In hindsight do you think the Pentagon study on DADT was a good thing?

[bluestateguy]

I was adamantly opposed to doing it, but now that the law was repealed (or I should say, the machinery is in place for the executive branch to finish the job from here on out), one has to ask if the study helped to advance, rather than inhibit, repeal.

All of the homophobes and the Manly Men were just convinced that this study would reveal mass discontent in the ranks with the prospects of serving with a gay man. The questions were even worded in a way to achieve that objective. But it didn't work, and the responses were overwhelmingly favorable to our side.

Yes, it was a risk, given that the report was turned in so close to the end of the session, after which the numbers would clearly not be there in Congress.

I think the study results may have brought a few more Republican and Blue Dog Democrat votes, while also revealing that the rank and file in our military are not (not a majority anyway) homophobic.

[Ozymanithrax]

1. Yes, because I think it helped passed the bill...

even if it lengthened the process.

[tabatha]

2. ditto

[Recursion]

3. Yes; 65-31 is much better than 51-49

for an issue that gets as much emotion up nationally as this does. And that report was what gave enough Republicans the cover to cross over to make it happen.

[EFerrari]

4. There were already many studies. It was a waste of money and time. nt

[MadBadger]

5. Do you think the bill passes without it?

Cuz I sure dont.

[EFerrari]

14. Is there any reason why the administration couldn't use the data

from all the studies that already showed the same thing?

[Pirate Smile]

6. I think now we can see how methodical the Obama Administration was in building up the case by

working WITH the Pentagon instead of turning it into a more adversarial process - i.e. Getting Gates and Mullen to be proponents for overturning the ban and doing the study, etc.

I also think they gave Gates the time he wanted to do the study and develop a plan for implementation.

If we were fighting the Pentagon again, like Clinton had too in 1992, then I don't think it would have happened.

The Obama Administration had to provide cover for moderate & conservative Democrats and for more moderate Republicans or else they would not have voted for it even though public opinion was on the side of overturning it. They essentially took away all the bogus arguments against repealing the ban.

I think President Obama always wanted to coordinate two of his goals - overturning the ban and respecting the Military. The time and process let him work toward doing both at the same time.

[Tx4obama]

7. +1000 n/t

[Pirate Smile]

11. Damn it - too late to edit my incorrect "too" to "to".

[SpartanDem]

8. It absolutely helped

without it you don't have cover for conservadems and moderate repubs.

[Kaleva]

9. The study left people like Sen. McCain hanging dry.

[Laelth]

10. No. It was a waste of time. n/t

-Laelth

[Unvanguard]

12. What does "good" mean? It was clearly necessary to get Congress behind repeal.

That was obvious at the time and is even more obvious now.

But that doesn't alter the fact that Congress should have been able to do what was right without a study, and so should have the military.

[kimi]

13. I absolutely think it was a good thing

Not cause it was such a money-drag, or that the results were a foregone conclusion.

But because the average American, who has NOT served, and only hears from the crazy-eyed, lunatic right-wingers who scream about guys feeling each other up in showers or chicks going down on each other in foxholes (or whatever BS is out there) - those folks HAD to hear what has been common knowledge in every single service for eons. Namely, that gay folks serve, and serve well, and it's a job. A JOB. Which a lot of people DO NOT want to do, do not have the fortitude or attitude to do. But straight folks, and gay folks, step up to do it, and ALL should be equally protected.

End of story. DADT being repealed -- should have been done years ago, but whenever, just glad to see it getting done now. Forever grateful, on behalf of my straight and gay brothers and sisters in arms.

(I'm a vet, and I think I speak for a lot of us.)

[Politicub]

15. The study was an important element in a highly discipline and successful approach

At the time the study was proposed, I thought it was more of a stall tactic to run out the clock. But I was wrong about that, and am in awe of the thoughtful process that went into the road to repeal.

It's nice to have a feeling of satisfaction that our government can be functional. Yesterday's was a landmark vote. I'm glad I was around to experience it.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

16. The fix was in on the study, the administration and brass knew how it would come out.

It was designed to buffalo the right wingers into a position where they'd have a lot more difficulty opposing repeal after the positions they'd already taken. Didn't stop McCain of course, lol.

[FreeState]

17. No the previous 22 studies had the same results, hearings on those studies would have been enough

Saved money, time and careers.

[jberryhill]

18. Yes - nothing about how this went down is a surprise to me /nt