Senator McCain Defends DADT

Submitted by: madest 6 years ago

Excuse me, Senator, but could you repeat that please?
There are 79 comments:
Male 10,845
hmm guess another case where I don`t have my facts straight. Okay then.

I take your "female soldiers WW2 and before" and raise you Soviet Female Army in WW2 + Joan d`Arc
0
Reply
Male 373
"homosexuals can`t swim, they attract enemy radar, they attract sharks, they insist on being placed at the captains table, they get up late, they nudge people whilst their shooting"
0
Reply
Male 7,378
Well if he says it doesn`t happen when there are documented cases that it does he either isn`t as informed as he thinks he is, or he`s just a doddering old fool. I go with the latter.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
Cajun247: Before 1950, If any two people in the military were caught `Being Gay` they were shipped to Leavenworth, It was not tolerated.

I`m not saying that there weren`t gays in the military before then, They just kept it hidden, Otherwise they faced the consequences.

If you think that`s not possible, I can tell you of stories where women joined the armed forces, As men, And fought on the front lines before WWII.
0
Reply
Male 10,339
@cajun:

Also, that lol.
0
Reply
Male 10,845
They didn`t care about orientation, they were concerned about performance. If you were a good marksman then they NEEDED you!
0
Reply
Male 10,845
No, it was more like they didn`t care if they were in a fox hole and getting shelled. That and if you were straight and happen to share that foxhole.
0
Reply
Male 10,339
@cajun:

There`s a reason for that.

People didn`t care if gays were shot in the back before then.
0
Reply
Male 10,845
Why? We had a "Don`t Ask Don`t Care" policy that`s why.
0
Reply
Male 10,845
auburnjunky we never had anything banning gays from serving in the military before the 1950s.
0
Reply
Male 10,339
It`s like a black person claiming racism at a KKK meeting.

OF COURSE gays will be hazed, treated unfairly, and maybe even killed in a military setting. ESPECIALLY in war. It`s a testosterone fueled, high energy, push your body and mind to the limit occupation. It is filled with good people, but it is also filled with stupid, redneck, homophobes.

If some gay guy went into a battle with a rainbow patch on his arm (exaggeration) he would probably be the victim of friendly fire.

DADT was put into place to PROTECT people with alternative sexual lifestyles. Why should they want to repeal something the HELPS them survive in their chosen profession?

Also, let`s not make this liberal, or conservative. CLINTON created DADT, and there were some democrats that voted against repeal the other day, because it was a piggyback legislation on a bill to raise military funding so republicans would vote for it. It`s bad backdoor politics, and it didn`t work!
0
Reply
Male 53
Senator McCain, can you repeat what you just said.
"Sure...it`s not the policy, it`s not the policy, it`s not the policy.........."
0
Reply
Male 587
A majority of the people posting here have no idea what they are talking about.. Try to do some research on the actual Policy of DADT and see how the military handles gays or people they believe to be gay. Taking the word of a gay ex service member is hardly proof.
0
Reply
Male 3,915
stupid senile old man...

obviously...there is a documented case of the military doing what the reporters are saying...they are literally saying "that IS the case, the military did exactly that"

they weren`t arguing what the policy was...they could have just as easily said according to his logic "you can put a policy against raping in the military too...but that still happens..."
0
Reply
Male 587
I think DADT should be in effect for ALL service members. Your sexual preference should never come in to play while you are serving in the military. You are not there to profess your love of a certain sex. Just follow orders and do your job and things should be fine. Keep your sexual preference where it belongs in your bedroom regardless of what the preference is.
0
Reply
Male 587
I did not vote for the man but I would love to see him get all ex war hero on their ass and start back handing those little bitch ass reporters. I love the reporters that claim to know more about the military and their practices then the people who do actually know. It`s like pissing in a wind storm, your just gonna make your self look like an idiot. Continuously asking the same question over and over again while interrupting the person asking the question has got to be the lowest form of journalism.
0
Reply
Male 1,053
MrsPoods: what do you base that on? The repeal of DADT will set things back the way they were. The passage of some NEW policy or law would do what you suggest.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
jtrebowski: McCain gave a direct answer, It just wasn`t one the reporter liked.
0
Reply
Male 3,364
@Crakrjak: It`s also a technique to try to illicit a direct answer from someone who is obviously trying to avoid doing so.
0
Reply
Male 10,339
First of all McCain is a stupid drating moron.

