CNN poll: 69% support letting gays serve openly in military — including 62% of Republicans

posted at 9:37 pm on February 22, 2010 by Allahpundit

There’s been a majority in favor of it since 1998 but the split at the time was 52/39. Now it’s 69/27, with Republicans and indies both above 60 percent. A fitting exclamation point to a week that saw conservatives hold the gay-friendliest CPAC evah.

Support for allowing gays in the military is much higher among Democrats than Republicans, but the policy wins support from a majority of Republicans as well. More than eight in ten Democrats say that gays should be allowed to serve; 62 of Republicans and 63 percent of Independents agree with that view.

The poll’s release follows Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut announcement Monday that he would be a sponsor of legislation next week to repeal the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy, which has been in place since 1993…

In 1994, a majority of Americans thought homosexual relationships were morally wrong; only 41 percent believed that homosexuality was not a moral issue. Now, for the first time since polls began asking this question in the 1970s, half the public thinks that homosexuality is not a moral issue.

The split on that last point is 48/50 between is/isn’t, but that trend will likely skew towards the latter over the next few years too. (Interesting footnote: In 1998, it was 48/45, so the “is” faction is holding steady thus far.) For all the blather about liberal realignment after The One was elected, I think gay issues is one area where it might actually happen — ironically because Obama’s economic agenda is so alarming to conservatives that it’s forced them to reprioritize fiscal responsibility as their organizing principle. Abortion will remain a fault line eternally because it’s a matter of life and death, but the libertarian impulse inside the GOP will continue to make inroads vis-a-vis gays. There’s nothing like aggressive statism to concentrate the mind on what’s most important.

Here’s Petraeus on Meet the Press this Sunday playing coy about his own opinion of “don’t ask, don’t tell.” He does say he supports the moves taken by Gates and Mullen but seems to want to go slow and let the Pentagon carry out a full review. (See this NYT story for a counterargument.) Given the numbers in CNN’s poll, I’m not sure how politically viable the review will be if it concludes we should stick with the policy.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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 5 6

I think THEY have some understanding of the military culture, and yet they believe it can work out.

Vyce on February 23, 2010 at 7:11 AM

You have no clue what you are talking about, they don’t think it can work out, they follow lawful orders and do everything in their power to achieve the goals given them regardless of how suicidal those lawfully given orders are. That is the military way.

doriangrey on February 23, 2010 at 7:20 AM

Hot Air is being overwhelmed with pro-homosexual messages. The message is clear: it’s a pro-gay website. Now, watch Hot Air drift off into obscurity. Michelle sold just in time.

apacalyps on February 22, 2010 at 11:59 PM

We shall see how many people bolt both this website and CPAC for the Value Voters Summit.

Squid Shark on February 23, 2010 at 7:20 AM

The last time we had a gay thread I commented about this. I should go back and look for it but I don’t have the time.
I had been curious about something. What is it gay men really like? Why would gay’s really want to join the military. Well, I had found an excellent article on just that. It seems many women are not the only ones turned on by a handsome man in a uniform. Google, if you dare, “gay military porn” and you will find that, in the gay community, there is a big affection for straight handsome men in uniform. Not gay men, but straight men in uniform.

Sure, it’s all about God and country. Gays just want to serve there nation. Sorry, it’s really just about lust and power.
Yeah, it’s a little hard to believe that’s all it’s really about. Take a look in the gay community, if you can stomach it. Tell me it’s not about anything else.

JellyToast on February 23, 2010 at 7:23 AM

This argument gets thrown right out the window, considering more and more high-ranking military officials are saying “you know what? The military can totally do this.” I think THEY have some understanding of the military culture, and yet they believe it can work out.

Vyce on February 23, 2010 at 7:11 AM

Of course it can happen. The military has long been a vehicle for social engineering by liberals who secretly loathe the military. They don’t understand the military culture. Nevertheless, by God, lift DADT and the gays will swish in by the hundreds to join the military. In the meantime, those who know that the homosexual lifestyle are told to shut up, ignore their core values and salute smartly. It’s utter BS. The DOD and the filthy lying coward in the White House has a duty to respect all servicemembers not just the perverts.

highhopes on February 23, 2010 at 7:29 AM

J.E. Dyer on February 23, 2010 at 1:01 AM

Well said. Even when I was in they didn’t want to pursue sexual harassment issues against gays. I know from being grabbed in the shower several times and the chain of command did NOTHING.

The people in this poll have no right to an opinion as far as I’m concerned. The military is not like any other work place and civilians don’t understand anything about it at all.

The problem is they think they do.

