Wednesday, July 23, 2008

THURSDAY STUFF - #25




TODAY’S HA, HA

Driving Infraction:

A policeman couldn’t believe his eyes as he saw a woman drive past him, while busily knitting. He quickly pulled along side her moving vehicle, wound down his window and shouted “Pull over!”

The woman replied, “No, they’re socks!”

Something new to make you go hmmmmm…

First it was the disappearance of the flag lapel pin, and then it was the refusal to place his hand over his heart during the pledge or singing of the National Anthem. Now we have the disappearance of the American flag from his official campaign plane.

After a month of being made-over, Barrack Obama’s official campaign 757 emerged with the painted American flag removed from its tail section, replaced with Obama’s “O” trademark symbol in red, white and blue.

Most official U.S. government aircraft, including Air Force One, bear the U.S. flag on their tails.

The plane also has Obamasan’s anthem: “Change we can believe in”, along with his website address.

Am I the only one, or do you also get the feeling that this president “wanna be” is ashamed of being an American? Hmmmmm…


PAGE TWO:

HOMOSEXUALS AND THE MILITARY:

As Congress takes up the issue of “Don’t ask, Don’t tell” policy concerning gays in the military, the Washington Post/ABC News is attempting shape public opinion in favor of allowing homosexuals to openly serve in the military. According to their survey, 75% of Americans believe that homosexuals who are open about their sexual orientation should be allowed to serve in the military, a figure that is up from 62% in 2001.

The president for the Center for Military Readiness, Elaine Donnelly, states that there are several flaws in the poll. She says, “One of the biggest flaws assumes the validity of Bill Clinton’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, which is not the 1993 law passed by Congress that strictly forbids homosexuals from military service.” Ms. Donnelly says the poll should have been worded: “Should the military require as a matter of policy forced co-habitation between homosexuals and heterosexuals in all military units?” “If they had asked the question that way, I believe they would have gotten a different answer.” Donnelly also said that the poll should only have been given to members of the military – not to the civilian population as a whole.

My opinion on this is, if the homosexuals are so adamant about serving in the military, then put them in a unit of their own and place them on the front lines. Perhaps they can be called the Pansy Brigade or the Lavender Chargers.