by Don Feder, GrassTopsUSA.com
On December 18, Osama bin Laden was sitting in a cave somewhere in Pakistan laughing his jihadist ass off. That’s the day the lame-duck Congress (John Adams: Three or more worthless men are a Congress) sacrificed national security to the gods of a spurious equality.
The pro-family movement has been steadily losing ground for years, even as we piled up victory after victory at the ballot box. It’s like the title of Patrick Buchanan’s book – “Conservative Votes, Liberal Victories.” We win at the polls; they win in Congress, in the courts and in the culture. If this continues, the Culture War will become a Culture Rout.
Politics is often a game of who-do-you-fear-the-most. The pragmatists, the “mavericks,” the oh-goodness-gracious-somebody’s-going-to-call-me-a-homophobe Republicans must be taught an object lesson – good, hard and fast.
Massachusetts Senator Scott Brown, a Lady Gaga Republican, is the perfect candidate for a shock-and-awe campaign. His vote to sodomize the military, by repealing Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, should be his political obituary, writ in 24-point type.
Brown pleaded for conservative support in the January 19 special election to fill Ted Kennedy’s Senate Seat. (Given the way things turned out, the enormous Ted must be smiling from that Au Bar in the sky.) The man who promised to be the 41st vote against Obama’s insanity has become an enabler.
In a candidate questionnaire produced by the Massachusetts Family Institute (MFI), Brown solemnly pledged to support retention of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. As the showdown approached, he said he would vote for repeal only after a vigorous debate. (There was none.) Further, Brown promised he’d only endorse the utopian measure after the Budget Proposal passed. (It didn’t.) That’s three lies.
MFI, whose PAC went to the wall for Brown less than a year ago, said the Senator and seven other GOP sellouts “broke ranks with their party on a fundamental issue of national security and that of the men and women who put themselves in harm’s way to protect our homeland.”
A little more than 11 months ago, while Tea-Partiers and social conservatives were celebrating the election of what they believed to be the first conservative Republican sent to the Senate from Massachusetts in a geologic age, the homoerotic left was maneuvering to turn our votes into its victory.
As Mass Resistance reports, at a March conference in Somerville, Mass., the Gay, Lesbian, Straight Education Network (GLSEN) began working on its strategy to subvert the will of the people.
Thereafter, the DC-based Human Rights Campaign arranged for Massachusetts’ ingénue Senator to meet with gay servicemen, all with a tale of woe to tell. According to the Department of Defense, of the service personnel discharged in 2008, 7 times more were separated for weight problems (4,555) than for homosexuality (634).
But like a rube at a sideshow carnival, Brown accepted it all with wide-eyed credulity. MassEquity (sodomy is a civil liberty) delivered thousands of postcards to the Senator’s Boston office.
Did it ever dawn on Brown that these folks are as likely to support him as the Service Employees International Union? Scotty could march in Boston’s annual gay pride parade the way he was attired in that Cosmo centerfold and the LGBT left would still back the Democratic nominee.
Of course, this could be more than a bid for the support of an increasingly shrill, self-styled minority.
With an eye toward reelection in 2012, Brown has carefully plotted his Senate trajectory. He was one of only five Republicans who voted for the last jobs boondoggle, but generally votes responsibly on fiscal issues.
The objective is to appear far enough right to maintain the base that elected him, but not so conservative as to incur the wrath of the Boston media, which will tolerate no dissent when it comes to the left’s favorite victim group.
Brown betrayed the Tea Parties (which mobilized activists from across the United States to work on his campaign), the Massachusetts Family Institute, and national-security advocates to appease The Boston Globe and WBZ, the CBS affiliate in Beantown. He should ask John McCain, his party’s erstwhile presidential nominee, how well pandering to the media works.
As cover for the betrayal of his core constituency, Brown ducked behind the Pentagon’s 266-page “situation-study” for DADT repeal – that and his vast military experience. Brown’s office reminded us of his background as a JAG officer with the Massachusetts National Guard, defending Guardsmen with positive drug tests and helping those about to be deployed overseas with estate planning and real estate advice. Many a real-estate transaction Lt. Col. Brown charged with naught but his sidearm and raw, physical courage.
Like Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Mike Mullen’s smarmy pleading, the Pentagon report was dictated by President Obama, a man whose dedication to national security is legendary. Even so, the report showed that nearly 60% of Marines and those serving in Army combat units opposed repeal.
Senator York also might have considered the words of Gen. Carl Mundy, USMC (Ret.), 30th commandant of Marines, who wrote to members of Congress in November that repeal would “inflict significant damage on the All-Volunteer Force.”