Enlisted women and men do not share showers, bathrooms or bedrooms, do they? Why is that?

dogsoldier on February 23, 2010 at 7:34 AM

You’ll be sorry…The overheard costs for commanders who have to deal with boy girl issues is huge,now…Gays will add a new dimension…Headquarters units are full of pregnant women who are non-deployable. As well, the thousands of Equal Opportunity complaints generated by women who don’t want to serve anymore or who are trying to attack a senior NCO or Officer are a net negative, disruptive, and a huge waste of time…Pre-deployment briefs are more a laundry list of boy girl what not to do lists than they are mission oriented. Commanders are doing the work to make all this work. Ask them if they want to further sexualize the military. Polling persons who know nothing of this subject is destructive. Ask the commanders…

Nozzle on February 23, 2010 at 8:14 AM

Let the gay mafia attack the NBA or NFL…Leave the world’s best military alone…Its about fighting the nation’s battles, stupid, its not about social justice…

Nozzle on February 23, 2010 at 8:16 AM

What’s next???Because the entitelement class never stops. Today its gay issues, tomorrow will be trans-sexual issues, then Druids, and so on…

Nozzle on February 23, 2010 at 8:18 AM

They’ll vote with their feet…Many of our best and brightest combat troops will leave. The old saying is its not hard until its stupid. Start making our troops spend an inoridinate amount of time “protecting” the new gay entitlement class rather than practicing the art of war and thousands will leave…

Nozzle on February 23, 2010 at 8:24 AM

I’m not surprised by this poll. I just think most people have gay family members that aren’t hiding it, and attitudes have changed.

Of course, there’s still some people who worry over nonsense.

AnninCA on February 23, 2010 at 8:33 AM

They only have to shoot straight.

Mr. Joe on February 23, 2010 at 8:37 AM

J.E. Dyer on February 23, 2010 at 1:01 AM

Very well said.
Do our top Generals who have said that they are okay with DADT changing WANT the storm to come? They keep mentioning that OTHER armies have changed but there is something they don’t mention- that the US owns the title of having the most litigious (sp) lawsuit loving legal system hands down.

When everything breaks down in the military between gays/muslim/ women/ HIV carriers being allowed to serve/ long deployments etc are these Generals hoping that there will be an aftermath to clean it up and go back to square one? There are those that love good storms and yell at the skies ” bring it on” but most of us would rather it pass south of us.

journeyintothewhirlwind on February 23, 2010 at 9:01 AM

Nozzle on February 23, 2010 at 8:18 AM

Too late, at least for the Druids. Air Force Academy Gives Pagans, Druids and Wiccans Place To Worship

BohicaTwentyTwo on February 23, 2010 at 9:04 AM

They’ll vote with their feet…Many of our best and brightest combat troops will leave

I dont know about you, but the of ones who I have known that claim that they will leave if deh gays come out, the only people who think they are the best and brightest are themselves.

Squid Shark on February 23, 2010 at 9:18 AM

It’s only the beginning, guys. Start to deconstruct discipline and morals and there’s noone to account to anymore. Watch that gay weddings in our beautiful military chapels will be next. They won’t stop with being “open” and using our military as a cruising ground. Being in the U.S. military is about discipline and fitting in to work as a unit which is what makes our men and women in the military the best in the world. We’re not Sweden, thank God. Individual open sexual expession does not belong and the military is not the place for this nonsense. They need to choose a different career.

mozalf on February 23, 2010 at 9:21 AM

It’s only the beginning, guys. Start to deconstruct discipline and morals and there’s noone to account to anymore. Watch that gay weddings in our beautiful military chapels will be next. They won’t stop with being “open” and using our military as a cruising ground. Being in the U.S. military is about discipline and fitting in to work as a unit which is what makes our men and women in the military the best in the world. We’re not Sweden, thank God. Individual open sexual expession does not belong and the military is not the place for this nonsense. They need to choose a different career.

mozalf on February 23, 2010 at 9:21 AM

Yes, gays should go to our universities instead and then we can watch gay weddings in the beautiful chapels on campuses. Your logic is clear.

thuja on February 23, 2010 at 9:36 AM

Nozzle on February 23, 2010 at 8:14 AM

Totally agree, the amount of time spent on training, discipline and counseling, due to PC social engineering, is inordinate and it degrades the mission. There is no question. Social engineering costs money and lives.

But no one who wants to get promoted is going to speak out. The position is untenable.

I’m glad I’m getting out before we have to have cake cutting ceremonies for gay history month.

NoDonkey on February 23, 2010 at 9:44 AM

If Hot-Air pushes pro-gay, or gay tolerance, in military or otherwise, I, for one, am out of here. (BTW I think your stats of percentage who support gays serving opening in the military are bunk.)

robm on February 23, 2010 at 10:47 AM

What is it gay men really like? Why would gay’s really want to join the military.

Hard as it is for your narrow mind to conceive, they are just people like any one else.

Grow Fins on February 23, 2010 at 10:50 AM

I’m sorry, I just don’t see what the big deal is about gays serving in the military.

If they want to serve this country and do so in an honorable way, then what’s the problem?

Besides, it’s not like changing DADT would suddenly allow gays to serve – they’ve been quietly serving for years.

I just think this is an entirely different issue than the morality/sinfulness question and the issue of same-sex marriage.

Religious_Zealot on February 23, 2010 at 10:50 AM

.

I just think most people have gay family members that aren’t hiding it, and attitudes have changed.

Of course, there’s still some people who worry over nonsense.

AnninCA on February 23, 2010 at 8:33 AM

Typical dick-headed thinking. Most people “feeeel” one way, so it must be right. Most people voted for Obama.

Most people don’t know their ass from their elbow, and at best can assess the current mood and fad.

Bet you can tell me what Ellen’s up to lately.

JiangxiDad on February 23, 2010 at 10:51 AM

Hot Air is being overwhelmed with pro-homosexual messages. The message is clear: it’s a pro-gay website. Now, watch Hot Air drift off into obscurity. Michelle sold just in time.

apacalyps

Good. I hope you leave.

