Senator-Elect Pat Toomey has just issued a statement supporting repeal of “Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell.”
“As I’ve said previously, my highest priority is to have the policy that best enables our armed services to do their job,” Senator-Elect Toomey said. “Our civilian and professional military leadership have now spoken and said we should repeal Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. I would support a free-standing measure to do so.”
If Majority Leader Reid keeps his word, the freestanding repeal measure passed by the House yesterday will be voted on in the Senate in the lame duck, before Sen.-Elect Toomey is seated. Still, the support of a credible conservative like Toomey is a sure sign that repeal is likely to pass.
Maybe if some favored liberal group gets something during the lame duck there will be less pressure to pass DREAM.
Or am I the one dreaming?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseJust how "credible" a conservative is Toomey then? I suppose he didn't bother to listen to the Air Force, Army and Marine Joint Chiefs either.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseUncledave, get with it! There's 77% support in the country for repeal. This is no longer a "liberal" policy.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbusePerhaps Pres. Bush knew something the rest of us did not and, for that reason, did not back Toomey.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI think Toomey's support of repealing don't ask/don't tell is indicative of fading support for the policy among conservatives. Personally, I am all for repealing the policy and I think most rank and file conservatives (at least here in PA) share this view. Its not something that the Republican base is concerned about and most don't see a good reason to keep the policy any longer. I was surprised as anyone to read Toomey's announcement, but I think this is just the beginning of more GOP support for repeal.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"Still, the support of a credible conservative like Toomey is a sure sign that repeal is likely to pass."
Um no, it's a sign he's just trying to build some moderate cred...
This congress created a "Military Leadership Diversity Commission" to address many issues... and the "Military Leadership Diversity Commission" has recommended getting rid of all restrictions on women on combat... along with DADT, THIS CONGRESS should deal with their recommendations.
External Link
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI'm stunned. I guess I was oversold on Toomey. Obviously, he's better than Specter, but maybe Rick Santorum had reason to be less than excited about him after all.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"a credible conservative like Toomey"
Let's see him spend a little time in the Senate casting votes before we induct him into the Conservative Hall of Fame. Even Obama sounded conservative when he was running for office.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI pray this will not happen. God help your children and grandchildren if this perversion infiltrates combat units. The one government institution that works is the military. Go ahead, play with it. I, as a retired Marine, will have no part in supporting it any more. You will find that a culture change brings a change in outcomes, as surely as night follows day. The economy may revive, you can get another job. Good luck getting another country.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseToomey is an incredibly strong fiscal conservative. That is what he cares about... after all, he was the president of the Club for Growth. On social issues, I think he is generally conservative, but somewhat pragmatic.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseReliable estimates are that 1% of the population is homosexual. How many of them would meet the other qualifications to serve? Of that group how many would serve?
Now consider how many will leave or not serve if forced to serve with open homosexuals?
Is allowing open homosexuals to serve in the best interest of the country?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseClue, how many will leave if DADT is repealed? Please let us know your prediction.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseClue - How many people do you think will leave the service if they're forced to serve with open homosexuals? And my next question would be, why would they leave?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseGood for him and good for America.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI am a bit mixed on DADT. I do not approve of Homosexual behavior and I believe that it is harmful to society but more importantly Homosexual Behavior is harmful to the individual.
I believe that in a combat situation having members of the same combat organization being romantically involved and all that entails; from laser focus on each other, to infidelity to a spouse or partner back home, and ugly break ups, are bad for unit cohesion and military effectiveness.
If the Military would realistically address those relationship issues I would not have a problem with gays in the military. The effect of a realistic approach to the issue of romantic relationships would likely be a ban on Gays and Women in Combat and Combat support roles. That would be another ugly fight.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseOUTRAGEOUS!
The military code of justice doesn't permit deviant behavior of any kind, much less deviant sexual behavior!
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"Toomey is an incredibly strong fiscal conservative. That is what he cares about... after all, he was the president of the Club for Growth."
The Club For Growth is not always fiscally conservative, anymore than the Chamber of Commerce or WSJ are. These groups seek the financial advantage of the business class. Often that puts them in the fiscal conservative group, sometimes it pits them against it.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWhat an incredibly disappointing piece of politically correct nonsense from Toomey who I supported financially and voted for in the last election. If you can't say something sensible Pat just keep your mouth shut.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseLet the commonsense you should have been born with estimate how many of our soldiers, the best in the world, will refuse to re-enlist. Roughly a third or more, certainly not less. Add to that how low recruitment will drop and then factor in what our military 'readiness' will then be.
We won't be able to fight our way out of a paper bag.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseDrat! An edit function to allow commenters to correct their spelling mistakes would be helpful ...
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse