Coons Politicizes Memorial Day
May 29th, 2010 by David Anderson
Read this disgusting politicization of Memorial Day by Senate Candidate Chris Coons. We are in the middle of two wars but he can not even resist the impulse to allowing a study before starting social experimentation on the military in the name of repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.
Late Thursday night the House voted on an amendment to repeal the law that prevents gays from serving openly in our nation’s military, but, in lockstep with other Washington Republicans, Congressman Castle voted against it.
“Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” is discrimination, plain and simple. It’s offensive, impractical, and has no place in this country.
Mike Castle disagrees. This Memorial Day weekend, let’s send him a message that Delaware simply will not tolerate discrimination.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by DelawarePolitics.net, delawareBNN. delawareBNN said: DelawarePolitics.net: Coons Politicizes Memorial Day: Read this disgusting politicization of Memorial Day by Senat… http://bit.ly/9IG2Zb [...]
I don’t see it as politicization at all. Coons said what needed to be said. It just so happened that by coincidence the vote happened around the same time as Memorial Day. Come to terms with your own bigotry, David, and just get the hell over it. The higher plane-end result here is that discrimination is bad. Thousands of men and women have been discriminated against and discharged from the military due to this policy. You see it as a “social experiment,” but most rational-minded Americans/humans see it as a logical progression in the fight for freedom for all.
David, if this had been said while giving a speech at a memorial service I would agree, but to put out a statement, I’m not so sure. I see it as taking advantage of the timing, which I am sure was on purpose by the Democrat controlled House.
And the larger question is about the policy in general. Of course this is just another avenue for the homosexual community to attempt to normalize their life style. The end game here for that community is marriage, and then to attack organized religion through discrimmination laws.
Hey teach, that’s higher plain. Just sayin’.
Thanks for the sharp jab Chris. We’ll be sure to remember it in November at the ballot box. Say Chirs, you and Nancy Pelosi should get married. Then there would be enough liberal stink to go around.
Thanks for voting the right way on this one Mike. That will also be remembered at the ballot box.
Actually, it’s not, Nancy…see here:
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/plane
level, position, stage, footing, condition, standard, degree, rung, stratum, echelon life on a higher plane of existence
This from the liberal New York Times:
“Indeed, both opponents and supporters of the ban say a host of thorny practical questions will face the Pentagon if Congress gives final approval to legislation allowing the repeal of the ban, which could happen this summer. ”
We have two wars going on and ultra liberal Chris Coons is more concerned with his own PC “values” than he is with national defense.
Chris Coons is waaaay too liberal for Delaware.
lol @ nancy!
Mike, I don’t mind the compromise we reached with DADT. I have no problem with gay and lesbian Americans serving their country. I do have a problem with changing the warrior culture to accommodate homosexuality. I don’t want some sensivtivity training explaining why I shouldn’t be offended when two guys make out in the shower.
You have to undertand that even the women in the military buy into the warrior culture. They are more likely to be the women who like Monty Python or climbed the trees when they were girls. The point is they fit in by choice. What the gay lobby wants to do is change every institution they touch. The gays and lesbians in the military now want to fit in. The people who want to change the law want to use the military to give legitimacy to an illegitimate lifestyle. They will want equal benefits, housing, and other thorny issue to be addressed. It is about cultural change and social engineering not defending the nation.
As for the politicization, read the statement. He directly ties it into Memorial Day and gives an implication that Castle opposing it somehow makes him less patriotic or respectful of the sacrifice of brave men and women some of whom were homosexual. Not only is it not true, it is a blatant attempt to politicize an holiday met to bring us all together. He is attempting to use it to divide us. That is what I call disgusting not his position on the issue.
I don’t want some sensivtivity training explaining why I shouldn’t be offended when two guys make out in the shower.
Tell us about the sensitivity training explaining why you shouldn’t be offended when a guy and a girl make out in the shower — you did have that, right?
David,
I’m afraid that you are like a broken clock. However, unlike a broken clock, you aren’t right even twice a day.
Dave you are right.
Chris Coons could have made his point (which is wrong) without playing politics with Memorial Day. He should be called out on it.
Mike: Would you recommend that openly gay military folks be given their own barracks? Why or why not?
Actually, it’s not, Nancy…see here
LOL! Doh!!
Guys and gals are not allowed to make out in the shower in a barracks.
Oh come on Mike, you didn’t like my defense of the Red Cross (ICRC) or support of adjusting the laws of Delaware so they have the same rights and requirements as the federal IDEA law so disabled families aren’t confused with conflicting statues. If you don’t give me twice a day, give me twice a week.
