Do Heterosexuals Have Any Rights?

The current assault on women's right to privacy in public restrooms implies that only those born with Gender Identity Disorder have any personal rights.  GIDites believe that people with male anatomies who are dressed as women should be able to use restrooms designated for people with female anatomies.   Women  are justifiably  concerned that sexual predators can take advantage of this situation and  dress as women to gain access to women's restrooms.   Depriving women of their right to sexual privacy to accommodate men makes women second class citizens. 

Psychologists first used the  term "Gender Identity Disorder" to describe persons who believed they had a brain of one sex trapped in the body of the other (transsexuals).  Recent research using functional
MRI's indicates that transsexuals really do have a brain of one sex in the body of the other sex.  This research indicates that those who consider themselves "homosexuals" have this same birth defect but don't recognize their condition.   "Transvestites" are males who like to dress as females. It's unclear if this desire involves a brain defect.    I'm not aware of a term for females who like to dress as males.

GIDites claim that transsexuals and transvestites might be attacked if they used a men's restroom while dressed as women.   GIDites seem incapable of understanding that sexual predators occasionally dress as women and enter women's restrooms in search of prey.   If GIDites can enter women's restrooms dressed as women then so can sexual predators.  Doctors can use an MRI to determine if a  person is a transsexual, but there is no test to determine if someone is a transvestite.  Some sexual predators have taken advantage of this situation to gain access to potential victims. 

GIDites reject a compromise that would provide the option of individual user restrooms for men dressed as women who don't want to use a men's restroom.  Single user, or family, restrooms would help solve other problems.    Parents are sometimes concerned about having a child of  the opposite sex use a public restroom because they cannot be sure who will be in there. 

A single user restroom would provide a safe place for a child to go.    Public schools should switch to single user restrooms for all students.   A poll indicates 43% of students fear harassment in restrooms because of the bullying prolem. 

Some adults might welcome the possibility of  using a "private" restroom.   For example,  some have medical conditions that require them to use diapers or similar products.   The women's restrooms I used to clean had small trash receptacles  for feminine hygiene products but I don't know if all women's restrooms have them.  Men's restrooms generally don't have them so there is the potential for embarrassment when disposing of such products.   The availability of single user restrooms would allow government to prohibit sexual predators, particularly those who prey on children,  from using communal restrooms.

Government could eliminate the problem for transsexuals by having Obamacare cover sex change operations.   Being born with a brain of one sex and the body of the other is a birth defect and  surgery to put the body on the same sexual page as the brain is corrective surgery.

The GIDites claim to be harmless, but are actually Trojan horses who are creating opportunities for sexual predators who wish to deprive women of their sexual privacy.  

There can be no justification for increasing the risk of rape so that some men can dress up as women.   Alternatives are available so such men can access a restroom.   The potential cost to rape victims is too great to provide such men access to the same restrooms as women.

Rape can be an extremely traumatic event for women    31% of rape survivors have problems with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, which is sometimes a problem for men who have been in extreme military combat.   13% of rape survivors attempt suicide and many turn to drugs or alcohol to escape the memory.  26.6% of women with bulimia nervosa reported they had been raped.

Those who want men  dressed as women to have access to women's restrooms obviously have no respect for a woman's right to sexual privacy or safety.   Congress should impeach any federal official who attempts to deprive women of their right to sexual privacy and increase the risk of sexual assault.

Hillary Clinton Acts Guilty in Ambassador Stevens Death

There is no question that  American Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens was murdered in Benghazi.  The question I have been dealing with in two previous posts is whether or not Stevens was placed in Benghazi so he would be killed much like Israel's King David ordered his general to have Uriah the Hittite assigned to a place in a battle where his death was virtually certain.

I don't expect to  prove who was responsible if Americans assigned Stevens to Benghazi to be killed.  Such proof might require the investigative skills of a real life Sherlock Holmes. 

Ian Fleming once observed:  "Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times is enemy  action."  Prior to the 2008 presidential primaries two known homosexuals who were acquainted with Barack Obama died violent deaths. In November, 2011, Larry Sinclair who wrote a book claiming to have had an affair with Obama, was killed by a hit and run driver.   Chris Stevens who was murdered by terrorists at Benghazi was also a known homosexual.

[Correction:  Larry Sinclair is alive.   A rumor about his death was posted on the Free Republic possibly as part of a pattern of intimidation reported by Kevin Dujan who had scheduled a radio interview with Larry Sinclair to discuss Sinclair's allegations about Obama being homosexual and using drugs.]

