Apart from the insane clown posse in the Christian right, the issue of women in combat is no big deal. Even Fox News, a reliable mouthpiece for Christian crazies, doesn't seem to have a problem with it. In a discussion with Fox's resident right wing, Iraq war supporting vet, Pete Hegseth, Megyn Kelly appeared to support the new policy. But in the time span of one week, Ms. Kelly has done a neck wrenching about-face with her almost hysterical commentary about the possibility that OMG, "girls," might be drafted because of the lifting of the ban on women in combat. Check out Kelly's latest hissy fit; but be warned that your monitor might start steaming because she was on fire. But one questions if this is genuine or if Kelly is just pimping the propaganda of hate group president Tony Perkins who claims that the presence of women in combat will cause an exodus of macho men and that will lead to the reinstatement of the draft. Hmmm.
From the beginning of the piece, Kelly was locked and loaded. After showing video of Secretary of Defense nominee Chuck Hagel speaking in favor of women in combat, Kelly commented that "the Pentagon's new move could open the door to women now being eligible for the draft, something you didn't year a lot about last week meaning your daughter, niece, sister might soon be required to register with the government at age 18 and may one day be called, against her will, to serve this country in a war." (As opposed to young men who are called, "against their will?")
Kelly, in scolding former USAF pilot and combat vet Martha McSally, painted a picture of girls being viciously yanked from the Barbie's. Kelly proclaimed that while many civilian women want military women to have equal rights, what could happen is that "all the little girls sitting at home with their moms, are going to be potentially eligible for a draft, if we have to institute one, because of you." She continued to hector: "You wanted to be in the military, you wanted certain roles but maybe our daughters don't want to and we don't want you opening that door for them."
When McSally said that it's congress' role to reinstate the draft, Kelly interjected "it's now possible." McSally said that there's no reason why women should be exempt from registering and noted that there are many non-combat military positions. Kelly responded that "we've done that from the beginning of time and we haven't included girls in the mandatory registration process..." In cuing up Pete Hegseth, she hysterically blithered about congress' role in creating a draft. She said "you tell me are mothers and fathers sitting home with their little girls, do they need to be preparing themselves to have their soon to be 18 year olds registering for a draft."
Hegseth agreed that it would make "people's hair stand up" if they thought their "little girls" would be drafted and that the number of patriotic guys and women who would volunteer in a time of national crises would eliminate the need for drafting women. Kelly, in quick and clipped tones, asserted that we got rid of the draft but "that doesn't mean that it's not going to come back...and one doesn't know what our enemies have planned for us in the future..." When Kelly asked Kelly if "God forbid we have a draft," Hegseth said he didn't think it would happen.
Kelly said that she could understand why the "brave" and "fit" McSally would go into the military; but, "God forbid we have a draft," she couldn't picture "girls" who aren't "socialized" to be "intermixing with boys and men in this fashion...it's like I just can't picture this happening in a successful non-stressful way." McSally noted that lots of men aren't qualified for service and interrupted by Kelly who (twice) wanted her to "speak to my point." Kelly shouted "how does it work?" She asked if the military would be just fine" if women were drafted. McSally again said that the current military principal, of having folks "where they best fit" would obtain. Kelly closed with a curt "we'll have to agree to disagree."
Whew, Kelly should stay away from caffeinated beverages before her show. But she shouldn't worry about her daughter. If she has the same kind of connections that lots of rich, well connected chicken hawk Republicans did back in the 60's, she'll get an exemption. But be scared, "girls," Uncle Sam might want you because Megyn Kelly and the Christian right say so. As I noted in an earlier post, just because you can't see the propaganda, doesn't mean it's not there on "fair & balanced" Fox News!
I guess it all comes down to where you look for your info
“It is true that the upper echelons of the military tilt right. My own research confirmed that about two-thirds of majors and higher-ranking officers identify as conservative, as previous studies found. But that tilt becomes far less pronounced when you expand the pool of respondents. That is because only 32 percent of the Army’s enlisted soldiers consider themselves conservative, while 23 percent identify as liberal and the remaining 45 percent are self-described moderates. These numbers closely mirror the ideological predilections of the civilian population. . . "
Two: please show me where I “always” post links that counter my claims. This one doesnt. The other link I posted on here doesnt. Do you have ANY instances of links that countered my claims? Or just more lies?
You would think that you could get some decent responses from people who claim to be so much more intelligent than us dumb, redneck idiot right-wing nuts. But for some reason you’re only capable of 3 responses: Name calling, insults and lies.
Future notice; I wont be responding to anything that looks like a monkey shoved a pencil up his ass and banged it against a keyboard. Come with something other than “you’re a troll, liar, lying idiot, stupid, dumbass lying idiot” and other such nonsense.
Military Times Poll: Romney bests Obama, 2-1
The professional core of the U.S. military overwhelmingly favors Mitt Romney over President Obama in the upcoming election — but not because of any particular military issues, according to a new poll of more than 3,100 active and reserve troops.
Senior military officers who described themselves as liberal fell from 16% in 1976 to 3% in 1996. Urben found that younger officers leaving the Army were far more likely to identify themselves as Democrats than those opting to stay, which would tend to make the more senior ranks increasingly Republican.
“Past surveys have shown senior military officers to generally be conservative and identify with the Republican Party, a trend which has solidified with the advent and professionalism of the all-volunteer force,” Urben wrote in her 2010 dissertation. “Meanwhile, recent surveys suggest that the officer corps is more likely to be conservative and Republican than most enlisted soldiers, an important distinction to keep in mind, considering enlisted soldiers outnumber officers by 4 to 1 in the Army.”
Indeed, there has been a conservative drift among U.S. military officers since the draft ended. In a 2009 survey of 4,000 Army officers, Heidi Urben, an active-duty officer and doctoral candidate at Georgetown University, found that between 1976 and 1996, the share of senior military officers identifying itself as Republican jumped from one-third to two-thirds, while those claiming to be moderates fell from 46% to 22%.
And this part:
A Pew survey released last year showed post-9/11 veterans’ political leanings are the reverse of the public they’re serving: 36% describe themselves as Republicans, and 21% as Democrats; 34% of the public said they were Democrats, and 23% Republican. Six in 10 vets say they’re more patriotic than the average American
Why do you insist on trying to distort what the article says? Also, the one part you sited had some other parts to it that you left out too:
“However, although Obama’s fundraising totals are higher than his opponent’s, eight of the 11 military branches the Center for Responsive Politics analyzed have given more to Republican presidential candidates — most notably the Navy, the Air Force and the Marine Corps.”
No matter how you want to spin it, the military is majority conservative.
From your link:
“The officers by and large are more conservative,” says an Army sergeant just back from Afghanistan. “But the enlisted tend to be more liberal.” Of course, with fewer than one in five of those in uniform an officer, there’s a lot more enlisted voters.
also…later in the article:
But there is conflicting evidence. The Center for Responsive Politics reported last month that self-described military personnel had donated $678,611 to Obama, 85% more than the $398,450 the Romney campaign has collected.
This blows your claim to shreds, u troll. Why do you always provide links that prove you’re a liar?
Arguing that the majority of the military doesnt lean Republican is like arguing water isnt wet.
Are you a veteran?
Once again, reality does not match up with wingnut fantasy:
Liberals, unlike neocons, have always been against war. So, yeah, liberals will come up with more reasons not to go to war. You see, troll, liberals would rather come up with an alternative solution to war, whereas, as you yourself say, neocons don’t have a problem going to war. neocons think war and violence are the answer to most everything.
Conservatives are much more likely to sign up for military duty than liberals. You’ll have way more liberals coming up with excuses not to go to war than conservatives.
Or, there will be an increase in the number of neocon/teabaggers claiming they have anal cysts, and/or shitting and pissing their panties for weeks, just to avoid the draft. Afterall, it worked for right-wing saviors Lardass Limpbag and Ted “shittypants” Nugent.
I can promise you this though; if the draft ever was reinstated and women had to be drafted in equal numbers as men you would see a huge increase in pregnancies and a huge drop in abortions.
I’ll tell you, there’s NOTHING that will get neoKKKon chickenhawks into a lather, more than the possibility of having to PARTICIPATE in the wars they love to cheerlead for . . .