Hipshots dates back to the 1980s when I was living on Guam. I wrote a weekly column for the Guam Tribune titled Hipshots with my picture circled by bullet holes. My articles were quite conservative and raised the hackles of island Democrats and other liberals. One of the Democrat senators in the Guam Legislature referred to my articles as "Cheap Shots." My writing stint lasted for a year or two until the Guam Tribune went out of business.
The Pacific Daily News (PDN) was the leading newspaper on Guam and the Guam Tribune just couldn't compete and their declining readership eventually spelled its end. PDN ran some of my letters to the editor and an occasional article or two. During my time as a senator in the Guam Legislature, Director of Corrections and the acting chief of police the PDN was right there to report on my every move, especially when I stumbled.
I'm not the sharpest tool in the drawer when it comes to computers and the ever changing electronics world. My son setup the blog for me and I have been writing various articles which haven't drawn very many comments. I guess the blog world is now so large that unless you're a well known personality, disgraced politician, sports figure, actor, etc., you're like a speck in the universe.
I wrote several articles for the San Antonio Lightning News, a computerized newspaper, operated by RG Griffing. Griffing is sort of a recluse and I never met him in person and my only contact was by phone or email. He was a candidate in the last San Antonio mayoral race and came in last. He has had a running feud with the Express-News since retrieving the old Lightning News as a computer version several years ago. His other claim to fame was being shot with a .357 revolver while wearing a bullet proof vest.
Now that I have given a thumbnail view of my writing prowess I'll get back to blog writing or whatever they call it these days. Unfortunately, Face book and Twitter are meaningless to me even though it's the biggest thing since color TV. Even Sarah Palin uses Twitter.
Actually, the blog that my son setup was: themesskit.blogspot.com. click on it and the Hipshots articles come up.
Newspapers Fall on Hard Times - Many leading newspapers are seeing their readership drop off sharply and that has been the case with the San Antonio Express-News. A very liberal, socialist, leaning newspaper to begin with the E-N was quick to throw white, conservative writers under the bus to cut costs. Roddy Stinson, a long time columnist was among the first to go. Blacks and Hispanic columnists were kept on and some of the more liberal ones are still churning out their usual bash conservatives garbage.
Kathy Clay-Little, a black writer, frequently trashes conservative talk radio hosts. In one article Clay-Little lashed out at Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck as exhibiting a malicious mean streak. She was taken to task for her anti-conservative remarks by a reader and she didn't like it. "Conservative talk radio built its success on playing to the angry and the antis, including an unhealthy dose of anti-minority sentiment. The formula hasn't changed in over 20 years," writes Clay-Little in a recent article.
She said that liberal talk radio never found the success of conservative talk radio because liberals lack the ability to get angry and stay angry. Liberal talk radio fails because the American people aren't fooled by its socialist/Marxist agenda. Like most liberals Clay-Little can dish it out but can't take it.
Leonard Pitts is another liberal, black writer who never misses a chance to bash conservatives. In a recent article Pitts was upset with the American Spectator for saying they had to raise rates because of a shortfall created by the perverse incentives of the liberal agenda.
What upset Pitts most wasn't the perverse incentives of the liberal agenda but the word liberal. "Conservative pols and pundits have done an astonishing job of rendering that word a synonym for a kind of birth defect that leaves one effete and nonsensical, even as that made "conservative" interchangeable with the healthy patriotism of the common folk. "It's telling that even liberals don't use the word liberal any more," Pitts said. What Pitts doesn't get is that it isn't conservative pols and pundits that hurts liberals it's their message of socialism.
When it comes to liberal, black writers who attack conservatives like a mad dog it's Eugene Robinson. The mere mention of Republicans or conservatives sends him into a writing frenzy. In one of his more violent outbursts Robinson wrote that trust might as well be a four letter word. "American public opinion seems to have become a Weapon of Mass Suspicion - but those who would exploit distrust, dissatisfaction and anger for political gain had better worry about collateral damage," he writes.
Robinson goes on in his tirade, "The over hyped tea party phenomenon is more about symbolism and screaming than anything else. A "movement" that encompasses gun nuts, tax protesters, devotees of the gold standard, Sarah Palin, insurance company lobbyists, "constitutionalists" who have not read the Constitution, Medicare recipients who oppose government run health care, crazy "birthers" who claim Obama was born in another country, a contingent of outright racists and a bunch of fat-cat professional politicians pretending to be "outsiders" is not a coherent intellectual or political force."
