Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Donít Ask Too Fast
Newsweek ^ | Jan 3, 2009 | Dan Ephron

Posted on 01/05/2009 6:41:46 AM PST by areukiddingme1

On gays, Obama's Joint Chiefs chair is caught between his boss and a conservative military.

In the next year, Mullen might have to ask troops to do something many will find even more uncomfortable: welcome openly gay men and women into their ranks. Such was the promise made by President-elect Obama in the 2008 campaign—gay-rights groups will hold him to it.

(Excerpt) Read more at newsweek.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: gaysinthemilitary; homosexualagenda; military; obama; obamatransitionfile

1 posted on 01/05/2009 6:41:46 AM PST by areukiddingme1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: areukiddingme1

I have an idea—let the Obammy put the gays in his “civilian army” that he’s going to unleash on the public.


2 posted on 01/05/2009 6:44:58 AM PST by basil (Outlaw gun free zones!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: areukiddingme1

The kooks are starting to call in their markers. Their press thinks they made the anointed one and therefore own his future decisions. Get the popcorn, we could have a figurative crucifixion by passover.


3 posted on 01/05/2009 6:47:42 AM PST by Steamburg ( Your wallet speaks the only language most politicians understand.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steamburg

Gays in the military. Larry the Cable Guy said it best...

Train seperate, fight together. The straight guys go in there and blow stuff up, there you send in the queers to put up curtains and clean the place up.


4 posted on 01/05/2009 6:50:13 AM PST by Cyclone59
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Steamburg

You’re underestimating how kooky the annointed one is himself. He’ll definitely try these things as soon as he has a chance. The question is whether the response will be fast enough and strong enough to deter him.

Frankly, I think we’re so cowed that he’ll get his way in all of the social programs he wishes to impose. And those social programs are his major goals, or at any rate, those of his handlers and brains, Ayers, Axelrod and Emmanuel, not to mention his vicious wife.


5 posted on 01/05/2009 6:53:23 AM PST by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: basil

Oh my God — the all Gay “civilian army,” could you imagine what in the “F” that would look like...”the horror, the horror, the horror.”


6 posted on 01/05/2009 6:53:37 AM PST by areukiddingme1 (areukiddingme1 is a synonym for a Retired U.S. Navy Chief Petty Officer and tired of liberal BS.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Cyclone59

What does “Openly Gay” in the military mean anyway? Can men tell other men soldiers that they’d like to have sex with them the way that men can tell women? Oh, that’s right, that can get you drummed out like Tail Hook.


7 posted on 01/05/2009 6:55:07 AM PST by massgopguy (I owe everything to George Bailey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: areukiddingme1

Obama is going to kill retention in the Armed Services with the lifting of DADT. The military is still conservative as a whole and open homosexuality is not a fit.


8 posted on 01/05/2009 6:55:19 AM PST by ScottinVA (All I needed to know about islam I learned on 9-11.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steamburg
Actually, this issue has almost nothing to do with partisan politics and everything to do with military staffing needs.

If you want any evidence of that, just go back to the Clinton administration and recall how much vocal opposition there was among conservatives to the idea of having women serving in combat roles.

Fast-forward 8-10 years and notice how silent these so-called "conservatives" have been regarding the active participation of women in combat roles in the U.S. military campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan. It's kinda funny how that opposition disappeared when it was a Republican sending them into combat.

9 posted on 01/05/2009 6:56:26 AM PST by Alberta's Child (I'm out on the outskirts of nowhere . . . with ghosts on my trail, chasing me there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: livius

O will not soon forget the firestorm that hit bubba when he tried to put openly gays and lesbians in the military.

Including Gen. Powell who took early leave in protest.

Once more O will concentrate on his waffles rather than make a decision.


10 posted on 01/05/2009 6:59:25 AM PST by Carley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: areukiddingme1

It’s not so much gays and lesbians openly serving that is worrying the military. It’s the inevitable flood of mandatory POGLBSH (Prevention of Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual Sexual Harassment) training and poorly-produced AFN commercials with which we’d have to put up. Putting up with all that stuff with just straights as theoretical predators is bad enough. Can you imagine the CJCS commercial about sexual harassment as revised for the new, gayer military? “I’m aware of the stigma of being penetrated by your CHUmate....”


11 posted on 01/05/2009 7:10:36 AM PST by Caesar Soze
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steamburg

“The kooks are starting to call in their markers.”

I agree. The problem that I have is not necessarily just with gays — the few that I have met in uniform and suspected were gay were relatively benign because they knew they had to present themselves in a certain manner and demeanor in order to be accepted and continue to have their rank respected. I’m afraid that if to “be out,” they drop all pretenses and make life for straight Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines unbearable.

