, House (CINCHOUSE). And when CINCHOUSE isn’t happy, no one is happy. Michelle’s courage and long-term effort in support of conservative causes are admired and respected. I will contribute further to the PAC when funds are available. At the moment, the robo-calling is truly annoying and not helping matters.

Request the correct people locate the Chris Smith entry in Alexandria, VA and eliminate it from the calling database.

Thanks in advance!

by Smitty

BAGRAM, AFGHANISTAN
This is something I worked on for a while, and presented to my colleagues at Mazar-E-Sharif, as I was enjoying the farewell barbecue:

Afghanistan Reflection

Vanity of vanities,
and what they say about those
best laid plans of mice and men.

As improvement we’d impose,
in such far places as these,
with results nearing chagrin,

Seeking to befriend our foes
with security and COIN,
rather than forcing the knees.

That the wider world they join,
which some prosperity knows,
and lives in relative peace.

Thus, we encounter disdain,
and corrupt activities,
as sure as the hot wind blows.

But if, by chance they should seize
that old liberty monsoon,
suddenly, likelihood grows,

That our efforts are not breeze,
that over mountaintop goes,
struggling to move it, in vain.
-CLS, August 2011

As delivered by the author: Continue reading Afghanistan Reflection →

by Smitty

If you’re a reader of Volokh.com, and you should be, then you’ve heard about Rehabilitating Lochner. For some background, see Lochner at Wikipedia. Shorter Lochner: the nanny state is not omnipotent, and privacy of contract exists.

Lately, George Will wrote about the resurgence of interest in the Lochner case, and this has led to follow-on beclownment at Media Matters, to which Bernstein replies:

So, I’d like to thank Media Matters for illustrating my point. You might even say that Media Matters has shown that Lochner remains a liberal bogeyman, at least among the less constitutionally and historically sophisticated.

Now, I may not be a hotshot lawyer, but I can at least come up with a sophomoric riff on the Volokh post:

by Smitty

Amid the sending up of the idiot Lefty ‘Day of Rage’ noise, Dana Loesch drops this little YouTube grenade:

by Smitty

Manland doesn’t have any design flaws, to my eye, (emphasis mine):

An Ikea store in Sydney, Australia, has either set retail shopping forward by three decades or set gender equality back by three decades—you decide: they’re testing out Manland, which is, as one local newscaster describes it, “basically a creche for husbands and boyfriends with short retail attention spans, a place to hang out while their wives and girlfriends run the aisles of Ikea.” Think ultimate man-cave stuff such as video games, foosball tables, free hot dogs, and pinball machines. (Apparently reading books is not encouraged in Manland!) As with Ikea’s childcare creche, women dropping off their husbands and boyfriends are given a buzzer. “After 30 minutes, the buzzer goes off, it reminds you that you have to come pick up your man or else, you know, we may have to all the authorities,” explains one Ikea sales associate. Clearly there are a number of loopholes in this whole program, not the least being the fact that it overlooks gay couples.

It’s not a loophole; it’s a design choice. Ikea is about making money, silly rabbit, not advancing a social agenda. The only business case for advancing a social agenda is that it somehow make money. It’s a furniture store, not a gay bar, Sarah: know the difference.

Update: linked at Three Beers Later.