US Politics Thread 2016-2020

[Mr Quatro]

Originally Posted by Onkel Neal

What a spectacle, Trump tearing down Jeff Sessions. I wouldn't trade 1 Sessions for 100 Trumps. I would say trump is losing it but I'm pretty sure he never had it in the first place.

I am just starting to think the same way Neal

You don't have to be a physiologist to detect something is wrong in the white house. Did you see his latest tweet: http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politi...D=ansmsnnews11

Donald Trump appeared to mock the Senate investigation into Russian electoral interference Tuesday, joking that after finishing with Jared Kushner, the probe should move on to his 11-year-old son Barron.

“Jared Kushner did very well yesterday in proving he did not collude with the Russians,” Trump tweeted, adding “Next up, 11 year old Barron Trump!”

[mapuc]

When reading your comments and hearing and watching the news I get a kind of Deja vu from an old classic sitcom

"- Are you still confused turn in next week to see the next episode of Soa..... Trump in the White House.

Markus

[Jimbuna]

US President Donald Trump says transgender people cannot serve in "any capacity" in the military.
He tweeted that he had consulted with military experts and cited "tremendous medical costs and disruption".
The Obama administration decided last year to allow transgender people to serve openly in the military.
But in June, Defence Secretary James Mattis agreed to a six-month delay in the recruitment of transgender people.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-40729996

Looks like another 'hot potato' is added to the fire but this time I suspect there will be support from both sides of the divide.

[eddie]

I would think disruption would be a big problem with that Jim. Transgenders make up such a small part of the military, but look at the problems it will cause.

[Skybird]

No need to actively ban strange people, but what should be ended indeed is serving them a special Bratwurst, made just for them.

It is not popular these days, but in the end soldiers have to be warriors and one must need them to focus on learning and trianing how to kill and wage battle and win wars. Its not their job to be the latest test tube added to the political correctness circus to experiment with gender roles outside the definition of X-X and X-Y. For that, enemies are laughing at you/us. There is feminization enough in miltaries throughout the West already, we need not to add "very exceptionnel beings" or three dozen of undecided wannabethisorthatorsomethingcompletelydifferent gender identities to the brimborium that already is boiling in the kettle. Humanity is a heterosexual species. Lets not forget that.

You have a mimi, you enter the military as a girl. You have a willy, you enter the military as a boy. End of discussion. Girls have to keep up physically with the boys in endurance and strength, the toughest standards rule for assessement and notes scoring, since the toughest standard for a warrior must be the challenge set up by the enemy. The weak must adapt to the stronger, no the other way around. This is about war, not just some spelling bee.

Did I hurt somebody's sensible special sentiments? Serves you right.

[cj95]

Originally Posted by Skybird

You have a mimi, you enter the military as a girl. You have a willy, you enter the military as a boy. End of discussion. .

I think the presence or absence of a 'Y" chromosome should be a better determinant than the actual "equipment" .

There are a few people with messed up anatomies or chromosome arrangements, but once a "Y" chromosome pops up....you're a dude.


.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by cj95

I think the presence or absence of a 'Y" chromosome should be a better determinant than the actual "equipment" .

There are a few people with messed up anatomies or chromosome arrangements, but once a "Y" chromosome pops up....you're a dude.


.

Sure. I pointed at the chromosome thing as well.

Originally Posted by Skybird

X-X and X-Y.

However, consider the social environment the military is, or any other closed social system: the effect if physical girl walks naked into the men's showers (or gets a separate shower and extra treatment) because girl says by genes she is a boy. The other men - most are men in the military, still - see the one thing, and do not know the other thing. What concerns people is what they see. Not some complex scientifical background story.

Keep it practical. We already spend huge sums on rebuilding qwuarters aboard ships and submarines to separate men from women. To me, on certain platforms like small submarines already this leads too far. Lets mix only there where women can stand their man - then I have absolutely nothing against it, zero - and the net effect in the widest meaning (may it be a raise in special expertise and knowledge or indeed an addition to combat power) justifies the additional complication and investment.

