calfoxwc Posted September 19, 2015 Report Share Posted September 19, 2015 Obamao is a heterophobe... http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-to-nominate-first-openly-gay-service-secretary-to-lead-the-army/2015/09/18/d4b1aafe-5e30-11e5-8e9e-dce8a2a2a679_story.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted September 19, 2015 Author Report Share Posted September 19, 2015 I hope he gets sued for sexual harrassment the first week. dirtbag obamao. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted September 19, 2015 Report Share Posted September 19, 2015 Do you have critiques not related to his sexual orientation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted September 19, 2015 Author Report Share Posted September 19, 2015 do you always miss the point of posts?(wait, I know the answer is "yes") The point, beaked one, is that of all the outstanding candidates to lead our army, Obamao just picks an openly gay one. That isn't just based on military bearing, etc. It's overtly political. Wait, you were never in the military - and you're a woodpecker, and you have no clue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted September 19, 2015 Report Share Posted September 19, 2015 and yet I still haven't heard anything out of you other than "he's gay".... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blowe Posted September 19, 2015 Report Share Posted September 19, 2015 Do you think his sexual orientation had zero to do with it woody? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted September 19, 2015 Report Share Posted September 19, 2015 Fucking disgusting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legacy Fan Posted September 19, 2015 Report Share Posted September 19, 2015 The guy has been on McHugh's staff the entire time. It's not like he's "just a gay" Besides, General Milley is a fucking badass. Also, who gives a shit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted September 19, 2015 Author Report Share Posted September 19, 2015 "on the staff" is one thing. He probably had a young female driver and coffee getter on this staff. Should SHE be in charge of the entire Army ? Of course it's deliberate, based on politics - to effectively implement perversion in the ranks.... he hates the military - never was in it, and is a freakin leftwing zealot from the very beginning of his growing up in Indonesia and in Hawaii with an avowed communist pedopile. remember what he said about needing his own military-like security force? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FairHooker11 Posted September 19, 2015 Report Share Posted September 19, 2015 if I were an enlisted soldier - knowing this It wouldnt be something I'd want to sign up for morale and cohesiveness is thrown out the window here & totally wrong! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted September 19, 2015 Report Share Posted September 19, 2015 Yes, gays aren't allowed to do anything. Except be florists and bake cakes or something, right? Any other role has to be politically motivated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blowe Posted September 19, 2015 Report Share Posted September 19, 2015 Yes, gays aren't allowed to do anything. Except be florists and bake cakes or something, right? Any other role has to be politically motivated. You didn't answer my question (it was pretty direct and simple). I'm not a homophobic person but I doubt him being gay did not play into Obama's choice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted September 19, 2015 Report Share Posted September 19, 2015 Do you think his sexual orientation had zero to do with it woody? I hope so, but I don't know. I bet it is more likely that it didn't matter than that it did. It would be pretty dumb to make a blatantly biased hire that is under the spotlight this much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legacy Fan Posted September 19, 2015 Report Share Posted September 19, 2015 "on the staff" is one thing. He probably had a young female driver and coffee getter on this staff. Should SHE be in charge of the entire Army ? Of course it's deliberate, based on politics - to effectively implement perversion in the ranks.... he hates the military - never was in it, and is a freakin leftwing zealot from the very beginning of his growing up in Indonesia and in Hawaii with an avowed communist pedopile. remember what he said about needing his own military-like security force? He's been in charge of and/or had his hands in some pretty special projects. He's got experience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legacy Fan Posted September 19, 2015 Report Share Posted September 19, 2015 if I were an enlisted soldier - knowing this It wouldnt be something I'd want to sign up for morale and cohesiveness is thrown out the window here & totally wrong! I would contest you have no idea about morale and cohesiveness. This hire will not affect either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FairHooker11 Posted September 19, 2015 Report Share Posted September 19, 2015 I would contest you have no idea about morale and cohesiveness. This hire will not affect either. when I take the oath to serve - then I have to obey orders as they are. it would be my choice before enlisting or at my discharge. I would contest based on that fact - that you sir do not know my personally held beliefs and others similarly held beliefs - would definitely affect their / my morale. And who cares but you about the guys credentials? This is an obama regime agenda driven hire - and that has more of us questioning the motive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted September 19, 2015 