"Don't Ask" Showdown Looms in Senate This Week

DADT should be repealed for the simple fact that it is the right thing to do. I hate to break it to some out there but ‘The Gays’ are people too and capable of serving in the military in an adult, professional manner without fondeling every teenaged new recruit they come across. Grow up people!

We need homosexuals in the Military about as much as we need pedophiles in day care centers. The liberals have forgotten that the purpose of the Military is not to advance their careers, advance their social agendas, or advance their political objectives. The purpose the Military is to defend the nation.

1. “President Obama’s fight to let openly gay men and women serve in the U.S. military”??? With respect, Mr. Thompson, please document that “fight.” Yes, he promised repeatedly during his campaign to “throw the weight of his administration behind passage of the Military Readiness Enhancement Act [now dead thanks to his backing Gate's demand in May that it be gutted],” but other than lip service, the only action we’re aware of nearly two years after he was sworn in is ONE phone call to Sen. Levin.

2. “Gates … ready to lift the ban”??? Again, with respect, Mr. Thompson, you appear to be one of those who did not hear all of what Mr. Gates told the Senate Armed Services Committee on February 2nd, which included:

“If legislation is passed repealing don’t ask, don’t tell, we would feel it very important that we be given some period of time for that implementation, at least a year.”
[That, technically, the current amendment would only provide an OPTION to repeal is beside the larger point.]

3. “withering on its own…’more humane’ [policy]… tightened its implementation”??? Again, with respect, the reality is very different from the Pentagon PR:

“If there is compelling evidence that a person has engaged in homosexual conduct, I would not expect that these new regs would make a difference.” – Pentagon General Counsel Jeh Johnson, March 25, 2010.

“Asked whether the new procedure would slow most cases down, the senior official also would not speculate. ‘You all want to find something between the lines here that really isn’t there….I’m not in a position to say one way or another’, the senior defense official said. ‘It’s not designed to have that effect’, another official added about the prospects for additional delays. … ‘This is in no way a moratorium or suspension in separations’, said [another senior defense] official, who asked not to be named.” – Politico, October 22, 2010.

“Servicemembers Legal Defense Network [SLDN]…continues to hear daily from military personnel who are under investigation for being gay and face the possibility of being fired. ‘We have clients who are still under investigation, who are still having to respond, and in fact we have a client under investigation right now under suicide watch’, [SLDN Executive Director Aubrey] Sarvis said. ‘So ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ has not gone away’. – AP, November 22, 2010.

“A general just approved the separation of an SLDN client serving overseas in the U.S. Air Force. This service member now faces an administrative separation board.” – SLDN, November 28, 2010.

Finally, if you look through TIME’s archives, you will discover the September 8, 1975, cover story featuring USAF TSgt. Leonard Matlovich who, that year, became the first person to out himself to fight the ban. Dan Choi wasn’t even born then, yet 35 years later was discharged because of the same evergreen bigotry that resulted in Leonard’s discharge and those of some 100,000 others before anyone ever heard of “DADT” which is just old wine in a new bottle.

Thank you.

“The purpose the Military is to defend the nation.”

True.

With respect, have you forgotten that gay soldiers are defending the nation just as ably as non-gay soldiers are?

They are serving today, right now.

DADT has never made any sense. It’s insulting both to the gay soldiers it expects to lie in order to serve, and to the non-gay soldiers to whom it ascribes some sophomoric prejudice worthy of a sixth-grader.

It’s way past time for DADT to go. Let those who can and will defend the nation get on with the job.

“Each side will be marshaling whatever evidence it can pull out of the year-long Pentagon review to buttress its argument.”
…
I bet there’ll be at least two senators who will present “evidence” from a 3,500 year document to buttress their argument against lifting the ban against “sinners” in the military.

From a link in the next story, about Wikileaks:
“After arriving in Iraq the young soldier, who is gay, complained of feeling socially “isolated” in the military.”
.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/8166395/Bradley-Manning-The-prime-suspect-of-giving-files-to-WikiLeaks.html
.
For opponents, more “evidence” that gays can’t be trusted to serve in the military.

Re: “President Obama’s fight”: I’d like to hear that Obama has broken a sweat on DADT. I’d like to hear that he’s called a single senator to try to enlist their vote. I’d like to hear that he has a strategy besides leaving the issues of gay civil rights to the last two lame duck weeks of a congress in which he has had a clear majority, even a sixty-vote super-majority for a while. I’d like to hear that he’s spent a nickel of political capital on a constituency that enthusiastically campaigned and voted for him. That’s what I’d like to hear. But I won’t. Because this president sees gay Americans only as a liability, and will fight for them only when he’s pushed to the wall, and then only half-heartedly. If DADT is repealed in this congress, it will not be because Obama fought for it, or even wanted it to happen very much.

DADT has to end. It is archaic. Not only that, but it institutionalizes bigotry and hatred. If the government can legally say somebody can’t have the job they would like (as a soldier, marine or sailor), what is to stop private corporations from instituting similar policies?
.
We are the country with an all volunteer force. We are also the country that discriminates against gay men and women. Good men and women, many with long, distinguished careers, have been forced from the military in recent years. How insane is that? We are a nation at war and our military leaders find it necessary to “separate” experienced fighting men and women because of how the lead their private lives?
.
Dan Choi outed himself. There were others who never outed themselves. Friends or neighbors outed them. Or worst yet, the military went on fishing expeditions, investigating the emails, ect., of unmarried officers. Because it is rare that a man becomes an officer and never marries. One man (sorry I can’t remember his name but he’s been on Rachel Maddow and other MSNBC shows) is fighting his discharge based on the unlawful search and seizure of his emails. Like Choi, he is a decorated officer whom those under him like and respect–even after finding out he’s gay.

Senator McCain lost his faculties a long time ago. It is totally amazing that the state of Arizona voted him back in, considering that he has become senile and often acts irrational. He mumbles and laughs when there is no cause. The very fact that he picked Sarah Palin, a peson who is totally unqualified to become VP or POTUS, as his running mate shows his lack of reasoning.
Insofar as the DADT – it is absolutely stupid to continue with this policy. There have been gays in the military for as long as there as been a military. There are gay members in Congress for as long as there has been a Congress. Most GI’s know if there is a gay in their midst and ignore the fact. They simply don’t care just as they don’t care in a civilian working environment. Discrimination is not the American way.

“most GI’s know if there is a gay in their midst and ignore the fact.”
.
And you know this how alex? What GI’s have YOU talked to that point you to this fact?
.
My son, who recently returned from the battlefield says it’s a very big deal among our fighting men. An added distraction to an already dangerous situation. Problem no. 1, where do you house them? Our soldiers overwhelmingly will tell you they don’t want them in their quarters. Housing them together is out of the question also. We are talking about a tiny percentage of our military to begin with, keep it to yourself, or go away, it’s that simple.
.
And I laugh every time a dimwitted liberal hawks the old tired talking point about Sarah not being qualified to be VP. Compared to a community organizer, turned senator for 140 some days, who you idiots thought was qualified to be the prez. Hilarious if it wasn’t so sickening.

Hey Homophobes! We won’t ask if your bigots if you don’t tell us that your bigots and we’ll even let you serve because frankly your fellow soldiers won’t care anyway and if they do it’s only because they are really, really, really annoyed by your hateful rants and fallacious argumentation and in lieu of kicking you out of the military they’ll probably just say “shut up.”

“My son, who recently returned from the battlefield says it’s a very big deal among our fighting men. An added distraction to an already dangerous situation. Problem no. 1, where do you house them? Our soldiers overwhelmingly will tell you they don’t want them in their quarters. Housing them together is out of the question also. We are talking about a tiny percentage of our military to begin with, keep it to yourself, or go away, it’s that simple.”
.
Yet a poll shows that about 70 percent of our fighting personell don’t give a hoot. It’s BS. Homosexuals have served honorably in our military through all our wars.
.
Lets extend our gratitude and let them serve our country with pride the same way as we extend our gratitude to heterosexual soldiers.
.
“And I laugh every time a dimwitted liberal hawks the old tired talking point about Sarah not being qualified to be VP. Compared to a community organizer, turned senator for 140 some days, who you idiots thought was qualified to be the prez. Hilarious if it wasn’t so sickening.”
.
What is a liberal Hawk? I’ve heard of chicken hawks – like that religious fella who said that the latest crop of ‘liberally picked’ medal of honor kittens didn’t get it for the right reasons. Dumb comments like yours and his comes from people who have no understanding of reality outside your political bubble.
.
It’s completely betrayed by the whole community organizer moniker. I don’t put stock in ‘experience’. It’s relative to common sense. But for someone as intellectually incurious, incapable of even remembering the basics of her own party and have to write it on her palm tells you volumes. Having seen her non political show with her basic political message I understand why people like her.
.
It’s all window dressing. We don’t want politicians and states men. We want images of our own shallow minds.
.
Tell your ‘son’ to grow up when it comes to serving with homosexual soldiers – they’re not there to touch his precious bodily fluids; they’re there to protect our country just like he is and in extension your @ss.

save you a lot!you must not miss it!

===== http://www.briskfeetinn.com =====

Why don’t you tell him to grow up asswhipe, him and the thousands like him who don’t want gays on the front lines. Surveys done in the right place will get you libs the results you want every time. Just like the handful of air force boys and girls who actually were the surveyees and live more comfortably than we do and know even less than we do about whats really going on. You wouldn’t have the balls to broach this subject with a member of the military who this really affects, just another gutless liberal with his head up his ass. This is really a subject which should not even be an issue, except for the very small handfull of homos who are merely wanting to make a statement, nothing more. If their one desire was just to truly serve and protect their country they wouldn’t even bring it up. There’s your common sense for ya.

“except for the very small handfull of homos who are merely wanting to make a statement, nothing more. If their one desire was just to truly serve and protect their country they wouldn’t even bring it up. There’s your common sense for ya.”
.
That’s the crux now isn’t it? It’s not what our military thinks, it’s what you feel about ‘them’ there ‘homos’.
.
As for the rest of your post – don’t you get tired of defending your basic lack of humanity and common sense with straw men and that liberals are to blame for your own antique view?
.
Don’t be scared; not one single homosexual soldier have the desire to do anything other than defend you and your ‘son’.
.
They’re not there because they fancy the uniform and want an endless supply of young innocent meat. They’re there for the same reason ‘straight’ young men and women are. If you believe otherwise you’re a fool, but reading your stew of talking points I guess you’re pretty clueless of that.

Jollypants, thanks for your defamatory and ignorant post comparing homosexuals to pedophiles. Bigots like yourself have forgotten how much gays and lesbians have sacrificed in the face of attitudes such as yours in order to build this great nation.

Those troops who rely upon linguists, or the many other qualified soldiers who have been canned due to their perceived sexual orientation, know exactly how much we need gay soldiers in the military.

Hippooath
I served with gays, who most in the company knew were gay, and they didn’t give a darn as long as they adhered to the same principles as non-gays while on duty. The latest study from the Pentagon reveals exactly what has been mentioned on other blogs, that 70% of those polled didn’t have any problem serving with gays.
Your lack of intellingence shows. Sarah Palin had to go to six colleges and attend summer sessions just to get a BA in Journalism. As recently as last week she declared North Korea an ally. She didn’t know Africa was a continent but thought it was a country. She is just plain old dumb. Compare that with Obama who graduated from Columbia and Harvard (summa cum laude), was President of the Harvard Law Review and taught constitutional law. They are as oppositve education wise as the North Pole vs the South Poles.
Apparently everyone forgot that her hubby (who was her adviser when she was Governor) was a member of the Alaska Independence Party whose members wanted to secede from the USA. She welcomed the group and some say she was also a member.
What does Sarah Palin read? “Oh everything” Could you be specific “I can’t think of anything specific — just this and that.” Wow—Wow————-

PS
I believe the Pentagon estimated that there are at least 60,000 gays serving in the military now.

“7.5Hippooath
I served with gays, who most in the company knew were gay, and they didn’t give a darn as long as they adhered to the same principles as non-gays while on duty. The latest study from the Pentagon reveals exactly what has been mentioned on other blogs, that 70% of those polled didn’t have any problem serving with gays.
Your lack of intellingence shows.”
.
I assume that this comment was meant for 2thirdrock and not me, since you and I are in agreement and I’ve stated the same to 2third as you now express. I don’t think 2third lack intelligence – just empathy and humanity. There’s nothing in what he and his ‘son’ stand for that lets me believe he understand much about this beyond what he ‘heard’. He certainly haven’t met any real ‘homos’ (as he calls them) since he have such a nonsensical comical view of homosexuals. It’s almost as he believes that they chose to be ‘homos’ and just want the next parade to be a pride one.

Hippooath — Sorry for the goof. You are correct.

It’s ignorant individuals like you that ruin the true foundation of this nation. You are a prime example as to why laws defending human rights are not being passed.
There is NO comparison between a pedophile and a homosexual individual.
The comment you made shows the ignorance that you hold. You should be ashamed to even say such a thing.
P.S. It’s estimated that there are 60,00 homosexual individuals that are currently serving in the military. Your worried about the cohesion of the military? If so, why are we currently one of the finest in the world?
Get over it. You are ignorant and a non-informed individual.

Here’s what I think: DADT is about two issues for those concerned. Firstly, it is about free speech; the First Amendment right to speak about same-sex relationships. Secondly, and probably the most controversial, is the issue of being “openly gay”. What does that mean? As it pertains to men, I understand that it will allow men in uniform to behave effeminately. This, to me, is the real issue for those against repeal. DADT already acknowledges that gay sex happens, and like most sex, it takes place in private. Those who think that DADT is about prohibiting same-sex acts in private and that those against repeal are bigots are just plain wrong. This is more about uniformed effeminate men embarrasing, say, a cohesive Marine combat unit that bonds closely around a combat mission. DADT ALLOWS discreet gay sex. It doesn’t allow uniformed men to behave like women or uniformed women to behave like men. In defense of DADT, how can one be considered a “bigot” about a sex act that takes place in private and is never seen by those it may offend and by virtue of being protected by DADT is tacitly condoned? My daughter and son-in-law, both petty officers in the Navy, say most of their colleagues just want all uniformed personnel to “act their gender”. DADT allows same-sex relationships while insisting on proper military bearing and comportment. The military is about uniformity and consistent behavior.

