I have a few thoughts on Joe Biden’s recent address to celebrate International Women’s Day – and if I can digress for a moment, I’m just sick at how commercialism has supplanted the true meaning of this holiday — which I think constitutes the longest time that he’s appeared in public since he’s become our posthumous president.
Biden spoke for 11 minutes. Those are 11 minutes I will never get back, but I can console myself with the knowledge that Joe Biden was at least spared the agony that the rest of us went through, on account of him not having lived to see this sad spectacle.
He stumbled over words – and not big words, like “inoperative medulla oblongata.” Small words, like articles, and prepositions, and people’s names who were standing in the same room with him.
As a public service, I am providing the following “Biden-to-English” translation of part of his talk:
BS (Biden speak): “…two emily qualified warriors…”
English: “two eminently qualified warriors…”
BS: “General Jacquelin Van O- O – Olust”
English: “Jacquelin Van Ovost”
BS: “General Van Ovust”
English: still “Van Ovost”
BS: “loo-genant Teneral Richardson”
English: “Lieutenant General Richardson”
Bs: “Lieutenant General Richson”
English: still “Richardson”
BS: [in the old timey, sexist days] “women weren’t…were banned from flying combat missions…”
English: um, “were”
If individual words were tough, you can imagine his troubles with entire phrases. For example, “Some of it is going to take… an…uhh…you know…it’s… it’s… an intensity of purpose and mission…” And “…making sure more diverse candidates are considering…. Are being considered for…”
Okay, that was the first 7 minutes, and I didn’t have the heart to go on. So I just skipped to the end.
And came across this gem: “I want to thank you both, and I want to thank the secre… the… uh… the former general. I keep calling him general. My… my…my uh… the guy who runs that outfit over there…”
One more time:
BS: “uh… the former general. I keep calling him general. My… my uh… the guy…”
English: My Secretary of Defense, ol’ What’s His Name.
BS: “…that outfit over there”
English: the Pentagon.
BS: “you know… you know the thing. The building. With a bunch of sides.”
English: still the Pentagon.
The only one of those Biden sentences I made up was the last one.
On a personal level, it’s a sad thing to watch someone who is just fading before our eyes. But the more depressing part of his address was not the way he bumbled through it, but what he actually had to slur.
Sorry: “say.” What he had to say.
The main focus of his address – at least as it was written out in gigantic letters for him on the teleprompter – was to celebrate women in the military. I think most Americans are grateful and heartened by the willingness of women to serve, and especially as someone who never served myself, I greatly appreciate that!
But as in so many areas of life, the leftist worldview ends up turning what should be a good thing into an identity politics axe to grind, and then grinds it. Over the course of the address, Biden’s speechwriter starts by celebrating women’s contributions to our military and praising the two specific women who are being promoted, but by the end, he’s making a not-too-subtle call for creating a kinder, gentler military.
He talks about finding ways “to make it easier and safer for more women, not just to join the military, but to stay in the military.” On the one hand, that doesn’t sound like a bad idea, because who wants any American job to be harder or more dangerous?
On the other hand… we’re talking about the MILITARY! Do we want the kind of recruits who say, “I’m looking for a job that is easy and safe. Let’s see… cosmetologist, government worker, life coach? Ooh, I know: how about the armed forces?!”
When it comes to defending our country, we want bad asses; we want lean, mean, fighting machines. We don’t want crisis counselors, or social workers, or diplomats. We want people who will kick in doors, break things, and kill bad guys.
We want George Patton, not Bradley Manning. The type of person who hears gunfire and runs TOWARDS it.
The type of person who, after the first day of Shiloh, when Sherman says, “We’ve had the devil’s own day, haven’t we?” answers, “Yes. Lick ‘em tomorrow, though.” (I love me some US Grant!)
Whoever wrote that speech had some good points. It talked about rooting out sexual assault in the military, which every decent person supports, and for fair treatment of women on all levels, which, ditto.
But the speech went beyond that, in ways that imply that the military should be a quasi-social program, with quotas to achieve gender equity. Biden celebrates the idea that women, “aren’t told no when they want to apply to Ranger school….”
And I guess if he meant that women should be allowed to apply – but get no special treatment, or lower standards to meet – that idea would be okay. But that’s not what he means. You can tell from the whole tenor of the speech.
For example, he touts the fact that the two women being promoted, “…will become the second and third women in the history of the United States armed force to lead combatant commands…” Do you think those two women want that to be the first thing anyone thinks about when seeing them?
I understand that it’s worth mentioning when someone achieves a “first ever” accomplishment: Jackie Robinson breaking the color barrier in baseball, Sandra Day 0’Connor becoming the first woman on the Supreme Court, Condoleeza Rice becoming the first female national security advisor.
But do we need to hammer that point for the second and the third person to rise through a glass ceiling that was already broken? Do you remember Democrats fawning over Amy Coney Barrett for being the fifth female on the high court? (Spoiler alert: you do not.) When I am on my death bed at age 116, will I be bombarded by the news that someone has just been made our 116th female general?
Many other moments in the speech revealed insultingly frivolous gender pandering. Biden mumbled about the many ways his military is becoming more welcoming to women, going so far as to tout the way they are “updating requirements for their hairstyles.”
I’m not making that up. And I can’t think of an idea that is more condescending to women than, “I’m sure these ladies would be lining up to serve, if only we didn’t insist they have unflattering haircuts!”
Can you picture a bunch of Marines lined up to get into landing craft before hitting the beach at Iwo Jima or Guadalcanal, and hearing this:
Square-jawed NCO: “All right men, you’re about to face the enemy. Remember Pearl Harbor, and Bull Halsey’s words, ‘When this war is over, the only place the Japanese language will be spoken WILL BE IN HELL!!”
Marines: “YEAAAAHHHH!”
Lone voice: “Hey Sarge, can we do something about these haircuts?”
NCO: “What? What the hell are you talking about?!”
LV: “I just think that with my skull shape, the high-and-tight look is not flattering.”
NCA: “What is your major malfunction, you numb—”
Second voice: “Yeah, and I’d like to have a mullet, even though they won’t be invented for 40 years.”
Third voice: “And a man bun! Why can’t I have a man bun?”
Aaannnnnddd…. Japan wins World War II.
Biden also seemed excited that we’ve got our top military strategists hard at work, “creating maternity flight suits…”
Let that sink in, people.
Maternity. Flight. Suits.
Because I remember that during my wife’s first pregnancy, we were reading all the experts recommending that the pregnant woman get plenty of rest, eat a diet rich in vitamins, and if possible, play classical music for the fetus.
Oh, and also, expose the fetus to as many extreme G forces as possible!!
Ugh.
When I think about these people being in control of our government, I have no words.
But Shakespeare did: “Thou art a general offence, and every man should beat thee!”
Avenatti/Chelsea Manning with Farrah Fawcett’s hair, 2024!
Martin Simpson 