Rockin' in the free world since 2005.

[Total: 37    Average: 3.1/5]
80 Comments - View/Add
Hits: 17604
Rating: 3.1
Category:
Date: 10/20/10 01:06 PM

80 Responses to Obama Fails You And The Gays… Again

  1. Profile photo of fancylad
    fancylad Male 30-39
    18499 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 1:16 pm
    Link: Obama Fails You And The Gays... Again - Obama`s administration filed an emergency request with the Court of Appeals today to end the Don`t Ask-Don`t Tell repeal
  2. Profile photo of Inter237
    Inter237 Male 18-29
    2441 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 1:28 pm
    hmm
  3. Profile photo of teddyboy11
    teddyboy11 Male 18-29
    101 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 1:35 pm
    I am going to see him speak today. I live in Portland, and he is here. Should be interesting.
  4. Profile photo of a1butcher
    a1butcher Male 40-49
    4812 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 1:36 pm
    Isn`t Anderson Cooper gay also?
  5. Profile photo of 5405841
    5405841 Female 18-29
    527 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 1:37 pm
    obama hasn`t really had that many fails yet...
  6. Profile photo of SPARTAKITTY
    SPARTAKITTY Female 18-29
    2123 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 1:39 pm
    Oh f*ck him. What is the harm in letting gay people serve? They exist, now get the f*ck over it.
  7. Profile photo of ggolbez
    ggolbez Male 18-29
    1933 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 1:40 pm
    FFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU

    I have supported Obama since the get go, but seriously? It`s come to this? Is Obama TRYING to lose the November elections to the Republicans? Because, drat, it looks like he`s drating trying.
  8. Profile photo of Angelmassb
    Angelmassb Male 18-29
    15511 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 1:40 pm
    What the hell
  9. Profile photo of DrProfessor
    DrProfessor Male 18-29
    3894 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 1:41 pm
    He`s not exactly failing them. And it isn`t entirely up to Obama, either. God, way to simplify it way too much and lay the blame all at one doorstep.

    If you read beyond the headline, you`d see that what they want to do is repeal it through congressional means, rather than having the courts magically undo it instantly. Because that could cause chaos and/or disruption in the army. And chaos is absolute anathema to the structure of the army.

    So it`s better to figure out a way that it can happen without causing a huge stir all at once.
  10. Profile photo of DrProfessor
    DrProfessor Male 18-29
    3894 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 1:41 pm
    So drat everybody who is freaking out right now. Learn to read, you pricks.
  11. Profile photo of Kegomatix
    Kegomatix Male 18-29
    1341 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 1:46 pm
    We need homos in the military just like we need women in the military......

    And by that I mean not at all.
  12. Profile photo of ggolbez
    ggolbez Male 18-29
    1933 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 1:49 pm
    @DrProfessor

    Yes, it all doesn`t count on what the President says

    Yes, all he`s trying to do is have the change come through congress so it will be more streamlined

    But you got to admit, this is a human rights issue. People have the right to serve their country, and no one should have the right to say who and who can not do that if they are a citizen. Having the President come out and ask for someone to not uphold personal human rights, is a travesty.
  13. Profile photo of comuser59
    comuser59 Male 18-29
    28 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 1:55 pm
    DrProfessor hit the nail right on the head. Legislative attempts to repeal DADT are already under way. A judge waving their gavel and saying "I hereby disappear the policy of DADT" is quite possibly the worst possible scenario. Sure it might seem the most desirable, but it doesn`t even come close to taking the long term ramifications into account. Let`s not forget, we have troops in harm`s way (i.e. we`re fighting a frickin` war) and all this can serve to do in the short term is distract them from the task at hand. And a distracted soldier is a dead soldier.
  14. Profile photo of DrProfessor
    DrProfessor Male 18-29
    3894 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 1:55 pm
    @ggolbez Oh no, I totally agree that DADT needs to be taken down. But this was a bit of political maneuvering, and not a full withdrawal of support from the cause, like people are suggesting.

