Connect with us

Top 10 “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” Repeal Lies That Never Came True

Published

on

Despite a year of Congress’ wrangling and dirty tricks, false testimony, lies, paranoia, and prejudice, the promise President Barack Obama made at his 2010 State of the Union Address, to repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” came true when Congress finally passed the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Repeal Act of 2010 in December of that year, and President Obama signed it into law one year ago today.

As you know, the law provided a roadmap to repeal the ban on openly gay service members, and certification that repealing the ban would not harm “military readiness and effectiveness, unit cohesion, and military recruiting and retention” took place in July. The ban officially ended in September.

Below is only a sampling, but they are ten of the worst lies about repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” told to the American people by military, political, and so-called “moral,” leaders and “experts,” only during the past few years. No doubt far worse ones were told by some of them, in private. Certainly, these and others were told by other “experts,” in public. Yet here we are, and none have come true.

The eminent Dr. Nathaniel Frank, a Senior Research Fellow at the Palm Center at the University of California, Santa Barbara, and an adjunct professor of history at New York University, is author of the book, Unfriendly Fire: How the Gay Ban Undermines the Military and Weakens America, and the author of the just-published, extensive report, “Accountability And DADT.”

All the statements below are directly from Dr. Frank’s excellent report, and from his Huffington Post article, “Will Defenders of DADT Stand By Their Dire Predictions?,” and we thank him. I hope you’ll take a moment to read the report and his article, and I hope you’ll take time to share them and this list below with everyone you know.

Lastly, Happy Anniversary.

Top 10 “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” Repeal Lies That Never Came True

  •  “[Lifting the ban] may even prove decisive to the viability of the all-volunteer force. That viability may, in turn, determine our ability to avoid in the years ahead — as we have for the past four decades — a return to conscription to meet our requirements for warriors in those conflicts.”
    –Frank Gaffney, Jr., Center for Security Policy, 2011
  • “I hope that when we pass this legislation that we will understand that we are doing great damage, and we could possibly and probably — as the commandant of the Marine Corps said and I’ve been told by literally thousands of members of the military — harm the battle effectiveness, which is so vital to the support, to the survival of our young men and women in the military.”
    –Sen. John McCain, 2010
  • “When your life hangs on the line, you don’t want anything distracting… Mistakes and inattention or distractions cost Marines’ lives… Assimilating openly homosexual Marines into the tightly woven fabric of our combat units has strong potential for disruption at the small unit level.”
    –General James Amos, Commandant of the Marine Corps, 2010, discussing his reasons for opposing openly gay service
  • “If the law is overturned and open homosexuals are welcomed into the military, the number of homosexuals in the armed forces can only increase — leading to a corresponding increase in same-sex sexual assaults.”
    –Peter Sprigg, Family Research Council, 2010
  • “What if [proponents of lifting the ban] are wrong? Is there any way to find out without taking a real risk with national security? Are the advocates of gays in the military prepared to say, fiat justitia, ruat caelum [‘Let justice be done, though the sky may fall’]? And if so, do the rest of us, the majority of gays and straights alike who would prefer not to take such a risk with our lives, property, and freedom, have any say in the matter?”
    –James Bowman, Ethics and Public Policy Center, 2009
  • Lifting the ban would lead to “inappropriate passive/aggressive actions common in the homosexual community,” “forcible sodomy” and “exotic forms of sexual expression.”
    – Elaine Donnelly, Center for Military Readiness, 2008 
  • “The presence of open homosexuals in the close confines of ships or military units opens the possibility that eros—which unlike philia is sexual, and therefore individual and exclusive—will be unleashed into the environment. Eros manifests itself as sexual competition, protectiveness and favoritism, all of which undermine the nonsexual bonding essential to unit cohesion, good order, discipline and morale.”
    – Mackubin Thomas Owens, Naval War College, 2011
  • “24,000 current members of the armed forces might be lost over and above normal discharge attrition in a one-to-three year period… Because these personnel would be completing one or more terms of service, they would, in fact, represent a hemorrhage of mature, skilled losses from the professional ranks. This is an enormous risk to the viability of our armed forces… If you vote to [lift the ban,] I believe you will inflict significant damage on the All-Volunteer Force.”
    – General Carl Mundy, former Commandant of the Marine Corps, 2010, in a letter addressing Congress 
  • “When your life hangs on the line, you don’t want anything distracting… Mistakes and inattention or distractions cost Marines’ lives.”
    – General James Amos, Commandant of the Marine Corps, 2010, discussing his reasons for opposing openly gay service 
  • “If this kind of agenda is forced on the Marine Corps, if it’s okay for the Marines, why is it not okay for the local school, the local marriage bureau, ultimately all of civilian life will be affected.”
    – Elaine Donnelly, Center for Military Readiness, 2010 
  • “When you’re in training situations, where you have an individual that has the power, really, of life and death, in some circumstances, over individuals, there can be a lot of coercion. And this can be a very dangerous situation and very intimidating situation. It’s just not healthy for the well-being of the military.”
    – Tony Perkins, Family Research Council, 2010 

