Don't Ask, Don't Tell: California Judiciary Does It Again

After the gay marriage issue and the unconstitutional denial of prisoners' voting rights (even while on parole, after serving jail time for low level criminal offenses) now this...

Apparently, a San Diego judge has placed an injunction on the military's "don't ask, don't tell," policy, again just weeks before an election according to a published AP article.

My question on this issue has always been, just how many in even the gay community serving at this point even care or would actually prefer to keep such a private issue as their sexual preference truly private?

I mean, the military is not supposed to be a dating service anyway, so just what has this particular rather personal issue have to do with serving in the military in this country, other than without such disclosure it does make battlefield housing and living arrangements a bit more complex?

This article also set forth that the American people at this point are less concerned with "social" issues such as these and the war than they are with the economy. Which again goes to prove just how far off the mainstream media are, and wonder just who is conducting and what segment of the population are being used for their polls.

The war has much to do with the economy, and joblessness and homeless in this country. After all, the costs for continuing this war for now nine long years has escalated and added to our deficit far more than even those discretionary expenditures for those bridges to nowhere. And will so for decades in all the veterans benefits and costs that will be needed for the next, oh say, fifty to sixty years.

A decision such as this should not be made by a federal or state judge, but as a policy decision, especially in times of war.

I believe this goes along the lines of all those policies regarding "fraternization" while serving, and also during times of war. I mean, just how much time do most of those serving really have for developing romantic attachments?

Maybe we need to rethink this entire "standing army" concept, or leave those decisions to those who are more aware of the ramifications. And again, just how many gays are actually serving, is what I would like to know, since it would seem that the majority of gay individuals are not exactly also supportive of this ongoing war either at this point to begin with, at least from my experience.

So just how many really are enlisting, and I would not hesitate to guess, not many and many of those that are or have, don't seem to be those which continue to push this agenda, but the civilian activists that somehow perceive that in keeping such a fundamentally personal issue private is denying them their "rights." But "rights" to what, I'd like to know.

Solicit?

The courts do seem to be continuing to accept cases and extending standing to "disinterested" parties more and more, including those now brought on behalf of "foreigner's" rights somehow in this country, under our Constitution and Bill of Rights ("We the People of the United States...for US and OUR posterity"), or using some perceived injustice or disenfranchised individual on behalf of a special interest group in order to feed the legal industry most of all under those federal statutes that provide for the payment of legal fees, at the taxpayer's expense, for any and all actions which can in any way be perceived as a "civil rights" case.

Your sexual preference is a "civil right," but while serving in the military (which is not a "civil" organization, in more ways than one, it would appear as of late) is not.

The military and its members are fighters, after all, not lovers.

Just think of the complications of a totally gay and separate unit with such a policy, and the additional questions that would need to be asked in such an event for at least housing purposes.

For example, "What are your tendencies, "butch" or "queen?"

California and its judiciary does it again, and no wonder there continues to be more at least generational Americans leaving that state, than new residents.

I just wonder whether they also just might work, through their political connections, for the AP which more and more does tend to focus on sensationalize, explosive and exploitive politically charged journalism and their "polls" each and every decade, rather than even questioning a military policy being addressed in a civilian court outside any true Constitutional basis or intent of those founders whatsoever.

Who would most likely hold that gays are more than welcome to serve in the military and volunteer army to protect the homeland if it is their desire.

But disclose they would have no time for dating, and if that was their objective than maybe the career military or a foreign engagement during a time of war wouldn't suit their primary or the military's ultimate aims.

Obama To Speak At ASU, Notre Dame and U.S. Naval Academy

It was announced recently that Barack Obama has scheduled appearances within the next two weeks at three major U.S. universities in order to speak at their commencement exercises. Arizona State University, a large Southwestern public college; Notre Dame, a private Catholic university; and the U.S. Naval Academy, a military academy.

Let's examine the three universities hand picked and selected out of the literally thousands of graduations which will occur this month throughout the nation:

Arizona State University is located in Tempe, Arizona and is the largest public university in the nation. It also just so happens to be a state that is and has been facing severe economic crisis due to both the housing and foreclosure crisis, and also the illegal immigrant situation and drug cartel wars which have erupted on the American Southwestern border.

It has been announced that despite the fact that over 74% of the American people are opposed to any amnesty of the estimated over 12 million illegal immigrants in this country, primarily from Mexico, that Mr. Obama, Ms. Pelosi and Congress are geared up to push and pass such legislation over the American citizens objections.

And in spite of the failure of the Bush Administration in the last McCain/Kennedy amnesty attempt in 2006 in a move to extend such privileges to foreigners who entered this country illegally, for which as in its provisions again as "undocumented," and here using counterfeit IDs, includes no really viable method of screening these individuals for any prior criminal activity either in this country or their former country of origin.

These workers have displaced literally thousands of U.S. workers, many legal Mexican-Americans, in both the construction and tourism industry in the border states, states which rely heavily on those industries and are facing increasing joblessness and homelessness as a result.

Iraq war veterans working on the reconstruction in Iraq are returning home now to find many of their jobs also now "outsourced" to foreign workers. Some of those same students graduating in the technology fields will find even limited success due to the degree of outsourcing in the technology fields which have occurred progressively under the Bush and prior administrations.

Arizona also has the highest property theft and drug related crime rate in the nation due to the continuing open border situation from both the auto theft rings, and drug cartel operations which have impacted both the Phoenix and Tucson metropolitan areas substantially since the first Reagan amnesty back in the 1980's.

