'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Repeal Votes Exist, Say Democrats

The Hill:

Lawmakers and gay-rights activists predicted Wednesday that both the Senate and House will have enough votes to repeal the "Don't ask, don't tell" law.

Read the whole story: The Hill

Comments

[Lucysmith111]

12:20 PM on 05/27/2010

Do you know what repealing this Law will do, have you met military men? Do you have any idea of the actions that will happen if this is repealed.

I wish I could say nothing would happen but that would be a lie, you are expecting what soldiers expect as the norm to change.

This will create a huge mess in the military, and if it is repealed someone or ones will get hurt.

[Rainbow Law]

01:00 PM on 05/27/2010

Someone must have mentioned this obvious fact already, but, here goes. NOTHING will change for heterosexual military members because they are ALREADY serving with gays and lesbians. The only difference is that now gay men and lesbians will not be discharged when someone finds out. Homosexuals are allowed to openly serve in the military in Israel, France, Germany, Canada, the United Kingdom and many other countries. With no problems.

Only homophobes are upset about this. Everyone else knows it is time for the military to join the 21st Century.

[aloevera456]

10:56 PM on 05/27/2010

You are an idiot homophobe. The only ones who will get hurt will be gays who get beaten up by knuckle draggers like you.

[politicalgenius]

09:13 AM on 05/27/2010

devil's advocate...

Why does it matter whether someone can serve openly?

[haval2]

07:37 AM on 05/27/2010

JUST DO IT! REPEAL REPEAL REPEAL.

[Tanyars5]

07:09 AM on 05/27/2010

The level of direspect displayed by the gay community of PBO is disgusting and repugnant.
DADT is not what gays are upset about it is gay marrage. The President is against gay marriage and will do nothing to help the gay community.
DADT affects a small minority of people. No one really cares. Repubs will change it when they get into office if it becomes a law. It is a rally call for the right wingers.
PBO should just move on to more pressing issues.
Whatever happened to jobs jobs jobs?

[enhancedvibes]

02:49 PM on 05/27/2010

You should type out Obama, cause PBO is not a commonly used acronym for the president.

[Quasi Libertarian]

06:44 AM on 05/27/2010

I think the time has come were gays should be able to serve openly. Repealing DADT is meaningless because the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) must be changed also. DADT is currently the loophole that has kept gays safe from prosecution. If DADT is repealed and the UCMJ is not changed, a different administration with a less friendly stance on gay rights could aggressively seek out to purge the military of gays.

On a personal note, I would like gays to be permitted for 2 reasons....(1) I believe that gays can serve every bit as heroic and with honor and it is their right...(2) Heterosexual Cowards or scammers of Military educational programs cannot "come-out" declaring that they are suddenly "gay" in order to not serve....No service member gay or straight wants a coward in their ranks.

[Tanyars5]

07:14 AM on 05/27/2010

No one thinks about the big picture. DADT will be repealed and nothing else will be done. Gays will get what they asked for and don't even understand the consequences.

[1differentdrummer]

06:41 AM on 05/27/2010

How many Arabic linguists did the Army need and how many did they discharge when the need was greatest?

[enhancedvibes]

02:49 PM on 05/27/2010

And Farsi linguists for dealing with Iran.

[Roland19]

06:40 AM on 05/27/2010

Actually, what I have often wondered is why the president doesn't just pull a Truman here, issue an executive order that allows homosexuals to serve openly, and be done with it.

[Pennsanic]

06:48 AM on 05/27/2010

Well Truman's approval ratings did reach a low of 23%. Even W didn't sink that low.

[Roland19]

06:51 AM on 05/27/2010

Not sure what that has to do with anything. Either removing this ban/policy is the right thing to do, or it isn't. Ensuring a groups civil rights are protected shouldn't be based on whether the notion is popular or not.

[enhancedvibes]

02:50 PM on 05/27/2010

I am wondering that as well. There must be some (unfortunately) political reasoning by going about it this way. I think it might be because Obama is trying to show Americans that he is working with the Joint Chiefs and therefore the different branches of military "have a say."

[AguynamedWayne]

06:26 AM on 05/27/2010

Except what they are voting on IS NOT REPEAL. This is yet another "COMPROMISE" that will STILL ALLOW GAY SOLDIERS TO BE KICKED OUT OF MILITARY SERVICE JUST FOR BEING GAY!

IT"S JUST ANOTHER OBAMA BAMBOOZLE. READ THE "COMPROMISE" IT'S TOTAL B.S.!!!!!!!

[RBLRDR]

06:43 AM on 05/27/2010

Hi Wayne, if I'm reading this correctly, it attaches a repeal amendment to the 2011 defense authorization bill which would be voted on at the end of this year. If so, for the first time, there will be a scheduled vote to do away with DADT. Let' hope so.

[AnotherTry]

06:51 AM on 05/27/2010

You've got it wrong. In order for the repeal to take effect, it requires THREE signatures; the president's, the sec of defense AND the joint chiefs of staff. If anyone of them do not want to sign the repeal once all of their delaying tactics have run out or they are no longer there i.e. the president ISN'T re-elected, there will be NO repeal. And every day until that time, soldiers WILL NOT be able to serve openly. This compromise electioneering BS.

[jaschrod]

06:03 AM on 05/27/2010

If I was gay, I would look for someone to thank for giving me a free pass from being used by the government for idiotic wars. The real shame is our government using, yes I said using some of our good people for wars that we should never have gotten into in the first place. My advice to the gay community, take your free pass, forget the military, go to college, and make some big bucks, military pay is not that good.

[enhancedvibes]

02:52 PM on 05/27/2010

Military pay is actually pretty decent when you take into account that their room and board are paid for.

[JcKeesling]

04:14 AM on 05/28/2010

Military pay is actually pretty good, but besides that, what makes you think people only want to join the military for the money?? I know it's hard to believe, but some people actually want to serve their country.

[socciforcongress]

06:02 AM on 05/27/2010

I'm a conservative, but I say if a person wants to lay their life on the line to serve this country, I will thank them and not care about their sexual preference. If the soldiers/sailors they work with don't care, why should I?

[Roland19]

06:16 AM on 05/27/2010

That's pretty much it. I care about whether or not you have the guts to join and do the things necessary to be part of the force. I gives not a damn about one's sexual preference. Frankly, that's none of my business.

[forestnfama]

06:34 AM on 05/27/2010

I am not gay but for those I do know I trust and respect them far more than I do a straight person who has problems with other peoples sexuality. Especially the lying moral religious bigot.

[AndyWright68]

05:09 AM on 05/27/2010

Don't ask, don't tell

Don't ask me to kiII for a paycheck and I won't tell you to go to heII!

[FarOutFish]

01:14 PM on 05/27/2010

If asked to defend your country would you still say "Go to Hell"? If the answer is yes you are a coward.

[enhancedvibes]

02:55 PM on 05/27/2010

Defend my country for what? I dont have to do jack s**t. Its a volunteer military. Thats the whole point. If I dont wanna, I dont wanna, my reasons are my own and could be any number of reasons. That does not mean I am a coward or un-patriotic. Some people's personalities are not fit for military service which subsists on a yes sir/no sir mentality. Not everyone can get behind that type of approach.

[AndyWright68]

06:51 PM on 05/27/2010

I don't kiII for money. If another government's military beached our shores I would be first in line to defend this country and i would do it for free.. Not only will I refuse any order to go overseas and kiII for a paycheck so the elite can have more power but I do not support our troops doing this either. Only cowards would kiII because they were ordered to and then accept money for the carnage they have produced. It takes a brave and honorable man to refuse.

[JcKeesling]

04:16 AM on 05/28/2010

Maybe you should know that being in the military doesn't only require you to be in combat. There's other jobs besides infantry, so you wouldn't have to "kill", what do you think women do?

[AndyWright68]

07:53 AM on 05/28/2010

Then I guess you don't understand the phase,"Support our troops." Lets go ahead and extend that to their support for sake of argument. Those who do the paperwork and/or make sure they have the supplies they need to kiII would also be considered accessories as in any criminal organization. Let's go a step further. Those who fund their operations would also be liable for the carnage produced. Even those who allowed their money to be used to fund such slaughter would be guilty. I am willing to go right to the people who voted for the person who sends our troops in harms way to kiII for money need to be included. I don't support any of these people and they are all guilt of war crimes. It takes a brave and honorable man/woman to reject orders, support and funding and do what is right instead of bowing down to tyranny and doing what they were trained to believe is honorable. Again. If they were fighting off an invading military on our beaches I would support them and be fighting right along side them. They are not. They choose to fight in illegal wars invading and occupying far off lands and are kiIIing hundreds of thousands of innocent people to assassinate hand fulls of "suspected terrorists". No way I would support anyone involved in these slaughters of human life.

[blueskybigstar]

04:50 AM on 05/27/2010

I have a hunch that the people in upper management in the military who don't want a repeal of DADT is because half the people they have ever been with might tell enough people that it gets back to their wives.

[Trittydi]

04:43 AM on 05/27/2010

Then do it.
*

[Pandaforum]

04:37 AM on 05/27/2010

this shows the weak leadership of obama. he makes promises he has no idea or sometimes no intention of keeping. After 18 months and it still is not a done deal.

[lippy33]

05:07 AM on 05/27/2010

this president's weak leadership sure seems to be getting stuff done, though. it's weird. all the super strong leaders of the past, and only this weak one could get any type of health care bill through congress. i still don't know how that happened. next will probably be wall street reform and while neither of these bills are perfect, they are moving the ball forward. now it's a repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell? There's a major sea change going on under this guy's watch. I bet he'll get immigration reform passed too, thanks to AZ's dumb law. And this oil fiasco has the country ripe for green energy!

i do understand that the president's been slower on some things or some don't understand his timing. But I also see how he is seriously underestimated. everything seems to be coming to a head under his watch. it's incredible to see (although not particularly pretty all the time).

[Imzadi]

05:31 AM on 05/27/2010

Well said!

[Roland19]

06:02 AM on 05/27/2010

I agree. This is very well said, sir!

[RBLRDR]

06:25 AM on 05/27/2010

No matter the topic or how much you have to stretch, you find some angle to criticize Obama and as a result your comments are ineffective and kind of pathetic.

[AnotherTry]

06:48 AM on 05/27/2010

First of all, this 'compromise doesn't end the discharge of openly gay soldiers. Second, the repeal would require the signatures of THREE people, the first time legislation would require more signatures than the president. Third, the only reason DADT is even being discussed by the gay rights movement is because it is the ONLY thing Obama promised to do for us. Yet it is the WHITE HOUSE who are letting the military leadership call the shots.

[FarOutFish]

04:34 AM on 05/27/2010

There was a time when the military represented manly men, the John Wayne, Randolph Scott stoned faced hero archetype. Homophobia reined supreme, those thought to be a little “swishy” might be the guest at a Blanket Party. Coming out of the closet could be dangerous for your health. That was then, over the past half century things have changed.

Now in the 21st Century, homosexuality has become more acceptable. The cohort of youngsters being recruited have grown up during the time when the attitude towards Gays changed. Unlike warriors of the past, today's recruits tend to accept Homosexuals. Today's recruit is better educated, more cosmopolitan than there predecessors. They realize Gay's are no threat to straights.

When President Clinton tried to get the military to change the rules to allow gays to serve openly, he was hit by a poop storm from Congress and the public. His proposal was a popular as a whore in church. He had to settle on “Don't ask, don't tell”. Surprisingly to many, Mr. Clinton's biggest supporter was retired Arizona Senator, and Air force General Berry Goldwater, The Icon of the conservative movement wrote President Clinton to tell him “Gays should have the same right to die for their country as any other American”. In 1993, America and the military were not ready for change. Today in 2010, attitudes have changed, now is the time to let homosexuals come out of the closet with the right ”To die for their country”.

[Lucysmith111]

12:32 PM on 05/27/2010

I really think this repeal should wait another ten years, the individuals I know would not like Gays in the military, I honestly do not think the soldiers In todays military are ready for what you want.

Or if it does get repealed I would wait for the military to start handing out counseling its soldiers and preparing them from whats to come, there would changes need to be made in policy.

I have met a few that have not come out and no offense they should not serve in the military.

[FarOutFish]

01:12 PM on 05/27/2010

The weren't ready when President Truman integrated the military. Given orders, the military adapts.

[enhancedvibes]

03:14 PM on 05/27/2010

"I really think this repeal should wait another ten years, the individuals I know would not like Gays in the military, I honestly do not think the soldiers In todays military are ready for what you want."

With all due respect, people in the military are not paid to have opinions, theyre paid to follow the chain of command, follow orders. I think it is naive to think that soldiers dont already know they are serving with gays and lesbians.