Gary Johnson on "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Sometimes the Courts get it right, and when they rule against a government policy that is just wrong, the President should let that ruling stand. That is precisely the case with this week’s rejection of the military’s ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy.

‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ has always been wrong, and it is still wrong. As Barry Goldwater said when the policy was first put in place, a fundamental tenet of conservatism is that government should stay out of people’s private lives — and out of the impossible task of legislating morality. When we are talking about men and women who are voluntarily defending our freedom, that is especially true.

http://dailycaller.com/2010/10/14/it-is-time-for-dont-ask-dont-tell-to-end/

 

[Luissa]

Great post, and 100% correct. The government should stay out of our private lives, and our private choices.

 

[hjmick]

Gary Johnson should be President. Sadly, I don't think it will happen.

 

[Bass v 2.0]

Sometimes the Courts get it right, and when they rule against a government policy that is just wrong, the President should let that ruling stand. That is precisely the case with this week’s rejection of the military’s ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy.

‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ has always been wrong, and it is still wrong. As Barry Goldwater said when the policy was first put in place, a fundamental tenet of conservatism is that government should stay out of people’s private lives — and out of the impossible task of legislating morality. When we are talking about men and women who are voluntarily defending our freedom, that is especially true.

It is time for ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ to end | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment

Homosexuals ought to keep their private lives to themselves and as long as no one asks no one should tell. I'm glad I'm not in the military any longer because I wouldn't know how to enforce something that has been dropped on me without any guidance and consideration of its impact on servicemembers.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Sometimes the Courts get it right, and when they rule against a government policy that is just wrong, the President should let that ruling stand. That is precisely the case with this week’s rejection of the military’s ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy.

‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ has always been wrong, and it is still wrong. As Barry Goldwater said when the policy was first put in place, a fundamental tenet of conservatism is that government should stay out of people’s private lives — and out of the impossible task of legislating morality. When we are talking about men and women who are voluntarily defending our freedom, that is especially true.

It is time for ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ to end | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment

Homosexuals ought to keep their private lives to themselves and as long as no one asks no one should tell. I'm glad I'm not in the military any longer because I wouldn't know how to enforce something that has been dropped on me without any guidance and consideration of its impact on servicemembers.

So should heterosexuals. However, being gay should not be grounds for dismissal. Governor Johnson is correct.

 

[California Girl]

Let the military decide for themselves.

 

[The Rabbi]

Sometimes the Courts get it right, and when they rule against a government policy that is just wrong, the President should let that ruling stand. That is precisely the case with this week’s rejection of the military’s ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy.

‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ has always been wrong, and it is still wrong. As Barry Goldwater said when the policy was first put in place, a fundamental tenet of conservatism is that government should stay out of people’s private lives — and out of the impossible task of legislating morality. When we are talking about men and women who are voluntarily defending our freedom, that is especially true.

It is time for ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ to end | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment

Whatever happened to the president being commander in chief? What gives some unelected judge the power to dictate personnel policies in the military? I thought narco-libertarians held up the Constitution. Now I see they'll happily shred it to get the results they want.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Sometimes the Courts get it right, and when they rule against a government policy that is just wrong, the President should let that ruling stand. That is precisely the case with this week’s rejection of the military’s ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy.

‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ has always been wrong, and it is still wrong. As Barry Goldwater said when the policy was first put in place, a fundamental tenet of conservatism is that government should stay out of people’s private lives — and out of the impossible task of legislating morality. When we are talking about men and women who are voluntarily defending our freedom, that is especially true.

It is time for ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ to end | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment

Whatever happened to the president being commander in chief? What gives some unelected judge the power to dictate personnel policies in the military? I thought narco-libertarians held up the Constitution. Now I see they'll happily shred it to get the results they want.

The President is only commander-in-chief when there's a declaration of war, and there hasn't been one of those since WW2. The Constitution also forbids against a standing army. So, technically, if we were following the Constitution, none of this would even be an issue.

 

[The Rabbi]

It is time for ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ to end | The Daily Caller - Breaking News, Opinion, Research, and Entertainment

Whatever happened to the president being commander in chief? What gives some unelected judge the power to dictate personnel policies in the military? I thought narco-libertarians held up the Constitution. Now I see they'll happily shred it to get the results they want.

The President is only commander-in-chief when there's a declaration of war, and there hasn't been one of those since WW2. The Constitution also forbids against a standing army. So, technically, if we were following the Constitution, none of this would even be an issue.

