Tuesday, December 21, 2010

Patty Murray Out of the Closet: Brags of Disdain for Straight Troops

I have long maintained that Washington State’s senior senator, Patty Murray has no real appreciation of love of our Military, in spite of her public proclamations of just that. Last evening, December 20, 2010, she all but openly admitted her disdain in an email expressing her happiness over her voting to repeal the so-called ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy implemented by former president Bill Clinton in 1993.

Murray’s email said,
“Last week, I proudly cast my vote for legislation to repeal the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT) policy. For far too long, men and women with the courage and commitment to serve our nation have been asked to hide the truth about who they are. This is shameful, it’s bad policy, and it needed to end. In a speech on the Senate floor prior to final passage, I urged my colleagues to repeal this failed policy and told the story of Major Margaret Witt, from Washington state, who was discharged under DADT.”

While Murray’s words are wrapped in gushing praise, she obviously did not bother to actually discuss the issue with front line combat Troops, but relied upon claims of a small segment of people in the Military who knew they would be ousted for declaring their sexuality and did so anyways.

Does she care anything at all of the vast majority of combat Troops, the ones who actually do the fighting, not serve in support capacity that vehemently expressed opposition to having to serve alongside homosexuals, worrying about such matters like unit cohesion and respect for chain of command?

How could she when she ignores their voices to embrace only the voices of the homosexuals?

I have long asked and never received an answer as to why is it, if someone really has “the courage and commitment to serve our nation,” it must be done so by declaration of one’s sexuality? What is the advantage of openly declaring yourself a homosexual?

Is it just so they “feel good?”

And what of our Military during war time? Did actual defense of the nation matter? I think not considering the Obama administration manipulated the opinions of our Troops in a DOD survey.

Had it played any role in the decision, it would have been noted that in reply to a question of “Was the effect on the unit’s ability to work together (knowing a fellow troop was gay)” was answered “Mostly negative or equally negative/positive 84.1%. Positive 15.9%”

A question on the effect of unit trust if DADT was repealed drew a response of “85% of Marine Combat Arms, 75% of Army Combat Arms, 64% overall say Negative, Very Negative, or Mixed impact.”

Some 24% responded they would leave the military or think about leaving sooner than planned if repealed, which would amount to nearly a half-million experienced Troops. Even if lesser numbers decided to end their careers early, the impact on Military readiness during war could be devastating to our National Defense. You can read through the actual report here.

Did any of that play a role in Murray’s continued pandering? How could it since she boasts of “PROUDLY casting her vote” for repeal and forcing those who stand between us and our enemies to endure the glares and possible harassment by homosexuals?

Also not taken into consideration by Murray and her cronies is what regulations will now need to be reviewed, implemented or rewritten, again while we have Troops fighting for their lives in Afghanistan and the potential of flare-ups in Iraq as we are winding that one down.

Nowhere in our society are male and female Troops required or expected to share toilet facilities or even shower together. But, with this repeal, Straight Troops Must Shower With Gays which alone is going to create tensions, especially within the confines of Navy ship or Submarine.

Would you feel comfortable feeling you were being ogled by someone of your own sex, merely for their sexual pleasure? We cannot and should not share showers with those of the opposite sex for that very reason, but somehow, we are to believe that a homosexual will not let his eyes wander to the naked body of a buffed out Marine?

And, if he acted upon that eyeful lust? If rejected, will the other soldier be expected to just accept being ogled? If the homosexual is superior in rank, will he use that rank to “penalize” the one rejecting him?

It has been known to happen when advances of male superiors are rejected by female soldiers. Why would we expect any difference from homosexuals? Are we to suddenly believe they are morally superior?

Yes, regulations are in effect to deal with such wrongs. But, Senator Murray and her cronies ignore that an increase in investigations and courts martial can only hinder our Troops effectiveness during war, not help it.

But to Sen., Murray, not of that matters nor was considered as she is “PROUD” to no allow homosexuals to openly declare their sexuality, combat Troops be damned.

Like other Democrats, their expressions of appreciation for our Military are a smoke screen for their actual disdain. To them, the Military is a tool for implementing their social changes, experimentation, not a fighting force of unique individuals ready to step between the country and her enemies.

How can any sane human being place the desires of a few over the welfare and defense of an entire nation?

Patty Murray is finally out of the closet and has openly declared her actual disdain for our Military.


al fresco said...

Say what you will about the 111th Congress, but it's passed more laws than any since the 1960s, Bloomberg says in a surprisingly rosy end-of-year roundup. It extended health insurance to 32 million Americans; passed sweeping Wall Street regulations; spent more than $1.67 trillion on economic initiatives; repealed "don't ask, don't tell"; gave the FDA the power to oversee the tobacco industry; expanded pay equity laws; muscled through tax breaks, and is getting set to ratify START. To boot, the market made its biggest gains over a two-year period since the late 1990s, big Wall Street firms are preparing to enjoy their most successful two years ever, and General Motors is already out of bankruptcy.

LewWaters said...

LOL, Al. Yes, they have passed massive legislation and nearly every bit of it moves America closer to becoming a cheap imitation of the failed Soviet Union.

As for GM coming out of bankruptcy, the government still owns a large percentage, don't they?

Yes, the 111th congress shoved a lot of bills down our throats, but don't be too surprised to find out they aren't the panacea you had hoped for.

Unless that is, you think we should follow the lead of Venezuela and Cuba.

Since you think they did so well, can you explain why it is that when the 111th congress convened in January 2009, unemployment was at 7.7%, (up from 4.6% when Democrats took over both houses of Congress in January 2007) and the latest numbers show us at 9.8%?

For all of the good you claim they accomplished, it appears the reality is that they have hurt middle America more than any other in Decades.

You do remember the middle class, don't you? The ones Democrats are always crying they are helping and fighting for?

A 5% increase in unemployment while they supposedly did so much good just doesn't add up.

Hot Sam said...

Yeah, Al, when you've got a majority in the House, a filibuster proof majority in the Senate, and a president of your own party, you tend to get a lot of laws you like passed.

Say what you will about the 111th Congress, they were utter failures. Despite those commanding majorities, most of their socialist plans were dealt serious blows - watered down in many cases. They literally had to bribe certain Demon Rat senators to vote for some of these stinking bills.

They will find the opposite shore moving farther away as they try to bridge the insurance gap to those 32 million Americans. The new laws will cause millions of Americans to LOSE their coverage as employers cancel or scale back coverage, or hire workers with no benefits.

And all these "victories" cost them dearly. They had the biggest loss in the House in six decades, and nearly lost the Senate. They will certainly lose the Senate in 2012 when twice as many Demon Rats are in contested races than Republicans.

The shift of seats from the 2010 Census favors "red" states, and Republicans will be re-drawing the lines. Since House seats affect the Electoral College, Obama's reelection chances just got slimmer.

The 111th Congress were COWARDS. They voted on the most contentious bills in the 11th hour while they still maintained control and wouldn't be held accountable for them. They put their principles as far away from the 2012 elections as possible.

GM is out of bankruptcy - so what! Most large firms that enter bankruptcy emerge stronger after having all their debts and other obligations stripped away! So they are selling cars again. Big deal. Guess what! They are mostly gas guzzlers.

Now we will have a Congress that actually READS and DEBATES and COOPERATES on bills.

That's "change we can believe in."