Report Share Posted September 19, 2015 I don't know, having an openly fag Sec of Def would have some morale problems among grunts who don't like them or there transgendered freak bro's. So I strongly disagree with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted September 19, 2015 Report Share Posted September 19, 2015 I would contest you have no idea about morale and cohesiveness. This hire will not affect either. It will if you think that every gay guy is the caricature of a sissy from TV shows. Otherwise, most people won't even know who the fuck that guy is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted September 19, 2015 Report Share Posted September 19, 2015 I don't know, having an openly fag Sec of Def would have some morale problems among grunts who don't like them or there transgendered freak bro's. So I strongly disagree with you. I don't know, having a black [insert military leadership position here] would have some morale problems among grunts who don't like them or their non-Christian freak bros. So I strongly disagree with you - Bubba from Mississippi (May 14th, 19-not long enough ago) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted September 19, 2015 Report Share Posted September 19, 2015 I have no reason to believe this guy is not qualified. I do think you severely limit your chances if you limit yourself to perhaps 1% of population as candidates as in homosexuals. Similar to restricting yourself to women doctors or lawyers. Or insisting your candidates come only from red haired people. You understand right? Affirmative action at the highest levels. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted September 19, 2015 Report Share Posted September 19, 2015 I don't know, having a black [insert military leadership position here] would have some morale problems among grunts who don't like them or their non-Christian freak bros. So I strongly disagree with you - Bubba from Mississippi (May 14th, 19-not long enough ago) Uh, blacks have had leadership positions in the military for decades. My Drill Sergeants in 1971 were black. Don't compare black to gay. A black guy would beat your ass for saying that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legacy Fan Posted September 19, 2015 Report Share Posted September 19, 2015 when I take the oath to serve - then I have to obey orders as they are. it would be my choice before enlisting or at my discharge. I would contest based on that fact - that you sir do not know my personally held beliefs and others similarly held beliefs - would definitely affect their / my morale. And who cares but you about the guys credentials? This is an obama regime agenda driven hire - and that has more of us questioning the motive. So raise your right hand, like some of us have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted September 20, 2015 Author Report Share Posted September 20, 2015 well I served, and I agree with Fairhooker bigtime on that. Obamao put him in that place to instigate more division and gay culture war with the troops. He'll favor minorities at every step. And Steve nailed it - it's politically leftwing affirmative action. At least this openly gay activist for obamao doesn't cross dress.... wait a minute... maybe he does. and bringing race into it was stupid, woodpecker. Really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted September 20, 2015 Report Share Posted September 20, 2015 Uh, blacks have had leadership positions in the military for decades. My Drill Sergeants in 1971 were black. Don't compare black to gay. A black guy would beat your ass for saying that. I think you missed the point here... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted September 20, 2015 Report Share Posted September 20, 2015 well I served, and I agree with Fairhooker bigtime on that. Obamao put him in that place to instigate more division and gay culture war with the troops. He'll favor minorities at every step. And Steve nailed it - it's politically leftwing affirmative action. At least this openly gay activist for obamao doesn't cross dress.... wait a minute... maybe he does. and bringing race into it was stupid, woodpecker. Really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted September 20, 2015 Author Report Share Posted September 20, 2015 It was a stupid, asshole point, woodpecker. Seriously, you have no idea about blacks in the military, and the military. The UCMJ is colorblind, you ignorant doofus woodpecker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted September 20, 2015 Report Share Posted September 20, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted September 20, 2015 Report Share Posted September 20, 2015 I'm drawing similarities between how some people want to treat gays in military roles now, and how I am going to assume blacks were treated in those same roles when they first were given access. Get it? Those people against blacks in these type of roles were wrong then, and those against gays in these roles are wrong now. #TeamWrongSideOfHistory All you have is "They're gay, ew" and cross dressing jokes. Even other posters on here that traditionally take conservative stances on issues are disagreeing with you. I think I'm also going to start my count back up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FairHooker11 Posted September 20, 2015 Report Share Posted September 20, 2015 well, in all fairness.... he does look Fabulous! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted September 20, 2015 Report Share Posted September 20, 2015 I think you missed the point here... I think the point you raised only means something to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.