Stevens wouldn't be the first high American official whose assassination was approved by someone in the United States government.  Military historian Robert Wilcox in his book "Target Patton"  claims that in December, 1945, OSS head "Wild Bill" Donovan ordered OSS marksman Douglas Bazata to kill Gen. George Patton because Patton was threatening to expose what Patton considered allied collusion with the Soviets that cost American lives.  The World War II era OSS was the predecessor of the CIA.   

Some believe Ambassador Stevens might have been  killed because he was about to blow the whistle on a questionable "gun running" scheme to send old  Libyan government weapons to Syrian "Contras" [or whatever Syrian rebels are called] or some other group.  A problem with this explanation is that an attack on Stevens in Benghazi would draw attention to whatever the CIA was doing there.   The fact the CIA facility was located so close to the consulate could indicate that the "intelligence" officials involved weren't very intelligent.   If the CIA had an operation going in Libya, locating it in the same city as a diplomatic facility would severely hamper keeping the operation secret.  The attack on the CIA compound indicates the terrorists suspected what the CIA was up to.   Their abuse of Stevens' body indicates they knew he was homosexual.

Those who don't understand government would likely say if the government wanted Stevens dead, President Barack Obama would have ordered the killing.  However, unless the  situation was similar to the murder of the Archbishop of Canterbury, Obama probably wasn't involved.  Archbishop Thomas Becket was killed in 1170 by followers of King Henry II of England who believed the King wanted him killed.   President Harry Truman probably did not know about the killing of General Patton. 

Then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton could  have been responsible, but I doubt she's intelligent enough to come up with such a plot.  It would be more likely that she went along with a plan developed. by someone else.    Her behavior before and after the incident implies she is guilty of something.   Her use of a private email service implies she was doing something improper, if not illegal.  Her attempt to avoid responsibility for the incident by inventing a easily disproved story about a riot caused by an anti-Muslim video implies she was covering up something, particularly considering that she came up with the story so soon after the incident.

Clinton's use of a private email server could have allowed terrorists to monitor her email.  If so they would have known the United States wouldn't protect its diplomats in Benghazi.  They might have also learned Stevens was homosexual which could have provided an added incentive to want to kill him.

If the murder of Stevens was part of a pattern that included the murders of Obama's homosexual acquaintances, the person in charge  was probably someone associated with Obama's financial backers.   They might have assigned someone to "protect their investment" by eliminating those who could pose a threat to Obama's election chances by raising the homosexual issue.  

Before I started this series I thought it was more likely that Stevens' death  was the result of incompetence.  Now, I think it is more likely someone wanted him to be killed.   I believe the test Sen. Saw Erwin used for President Richard Nixon and Watergate applies to Secretary of State Clinton and Benghazi.  If she knew Stevens was likely to be killed she is a crook.  If she didn't she is incompetent.

Were Benghazi Deaths Result of Incompetence or Murder One?

After I published the previous post suggesting the Benghazi massacre demonstrated Hillary Clinton's incompetence I received an email asking about the possibility that Clinton or someone intended for Ambassador Chris Stevens or another American to be murdered.   I'm still inclined to believe the best explanation is incompetence, but I recognize the incident could have involved premeditated murder. 

The death resembles an ancient murder from Israeli history.  King David of Israel had gotten Bathsheba, the wife of one of his soldiers  named Uriah the Hittite, pregnant.   When an attempt to cover up the situation failed, David sent orders for Uriah to be placed in the hottest part of the battle and have the army pull back so he would be killed. David then married Bathsheba so that most people would think her baby was the result of the marriage.    Ambassador Stevens was also placed in a situation in which death was virtually certain.

A potential problem with this scenario is that Clinton had no apparent motive for killing Stevens.   However, President Barack Obama could have had a motive if claims about his and Stevens personal lives are accurate.  I'm not sure whether or not the claims are true, but believe that those who read this blog deserve the opportunity to make up their own minds.

There are claims that both Barack Obama and Chris Stevens.  The claim that Stevens was homosexual seems to be more accepted than claims that Obama is even though the claims that he is homosexual have been made by those who describe themselves homosexuals.  Larry Sinclair  wrote a tell all book claiming to have had an affair with Obama.   Homosexual blogger Kevin Dujan claims that Obama is  homosexual. 

