I just wonder how much it costs to train "an aircraft armament system craftsman."

She never told anyone in the military she was a lesbian

Err, any chance her having a mustache and a haircut that stopped at the top of her earlobes might have been a tip-off?

From the article, it wasn't apparent why the police informed the military of the marriage... but it is implied / claimed that it was as a retaliation. And it might have been. However, it could have been an attempt to locate a felon. If you were the police, looking for some felon, and their partner was being uncooperative, would you not talk to the employer? Is that completely out of the realms of possibilities?

Also, I don't know if her partner had access to the base. It would not be unreasonable for them to have lunch on base, would it?

Still, it is possible that were some rednecks that hate lesbians. How would a jury ever determine the truth of what is in someone's heart?

It is perfectly reasonable to investiagte the partner of an alleged thief who had a warrant. If it was for drugs and they saw it out in the open, how would it be any different regarding the rules of the Air Force? Seems like she was too stupid to cooperate, and instead opened her yap and the police responded in kind.

There may be a case of police retaliation? Not sure...

But the DADT needs to be changed--do away with it.

For one--they are in the military already. As long as they follow the rules and want to destroy the enemy--they should be allowed to serve.

Other military members don't really care --as long as the rules are followed. They will not quit over this or not enlist because gays are in the military. They have a higher calling for most of them and gays do not hinder that calling or reason(s) to be in the military.

This is a perfect example of why DADT is wrong as it forces people to be dishonest. It forces them to hide and other people (like the police) can blackmail members of the service.

re; the headline . . .
I'm pretty sure "discharge" and "lesbian" should not be used in the same sentance

Murphy, I agree that DADT is a bad policy. How to correct it is not so simple.

Other military members don't really care... They have a higher calling for most of them and gays do not hinder that calling or reason(s) to be in the military.

This is debateable. This might be a bigger issue for males than females, but most straight guys don't like to shower with gay men. Just like most women probably wouldn't want to shower with straight men. What allowing openly gay men in service will do to our homophobic teenage military is unknown, but my guess is that it wouldn't improve matters.

This is a perfect example of why DADT is wrong as it forces people to be dishonest. It forces them to hide and other people (like the police) can blackmail members of the service.

#5 | Posted by MURPHY

Same could be said of drug useage, screwing your cousin or the pet goat.

1GOPiggie,

Come on out of the closet, already!!!! You are worse than Tom Cruise.

AXE, what the fuck are you talking about. I am not in a closet. And I really care where you want to put your pecker, as long as it isn't in or near me, it isn't my business.

Murphy was talking about people having to hide their sexual orientation and thought just waving a magic wand (simply saying that DADT doesn't exist) would solve all the problem of people being treated differently. He/she was talking like this change to allow openly gay military wouldn't cause any ill effects.

I was pointing out that people hide all sorts of shit, and you can't just change the way people feel / react to a situation with changing a law. If fucking your cousin is legalized (actually, I think it is legal in some places), telling your co-workers about your family reunion is still going to cause some people to stop having lunch with you.

"AXE, what the fuck are you talking about. I am not in a closet."

Oh, so you ARE out. Congrats!

Hard to see how the Air Force can possibly survive without this world-class human being in their ranks.

lettuce spray,

I have nothing to be "out" about. My sexual preferences are MY business. Unless I am hitting on you (and I am not), they are not your business.

If you want to know my sexual orientation, you can ask. But as I have an aversion to people who act like assholes, I probably wouldn't be interested in you regardless of your sex.

It's "lose", 1teabagitarian

1NutsOnChin-arian is way original, yepper.

Sweet, AU-hole and lettuce spray are both concerned for my spell check.

Of course, its cauze dey have know decent arguments.

"lettuce spray"

Wow. Never heard that before. Wow. ORIG-I-NAL. Great show! Awesome job!

#7 | Posted by 1libertarian

I won't say there would not be problems or issues that will come up with the change in the policy.

I am positive there will be issues.

BTW--I'm a she.

Hey, if you ever presented an your side of the discussion, instead of making snide remarks, we could have a discussion.

If, however, you just want to snipe... then go ahead. Childishness on your part doesn't harm me... I have nieces and nephews at your mentality level (so far, I have you pegged as 8... but you could slip to the 6 year old level at the rate you are going).

In case it is too hard for you to page up and actually read the postings, here are some of my questions from previous:

Still, it is possible that were some rednecks that hate lesbians. How would a jury ever determine the truth of what is in someone's heart?

most straight guys don't like to shower with gay men. Just like most women probably wouldn't want to shower with straight men. What allowing openly gay men in service will do to our homophobic teenage military is unknown, but my guess is that it wouldn't improve matters.

And when JPW said "but I hope she sues the shit out of that police department and wins...." I pointed out that he has already tried and convicted them without any evidence (a common trait on the DR by left and right).

Care to show and opinion on any of this? Or just want to stand on the sideline sniping?

I am positive there will be issues.

I am also sure there will be. The question is, should we try and anticipate them, design a solution, and perhaps test the solution with a sub-set of the military before we upset the entire apple cart?

BTW--I'm a she.

#19 | Posted by MURPHY

I wasn't sure, and I hate to inadvertently offend. I do it on purpose LOTS of times, but hate to do it by accident.

I think DADT, like a lot of other things, needs to be undone. I just want it done after consideration and with a little planning. Perhaps start with the coast guard (not in active combat) or something? Or would it be better to start with a branch that doesn't share such close sleeping and living quarters.

Would it be better to move, gawd, I don't even know the correct terms for all the 'other-than-straight' people into separate units? Would this be a logistical nightmare? Maybe a lesbian unit, a gay unit, a transgendered unit, a straight unit, etc.

Not trying to be flippant, but I have had only slight contact with that part of the military.

It seems like there has to a military model we can review and employ.

The military prohibited women from Navy ships--then allowed them. The result were a lot of pregnancies.

That's what happens when you put 19 and 20 somethings together in closed quarters--away form home and out at sea.

There are few women pilots. Women are still working on that bar.

And just recently they announced they would start to allow women on submarines.

Wait until they start demanding their partner get their pension.

Yes, I had heard about the huge problem with pregnancy on carriers and such.

I have known a few female pilots, but none in the military. [I flew cessna 172's for a while, years ago. May buy one if the economy ever picks up]. I have heard that combat flying is very physically demanding, but the most demanding thing I ever did was a stall-spin. LOL.

Go back to when blacks were integrated into the service. It might be the best example. Prejudice is prejudice. It might have a different cause, but it is probably the best model we would have.

For that reason, I think that same-oriented groupings would be bad, but might be a stepping stone. Like the Tusceegee Airmen (however you spell it). They got respect the old fashion way. They earned it by doing their job as well or better than anyone else.

I love the way you tried and convicted the cops without bothering to get any facts. How open-minded of you.

You want both cops to loose their jobs and have to work at walmart. To parrot your own phrase, Wow you're a piece of shit.

I pointed out that he has already tried and convicted them without any evidence

How about their own words-

Police officers, who said they spotted the marriage license on the kitchen table through a window of Newsome's home, alerted the base, police Chief Steve Allender said in a statement sent to the AP. The license was relevant to the investigation because it showed both the relationship and residency of the two women, he said.

As a libertarian, I would expect you to have problems with the cops seeing something through the window (if that is in fact how it was...), and fucking this woman over for absolutely no reason at all.

welcome to the "wow you're a piece of shit" club.

#6 | POSTED BY MARKH
"I'm pretty sure "discharge" and "lesbian" should not be used in the same sentence"

Hehe...
I could say something here, but I won't. Wrong venue.

Err, any chance her having a mustache and a haircut that stopped at the top of her earlobes might have been a tip-off?
#2 | Posted by CalifChris at 2010-03-14 01:22 PM | Reply | Flag: ??!! CC? Is that really you?

Would it be better to move, gawd, I don't even know the correct terms for all the 'other-than-white' people into separate units?

Fixed that for you, 1Lib.

Wow, I am pretty sure she broke the UCMJ for not cooperating with the police let alone DADT. She got off light as far I am concerned however that aspect of is totally ignored for the rest of the story.

As soon as she got married her sexuality became a matter of public record.

The police did nothing wrong, it was part of the investigation, no different then had they called my work and asked to speak with my spouse.

"They spotted her Iowa marriage license on the kitchen table through a window of her home."

Oh, SURE they did. C'mon man!

FTA: "The Rapid City Police Department says Newsome, an aircraft armament system craftsman who spent nine years in the Air Force, was not cooperative when they showed up at her home in November with an arrest warrant for her partner, who was wanted on theft charges in Fairbanks, Alaska.

