Lieberman: We Have 60 Votes To Repeal DADT

[dbackjon]

Well, we're going to argue in circles... but, I (and Obama) don't think it would be wise for a President to issue an executive order that would "basically neute[r]" federal law. It creates a terrible, terrible precedent. The correct way to go about repealing DADT is the way it's being approached. It's not the quickest or the least painful... but, it's the way it has to be done, imo.

The DOD review that's coming back is going to say what all of knew before - generally, people have no problem with repealing DADT, while there will be some pockets of resistance throughout the military. So basically, no new information.

The report is going to say a whole lot more than that. The reasons you list are reasons WHY it should be implemented. The meat of the report will be HOW to implement it. That will be A LOT of new information.

-What benefits will be afforded to gay couples in the military (equal benefits were granted to federal employee couples as single sex couples in 2009. Would this extend to military?)
-training manuals must be updated.
-will gay soldiers have separate barracks? will gay couples receive the married couple benefits in regards to on base housing?
-repeal ban on sodomy in UCMJ
-update Military Equal Opportunity program
-will DoD provide retroactive compensation and reenlistment to members kicked out under DADT? How will that work?

those are just a few issues that need to be resolved before DADT is repealed. It's not a simple or quick thing to do.

These were all known issues years ago. No excuses.

[Skjellyfetti]

These were all known issues years ago. No excuses.

No doubt about it. But, they have to work out HOW to implement them.... and that's the purpose of the report. And that's what the administration is working on...

Gannonfan thinks the report will have "no new information." That ain't true. He and others believe it's as simple as saying "Ok, gays can openly serve. Play nice." Ain't true either.

[clenz]

I'm failing to see what the issue is here that is taking so long.

Introduce a bill to repeal DADT. There is no need to attach any other shit to it. If you have the votes no reason not to get it done...it would take almost no time at all.

[Skjellyfetti]

These were all known issues years ago. No excuses.

See.

Introduce a bill to repeal DADT. There is no need to attach any other **** to it.

People think it's way more simple than it is. No need to consider any repercussions or how to actually implement it. Just implement it and everything will work itself out.

[clenz]

These were all known issues years ago. No excuses.

See.

Introduce a bill to repeal DADT. There is no need to attach any other **** to it.

People think it's way more simple than it is. No need to consider any repercussions or how to actually implement it. Just implement it and everything will work itself out.

I'm failing to see what there is to implement, and instead of laying out what needs to be done you just keep sucking on Obama's dick.

What logistical issues are there other than allowing a homosexual to be open about their sexuality?

[Skjellyfetti]

and instead of laying out what needs to be done you just keep sucking on Obama's dick.

I've already have. I don't know if you missed my post or are just borderline retarded.

-What benefits will be afforded to gay couples in the military (equal benefits were granted to federal employee couples as single sex couples in 2009. Would this extend to military?)
-training manuals must be updated.
-will gay soldiers have separate barracks? will gay couples receive the married couple benefits in regards to on base housing?
-repeal ban on sodomy in UCMJ
-update Military Equal Opportunity program
-will DoD provide retroactive compensation and reenlistment to members kicked out under DADT? How will that work?

[GannonFan]

These were all known issues years ago. No excuses.

See.

Introduce a bill to repeal DADT. There is no need to attach any other **** to it.

People think it's way more simple than it is. No need to consider any repercussions or how to actually implement it. Just implement it and everything will work itself out.

Truman led the way with desegregation and, lo and behold, we had desegration of the military. It took a few years after he took the lead in saying it was going to happen, but he led up front and got it done. That's the difference between a President leading and a President hoping that something happens in spite of what he does. It really is that simple - say what you're going to do, and then go about getting it done.

[Skjellyfetti]

Truman led the way with desegregation and, lo and behold, we had desegration of the military.

There wasn't federal law segregating the military. An executive order was appropriate. And executive order overturning FEDERAL LAW isn't appropriate. I'm all ears if you have an argument why that would be a good thing. But, I haven't heard one yet.

Truman also made his executive order..... wait for it.... at the tail end of his first term.

[GannonFan]

and instead of laying out what needs to be done you just keep sucking on Obama's dick.

I've already laid out what needs to be done. And these are just a few of the issues. I don't know if you missed my post or are just borderline retarded.

-What benefits will be afforded to gay couples in the military (equal benefits were granted to federal employee couples as single sex couples in 2009. Would this extend to military?)

Easy - yes, they get the same benefits

-training manuals must be updated.

When you say stuff like this, it just undermines your credibility.

-will gay soldiers have separate barracks? will gay couples receive the married couple benefits in regards to on base housing?

No, same barracks. And yes, same benefits, again.

-repeal ban on sodomy in UCMJ

Again, really simple.

-update Military Equal Opportunity program

this is hard because????

-will DoD provide retroactive compensation and reenlistment to members kicked out under DADT? How will that work?

Who cares - it will work itself out through the courts after the fact. It's not a show stopper.

Seriously, this is all you can come up with? If we can't quickly navigate ourselves through this then we're doomed - there's no way we can handle the compexity of running a nation if we can't do something this easy. Just get'r done already.

[GannonFan]

Truman led the way with desegregation and, lo and behold, we had desegration of the military.

There wasn't federal law segregating the military. An executive order was appropriate. And executive order overturning FEDERAL LAW isn't appropriate. I'm all ears if you have an argument why that would be a good thing. But, I haven't heard one yet.

Truman also made his executive order..... wait for it.... in his second term.

An Executive Order to stay a federal law is entirely appropriate, especially if we're in the process of trying to legislate the repeal of the same federal law. If Congress doesn't like the Executive Order, all they do is quickly pass a law saying screw you to the President and problem solved - no earth shattering, democracry crumbling scenarios as you allude to. In this case, Congress is, finally, working towards ending this. An executive order anticipating the eventuality of this is entirely appropriate.

And dude, come to the table with a little more history knowledge - Truman issued Executive Order 9981 in July of 1948. The election happened in November of 1948. That would clearly put his executive order in his first term. Darn those facts.

[Skjellyfetti]

I was going off memory and fact checked it and corrected it before you responded. But, the point remains. He did it 3 year after taking office. Obama's been in office 20 months. I'd be willing to wager he gets it done before Truman did.