1. Welcome to CowboysZone!  Join us!  Come on!  You know you want to!

The Ghosts of 1993

Discussion in 'Political Zone' started by MilesAustinforMVP, Nov 23, 2008.

  1. MilesAustinforMVP

    MilesAustinforMVP Benched

    782 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    The Ghosts of 1993

    #fullpost {display:none;} What high-profile policy change has the support of 75 percent of the American public, and could be implemented by changing a very few simple statutes at essentially no cost to the American taxpayer?

    That would be a repeal of Public Law 103-160, the 1993 measure more commonly known as "Don't Ask, Don't Tell", which prohibits openly gay persons from serving in the United States military.

    Public sentiment on DADT has shifted dramatically since 1993. A May, 1993 poll by ABC News and the Washington Post showed that 44 percent Americans favored allowing homosexuals (their wording) who have publicly disclosed their orientation to serve in the military, as compared with 55 percent opposed. An identical poll taken in July, however, shows 75 percent in favor versus just 22 percent opposed. Other recent polling shows similar results; in May 2007, CNN showed 79 percent of Americas in favor of allowing for openly gay troops to serve to 18 percent opposed, and in March 2007, Newsweek had 63 percent in favor and 28 percent opposed.

    What has changed? Well, certainly, America has become more liberal on a variety of issues related to same-sex-attracted individuals. But also our country is now at war, and military recruitment has become more of a problem. Not coincidentally, the number of dismissals under DADT has decreased significantly since 2002 as the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq ramped up. (It's not OK to be gay -- the army seems to be saying -- unless we actually need you.)

    If this were any other issue, it would be the sort of slam-dunk stocking stuffer that a new administration would be looking to implement quickly to bolster its favorability ratings. But of course, DADT is laden with historical significance, precisely because of the way that the Clinton administration mishandled the issue in 1993 and expended a lot of its political capital in the process. A Washington Times report -- as yet unconfirmed by other sources -- suggests that Barack Obama is likely to delay action on the issue until perhaps 2010.

    Does Obama have legitimate reason to proceed cautiously? It is hard to know. On the one hand, even if those who still oppose gay servicemembers are in a small minority, sometimes the minority is much more vocal than the majority. Going after a DADT repeal would surely pique the interest of the Radio Republicans; they'd attempt to portray Obama both as a liberal boogieman and as a political naïf for making the exact same mistakes that the Clinton administration did.

    On the other hand, perhaps this is the sort of fight that Obama should be inviting -- for target-practice if for nothing else. Obama should be fully ready to deploy the patriotism card, e.g. that our best and bravest troops should be allowed the honor of serving our country, and the commonsense card, e.g. that when our forces are stretched thin, we can't be dismissing them for something as frivolous as their sexual orientation.

    This is also precisely the sort of issue on which the Radio Republicans are liable to overplay their hand, missing the fact that Americans are capable of finer points of distinction than "Gay People Bad!", and that there is a sizable swing vote that is ready to see gays and lesbians serve in the army, even if they aren't ready to see them get married or adopt babies. Let the Radio Republicans wallow in their own insignificance.

    Put differently, if Obama can't get a DADT repeal passed, then good luck with something like universal health insurance, which though also supported by solid majorities of the public, is not at 75 percent support, and will be met with much, much more vigorous resistance from lobbying groups.
  2. Aikbach

    Aikbach Well-Known Member

    9,722 Messages
    39 Likes Received
    How many gay themed threads do we need? Its become quite a fatigued subject.
  3. zrinkill

    zrinkill Diamond surrounded by trash

    33,066 Messages
    805 Likes Received
    How many threads have Miles and Jiggs started?

    :D
  4. Maikeru-sama

    Maikeru-sama Mick Green 58

    14,547 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    Not any worst than all the Obama is terrorists, Obama is a racists, Obama is not christian threads certain folks felt the need to consistently beat us down with the weeks leading up to the election.
  5. burmafrd

    burmafrd Well-Known Member

    41,845 Messages
    1,688 Likes Received
    Why don't you do a count Maikeru- who started the most stupid threads?
  6. bbgun

    bbgun Benched

    27,868 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    How many football posts have they made? I'd venture less than ten.
  7. MilesAustinforMVP

    MilesAustinforMVP Benched

    782 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    I use another site for my football posts.
  8. bbgun

    bbgun Benched

    27,868 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    So if the mods eliminated this forum, we'd be rid of you for good?

    Hos, PUSH THE PLUNGER.
  9. MilesAustinforMVP

    MilesAustinforMVP Benched

    782 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    maybe, maybe not. I could very well start posting at the fanzone. Do you really want to take that chance?
  10. burmafrd

    burmafrd Well-Known Member

    41,845 Messages
    1,688 Likes Received
    Go ahead. Make our day.
  11. Hostile

    Hostile Tacos are a good investment Zone Supporter

    119,086 Messages
    3,070 Likes Received
    Tempting.
  12. JRid21

    JRid21 Member

    458 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    :bow:
  13. Aikbach

    Aikbach Well-Known Member

    9,722 Messages
    39 Likes Received
    So your logic is that bad taste must be reciprocated with more of the same?
  14. Maikeru-sama

    Maikeru-sama Mick Green 58

    14,547 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    No my logic is that I didn't see you in here whining when the other side was doing the same thing.
    PHP:
  15. zrinkill

    zrinkill Diamond surrounded by trash

    33,066 Messages
    805 Likes Received
    I was ....... stupidity from both "sides" catch it from me.
  16. Maikeru-sama

    Maikeru-sama Mick Green 58

    14,547 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    Yep, you are one of the better posters on these here boards.
  17. sacase

    sacase Well-Known Member

    4,304 Messages
    83 Likes Received
    The military is not the place for social expiraments, especially in time of war.

    Obama won't make this an issue, he is liable to loose badly on it. He said he would talk to the military about it and right now the military is not in a position to even attempt to allow homosexuals practice their lifestyle (You can be gay all you want, you just can't participate in any acts)

    I can think of a whole host of problems if Obama forces this down the militaries throat.
  18. MilesAustinforMVP

    MilesAustinforMVP Benched

    782 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    It is not a social experiment. That is a very simplistic and ignorant view of things. Israel has the most well trained and effective military in the world, and they allow homosexuals to serve openly. As do the British. We are at war and are troops are stretched thin; we shouldn't be kicking people out of the army who want to serve their country. There is no excuse for that other than bigotry. I get annoyed sometimes when Europeans call Americans racist, and it's stuff like this that give them fodder to bash us.
  19. Maikeru-sama

    Maikeru-sama Mick Green 58

    14,547 Messages
    0 Likes Received
    What?

    Historically, the Military has been a great place for social experiments.

    From Blacks and Women serving all the way up to Gays serving in a private manner.
  20. sacase

    sacase Well-Known Member

    4,304 Messages
    83 Likes Received
    No the Israelis do not have the best trained military in the world, we do. 5 years of combat operations tend to do that.

    Yes it is a social expiriment when you are trying to force the military to accept a certain lifestyle that is not compabitible with military service.

    You will probably cause far more retention problems than you had prior to letting them in.

    Now you have to create new housing for these people, which is a whole different can of worms.

    By the way do you realize that most people kicked out of the military for being homosexual are not homosexual? Of course not, you didn't serve.

Share This Page