U.S. politics isolation tank

[JMohegan]

I heard, and this was on Faux News so it has to be true, that around 85% of the discharges of gays were due to the gay purposefully coming out in order to leave the military. Wonder if anyone has any real data on this?

Klinger would be fucked now with the whole dress bit.

We had a guy sleepwalk on the ship and it worked to get his ass home. But I don't think he was faking. Damn good actor if he was.

*yawn*

Fox misinforms viewers, yet again. What a surprise.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/13/AR2007031301174.html

 

[JMohegan]

The 2008 Military Times Poll asked a new question that produced jaw-dropping results: “If the ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy is overturned and gays are allowed to serve openly, how would you respond?” The article emphasized that 71% of respondents said they would continue to serve. But almost 10% said “I would not re-enlist or extend my service,” and 14% said “I would consider not re-enlisting or extending my service.” Only 6% expressed “No Opinion.”

If the opinions of Reserve and National Guard troops are similar to those of active-duty personnel surveyed in the Military Times Poll, and if the poll’s findings approximate the number of military people who would leave or consider leaving if the 1993 law is repealed, combined losses (including Guard and Reserve forces) would be huge.

A rough estimate using Defense Department numbers for all service branches and components, totaling more than 2 million, indicates that a loss of one in ten (almost 10%) would cost the military approximately 228,600 people — more than the active-duty Marine Corps (200,000).
If an additional 14% decided to leave, the voluntary exodus would translate into a loss of almost 527,000 — a figure approaching the size of today’s active-duty Army (more than 545,000).
Estimates of losses in active-duty forces alone would range between 141,000 (10%) and 323,000 (23%).

http://tank.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZDVlN2FiZjhhNTA3N2JkNjJiM2ExNDAxNjJmMDFhOGE=

Eh, I don't know about this. I say call their bluff. Well, I guess we just did.

lol @ the National Review. I guess they got so excited, they forgot to finish reading the orignial source. Which concludes.....



David Segal, a military sociologist at the University at Maryland, drew a parallel between the current debate and earlier discussions about changing the composition of the force, from racial integration in the 1940s and 1950s to gender integration in the 1970s.

Segal described the nearly 10 percent of active-duty respondents who said they would leave the military if the policy was overturned as “a relatively small number.”

“That’s a smaller number of career officers than who in the 1970s said they would leave the service if women were admitted to West Point,” Segal said. “They were expressing a strongly held attitude. But when women were admitted to West Point, there was not anything near that kind of exodus from the service.”

Similar debates have surfaced in other countries that recently lifted in the ban, including Canada, the United Kingdom, Australia and Israel, Segal said.

“None of the dire consequences that were expected occurred,” Segal said. “My sense is, and this is just impressionistic, it was more peaceful than the gender integration of the military.”

 

[intothewoods]

How is that even a question?

Because the real fear is accidental gay fucking! Guard your tush!

 

[teknight]

Gives a whole new meaning (hole new meaning?) to rear guard action.

 

[midwestyankee]

The odds that we who post here will come up with a new and refreshingly entertaining pun and/or joke on the subject of the fear of gay sex are about the same as the odds that a Marine whose ass is saved from some Taliban fighter with a grenade in his hand by a big honkin' gay guy is going to give a shit about his buddy and savior's sexual preferences.

 

[Homburg]

http://cnsnews.com/cnsnewstv/v/79345

Any questions?

1) I can't get enough Barney Frank on this issue.

2) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O0h5Vtke3OA&feature

3) He has got to be giggling himself to sleep every night at this point. He's so full of win it's almost unbearable

--

The odds that we who post here will come up with a new and refreshingly entertaining pun and/or joke on the subject of the fear of gay sex are about the same as the odds that a Marine whose ass is saved from some Taliban fighter with a grenade in his hand by a big honkin' gay guy is going to give a shit about his buddy and savior's sexual preferences.

This.

 

[rosco rathbone]

http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-chait/80571/the-most-attention-money-can-buy

 

[Netzach]

http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-chait/80571/the-most-attention-money-can-buy

And we give a fuck what these people think because they MIGHT hire us? How pussy can a populace get?

 

[rosco rathbone]

How pussy can a populace get?

This gets into all kinds of interesting questions about absolute and relative measures of poverty.

Will huge differences in relative wealth cause a populace to rise up, even if they are doing well by some absolute standard?

 

[WriterDom]

In recent months, the Obama administration has begun to take ideas directly from the conservative playbook.


On national security, they’ve canceled civilian trials for terrorists, kept Guantanamo Bay open, and extended key provisions of the Patriot Act;

On federal spending, they have proposed a federal pay freeze as a first step towards fiscal sanity;

On immigration, the Left has abandoned its pursuit of comprehensive immigration reform; and

On economic recovery, they have admitted that the Obama tax hikes are wrong for America.


One more week of Speaker Nancy! I guess +39 wasn't enough for the "normal" midterm correction. Whatever gets you through the night.

 

[rosco rathbone]

Thought of WD when I saw this...

Is Palin-Mania a Liberal Plot?

 

[Netzach]

This gets into all kinds of interesting questions about absolute and relative measures of poverty.

Will huge differences in relative wealth cause a populace to rise up, even if they are doing well by some absolute standard?

It's a really interesting question. How bad does "bad" have to be.

I was trying to fall asleep watching something about the Louisiana Purchase and for some reason I'm finding myself thinking of Kentuckyians of the era and what it would feel like to have NOLA shut off to me and what I'd do....

Just the nutlessness of it all is depressing.

 

[WriterDom]

"In recent months, Palin's polling numbers among the general electorate have plunged to terrifying levels, and Republicans now realize they desperately need to stop her from getting the nomination."

More Palin fixation on the left is more like it. Most conservatives, republicans, and tea party people aren't too worried about November of 2012 yet. I'm kind of indifferent about Palin running but since you guys enjoy her so much I hope she does. I'm going to wait until the SC debate in May and see who is running and what they have to say. If it's anything like Hillary/Obama well I got a little tired of them by the 193,399th debate. I think they were reading from the same telepromter. Though I did like Obama's idea of having all the healthcare hearings on C-Span. I guess they were on C-Span Ocho because I didn't see a one.

 

[WriterDom]

Our lawmakers must be bored in Atlanta.

If you’re still unhappy with your local assessors or don’t like your local government, you no longer have to display the name of your county on your car tag. A new law lets you put a sticker reading “In God We Trust” in place of the county name.

 

[JMohegan]

It's a really interesting question. How bad does "bad" have to be.

I was trying to fall asleep watching something about the Louisiana Purchase and for some reason I'm finding myself thinking of Kentuckyians of the era and what it would feel like to have NOLA shut off to me and what I'd do....

Just the nutlessness of it all is depressing.

I am currently reading this book, and recommend it very highly.

It's about just exactly what you're talking about here. What happens when the line is crossed from "bad" to "I refuse to take your shit any longer."

 

[Netzach]

I am currently reading this book, and recommend it very highly.

It's about just exactly what you're talking about here. What happens when the line is crossed from "bad" to "I refuse to take your shit any longer."

That looks fantastic, and also like something H would love. I might send it to him.

 

[rosco rathbone]

I am currently reading this book, and recommend it very highly.

It's about just exactly what you're talking about here. What happens when the line is crossed from "bad" to "I refuse to take your shit any longer."

Looks great, added it to my list.

I guess the Civil War is going to be a big political topic this year, what with the whatchacentennial and all. My timing on making my way though the Oxford US History series works out so that I will be reading the big James MacPherson book on the war this year, so I'll know what people are talking about.

 

[marieR19]

Semi-related to all the "don't ask don't tell" hubbub of recently...

Litsters, what is your opinion about free speech vs hate speech? Should we (society as a whole) crack down on censoring hate speech, or allow hurtful words to be spoken in the name of freedom of speech?

This has come up recently on another forum I frequent, where the admin/leader allows anti-gay topics as long as no specific member is targeted. Apparently I'm the only homosexual on that forum who agrees on that (or at least the only one who vocally agrees). I see censoring speech as a very slippery slope, and I may be in the minority but I honestly see no problem with people expressing the view that homosexuality is a sin, etc etc. I think censoring things like "homos will burn in hell" can easily lead to censoring "this government is screwed up" and such...

