Thursday, January 28, 2010


This is one of those posts where I hate to venture for the mere fact I like to keep this light and airy - and then thought to myself - what is more light and airy than gays in the military?

Many have heard me say that if not for a gay cousin of mine (quite a bit older) taking me and my siblings under his wing, we would not have had such a great childhood - he bought us a Honda 50 to tear it up in a field across the street from our house; he took us to Disneyland, the San Diego Zoo, Sea World, the movies and was a joy to be around.

He was at our house regularly when he was stationed nearby - sharing meals and was like a big old brother. I love him. Back in the day the word "gay" had not been stolen by homosexuals and a rainbow was something only seen after a rain so we referred to him as "different". "Homo" was something only said in jest and never to a person who was "different"!

This whole business of offending gays in the military is, as my dear departed grandmother would call, "A CROCK OF HOOEY!" I agree - gays SHOULD be in the military - gays SHOULD have their own BRANCH of the military - gays SHOULD be sent in first to survey the situation (because who would give more detail to a situation?) - gays SHOULD have more rights in military combat because WHAT group of people have fought more for the rights to just be normal?

I do, however, draw the line at how this morning on Fox News, Adam Smith(D), Washington, describes HOW they are doing in the military - at least until they have their own branch of the military, "...fabulously..."

...oh boo...

Fabulously would be how I would describe how the draperies hang, or how someone like Halle Berry fits a gown, or a feeling after that first kiss...

Talk about Full Monty dialectics!

Is it my imagination or are the progressives trying to sissify our military? No offense to macho gays...

Crossposted here.