Skip to comments.Armed Services chairman won’t push to reinstate DADT if Romney wins
Posted on 06/21/2012 7:14:27 PM PDT by Free ThinkerNY
House Armed Services Committee Chairman Buck McKeon (R-Calif.) said he doesnt plan to try and reinstate Dont ask, dont tell (DADT), the former ban on gays serving openly in the military, if Republicans were to take the Senate and Mitt Romney won the White House in November.
McKeon and other Republicans were opposed to repealing DADT when the Democratic-controlled Congress passed it in 2010, but McKeon said Thursday that he didnt see a reason to re-start the fight over it.
We fought that fight, and I think right now its more important to get the things that our warfighters need, McKeon said at a breakfast roundtable with defense reporters, in response to a question about whether he would try to reinstate it under a Republican-controlled Congress and White House.
Thats not something I personally would bring up that doesnt mean that others wont, McKeon added.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
They must not simply reinstate DADT, but reinstate the complete ban on Sodomites in our military and they must do it before our next war or we will lose our next war.
Why would he?
Romney is already on record that he will not re-instate DADT and he the Father of Gay Marriage in America since he implemented it unconstitutionally in MA.
He has been Pro-Gay Rights his whole career and this is one policy position he continues to publicly support.
I’m not hearing much about how we’re going to push Mittens to the right these days.
So I guess we will have the Marine Corp band marching in the DC Gay Pride Parade..maybe with chaps and bare cheeks?
Plus a transgender Corps Commander at West Point? Where do they draw the line now that they have opened the gates?
They shouldn’t reinstate DADT. They should try to put it back the way it was BEFORE DADT.
If these idiots on our side really believed in their positions they would have no hesitation in fighting to put it back the way it was. They are coward statists who really don’t believe in these issues.
That bell has already been rung, kinda like the parts of Obamacare that allow people to keep their kids on their policy to 26 and force insurers to cover pre existing conditions.
This is a reminder to all of those that think they can/should stay home on election day that elections have consequences.
that’s nice but elections still have consequences.
No Romney, not now, not ever.
Ain't gonna happen. That genie is out of the bottle and isn't going back in.
Consequences of losing elections.
Mitt Romney has a considerable record as a gay activist.
In fact, it is purely speculative, but when I look at that head of hair and they way he presents himself to the cameras, I wonder if he’s not hiding in the closet. Unlike Obama, there has been no mention of any leaks or escapades. But I still can’t help wondering.
It would explain a lot.
I know gay people are in the service and I know they have been for some time...
that does not mean we need to know about it....just like I don't care to know the sex lives of heteros....
They had dam well better be careful to consider it.
The LYING political leadership bullied Military leadership...that is a fact.
The LYING political leadership (many republicans included) made sure the surveys were RIGGED because they ONLY focused on one thing...”Will you do your job” and of course the answer is yes. They then went out and LIED that all of us in the military APPROVED of gays and SUPPORTED it.
We do NOT.
They know this.
They shouldnt reinstate DADT. They should try to put it back the way it was BEFORE DADT. If these idiots on our side really believed in their positions they would have no hesitation in fighting to put it back the way it was. They are coward statists who really dont believe in these issues.
***Exactly. It was Clintoon who forced DADT. It was basically the first thing he acted on, although he never once mentioned it during his campaign. That’s because if he did, he wouldn’t have been elected.
Yes they do, and the sad truth of the matter is that with a Romney Presidency, it will destroy the GOP as the home of conservatives.
***I am almost starting to look forward to this. The last time it happened, the Republican party split off the Whig party over social conservative issues. We socons have a way of attracting those who join a parade so that they can lead it.
Romney winning in 2008 would have fully opened up the military to homosexuality sooner than Obama.
Mitt was pushing it almost 20 years ago.
do not believe that, homosexuals were not even pushing for open homosexually to be out of the closet in the military. I would like a little evidence to back up your statement...Back in the 70’s and 80’s I had 2 son’s in the military. Lets not forget DADT, Even Clinton had to settle for that...
He’ll do what he’s told to do by the Commander-in-Chief.
This is Mitt Romney in 1994.
QUOTE: "If we are to achieve the goals we share, we must make equality for gays and lesbians a mainstream concern. My opponent cannot do this. I can and will.
We have discussed a number of important issues such as the Federal Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), which I have agreed to co-sponsor, and if possible broaden to include housing and credit, and the bill to create a federal panel to find ways to reduce gay and lesbian youth suicide, which I also support. One issue I want to clarify concerns President Clintons dont ask, dont tell, dont pursue military policy. I believe that the Clinton compromise was a step in the right direction. I am also convinced that it is the first of a number of steps that will ultimately lead to gays and lesbians being able to serve openly and honestly in our nations military. That goal will only be reached when preventing discrimination against gays and lesbians is a mainstream concern, which is a goal we share.
As we begin the final phase of this campaign, I need your support more than ever. By working together, we will achieve the goals we share for Massachusetts and our Nation.
W. Mitt Romney
thank you for the info.....
For you apparently -count me out of your passive limp wristed acceptance of the homosexual agenda 'progress' imposed by the leftists.
Elections have consequences UNLESS RINOs and their useful idiots lead a fake conservative charge.
I will stick by the GOP platform while you retreat to spineless RINO gaga land.
How about reading the GOP platform and embracing conservative principles RATHER than tell me and others to accept leftist inevitability?
YES, elections have consequences UNLESS RINOs and their useful idiots set the agenda.
IF you keep posting this acceptance drivel then the only conclusion I can come up with is that YOU are part of the problem...
Here is one paragraph from the Republican platform:
The all-volunteer force has been a success. We oppose reinstituting the draft, whether directly or through compulsory national service. We support the advancement of women in the military and their exemption from ground combat units. Military priorities and mission must determine personnel policies. Esprit and cohesion are necessary for military effectiveness and success on the battlefield. To protect our servicemen and women and ensure that America's Armed Forces remain the best in the world, we affirm the timelessness of those values, the benefits of traditional military culture, and the incompatibility of homosexuality with military service.
So Does Reality Romney support the GOP Party Platform today -has he flipped since being anointed the nominee by fellow RINO's and the MSM?
It seems odd that Romney is willing to lead an effort to overturn one leftist law, taking over healthcare, but not willing to lead an effort to overturn another leftist law homosexualizing the military?
It will be interesting to see if and how the RINO's attempt to change the GOP platform to match the Reality Romney platform. I, and I am sure many, will be watching what they actually do, versus what they say.
Wasnt Alexander Hamilton gay?
CC, it’s so simple I cannot believe you missed the beauty of it.
When Obama commits an act like repealing DADT, it’s an event worthy of gnawing, self flagellation, the gnashing od teehr and the lamentations of de’wimminz.
When Romney or this guy refuses to do what any sane person expects a ‘Republican’ to do and reinstate it, well, that’s OK because at least it wasn’t Obama!
This is the exact same crap we are going to hear for the next 4 years across ‘conservative’ websites and talk radio because the very people who created the scenario of Romney as candidate and soon as president, will take no freaking responsibility for having put him there, nor by doing so guaranteeing the Obama agenda will be continued as ‘the new normal.
I will not vote for that backstabbing s.o.b., period.
As for McKeon, we need to pull Boehner's Speakership and the new Speaker needs to pull McKeon's committee chairmanship.
We didn't send all those Republicans up there for McKeon to pull stuff like this, with Obama having Sodomy Days at the W.H. for all the homosexuals in uniform. This is b.s.!
No, a gay cabal in the RNC leadership cadre is more like it. Too many of them learned the Princeton rub when they were at good old Chancre U.
The gay lobby loves to pretend that DADT is some affront to them, yet it was they who pushed for it and celebrated it when Clinton and the Left got it passed.
He won't do that, either. Nancy the Witch and Barky drafted Obozocare to resemble Romneycare as closely as possible for a reason. They will now attempt to cash that reason.
Un-elect these pro-sodomite Congress critters
We have a kakocracy. I’m reading Ronald Kessler’s IN THE PRESIDENT’S SECRET SERVICE. We’ve elected sex maniac after sex maniac to the highest office. They cannot control their passions or act honorably toward their spouse what can we expect? Their passions forge our fetters.
I guess sitting at home is not an option then. Who in the Republican party will push for a law that orders the removal of homosexuals from the military? Nobody. I don’t like going into a hospital, or an office and seeing issues of “Out” magazine laying around and the marketing of “partners” but we don’t have a history of removing rights and any attempt will not past constitutional muster.
I’d like to see it, but it’s not gonna happen. It does us no good to die on a sword of last year’s battle.
You should be upset with those that felt McCain was “too liberal” to vote for because they are to blame for all of this.
Two thoughts on this matter, 1) that with Romney's record on Gay rights issues, this splinters the democrat voting block; 2) the Generals have no business doing anything other than what they are told by elected officials for they are not political people but career soldiers (I am retired Army).
While I agree with preventing gays from openly serving my opposition is based on the fact that accepting Gays makes acceptance of their sexual habits okay, and if gay sex is okay then hetrosexuals will have to defend themselves from charges of consentual sex if forced/black (maled/femaled) into a gay relationship, and further any flurting by gays can actually be more than unwanted but rather an intimidation factor since Gays have achieved protected status.
Maybe having Sandusky charged in the month of Gay Celebration will dampen the current sport for gay lifestyls? His son will certainly hope so.
Instead lets look at John Quincy Adams, his stand against Martian Van Buren and Slavery was vilified by many at the time and he was shouted down in Congress whenever he brought it up.
But has History not proven he was on the right side? The Threat of Civil War was huge in the 1820's and 30's and yet he stood up to say "NO"!
Men like J.Q.A. still exist out there today, but in order to do so, we must the break from the Notion of their only ever being 2 parties, especially after one has been usurped by the other, as seen here and with Romney.
Romney is not a conservative. Anyone expecting him to turn things around is a fool.
Push him to the right? After we have proven that we will abandon our positions to vote for him, what leverage would there be?
Mega bump to your comments & I love your tagline!
I see this straw man argument posted here many times recently.
One CAN be a conservative and NOT in good conscience vote for Romney -it is possible. REGARDLESS, even if one holds their nose and does vote for the RINO scumbag Romney, one does not have to agree with any of Romney's limp wristed leftist views.
You want Romney and his limp wrist agenda -fine. There is a difference between supporting a lesser evil candidate and embracing the evils of defeat -one does NOT stay at home to do that.
What good is winning an election when the elector is the enemy of your principles?
Staying at home and not voting for RINO or not staying at home and voting for RINO -misses the point completely as to THIS and many other principled topics.
We do NOT elect a king.
As we all know, name calling always works, RINO, scumbag, enemy, evil, limp-wristed.. yea, okay..
You speak like a socialist democrat that just lost the logical argument and has nothing left except feelings and rage. Since you object to the Republican candidate both losing and winning, there is nothing left to say.
Your name-calling won’t change my mind and the minds of many other Americans that can see the forest past the trees.
You can utilize all the pretzel logic you want to justify your own feelings and I respect principled opposition, but my point still stands.
Romney is a RINO -that is a fact.
Supporting a RINO is what some may have to hold their nose and do (e.g. anyone but Obama); HOWEVER supporting progressive ideas is what NO conservative should do PERIOD.
You choose to vote for Romney -fine. However, don't expect to promote or push any progressive crap as inevitable and or acceptable and not expect to be called on it.
There are millions of leftist Americans -so what... Leftism remains leftism EVEN if it is a GOP RINO promoting it.
Do not forget prompted this exchange --your acceptance of a progressive homosexual military...
I will continue to ring the conservative bell -RINOs be damned!