Of course things like constant abuse/bullying/etc is different, and I know that words can hurt just as much as anything physical, I just don't see censoring as a solution. Any thoughts? Am I really in such a minority with this thinking?

 

[Homburg]

Free Speech applies to governments not censoring speech. I think this is an absolute good thing.

Leave it to individuals and private organizations in their own spaces (ie message boards) to worry about modulating hate speech. The moment the govt steps in it is censorship, no matter the content (barring the usual idiocy of yelling "FIRE" in a crowded theatre, etc)

 

[philosophygirl]

 

[AngelicAssassin]

Believe it or not, not everyone inside and outside the military think that repealing DADT is a good thing.

Sorry WD, that was the lame reason for DADT to start. If Clinton had balls, he'd have simply rescinded that portion of the UCMJ as CinC.

... and see this for what it is. Advancing the gay rights agenda.

You're walking a bloody knife edge stud, just as any of those with a gay rights agenda. Elimination of "refusal to allow to serve" doesn't provide for anything save removal of prejudice to serve. A homosexual that continues advances after a declaration of non-interest will get bounced for sexual embarrassment under conduct unbecoming just like a heterosexual counterpart. And no, JAG doesn't do civil ceremonies, nor is the chaplain's corps allowed to marry anyone in contravention of state law where the post/base resides.

As for hemorrhaging from a mass exodus of those that don't agree with open homosexual service, don't hold your breath. As of October 2010 (and quite frankly the Obama inauguration) the recruiting districts of all services have been at or above goal. As of January 2010, the number of Qualified No Jobs arriving at MEPS for the services have shot off the charts. In truth, for every individual departing for whatever reason concerning repeal of the homosexual service taboo, there's a pragmatic individual one rank below celebrating an opening at the next grade level, cascading down to another opening at the MEPS for a non-upper general enlistment.

 

[WriterDom]

Well DADT could have been repealed with one sentence. Don't ask, don't tell, don't tell on, and don't discharge (even if YOU do tell). Instead this probably won't be implemented until the end of Palin's second term. But before Gitmo is closed in 3012.

 

[Daddy2mylilgirl]

Wow.

TUCSON, Ariz. – Rep. Gabrielle Giffords of Arizona was shot in the head Saturday, an aide was killed, and an unknown number of others were wounded when an assailant opened fire outside a grocery store as the Democratic lawmaker met with constituents, officials said.

C.J. Karamargin, a spokesman for Giffords, said the congresswoman was in surgery as of 1 p.m. local time and that an unspecified number of Giffords staff members were injured in the shooting. Karamargin said he had no other information on the conditions of the injured or on the circumstances of the shooting.

Congressional officials said an aide to the Democrat was killed, and unknown number of others were injured, including staffers to the lawmaker.

President Barack Obama called the shooting "an unspeakable tragedy" and that such "a senseless and terrible act of violence has no place in a free society.

U.S. Capitol police say the shooter is in custody as one official said he carried out the attack with an automatic weapon. The officials who described the events did so on condition of anonymity, saying they were not permitted to comment publicly.

 

[neci]

 

[Homburg]

Wow.

TUCSON, Ariz. – Rep. Gabrielle Giffords of Arizona was shot in the head Saturday, an aide was killed, and an unknown number of others were wounded when an assailant opened fire outside a grocery store as the Democratic lawmaker met with constituents, officials said.

C.J. Karamargin, a spokesman for Giffords, said the congresswoman was in surgery as of 1 p.m. local time and that an unspecified number of Giffords staff members were injured in the shooting. Karamargin said he had no other information on the conditions of the injured or on the circumstances of the shooting.

Congressional officials said an aide to the Democrat was killed, and unknown number of others were injured, including staffers to the lawmaker.

President Barack Obama called the shooting "an unspeakable tragedy" and that such "a senseless and terrible act of violence has no place in a free society.

U.S. Capitol police say the shooter is in custody as one official said he carried out the attack with an automatic weapon. The officials who described the events did so on condition of anonymity, saying they were not permitted to comment publicly.

My condolences to their families.

that said, I can only wonder what sort of utterly useless anti-gun legislation this will spawn. It may be callous to think that, but it is the usual response to such events.