Chances of 'don't ask' repeal fading in Congress

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by leekohler, Nov 11, 2010.

  1. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #1
    And what did I tell you guys before? It's dead- not going to happen.

    FU Obama. You're just another POS Bill Clinton as far as we're concerned. Screw all you politicians, we'll have to win in court.

    http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/la-na-dont-ask-20101112,0,2166179.story

     
  2. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #2
    Cann't Obama just issue an executive order that would at least for a while stop the ban and end DADT.

    As I said a while ago before the election all I see from Obama is an empty suit. Every day he proves it more and more.
     
  3. leekohler thread starter macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #3
    He sure has. Let's see, what promise has he kept? Taxes? Nope. And don't say health care, because he screwed that up too.
     
  4. obeygiant macrumors 68040

    obeygiant

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Location:
    totally cool
    #4
    I wonder how it would disrupt the armed services? How could "loss of unit cohesion" occur?
     
  5. flopticalcube macrumors G4

    flopticalcube

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    In the velcro closure of America's Hat
    #5
  6. Apple OC macrumors 68040

    Apple OC

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2010
    Location:
    Hogtown
    #6
    why do people need to announce their beliefs to the rest of the world ... same goes for religion ... to each their own. Who really cares how people lead their lives if they are not harming others.

    I will never understand the Grandstanding :cool:
     
  7. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #7
    You expect me to say Health Care. LOL....

    I know you can go back to the election I said I did not like Obama and I called him an empty suit. He speaks pretty much nothing.

    I remember him promising more jobs. Now 2 years later lets see we have a break even on job creation. Unemployment is at best staying steady instead of rising and well over a trillion more in debt and looks like it is going to go even higher.

    THe guy is completely BS. The more I see it he will be a one term president and because he will be caught in his BS and lies very badly we will get someone worse.

    Yes worse.
     
  8. leekohler thread starter macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #8
    He had damn well better start standing for something, or you will be right.
     
  9. obeygiant macrumors 68040

    obeygiant

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Location:
    totally cool
    #9
    Thats interesting reading but doesn't really address the question. It looks like some of the countries that allow gay to serve openly have their recruits go through sensitivity training.
     
  10. hulugu macrumors 68000

    hulugu

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Location:
    the faraway towns
    #10
    Individual service members have told me that the current "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy is just a game that everyone has agreed to play and is not a particularly useful system.

    Additionally, a preview of the Pentagon report on DADT indicates that the Pentagon itself believes the change will cause "little harm."

    I'm sure there will some headaches, but overall, units in combat will have more important things to worry about and it will remain up to unit commanders to treat their soldiers properly.

    EDIT: To Lee, while I understand you're frustrated and impatient, I think President Obama is pursuing the right strategy here. He can't just invalidate DADT and his other option is, as the NYTimes called it, a gimmick by using the "stop-loss" order.
    Gays in the military need a real, long-term solution that won't be invalidated by the next administration and the best way to get that is through Congress.
     
  11. bobber205 macrumors 68020

    bobber205

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2005
    Location:
    Oregon
    #11
    They're not going to "announce" it. They just want to not be kicked out if someone "finds" out. They shouldn't have to HIDE it. Do straight people have to hide THEIR sexuality?
     
  12. hulugu macrumors 68000

    hulugu

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2003
    Location:
    the faraway towns
    #13
    I'm not sure what else he should be doing. I'll admit frustration at lots of things he has or hasn't done, but for the economy, I'm just not convinced that there's a solution that will work that he—or his staff—have just dismissed out of hand.
    Just as with DADT, the road is difficult, but even the presidency is subject to the slings and arrows of American politics.
     
  13. Moyank24 macrumors 601

    Moyank24

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2009
    Location:
    in a New York State of mind
    #14

    I'm not sure how wanting to be treated as their straight counterparts is "grandstanding". It's not about announcing anything, it's about not having to be worried about getting kicked out of the military they are found out to be gay.
     
  14. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #15
    Don't feed us broken promises and lie to the american people.

    Obama promised Health care (Fail)
    Obama promised ecomomic improvement (Fail. We are in worse shape than when he took office)
    Obama said end DADT (fail)
    Obama promised hope and changed (Fail)
    Obama promised Unemployment would not cross 8% and that is why we ate another 700bil bail out (BIG TIME FAIL)

    Obama made the promises so it is his fault he did not deliver. He made them. He screwed up. His fault for making them.
     
