Sunday, May 29, 2011

Meanwhile, In the Navy. . .

Navy too politically correct for ‘old salts’

Recruiting video.


Anonymous said...

Can the USS Che Guevara be far behind? Maybe the USS Castro or USS Hitler (he was a socialist too).

They are jacking up the country and driving a new one in underneath.

Dr.D said...

I've got mixed feelings about this. I went through Navy boot in late 1974 and the beginnings of PC, in retrospect were evident then.
On the other hand if a person male or female can perform the required tasks (assuming that the requirements haven't been "wimpefied" to accommodate women), I have no issue with women filling Navy billets. Women have repeatedly demonstrated that they are capable of delivering top notch performance when necessary. On the other hand I also that women being women and that men being men you can get powerful chemistry in small confined community's. I also know as a married man and a father of two young lady's that females have special needs that "could" complicated their deployment, particularly on submarines. I don't necessarily see that as a reason to exclude them but they do need to be addressed, so as to not degrade mission performance or moral. The Navy and for that matter all military services exist to extend our nations power beyond it's borders, as long as that is done effectively and under the laws of war the gender shouldn't be an issue.

waiting with much interest to hear other opinions.


Anonymous said...

This kind of thing has been going on for years. The current administration has merely picked up the pace. The Navy is now a combination social experiment and form of welfare.

There are double standards all over, and many leaders are afraid to discipline "protected" groups, like black females, because any disciplinary actions are likely to come back on the one who initiates the action. The next step in the new homosexual policy will be for the Navy to have quotas for the number of "Gays" in schools, promotion lists, etc., just like they now do for females and mionorities. This will be justified to "more fully integrate Gays into the modern Navy."



rexxhead said...

Has the Washington Times given up on proofreading?

That was physically painful to read, or perhaps I should write "that wuz fizikly paneful two reed".

Anonymous said...

Did you hear about the gay man who was finally allowed into the Navy? He called his mother and said, "Guess what, mom, I finally got a gob!"


Anonymous said...

The LEWIS AND CLARK class ships have been - up until the last two - named for explorers and inventors. If you desperately needed to play race politics with naming them, Wikipedia has several long lists of Hispanic explorers and inventors. Wouldn't have required that much work to find them.

But instead, no, we have to name a ship after a man who, due to his membership in the Communist Party, wouldn't even be eligible to enlist in the Navy today, nor could he ever get a security clearance. A man who described his time in the Navy as 'the two worst years of his life.'

Good stuff, huh?

That's why the sailors are pissed about this. Call us crazy, but we like tradition, and we take pride in the ones that we're still allowed to maintain.

-Former USN Surface Warfare Officer

John Smith said...

Reminds me of when I was stuck in a navy hospital. This obviously homo nurse came out of a storage room with a 2 gallon jar full of condoms and told everyone he was going to have a party with the guys that weekend.... That was the last time I reported an injury...

Anonymous said...

I'm a dinosaur, but I don't believe women should be on a ship. I have 3 daughters and 1 son. My son's an officer in the Navy and in his two tours at sea has seen the results of having women at sea. He saw several instances while on a long deployment of a female sailor getting pregnant and being sent home and the Navy would not fill that billet. Not to mention the ships not being designed for women and the rearranging that has to go on. As well as the women practicing reverse discrimination. Usually the males end up getting the shaft. Now they want to put them on Subs? And try to speed up the gay rights? Next they will want special heads for the transvestites.

Grog said...



Dedicated_Dad said...

Anon 5/29@14:10 -:
There is no such thing as "reverse discrimination" - the phrase indicates that only straights/whites/men can commit the secular-sin of "discrimination", and that the "reverse" is an rare, odd aberration.

The fact is that "racists" come in all colors, "sexists" in both genders, and all of them "discriminate."

This is one of many deliberate language ploys that The Enemy uses to control our thoughts by controlling the language we use to express them.

Do not participate!