Richard Spencer testified before the Senate Armed Services committee last week:<\/p>\n
“I testified before this committee, I believe in 2015, that it was my belief that the Department of Defense \u2013 specifically, individual services \u2013 was not to be a petri dish for social experiments<\/strong>.<\/p>\n
“We have…to fight forward so that readiness is the key and lethality is the product<\/strong>.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
Mark Green’s nomination for Secretary of the Army was torpedoed<\/a> in part because, some noted, he was replacing the Army’s first homosexual Secretary.<\/p>\n
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.\u00a0 (He also seemed to imply homosexual “courage” was on par with the Medal of Honor<\/a>, and that religious troops were equivalent to racists and bigots<\/a>.)<\/p>\n
Mabus was not among a group of 10 former SecNavs<\/a> who joined in support of Spencer.<\/p>\n
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.<\/p>\n
Spencer currently has “overwhelming support<\/a>” 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.<\/p>\n
The role of the Navy is to \u201cinflict pain on enemy,\u201d he said. \u201cWhen I see us inflicting pain on ourselves, it is an anathema to me and it has to stop.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
That’s something you don’t hear much anymore.<\/p>\n
With reference to OneNewsNow<\/a>.<\/span><\/p>\n
<\/div>\nADVERTISEMENT<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n
\n