McCain: ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ Has ‘Been Working And I Think It’s Been Working Well’
McCain: ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ Has ‘Been Working And I Think It’s Been Working Well’
In January, Sandy Tsao, an army officer, told her superiors that she is gay — a violation of the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT) law. On May 5, Tsao received a handwritten letter from President Obama stating that he is “committed to changing our current policy,” but that “it will take some time to complete (partly because it needs Congressional action).”
Today, ABC’s George Stephanopoulos asked Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) about his views on DADT. McCain did not commit to changing the policy, saying, “in all due respect, right now the military is functioning extremely well” without openly-gay service members. McCain concluded that the policy “is working well”:
McCAIN: But in all due respect, right now the military is functioning extremely well in very difficult conditions. We have to have an assessment on recruitment, on retention and all the other aspects of the impact on our military if we change the policy. In my view, and I know that a lot of people don’t agree with that, the policy has been working and I think it’s been working well.
Watch it:
McCain’s statement defending the efficacy of DADT comes in the wake of news that the military is about to discharge Dan Choi — a gay Arabic speaker –- simply for being openly gay. Choi’s dismissal is “the first known case” of a “mission-critical specialist” being discharged under DADT by the Obama administration. Last week, Choi told MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow why the policy is problematic:
CHOI: But the biggest thing that I’m angry about is what it says about my unit. It says that my unit suffered negative good order — negative actions — good order and discipline suffered. That’s a big insult to my unit. I mean, all the insult that the letter can do, to say that I’m worthy of being fired, you know, that’s nothing comparing to saying that my unit is not professional enough, that my unit does not deserve to have a leader that is willing to deploy, that has skills to contribute.
Choi isn’t alone. Since 1994, DADT has resulted in the discharge of more than 13,000 military personnel across the services, including approximately 800 with skills deemed “mission critical,” such as pilots, combat engineers, and linguists. According to a 2005 report from the Government Accountability Office, “the cost of discharging and replacing service members fired because of their sexual orientation during the policy’s first 10 years totaled at least $190.5 million — roughly $20,000 per discharged service member.
It’s unclear how these facts led McCain to conclude that the policy is “working well.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
But if you torture me I will sign off that I said something different. Torture works. Just look at me…
May 10th, 2009 at 1:18 pmWith all due respect, that is a really IDIOTIC statement from McCain. We have lost over 12000 great, patriotic, American troops because of this stupid policy and McCain thinks it has worked well? WTF
May 10th, 2009 at 1:19 pmHeads up TP….It’s Mother’s day and a Sunday….How about something good for all the bloggers…A TROLL FREE DAY…..Any one in the office.?..Sure would be nice if you would just delete them all as they post….P.B. & J
May 10th, 2009 at 1:20 pmIt’s unclear how these facts led McCain to conclude that the policy is “working well.”
– - McCain was likely referring to the fact that no male US soldiers have been reported raped by other males while on duty in Iraq. That’s their measure of success.
May 10th, 2009 at 1:24 pmMcCain pulls more shit out of his ass and pronounces it to be a bouquet of flowers.
May 10th, 2009 at 1:34 pmthe “DADT” is that policy, or law? I’ve heard it refered to as both. Either way though, its in effect, and coming out openly is currently grounds for removal from service. Its common knowledge, so the dismissed people shouldn’t be shocked. They knew that DADT was in effect, so they should have know what the end result would be if they went on tv telling the world they were gay.
And McCain saying that he feels the military is running well now is a fair statement. If its not broke, dont fix it. I’ll agree that improvements can always be made, but when the services are functioning well in combat conditions, distractions aren’t needed. The policy, right or wrong, IS in place now, and changing things may not result in something better. Just my thoughts on it.
May 10th, 2009 at 1:41 pm“In my view, and I know that a lot of people don’t agree with that, the policy has been working and I think it’s been working well,” said McCain.
First of all, I wonder just how many gays or lesbians served WITH McCain [Viet Nam] despite the fact that he had ‘no inkling’ they were were there because I believe that gays and lesbians have been serving in the military since before the first WW. Has he just assumed that this policy is ‘working well’ as he professes, and if it is, why have so many thousands been relieved of duty strictly due to their sexual orientation? I doubt he can answer that! When the military desperately NEEDS people for AfPak, but prefers to fire gays and lesbians??
May 10th, 2009 at 1:42 pmMaybe Grampy means that DADT has been working well in that it keeps teh icky gays away from good, honest, God-fearing soldiers.
May 10th, 2009 at 1:44 pmMcCain and Cheney still showing up on the Sunday talkers is just part of the reason that the GOP is @ 23%.
May 10th, 2009 at 1:45 pmOne way to Stop Bush-Cheney’s and unfortunately now also Obama’s Stupid Imperialist War:
What if huge segments of the military claimed to be gay…? (Just brainstorming…)
====
May 10th, 2009 at 1:50 pm” . . the Government Accountability Office, “the cost of discharging and replacing service members fired because of their sexual orientation during the policy’s first 10 years totaled at least $190.5 million — roughly $20,000 per discharged service member.”
That is $190.5 MILLION in TAXPAYER FUNDS! OMG, what a WASTE!
May 10th, 2009 at 1:55 pmIDEA:
On July 4, 2009, all gay people serving in all branches of the Military announce that they are gay, loudly. Get on television, print or any media outlet available.
Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell will be gone in one week. All you have to do is stand up for yourself. You are gay. Be proud of who you are.
Staying in the military, you are complicit in the discrimination of all gay people. Don’t be a tool.
You are being used by a Government that does not value you as a person. A Government that see you as “less than” straight Americans.
Remember, July 4, 2009 — Out In The Military Independence Day!
May 10th, 2009 at 2:03 pmMcCain? Who?
May 10th, 2009 at 2:05 pmConservativeForProgress Says:
It is unclear how Obama hasn’t done a damn thing about this yet.
Yeah, I mean, he’s just been sitting around on his butt with nothing to do since January 20.
People here have attempted to explain to you that this is a LAW. Pub.L. 103-160 (10 U.S.C. § 654). The President (unlike King George II) can’t simply overturn a law.
May 10th, 2009 at 2:09 pmHomophobia is just one of the many phobias that the fear-addled, cowardly little right wingers have.
Factophobia, Thoughtaphobia, Brownskinaphobia, and Sciencephobia are just a few of the others.
May 10th, 2009 at 2:10 pm>>>> Pub.L. 103-160 (10 U.S.C. § 654). The President (unlike King George II) can’t simply overturn a law.
So it is a law.
May 10th, 2009 at 2:21 pmdadtiscrazy Says:
IDEA:
On July 4, 2009, all gay people serving in all branches of the Military announce that they are gay, loudly. Get on television, print or any media outlet available.
May 10th, 2009 at 2:03 pm
Another idea:
On July 4, 2009, all people serving in all branches of the military announce they are gay, loudly.
That will be quite the pickle… ;)
May 10th, 2009 at 2:28 pm>>>On July 4, 2009, all people serving in all branches of the military announce they are gay, loudly.
what helpful purpose would be served by doing that?
May 10th, 2009 at 2:31 pmThere was a morning full of rightwingers on the talk shows today — it’s hard to understand the rationale for that when the republican party is down to 25%.
May 10th, 2009 at 2:32 pmWell, this is yet another reason I voted for Obama. The reason he hasn’t gotten to it yet because it has to go through Congress first and they have had bigger fish to fry in the first 100 days. I’ve heard stories from members in Congress that they’ll get to it this summer, so we’ll wait and see.
May 10th, 2009 at 2:36 pmGays in the military?? Why not? They pay taxes don’t they? If you want to exclude them from something, tell them that they aren’t American to pay federal income taxes. That ought to piss them off.
May 10th, 2009 at 2:37 pmMcCain got into Annapolis because he was a legacy, both his father and grandfather were admirals, which gave him an automatic admission. Congress and the Senate only appoint 535 members of each freshman class to each military academy. More than HALF of each class get in because of DADDY was a graduate of the same institution. Even ASKING him if gays should be allowed in is a stupid thing to do. HE didn’t earn HIS way into the Navy. Daddy earned it for him.
The current Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell is a stupid policy that restricts who can get a job, and that is discriminatory. Who cares what an admiral or general says, the military doesn’t BELONG to them, it belongs to the TAXPAYER!!
RNDGOF1 Says:
>>>On July 4, 2009, all people serving in all branches of the military announce they are gay, loudly.
what helpful purpose would be served by doing that?
I think it’s a good idea. It would force the military to confront the stupidity of DADT. There is no way that they would discharge every single person in the military all at once, nor would they try to punish every single one of them. The Commander-in-Chief would have to put a halt to disciplinary action under DADT (which he can do), and this would, effectively, put an end to the policy. And that would be a good thing.
May 10th, 2009 at 2:40 pmRNDGOF1 Says:
>>>On July 4, 2009, all people serving in all branches of the military announce they are gay, loudly.
what helpful purpose would be served by doing that?
May 10th, 2009 at 2:31 pm
Why not try to work it out for yourself?
Here’s a hint: I am Spartacus!
May 10th, 2009 at 2:40 pm>>>The current Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell is a stupid policy that restricts who can get a job, and that is discriminatory.
I thought it kept people from admiting they were gay. That doesn’t prevent anyone from getting a job. It may prevent them from keeping the job though.
May 10th, 2009 at 2:44 pmNo, Zooey, I am Spartacus.
No, I’m Spartacus.
I’m Brian and so is my wife!
May 10th, 2009 at 2:44 pm(Wait, how did that one get in there?)
Sorry again, but is DADT a policy, or a law? Isn’t there a difference between the two? A policy could be changed quick and easy by the person in charge of policy. A law would take more time, and require legislation.
In either case though, it is in effect now,right? And either way it can be changed, right? But untill it is changed, then violation of it is grounds for dismissal from service.
If DADT needs changed, then the process is there to change it correct?
May 10th, 2009 at 2:51 pmStop the stupid policy. If they can do their jobs, that is all that matters. John McCain is wrong. Number 8: I think that gays have been serving in the military in every war since the American Revolution.
May 10th, 2009 at 2:58 pmMcCAIN: But in all due respect, right now the military is functioning extremely well in very difficult conditions. We have to have an assessment on recruitment, on retention and all the other aspects of the impact on our military if we change the policy. In my view, and I know that a lot of people don’t agree with that, the policy has been working and I think it’s been working well.
Senator, I seriously question your mental fitness to serve in our government, especially in a body like the United States Senate. Either you know that the things you are saying are not true (in which case you are a liar), or you simply think they are true (in which case you are woefully ill-informed).
You said, “…right now the military is functioning extremely well in very difficult conditions.” Really? Because I seem to recall hearing reports that our military has been strained almost to the breaking point because of repeated deployments overseas (not to mention a lack of adequate funding for some of those operations.) So I do not believe that the military is “functioning extremely well” right now.
You then continued, “We have to have an assessment on recruitment, on retention and all the other aspects of the impact on our military if we change the policy.” Why? If you allow gay people to serve in the military and apply the same rules of sexual conduct to them as you apply to all other military people, why would there be a problem? First of all, recruitment will go way up right after the policy is first changed, then it will go down for a bit, then it will gradually level out at a rate higher than we currently have. If recruitment is a concern, then help end the illegal war in Iraq and you’ll have even more people signing up. I really do not believe retention will suffer, either. On what basis do you make this claim?
Finally, you added, “In my view, and I know that a lot of people don’t agree with that, the policy has been working and I think it’s been working well.” In what way, exactly, has this policy been “working well”? In what way, exactly, has this policy been “working”? More than 12,000 people have been discharged from the military for confirming they were gay. If the goal of the policy was to discharge gay people, then I suppose one could say it’s “working well”. But if the purpose of military recruitment and retention policies is to keep “the best and the brightest” then DADT has been an indisputable disaster.
I’ll say it again: Senator, I seriously question your mental fitness to serve in our government, especially in a body like the United States Senate. Either you know that the things you are saying are not true (in which case you are a liar), or you simply think they are true (in which case you are woefully ill-informed).
May 10th, 2009 at 3:00 pmNumber 8: I think that gays have been serving in the military in every war since the American Revolution.
A gay man, Baron von Steuben, trained our Revolutionary Army forces. And we couldn’t have won without him.
May 10th, 2009 at 3:01 pmMcCain is still insane, just the way he was back in the fall election campaign. Still wrong. What else is new?
O/T: someone should suggest to the Dept. of Energy and the Dept. of Transportation that we (they) can just disconnect their (our) vital systems from the internet and then we will not have to worry about teenage hackers from around the world getting illicit access to our electric power distribution systems and our air traffic control systems. These systems worked fine for decades without being hooked up to the internet, since the internet did not come into being until the 1990s. Better yet, if we stopped acting like imperial pigs around the planet, then there would not be any terrorism directed at us…
May 10th, 2009 at 3:06 pmReuters reported:
The Obama administration is holding “preliminary discussions” about changing the military’s prohibition against openly gay service members, White House National Security Advisor James Jones said on Sunday.
President Barack Obama pledged during the presidential campaign to change the policy. But the issue has been on the back-burner as the White House tackles other issues such as the economy and the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Jones said he does not know if the policy, known as “don’t ask, don’t tell,” will be overturned, and indicated a cautious approach.
“We have a lot on our plate right now. It has to be teed up at the right time … to do this the right way,” Jones said on the ABC program “This Week.”
Asked if the policy will be overturned, Jones said, “I don’t know. … The president has said that he is in favor of that. We’ll just wait. We’ll have to wait and see.
http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSTRE5491OQ20090510
May 10th, 2009 at 3:22 pmJones did not indicate a time table for the administration’s discussions on how to approach the issue.
May 10th, 2009 at 3:23 pmAbsolutely! If all gays serving in the military came out on July 4th 2009, the military would have NO option but to ask (beg) for an overturn of this law.
The problem is that the military is not faced with the issue unless it is on their terms. Turn the tide!
The reality is – you are putting your life on the line every day. Yet your rights are ignored every day.
While it honorable to server your country, your Government does not value you like your straight counterparts.
Go for guys and gals — July 4, 2009!
May 10th, 2009 at 3:34 pmWitch, I was just thinking the same thing. The homophobic trolls on Obama’s letter thread are horrendous. I think maybe it’s time to take on the subject of rape for men. Most men who rape men are heterosexual, and these trolls, I suspect, are the type most likely to rape a man in prison or in the military. It’s statistically more likely that the straight men would be raping gays in the military. Also, I’ve no doubt that lesbians are the victims of “corrective” rape, and if anyone finds information about this, give us a link. I’ve started a file on it.
Our military is broken for many reasons. I think about Iraq every single day. It’s the most horrifying thing I’ve ever seen our government do with public support. Reading the posts of homophobic trolls claiming they are active duty is just one more reason I am mortified by what we’ve unleashed on Iraq. To think that all that animosity, ignorance, and stupid is armed and occupying a nation disgusts me.
May 10th, 2009 at 3:35 pmMcCain is a card carrying member of buschCO.
May 10th, 2009 at 3:46 pmJesus, you stupid, pathetic old man!! Your time is over – shut the fluck up and RETIRE ALREADY, you feeble old turd.
May 10th, 2009 at 6:46 pmfemales say that they do not want to shower with men because the men will be checking them out or see them naked! why can’t hetrosexuals feel the same way about gay people? not bashing just wanting a rational (non gay supporting or bashing) answer?
May 10th, 2009 at 7:39 pmLouie – you’re an idiot. Nobody wants your ugly old body.
May 10th, 2009 at 8:23 pmSo according to McCain, fascism is okay if the trains run on time.
May 10th, 2009 at 8:25 pmLibellula saturata Annie so you have to be rude because you can’t give a rational answer?
May 10th, 2009 at 8:28 pmLouie123 thinks all homosexuals are pederasts and rapists that want him. With that assumption, the fear in the showers is understandable, but the assumption is just wrong.
You know, a lot of people want to kill American soldiers, I suppose if soldiers are “uncomfortable” with that, we shouldn’t deploy them, huh? I don’t remember comfort being a priority when I was in the military, but maybe it’s changed.
May 10th, 2009 at 9:34 pmif comfort wasn’t a priority then why do females shower seperate from males?
May 10th, 2009 at 9:48 pmIf rape is such a concern for you, then why aren’t you expressing concern for the women being raped in the military?
May 10th, 2009 at 9:50 pmi do not care if they want me or not.that has nothing to do with how i feel about people who choose to live an alternative lifstyle and then want special rights for it.
May 10th, 2009 at 9:50 pmwhy don’t they have showers for straight females straight males gay males and gay females. then they could be in the military. females say that they do not want to shower with men because the men will be checking them out or see them naked! why can’t hetrosexuals feel the same way about gay people? not bashing just wanting a rational (non gay supporting or bashing) answer?
May 10th, 2009 at 9:53 pmCFP what would you have Obama do? Have you ever served? Do you understand military law? He can’t just up and over turn it. This isn’t the Bush admin.
With all due respect to the gay community, he’s got other more pressing matters to deal with. I highly support repealing this but I think we could probably all agree that getting the economy back on track and health care reform are a bit higher on the priority list. Some of you trolls swear like he’s been in office for years, not months. Give the man some time.
I don’t understand how Senator McCain thinks this is working. All it’s doing is forcing out highly qualified individuals who could (or are) doing this country a great service. They should not have to hide who they are.
I’m sorry but when I was in the military I could care less who was watching my back, as long as someone was there.
May 10th, 2009 at 10:06 pmOh and Louie… that rape argument might work if it weren’t for the fact that something over 90% of sex offenders are HETEROSEXUAL males. Enjoy.
May 10th, 2009 at 10:07 pmi have never said anything about rape why are you trying to twist what i have said i said why don’t they have showers for straight females straight males gay males and gay females. then they could be in the military. females say that they do not want to shower with men because the men will be checking them out or see them naked! why can’t hetrosexuals males and females feel the same way about gay people? not bashing just wanting a rational (non gay supporting or bashing) answer?
May 10th, 2009 at 10:11 pmdadtiscrazy Says:
If all gays serving in the military came out on July 4th 2009, the military would have NO option but to ask (beg) for an overturn of this law.
Go for guys and gals — July 4, 2009!
I got news for you. If they come out…they will be processed out. It doesn’t matter if you agree with the current policy or not…it is the rules…and the military is very good at following rules!
They would be throwing away their careers…all on a kumbayu speech…from a non-military person who has no idea what they are talking about.
JMHO
May 10th, 2009 at 10:14 pmWell, louis, if you’re going to argue that gays should not be allowed in the military because straight men would worry about rape, isn’t it logical to conclude that you think women should not be in the military because they do worry about being raped?
May 10th, 2009 at 10:35 pmWait a minute! It’s logical that straight men should not be allowed in the military, because military women worry about being raped.
May 10th, 2009 at 10:48 pmIt’s working??? Thousands of highly qualified military personnel have been fired and it’s working???
His brain is disengrating faster than his body!!!
May 10th, 2009 at 11:19 pmNo, Louie – I was rude to you because you said a really stupid thing – and tried to pass it off as a “reasoned argument”.
You’ve probably showered with dozens of gay guys (presuming you’re a guy) over the years you were in high school and/or college.
And I’ll bet you that NOT A SINGLE ONE OF THEM looked at your silly junk.
What if they did?? Who cares?? Why is your junk so important that no eyes must pass over it? You ashamed of sumpin…?
And by the way, dearie, a stupid statement does not merit a well-reasoned reply – just a heapin’ helpin’ of SCORN.
May 10th, 2009 at 11:25 pmseslichat
May 10th, 2009 at 11:25 pmsesli chat
sesli sohbet
tonyrich300 Says: that is a really IDIOTIC statement from McCain. We have lost over 12000 great, patriotic, American troops because of this stupid policy and McCain thinks it has worked well? WTF Let’s not forget who put the DADT policy in place…None other than the great (sarcastic) Billary Clinton. Obama may be right in tryin to get it off the books yet should never have written a personal letter…since if he can’t get it done he will look like an idiot…Although he is Commander In Chief (CIC) he can not just make laws as he wishes…last I remember we are a democracy & this needs to be voted on…
May 11th, 2009 at 2:04 amI was in the military for 20 years as a firefighter & ran into my fair share of gays…95% of them worked extreamly well & never made an issue of thier sexuality…the 5% that were “problems” were the ones that used the issue as an excuse for “I am owed”…Tecnically by Sandy Tsao telling her bosses she is gay… she violated the poicy & can be booted…If her bosses asked her BEFORE she told them.. they should also be booted…It is called “DON’T ASK DON’T TELL” for a reason…Once the gay person makes advances to a straight person.. “Good order & discipline” are out the window as the straight person may feel unconfortable around the gay one…Since we are a “touchy feely don’t hurt feelings” society fair is fair…Again…as long as the job gets done & the people involved can concentrat on that…who care if one is gay or not…Again Sandy Tsao is a whiner & seeking people to help her when she violated the rules to start with.
Actually, if he simply reversed DADT, the law would revert to is being illegal for gays to serve, whether they told or not.
May 11th, 2009 at 2:59 amOver the years John McCain has said some pretty stupid things. That is something that I think most of us can agree on. But this last statement about “Don’t ask don’t tell” has got set a new standard for stupid. Stupid is a word that can’t begin to describe the fact that this policy has been a total failure and has caused the U.S to lose some of its’ best and brightest. And for what?? …God,WHAT AN ASS!!
May 11th, 2009 at 3:26 amtiffany rings?
May 11th, 2009 at 3:30 amtiffany rings?
tiffany rings?
tiffany rings?
tiffany rings?
McCain pulls more shit out of his ass and pronounces it to be a bouquet of flowers.
May 11th, 2009 at 4:00 amUGGs
UGG Boots
Thank you !
Nike dunk SB shoes
Nike dunk SB shoes
Ed hardy clothes
May 11th, 2009 at 4:13 amEd hardy clothes
DADT strikes me as being a modern day “separate but equal”, and we all know how “equal” things were when Blacks were separated from the Whites.
May 11th, 2009 at 5:01 amMcCain is quite right in saying that the DADT policy is working well. When potential recruits are asked questions pertaing to past drug use and past mental issue or even health issues its a DONT ASK DONT TELL. Now recruiters do ask, they ask in this format: “Now I am to ask you if you have ever used any illegal substance, again may I remind you that a yes means an automatic disqualification and you cannot enlist so do I ask you “Have you ever used any illegal substance?”" Hmmm can you guess how many recruits are actually disqualified for using an illegal substance and would any English teacher allow the stated “question” as a question. Thus DADT is used in more ways than simple sexual preference situations, so who can say it isn’t “working well” it is doing exactly as designed, to allow as many as who qualify on the lowest of standards to enlist.
May 11th, 2009 at 5:56 am<em>”For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them.
For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.
For even though they knew God, they did not [c]honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
Professing to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals andcrawling creatures.
Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them.
For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
For this reason God gave them over to (AW)degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural,
And in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.
And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, (AY)God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice…”
The Bible, Romans 1:18-29, (NASB)
May 11th, 2009 at 10:39 amtonyrich300 Says:
With all due respect, that is a really IDIOTIC statement from McCain. We have lost over 12000 great, patriotic, American troops because of this stupid policy and McCain thinks it has worked well? WTF
May 10th, 2009 at 1:19 pm
Believe your generalization – “…over 12000 great, patriotic, American troops…” is overly broad. Since homosexuality is a “self-described” condition it is possible, and likely based on bit’s military experience, that more that a few of this number faked this condition as a way to avoid finishing their service obligations. Think: “I don’t want to go to Iraqi so I’ll be flaming for a while…”
OTOH, the DADT policy doesn’t require a commander to ask a trooper whether or not they’re a homosexual. This means that homosexuals dismissed from a service made their sexual preferences more important than his obligation to the service.
Further, you have no idea what problems these dismissed individuals may have been causing because of their sexuality.
bit suspects there are very few potential “martyrs” in this number.
May 11th, 2009 at 11:45 am#67 – bitblt Says:
———————————————————
“OTOH, the DADT policy doesn’t require a commander to ask a trooper whether or not they’re a homosexual. This means that homosexuals dismissed from a service made their sexual preferences more important than his obligation to the service.”
May 11th, 2009 at 11:45 am
This is incorrect. The military DOES ask about a persons sexual orientation if they feel the person in question might possibly be other than heterosexual. They’re not supposed to, but they are doing so. This is a violation of the “Don’t Ask” part of DADT. Funny how this isn’t mentioned by anyone in the military.
I’ve heard from my straight friends currently serving in Iraq about how they’ve been asked about their sexuality. This was because they mentioned to their service-member friends that they know a gay veteran. It can only be assumed that these narrow service members assume that if you know someone who’s gay, that must mean you’re gay as well.
May 11th, 2009 at 12:08 pmbitblt Says:
——————————————————————————–
This means that homosexuals dismissed from a service made their sexual preferences more important than his obligation to the service.
Hmm. Wonder what that says about the married heterosexual service men then.
May 11th, 2009 at 5:05 pmAnybody who would make such a statement is retarded and that includes John McCain. Yes I said RETARDED and I meant RETARDED, not mentally challenged but plain old fashioned RETARDED. I thank God every day that he lost the election!
May 11th, 2009 at 5:14 pm