It's great that this is getting into the mainstream media. I recently had a conversation with a friend of a friend who didn't know anything about DADT. "Gays can't be in the army? Really? I didn't know that!"
It's a canny, canny move to put this in terms of the individual unit -- hearing a serviceman say "My unit is professional -- they could handle this," is a really tough line to attack.
When I read "kick the hell out of the Army", I initially thought you meant that he would be like some kind of maniacal multi-linguistic drill sergeant who would be so steamed about getting discharged that he would come back with a vengeance and then shout Arabic curses at all the grunts and they would be so fired up they would storm Dar Es Salaam and win the war for America forever and ever.
The more pressure Maddow and Savage and the other screeching harpies put on Obama the better.
Either he resists and the Liberals and Gays pout and cry and get sullen or he gives in and Red America remembers why they need the GOP.
Either way Obama is going to be pissed because if he wanted to do it he would have already and if he is pressured into doing something he personally objects to he is going to remember that and if he sticks to his principles and has to pay hell for it he will remember that too.
@5: What does one have to do to qualify as a "screeching harpy" in your book? Because if you've ever actually heard Maddow's voice, it is the opposite of screeching.
(But, y'know, use whatever generic bullshit term you want to discredit women, I get it.)
It's really smart that he made it about the remaining (presumed straight) members of his Unit, instead of about his own personal outrage. It does seem that the US Army and a small percentage of the American people have a really really poor view of those who serve their country. Choi framed it as people who support this discrimination don't trust that the men and women they entrust their freedom to are professional enough to deal with someone with a different sexuality. It not only exposes the ridiculousness of this legislation because Choi is such a well qualified leader, it also exposes the ridiculousness of anyone who supports this legislation because it says that they are, in fact, not supporting the troops or at the very least think they are emotionally capable of going to war but not of having an openly gay man or woman serving besides them.
This is the type of gay guy/girls we need to show more often in our ads, even when it comes to marriage. There must be a gay couple or two out there where one or both of them served in the military. I belive this would help the conservatives realise we are reqular people. Not to mention the Lt. is really hot.
It's super effective politically that gay and lesbian first responders, childrearers and soldiers are plentifully available for political PR and stuff. But I always cherished the illusion that most of us were kind of, I dunno, special in some way.
But the helpful propaganda is convincing me that on the whole we're now truly, almost awfully mundane. Which includes how some of us want to join Starship Troopers in fighting bugs or whatnot.
@10, The kind of linguist who understands that "don't tell" is the same thing as a lie. The kind of linguist who understands that being forced to lie is a violation of his oath as an officer. The kind of linguist who understands that a government policy that forces you to lie makes you highly vulnerable to blackmail, and a security risk.
@17 The blackmail issue is something that rarely seems to come up: just how vulnerable a service member is to someone who wants to expose his/her sexuality. Your job is on the line if you get caught in in the lie your are told you must maintain. Really, we should never put someone, particularly someone serving the country, in that position as part of official Government policy....it's insane.
"On this point, I wanted to tell you guys about a discussion I had with a friend a couple of days ago about ERW....
So, I met up with a friend I used to work with who was laid off by ERW [recently]. He was actually XXXXX's direct supervisor until that point, a Field Organizer. We talked for several hours and he just totally went off on ERW top-down organizing style.
Part of his job was to try and organize things with smaller groups around the state. He told me that the problem is that ERW continually fucks people over because they're only really concerned with where the money is coming from, though they put up a front that they want to help the community. As an effect, he said that he'd have people from these different community groups calling him all the time cussing him out because ERW would last minute decide that plans with a certain group weren't profitable, and would just get the order to ditch out on them. He said that it felt like 80% of the groups they would work with would be so angry at them, because they were really only worried about the most profitable 20%: the big donaters.
He also said that he felt bad for the people that worked there because they're massively overworked and underpaid, working on average 60 hours a week, and more during big events. The bosses don't listen to the suggestions of any of the volunteers, but give orders to them based upon the wants of those with the dollars.
So basically I'm saying that our assessment of ERW as a top-down, conservative organization is pretty accurate, straight from the horse's mouth itself. Should we still work with them, yes. But should we be prepared for them to fuck us over if we can't bring them money? Yes. Let's just be as careful with them as possible. This is why I personally prefer a grassroots approach in which all of our opinions are valid and help shape the outward focus of the groups' activities. We're not tied down to donations, and they are. This is also why they're not prepared to "rock the boat", and why we have a very important role to play in building this movement."
I'm also a huge fan of yours. A tour in Iraq and a degree in Arabic is nowhere near as awesome as hearing your outspoken advice and claiming a new lease on life. Thanks for helping me come out of the closet to my folks- LT Dan Choi
Either he resists and the Liberals and Gays pout and cry and get sullen or he gives in and Red America remembers why they need the GOP.
Either way Obama is going to be pissed because if he wanted to do it he would have already and if he is pressured into doing something he personally objects to he is going to remember that and if he sticks to his principles and has to pay hell for it he will remember that too.
(But, y'know, use whatever generic bullshit term you want to discredit women, I get it.)
"I like the cut of your gib"
Soldier:
"Stop!"
A- You conceed Dan sounds like a screeching harpy, right?
B- It is an attitude as well as acoustic effect.
But the helpful propaganda is convincing me that on the whole we're now truly, almost awfully mundane. Which includes how some of us want to join Starship Troopers in fighting bugs or whatnot.
Little known secret.
So, I met up with a friend I used to work with who was laid off by ERW [recently]. He was actually XXXXX's direct supervisor until that point, a Field Organizer. We talked for several hours and he just totally went off on ERW top-down organizing style.
Part of his job was to try and organize things with smaller groups around the state. He told me that the problem is that ERW continually fucks people over because they're only really concerned with where the money is coming from, though they put up a front that they want to help the community. As an effect, he said that he'd have people from these different community groups calling him all the time cussing him out because ERW would last minute decide that plans with a certain group weren't profitable, and would just get the order to ditch out on them. He said that it felt like 80% of the groups they would work with would be so angry at them, because they were really only worried about the most profitable 20%: the big donaters.
He also said that he felt bad for the people that worked there because they're massively overworked and underpaid, working on average 60 hours a week, and more during big events. The bosses don't listen to the suggestions of any of the volunteers, but give orders to them based upon the wants of those with the dollars.
So basically I'm saying that our assessment of ERW as a top-down, conservative organization is pretty accurate, straight from the horse's mouth itself. Should we still work with them, yes. But should we be prepared for them to fuck us over if we can't bring them money? Yes. Let's just be as careful with them as possible. This is why I personally prefer a grassroots approach in which all of our opinions are valid and help shape the outward focus of the groups' activities. We're not tied down to donations, and they are. This is also why they're not prepared to "rock the boat", and why we have a very important role to play in building this movement."