And the doyenne of discrimination includes flow charts of “analysis“ that you will not believe. And do NOT click on the link or the icon at right — or go below the fold — without protecting your keyboard. Remember that I warned you.
When DADT is finally repealed, I have no idea what Ms. Donnelly is going to do with herself. There will not be enough psychotropic drugs available to calm her after reading this tripe — and the aforementioned homo-obsessive, anal flow charts that will blow your mind.
From her report (you can also check out her breathless column at The Corner – The National Review):
In 1993 then-President Bill Clinton attempted to lift the ban on homosexuals in the military. Following months of intense debate, Clinton proposed a plan to accommodate homosexuals in the military if they did not say they were homosexual.Members of Congress considered Clinton’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT) proposal, but after twelve legislative hearings and field trips they realized that the concept would be unworkable and indefensible in court.
Contrary to most media reports at the time, Congress rejected DADT and passed a law clearly stating that homosexuals are not eligible for military service. The 1993 law-technically named Section 654, Title 10, U.S.C. but usually mislabeled “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”- passed with veto-proof bi-partisan majorities in both Houses. The only “compromise” allowed the Clinton administration to drop “the question” about homosexuality that used to appear on induction forms, but that inquiry can (and should) be administratively reinstated at any time. (A Secretary of Defense seeking a more “humane” way to enforce the 1993 law should stop the recruitment of people who are not eligible for military service.)
The 1993 Eligibility Law codified long-standing Defense Department regulations. It includes fifteen “Findings” recognizing that the military is a “specialized society” and “fundamentally different from civilian life.” Unlike civilians who go home after work, military personnel must accept living conditions that are often “characterized by forced intimacy with little or no privacy.” The purpose of the law, which Federal courts have upheld as constitutional several times is to protect “high standards of morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion that are the essence of military capability.”
Rep. Patrick Murphy (D-PA) and others are co-sponsoring legislation (H.R. 1283) that would repeal Section 654, Title 10, U.S.C. and replace it with an open-ended, radical “LGBT Law” that would forbid discrimination based on “homosexuality or bisexuality, whether the orientation is real or perceived.”
The following charts summarize the consequences of replacing Section 654, Title 10 with the proposed new “LGBT Law.” More information is available from the Center for Military Readiness at www.cmrlink.org.
I warned you…
And this is her prediction of what will unfold if gays and lesbians are allowed to serve openly. Reality- and science-based, of course. I didn’t make these up, btw — I just embellished to put Elaine’s full batsh*t stamp on them.

But wait…why should we burden our country with this sort of social engineering!?




16 Comments





YikesI couldn’t even get through the entire chart. I must go get a cup of coffee.
why oh why……when I see that woman’s picture do I think of the “OLD MAID” playing cards and “Sucking Lemons”???
Okay so where is the science again?Anybody can make a flow chart up but if you ask me this lady and her group should be sued for slander wither by a gay veterans group or the Palm Center or just LGBT people in gender. Would love to see her “scientific” information on cross.
UmmmmIgnoring and ridiculing the content of the chart aside (which I heartily encourage anybody with more than three operating brain cells to do), what the heck kind of flow chart is that?
It makes my brain hurt just looking at it. It has no “Flow”, no clear start or end points, no clear “decision” points. It’s not like any flow chart I’ve ever been exposed to…
And let me tell you folks, being in Middle Management at a couple different companies, I have seen flowcharts, so many damn flowcharts that at times I see them in my sleep, stretching off into infinity.
This is not a flowchart. This an artist’s interpretation of a flowchart, and an insult to flowcharts everywhere.
WTFIUWT “Forced Intimacy” BS?Like it or not, from the first time you go to the public pool or the school gym locker room, gay and straight men (because, let’s face it, these arguments are always rooted in male insecurity) are around each other nekkid. Somehow straight guys survive. Why would it be somehow different in the military?
Deja vu
http://www.history.army.mil/bo…
I’m with you on the flowchartsI mean, a good flowchart that is clear and concise IS a work of art. And to the extent that I can make out categories within the charts (e.g. “gays are no more perfect than anyone else”…meaning, what exactly) it’s highly offensive.
I do seem to be making out that Donnelly feels that problems related to sexual-related incidents will increase and lower morale, but where is the proof on that?
Considering the number of other countries where troops can serve openly, surely she should have at least some hypothetical data about that.
The stupid burns and gives me a headache.
Excellent find…And one that should be sent to Dem. Congresspersons for repeating over and over and over again every time one of the “decorated” suits say the words “decreases moral” or “poses problems for disciplining”.
Phoenix, may I please borrow your pearls?I need something to clutch after reading this. I also could use a nice glass of Shiraz, but it’s only 10:30 as I type this.
I just joined today after a month of lurking. I hope that my future posts will be more coherent. If you’ll excuse me, I have to pick my teeth up off the floor.
Ummmm, Elaine, dear……Lesbian former naval officer here, and no way, no how, and in no time or space, would I EVER hit on you were we sharing rack space or a shower.
Would not happen
Nope
Unh–unhhh
Yecccch.
Get over your fantasised sexual superiority feelings for simply being straight. That does not bean than any of us, let alone all of us, would want a nasty piece of work like you,
“bean than” is “mean that”sorry…distracted , vomiting…elaine donnelly influenza
Hey, give her a little creditAt least she knows what a flowchart is, or at least what one looks like. For someone like Elaine that constitutes a major intellectual breakthrough.
And you have to admit, constructing not one but two “flowcharts” with absolutely NO meaningful content is definitely an accomplishment of sorts.
look at it positively … … they could use the chart at her sanity hearing. Seriously, though –
If DADT is repealed, she’s out of a job. The status quo is her meal ticket, she probably knows this, and you’re going to see more of this from her in the coming months. But cheer up: if she goes before Congress in this mood, she may just make our case.
That’s the worst part….She thinks she knows what a flowchart is!
That, is not, a flowchart, good sir/madam.
I’ll give her credit for trying to make us think there’s an original though behind all that scowling, but I’m giving her effort a major FAIL.
Damnit.And I proofread before posting too.
That should have read “Original Thought”
Although I’m sure Elaine believes she is “original though”
=P
“Consexploitation” – ?????Just when I think I’ve heard everything…