The second college selection, the University of Notre Dame, also appears politically motivated. As a Catholic university which teaches also religion classes, Mr. Obama's positions on both abortion and stem cell research resulted in petitions being circulated at the university requesting that the "invitation" be withdrawn and was signed by over 11,000 students.

Although as a Catholic university, the Pope and church also have come out in support of Mr. Obama's illegal immigrant positions due to the fact that the majority of those illegal immigrants are of the Catholic faith.

In fact, the Pope in his last visit to this country used the opportunity to address the situation with his Church members with respect to Catholic church teachings, although with respect to border security, a separate but somewhat related issue due to the negative impact it has had on border residents, the Pope himself has a fortress surrounding Vatican City separating his country from Italy.

Border fencing and true security for those living in the border states, however, are not part and parcel of the intended legislation from all reports now coming out of Washington. Increased domestic screenings on American citizens, however, have increased at unprecedent levels instead rather than securing and limiting U.S. international ports of entry in placing global commerce and Big Business concerns over the lawful citizens rights to basic domestic and national security.

Due to this Constitutional federal negligence, the borders states are now hardest hit but the ramifications of which has been spreading at a rapid pace throughout the country due directly to those open borders.

With increasing American unrest with the progression and increases in troop levels for the Middle East war in direct opposition to Mr. Obama's stated positions while running as a candidate, the choice of the U.S. Naval Academy as the third selected university also appears to be a public relations appearance in order to gain further support from those graduates for the ongoing conflicts which are now occurring and continuing with increases and shuffling of troop levels.

The Anti-Bush appears to be needing some future military support, and the Naval Academy graduates will most likely be involved in the continuing conflict and eventually stationed within the Middle East who are obligated to serve in the military in some capacity upon their graduations.

And to this writer using America's children for governmental agendas due to the political climate with many Americans now questioning some of Mr. Obama's policies since gaining office in the war, stimulus, bailouts and his positions on illegal immigration and border security in spite of a lack of genuine citizen support for any of those recent measures or stated intentions, appears to be the lowest of the low in political posturing and public relations propaganda.

Department of Homeland Security: Marginalizing Our Military

In recent interviews after last week's Tea Parties conducted throughout the nation, much media spin and reporting has been done with respect to one group of individuals who were targeted as "potential terrorists" according to the Department of Homeland Security's "right wing extremism" memorandum issued prior to these events.

The focus which has occurred has primarily been directed toward the returning Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans and, as Ms. Napolitano commented, their susceptibility to being recruited by some of these "right wing organizations." The marginalizing of the entire Catholic faith (an anti-abortion "one issue" group primarily also) has not been addressed, nor the marginalizing of citizens who have been the victims of illegal immigrant crime and theft in this country nor those that hold with the Bill of Rights 2nd Amendment provisions who also were barely even given a nod. And a host of others who cannot in any way be categorized as affiliated with Ms. Napolitano or the Department's definition of "right wing."

This attempt at what is no more than mass propaganda and terrorism in and of itself, and marginalizing our military as potential terrorists or suscepitible to supposed "right wing extremist" ideology as defined by the Department can only be due to one agenda, and one only. An attempt to silence some of those returning veterans who just may have some more truthful information about what is really going on in Iraq and Afghanistan differing from what our mainstream media pundits have presented. Or discredit those outraged at this point with their multiple tours of duty contrary to their understanding when first enlisting for this "mission" back in 2001 and the direction it then subsequently took.

Or in order to minimize the sacrifices of those men and women who are now being reported by Ms. Napolitano's very own Department of Homeland Security whose agents are now detaining and holding for military trials at border checkpoints along the Canadian border some of those misled soldiers who are now refusing to return to their active duty after multiple tours these past seven years. I received two such reports of these detentions and "arrest" within the past 30 days since as a border security activist, I registered and receive the DHS builletins daily.

If we can marginalize those returning war veterans, then we can also eventually deny them future benefits, and also continue the Washington "spins" with respect to this ever-increasing war now under the Obama Administration, in direct opposition to his stated intentions during that two year run for office. And some of their stories when they return as unworthy of credence if contrary to governmental press releases and spins this past seven years.

The candidate who painted himself as the agent for "change" and the "Anti-Bush" who has now spent more under that unaccountable bank bailout he was instrumental in passing with those others in Washington, has now instead enlarged the number of troops and war in simply moving the troops around the Middle Eastern chessboard and its funding in the budget and a recent supplemental appropriations bill, and also now plunged this nation into more debt than the last four presidents combined.

While having an inaugural that puts some of the coronations of the Crown Heads of Europe to shame during a time when this country continued to further sink into the economic quagmire Washington itself created which reached a manufactured bank "crisis" when Mr. Obama was a member of the Senate Club in the Bush Administration. With all the "crisis" that have occurred within the past eight years alone now in this country, I'm wondering if all of them don't simply work for the networks and their owners under contract for ratings and their advertising revenue.

And then once elected, simply began his domestic and foreign carbon emitting, energy depleting and expensive road trips to sell the American people on Washington's ever increasingly outrageous "fixes" and policies, and apologizing to the globe, even a Saudi King, whose citizens were reported and responsible for the largest massive attack and civilian casualties in this country post World War II.

So how low can Washington continue to go in now not only declaring war on the majority of Americans in this "terrorist" bulletin, but also declaring war on its own military veterans?

"Mea culpas" are not going to get you out of this one, Washington bureaucrats. Public apologies to every single American in this country by the President, Vice President and all 535 members of Congress and federal bureaucracy and resignation at this point just might do it. But only might.

After all, the Sergeant-at-Arms in both the House and Senate are there for a reason and function, and this position is not simply a ceremonial one.