    It`s not about whether it gets repealed, but HOW it gets repealed.

    Like, okay. Let me give a parallel example. Imagine there`s a person stuck in a well. And everybody is all set to save him by digging under the well and placing explosive charges down there, in order to blow him straight out of the well. If the person in charge of the operation says "WAIT! Don`t get him out of the well! ...we wanted to set up a rope and pully system to help him climb out." It wouldn`t be unreasonable at all. It would be a much safer alternative for the person stuck in the well. It`s irresponsible of anyone observing the situation to take that quote, parse out "Wait, don`t get him out of the well!" and assume it just meant that the guy didn`t want to save him.
  15. Profile photo of splurbyburbl
    splurbyburbl Male 30-39
    2798 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 2:01 pm
    I blame my peers. I cannot tell you how many times I have heard anti-gay stuff from my fellow Marines. I just don`t understand what the hell they are so worried about.

    The people in power need to make up their minds and be done with it. I swear the say I watch the news and don`t hear anything controversial about gays in the military or being maried, is the day I throw a drating party. And all of you will be invited. I am just so sick of hearing about it. We, as a nation, have sooo many more pressing matters to attend to than wasting time on this nonsense.
  16. Profile photo of tridirk
    tridirk Male 50-59
    313 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 2:13 pm
    as if he ever really cared..... except for your vote!
    although I have heard



    so you would think he would relate?
  17. Profile photo of WhiteOokami
    WhiteOokami Male 18-29
    38 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 2:15 pm
    @Kegomatix

    The people that are "homos" are already in the military. So...just because they can say they are gay isn`t really going to change the way they fire weapons and what not. As for the women part I`m going to ignore that since I have three brothers in the Army and one sister as well and your comment was really not even well thought out.
  18. Profile photo of paddy215
    paddy215 Male 18-29
    1677 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 2:29 pm
    Trolling your own site again.
  19. Profile photo of Baalthazaq
    Baalthazaq Male 18-29
    4548 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 2:35 pm
    Well if... oh... DrProfessor has already done everything I came in here to do...

    *Twiddles thumbs*

    I guess I`ll be going then...
  20. Profile photo of Jotham
    Jotham Male 18-29
    52 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 3:05 pm
    I`m curious, why do they talk about stopping "Don`t Ask, Don`t Tell" when they really mean allowing gays in the military? Because canceling DADT wouldn`t do that, it would just make it so they can`t not tell anymore. Of course, I`m sure they don`t intend that.
  21. Profile photo of Kegomatix
    Kegomatix Male 18-29
    1341 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 3:16 pm
    @whiteookami

    Its my opinion and I am allowed to have it. I just wish people could see how much disapproval there is in the military.. Might surprise a lot of people what we think.... Or maybe not. I don`t know, its been a while since I`ve had to think as a civilian.
  22. Profile photo of DoTheKatango
    DoTheKatango Female 18-29
    13 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 3:35 pm
    @jotham
    The issue of Don`t Ask, Don`t Tell is that it`s not really don`t ask, don`t tell. It`s "don`t let us find out or you`ll be kicked out." By repealing the policy, you can`t be kicked out anymore. (Note the man that was discharged a few months ago then was accepted when the policy was repealed)
  23. Profile photo of ghettoelf
    ghettoelf Male 18-29
    55 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 3:49 pm
    IMPEACH!!!
  24. Profile photo of KMeatPiLover
    KMeatPiLover Female 18-29
    129 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 4:17 pm
    Fancylad fails to understand how the government functions. Don`t worry, you probably have another 40 years to figure it out.
  25. Profile photo of Gerry1of1
    Gerry1of1 Male 50-59
    36192 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 4:20 pm
    no surprise here. he said all along he would challenge it. doesn`t matter. changinog DADT policy does not change the UCMJ {Uniform Code of Military Justicde} ...that takes an act of congress.
  26. Profile photo of Gerry1of1
    Gerry1of1 Male 50-59
    36192 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 4:22 pm
    the reason gays aren`t allowed in the military is because the straight guys aren`t tough enough to keep up with Lesbians!

    I know I`m not.
  27. Profile photo of roariamadino
    roariamadino Male 18-29
    270 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 4:31 pm
    he kept the loophole open.

    i don`t know about some of the other people here but i for one am glad that if theres another war we disagree with at least there`s a dirty path away from hate.

    obama has kept the world alive, the man should be honored.
  28. Profile photo of splurbyburbl
    splurbyburbl Male 30-39
    2798 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 4:40 pm
    "obama has kept the world alive, the man should be honored."

    What exactly do you mean by that?? Exactly what has Obama done that has "kept the world alive"??
  29. Profile photo of Baelzar
    Baelzar Male 40-49
    1399 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 4:44 pm
    The military isn`t a country club.

    The only thing it should be worried about is killing people and breaking things.

    If having gays in the military helps that goal, great! If not, then it shouldn`t happen.
  30. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12390 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 4:54 pm
    Its my opinion and I am allowed to have it. I just wish people could see how much disapproval there is in the military.. Might surprise a lot of people what we think.... Or maybe not.

    It wouldn`t surprise people in the UK who were around and looking at it back when the UK repealed their DADT policy.

    *Prior to the repeal*, there was a lot of disapproval in the military. Anonymous surveys were done in the military and a large proportion disapproved of repealing it.

    After the repeal, nearly all of them changed their mind. It wasn`t what they thought it might be. There wasn`t any preferential treatment for homosexuals. It made no difference.

    Bob is gay and you don`t know. You`re not having sex with him.

    Bob is gay and you do know. You`re not having sex with him.

    Where`s the difference? What matters is whether you can rely on Bob as a fellow soldier and that`s unrelated.
  31. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12390 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 4:59 pm
    It`s not about whether it gets repealed, but HOW it gets repealed.

    This is the key point.

    I agree with Obama`s course of action. There`s a right way of changing military policy and a court order of DO IT RIGHT NOW is not the right way.
  32. Profile photo of moefreak
    moefreak Female 18-29
    1963 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 5:04 pm
    Obama is not against homosexuality. Period.

    He isn`t saying that gay people should not be allowed to serve in the military. He`s just trying to make the transition easier.
  33. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12390 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 5:06 pm
    The only thing it should be worried about is killing people and breaking things.

    The military does a lot of building things too. It`s surprising what the military can get built in not much time. It`s good for emergency relief work too, because it`s already well organised and has useful equipment. It`s not *just* killing people and breaking things.
  34. Profile photo of Genocyde
    Genocyde Male 30-39
    712 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 5:15 pm
    ::The military isn`t a country club.

    The only thing it should be worried about is killing people and breaking things.::

    Our Military serves to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

    I would reexamine your stance on what our military is.
  35. Profile photo of handys003
    handys003 Male 50-59
    2402 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 5:27 pm
    Ha! All you suckers thinking he was going to make changes with a liberal progressive platform. Not much difference in politicians. Same old sh*t just a different political whore in the Presidency. When you have people paying for your campaign you got to pay the piper back conforming to their agenda.
  36. Profile photo of handys003
    handys003 Male 50-59
    2402 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 5:29 pm
    @Angilion
    Sorry but that`s not how our US Constitution works. The courts have a final say in the legal terms to protect the minority view.
  37. Profile photo of Suicism
    Suicism Male 18-29
    3625 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 5:33 pm
    Angillion - what steps were taken to avoid the same types of encounters they are concerned about between, say, heterosexual male and female recruits?

    (It would suck if your entire platoon were a "distraction," lol)
  38. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12390 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 5:55 pm
    Our Military serves to protect and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

    Which, ultimately, it does by killing people and breaking things or threatening to do so. Those are the core functions of any military force. That`s why they have guns and bombs and suchlike.

    They also build things and help people caught in natural disasters, but their core function of the military is to be the military - an organised, disciplined *force*.

    You`re talking about why. The previous poster was talking about how. Different things.
  39. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12390 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 5:56 pm
    @Angilion
    Sorry but that`s not how our US Constitution works. The courts have a final say in the legal terms to protect the minority view.

    So if a judged declared the war in the middle east illegal, the USA military would have to immediately withdraw without any kind of plan?
  40. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12390 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 6:01 pm
    Angillion - what steps were taken to avoid the same types of encounters they are concerned about between, say, heterosexual male and female recruits?

    (It would suck if your entire platoon were a "distraction," lol)

    As far as I know, the same steps apply. On the one hand, there`s more opportunity for them. On the other hand, there are much fewer people who might be involved in them. So they`re probably less of an issue than heterosexual ones.
  41. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10722 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 6:02 pm
    So if a judged declared the war in the middle east illegal

    Such a judgment is wholly unrealistic. If it did happen the executive branch won`t care. This is a case of military law, not war.
  42. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10722 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 6:18 pm
    In any case all I`ve heard is that they`re not actually trying to reverse the decision just delay the order (why it`s called a "stay"). Hopefully that should solve the problem of "unwanted chaos".
  43. Profile photo of auburnjunky
    auburnjunky Male 30-39
    10339 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 7:53 pm
    I just love this.....
  44. Profile photo of Jotham
    Jotham Male 18-29
    52 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 8:30 pm
    @DoTheKatango
    Yeah, they obviously want to allow military personnel to publicly reveal their sexuality, but it`s not "Don`t Ask, Don`t Tell" that`s preventing that. DADT was a compromise between letting gays in the military and what they had before, not letting gays in the military and forcing them to reveal if they were gay.
    I`m saying that theoretically if you were to end DADT, gays would all have to leave the military instead of staying in secret.
  45. Profile photo of almightybob1
    almightybob1 Male 18-29
    4290 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 8:31 pm
    Well that seems... counter-productive. I wonder what will happen to the soldiers who came out during those few days between it being banned and being stayed?
  46. Profile photo of Gleeballs
    Gleeballs Female 18-29
    850 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 8:32 pm
    this bitch......... if it isnt some sort of billion dollar bank bailout or socialist healthcare, it is of no concern to him.
  47. Profile photo of handys003
    handys003 Male 50-59
    2402 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 8:33 pm
    @Angilion
    No. A Federal Circuit Judge does not have final say. Only the Supreme Court does on rulings that such notions for rulings that violate one of the amendments.

    Once again you are interpreting the Judicial Branch over Executive and for that matter Legislative branch section of the Constitution. A Federal judge has the right to determine whether any law that is conflict with the constitutional amendments to be illegal or not. However the final authority if neither side appeals rests with the authority determined by the Supreme Court Justices. It is a system of checks and balances to make sure not one of the 3 branches has more power than the other. It`s not perfect but helps ensure no dictatorship will threaten the public.

    Example: If a ruling over a law that seems to violate the amendment designed to protect. then it can be determined such law exceeds the right of the amendment. Thus making any law by any county, city , state, or federal illegal should one
  48. Profile photo of handys003
    handys003 Male 50-59
    2402 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 8:38 pm
    been done can be overturned limiting the authority of the other branches. Now should a congressman introduce a bill making it a US Constitution amendment and it passes ratification during election time by the majority of states. Then it will be added to the Constitution. Then it can be no longer ruled illegal by the courts and any law pertaining to such must be determined if it violates that amendment form that point.

    There is no Amendment on an act of illegal war. The President is Commander and chief and can determine such at his discretion but must be ratified within 90 days of the "War Powers Act". Thus since congress has abides the courts cannot say it`s illegal as there is no violation of US Constitution.
  49. Profile photo of darthrex111
    darthrex111 Male 13-17
    49 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 9:04 pm
    *sigh* Obama.... What the hell are you doing?!?!? I mean why cant gays be in the military??? whats so wrong? if someone wants to die for freedom, then they should be HONORED
  50. Profile photo of kummi90
    kummi90 Male 18-29
    541 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 9:12 pm
    Gleeballs:

    The bailout bill saved millions of jobs, and actually saved the economy. Go figure, huh!
    Way to keep ignorant though...
  51. Profile photo of auburnjunky
    auburnjunky Male 30-39
    10339 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 9:52 pm
    "The bailout bill saved millions of jobs, and actually saved the economy."

    HA. HAHA! HAHAHAHAHAHA!

    Give credit where credit is due kummi.

    Bush`s stupid ass signed the bailouts into law. Barack is responsible for the stimulus, that did nothing.
  52. Profile photo of OldOllie
    OldOllie Male 60-69
    15844 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 10:05 pm
    I may be missing something, but if DADT is declared unconstitutional, wouldn`t the situation revert to the status quo ante which was no gays in the military AT ALL?
  53. Profile photo of Toider
    Toider Male 18-29
    452 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 10:07 pm
    They need a plan in place for general housing of gays in the military. There needs to be some magnitude of segregation or it will cause a poostorm of discrimination and harassment problems which nobody wants to deal with right now. I think peacetime would be more appropriate for them to repeal or at least amend don`t ask, don`t tell. I also think the decision to allow homosexuals to serve openly should be up to the military and no one else. To undermine them during our current engagement is just stupid and dangerous.
  54. Profile photo of auburnjunky
    auburnjunky Male 30-39
    10339 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 10:27 pm
    Yep OldOllie. That`s exactly right!

    Once again, they haven`t thought it through.
  55. Profile photo of Wizard77
    Wizard77 Male 40-49
    582 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 11:06 pm
    kummi90 said- "The bailout bill saved millions of jobs, and actually saved the economy."

    ...that is a joke right?
  56. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10722 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 11:21 pm
    @auburnjunky and OldOllie

    No that`s dead wrong those policies were repealed when DADT was enacted.
  57. Profile photo of auburnjunky
    auburnjunky Male 30-39
    10339 posts
    October 20, 2010 at 11:43 pm
    Oh.

    Thanks cajun.
  58. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10722 posts
    October 21, 2010 at 12:03 am
    You`re welcome I`m going to bed.
  59. Profile photo of handys003
    handys003 Male 50-59
    2402 posts
    October 21, 2010 at 12:19 am
    @kummi90
    No the bail outs did not save jobs, and did not save the economy. The country is still at 10% unemployment. That`s not counting the rest of those who came off unemployment insurance the past year. It`s almost double around 20%. People are not spending money. Hawaii`s tourism alone is down 45% needless to say other tourists spots in the USA. The National debt is over 13 trillion and climbing. The Feds are getting ready to raise the interest rates. The Chinese own half our currency with T-Bills, and are on the verge of mass selling thus flushing the value of our currency down the toilet. Please as a European stay out and quit telling us what the stability of our country is. You have your own problems in France and England as it is.
  60. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    31771 posts
    October 21, 2010 at 12:52 am
    So if the SCoTUS said abortion was legal, that would overturn all anti-abortion `laws`? Well, YES! It does!
    And if the Gov`t said "Oh, just give us a while, we got abortion legislation in the works..." you`d agree?
    Face facts Angilion: The SCoTUS can be very powerful. IF the `law` is illegal, it`s GONE! At least after it passes the appeals process - lolz!
    YEah AuburnJunky, I`m LOVIN this!
    DADT - a Democrat policy! (Clinton)
    Obama promised to overturn it, now? Not so fast! Lolz!

    Listening to DrProfessor (and Baalth) spin and spin = priceless!

