Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 2:06 PM ET, 11/18/2010

Democrats confident of 'don't ask, don't tell' repeal

By Ed O'Keefe

Thirteen Democratic senators signaled strong support Thursday for ending the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy and said they are willing to work well into December to ensure passage of a defense bill that would end the ban on gays openly serving in uniform.

The show of support came as Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) said this week he plans to bring the bill up for a vote again despite the objections of Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who opposes an end to the policy.

Despite McCain's objections, other Republicans will vote for the measure if Reid allows for a fair debate and opportunity for both parties to introduce amendments, the supportive senators said Thursday.

"I'll go through Christmas Eve and I think we all will if it takes that," said Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.).

"The eighth day of Hanukkah," joked Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.), a devout Jew.

"The seventh day," Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) suggested. "I'm not giving up my eighth day," he said to laughs.

Joking aside, the Senate calendar is arguably the strongest roadblock to passage of the defense bill. A Pentagon study group reviewing how ending the ban could impact troop morale will submit a report to President Obama and top military leaders by Dec. 1. At least 10 senators of both parties have said they will not decide to vote on the matter until reading the report.

Senate Armed Services Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.) plans to hold hearings on the report shortly after its release and before senators vote on the defense bill. That would leave about two weeks before Christmas for the Senate to debate and pass the bill and for House and Senate negotiators to finalize a conference version of the bill before final passage.

Despite the tight timetable, the Pentagon is pushing for passing the bill during the lame-duck session, spokesman Geoff Morrell said Thursday.

"That's what we as an administration are pushing for, and we certainly see the merit in using that as the legislative vehicle to ultimately get to repeal," Morrell said, acknowledging that the Defense Department rarely comments on Congressional affairs.

Some senators want to see the Pentagon report before its due date, but it is unlikely to be released beforehand, Army Gen. Carter Ham said Thursday. Ham co-chairs the Pentagon team writing the report and testified Thursday at a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on his nomination to serve as commander of U.S. military forces in Africa.

Among those waiting to read the report is Sen. James Webb (D-Va.), a former Marine and Navy secretary. He praised Ham and his co-chair, Pentagon General Counsel Jeh Johnson, for spearheading an exhaustive review of the issue.

"It's going to be a very important study for us to look at and examine," Webb said Thursday.

Leave your thoughts in the comments section below

By Ed O'Keefe  | November 18, 2010; 2:06 PM ET
Categories:  Congress, Military  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Telework legislation passes
Next: Senate confirms Jack Lew as OMB director

Comments

Time to repeal DADT!

Posted by: 10bestfan | November 18, 2010 4:35 PM | Report abuse

It is time to repeal DADT now! Despite John McCain, who is of a generation no longer serving in the military, it is becomming more and more clear that current members of the military overwhelmingly don't object to the policy being ended. And since this is a civil and human rights issue they should never have even been asked in the first place.

But for the Democrats and moderate Republicans this is something more. A show that they can act together to do the right thing. Democrats need to get this passed and moderate Republicans can show that they have minds and thoughts of their own and don't and won't walk in lockstep with untra-conservatives.

Repeal DADT now. Give the American people a holiday gift of extending civil and human rights to those brave members of the LGBT community who are now serving and risking their lives for our country.

Posted by: peterdc | November 18, 2010 4:44 PM | Report abuse

Just enlist already and turn this blog over to someone with more than a one track mind.

Posted by: getjiggly1 | November 18, 2010 4:46 PM | Report abuse

Repeal DADT. Even the military's study (which John McCain said was so important) doesn't stand in the way.

Posted by: tinyjab40 | November 18, 2010 4:46 PM | Report abuse

Democrats were pretty confident about extending unemployment benefits but the conservative backstabbers among us would rather drive millions on jobless into bankruptcy and total poverty. What exactly do "conservatives" conservative if they destroy everything they touch?

Yeah, that is how to escape a recession. Create a depression to replace it.

Posted by: BigTrees | November 18, 2010 4:48 PM | Report abuse

It is becoming increasingly clear that those asking for more information before they vote on "don't ask don't tell" are stalling, looking for a way to avoid standing up for their beliefs.

The legislature will stall till hell freezes over.

Even if the Supreme Court took a stand, I doubt that we can get rid of "don't ask don't tell" but at least, voters could see where judges stand.