The role of the military, its reason to exist, is defined by the needs of war, not by wishes of civiul right smovements to use it as a platform to propagate interest group'S rights - may they be justified or just pipe dreams, it doe snot matter. The next war is the criterion. And its the only one.

I recommended this book in a separate thread, and I do it again here:

Manfred van Crefeld: Pussycats. Why the Rest beats the West, and what can be done about it.

I try to speak on grounds of healthy reason only. He speaks with far more factual insight, authority and expertise. And he says basically the same like me, at least where his book covers the matter in these postings.

[vienna]

Kristin Beck, transgender Navy SEAL hero: 'Let's meet face to face and you tell me I'm not worthy' --

http://www.businessinsider.com/krist...der-ban-2017-7

Beck is not just your average service member. Born Christopher Beck, she served for 20 years in the Navy with SEAL Teams 1, 5, and, eventually, the elite 6. She deployed 13 times over two decades, including stints in Bosnia, Iraq, and Afghanistan. She received the Bronze Star award for valor and the Purple Heart for wounds suffered in combat.


"I was defending individual liberty," she said. "I defended for Republicans. I defended for Democrats. I defended for everyone."

Kristin shouldn't have high hopes of a face-to-face: even if one were arranged, Trump would probably cancel due to a foot 'boo-boo'...




<O>

[vienna]

An interesting bit of tragicomedy regarding Trump's first tweet regarding the transgender troop ban; when the first tweet went out, Trump let ten minutes pass before he sent the second part (I guess its kind of difficult tweeting with such small hands), so all anyone saw was this:






Apparently, some people at the Pentagon, not knowing about the subject of Trump's tweet-storm (and it appears that was everyone at the Pentagon), kind of freaked because they feared Trump had finally gone 'round the bend and had unilaterally initiated some sort of military action, probably against North Korea, causing not a little bit of tension at the top levels of the military...


Sleep easy America: your security is in tiny hands...




<O>

[Onkel Neal]

If our people at the Pentagon freak that easily, we have real problems.

[vienna]

Can't really blame them. The real problem is the Freak-In-Chief who is the human equivalent of UXO: liable to go off at no notice, with the slightest provocation, and capable of inflicting real and severe damage...





<O>

[August]

It is short-sighted to call Trump anti-LGBT. Supporting LGBT rights does not mean that you have to be an LGBT Santa Claus who continually stuffs the stockings and leaves presents under the tree. Trump has to make decisions for the nation, not one group, and sometimes that means you don't get what you want.When it comes to LGBT politics it is sexuality first, country second. It is just the opposite when you are POTUS. Trump's decision may be unfair, but it was not incorrect.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opini...umn/513373001/

[vienna]

Still, that opinion piece doesn't refute the fact Trump, who campaigned as a defender of LGBT rights even to the point of declaring he was more of an advocate the Hillary Clinton, has once again turned on those who gave him support and has again proved he is incapable of telling the truth or keeping his promises. It is also very apparent Trump's sudden avid interest in the transgender issue is mainly because he knows he is steadily losing his base constituency and is becoming even more mired, by his own actions and words, in the increasing web of scandals and very serious doubts of his ability to govern, if he ever had any; what else does a conservative politician do when backed into a corner other than find some 'hot button' non-issue to try to fire up his base?. Trump, the snake-oil salesman, hopes while the hicks are busy fretting over the baubles he dangles, they won't notice he's fleecing them blind. "Ya got trouble, folks, right here in River City. Those trans people are fixing to do us harm!"...

Once a con man, always a con man...




<O>

[Skybird]

Couldn't resist.

[vienna]

Well, we don't know yet if Scaramucci can do the Fandango, but he is certainly moonwalking backwards away from his previous tweet, which he has since deleted:

Scaramucci deflects questions on White House leaks to Priebus --

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/scara...ry?id=48877830

Still, Scaramucci is impressive: it must be difficult to dance like that with one foot in his mouth...




<O>