    @kummi90 as AJ mentioned, Bush signed the Democrat Congress`s `bailout` while Obama signed the Democrat Congress`s STIMULUS, which did absolutely nothing. So thanks for supporting Bush! Have a nice day!
  61. Profile photo of vorpalsword
    vorpalsword Male 18-29
    1452 posts
    October 21, 2010 at 5:09 am
    "Well if... oh... DrProfessor has already done everything I came in here to do... "

    is that pick apart minor unimportant things of an article to show blind support for Obama?
  62. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    31771 posts
    October 21, 2010 at 5:44 am
    vv Yup @vorpalsword, that`s it in a nutshell!
    Although DrProfessor didn`t change the subject, which is Baalth`s #1 method of arguement. Still, all this spinning makes for delicious schadenfreude! Yum yum!
  63. Profile photo of pmarren
    pmarren Male 40-49
    4575 posts
    October 21, 2010 at 6:02 am
    Me thinks Barry doth protest too much... makes me a bit suspicious.
  64. Profile photo of Blayed
    Blayed Male 30-39
    5 posts
    October 21, 2010 at 7:50 am
    How has he failed me by overturning this, precisely?
  65. Profile photo of vorpalsword
    vorpalsword Male 18-29
    1452 posts
    October 21, 2010 at 8:05 am
    The military isn`t a country club.

    The only thing it should be worried about is killing people and breaking things.

    If having gays in the military helps that goal, great! If not, then it shouldn`t happen.

    oh be original, this post is almost word for word copied from something Rush Limbaugh and many other pundits have said.
  66. Profile photo of Kegomatix
    Kegomatix Male 18-29
    1341 posts
    October 21, 2010 at 9:46 am
    All these people that are complaining about it as if its their business need to stfu.. Unless you are in the military already or gay it is no concern of yours so I don`t understand why these retards go and protest about it... If it were a vote within the existing military... HAH I wish it were because it would be shot down so fast.
  67. Profile photo of tainteddeity
    tainteddeity Male 18-29
    848 posts
    October 21, 2010 at 10:12 am
    You tell em, Kegomatix! People shouldn`t be concerned about injustice unless it`s happening to them!
    Wait, no. That`s a drating stupid idea. Injustice is injustice. Stop guilting people into silence.
  68. Profile photo of Kegomatix
    Kegomatix Male 18-29
    1341 posts
    October 21, 2010 at 11:19 am
    tainteddeity 13-17 years from Europe

    ..... It ESPECIALLY has nothing to do with you so stfu people need to start thinking about what we ALREADY IN THE MILITARY want.
  69. Profile photo of OldOllie
    OldOllie Male 60-69
    15844 posts
    October 21, 2010 at 11:59 am
    I have a solution that would DEFINITELY work but would NEVER be implimented: segregated gay units. One of the reasons that blacks were able to overcome racism and prejudice when the armed services were integrated was because the segregated black units had proven their worth by performing with exemplary courage and honor. Gays could do the same thing given the chance.
  70. Profile photo of Cartunze
    Cartunze Male 60-69
    841 posts
    October 21, 2010 at 12:14 pm
    Well, I totally agree with President Obama on this. If we had a gay army, no one would want to fight us, because, you know, that would be gay.
  71. Profile photo of kralmir
    kralmir Male 18-29
    351 posts
    October 21, 2010 at 12:25 pm
    if i am fighting side by side with people i expect everything except for "who is the bad guy and how do we kill him without dieing ourselves" to not even drating exist, if you are whining and bitching about anything you are a faggot(drat you if you think this insult should apply to gay people) and should drat off, only >everyone< in the military should have the right to give their drating opinion about all this anyway, but nobody else.
  72. Profile photo of Kegomatix
    Kegomatix Male 18-29
    1341 posts
    October 21, 2010 at 12:31 pm
    Oldollie, I agree.. That would be a good start.

    And kralmir, thank you!

    Cartunze, hilarious.
  73. Profile photo of Cajun247
    Cajun247 Male 18-29
    10722 posts
    October 21, 2010 at 12:37 pm
    @OldOllie

    Far from the worst idea I`ve ever heard, mostly because I don`t think we need to do that. I think when DADT gets repealed a lot of people (soldiers) are going to figure out they fighting along with competent homosexuals the whole time (as in when they come out of the closet).
  74. Profile photo of Fatninja01
    Fatninja01 Male 30-39
    25407 posts
    October 21, 2010 at 2:39 pm
    meh..
  75. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    31771 posts
    October 21, 2010 at 5:13 pm
    The late senator Robert Byrd- DEMOCRAT -was once a Grand Wizard of the KKK. He wrote a long letter in 1946 (iirc) how he`d sooner resign than serve in a US Armed Forces with ni**ers!
    But when faced with the integration of blacks into the regular forces, mixed units! he didn`t resign! (coward!)

    My point is that many armies allow various sexual orientations, and they still function! Segregating gays would be counter-productive IMO. Just END DADT and if some folks don`t like it? They can leave!
    That Obama still pushes DADT is further proof that the MSM is 100% biased!
  76. Profile photo of NexusLetum
    NexusLetum Female 18-29
    136 posts
    October 22, 2010 at 3:04 am
    Why do people seem to think the President is so omnipotent? Essentially speaking, he CAN`T do this without support from military leaders and Congress, mostly the military. Or rather, he could, but the likelihood that some hopping mad General wouldn`t like it so much that he`d take some troops to `reclaim the nation` is strangely high at this time. So rather than be remarkably reckless, Obama recognizes that as the `Commander in Chief` he is mostly a figurehead in the chain of command. (I don`t care what you military types say, there is no reason this couldn`t happen if people were given enough motive)

    Now I don`t agree with him, and I wish people would get their heads out their asses, but he`s got to involve all the branches of government to do this. He`s got to put all arguments to rest by unequivocally stating that every part of the government supports the change. THAT`S how bad this situation is! It`s going to take a long time to get this done right.
  77. Profile photo of DJDoubleb
    DJDoubleb Male 30-39
    382 posts
    October 22, 2010 at 11:46 am
    Could be wrong but it seems that Obama saw the ban was going to be lifted by congress. Seeing the current leaders approval ratings plummet, he thought it would be better for them to do it instead of the courts.
  78. Profile photo of DrProfessor
    DrProfessor Male 18-29
    3894 posts
    October 22, 2010 at 1:48 pm
    drating READ, god damn you.

    "The administration argued that changing it abruptly "risks causing significant immediate harm to the military and its efforts to be prepared to implement an orderly repeal of the statute."
    Toobinsaid the administration would like Congress to deal with the issue on a political level and doesn`t want the courts to take it on unilaterally.
    A measure that would repeal the policy after a military review and approval from the president, defense secretary and Joint Chiefs chairman has passed the House and awaits action in the Senate.
    By battling the legal challenge to the existing law -- a traditional practice of the U.S. government -- the administration is trying to buy time to implement the repeal process worked out with military leaders and contained in the legislation before Congress."
  79. Profile photo of Angilion
    Angilion Male 40-49
    12390 posts
    October 23, 2010 at 6:51 pm
    They need a plan in place for general housing of gays in the military. There needs to be some magnitude of segregation or it will cause a poostorm of discrimination and harassment problems which nobody wants to deal with right now.

    It hasn`t elsewhere. I expect USA soldiers can cope as well as soldiers of other nationalities did.

    All this happened in the early 90s in the UK. There was raving and there were comments like yours, reasonable comments expressing a genuine concern about potential problems without being irrationally prejudiced themselves.

    Then they just removed homosexuality as an issue in the military and nothing much happened. Soldiers came out, openly gay people applied to join up and...one senior officer resigned. The only issue since then has been soldiers *in uniform* at homosexualist political rallies. It wasn`t an issue that they were there, just that they were there *in uniform*.
  80. Profile photo of lilwitch
    lilwitch Female 18-29
    18 posts
    October 28, 2010 at 2:27 pm
    he didn`t fail me i`m not American

Leave a Reply