Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Obama administration seeks stay of 'don't ask' ruling

By Ed O'Keefe

The Justice Department asked a federal judge Thursday to stay her ruling that the military suspend enforcement of the "don't ask, don't tell" law, arguing that the decision is disruptive to an ongoing Pentagon review of how to end the ban on gays serving openly in the military.

Government lawyers also said they will appeal District Judge Virginia A. Phillips's ruling to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

In court papers filed at U.S. District Court in Riverside, Calif. the Justice Department said that President Obama, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Mike Mullen support repealing "don't ask," and that Obama has ordered a Pentagon study on how the military would end the ban.

Immediate implementation of Phillips's injunction "would disrupt this review and frustrate [Gates's] ability to recommend and implement policies that would ensure that any repeal of DADT does not irreparably harm the government's critical interests in military readiness, combat effectiveness, unit cohesion, morale, good order, discipline, and recruiting and retention of the Armed Forces," the Justice Department said.

Lawyers for the Log Cabin Republicans, which brought suit challenging the constitutionality of "don't ask," plan to respond to the government's application for a stay within 24 hours, according to a spokeswoman.

The Defense Department in the meantime plans to follow Phillips's order to cease investigations and discharges of service members in violation of the 17-year old law.

"The Department of Defense will of course obey the law," Defense Department spokesman Col. Dave Lapan said in an e-mail to reporters. The Pentagon "will abide by the terms in the court's ruling, effective as of the time and date of the ruling," he said.

Pressed Thursday by an audience member at an MTV-hosted town hall forum about why he hasn't ended "don't ask" through executive actions, Obama said that his hands were tied until the Senate acts:

"This is not a situation in which, with the stroke of a pen, I can end the policy," Obama said, adding "I think people are born with a certain make-up and that we're all children of God. We don't make determinations about who we love."

Leave your thoughts in the comments section below

Staff writer Craig Whitlock contributed to this report.

By Ed O'Keefe  | October 14, 2010; 5:03 PM ET
Categories:  Administration, Military  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Federal worker union blasts tea party in radio ad
Next: Folks recommend working for the government, poll finds

Comments

first someone should ask adm.mullen and any general who sleep and eat in their quarters.what ever happened to the poll the pentagon took of the enlisted military what they thought of repealing the dadt.that was never made public,if you don`t have to fight,live or eat with the gays you should have no say in the matter.

Posted by: SISSD1 | October 14, 2010 5:14 PM | Report abuse

Through its actions, the Obama administration continues to be a fierce advocate of the status quo.

Posted by: wmaindependent | October 14, 2010 5:17 PM | Report abuse

GGA100.com Lawd, Lawd… When most of the straight men have been killed then I'll think about allowing gays to go to war and risk their lives too for $40,000 a year.
~ the Right Reverend Dr. Thurgood Goodlove, the Savedest man in the history of the Republican party
youtube/facebook/google legend

Posted by: kharma99 | October 14, 2010 5:33 PM | Report abuse

This gay man cannot stand to listen to that man utter a sound anymore on any topic.

He knows full well that he has statutory authority to issue a stop-loss order and end discharges immediately.

He also knows full well that he has bitterly fought every effort in the Congress to repeal DADT this year and has repeatedly lied about it to people who aren't watching as closely as the gay community.

Let this be a warning to all other progressive groups. The gay community is your canary in a coalmine. What he is doing to us, he will eventually do to you too, if he hasn't already.

Posted by: uh_huhh | October 14, 2010 5:38 PM | Report abuse

President Obama couldn't just let the court ruling stand. He has to go out of his way to block it. George Bush chose not to prosecute issues that were detrimental to his base, repeatedly. Obama appeases, appeases, and appeases again the rump Republican party and they've just spit in his face. Don't appease, defeat them, over and over again and protect the gay people who gave treasure and frequently blood, to get you in office.


Posted by: d-robertson | October 14, 2010 5:39 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: SISSD1:
if you don`t have to fight,live or eat with the gays you should have no say in the matter.
________________________

No, if you're in the military, you should have no say in the matter. The military is not a democracy, and you don't get to vote. You take orders and you obey them. Period.

Meanwhile, the military is under CIVILIAN control, which means the rest of us have every right to tell you how you will carry out your work for us.

