Brutally Honest

America in decline

Reason number 347:

The Army is ordering its hardened combat veterans to wear fake breasts and empathy bellies so they can better understand how pregnant soldiers feel during physical training.

This week, 14 noncommissioned officers at Camp Zama took turns wearing the “pregnancy simulators” as they stretched, twisted and exercised during a three-day class that teaches them to serve as fitness instructors for pregnant soldiers and new mothers.

Army enlisted leaders all over the world are being ordered to take the Pregnancy Postpartum Physical Training Exercise Leaders Course, or PPPT, according to U.S. Army Medical Activity Japan health promotion educator Jana York.

Developed by the Army in 2008, the course includes aerobics classes, pool sessions and classroom studies on the physiology of pregnant women. The NCOs learn special exercises for pregnant women, who shouldn’t push themselves too hard or participate in high-impact activities such as snowboarding, bungee jumping or horse riding, York said.

During the training, each NCO must wear the pregnancy simulator for at least an hour.

“When they first come in, the males are typically timid and don’t feel they have the knowledge to teach female soldiers,” she said. “However, after three days their confidence rises.”

Slowly but surely, America fades.

Via Mark Shea who adds:

One of our troops sent me that. He was… not pleased by this dumb piece of lefty sensitivity awareness raising being jammed down the throats of helpless soldiers.

Ever heard of Froma Harrop?

I'll confess to you I had not until today.  And now that I have, and the circumstances under which I've come to know who she is and what organization she heads up, I can only conclude that she's... well... ok... in the spirit of restoring civility to public discourse, I'll not call her a buffoonish hypocrite... I'll simply say she exhibited buffoonish hypocrite tendencies on a recent showing of the The Daily Show:

On her own personal blog, she suggests that she was victimized by the show's editors:   

Sure, much of my careful reasoning ended up on the cutting-room floor, but it was fun...

I'm going to suggests the woman has a problem understanding the meaning of fun.  Which suggests she may have a problem understanding the meaning of careful reasoning.

Carry on.

H/T to Hot Air via Matteo.

"This is not systemic abuse of the type that surfaced in Abu Ghraib" (UPDATED)

Bookworm is weighing in on the Marines relieving themselves on enemy dead episode:

I certainly don’t approve of what those guys did.  It’s vulgar, and I’m opposed to vulgarity on principle.  It’s stupid, both at a micro level and, as the recent headlines show, at a macro level.  It’s a typical example of group think.  I routinely tell my children to be very careful when they’re with a group, because there’s something about a group mentality that causes massive IQ loss.

The one thing I’m not is outraged.  This is not systemic abuse of the type that surfaced in Abu Ghraib.  Nor does it cross the line from stupid and vulgar into terribly abusive.  Terribly abusive would have been a video of these men doing the same thing to living prisoners.  Having Al Qaeda types — the ones who like to slice of men’s cool toy and stuff it in the victim’s mouth, or who videotape themselves beheading people, or who torture children to death, or who gang rape women, or who blow up school buses, etc. — having these types express outrage over this alleged “barbarity” only serves to highlight just how innocuous what these young men did really was.  Crude?  Yeah, sure.  But also innocuous.

I’m also not alone in my lack of outrage.  Even liberal Washington Post readers are unimpressed.  As of this writing, 82% of them think “It’s not surprising — things like this happen in war,” while only 11% find it an “unacceptable desecration” and 7% an “embarrassment.” Americans understand that boys will be boys, they understand that boys will always have their toys, and they understand that, under actual combat conditions, men make foolish decisions that nevertheless do not qualify as war-time atrocities.

I was listening to a local talk radio show as I made my way to my mid-day break and this event was the topic of the hour.  Two military types called in, one a Marine and the other an Army vet, and both seemed to agree with the gist of Bookie's thesis.  What took place was dumb, was stupid, was less than thoughtful, but the conditions under which these men were serving must be weighed before punishment is meted out.  

What happened just before the video?  Were any Americans injured and/or killed in the firefight preceding it? How many times have these men been exposed to combat?  How many tours have they been on?  All those questions and many more need to be answered before they're thrown under the bus. 

What they've done was certainly bone-headed and harmful but I agree with Bookworm.

Atrocity?

I don't think so.

UPDATE: Alan West puts it about as succinctly as one can:

“I have sat back and assessed the incident with the video of our Marines urinating on Taliban corpses. I do not recall any self-righteous indignation when our Delta snipers Shugart and Gordon had their bodies dragged through Mogadishu. Neither do I recall media outrage and condemnation of our Blackwater security contractors being killed, their bodies burned, and hung from a bridge in Fallujah.

“All these over-emotional pundits and armchair quarterbacks need to chill. Does anyone remember the two Soldiers from the 101st Airborne Division who were beheaded and gutted in Iraq?

“The Marines were wrong. Give them a maximum punishment under field grade level Article 15 (non-judicial punishment), place a General Officer level letter of reprimand in their personnel file, and have them in full dress uniform stand before their Battalion, each personally apologize to God, Country, and Corps videotaped and conclude by singing the full US Marine Corps Hymn without a teleprompter.

“As for everyone else, unless you have been shot at by the Taliban, shut your mouth, war is hell.”

 

 

Breitbart branded "notoriously evil" by CNN's Piers Morgan

Morgan has since claimed that he was engaged in a little British humor... right... you watch it, and decide for yourself:

I frankly think I get more visits on this blog in a day's time than Morgan has viewers... and now perhaps we might know why.

"A lead-from-behind strategy for a left-behind America"

That from Buck McKeon, Chairman of the Armed Services Committee, on Obama's defense cuts:

Perhaps it was a symbolic accident. On the 40th anniversary of President Nixon's announcement that America would build a space shuttle to explore new frontiers, Obama announces the results of his typically grandiosely-named Defense Strategic Review.

Readers here will be shocked to learn that Obama remains very much into spending hundreds of billions more dollars on union infrastructure jobs and teachers. But that his new defense policies involve fewer troops and reduced spending.

"Yes," says the current commander-in-chief, "our military will be leaner, but the world must know the United States is going to maintain our military superiority with armed forces that are agile, flexible and ready for the full range of contingencies and threats."

The world will, however, also know that the United States will no longer be capable of handling two simultaneous conflicts, not that China, Russia, Iran or North Korea would care. And they will know this because the Obama administration proudly announced this as part of its defense budget package, which should please a wobbly chunk of the Chicagoan's base.

This has become a familiar dodge for the Obama Democrat administration. Want a "reset" in Russian relations with no quid pro quo on Iran and with no allied consultations? Then, kill Bush's missile defense system in Eastern Europe and claim you can do it some other way in a smarter and cheaper fashion. Which can be seen now where, by the way? And how'd all that resulting Russian help go?

Think that America's pioneering engineering and scientific leadership in space is passe and want the money for something else? Then, proceed with retiring the space shuttles, rent seats on dubious Russian rockets and claim that through some grandiose partnership with profit-making companies, someday maybe an American could land on an asteroid. Ah, the romance of that!

Don't want any more Mideast military confrontations? Slap sanctions on a nuclear-weapon-building Iran and call it engagement, extending a hand instead of a fist. Name it progress when others follow the same timid trail. And exactly how well have those sanctions stopped Iran's progress?

"This," said Rep. Buck McKeon, chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, "is a lead-from-behind strategy for a left-behind America. The president has packaged our retreat from the world in the guise of a new strategy to mask his divestment of our military and national defense."

Head over to the post and read the pic's caption.  Priceless.

I don't doubt our defense budget may be ripe for well thought out cuts targeting bloat and inefficiencies or areas where duties overlap and are redundant.  I do doubt Obama's cuts have anything to do with that.

The Republican field has been handed an opportunity, one that should be taken advantage of sooner rather than later.

Does anyone really believe that a President who has ridiculed the notion of American exceptionalism has this country's future and well being in mind when he proffers up defense cuts?

Anyone?

Crossposted at Wizbang.

McCain complains that Gingrich has done “something that we don’t do in politics”

Which arguably, is tell the damned truth:

John McCain slammed Newt Gingrich Thursday for calling Mitt Romney “a liar,” accusing him of crossing the line of “something that we don’t do in politics.”

“I don’t think it’s appropriate to call your opponent a liar. That’s just something we don’t do in politics unless you certainly have some overwhelming proof,” said McCain on CBS’s “The Early Show.” The Arizona senator endorsed Romney on Wednesday in New Hampshire.

In an interview earlier this week, Gingrich called Romney a liar about his own record and beliefs.“He’s not telling the American people the truth,” Gingrich said. “It’s just like his pretense that he’s a conservative,” he said. “I just think he ought to be honest to the American people and try to win as the real Mitt Romney, not try to invent a poll-driven, consultant-guided version that goes around with talking points. I think he ought to be candid. I don’t think he’s being candid.”

You might recall that Mr. McCain used the tyranny of nice to repudiate those who were using President Obama's entire name during the 2008 campaign.

How'd that work out for you John Sidney McCain?

About as effectively I imagine as this is going to work.

We appreciate your service Senator McCain... but that's frankly about it.

Crossposted at Wizbang.

Colorblindness is bad, multiculturalism is good

Psychology Today turns Martin Luther King's message on its ear:

Racial issues are often uncomfortable to discuss and rife with stress and controversy. Many ideas have been advanced to address this sore spot in the American psyche. Currently, the most pervasive approach is known as colorblindness. Colorblindness is the racial ideology that posits the best way to end discrimination is by treating individuals as equally as possible, without regard to race, culture, or ethnicity.

