Archive for the ‘Progressives and Left’ Category

AJ Delgado over at NRO wrote a piece titled “Black Americans: The True Casualties of Amnesty”, and opens it up like this:

One of the sleeper issues surrounding the debate on amnesty for illegal immigrants – an inconvenient one that no proponent of a widespread amnesty wishes to acknowledge – is the devastating effect so-called immigration reform will have on African Americans.

The black unemployment rate is almost 11 percent, far higher than that of any other group profiled by labor statistics. African Americans are disproportionately employed in lower-skilled jobs – the very same jobs immigrants take. As Steven Camarota asked in a recent column, why double immigration when so many people already aren’t working?

The answer is pretty simple, really.  The Democrats want a new underclass of voters.

Black folks are increasingly wandering off the reservation when it comes to supporting Democrats.  Black Louisiana Senator Elbert Guillory changed party affiliation last year because he saw that the point of the left is control, and that the left’s promises are all betrayals and failures:

Black folks like Bernadette Lancelin may not have thought through and realized that “White House money” comes from taxpayers, but she knows that her community is being betrayed in favor of illegal aliens.

Black folks like Elaine from Baltimore want to know where they can get asylum:

US Civil Rights Commissioner Peter Kirsanow wrote the Congressional Black Caucus warning of the economic issues:

peter kirsanow

“The obvious question is whether there are sufficient jobs in the low-skilled labor market for both African-Americans and illegal immigrants,” Kirsanow wrote. “The answer is no.”

He referenced a 2008 commission hearing in which witnesses testified that illegal immigration “disproportionately impacts the wages and employment opportunities of African-American” males. Scholars noted that 40% of the 18-point decline in the black employment rate from 1960 to 2000 was due to immigration. He noted that illegal immigrants and blacks “often find themselves in competition for the same jobs.”

He pointed out a host of factors (many influenced or caused by progressive policies) that lead to large numbers of black Americans competing for the same jobs that no-skill/low-skill illegal aliens do.  What I didn’t see him mention is that the illegal alien can operate under the table and save their employer compliance costs for things like minimum wages, workman’s comp or social security – thus an employer can pay an illegal in cash, saving the employer resources, and allowing the illegal alien to unfairly compete in yet another way with American citizens.  And as noted, a large percentage of those poor Americans who are forced out of yet another job are black.

Democrats still have a huge number of black folks voting for them as a block, and they expect it to stay the same.  But the Democrats want new guaranteed voters and cheap labor (and many amoral Republicans want cheap labor, too).  A huge influx of teenagers moved around the country to strategic districts who will be voting Democrat not just next election but in every subsequent election – and they will be voting – that’s why Democrats oppose voter ID laws – that demographic change is how Democrats expect to dominate the nation in one party rule forever (flipping Texas is their most public focus).

Not sure if they’ll declare a thousand-year-reich or a people’s collective immediately afterwards.  Could go either way.

 

From Politico, a glowing retrospective on what a wonderful angel Eric Holder is and how everyone who questions his actions is racist.  Fast and Furious has been rendered a footnote to the left.

Holder, people close to him say, isn’t much hurt by the criticism over Wall Street, Gitmo, KSM or even the leaks; he remains confident that his decisions ultimately reflected the priorities of his boss. The same cannot be said for the 2012 vote by the GOP-controlled House to hold him in contempt of Congress for failing to turn over emails and documents linked to the Fast & Furious operation—a Justice-led gun sting that resulted in the death of a veteran Border Patrol agent in 2010. The vote was unenforceable. But no other sitting Cabinet member had ever faced a similar rebuke, and it remains the sorest of subjects with Holder.

Holder views the vote as emblematic of Republicans’ disrespect for Obama and himself, and he thinks that race is one, but not the only, factor in their attacks. Two people in his orbit told me he has described appearing before congressional committees as an experience akin to staring at a hostile “wall of Southern men.” (For the record: All of the 22 Republican members of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee are white, 21 are male and more than half are from Southern or border states).

“It was all about politics and had nothing to do with law enforcement,” insists former Holder spokesman Matt Miller. “They wanted to get his head.”

Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry, ICE Agent Jaime Zapata, and hundreds of Mexicans are dead because of Holder’s ATF.

fast and furious 2010 massacre teens

No one has been held accountable for those hundreds of deaths since Holder simply chose to stonewall.  The left said nothing about Fast and Furious until Holder was held in contempt, and then started lying about it and protecting the Obama administration and the “survivor” Attorney General.

Holder is so disgusted with Rep. Darrell Issa, the aggressive California Republican who chairs House Oversight, that aides find it hard to keep Holder sitting still during the necessary prep sessions. Holder often commiserates about his grillings, via text messages and email, with a group of supportive African-American journalists and public figures, including Rev. Al Sharpton; Juan Williams, the NPR commentator turned Fox contributor; former CNN analyst Roland Martin; Eugene Robinson of the Washington Post; NPR’s Michele Norris; and her husband, Broderick Johnson, a White House aide—a cadre that often encourages Holder to push back harder than his more cautious in-house advisers.

Issa, in a 2012 letter to Holder, denied any other motives than “legitimate Congressional inquiry” and accused Holder of stonewalling to prevent a “co-equal branch of government” from performing its “Constitutional duty.” Members of Issa’s committee have shown no signs of backing off either.

This is what Holder sent to the Oversight & Reform committee:

That's not a print of Malevich's "Black Square".

Thousands of pages of redactions with no information.  Lies upon lies upon lies, and Holder is mad because someone dares to hold him accountable for the actions of his department and the coverup he has engaged in.  Holder, a racist, screams “white people!” if someone questions him.  Holder’s feelings are hurt because he was called out for the hundreds of dead Mexicans and two US agents killed by his operation.  Yet the left’s violent ideological blinders only allow them to see Holder’s hurt feelings in a vacuum, as though nothing has happened.

The entire Politico piece can be best summed up with: “Holder is good.  Republicans are racist and hate him for no reason.  Everything else is a lie.”

The facts of the past are entirely rewritten by the left.

Liberal Privilege

Posted: June 18, 2014 by ShortTimer in Culture, Progressives and Left

From Professor Melvyn Fein:

One of the current liberal cliches tells us “whites” are privileged. The color of their skin evidently bestows benefits others do not receive. They are therefore supposed to be grateful and defer to those who are less fortunate.

But in what does this “privilege” consist? Yes, whites have not been discriminated against the way African-Americans have. They have not been denied jobs or forced to drink from separate fountains because of the pigmentation of their epidermis. This is surely an advantage — but how big an advantage?

Charges of white privilege make it sound as if every Caucasian is automatically successful. The fact is most are not. Few are born with silver spoons in their mouths. The vast majority needs to work hard to achieve the objectives they desire.

Far more pervasive is “liberal privilege.” The very people who accuse others of not being sufficiently grateful for their status are guilty of taking their own advantages for granted. Liberals do not seem to recognize the special treatment they receive. They actually believe they are nicer and smarter than others as a result of having been allowed to get away with this conceit.

Liberals can destroy the economy, but hey, no one could have done better. They can undermine the national security, but at least they were showing the appropriate humility. They can drive their country into bankruptcy, but this only confirms their compassion.

If one is a liberal, any nasty thing one might say about an opponent is passed over in silence. The cruelest invective is regarded as appropriate, given the sins of the target. Even vulgarity is excused because it emphasizes the understandable passion of the speaker.

If one is a liberal, lies are accepted as essential to promoting benevolent causes. The rabble does not appreciate the benefits heaped upon them; hence, it is OK to manipulate them into submission. Whatever the falsehood, the worst criticism will be that one “misspoke.” Or maybe one was quoted “out of context.”

Is this not privilege? Is it not a form of protection others do not obtain? Yet liberals consider it their due. They become huffy if their motives are questioned. Then they drive up truckloads of excuses they expect to be accepted without dissent. If this still doesn’t work, they attack their critics as playing politics (which, of course, they do not).

Read the whole thing here.

