For someone who is holding such a powerful office, President Obama reflects a decided lack of power. When it is convenient for him to do so.

Too bad that he seems to choose the wrong issues on which to exercise that power.

Thanks Jane! Keep the heat on!

I love the audience plant at 4:30. A young, female from Austin, TX a republican? I’m waving the bullshit flag…

The spinelessness of this man never ceases to amaze.

Obama Says He Can’t
Won’t Issue Executive Order Ending DADT

I can’t help but be reminded of the immortal words spoken by Adelaide to Nathan Detroit in Guys & Dolls – “I don’t believe you any more!”

Where is Rahm when O needs him to say f* the gays.

He’s too busy curb-stomping liberal “r***rds” in Chicago.

The Incredible Shrinking President.

Obama is absolutely right. He can’t issue an executive order repealing DADT. On the other hand, he does have the power to order the Pentagon to stop enforcing DADT. He can do that unilaterally and immediately. Period.

Bullying nakid Congressmen in the Shower?

That’s point number one. Point number two, the difference between my position right now and Harry Truman’s, is that Congress explicitly passed a law that took away the power of the executive branch to end this policy unilaterally

Question when did this happen?

Jane —

Get in the game and quit whining.

-David Axelrod

That’s point number one. Point number two, the difference between my position right now and Harry Truman’s, is that Congress explicitly passed a law that took away the power of the executive branch to end this policy unilaterally

The Justice Dept can challenge in court any law they think is unconstitutional right?

We seem to have three branches of govt: Larry, Curly & Moe.

Something to consider about this. If Obama ends it with and executive order, any future President could reinstate the policy with an executive order. If the government does not actively pursue the case, there is not chance of getting a definitive court judgment that would bind any future President and the military chain of command.

That said, it’s pretty risky betting that the Supreme Court will strike it down or refuse to hear it. And the defense authorization bill for FY 2011, like all of the appropriations bills, is still awaiting Congressional approval–and that would deal with it legislatively.

DADT will end & it will end on my watch.

The Senate Republicans filibustered the entire DoD funding bill because repeal of Don’t ask, Don’t Tell was in it, as Jane points out. The Senate and the House are both expected to become more conservative, not less so. The above statement is bullshit. No word parsing, no wishful thinking. It’s just a bullshit lie and there are only two possibilities: 1) Obama knows he’s lying or 2) Obama is too stupid to know it’s bullshit. Neither are exactly inspiring.

And get drug tested!

A very good point.

Of course he can’t. Because he doesn’t want to.

Yes, and when they knock on my door in 2012, I will be reminded of the immortal words of Rhett Butler.

Another abject DEM Obamanible RENEGE!

That’s point number one. Point number two, the difference between my position right now and Harry Truman’s, is that Congress explicitly passed a law that took away the power of the executive branch to end this policy unilaterally

Obama is Commander and Chief he could threaten to send the troops in Iraq and Afghanistan home right now unless the GOP gets all their members to vote to end DADT.
The GOP wants war we know that Obama however refuses to use the leverage he does have. Imagine what Lefty voter turnout would be this election if Obama threatened to end the wars unless Gays could serve.
Either way we would win big.

I know it’s not the point, but is anybody else a little squicked out by him flirting with and/or insulting the teacher “who looks like a student”? I tried to click through the video to see this but I couldn’t find it. And the healthcare stuff that I did see was making my head hurt. I’m still shocked by how hard it is for me to watch Obama these days. I last about 30 seconds and I have to turn him off.

The Senate and the House are both expected to become more conservative, not less so.

This is the conventional wisdom based on conventional methods of assessing midterms, but neither the GOP candidates, nor the voters, nor the political environment right now are conventional.

And I might add, that being 7/8 thru Woodward’s Obama’s Wars, I never gave O quite enough credit, hard as I tried, for incoherence. My new hypothesis is that O has some profound learning disability that has never been diagnosed and therefore he is unaware of. For which his other talents have been able to overcompensate, until he reached his Peter Principle position.

Hey, don’t attack me. I’m trying to be generous for a change.

I don’t believe a work Obama says.
If he said “good morning” to me, I’d go back home and go to bed, figuring it must be night.

Explain more I’m curious.

OMG.

Obama’s tweet made my stomach turn.
He might as well have said, anyone who wants to be cannon fodder for the MOTU,
DADT and I blah, blah, blather, blather, and I swear, on my watch,
in my second term. Suckers.

I wish people would stop siging up. That would be a huge first step to slow down our brutal insanity.

Obama can’t seem to do anything unless its a GOP policy then the GOP yells at him for doing it.

Okay, I agree, the CW in this case is narrative driven. Still, Lincoln and Pryor both joined the filibuster and Lincoln won’t be re-joining the Senate. That means that the Democrats are going to have to pick up a minimum of 3 seats to get beyond another filibuster. Do you HONESTLY think that’s going to happen?
Let me know when Elvis gets here.

Signing statement #2009-02
H.R. 1105, the Omnibus Appropriations Act, 2009
(P.L. 111-8)

Obama: “. . .This provision raises constitutional concerns by constraining my choice of particular persons to perform specific command functions in military missions, by conditioning the exercise of my authority as Commander in Chief on the recommendations of subordinates within the military chain of command, and by constraining my diplomatic negotiating authority. Accordingly, I will apply this provision consistent with my constitutional authority and responsibilities. . .”
http://www.coherentbabble.com/listBHOall.htm

Like Citizens United????? If that thang isn’t unconstitutional, I’ll be a monkey’s aunt

“DADT will end on my watch.”

“I will end DADT before the end of my first term.”

See the difference?

The White House applied no pressure on the Senate

This administration expressed in one simple phrase.

JANE, completely OT, but there’s an ad at the top of this page from an anti-Prop 19 group called “Marijuana Harms Families” that leads to some serious reefer madness . . .

Obama’s hands are tied. Jane’s too smart to be confused. Something else is going on, and if anyone here thinks it’s as simple as the President lied, then this site is as silly as the rest.

carol, carol, carol. There have been many comments here that explain that this site, like all the others, link to commercials. What we get is what we get. FDL doesn’t choose the ads. In case you haven’t read that before.

The GOP is running a Witch, a guy into horses, anti immigrant candidates with immigrant nannies anything can happen this election it seems.

Condescend much? That wasn’t my point. It’s so over the top it’s hilarious and I just wanted Jane to be aware of it.

And an asteroid could wipe out New Zealand tomorrow. But I’m not going to bet on it.

Like nobody saw that coming.

Translation; plutocrats gone wild.
Citizens United turned us into toast. We’re done. Both parties are going to shamelessly cater to the rich and corporate interests.

Forget manufacturing, the environment, seniors, poor, the middle class, labor, infrastructure, wildlife, national parks, regulations and protections of any kind. All window dressing from now on.

Our elected officials message is real simple; F__k You.

Agreed but what is going on what did Omama trade for DADT?

I’m not the biggest fan of Obama these days, but he’s right: Congress has the power to provide for the regulation of the national military. An executive order can interpret and apply the laws of Congress, but can’t overturn them.

Signing statements are swell but completely meaningless as a matter of law. And the President’s authority as Commander-in-Chief does not override the authority of Congress to regulate the military through the CMJ.

The executive branch has a lot of leeway in enforcing the laws, but they cannot just rewrite them on a whim. Imagine if George W. Bush could’ve done that with Social Security or Medicare, e.g.? Let’s not give the President more power than he has.

I’ve had just enough experience with LD (learning disabilities) to be dangerous, so take what I say with many grains of salt. My son was ADHD, manifest in his inability to concentrate and to break tasks down to manageable bites. His intelligence was not an issue, which was what made his difficulty in school so puzzling. I had him tested which resulted in a diagnosis & program for tutoring on his shortcomings, which worked tolerably well. That occurred when he was in elementary & high school. I also had a RA who grew up a day’s walk from the nearest road in Nepal, graduated from Swarthmore & ended up on Wall St. Clearly a talented, driven, intelligent man. Yet he couldn’t handle my work, which consisted of a background of ongoing projects that filled time between myriad short run demands (putting out fires being the cliche). I was going to have to fire him, but thought he was probably LD, so I called personnel & asked what their policy was. Turned out they didn’t have one, as I was the first to ask. So employer paid for diagnosis, testing & remediation & I arranged it all. Marked improvement.

Have no clue whether that’s O’s problem in a generic sense, & if it is, what the specific diagnosis might be, but some symptoms seem more than familiar.

I don’t think I have seen a stranger election the Tea Bagger candidates are so insane they are weak and I bet they scare Moderate Voters.

Obama has no problem with violating the Constitution in ordering torture, rendition and assassinations of US citizens. It’s just not possible to break or circumvent an obviously unconstitutional law.

I’m not in the inner circle. I don’t know. I know how the ads work here, though. They run. People get a check. Just like in DC.

Thanks for the latest Mz. Hamsher . . .

All we can do is keep Obama, the military and the corporate elites Under Pressure.

And I believe there IS a huge upswelling of general public understanding, outrage with actions to come.

And I’d like to thank you, TeddyP, David, Jon, all the front pagers, Rayne at Seminal (what a treasure you found) and all FirePups long term who are helping spread the outrage like wildfire.

To close; I don’t think we’ve remotely seen the depths of blowback from we the people on gay teen deaths, DADT/DOMA and equality rights in general.

It’s beginning to feel just at tad like Johnson and the 60′s again . . .

Thanks for all you and FDL/Seminal do . . . .

Obama’s timidity on just about every issue is ‘breathtaking’ (thanks Seinfeld).

I just give up trying to ‘work’ him out. Change requires getting stuff done, a lot of it unpleasant, but it’s as if he’d rather have the carpet fouled than clear the cat’s litterbox everyday.

Ok no diagnosis but can you mention symptoms right now I assume everything he does is based on him being a say anything to get elected traitor.

President Pinocchio is lying again: Congress cannot pass a law that removes any part of the President’s powers as Commander & Chief of the Military. Only a Constitutional Amendment can remove that power, and one hasn’t been passed to that effect.

Hahahahahahaha!!! “From Austin!”

Hahahahahahaha!!!

Spot on!

*G*

N may dawg bless each and every musician in that town and region . . .

Sorry I wasn’t thinking about the ads I thought you were hinting Obama got paid 13 pieces of silver to sell us out on DADT.

The law congress passed in 1993 DOES give Obama the power to suspend DADT. And the DADT policy as developed in regulations by the Clinton Administration specifically says the President has the power to suspend enforcement in wartime or national emergency.

Obama has repeatedly claimed that DADT “harms national security and impairs military readiness.”

This is EXACTLY the legal exception to enforcement of the law Congress passed in 1993. (TITLE 10 > Subtitle A > PART II > CHAPTER 37 > § 654: Policy concerning homosexuality in the armed forces.)

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

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/10/654.html

If the enforcement of DADT harms national security, President Obama is required by law not to discharge gay, lesbian, and bisexual servicemembers.

You’re a good person, E.

Very Good angle congress only controls funding for the army the President gives the orders.

Best Catch of the Month this deserves a Diary!

What? I don’t think it’s that simple.

The GOP is running a Witch, a guy into horses, anti immigrant candidates with immigrant nannies anything can happen this election it seems.

Also the guy who likes to dress up like a Nazi.

And re repealing DADT, does “on my watch” mean before or after the Republican House impeaches him? Just seeking clarification here.

The DADT language in the current Defense Authorization Bill gives the President (and his top military advisors) the ability to repeal DADT. That’s all.

In no way does it say what has to be put in its place. Could be open service. Could be a total ban. And the next president would have the option to completely change it again.

i wonder if the Republican would overturn the President on DADT. would the Republicans and Democrats overturn the President on this one? is there enough “shame” to stop the loonies from doing this.

and i expect Prop 8 to go to the Supreme Court and lose.

Article 1, Section 8:

Congress shall have power… To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces;

The President’s authority as Commander-in-Chief is secondary to the power of Congress to regulate the military. We do not have an emperor in this country.

The thing O does that makes me suspect LD is his incoherence. He seems not to realize the full meaning of the words he utters. Lying is probably the Occum’s razor explanation, but as I said, I’m trying for a change to give him the benefit of the doubt. In Woodward’s book, he is portrayed as asking the right Qs, being clear about his intention to get out of Af, yet does not seem to realize when he has been utterly contradicted by the military in the endless meeting on the Af strategy & ends up agreeing with things that are completely contrary to his strongly expressed opposite conclusion.

My son called this a brain fart. But O does it with such regularity, it makes one suspect something else is at work.

Thanks, but I posted a more detailed diary on just this angle a day or so ago over on the Seminal.

We go thru the same BS here post-after-post. Jest tryin to look at it from a new POV.

Again, read Article 1, Section 8 on the powers of Congress. More Americans should: Congress, not the President, provides the rules and regulations of the military. The President commands the military in accordance with those regulations.

Ok but I am still looking for a why would Obama piss us off before the election when his action gives him no friends from the GOP.
I do tend to think in reward punishment, action reaction logical thinking I don’t understand Obama.

What’s the good in being President if you can’t actually do anything? Obama would lead us to believe that his hands are tied on almost every issue. Phooey.

Question: could George Bush have issued such an order [were he inclined to do so]?

How could I forget the Nazi:) Are there any Dem scandals this election?

Is it only me or does this sounds like Bush when he tried to explain the bank bailout?

Glad you are on top of this issue:)

Me too. Something bigger. But, what do I know?

I’m just going to post a response that I made on an earlier diary on this issue. Please understand the below is what i think will happen, certainly not want i want to happen – which is repeal of DADT now.

I’m also really offended that they would even ask for a stay pending appeal. There’s no reason to ask the judge for permission to keep kicking gays out of the military, if the President opposes the policy.

I believe that anytime Obamco says something Progressive it’s a lie, and we should take him to mean the exact opposite of what he says.

My wild assed guess is they will get their stay and wait for the Joint Chief’s report to be released during the lame duck Congress or after the new Congress is seated. The report will be finessed to say that because a large majority of military persons are practicing Evangelical Christians who are uncomfortable with homosexuality in general, and homosexuals in particular, that repeal of DADT will threaten unit cohesion and morale, and as such should not be recommended during wartime if we wish to ensure stable military operations. Congress will dutifully accept the word of our nation’s top (born-again) soldiers and either postpone the vote until Global War On Terror hostilities cease, or choose to extend DADT officially. The former congressional scenario to occur during the lame duck session,the latter in a Repub-controlled House and/or Senate. Obama will dutifully sign it as Commander-In-Chief, however reluctantly, of course.

God I hope I’m wrong, but this sounds like more Kabuki again.

So my idea Obama can withdraw the troops unless Congress changes its mind would still stand?

Look or don’t look. It’s bigger than that. Not saying you shouldn’t keep asking questions, but don’t expect me to have any answers.

Yes. Good luck with the POV. Here.

If you have answers cool if not no biggie.

Of course Obama can withdraw the troops: decisions on troop deployments is what being Commander-in-Chief means. Congress has authorized, but not mandated, overseas use of force.

But Congress writes the laws under which the military operates the same as the civilian world. The UCMJ cannot be rewritten by presidential fiat.

W is clearly an undiagnosed LD. Don’t know what the specifics are, as I mentioned that I resonate with the behavior without knowing enough about the subject to be specific.

The point of diagnosis is two-fold. The most important part is to give knowledge to the person in question about his/her specific problems, and secondarily to develop a productive remediation program. Otherwise progress is problematic once the person’s own compensation skills are exceeded.

We also had a very talented securities analyst who was a pig at biz meals. Constantly ate with his mouth open, spilled food on his tie, made inopportune comments to clients. Firm sent him to charm school a couple of times, but as he was never diagnosed first, he never understood what he was doing was wrong. I was sure it was some kind of LD, but as he was well outside my sphere of influence, I never made any suggestions. LD is complicated, very little is known about most of them, except for a few, like dyslexia, and so if I had butted in it would have redounded badly on me, instead of helping him.

P.S. One symptom of some LDs is small motor skills problems. My son & the analyst clearly suffered from that (handwriting problems in my son’s case; chewing with mouth closed in the analyst’s case).

You’re late. Elvis got here January 8, 1935.

Three seats: Murkowski’s, Voinovich’s, Grassley’s, Burr’s — three of those four gets your three. Last I checked, the Democrats’ upside was 67 seats; their downside was 51 seats. Democrats need only pick up 10 seats over current estimates to hold the House. I’m not predicting that that’s what will happen, just pointing out how wide the uncertainty is at this late date.

Becca rules — here’s the earlier comment.

Becca October 13th, 2010 at 8:08 pm 43

Congress actually gave the President a great deal of power in 1993 with the bill everybody is calling DADT. The law itself does not in any way spell out the “we don’t ask, you don’t tell” principles which were later enacted as official DoD policy.

Okay, so the bill out of congress says essentially that gays, lesbians, and bisexuals shouldn’t be in the military because homosexuality is bad, evil, icky, and makes our armies lose wars. The bill then goes on to say the President, through his SecDef and DoD should come up with a policy and set of rules that discharges known LGBs, and describes some conditions under which this is supposed happen.

Then comes the interesting bit: “Rule of Construction.— 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— (1) the member engaged in conduct or made statements for the purpose of avoiding or terminating military service; and (2) separation of the member would not be in the best interest of the armed forces.
Source: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/10/654.html

So there you have it: Two ways they don’t have to kick out someone who says they’re gay or is known to be gay. One is when the claim –whether true or not — is for the purpose of getting out of the armed forces. The other is if the person’s discharge is not in the best interest of the armed forces.

DADT as a DoD policy came from the Clinton Administration’s interpretation of that law. Note again that it does not actually require gays and lesbians to be discharged if the armed forces will be harmed in doing so. But they leave it up to the armed forces, DoD and presumably on up to the president to determine whether harm exists or not.

Thus it is simple fact that every president from Clinton on has had the power to suspend DADT in individual cases, and by extension to all — because the DADT policy Clinton’s DoD drafted specifically listed war and national emergency as reasons why the policy might be suspended. They never actually needed a repeal. Fehrenbach, Choi, Witt and the rest of them — the military all along had the legal power to ignore DADT if they wished to do so.

True, a repeal would be better because it would remove the sense of congress assertion in law that homosexuals harm the military, which judges are obliged to take into account when making their rulings. But at the same time, the law itself has a massive executive branch / DoD loophole.

Obama in reality could have stopped the discharges with a stroke of his executive memo pen.

Sure you have the power to issue an executive order to end DADT. Look at all the other neat stuff your predecessor did without regard to the US Constitution or the rule of law. Hell, you can arrest me without a warrant, detain me indefinitely without charges… hell you can even have me assassinated on your orders alone. I’d say you have the power of all three branches of our government pretty much cinched up. The fact that is, you can do as you please. You have assumed from your predecessor absolute executive authority, just like any other tyrant, despot, or 2 bit dictator. So what the hell, Mr. pResident, do whatever you want, it certainly doesn’t matter what We , The People of the United States of America think.

Talkin’ to myself, to try to clarify my own thoughts. Don’t expect to convince anyone & don’t particularly care if I do. Even if my hypothesis is accurate, O is well beyond the point of no return, as was W.

Good point. Another reason for a definitive court ruling on Constitutionality if it can be gotten.

I would also watch what happens after December 1. Gates is going as of January; I don’t know what that means, if anything, relative to DADT and the military’s willingness to follow orders.

Becca has an excellent diary on this topic in Seminal…i strongly encourage everyone to check it out

Read #54 above. More Americans should. Congress, in law, is delegating a power to the president. The court has been especially willing to accept congressional delegation to the president in military matters.

Moreover, presidents have a huge amount of administrative discretion over such things as the administration of the policy. Obama could insure that evidence was scrutinized and the burden clearly placed on the accuser. If it became clear that a vigorous record of enforcing DADT was not the path to promotion, I think the numbers of discharges would decline.

Does anyone have figures on the number of discharges in Obama’s term compared to the same period in W’s?

And seemingly has in certain individual cases. Not nearly enough.

Nonetheless, that is a good catch about the existing law.

Well, that is the inherent contradiction — if Obama doesn’t have the power to do anything about it, he can’t guarantee that it will end, either.

Whatever their strategy is, the messaging is just off.

Scroll down to table under # of discharges heading. Seems to be tailing off in terms of #s, but a more important issue would be language specialists, which is not included in the table.

If that happens look for the LGBT community in the military to perhaps all resign en masse.

See, that threat alone will screw up the armed forces far more than continuing to appease the Xtians in the military (which is a meme and a false one).

If DADT is repealed I DARE anyone to predict that Xtians will resign from service.

The military is holding on to ages old prejudice by a mere bootlace and they know it.

Pressure, on them all . . . constantly, don’t let up. I think this one is winnable.

Jane, I would just love to see you interview the President.

Well how about Mr. Obama being honest about the power he DOES have on this then, eh? Because while he did not outright lie to the young lady with his answer to her, he was supremely disingenuous. Here is what Obama can do, and should do, today. At a minimum. And he absolutely, positively, without any question whatsoever, has the power to do so. While he is correct in that it would not “repeal DADT”, it sure as hell would put a stop to the loss of men and women to the loathsome policy.

There are three legal bases to the president’s authority, the report says. First, Congress has already granted to the Commander in Chief the statutory authority to halt military separations under 10 U.S.C. § 12305, a law which Congress titled, “Authority of President to suspend certain laws relating to promotion, retirement, and separation” Under the law “the President may suspend any provision of law relating to promotion, retirement, or separation applicable to any member of the armed forces who the President determines is essential to the national security of the United States” during a “period of national emergency.” The statute specifically defines a “national emergency” as a time when “members of a reserve component are serving involuntarily on active duty.”

The second and third bases of presidential authority are contained within the “don’t ask, don’t tell” legislation itself. The law grants to the Defense Department authority to determine the process by which discharges will be carried out, saying they will proceed “under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of Defense… in accordance with procedures set forth in such regulation.” Finally, the law calls for the discharge of service members “if” a finding of homosexuality is made, but it does not require that such a finding ever be made. According to the study, these provisions mean that the Pentagon, not Congress, has the “authority to devise and implement the procedures under which those findings may be made.”

So, contrary to your apparent assertions that there is just nothing Obama can do, there absolutely is something significant he can do, and it is well within his designated powers. The short form of it is called a stop loss order and Presidents have done it often, including famously George Bush to keep fighting these damn wars.

Thanks very much.

I agree entirely that a person of courage in his position could do much more. But maybe the figures show progress of a sort. Then again maybe W was so “successful” that there are fewer gays and lesbians to go after.

You could reduce the national debt putting that interview on pay per view. But let’s not hold our breath.

The President’s messaging on bipartisanship is equally confusing.

My hope is that after this election [Nov 2010] people will start working together and focusing on what we have in common

Does he think he was elected in 2008 to hope really hard that his political opponents will melt at the sight of his smile, join hands, and do the right thing for the American people?

For argument’s sake, let’s take him at his word for a moment:

Regarding healthcare, he said that many Republican ideas were incorporated into the final product. Good or bad, the question has to be why he’s so weak that he gives his opponents a lot of what they want and then lets them get away with deriding the product as socialist.

He gives up what he says he wants without a fight, gives in to what his opponents want, and then lets them walk away to tear down the product and beat him up politically.

Taking Obama at his word, the best I can say about him after two years is that he’s a weak and ineffective representative for real change.

I hear you. On all points.

Well, there’s always the POV that every single person is human being, and every single one who is treated unfairly is a tragedy, and does not represent progress. But I digress…

WHAT!!! I DON’T HAVE TO SHOUT AT YOU TO MAKE YOU UNDERSTAND??
*g*

At the very least, the President’s messaging on this issue is. . . confusing complete lying bullshit.

So how do you respond to Becca @#54?

You are so f’ing cute. And, Hip, if I might add. *g*

At least he won’t be able to sell it in 2012 the way he did in 2008. Judging from his performance on the trail lately, he can’t shout the mantras while people are expecting him to explain himself and his failures.

Had lunch with Pat01, who sends her regards to FDLers. She doesn’t comment much but lurks a lot. Was very hip to what’s going on here & not to be repressed. Except in her very red congressional district recently she drew a long straw, allowing her to ask a Q, but felt so uncomfortable, she did not.

Yeah, the LD would be a drop in the bucket of what’s taken place and is likely to take place under Obama in his final 2 yrs.

It’s a class war and all the elected offals are bought and paid for.

Only a mass outcry and uprising on the part of we the people will change anything.

And frankly, the LGBT cause may be the catalyst . . . I always thought losing jobs, homes and an antiwar perspective would provide a catalyst, but folks ain’t pissed off enuff yet.

In the past few weeks, I smell and feel an upsurge in the general public. And the LGBT’s are leading the way . . . bless them brothers and sisters each and every one. They know what it’s like to have yer back to the wall and be outnumbered every day of their livers.

And frankly, anyone who leads at this point has my support and vote.

SOMEone has to rouse the masses . . . course, it’s all doomed to fail as all empires expand too much and ignore the home base.

I’d like to hope we the people have a modicum of hope of implementing change for the better before it all collapses.

But the race is on and we are approaching the final turn and the finish line with respect to it all going down the toilet.

’11 is going to be a definitive year in many economic ways . . . it might be the year it all begins to collapse . . . as Hugh has postulated and shown, for a year or two now.

Agreed, thorough and solid.

Yeah really, cut your fking whining and cut a fckng check. lol. Obama has no intention of doing away with DADT bcz he gets the dems get to much campaign money from gays PROMISING to repeal it. DADT is the democrats version of the republicans abortion issue. Too much money is made promising to repeal it to ever actually do it.

Which learning disability do you think he has, because I don’t think ADD is it.

I have unmedicated ADHD, and nothing I’ve read about Obama indicates to me that he has any form of ADD. His scholastic performance almost certainly precludes it, as the structures of academia are arranged in such a way that sustained and unanimous top-performance is essentially impossible with ADD or ADHD; regardless of intellect.

When I was tested as a child I was given an IQ score of 144, but characteristics of my ADHD (hyperfocus, hyperactivity, etc.) made getting consistently high marks very, very hard. If courses had a heavy emphasis on exams, I’d do great. Heavy emphasis on daily coursework/homework? I’d falter considerably. My college career was divided beween A’s and low-C’s/D’s depending entirely on my particular interest in the subject matter. My experience has coincided with other’s I’ve met who appear to be quite intelligent, but who also have ADHD/ADD.

The wedding I went to on Sunday was celebration of lesbian marriage that had taken place in MA several months earlier. Yesterday I went with one of the women to tour an organic farm of someone she didn’t know well, who had been one member of a small group of Palladino picketers on Tuesday in New Paltz. Turns out he was a moving member of getting the mayor of the village of New Paltz to marry several gay couples in 2004. (Scroll down to New Paltz marriages.) I’d say, if he is representative, you could be right that LGBT rights could well be a catalyst. He’s a firebrand.

I agree that it’s not ADHD, and as I said in my initial comment, I know just enough about the subject to be dangerous. But I did develop a 6th sense about it, as I related in the two additional anecdotes. So I have no idea what it might be specifically, and never really thought about it in connection with O until I read Obama’s wars. There is something in his brain wiring that does really NOT compute.

Sadly, I no longer believe that President Obama would ever do anything that would end DADT, or do anything that would honor gay Americans. He talks real nice, but clearly will never do anything to advance our cause. Look at what a close member of his team said:

White House’s Jarrett:
Dead Gay Bully Victim Made ‘Lifestyle Choice’

Today the Washington Post’s gay kapo Jonathan Capehart shares a video interview he conducted on Monday with senior White House adviser Valerie Jarrett. She clearly states a belief that Minnesota gay teen Justin Aarberg, who committed suicide in July after being bullied, made a “lifestyle choice.”

What an outrage to claim that the 15-year-old Aarberg made a choice to be gay, and that sexual orientation is a lifestyle. Did she get her talking points from Tony Perkins and the Family Research Council? It’s doubly offensive that Capehart makes no effort to point out how dangerous Jarrett’s thinking is.

http://mpetrelis.blogspot.com/2010/10/whs-jarrett-dead-gay-bully-victim-made.html

He never had any intention of doing anything to advance the rights of gay people.

Is psychopathy a learning disability? ;-)

I’m just going down the list of them in my head, and having a hard time fitting Obama for one. Though all I know about them is from when I was old enough to understand mine and threw myself into learning everything I could about 504 learning disabilities for several weeks.

I’m becoming more convinced that the family he grew up in was dysfunctional, and that his main role was peacemaker, to the point where he’s never learned any other skill in handling people.

He probably should not have run for president, because in this one way he’s not qualified: presidents need to0 be able to deal with real opposition and with actual support. I’m not seeing him doing either one.

On RM tonight that guy Dellenger answered the question about why Obama is appealing the ruling pretty well, I think. How would it be if a single judge decided to rule against your favorite law? The idea is that Obama could actually argue against DADT in the Supreme Court and then there will not be a tinge of one judge deciding US policy against a law passed by congress. Sort of what the constitution contemplated, not the rule of one judge involving a federal law passed by congress. Geez, if it was any other way McCain would go nuts.

And if an asteroid did wipe out NZ I’d guess we’re all in harm’s way.

I swear that to be true, as monkeys and dems fly out my butt.

*G*

OT….. Will anyone at FireDogLake put up a post discussing the LIES Obama told at the MTV forum today about Social Security?

Obama claimed that CBO reports say in 2017 Soc Sec will begin to take in less than its obligations. And, at that point, Soc Sec will only be able to pay about 70% of its benefits.

He made no mention of the 2.5 trillion surplus held in Govt bonds which will be used to cover the shortfalls that will begin in 2017. And, he made no mention that the surplus will cover all those shortfalls until approximately 2038. At that time, if no changes in policy are made, then Social Security will only be able to cover about 70% of promised benefits.

Obama is suffering from hubris — extreme arrogance. He is out of touch with reality and overestimates his own competence and capabilities.

He is absolutely certain his first cut on issues is the correct one. He consults those who agree with him. When he hears dissent, he does not listen. He has no ability to recognize, much less admit mistakes, and consequently no capacity to regroup.

He is certain that, if he just hangs in long enough, things will work out. They always have for him.

Custer thought the same thing.

Yep.

“And So Begins The Change.”

With or without us.

There WILL be change in our lifetime . . . aka the next 10-20 years.

You are pushing me well beyond my knowledge. But NO, psychopathy is a personality disorder, not a LD. I also said that little is known about LDs. There are many more than you know about. For example, another LD I learned about thru some skiing friends, whose son could not communicate orally, is that he could not process incoming oral transmission properly so could not respond in words. It seemed that there was no remediation for that one at the time.

It could turn out that both personality disorders & LDs both involve brain wiring. I wouldn’t be a bit surprised. But at the moment there is a big distinction that can be made, in the sense that LDs redound mostly to the detriment of the affected person involved & his/her family & close associates, whereas personality disorders have much wider negative influences. Unless, of course, you happen to be U.S. prez.

One could guess that all alpha males share that trait. Goes with the job.

What I am suggesting is that the search for an “answer” need not go beyond: he believes his own bullshit.

Off like smoke and mirrors and bad marketing.

As you say yer own bad self ma’am, it ain’t the messaging, it’s the policy.

*G*

At the very least, the President’s messaging on this issue is. . . confusing.

Obama is into pontification. He says that he is against DADT but Congress must change it. Did you hear that? Case fucking closed, Hamsher.

He’s not confused; you are.

In fact, lack of knowledge about LDs drove me nuts. In the late 1980s, when my son was diagnosed, the standard story was that ADHD was a poor person’s problem. We were NOT poor, and I instantly knew that a false correlation, in the sense that once the economy changed so that we no longer were out on our tractors in the back 40, ADHD sufferers were at a disadvantage because they couldn’t easily sit at a desk & do mental work, no matter how smart, so they tended to underperform economically. That story line hadn’t changed for the 50 years they had already been prescribing ritalin, which though normally a stimulative, was thought to act perversely, i.e. as a calming agent for those who had ADHD. Didn’t pass the giggle test. I finally decided, on my own, that brain wiring had multiple channels, and ritalin allowed an alternative channel to be activated.

Normally I am against executive privilege and unitary authority. Really against it. The people rule. We don’t need another Decider. BUT:

1. I don’t agree that Obama is a weak pacifier entirely. His whole history is “I’ll do this” and “I’ll do that.”

2. Nothing is that simple: he also sees himself as a peacemaker.

3. We’re not talking in generalities here, we’re concerned with a problem that by common agreement, including the top military man in the country (Admiral Mullen), violates basic human rights.

4. So Obama should do something, difficult though it may be. We have to expect him to use use the brains he was born with and get beyond the generic “one judge deciding US policy against a law passed by congress” in this case.

Agree?

I can handle the truth . . . *G*

As I said, there is an Occum’s razor explanation that is far simpler than LD. Just probing one possibility rather than repeat the sos that we normally type.

He seems to have amnesia, too: he’s forgotten that he can issue an executive order and stop it immediately.

ADHD and things like right brained issues are normal variations on our very human theme. These variations don’t work well in an office cubical. (said a nervous left handed person)

He won’t be running.

He’s a one termer, the corporate fascists paid him, foisted him upon us and he’s done his job. He’s headed to GS for the rest of his career, with a two year period giving speeches at a $Mil a pop.

The next ticket the corporate fascists will hoist for us peons to consider will be HRC and Petreaus.

And the PUMA’s will fall for it, greedily . . . .

*trollscroll2.1engaged*

That’s GREAT to hear!!!

Thanks for sharing that . . . .

<fakequote>There is no such thing as a Stop Loss Order, and even if there were, the Office of the President cannot issue it.</fakequote>

By intentionally giving an answer to a question different from the one that was asked, he knowingly lied to that audience.

Q: Can you eat a taco?
A: No, I could never drink that much turpentine!

To him, YOU are the problem. YOU (mistakenly) think the things that he has said in the past lead logically (and compassionately) to a particular course of action.

But YOU are wrong. Just because he said he is against it, doesn’t mean he has to take a particular action against it. You’re not listening: Congress should do it.

He is LOCKED into a position and he CAN’T concede to the likes of you (us) that he must change direction.

Could amount to a shithill of beans. But I loved his stories. The best part was that up until the end, Jason West, New Paltz village mayor, was a cold feet supporter but the man I met two days ago leaked to the press a day in advance and thus cornered West into performing the ceremonies. More like him!

Did you read his cut on his mistake: He has acted too much like a liberal — or something to that effect. What planet is this asshole on?

Planet: Hubris.

Ok folks, waaaayyyyy to much psycho introspection on this dude.

He’s a corporate enaber.

Bought and paid for as all our elected offals are.

To begin to psycho analyze him is to forgive, which is ludicrous.

He’s to be judged by his actions and his ability to serve we the people.

He’s failed, he won’t running in ’12 . . . no sympathy.

He abused his position of power we elected him to, and now we fight for we the people.

Sorry PJ, not directed at you, rather the meme emerging he’s damaged goods.

He’s fucking damaged goods cuz he’s fucking we the people for corporate fascists.

Not for any other reason.

I will not coddle Obama, or any corporate fascism proponents of the status quo.

Be DONE with them!

Yes, handedness could well be another manifestation of the same problem.

BTW, it too, in my childhood and young adulthood, was thought to be a ‘choice.’

Agree.

Pride goeth before the fall. Get out the safety net. O’s going to need it.

Here’s the thing. Roll the clock forward to 2013 and President Palin is in office. A local federal judge has just ruled in favor of the Koch brothers and the Chamber of Commerce that SS, medicare and/or unemployment insurance is unconstituional. President Palin lets the ruling stand. OK?

He’s effing bought and paid for and speaks only to the corporate fascists.

What part of this does anyone NOT get????????

No more analysis, he’s a paid goon.

End of story.

If Pups want to do analysis, analyze the class war being waged . . .

The rest is effing kabuki . . . . . Harumph.

Yeah, and that Hamsher Woman ain’t confused much either, IMO.

*G*

I agree. My only addition is that he was absolutely sure that, by giving the corporate fascists what they want, he could incrementally advance the ball for the rest of us. You may think that was never a consideration. And you may be right.

I think he was so arrogant to believe he could cut the “grand bargain.”
I could be wrong — as before.

WASHINGTON, Oct. 14, 2010 – Pending an appeal, the military services have halted discharges under the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law, DOD officials said today.

“Earlier today, the staff judge advocate generals from the military services, in consultation with the Office of the Secretary of Defense Office of General Counsel, sent to their service staff judge advocate counterparts in the field an e-mail informing them of the ruling by Judge Virginia Phillips of the Central District of California, issuing an injunction barring the enforcement or application of 10 United States Code 654, commonly known as the ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ statute,” Pentagon spokesman Marine Col. Dave Lapan said in a written statement.

“The e-mail noted that the U.S. government is contemplating whether to appeal and to seek a stay of the injunction,” Lapan said.

“The Department of Defense will of course obey the law, and the e-mail noted that, in the meantime, the department will abide by the terms in the court’s ruling, effective as of the time and date of the ruling,” he said.
http://www.defense.gov//News/NewsArticle.aspx?ID=61279

You continue to be concerned with hypotheticals and the world doesn’t work that way. I tried (and apparently failed) to explain why this specific problem requires a specific response because it involves basic human rights, something this country is supposed to be based on.

What’s the good in being President if you can’t actually do anything? Obama would lead us to believe that his hands are tied on almost every issue. Phooey.

And I remember, when Bush was in office, how “powerless” the Congress was to stop him from doing many of the things he wanted to do.

Comment: Congress fails to rein in Bush
http://www.mysanantonio.com/opinion/MYSA070906_1H_sessions_8b434f_html.html

Congress votes to fund war, bows to Bush on domestic policy
https://wsws.org/articles/2007/dec2007/budg-d19.shtml

The pattern is clear and tiring: whatever progressive (Hope and Change) promises made during the campaign are explained away with references to tied hands and how it’s someone or something else’s fault. Would you use this routine at work to explain away lack of results? I can’t imagine telling students, “Sorry the class sucked. The institution stood in the way.” Bullshit. Words are cheap.

“But I tried, didn’t I? Goddammit, at least I did that” –R. P. McMurphy

I suspect too many lifers who see openly gay soldiers as a dilution of the aggressively heterosexual warrior culture that supposedly provides the military with its strength, the unique and superior identity that sets them apart in terms of social strata from that derisive epithet, “civilian,” are against the repeal. Obama crosses the line between civilian and soldier and sides with the military. This may explain, among other things, the speech at West Point and his continued use of George W’s martial phrase “on my watch,” as it indicates an identification with things military beyond his role as CinC. Control says there are owners, guard dogs and sheep. Like his point about not being more business-friendly, this is Obama letting us know whose side he’s on.

That is not really pending appeal, it is pending application for stay of Judge Phillips’ injunctive order which, you can bet the farm, will be slapped down and stayed by early next week at the latest. then the military will be right back doing what they have been doing all along. But, as I stated @93 above, there is a perfectly legal and appropriate method for Obama to stop that today, i.e. a stop loss order under 10 USC 12305. He could do it tonight if he gave a damn about ending the pernicious effects of DADT; but he does not, all he cares about is a little political gain from cheap and disingenuous rhetoric.

This is why I keep saying that President Obama acts more like a sitting U.S. Senator (his former job) than he acts like a sitting U.S. president.

It’s like Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell in the Senate are calling the shots (like they recently joined in doing by agreeing to keep the Senate open just enough to stop President Obama from recess-appointing any of his stalled nominees over this pre-election recess).

In President Obama’s mind, apparently, the U.S. federal judiciary plays second fiddle to Capitol Hill, filing appeals and blocking appeals based on a conservative agenda almost as much as George W. Bush and Dick Cheney did.

I agree that any change to DADT will die in the U.S. Senate, since President Obama decided NOT to let this federal judge’s ruling stand, uncontested by Obama’s DOJ. Obama punted the DADT ball to the Senate, where the conservatives running the Senate will bury it, again.

Hell, how about something at least symbolic: “I asked the Joint Chiefs to effectively and immediately suspend discharges as it is not in the best interests of the military because it prevents anybody who wants to serve in our armed forces and make sacrifices on our behalf from being able to. Unfortunately, they said no.”

Only a mass outcry and uprising on the part of we the people will change anything.

And frankly, the LGBT cause may be the catalyst . . . I always thought losing jobs, homes and an antiwar perspective would provide a catalyst, but folks ain’t pissed off enuff yet.

In the past few weeks, I smell and feel an upsurge in the general public. And the LGBT’s are leading the way . . . bless them brothers and sisters each and every one. They know what it’s like to have yer back to the wall and be outnumbered every day of their livers.

Actually the big corporations can give in on this one without eating into their profits (at least it looks that way to me). So I think it will ultimately go through.

The harder changes are the ones that have a more direct impact on BIG business and $$$$. Higher taxes on the rich, more environmental regulations on business, that sort of thing.

the tea party has promised to do all those things and they are about to have a huge victory. The Kochs in particular want those things. So they may shop a federal judge. Not particularly hypothetical.

You honestly believe that your “President Palin” would look to Obama’s actions on appealing rulings in order to make her decision as to whether to appeal a ruling? LOLOLOLOLOLLOLOL I want some of those drugs you’re taking. You can’t honestly believe any republican president would temper their own actions in any way based on what previous democratic presidents have done. I can envision Karl Rove laughing his ass off behind your back right now calling you a “sucker”!!!!!!!

it’s as if he’d rather have the carpet fouled than clear the cat’s litterbox everyday.

Thanks for reminding me. Got to clean the cat box, and I don’t have to get Congressional approval for it.

How about doing all of the above? There’s plenty of threads and plenty of comments on every thread to probe all the possibilities.

I disagree with econobuzz that to analyze is to begin to forgive.

Know thine enemy. Usually that’s practical advice, but there’s also the sheer joy in intellectual activity in trying to figure out the multiple motivations of complex human behavior.

That is indeed a tempting solution but what happens on Jan 1 of next year when the repubs take over? There is going to be fall out whichever way he goes on this. What is the fall out if he does it?

I know you want him to stand tall and take his lumps. But they could be considerable. Maybe he should try to get congress to pass the damn bill before Jan 1 before jumping off that cliff? At least let the military weigh in? Or argue in front of the Supremes?

Could be, I agree. but we all do what we think is right and hold each other to it. You know pitchforks and torches and that sort of thing.

I can pick up things on the floor with both my left and right big toes and feets.

Phreaks out honey every time.

*G*

Yes, more like him . . . and hers when they appear . . . more of ‘em.

TMI. *g*

Yup. Every one of your points is right where my money’s at.

Passing the “damn bill” in the senate doesn’t repeal DADT. All that will do is give congressional permission to the military to repeal the policy sometime in the future maybe if they feel like it. And, since Obama forced the house to strip the non-discrimination language out of the bill, what the military comes up with on their own will likely continue to discriminate. They will takes YEARS to implement a policy and will end up with segregated facilities and segregated career opportunities. Gates has already said he would want at least another year of discharges AFTER repeal.

Just listen to the statements they have been making more recently. Just this week Gates talked again about needing to make changes to buildings for repeal. Today the military leaked some of the survey results saying that some areas of the military had big concerns about repeal especially combat units, while other areas didn’t have concerns. This all sounds like prep talk for keeping gays out of some areas and putting them in their own buildings.

Ok . . .

And again my apology to PJ whom I have the deepest respect and admiration for as a long term Pup . . . I just erupted a bit, there . . . *G*

Good dawg yer not that well acquainted with reality, are ya?

Palin is despised and loathed by the GOP.

They use her but won’t let her run.

That’s been obvious since she brought McCain down.

Please . . . get yer messaging current with the present reality here at PUPSVille.

*rollseyes*

If the policy is discriminatory, and it is, if it is unconstitutional, and I believe it clearly is as do multiple courts now, and if Obama truly believes it wrong, as he says he does, then maybe he should get off his fucking ass and do the right thing. No, he cannot control what some currently hypothetical, maybe even mythical, Republican president in the future does. So what? And taking a principled stand himself now, in legitimate ways he can as I demonstrated, certainly does NOT preclude or invitiate continuing to seek full repeal by Congress and preclusion by an appellate court – eventually Supreme Court – finding of unconstitutionality. In fact, a President actually having the courage and principle of his supposed convictions might well set an example and give cover to others to do the same. He could actually be a leader. But of course he will not. His weakness and duplicity on this issue is pathologic and pathetic.

Yep, I think it was never a consideration . .

This shill was groomed to dump Dean for the first part, and beat HRC for the second part.

Why beat HRC? Cuz the Clinton’s want too much from the PTB and corporate lords. They extract too heavy toll . . . so the corporate fascists picked Obama, ran the table with the first Black Prez and Proggy label. All lies of course. The proggy part.

And once elected Obama made his cabinet picks and his admin picks, which in looking back, is the unveiling of what was to come.

I rest my case.

*G*

When was the last time the U.S. military did anything that was in the interest of the U.S. peeps?

And why do gays want to serve in the U.S. military anyhow. The U.S. military & PTB hate them and never do any good for the U.S population. I don’t understand the service thing.

INteresting, they are now fully covering their asses . . .

I’d suggest this is a sign that regardless of the legal ramifications that others have pointed put (Bmaz or TBogg be;pw?) there’s a ‘mo’ that is gathering speed and mass.

*G*

Or he could wait, as I said. The policy is not new. It has been with us a good long time. I’m sorry I don’t see him as duplicitous, pathologic and pathetic in this matter, as you do. I like to think he is looking for the best way forward to satisfy his constituents, some of whom may feel a good deal differently than you or I, if only for procedures sake. At some point he may make the decision you want.

He is damaged goods. But from all the way back, not the last couple of years.

i have to admit, he’s good at making speeches. Just no good at following through on the promises he makes in those speeches. (Unlike Shrub, who couldn’t make a decent speech under any circumstances, but followed through even on the stuff we thought was a joke.)

You’re assuming they will. What happens if, as seems likely, they can’t get a majority in the Senate?

you are right about that. I am not the Obama hater as many here are, even though I have a lot of problems with him. I could let him go in 2012. Palin? Yeah I think she wants money more than politics. But the rest of them are just as bad, and getting worse. And you just never know.

then he has two options: the supremes or executive order. (hopefully the military will have weighed in in favor by then.)

Yes, Obama can wait. Like a fucking pussy. It is not okay and acceptable for him to just stand stand by and “wait” when he could do something to remedy an unconstitutional and immoral policy now, that he is doing so is pretty telling. This type of pissant, small minded cowardice is what is wrong with this country.

You’re angry, I can tell. but that’s good, maybe Gibbs or someone is reading this and will get the message.

What you said. X2.

*G*

Now THERE ya go . . . thanks hoss . . . .

This type of pissant, small minded cowardice is what is wrong with this country.

Among many other things.

thanks carol, I’ll take a look.

I do not think Obama wants any part of the base to remain in the Democratic Party.

Hmm, I can’t speak for the LGBT community rich or poor or middle class . . . .

I WOULD wager most of the LGBT community is as proggy oriented as the rest of us het proggy’s.

I’d also wager that LGBT’s are more middle class oriented and focused as proggys are . . .

I won’t wager what beltway LGBT’s think or work for . . . . I’ll assume they work for the corporate fascists and against we the people like all Beltway folks do.

Cuz in the bottom line, it’s a class war and wealth and property of we the people, along with the worth of our labor, is the real issue.

Well he does not seem in a very big hurry to assuage the cussin’ and rhetoric around here, anyway. Wonder why that is?

Heysoos effing crystos do you read anything?

The Tea Party is doomed, going down in flames . . . in and of itself and also due to no part by the GOP distancing themselves from the TeaHats as the election approaches.

Do you know WHY the GOP is cutting the TeaBaggers off?

Cuz the Baggers are killin entranched GOP favs and splitting the vote . . . giving dems the advantage.

And giving alt voters some reason to go another way without electing Pubs!

Yer really not with it . . . and I don’t mind sayin yer message ain’t with reality, either.

*G*

SIgh . . .

Yes ma’am . . .

But being pissed off is HARD eCAHN!

lool

Mary is like a neighbor, I tell her things I don’t tell anyone else . .

*G*

Yes, I am sure if we just licked his ass and told him how excellent he is and grateful we are that he has blessed us with his presence in our meager lives, he would do so much more. Guess we should all just take some naive pills and chill huh?

And this is where I climb up on a chair and start clapping for all your input, even when I smack it a bit.

Thanks for all you do, with all my heart . . . .

Dawg bless ya.

Oooh, bmaz, I sooo want a naive pill. NOT.

So tell me, Blue, what other policies, actions and decisions Obama’s made do you support?

*blinking*

Well that’s kind of how Obama thinks. After the election he figures he’ll be able to get along just fine with the repubs. I suppose that’s true, if you agree with them.

But you are a fool, if you think the money behind the teas is going anywhere. That will be there a long time to come. And you have heard what they want. Or maybe you havn’t been listening. I do agree that to get elected they have to tone down their message, but do you really believe they forgot it?

“Changes to buildings” and “big concerns” about “combat units”? That just doesn’t wash. There are bigger issues that affect unit cohesion. “Segregated facilities” and “career opportunities”? Institutional inequality breeds unnecessary friction. Holding everyone to the same standard would go a long way toward diminishing the problem.

That’s not to say that it is not possible that Gates thinks these things necessary. And it may take time to make a cultural shift (if that’s an argument), but I would guess that 17-25 year old soldiers are more comfortable with that than an older generation of lifers. Similar arguments were made during desegregation and regarding women in the military. How about Gates yelling down the chain of command: “We are all green. Any abuse of fellow soldiers based on their sexual preference will be dealt with harshly under UCMJ.” The same is currently in place for racial discrimination . . . ?

‘K.

Fine.

I don’t accept or care about his upbringing.

He wasn’t groomed and tailored for Presidency from his birth or his upbringing.

He IS a puppet of the PTB.

Hope you get my POV.

No better to give him a hot line to you, so he knows what the message should be. After all you have all the wisdom, right?

You don’t respond to the issues or me . . . I remain dubious of yer intent.

Oh kay . . . . once again I turn back to the Bmaz tide . . .

Thanks hoss . . . . .

I did respond to you but do I really have to?

Your entire reply to my comment(s) is . . . it’s, it’s . . I can’t spell undecipheranble . . .
~~~EDITED IN MODERATION~~~

Sorry . . . can’t read yer stuff anymore . . .

~~~ModNote: Please take your argument about your argument outside please.~~~

And for the 200 I’d like to once again pay tribute to Mz. Hamsher and all the front pagers and the sane Pups everwhere who keep me engaged and enthused . . .

Dawg bless all y’all.

*G*

Hotline? I don’t need no stinking hotline.

I am pretty sure they know what I am saying

You know I am surprised that your outrage against the “moral and unconstitutional nature” of DADT leads you to take a superior tone that there are no other persons that could have a dissenting opinion on the pace of change or the path of it. And, further, that if the President shows some respect to the sensibilities of others he is a “pissant and coward”. He has not abandoned the cause. And neither have I. But the President is not a “coward” because he has not issued an executive order on Jan 20, 2009 or today. Sorry, just my opinion.

Hmm, I can’t speak for the LGBT community rich or poor or middle class . . . .

I wouldn’t claim to be able to speak for them either. In fact, I can’t really speak for anybody but myself.

I WOULD wager most of the LGBT community is as proggy oriented as the rest of us het proggy’s.

I’d also wager that LGBT’s are more middle class oriented and focused as proggys are . . .

You may be 100% correct.

I tend to see things a bit differently. Different people have different priorities. And that is IMO true of progressives as well.

And I’d say that there are a lot of people who are socially liberal but fiscally conservative. There is nothing which precludes a wealthy corporate dude from being pretty liberal on social issues.

Well that’s good. Maybe they will listen to your thoughts and we will all be happy. Or maybe not.

I’ll have to leave it there.

*blinks*

Uh, what did I do?

Thank you for your reply I’m assuming we are in accord for the most part given my comment . .

Hard times . . . we’re all in it together.

We’re all disenfranchised, we the people . . . I have NO clue what Blue is espousing.

*G*

me too exactly ….about 30 seconds is all … worse than bush

If you want to call feeling that if something is clearly unconstitutional and immoral, and there is a clear path to do something to at least partially remedy violations of said fundamental constitutional rights it ought to, in fact, be done instead of sitting on your ass for some unspecified political advantage – if you want to call that “superior” then so be it. To be honest, I do feel it is a superior position to the mealy mouthed pablum you and Obama preach. I guess I am guilty.

And showing “respect to the sensibilities” of bigots, bullies and dogmatic fundamentalists who will never change, and patience with the “pace of change” which has been effectively at a standstill for almost two decades, is a crock of shit.

Obama is more afraid of Jane than his own shadow.

~~~ModNote: If you have a disagreement, state it. If you are unable to do that without maligning others, take a walk around the block before you comment again. Please.~~~

It’s 2 decades on DADT, which has nice clean lines, so to say.

But the greater thing that people are really objecting to is ACTUAL equality.

Can’t wrap their brains around some homersekshual bein all as equal as theyumselves.

Thank you for your reply I’m assuming we are in accord for the most part given my comment . .

Yeah, I think we are basically in agreement.

Hard times . . . we’re all in it together.

We’re all disenfranchised, we the people . . .

True, and it would be great if we can all stick together. But I’m not sure we’re all always in the same boat.

For example, those who are making 3 million bucks a year are not quite as disenfranchised as the rest of us. ;-)

The President mistweeted. When he wrote:

“DADT will end & it will end on my watch.”

he meant:

“DADT will end but it will end according to my watch.”

but that took him over 140 characters.

You are incorrect about Article 1 Section 8: It only gives Congress power to make rules over the Military, it gives them no authority to strip powers from the President. In the 1940s President Truman ordered an end to discrimination, firmly establishing the precedent that the President can order an end to discrimination. The only way Congress can strip him of that power is if they pass a Constitutional Amendment (which is then passed by three-quarters of the states) which specifically amends the President’s Commander-in-Chief authority and removes his power to order an end to discrimination.

This is where Obama stands and he finds it necessary to tell us two weeks before an election? He’s trying to discourage his base.

My son was diagnosed with ADD/ADHD and I suspect myself also, undiagnosed, and my father of the same.

When my son was diagnosed I was told it affects 40% of males. My response was, anything that affects in not a disorder, but a normal behavior (aka: Boys will be Boys).

I also have a somewhat different background, in that I grew up between Africa, and England, and I learned early in life that there are differences between cultures.

That said, I see ADD and ADHD as necessary condition for boys to for survival in primitive societies. Pre-pubescent boys in Africa tend animals, which means keeping an eye on the animals (goats & cows, the wealth of the primitive) and throwing rocks at predators. No one trusts pre-pubescent with a spear or bow and arrows, those weapons are too expensive for these boys, rocks are inexpensive and abundant. My theory is the boys throw rocks and scream and make a fuss until the warriors (the young men) in the tribe arrive to resolve the issue.

If the boy is not ADD or ADHD and not looking around all the time, then the predators kill and eat the boys.

Boys do not behave as girls, and are somewhat unsuited sitting at school and listening to teachers, they are better at doing, and that takes us to a different part which is the Montessori method. Personally I was in continual trouble at school for looking out of the window, and when pounced upon by the teacher for inattention generally had already adsorbed the point of the lesson, and had the correct answer.

Some teachers, male and female did not like this behavior, and generally reacted badly to the teacher’s attitude. ADC, I’m thinking of you.

Thank you. I agree with you impatience for change, and increasing changing the rate of change (which technically is an acceleration).

This presumes change is a velocity, a vector.

“DADT will end on my watch.”

To be fair, if Obama signs bill mandating Must Ask Must Tell then technically yes, DADT will end on his watch.
:o)