Blogs and Stories
Best Political Résumé Ever
www.anthonywoodsforcongress.com
Insurgent congressional candidate Anthony Woods' life story reads like Aaron Sorkin wrote it—he's a gay, black Iraq veteran with a Harvard degree. He talks to The Daily Beast's Benjamin Sarlin about running on his biography.
In every election cycle, there’s one candidate whose life story stands out among the crowd. In 2004, it was Barack Obama; in 2006, it was Vietnam vet Jim Webb. This year, an underdog candidate for the U.S. Congress in California is the clear winner and it's not even close. Anthony Woods' biography—he’s a gay, black Iraq vet with a Harvard degree—reads like a West Wing script Aaron Sorkin threw into the wastebasket for being too over the top.
Woods, 28 years old, is running in a crowded Democratic field to replace Rep. Ellen Tauscher in California's 10th District, which includes parts of Sacramento and San Francisco's East Bay area. (Tauscher is leaving Congress to serve in Obama’s State Department; there’s no date yet for the special election.) Though he was briefly an aide to Gov. David Paterson in New York, Woods is the political unknown in the field, which includes California Lt. Gov. John Garamendi, State Sen. Mark DeSaulnier, and Assemblywoman Joan Buchanan.
Of the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy he’s fighting, Woods said, “We're a country fighting two wars, having trouble recruiting, yet we want to turn away some of our most talented, most well-trained soldiers?”
All that is likely to change soon, as Woods’ résumé seems perfectly tuned to attract national attention. One of his top issues is repealing the military’s “Don't Ask, Don't Tell” policy, an issue that seems to be gathering steam as liberals try to hold President Obama to his campaign pledge. Woods has already received an endorsement from Dan Choi, a fellow West Point graduate whose recent discharge for being gay made him a rallying point for activists, and popular blogger Andrew Sullivan recently took note of his campaign as well.
For Woods, the issue is deeply personal. He was forced to leave a promising Army career after he came out in 2008. He received an honorable discharge under the Don't Ask, Don't Tell rules.
“I knew getting into it that if I took a stand, it would be a costly decision and it certainly has become one,” Woods said in an interview with The Daily Beast. “But people have to take a stand for what's right. There's a reason this policy is on the front burner now... We're a country fighting two wars, having trouble recruiting, yet we want to turn away some of our most talented, most well-trained soldiers?”
Woods said that he “agonized” over the decision to come out for several months while he was studying for his master's in public policy at Harvard. In addition to his military career, his choice ended up costing him his military scholarship as well as several friends.
“As I grew more comfortable with who I was, the less comfortable I was with lying about it,” Woods said. “It was a real struggle because I absolutely love the military. I still do today. I would gladly serve, I would love to teach at West Point, I had no problem deploying again.”
Woods disagreed with President George W. Bush's decision to invade Iraq, but took pride in his work there commanding a unit of 17 West Virginia National Guard soldiers outside of Baghdad during his first tour of duty, and a 64-person unit in Tal Afar during his second. Tal Afar ended up being one of the first major success stories in the reconstruction effort in Iraq and, despite major violence in the region, Woods returned with all of the soldiers under his command alive. He earned a Bronze Star for his efforts.
The military was a natural career path—Woods was born at Travis Air Force Base in California’s 10th District and his grandfather and mother were in the Air Force. Woods' mother left the service in order to raise Woods alone, taking work as a housekeeper to support the family.
“She worked her butt off six days a week so I would never really feel the sting or have a full sense of how tough things were economically,” Woods said. He credits her sacrifices with helping him stay focused on his schoolwork en route to attending West Point, one of the most selective academic institutions in the country, and frequently invokes her struggles to afford health care on the campaign trail as he argues for reform.
The Right Dumps Carrie
Jacob Bernstein is a senior reporter at The Daily Beast. Previously, he was a features writer at WWD and W Magazine. He has also written for New York magazine, Paper, and The Huffington Post.
