So the military, the people who protect the nation can’t choose who they want,  because gays got their win with the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.  Now they can be openly gay. What exactly is openly gay anyway?

Gays are individuals, not defined by their sexuality—at least not the smart ones. So there is a wide spectrum to being gay.

When I think of being openly gay, I think about the black folks who say to me that I don’t “act black.” Sure I do. I am openly black, but being black doesn’t define me. Being American does, as does being human.

I believe that most gays in the military could care less about exposing their sexuality and are content to just do their jobs. I say this, because I don’t walk through life being black.

Unlike Hollywood where being gay or bi considered a la mode, the job of the military is to create military ‘personnel,’ regardless of sexual orientation, ethnicity, creed, or whatever. Black soldiers are not walking around saying, “I’m a black Colonel.” All the military cares about is the “Colonel” part; truth be told, the military is more concerned with one’s competence. The same would be true of “gays,” as most military men and women don’t care what type of sex[1] another soldier is having, as long as that sex doesn’t infringe on them.

I suspect that the military has a much better “gaydar” than gays think. Their peers either know who is gay in the military or they have their suspicions. There are high ranking gays in the military now. The woman who filed the suit to repeal DADT is a retired Colonel, I believe. I’d be willing to bet you that most of the people who promoted her already knew she had her penchant for the ladies.[2] Her gayness apparently didn’t negatively affect her career. It would appear that the only people who were concerned about her gayness was her.

So what Liberals have done for the military is what they have been doing to all of America for decades; infecting the military with cancer. Soon promotions will be measured by how many “gays” we have at a certain rank, or “I didn’t get this promotion or billet, because I am gay.” Gays will require their own facilities, and they could end up where black people were in the ‘40’s…segregated.

What’s interesting about DADT when compared to blacks being in the military is that blacks had to endure a very different form of discrimination. Discrimination against blacks was called “Don’t Ask, We Already Know.”

Blacks have been discriminated in the military for decades. Be it military or civilian, with rare exception,[3] people already knew who the blacks were in the military. Yet somehow in what Liberals believe is the most racist country in the world with the most heinous military, blacks managed to get a black Commander in Chief[4], and a black Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.[5]

It has been argued to me that DADT is needed so that gay military personnel could invite their significant others to events. Not true. Gay military personnel could have appeared with their same sex partners, and under DADT nobody could question either of them. It was just two buddies hanging out, or “girl’s night out” as far as DADT regulations were concerned.

But don’t expect bases to look like the Mission District of San Francisco, because as for showing affection towards one’s “partner,” PDA[6] is forbidden by everybody, gay or straight. No fraternization or ‘sororitization’ either.

I’m not sure what this new development will do to morale within the military. I do believe that there will be an “us versus them” mentality amongst homosexuals, which cannot be good for anybody, especially the military.

The military who is supposed to protect us now has become a victim of the Liberal agenda. Go ahead; declare your open gayness, whatever that means. But don’t expect the military to act according to the gay agenda like the civilian world.

Legislating based on sexual proclivity is wrong. Few jobs require knowledge of one’s sexual nature, and most that do are located near Hollywood. Repeal of DADT is just the Liberals’ way of attacking an institution, an institution that was not discriminating against gays.  The military is like Hollywood, in that they have a set of guidelines they felt made them more effective.

Turnabout is fair play, however. I say we attack their institutions—the media, Hollywood, Academia. Let’s sue them for discriminating against Conservatives, straights, Republicans…those are creeds!

Let’s show Liberals that we really understand the art of war.

That’s my rant!

Kevin Jackson is author of The BIG Black Lie and The Black Sphere blog.

[2] Licker License

[3] There were a handful of blacks who could ‘pass’ as white.

[4] He’s still a sissy

[5] Colin Powell

[6] Public Display of Affection

Apparently the rights of our troops only matter when it comes to the “right” to be openly gay—and not to silly things like the Constitutionally protected right to vote.

The MOVE act, which requires absentee ballots be mailed to military stationed or deployed overseas 45 days before the election, doesn’t seem to apply anymore.  Seven states missed their deadline, and although New York was granted a 15 day extension, they are two weeks late to even meet that deadline.

