Obama Won’t Leave Quietly; Now He Wants Women to Register for Draft [VIDEO]

Obama Won’t Leave Quietly; Now He Wants Women to Register for Draft [VIDEO]

Obama Won’t Leave Quietly; Now He Wants Women to Register for Draft [VIDEO]

While Donald Trump was announcing his pick of Gen. James Mattis as Secretary of Defense, the Obama administration was throwing a last minute sop to feminists and liberals.

On Thursday, the White House announced its support for requiring women to register for the draft.

iu-2

“As old barriers for military service are being removed, the administration supports — as a logical next step — women registering for the Selective Service,” said Ned Price, spokesman for the National Security Council. A Pentagon spokesman, speaking on behalf of Defense Secretary Ash Carter, said, “While Secretary Carter strongly supports our all-volunteer approach and does not advocate returning to a draft, as he has said in the past, he thinks it makes sense for women to register for selective service just as men must.”

In reality, however, Obama and Co. are spitting in the wind. Since we’re entering the last few weeks of Obama’s presidency, this action is mostly symbolic. To actually enact this mandate, the Republican Congress would need to alter current draft laws, and there is little support for such an action, especially since that body had already stripped the current National Defense Authorization Act of a women’s draft provision.

And feminists?

The feminist website Jezebel called the GOP response to this toothless proposal “general sexist panic,” but showed its own angst: “Women would not be forced to serve unless in the event of a national emergency, like another world war. While that thought is reassuring for now, thinking about the situations we might find ourselves in a few years down the road under a new administration is sobering.”

Apparently the commitment to equality ends at the door of a Selective Service office.

These women — or should I say, womyn — needn’t worry their eternally apoplectic heads about a Trump administration forcing them to pick up one of those nasty guns. Gen. Mattis is old school on the idea of women serving in combat roles. Forget the debate over whether or not women can perform physically — Mattis has serious concerns about whether women would be suited for “intimate killing.” “The problem is that in the atavistic primate world the idea of putting women in there is not setting them up for success,” he has said. He also has concerns about male commanders hesitating to send women into combat.

iu

And then there’s that issue of sexual attraction of young men and women in close quarters, placing “healthy young men and women together and we expect them to act like little saints.” Mattis, the intellectual “Warrior Monk,” states, “I don’t care if you go anywhere in history where you would find that this has worked.”

So if this effort to enforce a draft for women is a moot point, why is Obama doing this? Is it one last progressive hurrah? Or is the administration trying to trip up Mattis’s confirmation hearings? After all, it was Obama who fired Mattis as head of Central Command in 2013 — without even the courtesy of a phone call. Mattis and Obama were at odds on Iran.

For now, it doesn’t look like Obama and his fellow Democrats will get the power to force young women to register for the draft. But we also see that in the waning days of his presidency, Obama isn’t willing to take his final curtain call without throwing whatever barriers he can in the path of a new administration.

Written by

Kim is a pint-sized patriot who packs some big contradictions. She is a Baby Boomer who never became a hippie, an active Republican who first registered as a Democrat (okay, it was to help a sorority sister's father in his run for sheriff), and a devout Lutheran who practices yoga. Growing up in small-town Indiana, now living in the Kansas City metro, Kim is a conservative Midwestern gal whose heart is also in the Seattle area, where her eldest daughter, son-in-law, and grandson live. Kim is a working speech pathologist who left school system employment behind to subcontract to an agency, and has never looked back. She describes her conservatism as falling in the mold of Russell Kirk's Ten Conservative Principles. Don't know what they are? Google them!

14 Comments
  • J Walter says:

    Women need to be draft eligible. Gender equality and all that.

  • OC says:

    What part of the “equal” don’t y’all understand?

  • SFC D says:

    American men are required to register with Selective Service, they are ineligible for federal college financial aid if they do not. In addition, certain federal security clearances require registration. American women do not have to register.

    Equality means accepting the responsibilities along with the benefits.

  • Kim Quade says:

    So “y’all” must agree with Obama and the feminists at Jezebel, and disagree with Gen. Mattis and conservative “sexists” in Congress who oppose forcing women to register for the draft, right?
    Even though, as I pointed out in the post, the issue is moot.

    • GWB says:

      Actually, they are all merely making the point that what is sauce for the gander should also be sauce for the goose. if putting women into combat roles is so all-fired important that it MUST happen at all costs, then they darn well ought to suffer under the same duties as those men they are equal to. If anyone wants them in combat roles, then they should also support their registration with Selective Service.
      If someone does not want those burdens imposed on women, then intellectual and moral consistency would require them to not insist on women entering combat roles.

      Is it one last progressive hurrah? Or is the administration trying to trip up Mattis’s confirmation hearings?

      Yes.

      • Kim Quade says:

        It’s not about equality. The issue of women in the draft is of a risk to national security. It’s one thing for a qualified and highly trained female pilot to enter combat. It’s another to place unwilling enlisted women into an “intimate killing” arena, as Gen. Mattis put it. The outcome is disastrous, for both the women and the nation.
        But, as I said, it’s moot. Obama and his social re-engineering of the military will come to a quick halt, especially with Mattis as Defense Sec’y.
        Thanks to all for reading.

        • J Walter says:

          What about an unwilling enlist man? Oh that’s right men are disposable.

        • GWB says:

          Sorry, but if you believe women should be in all combat positions in the military, then you are a hypocrite if you believe they should be excluded from Selective Service registration. That’s the point of the first commenters.

          If that isn’t what you believe, then you really should put the shoe back on the other foot. They don’t believe it, either. (Sounds like you’re ok with women killing as long as it’s sanitary, technological and long distance; I’m not ok with it at all.)

          • Kim Quade says:

            I do not, nor have I ever, endorsed the idea of women in combat. Ever.
            I believe in biology, which tells me two things — 1) the average woman (draftee) will never have the strength of the average man, and 2) women do not generate the testosterone amounts which lead to aggression. Men fight and protect, women are programmed to nurture.
            Women pilots are few in number and not worth the argument here. We’re talking about drafting into infantry combat.
            Please show me in my post where I endorsed women serving in combat roles.

            • SFC D says:

              I’m decidedly against women in Infantry combat roles. I’m against Selective Service registration. I’m against a draft entirely. HOWEVER, there are people at a high paygrade that have decided that we WILL have women in combat roles, and we WILL continue to have Selective Service Registration. Women have zero penalty for not registering, while men do. Kindly explain the “fairness and equity” in that.

            • GWB says:

              That’s why I responded to your comments, Kim. Folks commenting were pointing out the hypocrisy of advocating one but not the other – the position of many feminists. Your argumentation against that was NOT stating that you were against women in combat, but were simply arguments against the “drafting” of women. That muddies the water, imo.

              As to you endorsing women in combat roles:

              It’s one thing for a qualified and highly trained female pilot to enter combat.

              That seems to endorse women in combat roles that aren’t in the “intimate killing” arena (based on the muddied waters).

              I figured you didn’t endorse women in infantry combat, but when you responded negatively to those pointing out the hypocrisy, it was harder to tell. I’m glad we got the waters unmuddied.

  • Nina says:

    I think he’s just trying to salvage something… ANYTHING of his legacy. Pandering to the womyn and lefties is evidently today’s method of choice before he heads to the nearest golf course.

  • Rusty Shackleford says:

    OK, His Obamaness wants to make men and women register for the draft, but what about all the 35 other genders, the zes, xes, and wtfs? Where are their equal rights? Barack Insane Obama needs to come clean on this terrible miscarriage of gender justice!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Subscribe
Become a Victory Girl!

Are you interested in writing for Victory Girls? If you’d like to blog about politics and current events from a conservative POV, send us a writing sample here.
Ava Gardner
gisonboat
rovin_readhead
Instagram