DADT is not about the sex. It’s not like homosexual soldiers want to be able to brag about the size schlong they nibbled or how much Bush private McGeegan really have.
.
It’s about forcing good soldiers and needed specialists out because they don’t want to pretend to be ‘straight’.
.
None of them want to be able to wear leather camo @ssless chaps – they just don’t want to pretend to be ‘straight’ in order to keep defending our nation.
.
Other nations with openly gay soldiers don’t seem to have a problem and unit cohesiveness don’t see to be the issue.
.
“DADT allows same-sex relationships while insisting on proper military bearing and comportment. The military is about uniformity and consistent behavior.”
.
No it doesn’t. The only thing it does is to tell homosexual soldiers is that the code of conduct they always show only applies if they don’t also say they are gay. Then suddently their gayness implies that their code of conduct is wrong.
.
This is not just a free speech question but more a humanity question; that they’re no less human or patriotic just because they kissed a same sex person and liked it.

hippoath: Thanks for making my point. “Openly gay” behavior is a recent societal phenomenon in America. Go back 40 years and you’ll find lots of gay people “in the closet” in open society. Sodomy laws were still enforced. The military is NOT open society. My prediction is that the Republicans will filibuster it until the new congress is sworn in in January. That will effectively stall it for the near future. DADT will not be repealed until that older generation of commissioned officers and non commissioned officers (petty officers, sergeants, warrant officers) who are the nuts and bolts of the military are no longer in authority.

The battle just begins….

Let’s face it – DADT will be repealed soon or ruled unconstitutional by the courts. So be it. However the repeal proponents need to consider a few facts when citing Truman’s decision to integrate the armed services back in the late ’40s??

I joined the US Navy in 1974, and at that time, some 30 odd years later, though apparently “integrated”, much of the leadership was still myopic in conflict about “the negro problem”. Realistically – I can’t recall a black man getting a fair chance until Reagan’s days in the mid ’80s, the tipping point for myself being when I had a black senior.

Sure – the homosexuals (not derogatory – just plain english here – same as the DADT amendments) will get to serve – but at what cost?

In the end the silent majority of military leaders who might be against the policy but are afraid of the unspeakable and remain invisible as to speaking about the impact (“Bob is an open homo – why should I give him a 4.0 eval above Greg who is a normal guy?”) will defer and discriminate against the homosexual members for decades to come if so forced to put their sexuality in the “open”.

Let’s face it – DADT perhaps should be repealed someday – and then let the “social fairness” of the military’s own social structure work it out. Standby Lt. Choi – it’s those you force with your presence whom will make it unbearable for your kind many years to come. Sorry, but just “human nature” at work. But at least you’ll have a comforting New Years in 2040 to celebrate in your own egotistic cause?

So for those in opposition of a “fair review” as called for by Sen. McCain – you might want to reconsider? – a delay of a few month’s debate wait is worth a few decades of reality??

(Just an honest opinion from someone who doesn’t really care about “the issue”). Perhaps more attention to the crap going on in Korea is appropriate?

It should NOT be this difficult. It’s about as simple as can possibly be. Are those who want to join the military or are already in the military able to do the job well? Yes? Then they stay. Their sexual orientation shouldn’t be a factor at all. If you’re THAT concerned about someone’s sexual orientation, I wonder whether you should be working in the military, because all the time and effort obsessing over that is time taken away from focusing on actual security issues at hand. You know, things that will actually affect the nation at large.

People need to grow up and get over themselves and quit worrying so much about who’s attracted to whom. It’s really none of your concern, and if you make it your concern, you have far too much time on your hands.

“We don’t have a problem,” John McCain, the Arizona Republican who has become a chief defender of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” in recent months, said on CNN Sunday. Rather, the push to end the policy is about a “political promise made by an inexperienced president, or candidate for president, of the United States.”

He added that the need to preserve the U.S. military’s fighting edge is “why people like the commandant of the Marine Corps has come out against repeal.”

Do tell, McCain, how do you figure not allowing gays to serve will “preserve our fighting edge”? We don’t have a problem? Tell that to the numerous people who’ve been harassed and fired because of other people’s ignorance and fear. Your credibility slips further and further away with each passing day, McCain.