The mother of  Trinity Church choir director Donald Young believes his murder was to protect Obama from Young claiming to have had a homosexual relationship with Obama.  There also has been a claim that Trinity Church had a program to help homosexual men avoid exposure.   The killing of accuser Larry Sinclair by a hit and run driver is a disturbing coincidence that could support a claim that Chris Stevens was sent to Benghazi to die.

I'm a commentator rather than an investigative reporter.   The death of Ambassador Chris Stevens certainly needs further investigation.  I still believe the Benghazi incident indicates Hillary Clinton is incompetent, possibly in  more ways than one.   A competent politician certainly wouldn't have gotten involved in a situation in which she could be accused of murder.  

Conservative organizations have been claiming that Obama is blocking an indictment of Clinton for her violation of security regulations by using a private email service.  Perhaps Obama is worried she might expose his involvement in the death of Stevens.

Can Old Lady Clinton Understand Benghazi Significance?

The thing that most bothers me about Hillary Clinton's comments about Benghazi is that she doesn't seem to understand why people are concerned about her mishandling of the Benghazi situation.   She doesn't seem to understand that her mishandling of the situation allowed al Qaeda to win a major victory at Benghazi by killing the top U.S. official in Libya.    Clinton doesn't seem to understand why her use of a private email server threatened national security.

The Obama administration had been claiming a victory every time it killed an al Qaeda leader including killing Osama bin Laden .   An intelligent Secretary of State would have wanted to prevent the enemy from being able to kill any American ambassador.  Clinton foolishly decided to make it as easy as  possible for al Qaeda to kill Ambassador Chris Stevens.  Her handling of the situation would have made more sense if she had wanted him to die.

Clinton's   attempt to make a diplomatic facility at Benghazi permanent was the biggest American battlefield mistake since the Battle of Hamburger Hill in the Vietnam War.  The war on terror has made much of the world a potential battle field.   The enemy can attack any where, at any time even in San Bernardino California.

In May, 1969, the commanding general of the 101st Airborne made a foolish decision to try to take a well defended but worthless piece of real estate that became known as Hamburger Hill.  The Americans suffered heavy casualties and failed to take the hill which the enemy then abandoned.  

Clinton had ample warning that the ambassador would be in eminent danger in Benghazi.  The consulate had already suffered two minor attacks.  There had been attacks on the Tunisian consulate and the U.N. Special Envoy's convoy.   The International Red Cross closed its office after it was attacked.   The British government withdrew its diplomats  from Benghazi after an attack on its ambassador's convoy.

Clinton's critics have focused on the inadequate security at the Benghazi consulate and ignored the fact that the facility shouldn't have been defended in the first place.   A competent Secretary of State would have followed the example of the International Red Cross and the British government and abandoned a  building that wasn't worth the loss of American lives.

Clinton's use of a less secure private email server may have made it possible for al Qaeda leaders to learn the United States wouldn't defend the consulate

The advice of the old gambler in the Kenny Rogers song "The Gambler" applies to war as well as poker

"You've got to know when to hold 'em
Know when to fold 'em
Know when to walk away
And know when to run."

  The United States should have walked away from Benghazi.    There is no shame in walking a way from a battle that cannot be won.  In the early years of World War II the British army walked away from  France and the United States army walked away from the Philippines because the locations couldn't be defended at that time.

Donald Trump's Abortion Answer Wasn't Wrong, the Question Was

Donald Trump was correct when he said a woman who had an outlawed abortion would likely be punished.  However, the most likely way of ending abortions would be through regulation of those providing medical treatment.   Chris Matthews question implied that abortion would become a criminal offense. In that case the woman as a participant in the "crime" would be subject to prosecution probably as an accessory, an accomplice or a "co-conspirator". The courts might not allow prosecution unless the woman was potentially subject to prosecution.  In such a legal environment prosecutors might use the offering of immunity from prosecution to abortion recipients in exchange for testimony against the abortion provider. 

In American medicine medical procedures that can pose a treat to health generally have to be approved by government.   The most likely way to prohibit abortions would be through prohibiting specific medical procedures.   This approach at the federal level wouldn't necessarily require congressional action because the executive branch has authority to prohibit medical  procedures. 