Secondly,DADT did not, and will not get repealed. The liberals couldn`t even get their own people to vote it out, so let it go.

Now no gays have to be killed by redneck homophobes in the line of duty, because nobody will know they are gay.
0
Reply
Male 80
not the policy its not the policy the policy not the...etc.
hehe
someone should remix that
0
Reply
Male 736
what a douche
i used to respect him a lot more but he`s sold out once too often
0
Reply
Female 547
@ nettech98: Um, no. If DADT is repealed, a person will have the choice of revealing their sexuality without the consequence of discharge. I usually don`t respond to such ignorance, but you sir are an idiot.
0
Reply
Male 191
@nettech98
While repealDADT is the poster child in this debate, the ultimate goal is to afford homosexuals the same rights enjoyed by heterosexuals. In this instance, those rights involve military service specifically.
0
Reply
Male 516
In a week the autotune the news kids will remix this.
0
Reply
Male 1,053
The part that cracks me up the most is that if you repeal DADT, you go back to the what existed before that. And that was that it was ok to ask if you were homosexual (on enlistment docs for example), and to seek out, prosecute, and discharge homosexuals. Is that what the pro-gay groups really want?
0
Reply
Male 661
I am a former infantryman. I served in the Canadian military, and this is my opinion. Any man or woman who has swore to serve and defend their country at any cost, even their own life, should serve and enjoy the same status as heteros. I have served with a fire team partner who was a gay man. His or my sexual preferences at no time had any bearing on my trust of him, nor him of me.

I cannot believe that many of the same people screaming about supporting the troops are screaming to keep gays out of the military.
0
Reply
Female 654
thats a hard way to go. there are some wierd possibilities on either side of that opinion. i tend to think that if your up to being in the service, god bless ya. its not an easy thing to do and its not going to change no matter who your drating. it will end in compromise one day, and then everyone can be pissed off together
0
Reply
Male 696
I`m unclear about one thing... Is it the policy?
0
Reply
Male 1,021
So far zero gays have been "exposed" and kicked out in 15 years. The only ones that had to go were ones that came forward and said they are gay, plus 2 gays were having drat in the showers and they got caught. No one has been investigated. These reporters are full of drat.
0
Reply
Male 4,290
[quote]as the one Canadian said, Homosexuality is an American phobia. The rest of the world embraces diversity. We should strive to be like them.[/quote]
How I wish this were true. Unfortunately there are homophobes of every nationality, not just Americans.
0
Reply
Male 2,841
Obama had the easiest presidential election ever.
0
Reply
Male 289
Hey, guys....It`s not the policy.
0
Reply
Female 3,598
man am i relieved that that guy isn`t president...
0
Reply
Male 17,512
D3rAnG3d: It`s a common interrogation technique, It`s used by the Police, Psychiatrists, the Military, and yes, Reporters too.

And Yes, They do hammer the question over and over and over and over to get people frustrated and attempt to pry a different answer from them.

Even if the answer doesn`t change, It makes your subject frustrated enough to possibly show anger, That`s a `Win` in their mind as well.
0
Reply
Male 1,598
I really hate it when reporters repeat the question over and over as if they expect repeating it will make the person give the answer they want.
0
Reply
Male 72
"I don`t care what you say, and I don`t care what others say." Ignorant much?
0
Reply
Male 5,608
Cont
Lt. Pierce: "And "man-hands." Was the vagina expensive?"
Bennet: "DAMMIT!!!!!"
0
Reply
Male 5,608
About the video:
If you are in the military and use military
property or lines, your communications ARE subject
to immediate review.
It`s not like no one told you ahead of time.
The same thing goes at a company.

If, while deployed to some odd country, you crack
a joke in your email to your brother:
"I can`t wait to get home and blow your great big
donkey dick!"
Being a guy, you could be set up for a discharge yet,
your senior would not be allowed to tell you before
proceedings began (DADT) until you receive your
orders and began discussing it yourself.

So then, how exactly do you PROVE you`re are not gay?

Bennet: "This is a picture! We`re getting married next leave!"
Lt. Pierce: ""SHE" looks a little hairy there, Bennet. "THEY" do like to be called "SHE," right?"
Bennet: "But... She has a vagina!!!"
Lt. Pierce: "And "man-
0
Reply
Female 38
"Now, even if they admit they`re gay, it can`t count against them because it`s against the rules to say so... and if there`s suspicion or even proof, they can`t act on it because it`s against the rules."

It can count against someone who says theyre gay. Youre breaking part of DADT by telling. So actually. You can get in trouble. No one is allowed to ask you and youre not allowed to tell.
0
Reply
Male 3,431
Gay people *CAN* serve. they aren`t being told they can`t, what they are being told is to NOT advertise being gay. Much the same way I was told NOT to advertise being straight in all of those idiotic sexual harassment classes.
0
Reply
Male 10,845
Meh doesn`t matter anyway.

Judge Virginia A. Phillip has already declared that law unconstitutional.
0
Reply
Male 496
"I really don`t understand why anybody would want gays in the military in the first place."

Because some gays give enough of a poo about your country to want to protect it. Do you care if the guy with a gun killing terrorists is gay? Or that he can do his job? I`d go for the he can do hi job bit, don`t discrimate against gays mate just because youre biggotted and afraid they might touch you at night.
0
Reply
Female 836
RoboPatton... few people felt comfortable when blacks were integrated into the military. Few felt comfortable when women could join... but, look aruond. Who`s protesting it now?

NO ONE.

Things like this just get to par for the course in a few years. If gays can be out in the military, no one will think twice about it ten years from now, just like all the other stuff that people said "would not work".
0
Reply
Male 101
@mykunter
because people who want to serve should serve
0
Reply
Male 30
last sentence cut off... "but that`s my problem... gays should be allowed to serve"
0
Reply
Male 30
I was in combat arms before and during the DADT time (disabled vet here). As I remember, DADT was intended to allow "gays" to serve without punishment. Before that, "gays" could be punished and kicked out. Now, even if they admit they`re gay, it can`t count against them because it`s against the rules to say so... and if there`s suspicion or even proof, they can`t act on it because it`s against the rules. I have to agree with McCain here... the policy isn`t what it`s made out to be.

On another note, there are definitely some things I had to do/had done to me that I wouldn`t feel comfortable having a homosexual or a woman do. (ever spoon with a man in underwear to survive a cold night? ever had your butt wiped by someone else because you`re in a chemical risk zone and wiping your own meant risking contaminating yourself? both accounts - yes for me). I wouldn`t feel comfortable with a woman doing it... nor a man who liked men. But that`s my problem... gays sho
0
Reply
Male 197
Why do people give a poo about gays in the military? Seems like such a stupid petty thing to care about, something you`d gossip about in Jr. High. Grow the fnck up people!
0
Reply
Male 2,436
I really don`t understand why anybody would want gays in the military in the first place.
0
Reply
Male 313
or just "Blame Canada"...... as the one Canadian said, Homosexuality is an American phobia. The rest of the world embraces diversity. We should strive to be like them.
0
Reply
Male 313
hmmm... I wonder who will get to be the "Al Sharpton" or "Jesse Jackson" for the poor discriminated against Gays?

@ggolbez - Right on Brother! You nailed it. It`s the discrimation of the month club. Pretty soon we can get it from Harry and Davids. This will continue as long as it puts money or power into some politician or groups hands.

0
Reply
Male 648
I could be mistaken...but i`m like 90% sure he said it`s not the policy.....or did he say it WAS the policy? I`ll have to rewatch.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
Yeah, Let`s all jump on the bandwagon and blame Republicans.

Don`t forget it was President Clinton that signed DADT into law, Obama on the campaign trail said that he`d end DADT to one crowd and supported it to another crowd.