Newsome was at work at the base at the time and refused to immediately come home and assist the officers in finding her partner, whom she married in Iowa where gay marriage is legal in October.

Police officers, who said they spotted the marriage license on the kitchen table through a window of Newsome's home, alerted the base, police Chief Steve Allender said in a statement sent to the AP. The license was relevant to the investigation because it showed both the relationship and residency of the two women, he said."

The problem here lies DADT and the Police Department. Read as they wrote above... they told her she had to leave and come home immediately... what is she supposed to do? Tell them her partner is being arrested and leave?

Secondly, the insensitivity of the police department is unsettling to me, they KNEW she would get kicked out for it. Why couldn't they have called her superior officer and requested she be sent home to help with an investigation? Why did her being a lesbian have to come out?

Yes the police was wrong. She has been outed against her will for something that she was damned if she did, damned if she didn't do.

I can't believe y'all are siding with the cops.

I love the way you tried and convicted the cops without bothering to get any facts. How open-minded of you.

#14 | Posted by 1libertarian at 2010-03-14 08:30 PM | Reply | Flag:

I read your other post about how the cops might have told the Air Force about her being gay so they could maybe find a criminal. How do you figure telling the Air Force she was gay would help them find a criminal? How does your logic work in that scenario? How could telling them she was gay possibly help their search?

I can't believe y'all are siding with the cops.

No kidding. The cops didn't charge her with anything, so she didn't do anything wrong. They abused their power by getting her kicked out, and the only explanation is that they were pissed she didn't drop everything and leave her work first thing when they contacted her.

Obama should've repealed DADT his first day in office. Dragging it out is unnecessary.

Police officers, who said they spotted the marriage license on the kitchen table through a window of Newsome's home, alerted the base,

WTF? I thought people were to be secure in their homes against unreasonable searches.

I just wonder how much it costs to train "an aircraft armament system craftsman."

#1 | Posted by danni

Craftsman???? Do you know what a craftsman is?

no shit. if it's DADT, who asked the prick cop?

what a shit place we live in. why are ppl so fucked.

@3, guess you'll have to wait and see just how stupid these cops really are, huh?

their probably too stupid for retaliation, i.e., their just plain asshole stupid. prejudice: sure, but stupid, yes.

we got a doozey of a case here. the cops/municipality will settle the AF won't, so how much is her lost career worth? i hope she bankrupts them all.

lettuce spray,

I have nothing to be "out" about. My sexual preferences are MY business. Unless I am hitting on you (and I am not), they are not your business.

If you want to know my sexual orientation, you can ask. But as I have an aversion to people who act like assholes, I probably wouldn't be interested in you regardless of your sex.

#12 | Posted by 1libertarian at 2010-03-14 04:39 PM | Reply | Flag
^^^^^^^^^^

Do you even read what you type before you post it dude?

Amusing stance for someone who just said it was justified for the police to out her because she didnt come home when they demanded it. Which, while the officers right to do so is debatable, her obligation to do so isn't. Just because someone identifies themselves as a police officer on the telephone doesn't make that a fact. Hell, I've laughed at cops who've tried that shit with me....sure they showed up at the door pissed off, but there was nothing they were legally able to do to me for blowing them off on the telephone.

Unfortunately for her, the bell has been rung and there's no way to un-ring it, so she's screwed.

Loh

Why are they kicking her out just because she is from the isle of Lesbos? No birth certificate?

I mean I can almost understand getting kicked out due to DADT because she is a homosexual, but I can't understand why she would be kicked out because of her nationality.

Pretty messed up. People can't even respect other peoples nationalities.

When I was in Basic and AIT showers were pretty quick so showering with gay dudes wouldn't have phased me. I was more worried about getting everything clean rather than worrying about somebody checking me out.

That's a woman? Are they sure? Did they check?

Hard to see how the Air Force can possibly survive without this world-class human being in their ranks.

#11 | Posted by rightisright at 2010-03-14 04:27 PM | Reply | Flag:

We say the same thing about you.

I wanted to join the armed forces, and the Air Force doesn't qualify.

Go Army!

Are South Dakota police accustomed to full cooperation from heterosexual spouses?

Do they retaliate against husbands and wives who are less than fully cooperative?

Where to start on all the stupidity and attacks on me today...

As a libertarian, I would expect you to have problems with the cops seeing something through the window (if that is in fact how it was...), and fucking this woman over for absolutely no reason at all.

