Really? What resume is that? He is a political hack. He has never been through Basic Training. He never served in any branch as a soldier. He probably cant field strip an M4 if his life depended on it. An over promoted pansy put up to make a political statement. Nothing more.
The first openly gay army secretary thread.
- Thread starter Samuel Nixon
- Start date
TheProgressivePatriot
Platinum Member
Check out some of the comments. The USMB is not the only place where moronic bigots dwell,
He's only been in Federal defense service since 2009, and in the past two years has done internship-caliber rotations as Under-Secretary or Assistance-Director of this-and-that within the Department of Defense --- quite probably being artificially fast-tracked for just such an insertion, while Obumble still has some calendar-time in which to screw things up before he heads for the Exit. Fanning will probably be out the door that same day, or within 30-120 days after January 20, 2017.
TheProgressivePatriot
Platinum Member
OK, it's fair and appropriate to question his qualifications-if it is thought that what he has done is m=not sufficient. Let's talk about his resume in relation to other, past secretaries going into the job. We can talk about his background in relation to others who might have been candidates for the job.
However, please realize that it is doubtful that this thread would even exist it he were not gay. It is permeated with the implication that Obama appointed him because he is gay, and or he can't do the job for that reason. That is what I object to. There is no information to support either assumption.
Looking at the flurry of mid-level DoD management jobs he has rushed through in the past two years, it is reasonable to assume that he was being fast-tracked for higher office.
Agreed.
Mostly that he is Gay.
Vast numbers of your fellow Americans see homosexuals as horrible examples and, to be honest, un-clean, both spiritually and otherwise.
Yes. That is understood.
Oh, let's see...
An extraordinary fast-tracking tour-de-force through the DoD in a junior-executive capacity, beginning in Obumble's second term, when he no longer has to worry much about Public Opinion...
Followed by the idea that 3% of our population identifies as some Gay-ish permutation or another, while the other 97% identify as Straight...
Followed, in turn, by the idea that 97% of the candidate-field would have been Straight, but that one of the 3% was chosen...
Followed by lack of trust which the currently President has engendered, with vast numbers of Americans, attributable to his soft stance on Illegal Aliens, Gays, etc...
Followed by the current President's reputation for Rule by Imperial Decree (EO), bypassing Congress, and undertaking Social Engineering by personal fiat...
Followed by Fanning's publicly-stated intent to re-mold the military to accommodate Gays...
Well...
Add-up all that Circumstantial Evidence, and those oh-so-Convenient Coincidences, and distrust of this President, and...
Hard evidence pretty much becomes irrelevant, when the deck is stacked that badly in favor of The Assumption...
Especially when Hard Evidence would be damned-near impossible to obtain...
Consequently...
Folks begin to settle for the DoD approach, when they're still not crystal-clear about threat-vectors and content...
They start dealing in well-grounded speculation... an ad hoc Enemy Intentions Desk.
Entirely understandable, and, in all likelihood, dead on target.
Last edited:
TheProgressivePatriot
Platinum Member
That is quite a rant but it is still and assumption, and not a fair one. You and I have no way of knowing what PRESIDENT OBAMA was thinking but it is apparent that you are predisposed to think the worst, This proves it. You said " Vast numbers of your fellow Americans see homosexuals as horrible examples and, to be honest, un-clean, both spiritually and otherwise". Really? can you substantiate that? What decade are you living in?
Yes, I thought so, also.
Indeed.
Fairness and Common Sense are, indeed, at-odds, from time to time, as may very well be the case in this instance.
Oh, happily conceded, but the case for overwhelming Circumstantial Evidence and Oh-So-Convenient-Coincidence has been adequately and effectively outlined.
Absolutely correct.
No need for 'proof'. I happily concede the point, as I did in my 'absolutely correct' feedback, above.
One need look no further than the overwhelming support - at the ballot box - for Defense-of-Marriage -style statute and referenda, even in Blue States, before SCOTUS shoved an override down the People's throats.
Oh, and, with respect to 'decades'... there is no 'time limit' or 'expiration date' on filth and sexual deviancy and perversion, such as homosexuality.
Last edited:
Shrimpbox
Gold Member
Shrill, but,good,post K.
Here's the deal. This guy is not lauded for,his vast knowledge on weapons systems or his relentless support for veterans at the va. This guy is a smoozer. He is acknowledged as the man who guided the Sec. Of Defense approval in the U.S. Congress. He is a liaison to the White House. As I said before, he is only in govt when dems are in power. As with all of,obamas appointments it is all political as opposed to strictly on merit. Yes all,administrations do it but Obama takes,it,to new levels of abuse. The reason we are getting 23 million federal workers jacked, an IRS in disrepair, a va in shambles, a state,dept. that is Jv ,and on and on is because Obama IS all about political appointees and not merit appointees. This is why he is anti American, it's about political power than what's good for,the country.
