Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Musings - (Bush's post-Clinton military changes. Good news for the good guys.)
Lyn's Page ^ | May 30, 2002 | Lyn Nofziger

Posted on 05/30/2002 4:03:09 PM PDT by Ragtime Cowgirl

May 30, 2002--There’s an old song, from the ‘40s I think it was, called “Little Things Mean A Lot.”

It was a love song but that’s also the way it is with national administrations. We all tend to look at the big picture and the headline stories when we judge presidents and congresses and governors but often it’s the little things that tell you where their hearts and heads are.

This administration is no exception.

We concentrate on terrorism and the middle east and the possibility of war between India and Pakistan and on domestic issues such as farm subsidies, education bills and social security. Meanwhile some important things slip by virtually unnoticed even though they may tell a lot about where this president stands, what he believes and how determined he is to push for them.

A couple of things come to mind.

Over at the Pentagon the army is removing women soldiers from ground reconnaissance units that will be part of fast-deploying combat brigades.

This reverses a Clinton administration policy that let women be assigned to special units that are trained to perform some of the ground sweeps such as those now being conducted in Afghanistan.

This is the second step the Bush administration has taken to reverse Clinton polices regarding the role of women in combat and the accompanying feminization of the armed forces.

Earlier the Pentagon to all intents and purposes emasculated DACOWITS, the Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Services and threw out all of Clinton’s appointees. The committee as Clintonized was pushing for women in combat and in general appeared to favor a co-educational armed services even though it inevitably wash was leading to weakening of physical standards for combat troops. The new DACOWITS will deal with readiness issues but not with women in combat.

It would appear that President Bush and Defense Secy. Rumsfeld have figured out that the purpose of the armed forces is to fight wars and not indulge in social experimentation.

What a pleasant change.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; Philosophy; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: bush; clinton; dacowits; feminization; military; rumsfeld

1 posted on 05/30/2002 4:03:09 PM PDT by Ragtime Cowgirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Ragtime Cowgirl
The committee as Clintonized was pushing for women in combat

I once saw an episode of Cops in which TWO female officers could not subdue and unruly woman. Add to that, they had to contend with an unruly man. And they think women could take on terrorists in physical combat? It only happens on Xena.

2 posted on 05/30/2002 4:12:24 PM PDT by Paul Atreides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ragtime Cowgirl
"and threw out all of Clinton’s appointees.

About darn time!

3 posted on 05/30/2002 4:43:41 PM PDT by elbucko
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paul Atreides
The one unfortunate characteristic young women seem to be picking up from the macho women role models on TV - they're mean...and self-centered. In order to believe that men and women are the same, we are asked to ignore our minds, bodies, souls, eyes, emotions....and all of human history. Let no one say that the left lets truth get in the way of their agenda.

We need a separate website (or a professional press) to catalogue the messes and landmines Clinton left for the new administration. Here's a doozy about a leftist "shadow government" the mainstream press is ignoring (keep e-mailing them....they know we know (^:):
Clinton Undead Haunting Pentagon (entrenched bureaucrats, Clinton holdovers obstruct Bush).

4 posted on 05/30/2002 4:46:54 PM PDT by Ragtime Cowgirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ragtime Cowgirl
What is truly telling is, how feminists boil everything down to competition with men. Can a woman not accomplish anything without it being compared to what a man does? For instance, the idiocy that is Women's Studies, particularly women's literature. I know what they consider the peak of literature by women is garbage, but they do read the works of classical female authors. Why? Cannot it not be included in with the writings of men? What about notable women throughout history? It all reminds me of those talk shows in which some high school loser is still obsessing over his/her bad experience in high school and it is twenty-five years later!
5 posted on 05/30/2002 4:59:10 PM PDT by Paul Atreides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Paul Atreides
On the positive side, Paul, their claims are losing credibility daily because history and experience are disproving their accusations against the male sex...indeed, boys and men are now the victims. (^:

At a recent UN's Women's conference, workshops on lesbian rights, fair wage rights, abuse, etc., were everywhere. One Christian pro-family group from the US..the lone pro-family group...drew a large crowd of hostile women...until the speakers began to talk about the history of the family, the strength and responsiblity of women through the ages, non-victim truths about the damage of the current single-parent families and no-fault divorces to women today. Truth is more powerful than the most persuasive rhetoric....when truth is allowed and encouraged in the public square.

6 posted on 05/30/2002 7:10:19 PM PDT by Ragtime Cowgirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson