Peter G (sinetimore) wrote,
Peter G

I Hope Donald Trump Burns In Hell

I want you to take a look at this picture.  I want you to take a good, hard look.

Longitme readers know where this is going.

During that travesty of a presidential campaign last year, when social standing mattered more than actual issues, I quit writing political pieces because, frankly, people were acting like idiots and I was sick of dealing with the bullshit.  It made my piece on Planned Parenthood look like a worshiping cult.  And other than a cheap shot here and there, I have largely stuck to my policy of not writing about politics.  And I will continue to enforce it in the future.

But not today.

Today, I am absolutely furious.  The point where some of my coworkers were worried I was going to completely flip out.  No other thoughts fill my mind.  I need to lash out.  At Trump.  At the voters who allowed this to happen.  To John McCain, pulling another face/heel turn.  To Sheri Skowkowski, who doesn't seem to want to admit she got jobbed by Trump.  To the social activists who enabled it to happen, who were charmed by the devil's smile and sold their souls without a second thought.

Today, I go on break, and I check my phone for news.  And there's the headline -- Trump is going to reinstate the transgender ban on military service.

Banning gays has always been a point that exposes the hypocrisy of the Republicans.  During the Reagan 80's and beyond, when people talked about being "Goldwater Republicans," they forgot a little piece of history.  After a debate, Republican nominee Barry Goldwater faced the press, and one of them asked him, "So what do you think?"

"About what?" Goldwater responded.

"About the ban on gays in the military," which was being brought up as becoming official policy at the time.

Goldwater thought about it for a second and simply said, "Well, that's just stupid."

But an entire political party anxious for an idea they could brand themselves with ignored that and continued their crusade against alternate sexuality.  Well, for the most part.  Like the Catholic Church, when one of their own is found to be gay or a child molester or something like that, Oh, the guy is fragile and he was taken advantage of by his victims and he needs support and not to be demonized.  But the instant it is someone outside their little protected realm, they are to be condemned and denied any human decency whatsoever.

(I will never approve of Pope Francis.  I don't care that he cares about the poor.  His stance on pedo priests is to extend mercy and understanding to them, not hand them over for criminal sexual assault.  He defends men who destroy the lives of little boys while disapproving of the gay lifestyle in general.  He is no man of God, and he's certainly no reformer.  He's just another cog in the machine.)

During the election, Trump made a big deal that, despite him appealing to the core Republican base which doesn't like any ideas that postdate 1955, he was going to be a great friend and ally of the LGBT community.  And a bunch of fools fell for it.  The same people that love Alec Baldwin despite him frequently using gay slurs to insult people he doesn't like.  They insisted that Trump wasn't going to do any of that -- he was being elected to help fix a broken government system, restore prosperity, and make America great again.  Gays weren't even on his radar.  Trump even promised to be a "real friend" to the LGBT community.

How do you feel now, you suckers?

He says transpeople are not just a distraction, but cost more to cover medically.  Gays have been in the military since it was formed (the commanders may think they've kept them out, but ask the rank and file.  They know who's gay, and none of them have ever had any problems), so the distraction argument is bullshit.  And more medical expenses?!?  This is like the anti-gay crowd that says anal sex leads to rectal problems.  I'm sorry, but if that was true, every Walmart in a gay neighborhood would never be able to keep Depends in stock.  Of course, that logic only applies to gay males -- women who prefer What Brown Can Do For Them or men who like to get pegged are spared the dreaded incontinence issues, if the lack of discussion about them is anything to go by.  Trump claims he consulted with "generals and military experts," but somehow didn't think to name any of these people.  Considering, the last time this came up, generals and military experts were saying nothing would happen if gays served openly, I'm very curious who he cherry picked to talk to.

No one is asking probably the biggest question right now, which is, what happens to those in the military who already identify as trans, to the point where they are chagning their profiles to the gender identity of their choice?  The Pentagon estimates that, since October 1 2016, about 250 people in the military have begun transitioning, and they and their families all get benefits and don't get dishonorably discharged.  The Rand Corp took it a step further -- their estimates are that, of the 1.3 million troops in the armed forces, there are between 2.5K and 7K people who identify as trans on active duty and between 1.5K and 4K in the reserves.  Their status is out, it's public, what happens to them?  Protected by the 5th Amendment?  If the law applied, the EEOC would have shot down the whole "separate but equal" bullshit back in the 80's.  People who genuinely want to serve their country are looking at having their lives stolen from them without so much as a by-your-leave.

At this point, I want to throw some hatred to the stupid keyboard warriors who think spending time complaining on the Internet is the same thing as actually going out and protesting, making change, and risking arrest to fight a corrupt power.  I was told I can't participate in the Safety Pin demonstrations because, as a white Christian cis male shitlord, I was what people feared and my presence was triggering to them so I should check my privilege and stay away.  Their own members sold out their own people, cause, rights, and movement so others could pretend they were important, and I'm the one to be feared?  I wouldn't trust you to run a popularity poll at Dunkin' Donuts, let alone a social movement with actual repercussions for the people placing their trust and faith in you.  Drop dead, all of you.  I don't want to be part of your protests, but don't you dare stop me from mine.  This is the only warning you get.

Of course, I have to give a couple of Big Stiff Middle Fingers to the Democrats, and specifically Bill Clinton and Barack Obama.  Clinton started this by replacing the military's "no gays" policy wiht "don't ask, don't tell," a policy which, hate to break it to you fans of St. Clinton, made absolutely no difference in implimentation.  Gays still couldn't serve openly, they could still be dishonorably discharged, but this was praised by the cult of personality that surrounded Slick Willie as social progress.  Then came Obama, who simply let DOMA fall instead of ordering it to end and allowed trans people in the military towards the end of his second term (the policy was only officially introduced about a year ago).  None of these were the actions of a leader, but someone who wanted to be seen as awesome without any direct action to bring down his legacy.  Had either of these two chumps just made it official, like when Harry Truman desegregated the armed forces (his logic was, "I'm the President, I'm the Commander In Chief, and I say, you're going to do this"), we wouldn't be in this fix.  But no.  Gays are only 1% of the population, and there are far more people who vote that think gay sex is icky.  There's more momey and people to mobilize with the second group, so let's protect our spots on the Gravy Train.  Defense Secretary Ash Carter was the one who actually ended the ban.

Oh, it's been a while since I've told Republican Senator John McCain to kiss my Polish ass, so why don't we make a quick detour?  Recall that, when McCain was running for President against Obama and the question of gays serving openly came up, he said he would defer to generals and military experts.  But when those generals and experts said it would be okay while Obama was considering the issue, he fell back on how gays were a distraction that cost a unit its lethality (no, McCain, I will never forget that.  You may be a war hero and a man of principle in the eyes of your constituents, but I see the real you.  You're just another political opportunist hiding behind vagueness that people project onto you).  Now, he's standing up against Trump's order, saying, "another example of why major policy announcements should not be made with Twitter."  Trump is looking to destroy the lives and legacies of thousands of people, and THAT'S what you're complaining about?  "Any American who meets current medical and readiness standars should be allowed to continue serving.  There is no reason to force service members who are able to fight, train, and deploy to leave the military regardless of their gender identity."  Notice he's only talking about those already in, not anyone thinking of joining up.  Apparently, pulling up the ladder on the treehouse is all they are worried about right now.

Obviously, a lot of trans people are taking this news hard.  One such person is Retired Col. Sheri Skowkowski, officially the highest ranking transgender military officer ever.  In an interview with Business Insider, she thinks the decision wasn't exactly Trump's.  "I think he's being influenced by Pence."  Yeah, because a multi-divorced, bullying, sexually harrassing, makes fun of the handicapped person couldn't possibly be biased against trans people.  You got suckered.  Admit it.  You put your faith in someone who never had any intention of standing up for you, but hey, at least he wasn't Hillary, right?

On the bright side, my life is well past halfway over.  Sorry, God and Jesus, but I don't want to stay in this hellhole any longer than I have to.
  • Post a new comment


    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded