Tedminator
Member
- Joined
- May 31, 2010
- Messages
- 190
- Reaction score
- 99
- Location
- South Florida
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
McCain didn't even address the survey findings with this retort... he's just taking swipes at individuals here. Is this truly all he has left?
Senator John McCain said:"The day that the leadership of the military comes to me and says, 'Senator, we ought to change the policy,' then I think we ought to consider seriously changing it."
Pentagon Study said:"We are convinced that the U.S. military can adjust and accommodate this change, just as it has others in history."
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Michael Mullen said:"right thing to do""repeal of the law will not prove unacceptable risk to military readiness" "Unit cohesion will not suffer if our units are well-led, and families will not encourage their loved ones to leave the military in droves"
Senator John McCain said:"At this time, we should be inherently cautious about making any changes that would affect our military, and what changes we do make should be the product of careful and deliberate consideration"
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Michael Mullen said:"War does not stifle change, it demands it. It doesn't make it harder; it facilitates it"
Senator John McCain said:"What I can say now, however, is that in addition to my concerns about what questions were not asked by this survey and considered in this report, I am troubled by the fact that this report only represents the input of 28 percent of the force who received the questionnaire. That is only six percent of the force at large. I find it hard to view that as a fully-representative sample set."
gates nailed his dumb ass
Some, particularly advocates of causes struggling for oxygen in the dwindling days of the lame-duck Congress such as those seeking repeal of the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy banning openly gay members of the military, are asking about the START treaty: What’s the hurry?
White House officials say Obama views START as a “legacy issue”—something that will reflect well on him in the history books. Arms control has been a central foreign policy interest of Obama since his Senate days when he worked closely with Sen. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) on containing so-called loose nukes in the former Soviet Union. Lugar is now the leading Republican proponent of ratifying START.
But with Republicans demanding substantial floor time both for START and for the defense bill carrying “don’t ask” repeal language, gay rights advocates fear time is running out for repeal, which would almost certainly be dead once Republicans take control of the House next month.
“In all honesty, we’ve kind of been waiting to be screwed over. It was just a question of whether we’d get screwed over earlier or later,” said Heather Cronk of GetEqual, a group pushing for “don’t ask” repeal. “We’d prefer later,” she joked.
KEY:
McCain is in red
Pentagon Study is in green
Michael Mullen is in blue
In 2006 McCain said the following about Don't Ask Don't Tell:
On Tuesday the Pentagon released a study indicating that most soldiers felt ending the policy would do no serious harm to the military. I will post a link to the study here. I suggest you go and read the study, it was quite interesting.
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Michael Mullen and Bush appointed Secretary of Defense Robert Gates came out and supported a repeal of the bill, saying it's the
This is absurd. Polls are accurate with a sample of 0.1% of the population, let alone 28% of currently serving military-persons.
36% of military members are currently serving with homosexual or bisexual soldiers.
92.5% of military members won't have their personal readiness downgraded if DADT is repealed.
Opinions? I thought I'd scour the web for a big picture, hope it helps. Just used print screen to get the snapshots. Before you make a decision it's a good idea to read the report, it was interesting, especially Part VII: Survey Results.
Thanks!
It's important to remember that the situation not being affected, or becoming better is a better situation than the status quo, thus the "positively/very positively" "No Effect" and "Equally Positive as Negative" are all saying that repealing the bill will keep the situation the same or make it better.
Banning ethnic kids from public schools would probably increase "school cohesion", because they typically come from lower income families on average (this is just a fact, as shown below). This does not however, make it justified to ban ethnic kids from public schools. I don't see how the argument from military cohesion makes it any less morally abhorrent.
Quoting all my charts might make the page a little clogged :/
Well my standard is that all citizens should be allowed in the military unless you can show some serious danger. For example, one may construct an argument that ex-felons shouldn't be allowed in the military because they constitute a serious risk.
Thus the default being that they're allowed in, I would need some actual detriment shown, not just "no effect".
Others many feel differently, but that's my opinion.
McCain didn't even address the survey findings with this retort... he's just taking swipes at individuals here. Is this truly all he has left?
That is generally the only thing left for people that oppose this. The opposition wanted pentagon support and got it; they wanted the release of the study and got it. Now all they have left is name calling and ridiculous assertions (such as a poll sampling 28% of a group was not representative). This has degenerated to a bad argument on the 3rd grade playground. Time to pass this and move on to important things.
McCain was even a proponent of the repeal. Then when he became an opponent, it was conditional opposition pending pentagon endorsement, then the study. Now he is just hopelessly in the camp of the bigots. Someone needs to crucify McCain for his intellectual dishonesty on this subject (in fact, all intellectual dishonest politicians need to be held accountable for intellectual dishonesty.)
As I said, I am fine with the change since the military commanders agreed with it.
That being said, I do not agree with your analysis that says a vote for no effect is a vote in favor. I say this for ALL surveys, not just this one. Saying that the middle bar sides with the pro or con side is in the eyes of the person who wants to slant a result. I see this in many political surveys. This allows both sides to claim the middle and both decry they won!
Thank Vishnu that McCain lost the election in 2008. His latest soundbite is that the economy is too bad to repeal DADT. It's almost as embarrassing as Brett Favre sticking around too long.
When it comes to personal freedom, "no effect" is a vote in favor. To think otherwise is about as anti-American as it gets.
I don't see how he's all that much worse than the Democrats. The Republicans are simply more open about their agenda. If you'll notice the Democrats haven't actually done anything productive, they just complain for a few months and then eventually give in, claiming their hands are tied.
Yes, the Dems really are a giant cruiseliner of Fail. It's amazing that they allowed the GOP to control congress even as the minority party. The GOP didn't have 60 votes in the Senate when they were the majority yet they managed to be in charge. I swear the Dems could have 90 votes in the Senate and still be pushed around by the 10 GOPers. Pelosi acts like it's the greatest accomplishment that she didn't a pumpkin pie. Reid didn't even try to control the message. The Dems recognize that they have a message problem and that creates an inferiority complex apparently.
Rule 22. The invisible filibuster. Can't really blame Democrats for it.
They should have let them read the phone book. They half-assed their political game. They had them set up as the Party of No but didn't get any good soundbites out of it. It would have been so smart of them then they could claim, "We have business that needs attention and the GOP wants to play games." Somehow they thought that they would be the losers if the GOP filibustered.
You don't have to read the phone book to filibuster anymore. You literally just need one single GOP senator to sit in his seat and challenge unanimous consent whenever someone moves to go to vote or whatever.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?