Longer version here.  Remember, this is the guy who actively said he will bankrupt the coal industry.

Now, here comes a mandate for 30% cuts in emissions, which are already low.

From WSJ:

WASHINGTON—The Environmental Protection Agency will propose a draft rule on Monday seeking a 30% reduction in carbon-dioxide emissions by 2030 from existing power plants based on emission levels from 2005, according to two people who have been briefed on the rule, setting in motion the main piece of President Barack Obama‘s climate-change agenda.

The rule, scheduled to be completed one year from now, will give flexibility to the states, which must implement the rules and submit compliance plans to EPA by June 2016. States can decide how to meet the reductions, including joining or creating new cap-and-trade programs, deploying more renewable energy or ramping up energy-efficiency technologies.

Either buy carbon indulgencies from Global Warming High Priest Al Gore or throw money at Solyndra or go out of business.  And soon the American people will be experiencing brownouts and blackouts and power loss that will be blamed on the greedy power companies.  There will always be kulaks or counterrevolutionaries or people who are not significantly revolutionary enough who are the cause of misery, never the actual tyrants who engineered it.

The Obama administration is already claiming credit for everything that was done by Bush 10 years ago and that is coming to fruition now.  The Chamber of Commerce (though reprehensible on amnesty) has already come forth warning that the new regulations will cost upwards of $50,000,000,000 for energy producers.  Watching the second Obama video above, he outright states “the companies will pass those costs onto their customers” – you will foot the bill for this.  The EPA is already setting up a legal bulwark to prevent anyone from assailing their new regulations – they’re spending your money to raise your power rates and cut your access to energy and now they’re spending your money on their lawyers to crush anyone who would oppose them.

As usual.

regulations grow freedom dies

From the National Shooting Sports Foundation:

The California Department of Fish and Wildlife has  announcedthat it will be holding its second  public workshop on June 3 to discuss the implementation of California’s new lead ammunition ban, signed into law last year by Gov. Jerry Brown after being championed by the Governor’s personal dog walker and Humane Society lobbyist. While this simple public forum may appear benign, this law (AB 711) illustrates the duplicitous work of the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS).

According to its website , HSUS is “the nation’s largest and most effective animal protection organization.” However, the group is not affiliated with your local shelter or dog and cat assistance agency.  …

Despite deceiving their donors into believing that they are supporting animal welfare efforts with their contributions, only 1 percent of its budget goes to local animal shelters.

I don’t want to steal the NSSF’s thunder here (I recommend reading the whole thing at the NSSF’s site here), but the HSUS uses virtually nothing for animal welfare and shelters, and it’s gotten so bad that states have issued consumer warnings because people didn’t know their money wasn’t going to help animals, but instead to hire lawyers and sink money into Carribean investment funds.

The big news is this:

Now, NSSF has obtained the HSUS playbook to ban hunting with traditional ammunition across the country. AB711 was the first key step in HSUS’s campaign to effectively ban all hunting through pursuing a ban on traditional ammunition.  The playbook says, “We have intentionally chosen to concentrate first on banning the use of all lead ammunition for hunting in California and pursuing a ban on federal lands owned by the Department of Interior in order to build momentum for the campaign and to spur change within the various ammunition manufacturers and state wildlife agencies.”

In its playbook, HSUS also reveals a tactic that should alarm every hunter who has viewed state and federal fish and game agencies as supportive of hunting.  Despite the fact that hunter license fees and excise taxes provide the vast majority of funding for these agencies, HSUS brags about infiltrating these agencies and expresses confidence in shaping their policies when it comes to use of traditional ammunition:

The HSUS has close working relationships with state wildlife agencies all across the country.  Our wildlife department staff and state directors regularly attend state wildlife agency meetings where they have presented to top level agency officials and developed close working relationships with wildlife law enforcement officers in the majority of states.  Our state directors attend department and commission meetings and have developed long-lasting relationships.  We are regularly contacted to participate in stakeholder meetings and asked about The HSUS position on pending proposals.  In fact, many of our staff serves on state wildlife agency appointed boards and commissions.  These existing relationships will go a long way in our campaign to end the use of lead ammunition.