However, in the case of overly feminine men — they did not enjoy the same respect that straight senior NCO’s received — however, put overly feminine/flamboyantly gay males in charge of group Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines and I can assure you that morale will break down. I would be concerned that enlistments would start to drop.

In addition, it has been my experience that gay men also come with a lot of emotional baggage about being gay — lots of alcohol and emotional problems. Not to mention the fact that Navy ships go to foreign ports — HIV/AIDS...there is an undisputed fact that remains that unprotected anal sex is the primary source of the spread of AIDS amongst men between the ages of 17-35...

Do we really need to do this “prove” it is a bad idea or can’t we just accept the comments made by then former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, General Colin Powell, who while speaking at the U.S. Naval Academy during one the Forrestal Lecture Series that he was quoted as saying; “homosexuality is not benign like race or color — it’s a choice,” he made that statement when answering a question of one of the young mid-shipmen sitting in the audience asked the question; “if your organization that you have sworn oath to, to uphold morals and values then changed its oath, what should that individual do.” General Powell’s response was; “resign.” Oh, but that’s right — that was then — this is now.


12 posted on 01/05/2009 7:15:36 AM PST by areukiddingme1 (areukiddingme1 is a synonym for a Retired U.S. Navy Chief Petty Officer and tired of liberal BS.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Caesar Soze
If this were to come to pass, would not the UCMJ require an overhaul? Also, would this not place a significant additional burden on the armed forces’ medical resources? It's my understanding that the lifestyle activities of the homosexual community (specifically the male half) present unique medical problems.
13 posted on 01/05/2009 7:24:59 AM PST by VRWCtaz (Things change. Change you hope for changes too. Spare change?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: areukiddingme1

Brings an all new meaning to “cover your buddies behind”.......

Argh


14 posted on 01/05/2009 7:27:26 AM PST by roaddog727 (BS does not get bridges built - the funk you see is the funk you do)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Bookmark.


15 posted on 01/05/2009 7:33:00 AM PST by little jeremiah (Leave illusion, come to the truth. Leave the darkness, come to the light.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: areukiddingme1
From an article I just googled, looking for that incident when a Chinese sub popped up in the middle of the Pacific fleet:

Mullen is said to be the brains of the “thousand ship navy” concept, a multi-national “global maritime partnership that unites maritime forces, port operators, commercial shippers, and international, governmental and nongovernmental agencies to address mutual concerns.” Some of the patter in the Navy’s June 2007 Playbook: “Through multinational exercises, security cooperation and personnel exchanges, the U.S. Navy is building ties with nations around the globe. Even in places where U.S. assistance is neither required nor routinely requested, nations are expressing a desire to work together to achieve common goals. This groundswell of support is a major step forward in promoting the economic and political stability that secures for all maritime nations the benefits of globalization.” The piece also outlines the Navy’s 30-year 313-ship rebuilding plan.

Mullen is the perfect choice for Obama's NWO plans, as well as his gay military. And with Bush's incredibly bad judgment in choosing his appointees, it's not surprising that that should be the case. Peter Pace out, Mullen in, all ready for the Mahdi to lead us into the Promised Land.

16 posted on 01/05/2009 7:52:11 AM PST by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: roaddog727

I thought it was; “never leave your buddy’s behind.” I could be wrong though.


17 posted on 01/05/2009 8:04:12 AM PST by areukiddingme1 (areukiddingme1 is a synonym for a Retired U.S. Navy Chief Petty Officer and tired of liberal BS.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: areukiddingme1
Barry and his gay advocates are playing with fire with their little social engineering experiment. Besides the drop in reenlistments. Any openly gay person in the 'Combat Arms' (Infantry, Armor, etc) will be signing their own death warrant.

These PC asshats seem to overlook that in combat BLOOD and GUTS are spilled. In our world that's called a BIO-HAZARD. And whose going to risk getting infected with god knows what disease to drag an openly gay wounded soldier or Marine out of harms way and getting BLOOD and BODY PARTS on themselves? Even after the fire-fight ends, what Medic will risk THEIR OWN LIFE to treat a wounded gay soldier or Marine on the battlefield?

Answer - No One. And I don't care who's yelling an order to do so. Enlisting in the military isn't a suicide pact. So any openly gay person who gets wounded will lay there and DIE - period. Every fire-fight location will be a HAZMAT zone.

So forget 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell'. It will be 'DON'T TOUCH'!

And I don't care what Israel or any other country does with their openly gay military personnel.

18 posted on 01/05/2009 8:14:00 AM PST by Condor51 (The difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: areukiddingme1

Two years of Obama policies from now active gays will be the least of the military’s problems.

Recruitment will fail (numbers may stay up, but only by lowering the standards and making military service a public works employment scheme).

Worn out equipment will not be replaced, and new advanced equipment that would give us a qualitative edge over our adversaries will be zeroed out.

Military budgets will be turned into cash cows for items not even related to military objectives, like DoD breast cancer research in the Clinton years. Likewise, expect lots of DoD money to be used for AIDS research when open gays are authorized.

The military will be used for proving Obama’s ego and manhood like Clinton’s use in Bosnia and Somalia. Lots of soldiers will die for actions not even related to our strategic interests.

By then, America will be really looking for Hope and Change.


19 posted on 01/05/2009 8:16:15 AM PST by oldbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Condor51

“And whose going to risk getting infected with god knows what disease to drag an openly gay wounded soldier or Marine out of harms way and getting BLOOD and BODY PARTS on themselves?”

No one! Absolutely freak’n no one! And that is what the Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines want to say to Admiral Mullen — but simply cannot, but that, that is God’s honest truth.

Amen brother! I could not possibly agree with you more.


20 posted on 01/05/2009 8:27:56 AM PST by areukiddingme1 (areukiddingme1 is a synonym for a Retired U.S. Navy Chief Petty Officer and tired of liberal BS.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: areukiddingme1

If Gays can openly serve and live in our military then its time for CO-Ed living arrangements for the military...

Whats the difference?

Now try to pull that one off at Sea....


21 posted on 01/05/2009 9:18:37 AM PST by tomnbeverly ("In the hour of darkness and peril and need, the people will waken to listen and hear.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: areukiddingme1

YEah—but think of the laughs we’d have. Our civilian army dressed in tutu’s!


22 posted on 01/05/2009 9:29:17 AM PST by basil (Outlaw gun free zones!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: areukiddingme1

I thought it was; “never leave your buddy’s behind.” I could be wrong though.

THere’s that one also.

Here’s another one to contemplate: Bringing up the rear.....


23 posted on 01/05/2009 9:38:25 AM PST by roaddog727 (BS does not get bridges built - the funk you see is the funk you do)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: roaddog727

Also gives new meaning to terms like “rear admiral,” “tail gunner,” etc.


24 posted on 01/05/2009 9:41:57 AM PST by Alberta's Child (I'm out on the outskirts of nowhere . . . with ghosts on my trail, chasing me there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child; Tailgunner Joe

Ping to Tailgunner Joe.....

Also gives new meaning to terms like “rear admiral,” “tail gunner,” etc.


25 posted on 01/05/2009 10:38:39 AM PST by roaddog727 (BS does not get bridges built - the funk you see is the funk you do)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: areukiddingme1

Anything to get elected.


26 posted on 01/05/2009 11:21:40 AM PST by panthermom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: areukiddingme1

Many already do welcome gays who do the job well.

It’s also a convenient way to get rid of someone who is undesirable for other reasons.


27 posted on 01/05/2009 12:10:58 PM PST by The_Repugnant_Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: basil

And beating the enemy to death with their pocketbooks!


28 posted on 01/05/2009 12:49:05 PM PST by liberalism is suicide (Communism,fascism-no matter how you slice socialism, its still baloney)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Condor51
These PC asshats seem to overlook that in combat BLOOD and GUTS are spilled. In our world that's called a BIO-HAZARD. And whose going to risk getting infected with god knows what disease to drag an openly gay wounded soldier or Marine out of harms way and getting BLOOD and BODY PARTS on themselves?

Amen to that. Gay and wounded? Might as well have taken a headshot because no one's going to touch you in that golden hour.

29 posted on 01/05/2009 1:16:53 PM PST by Centurion2000 (To protect and defend ... against all enemies, foreign and domestic .... by any means necessary.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: areukiddingme1
In the next year, Mullen might have to ask troops to do something many will find even more uncomfortable: welcome openly gay men and women into their ranks. Such was the promise made by President-elect Obama in the 2008 campaign—gay-rights groups will hold him to it.

I seriously doubt it. As the author of NRO's campaign spot has famously observed, all Obama promises cary an expiration date, which happens to fall on the day in which keeping the promise becomes politically disadvantageous.

Forcing the military to accept openly gay people is going to carry a huge political cost and provide him with virtually no political benefit. Gays are at most 2-3% of the population. He easily can afford to anger a them, especially since it's not like they're suddenly going to go out and vote Republican. Angering a much larger fraction of the civilian population that opposes gays in the military, not to mention the military brass with whom he will have to work, just to please a small fraction of the population whose votes he can take for granted, makes zero political sense.

Obama is going to quietly forget he made that promise, and if pressed on it, will simply say that making such sweeping changes during war time is not a good idea.

30 posted on 01/06/2009 11:59:58 AM PST by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: areukiddingme1

Obama will put gays in the military, and take away the tools (by cutting the funding) the military needs to combat current and evolving threats.


31 posted on 01/06/2009 12:28:03 PM PST by Thunder90
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson