I’m sorry I missed you all earlier. I wanted to thank you all for the support on my post on Friday. You guys are awesome and I appreciate you all very much. Jane and the rest of the FDL crew are so lucky to have you all.

Much love,
Lane

I think you did the right thing by asking your question to Bill Clinton. And Clinton answered it just like he does any other question….with rudeness…finger pointing…and outright lies! He has never accepted any personally responsibility for anything not only in his Presidency, but in his life. He has always shifted blame to others when called to task!! So, if it were me I wouldn’t give one good f**k what that asshole, degenerate had to say!!

Republicans at least have principles.

No they don’t. Case in point of millions of cases in point: The complete turn arounds that Rachel Maddow aired from Limbaugh, Gingrich and Palin about “Death Panels” aka, living wills.

Lane: While I think you’re right to implore Clinton to get into the fight again, don’t underestimate how many of us are with you whether he is or not. And please, do not discount that one need not be a part of the so called ‘gay community’ to completely understand the battle and to want to fight and support the battle for rights.

I agree with milleneryman that Clinton owes you an apology for wagging a finger at you and shaming you. I was repulsed and incensed by what he did.

1. Why is the age limit on Medicare & SCHIP constitutional. Does the equal protection clause potentially invalidate the age limit?

2. Is a Federal Mandate to buy private insurance legal? Why is is not an unlawful taking? And I’m familiar with Kelo vs New London, and the arguments used there seem a stretch for “common good” if I don’t buy compulsory insurance?

3. If the feds forces the insurance companies to eliminate ceilings on payments, drop the pre-exiting conditions clause, and otherwise deny payments, how high will that raise our insurance premiums?

Nothing in subsection (b) shall be construed to require that a member of the armed forces be processed for separation from the armed forces when a determination is made in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Defense that— …

(2) separation of the member would not be in the best interest of the armed forces.

So yes, Obama could change the policy by Executive Order by declaring that it is in the best interests of the armed forces to retain gay service members.

But I’ll go along with you.