Sarah Drops the Act
Tina Brown is the founder and editor-in-chief of The Daily Beast. She is the author of the 2007 New York Times best seller The Diana Chronicles. Brown is the former editor of Tatler, Vanity Fair, The New Yorker, and Talk magazines and host of CNBC's Topic A with Tina Brown.
Palin's Gold Mine
Duff McDonald is a contributing editor at New York magazine and a former contributing editor at Condé Nast Portfolio. His book, Last Man Standing, about Jamie Dimon, chairman and CEO of JPMorgan Chase, was published by Simon & Schuster in October.
Sarah Palin, Creationist?
Benjamin Sarlin is a reporter for The Daily Beast. He previously covered New York City politics for The New York Sun and has worked for talkingpointsmemo.com.
10 Palin Hits the Leakers Missed
Benjamin Sarlin is a reporter for The Daily Beast. He previously covered New York City politics for The New York Sun and has worked for talkingpointsmemo.com.
Samuel P. Jacobs is a staff reporter at The Daily Beast. He has also written for The Boston Globe, The New York Observer, and The New Republic Online.
The Man Who Beat Glenn Beck
Benjamin Sarlin is a reporter for The Daily Beast. He previously covered New York City politics for The New York Sun and has worked for talkingpointsmemo.com.
Wow, Harvard, West Point, 2 tours in Iraq, all by 28? That's pretty damn amazing.
He really sounds like a great young man with a hell of a future. We need more men and women who have actually served our country, whether it be in the military or the Peace Corps, to run for public office.
How does Woods defend his own dishonesty? Certainly he didn't serve 4 years in the military and avoid any and all conversations about "hot chicks" or anything sexual. For a gay soldier to comply with DADT, by definition they have to actively lie. Is that type of person, practiced in deception, going to be a trustworthy politician?
As a veteran who served during the Clinton DADT install, I know first hand what this yound man has been through but to think that lying isn't a fundamental part of the American story; you're wrong.
I wish him all of the success in the world as we need someone who was on the front line stumping for freedom as opposed to self righteous demagogues who think that they have the answers to the nation's problem by invoking fear, separation and unfair practices as our forefathers did not sign off on this type of behavior. Hats off and God Speed Mr. Woods!
what a silly comment!!! You are essentially saying that every gay person in the military isn't trustworthy! These are people who are serving our country despite our country's refusal to simply allow them to ACKNOWLEDGE their sexuality during that service. This is an additional sacrifice on top of the sacrifice of their time and talent to our nation's cause.
Anyways, if we are sticking to your incredibly high moral standards-- wouldn't vulgar conversation about sex also undermine that person's morality? In any case, couldn't anyone (a strict Christian, a gay person, etc.) just say "Man, I don't want to talk about this."
What an unrealistic worldview to assume that a person who has omitted information about their orientation or even told white lies about their sexuality is going to be so untrustworthy as to be unfit as a good political candidate. I hope God has mercy and doesn't judge you by your own standards.
I guess this is TDB's gay-a-day story. Unless there are others, suggesting the quota is being raised.
You missed one Banjo, go see the pregnant man story on the cheet sheet.
Amen.
There are two alternatives: allow gay soldiers to tell the whole truth about themselves, or insist that they at least mislead if not actively lie. Which one are you advocating?
If he was able to satisfy his superiors and comrades both in 4 years of West Point and while serving in Iraq, it sounds to me like he must have been both discrete and very capable as a soldier.
Discreet, dummy. Or a liar, as has been suggested elsewhere.
Haha...gotta love how this Banjo idiot just "corrected" your correct spelling with an incorrect one, and then called YOU a dummy! And this whole argument that Woods is a liar because he must've avoided conversations about hot chicks in the military per DADT, ergo he can't be trusted as a politician - that's another big LOL all around. He was actually mandated by the government TO lie, so if you have a problem with it, you have a problem with the government policy, not him...unless you're just some kind of idiot running his mouth.
the policy is don't ask don't tell, is it not? It may not be a good policy, but certainly plenty (maybe not all, but plenty) of gay men and women have abided by it successfully.
