Big Damn Gay Army Thread. (DU's Homo Mafia realizes it's going under the bus)

[asdf2231]

Ah the sweet sound of Liberals ripping each other to shreds.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x5351621

The Straight Story  (1000+ posts)        Sun Mar-29-09 11:09 AM
Original message
Gates: No change soon on `don't ask, don't tell' - he and Obama have "a lot on our plates right now.
 Gates: No change soon on `don't ask, don't tell'

WASHINGTON – Don't expect any change soon to the "don't ask, don't tell" policy about gays in the military.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates says both he and President Barack Obama have "a lot on our plates right now." As Gates puts it, "let's push that one down the road a little bit."

The White House has said Obama has begun consulting with Gates and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff on how to lift the ban. Gates says that dialogue has not really progressed very far at this point in the administration.

The Pentagon policy was put in place after President Bill Clinton tried to lift the ban on gay service members in 1993.

The policy refers to the military practice of not asking recruits their sexual orientation. In turn, service members are banned from saying they are gay or bisexual, engaging in homosexual activity or trying to marry a member of the same sex.

Gates appeared on "Fox News Sunday."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090329/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/g...

lunatica  (1000+ posts)      Sun Mar-29-09 11:17 AM
Response to Original message
1. Well, ****!
 Let's push the most basic human rights right on down that convenient endless road. We're just to busy right now, bailing out the Plutocracy who's right to taxpayer billions is more important.

ensho  (1000+ posts)      Sun Mar-29-09 11:18 AM
Response to Original message
2. I think there is a big fight going on between the Obama team and the
 

Pentagon for Obama's 'power'.

 

terisan (1000+ posts)       Sun Mar-29-09 12:12 PM
Response to Original message
6. No task force set up on Day 1 to figure the mechanics of implementation? To be fair
 is it possible the task force is meeting and has a timeline set for implementation?

Gates and Obama certainly don't have to add it to their workload.

 

roughsatori (1000+ posts)     Sun Mar-29-09 10:26 PM
Response to Reply #6
47. "TO BE FAIR" we should all have the same CIVIL-RIGHTS.
 Their workload??? Imagine if you read a post from a Freeper about Bushs* "WORKLOAD" as an apologetic.

Bluebear  (1000+ posts)        Sun Mar-29-09 04:20 PM
Response to Original message
11. Keep HOPING for CHANGE!

 

dem629  (994 posts)      Sun Mar-29-09 09:51 PM
Response to Original message
18. Obama and Gates are correct.
 Fixing the economy (including dealing with health care and energy), repositioning ourselves on two war fronts, and going into a budget battle takes a lot of political capital.

The last thing they need to do is hand the 'cons a gift in the form of an issue that riles up the righties almost as much as abortion, and weakening the administration's position in the really important battles.

They know this little dust-up will blow over and in the long run they're better off.

Shut up and get to the back of the bus.

FreeState  (1000+ posts)        Sun Mar-29-09 09:59 PM
Response to Reply #21
23. Got it - Ill got take my place at the back of the bus again and patiently wait to be treated 
 Edited on Sun Mar-29-09 09:59 PM by FreeState
with respect and equality under the law because we all know its just not important that people have their civil rights.

Okay I will and thank you Sir may I have another because I will vote for these people AGAIN after they lied to me. 

dbackjon  (1000+ posts)      Sun Mar-29-09 11:10 PM
Response to Reply #21
83. OBAMA and the DEMOCRATS WON'T DO SHIT FOR GAYS
 With people like you making excuses for them.

**** THAT

cboy4  (1000+ posts)        Sun Mar-29-09 11:43 PM
Response to Reply #101
103. Hyperbole. Uh huh.Well at any rate it's sad, as well as disgraceful
 that you so easily sign off on delaying human rights.

Because that's your position. Shame on you.

And you're a Democrat?

dem629  (994 posts)      Sun Mar-29-09 10:12 PM
Response to Reply #32
34. Then what's the reason?
 Why is he not doing it?

