Now the military gets political. Seven Days in May?

Well, this is turning into a real shit-show in a hurry.  Now the military's Joint Chiefs of Staff has stepped into politics to re-assure everyone that they are not National Socialists (did anyone say they were?).  According to media reports, our nation's military leaders "broke precedent" (yeah, you think?) to make a "foray into domestic politics" and place themselves in apparent opposition to their sitting civilian commander-in-chief.

Being modern or rather post-modern, they "tweeted" and, we hate to have to tell you, that at least one of them lied.  General Mark Milley, chief of staff of the Army, tweeted Wednesday:

 “The Army doesn't tolerate racism, extremism, or hatred in our ranks."  "It's against our Values and everything we've stood for since 1775.”

Well... not actually since 1775.  See, this is what happens when you attempt to erase history and fail to acknowledge the past.  In fact, the military was explicitly racialist until July 26, 1948, when President Harry Truman (a Democrat) issued an executive order that desegregated the military. 

It was an earlier President, Woodrow Wilson of New Jersey (also a Democrat), who had done so much to undo the work of Republicans to loosen the restrictions on race in the military.  As for extremism and hatred... you train people to kill for God's sake.  The military is extremism incarnate.  As it should be.

What should concern everyone interested in the preservation of the Republic is the fact that these military officers have been permitted to step into a political matter.  It is bad enough that they lobby unceasingly for increased spending that is often redundant or wasteful or grossly over-priced.  Now they are getting involved directly in politics -- just like they did in Germany and do in places like Venezuela. 

Remember crazy General Curtis LeMay?  You might remember him as George Corley Wallace's running mate in 1968 (yeah, no racism there, right?).  Imagine if he had pulled the same stunt over Cuba that these turkeys just pulled?  General LeMay argued mightily with President John F. Kennedy during the Cuban Missile Crisis.  LeMay wanted to start a nuclear war.  Imagine if he had "tweeted" his thoughts?

http://www.history.com/speeches/lemay-and-kennedy-argue-over-cuban-missile-crisis

Now we have something real and genuine that should concern everyone -- every Democrat, every Republican, every Independent -- and it's not the statues of generals but the real ones that should concern us.  Generals and politics do not mix.  That's why the founders of our Republic -- for the most part, soldiers themselves -- wrote our Constitution to explicitly exclude them from politics.  If you want to keep your democracy, keep generals out of politics.

Lady Gaga's point about transgenders in the military

This is just too delicious.  Expect to see it -- in mail, email, and on radio and on cable -- as part of some future election campaign. 

Lady Gaga's recent tweet in support of transgendered soldiers actually made a prima facie argument against transgendered individuals serving in the military.  Here's what she wrote:

Lady Gaga suggested that President Trump's ban on transgendered military personnel would lead to increased mental issues within the transgendered community that would lead to more suicides.  In order to prevent this, she suggested that these suicidal individuals be provided access to weapons, including weapons of mass destruction. 

Yes, look for this come election time.

In 2015, USA Today (hardly a journal of the right) wrote about a study by the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention which reported that 41 percent of transgendered individuals attempt suicide at some point in their lives -- compared to only 4.6 percent of the general population.  The study, by the Williams Institute, found that transgender adults were 14 times more likely to consider suicide, and 22 times more likely to attempt suicide, than the general population.  Sure, give that man (woman?) an M-16 and a flame-thrower.  No... make that a missile launcher and an Abrams tank.

Has the nice-guy, feel-goodism of post-modern American politics finally reached the point of farce?  Or perhaps we should commission a study into the mental state of our elected officials?

But it doesn't end there.

Recently, the United States Congress took a vote to have taxpayers pay for the sex-change operations of military personnel.  Where once it was "join the navy and see the world" -- now it's "join the navy and become a girl."  All on the taxpayers dime.

A few years ago a Republican Congressman calculated the amount of money America pays to what used to be called "Red China" in interest payments on the money our government borrowed from them.  He came up with the figure of $73.9 million per day -- every day!  Politifact fact-checked that figure and adjusted it up to $74.4 million per day. That's over $27 billion a year.

During the same period, China was able to increase its military spending by 11 percent -- from $131 billion to $146 billion.  Thanks to the interest we pay to China, the Chinese military budget is now the second largest in the world and growing at a rate sustained by our debt payments.  Chinese weapon sales to other countries (many of whom are not friendly to the United States) has grown by 143 percent.

So why are we paying for sex-change operations in the military?  It is something that we obviously cannot afford to do, making this an issue for fiscal conservatives as well as for social conservatives.

This goes out to all those who made China's military expansion possible.  Enjoy it... we paid for it.