At least 35 counties in Illinois also failed to mail out ballots on time, and evidence is now surfacing that election officials lied about ballots already being mailed so they could discreetly, and intentionally, keep military from voting.

Unless the ballots are mailed in time to be counted less than 13 days after Election Day, 50,000 troops from New York alone will be denied the opportunity to vote in arguably the most important election of their lifetimes.

The problem is so serious that the Department of Justice is suing against the New York Board of Elections.  Yes, that same Department of Justice that admittedly only wants to prosecute “traditional” voter intimidation cases that involve minorities.

The timing and locale of this problem is particularly ironic. Last week saw national Coming Out Day—complete with celebrities and pundits decrying the military’s privacy policy on homosexuality, and a federal judge who had previously ruled DADT unconstitutional ended its enforcement.

I suspect that our gay and lesbian servicemen overseas are likely far more concerned with whether they’ll get to choose their elected officials than whether they can openly choose a partner.

Somehow I doubt that this would happen if military tended to vote Democrat.  Maybe if veteran advocacy groups pledged their undying love to the Democrats like gay rights groups do, we’d give them protected victim status, too.

Except that as of late, veterans groups have been showing the Democrats a lot of love.  The VFW PAC (that’s “Veterans of Foreign Wars Political Action Committee” to civilians) has oddly endorsed Rep. Ron Klein over America’s favorite veteran: Lt. Col. Allen West.  Klein votes with his liberal colleagues over 97% of the time—including votes denying troops the resources they need to win the war.  He was endorsed over a man who in his own words, “would walk through Hell with a gas can in his hand” for his fellow soldiers.

Veterans choosing not to endorse a man like Lt. Col. Allen West—especially to endorse a far-left Democrat with no respect for the Constitution that our troops have sworn to uphold—is like if the NAACP had chosen to endorse Robert Byrd.

They’re out there offering to die for our freedom in a war that Obama won’t even say exists, and we treat them like a bunch of 21^st century sharecroppers.  Our military does the dirty work, and yet we ignore the numerous Constitutional amendments designed to protect Americans’ equal right to vote.  They’re not even getting 40 acres and a mule as a thank you.

I guess the military only matters when they can help push the liberal agenda, not when they’re going to vote against it.

The odd part of DADT having such a bad reputation is that it was designed to allow and encourage gays to serve.  Gay rights activists like the Log Cabin Republicans act as though enactment of DADT was a blow to their civil rights, but in actuality it was a prime example of Clinton’s ability to make a liberal decision appear to be a moderate compromise.

Prior to DADT, gays and lesbians were expressly forbidden to serve in the military.  Clinton introduced Defense Directive 1304.26, which prohibited military recruiters from asking applicants about their sexual orientation (which is where the “Don’t Ask” portion comes from).  The directive explicitly stated, “A person’s sexual orientation is considered a personal and private matter, and is not a bar to service entry”.  Clinton’s decision gave a best-of-both-worlds option, offering gays a chance to serve their country, while avoiding the numerous logistical problems that could arise if they were openly gay.  If anything, DADT was the best thing to ever happen to homosexuals who wanted to serve in the military.

Obama has said for years that he supports the repeal of DADT, so it strikes many as odd that his administration is appealing the judge’s ruling.  What the anti-DADT crowd has failed to recognize is that repeal via judicial activism means that the military will go back to discharging homosexuals as “undesirable”.  Reagan’s Defense Directive 1332.14 was the last military policy to mention homosexuality prior to DADT, which stated that “homosexuality is incompatible with military service”.

Luckily the MTV crowd doesn’t bother to fact-check, or Lady Gaga might be really embarrassed about making such uninformed speeches on the subject.

All that DADT requires is discretion. Contrary to what Obama said about the law “deny[ing] gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are”, I think the recent rash of suicides by bullied gay teens suggests that discretion works in their best interests.

What isn’t in the best interest of our military—or our country—is denying specific groups their right to vote.  Whether the ballots are somehow mailed in time for our troops overseas to have their votes counted is of course immensely important, but even more important is the message that this quandary sends our men and women in uniform.  It tells them they only matter when they can be used for hot-button issues, or the occasional “pretty good photo op”.