Democrats own both houses of congress, If they were united there is no piece of legislation the Republicans could block. The congressional leadership attached the repeal of DADT to the military spending bill, A critical piece of legislation, And still couldn`t get it passed, Because Democrats jumped ship and voted against it.
0
Reply
Female 2,352
I think it`s funny when a politician will say sh*t like "we don`t want to look into who is gay". I saw a documentary I don`t remember what it was called but there were a lot of in the closet gay guys screwing over other gay people. Sad.
0
Reply
Female 3
@meepmaker

Spot on observation =D
0
Reply
Male 4,793
I`m sorry senator, I`m a little spacey today, could you repeat that please?
0
Reply
Male 2,229
This american phobia is a waste of money, energy and resources.
0
Reply
Male 25,416
wow
0
Reply
Male 335
le douche
0
Reply
Male 6,694
He`s just still mad about the whole president thing.
0
Reply
Male 1,931
First it was blacks, then it was women, then it was Japanese, now it is Muslims, Homosexuals, and Hispanics. Racism and hatred everywhere. When will it ever end? When will people see their bigotry?
0
Reply
Male 7,378
[quote]You might not like it, but that`s what works for the military.[/quote]
--------
The point is it doesn`t work for the military, the government or the taxpayer. Throwing some highly trained individual out for who they have sex with may make sense to the religious conservatives but it can`t make sense to fiscal conservatives. It`s an enormous waste of resources.
0
Reply
Male 4,547
Also, if anyone wants to see a democrat with a Republican`s style. Check out Cenk Ugyur on the young turks.

Republican anger and straightforwardness with democrat ideas.
0
Reply
Male 4,547
"Uh, yes, but he`s right, it`s not the policy. Maybe somebody broke the rules and snooped around, fine, send them off with dishonorable discharge. "

Agreed.

I actually occassionally feel sorry for politicians. The question was loaded.

Lets say the Military checks private emails to make sure tactical information is not being given to enemy or outside forces. This is perfectly reasonable.

"Does the military not check private emails?"

McCain has to answer yes. The FALSE insinuation is that they`re doing it looking for "the gay".

The answer to the insinuation is no. The answer to the question is yes. McCain`s handling of it, whilst clumsy, is more honest than the reporter`s.
0
Reply
Male 2,345
and some of you here voted for this asshat...
0
Reply
Male 361
It`s republicans like these who make was once a great party go bad. I want the old republican party back and that is why I am a republican. I will keep fighting to restore the Grand Old Party to the liberty loving individuals they once were.
0
Reply
Male 363
@tridirk actually it was BP, then xenophobia by hispanics, THEN islamophobia and now DADT.
0
Reply
Male 1,195
"Lalala, I can`t here you, lalala."
0
Reply
Male 2,424
Uh, yes, but he`s right, it`s not the policy. Maybe somebody broke the rules and snooped around, fine, send them off with dishonorable discharge.

You might not like it, but that`s what works for the military. You might make one or two people feel more comfortable, but at the cost of many potential recruits shunning the military and looking elsewhere for work. Maybe this offends your sensibilities, but so what, it`s not about your sensibilities it`s about the fighting force of our nation and it`s capacity to operate efficiently.

Man this has been a super gay day on IAB!
0
Reply
Male 313
Today is DADT, yesterday Islamaphobia, what`s for tomorrow?

Just depends on where you look. This is how basic training should be don`t you think?
0
Reply
Female 1,006
"If I say it enough times, maybe it will be true!"
0
Reply
Male 795
One of the things I hate about these neo-cons is they just raise their voice and repeat themselves over and over again, and somehow, it actually works. Instead of breaking his stupid drating nose for being a non-nice individual, the lefties puss out, clam up and don`t drive the point home.

Just cause you say "They do not" 500 times doesn`t make it true dumb@$$.
0
Reply
Male 582
So wait...is it the policy?
0
Reply
Male 3,315
"It`s not the policy!" No one is saying it is, Mr. Senator. We`re saying it`s the practice."
0
Reply
Male 6,737
Typical republican.
0
Reply
Male 3,296
say it*
0
Reply
Male 3,296
repetitive argumentation is probably the worst form of making a point. just because you say a thousand times does not mean its correct
0
Reply
Male 271
what an idiot.
0
Reply
Male 7,378
Link: Senator McCain Defends DADT [Rate Link] - Excuse me, Senator, but could you repeat that please?
0
Reply