Results 1 to 25 of 60
-
06-08-2009, 08:55 AM #1
nonstop disco powerpack
- Join Date
- Jan 2007
- Location
- North Bend, Washington
- Posts
- 7,839
Libdopes, defend Obama on this one........
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court on Monday turned down a challenge to the Pentagon policy forbidding gays and lesbians from serving openly in the military, granting a request by the Obama administration.http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/...2l16QD98MHV380In court papers, the administration said the appeals court ruled correctly in this case when it found that "don't ask, don't tell" is "rationally related to the government's legitimate interest in military discipline and cohesion."
Mr. President, you are a bigot, and a liar.
-
06-08-2009, 09:20 AM #2
nonstop disco powerpack
- Join Date
- Jan 2007
- Location
- North Bend, Washington
- Posts
- 7,839
seriously, what a piece of shit.
-
06-08-2009, 09:27 AM #3
.
- Join Date
- Nov 2007
- Posts
- 5,475
Wow, look at that sig and that writing. If nothing else he is a very interesting guy. A graphologist would have a hayday with this.
Originally Posted by doughboyshredder
seriously, what a piece of shit.
it's all young and fun and skiing and then one day you login and it's relationship advice, gomer glacier tours and geezers.
-Hugh Conway
-
06-08-2009, 09:34 AM #4
caught inside
- Join Date
- Mar 2006
- Location
- is Gorges
- Posts
- 4,190
Why would a leftist defend a centrist?
-
06-08-2009, 09:38 AM #5
Registered User
- Join Date
- Dec 2007
- Location
- T-town, CO. USA
- Posts
- 1,602
"Don't ask don't tell?" Is that all you got? There are so many larger, more important issues facing us right now. You Obamaphobes are really reaching aren't you?
The REAL IMPORTANT issues to you wingnuts are; gay marriage, flag burning, abortion, and gays in the military?!
Has life for you really been so bad for you since Obama was elected? Or did you just get a tax cut and more affordable health insurance like the rest of us?Leave No Turn Unstoned!
-
06-08-2009, 09:49 AM #6
nonstop disco powerpack
- Join Date
- Jan 2007
- Location
- North Bend, Washington
- Posts
- 7,839
You obviously aren't paying attention. Originally Posted by DropCliffsNotBombs
The important issues are freedom, equality, and justice.
And, yeah, I must be a wingnut. I am pro gay marriage, would never burn a flag but support pieces of shits right to do so, abortion makes me ill, but I would never support legislation telling a woman what she can do, I not only support gays in the military, I actually don't support any sort of bigotry, whatsoever.
Maybe I am a wingnut, because I like guns and I support the concept of a free market? Maybe, it's because I am opposed to governments having the rights to spy on their subjects?
The last month has really shown me how few people are actually principled in their opinions. If Bush did the things Obama is doing all the dopes would be screaming for his blood, and distributing leaflets with devil horns drawn on his head. Now that your fucking messiah is in office, all you can do is say there's more important things. Yeah like socializing the country.
-
06-08-2009, 09:56 AM #7
searching for Shangri la
- Join Date
- Dec 2005
- Location
- San Vincente de Tagua Tagua, Chile
- Posts
- 4,375
Yeah but B B Bushhh didnt allow them to tell either.
-
06-08-2009, 10:06 AM #8
local of nowhere
- Join Date
- Sep 2005
- Posts
- 3,853
Start by reading the whole article. doh!
Last year, the federal appeals court in San Francisco allowed a decorated flight nurse to continue her lawsuit over her dismissal. The court stopped short of declaring the policy unconstitutional, but said that the Air Force must prove that ousting former Maj. Margaret Witt furthered the military's goals of troop readiness and unit cohesion.
The decision by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals was the first that evaluated "don't ask, don't tell" through the lens of a 2003 Supreme Court decision that struck down a Texas ban on sodomy as an unconstitutional intrusion on privacy.
The administration did not appeal that ruling to the Supreme Court and Witt's lawsuit is ongoing.
The appeals court in Pietrangelo's case also took the high court decision into account, but concluded that it should defer to Congress' determination that the policy fosters cohesion in military units.
Goals for the season: -Try and pick up a sponsor.--Phill
But whatever scares you most... --Rip'nStick
-
06-08-2009, 10:22 AM #9
High & Dry
- Join Date
- Dec 2006
- Location
- WV
- Posts
- 1,697
When did we get affordable health insurance? Originally Posted by DropCliffsNotBombs
All stunts performed without a net!
