From CBS News.
Never mind the fact that it would cost millions of dollars to revoke the policy and let gays serve openly in the military. I cannot even believe it would be in the best interest of a person to serve openly gay in the armed forces. Of course, the homosexual agenda propagators really could not give a rat’s patoot about the efficiency and well-being of our military. Their goal is to simply shove their agenda down everyone else’s throats.
The last time I checked, our military actually served a purpose of protecting our nation, not some asinine cause of advancing the perverted propaganda for the homosexual agenda.
Here’s Obama’s take on things:
“But I think there’s increasing recognition within the Armed Forces that this is a counterproductive strategy,” he said. “We’re spending large sums of money to kick highly qualified gays or lesbians out of our military, some of whom possess specialties like Arab-language capabilities that we desperately need. That doesn’t make us more safe.”
I’d like to see the actual large sums of money that are being spent to kick highly qualified gays or lesbians out of the military.
Isn’t it cute how Obama refers to the gays and lesbians as highly qualified? He goes on:
Asked what he could reasonably accomplish for the gay community as president, Obama said he can “reasonably see” repeal of the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy as well as signing legislation to ban workplace discrimination against gays. He said he’d like transgendered people to be covered by the law, but thinks it would be tough to get such legislation through Congress.
Is it just me, or are others getting fagged from the LGBT bunch?
Sphere: Related Content
The LGBT lobby is relentless, and the homophobes like Obama and Hillary (you know, the people with an irrational fear of the gay lobby) are so quick to cave into them.
Neil’s last blog post..Weekly roundup
Has Obama suggested that he will make the Marines wear pink camo in combat yet?
Sam Pierce’s last blog post..U.S.D.C.P. - United States Dept. of Consequence Prevention
True story Neil — it’s obvious who the homophobes are.
Sam, not that I’ve heard, but I’m sure he would at least like to see a change to a pretty pastel green. Can you imagine this guy being Commander in Chief? Any more bright ideas like this one and he might have a mutiny on his hands.
Sunflower Desert’s last blog post..Obama Opposes “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” Policy
I can’t find it right now, but I had a link to a Homo-American blog that was very critical of a position B-HO had taken, and the post was a clarion call to the LGBT community. I thought I had saved it to JKN, but it’s not there, nor is it in my bookmarks. I’ll find it though, and post it.
I wonder what B-HO will have to say to his old friend, Larry Sinclair, about this.
He seems to be losing his grip on this election, if he loses the Gay contigent, Reagan Democrats and anti-communists, this could be a repeat of the Reagan-Mondale election.
Jweaver’s last blog post..Angel-London POTD April 18, 2008
“Isn’t it cute how Obama refers to the gays and lesbians as highly qualified?”
That has to be among the top 10 most stupid things I’ve ever read or heard! Are you serious?
What - so gays and lesbians cannot be highly qualified? Just who the @#$$ do you think you are that you can make that distinction?
Here’s another good zinger: “The last time I checked, our military actually served a purpose of protecting our nation…”
I would change that to “…our military supposedly has a purpose - protecting our nation…” Though not their fault, they certainly are not “protecting” our nation currently. They are serving at the leisure of our President; who’s purpose is clearly not defending this country. I don’t know exactly what his goals in the mideast are, but they do not entail OUR protection.
And for the hat trick: “Their goal is to simply shove their agenda down everyone else’s throats.” LOL !! That’s about as rich as it gets, comming from someone like you.
You’d think hanging out with the libtards, that you would have heard far more stupid things than that? Strange.
Actually Mark, don’t try the I support our troops but not this war garbage at Sunflower Desert because that crap just doesn’t fly around here. Believe it or not but our military is completely voluntary, or hadn’t you heard? Considering that all the troops fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq knew where our military was engaged in battle prior to enlisting or reenlisting, I think that makes it their fault. I’m just grateful that they are taking the battle to the terrorists instead of letting the terrorists bring the battle to the US.
I’ve come to the opinion that lefties like you are so against the war because you wouldn’t have the balls to fight your way out of a wet paper bag. Fortunately, the US military picks up the slack for the gutless, ungrateful cowards such as yourself.
Mark,
Perhaps if you enrolled in one of Bill Ayers classes he could teach you what President Bush’s goals are in the Middle East. Certainly B. Hussein Obama’s domestic terrorist, “English professor”, neighbor, and key component in Chicago’s slimy Democrat political machine would be able to enlighten you!
Tammi
What does being voluntary have to do with being “their fault”?? They do as they are ordered. hmmm - Wonder where those orders come from. Oh, that’s right, some guy with the title of “Commander and Chief of the Armed Forces.” You have a very scewed view of “fault” and decision making.
Please do presume to know about my past. I proudly did my time in the Military. And please don’t assume that just because I don’t like our current President that I’m a leftie or like Obama/Clintion. I am a Libertarian/Constitutionalist and will be voting for one of those candidates.
Sam
I don’t have even the slightest idea what you’re trying to tell me. I guess you think Obama knows what Bush’s intentions are in the Middle East. I’d say you don’t know what you’re talking about.
Could you please tell me what the definition of “victory in Iraq” means? Just what event will happen that will cause this so called victory? You can’t tell me because you don’t know. No one does - not even our President or any of his top military commanders.
My apologies for presuming you were a code pink type leftie. Would Ron Paul moonbat be a better presumption?
Sticks and Stones beeatch… Sticks and stones.
Mark.
I made the assumption that you were one of the “war for oil” nuts. I also made the assumption that you might be the type to gravitate toward the Ayers teachings? I apologize if either assumption was inaccurate.
I would say, from my layman’s perspective, that victory in Iraq would involve the following:
-Iraqi forces are able to maintain security and will not be vulnerable to internal or external threats immediately after U.S. withdrawal.
I also believe that in order to see the possibility of victory in Iraq, one would have to come to the realization that we are already in Iraq and time travel has not been discovered so it is too late to prevent going into Iraq. One also would probably have to accept a certain level of military presence in Iraq indefinitely… unless of course, Iraq is somehow different from Germany, Korea, etc.
Sam
I think you nailed it! The sole purpose of the whole Iraq war, from MY layman’s perspective, is to create a permanent military presence in the Middle East.
IOW - Sticking our noses in other people’s business, yet again. That’s the whole reason for 9/11 in the first place.
Why ARE we still in Germany, Korea, etc. anyway?
In case anyone was wondering why I refer to Ron Paulers as moonbats. The above quote is exactly why. Blaming 9/11 on the US and our foreign policy makes me sick. Last I checked, it was radical islamic terrorists that caused 9/11. To blame the US is just asinine.
Mark,
I think you lose credibility when you jump to blaming the U.S. for 9/11.
I believe that there are U.S. interests overseas from time to time, not some lust for the resources of other nation’s as you might view it.
Sam Pierce’s last blog post..Chicago Slimeball In Chief Goes to Bat for B.O. and His Terrorist Pal