So, we all know about the historical ruling on DADT, right?

[conuly]

I'm reading the comments on the NYTimes article right now, about the only news site I *do* read the articles on because at least they screen them first.

This one, though woefully misguided, is making me giggle. I'll submit it to the Quote Marks blog, but it might take a while to get posted there.

Thank God for the Court of Appeals (next-step). Obviously this judge has never served...except on "the bench". Maintaining "good order and discipline" in the defense of this nation has been, and should always be a top priority when selecting its servicemembers. Not everyone is "qualified" to serve. The U.S. Armed Forces is built to be the most discriminating and selective institution in America. It has to be this way. It's not designed to take everyone. It doesn't want everyone. It's in the nature of the beast, i.e., high physical standards must be met/maintained, along with sound mental health. Past convictions to include documented immoral behavior are "disqualifiers". This military system worked during WWII (remember our Greatest Generation?) through present OIF/OEF campaigns. Do not repeal DADT. It's not "broke" so don't "fix" it. If you want "fair", coach youth sports where everyone gets a trophy-

Every time I read it with my quote goggles on, it comes out sounding vaguely dirty. I love it.

Comments

[queenlyzard.livejournal.com]

*giggles* indeed. That's some serious abuse of the English langauge!

(also, what's the latest news on DADT? I have been so very far out of the loop lately.)

[conuly]

Are you asking me or telling me?

[queenlyzard.livejournal.com]

well, now I'm just sticking my tongue out at you :)