Posted by: francisdyer | November 18, 2010 4:48 PM | Report abuse

This amazes me that Congress has spent so much time on this issue.
I agree with the late Barry Goldwater that gays have been in the military since the beginning of time and they don't have to be strait to shoot strait. If someone is acting in an inappropriate manner and causing dissension in the ranks (the concern for the military brass) there are avenues to drum them out of the service just like a strait person who's conduct is questionable.
In the mean time we are so damn concerned about an openly gay soldier serving, but allow the likes of that piece of feces that shot up Fort Hood in the ranks.
We really need a reality check!

Posted by: menopausequeen | November 18, 2010 5:06 PM | Report abuse

Time to keep DADT. And if James Webb votes for its repeal, he'll be going down to defeat when reelection time rolls around.

Posted by: AlbyVA | November 18, 2010 5:07 PM | Report abuse

Way overdue.

Those of us who have served - and have relatives currently serving in Afghanistan - agree that it's way overdue to be repealed.

Posted by: WillSeattle | November 18, 2010 5:12 PM | Report abuse


13 Dims who voted for repeal of DADT before are confident. What a shocker.

Silly Dims the vote was 56-43 last time and Lisa Murkowski did not vote then (this time she will vote against repeal). Three Democrats voted against repeal.

There is also a new freshman GOP senator in the lame duck session, Sen. Mark Kirk of Illinois, making it 42 Republicans.

Don't count on new senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) either. Or Jim Webb (D-VA) for that matter.

Posted by: screwjob22 | November 18, 2010 5:19 PM | Report abuse

Is anyone doing a study on how troops killing innocent Iraqis is affecting America's morale?

No?

Didn't think so. And yet we all know that ending the war is the right thing to do.

Just like ending DADT is the right thing to do.

It doesn't take a study of opinion to know the difference between right and wrong.

Posted by: trambusto | November 18, 2010 5:23 PM | Report abuse


Two Democrat senators, Mark Pryor and James Webb, are on the record TODAY that they do not think there will be a vote on repealing DADT before the end of this year.

Count on leftist WaPo hacks to omit that piece of news.

"While President Obama and most Democrats in Congress have voiced their support for repealing the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT) policy on gays in the military, a few Senate Democrats are leaving open the option of voting against repeal."

Posted by: screwjob22 | November 18, 2010 5:30 PM | Report abuse

AlbyVA was the only one one here to support KEEPING DADT. Well, AlbyVA, I heard a story about an old woman in VA who didn't want to see the day when a (bad word that starts with N) was in the White House. She actually died before Jan. 20, 2009. Sometimes we are just on the wrong side of history. But that doesn't not mean each and every person cannot have his or her opinion and express it openly. That's what makes this America. But being America doesn't make us miraculously just, fair or nice.

Posted by: davidwstory | November 18, 2010 5:34 PM | Report abuse

This amazes me that Congress has spent so much time on this issue. I agree with the late Barry Goldwater that gays have been in the military since the beginning of time and they don't have to be straight to shoot straight. Posted by: menopausequeen
__________________________________________
I've never heard this quote, but Goldwater was so on target in so many ways. Thanks for sharing.

Posted by: seaduck2001 | November 18, 2010 5:39 PM | Report abuse

Goldwqater's time was before the Republican party sold out to so-called Christian conservatives. Repealing DADT is long, long overdue. It is time to do the right thing. We have jumpted through all the hoops; some people would never stop thinking up new ones. It is time, past time, to quite listening.

Posted by: withersb | November 18, 2010 5:56 PM | Report abuse

Rubbish. A giddy Congress doing little to demonstrate the capacity to Think. DADT is not a civil right issue, it is a lifestyle preference.

DADT has nothing to do with an individual’s ability; however, it does protect sexual preferences without approving the lifestyle. What about the other DADTs just as old: i.e. bed hopping, wife swapping, Man-boy Love, Men-Animal Love, etc. are reprehensible interests, ‘urges’ and ‘tendencies’. If we repeal one, we must repeal all DADTs. To be just we must, to be uniform, repeal all moral standards, and doing so would just begin to scratch open the change of our social and global surface.

A 2009 UN report tells us that, 35 million people are infected with AIDS as the result of men having sex with men; the data includes heterosexuals, as men, infected by other men, continue to have sex with women (UNAIDS Secretariat: AIDS Epidemic Update, 2009. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization). Should Congress repeal the POTUS 1993 DADT affirms that the worldwide AIDS epidemic is no longer a concern to the United States.

So much for progress. The more advances we enjoy as a Nation, the less civilize we become.

