Althouse: A 9th Circuit panel keeps Don't Ask, Don't Tell in place.

November 1, 2010

A 9th Circuit panel keeps Don't Ask, Don't Tell in place.

"[T]he public interest in ensuring orderly change of this magnitude in the military – if that is what is to happen – strongly militates in favor of a stay...."

119 comments:

Unknown said...: Hmmm...

Bombs found on multiple US-bound aircraft.

9th Circus keeps DADT.

Coinkydink?; 11/1/10, 7:10 PM
Chase said...: Extremely Well Said by the Judge.; 11/1/10, 7:10 PM
mesquito said...: What kind od democracy is it when the judiciary defers to the political barnches. I mean, I NEVER heard of such a thing.; 11/1/10, 7:13 PM
Anonymous said...: "... militates ..."

Heh.

They're making puns. Wonder how they'll eventually rule on this?

If you wonder why we shouldn't have gays in the military I'd suggest you ask the Catholic Church.; 11/1/10, 7:13 PM
Big Mike said...: This is out of the Ninth Circuit???; 11/1/10, 7:16 PM
Palladian said...: "If you wonder why we shouldn't have gays in the military I'd suggest you ask the Catholic Church."

Fuck off.; 11/1/10, 7:23 PM
Skyler said...: Good ruling. Especially since the US Supreme Court has long ago agreed to defer to the military in excluding homosexuals.; 11/1/10, 7:23 PM
Anonymous said...: What sickens me about this case is the bald-face lying of the Log Cabin Repbulicans (who brought the case).

"The decision only slows the day when military service will be available to all Americans, regardless of sexual orientation, who want nothing more than to serve their country honorably and patriotically.”

What horseshit!

Gays are not prevented from serving in the military. What they're prevented from doing is "outing" themselves and causing disruption by that outing. Everyone is following the same order: Shut. Your. Piehole.

What is it with The Gheys?

Why do The Gheys (and ONLY The Gheys) feel a compulsion for everyone who would rather not know to know they are gay? It's frankly nobody's business if you're taking pipe up your keister.

Where's Titus when we need him?

Hey, Titus: Can you explain to the group why you can't just slurp semen but shut the fuck up about it? Isn't getting the semen good enough? Why do The Gheys feel the need to tell people who frankly don't want that much information?; 11/1/10, 7:24 PM
Palladian said...: Now the pussies in the military can avoid the terrifying prospect of scary gays in their midst for a little while longer.; 11/1/10, 7:26 PM
David said...: Well, Duh.

And not just because this is a "National Defense" issue.; 11/1/10, 7:27 PM
Palladian said...: So can we expect every member of the military to shut the fuck up about their cocksucking wives and their grubby spawn and their girlfriend's pussy then? Because, after all, why can't those people keep their filthy pussy-fucking private and do their jobs?; 11/1/10, 7:29 PM
mesquito said...: My dad was exec officer on a fleet oiler in the early 1960sHs major headaches were :a) a sailor whoseenereal disease literally laughed at all known antibiotics, extortion on lower decks, and c) sexual abuse of newbies by a gang of homsexual NCOs.; 11/1/10, 7:32 PM
Anonymous said...: "Especially since the US Supreme Court has long ago agreed to defer to the military in excluding homosexuals."

Homosexuals are not excluded from military service.

They are required to follow orders ... to SHUT. THEIR. FUCKING. PIE. HOLES. ABOUT. WHAT. THEY. FUCK.

Everybody follows the same order: "Don't ask. Don't tell." It's nobody's business.

Gays are not prevented from serving. They're prevented from disobeying the orders of their superior officers and advertising their sexual preferences to people who frankly could care less. They're not there to fuck each other. They're in the military to KILL PEOPLE.

Officers cannot fuck enlisted and discuss that either. Or they're busted down. Following orders to keep your fucking trap shut is nothing new to the military.

Get your facts straight, Gunny.; 11/1/10, 7:33 PM
Bob_R said...: I'm a bigger fan of SSM as a public policy (definitly pro) than I am and opponent of DADT (weakly against - arguments about combat units should not define the whole military - most of which is not at the sharp end). But I'm much more skeptical of the constitutional argument for SSM.

This is probably a good move on the part of the 9th. The 9th is looking at the pre election polls tonight. My guess is that has more effect than the bombs.; 11/1/10, 7:35 PM
Gabriel Hanna said...: Well, Obama got what he asked for--permission to continue to kick gays out until the issue is settled.