I’m sorry. I guess I’ve stayed away from blogging too much. I really don’t feel like taking the cheese and getting into this. If I remember, we discussed this several years ad nauseum back on DWA. The arguments have been laid out and I don’t think we’re going to change each others’ minds, David and Hube. So I’d prefer to not re-hash old battles. The end result of my side is that it’s treating all service-willing Americans the same and not punishing those willing to serve their country for being honest about who they are. Yes, there are logistical standards and practices that will have to be worked out. That will come.
Coons statement is disgusting, plain and simple. I must remind everyone that we’re not talking about a country club membership here. There is no “right” to serve in the military (though at times it’s been an obligation). There never has been. The military is not a place for social experimentation on secular-progressive psychological theory. It’s sole purpose is to defend our nation. Our professional military leaders should be the sole judge of wh may serve and who should not. The president and the Congress should abide by their judgement.
The majority of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (Adm. Mullen is the lone dissenter, unfortunately he’s also the chairman) favor maintaining DADT until a study currently underway on the matter is completed. Rep. Castle was entirely correct in voting to maintain the position of four of the five members of the Joint Chiefs. Democrats appear to be in a hurry to rush the repeal through because they probably realize they will not like what the study says when it comes out. Once the repeal is signed into law, look for this study to get swept under the rug.
Before Hubie snorts down too much of his cereal through his nose, I would caution that he and Mike look beyond the ‘free’ dictionary for sourcing the phrase. My googling determined that higher plain is correct or I wouldn’t have said as much. Not everything on the intertubes is accurate, of course.
Plane is the mathematical term for a two-dimensional surface. The other kind of ‘plane’ is the instrument with which wood is leveled, an action that cannot in any way be construed to be ‘higher’. And I will allow that the word ‘plane’ is commonly used to describe an esoteric state but I would suggest that it is an error found in the homonym.
A further look was definative to me that the root of the word in the phrase is tied to land: the phrase ‘higher plain’ itself rooted in a religious framework related to farming and managing pastures on higher and lower plains:
“There’s more to decisions about land use than climate change, population growth, migration and prosperous economies. In the High Atlas Mountains of Morocco, individual religious beliefs in local Saints are also linked to how the Amazig (Berber) people use their environment and manage local resources.
…To date, researchers have paid limited attention to the role of individual religious beliefs in the processes of change in the management of territory and communal natural resources. Dominguez and his colleagues use the High Atlas in Morocco as a case study to shed some light on the relationship between individual beliefs in local Islamic Saints and the changing use of managed pastures. Historically, the Amazig people have followed a traditional form of common property management based on the prohibition (called Agdal) of access to common pastures, mainly in the Spring, in order to obtain better grazing at the beginning of summer. This Agdal prohibition period is deeply rooted in long-held religious beliefs and practices.
http://cc.bingj.com/cache.aspx?q=higher+plain&d=66045897278471&mkt=en-US&setlang=en-US&w=70c5348f,7c1378ef
Nancy,
I’ve been using “higher plane” for at least a decade. I’ve also seen it referenced in dozens of publications, be they electronic or print. Your research aside, it has become socially accepted, so I think getting over it and moving on is perhaps the best option here!
Weighing in on the topic at hand: this world is full of gays, people. They’re all around you. They serve their country and should be free to do it without discrimination and having to disguise their sexual orientation or be summarily discharged from duty. How honorable is that?
Military service is a committment that has nothing to do with one’s civilian, sexual life. And especially now that we are sending in the National Guard to do the work of the military on foreign soil it is a no-brainer that ordinary everyday people are placing themselves in harms way for us.
So, whatever we can do to make this right – stop discrimination– is what we should be doing STAT.
If you don’t think much about English and the roots of words, Mike, I hope you at least expand your frame of reference when teaching your kids.
Seriously, I offer a palate of interesting options for discussion and all you have is move on!!
And, further, Nancy…a Google search of “higher plain” results in the venerable searcher offering to redirect you to “higher plane.”
Sorry for being so short, but you called me out as being wrong. I am not and I provided some evidence. You came back with some interesting etymology, but it doesn’t really add anything to the conversation because your whole point was moot to begin with. “Higher plane” is the more recognizable version of the phrase in today’s lexicon.
More, for Nancy’s pleasure:
http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/plain.html
http://www.grammar-monster.com/easily_confused/plain_plane.htm
http://www.beedictionary.com/common-errors/plain_vs_plane
Comment in moderation for Nancy’s reading pleasure!
Hey Harpy (that’s Nancy) – why should Mike offer his students a “new frame of reference” when 1) he isn’t wrong, and 2) you were acting silly in trying to correct him for it?
I get the same thing he does when Googling “higher plain” — a redirect to “higher plane.”
Considering some of your spelling and grammatical whoppers on your blog and elsewhere, I’d be one of the LAST to offer such advice to ANYONE.
Weighing in on the topic at hand: this world is full of gays, people. They’re all around you. They serve their country and should be free to do it without discrimination and having to disguise their sexual orientation or be summarily discharged from duty.