Posted by: Sakievich | November 18, 2010 6:13 PM | Report abuse

1 of 2

It's important to have a military service that is not mired with relationship issues within the ranks. That those involved or have intimate or vested interest of a sexual relationship be it real or virtual, at a primordial level interferes with military mission objectives.

Case in point. An acquaintance, as we were both ex military, he being US Army and I US Navy was sharing a story with me pertaining to an experience in Kuwait while under live fire from the enemy. The platoon, composed of both men and women were in trenches with Iraqi artillery fire being very accurate, wounding him and others.

Eventually, the battle turned in favor of US forces, overrunning the Iraqi artillery positions. However, before this turn of events took place, my friend was sharing with me how many of his men during the battle were in incapacitated with fear. A very natural, first time human reaction with some vomiting and a few urinating. Studies have also shown that only ~10% of the small arms holds in forward positions discharge their weapons at the enemy.

The platoon this person was responsible for was also composed of some females. If I recall correctly, he had a rifle squad composed of women. That the entire platoon was in the field for about 4 weeks, under field hygiene conditions. A euphemisms for "sponge bath" when lucky, wearing basically the same two set of uniforms. The conditions not favorable for logistics and refreshing of supplies, making water very scare and rationed.

During the battle, a problem that this platoon leader had to contend with was an issue he was not trained to deal with, and the single greatest obstacle to mission success. That was, what few men were willing or able to take an offensive position were focused on protecting the cowering women in the trenches. His 10% force more worried about what would happen to the US females if captured by the Iraqis, and not engaging the enemy. The men driven more by very basic primordial priorities of sheltering women for future procreation, instead of combat orders based on political agenda.

Thus, introducing extreme risk, in need of addressing, to a life and death hostile environment. Causing the actively engaged forces to consume time, energy and sudden demands associated with altering preconceived troop expectations as part of the greater battle plan. That this platoon became dysfunctional, at a time when such deviation from training endangered lives.

The true story I was shared above can be repeated in micro military environments as well. In situations where the crew and quarters are confined. Allowing for the opportunity and risk of intimate relationships or desires for such relationship become decision making distractions. Such events toady, already far to prevalent, leading to the dismissal of US Navy Line Officers.

Posted by: parkmcgraw | November 18, 2010 6:19 PM | Report abuse

2 of 2

Hence, the introduction of homosexual and lesbian personnel in the military is a much greater issue than just recruitment, retention and troop morale. Reaching issues such as closing the hatch to a flooding compartment, prematurely ending the life a gay lover or desire with no more hesitation and time required then that given to another crew member, one with less intimate feeling and sentiment attached.

In digression, returning the troops in the first part of this discussion, the artillery fire the US forces were sustaining from the Iraqi army was accurate. Being off only in distance but not in bearing. When overrun by US forces, the captured Iraqi were asked how it was that the Iraqi knew the bearing of the US troops. The response was smell.

The women in the platoon, being under standard combat condition field hygiene were menstruating in their uniforms. The seven women in the platoon meant ~2 each week having their periods in the field. That in the hot desert condition were detectable by the Iraqi army some 5 miles away, only having to vector in on the odor being transported by the wind. A foolish and pretentious act of integration that needlessly elevated risk exposure, causing many unnecessary casualties to the US forces. A selfish act driven primarily by immaturity and ignorance that continues today.

Therefore, to hear the US Senate ramble on this subject of "Don't Ask Don't Tell" sounds rather naive and an overly simplistic understanding of military life. An environment that the vast majority of these senators have never experienced. Most of these senators not having had the innate courage or raised from childhood with the personal ethos to serve their country by performing active duty in the US military. One of a very few forms of selfless behavior that really qualifies a person in my mind and many others I know as a true patriot and substantive citizen.

Instead, these Senators, grew up with the hypocritical and miss guided understanding that the true leaders of our country cowardly have others perform selfless challenges on their behalf.

All the while, willing to squander the benefits and completely ignorant of the needs of the US military and how best to utilize civilians in uniform or how the military function. Most failing to know how to properly mitigate risk in the military, never experienced how the military and people function under stressful environments that may endanger others and or one's own safety and life. Hearing arguments from Flag Officers, that for the sake of promotion are little more than politically correct "yes" men.

Posted by: parkmcgraw | November 18, 2010 6:20 PM | Report abuse

Great. Just what we need. Gay activists as a special protected class. I can imagine the classes every service member will have to go through while we re-learn what is right.

Posted by: USMC03sje | November 18, 2010 6:25 PM | Report abuse

These IDIOTS STILL don't get the message from two weeks ago.

