Posted on 01/04/2011 8:58:11 AM PST by SeekAndFind
Sarah Palin has remained silent on the issue of repealing “don’t ask, don’t tell,” which Congress passed in the lame-duck session — at least until now. ABC News’ Devin Dwyer has been on the Twitter beat and reports that Palin retweeted a message from radio host Tammy Bruce that supports the end of DADT:
But Monday night the former Alaska governor re-tweeted a post from conservative talk show host and blogger Tammy Bruce, who is lesbian, appearing to indirectly cast support for gays and an end to the ban on openly gay members of the U.S. military.
Bruce had been commenting on the controversy surrounding a U.S. Navy commander and a raunchy video when she turned to the issue of gays in the military.
“But this hypocrisy is just truly too much. Enuf already–the more someone complains about the homos the more we should look under their bed,” Bruce tweeted, suggesting that virulent opposition to gays may reflect the individual has something to hide.
Soon after, Palin re-tweeted the message to her following of more than 350,000 followers.
It should be stressed that retweeting does not necessarily connote agreement. Dwyer’s colleague Jake Tapper has to repeatedly make that point when Tapper retweets and adds his own commentary. It does suggest a de facto endorsement when unaccompanied by a substantive response, however, and it’s fair for those who follow Palin’s Twitter feed to assume agreement in this sense, as Tammy did in her response. Nor does this specific message explicitly address DADT repeal, although that’s certainly the larger context in the issue of gays and the military.
There is some irony in this quiet positioning, if indeed that’s what this is. The opposition to repeal of DADT in the Senate was led by Palin’s former running mate, John McCain. Palin has courted the conservative base in the GOP that opposed the repeal (as did McCain himself in his re-election bid this year), but managed to avoid taking a stand either way on this issue, one of the few from which Palin has shied.
Palin hasn’t yet responded to requests for comment on the retweet, and that will probably require Palin to clarify her position for the record on DADT. If she backs repeal openly, does this open a rift between Palin and the conservative base? Or does it take the edge off of the dissatisfaction over the repeal on the Right?
You're right of course, but the people with PDS wouldn't concede on anything, no matter how clearly and succinctly she expresses it.
Some people are beyond hope, even when she is re-elected in 16.
This is why everyone is talking:
Palin’s supporters don’t know where she stands on this issue.
Sounds good to me.
There are things that are right and wrong according to God’s law that man’s law can never adequately control.
Ideally, a civil and honorable society controls misbehavior through its disapproval. Conversely, a decadent society encourages those things that our Judeo-Christian foundation would find appalling, for example the list Paul made in his second letter to Timothy:
“But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God— having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with such people.”
Or to the Galatians:
“The acts of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God. “
Every one of us can read those passages and see a description, not only of the underbelly of our society, but of the role models which we emulate. Not only is sin tolerated, it is encouraged in modern-day America.
No longer does society disapprove of wrongdoing. We can’t pass laws to make people good. We can only pass laws that punish the results of egregious bad behavior, the tragedies that result when sin has done its dirty work.
The only way we’ll eliminate abortion is through changing minds. We see that happening already as a generation grows up seeing ultrasound images of fully-formed babies that are at risk of murder under the law.
You can never conquer sin, just try to keep it in its tawdry box. Laws can help with that, but public opinion is the stronger weapon.
And that’s the battle we’re losing now with all the pity-me stories from the “I was made this way” homosexual crowd, who have money and influence.
We must change the conversation to one of demanding integrity and honesty and character in all public dealings. If someone wants to live like a sleazeball in private, that’s between him and his Maker.
As for DADT, there are military regs that demand proper behavior, including forbidding public displays of affection. Enforce them for all, and let’s quit talking about it.
Has she really never taken a position on this? That would be surprising, since she’s such a bold, brave, conservative leader. Surely she’s on the record already, no?
What would be so tough about making a Facebook statement about Palin's position on homosexuals in the military?
And am I wrong but wasn't "DADT" a Clinton COMPROMISE with the previous hard line against homosexuals in the military? Why not go back to the old, er, position so to speak?
“Palin’s supporters don’t know where she stands on this issue.”
Right - but when ABC New posts a blog with the title “Sarah Palin Re-Tweets in Support of Gays” she can choose to either comment and clarify what her intentions and her views are, or she can leave it at that, and then we will all presume that ABC News has it correct. She’s never had a problem correcting the media when she feels misrepresented before.
Palin doesn’t need to clarify soon, just if she chooses to run. However, too many people are jumping the gun.
Stop, think and look at her record.
Palin supports the repeal simply because she doesn’t believe the government should be sticking their nose into the military’s business. I will wager big money that she views this similar to state’s rights that the military should set their own rules that work best for them as long as it allows those who want to and are eligible to serve. Our Constitution prohibits discrimination and Palin is a Constitutionalist. DADT is not what violates the Constitution, it is what happens if someone is outed that is against the Constitution. Sexual preference, gay or straight, should be made a non-diclosed issue for all. Our military trains warriors not exhibitionists.
Honestly, this makes me like her more. I would prefer a blanket policy of DADT, what happens in the bedroom, stays in the bedroom for gay and straights. Sexuality has NO place in corporate America and it should have no place in the military. It should be irrelevant BUT sexual harassment will apply to anyone gay or straight, if they cross a line. That is something the gay community might not be prepared for.
Show your sources.
uh, the military is the government’s business.
You whole post is pure BS.
Post a link where Palin said what you think she said.
Right now, I will wait to see if she addresses this herself.
Jedidah,
Exactly, God gives us free will, why won’t our government.
It doesn’t make immoral actions right, but God did not see fit to make it the 11th Commandment. Instead, he left it a moral issue, not a legal one, much like fornication.
And Tammy thinks it’s funny.
From Twitter:
“HeyTammyBruce Tammy Bruce
Ooh, looks like I’m going to need more Smores ingredients today as I watch ongoing Palin RT analysis.
1 hour ago”
http://twitter.com/#!/HeyTammyBruce
First, I’ve heard Tammy Bruce before and she is a bomb thrower of the first order. I don’t care for her.
Second, I have no issue with gays serving in the military. If they want to serve and die for their country, fine with me. If they harass other people there are laws on the books to deal with it.
If she’s for homosexualizing the military, she just lost my support.
Actually, she was asked about this on either Hannity or O'Reilly once (I'll never find it) and her answer was the issue is a distraction and should not be addressed during a time of war. She said she thought the Military had the right to set their own rules.
She did not make a definitive statement about being against repeal, only that she agreed with the military and thought the congress should not take up the issue. Alaskans do tend to have a more libertarian view of these types of things.
Apparently that's not good enough for some people, although it seems reasonable to me and mirrors my position almost exactly.
I understand if she doesn't come out guns a blazing against the homo's she will not be 'good enough' for the 'Holier than thou types' on here. But who is? They live to look down their noses at people. Heck, they've told me she isn't pro-life enough for them too.
Horse manure.
The repeal of DADT was supported by the sodomy lobby as well as the pandering, America-hating rats. If Palin is on their side, I am not on Palin’s side. The point of the repeal was to tell the military that they better accept recruits who want to openly flaunt their mental and emotional disorders. Any normal soldier, sailor, or Marine who brawls with a homo in the barracks is automatically subject to “hate crime” prosecution, and any perceived sleights of homos by the military will lead to quotas for every rank. (Are there “enough” homo generals?)
So spin it all you want - - if Palin is for sodomizing the military, then she can get elected without my vote.
FRegards,
LH
Hey Indylindy,
Read the Constitution, look at the Founding Father’s beliefs on the military. You are very, very wrong.
We have 3 branches of Federal Government, Executive, Legislative and Judicial. The military was never supposed to be a permanent government entity much like the Federal Reserve or Post office (which is a private business). It receives funding but is actually a separate entity who ultimately answers to the Commander in Chief but takes an oath to uphold our Constitution, not our government or President.
Clearly you are not a Constitutionalist since your entire post is BS.
“and it’s fair for those who follow Palin’s Twitter feed to assume agreement in this sense, as Tammy did in her response.”
B.S.
Read Tammy’s ‘response’.
She doesn’t ‘agree’ with the retweet.
She’s making fun of it!
(check the link in my post above)
I’m content to let her offer her own clarification. But since she has opened the door on this discussion, she needs to clarify soon.
Support for someone rests on more than one issue. But this one is pretty important, in that I think the current administration is going to try to use the military to bring in gay marriage by manipulating the rules for military dependents. So its more than just who gets to wear the uniform.
I never saw where Palin stated she supports this specific repeal. There are a lot of people that believe it is the military’s business even if they disagree with the “lifestyle”.
You can strongly oppose a gay lifestyle and still support the repeal of DADT because you don’t believe that specific law is the right approach.
It is the same as the healthcare repeal. You can not accuse everyone who supports the repeal of wanting no healthcare reform. They just don’t want THAT reform.
Palin hasn’t said she is Pro-gay, she has said that to some degree it isn’t our business and now hinted that the DADT law might not be the best approach. Doesn’t mean she isn’t for another approach.
People like you don’t like her anyway so this just gives you more reason to grump.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.