At its face value, colorblindness seems like a good thing — really taking MLK seriously on his call to judge people on the content of their character rather than the color of their skin. It focuses on commonalities between people, such as their shared humanity.

However, colorblindness alone is not sufficient to heal racial wounds on a national or personal level. It is only a half-measure that in the end operates as a form of racism.

...

Research has shown that hearing colorblind messages predict negative outcomes among Whites, such as greater racial bias and negative affect; likewise colorblind messages cause stress in ethnic minorities, resulting in decreased cognitive performance (Holoien et al., 2011). Given how much is at stake, we can no longer afford to be blind. It's time for change and growth. It's time to see.

The alternative to colorblindness is multiculturalism, an ideology that acknowledges, highlights, and celebrates ethnoracial differences. It recognizes that each tradition has something valuable to offer. It is not afraid to see how others have suffered as a result of racial conflict or differences.

Fascinating.  

A person's measure is dependent upon his/her skin color.  Their worth can only be arrived by taking stock of the pigment of their skin.  Ignoring skin color is racist.

Obama's supporters promised that his election would bring race transcendence.  

Is this what that looks like?

H/T to William Jacobson who adds:

I hope I don’t get in trouble for playing this video:

Crossposted at Wizbang.

Your bulb is about to be phased out....

By Locutisprime

Regardless of some last minute assurances a couple of weeks back that Republicans had interceded to stop the lunacy of completely outlawing and eliminating incandescent light bulbs forever, the forces behind the push to force all of us to use those squiggly fluorescent bulbs have prevailed.

So if you want to forestall the inevitable perhaps it isn't too late for you to go out these last few days of the year and scarf up several dozen incandescent bulbs for your own private use. Or else in another month or so, you may be looking at the last of your bulbs as some once did the carrier pigeon. Beginning January 1, they will be illegal to sell. That's all folks!

Say goodbye bulb:

New light bulb efficiency standards will begin phasing in on Jan. 1 despite intense opposition from conservatives, who have blasted the rules as a textbook unnecessary federal regulation.

While Republicans secured inclusion of a measure blocking funding for enforcement of the standards in a year-end spending bill, energy efficiency groups say the provision will have little practical impact. The Energy Department rules will nonetheless go into effect at the start of 2012.

"The [spending bill] cut funding for enforcement, however the law is still in effect," said Jack Gillis, spokesman for the Consumer Federation of America. "It is our expectation that companies will still comply with the law."

Steven Nadel, executive director of the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, said companies have been preparing for the new light bulb efficiency standards since Congress passed the 2007 energy law requiring traditional incandescent light bulbs to be 30 percent more efficient starting in 2012.

Obama needs more money

Remember when our beloved (by buffoons) President said this:

“The fact that we are here today to debate raising America’s debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can’t pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government’s reckless fiscal policies. … Leadership means that ‘the buck stops here.’ Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better. I therefore intend to oppose the effort to increase America’s debt limit.”

As the piece details, the President went on to state that his words back in 2006 were a mistake and thus pushed to have the debt limit raised just a few short months ago and did so successfully.

Well, should he get his way, we're apparently going to do it again:

The White House plans to ask Congress for an increase in the debt limit before the end of the week, according to a senior U.S. Treasury Department official.

The debt limit is projected to fall within $100 billion of the current cap by Dec. 30. President Barack Obama is expected to ask for additional borrowing authority to increase the limit by $1.2 trillion.

Chutzpah.

"Get a hold of yourself, Joe"

My former Governor thinks Joe Biden ought to be dropped from the ticket:

"You go back to the reasons that Joe Biden was put on the ticket in the very first instance. It was supposedly because he had the great experience. He had been there for years. He had been Foreign Relations chair. He had been chairman of the Judiciary and supposedly knew the workings of the Senate. Now, has that worked to the president's better interest or has it taken away from the president? And the gaffe is not just a question of will Joe Biden make a gaffe and incidentally I like him. Personally, I think he is a fine fellow," Former Gov. Douglas Wilder (D-VA) said on FOX News.

"But, Is he the person you want in place? You know, you always hear that thing. Suppose something would happen to the president, who would be in charge? The Vice President. Joe Biden? You have got to be kidding today when you say the Taliban's not our enemy," Wilder told Neal Cavuto.

"I fought in Korea, front line. I knew who the enemy were. The enemy were the people who were firing at me. And shooting at me. And so for some guy to come back and today, incidentally, to meet with the returning veterans and their families and I don't believe he would tell them 'Oh, look, the Taliban is not your enemy.' Just like they would have told us in Korea, 'Well, you know, the Chinese are not really your enemy, they're just helping out the North Koreans.' Get ahold of yourself, Joe," he said.

There's video with more at the link.

Crossposted at Wizbang.