So you're OK with unelected judges making policy for the military. Got it.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The President is only commander-in-chief when there's a declaration of war, and there hasn't been one of those since WW2. The Constitution also forbids against a standing army. So, technically, if we were following the Constitution, none of this would even be an issue.

Wrong. He is still the CiC then, just like the Army is still the Army. We do not disband the military when we are not at war, so the president is still in charge of it. I would ask you what part of the Constitution forbids a standing army, but I already know you do not know what you are talking about, so I won't bother.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

The President is only commander-in-chief when there's a declaration of war, and there hasn't been one of those since WW2. The Constitution also forbids against a standing army. So, technically, if we were following the Constitution, none of this would even be an issue.

Wrong. He is still the CiC then, just like the Army is still the Army. We do not disband the military when we are not at war, so the president is still in charge of it. I would ask you what part of the Constitution forbids a standing army, but I already know you do not know what you are talking about, so I won't bother.

Well Alexander Hamilton makes it clear that the President is only commander-in-chief after Congress declares war, and Hamilton was no believer in limited government. And since you don't want to ask, I won't tell you it's in Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The President is only commander-in-chief when there's a declaration of war, and there hasn't been one of those since WW2. The Constitution also forbids against a standing army. So, technically, if we were following the Constitution, none of this would even be an issue.

Wrong. He is still the CiC then, just like the Army is still the Army. We do not disband the military when we are not at war, so the president is still in charge of it. I would ask you what part of the Constitution forbids a standing army, but I already know you do not know what you are talking about, so I won't bother.

Well Alexander Hamilton makes it clear that the President is only commander-in-chief after Congress declares war, and Hamilton was no believer in limited government. And since you don't want to ask, I won't tell you it's in Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution.

You mean the two year limit on appropriating money for more than two years? How does that prohibit a standing army? You know that little gem applies even if we are at war, don't you? Or did you think the Constitution gets suspended during wartime?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Wrong. He is still the CiC then, just like the Army is still the Army. We do not disband the military when we are not at war, so the president is still in charge of it. I would ask you what part of the Constitution forbids a standing army, but I already know you do not know what you are talking about, so I won't bother.

Well Alexander Hamilton makes it clear that the President is only commander-in-chief after Congress declares war, and Hamilton was no believer in limited government. And since you don't want to ask, I won't tell you it's in Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution.

You mean the two year limit on appropriating money for more than two years? How does that prohibit a standing army? You know that little gem applies even if we are at war, don't you? Or did you think the Constitution gets suspended during wartime?

Why would I think the Constitution gets suspended during wartime?

How does it prohibit a standing army by declaring that you can't appropriate money towards the military for more than two years? It kind of speaks for itself.

 

[Revere]

A judge in California tells the United States Military what to do?

 

[The Rabbi]

Well Alexander Hamilton makes it clear that the President is only commander-in-chief after Congress declares war, and Hamilton was no believer in limited government. And since you don't want to ask, I won't tell you it's in Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution.

You mean the two year limit on appropriating money for more than two years? How does that prohibit a standing army? You know that little gem applies even if we are at war, don't you? Or did you think the Constitution gets suspended during wartime?

Why would I think the Constitution gets suspended during wartime?

How does it prohibit a standing army by declaring that you can't appropriate money towards the military for more than two years? It kind of speaks for itself.

And it screams "Kevin Kennedy is WRONG".

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Well Alexander Hamilton makes it clear that the President is only commander-in-chief after Congress declares war, and Hamilton was no believer in limited government. And since you don't want to ask, I won't tell you it's in Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution.

You mean the two year limit on appropriating money for more than two years? How does that prohibit a standing army? You know that little gem applies even if we are at war, don't you? Or did you think the Constitution gets suspended during wartime?

Why would I think the Constitution gets suspended during wartime?

How does it prohibit a standing army by declaring that you can't appropriate money towards the military for more than two years? It kind of speaks for itself.

Wouldn't it also speak for itself in wartime? We have been in Afghanistan for 10 years, Iraq for 7, WWII lasted 5 years. I may be wrong, but I am pretty sure that most, if not all, the wars we fought lasted more than 2 years, which would make them all unconstitutional.

Let me explain how it really works. The Army, and everyone else, comes to Congress every year for money, thus no money is appropriated for more than one year at a time. Even long term projects, like designing and building an aircraft carrier, need to get reauthorized every year in order not to violate the Constitution. Anyone who actually understood Constitutional law would understand that this does not prohibit a standing Army. It just means that Congress cannot pass a budget that is binding on future Congresses. It is one of the checks and balances built into our system.