Above we have the 2010 statement of Secretary of Defense Gates' intention to prepare for gays openly to serve in the US. Below, we have MAMZ's most candid statement of his feelings for gays in the military. Hint: "inherently uncomfortable."
Whose position is the most "progressive"? Compare the DADT video of Secretary of Defense Gates (above) to the letter MAMZ wrote opposing ALL gay military service:
By MARKOS C.A. MOULITSAS
It’s truly disturbing how much ado has been made over Bill Clinton’s campaign promise to lift the ban on homosexuals from the U.S. military. It’s ironic how it has taken a president who has never served in the military to make a promise that affects the military in such a negative manner.
Those who have served in the military, such as myself, understand the demands and pressures of military life are incompatible with allowing integration with homosexuals. I’m neither socially conservative or prejudiced, and neither is liberal columnist Mike Royko, Gen. Colin Powell, and influential liberal Democrats Sam Nunn and Les Aspin, all who’ve come out against lifting the ban.
Under military circumstances, as much has to be done as possible to focus the unit’s mission and keep disciplinary problems to a minimum. Worrying about whether the known homosexual sleeping next to you is watching as you change your underwear may seem trivial as you read this, but to the soldier who’s short-tempered after three weeks in the field and four hours of daily sleep, it becomes a matter of great importance to his pride and sensibilities.
And in any case, there aren’t many people who would change clothes in a group of co-workers if members of the opposite sex were in the same room watching. There is something inherently uncomfortable about it. Such fears would go a long way in disrupting efficiency and morale in a unit.
MARKOS C.A. MOULITSAS
When we read that MAMZ's position toward Blacks and Latinos (and others who might suffer discrimination) was a stated position of "detached selfishness," wherein he decided not to concern himself with winning or protecting the rights of others, or opposing persecution, therefore it is not hard to understand that MAMZ's position on gays would be at least "detached selfishness." However, the above letter tells us that MAMZ went far beyond apathy to public and open outright opposition to gay rights.
Parenthetically, I think the mistake President Bill Clinton made in 1993 was keeping Colin Powell on as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff before asking Powell whether Powell would support removing the bar against gay participation in the military. Clinton was caught flat-footed when Powell opposed the overt (and covert) integration of gays into the Armed Forces.
The New York Times reported recently that Powell has changed his mind:
When Mr. Clinton tried to end the ban on gay soldiers, General Powell was the Joint Chiefs chairman and opposed the move on the grounds that it would undermine discipline and order in the military but he supported the “don’t ask” compromise. In his statement on Wednesday, General Powell said “the principal issue has always been the effectiveness of the Armed Forces and order and discipline in the ranks.”
He noted that he had said for the past two years that it was “time for the law to be reviewed,” but his new statement of unequivocal support for the effort by Mr. Gates and Admiral Mullen could be an important factor as the debate moves forward this year.No sooner had Clinton announced his determination to allow gay service by issuing and executive order than Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Colin Powell announced his opposition to Clinton's proposed executive order. And Markos C. Alberto Moulitsas Zúñiga took a position substantially to the right of Phyllis Schafly's position:
Schaffly "deferred to the judgment of Colin Powell" while MAMZ expressed his deeply held discomfort with gays, whose presence in the military, he said, made him "inherently uncomfortable."On the matter of admitting gays to the military, Schlafly said she defers to the judgment of Gen. Colin Powell, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and other Pentagon brass who oppose it.