Change: Colin Powell now opposes “don’t ask, don’t tell”

posted at 9:19 pm on February 3, 2010 by Allahpundit

You know I’m posting this just for the inevitable 300 angry “RINO!” comments, right?

“In the almost 17 years since the ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ legislation was passed, attitudes and circumstances have changed,” General Powell said in a statement issued by his office. He added: “I fully support the new approach presented to the Senate Armed Services Committee this week by Secretary of Defense Gates and Admiral Mullen.”

Robert M. Gates, the defense secretary, and Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told lawmakers on Tuesday that they supported President Obama’s proposal to repeal the 1993 law forbidding gay men and lesbians to be open about their sexuality while serving in uniform…

When Mr. Clinton tried to end the ban on gay soldiers, General Powell was the Joint Chiefs chairman and opposed the move on the grounds that it would undermine discipline and order in the military but he supported the “don’t ask” compromise. In his statement on Wednesday, General Powell said “the principal issue has always been the effectiveness of the Armed Forces and order and discipline in the ranks.”

Gates, Mullen, Powell, Shalikashvili: Have any top Pentagon brass, current or retired, come out strongly against repeal in the past few weeks as this debate picked up steam? I know that Peter Pace was against repeal as recently as three years ago but he’s been quiet lately. I’m surprised some enterprising lefty reporter hasn’t dialed up Papa Cheney and asked him for his views on the subject. He’s actually to the left of The One on gay marriage (publicly, at least) so presumably he’d be good for a useful “if it’s okay with the generals, it’s okay with me” soundbite. Chop chop, Politico!

Meanwhile, Arizona Republicans ponder the eternal question: WWMD?

McCain spokeswoman Brooke Buchanan pointed out that Mullen repeatedly emphasized that he was speaking for himself and not on behalf of the military leadership during Tuesday’s hearing. She said McCain’s stance remains unchanged and that until the Pentagon team finishes its policy review there will be no official recommendation from military leadership.

“Sen. McCain believes that DADT works. But if the military leadership decided that it would be beneficial to repeal DADT, he would obviously listen to leadership,” Buchanan said. “He respects Admiral Mullen and Secretary Gates, but would like to withhold judgment on the repeal by waiting for the conclusion from policy review.”…

If the Don’t Ask Don’t Tell review finds that repealing the policy would be advantageous to the military, Buchanan said McCain would consider it. But first the military must address a host of concerns through the upcoming series of hearings and discussions.

Exit question: With Hayworth looming over his shoulder, is Maverick really going to sign off on repealing DADT? And if he does, what’s Sarahcuda going to say when she’s inevitably asked about it?

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

There is a world of difference between what the political class states and what actually happens. Passing a law doesn’t change reality except in the head of deluded liberals. – sharrukin on February 4, 2010 at 2:53 PM

The internal fuss has not ended in Israel either. Click on to what the IDF Chief Rabbi said in November:

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1106488.html

SC.Charlie on February 4, 2010 at 3:13 PM

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1106488.html

SC.Charlie on February 4, 2010 at 3:13 PM

Violence, anger, and soldier pitted against soldier. That doesn’t really bolster your case much!

Bear in mind that Israel has conscription unlike the US. In the US they can just choose not to re-enlist and many would do exactly that. The US military gets a lot of their recruits from the conservative Christian community, as well as the black and Hispanic community. None of these groups much care for the policies you are pushing and many will vote with their feet.

No worries though, I am sure the liberal community will step courageously into the breach. /s

sharrukin on February 4, 2010 at 3:30 PM

Colin is such a colon.

mizflame98 on February 4, 2010 at 3:34 PM

I think fighting men have enough to worry about on today’s battlefield.
From the military men I’ve known, Army, being gay is not a popular thing.
Why do our guys have to watch their backsides EVERYWHERE?
We shouldn’t have gays at least in combat situations just like we shouldn’t have women in them: major distraction.
I think Don’t ask don’t tell is a good way to deal with it.
The soldiers in units can take care of the problem themselves by either accepting gays or shunning them, much like what happens already with openly gay service people.
If I am a woman living in the barracks, I don’t want to take showers with men OR lesbians.
So where are the rights of those people?

Badger40 on February 4, 2010 at 4:42 PM

Colin is all about skin color.

Badger40 on February 4, 2010 at 4:43 PM

Friends, the hypocrisy is that gays and lesbians ARE allowed to serve as long as they you don’t KNOW who they ARE ………. I am regret that you might get so upset.

SC.Charlie on February 4, 2010 at 5:23 PM

What happened to the logic that gender and skin color are not behavioral, and homosexuality is? Did the logic go away?

Will the heterosexual guys be living in the women’s quarters now? Why not? What’s wrong with it, as long as the men behave? If it makes the women uncomfortable, they will just have to get over their prejudice.
-
Has anybody asked the people affected?
-
I seriously doubt that the sexual harassment criteria and enforcement will be equal to that women enjoy.
But then it’s not exactly the same; the hetero men are not sleeping and showering with women.

KyserS on February 4, 2010 at 5:23 PM

What happened to the logic that gender and skin color are not behavioral, and homosexuality is? Did the logic go away? – SyserS

Most people have a heterosexual orientation, a minority doesn’t. That’s the simple fact. Would it be logical for a someone with a homosexual orientation not admit to their sexual orientation? ……… I would guess that the answer might be yes, if they feared for their personal safety and acceptance.

SC.Charlie on February 4, 2010 at 5:55 PM

It’s ironic that those who push for homosexuals in the military are the ones who are directly or indirectly involved in the downturn of this nation.

b1jetmech on February 4, 2010 at 6:24 PM

They dont think about sex too much with ugly straights I would imagine, so you should be fine.

But in all seriousness, trying to link the gays in the military with the folks who go around having sex in the streets or the trannies is a misnomer.

Squid Shark on February 4, 2010 at 8:57 AM

Yeah, I’m sure an ugly straight like me will be fine. But what about a handsome man in uniform? A little thought occurred to me when I read your post. What do gay men like? What do we always here women like? Why, a man in uniform. So, here we are talking about gays wanting to join the military. Google “gay military porn” and see how many sites come up. Here’s a link, I admit, just one, about a Fox news story on a gay military porn bust at Ft. Bragg back in 2006. Seems in the gay community, straight guys in uniform is a big thing. Just a coincidence, I suppose.
Here’s an excerpt:

1) There is a huge market for “gay” military porn because lots of homosexual men are turned on by “straight-acting,” “macho” (masculine) men. I realize it’s a sick comparison, but just as many women like a “man in uniform,” so do homosexual men. On Jan. 29, 2010, a Google search on the three words “gay military porn” (no quote marks) yielded “about 1,300,000″ entries. “Gay Military Porn” (in quote marks) yielded 34,300 entries. This is a huge (and very twisted) business, and obviously the demand is high among men with a homosexual problem.

http://americansfortruth.com/news/gay-military-porn-bust-reminds-us-of-some-inconvenient-truths-regarding-homosexuality-and-the-military.html

JellyToast on February 4, 2010 at 6:38 PM

It’s ironic that those who push for homosexuals in the military are the ones who are directly or indirectly involved in the downturn of this nation. – b1jetmech on February 4, 2010 at 6:24 PM

Yep, that fits the description of Barry Goldwater, the 1964 Republican presidential candidate, who was later respectfully nicknamed Mr. Conservative. Friend. the fact is that gays and lesbians have and continue to volunteer to serve and defend this country.

SC.Charlie on February 4, 2010 at 8:26 PM

Friend. the fact is that gays and lesbians have and continue to volunteer to serve and defend this country.

SC.Charlie on February 4, 2010 at 8:26 PM

Yes. Exactly.

J.E. Dyer on February 4, 2010 at 9:04 PM

Friend. the fact is that gays and lesbians have and continue to volunteer to serve and defend this country.

SC.Charlie on February 4, 2010 at 8:26 PM
Yes. Exactly.

J.E. Dyer on February 4, 2010 at 9:04 PM

Then what’s the problem? Unless you proponents of letting them serve openly are looking for a big ad campaign and then it’s exactly what many suspect. Serving to help push normalization of the lifestyle. Then I’m back to my square one argument. The military isn’t a place for social experimentation. We break stuff and kill people. We don’t need another distraction.

hawkdriver on February 4, 2010 at 10:03 PM

That was my point, hawkdriver.

J.E. Dyer on February 4, 2010 at 10:07 PM

But it’s always good to see you around.

J.E. Dyer on February 4, 2010 at 10:07 PM

But it’s always good to see you around.

J.E. Dyer on February 4, 2010 at 10:07 PM

Hooah

hawkdriver on February 4, 2010 at 11:28 PM

Still waiting for the explanation of or definition of just what “openly” means.

Lourdes on February 5, 2010 at 8:39 AM

Friend. the fact is that gays and lesbians have and continue to volunteer to serve and defend this country.

SC.Charlie on February 4, 2010 at 8:26 PM
Yes. Exactly.

J.E. Dyer on February 4, 2010 at 9:04 PM

Then what’s the problem? Unless you proponents of letting them serve openly are looking for a big ad campaign and then it’s exactly what many suspect. Serving to help push normalization of the lifestyle. Then I’m back to my square one argument. The military isn’t a place for social experimentation. We break stuff and kill people. We don’t need another distraction.

hawkdriver on February 4, 2010 at 10:03 PM

hawkdriver wins.

Lourdes on February 5, 2010 at 8:40 AM

Gonna’ quote Ollie North who appeared on Hannity last evening:

(Regarding Don’t-Ask-Don’t-Tell and those people who are entertaining idea to repeal it):


“It affects readiness, recruiting and retention
and they’re ignoring it.”

Lourdes on February 5, 2010 at 8:43 AM

They don’t call Powell “the Perfumed General” for nothing.

He really looks like a Girly Man with this “opinion” of his.

Remember that, it’s an opinion. From an effeminate wishy-washy guy who claims he’s Conservative but he voted for Barack Obama. One guess why.

Lourdes on February 5, 2010 at 8:53 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4