Grow Fins on February 23, 2010 at 10:52 AM

Hard as it is for your narrow mind to conceive, they are just people like any one else.

Grow Fins on February 23, 2010 at 10:50 AM

LOL. Apparently not. They are a special class of people deserving of special rights and protections based upon their differing genetic make-up–haven’t you heard? Jeez, your tag-team with BlandinCA is so freakin tiresome!

JiangxiDad on February 23, 2010 at 10:52 AM

If that poll is correct it’s because the majority of people have not served in the military and have ben brainwashed by by the deviant society we live in. We have the best military in the world but it will go down fast if we keep going with all this PC nonsense. Having served in the military and seen the western european model which is not a military but for the most part but a social club. Except for the British the other european countries don’t have a military that will fight.

apoole on February 23, 2010 at 10:53 AM

Good. I hope you leave.

Grow Fins on February 23, 2010 at 10:52 AM

Of course you do, that’s your job silly.

JiangxiDad on February 23, 2010 at 10:53 AM

Typical dick-headed thinking. Most people “feeeel” one way, so it must be right. Most people voted for Obama.

Most people don’t know their ass from their elbow, and at best can assess the current mood and fad.

Bet you can tell me what Ellen’s up to lately.

Hey, the poll suggests that most people, even those identifying with conservatives, simply disagree with you.

You may just have to accept that one. :)

AnninCA on February 23, 2010 at 10:55 AM

Most people don’t know their ass from their elbow, and at best can assess the current mood and fad.

Spoken like a true… well, what? Certainly not someone who believes in the American people. You should change your name to JiangxiHamilton.

“Your people, sir, is a great beast.” (Alexander Hamilton 1792)

Grow Fins on February 23, 2010 at 10:55 AM

special rights

Special rights? The right to be who you are without fear of persecution? Just like special rights for black people, for women, for the poor, right?

Grow Fins on February 23, 2010 at 10:57 AM

Yes, gays should go to our universities instead and then we can watch gay weddings in the beautiful chapels on campuses. Your logic is clear.

thuja on February 23, 2010 at 9:36 AM

Nice try but universities aren’t based on discipline and moral regulations (which is why they’re so screwed up to begin with) created for the good of the overall units and communal living. Religion and the military have rules, laws, standards that gay activists hate and despise. They would love nothing better than to dismantle the only stabilities and obstacles that stand in their way. Definitely not wanting to fit in and get along with the rest of us. Only cram their sexual lifestyles down our throats at whatever costs. Doesn’t sound healthy to me.

mozalf on February 23, 2010 at 11:01 AM

Anyway, it’s good to see that people support this change. DADT has outlived its usefulness.

At this point, it’s downright hypocritical as policy.

AnninCA on February 23, 2010 at 11:02 AM

Hey, the poll suggests that most people, even those identifying with conservatives, simply disagree with you.

You may just have to accept that one. :)

AnninCA on February 23, 2010 at 10:55 AM

Moron. I didn’t say most people agreed with me. I said what people agree about doesn’t make it so. Jesus, i wish HA administered an IQ test before people are allowed to comment.

JiangxiDad on February 23, 2010 at 11:04 AM

Only cram their sexual lifestyles down our throats at whatever costs.

Interesting metaphor.

Grow Fins on February 23, 2010 at 11:05 AM

Jesus, i wish HA administered an IQ test before people are allowed to comment.

..and vote.

Grow Fins on February 23, 2010 at 11:06 AM

Spoken like a true… well, what? Certainly not someone who believes in the American people.

Believes “in?” I believe that like most people, they’ll do right with good leadership, and must be shown the way. That’s what our institutions were supposed to be for. Absent that, they falter, like anyone else. Read history and literature. (Go back to 7th grade and start with Lord of the Flies.)

Ah, what the hell. Who cares what u do. You and Ann can deserve HA if you can wrangle it away from others :)

JiangxiDad on February 23, 2010 at 11:09 AM

..and vote.

Grow Fins on February 23, 2010 at 11:06 AM

4sure.

JiangxiDad on February 23, 2010 at 11:09 AM

Interesting metaphor.

Grow Fins on February 23, 2010 at 11:05 AM

yes, stipulated. We know,anyone who condemns/criticizes the current gay agenda is really a secret homosexual.

JiangxiDad on February 23, 2010 at 11:10 AM

Interesting metaphor.

Grow Fins on February 23, 2010 at 11:05 AM

Thanks! You like? Deliberate double-entendre, Fins.

yes, stipulated. We know,anyone who condemns/criticizes the current gay agenda is really a secret homosexual.

JiangxiDad on February 23, 2010 at 11:10 AM

In your dreams, Jiangxi.

mozalf on February 23, 2010 at 11:13 AM

Anyway, it’s good to see that people support this change. DADT has outlived its usefulness.

At this point, it’s downright hypocritical as policy.

AnninCA

Are you a soldier who deals with them? Seems changing DADT should be a decision only for those in the military to make; not civilians with a progressive immoral statement to make.

IntheNet on February 23, 2010 at 11:17 AM

This argument gets thrown right out the window, considering more and more high-ranking military officials are saying “you know what? The military can totally do this.” I think THEY have some understanding of the military culture, and yet they believe it can work out.

Vyce on February 23, 2010 at 7:11 AM

This comment illustrates perfectly the problem. “high-ranking military officials” live in a completely different WORLD in the military than the enlisted people who will be most affected by this. How the hell would they know? Do they live in a barracks or a dorm? Um no, they don’t. Do they have even a tiny clue about life in that environment?

They may think they do and civvies may also, but both groups know absolutely zero.

Enlisted men and women do not share barracks or dorm rooms do they? Do they share showers and bathrooms?

That pretty much ends the debate.

dogsoldier on February 23, 2010 at 11:21 AM

I really don’t understand the argument that having gays serve openly in the military will undermine morale and discipline. Gays already serve, their fellow soldiers already know who they are in large part, and the command studiously looks the other way. DADT is a charade, and I think all would be better off if the military no longer had to play that game.

The money question is, how does repeal of DADT affect mission readiness? And the answer is, it doesn’t. Repeal DADT.

entropent on February 23, 2010 at 11:27 AM

Change we don’t want. People, like some of those here, think that because the polls say something is popular that it is right to do. Obama, had good poll numbers when he was elected. Does that mean it was a good idea to put him is office. NO. Homosexuality is wrong and should be cured not given in to. A man shall leave his mother and father, cleave to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh. That’s the law of the universe. Get used to it.

inchdeep on February 23, 2010 at 11:28 AM

Special rights? The right to be who you are without fear of persecution? Just like special rights for black people, for women, for the poor, right?

Grow Fins on February 23, 2010 at 10:57 AM

OT, but it’s ridiculously telling that you’d lump “the poor” into that group. As if that just how they’re born and how they’ll stay.

Huzzah for the progressive caste system.

TheUnrepentantGeek on February 23, 2010 at 11:30 AM

Believes “in?” I believe that like most people, they’ll do right with good leadership, and must be shown the way. That’s what our institutions were supposed to be for. Absent that, they falter, like anyone else. Read history and literature. (Go back to 7th grade and start with Lord of the Flies.)

Ah, what the hell. Who cares what u do. You and Ann can deserve HA if you can wrangle it away from others :)

I thought you conservatives were all about fundamental human nature, absolute truths and the like (innate desire for liberty, God-given qualities etc.). This certainly reads like some sort of paternalistic (governmental–gasp!!) model of ‘shaping’ peoples’ behaviors and attitudes. Which is it?

Grow Fins on February 23, 2010 at 11:31 AM

OT, but it’s ridiculously telling that you’d lump “the poor” into that group. As if that just how they’re born and how they’ll stay.

Huzzah for the progressive caste system.

No. Poor people have a right to equal rights under the law. Just like everyone.

Grow Fins on February 23, 2010 at 11:32 AM

Oh … and as for gays in the military …

Yeah. Some of our guys will be uncomfortable, they’ll play a couple practical jokes, and then they’ll get over it. The end.

Then they get back to killing people and breaking things.

Hysterics probably aren’t warranted.

TheUnrepentantGeek on February 23, 2010 at 11:33 AM

I really don’t understand the argument that having gays serve openly in the military will undermine morale and discipline. Gays already serve, their fellow soldiers already know who they are in large part, and the command studiously looks the other way. DADT is a charade, and I think all would be better off if the military no longer had to play that game.

The money question is, how does repeal of DADT affect mission readiness? And the answer is, it doesn’t. Repeal DADT.

entropent on February 23, 2010 at 11:27 AM

It comes down to accepting and respecting the codes, rules and regulations set by the military. A person who follows orders and accepts authority. If someone needs to express themselves sexually and go against what the rest of his or her unit believes and honors then perhaps they should find a more appropriate line of work because they don’t want to fit in. Somewhere where they don’t put others at risk or cause dissention because of selfish desires. There are plenty of opportunities out there where they are free to express their sexuality without putting others at risk and destroying our military.

mozalf on February 23, 2010 at 11:33 AM

We know,anyone who condemns/criticizes the current gay agenda is really a secret homosexual.

No, not that simple. I guess I just don’t understand exactly what is being condemned and criticized. Is it just that you find the idea of anal sex repellent?

Grow Fins on February 23, 2010 at 11:34 AM

No. Poor people have a right to equal rights under the law. Just like everyone.

Grow Fins on February 23, 2010 at 11:32 AM

Nice save, but your Freudian slip is still showing.

TheUnrepentantGeek on February 23, 2010 at 11:34 AM

TheUnrepentantGeek

+100

The hysterics seem to have a very low opinion of the adaptability of the American soldier.

Grow Fins on February 23, 2010 at 11:35 AM

Nice save, but your Freudian slip is still showing.

Ooh Freud. What does he have to say about homophobia?

Grow Fins on February 23, 2010 at 11:36 AM

Just curious anyone bother to poll the service members,somehow it strikes me that thier opinion might be relevent.

heshtesh on February 23, 2010 at 11:38 AM

If someone needs to express themselves sexually and go against what the rest of his or her unit believes and honors then perhaps they should find a more appropriate line of work because they don’t want to fit in. Somewhere where they don’t put others at risk or cause dissention because of selfish desires. There are plenty of opportunities out there where they are free to express their sexuality without putting others at risk and destroying our military.

mozalf on February 23, 2010 at 11:33 AM

1) What do you mean by “express their sexuality?” Gays in the military are not the same gays that parade down Folsom Street. No one, man or woman, gay or straight, is expressing sexuality in uniform.

2) How do gays in the military put anyone at risk?

3) How do you know what the rest of a gay’s unit believes and honors? People in the military have a very wide variety of opinions, just like anyone else.

entropent on February 23, 2010 at 11:40 AM

So the new HOT AIR management wants to chuck “don’t ask, don’t tell.”

The new military can’t manage special relations between members of the opposite sexes (most women don’t serve out their tours, for reason of pregnancy), cohesion is really going to be destroyed by same sex special relationships.

Warriors can accept hazardous duty if they know they drew that card by a fair luck of the draw. Start allowing special relationships, the kinds that are bonded behind closed doors, and the special relationships boy-boy, girl-boy, girl-girl will destroy organizations that work cheek-by-jowl long hours because the suspicion will be that those who behave themselves will get hazardous duty before someone’s lover.

So the new management’s bought a soap box? Can someone refer me to a new conservative news clearing house. We’ve been compromised.

Too bad, HOT AIR started out well.

Limpet6 on February 23, 2010 at 11:41 AM

Do we call it unfair if police don’t hire one-legged midgets? Or the blind? Sometimes the job description determines who is hired.

I don’t pretend to know much about the military. But my pastor just retired from 30 years as a chaplain, and he says it just won’t work, for reasons already covered. Those of us who don’t know should listen to those who do, look at how it has worked out where it has been tried.

To compromise effectiveness for “fairness” is nuts.

jodetoad on February 23, 2010 at 11:42 AM

As I’ve said before, the only time in my adult life that I had to shower with people of my sex was in the Army Reserve. If I’d thought anyone was ogling me, an already-uncomfortable situation would have seemed far worse.

If we are going to ignore sexual orientation, why not require both sexes to shower together? Who seriously thinks that would be a good idea?

Military life is difficult enough; why add another stressor?

KyMouse on February 23, 2010 at 11:43 AM

I will not continue with this website if it becomes a pro-homo base to corrupt true conservative values.

bperiwinkle on February 23, 2010 at 11:45 AM

Well, whether people like it or not, DADT is going to be repealed, and there are plenty of spokespeople from military ranks that support the move. They are now speaking out.

AnninCA on February 23, 2010 at 11:49 AM

Special rights? The right to be who you are without fear of persecution? Just like special rights for black people, for women, for the poor, right?

Grow Fins on February 23, 2010 at 10:57 AM

So you think all gays are the same as “black people” (who btw can be gay) for the same as all “women” (who btw can be gay)?
A gay black women is a what…trifecta?
A black man can walk into a any restroom…so where does a gay man walk into. Until this military thing came up, gay men were always stating that they were “women trapped in a man’s body”, that was their slogan in the 60′s and 70′s. Then they realized that was not good for the military, so they began changing their marketing theme.
The fact is, on a whole, the gay community is not “normal”…ever see the pictures of the Folsom parade? Now find a major gay magazine or publication or group that denounces those actions. Bath houses are embraced by the gay community…not by the heterosexual community.
Gay is a sexual, not a cultural group. Their identity is purely based on a sexual need, a desire they care (most of them, or at least the groups representing them) not to contain.
Folsom street fair: (adult content, be aware)
Here
Here, watch out, warning
Here….this is about the children on the streets during this fair, how sweet…do not click and follow the stories unless you really want to know what the gay lifestyle is about.
This is on public streets, condoned and enjoyed by the city of SF, and supported by the gay community that just wants to be “normal”…

right2bright on February 23, 2010 at 11:49 AM

1) What do you mean by “express their sexuality?” Gays in the military are not the same gays that parade down Folsom Street. No one, man or woman, gay or straight, is expressing sexuality in uniform.

2) How do gays in the military put anyone at risk?

3) How do you know what the rest of a gay’s unit believes and honors? People in the military have a very wide variety of opinions, just like anyone else.

entropent on February 23, 2010 at 11:40 AM

Discipline. Plain and simple. Gays that obviously. That sounds dangerous to me.

mozalf on February 23, 2010 at 11:49 AM

Is it just that you find the idea of anal sex repellent?

Grow Fins on February 23, 2010 at 11:34 AM

Click on my link above and tell me how you know these people are “normal”.

right2bright on February 23, 2010 at 11:53 AM

1) What do you mean by “express their sexuality?” Gays in the military are not the same gays that parade down Folsom Street. No one, man or woman, gay or straight, is expressing sexuality in uniform.

2) How do gays in the military put anyone at risk?

3) How do you know what the rest of a gay’s unit believes and honors? People in the military have a very wide variety of opinions, just like anyone else.

entropent on February 23, 2010 at 11:40 AM

Discipline. Plain and simple. Gays that want to express their sexuality without regard to the consequences don’t seem all that reliable to me. That sounds dangerous to me.

mozalf on February 23, 2010 at 11:49 AM

mozalf on February 23, 2010 at 11:53 AM

http://www.vetvoice.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=3707

The only poll of the military itself shows declining support for DADT.

The poll, however, is not scientific. It underrepresents the groups that would be inclined to want to see a change in the policy.

Presumeably, then, the support is even higher for repealing the policy.

AnninCA on February 23, 2010 at 11:55 AM

I thought you conservatives were all about fundamental human nature, absolute truths and the like (innate desire for liberty, God-given qualities etc.). This certainly reads like some sort of paternalistic (governmental–gasp!!) model of ’shaping’ peoples’ behaviors and attitudes. Which is it?

Grow Fins on February 23, 2010 at 11:31 AM

When you can’t respond specifically to what I said, you switch to “you conservatives.” I’m not addressing you as “we conservatives.” I’m addressing you as me.

JiangxiDad on February 23, 2010 at 11:55 AM

I’m personally anxious for all these “gay rights” issues to get thrown under the bus, if for no other reason than that it will free up some homosexuals to not simply auto-check the box marked “Democrat” on ever ballot they come across. On the spectrum of threats to not only America but western civilization itself, from the fiscal catastrophes of the welfare state to the demographic and military catastrophes of Islamism, any negatives that may be associated with homosexuality are about as threatening as a squirrel.

Blacklake on February 23, 2010 at 11:57 AM

Things were better here when Michelle owned the site…

TBenton on February 23, 2010 at 12:01 PM

Discipline. Plain and simple. Gays that obviously. That sounds dangerous to me.

mozalf on February 23, 2010 at 11:49 AM

Look, I served in the US Army from September 1981 to March 1993 (before DADT was implemented). I was stationed in CA, TX, MA, HI, and Korea. I knew plenty of gays, it was generally a very open secret. Even before DADT was implemented, the command did not make an issue of it unless the gay soldier wanted to get out of his/her contract, or screwed up so badly they needed an excuse to get rid of them. Fellow soldiers, if they were uncomfortable with it, made jokes, and if they weren’t, made friends.

I read some of these comments, and I just don’t understand. Some of the comments seem driven by a personal revulsion to homosexuality, and that’s fine, but it’s not a good basis for policy. How is having an openly gay soldier a breach of discipline? How does it impair unit readiness? Someone pointed out that there are a lot of female soldiers that get pregnant. That’s not a problem with gays.

The issue comes down to mission readiness. A soldier is a soldier. Black or white, gay or straight, a soldier is green before anything else.

And for what it is worth, I have had gay soldiers ask me out. I said no. That was the end of it. Gays in the military wasn’t a big deal in the 80′s, and attitudes of the new generation are far more accepting. It will be even less of an issue now.

entropent on February 23, 2010 at 12:04 PM

Sure, it’s all about God and country. Gays just want to serve there nation. Sorry, it’s really just about lust and power.
Yeah, it’s a little hard to believe that’s all it’s really about. Take a look in the gay community, if you can stomach it. Tell me it’s not about anything else.

JellyToast on February 23, 2010 at 7:23 AM

Jelly, whatever problem you have is no small thing. Bigot. Coward. Ignorant fundamentalist Christian. Guessing you’re all those things and more. Get out into the real world. Educate yourself beyond the very narrow and small world you appear to live in. Check out entropent’s post above as a starting point on this issue. Your type is an embarrassment to the conservative movement.

dakine on February 23, 2010 at 12:18 PM

Gays in the military wasn’t a big deal in the 80’s, and attitudes of the new generation are far more accepting. It will be even less of an issue now.

entropent on February 23, 2010 at 12:04 PM

Far more accepting doesn’t take into account those serving who do not want to be asked out or live side by side with those who choose to practice a perverted lifestyle in their off duty time. You completely disregard their rights in your zeal to weaken the military. That is exactly what will happen with the chaos you advocate.

highhopes on February 23, 2010 at 12:20 PM

Look, I served in the US Army from September 1981 to March 1993 (before DADT was implemented). I was stationed in CA, TX, MA, HI, and Korea. I knew plenty of gays, it was generally a very open secret. Even before DADT was implemented, the command did not make an issue of it unless the gay soldier wanted to get out of his/her contract, or screwed up so badly they needed an excuse to get rid of them. Fellow soldiers, if they were uncomfortable with it, made jokes, and if they weren’t, made friends.

I read some of these comments, and I just don’t understand. Some of the comments seem driven by a personal revulsion to homosexuality, and that’s fine, but it’s not a good basis for policy. How is having an openly gay soldier a breach of discipline? How does it impair unit readiness? Someone pointed out that there are a lot of female soldiers that get pregnant. That’s not a problem with gays.

The issue comes down to mission readiness. A soldier is a soldier. Black or white, gay or straight, a soldier is green before anything else.

And for what it is worth, I have had gay soldiers ask me out. I said no. That was the end of it. Gays in the military wasn’t a big deal in the 80’s, and attitudes of the new generation are far more accepting. It will be even less of an issue now.

entropent on February 23, 2010 at 12:04 PM

Then why fix something that ain’t broke by your logic. Keep your genitals and your cravings private like everyone else. Why come “out” if not to use the military as some kind of social experiment and a cruising ground for sex. Can you say “NAMBLA”? They have rights too, then.

mozalf on February 23, 2010 at 12:22 PM

bperiwinkle on February 23, 2010 at 11:45 AM

I didn’t know anger at homosexuals was a Conservative Value? Reagan fought against the Brigg’s Initiative that would have kicked homosexual teachers out of schools, I guess he was pro-gay huh and we should treat him as nothing more than a RINO!

I’ll quote Goldwater.

There is no position on which people are so immovable as their religious beliefs. There is no more powerful ally one can claim in a debate than Jesus Christ, or God, or Allah, or whatever one calls this supreme being. But like any powerful weapon, the use of God’s name on one’s behalf should be used sparingly. The religious factions that are growing throughout our land are not using their religious clout with wisdom. They are trying to force government leaders into following their position 100 percent. If you disagree with these religious groups on a particular moral issue, they complain, they threaten you with a loss of money or votes or both. I’m frankly sick and tired of the political preachers across this country telling me as a citizen that if I want to be a moral person, I must believe in ‘A,’ ‘B,’ ‘C,’ and ‘D.’ Just who do they think they are? And from where do they presume to claim the right to dictate their moral beliefs to me?

Holger on February 23, 2010 at 12:22 PM

The poll, however, is not scientific. It underrepresents the groups that would be inclined to want to see a change in the policy.

Presumeably, then, the support is even higher for repealing the policy.

AnninCA on February 23, 2010 at 11:55 AM

That’s a huge assumption. With leaps in logic like that you have a future in global warming research.

The fact of the matter is that the DOD just had the first meeting on repeal of DADT last Friday. It will be months before they report out but presumably they will do a better job quantifying the views of the military than your presumptions.

highhopes on February 23, 2010 at 12:26 PM

considering more and more high-ranking military officials are saying “you know what? The military can totally do this.” I think THEY have some understanding of the military culture, and yet they believe it can work out.

Vyce on February 23, 2010 at 7:11 AM

I wonder how many of these high-ranking military officials live in an open bay barracks? Sure they may have a remington raider work for them that’s gay, but is that the same as living with them?

I spent a number of years in the military, and actually I could care less if gays serve openly or not. All I would ask is that the guy sharing my fighting hole kept his hands off me except for rendering first aid, and that he pointed his rifle in the right direction and fire it.

McCain Hater on February 23, 2010 at 12:28 PM

Jelly, whatever problem you have is no small thing. Bigot. Coward. Ignorant fundamentalist Christian. Guessing you’re all those things and more. Get out into the real world. Educate yourself beyond the very narrow and small world you appear to live in. Check out entropent’s post above as a starting point on this issue. Your type is an embarrassment to the conservative movement.

dakine on February 23, 2010 at 12:18 PM

Nothing motivates someone to explore a new perspective like name calling!

Feeling righteous yet for having called out the nasty “fundamentalist” (whatever the hell that means today) yet?

TheUnrepentantGeek on February 23, 2010 at 12:28 PM

Yes, by all means, poll civilians to determine what’s best for moral in the military.

All those polls during the heat of the Iraq war sure were helpful.

spmat on February 23, 2010 at 12:33 PM

*morale

spmat on February 23, 2010 at 12:33 PM

My logic for repeal, as I stated in my original post, is that DADT is an elaborate charade. A game. A fiction. As such, it is pointless. And yes, it is broken. When everybody has to studiously ignore the elephant in the living room, the system is indeed broken. The only thing it does is allow gays who signed a contract, to get out of it if they want to.

entropent on February 23, 2010 at 12:35 PM

TheUnrepentantGeek on February 23, 2010 at 12:28 PM

Calls ‘em like I sees ‘em Geek. And you know very well what “fundamentalist Christian” means.

dakine on February 23, 2010 at 12:46 PM

I’m going to try an explain this in a different way then any I’ve seen previously. For background purposes, I’m a USMC Veteran.

So, let’s say Allahpundit lives in a nice apartment building in NYC. Let’s further say that it’s an above-average rent building; one in which most people can’t afford and the residents are quite proud to reside. And even further, the residents must navigate though dangerous neighborhoods surrounding the building just to have the privilege of living there.

Now, lets add an element of homeless folks milling about the periphery of the building, maybe spillovers from the dangerous neighborhoods surrounding the building, or maybe their just down on their luck during the tough economic times. They’re not dangerous, deviant, or part of a criminal element; they’re just disadvantaged at the moment, or otherwise unable to afford the rent for this building. Surely some of them would like to live in Allah’s upscale building, and reap the benefits of such an abode, even if it means they still have to navigate those dangerous neighborhoods on a regular basis.

Should those homeless be allowed to move in to Allah’s building? And in doing so, is it okay to displace someone who’s been living there, or someone else on a waiting list who has the financial wherewithal to live there?

Let’s ask some people from Wyoming.

That’s the equivalent of the CNN poll.

(This is example is not meant to suggest that military members are better-advantaged or otherwise superior to anyone; nor is it meant to indicate that gays are either disadvantaged or otherwise under-privileged. Rather, it seems to me that these polls are always conducted among people who have the least personal interest in the outcome. And polls of military members are entirely unreliable on this topic- there’s just too much risk for your average LCpl to say “No, keep ‘em out” besides the fact that wartime pressures can skew the results. For the record, I’m against allowing gays to serve openly- I think it will have no discernible positive effect on the men and women serving, and can only undermine moral. I also don’t want Allah’s landlord to house the obviously otherwise homeless.)