Posted by: uh_huhh | October 14, 2010 5:41 PM | Report abuse

Posted by SISSD1:
what ever happened to the poll the pentagon took of the enlisted military what they thought of repealing the dadt.
__________________
I assume that when they ended segregation in the military, they made sure to ask all the white folks and their families how they would "feel" about serving with African Americans.

Posted by: erynq1 | October 14, 2010 5:46 PM | Report abuse

sure, let's just wait.

obama's new policy on everything... wait wait wait.

not much leading going on.

Posted by: docwhocuts | October 14, 2010 5:53 PM | Report abuse

Seems lady liberty believes justice can't wait...for the completion of a report.

In the clash of the courts and the military, which bureacracy will prevail?

The one with the guns, or the one with the law.

Tune in tomorrow to find out.

Posted by: sto123 | October 14, 2010 5:56 PM | Report abuse

Whether condoning torture & refusing to prosecute war crimes, selling out health insurance before the debate began, or allowing his fiscal policy to be dominated by the Sons of Rubin, Obama has consistently demonstrated that he is not interested in the least at putting this country back on the right course. This is just another example that he lacks the moral spine or basic character necessary to be an effective leader, let alone President. Hillary in 2012!!

Posted by: Ryuho | October 14, 2010 6:01 PM | Report abuse

Thanks for selling the left out yet AGAIN, Barry, you useless....

Posted by: Vajrakilaya | October 14, 2010 6:07 PM | Report abuse

Just one more case of the vast majority having to tolerate unacceptable activity and/or behavior by a very small minority.

Posted by: GordonShumway | October 14, 2010 6:07 PM | Report abuse

This whole thing is a moronic publicity stunt anyway, to draw attention to this issue right before the election.

Let the military do their analysis, and legislate this the correct way, not through activist judges.

Posted by: Benson | October 14, 2010 6:24 PM | Report abuse

If they are willing to fight for our country and die for us, they should have the same rights as non gay soldiers. Since women have been allowed to fight along side men, have they been raped by male soldiers? Has the readiness of the military gone down because of female soldiers? This is all a bunch of crap!!!

Posted by: bigedpape | October 14, 2010 6:28 PM | Report abuse

If they are willing to fight for our country and die for us, they should have the same rights as non gay soldiers. Since women have been allowed to fight along side men, have they been raped by male soldiers? Has the readiness of the military gone down because of female soldiers? This is all a bunch of crap!!!

Posted by: bigedpape | October 14, 2010 6:29 PM | Report abuse

"This is not a situation in which, with the stroke of a pen, I can end the policy,"

Really, Mr. President? You sure are making plenty of stokes of the pen to keep this law in place. The president doesn't have to ask for a stay or appeal this ruling. And he has the legal authority to halt the discharges even without this ruling. He's disingenuous and perhaps LGBT's greatest obstacle to equal rights at the moment.

Posted by: DCCharles | October 14, 2010 6:36 PM | Report abuse

Clearly, Obama decided to do the politically expedient thing -- too risky to act on this, or let the ruling stand, because then the Republicans would come after him, so throw the sympathetic Democrats under the bus and then say you couldn't help it. He's a genuine coward.
Oh, and how does drumming out translators and other critically trained personnel HELP the military? There is no need for "a study" and you implement it by implementing it. Nobody stalled like that on the civil rights act or Roe v. Wade.

Posted by: Beckola | October 14, 2010 6:47 PM | Report abuse

Maybe Jesse Jackson knew more than we did when he made that supposedly off-camera remark about him wanting to 'perform surgery' on Obama. But that would presume Obama had the body parts indicated, wouldn't it?

I'm voting for Dems this mid-term election but I won't work for Obama's reelection in 2012. I expect to vote for him, but enthusiasm for BHO just isn't there. What he's doing with DADT is part of the reason why I won't be active. We are the change we've been waiting for, but he sure isn't.

Posted by: Sisko24 | October 14, 2010 6:47 PM | Report abuse

Maybe Jesse Jackson knew more than we did when he made that supposedly off-camera remark about him wanting to 'perform surgery' on Obama. But that would presume Obama had the body parts indicated, wouldn't it?

