<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: &#8216;A Closer Look&#8217; at CMR&#8217;s 1100 Generals List</title>
	<atom:link href="http://servicemembersunited.org/?feed=rss2&#038;p=2152" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://servicemembersunited.org/?p=2152</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Aug 2010 17:23:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bill</title>
		<link>http://servicemembersunited.org/?p=2152&#038;cpage=1#comment-616</link>
		<dc:creator>Bill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Mar 2010 04:53:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://servicemembersunited.org/?p=2152#comment-616</guid>
		<description>Kudos to Servicemembers United for starting this great project, &quot;Flag and General Officers for the Military:  A Closer Look.&quot;  Elaine Donnelly is considered a joke by the LGBT community and apparently by many members of Congress, but in fact she must be taken seriously.  She seems to be held in highest esteem by Senator John McCain who is probably the greatest obstruction to ending DADT because of his extremely powerful position as ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee.  He has been quoting this study widely in Congress and, with hypocrisy that has been documented elsewhere, maintains his stance for continuing DADT.

The Servicemembers United study is only preliminary, but it demonstrates that the list should be used with great caution by opponents of military sexual orientation neutrality who happen to think themselves honest and objective.  

The notorious list can be seen by clicking &quot;We, the Undersigned Flag &amp; General Officers&quot; at http://flagandgeneralofficersforthemilitary.com/
I hope anyone who knows flag officers who do not belong on the list will contact Servicemembers United.  I also hope those who were legitimate signatories will review their positions and also contact Servicemembers United to express their changed opinions.  My guess is that many who originally signed in good faith would no longer want to belong to the league of the ignorant, bigoted, or homophobic.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Kudos to Servicemembers United for starting this great project, &#8220;Flag and General Officers for the Military:  A Closer Look.&#8221;  Elaine Donnelly is considered a joke by the LGBT community and apparently by many members of Congress, but in fact she must be taken seriously.  She seems to be held in highest esteem by Senator John McCain who is probably the greatest obstruction to ending DADT because of his extremely powerful position as ranking member of the Senate Armed Services Committee.  He has been quoting this study widely in Congress and, with hypocrisy that has been documented elsewhere, maintains his stance for continuing DADT.</p>
<p>The Servicemembers United study is only preliminary, but it demonstrates that the list should be used with great caution by opponents of military sexual orientation neutrality who happen to think themselves honest and objective.  </p>
<p>The notorious list can be seen by clicking &#8220;We, the Undersigned Flag &amp; General Officers&#8221; at <a href="http://flagandgeneralofficersforthemilitary.com/" rel="nofollow">http://flagandgeneralofficersforthemilitary.com/</a><br />
I hope anyone who knows flag officers who do not belong on the list will contact Servicemembers United.  I also hope those who were legitimate signatories will review their positions and also contact Servicemembers United to express their changed opinions.  My guess is that many who originally signed in good faith would no longer want to belong to the league of the ignorant, bigoted, or homophobic.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Box Turtle Bulletin &#187; &#8220;Elaine&#8217;s List&#8221; of 1,100 officers doesn&#8217;t represent today&#8217;s Military</title>
		<link>http://servicemembersunited.org/?p=2152&#038;cpage=1#comment-613</link>
		<dc:creator>Box Turtle Bulletin &#187; &#8220;Elaine&#8217;s List&#8221; of 1,100 officers doesn&#8217;t represent today&#8217;s Military</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2010 01:18:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://servicemembersunited.org/?p=2152#comment-613</guid>
		<description>[...] not yet gotten through the entire list, but they&#8217;ve looked at 200 officers and have issued a preliminary report telling us a bit more about &#8220;Elaine&#8217;s [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] not yet gotten through the entire list, but they&#8217;ve looked at 200 officers and have issued a preliminary report telling us a bit more about &#8220;Elaine&#8217;s [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
