A Tale of Two Congressmembers

Fight pro-homo yellow journalism/research: the claim that “300 language experts have been fired under DADT, including more than 50 who are fluent in Arabic” relies upon a mendacious representation of data found in a 2005 GAO report that examines separations for homosexual conduct over the 10-year period 1994-2003. Even a cursory reading of that report reveals that few, if any, of the 300-plus individuals could conceivably be deemed “experts” – many didn’t even complete their language training. And of the over 50 (actually 54) ostensibly fluent in Arabic, only 20 achieved any sort of proficiency at all and none of these scored high enough to be considered fluent in the language.

Gen. John Shalikashvili, joined by around a hundred other retired flag officers, asserts that **the evidence** supports repeal of DADT. This opinion is based upon experiences reported by foreign militaries and a rather sparse body of social science research. What Gen. Shalikashvili doesn’t address is revealing. He fails to consider whether lessons learned by other militaries translate to the American case. And he fails to point out that the research he cites in support of his position was produced and/or funded by gay rights advocates. (For example, he insinuates that the well-respected Rand Corporation generated a paper, when in fact it was the product of the University of California Santa Barbara’s Palm Center, hardly a disinterested scholarly enterprise.)

The only way pro-homos can argue policy is by lying.

The only way pro-homos can argue policy is by lying.

Isn't this the way of politics in our country?

"What Gen. Shalikashvili doesn’t address is revealing. He fails to consider whether lessons learned by other militaries translate to the American case."
--Alessandra

Maybe you can address it then.

Homophobia is a form of mental illness.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/... is an editorial by Gen. Shalikashvili where he writes "While it is true that the U.S. armed forces are unique, it is important that we not marginalize the lessons learned in other countries -- particularly those that often conduct joint operations with us" -- making it clear that Alessandra's claim that "He fails to consider whether lessons learned by other militaries translate to the American case" is quite false.

The fact is that bigots lie -- whether it's about blacks, women, or gays -- to justify positions that they know are not morally defensible.

(For example, he insinuates that the well-respected Rand Corporation generated a paper, when in fact it was the product of the University of California Santa Barbara’s Palm Center, hardly a disinterested scholarly enterprise.)

Yet another example of the dishonesty of bigots. Here is RAND's own news release about the study: http://www.rand.org/news/press/2009/1...

Is RAND itself guilty of "insinuation"? No, it is the bigots who are guilty of that with their ad hominem arguments that do not address the actual content of the study.

"The fact is that bigots lie -- whether it's about blacks, women, or gays -- to justify positions that they know are not morally defensible." -truth_machine-

Well truth_machine, you've certainly shown your bigoted side on many occasions over the years. The only difference between yourself and the bigots you attack is that your form of bigotry is more "politically correct".

Yes people be forewarned: If you cross T_M you run the risk of being accused of being racist, stupid, and ignorant.

I of course completely support T_M's right to make a fool out of herself with her sexist and racist unsupported hyperbole.

By the way, doesn't "homophobia" translate to "fear of human beings"?

Sure it does, billclausen. That's why Alessandra uses the so much more enlightened "pro-homo" to designate those who like human beings.

billclausen, I giggle sometimes, as you are a reasoning and reasonable person whose opinions seem to have stopped evolving somewhere in the mid-'80s.

I believe it was 1982 when "homophobia" last meant 'fear of man.'

Double click the word, and the Independent's Answers.com dialogue box will give you a contemporary reference.

---

On a more serious note, you can tell Alessandra is one angry, frightened dude. I hope he doesn't have to work or associate with any of 'them.' (And I'm sure he thinks he doesn't.)

And meanwhile we dolphins laugh at you humans--Homo Sapiens that you are.

By the way, truth_machine did us all a favor by taking the time to research the false assertions made by Alessandra, proving him as an out and out lying bigot.

Thanks.

Sorry you and billclausen don't get along, as you both bring a lot to these forums.

C'mon, binky, what's a decent forum without a cat fight now and then? :-)

Addressing the rift between truth_machine and myself:
The reason we do not get along is because when someone has to resort to calling people "racist" or "moron" "jackass" or simply lying about people I won't sit by and let that person do that without answering the charges.

I can debate and disagree with binky, and yet I know the conversation will be civil, truth_machine on the other hand generally depends on insulting people.

You can click on my comments and look at the archived comments I have written and while you may not agree with me, and while I have been proven wrong on occasion, (and I've been proven wrong by none other than binky on at least one of these occasions) I don't have resort to the name calling that truth_machine to which truth_machine resorts. Click on truth_machine's link, look at her comments, and you will see endless unsupported character assassinations including a recent reference that Brooks Firestone doesn't like Obama because Obama is Black. (Posted on January 18 at 2:26 p.m. Once again, no evidence is provided)

Here is a list of truth_machine's comments http://www.independent.com/users/trut...

and here are mine http://www.independent.com/users/bill... you can decide for yourself why we don't get along.

Here is a good example of how trying to reason with truth_machine is impossible:

http://www.independent.com/news/2007/...

As binky points out, T.M. is capable of making good points, when she chooses to do so.

Note to "truth_machine" (read propaganda_machine)

You would embarrass yourself less if you realized skimming a press release carelessly doesn't enable you to know the Truth!

"On November 10 the Boston Globe reported that “RAND and the University of Florida” had produced new research that would help the Obama Administration to repeal the 1993 law regarding gays in the military, mislabeled (as always) “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” The Globe hailed the report as something new and credible. In fact, it is neither.

As stated in a November 9 RAND news release, the 23-page report was the result of a “contract” between the Michael D. Palm Center, a University of California-based activist group, and the two authors, Laura Miller, Ph.D., of RAND and Bonnie Moradi, Ph.D., of the University of Florida. A corporate spokeswoman has confirmed that the Miller/Moradi/Palm paper, pretentiously titled Attitudes of Iraq and Afghanistan War Veterans Toward Gay and Lesbian Service Members, was not a RAND study.

The paper in question actually is a substandard re-interpretation of the thoroughly-spun Zogby Poll sponsored by the Michael D. Palm Center in 2006. The "new" paper, which was commissioned by the Palm Center, amounts to a re-reading of four year-old tea leaves that also were paid for by the Palm Center. Perhaps RAND trusted that no one would inspect the document too closely, or notice that it provides over-interpreted conclusions based on a small survey sample gathered by questionable, non-random methodology that was paid for by a gay activist group. "

For those who can read, instead of just spitting out their ignorant pro-homo propaganda, the full article is here:

http://cmrlink.org/HMilitary.asp?docI...

Truth_machine:
The fact is that bigots lie -- whether it's about blacks, women, or gays -- to justify positions that they know are not morally defensible.
===============
That's exactly why you and other bigoted pro-homos like you lie. You don't have a case for normalizing homosexuality, the only way to push it forward is by lying!

(maybe that explains why you and others carry such a mountain of bile inside you and constantly spit it out in your comments).

By the way, truth_machine did us all a favor by taking the time to research the false assertions made by Alessandra, proving him as an out and out lying bigot.

Thanks.
=====================
Too bad you can't read things by yourself. A common characteristic of pro-homos, isn't it? Anything you hear is good for you. There's a word for that, it's called naive.

We could name the fanatical pro-homo ideas proposed here as "sexuality for the stupid," aka, how ignorant, petty, bigoted people like to delude themselves as having superior thinking on sexuality.

Once again, Alessandra throws up a lot of words, saying very little indeed.

She references an anti-gays-in-the-military website, which re-interprets the RAND study (paid for and promoted by RAND, no matter how much she dislikes it).

And the actual report didn't attempt to hide any of the revelations you so energetically promote:

(from the RAND report):

"Declaration of Conflicting Interests
"The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interests with respect to the authorship and/or
publication of this article.
"Funding
"The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research and/or
authorship of this article: This article is based on a study funded by the Palm Center, University
of California, Santa Barbara"

Rather than tear apart that study, perhaps Alessandra should offer a countervailing opinion. A superior form of argument, I warrant.

Nice (inaccurate) use of language by the way Alessandra: "Pro-homo." Quite fierce. You should have thrown in pro-fag, pro-queer, pro-deviant, pro-nancy, or pro-sissy!!

http://edition.cnn.com/2000/HEALTH/09...

Paul Crane said he lost everything when he was kicked out of the Army after 15 years — for being 8 pounds overweight.

Every year, between 3,000 and 5,000 service members such as Crane are forced to leave the military for being too fat.
——
Although there’s a difference between someone who sits behind a desk all day and someone whose work involves physical activity, it’s completely discriminatory to discharge someone with a career military sedentary job because they ate a few more Twinkies.

I don’t see pro-homos crying about how unjust it is that good men and women who had a few more chocolate bars were expelled from the military–if they were in sedentary jobs. Additionally, the chunky don’t harass other people in the showers because of their overweight condition, and fat men don’t get military women pregnant because of their preference for two large fries.

There were a lot more fat people that were discharged than DADT cases, but are liberals wailing and putting on their drama queen shows about it? Are they calling the President to overturn this horrible discrimination against the fluffier of our military?

No, they can care less, those hateful waistline bigots.

How ironic that ho

How ironic that we're talking about twinkies and gay issues in the same blog. This brings to mind the murder of Harvey Milk by Dan White. White used the "Twinkie Defense" saying the sugar caused him to kill Harvey Milk. The defense worked pretty well because White only served five years.

In a final twist of irony after getting off with a slap on the hands by only serving five years for murdering two people, Dan White commited suicide.