Well, there you have it in his own words and racist views. Pretty well sums up what political party Robinson favors. Of course the editors of the E-N can't wait to publish his articles.
Ruben Navarrette, a liberal, Hispanic writer for the E-N, sticks it to conservatives on a regular basis. In a recent rant Navarrette lambasted Sen. McCain for giving Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano a hard time when she appeared before a Senate committee.
Napolitano had publicly opposed the new Arizona illegal immigration law. When asked by McCain if she had read the law she said she hadn't. Navarrette tried to put words in her mouth in his article defending her. Sorry, it didn't work. Napolitano is clearly over her head and should never had been appointed in the first place. She should have been fired for calling military veterans "Right Wing Extremists" and referring to terrorist attacks as "Man-made Disasters."
Liberal E-N writer, Garrison Keillor, an old, gringo like me, manages to get his socialist messages across in his articles. Using the oil spill mess he attacks conservatives who have championed increased oil drilling. He calls it Drill baby and says it points to more disasters.
He likened the NRA to the AFL-CIO, NEA, AARP and bank robbers. Can't resist the opportunity to take a swipe at the champion of gun rights. According to Keillor man is pushing the planet to extinction. We're all doomed and Keillor says and we might just as well sit in our backyards eating ice cream as the Gulf turns dark and the polar icecap melts. Yeah, and what about those poor Polar Bears Garrison? What a jerk and the editors of the E-N love the guy.
Don't mention Tea-partiers around liberal, writer Froma Harrop or you'll have her Fromaing at the mouth. She calls the tea party a crowd of self-contradiction, self-delusion and self-serving positions. Her victim for ridicule in a recent article is Tea Party favorite Rand Paul, the Republican nominee for senator from Kentucky.
Harrop writes, "What damns Paul wasn't the flap over his views on the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Presumably Paul isn't a racist. He's just a privileged white guy - a doctor and son of 11-term congressman Ron Paul - who lacks feeling for America's tragic history of racism." Yeah, just a couple of privileged white guys who are really racists at heart. Keep it up Froma - let's see how things turn out in November.
Let's face it - the Express-News is a liberal rag and always has been. They're so fearful of being labeled as racists that they have keep liberal blacks and Hispanics on the payroll at the expense of whites and conservatives. However, that's not the main reason they're losing readership. They can't compete with computers and the electronic age. The printed newspapers are becoming extinct like the dinosaurs.
Monday, June 7, 2010
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
Obama Targets Don't Ask Don't Tell Policy
Top Military Brass Run For Cover On DADT - Thanks to the Clinton administration the military was saddled with their feminization and homosexual policies. The "Don't Ask Don't Tell" (DADT), implemented in 1993, allowed homosexuals to serve in the military as long as they kept their "alternative lifestyle" secret. If their homosexuality was revealed they were discharged. For the first time women were allowed to be thrown in with the men with the exception of serving in direct combat. Somehow these policies were supposed to improve the military. Unfortunately, they haven't.
While still on active duty Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf stated the following on homosexuals in the military: "In every case - Not most cases - In every case where homosexuality became known in the unit, it resulted in a breakdown in morale, cohesion, effectiveness - with resulting dissent, resentment, and even violence." Gen. Schwarzkopf knew what he was talking about. Luckily he wasn't fired for his comments.
Former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Marine Gen. Peter Pace, the first Marine to hold the post, wasn't so lucky. Gen. Pace was fired for saying homosexual acts were immoral and for opposing the lifting of the DADT rule. So much for telling it like it is.
Not so with the current chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Michael G. Mullen. Following Obama's State of the Union address where the CinC stated that he planned to repeal the DADT policy, Mullens jumped on the band wagon and said the the armed services should lift the ban because the military shouldn't force young men and women to lie about who they are. Mullen wasn't about to sink his politically correct ship by siding with his predecessor Gen. Pace. I guess if anyone was going to lie about the policy it would be Mullen. Even retired army general and former Secretary of State Colin Powell sided with Mullen.
The latest scuttlebutt in the feminization/homosexual movement is that women are going to be allowed on subs. That should make the men happy. Now they won't have to wait for shore leave anymore. That is unless the women don't like men. Then there's a problem. I'm sure Adm. Mullen and the Joint Chiefs will have all the answers. I wonder what the late Adm. Bull Halsey of WWII fame would have to say about all this if he were alive today? I think I know what Gen. Patton would say.