Judge Fletcher suggested that the stay should not allow gays to be discharged, but the other two judges disagreed:

“In our view, this ‘carve out’ is inconsistent with the stay itself and would be subject to the vagaries of the rule of unintended consequences,” they wrote. “It could have the unfortunate effect of encouraging violations of [the law] in the interim, which, if the statute were ultimately to be found valid (an issue on which we express no opinion), would leave the persons involved in a precarious position, because even [the Log Cabin Republicans] admit that the government could resume discharges if the District Court judgment is reversed.”

Allowing open gays in the military is a much smaller change than totally redefining the basis of marriage as understood by Western civilization in defiance of a constitutional amendment. I can't figure out the logic.

But then, Secretary Fall was convicted of accepting a bribe Doheny was acquitted of offering him. Stranger things have happened.; 11/1/10, 7:37 PM
Bob_R said...: Sure, "shut your fucking pie hole" is a good policy for everyone. But I think the substantive issue with DADT for gays in the military is that if you have someone in the chain of command who hates your guts they can use your private life against you. They used to be able to do that with hetero adultery. Don't think that works anymore.; 11/1/10, 7:41 PM
Anonymous said...: "Now the pussies in the military can avoid the terrifying prospect of scary gays in their midst for a little while longer."

Yeah, it's the military who are the pussies ... not the homos. Uh huh.

Look, there are hundreds of thousands of gays in the military and nobody gives two shits about it - except the gay people.

It's never enough. They don't just want to serve - they want to advertise! They want to impose themselves on their co-workers.

Well, then go find another career where you can go to work and impose your sexuality on everyone around you who would rather you just shut the fuck up because you're frankly really not as special as you think you are twinkletoes.

You just munch carpet. Big fucking deal, butch.

The military is not like other employment. If you don't like gays at your work ... you can just quit. But in the military, you would be forced to work in very close quarters next to perverts and not have the option of removing yourself from that situation.

That's why courts will allow the military to conduct its affairs in ways that would not be appropriate in everyday life.; 11/1/10, 7:42 PM
Anonymous said...: "... if you have someone in the chain of command who hates your guts they can use your private life against you."

So what?

Look ... if you have anyone in your chain of command who hates your guts they'll just find another reason to bust your ass down. Your fucking shoes aren't shiny enough is all the reason they need to make your life a living fucking hell.

It's not about command pressure.

It's about gays thinking the rules don't apply to them. They can redefine entire words.

I'm not in the military. Don't have a dog in the fight except I'd prefer that my fighting men and women overseas aren't spending so much time sucking each others cocks that they can't fucking find bin Laden.

Which seems to be the case.

How about we put each others peckers away and find a Jihadi to fuck up the ass?; 11/1/10, 7:47 PM
former law student said...: Judge Diarmuid O’Scannlain believes that judges, because they answer to no one, should not be "activists."

Preserving the constitutional compromise between law and liberty requires federal judges to defer to the legislative and executive branches on all issues properly within the realm of the law. If the text of the Constitution does not preclude the government's action, the judge must uphold it. He must do so even if the government's action is patently unfair or plainly inappropriate, for determining that something is "unfair" or "inappropriate" without an independent standard for fairness or appropriateness requires an exercise of sheer will. And the power to direct government action pursuant to one's own will is precisely the power that a judge lacks.

The judge's duty to apply the law faithfully demands that he do more than merely defer to the political branches of government when they permissibly exercise governmental power. The very concept of law requires the judge to apply it in a manner that is both predictable and uniform. Predictability ensures that everyone knows what the law is at any given point in time. Uniformity ensures that the law is applied in the same way by any judge to any party anywhere in the country.; 11/1/10, 7:48 PM
David said...: Trivia alert: Steve Trott, one of the majority of two judges in this decision, was a member of the 1960's folk group "The Highwaymen."; 11/1/10, 7:50 PM
EnigmatiCore said...: "Bombs found on multiple US-bound aircraft.

9th Circus keeps DADT.

Coinkydink?"

Yes; 11/1/10, 7:51 PM
Jason (the commenter) said...: "Go slow!" says Obama, of all people.

What a disgrace.

