The Rude Pundit - DADT: Absurd from the Start

[meegbear]

Hey, kids, it's Veterans' Day, and what better way is there to celebrate than to fuck a soldier in the foxhole? Or at least that's the ongoing hilarious queer fear that's pervading the conversation over finally putting a bullet in the back of the skull of Don't Ask Don't Tell. The public and members of the military tell pollsters, in large majorities, either "Okey-dokey" or "Who gives a happy monkey fuck?" when asked if they think gays and lesbians should be allowed to serve openly in the armed services. So, of course, it looks like Democrats are gonna cave to the last people in America who still think Sgt. Joey Sissypants is gonna get rapey in the barracks with his troops or conjuring a lip-licking bull dyke who stands in the women's shower and thinks, "Smorgasbord."

Since this historic day asks us to remember things what is historical, let's pause to look back at the 1993 Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on President Bill Clinton's implementation of DADT. Sometimes it's like a Beckett play, sometimes it's like an Abbott and Costello routine. And several of the players are still in Congress (or, in the case of Indiana's Dan Coats, a-coming back). Here's John McCain, who has vowed to filibuster a defense spending bill if it contains DADT repeal (because, you know, apparently it's not treason anymore to block funding to the troops) speaking to Secretary of Defense Les Aspin and various generals, including Colin Powell (get a friend and read it like a comedy routine):

"McCain: If someone tells, someone who tells the commanding officer, that's not homosexual conduct. That's no reason to initiate an investigation. Yet Secretary Aspin just said that there is reason to do so.

Aspin: Senator, in the -- in the policy, conduct is defined as statements. Statement is a conduct in -- in the -- in the policy.

McCain: So -- so what you're saying is that in -- in -- but yet, being in a homosexual parade, marching in a gay rights rally in civilian clothes is not homosexual conduct.

Aspin: Because a person might be a heterosexual who's in favor of gay rights and attends the gay parade, yes.

McCain: If that person is dressed in -- in a -- bizarre clothing and under the banner of -- of some organization which advocates --

Aspin: No.

McCain: -- certain things, what does that mean?

Aspin: It depends under the circumstances. But the point is that a person should not be automatically barred from -- from attending a gay parade if they are -- if they're doing it in civilian clothes because a person who goes -- attends a gay parade is -- does not prove that they are homosexual just by attending the parade."

Yep. This is what the most deliberative body ever conceived in the history of deliberating deliberately actually discussed. Of course, McCain had to talk about cross-dressing:

"McCain: Well, how about, General Powell, if they went in transvestite clothing?

Powell: I think that would be something that I as a commander would find troubling and I would begin to wonder about that situation, but just the attendance solely at the parade --

McCain: This policy says marching in a gay rights rally in civilian clothes will not in and of themselves constitute credible evidence that would provide a basis for initiating an investigation.

Powell: I would still take a hard look at it to see whether the costuming that was used started to slop over the good browns of ordered discipline.

McCain: According to this regulation, you can't."

(The Rude Pundit's pretty sure that "good browns" is suppose to be "good grounds," but, for the sake of anal sex, let's go with the transcript.)

Oh, how about one more exchange between Sen. Carl Levin and Powell, only because it includes the word "rebuttable."

"Levin: We've talked about here that, if one announces that he or she is a homosexual, that he or she is engaged in illegal activities that are homosexual, but it is rebuttable. And we -- and you define in your policy homosexual activities as bodily -- sexual bodily contact with another person. Is that correct? Is that all your understanding? That in terms of --

Powell: It's an act.

Levin: -- homosexual activity in the policy --

Powell: An act. Homosexual act.

Levin: Yeah, right. That involves bodily contact with another person. Is that correct, General?

Powell: That's what the policy says."

You know what would honor veterans today? To treat soldiers like grown-ups.

http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/

[SidDithers]

1. K&R...nt

Sid

[terrya]

2. Thank you K&R

I remember, during that whole shameful episode after President Clinton announced his intention to lift the ban on gays in the military (as he promised during the 1992 campaign) and before DADT was put into place, a trip to a submarine by members of the the Senate Armed Services Committee (including Sam Nunn and that champion of morality, Strom Thurmond). The military men giving the tour of the sub to the senators made a point of showing how close those bunks in the submarine's living quarters were. I winced with disgust at the not so subtle message...we gays were sexual predators and we couldn't be trusted around other men. Just shameful.

Let's honor gay and lesbian veterans and those serving in the closets people like Colin Powell and Sam Nunn forced them into in 1993. Repeal DADT now.

[Scurrilous]

3. Thanks.

K & R :thumbsup:

[Johonny]

4. John McCain believes sweaters make you gay

so I wonder what clothing he thought they'd be marching in?