We will be filing a petition to ban the use of lead ammunition for hunting purposes on federal lands owned by the Department of Interior (DOI)—which comprises about one-fifth of the total land area of the United States.

We are in a better position than other groups to spearhead this effort given our strong federal congressional and agency relationships, as well as our years of experience working through these types of reforms. We are currently in discussions with the DOI on furthering this goal, and we have great confidence—given our mainstream approach and our knack for strategy—that we will be able to achieve all or part of this goal.

The group claims they are “ushering in a new era of humane management” that will only work to outlaw lead ammunition, not ban hunting. However, in an interview posted this month an HSUS spokeswoman revealed their true agenda:  “We are the Humane Society of the United States, so we do not support hunting.”

It’s one more step in the long march.

Banning lead ammunition makes hunting more expensive, which pushes people away from the sport.  Banning lead ammunition on public lands and all DOI lands (which is quite a lot when you look at the agencies they run) pushes poorer hunters out of the sport… which is the point.

Change it from a normal tradition for Americans to one that’s expensive and marginalized and it can be slowly destroyed… as is their objective.

There have been a lot of stories about this in the last couple of weeks.  Frankly, it’s disgusting and traitorous to the citizenry who care about the nation.

First you have the suicidally stupid GOP senators saying they’ll pass amnesty if they get back the senate (via HotAir):

no matter how much the GOP blathers about border enforcement and security, what they’re really interested in — both for political reasons and to please their masters in the business lobby — is legalization.

“I certainly think we can make progress on immigration particularly on topics like modernizing our legal immigration system, improving our mechanisms for enforcing the law and I think if you did those things you could actually make some progress on addressing those who are illegally,” Rubio said Wednesday evening of the prospects of passing immigration reform in 2015.

Yeah, they’ll import some more Democrats, and cheap labor for their cronies, and alienate every conservative and American who actually cares about their citizenship and nation.

Speaking of their business cronies, the head of the Chamber of Commerce demands importing more illegal aliens or else! (also via HotAir)

This guy’s only saying what the entire Republican leadership thinks.

Maybe the “joke” is that he’s pretending to care about the political implications of amnesty and the fate of the GOP when all he really wants is cheap labor.

“If the Republicans don’t do it, they shouldn’t bother to run a candidate in 2016,” Donohue joked at an event on infrastructure investment in D.C. “Think about that. Think about who the voters are. I just did that to get everybody’s attention.”…

“You think Congress can get immigration reform done this year, in an election year?” moderator Eamon Javers asked Donohue.

“Yes, yes,” Donohue replied.

National Association of Manufacturers President Jay Timmons said he also thought immigration reform could pass this year, perhaps in a lame-duck session.

Of course they’ll do it in a lame-duck session, when there are no electoral consequences.  Besides, there never will be electoral consequences since the Democrats will be elected in perpetuity.

The shortsighted greedy clowns in the Chamber of Commerce will be strangled by regulations and taxation to pay for the social welfare costs of an imported underclass of “cheap” labor – except for the biggest of big business cronies, of course.  Speaking of biggest of big business cronies, internet multibillionaires are already celebrating the importation of cheap labor for their own enterprises:

The immigration reform advocacy group co-founded by Facebook chief Mark Zuckerberg notched a win in Tuesday night’s GOP primary in North Carolina.

Rep. Renee Ellmers (R-N.C.), who has backed “earned legal work status” for people who came to the country illegally, beat off a primary challenge from former Wall Street trader Frank Roche, in a race seen as an early indication of the role immigration would play in this year’s GOP primaries.

Ellmers, elected to Congress amid the Tea Party wave in 2010, was the favorite in the race for the 2nd District, but had drawn opposition for her stance on immigration reform.

“Despite being attacked by those opposed to commonsense immigration reform, Congresswoman Ellmers consistently articulated a solution to fix our broken immigration system, and tonight her constituents made clear their support for her leadership by overwhelmingly voting for her over her anti-immigrant primary opponent,” FWD.us president Joe Green said in a statement.

“Congresswoman Ellmers’ commanding primary victory makes clear: the time is now for House Republicans to bring immigration reform legislation to a vote.”

The FWD.us affiliate supporting conservatives, Americans for a Conservative Direction, had backed Ellmers with a $200,000 TV ad calling her a “conservative fighter for North Carolina” earlier this year. The ad outlined her efforts to fight the federal deficit, support for North Carolina military bases and “fix our broken immigration system once and for all” while still offering “no amnesty, period.”

Yes, the leftist globalist corporatist group called “forward” has a puppet called “Americans for a Conservative Direction”, and even throws hundreds of thousands of dollars out to say how conservative she is and how she’ll never pass amnesty, she’ll just pass comprehensive “common sense” immigration reform… so the child multibillionaire can have his way at your expense.

>Lame Duck "Immigration Reform" - Amnesty

And then of course, there’s White House chief-of-staff puppetmaster Valerie Jarrett saying that Boehner will pass amnesty (via Breitbart):

“I think we have a window this summer, between now and August, to get something done,” Jarrett said, according to the Las Vegas Review-Journal. “We have a commitment from Speaker Boehner, who’s very frustrated with his caucus.”

Addressing attendees at an event described as conference where “investors and elite political donors” along with “hedge fund managers, political and business leaders and celebrities” can “speak freely,” Jarrett said that the Senate’s bill would pass in the House if Republicans brought it to the floor.

Translation: “The super-rich who are insulated from society will do this to you.”  This is the kind of thing that goes on in oligarchies around the world, not in a representative republic.

-

And as a couple more notes, the Obama administration has told US schools to accept illegal alien children regardless of documentation or lack thereof, and of course there’s this bit that Mark Krikorian at National Review discovered:

More interesting, though was this bit from the article:

The administration is also reportedly looking at shortening the time an immigrant is considered new, and therefore a removal priority. A recent immigrant would go from someone who entered in the last three years, to someone who entered in the last two weeks.

Although I disagree as a matter of policy, the idea that an illegal has put down roots here after three years, and thus shouldn’t be deported, at least makes a certain kind of sense. But to exempt an illegal alien from deportation simply because he snuck in at least 15 days ago is surreal. Or, more accurately, it’s proof that the Left has no intention whatsoever of enforcing future immigration laws, even if all the illegals here today get amnesty.

The goal of “comprehensive immigration reform” isn’t the fixing of any particular aspect of immigration law. It’s the abolition of immigration law.

Of course.

And the idea that someone has broken into your house and chosen to squat… does not make it theirs.  It makes them an intruder.

Via Breitbart, Eric Holder’s gunrunning ATF is planning to use drones:

Attorney General Eric Holder admitted Tuesday that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives was in the process of looking at the use of domestic drones.  …

“Within the Department, the only component that uses these vehicles at this point is the FBI,” Holder explained. “The ATF in the process of working through to see if they want to make use of them.”

And via the Daily Caller, Eric Holder getting mad at being called out for being held in contempt.  Full video of the exchange between TX Rep Louie Gohmert and Mexican-cartel-arms-merchant General Eric “You Don’t Wanna Go There” Holder:

Gohmert is entirely too nice to Holder, and unfortunately seems to try to address a couple too many points as his time runs out.

Via Washington Free Beacon:

Attorney General Eric Holder said on Friday that gun tracking bracelets are something the Justice Department (DOJ) wants to “explore” as part of its gun control efforts.

Technological tricks are par for the course for anti-rights gun banning autocrats.  Technology becomes a tool to ban things – just mandate a feature for “safety” (especially when it’s the antithesis of safe) and suddenly all the things they want to ban can be banned in the name of “safety”.  Then soon enough the last thing wasn’t “safe” enough, and it can be banned, too.

What’s perhaps even more disturbing is the amount of money going into this:

The Justice Department has requested $382.1 million in increased spending for its fiscal year 2014 budget for “gun safety.”

Included in the proposal is $2 million for “Gun Safety Technology” grants, which would award prizes for technologies that are “proven to be reliable and effective.”