#23 | Posted by jpw

Dumb-fuck. You have 1 side of a story. Written by someone who JUST MIGHT HAVE A BIAS. You happen to be anti-cop, or unable to understand that there are 2 sides. That is sad for you.

Now, to the question you SHOULD have asked. Why would I, as a libertarian, support the police? Because I believe if you don't like a law, whether it is the DADT or the pot laws, you work to change them, you don't just break them. That is the difference between a citizen of a country and a lawless piece of shit liberal.

...for all the 'other-than-white' people into separate units?

Fixed that for you, 1Lib.

#26 | Posted by snoofy

Sorry, snoofy, but you have your racist head so far up your ass that you can't read or comprehend. The subject was about the best approach to end DADT. This had nothing to do with race, until a RACIST like you came along. I would say thanks for playing, but idiots posts like yours didn't contribute, so you weren't even playing. Just slinging your racism around.

The problem here lies DADT

Thus this thread.

... and the Police Department.

Your reading of the story that MIGHT JUST BE A BIAS reporting.

they told her she had to leave and come home immediately... what is she supposed to do? Tell them her partner is being arrested and leave?

Tell them she had an "emergency" at home. Lie (as she had been doing for a LONG DAMN TIME, and tell them she was feeling bad, forgot her meds, whatever. You know, anything to assist the cops, instead of attempting to impead the investigation.

Secondly, the insensitivity of the police department is unsettling to me, they KNEW she would get kicked out for it. Why couldn't they have called her superior officer and requested she be sent home to help with an investigation? Why did her being a lesbian have to come out?

So, you want to cops to lie to her boss? They called her and gave her the opportunity. She didn't want to do that. Do you REALLY want to have to police lie?

Yes the police was wrong. She has been outed against her will for something that she was damned if she did, damned if she didn't do.

Not true.

#29 | Posted by greeneyedguy

I disagree (obviously) with your arguments, but want to thank you for being passionate withouth the attacks.

How do you figure telling the Air Force she was gay would help them find a criminal? How does your logic work in that scenario? How could telling them she was gay possibly help their search?

#30 | Posted by Buffalo_Bob

I would guess it was in asking someone at the base for permission to enter the base for the purpose of locating a felon, who is the spouse of .... I would guess it would be germain to the commanding officer to allow the police to investigate. If it was 'her neighbor down the street and around the corner' the military might have said 'no, catch her when she is off-work.' After all, we are at war and she works on airplanes.

Amusing stance for someone who just said it was justified for the police to out her because she didnt come home when they demanded it.

Obviously, you didn't read. I said the cops might have been racist, they might have been doing their job, and it would be hard to know what the reason was in their heart. However, when they called and she didn't assist them, they went to her commanding officer. That is the normal procedure, as far as I know. In talking to her CO, her "lie" was exposed.

her obligation to do so isn't.

If the cops are looking for someone, you don't have to help them. They may, however, come to your job. They might arrest you if they believe you are hiding her or witholding information. Maybe that was the reason they went to the base, so they could find the felon and then go back to their donuts.

Hell, I've laughed at cops who've tried that shit with me....sure they showed up at the door pissed off, but there was nothing they were legally able to do to me for blowing them off on the telephone.

#36 | Posted by Lohocla

Sure, and maybe she did the same thing, laughed when they called. So they showed up. Maybe she isn't laughing now.

Maybe she isn't laughing now.

Or maybe she's laughing all the way to the bank.

Taxpayers, of course, will be obliged to pay for the police fuck-ups, and the cops will keep their jobs.

Police officers, who said they spotted the marriage license on the kitchen table through a window of Newsome's home.

This level of evidence would never get you a search warrant. How can the police be certain it's a real marriage license, how can the police be certain they're reading the names correctly from so far away, etc.

DADT don't work.

Not only that but by living in a society where people are afraid to reveal their sexual orientation you leave yourself vulnerable to all sorts of dangerous blackmail scenarios.

Don't Ask Don't Tell is a national security risk.

A stupid, evil and totally unnecessary one.

This argument needs to be made more.

These cops are obnoxious, bigoted pricks.

Fuck 'em with a nightstick till they bleed out.

Be Well.

I thought Obama was going to put a stop to stuff like this. Oh yeah, I forgot. It doesn't matter when a lib lies to our faces only when a repub does.