America’s Next Bill Clinton!


Gen Peter Pace is still an asshole and homophobe

This is funny. It really is funny. At work this morning, the thing that’s being passed arpimd is at the below link.

http://www.blackfive.net/main/2007/10/general-ret-pet.html.For those who can’t see the picture, it’s a note card written to his platoon, with four stars pinned on it. It says, “These are yours, not mine. With love and …”

Apparently, former Chief of Staff Peter Pace, who not once, but twice as CoS condemned homosexuals serving in the military and also made some very anti-women comments earlier in his career, put that below at the Vietnam Memorial in DC.

A little chubby Navy girl showed it to me and goes, “You read it, because if I read it, I’ll cry.”

It’s written to his platoon – many of whom died during the Vietnam War. It was written as a way to “honor them” saying that he owes them for these stars, and they made him who he is today.

Everyone was moved by it. I asked the question of why it’s so touching knowing that he is anti-women and anti-gays.

He was a leader of all troops, speaking out against homosexuality, equating it to adultery.

I am sorry – but being unfaithful to the person you love is wrong – and should be condemned, but two people in love, sharing the gift of love and touch and emotions is not wrong.

I wonder if he knew that some of those who died during the Vietnam War was gay, whether he would still have done what he did.

The military wants to talk about leadership and love and brotherhood – but it only applies if you’re straight, god-loving and buy into its ideals.

“People’s actions speak louder than their words, why are we moved by this bigot?” I asked.

She walked away and said, “You’re ignorant.”

Who’s really ignorant here – the person who will be moved by a gesture of a bigot, or one who recognizes the inconsistency in all of this? I vote for the former.

The fact of the matter is this: either these people in the military are really fucking dumb, or have been brainwashed. The logic is clear as day – you can’t be a leader and appreciate your troops, unless you accept for who they are. As a leader, you lead all people – just not the people you don’t see as being sinful.

Peter Pace can go fuck himself too, now that he’s retired. Sometimes, war is a good thing – it weeds out people like that.

Advertisements


Republicans: for the love of blowjobs

bathroom_stall.jpgOkay, first of all, is “blow job” one or two words? I’ve seen both versions. Can I get an English major to help me out here?

And secondly, add Sen. Larry Craig (R-ID) to the long list of Republican politicians who have gone down – and almost literally, for sexual misconducts. According to CNN reports, Craig was arrested early June (and this has now just came out, but don’t expect Craig to do the same anytime soon) at a Minneapolis Airport for attempt of lewd act in the airport’s bathroom. Story is here: http://idahostatesman.com/eyepiece/story/143517.html

Does anyone want to tell me what’s going on here? Craig is the third Republican this summer to have been arrested for sexual misconduct in public places. Worst yet, all three of these politicians (and don’t forget David Vitter of Louisinana who was named in the DC Madam case, too) were involved in SAME SEX acts.

All three have track records of speaking out, and quite passionately, against homosexuality or even sexuality in general. I guess if you spend your entire life fighting against something, it kind of “grows” on you, or you “grow” on the idea, and the next thing you know, you’re doing it.

But being a Republican politician, you don’t want to use your privilege for sex, as you are very moral, so you try to solicit sex in public bathrooms, or go down on an unsuspecting guest sleeping at your house, instead, as national Young Republican Chair Glenn Murphy (http://www.news-tribune.net/breakingnews/local_story_219210228.html) did this summer. So, we’ve got David Vitter who visited a prostitute. Bob Allen who offered a cop money to give the cop a blow job, Larry Craig who made a pass in a public bathroom at a police officer who was undercover (and apparently on the toilet) and Murphy, who decided that the best part of waking up, for a Republican, is with a cock in your mouth.

So focused on blowjobs, these Republicans are failing to do their jobs, and that’s not a good thing – at least for Republicans anyway. Is it It seems Republicans are either on vacation at their ranch or in the bathroom or some other shady places looking for a quick BJ. True?

I can’t help but laugh about it, but at the same time, it makes me wonder about people who are so “moral” and “ethical” about sexual issues, yet are so …depraved (and deprived) for sex. But, hey, political capital is political capital. As a Democrat, I’d take it however I can. How about the Republican Party start a social network just for gay Republican politicians. It’ll be as sort of a facebook type thing. If one Republican felt a need for let off a little steam (and we all do now and then), he can just log on to GOP (Gay Officials and Politicians) and “poke” another Republican he has his eyes and possibly mouth on.

If the guy feels the same way, he pokes back, and they can meet in some Congressional bathroom, specially designated for Republicans, and do all the poking their long-neglected little Republican bodies desire. That would help with a lot of the problems they’re facing. Besides, blowjobs are greatly appreciated and all, but would you want to get one from a bathroom looking like this? Ewww!

In fact, I think Ted Haggard can be their chairman.And you know what, if push comes to shove, they could always go to a private prostitute-for-hire. I here some guy named Roberto is out of a job.Thoughts?



It’s just sex …

Reading one of the Campus Progress web logs this morning, I ran across an interesting statistic – that just about or more than 50 percent of college students are “still virgins.” My question: why do we care? Why is it that, as a society, we treat losing one’s virginity as sort of a rite of passage in which a new person is born and the old, less mature person is gone? It’s to say, as if, a person’s accomplishment in life is based on whether or not that person has engaged in sex. With rite-of-passage teen movies like “American Pie” being a part of the popular culture, it seems the message we’re sending teens is: your worth and dignity is based on whether you’ve “done it.” Yet, they also get messages from the Christian-right about remain “pure” and “untouched” until marriage. The result is a clash of culture, in which, on one hand, the message is about the importance of having sex. On the other hand, the message is about “saving” oneself until marriage. What’s a kid to do, really, in that situation? If virginity is so special, how come the majority of us aren’t even in touch with the person to whom we “lost” it? The truth is when it comes to virginity, there is nothing lost, and nothing gained.

Besides, what’s the exact definition of a virgin anyhow? One who’s pure in both thoughts and mind? One who’s never orgasmed? One who’s never had intercourse? One who’s had intercourse but never orgasm? Does oral sex count? What about priest sex? It’s all confusing, really — yet we’re still obsessed with the idea of virginity.

The fact of the matter is that there are more important things to worry about in one’s lifelong accomplishment than sex and “virginity.” We see movies like “The 40-Year-Old Virgin,” but we don’t see movies like, “The 40-Year-Old Bum Who Hasn’t Done a Damned Thing to Make the World Better.”

Sometimes, I wonder why. Why can’t we just teach kids, from both the left and the right that sex is something amazing and wonderful that should only be had with responsibility, respect and readiness? Isn’t that a much better message than: if you aren’t having sex, you’re a loser or if you’re having sex, you’re a slut?

Wouldn’t it make the whole abstinence education debate much easier to digest? Wouldn’t it make birth control much more easily gotten? Wouldn’t it strike down patriarchy and society’s ideal of a family at its root? It certainly would. Just by changing our personal outlooks on virginity and sex, we can certainly make move the world in the right political direction.

Second point: why does society put such a strong emphasis on the act of sex? It is, after all, only sex. I don’t mean to sound like a frat boy here, but sex is just an act. It’s neither holy nor God’s gift. It’s neither divine nor special. It’s purely biological, just like any other activity that we engage in as humans. Sure, sex is certainly not making love, but it’s got a quality of its own. Just like going for a walk, having dinner or spending the afternoon with someone, sex is just an act. It only becomes special when the person with whom we are sharing it is special. Other than that, sex is just – sex. Why make things any complicated than life already is? To be sure, one should always be monogamous in a relationship, but let’s not treat sex anymore special than just a kiss. A kiss, after all, without any emotions put into it, is just a kiss.

 Kind of funny, too, how “virginity” never seems to be an issue discussed when it comes to the LGBT community. I guess to the right, “virginity” is only important when baby-making is involved.



The homosexual witch hunt.

I don’t make it a habit of defending conservative Republicans, but I will in this case. 

At this rate, I am never going to get to blog about the male-female relationship I’d been thinking about for the past few days; but I ran across something interesting on another blog here: http://pandagon.blogsome.com/2007/08/07/busted-florida-republican-state-reps-black-gay-panic-defense-on-soliciting-charge/, and thought I’d write on it instead.

 Here’s a synopsis of the story. A state representative in Florida was arrested for solitication of same-sex prostitution in a public bathroom. It turned out the person he was solicitating was an undercover police officer – and thus he was arrested.

 What makes this story is funny is that this man is a conservative Christian Republican. His defense? “Well, the guy was black and he was intimidated, he didn’t want to become a statistic. So, he was just making a pass at the guy to try to bail himself out of a bad situation.”

Liberals are having a field day with this, in pointing out the hypocrasies of the religious right and the piss-poor defense this representative gave.

 But I’d like to take a different approach. Too often, it seems we liberals only scratch the surface and do not think of the actual issues. Here’s my issue with the whole situation: why the hell are we still engaged in a witch hunt for homosexuals?

If two guys want to give each other blow jobs in a public bathroom, or anywhere else, why is it my business? This, for me, is simply a modern-day witch hunt for homosexuals. It exists simply as a means to punish homosexual men for being gay. On the surface, it might seem like a way to keep good order and discipline, but do we see this going on in women’s bathrooms or at the bar?

Why is it okay for me to be at a bar, with some girl on my lap and slobbering all over me, but it’s not okay for two men to be intimate in a bathroom stall or anywhere else? Straight sex happens in bathrooms all the time, but that’s not being cracked down on. So why target homosexuals?

 The plight of gay men is already that they can’t really behave intimately in most places in public, and now we’re cracking down on their behaviors in a semi-public place? What’s next, cracking down on two men kissing in the car, at home or at a bar? Gay men already suffer as is from being able to display their affection in public, and at home, it’s not really accepted by most.

 As a taxpayer, I’d rather police officers go out there and focus on, oh, I don’t know, gang violence, rapes, murders, and drunk drivers than standing at some corner stall busting guys for asking for and receiving blowjobs.

Besides, as a police officer, you’ve got to have screwed up pretty bad to be assigned the duty of hanging out at public bathrooms, pretending to be gay and waiting for some guy to come up to you, offering you a blowjob.

The point is that it’s unfair and it’s discriminatory. It’s profiling in a sense, and it seems we scream and yell about airport profiling and will be quick to jump on anyone right-leaning when they are caught in a situation like this. But as true liberals and Democrats, aren’t we supposed be defending their rights? So what if they’re gay and Republicans? They’re people, too. Let’s focus on the real issue here.

But, there’s a lighter issue also at work: bathroom sex can be hot, but why the hell are these men looking for each other in public bathrooms? Isn’t that what gay bars, craigslist, and Promise Keepers meetings are for? If push comes to shove, they can always go to the Catholic Church. But that’s not the point now, is it?

Also, who the hell would PAY to give a blowjob? To be sure, I don’t pay to get one either – but when it comes to the penis, I wouldn’t even want to taste my own. :X But I don’t suppose that’s the point in all of this, is it?

Thoughts?