In shocking, shocking, shocking news, President-elect Barack Obama will not let Teh Gayz run rampant over the military come January 20th. In fact he may wait until later in his term to attempt overturning DADT. Instead of opening the floodgates of sodomy on the armed forces his first day in office, Obama plans to meet with the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Pentagon to develop new legislation he can present to Congress.
Which sounds quite reasonable.
In fact, I've been unable to find any reference to Obama promising a timeline on withdrawal (to borrow a phrase) of the policy. So, what is the point of the article at all? Other than to paint Obama as a liar, a promise breaker, a turncoat on this "explosive" issue (and probably everything else, now that we mention it; he's a secret Muslim and a liar, don't ya know.) Not that The Washington Times, that bastion of fair and balanced reportage, would ever resort to such a thing.
And what makes me think that anything having to do with Teh Gays is "explosive" as far as these douchsniffers are concerned?