US lawmaker: End limits on gays in military

[kpete]

Source: AFP

US lawmaker: End limits on gays in military

WASHINGTON (AFP) — The US military would have to drop its "don't ask, don't tell" ban on gays serving openly in the armed forces under legislation California Representative Ellen Tauscher was to introduce Monday.

"It makes no sense to discharge capable service members for something as irrelevant as their sexual orientation," Tauscher wrote in a letter urging House colleagues to sign on as co-sponsors of the bill.

It was not clear what fate awaited the legislation, which came 16 years after then-president Bill Clinton tried to fulfill a campaign vow to lift the ban on homosexuals serving in the military and ended up locked in a bruising political battle that sapped his influence shortly after taking office.

Clinton ended up backing a policy abbreviated as "don't ask, don't tell," which aimed to allow gays to remain in the military so long as they did not reveal their sexual orientation.

Read more: http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5ibTTU7BOmmKmm8WDoCOskYBwnxEQ

[Captain Hilts]

1. She's completely the wrong person to submit such a bill. nt

[NorthCarolina]

2. I would have preferred Kucinich submitting it...but am Happy it was submitted just the same n/t

[Captain Hilts]

3. Also the wrong person to submit it. We now have several progressive veterans...

that would do it.

This is one of those occasions where having served REALLY matters. It's part of the reason Clinton got tarred and feathered over this issue.

[Posteritatis]

4. I couldn't care less who submitted such a bill (nt)

[Captain Hilts]

5. It matters, especially on such a third rail issue. Look what happened to Clinton. DEMs...

took him down for it.

[Posteritatis]

6. That's because Dems have no shortage of bigots either

If a "progressive veteran" proposed the bill the homophobes would still crap all over them for it. They'll fight something like this tooth and nail no matter what the credentials behind the person proposing it are, period.

[Captain Hilts]

7. But they'd be much more likely to have support of veterans' groups and a vet can...

tell all those draft dodgers - Newt, Limbaugh, McConnell, etc. they don't know what they're talking about.

[Posteritatis]

8. Still not convinced; these days people'd react to the content more than the sponsor (nt)

[Captain Hilts]

9. Someone who has not served cannot fight off most of the attacks.

Let's not make the same mistake, again.

[Posteritatis]

10. Sure they can; the ban is stupid, and attacks on service records are changing the subject (nt)

[Captain Hilts]

11. The lack of military service of the person sponsoring the bill is the point here.

Over and out.

[noamnety]

14. And all the other dems

have proven themselves to be the wrong person to NOT submit such a bill.

[ooglymoogly]

12. One thing this bill will show us is who the bigots in the

Dem party are and who to work against; Though it has a snowballs chance in the proverbial.

[ooglymoogly]

13. Double kick and Rec. nt

[brentspeak]

15. Tauscher is doing this as a cover for her torpedoing the HR 200 legislation

That legislation is designed to allow bankruptcy judges to renegotiate homeowner's mortgages -- that's so people don't get thrown out of their homes. Tauscher is a whore for the banking industry.