White House, Congress reach deal on repeal of DADT

  • irishkcguy

    Posts: 780

    May 25, 2010 6:59 AM GMT
    http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/05/25/congress.military.dadt/index.html
  • irishkcguy

    Posts: 780

    May 25, 2010 7:14 AM GMT
    This seems like progress.
  • calibro

    Posts: 8888

    May 25, 2010 3:49 PM GMT
    yeah, no dice... and no vote from me in the midterm election
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 25, 2010 6:24 PM GMT
    Everyone needs to contact their representatives NOW to help urge this on.
  • coolarmydude

    Posts: 9190

    May 25, 2010 6:31 PM GMT
    Wait and see...
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 25, 2010 6:44 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 saidFrom the article:

    The proposed agreement -- reached Monday by the White House and top congressional Democrats -- calls for a repeal of the controversial policy to become final after completion of the military review expected by the end of 2010, followed by a review certification from President Obama, Gates and Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

    So they're wasting all this time and money on a review that they will then ignore if it suggests that repeal should not happen and they will then repeal it.

    That's real smart and efficient government. icon_rolleyes.gif


    Leave it to someone who has never served in the military to make such a stupid comment.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 25, 2010 6:51 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    jmnyc1177 said

    Leave it to someone who has never served in the military to make such a stupid comment.



    Did I misread the sequence of events here?


    No, only that they act independent of one another, so it's not so much inefficient as it is congress got tired of waiting for the military to get it's shit together.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 25, 2010 6:53 PM GMT
    jmnyc1177 said
    southbeach1500 said
    jmnyc1177 said

    Leave it to someone who has never served in the military to make such a stupid comment.



    Did I misread the sequence of events here?


    No, only that they act independent of one another, so it's not so much inefficient as it is congress got tired of waiting for the military to get it's shit together.


    jmnyc, it's best to simply block him and ignore his posts. Seriously. He's not worth an ounce of spit.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 25, 2010 7:22 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    jmnyc1177 saidNo, only that they act independent of one another, so it's not so much inefficient as it is congress got tired of waiting for the military to get it's shit together.

    But the President is in charge of the military, so if they are just gonna repeal the law anyway, stop the review since it's gonna be ignored if it is against repeal... unless of course the review has been determined to be pro-repeal before it's even conducted and written.... then of course it's worth all the time, effort, money and paper it's printed on. icon_rolleyes.gif



    President isn't in charge of Congress though. He wants it repealed and has made it clear that he wants it done through legislative avenues. He's even expressed a preference for the repeal to be implemented AFTER the review, especially to give congressmen cover against the accusation that they're acting without the military's acceptance. I think that you just want to find a way to sllip in criticism of the government just to get under people's skin. Do you have any opinions that are stated to add to the commentary?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 25, 2010 7:26 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    unless of course the review has been determined to be pro-repeal before it's even conducted and written.... icon_rolleyes.gif



    I should have known you'd slip something like that in your remarks. I find it harder and harder to find crediblitiy in anything you say. Even something like the repeal DADT, you can't seem to give the government any credit on.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 25, 2010 7:47 PM GMT
    My fingers are crossed.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 25, 2010 7:51 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 saidFrom the article:

    The proposed agreement -- reached Monday by the White House and top congressional Democrats -- calls for a repeal of the controversial policy to become final after completion of the military review expected by the end of 2010, followed by a review certification from President Obama, Gates and Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

    So they're wasting all this time and money on a review that they will then ignore if it suggests that repeal should not happen and they will then repeal it.

    That's real smart and efficient government. icon_rolleyes.gif


    hahahahah true. Dems are so fucking slow.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 25, 2010 8:02 PM GMT
    Repeal is NOW. But it won't happen without your help. EVERYONE needs to write, fax, call, meet, etc... to their representatives. Also tell those in charge of the repeal to repeal it correctly and not to "back down" and compromise. We need the phones on Capitol Hill to be ringing every second from here till it is finalized. We need everyone's help....

    Open your emails and type...NOW.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 25, 2010 8:11 PM GMT
    JakeBenson said
    southbeach1500 saidFrom the article:

    The proposed agreement -- reached Monday by the White House and top congressional Democrats -- calls for a repeal of the controversial policy to become final after completion of the military review expected by the end of 2010, followed by a review certification from President Obama, Gates and Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

    So they're wasting all this time and money on a review that they will then ignore if it suggests that repeal should not happen and they will then repeal it.

    That's real smart and efficient government. icon_rolleyes.gif


    hahahahah true. Dems are so fucking slow.


    The purpose of holding a review is to ensure that all possible support, implementation, legal and training issues are understood and prepared for before the ban is listed. The result is a forgone conclusion. Take a look at this study which compares similar changes in the UK, Canada and Israel: http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2010/03/pdf/dadt_repeal.pdf

    The American military is much larger than any of these other countries, and decisions in any military are not generally taken in a particularly impetuous manner. I'm not greatly enthused that the review will take 9 months---I doubt the issues are actually as complicated as some have implied. There should be a formal moratorium in place on dismissing anyone while the review is conducted.

    There is however a solid reason to allow the military to take the lead here: the imposition of DADT constituted an intolerable political interference into the hiring policy of the military, and one that has been shown to it's functioning. To correct this by a political fiat is equally intolerable. Having removed the legislative ban, it should be up to the military to remove the policy using its own internal procedures.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 25, 2010 8:26 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    JakeBenson said
    southbeach1500 saidFrom the article:

    The proposed agreement -- reached Monday by the White House and top congressional Democrats -- calls for a repeal of the controversial policy to become final after completion of the military review expected by the end of 2010, followed by a review certification from President Obama, Gates and Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

    So they're wasting all this time and money on a review that they will then ignore if it suggests that repeal should not happen and they will then repeal it.

    That's real smart and efficient government. icon_rolleyes.gif





    hahahahah true. Dems are so fucking slow.



    Well at least you get it.

    Maybe you could explain my statement to jmnyc1177.


    Sheesh...now I know why people sometimes devolve to name calling. Nothing has to be explained, I'm pretty clear on the process, I just don't care much for your opinion on the issue.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 25, 2010 8:30 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 saidSo they're wasting all this time and money on a review that they will then ignore if it suggests that repeal should not happen and they will then repeal it.

    That's real smart and efficient government.

    A more efficient government is a dictatorship...let's go back to that, huh?

    It's like you just discovered civics and politics in the last two years. Have you never learned how a bill is made in Congress, how much inertia a tradition (like the military's ban on homosexuals) has?

    From posts you've made in other threads, I know that you couldn't care less about the success of our current administration, much less understand the process necessary for creating change. Are they a little slow on this stuff? Maybe, but it never bothered you before THIS administration (as if Obama invented red tape or something).

    Your trolling here has served no purpose other than your narcissism. Do our country a favor though: keep voting Democratic like you've been doing to--how did you put it--prove that Democrats are a failure. Yes, I hope you help them fail again and again and again and again.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 25, 2010 8:38 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    mickeytopogigio saidA more efficient government is a dictatorship...let's go back to that, huh?

    It's like you just discovered civics and politics in the last two years. Have you never learned how a bill is made in Congress, how much inertia a tradition (like the military's ban on homosexuals) has?

    From posts you've made in other threads, I know that you couldn't care less about the success of our current administration, much less understand the process necessary for creating change. Are they a little slow on this stuff? Maybe, but it never bothered you before THIS administration (as if Obama invented red tape or something).

    Your trolling here has served no purpose other than your narcissism. Do our country a favor though: keep voting Democratic like you've been doing to--how did you put it--prove that Democrats are a failure. Yes, I hope you help them fail again and again and again and again.

    You and the others get so agitated on here whenever you are confronted by a political view that isn't in line with your own.

    Of course, the obvious retort is, "No we are intelligent and enlightened and you are stupid and we don't like reading your dumb ideas."

    Great way to discuss differeing points of view.


    C'mon SB, you don't come with a different viewpoint, you come to agitate and jab. A viewpoint can be discussed. Jabs can only be defended against...
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 25, 2010 8:43 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 saidYou and the others get so agitated on here whenever you are confronted by a political view that isn't in line with your own.

    Of course, the obvious retort is, "No we are intelligent and enlightened and you are stupid and we don't like reading your dumb ideas."

    Great way to discuss differeing points of view.


    Stop pretending you're some martyr for balance or honest debate.

    Your point of view has contributed nothing to the discussion. Knowing that your motivation in voting for Obama (for your "perfect storm" scenario) was to "let the world see the failure of Democrats", I find any comment you make about the efficacy of government a completely cynical, narcissistic affront to reasoned debate.

    Please, debate the merits of this repeal, and its process. I'm dying to hear how you would do things differently. Go on, oh wise dictator: tell us how to run this government.
  • coolarmydude

    Posts: 9190

    May 25, 2010 9:09 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    jmnyc1177 said

    Leave it to someone who has never served in the military to make such a stupid comment.



    Did I misread the sequence of events here?


    You misread everything! icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 25, 2010 9:59 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    Repeal: Good

    Process: Stupid (if the President has the military performing a study / review to see whether or not it should be done even though Congress and the President have already decided to do it.)


    Well, Stupid is debatable. Slower than you want, maybe, but explain how you would persuade the very powerful interests in Congress and the military to change swiftly
    ...

    southbeach1500 saidCut spending (not the rate of spending, but the actual amount spent).

    Repeal the healthcare bill.
    ...
    etc.

    This stuff is not pertinent to this discussion. However, since you brought it up:

    Spending: which spending? "Cutting Spending" is a mantra of the Republicans. The idea sounds great, but what would you cut?

    Health Care Bill: although it's WAY too soft for me, and doesn't provide a public option much less single-payer (which would have saved our country trillions), it does in fact address many of the abuses of the insurance industry. How would you like to address the abuses of the insurance industry? The bill here (sucked nearly dry by conservatives) does more than anything proposed by--other than Hillary--anyone.

    Taxes: tax a corporation, like we used to. Small businesses bear a disproportionate burden (I agree with you). But the solution isn't more tax cuts, it's better distribution of the burden.

    Social Security: make it progressively funded, or at least flat. Only the first $90,000 of any individual's income is taxed for Social Security. Raise that cap, and the funding problem goes away. The under-30 people pay for your grandma today, so taking away that funding source is the surest way to make the program bankrupt and to put your grandma on the street. Preventing the under-30 from collecting on Social Security is--what?--a solution to its funding problem? That's rich. Every under-30 person on Social Security (a very small percentage) NEEDS it.

    My mother (who worked her entire life, bless her heart) relies on Social Security and Medicare to make it. No way for her to work off her retirement and pay for her cancer treatments, etc.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    May 25, 2010 10:27 PM GMT
    It would also be helpful to know where this beautiful, egalitarian country of Libertopia is, so that we can follow their real-world example. And we could all move there.
  • DCEric

    Posts: 3713

    May 25, 2010 10:40 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 saidFrom the article:

    The proposed agreement -- reached Monday by the White House and top congressional Democrats -- calls for a repeal of the controversial policy to become final after completion of the military review expected by the end of 2010, followed by a review certification from President Obama, Gates and Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

    So they're wasting all this time and money on a review that they will then ignore if it suggests that repeal should not happen and they will then repeal it.

    That's real smart and efficient government. icon_rolleyes.gif


    This would have been easier if Republicans didn't keep dragging their feet.