Box Turtle Bulletin

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Doesn’t Defend DADT

Timothy Kincaid

May 7th, 2008

One of the defenses made in support of continuing the military’s anti-gay Don’t Ask - Don’t Tell policy is that senior military strategists oppose gay soldiers from serving openly. Well, it doesn’t get more senior than the Chairman of the Joint Cheifs of Staff.

Speaking at West Point this weekend, Admiral Michael Mullen was asked his opinion about the impact if the incoming administration were to be supportive of gay servicemembers. According to PinkNews,

Speaking to graduating cadets at West Point military academy on Sunday, Admiral Mike Mullen said that the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy enacted by Congress in 1993 is a law that the Armed Forces follow.

“Should the law change, the military will carry that out too,” he said.

This is the second time that Mullen has appeared unfazed by the notion of openly gay soldiers. During his confirmation he told the Senate,

“I really think it is for the American people to come forward, really through this body, to both debate that policy and make changes, if that’s appropriate.

“I’d love to have Congress make its own decisions with respect to considering repeal.”

Without the public support of military leaders or prominant politicians, it is surely only a short time before this misguided policy is scrapped for good.

The Dishonesty of Elaine Donnelly

Timothy Kincaid

May 1st, 2008

Elaine Donnelly has made it her life’s mission to return the military to the 1930’s. Through her Center for Military Readiness, she agitates against gays in the military and women in combat.

While gay people make her shudder, women are grudgingly acceptable in the service - as long as they don’t fight. It’s just not very lady-like, ya know.

But while Donnelly actively campaigns to reduce equal opportunities for women in the Military Service, you’d never know that from her new anti-gay campaign. On her new website established “build an online army” to fight against “gay activists”, there’s no reference to Donnelly’s hostility towards “Pentagon feminists” or any other anti-woman policies she espouses.

Instead, Donnelly states her purpose as “Support for Military Men and Women“. [emphasis mine]

Perhaps she realizes that being both anti-woman and anti-gay may seem just a little too hateful even for those who might support her agenda of restricting the Military to heterosexuals.

And like so many anti-gays, Elaine Donnelly has given up even the slightest shred of integrity she may have ever held. To Donnelly truth is subjective and honesty inconvenient.

See Also:
Personal Cruelty
Time Magazine Relies on Non-Representative Poll Pushed by Anti-Gay Activist
More Evidence that DADT is Dead
American Family Association Picks Up The “Ailing General” Theme

Fit For Military Service

Timothy Kincaid

April 21st, 2008

The Servicemembers Legal Defense Network (SLDN) reports on the morals waivers granted to potential soldiers. The Military believes the following is acceptable within the history of their servicemember:

• manslaughter
• kidnapping or abduction
• rape, sexual assault, criminal sexual assault, incest or other sex crimes
• indecent acts or liberties with a child
• terrorist threats including bomb threats

But what would cause the complete and utter breakdown in military cohesiveness? What is that one thing that good southern Christian boys would be unable to overlook due to their upbringing and moral character? What is worse than a killer, rapist, child molester or terrorist?

They must be getting answers from Sally Kern.

Investigation into Fired Justice Department Employee

Timothy Kincaid

April 17th, 2008

NPR raised questions recently about whether Assistant U.S. Attorney Leslie A. Hagen was fired due to a rumor that she was a lesbian. Now it appears that an investigation has been opened.

When NPR first reported Hagen’s case earlier this month, Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA) asked the Inspector General’s Office and the Office of Professional Responsibility to confirm that they were looking into Hagen’s case.

Leahy and Specter — the top Democrat and Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee — received their response Monday night.

In a letter dated April 14, Glenn Fine of the Inspector General’s Office and H. Marshall Jarrett of the Office of Professional Responsibility said they are looking into whether Hagen was “discriminated against in employment decisions on the basis of alleged sexual orientation or other improper factors.”

The Washington Blade questioned Elaine Kaplan, who served as head of the U.S. Office of Special Counsel during the Clinton administration. Kaplan explained that while Clinton’s executive order - which still stands - prohibited sexual orientation discrimination, the current head of the Office of Special Counsel, Scott Bloch, has created a definition that is essentially toothless.

It’s unlikely that the Office of Special Counsel would take action in the Hagen case because it involves alleged discrimination based on her sexual orientation, not a specific “homosexual act,” Kaplan said.

But somehow I suspect that neither Leahy or Specter will accept duplicitous responses to their inquiries. Specter, in particular, can get quite cranky if he feels that some bureaucrat is not adequately addressing his committee’s concerns.

A Noble Common Trait

Timothy Kincaid

April 16th, 2008

What do the following all have in common?

Gerald Ford, 38th President of the United States

Bill Clinton, 42nd President of the United States

Dick Cheney, 46th Vice President; Secretary of Defense, Bush Sr. Administration

Barry Goldwater (”Mr. Conservative”), 1964 Republican Presidential Candidate, Senator (R - AZ), Chairman of Committee on Armed Services

William Cohen, Senator (R - MA), Secretary of Defense, Clinton Administration

Colin Powell, Secretary of State, Bush Jr., Chairman of the Joint Cheifs of Staff, Bush Sr.

John Shalikashvili, Chairman of the Joint Cheifs of Staff, Clinton administration

Lawrence J. Korb, Assistance Secretary of Defense, Reagan administration

Alan K. Simpson, Senator (R - WY), Chairman of the Veterans’ Affairs Committee, member of Iraq Study Group

All of the above public servants have an impressive knowledge of the strengths and weaknesses of the United States Military. All of them love their country and want policies that best serve the nation and its armed services.

And all of the about have at some point expressed at least a lack of convinction in the laws that keep gay men and women from serving openly. Many have been outspoken advocates for eliminating this antiquated discrimination.

Of course there are a great many more within Government and without who have varying levels of experience in or with the military who agree. And the general public is overwhelmingly in support of eliminating Don’t Ask - Don’t Tell. In fact, it’s hard to find anyone to stand up for the merits of the policy.

Its day has passed. So it’s up to us to remind Congress to do both the popular thing and the right thing and toss this moldering pile of bias in the trash bin of history.

Personal Cruelty

Timothy Kincaid

April 10th, 2008

Anti-gays often portray their attacks as being directed against a nebulous “homosexual agenda” or perhaps “the sin of homosexuality”. This is often packaged with a claim that they love individuals, or “the sinner”.

But sometimes their anti-gay activism reveals itself to be an obvious hateful attack on individuals.

For example, Tammy Baldwin has served as the representative for Wisconsin’s 2nd congressional district since 1999. And since that time Lauren Azar, her other half, has been accorded travel privileges on par with the spouses of other Congressmen. Although the House rules specify that spouses are given travel accomodations, the former House Speaker, Dennis Hastert (R-Ill), had waived the rules for Azar.

However, when Azar prepared to accompany Baldwin on a fact finding mission this year, the Pentagon blocked her from traveling on a military plane. The situation was resolved when current House Peaker Nancy Pelosi informed Defense Secretary Robert Gates that she was waiving the House rules to allow Azar to travel.

From the AP

The Pentagon still has in place its “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, which bars gays from serving openly in the military. But that had nothing to do with this case, said Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell.

“This is strictly about following our statutory guidelines and the House rules,” he said.

Morrell said that Pelosi asked Gates to honor her decision to waive House rules to allow Azar to travel and that Gates asked her to put that request in writing.

“She did so, and he — in this one case only — agreed to it,” Morrell said. “This is not a precedent by any means. This does not open the doors for life partners to travel on congressional delegations.” But Gates has agreed to review future requests on a case-by-case basis, Morrell said.

Now most living breathing people see this as a simple act of decency. Most folks would think it odd to insist that Baldwin be the sole Congressman to travel alone.

However, Elaine Donnelly and the AFA spin it differently

Elaine Donnelly of the Center for Military Readiness calls this situation “a slippery slope.” “This sets a disturbing precedent because it tends to suggest that marriage doesn’t matter, [and that] marriage of people of same-sex or any such association should be treated as the equivalent of marriage,” she contends.

Donnelly believes this gives ammunition to those who want to change the military’s policy of not allowing homosexuals in the military. “This is an incremental step forward for the gay rights agenda,” she continues. “These things are all interconnected. This radical social change doesn’t always happen overnight with a court ruling. Sometimes it comes creeping along incrementally.”

This is a single instance of a consideration granted to an associate in Congress. Donnelly’s concerns about a “slippery slope” ring hollow when compared to the assurances of the Pentagon.

So why, then, does Donnelly find Azur’s travel so objectionable? Why would she complain that Azur should not be granted passage?

Simply, because Baldwin and Azur are gay.

By her attack on the travel of a specific individual, Elaine Donnelly discredits any presumption of principled objection and reveals her agenda and herself to be petty, spiteful, and cruel.

Ex-Army Georgetown Student Opposes DADT

Timothy Kincaid

April 9th, 2008

Former Army staff sergeant William Quinn expresses why anti-gay discrimination in the US Military should end:

The current policy seems designed only to appeal to those who dislike homosexuals. When a policy’s stated purpose is to maintain high morale by allowing bigots to avoid those they dislike, it is wrong and should be abolished. President Truman once said that the racial integration of the military was “the greatest thing that ever happened to America.” His was only the first step to full integration.

Pentagon Tries to Hide Maj. Rogers’ Orientation

Timothy Kincaid

April 3rd, 2008

We commented earlier on how the mainstream media omitted all mention of Major Alan Rogers’ orientation or of his efforts to overturn the military’s ban on open gay servicemen. We told you how the Washington Post ombudsman wrote a column to repair that deliberate exclusion. Now there’s a new twist.

According to the Washington Blade, Rogers’ profile on Wikipedia has been modified

The user on Monday redacted details about Rogers that appeared on the online encyclopedia site. Information that was deleted included Rogers’ sexual orientation; the soldier’s participation in American Veterans for Equal Rights, a group that works to change military policy toward gays; and the fact that Rogers’ death helped bring the U.S. military’s casualty toll in Iraq to 4,000.

And while the individual responsible isn’t known,

The IP address attached to the deletion of the details and the posted comments is 141.116.168.135. The address belongs to a computer from the office of the Army Deputy Chief of Staff for Intelligence (G-2) at the Pentagon. The office is headed by Lt. Gen. John Kimmons, who was present at Rogers’ funeral and presented the flag from Rogers’ coffin to his cousin, *Cathy Long.

The factual information has been reinstated in the Wikipedia entry.

* Long is the cousin that was unaware of Rogers’ orientation and thought it should be left out of the Post article.

Post Ombudsman Reports on Hero’s Orientation

Timothy Kincaid

March 30th, 2008

On the 22nd, the Washington Post ran a story on the death of a war hero omitting the fact that he was gay. We, among others, found that this did a disservice to Maj. Rogers.

Rogers had been very active in the efforts to overturn Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell and I have little doubt that he would want his death to serve the same cause as his life.

Today Deborah Howell, the post’s ombbudsman wrote a column that clarified the process that went into striking this part of his life from the story. It reads as a tale of casual institutionalized heterosexism.

The reported knew of Maj. Rogers orientation and of his efforts to fight against DADT. She knew that he would want the world to know that gay men and women were fighting in Iraq with honor and dignity and giving their life for their country. The editorial staff said, “no”.

St. George first wrote a story that included his friends talking about his orientation; some at the paper felt that was the right thing to do. But the material was omitted when the story was published. Many editors discussed the issue, and it was “an agonizing decision,” one said. The decision ultimately was made by Executive Editor Len Downie, who said that there was no proof that Rogers was gay and no clear indication that, if he was, he wanted the information made public.

It is difficult to know what proof Downie required.

But within this story is, I believe, an illustration of how many heterosexuals view gay people.

Rogers’s cousin, Cathy Long of Ocala, Fla., said that she was the closest in the family to him. To her, “The Post did a wonderful job. Personally, as far as the family is concerned, we really didn’t know about this until after his death. It was in the back of our minds, but we didn’t discuss it.” She is glad The Post story did not say that he was gay. “I really feel Alan was a lot more than that.” She thought the Blade story was “self-serving whatever their cause is and that they’re trying to use Alan to do that.”

Shay Hill, his beneficiary and University of Florida roommate, said that he and Rogers were “like brothers” and that he knew Rogers was gay. “He worked to change the system from within. You don’t out yourself to make a point. Just because he’s gay should have no more relevance than I’m straight. It’s not fair to make a bigger deal out of this than it needs to be.”

Much was made that Rogers “didn’t have family”. Because to heterosexuals, decisions about life and death should be made by those with the same genes - or those linked by marriage (from which we are excluded). So a distant cousin - one Rogers didn’t feel comfortable discussing his life with - gets to decide that Rogers was “more than that”. And it matters little to her, or the straight college roommate or the straight editorial staff that the “self-serving cause” that the Blade was advocating is a cause that Rogers fought for.

Yet again straights get to decide that being gay is irrelevant and a bit of a dirty little secret. And those people that Rogers spent time with… well they are gay or socialized with gays so obviously they are just activists and their opinions can be dismissed. And the straights can hide behind “proof” and the notion that telling someone’s orientation somehow diminishes them.

Thank you Deborah Howell for giving dimension to Maj. Rogers’ life. Perhaps some day such exclusions will not require the help of an ombudsman.

(thank you to Jason Cianciotto for bringing this column to our attention and for giving his own testimony for his friend Maj. Alan Rogers)

An Irrelevant Fact

Timothy Kincaid

March 28th, 2008

This month the Washington Post told us:

He was a soldier first, and that was clear when Army Maj. Alan G. Rogers was buried at Arlington National Cemetery with full military honors. Rifles were fired. A bugler played taps. An Army chaplain said the decorated officer would be remembered as “one of the heroes of history.”

And MSNBC filled in:

His parents passed away and he was divorced with no children. But he had his friends, one of whom he contacted just hours before his death.

Rogers was a hero, the media told us. But like so many heros, they just forgot to mention that he was gay. Well, you never know, this man who was active in D.C. chapter of the American Veterans for Equal Rights (a group dedicated to overturning Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell) just might not want people to know his dirty little secret. Ya know?

The Washington Blade has the story.

Time Magazine Relies on Non-Representative Poll Pushed by Anti-Gay Activist

Timothy Kincaid

February 4th, 2008

On the 29th, Time Magazine ran an article about the 15th anniversary of the military’s Don’t Ask – Don’t Tell policy. And as anti-gay activist Elaine Donnelly, president of the non-profit Center for Military Readiness, is about the only one still willing to publicly champion discrimination against gay soldiers, they used her as a source of information.

Ms. Donnelly and her Center are the face of anti-gay activism for issues surrounding the military. It has not been an easy task.

In the past 15 years, the public has been exposed to a steady list of gay persons expelled from service that seem to defy logic. Leaders, poster boys and girls (literally), linguists, medics, heroes, people who have the support and trust of their peers. And the public has increasingly come to question the necessity of excluding gay people from service.

They’ve not been alone. In recent years former generals and admirals, a former Defense Minister, a former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and a former Republican Senator have all said that it was time for this discriminatory policy to go.

Donnelly’s intractable position of total opposition to any gay person serving (openly or under DADT) has appeared to be ever more shrill in contrast to these carefully considered changes of opinion. And her public efforts to punish gay soldiers paint her as cruel and extremist.

When Sgt. Manzella came out to a national audience on 60 Minutes and suffered no immediate penalty, Donnelly was livid. She set about trying to force the military’s hand, bothering commanders at his base and going so far as to tell news sources that Manzella’s superiors should be disciplined for not firing him.

But new sources seeking supporters of an exclusionary military are limited in their options. Few voices seek to publicly support the Don’t Ask Don’t Tell policy, and some have found anti-gay moralizing to be detrimental to their career. So perhaps it is reasonable that Time turned to Donnelly for its anti-gay “balancing voice”.

However, they did not have to rely on her for a report of the opinions of service persons. A Zogby Poll released in December 2006 shows that only 37% of active service persons serving in Iraq and Afghanistan indicated that gay personnel should not be allowed to serve openly (26% favor disbanding DADT and the rest have no opinion). The same poll showed that 72% of returning soldiers were personally comfortable around gay people.

Yet Time chose to report the following:

But Americans in the military seem less friendly to the idea of junking the ban. A 2006 opinion poll by the independent Military Times newspapers showed that only 30% of those surveyed think openly gay people should serve, while 59% are opposed.

That quote is taken almost verbatim from Donnelly’s website:

In the most recent poll announced by the Military Times newspapers, in answer to the question “Do you think openly homosexual people should be allowed to serve in the military?” 30% of the active duty military subscriber respondents said Yes, but 59% said No, 10% having No Opinion. The same percentage, 59% in opposition, was reported by the Military Times survey in 2006 (Army Times, Jan. 8, 2007).

So do service persons oppose gay participation by 39% as Zogby reports, or 59% as Donnelly claims? Well, in the same article on her website, Donnelly dismisses and criticizes the Zogby poll as being nonrepresentative:

Apparent absence of random access undermines the credibility of the poll, even though the news release makes the inflated claim, “The panel used for this survey is composed of over 1 million members and correlates closely with the U.S. population on all key profiles.”

Much of the anti-gay argument of those supporting DADT is that the young recruit would not want to be in the proximity of gay soldiers. Those in favor of allowing open service argue that young people are more familiar and comfortable with gay people than those of, say, Donnelly’s age.

Donnelly is quite critical of anyone making this argument. However, she must not have taken a good look at the poll on which she is relying. Nor did Time notice any inconsistency.

Had they looked closer, they would have noted that the participants in the Military Times poll were far from representative of military service persons.

Using the 2000 statistics of the Heath Status of the United States Army (and assuming that there is not a strong variance between services) we can compare the Military Times poll to the Army’s report of those who actually serve.

• Army average age – 28; MT poll participant average age – 37
• 44% of service members between 17 and 24; 7% of MT poll participants fell in this category
• 8% of army personnel are 40 or older; 41% of MT poll participants are 40 or older
• 51% of army personnel are married; 82% of MT poll participants are married

As the Military Times put it, “The annual poll has come to be viewed by some as a barometer of the professional career military.”

In other words, this is NOT a poll of active service persons who are on the front lines eating, sleeping, and showering with their mates. In fact, only 2% of those polled lived in barracks. Unlike the Zogby poll, the Military Times poll is of those who have made the military their career.

When viewed in conjunction with the Zogby poll that Donnelly found so faulty, the logical conclusion is that those military persons who sit on their butts in an office have the luxury of entertaining their anti-gay biases while those are in the line of fire may care more about the abilities of their fellow soldier than they do about the gender of his spouse.

Pentagon Claims Don’t Ask - Don’t Tell is Still Alive and Well

Timothy Kincaid

January 22nd, 2008

The Washington Times ran an *article about the declining numbers of discharges for homosexuality during times of war. The Times reports a statement released to them from the Pentagon:

“Our policy implements the law Congress passed after prolonged research and debate,” said Pentagon spokeswoman Eileen Lainez. “The Department will continue to follow congressional mandate on homosexual conduct. This law requires the Department of Defense to separate from the armed forces members who engage in or attempt to engage in homosexual acts; state they are homosexual or bisexual; or marry or attempt to marry a person of the same biological sex.”

Ms. Lainez said “we can’t speculate as to why the number of discharges has declined” from 1,273 in 2001 to 612 in 2006.

OK, Ms. Lainez, if you say so.

* In reading the article, keep in mind that the Washington Times is actively hostile towards gay equality and is one of the few newspapers to continue to insist that their writers use “homosexual” whenever they refer to gay people.

Don’t Ask, Don’t Hear

Timothy Kincaid

December 13th, 2007

This Sunday’s 60 Minutes will feature a gay soldier who told, and told, and told.

[Sgt. Darren] Manzella, a medic who served in Iraq for a year, currently serves as medical liaison for the 1st Cavalry Division stationed in Kuwait, where he says he is “out” to his entire chain of command, including a three-star general.

And no one heard.

He then says his commander reported him, as he was obliged to do, and then “I had to go see my battalion commander, who read me my rights,” he says. He turned over pictures of him and his boyfriend, including video of a passionate kiss, to aid the investigation. But to his surprise, “I was told to go back to work. There was no evidence of homosexuality,” says Manzella. “‘You’re not gay,’” he says his superiors told him. This response confused him and, he says, the closest a superior officer came to addressing his sexuality was to say “I don’t care if you’re gay or not.”

Although many of the Republican candidates for President think that servicemen and women are too conservative to bond with a gay fighter, I suspect that when it comes to fellow warriors, our soldiers are more interested in conserving their skin than conserving their prejudices.

For more information on how you can make an impact in changing this discriminatory and freedom-threatening policy, visit the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network website. (Photo curtesy of SLDN)

Republican Candidates Support “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”

Jim Burroway

November 29th, 2007

In last night’s Republican CNN/YouTube debate, there were two questions about gay issues.

The first question came from Brigadier Gen. Keith Kerr (Ret.), who has been openly gay since his retirement. He asked about “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” The second question was about whether the candidates would accept support from the Log Cabin Republicans.

Here is the transcript from that debate:

Anderson Cooper: All right, let’s get back to the debate. Another question from a YouTube viewer. Let’s watch.

Brigadier Gen. Keith Kerr (Ret.): My name’s Keith Kerr, from Santa Rosa, California. I’m a retired brigadier general with 43 years of service. And I’m a graduate of the Special Forces Officer Course, the Commanding General Staff Course and the Army War College. And I’m an openly gay man.

I want to know why you think that American men and women in uniform are not professional enough to serve with gays and lesbians.

Cooper: I want to point out that Brigadier General Keith Kerr is here with us tonight. I’m glad you’re here.

(Applause)

Again, the question to Congressman Hunter.

Hunter: General, thanks for your service, but I believe in what Colin Powell said when he said that having openly homosexual people serving in the ranks would be bad for unit cohesion.

The reason for that, even though people point to the Israelis and point to the Brits and point to other people as having homosexuals serve, is that most Americans, most kids who leave that breakfast table and go out and serve in the military and make that corporate decision with their family, most of them are conservatives.

They have conservative values, and they have Judeo-Christian values. To force those people to work in a small tight unit with somebody who is openly homosexual goes against what they believe to be their principles, and it is their principles, is I think a disservice to them. I agree with Colin Powell that it would be bad for unit cohesion.

Cooper: I want to direct this to Governor Huckabee.

Thirty seconds.

Huckabee: The Uniform Code of Military Justice is probably the best rule, and it has to do with conduct. People have a right to have whatever feelings, whatever attitudes they wish, but when their conduct could put at risk the morale, or put at risk even the cohesion that Duncan Hunter spoke of, I think that’s what is at issue. And that’s why our policy is what it is.

Cooper: Governor Romney, you said in 1994 that you looked forward to the day when gays and lesbians could serve, and I quote, “openly and honestly in our nation’s military.” Do you stand by that?

Romney: This isn’t that time. This is not that time. We’re in the middle of a war. The people who have…

Cooper: Do you look forward to that time, though, one day?

Romney: I’m going to listen to the people who run the military to see what the circumstances are like. And my view is that, at this stage, this is not the time for us to make that kind of…

Cooper: Is that a change in your position…

Romney: Yes, I didn’t think it would work. I didn’t think “don’t ask/don’t tell” would work. That was my — I didn’t think that would work. I thought that was a policy, when I heard about it, I laughed. I said that doesn’t make any sense to me.

And you know what? It’s been there now for, what, 15 years? It seems to have worked.

Cooper: So, just so I’m clear, at this point, do you still look forward to a day when gays can serve openly in the military or no longer?

Romney: I look forward to hearing from the military exactly what they believe is the right way to have the right kind of cohesion and support in our troops and I listen to what they have to say.

(Audience booing)

Cooper: All right. General Kerr is — as I said — is here.

Please stand up, General. Thank you very much for being with us.

Did you feel you got an answer to your question?

Kerr: With all due respect, I did not get an answer from the candidates.

(Applause)

Cooper: What do you feel you did not…

Kerr: American men and women in the military are professional enough to serve with gays and lesbians.

For 42 years, I wore the army uniform on active duty, in the Reserve, and also for the state of California. I revealed I was a gay man after I retired.

Today, “don’t ask/don’t tell” is destructive to our military policy.

Every day, the Department of Defense discharges two people, not for misconduct, not for the unit cohesion…

Cooper: Wait, the mike is — you’ve lost me. Is the microphone not working? Please, just finish your — what is your question?

Kerr: Not for the unit cohesion that Congressman Hunter is talking about, but simply because they happen to be gay.

Cooper: OK. Senator McCain …

Kerr: And we’re talking about doctors, nurses, pilots, and the surgeon who sews somebody up when they’re taken from the battlefield.

Cooper: I appreciate your comments.

Senator McCain, I want to give you 30 seconds. You served in the military.

McCain: General, I thank you for your service to our nation. I respect it. All the time, I talk to our military leaders, beginning with our joint chiefs of staff and the leaders in the field, such as General Petraeus and General Odierno and others who are designated leaders with the responsibility of the safety of the men and women under their command and their security and protect them as best they can.

Almost unanimously, they tell me that this present policy is working, that we have the best military in history, that we have the bravest, most professional, best prepared, and that this policy ought to be continued because it’s working.

Cooper: All right. We’ve got another question. Let’s listen.

David Cercone: Hi, my name is David Cercone. I’d like to ask all the candidates if they accept the support of the Log Cabin Republicans, and why should the Log Cabin Republicans support their candidacy?

Cooper: Governor Huckabee, would you support — would you allow support from the Log Cabin Republicans, a group of gay Republicans?

Huckabee: You know, in my position in this entire election, I need the support of anybody and everybody I can get.

(Applause)

(Crosstalk)

Huckabee: Sure, they should. I disagree with them, strongly disagree with them on the idea of same-sex marriage, but in a democracy we can have disagreements over some policies and still agree on the greater things that make us Republicans.

So would I accept their support? Of course. Would I change my position on same-sex marriage? No, I wouldn’t. But if they’re willing to support me, I’ll be their president. I’ll be anybody’s president, but I’ll be true to my convictions, and I think that’s what Americans look for — not someone they’re going to agree with on everything, but somebody who at least has some convictions, sticks with them, can explain them, and can at least have respect for people who have different ones.

(Applause)

Military Mistakenly Recruits On LGBT Web Site

Jim Burroway

October 18th, 2007

USA Today is reporting that the the Army, Navy and Air Force had mistakenly advertised for recruits on  GLEE.com, a networking website for gay professionals, despite gays being barred from military service under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

Most of the jobs posted in the web site were for were thousands of hard-to-fill positions requiring specialized training, including Arabic translators, intelligence analysts, and medical professionals, as well as nearly a thousand combat positions. Ironically, we’ve seen dedicated gays and lesbians kicked out of all of these positions under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

Recruiters were surprised about the postings on GLEE.com, and they said they would remove the ads:

“This is the first I’ve heard about it,” said Maj. Michael Baptista, advertising branch chief for the Army National Guard, which will spend $6.5 million on Internet recruiting this year. “We didn’t knowingly advertise on that particular website,” which he said does not “meet the moral standards” of the military.

Openly gay Americans proudly serving their country does not “meet the moral standards” of the military, but convicted felons and gang members are perfectly acceptable.

US Army Reserve Advertises On Bisexual Dating Show

Daniel Gonzales

October 11th, 2007

A friend who actually works at TV Week brought this to my attention. For those of you who don’t know pop culture personality Tila Tequila is the star of a new reality dating show on MTV. The catch, Tila is bisexual and thus half the contestants vying for her attention are men and half are women.

Tucson Calls For Repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”

Jim Burroway

September 6th, 2007

I have no idea how I missed this. It took the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network to get me to notice that Tucson, Arizona — my fair city — passed a resolution calling on Congress to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” Mayor Bob Walkup (R) and the Tucson City Council approved the resolution which reads in part:

“Military readiness is enhanced when every qualified, capable American, regardless of sexual orientation, is welcomed into our Armed Forces and has his or her talents utilized in the best interest of our national security.”

Tucson is a significant military town, home of Davis-Monthan Air Force Base and Raytheon, a major defense contractor. (Raytheon, by the way, became the first aerospace company to win a perfect score on the HRC’s Corporate Equality Index in 2005.) In addition, Tucson’s sunny weather has attracted a huge number of military retirees — they often try to arrange for their last posting at D-M before retirement.

Nevertheless, Tucson is an incredibly open city for LGBT’s. In 1975, Tucson was one of the nation’s first communities pass anti-discrimination laws based on sexual orientation, and more recently Tucson (Pima Co.) led the state in defeating the anti-marriage amendment.

Tucson’s resolution follows similar measure from Atlanta, Chicago, New York, San Francisco and Saint Louis.

Decorated Paratrooper Booted Under DADT

Jim Burroway

August 27th, 2007

Via the SLDN’s Frontlines, the Stockton Record reports on Randy Miller, an army paratrooper who loved the armey, loved serving the country, and loved following in the footsteps of his late father, his mother and stepfather:

During the one year and 361 days that Miller served in the Army, he earned two Army Achievement Medals and a Combat Infantryman Badge. He voluntarily sought out the dangerous assignment of a paratrooper, making 22 jumps.

He was injured during one of his training jumps, although he didn’t realize it at the time. He went to Iraq with A Company, 1st Battalion, 504th Parachute Infantry Regiment of the 82nd Airborne. After he returned to the US, an MRI showed that the tear in his knee had quadrupled. But his army career came to an abrupt end before it could be treated:

He said he was in a known gay bar minding his own business when a male soldier made him a sexual proposition, which he rejected. The rejected soldier reported Miller to a superior, and Miller was subsequently called in. He didn’t lie. He admitted he was gay.

Miller showed a great deal of integrity in refusing to lie. Unfortunately, “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” leaves soldiers open to retaliation and blackmail. A lesser soldier might lie (or worse) to protect his career. Doesn’t anyone else think we leave our armed forces exposed when men and women of integrity are booted while others remain in the services?

Don’t Ask, Just Assume

Jim Burroway

August 3rd, 2007

Military policeman Pfc. Christopher Mastromarino, after months of harassment and anti-gay slurs, appears to have been targeted by Army leaders for dismissal because they think he is gay.

The decorated soldier with an exemplary service record was court-martialed in May after indecent assault charges were filed against him in February. Those charges were brought despite the sworn testimony from witnesses that they did not consider the physical contact between themselves and Mastromarino to be an assault. Mastromarino says the rumors and slurs started when he moved in with his openly gay cousin and partner who lived in the Washington, D.C. area.

A Poll last December found that two-thirds of military personnel who served with someone they knew to be gay did not believe their presence impacted unit cohesion. That same poll found that only 52% received training on prevention of anti-gay harassment. But Pfc. Mastromarino’s case shows how attitudes fostered by “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” can affect military cohesion, even involving straight servicemembers who fall under the pall of suspicion.

Joint Chiefs of Staff nominee Admiral Michael Mullen thinks it’s time to revisit the military’s ban on gays and lesbians. During his confirmation hearing Tuesday before the Senate Armed Services Committee, Adm. Mullen responded to Sen. Susan Collins’ (R-Me) question about continuing dismissals of qualified servicemembers. While he says that he supports the current policy while it is in place, he also believes that Congress ought to re-evaluate it:

“I really think it is for the American people to come forward, really through this body, to both debate that policy and make changes, if that’s appropriate.” Mullen indicated that he would like Congress “to make its own decisions” with respect to considering a repeal of the ban.

Meanwhile, the military continues to lower its standards for new recruits, with the number of incoming soldiers with prior felony arrests or convictions tripling in the past five years. CBS News reports that the Army accepted an estimated 8,000 recruits with criminal records. SLDN delves deeper into the numbers here. And now even gang members are preferred in today’s army over decorated patriots who merely fall under the suspicion of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

Oops!

Jim Burroway

July 13th, 2007

You know things are weird when they show up in, well, News Of The Wierd:

Servicemembers Legal Defense Network activists told reporters in June that at least 59 U.S.-trained Arabic speakers have been ejected from the military because they’re gay (and in each case despite being a native English-speaker who completed intense, expensive military language school). But a month before that, as symbolic of the government’s shortage of Arabic speakers, an official of the U.S.-funded Al Hurra Middle East television service admitted that it had recently, inadvertently, broadcast several pro-terrorist programs (including an hour-long tirade encouraging violence against Jews), attributing the error to the fact that no senior Al Hurra news manager speaks Arabic.