The current commandant, Gen. James Amos, agreed earlier this month, when he told Congress that DADT repeal “has strong potential for disruption at the small unit level, as it will no doubt divert leadership attention away from the almost singular focus of preparing units for combat.” Three of four service chiefs opposed repeal.
Even in the Pentagon’s Potemkin Village report, 24% of service personnel surveyed said they’d leave the Armed Forces, or seriously consider leaving, if DADT was MIA. Among Army combat units, the figure was 36%, for Marine combat units, 48%. In a 2006 Military Times poll, 58% said they opposed repeal and 24% said repeal would force them to leave or consider leaving when their enlistment was up.
So what if we could end up losing almost half of Marine combat forces? It’s not as if we were in a war or anything. Rumor has it that Adm. Mullen is even now preparing an elite force of choreographers and hosts of HGTV’s redecorating shows to take up the slack.
More than 1.000 high-ranking retired Flag and General Officers, many with even more combat experience than Scott Brown, signed a petition to Congress, declaring: “We believe that imposing this burden on our men and women in uniform would undermine recruiting and retention, impact leadership at all levels, have adverse effects on willingness of parents who lend their sons and daughters to military service, and eventually break the All-Volunteer Force.”
Mullen has announced a zero-tolerance policy for warriors with qualms about embracing the moral new order. My friend Dr. Rick Scarborough, president of Vision America and a Southern Baptist pastor, says that now “Christians will have to violate their conscience to serve.”
As the Center for Military Readiness explains, “a mandatory ‘three-tiered’ education program focusing on resistant combat troops, to change attitudes and opinions (religious beliefs?) on LGBT issues” is the next step – led by the gay lobby, one assumes. Perhaps Congressman Barney Frank will deliver guest lectures on tolerating male hookers who run an escort service out of one’s condominium.
DADT repeal raises intriguing questions. If open homosexuals can shower with the objects of their desire, why can’t heterosexual men come clean with servicewomen? Since Congress has decided to repeal the law of sexual attraction, why not do it across the board?
On World AIDS Day (December 1), MassEquality, one of the groups that domesticated Brown, noted: “Gay and bisexual men continue to be among the hardest hit by the epidemic in the United States (wonder why). They are 44 times more likely than the general population to become HIV positive.”
In combat, your buddy is a walking blood supply. Surely, the HIV-positive have a right to serve too – since service is now defined as a civil right. And what about all of the other nasty STDs to which gay men are disproportionately prone?
In discussing DADT repeal, many in the pro-family movement quite naturally focus on the harm to the military. What about the effect on society of this next step in the normalization of a proclivity at war with Judeo-Christian morality?
Just days before the Senate vote to affirm homosexuals serving openly, ABC News reported that David Epstein, a Columbia University political science professor, was charged with incest for carrying on a three-year affair with his adult daughter.
While admitting nothing, the defendant’s lawyer, Matthew Galluzzo, told ABC: “We are obviously all morally opposed to incest and rightfully so” but – and you knew this was coming, didn’t you – “at the same time, there is an argument to be made in the Swiss case (the land of yodels and cuckoo clocks is thinking of legalizing incest) to let what goes on privately in bedrooms” go on privately in bedrooms.
In case you fail to see the connection, Galluzzo adds: “It’s OK for homosexuals to do whatever they want in their own home. How is this different?” May it please the Court, the prosecution rests its case and moves for summary judgment.
Until we begin fighting the Culture War like our opponents, our side will keep losing. For the past several years, the Conservative Political Action Conference – the largest annual conservative gathering – has proudly listed GOProud (the Village People meet tax cuts) as a co-sponsor, yet many of us continue to attend these orgies.
Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels has called for “a truce on social issues” – which is rather like the Wehrmacht calling for a truce after the conquest of France and half of Russia.
A group of Tea Party libertarians presented a petition urging the incoming House leadership to jettison the social agenda (icky stuff like the defense of marriage and the unborn) – because, supposedly, the Tea Parties care only about issues preceded by a dollar sign.
Repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell must be the proverbial line-in-the-sand that’s already been crossed.
Senator Scott Brown is the perfect object on which to inflict a lesson. He’s up for reelection in 2012. As a Republican in Massachusetts, he’s already on the endangered species list. This time, the Democrats won’t nominate the political equivalent of Typhoid Mary, as they did in the special election.
It’s time for pro-family forces to give him a gentle nudge into the great beyond. DADT is one battle, albeit a frightfully important one for national security. Others will be coming at us fast and furious.
We must teach our alleged friends that votes have consequences. The best way to do that is to make Scott Brown a footnote in political almanacs.
Don Feder is a former Boston Herald writer who is now a political/communications consultant. He also maintains his own website, DonFeder.com. This column originally appeared on GrassTopsUSA.com and appears here with the author’s permission.