I guess when it comes to our military’s votes, our policy is “We’re not going to ask, and you won’t get a chance to tell.”

The SEALs were tasked with capturing Ahmed Hashim Abed, the terrorist responsible for the torture and murder of four Blackwater USA security guards in Fallujah in 2004. As Fox News reported,

The four Blackwater agents were transporting supplies for a catering company when they were ambushed and killed by gunfire and grenades. Insurgents burned the bodies and dragged them through the city. They hanged two of the bodies on a bridge over the Euphrates River for the world press to photograph.

This obvious provocation by Blackwater of transporting supplies created the stir that got Abed atop the “Most Wanted Manmade Disaster” list.  As you can see, all this was Blackwater’s fault!

Regardless, the SEALs did their job. They captured Abed.  And when they brought him in, Abed said that he had been punched…in the gut.  And he had the fat lip to prove it.  Now I know SEALs are tough, but that must have been one heck of a “gut punch” to make his lip swell.  I’m no attorney, but I think I could get these SEALs off on this technicality alone.

Shameless Plug: Consider buying my book The BIG Black Lie and get others to consider it as well. It is an Amazon best-seller and the only 5-star political book on Amazon!

The charges facing the SEALs are as follows:

Matthew McCabe, a Special Operations Petty Officer Second Class (SO-2), is facing three charges: dereliction of performance of duty for willfully failing to safeguard a detainee, making a false official statement, and assault.

Petty Officer Jonathan Keefe, SO-2, is facing charges of dereliction of performance of duty and making a false official statement.

Petty Officer Julio Huertas, SO-1, faces those same charges and an additional charge of impediment of an investigation.

So let’s recap. Three Navy SEALs were tasked with capturing a bona fide terrorist who had undoubtedly kidnapped and executed four Americans, mutilated their bodies, then hanged two of them from a bridge in Iraq.  And the terrorist complains of unsubstantiated “harsh treatment” because…he has a fat lip!  Do you think terrorists read the Liberals’ playbook?

Now if this were a civilian situation, I might not have to ask this next question.  However since the military is responsible for this, I’d like to know the person(s) who brought these SEALs up on charges, so I could…punch him in the gut!  Then I’d kick him in the naughty bits, sans cup, AND finally I’d punch him in the lip…until it was fat! 

What kind of nation have we become when our citizens can be mutilated and hanged, and our fighting men are then prosecuted for doing their jobs, by bringing the culprit to justice…fat lip be damned? I bet you can find many people in America would say that Abed got off pretty easily, if all he got was a punch in the gut!  Believe me when I tell you from first-hand experience that you would need only an infinitesimal fraction of a SEAL to take care of ten Abeds.

Here’s the wrap:

Neal Puckett, attorney for McCabe has captured the next steps in this psychodrama in his comment:

“I don’t know how they’re going to bring this detainee to the United States and give us our constitutional right to confrontation in the courtroom,” Puckett said. “But again, we have terrorists getting their constitutional rights in New York City, but I suspect that they’re going to deny these SEALs their right to confrontation in a military courtroom in Virginia.”

And as part of ObamaNation’s “embarrass the US military” and “divide and conquer America” strategy, the plan is to use three other SEALs (two of them officers!) to testify against the other three SEALs, all of whom are enlisted men.  And what can we expect these THREE other SEALs possibly add to this discussion?  That perhaps one of the SEALs in question did indeed punch the detainee…in the gut!

Will there be an investigation as to “why” Abed was punched in the gut.  Maybe Abed was badmouthing Protestantism or Catholicism? Certainly according to Islam, you can’t say anything bad about that religion. Or maybe it was because he had burned and killed four Americans sent to help Iraq, then hung two of them from a bridge? 

At this point, why don’t we just decommission the military and let the Girl Scouts take over? Oh that’s right we already did that—when Obama was sworn in!

© 2009 Kevin Jackson – The Black Sphere All Rights Reserved

So while our military men and women die in Afghanistan, Obama “thinks.” Despite the fact that General McChrystal has given Obama his professional opinion and requested 40,000 troops, Obama must “think.”  We’ve all seen him think, that practiced pose, head askew showcasing his smooth jaw line, while casting his contemplative gaze hither and yon.  Boy does he look smart, when he does that. Downright presidential!

