« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »
02/16/2010
Video: Far-right loves, loves, loves Cheney -- just not when he's being accurately pro-gay
Okay, so check whatever opinions you might have about Dick, and watch this little clip:
Regardless of your feelings, you probably find this to be a mostly fair assessment, right? It's essentially a summation of where we stand, what's been said, and how we're proceeding. And no matter how one feels about Cheney, he does have insider knowledge of the process.
Well, leave it to the Family Research Council to mine a pro-gay agenda out of simple assessment. In a piece headed "Cheney Gets His Facts Wrong," FRC says of the former Veep:
I think much of what he had to say was accurate. However, near the end of the interview Cheney's facts were wrong when he replied to a question about the repeal of the military's policy of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." Cheney, who has also spoken out against efforts to protect marriage said, "When the chiefs come forward and say, 'We think we can do it,' then it strikes me that it's -- it's time to reconsider the policy. And I think Admiral Mullen said that."
However, that's not what Admiral Mullen said. Admiral Mullen told the Senate earlier this month, "It is my personal belief that allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly would be the right thing to do." It was clear he was not speaking for the Joint Chiefs, some of whom are opposed to changing the policy, saying it would be "disruptive," which of course could undermine military readiness and as a result weaken our national security.
Cheney Gets His Facts Wrong [FRC]
Okay yes, true, Mullen is not every single member of the Joint Chiefs. But he is a little something called the, oh, I don't know -- CHAIRMAN. He does meet and strategize with this body, as a rule. And he, like former Joint Chiefs Chairmans John Shalikashvili and Colin Powell, is using his leadership position to lead on this issue. That's not a minor point that is discredited by the vague notion that repeal would be "disruptive." Mullen's support is a MAJOR point that must be respected for what it is, regardless of personal resistance to it (the same way we had to note the weight of former Chariman Peter Pace's position when we boldly resisted his homo-hostile comments).
It's absolutely disingenuous for FRC to discredit Mullen's influence and role, or to act like Cheney is misleading the public. And in fact, if you want to talk about TRULY weakening the armed forces and national security, then let's talk about this new precedent of discrediting the opinions of top military brass simply because they don't jive with your own anti-gay agenda. For those who care about reality rather than rhetoric, the willingness to shun any leader who supports fairness seems like far more of a threat than does the willingness to embrace openly gay people who simply want to fight and possibly die in order to defend their nation. Call me crazy (if your pre-conceived agenda says you must).
***
**SEE ALSO: DADT expert (and G-A-Y friend) Nathaniel Frank on what current polling really says: Gay Troops and the Trouble With Polls [HuffPo]
Your thoughts
How scary and shocking that one's sin of homophobia is more important than our national security. All the countries that have integrated patriotic gay people into their armed services are doing just fine--some even serve with us in Afghanistan. Lying about one's personal life, sowing division, kicking people out after spending thousands on training them and using our military to promote the anti-gay agenda does not make us more secure. It makes us less secure.
Anti-gay advocacy groups need to focus on repenting and leaving homophobia, not on destabilizing our military.
Posted by: Michael | Feb 16, 2010 11:30:07 AM
Even Darth Vader had a soft spot for his immediate family... at least eventually.
Posted by: Dick Mills | Feb 16, 2010 12:26:43 PM
I'm not moved. He did nothing while he was in power, has no real clout anymore, and is generally despised. His statements are really just for the history books, and should be seen as such.
Posted by: BamBam | Feb 16, 2010 6:13:52 PM
comments powered by Disqus