Richard Spencer, Trump Nominee for Secretary of the Navy

Richard Spencer testified before the Senate Armed Services committee last week:

“I testified before this committee, I believe in 2015, that it was my belief that the Department of Defense – specifically, individual services – was not to be a petri dish for social experiments.

“We have…to fight forward so that readiness is the key and lethality is the product.”

Mark Green’s nomination for Secretary of the Army was torpedoed in part because, some noted, he was replacing the Army’s first homosexual Secretary.

Richard Spencer would be replacing someone people might arguably have called the Navy’s first homosexual Secretary, Ray Mabus, who at times was accused of valuing social change above military effectiveness.  (He also seemed to imply homosexual “courage” was on par with the Medal of Honor, and that religious troops were equivalent to racists and bigots.)

Mabus was not among a group of 10 former SecNavs who joined in support of Spencer.

Spencer’s greatest weakness might be his previous proposal to close military commissaries as a cost-saving measure — something that was wildly unpopular with the military.

Spencer currently has “overwhelming support” from the Senate Armed Services Committee. It will be interesting to see how activists may attempt to change the narrative over the next few weeks.

The role of the Navy is to “inflict pain on enemy,” he said. “When I see us inflicting pain on ourselves, it is an anathema to me and it has to stop.”

That’s something you don’t hear much anymore.

With reference to OneNewsNow.


One comment

  • Anonymous Imperial Patriot

    I know that a lot of Sailors join me in saying “Good riddance” to Butthole Mabus leaving.

    I read the Navy Times and none of the comments paint a positive view of Mabus.

    The transgressions he made against the United States Navy are numerous; I shall name his worst:

    -His social justice experiments took funds away from needed projects; like the Ohio-class Replacement Submarine.

    -He bears the brunt of the failure of the Type I Naval Working Uniform.

    -He tried to sweep under the rug the revelation that the Navy wastes money on civilian personnel that outnumber the personnel of the Navy.

    -He attacked the character of the United States Marine Corps after a Navy-commissioned study determined women to be fundamentally incapable of meeting the minimum physical/mental standards of combat roles.

    -He tried to prevent the F/A-XX from being a manned platform, an act that even drew the ire of Air Force generals.

    -He attempted to name Naval vessels after Democratic civil rights activists; many of whom were openly hateful of the United States military.

    -He eliminated the Navy’s rating system. Although the system was reinstated within a few weeks, he attacked the character of the enlisted Sailors who dared to criticize his decision.

    Because of these transgressions, among others, it is my belief (and it is shared by many) that Ray Mabus is a failure of a SecNav. The fact that Richard Spencer knows that the purpose of the Navy is to win wars, and not to accommodate sexually-immoral, anti-Christian bigots; that alone makes him a better choice.

    Let posterity allow us to forget the name of Ray Mabus.