PDA

View Full Version : Ken Buck Opposes DADT Repeal: Military Should Be 'As Homogeneous As Possible' (VIDEO)




Agorism
09-20-2010, 10:07 AM
Link to video (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/17/ken-buck-homogeneous-military-dadt_n_721804.html)



During a debate on Friday, Colorado GOP Senate nominee Ken Buck made some of his most direct comments to date opposing the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell, saying that the military should be "as homogeneous as possible" and the country should not get distracted in talking about "lifestyle choices."

Buck and his opponent, Democrat Michael Bennet, engaged in a "lively" debate on Friday, hosted by Colorado Springs affiliate KOAA and the Colorado Springs Gazette. Although the primary focus of the debate was economic issues -- with Bennet saying he supports "extending the middle class tax cuts" and Buck stating that extending the Bush tax cuts would "pay down the deficit" -- the two men also touched on social policies.

In the past, Buck has said that he supports keeping the military's ban on gay men and women serving openly in the military, reportedly telling the Colorado College Republicans, "Right now, the policy works. I'm not saying it will never be changed. It probably will be changed. But I'm not sure if we're ready today." In Friday's debate, Buck gave a longer answer, saying that "lifestyle choices" should not be part of the discussion:

BUCK: I do not support the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell. I think it is a policy that makes a lot of sense. It's not whether an individual is gay can serve in the military, the question is whether that individual can be openly gay in the military. It's one thing to deny someone access to the military and to a career in the military, it's another thing to -- for morale purposes and other purposes -- make sure that we are as homogeneous as possible in the military in moving towards the common goal of the security and the military action, as opposed to the distractions that are caused by allowing lifestyle choices to become part of the discussion.

The Huffington Post contacted the Buck campaign for clarification on his positions, but we did not receive a response.

Being gay is not a "lifestyle choice," according to all major mainstream medical and mental health organizations. The American Psychological Association states, "[M]ost people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation."

"It flies in the face of our military, in terms of they were able to successfully integrate when we desegregated the armed forces," said Trevor Thomas, communications director of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Fund, which supports repealing DADT. "They were able to successfully integrate women in the academies, when that was moved forward, and then they were able to now -- happening right now -- successfully integrate women officers on submarines, serving side by side men. So Mr. Buck remains out of touch, and he should talk to some military.

Brett85
09-20-2010, 10:45 AM
At least he doesn't support federal drug laws like Rand. I'm considering donating to Buck's campaign.

idirtify
09-20-2010, 10:53 AM
At least he doesn't support federal drug laws like Rand. I'm considering donating to Buck's campaign.

rand supports federal drug prohibition?

Brett85
09-20-2010, 10:55 AM
rand supports federal drug prohibition?

In the interview he gave to Fox yesterday he said that he didn't support any changes to federal drug laws. I don't see any reason to still support Rand when he keeps flip flopping every day on this issue.

idirtify
09-20-2010, 11:00 AM
"They were able to successfully integrate women in the academies, when that was moved forward, and then they were able to now -- happening right now -- successfully integrate women officers on submarines, serving side by side men. So Mr. Buck remains out of touch, and he should talk to some military.
-----------

Yeah, and there are so many COA (cycle-of-abuse) bisexuals that the military would shrink to a quarter of its size if they all came out.

idirtify
09-20-2010, 11:02 AM
In the interview he gave to Fox yesterday he said that he didn't support any changes to federal drug laws. I don't see any reason to still support Rand when he keeps flip flopping every day on this issue.

OMFG! Is there a link or a tube - or a separate thread about this?

Danke
09-20-2010, 11:08 AM
I'm for having as many geneous military men as possible too, but why **** ones?

erowe1
09-20-2010, 11:10 AM
I'm for having as many geneous military men as possible too, but why **** ones?

If you want to maximize the number of geneouses, you can't do that by excluding the **** geneouses. Can you?

specsaregood
09-20-2010, 11:14 AM
In the interview he gave to Fox yesterday he said that he didn't support any changes to federal drug laws. I don't see any reason to still support Rand when he keeps flip flopping every day on this issue.
You know full well that is not what he said. He said he is not "proposing" changes. Not that he didn't support them. ie: that is not a part of his campaign platform. He did not say he wouldn't vote for changes. This was cleared up to you in the related thread. So why are you misstating his position here? :confused:


OMFG! Is there a link or a tube - or a separate thread about this?

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=261235

Brett85
09-20-2010, 12:30 PM
[QUOTE=specsaregood;2896448]You know full well that is not what he said. He said he is not "proposing" changes. Not that he didn't support them. ie: that is not a part of his campaign platform. He did not say he wouldn't vote for changes. This was cleared up to you in the related thread. So why are you misstating his position here? :confused:

Lol. If that's the case then Rand is very good at parsing words. He's the best politician I've ever seen. He could teach Bill Clinton a few lessons.

Slutter McGee
09-20-2010, 01:18 PM
[QUOTE=specsaregood;2896448]
Lol. If that's the case then Rand is very good at parsing words. He's the best politician I've ever seen. He could teach Bill Clinton a few lessons.

He is very good at it. Earlier in the year he said that he did not support eliminating all Federal Drug laws. Well, there are some Federal Drug Laws that I would consider constitutional, such as intercepting drugs at the border or in customs. He used the word "all" on purpose. And yes he is a good politician.

Sincerely,

Slutter McGee

GunnyFreedom
09-20-2010, 01:33 PM
If you are a liberty candidate running in the current climate where the debate is dominated by liberals and neocons, then you quite often have to speak in Rorschach blots. :( We are, in fact, relying quite a LOT on you guys to help educate the electorate so that we don't ever have to do that again.

specsaregood
09-20-2010, 01:34 PM
He is very good at it. Earlier in the year he said that he did not support eliminating all Federal Drug laws. Well, there are some Federal Drug Laws that I would consider constitutional, such as intercepting drugs at the border or in customs. He used the word "all" on purpose. And yes he is a good politician.


Bingo, it still amazes me that we have to spell it out here to our members.

Brett85
09-20-2010, 04:14 PM
Bingo, it still amazes me that we have to spell it out here to our members.

But there's still the issue that hasn't been cleared up about Rand supporting funding for the drug war. I don't really understand why so many people blindly support Rand. Somebody has to hold his feet to the fire on some of these issues. He's been throwing the liberty movement under the bus every chance he gets.

http://www.kentucky.com/2010/09/17/1439630/sheriff-contradicts-paul-campaigns.html

winston_blade
09-20-2010, 04:22 PM
DADT might get overturned by the Supreme Court as a violation of free speech anyway. If I remember right, there is a case in the pipeline right now.

specsaregood
09-20-2010, 04:37 PM
But there's still the issue that hasn't been cleared up about Rand supporting funding for the drug war. I don't really understand why so many people blindly support Rand. Somebody has to hold his feet to the fire on some of these issues. He's been throwing the liberty movement under the bus every chance he gets.

http://www.kentucky.com/2010/09/17/1439630/sheriff-contradicts-paul-campaigns.html

I tend to go by what he says, not by third hand heresay. As far as blindly supporting him? Hardly, everything he says gets nitpicked, but if you listen to exactly what he says, he seems to always leave a liberty-oriented "out". But hey, even if you take everythign he says at his worst, he is still going to be one of the most liberty oriented senators around. With Mike Lee of UT challenging him for the #1 spot. And Mr. Lee doesn't have a tough general election coming up.

RonPaulFanInGA
09-20-2010, 04:48 PM
But there's still the issue that hasn't been cleared up about Rand supporting funding for the drug war. I don't really understand why so many people blindly support Rand. Somebody has to hold his feet to the fire on some of these issues. He's been throwing the liberty movement under the bus every chance he gets.

hXXp://www.kentucky.com/2010/09/17/1439630/sheriff-contradicts-paul-campaigns.html

Going by an AP account. :rolleyes:

And you were already answered that operation UNITE is an earmark that is inserted into unbalanced budgets. Paul has already pledged to not insert any earmarks nor will he vote for any unbalanced budgets.

Good grief. Read between the lines.

specsaregood
09-20-2010, 05:14 PM
And you were already answered that operation UNITE is an earmark that is inserted into unbalanced budgets.
...
Good grief. Read between the lines.
So if I am understanding this correctly and I think that I am, that makes twice in this thread that "traditional conservative" has purposefully miststated Rand's position into a negative light, despite having it explained to him in other threads previously? :confused:

Brett85
09-20-2010, 07:08 PM
So if I am understanding this correctly and I think that I am, that makes twice in this thread that "traditional conservative" has purposefully miststated Rand's position into a negative light, despite having it explained to him in other threads previously? :confused:

I would like Rand to actually clear up these issues himself. He doesn't need professional apologists to spin everything he says. I've donated money to Rand and made phone calls for him, but I'm done with all that if he can't stand on principle on these issues. I consider myself to be a conservative, and I'm far more libertarian than Rand is.

GunnyFreedom
09-20-2010, 07:23 PM
I would like Rand to actually clear up these issues himself. He doesn't need professional apologists to spin everything he says. I've donated money to Rand and made phone calls for him, but I'm done with all that if he can't stand on principle on these issues. I consider myself to be a conservative, and I'm far more libertarian than Rand is.

Wow, specs, is Rand paying you to shill for him? :rolleyes:

that's the same thing Paul supporters were accused of during RP08. :mad:

specsaregood
09-20-2010, 08:35 PM
I would like Rand to actually clear up these issues himself. He doesn't need professional apologists to spin everything he says. I've donated money to Rand and made phone calls for him, but I'm done with all that if he can't stand on principle on these issues. I consider myself to be a conservative, and I'm far more libertarian than Rand is.

Rand could promise the voters free puppies, hershey kisses and free money for all as far as I'm concerned; as long as he votes the right way when he gets into office. I'd rather have 6 years of a principled senator than 2 months of a principled losing candidate. If you want to read the negative view and ignore the wiggle room, so be it. I on otherhand am an optimist.

oyarde
09-20-2010, 08:37 PM
Rand could promise the voters free puppies, hershey kisses and free money for all as far as I'm concerned; as long as he votes the right way when he gets into office. I'd rather have 6 years of a principled senator than 2 months of a principled losing candidate. If you want to read the negative view and ignore the wiggle room, so be it. I on otherhand am an optimist.

I do not like chocalate and want no puppies , But I would like a principled Senator .

Brett85
09-20-2010, 08:43 PM
Rand could promise the voters free puppies, hershey kisses and free money for all as far as I'm concerned; as long as he votes the right way when he gets into office. I'd rather have 6 years of a principled senator than 2 months of a principled losing candidate. If you want to read the negative view and ignore the wiggle room, so be it. I on otherhand am an optimist.

That reminds me of what Nancy Pelosi said about the health care bill. We have to pass the bill so that we can find out what's in it.

low preference guy
09-20-2010, 08:46 PM
That reminds me of what Nancy Pelosi said about the health care bill. We have to pass the bill so that we can find out what's in it.

not true. he is telling you what he is going to vote for

a balanced budget
term limits
read the bills
cite which parts of the constitution authorizes specific bills
ban government contractors from lobbying
defund/repeal obamacare

specsaregood
09-20-2010, 08:48 PM
That reminds me of what Nancy Pelosi said about the health care bill. We have to pass the bill so that we can find out what's in it.

Then you aren't paying attention. But its been explained to you, if you want to see the negative, so be it.