Sorry, I couldn’t stop at just ten. That was eleven.

Every one of the people on this list owes a profound apology not only to the gay, lesbian, and bisexual service members who are or who have served our nation, but to all the heterosexual service members as well, whose reputation was diminished by these lies.

Telling lies about gay people doesn’t only affect — or implicate — gay people. It infects and diminishes straight people, too. For example, by saying straight soldiers would quit if openly-gay service members were allowed to serve. Soldiers — good ones at least — don’t cut and run.

Tony Perkins, Senator McCain, Elaine Donnelly, Peter Sprigg, General Amos (who at least changed his opinion), General Mundy, Mackubin Thomas Owens, Frank Gaffney, Jr., and all the others whose lies diminished our service members, and our nation, we’re waiting. Apologize. It really is the very least you can do.

There's a reason 10,000 people subscribe to NCRM. You can get the news before it breaks just by subscribing, plus you can learn something new every day.

Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

Hard-Right Groups Expanded Power Across the Trump Administration in 2025: Report

Published

on

Hard-right groups have expanded their influence inside the Trump administration, a new report on hate and extremism by the Southern Poverty Law Center finds, according to The Guardian. A federal grand jury indicted the SPLC, a civil rights organization, on federal fraud charges earlier this year — months before the report’s publication.

“2025 was a turbulent year marked by injustice, social upheaval and stark new threats from a hard-right movement rapidly establishing its power across institutions,” reads the director’s note to the SPLC’s “2025 Year in Hate and Extremism” series. “The hard right effectively seized the power of government as a messenger for extremist rhetoric and a tool to dictate policies affecting the everyday lives of millions of people.”

The Trump administration “radically” shifted policy to favor the hard-right and extremists, reads the SPLC’s report titled “Empowering Extremists,” which was published Tuesday as part of the series.

The report found that the Trump administration has “shifted the focus of federal law enforcement away from violent crime investigations to sweeping immigration raids through American communities, targeting undocumented people as well as Black and Brown people — often regardless of immigration status and absent any suspicion of a violent offense.”

It states that on Sept. 22, 2025, “Trump issued an overly broad, vague executive order designating ‘antifa’ — a term often applied to people and community-based organizations opposing white supremacy, racism and the far right more generally — as a domestic terrorist organization.”

The Guardian noted that the SPLC report “pointed to conservative influencer Andy Ngo, who told Trump during a roundtable in October that ‘perhaps the state department should designate Antifa … a foreign terrorist organization.'”

“Would you like to see it done?” Trump replied. “You think it would help? I’d be glad to do it. I think it’s the kind of thing I’d like to do. Does everybody agree? If you agree, I agree. Let’s get it done.”

Trump “kept his promise,” the SPLC noted. “In November 2025, the State Department named four left-wing militant groups as foreign terrorist organizations.”

The report stated that the Trump administration’s “law enforcement shifts make Americans less safe,” and its actions increase the “threat posed by far-right extremism.”

“The administration gutted efforts to tackle hard-right extremism and downplayed — and even defended — the threat of right-wing extremist violence,” the report alleges. For example, the DOJ “removed a June 2024 peer-reviewed study from its website that concluded that far-right attacks continue ‘to outpace all other types of terrorism and domestic violent extremism.'”

 

Image via Reuters 

 

Continue Reading

News

CNN Fact-Checker Scorches Trump Over the Price of Gas

Published

on

President Donald Trump keeps insisting that gas prices aren’t especially high. What many Americans see at the pump tells a different story, and CNN fact-checker Daniel Dale has the numbers to prove it.

