Posted on 06/21/2012 10:10:38 AM PDT by scottjewell
WASHINGTON -- The Republican chairman of the House Armed Services Committee said Thursday that allowing gays to serve openly in the military is a settled issue that he won't try to reverse even if Mitt Romney wins the presidency in November and the GOP captures the Senate. Rep. Howard "Buck" McKeon of California said his focus is on restoring money for the military after the latest round of defense cuts - a planned reduction of $487 billion over 10 years that could nearly double if Congress fails to avert automatic, across-the-board cuts. Pressed on the divisive issue of gay rights that roiled Congress two years ago, McKeon said he wouldn't revisit it. "We fought that fight," McKeon told defense reporters at an hour-long breakfast interview. He said his goal is to "get the things that our warfighters need." The committee chairman said other GOP lawmakers might try to reinstate the "don't ask, don't tell policy" that was in effect for nearly two decades. "That's not something that I would personally bring up," he said. He recalled that in 1994, when Republicans took control of the House after 40 years, there were high expectations for ambitious changes. "They expected us to pull off miracles. That's not how things work. I'd rather focus on money for defense," McKeon said. Congress passed and President Barack Obama signed legislation in December 2010 repealing the policy. The change took effect last year and military leaders have concluded that it has not affected morale or readiness. In fact this month, the Pentagon is marking gay pride month with an official salute.
(Excerpt) Read more at sacbee.com ...
GOP has gone soft and abandoned social conservatives, but I suspect this might one day in the not-too-distant future be reversed.
What a bunch of fags.
Thanks GOP for just using the issue for votes until Obama where you then just shrugged your shoulders and bent over.
“Rep. Howard “Buck” McKeon of California”, it figures.
I think the troops will express their views on this more openly when Obama is no longer in office. As a vet I know first hand that the troops are opposed this openly homosexual policy.
It is particularly distressing to see the death of a great nation when it is your own.
Words cannot express the disgust and disappointment I have with Republicans like “Doe” McKeon.
This day calls for men of conviction, courage, and action. And all we have are these reptilian, Republican eunuchs.
I am afraid that the cost to us to save the America of our Fathers is the identical price our Fathers paid.
If we will not pay that price, we will not save our nation.
In 2010 when we gathered together to form the TEA party movement we knew we had to get three things done. First we had to defeat Democrats and make them afraid of us. We got that done in Nov. 2010. Next we had to scare the media and rub their nose in the truth - we’re working on that. Finally we have to clean out the RINO cowards and make them fear us - we’re working on that as well. This reminds us of how much work we have to do on that last one. That gets rolling on January 21, 2013.
Amen to every bit of your last. Spot on.
America at the Crossorads of History
http://www.jeffhead.com/crossroads.htm
This election cycle, we still have the opportunity to start turning it around. But we simply must elect to the Hosue and Senate...and in the state houses, individuals who are not “career” politicians, rather Tea Party types, willoing to go serve their nation and set the house in order for the sake of our kids and grandkids and thier life, liberty, and prosperity.
Men and women who will not give in or retreat...or cede the war as a result of a setback, but return stronger than before and retake lost ground...fortifying it, strengthening it, so it is not lost again, then moving on to take back more, until the whole of the nation is reclaimed.
If we do not do this...I fear that your words will be all too prophetic.
The troops will take care of matters like this in the barracks after lights out like they always have.
Excellent link. Great piece, every word true.
“The troops will take care of matters like this in the barracks after lights out like they always have.”
But its not enough; there has to be real public and procedural and policy changes. A full reversal of the whole false trend.
Besides, they can now charge others with hate crimes, hate speech, so troops taking matters into their own hands would be severely disciplined. Something greater is needed, as others have posted above.
Inevitably it will cause disciplinary and readiness issues, just like women in combat troops caused for the Russians and Israelis. Then they will be forced to do something about it.
Allowing perverts to serve openly will never be settled.
In coming years the enormous problems this cause in our military and its ability to fight wars is likely to lead to disaster
“they can now charge others with hate crimes, hate speech, so troops taking matters into their own hands would be severely disciplined”
Well.....as a retired Army legal administrator (not a JAG, more a senior paralegal) I can say that the wheels of UCMJ turn as slowly as on the civilian side. A soldier facing Article 15 can always request trial by court-martial. The stakes go up as far as potential punishment but the burden of proof becomes more difficult as well. And the supporting paperwork on both sides increases exponentially.
IIRC, the current Manual for Court Martial does not list “hate crime” as a separate article of UCMJ. That sort of charge usually gets subsumed under a catchall like Article 134 (actions prejudicial to good order & discipline) and proving “hate filled” intent is like the proverbial nailing of Jello to the wall.
The majority of soldiers accept the military justice system as the means to accomplish the mission and for the fact that it protects as much as it is used to prosecute.
Now..... implicating the chain of command is another matter and a whole different legal universe in itself. Look at how long it has been since the Fort Hood jihadi Hasan killed all of our people. Three years this November. I’m digressing but the delays impeding that case going to trial have as much to do with official interference by the chain as those used by the defense team.
Anyway, mandated fundamental change in attitudes toward homosexuality within the close confines of military service may be a top political goal, but it’s not filtering down to the enlisted ranks very well at all. Just my opinion.
Well, this is certainly your area of expertise, sir! Thanks muchly for such enlightening information.
In any case, you are also very probably correct that a political agenda cannot change a basic fact of human nature (i.e., young males entering military service will respond to homosexuals in their midst from the gut, not according to a political correctness teaching manual).
In that case, there will be trouble on the horizon, perhaps (hopefully) leading to a re-thinking of the wisdom of this decision. (repeal of DADT and all which has followed).
The longer it stays in effect, the more difficult it will be to reverse.
This is why I despise Romney so much. He won't lift a finger to undo this damage. And I'll bet he even continues the "gay pride" month nonsense in the DOD if elected.
This will come back to bite the GOP in the butt.
Conservatives should focus on homo rape in the military because it’s going to get nasty and men are ashamed to talk about rape unless they know it is safe to do so. We ought to make it safe for men to talk about being in an anti-Christian homo army.
“homo rape in the military”
As in the Sandusky horror, that’s about gross abuse of authority than random opportunism by cruising queers. When there is a rash of incidents with barracks homos suffering severe beatdown or worse and everyone clamming up like the Town Bully residents when the investigators showed up, then the chain of command will realize that the primal dictates of human heterosexuality are far more powerful than the imposed mandates of political correctness.
SecyDef Panetta’s pandering tribute to “Gay Pride” month is going to result in things ending badly in a series of `unfortunate instances of workplace violence’, just my humble opinion.
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.