As a sidenote: I recently had to explain to a 22-year old that “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” was actually enacted as a pro-gay compromise. How crazy is that?! What was a positive step forward for gay people in the 90’s is seen as a completely unacceptable compromise today. How things do change.
Posted by Karol at 11:46 PM
As Will Rogers once said, “Even if you’re on the right track, you’ll get run over if you just sit there”.
“Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” was a toe in the door but there hasn’t been any forward progress on the issue in years. And by forward progress I mean full integration, of course. When the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs is saying it’s time, then it’s time.
I will be sure to note that we must always agree with the Joint Chiefs Chairman on all matters military.
I love that Obama is getting attacked on Clinton’s policy. There is something just awesome about that.
The Chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff also said that aliens told him we should all jump off a cliff. While you’re rushing to carry out those orders, I’ll put in a referendum asking them to reinstate pre-”don’t ask don’t tell policy”. That way everyone will be happy. You did your duty, and I don’t have to worry about being naked in the showers.
@Phang – Worry about being naked in the showers? Seriously? Are you actually implying that allowing gays to serve openly in the military will lead to your getting raped? I’m more than happy to debate this issue on it’s merits, not on blatantly ridiculous notions like you’re suggesting.
@Karol – I wasn’t saying that the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs (COJC from now on) is the last word on the subject, but if I were to ask someone about whether the armed forces is ready for this change, I would lend more weight to his opinion. If the highest ranking military officer in the entire armed forces states his view on the military, I’m likely to lend credence to his long experience in the matter vs. your average person on the street. We defer to the COJC on matters of military readiness, troop deployment, operational guidelines, etc… Why would his opinion on this matter be any less trustworthy? Again, there’s debate to be had but taking into account the COJC’s advice is not the same as blindly following someone off a cliff.
And Clinton took a lot of crap about Don’t Ask Don’t Tell too, from gay advocates, who said at the time that the policy was not the blanket acceptance that they wanted. Obama is just hearing the same thing. But it’s worse because Obama campaigned on this issue specifically.
The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff works at the pleasure of the President. Ergo, that’s why you’ve had Chairmen say things like, oh, “Sure we can bomb North Vietnam to the peace table.” Tell me, did that work out all that well?
Just saying, four stars are political animals. Ergo, they tend not to mess with the biggest predator in the room. Just something to consider before you start saying “Well the JCS say…”, as the rest of the sentence is “…whatever the boss d*mn well says.”
The simple fact of the matter is Congress passed a law. In a society in compliance with the Constitution, the legislative branch would be telling the Executive if they wanted the law changed they’d have gotten to it. Or they’d, you know, change the law. I think this is the kind of thing where I look at Democrats and say, “You’ve got a majority. If it’s a burning issue that we’re screwing with in the middle of two wars, pass it through Congress and take your lumps. If not, leave it alone.
The fact that we’re trying to do this through back door means is another indication people do not take national security seriously. This is a rather large problem for many religious Americans. Many of them serve in the armed forces. It’s all good to say “Well gays shouldn’t be discriminated against…”, but I don’t think it’s worth having 5-15% (depending on who you listen to) of the armed services opt to not reenlist. (See the Army/Navy/AirForce Times survey done a couple months ago–that number’s not out of my head.)
This isn’t like women, blacks, or whatever claptrap people want to throw out there. Strange, but there are pretty clear ways of telling someone is a woman, black, etc.. You can’t tell someone is gay until, well, they tell you or you see them do something. Not to mention, you’re going to have UCMJ issues (also in Congress’s court).
As a male who was raped by a homosexual man at a young age I don’t need your “debate” that it can’t possibly happen.
Second, as we have elected Hitler II to the presidency, I think it is our national duty to resist the crystalnacht currently being used to assault straights, males, whites, conservatives, Christians, Republicans, blue-dog Democrats, the elderly, Asians, decency, common-sense, the rich, the middle class, and the working poor.
Gays in the military already have special rights. Why do they get more? Tell me this: why can’t Obama walk into a schoolyard, drop his pants and wave his junk at children? I mean, what kind of conservative are you to deny him his rights?! Wouldn’t the children learn all sorts of wonderful things about their own sexuality? Of course not, that’s why we have laws against that kind of behavior. Then Clinton has to go say “well, as long as Obama doesn’t TELL anyone he waved his junk around, it’s not illegal and our nation’s enemies will respect us more!”
Whats the matter, that analogy not working for you? You haven’t heard of Kevin Jennings, the child molester who has been put in charge of schools? You don’t know WHO put him there, who thinks like him, praises him, LEGITIMIZES him? The same person pushing for more special rights for gays in the military.
I’m sorry if you think male couples should be screwing on the streets and are offended by people who love this country. I’m sorry that you’re upset that liberal’s national-socialist and fascist principles and values were defeated in WWII. Mostly, I’m sorry that people in this day and age are faced with them again, from liberals within our own government.
Someone could probably write a master’s thesis analyzing the myriad logical fallacies that make up that one comment. Congratulations! You win the Internets!
Phang, you might find this debate useful.
Just one thing, FYI: not all gays are pedophiles and not all pedophiles are gay.
Hitler II? Oookaaay. I’m sorry, but while I may not like the President’s policies, I think we’re pretty far removed from Hitler II. Now, if there’s a suspicious attack right before mid-terms that people attempt to use as justification to stop what is shaping up to be a one-sided a**whuppin, we can talk. But until then, let’s not get nutty about the references to a certain Austrian.