Defend his own dishonesty? Oh, that's right, he should apologize for the lie that allowed him to serve in the military, leading men and women in battle, defending the rights that you and the rest of us enjoy here at home. Yes, you're right, he should be forced to apologize for repeatedly lying about who he was so that he could do those things.
Give me a break! You can take the position that a lie is a lie, but you cannot even begin to draw an appropriate parallel between the now commonplace lies politicians feed us for their own self-serving interests and the lie this young man told the US military, albeit for his own self-interest of staying in the military, but which also served the greater purpose of defending this nation.
I am not saying he should have lied, but really, you think because he was forced to hide his identity he is not fit to be an elected leader? Does that mean that Jews who tried to conceal their heritage during the Holocaust were also untrustworthy?
Maybe if we didn't have DADT there would be no need for soldiers like Mr. Woods to "lie" or put on an act. Consider that.
What an assinine, laughably absurd comment. I suppose you blame the Jews for the Holocaust too, right? Obviously, you are engaging in mental gymnastics in order to accomodate your anti-gay bigotry, and that makes you an ignorant, not to mention rotten, human being.
If the absence of homophilia and concern about the destructive effects of allowing gays to insinuate themselves into the military the way they did the Catholic church is "anti-gay bigotry," then you are painting most Americans into a pretty tight corner. But don't expect us to stay there.
Amen!
WHY are there so many stupid people?! Is it our educational system? I just don't get this hostile attitude toward gays. It's strikingly similar to the hostility blacks were subjected to in the past in the military and elsewhere, with the same lame arguments. Where does this stupid misdirected anger come from? Borderline personality disorders? Bad brain chemistry? It just defies logic.
Are you kidding me!?!?That's some pretty twisted, one dimensional logic you're attempting there.The DADT policy has dishonesty built into it's very core.Forget the gay soldier having to lie about "hot chicks".....the policy forces him to lie everyday, to everyone about who he is as a human being!! Thus...the policy itself is fundamentally immoral.
To Ralph777:
The sort of man who is willing to struggle through personal inner conflict in order to serve his country with skill and valor, NO thats not the kind of guy we want in politics AT ALL!
I agree with nolajo completely!
"Inner conflict"? The guy was surrounded by males. This is called hog heaven.
Did you miss the sentence that read, "As I grew more comfortable with who I was, the less comfortable I was with lying about it," Woods said?
Seems rather honest to me.
A natural politician! LOL
Oh please, do shut the f.... up. Your comment is blatantly disingenuous.
We gather you are talking to Banjo, yes?
Soulmentor, it's the hit bird that flutters. Old New England saying.
Do you even know anything about serving in the military? Making stupid comments like that, you obviously lack sophistication and intelligence.We don't just sit around talking about..."hot chicks" as you put it. In the army I'm in, we really don't give a crap about what people do in their private lives. As long as you don't show up on the blotter come Monday and don't pop hot on a random drug test...you're ok with everyone.
Did you vote the Bush/Cheney ticket:-)? Cheney got like five deferments to avoid Vietnam:-). That loser wouldn't even serve when called upon.
And Clinton ran away, what is your point? I love this new liberal rallying cry that Cheney got 5 deferments. Let's face it; politicians that did not serve are generally wimps, especially the ones old enough to serve in Vietnam. This statement is true for both sides of the aisle. I will continue to protect them because they are Americans and in the Army I serve in we follow the policies fight the war and shut our mouths.
Oh, is HE the one who wrote a policy called "Don't Ask, Don't Tell?" No, it was supposed to be a compromise position which encouraged gay military personnel to lie so they could *pretend* there are no gays in the military. There ARE gays in the military and I don't think anyone can refute that. The number of gays dismissed each year would make the denial on a par with Ahmadinejad claiming there are no gays in Iran at the same time there are news photos showing gay youths being hanged in the street.