By now we are all aware of Obama’s vast military experience, experience that would easily lead us to believe that he could cast doubt on General McChrystal’s military acumen.  Nevertheless, I will remind you of a few things you may have missed. 

Shameless plug:  Consider my book The Big Black Lie, an Amazon Best-Seller, and a funny and satirical read on how Liberals try to destroy the lives of ordinary Americans…who happen to be black! Read on!

Obama’s vast military insight comes from the war movie Blackhawk Down, ironic in the fact that Blackhawk Down is a tribute film to the real first black president, Bill Clinton. 

Now most of us consider Blackhawk Down an utter embarrassment to America—not the US military. Had the Marines been allowed to do their jobs in Mogadishu, Blackhawk Down would likely have been titled:  The Hole Where Somalia Used to Be.  However for Obama, the lessons of Blackhawk Down were very different from what patriotic Americans might think.

Obama learned from Blackhawk Down that a president can embarrass the US military with impunity, so much so that Hollywood would actually create what they believe is a “feel good” depiction of failure!  He further learned that through bureaucratic wrangling, a president can take what is undoubtedly the best military in the world, and reduce it to little more than the prison sissy.

Blackhawk Down proved that a complicit Commander in Chief can lead the greatest military in the world to a bully beatdown by an African warlord, and 3^rd-world, 2^nd-rate dictator! 

Finally Blackhawk Down proved that you can use the military as part of a “look over here” strategy, while in this case, POTUS chased a chubby intern around the Oval Office, or whatever you want to take the nation’s eye off of.

How’s this for military strategy?  Piss off all of our allies.  Put limits on our intelligence gathering. Tell the enemy that when we capture them, we will put them up at the Waldorf Astoria.  Demoralize the military, by reducing their budget.  And how about we create a civilian group that is “equivalent to the military”…only better!  Is it any wonder how an African Somali warlord could make us tuck tail and run with a Democrat POTUS?  Sounds suspiciously like what an African Kenyan is attempting to do to America right now!

Contrast Obama’s experience with McChrystal, and you begin to see the picture.  McChrystal has been a student of the military since 1973, when he entered West Point. Then in 1978 McChrystal joined one of America’s elite special forces group, enrolling in the Special Forces Officers Course, and graduating one year later.

Believe it or not however, with McChrystal’s amazing background in the military, he has the same amount of actual battlefield experience as Obama, both having served in four wars. 

McChrystal has served in Operations Desert Shield, Desert Storm, Enduring Freedom, and Iraqi Freedom. Obama shares Afghanistan and Operation Iraqi Freedom with McChrystal.  However in addition, Obama has the War on Achievement—the internal war being waged against conservative Americans—and  there is that bothersome Fox News, which created Obama’s media War on Fox News.

We all now know from the state-run media that one socialist, Harvard elitist “needlehead” trumps 47 million American patriots, one news network, and one well-trained General.  Socialist please!

After Googling “war strategy,” Obama said the following in his recent address to troops:

“I won’t risk your lives unless it is absolutely necessary,” Obama told service men and women at Naval Air Station Jacksonville. He promised a “clear mission” with defined goals and the equipment needed to get the job done.

 What America’s infantile Commander in Grief obviously doesn’t understand is that he has an obligation to protect the men and women already fighting!  Their lives are at risk now!   Further, their fellow servicemen for the most part are ready to serve; trained to serve.  Obama’s statement shows his naiveté of anything outside of community organizing and the sodomizing of America.

Here’s the wrap:

The wars are an area where Obama can’t blame bush.  When Bush left office, the wars were well in hand.  Under Obama however, we are getting our butts kicked, but good!  Obama himself said that Afghanistan was the war we needed to support.  He has supported this one, like he has supported job creation in America…right into the ground.

“Fourteen Americans gave their lives. And our prayers are with these service members, their civilian colleagues and the families who loved them,” Obama said. “They were willing to risk their lives, in this case to prevent Afghanistan from again becoming a safe haven for al-Qaida and its extremist allies.”

