And we won’t hear Mike Turner’s position?

The Dayton Daily News-less has the back-assward positions of Austria, Jordan and Boehner on gays in the military- but no mention of Teflon Mike:

WASHINGTON — Republican congressmen Steve Austria and Jim Jordan objected Wednesday, Feb. 3, to Pentagon plans to end a ban on gays and lesbians openly serving in the armed forces.

Jordan, R-Urbana, and Austria, R-Beavercreek, issued their critical statements just one day after Defense Secretary Robert Gates said he would appoint a high-level panel to review ways to end the prohibition within a year….

“I would have great concerns about what introducing open homosexuality into the military might do to jeopardize the effectiveness, readiness and preparedness of our military,” Jordan said, adding that “active duty military service and civilian life are vastly different.”

Austria said that the current policy “seems to be working and we should be consulting with our commanders on the ground on whether or not there is a problem and if the current policy needs to be reviewed.”…

A spokeswoman for Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, said he backs a repeal of the current policy.

Austria and Jordan echoed House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-West Chester, who on NBC’s “Meet the Press” Sunday asked, “In the middle of two wars and in the middle of this giant security threat, why would we want to get into this debate?”

via Area congressmen object to ending military gay ban.

Apparently, it’s too much work to find out what Mike Turner says- or maybe he hasn’t gotten his talking points yet from Boehner. You’d think this simple bit of reporting wouldn’t be too difficult for the paper that endorses him every election.

For the record- not a single one of these congressmen has served in the military- where there have always been homosexuals serving honorably.

And if two wars is a problem for Boehner- try getting out of them. This affects so few people that it’s really a non-issue, except to those who must serve in secret.

It’s time to end “Don’t ask, Don’t Tell” and implement “none of your business”- after all, aren’t they protecting the “land of the free” where “all men are created equal.”

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed! If you wish to support this blog and independent journalism in Dayton, consider donating. All of the effort that goes into writing posts and creating videos comes directly out of my pocket, so any amount helps!

Leave a Reply

24 Comments on "And we won’t hear Mike Turner’s position?"

Notify of
avatar
Johnathon

House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-West Chester, who on NBC’s “Meet the Press” Sunday asked, “In the middle of two wars and in the middle of this giant security threat, why would we want to get into this debate?”
Boehner answered his own question. We are disqualifying someone who is qualified, perhaps more so than his/her heterosexual counterpart, to do certain tasks in the US armed forces on the grounds they’re are homosexual.
Not only is this when we should be having this debate, it’s when we should be ending it and letting anyone who wants to serve, do as such. Because if the best translators in the world prefer to be bedfellows with their own gender, I’d much rather have them doing the translating than someone who isn’t the best in world simply because they choose to sleep with the opposite gender.
This is putting party politics before what’s best for the country.

Greg Hunter
Greg Hunter

From a purely political perspective Mike is in a safe seat and he has no vested interest in answering the question; therefore, he will not.

Jeff of Louisville
Jeff of Louisville

Given Turners record on LGBT issues we don’t even need to aks him the question; we already know the answer.
 
 
 
 
 
 

Greg Hunter
Greg Hunter

I agree Jeff, but as I think about it he should actually be THE congress person to comment on the issue as he is on the Military Affairs committee?  The DDN will not put pressure on the anointed one and it would be interesting to see how he would respond if there actually would be an opponent to his Congressional Seat.  I would love to see old Mikey boy question Mike Mullen.  Not a chance which is why the Republicans will not take it up.

Gary Staiger
Gary Staiger

Even if there were an opponent [ and the Dems, Greens and no one else has a credible candidate]  it would not make any difference to Turner unless they had a LOT of $$ to spend.  He will do as he has done in past elections, simply ignore the opposition. Great democracy we have here [NOT]

Jeff of Louisville
Jeff of Louisville

On this and other LGBT issues Turner might be representing the majority opinion in his district, given the big military/military retiree presence here, not to mention that it is fairly culturally conservative (as is the entire Ohio Valley, for that matter). 

If he is on the military affairs committee we will know soon enough, based on his votes or if his committee holds hearings and Turner asks questions.

Civil Servants are People, Too
Civil Servants are People, Too

Headline should read: Congreessmen have No Faith in Military to Do Their Jobs in Changing Times.” 

Do you think they would change their tune then?

I do.  

Pseudonymous
Pseudonymous

I think both sides are going about this wrong. Has anyone done a survey or study of the armed forces to determine if allowing troops to “come out” will affect effectiveness and morale?

Scott

David, as a veteran I think you’re particularly qualified to speak on the specific impacts of this change.  Opponents seem to be concerned about degrading the cohesiveness of the unit and the ability of soldiers to count on one another in stressful battle situations – can you give some perspective from your experience?

Greg Hunter
Greg Hunter

I think it opens up more avenues for a fraternization without the consequential resultant reassignment of the impregnated person stateside to work in the Security and Badging office.  Fraternization is still Fraternization, No?  If we really wanted to save money.  Go back to an all male Military.  Pregnancy the ultimate “Get Out” clause.
Some Classic Links on Pregnancy in the Military.

Joe Lacey

Any survey would be compromised by people with strong political views who can simply claim that it will hamper their morale and effectiveness.  Armed forces currently operate with high morale and effectiveness both here, in units with service members who are widely accepted as gay (effectively out), and abroad, in the 25 countries where gay people serve openly in the military.

Shortwest Rick
Shortwest Rick

Once again the objections are smoke screen. Demoralization of the hetro troops, not. Readiness to go in to combat? What are they saying, if gays allowed to be out everybody’s going to be lined up for a bj when the bombs start falling? No, what this entails is any Republican Congressperson or Senator fears loosing their voting base that they spent three decades re-educating to hate a particular group if they support repeal of don’t ask don’t tell.

jstults

David:

The US Military is still backwards on their position of putting females in combat roles…

Slow down there bubba, there’s quite a few female fighter pilots who would beg to differ.  Just because the Army is a little behind the power curve…

David Lauri

Via SLOG:

Countries that forbid gays in their military: Cuba, China, Egypt, Greece, Iran, Jamaica, North Korea, Pakistan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Serbia, Singapore, South Korea, Syria, Turkey, Venezuela, Yemen, the USA.
Countries that allow gays to serve in their military: Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bermuda, Brazil, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Peru, the Philippines, Romania, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the UK, Uruguay.

Pseudonymous
Pseudonymous

@ Joe Lacey: it could equally be said that a survey would be “compromised” by those with strong political views in favor, too. A survey can’t be “compromised” by answering honestly unless you’re working backwards from the answer you’ve already decided on.

Joe Lacey

Fine.  Then a survey would be compromised by those with strong political views (end of sentence).  It’s very likely that you will get answers that are not frank or honest from those holding strong political views on this subject.  Either way that diminishes the value of any survey of service members.  A study of the morale and effectiveness of fighting forces that currently have openly serving gay people would be far more valuable.

Pseudonymous
Pseudonymous

What you propose would be worthwhile, especially if it took into consideration opinions and efficiencies before and after, but not to the exclusion of polling Americans as well.

But assuming an anonymous survey, what motivation would anyone with strong opinions one way or the other have NOT to be honest? It’s only the relative anonymity of the internet that allows me to have this discussion with you, as the last time this topic came up on here, someone’s livelihood was threatened and he was accused of supporting beheading gay teenagers. (Can’t remember if that was you or David Lauri that said that and never recanted despite many opportunities to do so.)

David Lauri

It’s only the relative anonymity of the internet that allows me to have this discussion with you, as the last time this topic came up on here, someone’s livelihood was threatened and he was accused of supporting beheading gay teenagers. (Can’t remember if that was you or David Lauri that said that and never recanted despite many opportunities to do so.)
 
Um, wow.  First, I don’t hold power over anyone’s job. Second, I really don’t remember ever writing anything about the beheading of gay teenagers.  I did a Google search just to double-check, and my comments on the only link that is really me and not some other combination of “david lauri” have nothing to do with beheading or gay teenagers.
 
I don’t even know of any place that beheads gay teenagers.  There are, however, places that hang them.

Pseudonymous
Pseudonymous

My apologies, David L.; it was Joe Lacey that said it, on Nov.24, 2009:

“I trust Mr. Vigh had fun reading about last week’s murder and decapitation of Jorge Steven Lopez, a gay teen in Puerto Rico.”

See, I’m capable of acknowledging my mistake and apologizing. To the best of my knowledge, Joe never formally retracted his calumny. I’m offering him another opportunity to do so here, however, so that he can be seen as a reasonable person in this debate and not a hot-headed extremist.

Jeff of Louisville
Jeff of Louisville

….well, did Robert Vigh have fun reading about that?  It was a question.  Did Vigh answer it?
 
 
 
 

David Lauri

Wow, learn how to use hyperlinks.  Every comment made on esrati.com has a permalink which you can get by right-clicking on the date and time of the comment. You can link directly to Joe’s comment so that it can be read in its context.
 
Also, learn what sarcasm is. By saying what he said, Joe wasn’t making a literal claim that Mr. Vigh actually took pleasure in the murder of a gay Puerto Rican teenager; he was using a, to quote Wikipedia, “rhetorical device of using a characterization of something or someone in order to express contempt.”

Greg Hunter
Greg Hunter

The Cincinnati Enquirer called Turner’s Office and got no comment.  I can look up link but so can you.
 
Despite the implication of allowing gays to serve in the Military with respect to Romania, I found that as a society that were a tad more homophobic than most Americans but would allow more closeness between males than their American counter parts.  For example I would give the Romanian Plant Manager a back massage, and he loved it (I have a gift) but the American.  Not so much.

Gays are allowed to serve openly in the Romanian army. According to the Ministry of Defence’s recruitment policy, “it is the right of every Romanian citizen to take part in the military structures of our country, regardless of their sexual orientation.”[7] Nonetheless, many– if not most– gay and lesbian members of the military choose to remain closeted in the work place due to continued fear of discrimination.

Now when it comes to sexuality I think the Romanians have it down.  Oh to get this service in Dayton.  Well you can, but it takes some…..  Enjoy!

Joe Lacey

Why study people’s opinions on this?  The opinion study would be useless.  People’s responses to a survey about gay people would be skewed by strong feelings either way whether the survey was anonymous or not or whether the survey was in America or overseas.  If you are really interested in an effecient mlitary,  study the effectiveness and morale of the Israeli (or any other country that allows it) military both before and after they allowed gay people to serve openly.

I have no idea what Mr. Vigh’s livelihood is.  He said that he enjoyed defending the dehumanizing comments of someone else about gay people.  If he enjoys that then he should enjoy one of the results of such dehumanizing comments, gaybashing.

wpDiscuz