The whole argument has been twisted by the Right so it's unrecognizable. We have allowed them to portray the issue as if it's about allowing unsuitable soldiers into the military when it's really about not accepting otherwise qualified persons or kicking them out later. At what age do most people volunteer for military service? Their late teens or very early 20s, a time when many are still unaware or in denial about their innate sexuality. If you take into consideration military schools, as in Mr Woods' case, or ROTC programs the age is even younger and their sexuality even less defined. Later, even if they are acceptable, even exemplary soldiers they are separated from the military. In this it's similar to the Boy Scouts of America. The Right would have you think the issue is keeping Michael Jackson from signing up as a Scoutmaster when it's really about not kicking out Scouts, many of whom joined the group as elementary school aged Cub Scouts, who in the course of their lives discover they happen to be homosexual. The quality of their service has not changed, the only thing that has changed is the individual's self-knowledge.
Mr Woods, who like Lt Dan Choi, is a West Point graduate and from a military family, would have planned a career path in the military probably LONG before he was fully aware of his sexual orientation. Another recent DADT casualty in the news, Lt Col Victor Fehrenbach, was also from a military family and joined when he was 21. They served honorably, even admirably, and were awarded for the quality of their service. They are the same person they were all along and the quality of their service has not changed. The only thing that changed about them is awareness of their sexuality. You CANNOT blame them for continuing service afterward when the military's policy is basically "Don't tell me, I don't wanna know."
The point is homosexuals want MORE of their kind in the military. That advances chances for more promiscuous sex with the consequent cost to society and unit cohesion. Take a look at Hitler's top people when he was rising to power. There was an extraordinary concentration of homosexuals. That's leaving aside the fact he was himself almost certainly gay. I don't think we need that sort of thing here.
"The point is homosexuals want MORE of their kind in the military."
That's patently silly. What homosexuals WANT is for those who wish to volunteer for military service to be judged by the quality of their service and their actions, not the repeatedly disproven myths about "what gays are like" spouted by the Right. You'd think, based on the way the Right frames the argument, that we're talking about drag queens signing up, the RuPaul Rangers I suppose, so they can "vogue" on the battlefield and make catty comments about the enemy's lack of fashion sense. Somehow I doubt Lt Col Fehrenbach was thinking, "Stripes with PLAID?! DIE!!!" when he was bombing enemy sites for which he was later given medals. For that matter the *birth* of the gay rights movement in the US was due to the treatment of gay soldiers AFTER WWII. While perfectly aware of gays in the military and happy to make use of their skills during the war, as soon as victory was declared they began dismissing people for being gay when they were no longer needed and as a cost cutting measure. Some of the first gay rights protests in this country were over taking away benefits (similar to what will happen to Fehrenbach, BTW) even though the gay soldiers had served honorably during the war. What gays want is to be judged fairly and equally based on their behavior, actions, and service record when they wear the uniform of the US military, not on some fantasy of lisping queens or rapacious sexual predators invented by the Right.
Your attempt to slur gays by associating them with Hitler (according to Godwin's Law you just lost the argument by invoking him) is ham-handed and stupid. I think Hitler's niece Geli Raubel, with whom he had a creepy, obsessive incestuous interest, would doubt that, as would Eva Braun. But for the sake of argument what if it were true? Does that mean that Pol Pot, Stalin, Mussolini, and Saddam Hussein's heterosexuality is an indictment of "straight" people, the fatal flaw inside them that lead them down the path to genocidal madness? Of course not.
Frankly, there is no need to ever talk about your sexual orientation in a work place.
And frankly, it's thoroughly out of line to have a pin up in your locker too, right? No one would ever do that...........
Llplo99
What? Unless you're working in a place where human conversation is barred, most of our talk centers around our lives outside of work. Those lives usually involve a significant other.
All of us who are heterosexual in orientation have the "luxury" of talking about it (which would violate any assinine "Don't tell" policy right there) all the time in the work place and in myriad ways. When we invite co-workers to our weddings, our baby showers; when we grouse about the fight we had with our husbands/wives during lunch breaks--we're "telling about/alluding to" our sexual orientation. (And--put your hands over your ears here--some of the women I work with ACTUALLY dicuss their sex lives with one another.) In none of the above circumstances the talk never ABOUT sexual orientation; rather about the fruits of sexual orientation (many of those fruits being very benign and even embraced by our society).
Strictly speaking, talking about sexual "orientation" would really involve having a conversation about whether you have a sexual preference for a man, a woman, or both. In all my many years of working, I've never been privy to a group/ or one-to-one conversation about this issue where my participation was forced or coerced.
If you've ever worked with homosexuals, you'd know they talk about little else.
You dumb jerk- the military is and always has been full of gays. It's like professional sports! You probably think if no is staring at you in the shower in the gym, it means there are no gays there. I doubt it! GROW UP!
As for his having been forced to lie- show me a politician who hasn't polished this skill to a bright shine, I can think of very few. He strikes me as principled to the point he'd be as likely or liklier to be able to get a grip on that than most. He doesn't have anything left he needs to lie about.
Once we were considered a security risk because we were vulnerable to blackmail if outed. Let's be done with it.
A trustworthy politician???????????? Ha ha ha. LOL etc. we'd better break the old mold and try it with some guys like this. Compelled to be honest at great personal cost. How many of you 'phobes out there have ever sacrificed anything for a principle?
See the above about the dangers of a homosexualized military.
Ralph
Instead of characterizing Woods as "dishonest," why not simply characterize him as "compliant" with a policy that (as your own reply seems to acknowledge) required--even supplanted--a service person's "actively" lying as a condition of joining the service? A policy such as this results in a true Catch 22--wherein the subject of the policy is in a no-win situation no matter how he/she chooses to approach it: Tell the truth--no admission allowed; Lie--admission allowed (but that makes you a liar by default).
Uh, are you implying that there are honest politicians? Hell, I voted for Obama, but I know the guy is a *politician.* He crafts his words to appeal to voters.
I'm more worried about him understanding fiscal issues or other political issues. If he's an intelligent and competent guy, then his background is a plus. If not, then you shouldn't vote for him. That's what it comes down to.
Tal Afar ended up being one of the first major success stories in the reconstruction effort in Iraq and, despite major violence in the region, Woods returned with all of the soldiers under his command alive. He earned a Bronze Star for his efforts.
********************************************
What a REALLY dumb post. After reading the above you have the nerve to question this young man's reliability and trustworthyness. Unbelievable.
Big raplh777...this was just unintelligent. You question the honesty of man, when the law or rule or procedure or directive is put in place by your own government. By the same logic, any man/woman serving in the military during war time should be looked at as one who has killed. Is that type of person, practiced in murdering, going to be a pro life politician?
Note to self: Ralph777 will do more backflips than an Olympic gymnast to justify his homophobia. You'd rather a soldier openly violate DOD policy to satisfy your feeble-brained political qualifications, Ralph? Jump back into the nether orifice whence you came and let the grownups talk. Sheesh.
"Homophobia" is a gay-created term that means an absence of homophilia, or love of gays.
"Homophilia" is a bigot-created term coined, presumably, to make acceptance of homosexuality seem less like a choice than a mental condition.
As for you definition of it, Banjo, I have an absence of philia-caliber about homosexuality, yet none of my gay friends think I'm homophobic. What do yours think?
Why should he have to discuss his sexual preference with the US Army?! They didn't ask. He wasn't required to tell. That's what the "Don't Ask Don't Tell" policy is all about. Nothing dishonest about his behavior. Oh and I somehow avoided discussions about "hot chicks" too during my 11-year tenure in the Army...most Army folks have better things to talk about.
Actually, yes.
How can you tell that a politician is lying? Answer: His lips are moving!
That is not as much of a joke as it sounds. All politicians lie, cheat, and steal. That's what we pay them to do, or is your real name Pollyanna?
So basically every parent who told their children that they needed to be good in order to get presents from Santa Claus is also not trustwothy enough to be a politician. That is an active lie that is bred in deception at the beginning of every holiday season in order to get children to behave. Also any male soldier who had a female in their barracks room is a law breaker but no one cares about that.
DADT does not keep homosexual soldiers everywhere from coming out. It makes them a target for unfair removal and harrasment. This does not make him any worse of a politician than any other candidate.
What an inspirational young man. He may be the Leader of our fight we so strongly need. Good luck Mr. Woods!
How do you know what conversations he had, or was privy or subjected to in the military? I know I don't, and I can guarantee you don't either. What I do know is that he served honorably and did his time. Period point blank.You're just mad because he's a Democrat and gay. If he was gay and a regressive, you'd find a way to excuse his sexuality. Get over yourself.
How do we know he served honorably? Because he says so and Daily Beast swallows it whole? Talk about bath house sex.
Anthony Woods received an honorable discharge from the military.
How about because he was honorably discharged? Unless you are referring to one's subjective honor; I don't think that can be measured very easily.
The Bronze Star Medal is a United States Armed Forces individual military decoration that may be awarded for bravery, acts of merit, or meritorious service. When awarded for bravery, it is the fourth-highest combat award of the U.S. Armed Forces and the ninth highest military award (including both combat and non-combat awards) in the order of precedence of U.S. military decorations.
Is this a story, or part of the campaigns get ou the vote. Does Daily Beast plan to profile and bask in the compelling backstory of his opponents lifestyles, or does just black, gay and a chaptered ex soldier qualify.
Bath house sex? It sounds like your overheated imagination has gone into overdrive, Banjo. When are you coming out of the closet?
I think actual qualifications are getting mixed up with the latest fads in political tolerance. He may be an excellent politician, but its because he's smart and honest and talented, not because he can check all the right boxes.
My boyfriend served, and he always deferred from those conversations. It grosses him out. I mean, I use more profanity and graphic language than he does. So, yeah, I think he could have gotten through four years without making lude comments about women. Military doesn't equal mind in the gutter.
I'm in his district and I'm delighted to have a youthful, non-Sacto type to vote for. Go Anthony Woods!
This comment has been removed by The Daily Beast's editors.
Eh, go burn a cross, douchebag.
It is really a shame that ignorance is free. Because in these hard economic times, one could really make a killing.
And if everything else fails
Elect them President.
Yeah those liberals, so inclusive, who needs 'em. Why can't they be more like the conservatives where you, for the most part, stick with "straight" white men. Those liberals...
One term anyhow.
Or elect him head of the RNC.
That is if he doesn't mind being a rebranding-effort token and apologizing if he gets out of line to the bloated, sweaty white boss.
Boy do cons hate the gays and blacks. No, viewsonic, libs are happy when an oppressed minority gets good in this bigoted society. No thanks to your ilk.
This man is an American hero who risked his life FOR YOU. You don't deserve to lick his boots.
Wow, View, you have to be replete with a banjo, a white hood, and two sibling-parents to even come up with a well-versed rant like that...guess yer still pissed your old white guy lost...get over it.
No.
View thinks he gets a pass
On saying dumb racist stuff
Because he's black.
No, we like'm singin' 'We Shall Overcome'- cretins like you and Banjo.
To be honest I wish black men would stay out of the limelight when it come's to the PRESIDENT, but for some reason it seem's hard for them to do, I say this because the republican's will find some reason to link this man's life to the PRESIDENT, read what viewsonic wrote! that's my point, he has found a way to use the term Mulatto in a negative manner! as an AFRICAN AMERICAN it's hard to believe this is the year 2009! it's as if i am living in the NINETEEN SIXTY'S! RACISM is alive and well, and it took a BIRACIAL PRESIDENT to bring it out in the open where it should be!
This comment has been removed by The Daily Beast's editors.
We need more representatives in government with military service, especially a West Point background. Leaders of character. Duty, Honor, Country. Values that are way too rare in elected officials from any party. He's gay. I'm nearsighted. So what?
Good luck Anthony Woods and BEAT NAVY!!!
"He's gay. I'm nearsighted. So what?"
