Wednesday, July 26, 2017

Breaking News: Dupe Bans Trans from Military

On Wednesday, the Russian dupe in our White House tweeted that the United States will not “allow or accept” any transgender person to serve in the military.

The Liar-in-Chief claims that it consulted with “generals and military experts” on the sweeping policy. “Our military must be focused on decisive and overwhelming victory and cannot be burdened with the tremendous medical costs and disruption that transgender in the military would entail. Thank you,” it tweeted.

(Source: Fox News)

36 comments:

  1. Please leave the slurs against our President out of your blog. It's fine to express disapproval with Trump's decision (I also disapprove his decision), but please refrain from using phrases such as "Dup","Liar-in-Chief",etc.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I call them as I see them.

      Delete
    2. Why are slurs so bad? This is the most ridiculous president we've ever had in history and there's many in congress (including the republican side) that agree. He's cutting money out of every program.. PBS, healthcare, anywhere he can so money can be spent on bombs? We might as well be living in north korea at this point. Btw, it's been calculated that it costs .000001% of the military budget to pay for sex changes, and if that critical 2-5 million dollars is SO critical that we save, then simply eliminate paying for sex changes.. Why completely ban 15,000 willing transgender soldiers from the military?

      Delete
    3. One more statistic.. I blogged about this too, but if trump is worried about the cost. His trips to his resort Mar-a-lago in florida costs $3.6 million everytime he flies down there (special presidential jet, paying secret service to protect him). He's gone down there 42 times since he started. The amount he spent playing golf so far in his first 6 months of presidency would pay for transgender military healthcare for the next 50 years. Either he's a bigot, or he thinks transgender in the military is somehow going to make us look weak against north korea.

      Delete
    4. Sorry but the slurs are absolutely appropriate. Moreover, this is a President who uses slurs extensively against not only political rivals and people he disagrees with, but now even against his own Cabinet members. His constant lies are an embarrassment to the American people. His recent actions are just another example of his lies as he said on the campaign trail that no one will protect the LGBT people than he will.

      Delete
    5. This is Stana's blog so she may express her opinion as she wishes. Personally, her term was far more gentile than what I would have used.

      Delete
    6. Stana -

      Slurs? Nah.... It's only shorthand for the ugly demon who fouls the halls of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. He deserves a new US Government provided residence - such as Leavenworth.

      M

      Delete
    7. I have no problem if you 'call them as you see them'. At least 'them' is a personal pronoun. I do take issue with referring to the President as an 'it', which is one of the most derogatory terms ever applied to a transgender person.

      It would be nice if we could simply disagree without being disagreeable but demonizing, ridiculing and demeaning are the core tactics of Saul Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals" that have been the playbook for the left for the past 45 years. Hillary wrote her thesis about her mentor Alinsky and his tactics were honed and employed by Obama.

      I disagree with the tweet about transgender people in the military. I do not believe that such complex issues as both the military and transgender can be compressed into tweets. I believe that transgender people can serve with dignity and honor and I believe that the day when that happens will soon come. In the meantime the military and the VA is deeply concerned with the issue of suicide. Many on the 'gender' blogs have discussed the high rate of suicide in the gender community. The common statistic is that 41% have attempted suicide. Secretary Mattis has indicated that he wants more time to study the issue. The Obama administration had 8 years to deal with this issue and originally started out against the proposition and then dragged its feet and simply said that the date for implementation would be 7/1/17, long after they were gone.

      Let's be civil and let's have a full review of the pros and cons. The military needs to be a defense force and it should not lose sight of its primary goal.

      Just my two cents,
      Pax
      Pat

      Delete
  2. Well, he did say "thank you" WTF?

    One of his golf outings would pay for about 7 GRSurgeries, so which seems more like a tremendous cost? His tweets are more disruptive than I could ever be.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Fearless Leader needs to recover his base support by diverting attention from his inability to perform his job - so he is feeding them more hate speech to keep them happy. Unfortunately our serving military brothers and sisters are caught in the feeding frenzy. :(

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I would say Obama was incapable of performing his job.

      About Trump - he should have served as a vice president or a governor of a state before running for President

      Delete
    2. Obama was incapable of doing his job because he was stymied at every turn by a GOP congress and senate and was so deeply despised he could get nothing done. History will look back fondly on his tenure compare to orange man...

      Delete
    3. Joanna, Obama had every opportunity to get things done when both chambers of Congress had Democrat majorities.

      Delete
    4. He only had so much political capital to use the 60 votes in the Senate. The GOP had to change the rules to get 51 votes in the Senate. So don't say that Obama could act like a dictator.