 Reading that statement made to America’s fighting men and women, one would think that Obama would listen to a battle tested general, whom he put in charge of Afghanistan.  Yet Obama does nothing. 

Those who can, do.  Those who can’t, “think.”   Unlike  Rodin’s “The Thinker,” eventually for Obama the time for posing needs to come to an end.

That’s my rant!

© 2009 Kevin Jackson – The Black Sphere All Rights Reserved

Where is the liberal outrage over the possibility of Obama getting the United States into yet another war? I guess when you are the party of warmongering, your outrage is reserved for demagoguery only when a Republican is in office.
Democrats are amazingly quiet about their warmongering, racist Democrat presidents, who have presided over four wars: WWI, WWII, the Korean War, and the Vietnam War. Democrats are equally quiet today, when it comes to their Messiah stirring up the new mess in “Pockestan,” and the notion that Obama will likely be presiding over four wars simultaneously: Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan…and don’t forget Obama’s War on Achievement!

The good news for America is that Obama is field-tested and battle-hardened, having fought those four Somali pirates. That was a close one.

Fortunately Obama hadn’t entirely disbanded and demoralized the military, less we have to rely on the civilian national security farce. This ragtag group “community organizers” doesn’t have classic military issued weapons. Instead, they are armed with…extremely tough words. And as we have learned from Obama—there are plenty of words.

I know I sleep well at night knowing that Obama is in charge of dealing with the situation brewing in “Pockestan.” After all we are dealing with Al Qaeda insurgents who have been attempting to destabilize Pakistan for some time now. They fight to obtain nuclear weapons. I’m just speculating here, but I don’t think they are planning on just using words against the US.

Given Obama’s tough stance on issues such as the protection of America and his staunch support of the United States military, I found it quite humorous that these Islamic jihadists would dare to challenge him. I’m left to wonder why these “former extremists” and potential “man-made disasterists” did not escalate this action when they had their chance—when Bush was in office? Bush was a man of action, not words! Stirring up a mess in Pakistan with Obama in power? Well that’s just asking for some seriously strong words!

In this Reuters article, the author writes:

“Obama took a pragmatic, arms-length approach to dealing with both Afghan President Hamid Karzai and Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari, stressing support for their democratically elected governments but avoiding becoming wrapped up in personalities.”

I love the media’s take on Obama—the “pragmatist.” You have to appreciate that quality in a leader; particularly when you are held by four Somali pirates in a dingy in the middle of the ocean. I know if I were in that situation, I’d like a pragmatic approach as well—a pragmatic Navy seal team to just shoot the bad guys…day one!

It does appear that Obama may finally be recognizing the threat of global jihad, as evidenced in this statement:

“I’m pleased that these two men, elected leaders of Afghanistan and Pakistan, fully appreciate the seriousness of the threat that we face and have reaffirmed their commitment to confronting it,” Obama said as both Karzai and Zardari stood silently at his side.

Here’s the wrap:

To think that during the election, Obama all but promised to shut down America’s military, decommission our nuclear program, stop funding weapons programs, and so on. He has now ended torture, and we will now essentially use “dialogue” as a weapon. After sitting through what appear to be an inexhaustible supply of painful Obama press conferences, I can attest that Obama is wearing me down—Just stop it! I’ll tell you whatever you want to know! Just no more press conferences!

Nevertheless we get to see the true spirit of the racist warmongering Democrats, with Obama’s potential invasion of “Pockestan.” I will admit openly that I actually hope Obama invokes the ghosts of racist warmongering Democrats past—I think it would be the right move to protect America.

Further, admittedly I like the idea of Obama providing his racist Democrat base with a sharp poke in the eye. Nothing like having wars fought on four fronts (don’t forget Obama’s War on Achievement) to accomplish that. Thankfully he ended the Somali war quickly, or there would be five simultaneous wars! As we have come to learn about Obama, he likes to do things bigger and blacker. Why should war be any different?

That’s my rant!

Be sure to check out our latest video on another Democrat racist – Hugo Black© 2009 Kevin Jackson – The Black Sphere All Rights Reserved