Republican Sen. John McCain isn't too happy about scrapping the DADT policy and said so in no uncertain terms. "There's over a thousand retired generals and admirals who have sent letters to us saying they do not want it repealed. The Veterans of Foreign Wars and the American Legion also oppose ending the "don't ask don't tell" policy. "We have a policy that is working, and that has been my position throughout," McCain said.
Way to go Sen. McCain! Of course the Obama crowd, including Adm. Mullen and the PC Joint Chiefs, could give a rat's butt less about what McCain and retired generals and admirals have to say.
On Feb. 8, 2010, retired Navy Captain Lawrence R. Jefferies wrote a letter to Adm. Mullen taking him to task for advocating homosexuals openly serve in the military services. Jefferies enlisted in the Navy in 1948 and served for 31 years before retiring. It's a rather long letter so I will only quote a few comments made by Capt. Jefferies. "Like you, I encountered homosexuals throughout my Navy career and in civilian life. Unlike you, I do not find they are more deserving than non-homosexuals or that they constitute a viable or necessary body of troops for the defense of our country," Jefferies wrote.
Jefferies continues, "My experience is Naval. I can't speak for the Army, Air Force, or Marine Corps. Those services are generally based ashore with nearby civilian communities. In such communities, homosexuals may be able to find sexual gratification without interfering with military duties. But the best analogy to a ship at sea is a prison. There is no other outlet for sexual drives and I know of no prison in the united States that assigns males and females, or who intentionally assign known homosexuals, to the same cell. That is one of of the differences between your position and mine."
"During my enlisted service, Jefferies notes, homosexuals seemed to be a clumsy lot. They had a tendency to repeatedly fall headfirst down and engine room ladder. Some were even known to troop on deck and "fall" overboard. The crew had a way of policing themselves to eliminate homosexual advances. Perhaps you in your assumption that military personnel are more liberal today, but I would look very closely at prevalent attitudes before I closed the book on the issue."
Jefferies went on to say, "That sexual misconduct in the Navy exists to this day is obvious....... I recall that a lesbian ring was discovered on the USS NORTON SOUND back in the late 60's or early 70's. I also recall that one of the cruisers returning from the First Gulf War reported 40% of the female crew members were pregnant after a six-month deployment. Just recently I read that the Commanding Officer and Command Master Chief were relieved from an Atlantic Fleet destroyer because fraternization between several Chief Petty Officers and female members of the crew. Just the other day I heard news reports that a birth control pill previously reserved for use by women in combat had to be made available to all females in the military, clearly implying that intercourse was occurring in combat units and such conduct was known to unit commanders. Is there some reason you believe that homosexual activity would not also occur or is not occurring?"
The Jefferies letter made it clear that allowing homosexuals to serve openly or otherwise in the military was a bad idea that adversely affected the mission of the military.
Today there are 1.5 million active military and 1 million reserve personnel in the armed forces. Of that number over 14 percent are women. Thanks to DADT the number of homosexuals is unknown. According to the military over 7,000 homosexuals were discharged from the military during the period 1997 - 2007.
There's a place in the military for women to serve. Before the feminization of the military women performed administrative and medical duties. They had their own women officers and NCOs and billets separate from male personnel. Women who became pregnant were discharged. The system worked well and the military was a better organization compared to today's military. Homosexuals were banned from serving and immediately discharged when discovered. That's the way it should be today.
We don't need women acting like men, leading bayonet charges, throwing hand grenades, driving tanks, flying combat aircraft, serving on ships, with the exception of hospital ships, and performing duties best accomplished by men. Women who have small children should not be allowed in the military. Their job should be acting like a mother and raising their kids instead of putting on a uniform and shoving their kids off on relatives to raise.
The military tried to make a heroine out of PFC Jessica Lynch who, with two other women and 14 men in a military convoy, was ambushed in Iraq by the enemy. Initially the military reported that Lynch had fired her weapon until running out of ammunition, was wounded and captured with the rest of the personnel in the convoy. Lynch and the other two women never fired a shot. One women was killed and another wounded. Lynch was injured when the vehicle that she was in rolled over in a ditch. Only the men put up a fight.