The deaths associated with the most popular form of abortion in which the doctor basically pokes around in the woman to pull out the baby, sometimes in pieces, could justify prohibiting the procedures on the grounds that it poses too significant a threat to the woman's health.  The procedure sometimes causes fatal bleeding because the doctor cannot tell if he has caused bleeding. There is an alternative procedure available for late term pregnancies which  poses less of a threat. Removing the baby using a cesarean section allows the doctor to easily monitor the situation and catch any source of bleeding.  Requiring use of this procedure for premature ending of a pregnancy  would have the benefit  of the child being removed alive.  This approach to ending a late term pregnancy  should  give both sides what they want.  The woman would be allowed to end her pregnancy and the child would be born alive.  

Teddy, Truman and Trump

I've thought for some time that America might need a president like Theodore Roosevelt or Harry Truman.  They were strong larger than life leaders who played a major role in making the United States a strong world power.   Donald Trump is the only current candidate who comes close to the personality of those two.

Teddy Roosevelt inherited the presidency after the assassination of President William McKinley.   The United States had won a war with Spain, but European powers who had designs on Latin American countries that owed money to them didn't regard the United States as a major power.  Roosevelt told them to stay out and he would deal with Latin American debtor nations.  Latin American nations complained about Roosevelt's Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine, but his actions prevented European nations from dividing up Latin America the way they were dividing other parts of the world.  Roosevelt's heavy handed approach to Latin America also produced a canal through Panama.

Roosevelt negotiated an end to a war between Japan and Russia and earned a Nobel Peace Prize.  He ended  a west European conflict over control of  Morocco that might have become a major war.

Roosevelt pushed Congress to give the United States one of the world's largest navies.

Harry Truman inherited the presidency upon the  death of President Franklin D. Roosevelt as World War II was ending.   He faced the task of rebuilding a world devastated by years of Depression and war.  He set up the Marshall Plan to help west European countries rebuild their economies so that the communist political political groups couldn't use the situation to gain control of those countries.  He helped the Japanese switch from being a military power to a nation focused on economic goals.  Truman helped establish the United Nations and a system of regional treaties as he made the United States the principle super power.  He kept the country from slipping back into a Depression.

Teddy Roosevelt was the original Bull Moose.  He was out spoken and belligerent with strong opinions.   In 1912, he was so upset with his successor that he ran against him on the "Bull Moose" party ticket.

Harry Truman wasn't a tall man but he would stand up to anyone from Kansas City political strong man Boss Pendergast  to the leader of the Soviet Union Joseph Stalin.  When one of the nation's greatest generals, Douglas MacArthur challenged Truman's decision on how to handle the  Korean War, Truman didn't hesitate to say "you're fired."  Critics sometimes complained about  his crude language.  

Donald Trump is clearly the only "Bull Moose" in the race.  He shares Harry Truman's pen chant for using language that some consider crude.  Donald Trump is  a real larger than life person like Teddy Roosevelt and Harry Truman were.  To borrow an old Flip Wilson tag line "what you see is what you get".   He tells voters what he thinks rather than sticking to a  prepared script like most of the phonies who run for office.   Like Roosevelt and Truman he won't let special interests push him around.

It isn't necessary for presidents to enter office with specific plans for handling all problems.  We need a president who knows how to select qualified subordinates.  Richard Nixon was one of the 20th Century's most intelligent presidents, but he was forced to resign because he chose the wrong people to assist him in the White House.   The War on Terror is going badly in part because President Barack Obama chose an inept Secretary of State named Hillary Clinton. Trump's business success demonstrates he knows how to make good decisions.    The United States is facing a difficult war because of poor presidential decisions.  We need a strong leader who will take charge and make the nation great the way Presidents Theodore Roosevelt and  Harry Truman did.

The Only Way to Stop Trump

It's probably too late for Republicans to keep Donald Trump from getting the Republican presidential nomination.  There is a  remote possibility that Gov. John R. Kasich could defeat Trump if Sen. Marco Rubio and Sen. Ted Cruz dropped out and threw their support to Kasich.

Neither Rubio nor Cruz has any chance of winning the nomination.  They appeal to only a portion of Republicans with little chance of appealing to those Republicans who don't call the selves "conservatives".  Many of the people who are voting for Trump are only doing so because  they don't want Cruz or Rubio and Trump is the only other Republican with a chance to win the nomination.

If Cruz and Rubio drop out the voters who are supporting Trump as the least of the three "evils" might switch to Kasich    If there are enough Republicans in this category, Kasich might be able to compete with Trump.

Perhaps Rubio and Cruz could be bought off with promises of positions in a Kasich administration.  Rubio is a plausible vice presidential running mate.  Cruz could be offered the Attorney General position
with a secret promise of a Supreme Court nomination late in the administration.