Fanning appointment is news because he is gay and that is,promoted by the ones who do the appointing. If you read the articles all the print is about lgbt groups expecting fan in to make,them a top priority. So instead of having the best army, we will have the most tolerant army, and a divisive one. It isn't people like me who bring this up, it is all the left wingers here who then want to say how this would not even be a big deal if the guy wasn't gay, but you guys are pushing his gayness. You all consider it progress that the guy at the army is gay, when all it means to me is another example of how,the left doesn't want professionalism, they want to make a point about how they are going to,shove the agenda down people's throats, period. This is what Obama is doing. The story is not that Eric fan in is selected for sec of the army, the story is Obama did something groundbreaking by appointing a gay to a top,defense position. I don't care if the guy is gay, but Obama does.
Civilian run army, yes. But having some form of military service, not currently being in the service should be a requirement.
Here's the deal. This guy is not lauded for,his vast knowledge on weapons systems or his relentless support for veterans at the va. This guy is a smoozer. He is acknowledged as the man who guided the Sec. Of Defense approval in the U.S. Congress. He is a liaison to the White House. As I said before, he is only in govt when dems are in power. As with all of,obamas appointments it is all political as opposed to strictly on merit. Yes all,administrations do it but Obama takes,it,to new levels of abuse. The reason we are getting 23 million federal workers jacked, an IRS in disrepair, a va in shambles, a state,dept. that is Jv ,and on and on is because Obama IS all about political appointees and not merit appointees. This is why he is anti American, it's about political power than what's good for,the country.
Fanning appointment is news because he is gay and that is,promoted by the ones who do the appointing. If you read the articles all the print is about lgbt groups expecting fan in to make,them a top priority. So instead of having the best army, we will have the most tolerant army, and a divisive one. It isn't people like me who bring this up, it is all the left wingers here who then want to say how this would not even be a big deal if the guy wasn't gay, but you guys are pushing his gayness. You all consider it progress that the guy at the army is gay, when all it means to me is another example of how,the left doesn't want professionalism, they want to make a point about how they are going to,shove the agenda down people's throats, period. This is what Obama is doing. The story is not that Eric fan in is selected for sec of the army, the story is Obama did something groundbreaking by appointing a gay to a top,defense position. I don't care if the guy is gay, but Obama does.
Civilian run army, yes. But having some form of military service, not currently being in the service should be a requirement.
TheProgressivePatriot
Platinum Member
Human Rights Campaign: Mike Huckabee is Blinded by His Own Bigotry, Unfit to be Commander in Chief
September 19, 2015 by Brandon Lorenz HRC: Mike Huckabee is Blinded by His Own Bigotry, Unfit to be Commander in Chief
Today, HRC reacted to Mike Huckabee after Huckabee said today that President Obama was “more interested in appeasing gays,” in nominating Eric Fanning to lead the Army.
The Washington Post noted yesterday that Fanning has more than two decades of national security experience, including oversight of some of the Pentagon’s largest shipbuilding and fighter systems.
“Mike Huckabee is so blinded by his own bigotry that he would oppose someone with two decades of national security experience just because of his sexual orientation,” said JoDee Winterhof, HRC Senior Vice President of Policy and Political Affairs. “Mike Huckabee’s naked prejudice and willingness to smear an experienced public servant shows he is unfit to be commander in chief. Other candidates should make immediately clear they won’t tolerate Huckabee’s bigotry and that they will make these decisions based on Eric Fanning’s experience and on the merits.”
September 19, 2015 by Brandon Lorenz HRC: Mike Huckabee is Blinded by His Own Bigotry, Unfit to be Commander in Chief
Today, HRC reacted to Mike Huckabee after Huckabee said today that President Obama was “more interested in appeasing gays,” in nominating Eric Fanning to lead the Army.
The Washington Post noted yesterday that Fanning has more than two decades of national security experience, including oversight of some of the Pentagon’s largest shipbuilding and fighter systems.
“Mike Huckabee is so blinded by his own bigotry that he would oppose someone with two decades of national security experience just because of his sexual orientation,” said JoDee Winterhof, HRC Senior Vice President of Policy and Political Affairs. “Mike Huckabee’s naked prejudice and willingness to smear an experienced public servant shows he is unfit to be commander in chief. Other candidates should make immediately clear they won’t tolerate Huckabee’s bigotry and that they will make these decisions based on Eric Fanning’s experience and on the merits.”
TheProgressivePatriot
Platinum Member
Fox News Corners Huckabee On 'Very Qualified' Eric Fanning – Huckabee Fibs About Obama Announcement
Fox News Corners Huckabee On 'Very Qualified' Eric Fanning – Huckabee Fibs About Obama Announcement
On Fox News Business Monday morning, Huckabee was actually challenged on his attack, with host Sandra Smith even pointing to a Washington Post piece praising Fanning's qualifications.
"Is there any indication from the White House that they nominated him for any reason other than his qualifications?," Smith asked.
Standing by his Facebook rant, Huckabee responded by asking why the White House was "making such a big deal and talking about" Fanning's sexual orientation.
Smith responded that Fanning "is widely seen as very qualified for the job."
And in fact, at no point could NCRM find the White House saying anything about Fanning's sexual orientation during or since the announcement – with one possible exception: on Saturday morning the White House posted to Facebook a link to a New York Times article. That article link reads, "Obama Names First Openly Gay Secretary of the Army."
At no other point did the White House "make such a big deal" about Fanning's sexual orientation – or actually even mention it at all.
Fox News Corners Huckabee On 'Very Qualified' Eric Fanning – Huckabee Fibs About Obama Announcement
On Fox News Business Monday morning, Huckabee was actually challenged on his attack, with host Sandra Smith even pointing to a Washington Post piece praising Fanning's qualifications.
"Is there any indication from the White House that they nominated him for any reason other than his qualifications?," Smith asked.
Standing by his Facebook rant, Huckabee responded by asking why the White House was "making such a big deal and talking about" Fanning's sexual orientation.
Smith responded that Fanning "is widely seen as very qualified for the job."
And in fact, at no point could NCRM find the White House saying anything about Fanning's sexual orientation during or since the announcement – with one possible exception: on Saturday morning the White House posted to Facebook a link to a New York Times article. That article link reads, "Obama Names First Openly Gay Secretary of the Army."
At no other point did the White House "make such a big deal" about Fanning's sexual orientation – or actually even mention it at all.
There is no room for fags in a military leadership position. It sends the wrong message to the troops and impacts morale and discipline.
What a role model
I guess its OK today to want to grow up and be a Homo leading the Army
Its a New World Order
-Geaux
What a role model
I guess its OK today to want to grow up and be a Homo leading the Army
Its a New World Order
-Geaux
TheProgressivePatriot
Platinum Member
Yup...the new world order. Might as well get used to it. I doubt if the average solder is giving the fact that he's gay much thought.....certainly not as much as you are.
Why do some people see sexuality as the most salient feature and the most important thing about a gay person? It seems that those who have a problem with this sort of thing have sex on their minds a lot. That's all they can see. I'm sure that he will be a fine role model and most will the really important things about him.
Iceweasel
Diamond Member
I wonder if it's because they MAKE it the most important thing. Have you served? If not how do you know what the military personnel think? He was a pencil pusher, only in the Pentagon since the obama administration and never served. It's obvious he was appointed because of his sexuality so apparently it was the most important thing about him.
TheProgressivePatriot
Platinum Member
Who makes it the most important thing? Fanning isn't talking about it . Obama didn't talk about. YOU and your ilk are talking about it. How the **** is it obvious that he was appointed because he is gay. That is just more of your horseshit.
And yes I did serve !
Iceweasel
Diamond Member
No, they aren't going to say it, how old are you? A few years ago obama's edict did away with don't ask don't tell and now the most qualified guy is a homosexual pencil pusher? Get real.
TheProgressivePatriot
Platinum Member
This pencil pusher horseshit is just one more example of how far out of touch with reality you are
Iceweasel
Diamond Member
You're in denial. He never even served, no one that came up through the ranks was qualified?
TheProgressivePatriot
Platinum Member
Neither did his predecessor serve in uniform old sport!
Similar threads
New Topics
-
Joe Rogan has a great "demo" of what Tyler Robinson is supposed to have done....- Started by EMH
- Replies: 1
-
-
Virginia Republican flips Democrat-held seat for first time in nearly 4 decades- Started by 1srelluc
- Replies: 14
-
So leftists argued Trump was wrong about imminent danger. How about West Coast?- Started by Pastelli
- Replies: 4
Latest Discussions
-
-
-
-
Cops swarm on Jeffrey Epstein’s Zorro ranch to search for bodies of two girls- Latest: marvin martian