BKeyser on February 23, 2010 at 12:48 PM

There is no reason to repeal DADT, with the exception of opening up a whole new avenue for discrimination lawsuits by gays in the military, now free to declare themselves as such.

awake on February 23, 2010 at 12:57 PM

So the new management’s bought a soap box? Can someone refer me to a new conservative news clearing house. We’ve been compromised.

Too bad, HOT AIR started out well.

Limpet6 on February 23, 2010 at 11:41 AM

Actually, I would put down this post, and all the gay stuff since CPAC down to Allah testing the limits to see when they push back. Not that AP isn’t Pro-Gay but the conclusions drawn from this Poll and the one at CPAC are absurd.

Rocks on February 23, 2010 at 1:05 PM

Blah blah blah, if the folks in the service say yes (of their own feel will and conscience), then I say yes.

Knott Buyinit on February 23, 2010 at 1:08 PM

It won’t end here. There will be fresh demands as soon as DADT is abolished. We are never going to get the minuscule gay vote, Republicans are being used to further a grievance agenda based on special rights. A mistake regardless of what anyone thinks of individual gay people.

echosyst on February 23, 2010 at 1:10 PM

Would the same 69% support their daughters being forced into coed locker rooms and/or sleeping quarters in school?

Wine_N_Dine on February 23, 2010 at 1:12 PM

CNN poll…hummmmmmmm…69% of like minded liberals…give me a break dude, no kool aid needed1

FloridaMike on February 23, 2010 at 1:15 PM

Wine_N_Dine – DARN. GOOD. POINT. Kudos.

echosyst on February 23, 2010 at 1:19 PM

Would the same 69% support their daughters being forced into coed locker rooms and/or sleeping quarters in school?

What about the sons? Or does “daughters” have a greater charge in your cheap and obvious strategy of appealing to emotion?

Grow Fins on February 23, 2010 at 1:21 PM

Would the same 69% support their daughters being forced into coed locker rooms and/or sleeping quarters in school?

Wine_N_Dine on February 23, 2010 at 1:12 PM

They do send them off to school with other girls knowing that some are l3sbians. Straight guys will be more of a threat to the girls than gays will be.

dedalus on February 23, 2010 at 1:22 PM

Grow Fins on February 23, 2010 at 1:21 PM

Men are a lot less likely to mind co-ed locker rooms, dumbass.

Darth Executor on February 23, 2010 at 1:23 PM

Just because everyone is doing it, that doesn’t make it right. Lets not jump on the “Gay is cool” bandwagon, because it most certainly is not.

SGinNC on February 23, 2010 at 1:23 PM

SGinNC on February 23, 2010 at 1:23 PM

Hot Air has become butt pirate central. It certainly is “cool” around here.

Darth Executor on February 23, 2010 at 1:27 PM

That’s true dedalus but they aren’t forced to shower and sleep together…well not yet anyway. Not at least till the next obamaczar calls for it.

Wine_N_Dine on February 23, 2010 at 1:34 PM

No one but the GOProud booed at CPAC They started protesting even though the man wasn’t expected to speak about homosexuals.
GOProud are not conservative and had no reason to be at CPAC.
CNN polls are never accurate ,never have correct samplings, always sway heavily for progressives on ever issue.
It is CNN after all, one of the least trusted news stations. That distrust is for a reason.
CNN polls also stated in the past that most people in Cali and Maine were for gay marriage. We wouldn’t even know their poll wasn’t accurate if an actual vote hadn’t taken place.
I have yet to meet one person who is a Republican or Indie that doesn’t at least have some objection to gays “serving openly” in the military. Most are strongly opposed.

LeeSeneca on February 23, 2010 at 1:35 PM

Homosexuals are a small minority of the population. If the military cannot perform their jobs in the company of qualified homosexuals, then the military isn’t really teaching these young men professionalism, are they? This is not rocket science, this is how to maintain professionalism in the midst of anyone you would encounter in real life. If they ever decide to leave the military and get a job in the civilian world this is something they will eventually have to come to grips with. What is the problem with homosexuals? If they misbehave or sexually harass a fellow soldier then they are in violation of regulations and will be disciplined.

LevStrauss on February 23, 2010 at 1:35 PM

The true test comes when 2 gay men have a relationship within a unit. Depending on the chain of command in that unit it could be a major problem. Even if favoritism is not going on, the perception will be that there is. I am still not clear on why people have to announce their sexuality in a military setting.

echosyst on February 23, 2010 at 1:38 PM

That’s true dedalus but they aren’t forced to shower and sleep together…well not yet anyway. Not at least till the next obamaczar calls for it.

Wine_N_Dine on February 23, 2010 at 1:34 PM

I agree that the military is different from civilian life and each branch needs to address its own issues.

However, if Obama has a czar working on l3sbian showers that could be worth a look. Another argument for transparency in government.

dedalus on February 23, 2010 at 1:40 PM

How do gay showers solve the problem? It creates a problem of a different kind.

echosyst on February 23, 2010 at 1:42 PM

Republicans should remember 2 numbers, 31 and 0. That is the record so far on states that have put gay marriage on the ballot. So far it is a blowout in favor of traditional marriage.

echosyst on February 23, 2010 at 1:44 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6