I'll take the President's internal polling calculations over SLDN's take on it.

dbackjon  (1000+ posts)      Sun Mar-29-09 11:11 PM
Response to Reply #34
84. BECAUSE HE IS HOMOPHOBIC BIGOT THAT DOESNT CARE ABOUT GAYS

Well DUH!

dem629  (994 posts)      Sun Mar-29-09 11:14 PM
Original message
If you think putting it in caps makes it true, well....
 sorry. I don't think President Obama is a "HOMOPHOBIC BIGOT."

Just my opinion.

Zhade  (1000+ posts)      Mon Mar-30-09 12:37 AM
Response to Reply #34
116. Ah. A true believer hiding his bigotry behind Obama.
 ****ing coward.

[USA4ME]

I'm not one to care what tinkerbelles think about 24/7/365, butt (pun intended) that thread does pretty much sums it up.

.

[Lord Undies]

cntboy4boys  (1000+ posts)        Sun Mar-29-09 11:43 PM
Response to Reply #101
103. Hyperbole. Uh huh.Well at any rate it's sad, as well as disgraceful
 that you so easily sign off on delaying human rights.

Because that's your position. Shame on you.

And you're a Democrat?

Human rights?  I don't think so.  Homosexuality is but one of many abnormalities which can keep one out of the armed services.  Should logic be thrown away so all physical and mental handicaps can be welcomed into the armed services with open arms?  Or is it only homosexuality that deserves special consideration and privilege?

Being a homosexual does not make one special in any shape, form, or fashion.  It's just a freak of nature, like being born colorblind, or being born an albino.  Being a homosexual is limiting.  Homosexuals need to accept that fact and "moveon".  That's just the way it is.         

[DumbAss Tanker]

Now that right there is funny, I don't care who you are!

 

[Karin]

The bonfire is still raging.  They're getting nasty with each other:  "F*** You!  I wish they'd ban you!"
Then someone offered this up

Solon  (1000+ posts)        Mon Mar-30-09 10:28 AM
Response to Reply #141
142. Yeah, the "I trust Obama" line doesn't fly sparky, especially about the polling...
 latest polls show that about 75-80% of Americans support GLBT people serving OPENLY in the Military.

That was an ABC/Washington Post poll in July 2008.  I don't know how they worded it, or who the sample was, they didn't provide those details. 
Depending on the question, I wonder if the respondents were thinking along the lines of:  A lesbian would be fine, OK, all butch and tough; but a transgendered, no that's too creepy. 

I wonder if there are a whole mess of trannys out there just clambering to serve in the military.   

[Eupher]

Since when does a popularity contest dictate who can/can't serve in the military?

Does that mean that midgets can serve as well? I think they'd make great tank drivers (with a seat extension). 

[TheSarge]

unatica  (1000+ posts)      Sun Mar-29-09 11:17 AM
Response to Original message
1. Well, ****!
 Let's push the most basic human rights right on down that convenient endless road.

Since when did taking a high hard one up the @ss a "basic human right"?

[AllosaursRus]

I dunno......I don't think I would be very comfortable with a cornholer in my foxhole during combat. What if his boyfriend is there too? Who do ya think they would protect? The unit, or their significant other?

I would like to think we would all be in it together. Think of it this way, if my wife was with me under these circumstances, you can bet I would be looking out for her first and foremost! Kinda puts everyone else in danger, don't ya think? BAD IDEA!

[delilahmused]

lunatica  (1000+ posts)      Sun Mar-29-09 11:17 AM
Response to Original message
1. Well, ****!
 Let's push the most basic human rights right on down that convenient endless road. We're just to busy right now, bailing out the Plutocracy who's right to taxpayer billions is more important.

The problem with letting yourself be someone's bitch is when they're through slapping you around they kick your ass to the curb. There isn't one group on the left that's so indispensable it wouldn't suffer the same fate if it was politically expedient . Besides there's always a new ho' willing to bend over and beg for more.