President Barack Obama’s budget proposal also calls for $1.1 billion to “protect Americans from gun violence—including $182 million to support the president’s ‘Now is the Time’ gun safety initiative.”

The same Department of Justice that sent guns to Mexican narcoterrorist cartels now wants a third of a billion dollars to spend to target you and your rights.  Eric Holder brought plenty of “safety” to Mexico and the border, and then hushed it up afterwards.

fast and furious 2010 massacre teens

-

Suddenly a tech firm going after the American gun industry to consolidate it and control it and provide high-tech “safety” would be of even more interest to a government spending $382,100,000 on gun “safety”; with $2,000,000 for tech proof of concept.

There are numbers for different specifics within Holder’s PDF request, but considering the Holder DOJ’s established policy of lying, withholding information, and Holder currently still held in contempt of congress for stonewalling and lying, pardon me if I consider those numbers to be a huge pile of crap.

-

Update: Katie Pavlich weighs in on the subject at Townhall, adding in an almost Colombo-esque “one more thing”:

As a reminder, Attorney General Eric Holder is sill in contempt of Congress for his stonewalling and failure to cooperate with the Oversight Committee Investigation into Operation Fast and Furious. Further, lets not forget Holder is also the guy who said we should “brainwash” people against guns.

She also notes Bob Owens breaks things down a bit more Barney-style, reminding folks that “gun tracking bracelets” really means “smart” gun technology like a radio-transponder bracelet-gun combo that is only activated when worn, but longtime readers probably remember this story where I broke it down here, and other folks probably already clicked on it above (the “technological tricks” link).  So it’s updated and noted now for folks who may be reading this on smartphones or devices where links are a PITA, rather than at a computer terminal.

HotAir has also picked up the story.

An older piece, but one worth bringing up.  Marine Captain Katie Petronio explains:

As a combat-experienced Marine officer, and a female, I am here to tell you that we are not all created equal, and attempting to place females in the infantry will not improve the Marine Corps as the Nation’s force-in-readiness or improve our national security.

It’s something I’ve been saying for a long, long, long, long, long, long, long time.  It’s something combat veterans and male Marines and army combat arms people have been saying for a long time.

captain katie petronio

She lists her experience in combat zones, and it’s pretty extensive.  She was attached to combat units for a long time.  She earned that middle ribbon in the top row.

This combat experience, in particular, compelled me to raise concern over the direction and overall reasoning behind opening the 03XX field.

03 being infantry in the Marine Corps.  There’s also no reason women should be in the 08 field (artillery) or the 18 field (armor).

Who is driving this agenda? I am not personally hearing female Marines, enlisted or officer, pounding on the doors of Congress claiming that their inability to serve in the infantry violates their right to equality. Shockingly, this isn’t even a congressional agenda. This issue is being pushed by several groups, one of which is a small committee of civilians appointed by the Secretary of Defense called the Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Service (DACOWITS). Their mission is to advise the Department of Defense (DoD) on recommendations, as well as matters of policy, pertaining to the well-being of women in the Armed Services from recruiting to employment. Members are selected based on their prior military experience or experience with women’s workforce issues. I certainly applaud and appreciate DACOWITS’ mission; however, as it pertains to the issue of women in the infantry, it’s very surprising to see that none of the committee members are on active duty or have any recent combat or relevant operational experience relating to the issue they are attempting to change. I say this because, at the end of the day, it’s the active duty servicemember who will ultimately deal with the results of their initiatives, not those on the outside looking in.

Thank you, ma’am.

Can women endure the physical and physiological rigors of sustained combat operations, and are we willing to accept the attrition and medical issues that go along with integration?

As a young lieutenant, I fit the mold of a female who would have had a shot at completing IOC, and I am sure there was a time in my life where I would have volunteered to be an infantryman.  …

She lists her bonafides and background, and she would have been the kind of candidate that do-gooder political correctness social engineers would’ve loved.

She sadly ran into the unfeeling, uncaring thing that is reality.