Extend the tax cuts or you will hear more screaming louder than when you fiddled with OBAMACARE. You also have THIRTHEEN(13) appropriation bills that you were supposed to pass months ago.

Do what the hell your being paid to do, and stop pandering to special interests

Posted by: frankn1 | November 18, 2010 6:26 PM | Report abuse

What macho man in the military is afraid of the thought of fighting along side of a gay guy who would kill as fast as or faster than he would himself? Name one and I'll show you an idiot.

As for the senators who want to study this some more, McCain, shut up and get out of the way. You are losing your hallowed status as a "war hero" pretty fast if you can't trust your comrades in arms to do the right thing. Back in the days of Vietnam, there were gays in every unit fighting and dying in silence about their status, and none gave less than their best for the nation. Why, in the name of the Almighty, do these homophobes have to pick on gay and lesbian service members? When it comes to strength of character, I will side with the gays and lesbians before I will agree on anything that McCain and his ilk have to say.

Posted by: ronjeske | November 18, 2010 6:27 PM | Report abuse

Americans have to decide if they stand with the United States Constitution and western liberal values - or whether they are in solidarity with the Taliban and the president of Iran on this one.

You're either with us or against us, conservatives. Choose your country/hemisphere - and century - and support it.

Posted by: B2O2 | November 18, 2010 6:36 PM | Report abuse

I thought people enlisted in the military services to serve their country, not to announce to their fellow soldiers that they were gay.

I also thought that the military had strict rules about the soldiers conduct, which does include their sexual conduct around each other.


I guess 'blanket parties' will have a whole new meaning if DADT gets repealed.

Posted by: momof20yo | November 18, 2010 6:40 PM | Report abuse

To clarify, the start of my posting 2 of 2 should read;

Hence, the introduction of "openly" homosexual and lesbian personnel in ...

For I do not doubt that in times past and today, that we had or have courageous and patriotic homosexuals and lesbians in the US Military. It was the fact that this orientations are keep silent or very low key is what allowed for the people they interacted with to remain mission focused and relatively functional.

Did I suspect some I knew in the military might be homosexual, yes. And again, it was because those aspects of the person's life style remained closed that permitted the department and crew to function in a normal manner. Opening the currents to this topics, absolves the benefits of silent integration.

Posted by: parkmcgraw | November 18, 2010 6:46 PM | Report abuse

I would rather fight with gays and lesbians who are committed to the service of our country and want to serve same with their skills and talents, then have the "unprincipled-principled" John McCain (aka, the Great Flip-Flopper) by my side.

Posted by: wmdteam | November 18, 2010 6:58 PM | Report abuse

20% of Americans have no job.

The right to announce to the world a man is doing another man is more important.

Posted by: oracle2world | November 18, 2010 7:07 PM | Report abuse

Well I guess if they ever start the draft again you will be able to claim to be homophobic to get a 4F rating and get out of the draft. In WWII you had to claim you were gay to get out of the draft but, soon it will be a claim of being straight to get out of the draft.
What Comgress need to worry about is TSA having gays feeling up same sex passengers. how many spouses want some lesbian molesting their wife, or a gay molesting their husbands?

Posted by: thasam | November 18, 2010 7:08 PM | Report abuse

to parkmcgraw: I wonder if you could describe for us precisely what is the difference between being LGBT and being "openly" LGBT. Its a very curious concept to me, particularly since I doubt very much if rank-and-file service personnel do not have a pretty good idea today who is who.

Posted by: OldUncleTom | November 18, 2010 7:15 PM | Report abuse

Well I guess if they ever start the draft again you will be able to claim to be homophobic to get a 4F rating and get out of the draft. In WWII you had to claim you were gay to get out of the draft but, soon it will be a claim of being straight to get out of the draft.
What Comgress need to worry about is TSA having gays feeling up same sex passengers. how many spouses want some lesbian molesting their wife, or a gay molesting their husbands?

Posted by: thasam | November 18, 2010 7:18 PM | Report abuse

the fact that the dems care more about don't ask don't tell than jons is why the rest of the dems need to be booted out...

Posted by: DwightCollins | November 18, 2010 7:19 PM | Report abuse

I am an 81 year old mother, grandmother, and great-great grandmother but wonder when will the church and the government get out of people's bedrooms....Doesn't our Declaration of Independence and the Constitution both in their way state that "all men are created equal" and as long as they are paying their taxes and are not criminals then they should have "equal rights" and if their rights are not necessarily your kind of rights then tough. If your "God" has made us all are you ready willing and able to finally admit that your "God" also made a "mistake" in creating homosexuals. Homosexuality is not a chosen way of life but closed minds will never admit that.

Posted by: bjk89 | November 18, 2010 7:25 PM | Report abuse

Every time I read these comments-I note that not ONE of you ever questions the claim of "sexual orientation"!Why do you accept the special identification of a person who assets that he/she has to have sex with a partner of the same gender?
Most of you say things like-"It doesn't matter to me" or "gays can serve and fight as well as straights"! You are so brainwashed by the homosexual agenda which has gradually forced their acceptance of a degenerate,destructive,and disease spreading activity as a "special right"-sometimes equated with the historical mistreatment of blacks!
We should never allow open sodomy in our elite military!

Posted by: lyn3 | November 18, 2010 7:36 PM | Report abuse

Good to know the Dimwitcrats are working on the really important stuff — while one in ten Americans remain out of work.

Posted by: thebump | November 18, 2010 7:47 PM | Report abuse

I'm glad the report results were leaked. That way there is no temptation to "improve" the results before release.

Posted by: JimZ1 | November 18, 2010 7:55 PM | Report abuse

The issue of fighting next to a gay man is a strawman, and always was. The difficulties would come in garrison and camp, which is where soldiers spend most of their time.

The jealousy and suspicion raised when people pair up sexually is what destroys unit cohesion, not the fear of being stared at or hit upon.

Lord knows what they'll do with the religiously conservative personnel and chaplains. Removal of DADT will necessarily mean "sensitivity classes" where gays and lesbians can easily become a protected class. Not that most of the folks here will have to deal with it.

Posted by: dmlpearl | November 18, 2010 8:07 PM | Report abuse

The military is a different place than civilians think. You eat, sleep,shower, die with each other and there are freqently no separate rest rooms.Sleeping and showering with a gay person is uncomfortable to say the least. Having people eyeing you is embarrasing. I have no problems with gays except having them use the same shower with me.I spent 4 years in the Air Force and excluding the above it would be okay but not beyond that. You would have to use a third place for gays and there just isn't always that option. If you feel that is okay then why do we separate rest rooms in the first place? McCain knows what he is talking about and I say that as a democrat.This is a thing that only the military should vote on.

Posted by: wayne5436 | November 18, 2010 8:15 PM | Report abuse

Hello,Christmas is coming soon, give family, friends, love, his own gift ready?
If not, let me go! welcome to: http://www.bizboysell.com
Air jordan(1-24)shoes $33
UGG BOOT $50
Nike shox(R4,NZ,OZ,TL1,TL2,TL3) $33
Handbags(lv fendi d&g) $33
Tshirts (Polo ,ed hardy,lacoste) $16
Jean(True Religion,ed hardy,coogi) $30
Sunglasses(Oakey,gucci,Armaini) $12
New era cap $9
Bikini (Ed hardy,polo) $18
FREE SHIPPING
===== http://www.bizboysell.com ====


Posted by: itkonlyyou382 | November 18, 2010 8:35 PM | Report abuse

Next time Congress authorizes a Draft, all we have to do is write down "I AM GAY".... That's it. We don't have to run off to Canada anymore.

This is why DADT must be eliminated. It compromises America's ability to raise the necessary fighting force to defend the country in times of war. Abolish it already.

Posted by: KenG3 | November 18, 2010 8:55 PM | Report abuse

I don't understand why people think that just because someone is gay or lesbian that they are going to make sexual advances towards their comrades-in-arms. Do heterosexual troops go around hitting on each other and destroying unit cohesion? Do people really think that repealing DADT is going to suddenly turn our homosexual men and women in uniform into sex crazed animals? Zip! Bam! Wow! and suddenly they no longer hold the same values? " Oh gee, now that I can disclose my sexual orientation, I am going to stop acting like an upright, respectable young man/woman and start acting like a sleeze ball."
And to answer the statement about sleeping and showering in the same room - ummm does anyone go to a gym? Straight men and gay men always shower together and have since they've been in high school. It's not a big deal unless one (homo or hetero) is insecure about their sexual orientation. Repealing DADT removes a layer of insecurity and would probably make the relationships more open and honest, stronger, improving cohesion.
Gay/Lesbian doesn't define a person. Their integrity does. To each their own and may we all live our lives in display of brother/sisterhood.

Posted by: Nicksf94110 | November 18, 2010 9:08 PM | Report abuse

Nicksf94110 wrote:

"I don't understand why people think that just because someone is gay or lesbian that they are going to make sexual advances towards their comrades-in-arms. Do heterosexual troops go around hitting on each other and destroying unit cohesion?"

Yes, they do all the time, but it is almost entirely in mixed gender support units. The point is that once gays are in, then pairing will eventually take place in close combat units as it does in support units. It's not the sex, so much, as it is the suspicion that sex can have something to do with preferential treatment, in such things as promotions, assignments, and a dozen other things.

Posted by: dmlpearl | November 18, 2010 9:14 PM | Report abuse

Why are the Republicans so adament against ending DADT? They have always said that they listen to the people and vote accordingly. The overwhelming majority of Americans believe this law should be repealed and that gays should be allowed to serve openly in the military. Also, the militery troops overwhelmingly see no problem with gays serving openly.

Posted by: OldFogie | November 18, 2010 11:01 PM | Report abuse

Some of us do. However, we, as a whole in the military, DO NOT support risky sexual behavior, embrace the AIDS epidemic*, or expand the idea that "sexual preferences" is a civil right. Should we end DADT, then we must, to be ethical, end ALL DADTs, all of them. The idea of men "doing" men as a right, must extend to all social fabric and must be taught as normal as breathing.

The United States announces to the world: We found a new birth control, AIDS. We love it, we want it, we aggressively will promote it. Death is a welcomed embrace. We no longer are concerned over AIDS Awareness Day. The U.S. is taking on new leadership: AIDS as the new Weapon of Mass Destruction.

(*UNAIDS Secretariat: AIDS Epidemic Update, 2009. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization)

Posted by: Sakievich | November 19, 2010 12:00 AM | Report abuse

Good to end DADT. Gays are all around us, some in our families. Let them be as they are. Let them serve.

Posted by: RealTexan1 | November 19, 2010 12:23 AM | Report abuse

The most important thing that has surfaced in this debate is the irrelevance of John McCain. He exhibits the onset of Alzeimers and should be booted out. He has flip-flopped more than once. Sometimes he is for the repeal and sometimes against the repeal when nothing remotely of any significance has changed.

Posted by: shaik1 | November 19, 2010 3:54 AM | Report abuse

Talk about depression, it is devistating and dispicable that serving the flesh, feeding the flesh is more important than family, God and country. In this age of deception and corruption, many could care less how we express oursevles, how we show children just how little we think of marriage, love and family. That is what happens when so-called adults act out as spoiled rotten brats, with no sense of self discipline and common decency, No real role models for children to grow healthy and sound. We don't have to wonder why their are so many drug dependent one's, sex addicted with all the other immorality that will take down our country. Homosexuality does not serve any respectable purpose. it is a deviant sexual practice, no matter how they attempt to disguise it. Pure evil, they walk in darkness! Indoctriantion and soical engineering is bringing our country into the bowels of hell, dropping like a ton of bricks.

Posted by: boski66 | November 19, 2010 4:44 AM | Report abuse

the civilian DoD leadership rigged the survey questions to get the "proper" conclusions in order to please their boss at 1600 Penn. Ave. All right, debate the merits and detractions to repeal of DADT, but don't act in a cowardly manner by attaching it as a rider to the Defense Appropriations Bill.

Posted by: pielusztcontractor | November 19, 2010 8:48 AM | Report abuse

McCain should never have been released from POW camp!

Posted by: dakotahgeo | November 19, 2010 10:40 AM | Report abuse

boski66 wrote: "... Indoctriantion (sic) and soical (sic) engineering is bringing our country into the bowels of hell, dropping like a ton of bricks."
=====================
And may you enjoy the ride, sir. LOLOL

Posted by: dakotahgeo | November 19, 2010 10:43 AM | Report abuse

For those who keep saying repeal DADT do you have any idea what Homosexuality is? Do you realize that it is a self destructive behavior? Check out the Stats from the CDC.
check out this link too.
http://www.empowher.com/media/video/can-anal-sex-increase-fecal-incontinence-problem-dr-sanz-video

You want these individuals to serve openly?

Stop buying into this gay Politically Correct BS and Gay Pop Culture. Our military does not need Openly Gay Soldiers!

Sen. Webb, Nelson and Manchin better wake up and see that they will be voted out. There is a difference between tolerating Homosexual behavior and Accepting Homosexual behavior.

Posted by: tedy2 | November 25, 2010 9:39 PM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company