Posted on 02/17/2012 7:39:24 PM PST by red flanker
A retired female fighter pilot running for former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords' open seat in Congress said Friday that Rick Santorum's recent remarks on women in combat make her want to "go kick him in the jimmy."
Martha McSally, a retired US Air Force colonel and a veteran of the war in Afghanistan, is running in Arizona's congressional special election as a Republican. According to her Facebook page, she was the first American woman to fly in combat since the 1991 lifting of a ban on women in that role.
Appearing Friday morning on FOX News Channel's "FOX & Friends," she called the Republican presidential candidate "completely out of touch" for saying that the "emotions" felt by men seeing a female soldier in harm's way may jeopardize their mission.
(Excerpt) Read more at video.foxnews.com ...
She sounds like one of those feminist types.....how precious.
When you can run as fast as me, carry as much as me, have the same (as in the same; not the same-same but different crap), physical fitness test standards as me, combat fitness test standards as me, go thorough the same infantry schooling as me.....then we'll talk.
Until then, STFU and make dinner.
Life is hell for democrats when they realize that there are people who want to live their lives differently from them, out of their control.
Whatever happens, they accept the risk, and they still want to be there. If any guy is concerned, they are free to take their place.
After flying combat missions with males, you'd think she'd be able to take differences of opinion a little better but she probably didn't respect them at all.
It's called biology. Ten men on an island with 1000 women have a chance at a civilization. 1000 men with 10 women, not so much. Women are biologically more important than males. It's a fact, and any society that fights biology is doomed to failure (in the long term)...
In fact, McSally’s remarks are sexist in the extreme. What would happen if a male threatened to assault sensitive parts of a woman’s anatomy?
Might be interesting to see what the people who think women can’t meet military standards think of this 51-year-old with prior service in the Navy — she did better on her PT than most of the people her son’s age in her basic training company and the Army is letting her join the Army Reserve, even though Army rules prevent her from enlisting in an active duty unit (though she could be mobilized for active duty).
I’m guessing this 51-year-old woman could kick many people on this thread in the you-know-what.
51-year-old mom holds her own during Basic Combat Training
By Melissa Buckley
Fort Leonard Wood Guidon
http://www.myguidon.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=14483&Itemid=39
Article:
“No, that’s not the issue,’’ he said. “I’ve never raised that as a concern. The issue…is how men would react to seeing women in harm’s way or potentially being injured or in a vulnerable position and not being concerned about accomplishing the mission.’’
I am against woman in combat for other reasons but if a man can't control his emotions then he should be in combat.
should --> should not
Looks like the ole political correctness bullsh!t strikes again.
Oh well, sinking ever further into the abyss.
Mea culpa. Misread.
Not all women are jacked up dykes like this jimmy biter. There is nothing wrong with atheletic women; but not all women can build their bodies to survive on the front lines of combat.
If we make a rule that woman are equal to men in combat use, and then the left is successful in re-instituting the military draft, we are going to be putting all women on the front lines.
Femi-nazis will have instituted their Equal Rights Amendment without altering the constitution.
“I’m guessing this 51-year-old woman could kick many people on this thread in the you-know-what.”
At her age, she would max out the push-ups with 34. A 30 year old male would need 77. She could max out the 2 mile run with a time of 17:36 (8:48/mile). A 30 year old male would need to run the same distance in 13:18 (a 6:39 mile).
In the article, she talks about having s slap contest in her self-defense training. Oddly enough, I went thru a career without ever being taught to SLAP the enemy!
I don't dispute your point historically. However, in the modern Western world, abortion is doing more to reduce the number of kids being born than letting women serve in the military.
The experience of the British abuse of Afrikaner women in South Africa during the Boer Wars is just one relatively recent example of the damage done over the short- and medium-term to a society by targeting the women and children, thereby cutting the reproductive rate. Farther back in history there are many more examples of the need to protect women in general, especially mothers and their children.
I do not agree with Rick Santorum on birth control. However, it's pretty hard to deny the raw facts of reproductive rates that have caused Orthodox Jews to become a powerful force in what was once a largely secular Zionist state of Israel, that have caused Roman Catholics to become an increasingly important segment of the population of historically Protestant societies in Northern Ireland and Scotland, and that threaten to make Western Europe into an Islamic region due to declining birthrates of white Europeans.
Declining birthrates have much less to do with women in the military than with whether women should be stay-at-home mothers with large families. I don't think anyone elected to office on the national level in modern American political life is going to argue that the government should be telling women they have to be stay-at-home mothers. If families want to do that, it's their choice, and government should respect that choice, but it's not government's role to make that choice for women and their husbands.
We're conservatives, and while it's true we're not libertarians, we also are not theocrats. The United States Constitution does not authorize the United States government to impose religious views on its citizens, and a religiously based requirement of large families and stay-at-home motherhood isn't something I would consider to be a proper role for civil government even if America were an explicitly Christian and covenanted nation. Those decisions belong to families, not the civil government.
The 2000 Equality amendment to the Military Service law states that "The right of women to serve in any role in the IDF is equal to the right of men."
The Caracal Battalion, for example, is made up of mostly females. Women serve in the full combat capacity on Israels southern borders.
Another crude fact is that women have sanitary needs that men do not.
Logistics is crucial, and keeping the front line soldiers supplied with ammo and food is of primary importance. And for every package of “feminine protection” that had to get flown/trucked/packed to the front lines, is one package of food or ammo that there is no room for.
This reason alone should settle the argument.
With the opposition of both this woman and McPain, I am sure Saint Rick will get creamed in AZ, where they rarely deliver a surprise.
s I have posted before:
She was a person that did not go through the chain of command to take her objections forward.
It was all about her. The US does/did not have a SOFA with Kuwait and therefore we had no protections in place so women had to play by the local rules. But she thought she was special. That is wrong on many levels, as a leader is supposed to put service before self-she did not.
She was a marginal pilot and parlayed her sex into a shield to protect her career, always ready to file EEO complaints (she had several already filed in her past. . .this explians her plum assignments after her whining).
Basically, not that good a pilot, selfish and arrogant among even other fighter pilots. She was intolerable.
Flying fighters is tough, especially when flying the A-10. . .that said, however, regarding McSally:
She was a person that did not go through the chain of command to take her objections forward.
It was all about her. The US does/did not have a SOFA with Kuwait and therefore we had no protections in place so women had to play by the local rules. But she thought she was special. That is wrong on many levels, as a leader is supposed to put service before self-she did not.
She was a marginal pilot and parlayed her sex into a shield to protect her career, always ready to file EEO complaints (she had several already filed in her past).
Basically, not that good a pilot, selfish and arrogant among even other fighter pilots. She was intolerable.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.