"Losers"

 I linked the article from the Atlantic yesterday about Trump's attitude toward the military and military service.  While some of it is old news regarding the late Senator John McCain, the extent of Trump's hatred toward the military, an institution of which he is supposed to be Commander in Chief,  has heretofore not been fully known.

Of course, Trump is on the record as fully denying the claims of the article despite witnesses:



It would be a mistake to think Trump's supporters would stop supporting him over these revelations.  These people are truly lost.  No amount of facts will make them budge.  That is what makes them so scary.  They are willfully stupid.  There are literally tens of millions of these people, whether or not they ever served in the military, and they are lost.  They are not going to shed years of lies told them  by outfits like Fox News or, more important, they are not going to reject the garbage taught by their parents of racism, xenophobia, and sexism.  They just aren't.  They will go down with the S.S. Donald Trump no matter what.

And there is this snip from Rachel Maddow's interview with Trump's niece Mary Trump:



The one thing that would "trigger" Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden is the military given Biden's late son Beau's service.   I can picture the ads, I can picture Biden bringing this up during the debates.

If a Democrat had ever shown this much contempt for the military, that candidate would be history and buried in a landslide.  However, Trump supporters are cultists.

I personally don't think it is going to make much difference in Trump's support, but I hope for the sake of the country I am wrong.

Oops:

Two former sr Trump admin officials confirm .@JeffreyGoldberg reporting that President Trump disparaged veterans and did not want to drive to honor American war dead at Aisne-Marne Cemetery outside Paris.

— Jennifer Griffin (@JenGriffinFNC) September 4, 2020

Etc.

It was inevitable, but women are already serving in combat roles more or less. It's only now official:

Aren't women more or less serving in combat already?

The years of warfare in Iraq and Afghanistan have blurred, if not erased, the traditional notions of combat versus noncombat positions. Battle fronts are fluid, and the concept of a defined front line is virtually meaningless.

The numbers prove it. Some 280,000 women have been deployed to those two countries since 2001, the military says.

Female helicopter pilots fly in and out of combat zones. Female medics treat the wounded wherever they fall. In Afghanistan, the Marines have set up all-female teams, known as "lionesses," who are deployed to speak to Afghan women who would never speak to male U.S. troops. The Marines have found them extremely valuable in gathering intelligence.

More than 150 women have been killed and more than 800 wounded in the Iraq and Afghan wars, according to the military.

I am sure Phyllis Schlafly raised a big fit about it.

One of her big "arguments" she and her Eagle Forum made against the ERA was the possibility of women being drafted and thus serving in combat roles.
______

The motions made by Jodi Arias's attorneys were denied by the judge.

Obama Said "Fewer," NOT None

I keep reading these talking points supposedly refuting what Obama said about the "horses and bayonets" at Monday's joke of a debate. People I went to high school with and who I friended on Facebook keep posting the same hogwash over and over again misquoting Obama.

He never said ANYTHING about the military no longer using "horses and bayonets." He said in effect we have fewer of them now than in 1916 because of the greater technology in warfare.

Talk about grasping at straws. I didn't even vote for Obama, and this thing drives me crazy.

It was Mitt, not Barry, who made monstrous gaffes in the debate.