I'm voting for Dems this mid-term election but I won't work for Obama's reelection in 2012. I expect to vote for him, but enthusiasm for BHO just isn't there. What he's doing with DADT is part of the reason why I won't be active. We are the change we've been waiting for, but he sure isn't.

Posted by: Sisko24 | October 14, 2010 6:48 PM | Report abuse

Obama formally declares war on non-straight America. With 'Democrats' like him, who needs Republicans? What a betrayal. He can forget about being re-elected.

Posted by: Student_Of_Irony | October 14, 2010 6:53 PM | Report abuse

There really is a Pentagon study going on. Not just a lame excuse. There's been a lot in the news about an outside contractor doing a survey of the military. This is absolutely true. The survey was even posted online a couple of months ago. In the meantime, the Justice Dept. should NOT appeal. They have 60 days to do so, so they should just sit tight. Filing an appeal before the study has been completed would be as disruptive of the process as this injunction. However, if Congress goes Republican on 11/2, then don't appeal - ever, because a Republican Congress will never vote for repeal.

Posted by: CRinVegas | October 14, 2010 7:00 PM | Report abuse

It's sad how the Obama administration yet again sticks its thumb in the eye of its supporters. Much smarter to have considered this ruling as a gift. The next congress is hardly MORE likely to repeal DADT. I sincerely hope the stay is rejected.

Posted by: John0123 | October 14, 2010 7:03 PM | Report abuse

Can we recall Obama? I couldn't stand W crap and now I can't stand Obama's betrayal.

Posted by: rappahanock | October 14, 2010 7:05 PM | Report abuse

Obama was very clear during the 2008 Presidential Campaign that he does not support Gay Marriage, so why all the big surprise?

Posted by: Indi1 | October 14, 2010 7:10 PM | Report abuse

Could be better if Obama's justice department prosecute the owner of the mine that killed our miners in west Virginia

Posted by: rappahanock | October 14, 2010 7:10 PM | Report abuse

Like many other liberal democrats (who happen to also be gay) I contributed substantially to his 2008 campaign. But I am very sadly and reluctantly coming to see that he is a rational, calm law professor who does NOT grasp that being President ALSO requires the willingness to fight as well as reason, and to punish as well as conciliate. He doesn't "get it," and as usual in the case of American gay citizens (I'm a 4-year 'nam era veteran -- so that "DADT" essentially spits on my service to my country) -- we pay up for promising-looking leaders who then the leave us (as usual) IN THE BACK OF THE BUS. President Obama's lack of leadership in this "tiny" (to HIM) area, and now his decision to have the Justice Dept fight the new court ruling has lost me forever. I'll vote for a hopeless Green candidate in 2012 rather than for this guy who can't see the forest for the trees.
Alo-HA, indeed, Barrack.

Posted by: ymeaberk | October 14, 2010 7:10 PM | Report abuse

This 'commander in chief' just follow military orders.He is just to little to command anything.

Posted by: rappahanock | October 14, 2010 7:18 PM | Report abuse

SISSD1 -- first someone should ask adm.mullen and any general who sleep and eat in their quarters.what ever happened to the poll the pentagon took of the enlisted military what they thought of repealing the dadt.that was never made public,if you don`t have to fight,live or eat with the gays you should have no say in the matter.

***
So, if the all-white military did not want black soldiers in 1948, should Truman have not integrated the military?

Posted by: DeclanMcman | October 14, 2010 7:18 PM | Report abuse

I wonder if the president or his advisors ever wonder why there's an "enthusiasm gap" between tea partiers and progressive, liberal, or even moderate Democrats. The reason is not because of any individual Democrat in congress -- I loathe my blue dog representative Heath Shuler, but I'm eager to support him against his radical right-wing opponent. My lack of enthusiasm is the direct result of my disappointment with and growing disdain for Mr. Obama's poor skills at governing -- and his decisions since the election to surround himself with timid, passive mediocrities like A.G. Eric Holder, DINO Dems like Geithner and Summers, and passive-aggressuve sellouts like Rahm Emanuel.

It seems the Republicans were right in 2008: Obama lacks the leadership skill of being able to lead. Instead, he hides behind his equally timid advisors and blames his own weakness and failures on the weakness of congressional leaders.