As recently as Tuesday, Trump claimed that the price of gas is “not very high, relatively speaking. I mean, it’s lower than during the Biden administration.”

Trump was not especially specific, but Dale is.

According to AAA, today’s average gas price is $4.16. That is lower than the peak number during the Biden administration, $5.02, which occurred after Russia attacked Ukraine in 2022.

“But the current $4.16 per gallon national average is significantly higher than the national average when Biden left office in January 2025, which was $3.12 per gallon,” Dale explains. “And it’s higher than the national average was on 1,334 of Biden’s 1,460 full days as president, figures provided by AAA show.”

Dale reports that today’s price is higher than the price during 91 percent of the Biden presidency, and higher than any day during his final 29 months.

Today’s price is also “much higher” than it was one year ago: $3.12. It’s higher than on the day Trump launched his attack against Iran: $2.98.

The good news is today’s price is lower than the price from one month ago ($4.53) and lower than last week ($4.29).

Trump has repeatedly promised lower prices once the Iran war ends.

Just last week he told reporters, “when it’s all straightened out, you’re going to have oil prices drop down to maybe even lower than they were.”

During his explosive “Meet the Press” interview on Sunday, Trump claimed that as soon as the Iran war is settled, “gasoline prices are going to drop like a rock.”

In May, he claimed the price of gas was “peanuts.” And in mid-April, Trump declared that the price of gas “hasn’t gone up as much as I thought.”

Just weeks after the Iran war started, in March, Trump said that gas prices “are gonna come tumbling down along with everything else” once the war is over.

Dale also found Trump frequently claims he saw the price of gas in Iowa hit $1.85.

“I was in Iowa, another place I like a lot, and it was just before we started the excursion to Iran. And we passed gas stations; it was $1.85 a gallon. And we’re going to get them down to those numbers again very quickly,” Trump said.

That trip to Iowa was in January, Dale notes, when the average price in the state was $2.57. Only a niche blend that is not for use in all cars hit $1.85.

 

Image via Reuters 

Continue Reading

News

Letter From Deep Red Trump Country Blasts President as ‘Low-IQ Idiot’

Published

on

President Donald Trump’s performance on Sunday’s “Meet the Press” — where he cut the interview short and blasted the moderator as “crooked” — was widely criticized, with many noticing his habit of attacking women reporters.

Among those who noticed was a resident in deep red Trump country: Florida’s The Villages, known as the “largest retirement community in the world,” where nearly seven out of 10 county residents voted for Trump in 2024. One resident recently told BBC News, “we’re as red as red gets.” Indeed, many residents travel in golf carts, often with Trump flags flying behind them.

In a letter to the editor in the Villages News, Edward McGinty wrote that he watched the president on “Meet the Press” and concluded that he is “a total embarrassment to this country.”

McGinty said that “Meet the Press” moderator Kristen Welker is “a very intelligent woman who is very fair,” while “Trump is in the habit of calling people he disagrees with dumb and stupid, especially women reporters.”

McGinty asked: “When will they have the gumption to say back to him, ‘Hey buddy, there is a stupid person in this conversation and I am looking at him right now’?” He lamented that “they are afraid of losing their jobs or being banned from the White House press club.”

“It’s been 10 years since this low-IQ idiot, this con man, came down the golden escalator,” McGinty said of Trump. “That is plenty of time to know—even if you are the most dedicated Republican voter—that this guy is a con man who has no manners and no morals. The whole world is looking at the USA and thinking we have lost our minds, electing the man who tried to overthrow our democracy on Jan. 6, 2021.”

Indeed, as The Daily Beast reported in April, a “Gallup poll conducted in 2025 across more than 130 countries found median approval of U.S. leadership dropped from 39 percent in 2024 to 31 percent in 2025. At the same time, disapproval rose to a record-high 48 percent.” That poll was conducted before Trump’s war in Iran.

It also found that approval of American leadership “declined by 10 points or more in 44 countries between 2024 and 2025, with the steepest declines concentrated among U.S. allies, including many members of NATO,” according to The Daily Beast.

“I have said this many times before,” McGinty concluded. “If Donald had run as a Democrat or Independent, I would still be calling him a filthy pig just like his father. Of course, the MAGA voters will take his side. Why? Because they are exactly like him. People with no morals.”

 

Image via Reuters 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2026 AlterNet Media.