I agree. However, perhaps you’d like to answer the question that Mike doesn’t wanna get into again: Should gays in the military get their own barracks? Why or why not?
Hube – should gay veterans have separate cemeteries? Why or why not?
“Our professional military leaders should be the sole judge of who may serve and who should not. The president and the Congress should abide by their judgement. ”
Yet another so-called conservative fails to reconcile his pro-military views with the Constitution’s insistence on civilian control of the military.
On Hube’s question: Who gives a shit? Just because you can pose a question doesn’t make it worth answering.
Hube – should gay veterans have separate cemeteries? Why or why not?
Why should they? Are women separated from men in cemeteries?
On Hube’s question: Who gives a shit? Just because you can pose a question doesn’t make it worth answering.
It’s not worth answering unless 1) you’re too stupid to give an intelligent answer, or 2) it impedes your argument for just repealing DADT w/o any other stipulations.
“You have to undertand that even the women in the military buy into the warrior culture. They are more likely to be the women who like Monty Python or climbed the trees when they were girls.”
Excuse me??? Who are you to make that kind of characterization of women who serve in the military????
David wrote: “I do have a problem with changing the warrior culture to accommodate homosexuality.”
Darn tootin’! After all, if heterosexuality was good enough for that exemplar of the warrior culture, Alexander the Great …
oh …
wait …
damn.
It is not a moot question. Do you Want the best military in the world or a lab for social policy.? Q
back to the real story… chris coons playing politics with the one day we set aside for real heros…very sad
Well cookie there’s nothing negative about it. I know hundreds of military women. I have surveyed many for MWR events.
The real question is not whether a homosexual can pull the trigger. The issue is what effect this will have on the military as a unit. Now we can play the politically correct game and say that everyone will get along fine, or we can be honest and realize that heterosexual males will have a serious problem serving with homsexuals. One of the un-intended consequences if DADT is repealed is that you will see a drop in heterosexual enlistment.
Now we could talk all day on whether this is right or discrimination, but at the end of the day it has the potential to weaken the best fighting machine in the world. But maybe that is the whole idea behind it.
I will say that I think that the person who considers themself a homosexual and also wants to serve in the military deserves the same respect as anyone else, but I do think they are being used as pawns by the radical homosexual community, to forward their agenda.The radicals are actually hoping for problems within the military so that they can then call for more laws against discrimination. The end game is attacking the organized religions that still refuse to acknowledge homosexualltity as a legitimate life style.
They can’t ‘legitimize’ abnormal behavior, no matter how much they rationalize. Notice how the left canonizes Darwin to destroy religion, yet utterly ignores his primary tenet when discussing homosexuality? More leftist hypocrisy.
http://www.delawareonline.com/article/20100531/NEWS/5310311/Rooting-out-word-origins-makes-Newark-boy-spelling-champion
To all the teachers out there: this is what I am talking about. Teach creativity. Teach kids to follow the roots of words. Get out your latin dictionary once in a while and dig deeper! Open those doors in the mind that will foster the seeds of innovation.
Great retort there, Nance.
Exactly, Nancy.
Of course, I hope you’re not implying I’m guilty of NOT doing such with my students. Happy Memorial Day to all of you.
“To all the teachers out there: this is what I am talking about. Teach creativity. Teach kids to follow the roots of words. Get out your latin dictionary once in a while and dig deeper! Open those doors in the mind that will foster the seeds of innovation.”
Nancy you have left out the best resource for learning about words and their roots. That is the website
hotforwords.com
This is hosted by that world famous wordsmith, Marina Orlova.
I am sure out budding Spelling Bee champion would spend extra time on this site if he was aware of it.
““You have to undertand that even the women in the military buy into the warrior culture. They are more likely to be the women who like Monty Python or climbed the trees when they were girls.”
Excuse me??? Who are you to make that kind of characterization of women who serve in the military????”"
Lighten up Cookie. David is just excited that there are women who like Monty Python.
Dear “Real Anon”
Lovely…more nonsense from another liberal who’s too afraid to let anyone know who he (or she) is.
Civilian control of the military is not what is being discussed here. For more than two centuries, civilian leaders have given great deference to our professional military officers in matters of how the day to day operation of the military is to be conducted. Even presidents who have been generals have understood this and allowed the generals and admirals they appointed to their positions to run their services. By our Constitution, they are absolutely accountable to the civilian leadership for the results they produce and the civilian government controls their purse strings. Lincoln never told his generals how to prosecute the Civil War, but he fired plenty of them who did not produce results until finding U.S. Grant. Even though a civilian is the commander in chief (who had to be told by his predecessor he needed to learn how to salute), a military can only be run by military men & women. And any president should give great deference to what they say. This president and Congress are attempting to slam through secular socialist reform before the bad news can come out.