http://charlotte.news14.com/content/top ... on-t-tell-
Discuss.

Good. It was a dumb law. There were gays in the military. We knew who they were. As long as they weren't trying to slap us with their dick, we didn't care. Contrary to wack-job beliefs, gays do not drag down military morale.ASUMountaineer wrote: Discuss.


How?clenz wrote:Seems like Obama dropped the ball, or soap in this case, on this one thus far
Seems like something he could have pushed through rather quickly and easily with the majority that his party holds.Skjellyfetti wrote:How?clenz wrote:Seems like Obama dropped the ball, or soap in this case, on this one thus far

Desegregation is not the same as gays in the military. There is a federal law that has to be overturned and only Congress can do that. Segregation of the military was a military policy and one that the President, as Commander in Chief, could overturn on his own. The President can't overturn federal law with an Excecutive Order. He'd have near limitless power if he could.GannonFan wrote:Not sure what's taking so long - should've been an Executive Order more than a year ago and we should be in Year 2 of going through the change. Should've used Truman's desegregation of the military as a template.

It hasn't even been a year and a half.clenz wrote: Seems like something he could have pushed through rather quickly and easily with the majority that his party holds.
How long does it take for a bill to get introduced into congress to pass?Skjellyfetti wrote:It hasn't even been a year and a half.clenz wrote: Seems like something he could have pushed through rather quickly and easily with the majority that his party holds.

Only in really unusual circumstances like the health care bill.clenz wrote:How long does it take for a bill to get introduced into congress to pass?Skjellyfetti wrote:
It hasn't even been a year and a half.
I'm not a big political guy, but does it really take a year, or more, for a bill to make it through congress?
In his State of the Union address on Jan. 27, 2010, Obama said, "This year, I will work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are."
Six days later, Obama's top Pentagon officials offered the Senate Armed Services Committee details on how Obama's pledge will be carried out.
“The question before us is not whether the military prepares to make this change, but how we best prepare for it,” said Gates. “We have received our orders from the commander in chief and we are moving out accordingly."
http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/pro ... ll-policy/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;Gates and Mullen cautioned that the switch would not be immediate. Not only does Congress need to change the current law, but the Pentagon will first carry out a detailed "implementation plan" led by Pentagon legal counsel Jeh Johnson and Gen. Carter Ham, who commands the United States Army in Europe. It's likely to take months for the Pentagon to complete its plan.
In the shorter term, Gates said that the Pentagon would move toward enforcing the current policy "in a fairer manner." Gates established a timeline of 45 days for those changes.
"We believe that we have a degree of latitude within the existing law to change our internal procedures in a manner that is more appropriate and fair to our men and women in uniform,” Gates said.
Long story short it would take almost no time at all for the bill to be put into the box for congress to look at. How much "transition" needs to be gone through for someone to be able to say "I'm gay"?Skjellyfetti wrote:Only in really unusual circumstances like the health care bill.clenz wrote: How long does it take for a bill to get introduced into congress to pass?
I'm not a big political guy, but does it really take a year, or more, for a bill to make it through congress?
But, his term is four years and he has shitloads of initiateves (as does Congress) that they have to get through. They can't just do it all at once. May of '10 is relatively early in his first term.
And they've been working with the military for months to prepare for the transition.
In his State of the Union address on Jan. 27, 2010, Obama said, "This year, I will work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are."
Six days later, Obama's top Pentagon officials offered the Senate Armed Services Committee details on how Obama's pledge will be carried out.
“The question before us is not whether the military prepares to make this change, but how we best prepare for it,” said Gates. “We have received our orders from the commander in chief and we are moving out accordingly."http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/pro ... ll-policy/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;Gates and Mullen cautioned that the switch would not be immediate. Not only does Congress need to change the current law, but the Pentagon will first carry out a detailed "implementation plan" led by Pentagon legal counsel Jeh Johnson and Gen. Carter Ham, who commands the United States Army in Europe. It's likely to take months for the Pentagon to complete its plan.
In the shorter term, Gates said that the Pentagon would move toward enforcing the current policy "in a fairer manner." Gates established a timeline of 45 days for those changes.
"We believe that we have a degree of latitude within the existing law to change our internal procedures in a manner that is more appropriate and fair to our men and women in uniform,” Gates said.



Is there anything Barry does that you won't defend?Skjellyfetti wrote:Only in really unusual circumstances like the health care bill.clenz wrote: How long does it take for a bill to get introduced into congress to pass?
I'm not a big political guy, but does it really take a year, or more, for a bill to make it through congress?
But, his term is four years and he has shitloads of initiateves (as does Congress) that they have to get through. They can't just do it all at once. May of '10 is relatively early in his first term.
And they've been working with the military for months to prepare for the transition.
In his State of the Union address on Jan. 27, 2010, Obama said, "This year, I will work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are."
Six days later, Obama's top Pentagon officials offered the Senate Armed Services Committee details on how Obama's pledge will be carried out.
“The question before us is not whether the military prepares to make this change, but how we best prepare for it,” said Gates. “We have received our orders from the commander in chief and we are moving out accordingly."http://politifact.com/truth-o-meter/pro ... ll-policy/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;Gates and Mullen cautioned that the switch would not be immediate. Not only does Congress need to change the current law, but the Pentagon will first carry out a detailed "implementation plan" led by Pentagon legal counsel Jeh Johnson and Gen. Carter Ham, who commands the United States Army in Europe. It's likely to take months for the Pentagon to complete its plan.
In the shorter term, Gates said that the Pentagon would move toward enforcing the current policy "in a fairer manner." Gates established a timeline of 45 days for those changes.
"We believe that we have a degree of latitude within the existing law to change our internal procedures in a manner that is more appropriate and fair to our men and women in uniform,” Gates said.
That's what I thought. I don't understand how something as simple as allowing someone to openly be gay in the military could take this long to get through as a bill.dbackjon wrote:Bullshit, skjelly
Obama could have issued an order suspending discharges - as C-I-C he could have had the order waiting for his signature two seconds after he was inagurated.
He COULD have gotten this done in the first 100 days with little effort. Polls show 80% of Americans support this.
Obama doesn't GIVE A SHIT about equality - proven time and time again.
Agreed on this as well. I don't see many incumbents that I will be voting for this November.dbackjon wrote:And a big FUCK YOU to those that voted against this.
Only 5 Republicans voted for it in the house - bunch of fucking bigots.

Agreed - plenty of work could've been done on this from day one, without Congress, but it wasn't. And since Congress had to be involved, one would've thought that getting to this while the supermajority was in place would've been the best time. There wasn't a single obstacle in Obama's way for more than a year and he didn't tackle it. That's a missed opportunity that he's only now trying to fix.dbackjon wrote:Bullshit, skjelly
Obama could have issued an order suspending discharges - as C-I-C he could have had the order waiting for his signature two seconds after he was inagurated.
He COULD have gotten this done in the first 100 days with little effort. Polls show 80% of Americans support this.
Obama doesn't GIVE A **** about equality - proven time and time again.

GannonFan wrote:Agreed - plenty of work could've been done on this from day one, without Congress, but it wasn't. And since Congress had to be involved, one would've thought that getting to this while the supermajority was in place would've been the best time. There wasn't a single obstacle in Obama's way for more than a year and he didn't tackle it. That's a missed opportunity that he's only now trying to fix.dbackjon wrote:Bullshit, skjelly
Obama could have issued an order suspending discharges - as C-I-C he could have had the order waiting for his signature two seconds after he was inagurated.
He COULD have gotten this done in the first 100 days with little effort. Polls show 80% of Americans support this.
Obama doesn't GIVE A **** about equality - proven time and time again.

Indeed - politically, he took the worst option available. The people against this were always going to be against it, and the people for it wanted it done much, much sooner. Politically, he disappointed everyone without making anyone happy.houndawg wrote:GannonFan wrote:
Agreed - plenty of work could've been done on this from day one, without Congress, but it wasn't. And since Congress had to be involved, one would've thought that getting to this while the supermajority was in place would've been the best time. There wasn't a single obstacle in Obama's way for more than a year and he didn't tackle it. That's a missed opportunity that he's only now trying to fix.Meh. He was hosed either way - if he'd moved on it we'd be hearing a different whine from the same people, all about esprit du corps, and unit cohesion, and Barry never served in the military and isn't an American anyway. Please.
Now, having said that - I think he misplayed it from a purely political perspective because he lost support from the only constituency that was in play. His enemies were going to hammer him regardless so why not strengthen his position in the Gay community?


These 2 recent polls a majority, but no where near 80%dbackjon wrote:Bullshit, skjelly
Obama could have issued an order suspending discharges - as C-I-C he could have had the order waiting for his signature two seconds after he was inagurated.
He COULD have gotten this done in the first 100 days with little effort. Polls show 80% of Americans support this.
Obama doesn't GIVE A **** about equality - proven time and time again.
That's the problem. Playing politics. He should have done it because it was the right thing to do.GannonFan wrote:Indeed - politically, he took the worst option available. The people against this were always going to be against it, and the people for it wanted it done much, much sooner. Politically, he disappointed everyone without making anyone happy.houndawg wrote:
Meh. He was hosed either way - if he'd moved on it we'd be hearing a different whine from the same people, all about esprit du corps, and unit cohesion, and Barry never served in the military and isn't an American anyway. Please.
Now, having said that - I think he misplayed it from a purely political perspective because he lost support from the only constituency that was in play. His enemies were going to hammer him regardless so why not strengthen his position in the Gay community?