  15. KingYaba macrumors 68040

    KingYaba

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2005
    Location:
    Up the irons
    #16
    Here's to hoping our 3rd branch of government will settle this mater.
     
  16. Queso macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2006
    #17
    Here you go Senators et al. A quick map of which countries permit (blue) LGBT service against those that don't (red).

    [​IMG]

    Let's not pretend that DADT doesn't effectively put the USA in with the red camp, together with Zimbabwe, Iran, Somalia and North Korea. Observers will probably also notice that the entire Rest Of Developed World is coloured blue.

    Americans, you must feel proud!! :rolleyes:
     
  17. leekohler thread starter macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #18
    What strategy? It's DEAD. Nothing is going to happen. It's over. What part of that article is a mystery?

    As for what he could be doing- he could stop aggressively fighting the court decision that found it unconstitutional for starters, because congress will not repeal it now.
     
  18. mcrain macrumors 68000

    mcrain

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Location:
    Illinois
    #19
    In May, the House passed a repeal of DADT. The President has said he would sign it. It hasn't gotten through the Senate because of republican opposition and the ***** 60 vote unconstitutional supermajority that they have been stuffing down the throats of the american people.

    If you want to blame someone, blame the (now) 47 republicants in the senate.

    (edit) If he stops fighting the court case, the issue becomes moot and it won't get to the supreme court. It's a good case to take on appeal.
     
  19. leekohler thread starter macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #20
    Obama has done no one any favors by fighting the court case, which it has been pointed out that he did NOT have to do. I can blame Obama for that, and I do. Stop making excuses. There is plenty he could have done- plenty. He has to take the blame for this not getting done away with as well. It's not just Republicans.

    Seriously, Obama has to stop being such a goddamn wimp. He's already lost this and now it looks like he's not even going to try to fight the Republicans on the tax cut thing. That's BS and he's not helping anyone. We elected Obama to LEAD, not cave.
     
  20. mcrain macrumors 68000

    mcrain

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Location:
    Illinois
    #21
    I agree with you about the leadership problem, but not about the case or about who is ultimately to blame.

    Obama should have led the fight, and convinced people that he was right. Instead, he barely said anything and allowed the hate filled right wing media to define the story. This allowed the 40 republicants in the senate to filibuster any meaningful legislation, including DADT repeal.

    As for the case, I truly believe that keeping this case in the appeals process is far better than allowing a really bad factual case to come along and define the issue for a right-wing stacked supreme court.
     
  21. leekohler thread starter macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #22
    So you think it should just stay in the appeals process indefinitely? That's a great solution. There is also no indication that the Supreme Court would not strike it down. The same court struck down sodomy laws.

    And as for you calling me impatient, I don't think waiting for decades for this to be done away with is impatient. That is not a fair characterization- not at all. I get sick of people calling us impatient. We've waited a very long time for this. The time for being "patient" is over. It's time for action. No more excuses.
     
  22. mcrain macrumors 68000

    mcrain

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Location:
    Illinois
    #23
    I don't and won't call you impatient, and in fact absolutely agree with you. This should have been done away with a long time ago, but because of the law passed by the GOP when Clinton first mentioned gays in the military, it is more difficult than it should be.

    Obama could have and should have done more to lead this issue, and by not doing more leading, he ceded the argument to the right-wing homophobic wackjobs of the republican/tea party.

    This issue is going to end up before the supreme court someday, and the question is do you want a case with good facts or bad facts there? Do you want a case where you have some control over the outcome. The alternative is a case where the facts stink and a loss affirms the policy.
     
  23. leekohler, Nov 12, 2010
    Last edited: Nov 12, 2010

    leekohler thread starter macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #24
    Just what are these "bad facts" you speak of?

    And you're right, it was hulugu who called me impatient, which is BS.
     
  24. mcrain macrumors 68000

    mcrain

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Location:
    Illinois
    #25
    An axiom of the law is that bad facts make bad law. What happens is that a case with a terrible fact pattern ends up being appealed and results in a decision that ends up as precedent to other situations. There are many examples of this happening (bong hits for Jesus or an Erisa case).

    My concern is that the case that is currently being appealed, the one you want the Justice Department to not appeal, not enforce, and basically give up on, has good facts for the result that you want. It has a lower court decision and fact findings that open the door for the supreme court to rule in what I think would be the right way.

    On the other hand, I can imagine many different cases that could go before much more conservative lower court judges with wildly more extreme findings of fact going to the supreme court and resulting in a decision that sets DADT and civil rights back decades.
     

Share This Page