LOL.... last sentence was priceless.
Wish I was there to vote for him. His race and sexual orientation are just the parts that came with him when he was born. He chose to attend West Point and honorably serve his country, that's why he would get my vote. Outstanding young man, California certainly needs him.
I agree totally with you. Though straight, old and white I served as a medical evacuation helicopter pilot iin Viet Nam and can appreciate (as only someone who's been shot at in anger can) the mind-numbing fear that threatens your very being. To have attended USMA West Point is, in itself, a badge of honor that few of us are able wear; to have led troops not once, but twice, in a hostile enviornment such as Iraq and to safely lead a company of men without loss through the rigors there faced is prize of inestimable value. The facts of his life gay, black and talented are just that-facts. He is in no more control of these things than the color of his eyes or hsi handedness. When we all begin to accept that reality, some of these moronic comments will be even more laughable than they already are.
Having someone with Mr. Woods' qualifications want to stand for public office in this age of expose and sensation is, in and of itself, an act of bravery.
Bravo!!
Fultoni
YOU ROCK! (And thank you for your service.)
I am a Viet Nam era veteran as well when there was no policy to enforce lying, it was part survial. My question is why do we assume he was lying? At what time did he realize his homosexuality? I fought mine for the 8 years I served and got out honorably when I realized who and what I was. It's posible he kept his sexuality in the closet when he took out his gun and put on his honor to lead his men. Those men and woman on the front lines really don't have time to worry about sex, they are saving each others lifes and defending freedom for all of us. That includes the freedom to be gay, to be who or what you are.
Bravo indeed....
i get the feeling that out that people are viewing homosexuality as a qualification, which in my opinion is wrong. I dont sexuality is a big deal when trying to choose your politician, there are bigger issues
Yah, was a cheerleader until got to the words: "with a Harvard degree". The place that graduates bad finance and bank impersonators. Better 'degree' graduates flunk out of junior college.
Even the lit major model wantabee on Tyra's show when asked to describe a plot from any one of a number of well known books could not!
Congratulations!! You read 21 words before you formed an opinion!! See if you can actually finish an article before forming a dismissive opinion--oh, that's more than your 21 word limit. Sorry, read this in two parts.
Hey, what do you want? I can't help it if the word 'Harvard' presented as some kind of testament to greatness raises the bile level to the red zone for me. It sort of gives me the dreaded 'not yet another lemming from THAT institution' feeling. Same tired Harvard team in all the high positions so that they can keep with unchallenged, good old boy network thinking in all they do. Harvard seems to be (from whatever college, department or 'school') overrated.
Bless him; he is probably a super person who is took another in-bred thinking, more likely than not incompetent road really well traveled.
How far did Benjamin look to find this barbie fantasy and oh my God how beautiful, lets print it.
1. I am sure after attending Harvard with all the other victims, the activists chromosomes just popped out and he had to come forward and through, school, full pay & benefits away. I am not buying it.
2. No we do not want gays in the military, we already have enough problems with undiscipline soldiers, rappists, theifs, drug addicts, financial vagrants, and all the other problems of society.
3. Gay life style is another major distraction being held up as acceptable and promising.
4. Ex-Army Captain, cleanly shaven, tall, young, with pedigree and Gay lifestyle are not attributes fond on the application form for Congress thank goodness, but I am sure the liberals are already working on that.
5. Unlike this idiot many of us have different lifestyles and habits that are composed and discreet but not illegal and deviant. And even if his was, why is their an infatuation with making it part of every conversation with the lowliest private that one has a guy life. Oh who cares, live your life.
6. Idiot.
Shift the drool bucket to the other side of your mouth and continue to watch Fox News
He obtained a masters in public policy, which is totally different from the business school.
One of the definitions of intelligence is the ability and propensity to make finer distinctions in information than the "normal" person would. Let's all step up and use it - or we lose it and continue to dumb down.
Of course, the article left out where he stands on any issue other than DADT.
all he needs is a vagina and he has ALL the bases covered...
and a latino surname
Ha! Priceless.
