Comments on: DADT Is Still An Issue for GOP Base

By: William Tripp

William Tripp — Mon, 24 Sep 2012 13:35:42 +0000

Why is the election this year have candidates who want to run this country like it got ran in the thirties and forties. Let’s go forward and not backwards.

By: Donny D.

Donny D. — Sat, 22 Sep 2012 14:32:52 +0000

And a bunch of the people in “the base” want sodomy laws to be legal again.

By: Boo

Boo — Wed, 19 Sep 2012 17:16:05 +0000

I think at this point any attempt to re-implement it would involve hearings with a bunch of generals on camera saying there’s no real point in doing so.

By: SharonB

SharonB — Wed, 19 Sep 2012 17:10:15 +0000

The repeal as a goal is found in their 2012 party platform. The language about review of personnel and administrative policies for the military includes women’s reproductive health care options, combat related career opportunities, and DADT .

By: JohnAGJ

JohnAGJ — Wed, 19 Sep 2012 00:05:43 +0000

This is one I’m not worried about. Yeah, the social cons would love to bring back DADT or something worse but haven’t come to terms with the fact that their day is long past on this and even their own party has little stomach for a renewal of this fight. If Romney wins I do not believe that he would pursue this, pro-DADT legislation being sent his way or through executive action. I also don’t believe such a bill could get through the Senate – even if the GOP retakes control of that body. Should I be wrong about this, I’m confident that it would be struck down by the courts because it has been repealed for too long for the government to make an argument that could be given a pass on this now. No, DADT is dead. Vote for or against Romney based on other issues, not because of this one.

By: MsRowena

MsRowena — Tue, 18 Sep 2012 23:57:42 +0000

Have you boys seen a picture of Rep. Jim Jordan back when he was a college wrestler? You might want to google that. Not that that has anything to do with his political views, but it odd to consider he spent a lot of time grappling with other muscley young men in skimpy outfits.

Not that there’s anything wrong with that.

By: Michael Bedwell

Michael Bedwell — Tue, 18 Sep 2012 21:23:34 +0000

Uh, with respect, y’all are forgetting that legislation is NOT required; that over 100,000 LGBs were kicked out of the military before anyone had ever heard of DADT. From early WWII until March 1, 1994, when federal law TITLE 10, Subtitle A, PART II, CHAPTER 37, Section 654 [aka DADT] took effect, they were discharged simply under internal policies of the Department of Defense, never voted on by Congress, nor required to be. So, it’s NOT just an issue of whether or not a future Congress might want to restore the law DADT or some variation, but what a future President wants, or is willing to abide that his Secretary of Defense and Joint Chiefs of Staff want.

I hasten to add that I don’t think any of these scenarios are likely to happen, but it’s important for everyone to understand all of them.