In response to:

Women Serving in Combat Positions Is a Batty Idea

RGR28 Wrote: Jan 27, 2013 1:21 PM
Giles can always be counted on for his republican-based dislike of women.
Mother of 4 -- the original Wrote: Jan 27, 2013 2:38 PM
Typical left-lib inversion of terminology.

Recognizing and protecting the unique value of women, equal in rights but different in capabilities, is honor, not "dislike".
Original Saepe_Expertus Wrote: Jan 27, 2013 1:27 PM
RGR 28...shall we count on you to continue to make Class 5 Stupidity comments, like the one you just offered? Your 'position' is so ludicrous as to be completely unworthy of further comment.
RGR28 Wrote: Jan 27, 2013 1:30 PM
Who else would use the word "dames" to generalize about women? Aside from his being snarky is appears to be stuck in the middle of the last century.
RGR28 Wrote: Jan 27, 2013 1:34 PM
"Dames" has become a word used to denigrate women, like "chick", "broad", and the C word.

I suspect when he is at his most clever he also talkes about n---ers, fa--ots, and SP-cs.

Last Thursday Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta and other U.S. military leaders lifted the ban on women serving in combat positions. I, for one, think this is a great idea and have a few modest proposals, if the brass inside the beltway is open to suggestions, on how they should deploy the dames (and whom they should deploy).

First off, if you truly want to eviscerate the enemy—namely Muslims—then I propose sending the most nerve grating and foul women Hollywood has to offer straight into hot zones as our forward armies. I’m a thinkin’ starting off with Roseanne Barr, Joy...