      Delete
    5. Obama did 8 yrs not in news every day, looking for praise telling us how he won the election

      Delete
  4. I actually don't have a problem with his decision. There are a lot of conditions that make one unable to serve. My autistic son was not able to enlist, but it doesn't mean he's being hated or discriminated against. I want to feel safe and protected by the military and they have a different battle-front than we do.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AnonymousJuly 26, 2017

      I am a military brat and military wife from way back. I know one thing gay and transgenders have been in our military since the Revolutionary war. You forget, Unknown, that physical exams were not done until recently. All you had to do was give a name and sometimes not even that. In war there were men who put on dresses to avoid service and women who put on men's trousers and went into the military. A woman, transgendered or otherwise can do the same job as a man, and usually qualifies. Qualifying is the only requirement. And if you don't like it maybe you should get up off your duff and enlist.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous, I tend to agree with you. I think if anyone who meets the physical requirements should be able to serve in the military.

      Delete
    3. Catherine Smith.July 27, 2017

      The problem is 'military' always brings to mind a 'Rambo,' macho, butch guy who is all muscle and not much brain who just does as he is told without question. To function at all the 'military' needs a variety of skills and abilities and you know what, most of them demand non-Rambo types who can think! I am sure your autistic son might have a human quality that could be useful to the military. The ‘military’ just needs to adapt and learn how to get the best out of everyone. I am surprised the President hasn’t brought God into the argument yet. In the end you only get who you vote for - and you voted for him. So hard luck! Catherine.

      Delete
    4. Catherine, the president did announce via twitter yesterday that "we do not worship government, we worship god." Makes it seem pretty uncomfortable for those of us who do not worship his brand of god or any god at all. https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/890260758050856961

      Delete
    5. Sadly, there are people who blindly support POTUS without paying any attention to independently verifiable facts. POTUS is known for retweeting unverifiable rumors as if they were facts. In the case of transgenders in the military, the cost is much less than the Viagra prescriptions now being doled out to the military.

      POTUS has announced a policy via tweets, and not via formal order. As such, the military as of now, hasn't responded to tweets - they await formal orders in writing. The Generals and Admirals in charge of implementing policy will take their time writing rules and regulations, as they don't want to lose loyal service members because of a capricious commander in chief. Since transgenders are already in the military, they will likely grandfather in current personnel - if only to preserve harmony in the ranks. They serve honorably, one can't dismiss them for being who they are.

      POTUS supporters who ask us NOT to use slurs against him are being a little two faced. He uses slurs against anyone who stands in his way. Why shouldn't his opponents be able to do the same in regard to him? Virtually every word that comes out of his mouth is a lie, including "AND" and "THE". Why shouldn't he be called the Prevaricator in Chief?

      Other slurs seem even more appropriate as of late. Recently, he turned the Boy Scout Jamboree into a political rally. When I saw the video clip, I couldn't help but think of der Fuhrer, the Hitlerjugend, and Leni Riefenstahl filming the rally. Sadly, POTUS's appearance there was an insult to der Fuhrer, the Hitlerjugend, and Leni Riefenstahl, as he is merely a second rate person infatuated with his own image. It is appropriate to call the man an "Orange Hitler", as he aspires to that level of misguided, unchecked power.

      Since his statement against transgenders in the military has no credibility in its own right, what really is going on? He is using his outrageous behavior to distract us from the legerdemain being used to remove his own Attorney General. This is being done so that he can stymie the investigation into his collusion with the Russians. He is a traitor, a man who was compromised by the Russians long ago, and someone who owes their mob big time. He sees nothing wrong with betraying this country to keep his sorry ass out of jail.

      But why are people supporting him? Most people hate admitting that they have made a mistake. And people who supported POTUS have made a big mistake. It is much harder for them to admit this mistake, as it is bigger than many of the little errors in judgement they make on a daily basis. So it will take time for these people to stop supporting him.

      As for me, POTUS can screw himself and the horse he came in on. And his supporters can do the same, as long as they support his actions that harm our community and our country.

      Delete
    6. Catherine Smith.July 30, 2017

      Well, that's it then. Once anything is done in the name of a 'God', in my opinion it's the end of all sound reasoning and you have to question any motives. Keep God and all followers out of the equation is what I say. Religious commitment is having a closed mind and blinkered thinking. Believe if you like but leave it all at home. Anything good that people do isn't in the name of a 'God' - it's just a good thing to do because it's a good thing to do and in the name of 'nobody' in particular.

      Delete
  5. And within a week, if anyone in the press is paying attention, it will come out that not a single "general or military expert” can be found who made this claim, or spoke to Trump. I don't know how the man can sit down, considering how many things he pulls out of his ass on a daily basis.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Of course. He does have a habit of pulling "facts" out of his rectal cavity and smearing them on the wall, doesn't he?

      Delete
  6. AnonymousJuly 26, 2017

    I am a transgender female from Ontario Canada, living full time as a woman for the last 15 years, and all my IDs states me as woman. It is very unfortunate that you have such an ignorant, uneducated selfish person as president. Our prime minister walks in Pride with his family.
    So it looks like transgenders in military is only a dollar sign. Get rid of them to save money! Unbelievable! This year I was in Florida in june and all my friends over there were complaining in distress that they cannot even gather in restaurants in peace. So sad! I feel for you girls. Move over here and experience the beauty and comfort of being accepted and treated as a human being as transgender. Sorry again! Brenda

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. AnonymousJuly 26, 2017

      I apologize for our stupid americans. We did not realize that so many idiots could be brainwashed by the right wing media. We will fight our way out of it. One way or another. Democracy will win.

      Delete
    2. If many of us could move to Canada, we would. But your immigration laws are geared to get the best and brightest. That rules out a large number Americans.....

      Delete
  7. what a complete and utter moron

    ReplyDelete
  8. I never asked for daily updates from trump, but he sends me an email every day. It's mostly propaganda, but I look at it just for the irony. Here's today's headline blurb:


    "President Trump continues to devote this week to honoring past, present, and future American Heroes. From our rising leaders, to our most experienced veterans, it is important that we come together to recognize and celebrate those who put our great country and its values before themselves."

    It takes a special kind of egomaniac - megalomaniac? - to be able to put out such hypocritical stuff like this from one day to the next. :-(

    ReplyDelete
  9. 365 days a year 4 yrs of hateful laws the country cannot stand for this . I think John had a problem with a Black president . And will accept & love a crazy self Money Making President!

    ReplyDelete
  10. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I am not really happy with the most recent presidents. It appears some revision needs to be made to the U.S. system of government.

    The job of the president seems too much for an individual to handle. A suggestion would be to break the position up into two different positions: 1. Head of state. (S)he would be elected by popular vote. That individual would be mainly responsible for dealing with foreign heads of state and be a voice of the people, as well as to veto or sign into law bills.
    2. Chief executive officer. This individual would be determined by a electoral college, similar to a board of directors. Citizens would vote for individual electors by their names. This individual would be responsible for running the country. For this position we need someone who is an exceptional executive who might not necessarily be charismatic and photogenic.

    Dividing up other responsibilities is something to be determined later.

    Still another case is the stress that a president undergoes ages the person terribly

    ReplyDelete
  12. We need to post that photo of his Trumpness holding a LBGTQ flag all over the Internet.

    We can only hope that the Republicans in Congress ... the responses to the Tweet so far indicate this ... will come to realize that the present occupant of the White House has no idea how to run the Presidency, how this government works, and seems to have little agenda other than feeding his own bloated ego.

    ReplyDelete
  13. AnonymousJuly 28, 2017

    I do not like the slurs on either side. I believe that the slurs just lead to more name calling and take the focus away from the main issues. I am more impressed listening to someone whose view point I may not agree with if they do not go to the name calling. Just like I will not listen to comedians who cuss all the time in their acts.

    I will not talk politics with many people because of the slurs and any more it becomes so emotional for people.

    I have one person who we can talk because we discuss the issues and learn from each other.

    I am unhappy with the politicians on all levels. Local, state and federal. Many are only serving to benefit themselves. I know of a city councilman that serves for the benefits. I have contacted my state and federal representatives without a reply. Those same representatives then used my e mail to send me a request to donate to their campaign.

    Politicians from either party will tell you want you want to hear to get elected but then follow the money once elected.

    But this seems to be what society has become. What is in it for me instead of working together for a better society. It seems to many people have a sense of entitlement.

    Ask anyone who works with the public how they are treated.

    I consider myself conservative and I am a veteran.

    I do not have an issue with a transgender person serving as long as they meet all the requirements to serve.

    ReplyDelete
  14. IMHO, though regrettable in the extreme, this is just one more silly tweet. Deeply concerning though this is - to us few - the Potus has a genius for diverting attention from the bigger issues.

    Like watching a sleight of hand conjurer, we need to exercise some adult skepticism, and watch his other hand. Because the real action is behind the scenes.

    ReplyDelete