As others have noted, all he has to do to end DADT is NOT appeal the judge's decision. Then its unconstitutionality is set in stone, and he can ask (since he'll never tell, demand, or insist) that Congress ratify the decision, in effect repealing the flawed law.

Instead, for 21 months Mr. Obama has encouraged the military to WAIVE its morality and education requirements so as to recruit high-school dropouts and convicted felons -- felons recruited to replace the trained men and women in arms of good moral character and outstanding academic and military qualifications whom he happily throws out for being different.

No, I won't vote for Mr. Obama in 2012. I can't vote for the Republican candidate, whoever it may be, but I can write in a decent man or woman (Hillary, perhaps?) to replace him.

Posted by: adreed | October 14, 2010 7:21 PM | Report abuse

The irony of a (half) black president continuing to treat gays in America as second class citizens is not lost on this former supporter. So much for the "fierce urgency of now." I had thought the homophobia was coming from Rahm's camp, but now it's obvious it comes right from the top. I'd at least respect him if he just came out and said it, but to resort to the mendacity of "This is not a situation in which, with the stroke of a pen, I can end the policy." Uh, yeah, you can sir. Stop-loss? Hello?

Posted by: cgindc | October 14, 2010 7:22 PM | Report abuse

Port side heterosexuals make a head call. Clear the head. Starboard side heterosexuals make a head call. Clear the head. Port side gays make a head call. Clear the head. Starboard side gays make a head call. Clear the head.

Posted by: ComradeRahcuk | October 14, 2010 7:23 PM | Report abuse

Obama is doing the right thing. The military is currently reviewing how to make the transition to ending DADT. Supposedly the committee report will be finalized at the end of the year and should be put into effect next year.

It's about respect for military procedure.

Now if, by chance DADT isn't repealed next year, then I obviously have to eat my words and be peeved yet again at the white house buffoonery.

Posted by: yarbrougharts | October 14, 2010 7:24 PM | Report abuse

What a wimp Obama is. If he were president instead of Truman, at the time that the military was desegregated it never would have happened. If anybody thinks that it was easier than DADT, he does not know his history. Almost all the top brass at the time were southerners who opposed it. There were rumbles of a military rebellion but Truman was undeterred.

Posted by: Desertstraw | October 14, 2010 7:38 PM | Report abuse

"Thanks for selling the left out yet AGAIN, Barry, you useless...."

Posted by: Vajrakilaya

===============

Don't you love it when one of the many Republican trolls who regularly post here, trying to sow dissension on the left, slip up and reveal their identity? "Barry" is well-established wingnut code for the brief period Obama spent in Indonesia as a child, when he went by that name.

Vajrakilaya is not unique here. So many of the posters who *appear* to be dissatisfied Obama voters are merely the same tired two-time Bush voters trying to see what trouble they can cause.

Not that I'm not frustrated that we haven't been able to fix more of the problems Republicans caused and Obama inherited. But I'm adult enough to know that Obama has to fight a pretty tenacious domestic Taliban element here in the US, who have to be dragged kicking and screaming into the 20th century (and forget about the 21st, that is scary as hell to them). The man simply has a lot on his plate, and he cannot fix all the broken things here at once.

DADT will fall. I don't see anything wrong with making it a process instead of a shock. Does that make sense? Conservatives will prove once again to be on the wrong side of history, but it always takes time for this perpetual ritual to unfold.

Posted by: B2O2 | October 14, 2010 7:40 PM | Report abuse

This makes no sense other than as a sop to the Pentagon. To risk his bona fides with progressives (like me) to placate some Nervous Nelson in the inner ring strikes me as an extraordinarily foolish political move. Looks like Mr. Obama is going to have a tough time getting past his SecState in the primaries....

Posted by: abqcleve | October 14, 2010 7:46 PM | Report abuse

The Obama administration is correct in appealing the court ruling before any other group or individual does.
The reason is simple, in my view. If the ruling is overturned -- and it could be overruled -- then any gay people in the military who came out of the closet, could then be immediately fired because of their sexual preference. This would be an absolute disaster for them.
Until the gay ban is permanently lifted by Congress, or a Supreme Court ruling that has been appealed and the appeal is dismissed, the risk remains. Until that happens, career military gays would be well advised to remain careful and quiet.
Rudy Haugeneder
Canada

Posted by: Rudy7 | October 14, 2010 7:47 PM | Report abuse

obama fail...again.

throw another punch left obama. see if i vote democrat in november.

Posted by: anarcho-liberal-tarian | October 14, 2010 7:53 PM | Report abuse

If the military lifts the ban on gays serving in combat, then and only then should DADT be reversed.

If a gay is willing to go into combat, then a gay has my full support. But if a gay is not willing to go into combat, then DADT should be enforced.

For the military needs combat troops more than it needs desk jockeys.

Posted by: Chuck8764 | October 14, 2010 7:56 PM | Report abuse

Justice delayed, is justice denied.
The Obama legacy lives on.

Posted by: mtpeaks | October 14, 2010 7:57 PM | Report abuse


There is no constitutional right to enlist in the U.S. military. None.

The reason the military does not allow homos is there is a law against it. Only Congress can change that law. The president cannot order it because he would be breaking the law. The Constitution grants Congress to make laws about the military. This is constitutional. The Supreme Court agrees and will toss out the challenge to DADT.

Posted by: screwjob21 | October 14, 2010 8:00 PM | Report abuse

Obama just cannot take a stand for the people that elected him. As a result he'll be losing the house and senate in November.

Obama is a great campaigner but lacks leadership skills.

Posted by: Maddogg | October 14, 2010 8:01 PM | Report abuse


There is no constitutional right to enlist in the U.S. military. None.

The reason the military does not allow homos is there is a law against it. Only Congress can change that law. The president cannot order it because he would be breaking the law. The Constitution grants Congress to make laws about the military. This is constitutional. The Supreme Court agrees and will toss out the challenge to DADT.

Posted by: screwjob21 | October 14, 2010 8:02 PM | Report abuse

P90X Extreme Fitness System ONLY ONLY 42$$$$$$$
sorry to disturb u. just take u a little time.
If you are in need,
welcome to : h t t p : / / w w w . b 2 b j o r d a n s . c o m ./
50%off ca,ed hardy t-shirt$15 jeans,coach handbag$33,air max90,dunk,polo t-shirt$13,,lacoste t-shirt $13 air jordan for sale,l nba jersy for sale sale,$35,nfl nba jersy for sale
free shipping
accept paypal credit card
lower price fast shippment with higher quality
BEST QUALITY GUARANTEE!!
SAFTY & HONESTY GUARANTEE!!
FAST & PROMPT DELIVERY GUARANTEE!!
Packing: All the products are packed with original boxes and tags also retro cards/ code
numder
Features: AAA QUALITY, COMPETITIVE PRICE AND SERVICE
1) The goods are shipping by air express, such as EMS,the shipping time is in 5-7 business days
2) They are in stock now;
3) Various styles and color for clients’ choice
4) The Products are fit for most people, because of our wholesale price
puma gucci$35,nike jordans six ring,yeezy$%5!!
new era caps$13 gucci handbags jeans,t-shirts sunglass,caps
true religion jeans$35,ca,ed hardy jeans$35
LV,CHANAL,HANDBAGS$35
NIKE SHOX+AIR MAX+TL3+OZ+NZ ONLY $35
UGG TIMBLAND+LACOSTE SHOES+ED HARDY SHOES$35
DIESEL T-SHIRT,GSTAR T-SHIRT,CA T-SHIRT,50% OFF FOR SALE $15
DIOR SUNGLASS,DG SUNGLASS$15
new brand watches only $$$$$$$60
h t t p : / / w w w . b 2 b j o r d a n s . c o m ./

Posted by: 1561705755 | October 14, 2010 8:18 PM | Report abuse

This all has little to do with marriage or equal rights. All this "sturm and drang" is about forcing American society to accept homosexual behavior as totally normal and deserving of everything anyone else already has. The problem is that some dysfuntional gays absolutely insist on such publically bizarre behavior that many are revolted by it. It backfires.

Posted by: drzimmern1 | October 14, 2010 8:28 PM | Report abuse

I cannot even express how dismayed I have become with President Obama. All I can say is that he sure fooled me. When he said he was against "dumb wars", I believed him and then he surged in the stupid Afghanistan conflict. When he said he supported importing drugs from Canada and thought the Republican Congressman Billy Townsed, was a dreadful person for cutting a deal with drug companies, I believed him. Then he invites Billy Towsed to the White House and cuts a deal with drug companies to make drug importation illegal. When Obama said he would repeal DADT, I believed him. And now he is fighting a court that did just that. Immigration reform? Energy independence? Card Check? Fogetttttabout it!! And I am not some starry eyed young college student. I am a 72 year old Grandmother and I can hardly believe I was such a sucker for a smooth talker who promised "Change you can believe in." There's real irony here - we have been sold down the river by a black man.
I am still a liberal Democrat but I will NEVER support Obama again.

Posted by: abowers1 | October 14, 2010 8:29 PM | Report abuse

The Obama administration argument that enforcing the injunction will cause chaos. I can't see how removing good men and women from the armed forces can't be more disruptive and chaotic. The chaos is the fear of those who cling to the status quo.

The Obama administration is asking that we wait until the military determines in its review whether it will be ok for gay men and lesbians to serve next to heterosexual soldiers. THEY ALREADY DO.

The violence is to the emotional and spiritual integrity of gay men and lesbians not to the heterosexuals who ignore the whole issue.

Obama wants this settled by Congress. Well, I don't see how a minority that will never exceed 3 to 7 percent of the population will ever be able to garner the majority needed to "win" in Congress. Minority civil rights is what the Bill of Rights was designed to protect. Precisely because of the tyranny of the majority.

Posted by: ccforbes | October 14, 2010 8:33 PM | Report abuse

There is no constitutional right to enlist in the U.S. military. None.

The reason the military does not allow homos is there is a law against it. Only Congress can change that law. The president cannot order it because he would be breaking the law. The Constitution grants Congress to make laws about the military. This is constitutional. The Supreme Court agrees and will toss out the challenge to DADT.
Posted by: screwjob21 | October 14, 2010
==============================
Yup, and 100 years ago women gained their 'constitutional right' to vote, and Afro-Americans gained the same full right just 50 years ago.
So what's your point? That a minority can't make their case for equal opportunity under the law?
The Obama adminstration is taking this stand, so do you agree with this selected equality approach?

Posted by: mtpeaks | October 14, 2010 8:34 PM | Report abuse

Mafia or religious leaders have no respect for free thinkers, following orders is the only reality. Free thinkers get whacked or beaten until they learn what counts. It is no different in a harsh dictatorship, readers of any book except the Bible or Koran are suspect. Pol Pot executed all those wearing glasses.

Posted by: morristhewise | October 14, 2010 8:40 PM | Report abuse

The president told young people he will guarantee homosexuals will be integrated into our military while he is president.

If I were an anti-gay military person, I would be happy to hear him say that.

Anything that comes out of his mouth is a lie.

Posted by: dskiff | October 14, 2010 8:43 PM | Report abuse

Let the military do their analysis, and legislate this the correct way, not through activist judges.

Posted by: Benson | October 14, 2010 6:24 PM
______________________________

You mean like the activist judges who integrated the schools?

Look, Obama has given gays the you-know-what. Like many middle/upper-class blacks, he is culturally conservative, plus he figures being black is enough of a handicap, he doesn't need to be seen as being overly sympathetic to gays. He could've instructed Justice to just fold the tents, and didn't.

A win is a win is a win. To say, basically, you can get a good win later is malarkey; don't risk the ugly win you have from the "activist" judge now (and by the way, that "activist" judge has it right, it is unconstitutional; minor detail, I know). Ike followed the courts on civil rights, Obama could have too -- if he wanted to.

Posted by: gbooksdc | October 14, 2010 8:45 PM | Report abuse

DO XTIANS BOMB CLINICS etc? DO XTIANS SEND TERRORIST LETTERS TO THE US GOVERNMENT??? DO XTIANS ENCOURAGE ATTACKS ON SAME SEXERS??? DID THE CHURCH START SLAVERY IN THE US AND EUROPE??? DO XTIANS QUOTE FROM A BOOK (BIBLE) THAT ENDORCES GENOCIDE?/ SLAVERY AND CHILD MARRIAGES TO ADULTS??? POLYGAMY??? INCEST??, A MAN IS ALLOWED TO SALE HIS WIFE AND KIDS INTO SLAVERY TO PAY OFF HIS DEBTS..STONEING TO DEATH DISOBIDIENT KIDS(CHILD
ABUSE)...GOOGLE: BIBLE RAPE LAWS ,SOME FAMILY VALUE HUH, RELIGION IS NO EXCUSE TO BE INHUMANE PERIOD, HUMANE CIVILITY

WARNING: ALERT Evangelical Thought Police or E.T.P. Virus detected – Administer Anti-Mind Programming Counter Measures. Clearing Sequence to begin in 1,2,3,………..Clearing Complete – E.T.P. Virus Removed.
Clear and present danger

Posted by: shaiarra | October 14, 2010 8:50 PM | Report abuse

they are willing to fight for our country and die for us, they should have the same rights as non gay soldiers. Since women have been allowed to fight along side men, have they been raped by male soldiers? Has the readiness of the military gone down because of female soldiers? This is all a bunch of crap!!!

Posted by: bigedpape
==========================
1. If blind people and violent people with psychological issues want to join the military - then shouldn't they be allowed to in the name of equality and the ADA? No?

2. Why yes, women soldiers have been raped by our own soldiers and by enemy soldiers. Others have been busted for becoming prostitutes charging fellow soldiers sex for pay on Navy ships, FOBs in Iraq, on remote AFBs.

3. Is the military less ready because of female soldiers? Yes and no. Some fields like dental technician and mess cooking have gotten better because of females coming in to those military skills positions. Unfortunately, those in warrior branches have disclosed that the experience with females has come with lowered physical standards, less people reporting fit for duty

Posted by: ChrisFord1 | October 14, 2010 8:52 PM | Report abuse

Actions speak louder than words, Mr.Obama.
We've come to understand this about you.

Posted by: mtpeaks | October 14, 2010 8:56 PM | Report abuse


If you want to repeal DADT then repeal it. Are some of you really that dense or are you feigning ignorance. Congress passed the law only Congress can repeal it. Now the real question is: Do you have the votes? Hmm?

There is going to be a huge GOP majority in the House and possibly a GOP majority in the Senate. If you could not get DADT repealed by a liberal congress what makes you think you can with a conservative one? Preposterous.

Posted by: screwjob21 | October 14, 2010 8:56 PM | Report abuse

Nothing more than political tricks, lies and snake oil.

Posted by: mail19 | October 14, 2010 9:00 PM | Report abuse

uh-huunnh "This gay man cannot stand to listen to that man utter a sound anymore on any topic.

He knows full well that he has statutory authority to issue a stop-loss order and end discharges immediately."

============================

So if recruitment falls off substantially, all that needs to be done is issue a "stop-loss order" fixing all soldiers as in the military with no expiration on their term of enlistment - many stuck indefinitely out in the Fleet or grunts on their 4th or 5th combat deployment??

Wow! You gay people sure are clever!

Posted by: ChrisFord1 | October 14, 2010 9:01 PM | Report abuse

What an absolute non-issue.

All attention should be focused on development of non-detonation tech, so fewer of our soldiers get blown up with IED's.

I can hardly believe serious soldiers bother burning mental energy on the, lie if you're gay requirement, which some brilliant person added to military codes, I guess so there would be pretzel logic to accompany the the beers.

Posted by: quiet1 | October 14, 2010 9:05 PM | Report abuse

I believe that the Obama administration would prefer that the Pentagon justifies and Congress goes along with the lifting of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"; however, by fighting this judge's ruling, it is reinforcing the conclusion made by many of the president's supporters (including myself) that he would rather play politics than take a hard yet morally correct stand on a controversial issue.

Posted by: gerald6 | October 14, 2010 9:19 PM | Report abuse

I believe that the Obama administration would prefer that the Pentagon justifies and Congress goes along with the lifting of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"; however, by fighting this judge's ruling, it is reinforcing the conclusion made by many of the president's supporters (including myself) that he would rather play politics than take a hard yet morally correct stand on a controversial issue.

Posted by: gerald6 | October 14, 2010 9:19 PM | Report abuse

Now, at a time when our military is as heavily engaged as it has been for more
than forty years, at a time when individual troops are ordered to repeated
deployments to the war zones, now in a time of military uncertainty and maximum
commitment, is the wrong time for our politicians to advocate for a social
engineering experiment by endorsing an end to the current don't ask, don't tell
policy.

Neither the president nor an overwhelming preponderance of those in Congress
have served a single day in our country's military. For them now to pander to a
vocal minority seeking a liberal interpretation of society's rules is disturbing
and quite revealing as to the total lack of any consideration of the residual
effects of their actions. To politicize our military in a time of war is as
incredibly contemptible as it is indisputably ignorant of the military as an
institution, a separate and distinct body tasked with the most crucial tasks of
defending our nation in a time of war.

To our politicians I say: Tinker with the civilian world if you must; do not
impose your liberal agenda on America's military for the purpose of vote
gathering.

Are there gays in our military? Certainly and always has been. "Don't ask, don't
tell!"

You can read my complete article here:

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/5815772/dont_ask_dont_tell_and_the_foll
y_of.html?cat=9

Posted by: denniscopson | October 14, 2010 11:09 PM | Report abuse


Dear customers, thank you for your support of our company.
Here, there's good news to tell you: The company recently
launched a number of new fashion items! ! Fashionable
and welcome everyone to come buy. If necessary, please
input:
http://www.bizboysell.com
Tshirts (Polo ,ed hardy,lacoste) $16
New era cap $9
Air jordan(1-24)shoes $33
Handbags(ed hardy,lv,d&g) $30
Jean(True Religion,ed hardy,coogi) $25
Sunglasses(Oakey,gucci,Armaini)$12
Bikini (Ed hardy,polo) $16
http://www.bizboysell.com
▍ ★∴
   ....▍▍....█▍ ☆ ★∵ …./
   ◥█▅▅██▅▅██▅▅▅▅▅███◤
   .◥███████████████◤
 ~~~~◥█████████████◤~~~~

Posted by: itkonlyyou316 | October 14, 2010 11:14 PM | Report abuse

Let's be honest and acknowledge that gay men and women have been serving, more or less quietly, in the U.S. military for centuries. (Revolutionary War hero Gen. von Steuben has an interesting history.) So the presumption should be that the Pentagon can live with the injunction while the appeal moves forward. Why should military careers continue to be destroyed during this limbo period? Better to have gays in our military than felons and very low-IQ people.

Posted by: beachcomberT | October 15, 2010 7:04 AM | Report abuse

.......stay in the back of the bus while we "study" the matter.....

Posted by: wp121606 | October 15, 2010 12:24 PM | Report abuse

To be clear, I am 100%, unequivocally opposed to homosexuality on personal religious/moral grounds. But, I see DADT ask a political "hot potato" and nothing more.

I am quite sure that the fighting Soldiers, Marines, Sailors and Airmen who serve this country care about neither the color, nor the age, nor the sexual proclivity, nor the gender, nor the religion or lack thereof of the person next to them on the battlefield when the bullets are flying and the bombs are exploding.

When fighting time comes the only questions are, "Are you friend or foe?" and "Can I depend on you to have my back?" Anything else is just mud in the water; extraneous garbage that they don't have time to deal with or be distracted by. When fighting time comes, it's kill or be killed and nothing else matters.

In light of that reality, and the fact that both the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff are in favor of overturning DADT, President Obama should direct his Justice Department to cease and desist with all the "challenge" and "appeal" foolishness and simply abide by Judge Phillips' ruling. After all, didn't he say he would repeal it is elected when he was a candidate? I'm sure a lot of folks voted for him because he had the fortitude and honesty to take that stance along with his other campaign positions.

The brave young men and women who are members of the nation's armed services will follow whatever lawful orders they are given from their superior officers and they will fight, with bravery and distinction, next to whomever has answered the aforementioned two questions in the positive. The fact that they all, homosexual and heterosexual alike, have volunteered to serve at the risk of life and limb is confirmation of their mutual commitment to the task at hand.

So,just get the politicians out of the way and let those who are willing to give their service serve. The nation should be thankful that they are there to do a dangerous job that most citizens are not willing to do or are not capable of doing.

To deny someone the right to obtain the honor and advantages associated with serving in the Armed Forces simply because of their sexual orientation is at once stupid and anti-american.

Posted by: vincent-cowherd | October 15, 2010 2:17 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company