Sign Up to Receive Email Action Alerts From Issa Exposed

Pentagon DADT study released: Discussing some of the key findings

DADT trial

Cross posted from Open Left

By Adam Bink

This afternoon, the Pentagon Comprehensive Working Group report was released, and I’m coming up for air after reading through some key graphs. The report surveyed “400,000 active duty and reserve component Service members with an extensive and professionally-developed survey, which prompted 115,052 responses-one of the largest surveys in the history of the U.S. military,” (which includes self-identied gay or lesbian servicemembers), along with 150,000 spouses and other family members, foreign allies, members of Congress, services chiefs, service academy superintendents, and other personnel. Which makes it hard to cast as some minority report.

I think these paragraphs of the report indeed states it best:

The results of the survey are best represented by the answers to three questions:

  • When asked about how having a Service member in their immediate unit who said he or she is gay would affect the unit’s ability to “work together to get the job done,” 70% of Service members predicted it would have a positive, mixed, or no effect.
  • When asked “in your career, have you ever worked in a unit with a co-worker that you believed to be homosexual,” 69% of Service members reported that they had.
  • When asked about the actual experience of serving in a unit with a co-worker who they believed was gay or lesbian, 92% stated that the unit’s “ability to work together” was “very good,” “good,” or “neither good nor poor.”

The latter point is a statistic which is 89% for those in Army combat units and 84% for those in Marine combat units. Additionally, 74% of spouses of military service-members say repeal of DADT would have no impact on their view of whether their husbands or wives should continue to serve.

Other key graphs I think are important to highlight (bolding mine where seen):

The reality is that there are gay men and lesbians already serving in today’s U.S. military, and most Service members recognize this… Anecdotally, we also heard a number of Service members tell us about a leader, co-worker, or fellow Service member they greatly liked, trusted, or admired, who they later learned was gay; and how once that person’s sexual orientation was revealed to them, it made little or no difference to the relationship. Both the survey results and our own engagement of the force convinced us that when Service members had the actual experience of serving with someone they believe to be gay, in general unit performance was not affected negatively by this added dimension.

In communications with gay and lesbian current and former Service members, we repeatedly heard a patriotic desire to serve and defend the Nation, subject to the same rules as

everyone else. In the words of one gay Service member, repeal would simply “take a knife out of my back….You have no idea what it is like to have to serve in silence.” Most said they did not

desire special treatment, to use the military for social experimentation, or to advance a social agenda. Some of those separated under Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell would welcome the opportunity to rejoin the military if permitted. From them, we heard expressed many of the same values that we heard over and over again from Service members at large-love of country, honor, respect, integrity, and service over self. We simply cannot square the reality of these people with the perceptions about “open” service.

Along the way to gender integration, many of our Nation’s military leaders predicted dire consequences for unit cohesion and military effectiveness if women were allowed to serve in large numbers. As with racial integration, this experience has not always been smooth. But, the consensus is the same: the introduction and integration of women into the force has made our military stronger.

The general lesson we take from these transformational experiences in history is that in matters of personnel change within the military, predictions and surveys tend to overestimate negative consequences, and underestimate the U.S. military’s ability to adapt and incorporate within its ranks the diversity that is reflective of American society at large.

This one is particularly interesting:

We support the pre-existing proposals to repeal Article 125 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice and remove private consensual sodomy between adults as a criminal offense. This change in law is warranted irrespective of whether Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell is repealed, to resolve any constitutional concerns about the provision in light of Lawrence v. Texas and United States v. Marcum. We also support revising offenses involving sexual conduct or inappropriate relationships to ensure sexual orientation neutral application, consistent with the recommendations of this report. For example, the offense of adultery defined in the Manual for Courts-Martial should be revised to apply equally to heterosexual and homosexual sex that is engaged in by or with a married person

If you’re wondering, given the size of the poll, the margin of error for the service member poll is +/- less than 1%, and “similar” for the spouse survey. So it’s hard to cast the numbers as wildly inaccurate.

The Working Group concluded that “Based on all we saw and heard, our assessment is that, when coupled with the prompt implementation of the recommendations we offer below, the risk of repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell to overall military effectiveness is low.”

In a press conference announcing the release, Secretary Gates commented:

Now that we have completed this review, I strongly urge the Senate to pass this legislation and send it to the president for signature before the end of this year. It is only a matter of time before the federal courts are drawn once more into the fray, with the very real possibility that this change would be imposed immediately by judicial fiat – by far the most disruptive and damaging scenario I can imagine, and the one most hazardous to military morale, readiness and battlefield performance.

While “judicial fiat” is not the language I would have chosen, Gates is using the threat of a court ruling as an argument for Congress to enact repeal “the right way”. It’s an interesting case that may encourage Senators to support repeal.

Jeh Johnson, a co-chair of the Working Group, also spoke, and noted that the resistance to repeal “is driven by misperceptions and stereotypes.”

The full report can be found here. I will continue updating this post as I keep reading, and let you know of other developments.

And as I wrote this morning, now is a more critical time than ever to call swing Senators and ask friends/family/colleagues to also do so, using the Pentagon report as a tool. A list of swing votes can be found here, and the number is 202-224-3121. We still have work to do.

Updated: An interesting section on page 122 that I think gets at much of the concern and stereotypes not just in the military, but in greater society with respect to gays and lesbians becoming teachers, or the passage of ENDA- and batted down by the Pentagon.

In listening to Service members we found a perceptions gap- between the perception of the gay Service member that people know and work with, and the perception of the stereotypical gay individual that people do not know and have never worked with. When Service members talk about a unit member they believe to be gay or lesbian, their assessment of that individual was based on a complete picture and actual experience, including the Service member’s technical and tactical capabilities and other characteristics that contribute to his or her overall effectiveness as a member of the military and as a colleague.

By contrast, when asked about serving with the imagined gay Service member who is “open” about his or her sexual orientation, that feature becomes the predominant if not sole characteristic of the individual, and stereotypes fill in the rest of the picture. Stereotypes motivated many of the comments we heard. The most prevalent concern expressed is that gay men will behave in a stereotypically effeminate manner, while lesbian women are stereotypically painted in “masculine” terms. We heard widespread perceptions that, if permitted to be open and honest about their sexual orientation, gay Service members would behave as sexual predators and make unwelcome sexual advances on heterosexuals, gay men would adopt feminine behavior and dress, there would be open and notorious displays of affection in the military environment between same-sex couples, and that repeal would lead to an overall erosion of unit cohesion, morale, and good order and discipline.  Based on our review, however, we conclude that these concerns are exaggerated and not consistent with the reported experiences of many Service members.

The perceptions gap we note here is also reflected in the survey data. The data reveals that Service members who are currently serving with someone they believe to be gay or lesbian are less likely to perceive a negative impact of repeal on the key elements of unit task and social cohesion, and unit effectiveness. Conversely, those who have believe they have never served with someone who is gay or lesbian are more likely to perceive a negative impact. Likewise, of Service members who believe they have in their career served in a unit with a co-worker who is gay or lesbian, 92% stated that the unit’s “ability to work together” was “very good,” “good,” or “neither good nor poor.”

Thus, our view is that the negative perceptions and predictions of serving alongside a gay Service member are refuted by the considerable track record of actual experiences where Service members did exactly that.

Update 2: This section on pages 126-27 make up especially critical talking points against one of the lead anti-repeal arguments, that being “now is not the time”:

Change During a Time of War

Our assessment also took account of the fact that the Nation is at war on several fronts, and for a period of over nine years, the U.S. military has been fully engaged, and has faced the stress and demands of frequent and lengthy deployments. When it comes to a repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, many ask: why now?

The question “why now?” is not for us, but for the President, the Secretary of Defense, and Congress, informed by the military advice of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The question we answer here is “can we now?” We considered the question carefully and conclude that repeal can be implemented now, provided it is done in a manner that minimizes the burden on leaders in deployed areas. Our recommended implementation plan does just that, and it is discussed more fully in the accompanying support plan for implementation.

The primary concern is for the added requirement that will be created by the training and education associated with repeal. We are cognizant of these concerns, but note that during this period, the Services have undertaken education and training in deployed areas on a number of important personnel matters. These education and training initiatives have included increased emphasis on sexual assault prevention and response, suicide prevention, and training to detect indications of behavioral health problems.

The conduct of these programs in deployed areas indicates that training and education associated with a repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell can be accommodated. We assess this to be the case, in large part because our recommendations in this report involve a minimalist approach to changes in policies, plus education and training that reiterates existing policies in a sexual orientation-neutral manner.

It is also the case that the results of the survey indicate, though this is a time of war, a solid majority of Service members believe that repeal will have positive, mixed, or no effect. Most of those surveyed joined our military after September 11, 2001, and have known nothing but a military at war.

We are also informed by past experience. In the late 1940s and early 1950s, in the period immediately following World War II, during the Korean War and the beginning of the Cold War, our military took on the task of racial integration, in advance of the rest of society. And, at the time, the change implicated far larger numbers of Service members: African Americans in the Army then numbered 700,000 of a total force of over 8 million, and the opposition to racial integration was far greater than today’s resistance to repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. The process of racial integration was slow and presented many challenges, but history shows that there were no differences in combat effectiveness in the Korean War between integrated and all-white segregated units.


The Pentagon Study in its entirety:

[scribd id=44421654 key=key-2auyhqp1qclrywcylaeu mode=list]


  • 1. Kathleen  |  November 30, 2010 at 8:12 am

    Have been reading your comments at Open Left. Thanks for helping us through it.

  • 2. Lesbians Love Boies  |  November 30, 2010 at 8:15 am

    Well, I now have to call Sen. McCain and Sen. Kyle again and demand they repeal DADT…again! I think I am going to bake up some snicker doodles first, get high on sugar and then call!

    Oh, and subscribing…

  • 3. Ann S.  |  November 30, 2010 at 8:19 am

  • 4. StraightForEquality  |  November 30, 2010 at 9:50 am

  • 5. JonT  |  November 30, 2010 at 9:46 am

    ☮ (subscribing).

    And LLB, I'm convinced that no matter what this report says (and it is and interesting read), McCain will never support repeal of DADT.

    He's just too old and set in his ways. No evidence will ever be good enough for him – that seems quite clear to me by now.

    Guess it doesn't hurt to try, but…

  • 6. Lesbians Love Boies  |  November 30, 2010 at 9:48 am

    There is always Kyle – but I don't hold out hope for either. It's really too bad these two are in AZ – anyone want to trade Senators?

  • 7. Gregory in Salt Lake  |  November 30, 2010 at 11:13 am

    LLB pretty please make some gluten-free SD's for me : ) (p.s. your comment made me LAUGH ALOUD! thank you!)

    btw – do some of you know Sara O. ? She's beat out all the candidates for a highly technical IS job in Salt Lake City and moving here in January. Congrats Sara! Kate: this is the person that your referred to me : )

  • 8. Tomato  |  November 30, 2010 at 2:13 pm

    Gregory: Pamela's Mix makes good gf SDs, as does The Cravings Place basic sugar cookie mix.

  • 9. Richard A. Jernigan  |  December 1, 2010 at 12:15 am

    Thanks, Tomato! I have a friend whose grandson requires a gluten free diet. I will pass this along to her.

  • 10. Gregory in Salt Lake  |  December 1, 2010 at 12:30 am

    TU! : )

  • 11. elliom  |  November 30, 2010 at 3:52 pm

    LLB: Don't forget the MILK for those snickerdoodles!

  • 12. adambink  |  November 30, 2010 at 9:30 am

    Hey Kathleen. You bet!

  • 13. Gregory in Salt Lake  |  November 30, 2010 at 11:14 am

    Ditto! Thanks Adambink!

  • 14. Ronnie  |  November 30, 2010 at 8:18 am

    Repeal it….NOW!!!!!!!!…. =


  • 15. John  |  November 30, 2010 at 8:20 am


  • 16. Kevin S.  |  November 30, 2010 at 8:26 am

    It's going down. They aren't getting 41 votes to ignore this.

  • 17. Alan E.  |  November 30, 2010 at 8:28 am

    Repeal it already!

  • 18. Gregory in Salt Lake  |  November 30, 2010 at 11:15 am

    I agree Ronnie and Alan!

  • 19. Jeremy  |  November 30, 2010 at 8:33 am

    I just got done reading through some of the comments on Fox "news". com. I was not surprised to see the hatred being spewed. But more surprisingly is that Fox is spinning this report way out of context. I never trusted Fox network, but how can we sit by and let them stir up such hatred when it is clearly a lie. I say we take down the biggest stain on America, Fox "news"…what can we do? Anyone have any ideas? Until we ruin the credibility they carry with the ignorant people out there, we will have an uphill battle. They are blatantly bigoted and need to be called on it to their audience. Maybe compile the lies and inaccuracies so we can show the general public the truth.

  • 20. Sagesse  |  November 30, 2010 at 8:39 am

    Adam, check out their comments on the role of chaplains. Page 11 of the report, with more detail inside.

  • 21. Ronnie  |  November 30, 2010 at 8:49 am

    MSNBC's Rachel Maddow discussing the release of the Pentagon report today with MSNBC's Tamron Hall….<3…Ronnie:

  • 22. Straight Ally #3008  |  November 30, 2010 at 8:56 am

    Brass tacks, guys. Who might vote for cloture, and effectively for DADT repeal, on the GOP side? Lugar, Ensign, Snowe, Collins, Kirk, Murkowski? As usual, I'm not holding my breath about Brown doing the right thing. On the Dem side, we have to contend with Pryor and possibly Lincoln breaking ranks. If anyone has any recent info, I'd love to hear it.

  • 23. Lesbians Love Boies  |  November 30, 2010 at 9:19 am

    The FRC released its own study of service members polled on DADT…using that wickedly inaccurate CC Advertising that NOM has used in the past. I did some googling this AM on CC Advertising – seems they aren't exactly on the up and up on their polling practices…but nonetheless – here is a link to a story on their report…which states that 'almost' 63% of active duty and retired military 'FAMILIES' oppose overturning DADT…hmmm…wonder how they got those families phone numbers for the survey…oh, yeah, their churches perhaps?

    DADT, or "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" refers to open homosexuality in the military. The Center for Security Policy and the Family Research Council today released a jointly commissioned public opinion survey showing almost 63 percent of active duty and retired military families oppose overturning the policy prohibiting open homosexuality in the military, commonly referred to as "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." The national survey of more than 10,000 members from each branch of the military community was conducted by CC Advertising and completed on November 27.

    The CSP-FRC poll asked whether the current ban on open homosexuality should be overturned. In contrast, the Pentagon's much- ballyhooed military member survey which is expected to be released later today failed to pose this central question. Most national polls do not focus on the military community.

    Read more:

  • 24. Ronnie  |  November 30, 2010 at 9:24 am

    The FRC are ungrateful little brats….shame on them for disrespecting soldiers who have risked their lives for them…SHAME!!!….. > I ……Ronnie

  • 25. Kathleen  |  November 30, 2010 at 9:25 am

    Like I'm supposed to pay attention to a poll commissioned by a known hate group. There. I already got to use it.
    (and, yes, I understand the logical fallacy in my dismissing it for this reason – but it was fun).

  • 26. Mark M. (Seattle)  |  November 30, 2010 at 9:30 am


  • 27. Felyx  |  November 30, 2010 at 9:31 am

    LOL!!! Way to tell it like it is Kathleen!!!

  • 28. Straight Ally #3008  |  November 30, 2010 at 9:38 am

    Nah, that's just realistic evaluation of the source.

  • 29. JonT  |  November 30, 2010 at 9:57 am

    Yeah, I was totally blown away by an FRC (a known hate group) funded poll carried out by an advertising agency.



    I wonder if they commissioned this 'poll' before, or after the Pentagon study was leaked.

  • 30. Lesbians Love Boies  |  November 30, 2010 at 10:01 am

    After, they started it on Nov. 26th and finished it on Nov. 27th. Fastest poll ever to be made up … erm done.

  • 31. JonT  |  November 30, 2010 at 10:10 am

    'After, they started it on Nov. 26th and finished it on Nov. 27th. Fastest poll ever to be made up…'

    Wow, I was half joking, but you are right! What a transparent load of crap!

    FRC is really scared about this aren't they? Good! It will be a pleasure watching them lose – either via Congress or the Courts.


  • 32. Gregory in Salt Lake  |  November 30, 2010 at 11:19 am

    so absurd!

  • 33. Lesbians Love Boies  |  November 30, 2010 at 11:23 am

    JonT – I don't actually know the timeline of the study…but it was after I do know that.

  • 34. adambink  |  November 30, 2010 at 9:31 am

    Yes, I couldn't even bring myself to mention it, everything about it was so infantile.

  • 35. Lesbians Love Boies  |  November 30, 2010 at 9:44 am

    I actually think it's interesting that 37% of the far right religious fundamentalists are wanting to repeal DADT too…that is somewhat saying positive things.

  • 36. Gregory in Salt Lake  |  November 30, 2010 at 11:20 am

    that came to mind too when read the poll : ) (though admittedly I'm positive-biased to a fault)

  • 37. Straight Ally #3008  |  November 30, 2010 at 9:40 am

    The FRC poll found that 104% of active duty military personnel, their families, and their pets will spontaneously combust if DADT is repealed.

  • 38. Kathleen  |  November 30, 2010 at 9:54 am


  • 39. Gregory in Salt Lake  |  November 30, 2010 at 11:24 am

    LOLROLF!! (@ "comust") I'm trying to be a college professional with a lab full of students and I'm getting random glares for my outbursts of glee.. Yay for Illinois, Rebecca in Chicago & Isa's mom!. Yay the study is released! Yay for Felex! Glad for proactive news!

  • 40. Gregory in Salt Lake  |  November 30, 2010 at 11:25 am

    maybe a new definition for "comust" ?

  • 41. anonygrl  |  December 1, 2010 at 4:23 am

    Comust- similar to combust, but instead of bursting into flame, the families, friends, acquaintences and pets of military personel forced to live in a post DADT world will burst into clouds of mold spores, which will be impossible to get out of the carpet. The DOD will then be forced to spend billions recarpeting all military housing and other installations, thus they will go broke, leaving no money to pay the newly open service members salaries, and THAT is why we must never, ever repeal DADT.

    Now we know!


  • 42. fiona64  |  December 1, 2010 at 4:47 am

    Holy crap. You mean there is military family housing with carpet?

    All of the places on Presidio of San Francisco (where I lived when married to my first husband, who was active duty), without exception, had hardwood floors.

    Fiona (who thought that hardwood was great until she lived with it …)

  • 43. anonygrl  |  December 1, 2010 at 4:56 am

    I dunno, I prefer hardwood myself.

    Yes, there are some places that have that awful industrial carpet. It is nasty stuff, and much worse than a hardwood floor.

  • 44. Alan E.  |  December 1, 2010 at 7:55 am

    I prefer hardwood. It's so much easier to keep clean, especially with dogs.

  • 45. fiona64  |  December 1, 2010 at 8:20 am

    Sure, it's easier to keep clean with dogs … but it is *cold.* I lived 1/4 mile from Baker Beach, dudes … it was awful.


  • 46. Alan E.  |  December 1, 2010 at 8:32 am

    I never go barefoot at home during the colder days, even when walking on rugs or carpet. My Uggs (pronounced oogz according to my friend that works at their store, or at least how many Europeans pronounce it) are by favorite article of clothing at home.

    However, yes, Baker Beach is a cold area.

  • 47. Lawrence  |  November 30, 2010 at 10:03 am

    We will hear a lot about is "didn't ask the right question" from the haters, and we are seeing McCain at this too. The report directly tackles this question, pointing out that it would have been inappropriate for the military to hold a referendum on military decisions, but then interestingly suggesting that their results essentially do imply an answer to this question (concluding that most military are not against repeal).

  • 48. JonT  |  November 30, 2010 at 10:12 am

    Agreed. There is also a section in the report called 'Lessons from History' (Section VIII) that is quite informative, especially regarding racial integration. 🙂

  • 49. adambink  |  November 30, 2010 at 9:32 am

    By the way everyone, if you're looking for more on the optics of the vote count etc., I did a "state of play" update this morning, found here.

  • 50. adambink  |  November 30, 2010 at 9:33 am

    Rather, here.

  • 51. Straight Ally #3008  |  November 30, 2010 at 9:46 am

    Thanks, Adam. I'm glad to hear positive things about Lincoln and Webb, and I can't say that Pryor surprises me – I have yet to meet a pro-LGBT rights creationist. My completely unscientific gut instinct is that Brown isn't gettable.

  • 52. Lawrence  |  November 30, 2010 at 9:48 am

    The report makes great reading, being very down-to-earth, factual and interesting in its discussion of the impact of stereotypes and fears versus the reality of working and fidgeting alongside real people. The actual biggest issue in all this turns out to be religion, which won't surprise people here. The most obscene quoted responses seemed to all be driven by religious intolerance, and the "chaplains" are more extreme than anyone else surveyed! The report interestingly and delicately tackles the question of how to respect the rights of certain people to continue to believe the crazy hate their religious "teachers" continue to foist on them while not allowing this to prevent people working together regardless of sexual orientation. In a nutshell, this the issue in all our current court cases and fights for equality, where none of this would be so hard if supposedly christian organizations actually practiced christianity rather than fomenting hate out of selective interpretations of a few lines of ancient bigoted writings (and making money along the way…).

  • 53. Lawrence  |  November 30, 2010 at 9:50 am

    "fighting" not fidgeting by the way (spelling conflictor strikes again) :):)

  • 54. Felyx  |  November 30, 2010 at 11:29 am

    LOL!! I liked 'fidgeting' better! (It encompasses about 90% of my idea of what the military actually does on a daily basis… i.e. the battle is usually short but the prep time takes forever!)

  • 55. Straight Ally #3008  |  November 30, 2010 at 9:55 am

    You have to figure that these chaplains regularly deal with people not of their faith, in other words, people who will be tortured for eternity in hell. But gays? Forget it, that's too much!

  • 56. Alan E.  |  November 30, 2010 at 10:15 am

    the “chaplains” are more extreme than anyone else surveyed

    That's because Baptists and Evangelicals are among the highest numbers when it comes to chaplains.

  • 57. Lesbians Love Boies  |  November 30, 2010 at 10:22 am

    I always think of Mash's Father Mulcahy when I hear of Chaplains in the service…

  • 58. Straight Ally #3008  |  November 30, 2010 at 10:56 am

    From the M*A*S*H episode "Blood Brothers":

    I want to tell you about two men. Each facing his own crisis. The first man you know rather well. The second is a patient here. Well, the first man thought he was facing a crisis. But what he was really doing was trying to impress someone. He was looking for recognition, encouragement, a pat on the back. And whenever that recognition seemed threatened he reacted rather childishly. Blamed everyone for his problems but himself because he was thinking only of himself. But the second man was confronted with the greatest crisis mortal man can face, the loss of his life. I think you will agree that the second man had every right to be selfish. But instead he chose to think not of himself, but of a brother. A brother! When the first man saw the dignity and the selflessness of the second man, he realized how petty and selfish he had…I….I…I had been. It made me see something more clearly than I've ever seen it before. God didn't put us here for that pat on the back. He created us so he could be here himself. So he could exist in the lives of those he created, in his image.

  • 59. Lawrence  |  November 30, 2010 at 10:31 am

    Yup. The contrast between the "not a big deal" attitude of most military (and all the other institutions and countries discussed in the report) and the extreme hating chaplains is quite explicit and amusing in this formal military report though :)!

  • 60. Mark M. (Seattle)  |  November 30, 2010 at 10:22 am

    Yeah the chaplains that oppose Gays but have no problem with ignoring 'Thou shall NOT kill'

  • 61. fiona64  |  December 1, 2010 at 2:31 am

    Two things: The commandment is "Thou shalt not murder," which is different.

    And, chaplains (like medics) are non-combatants.


  • 62. Mark M. (Seattle)  |  December 1, 2010 at 3:19 am

    Not true Fiona…chaplans are indeed trained to fight and kill, and are put into battle just like any other soldier as the need arises.
    And murder is a subjective term….one persons justified killing is anothers murder

  • 63. fiona64  |  December 1, 2010 at 4:50 am

    I worked for the DoD for 16 years. Your assessment is inaccurate. Chaplains don't even go through regular basic training; there is a whole separate course for them.

    Quote: As a non-combatant, chaplains do not carry or use weapons.


  • 64. Mark M. (Seattle)  |  December 1, 2010 at 7:09 am

    I guess things changed from when I was in the Navy….either that or the chaplan I went through boot with was just a figment of my imagination 🙂

  • 65. fiona64  |  December 1, 2010 at 8:21 am

    I started working for DoD in 1982 … and it has not changed from that day to this. Just sayin' …


  • 66. fiona64  |  December 1, 2010 at 8:22 am

    PS — it could have been a chaplains' assistant with whom you went through boot. They still have to go through regular training, etc., which the actual chaplains do not.

    Fiona (who briefly dated a chaplains' assistant)

  • 67. Lawrence  |  November 30, 2010 at 12:44 pm

    More on those fun chaplains. This comment from p134 seems to suggest that the chaplain spectrum goes from completely whacko to just plain confused. Surely there must be one or two who "love their neighbor as themselves"?

    <cite>In the course of our review, we heard some chaplains condemn in the strongest possible terms homosexuality as a sin and an abomination, and inform us that they would refuse to in any way support, comfort, or assist someone they knew to be homosexual. In equally strong terms, other chaplains, including those who also believe homosexuality is a sin, informed us that “we are all sinners,” and that it is a chaplain's duty to care for all Service members.</cite>

  • 68. Lesbians Love Boies  |  November 30, 2010 at 12:49 pm

    It seems to me that it is time to replace some of those nut-job chaplains with real chaplains.

  • 69. John  |  November 30, 2010 at 1:07 pm

    Agreed. I am ashamed that many claim to be in the same religion as I.

    Isaiah 58:6-12:

    “Is not this the kind of fasting I have chosen: to loose the chains of injustice and untie the cords of the yoke, to set the oppressed free and break every yoke? Is it not to share your food with the hungry and to provide the poor wanderer with shelter—when you see the naked, to clothe them, and not to turn away from your own flesh and blood? Then your light will break forth like the dawn, and your healing will quickly appear; then your righteousness will go before you, and the glory of the LORD will be your rear guard. Then you will call, and the LORD will answer; you will cry for help, and he will say: Here am I.

    “If you do away with the yoke of oppression, with the pointing finger and malicious talk, and if you spend yourselves in behalf of the hungry and satisfy the needs of the oppressed, then your light will rise in the darkness, and your night will become like the noonday. The LORD will guide you always he will satisfy your needs in a sun-scorched land and will strengthen your frame. You will be like a well-watered garden, like a spring whose waters never fail. Your people will rebuild the ancient ruins and will raise up the age-old foundations; you will be called Repairer of Broken Walls, Restorer of Streets with Dwellings."

  • 70. Bob  |  December 1, 2010 at 3:05 am

    replacing the nut jobs, Ham alluded to doing exactly that , in his statement, when he referred to thos chaplains who may not be able to reconcile their faith with their position,,,, and perhaps in those situations they would find it necessary to leave……

    such powerful statements,,,,, everyone is ready, lets not forget our job ……. the final push, keep the phones and e-mails busy, the public must ramp up their effort to make their senators accountable to the people,

    Obama sent an e-mail today asking us to do just that and requesting to sign his petition…..

    That is the work we all need to do , on this side of the senate floor…….

  • 71. Straight Ally #3008  |  November 30, 2010 at 12:52 pm

    People like the fire-and-brimstone chaplains with their hands on the nuclear trigger are pretty much my worst nightmare.

  • 72. nightshayde  |  December 1, 2010 at 4:33 am

    One of many reasons Mike Huckabee worries me so much. Sarah Palin, too — but to a lesser extent.

  • 73. Ann S.  |  November 30, 2010 at 1:10 pm

    It seems to me that a chaplain who would "refuse to in any way support, comfort, or assist someone they knew to be homosexual" is refusing to perform his or her duty and should be discharged. Pronto.

  • 74. nightshayde  |  December 1, 2010 at 4:33 am

    Preferably a dishonorable discharge.

  • 75. Lawrence  |  November 30, 2010 at 1:29 pm

    So here is the flush mechanism 🙂 If god would just withdraw his/her endorsement they would all simply disappear!

    <cite> Service. members. with. his. or. her. faith,. the. chaplain. may. request. that. the. or.her…</cite>
    p24 of the SPI implementation doc.

  • 76. Tomato  |  November 30, 2010 at 2:30 pm

    "Surely there must be one or two who 'love their neighbor as themselves'?"

    Yes. There are. But only one or two at the moment.

  • 77. Tomato  |  November 30, 2010 at 2:51 pm

    And another, who won "chaplain of the year"

  • 78. Steve  |  December 1, 2010 at 12:55 am

    Most military chaplains are Southern Baptist. I think like 60%

  • 79. Tomato  |  November 30, 2010 at 2:20 pm

    "none of this would be so hard if supposedly christian organizations actually practiced christianity"

    Oooh, ooh, is this where I get to trot out Marcus Borg and the Jesus Seminar and ?

  • 80. Cat  |  November 30, 2010 at 9:52 am

    Beautiful stuff! Of course this study will only further radicalize the far right trolls and extremely religious, but it should be convincing to many moderates who were concerned about adverse effects of repealing DADT.

    It's great to have a tough and masculine institution such as the US military saying: being gay is OK; we don't mind.

    Given the fact that support for ending DADT is much further along than the support (at the time) for ending bans on race and gender, this should be a no-brainer. Only those with malfunctioning brains could possibly oppose…

  • 81. Lesbians Love Boies  |  November 30, 2010 at 9:57 am

    For anyone who missed the airing this afternoon…

  • 82. Lesbians Love Boies  |  November 30, 2010 at 9:58 am

  • 83. Kathleen  |  November 30, 2010 at 10:06 am

    Which one of them has the pet bird in their pocket?

  • 84. Lesbians Love Boies  |  November 30, 2010 at 10:08 am


  • 85. JonT  |  November 30, 2010 at 10:13 am

    Yeah, sorry I could not listen to that video – the bird was too loud and distracting 🙂

  • 86. Lesbians Love Boies  |  November 30, 2010 at 10:18 am

    I hadn't noticed the bird…but I have a screaming dog at my side because the neighbors are outside hammering nails for Xmas lights.

  • 87. Lesbians Love Boies  |  November 30, 2010 at 10:17 am

    I think the telling part of the study is on page 227 (of the scribd file) where they ask:

    Question 83. In your opinion, which of the following are the top THREE factors that enable you to fulfill your mission during combat?

    The answer "having only heterosexual members in the unit" were all under 10% with most around 3%.

  • 88. Lawrence  |  November 30, 2010 at 5:50 pm

    And what the survey shows as far and away the most important is trust and teamwork. Which is negatively impacted if service people have to lie, keep secrets, not trust the people around them, and have to serve "with a knife in their back". McCain is so stupid and wrong to claim that this is somehow working. McMullen now gets this right that this attack on trust is antithetical to all the principles of military service.

  • 89. Lesbians Love Boies  |  November 30, 2010 at 10:26 am

    Axelrod: Don't Ask, Don't Tell will end

    President Obama's senior adviser David Axelrod is adamant that the "don't ask, don't tell" policy will end.

    During an interview with CNN Lead Political Anchor Wolf Blitzer in the Situation Room, Axelrod said of the military's controversial "don't ask, don't tell" provision, "This policy is gonna end."

    Axelrod maintained that Obama "has made it clear that he is intent on ending this policy" and that "we're depriving patriotic young Americans of their right to serve."

    Axelrod's comments come on the same day that a long-awaited Pentagon review of the policy was released. Recommendations from the report are based on surveys, focus groups and face-to-face meetings at bases around the world and even a carefully controlled effort to communicate anonymously with homosexuals serving in the military.

    "More than nine out of 10 troops said their unit's ability to work with someone they thought was gay or lesbian was very good, good, or neither good nor bad," the author of the report wrote.

    Asked if the president would consider issuing an executive order to end the policy, Axelrod placed the burden to undo DADT on Congress.

    "We need Congress to act to repeal what they've done," Axelrod said.

    Full Story:

  • 90. Kate  |  November 30, 2010 at 10:29 am

    "Now is not the time" for repeal? When IS the time? Oh, yeah; that's right — when They reinstate the draft. That's when They will want every queer 18-year old in the country.

  • 91. Gregory in Salt Lake  |  November 30, 2010 at 11:39 am

    !! (Hi Kate!)

  • 92. Lesbians Love Boies  |  November 30, 2010 at 10:33 am

    Illionois House Passes civil unions legislation in historic vote 61-52:

  • 93. Lesbians Love Boies  |  November 30, 2010 at 11:14 am

    Here is the voting board:

  • 94. Kathleen  |  November 30, 2010 at 11:16 am

    That made me tear up when I heard how excited people were when it passed. (happens a lot from things on this board)

  • 95. Lesbians Love Boies  |  November 30, 2010 at 11:18 am

    Me too! I actually didn't expect cheering and jumped a bit (it's now quiet here.)

  • 96. nightshayde  |  November 30, 2010 at 11:20 am

    Hooray! This is excellent news. =)

  • 97. Gregory in Salt Lake  |  November 30, 2010 at 11:28 am

    Hooray is right! : ) Thanks for posting LLB…I tuned into live session a little late.

  • 98. Lesbians Love Boies  |  November 30, 2010 at 11:35 am

    Something else you can watch LIVE…

    Catholics for Equality Invites You to
    A Catholic Family Conversation on LGBT Issues

    Wednesday, December 8, 2010 8:30 – 10:00 PM (ET)
    Georgetown University Intercultural Center Auditorium

    Speakers include:

    Andrew Sullivan, Atlantic senior editor, political commentator, author, blogger

    Maggie Gallagher, National Organization for Marriage spokesperson, political commentator, writer

    E.J. Dionne, Washington Post columnist, Brookings Institute senior fellow, political commentator, author

    Hanna Lomax-Vogt, Georgetown College Democrats

    Joel Knowles, Georgetown College Republicans

  • 99. Lesbians Love Boies  |  November 30, 2010 at 11:35 am

    The live cast will be here:

  • 100. Gregory in Salt Lake  |  November 30, 2010 at 11:43 am

    good for Maggie to be gutsy enough to dialogue with "Gay Catholic journalist Andrew Sullivan" — I can only think this type of forum will only help our side : )

  • 101. Sagesse  |  November 30, 2010 at 11:56 am

    I plan to watch, but I don't know why anyone would want to hear Maggie Gallagher's views about Catholic LGBT families.

    I've watched Andrew Sullivan take on Maggie before. I expect it will be civil, but she doesn't have the intellectual horsepower to take on Sullivan. He runs rings around her.

  • 102. DaveP  |  November 30, 2010 at 11:56 am

    Maggie again. Sheesh, that woman is like a fart in an elevator. I just wish she would go away and stop making things so unpleasant for everyone.

  • 103. Richard A. Jernigan  |  November 30, 2010 at 11:36 am

    How is John McLame going to weasel out of repealing DADT now? This report is the death knell for DADT.

  • 104. Lesbians Love Boies  |  November 30, 2010 at 11:38 am

    He will invent something – I have faith in the other states though.

  • 105. Kathleen  |  November 30, 2010 at 11:39 am

    He's claiming it's irrelevant because it doesn't ask the right questions.

    As far as I'm concerned, McCain is irrelevant.

  • 106. nightshayde  |  November 30, 2010 at 11:56 am

    I'm sure his ideal question would be something like this:

    How opposed are you to the idea of sleeping near queers?
    a. Violently opposed
    b. Extremely opposed
    c. Very opposed
    d. Pretty gosh-darned opposed

  • 107. anonygrl  |  December 1, 2010 at 4:43 am


    e. Yay! Let them sleep in MY bunk! Oops… did I say that out loud? Oh no, here come the DADT police…

  • 108. Ronnie  |  November 30, 2010 at 12:00 pm

    Interesting how when the surveys were issued he was all for them…let us wait until the studies come in he said..& our side was all like…the survey's are conservative anti-repeal leaning……now that the reports don't say what he wanted them to say…they are irrelevant …..go figure, yeah?…….. : / …..Ronnie

  • 109. nightshayde  |  November 30, 2010 at 12:51 pm

    Just like NOM. "The will of the people" must triumph over all — until "the will of the people" supports an end to discrimination.

  • 110. Gregory in Salt Lake  |  November 30, 2010 at 11:45 am

    did you see the video earlier with Anderson Cooper showing McCain's different video declarations on DADT since 2004? …Anderson won't let him get away with it!

  • 111. Lesbians Love Boies  |  November 30, 2010 at 11:42 am

    FRCs statement:

    FRC Criticizes Pentagon's CRWG Report on Open Homosexuality in the Military; Urges Extensive Hearings on Flawed Report

    No Level of Risk Should be Acceptable Merely to Advance a Liberal Social Agenda says FRC

    WASHINGTON, D.C. – Family Research Council (FRC) today renewed its criticism of the process which led to the release today of a report by the Pentagon's Comprehensive Review Working Group (CRWG) on the issue of open homosexuality in the military.

    Following President Obama's call in his State of the Union address for repeal of the 1993 law barring open homosexuality in the military (usually referred to as "Don't Ask Don't Tell") Secretary of Defense Robert Gates formed the CRWG to explore how – not whether – to implement a repeal of the current law.

    Marine Corps veteran and Family Research Council President Tony Perkins issued the following statement:

    "Congress should hold extensive hearings on this topic, on both the findings and methodological weaknesses of this report, before taking any action to overturn current law. No level of risk should be acceptable merely to advance a radical social agenda.

    "Sadly, today's report, and the ten months of work by the Comprehensive Review Working Group, may be of little value to Congress, because they failed to address the central question – whether overturning the current law would enhance our nation's ability to fight and win wars. By beginning with the premise that the law would be overturned, and exploring only how to implement such a change, the conclusion that such a change would be feasible was foreordained.

    "The same concern applies to the surveys conducted of servicemembers and their spouses. Media reports to the effect that a majority of servicemembers 'would not have a problem' with homosexuals in the military overlook the fact that the surveys did not ask whether respondents support repeal of the current law. If most servicemembers say that under a different policy, they would continue to attempt to do their job in a professional manner, that is only what we would expect. This does not mean that a new policy would not undermine the overall effectiveness of the force. And if even a small percentage of our armed forces would choose not to re-enlist, or part of the public would choose not to serve in the first place, the impact on the military would be catastrophic."


  • 112. Lesbians Love Boies  |  November 30, 2010 at 11:44 am

    “Congress should hold extensive hearings on this topic, on both the findings and methodological weaknesses of this report, before taking any action to overturn current law. No level of risk should be acceptable merely to advance a radical social agenda.

    Um, Mr Perkins, that's what was going on the last 10 months – you are an idiot.

  • 113. Gregory in Salt Lake  |  November 30, 2010 at 11:46 am


  • 114. Kathleen  |  November 30, 2010 at 11:46 am

    Tony Perkins was in the Marine Corps?

    (that was the only useful piece of information in the statement)

  • 115. Kathleen  |  November 30, 2010 at 11:46 am

    BTW, I so hate the fact that he's ruined my association with the name Tony Perkins – one of my fave actors of his era.

  • 116. Ann S.  |  November 30, 2010 at 11:56 am

    "Mother-m-mother, uh, what is the phrase? She isn't quite herself today."

  • 117. Ann S.  |  November 30, 2010 at 11:58 am

    "A boy's best friend is his mother."

  • 118. Carpool Cookie  |  November 30, 2010 at 3:33 pm

    "Mother! Oh God, MOTHER!! Blood…BLOOD!!"

    Lordie…we could go on all night with this : )

  • 119. Lesbians Love Boies  |  November 30, 2010 at 11:50 am

    If he joined shortly after high school…then he joined in 1981 or 1982 – no where does it say how long he served (but they imply he retired – which I seriously doubt.)

  • 120. Lesbians Love Boies  |  November 30, 2010 at 12:07 pm

    Nope, he joined after getting his masters. after the service he worked for the baton rouge city police, then we went and worked at WBTR TV as a reporter…then he was the campaign manager for Louis E. "Woody" Jenkins – and worked for the KKK grand wizard David Duke – hmmm…all this before he won the Louisina House of Rep in 1996?

    Makes me think his stint in the military was about 6 months.

  • 121. Kathleen  |  November 30, 2010 at 12:10 pm

    Maybe he was outed.

  • 122. Ed  |  November 30, 2010 at 1:57 pm

    Im from Lafayette Louisiana, 1 hour west of Baton Rouge. I did not follow politics until very recently….I am utterly embarrassed this schmuck represented my state. Makes me sick……

  • 123. fiona64  |  December 1, 2010 at 2:34 am

    Oh. Dear. God. He worked for David Duke?

    Now we know from whence he learned it.


  • 124. Sagesse  |  November 30, 2010 at 12:10 pm

    Perkins testified against repeal in the first round of Senate hearings earlier this year. Being a veteran makes him an expert. If I recall he served one tour, then moved on.

  • 125. Lesbians Love Boies  |  November 30, 2010 at 12:15 pm

    I am sure the Senate regrets letting the racist-anti-gay-hating Perkins to speak.

  • 126. Sagesse  |  November 30, 2010 at 12:57 pm

    Well, except for the Republican senators who invited him :).

  • 127. Lesbians Love Boies  |  November 30, 2010 at 12:58 pm

    They might actually regret it too..which is why Tony Perkins is going postal.

  • 128. JonT  |  November 30, 2010 at 2:45 pm

    Well, FRC is classified as a hate group now.

    Would the senate allow him to testify any more that they would let the grand wizard of the kkk testify? Or a leader of some right wing nazi group?


  • 129. Steve  |  December 1, 2010 at 12:57 am

    Just like other gay men, he joined to prove his manhood and butchness. The Marines are really in denial about how gay their service is.

  • 130. Ronnie  |  November 30, 2010 at 11:52 am

    More from the ingrates who owe their freedom to Gay & Lesbian soldiers who are currently risking their lives for them….shame on FRC….& they wonder why they have been labeled a hate group… : / …Ronnie

  • 131. elliom  |  December 1, 2010 at 2:36 am

    And if even a small percentage of our armed forces would choose not to re-enlist, or part of the public would choose not to serve in the first place, the impact on the military would be catastrophic.”

    Except….you're forgetting about all those who WOULD enlist or re-up because this policy is gone. Somehow, I think the number of ppl who would leave/avoid the military because of "teh ghey" is significantly smaller than those who would continue/begin to serve because of / in spite of this policy.

    This statement doesn't make sense.

  • 132. nightshayde  |  December 1, 2010 at 4:37 am

    Especially since there are already thousands of GLBT active service members.

  • 133. Ann S.  |  December 1, 2010 at 5:43 am

    I think one of the most telling bits is that people who knew they served with someone LGBT thought it was no big deal, even if they still harbored bias toward "stereotypical" LGBT people. If more people served openly, I think that the servicemembers who thought they just couldn't serve with openly LGBT people would find that they had been wrong.

  • 134. Steve  |  November 30, 2010 at 12:11 pm

    There is a second document with implementation guidelines:

    Much of it is pretty repetitive, but there is an interesting FAQ with cases examples on how to deal with some issues that can arise. Also about benefits that can't be offered to due DOMA and ways to mitigate that in the mean time.

  • 135. Felyx  |  November 30, 2010 at 12:19 pm

    Wow! Concern over (marriage) benefits… now that IS progress!!

  • 136. Steve  |  November 30, 2010 at 1:32 pm

    Yeah, they are making an effort. On the one hand, they don't want to introduce a special category for domestic partnerships or affidavits that people are in a relationship. On the other hand they are exploring what can be done despite DOMA and are recommending some changes so that same-sex partners can be designated as recipients for some things.

    The biggest issue is the Basic Housing Allowance (more money for married people) and military housing, which is only available when married. The latter is pretty important during foreign assignments.

  • 137. Lawrence  |  November 30, 2010 at 5:30 pm

    The issue, obviously, is DOMA which is gradually being proven in various courts to be unconstitutional and needs repeal. I read the sections in the SPI as kind of saying that if DOMA goes away then legal marriages may become relevant allowing future policies to change to allow same-sex benefits based on such marriage statuses. The survey questions, including for spouses, explicitly explored the issue of gay and lesbian couples moving in next door 🙂

  • 138. Richard A. Jernigan  |  December 1, 2010 at 12:45 am

    I actually had someone tell me that the only thing he did not like about having gay neighbors was the increase in the property taxes after the gays moved in and started renovating everything. And he made sure that I knew he was even joking about that. But we do seem to go to work on our houses and yards, don't we?

  • 139. anonygrl  |  December 1, 2010 at 4:47 am

    LOL… it's awful when property values go UP.

  • 140. Richard A. Jernigan  |  December 1, 2010 at 5:42 am

    Having the property values go up is not so bad, except that the taxes on those property values seem to go up at a greater percentage rate than the property values themselves do.

  • 141. Lesbians Love Boies  |  November 30, 2010 at 12:30 pm

    GREAT LA Times Editorial on the SPCLs recent Hate Outing of FRC

    Hate under cloak of religion

    …The council's president, former Louisiana lawmaker Tony Perkins, reacted angrily to the designation, calling it "slanderous" and demanding an apology. "The left is losing the debate over ideas and the direction of public policy, so all that is left for them is character assassination," Perkins said, insisting that his group "will continue to champion marriage and family as the foundation of our society and will not acquiesce to those seeking to silence the Judeo-Christian views held by millions of Americans."

    Other conservative commentators also have assailed listing the council as a hate group, calling it an affront to protected speech. That is a superficially compelling argument, but it won't withstand scrutiny. It is perfectly possible for a church or an organization associated with a denomination or religious tendency — as the Family Research Council is with evangelical Protestantism — to oppose, say, marriage equality as a departure from tradition and traditional notions of civic virtue without defaming gays and lesbians as a group.

    But the council goes well beyond that. Over the years, it has published statistical compendiums purporting to quantify the "evils" of homosexuality. One of its pamphlets is entitled, "Dark Obsession: The Tragedy and Threat of the Homosexual Lifestyle." At various times, its spokesmen have spuriously alleged that the gay rights movement's goal "is to go after children" and that child molestation is more likely to occur in households with gay parents. Last week, one of its senior fellows, Peter Sprigg, told reporters on a conference call concerning repeal of the "don't ask, don't tell" policy that "homosexuals in the military are three times more likely to commit sexual assaults than heterosexuals are relative to their numbers."

    Full Article:

  • 142. Pentagon Study Released: &hellip  |  November 30, 2010 at 4:41 pm

    […] Pentagon report, here. A good review at Prop 8 Trial Tracker. Organizations that are now listed by the Southern Poverty Law Center as hate groups were allowed […]

  • 143. Cat  |  November 30, 2010 at 4:34 pm

    McCain keeps on being such an *ss:

    1. "You should ignore the report because it didn't ask the military if it should appeal." Boy, does he hate the fact that the report shows not only that it can be done and a significant majority of the military would be OK with that, it also shows how it can be done. Why would you continue to discriminate against people once it's proven it is not necessary, Mr McCain?

    2. "The DADT policy is working just fine." He just doesn't care about the people on the receiving end of this hurtful policy. I repeat my previous point: why would you continue to discriminate against people once it's proven it is not necessary. "… furthers legitimate government interest…", anyone?

    3. "This is a promise made by Obama". Yeah, let's not do anything that makes Obama look good. Keeping your foot down may be bad for the country, but it is good politics.

    I am SO glad McCain lost the presidential election.

  • 144. Evelyn J. Brooks  |  November 30, 2010 at 11:00 pm

    Lets study the study that made the study so we can study it better.

  • 145. Gregory in Salt Lake  |  December 1, 2010 at 12:53 am

    HOOT!! (owl laughing…not to be confused by WOOT) so true EJB!

  • 146. Richard A. Jernigan  |  December 1, 2010 at 12:42 am

    Any ideas on how long it takes before McLame's RentBoy surfaces?

  • 147. Gregory in Salt Lake  |  December 1, 2010 at 1:00 am

    wouldn't that be something! alas….being a person that lived in the in denial universe for such a long time my compassion extends even to John McCain and his Anita-Bryant-bubble of ignorance….

  • 148. nightshayde  |  December 1, 2010 at 4:39 am

    Mine doesn't.

  • 149. Sagesse  |  November 30, 2010 at 11:07 pm

    Why Canada should protect gender identity

  • 150. Sagesse  |  November 30, 2010 at 11:10 pm

    The comments referred to in the gender identity article above.

    Evangelical leader accuses Tories of helping push NDP bill on gender

  • 151. John  |  December 1, 2010 at 12:43 am

    I read the comments on the second article there, or at least a couple pages of them.

    WAY different than you would see in the States. In the States, you would see things like, "These people are sick" and preaching about sin.

    There, you see "WTF? Why does this bigot give a care?"

    It's refreshing. Go Canada!

  • 152. Gregory in Salt Lake  |  December 1, 2010 at 12:49 am

    World Aids Day TODAY. Hugs/love/prayers to all those suffering here and around the world. Love, Gregory

  • 153. Richard A. Jernigan  |  December 1, 2010 at 2:15 am

    Also, Chanukkah starts this evening at sundown. So, to all my P8TT family–HAPPY CHANUKKAH! Kind of appropriate that World Aids Day and the first night of the Festival of LIghts are the same this year. After all, Chanukkah is about the miracle of one night of oil lasting for eight nights until a new run of oil could be made and consecrated, and World Aids Day is about shedding new light on HIV/AIDS and continuing to press for a cure and even better treatments, as well as education about how to prevent and/or reduce the spread of HIV. May both miracles come together to make an even greater one.

  • 154. Gregory in Salt Lake  |  December 1, 2010 at 2:34 am

    thank you for education about CHANUKKAH! : )

  • 155. fiona64  |  December 1, 2010 at 2:36 am

    Thank you Richard! (My FB page entry on holiday traditions this week will be about Hanukkah, BTW — and Saturday Night Musical will be "Shalom Rav" (if I can find it) or "Light One Candle" (if I can't find Shalom Rav).

    Love to you and BZ,

  • 156. Ann S.  |  December 1, 2010 at 5:40 am

    Happy Chanukkah, Richard and BZ! And to everyone else celebrating the Festival of Lights!

  • 157. Gregory in Salt Lake  |  December 1, 2010 at 1:13 am

    official website:


    NPR reflections:

  • 158. Bennett  |  December 1, 2010 at 1:36 am

    Maybe these are the right questions:

    Mr. McCain, during your time in the military, if you had served next to gay service members, how would you have treated them?

    Mr. McCain, during your time in the military, what type of "cohesion enhancing" activities did you engage in that would have been inconvenienced by the presense of gay service members. Did you participate in having hookers come in to assist with building morale like we hear is commonplace in the military?

    Oh, and, Mr. McCain, you have the reputation of being a bit of a womanizer. where is that coming from?

  • 159. Ronnie  |  December 1, 2010 at 2:41 am

    Happy 1st day of Hanukkah…but don't forget today is World AIDS Day…..Today my Facebook account shows red in remembrance of my Uncle Charlie who passed away in 1992 when I was 7yo going on 8….I also show red for all those whose lives were lost worldwide…children, mothers, fathers, family, friends, loved ones….as well as those who currently living with HIV….so please, if you have a Facebook account…add a red ribbon or an image from google…

    Today celebrities have killed their cyber connections…… Alicia Keys, Justin Timberlake, Usher, Lady Gaga, Kimberly Cole, Ejijah Wood, Ryan Seacrest, Jay Sean, Swizz Beatz, Serena Williams, Daphne Guinness, Kim Kardashian & more are participatin in this action to raise money for "Keep a Child Alive", which raises funds to fight AIDS in africa & India


  • 160. Ronnie  |  December 1, 2010 at 2:44 am

    apologies….Africa should be capitalized……& hear is the link to "Keep a Child Alive" website…..<3…Ronnie:

  • 161. Gregory in Salt Lake  |  December 1, 2010 at 4:18 am

    Thanks Ronnie : )

  • 162. Gregory in Salt Lake  |  December 1, 2010 at 4:21 am

    p.s. "Three Cheers!" for your uncle Charlie! ((HUGS))

  • 163. Ronnie  |  December 1, 2010 at 7:11 am

    You're welcome Gregory & thank you as well….<3….Ronnie

  • 164. Bob  |  December 1, 2010 at 2:57 am

    Happy World Aids Day, to all, I think of where we've been, and where we are, and how science has helped in our fight against this disease, I think of how organizing to fight both a stigma, and for health care, brought our community together, out of necessity we formed bonds, with each other as well as alliances with new allies…… the benefits of our sense of community are shared with others and know benefit everyone.

    When aids was first diagnosed it was largely groups of gay men at the clinics, it seemed like our space, but now, we've learned to share that space, with straight men and women, and especially with i.v. drug users. the work we did as Rainbow Qmunity helps many, and benefits now raise awareness and funds to help those around the world….

    And not to be overlooked is our latest victory, in that the Pope himselft has changed his stand on the use of condoms,,,, think for a moment about the impact of that tiny step forward, it has taken so long, but it wil not go unoticed in attitudes on the front lines, As well as living proof that a religious dogma can be affected by social change and scientific information.

    It finally put a crack in the popes fascade…..

    It is also a day of remembrance of all those who died, let our advances be a testimony to those lives, and may we continue as Rainbow people to work towards equality and justice for all…..

  • 165. Gregory in Salt Lake  |  December 1, 2010 at 4:20 am

    Thank you Bob for you insight & feeling. Interesting about Pope…that is HUGE change!

  • 166. Ronnie  |  December 1, 2010 at 3:35 am

    San Francisco AIDS Foundation employees say "It Gets Better"……<3….Ronnie:…!

  • 167. Phillip R  |  December 1, 2010 at 3:36 am

    This worries me when it comes to repealing DADT….

    Don't want to turn this into a republican vs democrat argument but I could really see this causing a grid lock.

  • 168. Bob  |  December 1, 2010 at 3:53 am

    right Phillip, that does pose a problem,,, and I'm wondering how it will work out…….

    would we be willing to give up our principles on the tax cuts to the wealthiest, I mean just use that as a bargaining chip to get DADT repeal NOW, and worry about the money issue in the next election,,,,,, would we be willing to let more of the masses join the ranks of the homeless, shopping at food banks,

    well at least that would increase the value and purpose of feed equality,

    I wonder what the dems have in the works to avoid that kind of payoff?????

    is DADT repeal more important than the tax cuts issue,,,,

  • 169. Lesbians Love Boies  |  December 1, 2010 at 4:00 am

    Those are dirty tactics…and they need to be called out on it.

  • 170. Lawrence  |  December 1, 2010 at 6:48 am

    This isn't just a problem – this IS the senate republican's plan to NOT vote on DADT this session, or anything else until the rich get their tax cuts back. All nicely wrapped up in a cozy argument about "small businesses". This makes it not about the strength of the military report – that is no longer the debate with this tactic. This "gay stuff" is all now irrelevant relative to "economic issues" so the republicans will happily filibuster on their economic principles and say this I not because they don't like the gay. This is a tactic breathtaking in it's chutzpah, and yes dirty politics. Calling them out has done nothing so far – in fact they have seen it win them elections. So the DADT question is now whether the Democrats and Obama have any way of aggressively dealing with this and whether any republicans will break ranks, which will be very hard now.

    After the joy in reading the report, I think we should prepare to be disappointed as the hard core political maneuvers become reality. Unless our so far uninspiring political Democrat supporters suddenly get very smart about how to escape this. And I'm sorry, but this is Repulican vs Democrat with one side absolutely aligned against equal rights.

  • 171. John  |  December 1, 2010 at 6:58 am

    Yes, it's sickening.

    The Republicans are masters at making themselves look like the party of the "average income" Christian, while supporting policies that don't help anyone with average income, nor are they even supporting the values they claim to support (for instance, their anti-abortion rhetoric actually results in MORE abortion than if we taught true sex-ed in school).

    It's all about making the Democrats look ineffective right now. And it doesn't matter who's rights get stepped on for these political points, as the game is more important to them than the people.

    It's sick.

  • 172. Bob  |  December 1, 2010 at 7:22 am

    right we're the football again,,,,,,,,,, but we can't give in, keep lobbying, keep up the heat,,,,,

    the military too must put the pressure on the repubs, cause if someone doens't step up and help this pass the courts will, and the militiary already has said it will be better for them if congress does it in Senate vote, so the big wigs in military, better do some lobbying too……

    couldn't we increase our lobbying pressure if we combined our efforts with those masses of middle class who stand to lose if tax cuts are handed to the wealthiest 1%

  • 173. Ronnie  |  December 1, 2010 at 4:00 am

    Hehehehe…(snickers)…..Dan Savage discusses the Pentagon reports & Senator Mc Lame…I mean McCain with Keith Olbermann….<3…Ronnie:

  • 174. Ronnie  |  December 1, 2010 at 4:03 am

    "Who's left to interview?…..The Spartans?" ~ Dan Savage

    I Love it….I Love Hype…..<3….Ronnie

  • 175. Lesbians Love Boies  |  December 1, 2010 at 4:21 am

    "We will not defend Proposition 8"
    ~ Kamala Harris at her victory party last night

  • 176. Gregory in Salt Lake  |  December 1, 2010 at 4:50 am

    : D HUGE SMILE!!! I'm so happy for the way the CA elections went!

  • 177. The Pentagon’s stud&hellip  |  December 1, 2010 at 8:51 am

    […] The full report is there on scribd. Via Prop 8 Trial Tracker, where they have a pretty good summary of key points and language. […]

  • 178. Rhie  |  December 2, 2010 at 10:44 am

    checkin the box

  • 179. Rhie  |  December 2, 2010 at 10:44 am

    checking the box

  • 180. Rhie  |  December 2, 2010 at 10:45 am

    Checkin box

Having technical problems? Visit our support page to report an issue!