CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › Obama | Homosexuals
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Obama | Homosexuals - Page 5

post #201 of 226
3/19/10 at 3:54pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jan View Post
I guess this is the most appropriate thread I could find for this since I failed to find the "Don´t ask Don´t tell" one:



Wow. This is causing quite a ruckus over here and I have to say that this is one of the most reprehesible and disgusting statements I have heard in quite some time. And that is saying something.

For everyone that knows a iota about recent European history this is a scandalous statement. After all Sebrenica was the darkest hour of NATO in general and the Dutch army in particular. Blaming the spectacular failing to live up to thier standards and proposed goals that lead to an organized genocide under the eyes (and disputable even with active help by NATO units) of NATO on gays? Fuck you. Sir. Not only is it an obviously moronic statement that has been furiously attacked by the Netherlands already it is even more a whitewash and exculpation of epic proportions short of Pontius Pilatus.

I hope this guy gets raped by those pussy gay soldiers that fire up genocide.
Some were there are legions of undead hoplites thirsting for this guys blood. Let be honest, the only people to blame for African Genocide are the politicians of all countries and political parties.
Reply
post #202 of 226
3/19/10 at 4:42pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jan View Post
I hope this guy gets raped by those pussy gay soldiers that fire up genocide.
It's sad, but some people cross a line, and well, it's a question of whether they'll attack your friends, or you'll attack them first.
Reply
post #203 of 226
3/19/10 at 6:06pm
http://www.pamshouseblend.com/diary/...g-dadt-protest
http://www.pamshouseblend.com/diary/...going-to-trial
Reply
post #204 of 226
4/22/10 at 8:42pm
White House: Sorry, gays, no action on DADT this year. ttyl.

2009's Total DADT Discharges: 443
Reply
post #205 of 226
4/23/10 at 8:25pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew Merriweather View Post
"Homosexuals can't swim, they attract enemy radar, they attract sharks, they nudge people when they're trying to shoot, they always insist on sitting at "The Captain's Table"... they *muck about*. Imagine... the fear... when you go to sleep with a gay man next to you and think "Oh God, when I wake up, will everyone be dead?" You can't run an army like that."
What are you using for your source, or is that your own personal opinion?
Reply
post #206 of 226
4/26/10 at 7:05pm
Um, ya think he's mad or somethin'?
Reply
post #207 of 226
4/28/10 at 1:20pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Vivisector View Post
What are you using for your source, or is that your own personal opinion?
Reply
post #208 of 226
5/25/10 at 10:20pm
Obama supports military gays 'coming out'

Quote:
BARACK Obama has given Democrats the all clear to push ahead with a vote in Congress to repeal the ban on gays and lesbians serving openly in the US military. But implementation of the change could be delayed until next year, allowing the Pentagon time to complete its report on how such a big cultural shift should be managed.

The compromise was being carefully crafted in a bid to ensure enough support for the repeal of the so-called ''don't ask, don't tell'' law, introduced in 1993 by the Clinton administration. The rule effectively turned a blind eye to gays and lesbians in the services, protecting them against a military ''witch-hunt'' while demanding that they remain closeted.

Conscious that November's mid-term elections are likely to usher into Congress more conservative Republicans, tipping the balance against repeal, Democrats plan to propose an amendment to a routine defence expenditure bill when it comes before the House of Representatives on Thursday.
Reply
post #209 of 226
9/21/10 at 4:52pm
Fuck

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_gays_military
Reply
post #210 of 226
9/21/10 at 5:22pm
Ugh. Well... hopefully this will eventually get sorted out. But it looks like a pretty major setback for a while.
Reply
post #211 of 226
9/21/10 at 5:47pm
Not surprising. Not in the least.

I eagerly await the reasoned and polite spin from the forum's **cough cough** moderate Republican apologists. You know, the ones still trying to peddle that asinine "Hijack" myth about their team and it's decades long Platform Of Darkness.
Reply
post #212 of 226
9/21/10 at 5:50pm
Speak of the devil....

DADT needs to be repealed ASAP, so mind your P's and Q's. We need to keep as many volunteers in the Armed Forces as we can these days.
Reply
post #213 of 226
9/21/10 at 5:53pm
Great, so because the Republicans weren't given the chance to load the bill down with amendments guaranteed to kill it, they killed it. Nice.
Reply
post #214 of 226
9/21/10 at 6:00pm
You would think even IF you just loathed gays, you'd be all to happy to let them sign up to go get shot at.

ETA: Of course, that attitude just leads to sticking gays ONLY on the frontlines and not letting them enjoy promotions, rank, etc.
Reply
post #215 of 226
9/21/10 at 6:23pm
I think it should be repealed. But just do an up-or-down vote on it. Don't set it up as political theater by attaching it, along with a polarizing immigration bill, to the bill for military funding six weeks before the election. This vote was more about Democrats generating material for political attack ads than it was about actually changing the policy. With Collins and Snow in favor of repeal, Scott Brown tying his position to the Pentagon study set to come out on December 1 (which is expected to be weighted towards repeal), and Blanche Lincoln not having to worry about answering to the conservative Arkansas voters after November 2, the votes should be there soon. They may already be there. Quit playing political games and just get it done.
Reply
post #216 of 226
9/21/10 at 6:50pm
You have to keep in mind that this probably WAS the best way to get it done. The (fucking Goddamn) "Blue Dog" Democrats likely needed the extra protection of being able to say they were voting for military funding, not specifically gay rights. That was likely behind the way they brought it to the floor.
Reply
post #217 of 226
9/21/10 at 6:51pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jvc View Post
I think it should be repealed. But just do an up-or-down vote on it. Don't set it up as political theater by attaching it, along with a polarizing immigration bill, to the bill for military funding six weeks before the election. This vote was more about Democrats generating material for political attack ads than it was about actually changing the policy. With Collins and Snow in favor of repeal, Scott Brown tying his position to the Pentagon study set to come out on December 1 (which is expected to be weighted towards repeal), and Blanche Lincoln not having to worry about answering to the conservative Arkansas voters after November 2, the votes should be there soon. They may already be there. Quit playing political games and just get it done.
I have to agree with most of this.

Parties aside, I fucking HATE these games of "well, attach it to this bill. There's no way they can turn that down. Muahahahaha. Political Fodder!!!!1"

It's that kind of behavior that's fucked our political system.
Reply
post #218 of 226
9/21/10 at 11:37pm
if Obama had any balls, Could he repeal DADT with a Signing Statement? Truman used Executive Order to allow blacks to serve desegregated. Can't Obama?
Reply
post #219 of 226
9/23/10 at 12:58am
Chambliss Admits "All Faggots Must Die" Comment Came From His Atlanta Headquarters
Reply
post #220 of 226
9/23/10 at 2:08am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rourkefan View Post
if Obama had any balls, Could he repeal DADT with a Signing Statement? Truman used Executive Order to allow blacks to serve desegregated. Can't Obama?
No. Without knowing much about the details, my guess is that since DADT is a federal regulation, repealing it by executive order would an overstepping of executive authority and therefore unconstitutional.
Reply
post #221 of 226
9/23/10 at 3:04am
Quote:
Originally Posted by JuddL View Post
No. Without knowing much about the details, my guess is that since DADT is a federal regulation, repealing it by executive order would an overstepping of executive authority and therefore unconstitutional.
Which, hilariously, is what half the country is convinced he's been doing for two years now anyway.
Reply
post #222 of 226
9/23/10 at 3:17am
Quote:
Originally Posted by soylentgreen View Post
Which, hilariously, is what half the country is convinced he's been doing for two years now anyway.
yea, but there's a difference between people thinking he's done it and him actually doing it. The latter could be challenged in court and would just be terrible for everyone involved.

DADT will get repealed by Congress... hopefully sooner rather than later.
Reply
post #223 of 226
10/29/10 at 12:44am
Obama Signals Shift On Gay Marriage Support

Quote:
President Obama told a group of progressive bloggers Wednesday that his attitude about same-sex marriage, an issue that he has consistently and openly opposed, was beginning to "evolve."
After reading the entire transcript of the conversation, I definitely felt better about Obama (better than lately, anyways). And not just about gay marriage, I should point out. Everyone here should look it over, honestly, and you might get your nerves a lil' bit aligned.

But in re: to gay marriage, everyone who knows anything knows he's for gay marriage. He was candid about it when he was just a lowly Chicago politician, and he's obviously putting on his Washington D.C. face when he plays footsie with the idea. I wouldn't be surprised AT ALL if either during the 2012 campaign or during his next term he "suddenly" comes around to the idea.

I really, really hope he's getting a big, thick book of strategies in place for when the Repubs take over the House.
Reply
post #224 of 226
6/25/11 at 6:07am

http://edition.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/06/25/new.york.gay.marriage/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

 

Bravo, New York.  Interesting that the bill passed a Republican controlled senate.  Good for them.

Reply
post #225 of 226
6/25/11 at 8:29am
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Closer View Post

http://edition.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/06/25/new.york.gay.marriage/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

 

Bravo, New York.  Interesting that the bill passed a Republican controlled senate.  Good for them.


Not to minimize the votes of the four Republican crossovers who made the bill's passage possible, but the writing was on the wall, at least here in New York. Governor Cuomo made gay marriage a centerpiece of his campaign and polls showed that a slim majority now support the idea.

 

That said, I'm glad that the Republican-controlled Senate allowed this to come to a vote at all, instead of tying it up in session or using some other procedural loophole.

 

Reply
post #226 of 226
6/25/11 at 9:06pm

Hats off to the Republican's who faced the facts.  Still way too few to give the party any kind of credit.  In fact, it was thoroughly satisfying to watch the show roll right on past asshole Senator Greg Ball, the right wing holdout obsessed with "protecting" religious dark agers from the insidious spread of progress.

 

Good job, New York.  Make no mistake, though.  This is Trenton...but the war is far from won.

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Political Discourse
CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › Obama | Homosexuals