First they came for the Communists,
  and I didn’t speak up,
    because I wasn’t a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
  and I didn’t speak up,
    because I wasn’t a Jew.
Then they came for the Catholics,
  and I didn’t speak up,
    because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me,
  and by that time there was no one
    left to speak up for me.
by Rev. Martin Niemoller, 1945

Cindie

[franksolich]

Oh my.

The primitives look really funny when they squibble-squabble, dancing around the bornfire and wiggle-waggling their armpits at each other, with menacing expressions on their faces.

It's better than a Three Stooges movie.

[Mr Mannn]

Ya know it only takes an executive order. Zero IS the Commander In Chief.
Congress doesn't have to vote. Zero doesn't even have to write the order, he could just pick up the phone and ask the military to draft 3 orders detailing what he wants, They can present them to him, and he picks the one he likes.

So I think the sissy boys are on to something here. They are beginning to realize they are a liability to reelection efforts. Sure, the libs will take their money. But when the rubbers meet the hairy road, they're just a one night stand to the libs who leave in the morning, never once looking back. Kinda sad when you realize you've been used and tossed aside like a sticky hankie.

[Texacon]

What in the HELL is this user name supposed to represent?

cntboy4boys  (1000+ posts)

IF that means what I think it means       








YUCK!

KC

[asdf2231]

Toasterlad  (1000+ posts)        Mon Mar-30-09 07:15 PM
Response to Reply #149
156. It's Not Opinion. It's Fact.
 Please provide one* instance of Obama actually DOING something positive for GLBT people. If you can't (and you can't) than stop pretending - at least to yourself - that Obama is interested in helping the gay community. The best that could be said for him is that he's as interested as you are.

*and please don't waste my time with that non-binding UN crap which has ZERO impact here or anywhere else. It is not progress to think that gay people shouldn't be killed for being gay, and if you think it is, you're more of a 'phobe than I thought.

 

Maven  (1000+ posts)      Mon Mar-30-09 10:22 AM
Response to Reply #18
139. You should be banned from this site.
 In the old days, you would have been.

 

[JohnnyReb]

Just what the military needs, a bunch of pretty boys that refuse to get down in a foxhole.

DUmmie fairy, "FOXHOLE! I thought the recruiter said 'foxy-hole'."

[Duke Nukum]

How many gay DUmmies are chomping at the bit to get into the armed forces anyway?

And what about midgets and the NBA?

[DumbAss Tanker]

How many gay DUmmies are chomping at the bit to get into the armed forces anyway?

And what about midgets and the NBA?

Oh, there are some few, no doubt; always have been a few who just denied it and joined up, some served well, some reverted to type and got thrown out, and some were living and breathing comedy relief with their insane poofter ways.  I doubt if any gays at DU would actually hack it, they all have their eyes on the benefits but none of them would put their live on the line to earn them.

[BamaMoose]

The gay version of Tom in Tib shows up:

sui generis  (1000+ posts)        Mon Mar-30-09 08:57 AM
Response to Reply #62
127. good for you! 
 Edited on Mon Mar-30-09 09:47 AM by sui generis
Now if only you were babbling on about your own life, instead of everyone else's.

As it happens my partner served as a Lt.Cdr on the Enterprise CVN-1965, and until recently was still subject to the backdoor draft that had nothing to do with farting, unlike your gravid opinion.

I grew up in a military family myself - and most of all I can tell you I don't think I've met a soldier or sailor or marine that I wouldn't think twice about beating the crap out of if warranted, and moreover probably wouldn't break a sweat doing. I'd like to quote Eddy Murphy here: "it's some 'barrassin' shit get yo ass beat by a fag." Maybe that's the reason ya'll are so skeert of us?

Civilian blowhards, including Obama, just shut the **** up and let us serve with honor. To hide behind some amateurish idea of political expediency and strategy is just ****ing stupid and cowardly, and DISHONEST.

Virtually every other developed country lets us serve openly. We are number one in being last - and dear democrat, you don't even own that title alone.

We're red blooded Americans, AND mainstream democrats, and the rest of you asswipes are just day late shit for brains un American bigots, no matter what shade of lipstick you put on the pig.