Also, what's his religion? Or is that not an angle for his political career?
and a disability...
You white boys threatened by all this aren't ya? Afraid people around the world may someday be able to treat you the way you've treated them? That would be scary...........
This user is no longer registered.
There are already gay people in the military. If they work hard and are willing to serve, what they do in your bedroom is nobody's concern but their own. You are assuming that all people act like children. According to you, men and women should not work together either. Apparently they aren't mature enough to act like adults. I know you know better then that...
(P.S. I don't think you're a loser.) :)
This user is no longer registered.
I don'y know about fat, but you sure could use a spell check program and some lessons on the correct use of the English language.
This user is no longer registered.
You said fat.
"I guess I'm just a big fat loser"
Anyway, I really think you are underestimating the professionalism of American Armed Service Members. I am sure they would act professional and not "talk... about their sex lives and admire their straight fellow soldiers" As you said turnipsuv
You have obviously never served if you think the military does not already have a sexually charged environment. I can personally attest that when you are not deployed, sex happens....pssst...even homosexual sex.
We didn't care who you slept with or what you did on your personal time as long as you showed up for PT in the morning and duty on time. Being homosexual does not automatically make you less of man or sex crazed. Being a homosexual in the military is not an ideal heaven seeing as how your life could be lost any day while you fight for people like you who have the reasoning capabilities of a tomato. I served beside homosexuals who were good people and had a true sense of honor, duty, and responsibility. Don't discredit those people because you have no clue about life.
There have been gays in just about every military in history. You can start with Alexander the Great, Julius Ceasar(Bisexual), and a whole host of other famous person in military history. In fact I believe it was Baron Von Steuben of the American revolution who was kicked out of the Prussian army for "Bugger" and showed up on our doorstep with his 17 or 18 YO male "protege" to help shape the American Revolutionary forces. My father in law who was in WW2 says there were gays in his outfit, everyone knew it and nobody cared because as long sas the guy in the foxhole is shooting too you might survive. He even spoke of guys sleeping in the same bunk on the way over on the rtransport ships. Apparently, the prospect of getting killed in Germany or France outweighed any considerations about whether the next guy is gay.
Another person being touted for having a great "life story." Sigh.
I still prefer people with brains and great ideas.
He did go to Harvard...
Ugh! :)
I am grateful to him for his service to our country. But he aborted that commitment. He knew the policy going in.
See, this is what is wrong with our country. This young whipper-snapper expects to just waltz in and be elected to the US Congress. Not state assemblyman, not mayor, not county supervisor - US Congress. He has no corporate experience. No business experience. He really hasn't much of a "life story". Nice resume - SO FAR. It was his mother who sacrificed for him.
The three people he is running against are each and every one immensely more qualified to represent the citizens of his district. They've the life experience, the public service experience, the civic experience, business experience, raising a family commitments. They've paid their dues. They deserve to lead him.; not to be tossed aside to serve as his "subjects".
And yet he served regardless. Sounds noble to me...
But I hear you on the rest of it, but don't we often complain about our politicians for those very reasons?
I'm gay. I am not ashamed. But it's not an adjective with which I would describe myself. I don't feel my sexual preference is to a badge of distinction. I myself don't get up everyday and think "I'm gay." How many people do you know who tell you he/she is straight? So Woods is gay. You put "gay" first, followed by "black" (ah, we could see his photo!) in your lede's opening gambit. If he were straight would you have mentioned it? Aside from the young man's obvious accomplishments, his chances for political success should have little if nothing to do with being gay.
Great credentials, but you miss one important fact. In this world you can say whatever you want to say and just about do what you want. However, at the end of the day, this young man can have an epiphany and say he has been converted and is no longer gay and his sexual life changes. However, he will never be able to take away the fact that he is a black male.
"at the end of the day, this young man can have an epiphany and say he has been converted and is no longer gay"
Seriously rob, you think so?
"and we are not saved..."
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.
Please log in to leave comments.