Talk:Don't ask, don't tell

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search

If nobody has any objections, I am going to remove the phrase "Openly' from the article. Don't ask don't tell allows homosexuals in the military, but they may not be open about it (That would be the "Don't Tell clause). If anybody objects, please change it back.

Attacks on Clergy

Line removed about attacks on clergy. The claim is sourced by one link and further research on the name of the chaplain allegedly involved in the incident does not reveal anything about him being attacked by anyone. --HarabecW 00:27, 18 May 2011 (EDT)

sentence mostly opinion.

'The repeal of the law will likely decrease our military effectiveness, as openly gay soldiers are a risk to lower morale and unit cohesiveness' Tell that to the Theban Sacred Band! Cmurphynz 08:51, 4 October 2012 (EDT)

Is Bill Clinton as liberal as you say?

As many liberal positions as he may take, I find it ironic that he isn't at least credited by Republicans with making a piece of legislation that Republicans actively fight to protect against Democrat opposition (and Log Cabin Republicans). Give the man some credit here, is this executive order illegible to be called conservative because a Democrat introduced it? Come on, people. KommissarReb 09:53, 5 December 2016 (EDT)

When Don't ask, don't tell is defended by republicans, they are going against their party. Those folks are often called RINOs (Republicans in name only) because they act as though they were democrats. Just because some people who call themselves republicans defend this, doesn't mean they are true republicans--perhaps they are just caving to the pressure of "political correctness" or perhaps they are complete traitors. Either way, they do not represent the party as a whole. This in general is probably why Trump won--people were fed up with "the establishment" republicans, a.k.a. RINOs. --David B (TALK) 10:32, 5 December 2016 (EST)
It's confusing what is and isn't considered to be conservative nowadays, with the term being bent and twisted to the point where I couldn't care less about labels anymore.
Trump won the election for a reason that still eludes the SJW's who supported Hillary for little reason beyond her gender, and Trumps political positions on social issues (like abortion). Trump appealed to the Rust Belt (something Romney failed to do) and working class whites and middle-aged whites, which the Democratic establishment actively alienated by throwing them under the bus while giving minorities preferential treatment. They rigged the primaries against Jim Webb and even Bernie Sanders, which I bet did anything but sit well with their supporters; possibly to an extent that they would vote for Trump just as protest to a corrupt party establishment. To be honest, I am disgusted by both the GOP and the Democratic Parties for their sleaziness. The RNC enacted Rule 40(b) regardless of whether or not more delegates said "no" (John Boehner read what he said on a teleprompter), and the DNC allowed Debbie Shultz to remain as the head until AFTER the convention was over. There is so much to cover on how the DNC screwed Bernie and his supporters over, that I find it nothing short of nauseating and depressing.
But the thing is, Trump had about as much support as Romney did, but Hillary had less support than Obama did. For this reason, libtards are now saying things like "America is sexist!" and "#NotMyPresident" even though they blasted Trump for merely saying that he would claim the election was rigged if he didn't win. But the SJW's are rioting and protesting, while some of Trump's fringe supporters are committing hate crimes and attaks on people they suspect didn't vote for him.
Trump is egotistical, and he lied about prosecuting Hillary Clinton or eliminating Obamacare. Not that I cared about either one of those promises, but now we have a President-elect who we can't trust to say what he truly means. The only thing he seems consident on is his stances on environmental issues, and I am not at all reassured by this. He loves eminent domain, probably wouldn't repeal the Energy Policy Act of 2005, appointed climate-change denier Myron Ebell as head of the EPA transition team, even though he has no scientific credentials to make the claims he does beyond support by the natural gas and coal industries. The natural gas industry and coal industry will say what they feel they need to say to protect their immediate best interests for their business, so of course they will have anthropocentric views. Call me a liberal spy for that one stance, I don't really care about liberal/conservative labels being put on me anymore.
I think party-loyalty is rediculous and I agreed with Trump for not honoring that dumb pledge to not run as a 3rd party candidate, and to endorse the eventual nominee. At least he admitted that he wouldn't honor the pledge because he may possibly break it. Every other candidate made the pledge, but some (like Ted Cruz) didn't honor it. If I ran for president, I would not have made such a pledge because chances are I'd break it in a heartbeat. On top of all of that, Donald Trump is a serial party-switcher who once said in 2004 he identified more with the Democrats and that "I've been around a long time. And it just seems the economy does better under the Democrats than under Republicans.".
I felt that we needed an anti-establishment guy (like Ron Paul) to beat the establishment and drain the swamp, but not this guy. Not Donald Trump. He won't drain the swamp I'm afraid. Instead, he'll dump toxic sludge into it and leave a mess for the next president to clean up. KommissarReb 10:22, 7 December 2016 (EDT)
"Drain the swamp" is becoming an increasingly misused term. Trump used it to evoke memories of Reagan. Reagan used it when he said, "when you're up to you your ass in alligators, drain the swamp", meaning "cut the budget", the alligators being the Washington establishment bureaucrats and holdovers of Great Society and New Deal programs. The swamp water is the budget funding the establishment alligators swim in. Trump is not taking about budget restraint, in fact, he's proposing massive stimulus and deficits. And DADT was never a conservative policy. It was always a liberal-progressive policy that liberals and progressives repudiated 20 years later as bigoted. Conservatives always oppoposed it. RobS#NeverHillary 13:51, 7 December 2016 (EST)