Ridiculous - that you should even be on DU.

"I don't think I've met a soldier or sailor or marine that I wouldn't think twice about beating the crap out of if warranted, and moreover probably wouldn't break a sweat doing." - Ridiculous claim to show what a tough guy he is: Check.

"Lt.Cdr" - Attempting to use the vernacular and failing: Check.  <For those who haven't interacted much with the US Navy, Lieutenant Commander is almost always abreviated LCDR.>

"CVN-1965" - No matter how stupid you are, you don't accidentally screw up a hull number that badly.  Unless you were in Seal Team 22, crossdecked to the Marines, detailed to the Rangers, supporting the Coast Guard, executing joint operations with the local dog catcher....Check.

And they both claim to be from Texas. TittyBoy's mole?  Hard to tell the difference.

[delilahmused]

I grew up in a military family myself - and most of all I can tell you I don't think I've met a soldier or sailor or marine that I wouldn't think twice about beating the crap out of if warranted, and moreover probably wouldn't break a sweat doing. I'd like to quote Eddy Murphy here: "it's some 'barrassin' shit get yo ass beat by a fag." Maybe that's the reason ya'll are so skeert of us?

You know, I was thinking about how much I'd like to bitch-slap him until cries like the ***** he is but it's just not worth breaking a nail.

Cindie

[Lord Undies]

Virtually every other developed country lets us serve openly. We are number one in being last - and dear democrat, you don't even own that title alone.

Weak-weak argument there, Skippy.  The USA militray is #1 at being #1.  Maybe retaining some standards has made that a fact.

[djones520]

Weak-weak argument there, Skippy.  The USA militray is #1 at being #1.  Maybe retaining some standards has made that a fact.

Do you doubt the abilities of the IDF and JSDF though?

[asdf2231]

Do you doubt the abilities of the IDF and JSDF though?

Hell, the Spartans used to scare the crap out of everyone and they were gayer than a pride parade in San Fran.

[djones520]

In my opinion, the only thing that would weaken the US Military by allowing gays to openly serve, would be the infighting that it would cause by people who can't accept it.  Gay's who are there to truly serve are not going to be holding their gay pride parades on base.  Those who aren't there to serve will get drummed out so fast it won't even be funny.

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

Do you doubt the abilities of the IDF and JSDF though?

...

In my opinion, the only thing that would weaken the US Military by allowing gays to openly serve, would be the infighting that it would cause by people who can't accept it.  Gay's who are there to truly serve are not going to be holding their gay pride parades on base.  Those who aren't there to serve will get drummed out so fast it won't even be funny.

Different cultures.

The problem with pro-gay military activists is they assume their culture is THE correct culture. If the so-called "multiculturalists" are to be believed then even the most "backward homophobic Bible-thumping redneck" is entitled to be such and if we find it is the backward homophobic redneck that carries the lion's share of military enlistments then we have to ask whether our military prowess is worth sacrificing on behalf of a statisically insignificant segment of the population that cannot/will not cover the difference created by the alienation of those who currently serve.

[Lord Undies]

Do you doubt the abilities of the IDF and JSDF though?

I was going to add, but Mr. Bunny said most of it quite well.

[djones520]

Our military prowess isn't based off of Bible-Thumping rednecks.  It's based off of a cross section of the entire US.  We know gays do serve in the military right now.  It's not a large number, but they do.  They don't detract from the service at all, hell we've all ready the stories about good service members being forced out because it was discovered that they where gay.

When I went through ALS, the class had a discussion about this.  Most people in the class (a group of 20 Airmen about to become NCO's) agreed that allowing gays to openly serve would really only be detrimental in the sense that there would be a backlash by people who just wheren't ready to accept it.  My vote on the topic was no because of this.  While I believe that gays should have the right to serve if they truly want to, I think it would still be damaging to the service because it's still to stigmatized in this country.  We can't do the things we have to do if you've got people who are "afraid" of the guys their going into battle with, even if their just as capable as you are.