I know everyone's pointing to the GOA report on DADT, gasping that a government that says that it can't afford a decent health care system (never mind that single-payer would cost less than what we have now) would spend $193.3 million in five years directly on discrimination, but that number doesn't bother me too much. Weren't economists just arguing that the US government should be spending more money instead of less, what with the recent drop in aggregate demand and the lack of investment in the American economy by the private sector? While it's not much in the grand scheme of things and not the most efficient way for the government to spend that money, I can think of a few things worse than than training, housing, and food for several thousand working class people that the US government could spend money on.
This chart is interesting to me, though. I never knew the break-down when it came to officer versus enlisted DADT discharges, and I'm surprised that only 2% of people discharged under DADT were officers. You wouldn't know it if you watched the cable news, where it seemed like more than two-thirds of people discharged were officers. I guess the target audience for cable news programs prefers to hear about oppression from people who went to college.