I can say from firsthand experience in Iraq and Afghanistan, and not just emotion, that we haven’t even begun to analyze and comprehend the gender-specific medical issues and overall physical toll continuous combat operations will have on females.

I was a motivated, resilient second lieutenant when I deployed to Iraq for 10 months, traveling across the Marine area of operations (AO) and participating in numerous combat operations. Yet, due to the excessive amount of time I spent in full combat load, I was diagnosed with a severe case of restless leg syndrome. My spine had compressed on nerves in my lower back causing neuropathy which compounded the symptoms of restless leg syndrome. While this injury has certainly not been enjoyable, Iraq was a pleasant experience compared to the experiences I endured during my deployment to Afghanistan. At the beginning of my tour in Helmand Province, I was physically capable of conducting combat operations for weeks at a time, remaining in my gear for days if necessary and averaging 16-hour days of engineering operations in the heart of Sangin, one of the most kinetic and challenging AOs in the country.

Again, this is all from a woman who’s been there and done that, explaining how physically the task is simply incompatible.

By the fifth month into the deployment, I had muscle atrophy in my thighs that was causing me to constantly trip and my legs to buckle with the slightest grade change. My agility during firefights and mobility on and off vehicles and perimeter walls was seriously hindering my response time and overall capability. It was evident that stress and muscular deterioration was affecting everyone regardless of gender; however, the rate of my deterioration was noticeably faster than that of male Marines and further compounded by gender-specific medical conditions. At the end of the 7-month deployment, and the construction of 18 PBs later, I had lost 17 pounds and was diagnosed with polycystic ovarian syndrome (which personally resulted in infertility, but is not a genetic trend in my family), which was brought on by the chemical and physical changes endured during deployment. Regardless of my deteriorating physical stature, I was extremely successful during both of my combat tours, serving beside my infantry brethren and gaining the respect of every unit I supported.

Regardless, I can say with 100 percent assurance that despite my accomplishments, there is no way I could endure the physical demands of the infantrymen whom I worked beside as their combat load and constant deployment cycle would leave me facing medical separation long before the option of retirement. I understand that everyone is affected differently; however, I am confident that should the Marine Corps attempt to fully integrate women into the infantry, we as an institution are going to experience a colossal increase in crippling and career-ending medical conditions for females.

If you don’t have the time to read her whole column, she has plenty more reasons to explain her points if you’re still unconvinced.

Which once again leads me, as a ground combat-experienced female Marine Corps officer, to ask, what are we trying to accomplish by attempting to fully integrate women into the infantry?

For those who dictate policy, changing the current restrictions associated with women in the infantry may not seem significant to the way the Marine Corps operates. I vehemently disagree; this potential change will rock the foundation of our Corps for the worse and will weaken what has been since 1775 the world’s most lethal fighting force. In the end, for DACOWITS and any other individual or organization looking to increase opportunities for female Marines, I applaud your efforts and say thank you. However, for the long-term health of our female Marines, the Marine Corps, and U.S. national security, steer clear of the Marine infantry community when calling for more opportunities for females. Let’s embrace our differences to further hone in on the Corps’ success instead of dismantling who we are to achieve a political agenda. Regardless of the outcome, we will be “Semper Fidelis” and remain focused on our mission to protect and defend the United States of America.

Unlike Captain Petronio, I don’t applaud any organization that seeks to put substandard candidates into roles they aren’t fit for.  She’s polite enough to give them credit for “meaning well”.  But as I’ve said every time, it’s not a measure of character or of value of the individual’s desire to serve or their individual bravery.

It’s simply that if you aren’t biologically set up for success in a grueling environment and it’s a necessity that you succeed, then you shouldn’t be put in that position just so some ideologue politically-correct social engineers can congratulate themselves at cocktail parties and say how wonderful they are for giving you the “opportunity” to have your bones ground down in the mud because you never should have been there.

-

But there are still hard-leftist groups who advocate for “equality” where there is none and actively want women in combat.   Noteworthy that their counterpoint speaker to Petronio is a man.

And their board of directors is awash in leftists, none of whom will ever have to answer for the failures they wish to create.