Romney on DADT (Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell)

http://2012.republican-candidates.org ^ | November 9, 2011 | Mitt Romney

[DBeers]

Romney on DADT (Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell)

Question: How do you feel about gays serving openly in the military.

Romney: That’s already occurred and I’m not planning on reversing that at this stage. <

Question: But you’re comfortable with it?

Romney: I was not comfortable making the change during a period of conflict, by virtue of the complicating the features of a new program in the middle of two wars going on, but those wars are winding down and moving to that direction at this stage no longer presents that problem.

November 9, 2011: Romney meeting with the editorial board of the Des Moines Register.

[DBeers]

Reality Romney versus the GOP Platform:

http://www.gop.com/2008Platform/NationalSecurity.htm

Here is one paragraph from the Republican platform:

The all-volunteer force has been a success. We oppose reinstituting the draft, whether directly or through compulsory national service. We support the advancement of women in the military and their exemption from ground combat units. Military priorities and mission must determine personnel policies. Esprit and cohesion are necessary for military effectiveness and success on the battlefield. To protect our servicemen and women and ensure that America's Armed Forces remain the best in the world, we affirm the timelessness of those values, the benefits of traditional military culture, and the incompatibility of homosexuality with military service.

So Does Reality Romney support the GOP Party Platform today -has he flipped since being anointed the nominee by fellow RINO's and the MSM?

It seems odd that Romney is willing to lead an effort to overturn one leftist law, taking over healthcare, but not willing to lead an effort to overturn another leftist law homosexualizing the military?

It will be interesting to see if and how the RINO's attempt to change the GOP platform to match the Reality Romney platform. I, and I am sure many, will be watching what they actually do, versus what they say.

[muawiyah]

There’s probably a reason all the more modern Romneys are so unconcerned with polygamy, and yet ready to hit a home run for the gay blades.

[skeeter]

What a flake. The perfect RINO.

[wagglebee]

Homosexual Agenda Ping

Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda ping list.

Be sure to click the FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search link for a list of all related articles. We don't ping you to all related articles so be sure to click the previous link to see the latest articles.

Add keywords homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list.

[Happy Rain]

Everyone should vote for their favorite in the remaining primaries and then vote for the GOP nominee, whoever it is, in November.

Obama must be defeated.

[achilles2000]

I won’t vote for Obama or Romney, but I’d rather have Obama. It is far better to have an enemy who is out in the open. Romney is a worse RINO than Bush or McCain.

[donmeaker]

During WWII, it was brought to the attention if Eisenhower that some of the women in his administrative pool were lesbians. He asked the commander to make up a list of the women who were lesbians. She said “I will follow your orders, but bear in mind that my name will be at the top of the list.” The lady who was the clerk for the commander of the administrative pool piped up. “No, I will be typing the list. My name will be at the top.”

Eisenhower looked from one to the other. “Never mind, I don’t need it now.”

[Engraved-on-His-hands]

If you are primarily concerned with marginal tax rates, then Romney may be your man. If you are more concerned with the social fabric and moral underpinnings of our society, then I don’t see how that voting for either Romney or Obama helps matters out any.

[donmeaker]

But in 2008 Romney was the conservative. Not only that, Obama tells us that Romney is a right wing extremist.

[Celtic Cross]

Why prefer either of them? Romney-phobia has reached such a fever pitch on FR that more and more people are saying they'll support Obama-- I've even seen a few say they'll actually vote for him.

Romney is a socialist, Obama is a socialist. There is zero reason to favor or support either of them. Lets not forget that we are fighting against a philosophy, not any one person.

[donmeaker]

After all, Romney has shown his disregard for social fabric by getting divorced so many times.

Oops, that would be Newt.

[donmeaker]

I myself am concerned with government spending. That spending seems targeted to destroying the moral fabric of the nation. If Romney with a R house can stop the spending, that will give the moral fabric a chance.

[Celtic Cross]

Careful there -- I've seen zots labeled "Mr. Gingrich detractors."

Newt is apparently sacrosanct.

[DBeers]

But in 2008 Romney was the conservative. Not only that, Obama tells us that Romney is a right wing extremist.

FRANKLY, I really do not care how Romney feels personally about an issue. I want to know what he will do as an executive. We are electing a representative executive that should uphold the Constitution and represent the GOP Platform. We are not electing an omnipotent ruler.

IF Romney pledged to uphold the and defend the Constitution and promote, pursue, and strive to achieve the GOP platform AND I BELIEVED HIM -then I would have no problem voting for him. I have yet to see this from Romney. When I look for principled leadership in him in this regard I see a tap dancing politically correct play it safe pandering progressive pansy....

[Engraved-on-His-hands]

In case you haven’t noticed, the biggest enemies of social conservatives are liberal Republicans. They only feign concern for the moral fabric of our country in order to get the plantation votes of social conservatives. They have no intention of actually doing anything positive socially, unless they can make a buck out of it, and maybe not even then.

Sorry, I’m not buying your (wide assortment of short words).

[DBeers]

I myself am concerned with government spending. That spending seems targeted to destroying the moral fabric of the nation. If Romney with a R house can stop the spending, that will give the moral fabric a chance.

What of the rest of GOP Platform? Should the GOP change into the MDFP (Morally Devoid Fiscal Party)? Maybe they should just join the Libertarian Party which already represents this mindset. Tell me again, how successful have the Libertarians been? ROTFLMAO

[DJ MacWoW]

If you’re worried about “social fabric” then you won’t vote for a Mormon Bishop.

[DJ MacWoW]

If Romney with a R house can stop the spending, that will give the moral fabric a chance.

In business, Romney did not save companies. He sold them piecemeal and made a bundle.

As Governor he raised fees and taxes 300%

He's the father of Romneycare, grandfather of Obamacare, and a socialist.

[Celtic Cross]

Who gives a hoot whether somebody is a mormon? If they’re moral and upstanding I honestly don’t care.

[achilles2000]

I’m writing in James A Garfield for President. If Obamalini’s eligible, so is Garfield. Besides, Garfield won’t embarrass us.

[Gator113]

Yet people that call themselves conservatives, many on FR, are willing to actually vote for this POS!

[Celtic Cross]

Reminder -- I'm not a Romney supporter.

That said, Bain did save some companies. Others they didn't, for whatever reason. Not everybody succeeds -- if your business model is flawed, you lose.

But hey, thats capitalism. Get over it.

[DJ MacWoW]

You should care. Beliefs color how a person thinks and acts.

If you thought you would become a god with your own planet in the after-life, how concerned would you be for those that you saw as "lesser beings"?

[DBeers]

Lest we forget...

The 65-31 vote in the Senate overturning the forever present ban on homosexual sex in the military garnered support from progressives representing both sides of the aisle.

Here are the RINO Senators who voted in favor of homosexualizing the military:

Scott Brown (MA.)

Richard Burr (NC.)

Susan Collins (ME.)

John Ensign (NV.)

Mark Kirk (IL.)

Lisa Murkowski (AK.)

Olympia Snowe (ME.)

George Voinovich (OH.)

Burr, Ensign, and Kirk were three surprise yes votes; The Communists were only expecting the support of five RINOs.

No Democrats (Communists) voted no.

[Celtic Cross]

Scott Brown...Man I hate that guy.

Better than granny warren, but still...I wouldn't piss on him if he were on fire.

[Gator113]

That chicken-shit argument doesn’t work.

Take your sanctimonious tripe and stuff it.

[DJ MacWoW]

Bain did save some companies.

Very few.

But hey, thats capitalism. Get over it.

This has nothing to do with his wealth. It has to do with whether he has knowledge and the capability. He doesn't.

He also agrees with Obama taking over two automobile companies. Is THAT about capitalism? Or pure socialism......

[central_va]

Eisenhower looked from one to the other. “Never mind, I don’t need it now.”

Figures you'd be right here defending DADT.

[duffee]

Open homosexuality in the military would appear to be compatible with Romney’s other positions on homosexuality.

[Gator113]

LOL.... AFTER I slammed you I looked at your profile. LOL... we are members of the same club. Oops. My 3rd has lasted for over 40 wonderful years.

[DBeers]

After all, Romney has shown his disregard for social fabric by getting divorced so many times.

Oops, that would be Newt.

Are you a leftist? You sure sound like one.

Romney sucks right now unless and until he declares and pledges he will promote the GOP platform. I am not voting for an omnipotent icon ruler with feelings that may mirror mine. I am voting for an executive and as such I judge his policies, his past performance, and his future promises.

I would much rather elect a person of substance that has made errors in the past but pledges to promote a conservative future RATHER than electing a politically correct tap dancing pansy with no conservative spine (Romney).

[duffee]

You are right, Romney hasn’t given me any reason to believe he has any core beliefs or that he will be able or willing to do what is necessary to make the changes that are needed fiscally or socially. All I really see from him is that he wants to hold the office of Presidentnot to actually be President.

[DBeers]

You are right, Romney hasn’t given me any reason to believe he has any core beliefs or that he will be able or willing to do what is necessary to make the changes that are needed fiscally or socially. All I really see from him is that he wants to hold the office of Presidentnot to actually be President.

Agreed.

He has to give me something principled I can believe in to vote for. I am not voting for a personality. The cult of personality model we have now in office is a complete failure -we do not need another one EVEN if he has an R next to his name.

[heye2monn]

Hard to defend polygamy and oppose gay marriage at same time.

Once you get away from the one-man, one-woman model, all bets are off. There’s no stopping at one form of marriage or another. Everyone has a justification for each weird combination.

[Berlin_Freeper]

4,000 Christians Show up at North Carolina Capital to Support Marriage Amendment

[Lady4Liberty]

Mitt Romney's Homosexual Agenda

***

***

Romney's State Sponsored Push Of The Homosexual Agenda Onto Children.

***

***

1.) "Husband" and "Wife" has been replaced by "Party A" and "Party B".
2.) Justices of the Peace are required to "solemnize" these marriages or be fired, as ordered by Gov. Mitt Romney on April 25, 2004. "We're just following the law," said Mitt Romney.
3.) Male/Female checkoffs for both Party A and Party B now on marriage license.
None of this was required by any law passed by the Legislature, or even ordered by the court. Governor Mitt Romney did this on his own, in cooperation with the ruling: "We're just following the law."

***

Mitt Romney's Gay Youth Pride Proclamation.

***

Massachusetts Tells Catholic Church it MUST Permit Homosexual Adoption
Mon Feb 20, 2006 12:15 EST
BOSTON, February 20, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and a top government leader have told a group of bishops that their request that Catholic institutions be exempt from placing foster children with same-sex parents will be denied. [link]

[USAF80]

Rape and sexual assault have increased in the military. This includes homo rape which has been on the increase. The report was out this week but the military is being quiet about it.

[mcshot]

SCOTUS vacancies, saving our Constitution and yet you choose to vote for the killer of this Country. I’m ABO for seemingly endless reasons.

[achilles2000]

Look at Romney’s record on judges. Look at his record as a governor: HE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR TURNING THE SODOMITES’ BURLESQUE OF MARRIAGE LOOSE ON THIS COUNTRY. HE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ROMNEYCARE, AND A LOT MORE. I will support conservative reps and senators - Ted Cruz, for one - but I won’t support Mittens, ever.

BTW, James Garfield is not the “killer” of this country. Romney is just a stealth Obama who would continue moving in the same direction, but more discretely, “intelligently”, and slightly more slowly.

[donmeaker]

Odd, I find people can defend slavery and get a pass, but to tell the truth about Newt’s marital past, and I am warned that I am close to the edge.

I hope the warning is ironic.

[Salvation]

Looking for the Drudge/Romney picture. My computer is slow today.

[Salvation]

Obama must be defeated—————————————————————————————————————

Then vote for Newt — write him in.

[The_Media_never_lie]

Just like ‘em, arguing about who gets to be on top.

[donmeaker]

There are two management approaches, and only two.

One is “back to basics” the idea that there are some things so important that if done right, they make a difference.

The other is “details matter”, the idea that after you have the basics right, getting the details right makes you even more effective.

When the government has not passed a budget in 3 years, it seems to me to be time for ‘back to basics’. If we focus on things on which we all agree, we can get the government back under control. After that, we can push for all the other aspects.

[donmeaker]

So what in my anecdote did you see as defending DADT?

[donmeaker]

I wish you continued joy in your third marriage.

I am off the market, at least until my children are grown. After that, for an unusual lady, I could try again, but why?. So long as I can be happy by myself, why commit sin in an attempt for greater happiness? If I can’t be happy by myself, why would I think I could make someone else happy?

Interesting how many people don’t think I am conservative.

[donmeaker]

My recollection is that DADT was passed by Democrats. My belief is that DADT was an abomination, making some soldiers subject to blackmail, making the military chain of command ripe for corruption.

Better to accept, or not accept homosexuals, than to accept them so long as they were not accused.

Homosexuals have served honorably, and dishonorably. Recently Private Bunning has to be the poster child for DADT. Better for such people to be out, or to be in without a grievance.

[DBeers]

My recollection is that DADT was passed by Democrats.

You are correct -it was a progressive step on the road to utopia. The camel's nose in the tent. The next step was legalizing homosexual sex in the military.

My belief is that DADT was an abomination, making some soldiers subject to blackmail, making the military chain of command ripe for corruption.

Actually, homosexual sex is an abomination (as well an Obamanantion). DADT was passed to accommodate those suffering from the homosexual disorder who otherwise served with no other problems. It was put in place to deter witch hunts against otherwise good service member. It was not put in place, as you suggest, to demean downtrodden homosexual beings. Homosexual sex has ALWAYS been illegal in the military EVEN under DADT. All that the legalization of homosexual sex in the military has done has empowered the flaming fruits & nuts in addition to empowering morally devoid people like you to come out of the shadows and post your leftist homosexualist thoughts and views here on FR.

Better to accept, or not accept homosexuals, than to accept them so long as they were not accused.

Like so many that promote the homosexual agenda (not surprisingly, RINO's, Romneybots, and Libertarians) you seem intent on conflating a disordered activity with a state of being as if to excuse the disordered activity. I can accept a person without accepting the homosexual sex he/she chooses to engage in. There is such a thing as legitimate discrimination.

Homosexuals have served honorably, and dishonorably. Recently Private Bunning has to be the poster child for DADT. Better for such people to be out, or to be in without a grievance.

What is honorable about homosexual sex? You seem confused. People who choose to engage in homosexual sex are mentally disordered e.g. abnormal and self destructive.

I guess you disagree with the GOP platform like many RINOs?

Regardless your support for homosexualizing the military and Romney the RINO -know that myself and other true conservatives WILL overturn this and many other 'progressive' initiatives. Enjoy it while you can -the pendulum is swinging right and will swing right with a vengeance!