It Seems to me a hold could be placed on the policy DADT until it is reviewed and the changes passed by Congress.since when has government not been able to delay beaurocratic process. It is becasue the basic religious group is still in control of the military

Indeed, I often worry about their loyalty to Obama.

As someone serving in the US military, I for one, can't wait for this policy to change. I'm serious about our military commitments and some silly, discriminatory policy is keeping America from utilizing it's full measure of combat capability to disrupt and destroy terrorism abroad.

We need every single, capable military member, especially linguists, to fight this fight with us. We got over it with blacks serving with us in the 40's and 50's, we can work through this one as well. Discrimination is unacceptable in America. Period. Our military is professional enough to rid itself of this institutionalized discrimination.

It does not require Congressional action. Obama could make this happen today if he wanted to. He's too much of a coward to do it.

I would, however, love to hear a conservative DADT supporter explain why the United States is stronger, safer, and more secure with Lt. Choi out of the military.

When I was in Korea, we had a suspected homosexual in our unit. He was a handsome, muscular, charming, masculine guy and probably could have been a hit with the ladies if he'd had his priorities straight.

I never got a lick of sleep for thinking about him. He was on my mind every moment.

Do you think I performed well as a soldier on no sleep?

Big political points for showing leadership here. Sooner the better.

Obama could make this happen today if he wanted to. He's too much of a coward to do it.

I'm guessing he'll find his courage right after the 2010 midterms...

I never got a lick of sleep for thinking about him. He was on my mind every moment.

Do you think I performed well as a soldier on no sleep?

I mean this with all seriousness, Myke. I am not pre-judging you, being snarky or anything else. I am trying to understand.

Why? Why was he on your mind all night? Why did you lose sleep over him? Did his presence annoy you? Disgust you? Discomfort you?

Why was his sexuality so all-consuming in your thoughts?

Myke K asked:

> Do you think I performed well as a soldier on no sleep?

Not clear how long ago Myke K served in Korea, but the longer ago it was, the less relevant that argument becomes. Fear of being in close quarters with gay people is very much a generational thing, and there's plenty of evidence that it would not be a significant problem. Indeed, there are many cases of military personnel expelled under DADT who served effectively for months or years, being "out" to their fellow soldiers and even their COs. The men and women they work with in their units often don't really care; the problem comes up when someone else, higher up in the chain of command gets an anonymous phone call or e-mail, and then the whole weight regulation and policy comes crashing down. What do you suppose that does to unit cohesion?

Perhaps significantly, Myke K says not a word about this "suspected homosexual's" ability to do his job as a soldier, so presumably the man's performance in the units was unaffected.

I never got a lick of sleep for thinking about him. He was on my mind every moment.

I know this had been addressed already, but I love it when conservatives get all homoerotic in the morning... Maybe if you had stopped fawning over him and focused on your duties, you would have performed better, eh?

Seriously, though, you didn't point to anything he did to disrupt unit cohesion. You note that he was a "suspected homosexual" and not openly gay. So you're freaked out enough to lose sleep because you're serving with someone who you think is gay? Sorry to break it to you, but it sounds like you're the one damaging unit cohesion, there, not the "suspected homosexual."

You're blaming someone else for your unfounded fears and prejudices, and it's disgusting.

If it isn't clear enough by now, the only real argument was, is, and continues to be the large proportion of Jesus freaks permeating the armed forces, especially in command positions.

I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure Myke K was indulging in a bit of satire.

Perhaps, Myke K, you should have put the mirror away and just slept.

The beloved Myke K is the parody of Doc Mikey K, who, while serving in the Marine Corps was following Marine practice of just looking "For a Few Good Men". Semper, baby.

Already forcing the issue on DADT is the legalization of same sex marriage in several states with military bases. One does not get dependant benefits (i.e. health care) until you can present the piece of legal paper to your local CBPO. So if someone says they are "not practicing the gay" but have legally married a same sex partner, what is the admin office to do? The military has often been ahead of the civil rights game (integrated military in the 50's, equal pay for men and women for decades). It really is time to declare DADT a dated and stupid concept and pave the way for happily married couples of all gender combinations to serve the country.
As for "what the troops think"...I'm retired after 28 years air force service and can handle it. Younger folks should be able to.

So we heard from Sestak... when are we going to hear Specter's take on DADT?

Firing competent soldiers with in demand skill sets is a threat to national security. This is the height of absurdity.

I still think all of the soldiers dismissed for their sexual preference should form a contracting group (not that I advocate war profiteering). Maybe they could call it The gAy Team or Rainbow Water.

Yes, the military ended segregation in 1954, following the steps put forward by Harry Truman in the late '40s. However, do not forget that our military, and much of our Federal Government, were segregated by Executive Order in 1915 by the, supposedly, Progressive Woodrow Wilson. He brought his views from Princeston, where he refused to admit African-American students.

Everytime Sestak speaks, he appears to grow in stature. He was very positive when he thanked the excellent infantry officer on his service. Over 12,000 trained military personnel have been lost due to this idiotic DADT policy.

But, if you let gays serve openly, and show how they can do a great job, then you run the risk of women proving that they are capable of holding combat arms slots (infantry, armor, artillery, and cavalry), which they are currently prohibited from in the US Army.

You can't have everyone get a chance to volunteer for combat regardless of gender or orientation, because it'll make the chickenhawks feel emasculated.

Steve writes: "... I would, however, love to hear a conservative DADT supporter explain why the United States is stronger, safer, and more secure with Lt. Choi out of the military."

Because Jesus wants it that way. And, you know, you can't win wars unless God is on your side.

Sometimes I think this country isn't good enough for patriots like Lt. Choi. We need to overturn DADT immediately. Actually years ago.

Excuse me, but this is happening on President Obama's watch, is it not?

Can't he change the policy? Doesn't he have the power to do so? He has control of the Executive Branch, his party has control of the Congress. He campaigned on it, but now he says he will wait until next year before doing anything about it. Well, in the next year or better, six or seven HUNDRED troops could be thrown out, if the averages hold. And all because President Obama doesn't want to do anything in a time of war to keep some soldiers in the service. If now isn't a good time to do something, will 2010 be that year? Or will he punt the issue again because of the Congressional mid-terms?

Do you think this absurdity continues because of some mystical, powerful hold George W Bush still has on military policy in this country, or do you think it continues because President Obama is selling you out, issue by issue, policy position by policy position, because he never had any intention of governing the way that liberals thought or expected him to?

What's it like to wake up and realize that what you hoped and wished for turned out to be a steaming pile of broken promises left there by a blue dog? Some change you voted for, eh, liberals? How much more power and influence do you have to give Obama before he starts to implement your desired changes? Oh, that's right. He wants to be re-elected, so you can spend ANOTHER four years waiting.

And you wonder why I think you're morons.

President Obama won't protect gays, and he won't protect Polar Bears.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30635672/

Polar Bears!

The Obama administration will retain a Bush-era rule for polar bears, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar announced Friday, in a move that angered activists who noted the rule limits what can be done to protect the species from global warming.

The administration had faced a weekend deadline to decide whether it should allow government agencies to cite the federal Endangered Species Act, which protects the bear, to impose limits on greenhouse gases from power plants, factories and automobiles even if the emissions occur thousands of miles from where the polar bear lives.

"We must do all we can to help the polar bear recover, recognizing that the greatest threat to the polar bear is the melting of Arctic sea ice caused by climate change," Salazar said in a statement. "However, the Endangered Species Act is not the proper mechanism for controlling our nation’s carbon emissions.

How much do you want to bet that gay polar bears are going to vote Republican in 2010? Why am I the only one laughing at that?

Oh, that's right! Liberals are crying in their granola.

Just to head off any of the worshippers kneeling at the altar The One who will whine, "Give him tiiiiiiime..."

I don't have time for President Chickenshit to diddle himself until 2012 and the DNC to circlejerk through 2010 midterms. I, personally, need this policy gone NOW. My family is being ripped apart by this policy NOW. I don't have time, neither does Dan Choi, and neither do a good proportion of the estimated 65,000 of my brothers and sisters in uniform.

And you wonder why I think you're morons.

Not really. But we do wonder what you ever got out of pretending you were a progressive.

Even those of us who expected Obama to let us down in many ways aren't happy about Obama's failures in this and other areas. The question is: why are you, J?

Huh?

Make it about yourself much?

But we do wonder what you ever got out of pretending you were a progressive.

I don't think he ever did. Normy is a performance artist/troll who's been happily pissing away here for years. Your best approach is to laugh at him and ignore him.