The real hero was a young sergeant by the name of Donald R Walters, who fought the enemy with his rifle until he ran out of ammo before being killed. His body was found with two bayonet wounds in the abdomen. He had also been shot numerous times in the legs and back. A total of 11 members of the convoy were killed and the rest taken prisoner.
Walters was initially awarded the Bronze Star. After further investigation that revealed the true facts in the ambush and the battle that followed his Bronze Star was upgraded to the Silver Star.
Regardless of the outcry and opposition to allowing homosexuals to serve openly in the military and allowing women to serve on submarines I suspect that in the end it will become policy. Rules of Engagement that are tying the hands of our troops in battle and causing increased casualties will continue. Rules that give a clear edge to the ruthless, cowardly enemy that our troops meet on the battlefield.
As much as I respect Gen. David Petreaus, who is a proven combat leader, he was wrong as hell when he told his troops to "fight fair." You fight to win! The mission of the military is to win wars not lose them. America didn't win WWII by fighting fair.
Generals and Admirals will continue to take the "politically correct" course of action more concerned with their careers than looking out for the troops. Those that do speak out will be quietly relieved and retired as was the case with Marine General Peter Pace former chairman of the Joint Chiefs.
The military will survive but it won't be as effective as it could be as a result of the "social experiments" and other ludicrous policies that have been forced on military commanders.
It's a wonder that the military is able to recruit young men to serve. It's a tribute to those who put on a uniform and go in harms way in defense of freedom. Especially when the question is raised as to who in the hell is looking out for the troops? It isn't the generals and admirals, or the Secretary of Defense and it sure as hell isn't the Commander In Chief.
While still on active duty Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf stated the following on homosexuals in the military: "In every case - Not most cases - In every case where homosexuality became known in the unit, it resulted in a breakdown in morale, cohesion, effectiveness - with resulting dissent, resentment, and even violence." Gen. Schwarzkopf knew what he was talking about. Luckily he wasn't fired for his comments.
Former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Marine Gen. Peter Pace, the first Marine to hold the post, wasn't so lucky. Gen. Pace was fired for saying homosexual acts were immoral and for opposing the lifting of the DADT rule. So much for telling it like it is.
Not so with the current chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Michael G. Mullen. Following Obama's State of the Union address where the CinC stated that he planned to repeal the DADT policy, Mullens jumped on the band wagon and said the the armed services should lift the ban because the military shouldn't force young men and women to lie about who they are. Mullen wasn't about to sink his politically correct ship by siding with his predecessor Gen. Pace. I guess if anyone was going to lie about the policy it would be Mullen. Even retired army general and former Secretary of State Colin Powell sided with Mullen.
The latest scuttlebutt in the feminization/homosexual movement is that women are going to be allowed on subs. That should make the men happy. Now they won't have to wait for shore leave anymore. That is unless the women don't like men. Then there's a problem. I'm sure Adm. Mullen and the Joint Chiefs will have all the answers. I wonder what the late Adm. Bull Halsey of WWII fame would have to say about all this if he were alive today? I think I know what Gen. Patton would say.
Republican Sen. John McCain isn't too happy about scrapping the DADT policy and said so in no uncertain terms. "There's over a thousand retired generals and admirals who have sent letters to us saying they do not want it repealed. The Veterans of Foreign Wars and the American Legion also oppose ending the "don't ask don't tell" policy. "We have a policy that is working, and that has been my position throughout," McCain said.
Way to go Sen. McCain! Of course the Obama crowd, including Adm. Mullen and the PC Joint Chiefs, could give a rat's butt less about what McCain and retired generals and admirals have to say.
On Feb. 8, 2010, retired Navy Captain Lawrence R. Jefferies wrote a letter to Adm. Mullen taking him to task for advocating homosexuals openly serve in the military services. Jefferies enlisted in the Navy in 1948 and served for 31 years before retiring. It's a rather long letter so I will only quote a few comments made by Capt. Jefferies. "Like you, I encountered homosexuals throughout my Navy career and in civilian life. Unlike you, I do not find they are more deserving than non-homosexuals or that they constitute a viable or necessary body of troops for the defense of our country," Jefferies wrote.
Jefferies continues, "My experience is Naval. I can't speak for the Army, Air Force, or Marine Corps. Those services are generally based ashore with nearby civilian communities. In such communities, homosexuals may be able to find sexual gratification without interfering with military duties. But the best analogy to a ship at sea is a prison. There is no other outlet for sexual drives and I know of no prison in the united States that assigns males and females, or who intentionally assign known homosexuals, to the same cell. That is one of of the differences between your position and mine."
"During my enlisted service, Jefferies notes, homosexuals seemed to be a clumsy lot. They had a tendency to repeatedly fall headfirst down and engine room ladder. Some were even known to troop on deck and "fall" overboard. The crew had a way of policing themselves to eliminate homosexual advances. Perhaps you in your assumption that military personnel are more liberal today, but I would look very closely at prevalent attitudes before I closed the book on the issue."
Jefferies went on to say, "That sexual misconduct in the Navy exists to this day is obvious....... I recall that a lesbian ring was discovered on the USS NORTON SOUND back in the late 60's or early 70's. I also recall that one of the cruisers returning from the First Gulf War reported 40% of the female crew members were pregnant after a six-month deployment. Just recently I read that the Commanding Officer and Command Master Chief were relieved from an Atlantic Fleet destroyer because fraternization between several Chief Petty Officers and female members of the crew. Just the other day I heard news reports that a birth control pill previously reserved for use by women in combat had to be made available to all females in the military, clearly implying that intercourse was occurring in combat units and such conduct was known to unit commanders. Is there some reason you believe that homosexual activity would not also occur or is not occurring?"
The Jefferies letter made it clear that allowing homosexuals to serve openly or otherwise in the military was a bad idea that adversely affected the mission of the military.
Today there are 1.5 million active military and 1 million reserve personnel in the armed forces. Of that number over 14 percent are women. Thanks to DADT the number of homosexuals is unknown. According to the military over 7,000 homosexuals were discharged from the military during the period 1997 - 2007.
There's a place in the military for women to serve. Before the feminization of the military women performed administrative and medical duties. They had their own women officers and NCOs and billets separate from male personnel. Women who became pregnant were discharged. The system worked well and the military was a better organization compared to today's military. Homosexuals were banned from serving and immediately discharged when discovered. That's the way it should be today.
We don't need women acting like men, leading bayonet charges, throwing hand grenades, driving tanks, flying combat aircraft, serving on ships, with the exception of hospital ships, and performing duties best accomplished by men. Women who have small children should not be allowed in the military. Their job should be acting like a mother and raising their kids instead of putting on a uniform and shoving their kids off on relatives to raise.
The military tried to make a heroine out of PFC Jessica Lynch who, with two other women and 14 men in a military convoy, was ambushed in Iraq by the enemy. Initially the military reported that Lynch had fired her weapon until running out of ammunition, was wounded and captured with the rest of the personnel in the convoy. Lynch and the other two women never fired a shot. One women was killed and another wounded. Lynch was injured when the vehicle that she was in rolled over in a ditch. Only the men put up a fight.
The real hero was a young sergeant by the name of Donald R Walters, who fought the enemy with his rifle until he ran out of ammo before being killed. His body was found with two bayonet wounds in the abdomen. He had also been shot numerous times in the legs and back. A total of 11 members of the convoy were killed and the rest taken prisoner.
Walters was initially awarded the Bronze Star. After further investigation that revealed the true facts in the ambush and the battle that followed his Bronze Star was upgraded to the Silver Star.
Regardless of the outcry and opposition to allowing homosexuals to serve openly in the military and allowing women to serve on submarines I suspect that in the end it will become policy. Rules of Engagement that are tying the hands of our troops in battle and causing increased casualties will continue. Rules that give a clear edge to the ruthless, cowardly enemy that our troops meet on the battlefield.
As much as I respect Gen. David Petreaus, who is a proven combat leader, he was wrong as hell when he told his troops to "fight fair." You fight to win! The mission of the military is to win wars not lose them. America didn't win WWII by fighting fair.
Generals and Admirals will continue to take the "politically correct" course of action more concerned with their careers than looking out for the troops. Those that do speak out will be quietly relieved and retired as was the case with Marine General Peter Pace former chairman of the Joint Chiefs.
The military will survive but it won't be as effective as it could be as a result of the "social experiments" and other ludicrous policies that have been forced on military commanders.
It's a wonder that the military is able to recruit young men to serve. It's a tribute to those who put on a uniform and go in harms way in defense of freedom. Especially when the question is raised as to who in the hell is looking out for the troops? It isn't the generals and admirals, or the Secretary of Defense and it sure as hell isn't the Commander In Chief.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