Oh but this whole country is full of lies
You're all gonna die and die like flies
I don't trust you any more
You keep on saying "Go slow!"

--Nina Simone from Mississippi Goddam; 11/1/10, 7:55 PM
Anonymous said...: "permission to continue to kick gays out until the issue is settled."

Here again ... we have a liar.

Nobody is kicking "gays" out. They're kicking out people - all people gay or not - who cannot fucking follow a simple order.

SHUT. YOUR. FUCKING. TRAP.

Heterosexual military who cannot follow orders are removed from the military every. single. day.

Why do the gays think they are above following orders? YOu know, it makes it seem like The Gheys are joining the military for the express purpose of undermining discipline and effectiveness. As a way of destroying the military from within.

Kinda like they joined the Catholic Church and destroyed that institution.; 11/1/10, 7:55 PM
Anonymous said...: " ...Bombs found on multiple US-bound aircraft."

Obama's wag-the-dog moment. Trying to demonstrate his effectiveness.

Nobody bought it.

1) Saudi's put the "bombs" aboard
2) Saudi's alert US to bombs
3) US finds the ONLY TWO bombs out of billions of packages.
4) Arrests within the news cycle before the story goes cold.
5) On the eve of historic elections.
6) Saudi's get F16s.

Wag. The. Dog.; 11/1/10, 7:58 PM
Anonymous said...: Another major victory for the Obama Administration!; 11/1/10, 8:00 PM
Revenant said...: Allowing open gays in the military is a much smaller change than totally redefining the basis of marriage as understood by Western civilization in defiance of a constitutional amendment.

What constitutional amendment are you talking about?; 11/1/10, 8:03 PM
Jason (the commenter) said...: New "Huessein" Ham : Heterosexual military who cannot follow orders are removed from the military every. single. day.

They are sworn to protect the constitution and they are violating the constitution by the orders they give. Every person enforcing DADT has no honor and is a traitor to our country.; 11/1/10, 8:04 PM
EnigmatiCore said...: "Every person enforcing DADT has no honor and is a traitor to our country."

Are you questioning their patriotism?; 11/1/10, 8:07 PM
Anonymous said...: Jason: Meh.; 11/1/10, 8:08 PM
The Crack Emcee said...: Palladian,

I hate to say it - because your "fuck off" made me laugh out loud - but Ham's right:

Gays have MAJOR boundary issues, examples starting with what's happened in the Catholic Church.

And it's not about fearing gays but disruption of military operations. Gays can cause a hell of mess when they want to/are allowed to. We had two gay guys who started skipping on deck, holding hands, only to leap off the ship into the Indian Ocean.

On the other hand, the postal clerk was a gay guy with incredible power and respect. Everybody wants their mail out to sea, so he had no shortage of friends/lovers/supporters.

My take hasn't changed:

The discussion of gays in American society, so far, has been dishonest and immature. "Will & Grace" don't cut it. We need a real one where all the facts of gay behavior, good and bad, are taken into consideration. Anything less and I'm voting for discrimination every time.; 11/1/10, 8:09 PM
Jason (the commenter) said...: EnigmatiCore: Are you questioning their patriotism?

I said they are traitors to our country, how much clearer do I have to be?; 11/1/10, 8:10 PM
mesquito said...: Every person enforcing DADT has no honor and is a traitor to our country.

Care to walk that back a little, Hoss?; 11/1/10, 8:10 PM
mesquito said...: Apparantly not.

Chortle.; 11/1/10, 8:11 PM
MadisonMan said...: Like others, I like the use of the word militate in this context.; 11/1/10, 8:14 PM
Anonymous said...: "Another major victory for the Obama Administration!"

Barack Obama hates queers. Can't fucking stand them. Why The Ghey's keep voting for this guy is one of the greatest political blunders in history.

Barack Obama has set the cause of gay people back 50 years. They should be burning him in effigy.; 11/1/10, 8:14 PM
The Crack Emcee said...: YOu know, it makes it seem like The Gheys are joining the military for the express purpose of undermining discipline and effectiveness. As a way of destroying the military from within.

Various forms of subversion are a real issue here.

Oh, and Jason (The commenter) Nina Simone was a nutjob.; 11/1/10, 8:14 PM
Trooper York said...: I think gays have served honorable for many years in the military as some of the eye witness accounts posted here prove.

I mean look at Captain Crunch. Now that dude is definately gay.

And he was such good Captain that they named a ceral after him.

Now you can't say that about Admiral Nimitz now can you?; 11/1/10, 8:15 PM
Trooper York said...: Plus almost everyone at Old Navy seems gay and they seem to be doing pretty good since they are selling coats for about five bucks.

How the hell do they do that?; 11/1/10, 8:16 PM
Palladian said...: "How the hell do they do that?"

They're knitted out of ass hair harvested from gay waxing salons.; 11/1/10, 8:17 PM
Trooper York said...: Oh that explains it.

They do a lot of browns. I thought it was just because it was the fall. Thanks Palladian.; 11/1/10, 8:19 PM
Palladian said...: They also use the hairs that are up OldMobyHam's butt. There's apparently a lot of them up there.; 11/1/10, 8:20 PM
Anonymous said...: "They're knitted out of ass hair harvested from gay waxing salons."

Shut the thread down.

We have a winner.

Ding. Ding. Ding. Ding.; 11/1/10, 8:21 PM
Palladian said...: See even us semen-guzzlers can have a sense of humor in the face of bigotry.; 11/1/10, 8:22 PM
Trooper York said...: Hey do you think if our army guys would wear hair shirts harvest from New Ham's ass hair that those Muslim guys would just surrender. I understand they are scared of ham, bacon and every other kind of swine except for Helen Thomas.

That could be a new secret weapon.; 11/1/10, 8:24 PM
The Crack Emcee said...: Palladian,

See even us semen-guzzlers can have a sense of humor in the face of bigotry.

Dude, it's not bigotry - it's reality. Gays were told, by gays, that if they didn't behave with dignity it would backfire - and it has - just as "black power" has backfired on blacks.; 11/1/10, 8:25 PM
The Dude said...: Whoa, for a minute there I thought this discussion was going to lead to the great flounce off, version 2.; 11/1/10, 8:25 PM
Chennaul said...: The Catholic Church analogy.....

Really?

You want to go with that?

If that's true then where are the like military cases now?

Basically you have nothing in that set up.

Try again.; 11/1/10, 8:26 PM
Anonymous said...: "There's apparently a lot of them up there."

Just a few.

The dishonesty surrounding this issue is a major hair up my butt.

Look ... let's be honest about this. Nobody is kicking gays out of the military for merely being gay.

Gays are ONLY kicked out of the military for DOING something. Not BEING something.

Gays want SPECIAL privileges not obtainable by anyone else and that's what this is really all about.

That's why I became New "Hussein" Ham. I get special privileges because I'm a Muslim now. Nobody can criticize me or else they clearly are religious bigots. Because only religious bigots attack someone named Hussein.

The gays want that.

So they can fuck kids.; 11/1/10, 8:27 PM
Chennaul said...: btw-

Now you now why Obama appealed it to the Ninth.

Was it really that difficult?; 11/1/10, 8:28 PM
Palladian said...: "Dude, it's not bigotry - it's reality. Gays were told, by gays, that if they didn't behave with dignity it would backfire - and it has - just as "black power" has backfired on blacks."

"Gays", like "blacks" are not a monolithic entity, at least in my book. The idea that there's a "community" or a connective philosophy is a fiction created by leftists.; 11/1/10, 8:28 PM
Palladian said...: Trooper, many Muslims consider it a religious duty to remove pubic and ass hair, so that source might alone prove frightful enough.; 11/1/10, 8:31 PM
Chennaul said...: It's something much simpler-it's about

honor.

Now someone who actually voted for someone because she felt they were lying and seemed to prefer that wouldn't get that in a million years but some of you others should begin to grasp it.; 11/1/10, 8:32 PM
Anonymous said...: "It's something much simpler-it's about honor."

I would submit that people who fuck other people up the ass have no honor.

Period.

And I'm entitled to that opinion, as an American. That's my franchise.; 11/1/10, 8:39 PM
Jason (the commenter) said...: The Crack Emcee: Dude, it's not bigotry - it's reality. Gays were told, by gays, that if they didn't behave with dignity it would backfire - and it has - just as "black power" has backfired on blacks.

This was brought about by gays unthinkingly following Democrats and letting their organizations be taken over by professionals only interested in getting a pay check.

Gays need less dignity. They need to be picketing Democrats AND Republicans and heckling them when they make speeches. No one should be able to pretend that they are "okay with the gays" when they clearly are not.; 11/1/10, 8:43 PM
Jason said...: Jason (the commenter)

I have quite a number of close friends who enforce this ban who have taken fragments and bullets for this country.

I'd advise you to watch who you say that in front of, because if you said it in front of me you would be drinking through a straw for a month.; 11/1/10, 8:45 PM
somefeller said...: DADT is an unfunny joke that should be repealed, but the court got it right here. This sort of thing is best handled by the legislative branch, and it's going through such channels right now. Maybe the post-election Democrats will grow some spines and the Republicans who claim to believe this is a bad policy that should be handled legislatively rather than judicially will get together and repeal this law.; 11/1/10, 8:47 PM
Anonymous said...: "I'd advise you to watch who you say that in front of, because if you said it in front of me you would be drinking through a straw for a month."

Jason (the commenter) is a Moby. When he claims that "Every person enforcing DADT has no honor and is a traitor to our country" he's just trying to get a rise out of the room.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.

So he can suck it.; 11/1/10, 8:49 PM
sunsong said...: can you spot the gay soldier?; 11/1/10, 8:50 PM
The Crack Emcee said...: I'd advise you to watch who you say that in front of, because if you said it in front of me you would be drinking through a straw for a month.

Like I said, not bigotry but reality.; 11/1/10, 8:52 PM
Palladian said...: "I'd advise you to watch who you say that in front of, because if you said it in front of me you would be drinking through a straw for a month."

Are you threatening physical violence over a civilian voicing their opinion about our civilian-controlled military?

That's sub-honorable, in my book.; 11/1/10, 8:54 PM
Anonymous said...: "This sort of thing is best handled by the legislative branch and it's going through such channels right now."

I would submit that this sort of thing is ONLY Constitutionally handled by the Legislative Branch ... and it's not going well. The fact of the matter is that gays have not convinced society that we are better off giving them special privileges.

In 22 elections held on gay marriage in states across the nation, not one single ballot measure put before the people has legalized gay marriage. Most fail by 70-30% margains.

It's not even close.

American's do not support the gay agenda, which is why gays have put their faith in Democrat Party judges.

Gays can't win at the polls ... so they'll try every other way to impose their will on the rest of us whether it is Constitutional or not.

At least until Muslims take over.

Then they're dead.; 11/1/10, 8:56 PM
somefeller said...: Don't quote me or respond to my comments, New "Hussein" Ham. You're too stupid to have that privilege. Thanks. Carry on.; 11/1/10, 8:58 PM
Jason said...: No, dipshit, I'm not.

I'm threatening violence to anyone who calls my wounded brothers a traitor to their country to my face, on a point of honor.

But gays lose 30 IQ points over this stupid issue everytime they discuss it, so you get a pity pass.; 11/1/10, 8:59 PM
Anonymous said...: "Can you spot the gay soldier?"

No, because those soldiers are not asking. And they're not telling.

Just like they're ordered to do. They're acting honorably. Just like we expect them to do. And they're being treated honorably.

Just like they'd want us to.; 11/1/10, 8:59 PM
sunsong said...: troops would back don't ask repeal; 11/1/10, 8:59 PM
Anonymous said...: "You're too stupid to have that privilege."

Blow me.; 11/1/10, 9:00 PM
Chennaul said...: Gawd-who's the puppet master of New Ham?

Dude up your game.; 11/1/10, 9:00 PM
Jason (the commenter) said...: Jason: I have quite a number of close friends who enforce this ban who have taken fragments and bullets for this country.

They still enforcing it? Then they're traitors in my book.

We don't need people to take bullets for "the country". We need people to take bullets for the constitution. If they wont do that, they might as well be Al-Qaeda. They are dangers to us all.; 11/1/10, 9:03 PM
Palladian said...: "Dude up your game."

Not likely.; 11/1/10, 9:05 PM
Anonymous said...: "Troops would back don't ask repeal"

Troops don't tell Americans what to do. We tell the troops what to do.

If you would rather have a different system, I'd suggest you go elsewhere because most Americans are happy with this system.

Incidently, that report was leaked to the media by troops not following legal orders from their superiors. "The findings of the investigation were leaked over a month early to NBC News on Thursday night -- though the results will still not be released until December 1, when the Pentagon plans to reveal its plan for legislative repeal of the policy."

I think that says something about honor amongst these alleged soldiers.; 11/1/10, 9:05 PM
Jason said...: Jason (the commenter)

If you haven't noticed, DADT is still the law of the land.

And you have a grossly idiotic notion about what honor is.; 11/1/10, 9:08 PM
Anonymous said...: "Gawd-who's the puppet master of New Ham?"

Do you have an argument to make? Or are you just going to name-call?

If you want to advance an argument in favor of your position, then I'm happy to debate you. Debate = knowledge and an exchange of opinions. Perhaps a swaying.

Name calling is just child's play and I don't have time for it.

Up your game, punk.; 11/1/10, 9:10 PM
Anonymous said...: "And you have a grossly idiotic notion about what honor is."

I'll repeat what I said earlier ... those who want to fuck other people up the ass ... I think it's a given that they have grossly idiotic notions about a whooooooole lot of things.

Don't look for honor amongst such people.; 11/1/10, 9:12 PM
Jason (the commenter) said...: Jason: I'm threatening violence...

For something someone says.

I hope you aren't in the American military, because you have no place there.

The only thing that irritates me about your threat is that you could say stuff like that and get into the military. Even though you would clearly be lying when you took your oath, they'd let you in. But someone who is openly gay, would not be able to.

And why are they not allowed in? Because being gay isn't honorable. That's what everyone for DADT thinks. They have a thousand other excuses, but that's what they mean.

So don't any of you get even slightly mad at me for questioning other people's honor when you do so without the slightest hesitation.; 11/1/10, 9:13 PM
woof said...: 1) Not all gays practice anal sex
2) Lots of straight people practice anal sex

I don't understand how a particular sex act has anything to do about a person's honor.; 11/1/10, 9:14 PM
Jason said...: 18 years commissioned service, and a combat infantry badge.

When I need a lecture from someone like you about honor I'll let you know.

I've studied it at the hands of better people than you.; 11/1/10, 9:15 PM
former law student said...: Palladian -- are you young enough to join the military? Because you'll be able to join up free of DADT restrictions by Christmas, thanks to the U.S. Congress.

If I'm wrong, I'll never comment here again.; 11/1/10, 9:17 PM
EnigmatiCore said...: I said they are traitors to our country, how much clearer do I have to be?

Oh, not much clearer, at all.

Did you enjoy the Sanity rally?; 11/1/10, 9:20 PM
Jason (the commenter) said...: Jason: 18 years commissioned service, and a combat infantry badge.

You're bragging about it, to people who aren't legally allowed to serve. As you wish it to be!

That speech might mean something somewhere else, but it means less than nothing here. It is an embarrassing admission on your part.

It is a shameful thing to say!; 11/1/10, 9:22 PM
Jason said...: Newham,

Has it occured to you I have had gay soldiers under my command, too? Some damn good ones. Call them a traitor to this country to my face to my face I'd give you a thrashing the likes of which Michael Vick's dogs would wince at.

I suspect you'd take it better than J the C, though.; 11/1/10, 9:23 PM
Revenant said...: They still enforcing it? Then they're traitors in my book.

DADT is an idiotic law, but it isn't quite as idiotic as that remark.; 11/1/10, 9:23 PM
Jason said...: "embarrassing?"

You're an idiot, dude.; 11/1/10, 9:25 PM
traditionalguy said...: Does this mean that Obama will not order the end to DADT, because the Congress needs to do it...Yeah do it right after the Congress turns Republican with a side of Tea Party dressing?; 11/1/10, 9:27 PM
The Crack Emcee said...: Are you threatening physical violence over a civilian voicing their opinion about our civilian-controlled military?

Most civilians don't know dick about the military.

Or maybe I shouldn't put it that way on this thread,...; 11/1/10, 9:28 PM
Anonymous said...: "I don't understand how a particular sex act has anything to do about a person's honor."

I'll explain it to you if you'll answer a personal question (and you're free to decline): Has anyone ever fucked you up your ass?; 11/1/10, 9:31 PM
EnigmatiCore said...: How is that question relevant?; 11/1/10, 9:34 PM
former law student said...: Yeah do it right after the Congress turns Republican with a side of Tea Party dressing?

The Senate isn't changing composition till next year, unless Christine O'D wins in Delaware or Kirk wins in Illinois. (maybe one or two other states, I don't know.)

They have to come back after the election to pass a budget.; 11/1/10, 9:34 PM
Anonymous said...: "Has it occured to you I have had gay soldiers under my command, too?"

I never said gay soldiers were "traitors to their country."

That was "Jason (the commenter)."

I have no idea whether you had gay soldiers under your command. And neither did you. Since only dishonorable soldiers would violate their orders and you should have no Earthly idea of the sexual orientation of the soldiers under your command.

Since they're under orders not to tell. And since you're under orders not to ask.

Only dishonor comes to those who know because they asked. Or told.; 11/1/10, 9:37 PM
The Crack Emcee said...: 1) Not all gays practice anal sex
2) Lots of straight people practice anal sex

Yeaaap. I used to call my boy:

Me: "What chu doin'?"

My boy: "Watchin' cartoons. The girly-o's got the boner up her ass."

The girly-o in the background: "Shut up!"; 11/1/10, 9:39 PM
woof said...: Just because you don't "tell" doesn't mean your orientation can't be revealed.; 11/1/10, 9:39 PM
Anonymous said...: "How is that question relevant?

I'll answer that question if you'll answer this question (and you're free to decline): Has anyone ever fucked you up your ass?; 11/1/10, 9:40 PM
Jason said...: I'm not under any obligation not to know. Just not to ask.; 11/1/10, 9:40 PM
Anonymous said...: "Just because you don't "tell" doesn't mean your orientation can't be revealed."

Again, I reiterate that there is no military prohibition against gays serving.

So if somebody "revealed," there would be absolutely no problem.

You are allowed to be gay and also be in the military. That is the law and that is the practice. What you are not allowed to do is to TELL people you are gay. And you are not allowed to ASK people if they are gay.

Those are the fucking orders. SHUT YOUR FUCKING PIE HOLE. Pretty simple.

Seems like we could all get along under those rules ... but somehow, it seems like The Gheys NEEEEEEED to tell people. To advertise their wares. It's seems like either a compulsion - or maybe it's a deliberate strategy.

I lean towards the strategy theory.

I think there is a lot more here than meets the eye. It's not just about sucking cock. After all, you can suck all the cock you want at just about any airport. Just ask any Senator.

I think it may be about destroying the military from within it. I think it might be a deliberate act of sabotage by people who don't like war.

I don't KNOW that. But I think it's possible. I'm of that opinion. And this is still America where we're free to have opinions.

Right?; 11/1/10, 9:49 PM
EnigmatiCore said...: You want to know if anyone has ever fucked me up the ass, and in exchange you will tell me how it would be relevant if anyone has ever fucked Jason (the commenter) up the ass?

That about sum it up?; 11/1/10, 9:49 PM
woof said...: deliberate act of sabotage by people who don't like war

Anyone who likes war is a moral degenerate.; 11/1/10, 9:51 PM
woof said...: Why is it that homophobes are so preoccupied with ass fucking ?; 11/1/10, 9:52 PM
EnigmatiCore said...: I don't know. They had a couple of good songs. Why Can't We Be Friends, Low Rider...; 11/1/10, 9:53 PM
Anonymous said...: "I'm not under any obligation not to know. Just not to ask."

But you don't know ... UNLESS you ask.

You might hear. But hearin' ain't knowin'.

And if you're parsing your orders, then you're probably headed for a court martial, dude.

So, you know ... don't re-up.; 11/1/10, 9:53 PM
Anonymous said...: "Why is it that homophobes are so preoccupied with ass fucking ?"

Maybe they're scared of being fucked up the ass? Maybe they were raped as kids by actual homosexuals up their ass and so therefore they fear homosexuals because of that.

Maybe that's why they're homophobes ... defined (Webster) as "a person who is afraid of homosexuals." Notice that mere homophobia is not an "irrational" fear. It's just a fear. And fear can be well-grounded.

Should a person fear anal rape? Is that a normal fear?

Seems normal to me, but it's just an opinion.; 11/1/10, 9:59 PM
woof said...: You were anally raped as a child ?; 11/1/10, 10:01 PM
Anonymous said...: "Anyone who likes war is a moral degenerate."

Anyone who doesn't understand that war is an Earthly evil we are powerless to escape is bound to have one thrust upon him sooner or later.

And you can either fight or die. But most gay people that I have met don't understand this axiom. They are reflexively against war no matter what the reason. They don't believe in fighting back.

It's why gays are such an easy target for Muslims. Gays submit.; 11/1/10, 10:03 PM
Anonymous said...: "You were anally raped as a child ?"

I don't think that would be any of your business ... but if I was, and if that then caused me to fear homosexuals, then I'd have a well-grounded homophobia.

Wouldn't you agree?

I would add that many children have been anally raped by homosexuals. Why you just have to read the newspaper to understand that.

You say "homophobia" as if people who are afraid of homosexuals should be ashamed of their fear.

Homophobia is merely the "fear of homosexuals." And there is plainly something to fear, since many homosexuals have raped children. As evidenced by the lawsuits currently and formerly pending against the Catholic Church can attest.

To you ... homophobia is bad.

To a victim of homosexuals ... homophobia is their protection against further victimization.; 11/1/10, 10:06 PM
woof said...: I guess Mark Bingham was an aberration.; 11/1/10, 10:07 PM
woof said...: since many homosexuals have raped children

Straight people don't sexually abuse children ?; 11/1/10, 10:08 PM
Anonymous said...: "Straight people don't sexually abuse children ?"

Sure they do. And they produce Heterophobians.

And heterophobians shouldn't be demonized any more than homophobians should ... since you know, they're the victims.

Focus! You have a warped view of whether it is morally correct to be a homophobe. When, in reality, soemone who has been raped by a homosexual would be foolish NOT to be a homophobe.

If a bat bites me ... then I become a chiroptophobe ... do I not?; 11/1/10, 10:15 PM
woof said...: So you were anally raped as a child.; 11/1/10, 10:16 PM
Anonymous said...: "So you were anally raped as a child."

No, however I fear that you were brainally raped as a child.

I pity you.; 11/1/10, 10:22 PM
somefeller said...: Hey, woof, don't feed the troll. Or the prole. Whichever term works better for you.; 11/1/10, 10:23 PM
EnigmatiCore said...: Depends on the bat. You could end up like Kristen Stewart.; 11/1/10, 10:24 PM
woof said...: I'll stop feeding the troll however entertaining it is.; 11/1/10, 10:25 PM
Jason said...: So, if a homosexual child rapist... weighs... the same... as a duck...; 11/1/10, 10:36 PM
EnigmatiCore said...: Strained gravy!; 11/1/10, 10:39 PM
Anonymous said...: So, 53 days until FLS stops posting.; 11/2/10, 1:48 AM
Revenant said...: I still can't figure out if New Ham is a moby or just deeply stupid.; 11/2/10, 3:53 AM
TWM said...: "So can we expect every member of the military to shut the fuck up about their cocksucking wives and their grubby spawn and their girlfriend's pussy then? Because, after all, why can't those people keep their filthy pussy-fucking private and do their jobs?"

See this is what happens when people start celebrating the win before the game is really over. They get all pissed when it doesn't turn out the way they expected.

Also, it shows what kind of person they really are.; 11/2/10, 7:16 AM
AllenS said...: I'd like to see DADT repealed, so we can get back to the way it used to be, the dishonorable discharge of homos.

AllenS, veteran; 11/2/10, 8:23 AM
Mick said...: The military is not a democracy. it is a fighting force that must keep the chain of command intact and at all cost promote military preparedness.
Gays are not explicitly banned from the military, but their sexual practice is:

925. ART. 125. SODOMY
(a) Any person subject to this chapter who engages in unnatural carnal copulation with another person of the same or opposite sex or with an animal is guilty of sodomy. Penetration , however slight, is sufficient to complete the offense.
(b) Any person found guilty of sodomy shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.

DADT was a compromise that allowed gays to serve. Otherwise the military is free to throw out, or keep out, known homosexuals who, after much money and time was spent training them, could eventually violate the anti- sodomy statute. Taking away DADT just allows the military to revert to searching them out or preventing them from getting in.; 11/2/10, 9:38 AM
former law student said...: So, mick, how many married soldiers were tossed out because their wives blew them, in violation of Article 125?; 11/2/10, 10:01 AM
dbp said...: It may be late for this, given how the thread has degenerated but how about this for a compromise?

DADT to prevail in situations of close physical contact such as boot camp and combat arms. Otherwise, let it be repealed.; 11/2/10, 10:11 AM