A federal judge has ruled that the males-only draft is unconstitutional – which makes sense given that all combat roles are now open to women. And I hate to break it to everyone but it is either ban all women in the military, or agree to draft women if it ever comes to that. There’s no half way point here…it is simply unfair to say that one class of people who can fight are excused while another class of people aren’t. Either the entire class is in, or it is out. Shortly after I read that bit of news, this popped up in my Twitter feed:
The victories of Feminism have not really been a victory for feminine ideals or for the feminine point of view. On the contrary, it has involved the progressive invasion of the feminine side of life by masculine ideals. – Christopher Dawson
Chesterton also noted this when he pointed out that Feminism asserts that women are slaves when they serve their husbands but free when they serve their employers. The whole thing is rather ridiculous…but, here we are. Personally, I think you ladies are rather nice and when you’re doing women things, I’m impressed. Less impressed with female boxers and infantrymen. This will change – and the change, when it comes, will be extremely rapid. It’ll come right around the next serious war we get into. Don’t get me wrong: there are roles women can certainly play in today’s military – pilot and drone pilot immediately spring to mind. But jumping out of an airplane in full combat gear and then running into battle…maybe not so much. In the end, though, it has to be all or nothing: all combat, or no combat. People will have to pick.
Blogs For Victory 
Well according to progressive orthodoxy Mark anyone can be a woman, so you will have to be more specific …. lol
Does anyone else find it strange that Democrats have no problem finding the trillions of dollars needed for their agenda like universal inferior healthcare or the green new communist deal, but shriek in childish rage over allocating a few billion to protect Americans from unnecessary illegal crime? I do.
I didn’t watch the Oscars and don’t understand why people do. When I want to watch people pander to the audience and play make believe, I just watch Democrats.
So the Senate released their report a couple of weeks ago and found ZERO evidence of collusion. NADA. ZIP. Yet here we are here still talking as if Mueller has anything and as I watch MSNBC this morning, they are all giddy that Mueller is digging into Trump’s financial dealings going back decades. We have truly become a banana republic when we allow prosecutors unlimited scope to go after political people. When presented in real time with real actual espionage crimes on behalf of Hillary Clinton, the FBI rushed to exonerate her and in the process gave immunity to many of her aides. Can everyone see the discrepancy here?
Well according to progressive orthodoxy Mark anyone can be a woman, so you will have to be more specific …. lol
You laugh (hell, I laughed), but transgenderism has the potential to turn feminism on its ear. How do they reconcile their hatred of men with allowing a man who suddenly “feels” like a woman to join their club?
Feminism has already bumped heads with transgendersism. After all that work and passion put into the brilliant idea of illustrating the inherent dignity of women by having them dress up as female genitals and march around howling like hyenas, those pesky trans protested on the grounds that “not all women have vaginas”.
I hear they have committees working on designing new crude and vulgar costumes, but can’t quite figure out how to accommodate women with penises and men with vaginas. Do they incorporate penis-women into the fold, and if they do that (Imagine the costumes!) are they discriminating against the vagina-men? Ah, the problems of the modern world!
When basically ANYTHING can be construed as a “sexual assault” (including asking a female for a date or telling her she looks nice) there is the problem of voyeurism and at what point does that cross into “sexual assault” or “sexual harassment” when an obviously male person is ogling a young girl in the toilet or dressing room? (Which reminds me—-feminists have steadfastly ignored the problem of homosexual harassment, so evidently if a lesbian harasses or assaults another female that is OK.)
We should point out that based on the precedents set (and applauded) by the Left, when Hillary is investigated the investigation can and should go all the way back to Whitewater.
Cluster, you make a good point I think should be played out long and loud. Of course, the Right would need a coherent voice to be able to do this, someone not already slimed by the Left.
That is, a big chart showing the billions and trillions of dollars spent or proposed for Leftist boondoggles and pet projects and the tiny amount asked for by Trump for national security next to those figures.
Behold the breathtakingly stupid AOC:
“Our planet is going to hit disaster if we don’t turn this ship around and so it’s basically like, there’s a scientific consensus that the lives of children are going to be very difficult,” Ocasio-Cortez said while chopping up food in her kitchen during an Instagram live video. “And it does lead, I think, young people to have a legitimate question, you know, ‘Is it okay to still have children?'”
I will say this unequivocally – the last three generations of Americans have no idea what a “hard life” is. We are some of the most pampered, spoiled people in history and many people like AOC need to contrive hardships to claim victim status. That being said, I will encourage progressives like AOC to NOT have children. I think that would help immensely.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/43880/ocasio-cortez-people-maybe-shouldnt-reproduce-due-ryan-saavedra?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=mattwalsh
You kinda wish Alexandria Occasional-Cortex’s parents had asked that question, don’t you?
And answered in the negative.
I do … lol and I heard Rush make a great point re: that video of hers too. Everything in her kitchen is a result of fossil fuels. the food she was preparing was planted, grown, harvested, and delivered to her all as a direct result of fossil fuels. And I will wager to say that she doesn’t even realize that.
BTW, I love the term “End Stage Feminism.” OK, maybe “love” is a bit over the top, but the image it conjures up of something bad that has metastasized into something terminal, is, I think, fairly accurate; at least I hope so.
Just a reminder from 4 days ago 3 threads back In response to rgrg2:
I’ve been on this blog since 2004, Amazona and Cluster almost as long. I can’t recall any self-identified Liberal ever coming here and claiming he/she was all about individual liberty, honor, integrity, personal initiative or personal responsibility. Absent that claim from ANYONE, are we wrong to conclude that Liberals are not in favor of those values? And if not those values, then what values DO you support? Surely you have some idea what form of government you support — or not. You’ve never said.
Now I’m not surprised that he/she hasn’t responded. As Amazona has often pointed out, in all the years we’ve been here, only one Liberal has EVER explained his/her political/ideological philosophy, and that person was an avowed Marxist and proud of it. My theory has always been that there can only be two reasons why no one has ever answered: (a) they don’t know what they actually believe; or (b) they can’t admit what they really believe as most people would find it repugnant.
Spook, I think there is a third alternative. That is, the average Lefty DOES know what he believes, and he not only does not think it is repugnant he thinks most people agree with him. And that is that the opposition is bad, evil, and represents disaster on every level, and must be stopped. What he calls his political philosophy is really just distrust and hatred of an Invented Other. While this is not a political belief, it is what passes for a political belief on most of the Left—-and they DO believe it.
I’ve run into this for years. When asking “Why are you guys so hard on Bush?” I never got a POLITICAL answer, never got a POLICIES answer, but it was always that this was just “fair” after the way the Right treated Clinton.
Yes, elections ARE based on nonsense like this, which is why the Left wins as often as it does.
Go to any site that encourages commentary and see how much of this commentary is really just spewing of hatred (and that is not hyperbole—-this is real, true, HATRED) of Trump and by extension anyone who does not share in this hatred. Not an analysis of any policy or proposal based on ITS merits, but only on which team supports it.
Ask a Dem why he or she does not like Republicans and you will hear that this is not only natural but desirable, because Republicans are vile, greedy, racist white supremacists with no moral values or concern for the planet.
Did you see a political thought in there? Neither did I. There is a reason the Left works so hard to drown out any effort to talk about actual POLITICS—about the best blueprint for governing the nation, about the reasons the Constitution is written the way it is and what that means for having a successful United States.
The emotional, hate-driven, pseudo-politics of most on the American Left are wholly dependent on simply resisting and obstructing the hated Right. So the Left was all about border security when it could be used as a political weapon against a Republican president or Congress and is now against border security because it is advocated by a Republican president and (some) members of Congress.
The Left is against child abuse when it can point fingers at Catholic priests but quite happy funding the foundations for child abuse that goes beyond mere personal contact all the way to sex slavery when that is part of the #RESIST mentality.
It is true that most Dems are totally ignorant of the political system they support and enable, but at the same time they do know what they DO believe, and that is that there is a moral imperative to stop, block and eventually eliminate a demographic they have been told is the epitome of evil. That is, anyone who is not a Democrat.
I think rgrg2 should be allowed to post here, at least sometimes, because he is such a brilliant example of this. If any of us were to speak FOR the Left, we could be accused of exaggerating, even of lying, about the Left’s perspectives. But people like rgrg2 illustrate it for us. These people will quote some political terms every now and then, but that all superficial—-their real reason for posting is their need to express their blind, overweening, pathological HATREDS, which they have been carefully trained to think of as POLITICAL thought. No link is a link to information, it is a link intended to support that hatred.
I think rgrg2 should be allowed to post here
I agree. He has a unique opportunity to explain his point of view to a handful of Conservatives who all have reasonably open minds. Now I was born at night, but not LAST night, so he’ll have to be pretty convincing. I don’t know if he’s ever had that moment of epiphany when someone he disagreed with said something, and his mind’s response was, ” I never looked at it that way before,” but I know I have — on many occasions.
I agree up to a point. In the past when someone like this has been allowed it always seemed to turn into just nonstop lying and Conservative-bashing and only took up space. Responding to people like this only feeds them, and ignoring them leads to gloating about how they just made such amazing points no one could rebut them.
There has been a tipping point in the past and I think that has been a good call.
So …. it has nothing to do with corrupt socialist governments???
Al Gore takes a swipe at Trump and says REAL national emergency is connection between climate change-related droughts in Central America and US-bound migrant caravans
I don’t know what to say other than progressivism is a mental disorder and not an ideology.
Transgender runners, both 17, finish one-two in a Connecticut high school women’s 55-meter dash – reigniting debate over their participation in female track events
See 1:22 pm
Feminism has already bumped heads with transgendersism
The media are playing the clip over and over of AOC asking if young people, being faced with a planet that won’t be inhabitable in 12 years, should still have children.. Short answer — NO. Liberals should not have any more children. I’d donate to a Go-fund-me account that would pay each and every Liberal of child-bearing age to be sterilized. First smart question AOC has asked.