Dems reluctant to take on 'don't ask, don't tell', page 1
Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 1 times
Topic started on 11-6-2008 @ 03:34 AM by jasonjnelson

Dems reluctant to take on 'don't ask, don't tell'


news.yahoo.com
WASHINGTON - Democrats say the nation should be ashamed of its ban on gays serving openly in the military. It discourages qualified people from joining the ranks at a time when the armed forces are stretched by two wars, they say, and is degrading to those willing to serve their country.
So what have the Democrats done about it? Nothing, really.

Since taking control of Congress in January 2007, Democrats have not convened hearings on the matter or taken up legislation that would let gays serve

(visit the link for the full news article)



Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
Federal court rules against military gays policy


reply posted on 11-6-2008 @ 03:39 AM by Karlhungis
reply to post by jasonjnelson


You make it sound like the republicans would love for gays to be in the military. It isn't just the democrats that want to avoid this issue because it is a terribly complicated one.

I served and I can honestly say that the military would have a very hard time adjusting to openly gay people serving. The military is still still struggling with the treatment of women, so to expect a natural transition to embracing gay servicemen is a tall order.



reply posted on 11-6-2008 @ 04:01 AM by jasonjnelson
reply to post by Karlhungis


I agree, and to try and paraphrase an entire thread: I have already stated a very similar opinion based on my experience in the Marines.

But no, I do not expect the republicans to embrace the issue.

But that is the point, isn't it?
This is all about teams.

We need a bigger or better team? Recruit members!

Wear their name or advert on our sleeves!

But when it all is said and done, here go the players, reminding you that if you just give them 6 more years, we can do this ol' buddy! We'll get you what you need!

Just don't abandon them for a party that might actually suit their needs more. Like the libertarian party, or the greenies.


reply posted on 11-6-2008 @ 04:11 AM by Karlhungis
reply to post by jasonjnelson


Semper Fi.

I honestly can't imagine the difficulties that an openly gay person would have from day one. Drill instructors aren't exactly sensitive people and if they were forced to give gay recruits special treatment, then I feel even more sorry for the gay recruit when the other guys get him alone.

You would have to be crazy to sign up for the military and plan on being openly gay.

I agree with you about choosing sides though. That is what it is all about. You can blame the failures of the government on the "Republicans" or the "Democrats" and then get your team in office the next term. Then your candidate will fail and screw the people, so the other team gets the next shot. No one ever gives up because they know that once their team gets in, everything will be OK. They don't realize that Democrats and Republicans are the same team.

It is amazing that the system continues to work.


reply posted on 11-6-2008 @ 04:18 AM by jasonjnelson
reply to post by Karlhungis


Semper Gumby to you as well!

I think it odd that the republicans are being elected by right to lifers, and then they do nothing about the abortion issues. Same with the dems and gay rights. This allows the two parties to keep going at it...

I almost feel like this is gym class, and the real athletes, (the parties and their rich interests) are being forced to pick teams.

"I'll take the gun-nuts"

"okay... hmmm, hey, you, yeah, Minorities, lets go! My team"

" Damn, nice pick... Who's left?...Religious zealots, get over here!"


Whatever.

[edit on 11-6-2008 by jasonjnelson]


reply posted on 11-6-2008 @ 04:24 AM by jasonjnelson
reply to post by LDragonFire


And I agree. So this is a conspiracy. See my last post.

They give us lip service, and if we go with a minor league team (other parties) they really don't care.

It's like the Dems "stopping" the war in Iraq.



reply posted on 11-6-2008 @ 05:09 AM by skyshow
reply to post by jasonjnelson


Dude, I have to jump in here. The reason it isn't happening, is due to polling. The vast majority of folks still do not accept gay people plain and simple. The gay issue was used by the GOP/Rove people during the last pres. election and as another poster posted, is why it tilted it over to favor of another 4 years, and here we are at 4 dollar plus gas, a bunch of needlessly dead soldiers and hundreds of thousands of dead innocent civilian Iraqis, an outed CIA agent, a gay-prostitute fake journalist with WH press passes & employed in press conferences as a plant, "you're doing a heck of a job Browny"(Katrina/FEMA director eventually fired and then rehired), "we'll smoke him out", Enron budy, My Pet Gote, illegal wire tapping on American citizens, flipping off the people (yes there are actual pictures of Bush giving us the people the middle finger) veto on the health care for needy kids, and esentially a bankrupt nation here at home trillions of dollars in debt! (I could go on and on)...

If dems pushed this platform issue into the spotlight, it would do it's "magic" once again, and motivate a lot of backwards bible thumping, ignorant people who aren't friendly to equal rights back to the polls to vote Republican. We all know how the Republicans would like that right? There's your answer.


[edit on 11-6-2008 by skyshow]


reply posted on 11-6-2008 @ 02:58 PM by jasonjnelson
reply to post by skyshow


I would argue with you that that's my point.
Polling in the attached article suggests that the majority of Americans support gay rights.

So why does the party that claims to have that group on its team get away with not actually standing up for them? Why not take the gay vote, (and donor money) to a new party? Both groups, dems and repubs, are both comprised of groups that they owe no allegiance to.

If there was ever a time that I believed there to be a secret agenda that they both had, this is it...


reply posted on 11-6-2008 @ 08:24 PM by skyshow
reply to post by jasonjnelson


Gay rights are supported by the platform. Also, like many other issues, with a very narrow majority, putting things out on the table and pushing for a vote is often a waste of time. Give the Democrats a wide majority in both houses and the executive, and you will see this issue and others (I won't provide the laundry list, you can go onto the DNC website and download the party platform and read it for yourself).

Not to try and tear down your position, because I see why many people might easily think this. However there is no "secret agenda" going on her whatsoever. It's politics. They need a larger majority to really push items that won't be supported by Republicans. If they know the votes aren't there, they usually (and this goes for both parties) don't even bother with it.
Pages:     ^^TOP^^