Posted on 06/04/2018 1:10:36 AM PDT by Kaslin
Every one in the military is bound by the same rules.
Those who can’t abide by them have no place in it.
The military is supposed to set an example for society and isn’t meant to be a social service agency.
Its not about feelings, its about duty.
I meant that as a free people we have the privilege of defending the freedom of others as soldiers.
That’s been unique to America until relatively recently in history.
Only free men can defend a free country. When we lose sight of it, only then will we no longer have freedom here.
>>But people’s off-duty lives are their business. The two are different things.
Are you a veteran of a seagoing or combat force?
Case in point: Harvey Weinstein (among many). The man was considered a "god" by the movie industry.
He could do no wrong by Hollywood's flawed standards.
Weinstein stupidly believed that approval of his business success was approval of him personally.
He thought he could do whatever he wished when he wished to any woman he wished.
He is a much wiser man today facing jailtime and business bankruptcy.
Same for pervert and sexual deviant, onetime NYAG, Eric Schneiderman.
He had the world on a string.He was going places politically and cashing in bigtime.
But he had despicable weaknesses that he inflicted on his bedroom partners.
Now he, too, is in No Man's Land, facing an uncertain future.
I could go on and on.
Also, there’s none of Ayn Rand’s particular rendition of objectivism in military duty. Empathy is mandatory and absolutely necessary. Otherwise, courts martial, unnecessary deaths and lost battles would result.
I’ve also made sure that members of platoons had everything that they needed for their health before marching and watched them closely for problems during training (mandatory, the law). No one is allowed to get sick, injured or to be left behind.
We didn’t even own ourselves. We were the property of the U.S.A. with commanders administrating us as property. That’s the law that we lived under. We could have been punished for getting a sunburn without taking measures to stop the sunburn from happening.
It is interesting, though, to study political demographics and different ways of socializing...and anti-socializing. The discussion reminds me of study of conspiracy theory adherents.
Hope you have a good day despite my arguments. I’m objective, too, but not apathetic in the tradition of some demographics in Eurasia.
And conservatives must declare that Demonicrats have demonstrated themselves to be lying abortion-murdering traitors.
DEFUND socialist/totalitarian collectives, foreign and domestic. It’s easy to...
live-free-republic
——That’s what most of us believe. ——
That is not reflected by the Presidential election. Hillary won the popular vote. There are more of them than of us. Were it not for a very charismatic leader emerging, we would not be in power.
At best the conservative/moderate coalition is at breakeven.
The other side isn’t having children.
Places like SF and Austin have more dogs than kids.
In Chicago, they’re gunning down the next generation.
This may be liberalism’s high water mark.
Intersting and salient point
The point I try to continuously make is that our margin is thin and we must not become complacent.
“So when the social media companies start deplatforming conservatives, and engines like Google start up with antics like listing the GOP’s ideology as “Nazism,” we need to respond to their exercise of their power with the exercise of our own power – via our elected representatives. A GOP bill requiring social media platforms to explicitly and clearly explain their content policies, to disclose to banned people their exact violation, to provide a rapid, meaningful appeal process, and to provide for lawsuits (with fee awards to prevailing plaintiffs) to remedy violations is just the first step toward a regulatory solution.
The Fredocons will whine that this is not a conservative solution. Oh. Well, “
And you just watch as that comes back and bites us in the ass someday.
Once you have their bias in writing, then what? Oh yeah, just smug satisfaction, and you are still censored.
In the end, no amount of mental gymnastics can require any social media platform to platform whomever outside of their final say, like it or not.
This is a matter of not being a lazy whiner, and looking for the state to “fix” a website. All Google has to do is string together a word salad of legal jargon, and they are free and clear anyway.
What he can do is take the money you gladly invest in Google, and get together with other conservatives and fund the creation of a new platform.
Unless he is saying we are too stupid or broke to do this?
All of this is great, but it will not work until we take back the educational system and return it to studies where kids actually learn things without indoctrination. That means these school books designed with falsities have to go also. The lying has to stop.
Has to be done asap too.
All of this is great, but it will not work until we take back the educational system and return it to studies where kids actually learn things without indoctrination. That means these leftist school books designed with false and reinvented history and science have to go also. The lying has to stop.
Has to be done asap too.
“Who’s in Galt’s john.” Brilliant.
You are an idiot then. Can you admit that it is a crazy thing now? Libertarians tried to pawn off their f'ed up semi liberal globalist up ideology as conservative - IT IS NOT. We true patriots are rebuking it daily. Limbaugh has been gas-lighting 'normals" for yeas trying to get them into thinking libertarianism is the same as conservatism. He is dead wrong.
I think that "conservative this" and "conservative that" have become the most hated words in the American political lexicon - by those who hold conservative tenets, because they precede pandering to liberals and condescension to one's presumed political supporters - I mean where are you gonna go - Pelosi? I have no clue where many of Trump's policies fit on the political spectrum because while everyone else is arguing political labels Trump is trying to argue practicalities and common sense (which stopped being big-C Conservative values with the passing of Reagan and certainly with the passing of WFB).
I personally cringe whenever I see a pol waving his "C" in my face. I grab my wallet, close my ears and head for the exit - you know like when Ryan said that we need to pass the budget so we could turn to "our [what's this royal we stuff] Conservative" agenda - the out of control budget being at the top of the little-c conservative agenda.
First, a foxhole or the crowded crews quarters on a ship, is not a "private" bedroom, and this is an issue that goes to the heart of unit cohesiveness and military effectiveness.
Second, I think that I have rather strong libertarian views myself, and among those tenets are common sense and a strong grounding in natural law. What's between your legs is just a given and the relationships between men and women and family and society are pretty much givens. Corroding those relations is what the international communist conspiracy is about, and communism is utter anathema to libertarians, which is why libertarians believe in defense of boarders and defense of country.
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.