Senator: Obama should get Pentagon support on gays

[REVxERIK]

Senator: Obama should get Pentagon support on gays | Politics | Reuters

By Thomas Ferraro

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A leading U.S. Senate Democrat said on Sunday he expects President Barack Obama to keep a renewed vow to end discrimination against gays in the military, but that Obama should do so with the support of the Pentagon.

forgive my skeptic opinion, based on his current "doing" habits, that he will either A. not do it or B. take years and years to end it.

 

[The Rabbi]

He wont do anything because it will cost him support one on side or the other.

I think the military should be able to impose the policy they think is best. They're the ones in charge here on a day to day basis.

 

[REVxERIK]

He wont do anything because it will cost him support one on side or the other.

I think the military should be able to impose the policy they think is best. They're the ones in charge here on a day to day basis.

strangely enough i'll have to agree with you on this. but he IS the head of the military technically so what he says will go.

 

[bodecea]

Senator: Obama should get Pentagon support on gays | Politics | Reuters

By Thomas Ferraro

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A leading U.S. Senate Democrat said on Sunday he expects President Barack Obama to keep a renewed vow to end discrimination against gays in the military, but that Obama should do so with the support of the Pentagon.

forgive my skeptic opinion, based on his current "doing" habits, that he will either A. not do it or B. take years and years to end it.

Did Truman wait for the Pentagon's support?

 

[The Rabbi]

He wont do anything because it will cost him support one on side or the other.

I think the military should be able to impose the policy they think is best. They're the ones in charge here on a day to day basis.

strangely enough i'll have to agree with you on this. but he IS the head of the military technically so what he says will go.

He is there to provide oversight, not to micromanage or use the military as a laboratory for social enginnering.

 

[bodecea]

He wont do anything because it will cost him support one on side or the other.

I think the military should be able to impose the policy they think is best. They're the ones in charge here on a day to day basis.

strangely enough i'll have to agree with you on this. but he IS the head of the military technically so what he says will go.

He is there to provide oversight, not to micromanage or use the military as a laboratory for social enginnering.

Whoa! Deja vu!!!!!

 

[nodoginnafight]

He wont do anything because it will cost him support one on side or the other.

I think the military should be able to impose the policy they think is best. They're the ones in charge here on a day to day basis.

Absurd - the military (The employee) does not dictate to the employer (The people - as represented by POTUS)

The military is there to do what they are directed to do - no more, no less.

 

[Qball]

He wont do anything because it will cost him support one on side or the other.

I think the military should be able to impose the policy they think is best. They're the ones in charge here on a day to day basis.

Absurd - the military (The employee) does not dictate to the employer (The people - as represented by POTUS)

The military is there to do what they are directed to do - no more, no less.

It'll take an act of Congress for him to repeal DA/DT either way you slice it. Having Pentagon backing is a way to make this look like a policy decision instead of a political one.

 

[Si modo]

Senator: Obama should get Pentagon support on gays | Politics | Reuters

By Thomas Ferraro

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A leading U.S. Senate Democrat said on Sunday he expects President Barack Obama to keep a renewed vow to end discrimination against gays in the military, but that Obama should do so with the support of the Pentagon.

forgive my skeptic opinion, based on his current "doing" habits, that he will either A. not do it or B. take years and years to end it.

I think you are being realistic. I like realistic - a lot.

 

[REVxERIK]

Senator: Obama should get Pentagon support on gays | Politics | Reuters

By Thomas Ferraro

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A leading U.S. Senate Democrat said on Sunday he expects President Barack Obama to keep a renewed vow to end discrimination against gays in the military, but that Obama should do so with the support of the Pentagon.

forgive my skeptic opinion, based on his current "doing" habits, that he will either A. not do it or B. take years and years to end it.

I think you are being realistic. I like realistic - a lot.

thanks. i try to keep it real.

 

[bodecea]

He wont do anything because it will cost him support one on side or the other.

I think the military should be able to impose the policy they think is best. They're the ones in charge here on a day to day basis.

Absurd - the military (The employee) does not dictate to the employer (The people - as represented by POTUS)

The military is there to do what they are directed to do - no more, no less.

It'll take an act of Congress for him to repeal DA/DT either way you slice it. Having Pentagon backing is a way to make this look like a policy decision instead of a political one.

I'm not quite sure...I don't think it's a law, more of an Executive policy.

 

[EriktheRed]

There are a lot of good soldiers, marines, sailors and airmen who just don't approve of homsexuals whether some of us like it or not. I never cared, but I knew back then my opinion was in the minority. I'm guessing that the negative attitudes have softened since I was in the service, but if a substantial portion of servicemembers (meaning a large minority, if not a majority) still don't support allowing openly gay members in their ranks, their opinion should be respected for morale reasons if nothing else.

 

[The Rabbi]

He wont do anything because it will cost him support one on side or the other.

I think the military should be able to impose the policy they think is best. They're the ones in charge here on a day to day basis.

Absurd - the military (The employee) does not dictate to the employer (The people - as represented by POTUS)

The military is there to do what they are directed to do - no more, no less.

That's a complete misunderstanding of the roles of the military, the CinC, and the People.
The CinC is more like the board of directors while the chiefs of the services are more like the CEOs.
Look, the military is very good at killing people and breaking stuff. That is their job. The leadership in the military is tasked with carrying out whatever the president decides is US policy that involves military matters. They should be given broad tasks (defeat the Iraqi military and take control of the country) and allowed latitude to achieve those any way they feel is right. They are the professionals here, not Obama. The chiefs will be able to decide whether having open perverts in the military will help or hinder their mission-readiness. That's the only question that really matters: will this help or hinder the military in their job of hurting people and breaking stuff? I'm not really qualified to say. Neither are most of the people on this board.

 

[blu]

There are a lot of good soldiers, marines, sailors and airmen who just don't approve of homsexuals whether some of us like it or not. I never cared, but I knew back then my opinion was in the minority. I'm guessing that the negative attitudes have softened since I was in the service, but if a substantial portion of servicemembers (meaning a large minority, if not a majority) still don't support allowing openly gay members in their ranks, their opinion should be respected for morale reasons if nothing else.

this same fallacy has been used over and over to oppress people

 

[EriktheRed]

There are a lot of good soldiers, marines, sailors and airmen who just don't approve of homsexuals whether some of us like it or not. I never cared, but I knew back then my opinion was in the minority. I'm guessing that the negative attitudes have softened since I was in the service, but if a substantial portion of servicemembers (meaning a large minority, if not a majority) still don't support allowing openly gay members in their ranks, their opinion should be respected for morale reasons if nothing else.

this same fallacy has been used over and over to oppress people

Well, the military is a pretty important institution....