-
06-08-2009, 10:27 AM #10advres Guest
LOUD NOISES
-
06-08-2009, 10:44 AM #11
nonstop disco powerpack
- Join Date
- Jan 2007
- Location
- North Bend, Washington
- Posts
- 7,839
Wow, you really are slow, aren't you? I mean I kind of thought you might have just been loaded while you were arguing with rubi the other day, but wow, you are such a dipshit it's incredible. Originally Posted by gonehuckin
The supreme court case had nothing to do with Major Witt. Her lawsuit is ongoing, and I hope that the results are in her favor.
-
06-08-2009, 11:24 AM #12
local of nowhere
- Join Date
- Sep 2005
- Posts
- 3,853
If you dont see the connections of why they are opposing this case (in favor of congressional approval) versus not opposing Witt's, then this whole discussion is over your head and you should bow out. Originally Posted by doughboyshredder
Goals for the season: -Try and pick up a sponsor.--Phill
But whatever scares you most... --Rip'nStick
-
06-08-2009, 11:31 AM #13
nonstop disco powerpack
- Join Date
- Jan 2007
- Location
- North Bend, Washington
- Posts
- 7,839
What do you think the connections are, shorty?
-
06-08-2009, 11:37 AM #14
local of nowhere
- Join Date
- Sep 2005
- Posts
- 3,853
He knows its going to take congressional changes to the laws in order for this to take hold. He's putting the burden back on the gov't to demonstrate how this policy actually effects cohesion in the military. He's not allowing the appeals court to effect law. Its not a constitutional matter. In other words, he's priming the pump so that congress isn't slighted and opponents can't base their disputes on "activist" judges, while forcing the issue by making his opponents on the issue try to prove their case (which they can't). Originally Posted by doughboyshredder
Goals for the season: -Try and pick up a sponsor.--Phill
But whatever scares you most... --Rip'nStick
-
06-08-2009, 11:47 AM #15
Registered Undead
- Join Date
- Oct 2005
- Location
- PNW
- Posts
- 1,590
The round appears to go to gonehuckin. I'm not sure whether Obama's after congressional action or something actively and visibly driven by the Joint Chiefs. But from all appearances he's after "change that can endure". Evidence is, increasingly, that Obama is a methodical and patient hunter. Perhaps annoyingly so.
Time will tell.
-
06-08-2009, 11:50 AM #16
nonstop disco powerpack
- Join Date
- Jan 2007
- Location
- North Bend, Washington
- Posts
- 7,839
It is absolutely a constitutional matter. The entire policy is unconstitutional as far as I am concerned.
I hope that you are right though spindrift.
I just don't see how it does any good for Obama's admin to ask the court not to hear the case.
-
06-08-2009, 11:52 AM #17
truckin'
- Join Date
- Dec 2006
- Location
- crown of the continent
- Posts
- 11,071
Here's the first three paragraph's from today's WashPost article on it:
"The Supreme Court today declined to hear a constitutional challenge to the Pentagon's "don't ask, don't tell" policy banning openly gay people from serving in the U.S. military, a move that could effectively leave it to the Obama administration to resolve the long-controversial issue.
In a separate action, the court also ruled unanimously that Americans cannot sue the current Iraqi government in U.S. courts for acts by the regime of Saddam Hussein regime, who was driven from power by U.S. invasion forces in 2003.
In the "don't ask, don't tell" case, the Supreme Court sided with the Obama administration, which had urged the justices not to hear the appeal against the policy, even though Obama is on record as opposing it. The court thus spared the administration from having to defend in court a policy that the president eventually wants to abolish pending a review by the Pentagon. "
--------------snip-------------
If this is correct,
1) The administration asked to not review as they have started internally reviewing in order to change;
2) 'Defense' will have to wait until after said review and any action or lack thereof.
Nice potstirring tho DBS!
The blues has always been about taking your problems and turning them into something you can dance to, drink to and fuck to.
We're certainly not a blues band in any kind of purest sense, but to me Rock and Roll has always had it's roots in that tradition.
Patterson Hood of the DBT's
-
06-08-2009, 12:06 PM #18
local of nowhere
- Join Date
- Sep 2005
- Posts
- 3,853
Point taken. I'm against the policy as well. I believe in the freedom to do as you choose with another consenting adult and I don't think it has any effect on our military. Even if it did, then maybe the military needs a culture change. Originally Posted by doughboyshredder
But what he is doing is not allowing this to become further intrenched against him. If the SC decided to hear that case and came down against the plaintif while not providing the same reasoning, then the window that would have allowed a sympathetic congress to review the law would close.
Its not a constitutional issue simply because over and over again its been found that member of the military do not enjoy all of the "rights" of citizens. Free Speech/Assembly for example.Goals for the season: -Try and pick up a sponsor.--Phill
But whatever scares you most... --Rip'nStick
-
06-08-2009, 12:11 PM #19
is classy as fuck
- Join Date
- May 2004
- Location
- Colorado Cartel HQ
- Posts
- 16,218
you're dumb
No, your dumb
No, you're dumb!Watch the seventh episode of
The Blurred Chronicles
Episode Six
HATERS GONNA HATE!!!! lol
The Blurred Chronicles on facebook
'Karma' is an Eastern religious concept which views all human dramas as the will of God as opposed to present - and past - life actions.
-
06-08-2009, 12:12 PM #20
features a sintered base
- Join Date
- Apr 2002
- Location
- Impossible to knowl--I use an iPhone
- Posts
- 8,472
DBS needs to follow powderboard rule one: post first, then smoke crack. Or just come up with a complaint about Obama that makes some sort of sense--there are several out there, not that you could tell from threads like this one.
[quote][//quote]
-
06-08-2009, 12:17 PM #21
Registered Undead
- Join Date
- Oct 2005
- Location
- PNW
- Posts
- 1,590
To be clear, I'm in favor of abolishing the policy. And in favor of equal marriage rights. Etc. However, I've also seen the "right" things done without adequate foundation building - only to see them swept away with a few words or a stroke of the pen. Originally Posted by gonehuckin
It takes some real management skill to be patient enough to set this sort of thing up so it'll stick. So far, the Obama team appears pretty talented in this regard. I just hope they make the right things happen over the next few years...Last edited by spindrift; 06-08-2009 at 12:20 PM.
-
06-08-2009, 12:25 PM #22advres Guestyou're a towel. Originally Posted by Blurred
-
06-08-2009, 12:55 PM #23
etnevreS reilavaC erutuF
- Join Date
- Sep 2008
- Location
- ...eseehc fo modgnik eht ni ssertrof reeb A
- Posts
- 2,488
Hey Tye, Originally Posted by Tye 1on
Here's the first three paragraph's from today's WashPost article on it:
"The Supreme Court today declined to hear a constitutional challenge to the Pentagon's "don't ask, don't tell" policy banning openly gay people from serving in the U.S. military, a move that could effectively leave it to the Obama administration to resolve the long-controversial issue.
In a separate action, the court also ruled unanimously that Americans cannot sue the current Iraqi government in U.S. courts for acts by the regime of Saddam Hussein regime, who was driven from power by U.S. invasion forces in 2003.
In the "don't ask, don't tell" case, the Supreme Court sided with the Obama administration, which had urged the justices not to hear the appeal against the policy, even though Obama is on record as opposing it. The court thus spared the administration from having to defend in court a policy that the president eventually wants to abolish pending a review by the Pentagon. "
--------------snip-------------
If this is correct,
1) The administration asked to not review as they have started internally reviewing in order to change;
2) 'Defense' will have to wait until after said review and any action or lack thereof.
Nice potstirring tho DBS!
They're trying to have a typical PolAss argument and you come and spoil it with facts and stuff.
I hate to do this... but doughboy, yer seriously sounding like vvv in all these threads.
pmiP triD remroF
-dna-
!!!timoV cimotA erutuF
-ottom-
"!!!emit a ta anigav eno dlroW eht gnirolpxE"
-
06-08-2009, 12:58 PM #24
worm turn
- Join Date
- Dec 2004
- Posts
- 788
Hey DBS, remember when you were asking what kind of gun to get for hiking in black bear country? This is like that: you're freaking the fuck out over every little thing, and generally, your instincts about what's happening are wrong.
Remember when you were freaking out about Obama picking a Republican for Sec. of the Army? Guess what–he's against Don't Ask Don't Tell too. Rather than getting distracted by a minor, yet potentially crippling sideshow, he's putting the pieces into place for a change, and making sure that it won't be a shit-show.
-
06-08-2009, 12:58 PM #25
Registered User
- Join Date
- Jan 2003
- Location
- nh
- Posts
- 7,013
you're a towel! Originally Posted by advres
People should learn endurance; they should learn to endure the discomforts of heat and cold, hunger and thirst; they should learn to be patient when receiving abuse and scorn; for it is the practice of endurance that quenches the fire of worldly passions which is burning up their bodies.
--Buddha
*))
((*
*))
((*
www.skiclinics.com
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks