Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You are WRONG - there was never a Supreme Court ruling about Don't Ask, Don't Tell. This was a Legislative action on December 18, 2010, before the new 2010 elections sent the Democrats to the minority. It was one of those end of the year things that Congress does so they can go home for Christmas.
The issue in this case is NOT about whether Don't Ask, Don't tell should have been repealed - it's about the President of the United States forcing the Military Leadership - all the Joint Staffs to violate their OATH to follow the Laws of the USA and give in to the whim of the President - OR resign from office.
This is the same President that stated in an interview in December of 2008 that he would never make repeal of DOMA a "litmus test" to his Joint Chiefs of Staff.
I disagreed with DOMA the day it was passed and never wavered on that - it is absolutely WRONG to discriminate against Gay Americans because of what they may or may not do in the privacy of their bedrooms. So this is the real question - what is more wrong? Discrimination that is passed by Congress and signed by a President (in this case, Bill Clinton), OR is it more wrong to have a sitting President that has no respect for the "Law of the Land" and uses his power to threaten American citizens (in this case the Military Joint Chiefs of Staff)?
Bad Law can be overturned by Congress or the Supreme Court - what do we do with a Bad President who believes he is above the Law and uses his power to threaten citizens? We have a serious problem and nobody really wants to face that. This same administration has continues to threaten citizens - the IRS Target program is a great example of that. It's no wonder that people are afraid of him - his Oath of Office is meaningless to him and he has no compunction about using his power against the US Citizens on his whim.
Status:
"everybody getting reported now.."
(set 17 days ago)
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,547 posts, read 16,528,077 times
Reputation: 6029
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kibby
The issue in this case is NOT about whether Don't Ask, Don't tell should have been repealed - it's about the President of the United States forcing the Military Leadership - all the Joint Staffs to violate their OATH to follow the Laws of the USA and give in to the whim of the President - OR resign from office.
You do realize that you can agree that a policy is wrong, and not violate it right ?
It is not a violation of your oath to simply say you disagree with a policy, it isnt a violation until you well,violate the policy.
It was Republicans that went to court to remove DADT, and won..
I knew that .... but Obama and the Democrats made absolutely sure that the DADT ruling in California was dead in the water. You are correct about Obama not caring anything about Gay Americans, Obama is all about Obama - everyone else is Cannon Fodder to his ambitions and Ego. He pushed DADT to poke a stick in the eye of the GOP, if he cared at all about Gay Rights he would have done something before the California Court stepped in (which he fought tooth and nail) and before Biden forced him into action on DOMA. A lower court did not over-turn DADT, the US Congress did in December of 2010, I think they went along with it to make sure it didn't get to the Supreme Court. The last thing the GOP was interested in was a US Supreme Court decision about Gay Rights.
The one thing that Obama and the Democrats could never allow was for any GOP group to bring DADT or DOMA to the US Supreme Court ..... and that's exactly where that case was headed.
The fact remains - he threatened the Military Joint Chiefs with firing if they did not go against settled US Law and in any book ..... that's WRONG. Obama LIED about his "litmus test" to the Military Leadership, but what's new about that? He is the dude that won the Lie of the Year Award from the Washington Post in 2013. There are so many LIES that it's hard for anyone to even keep track of them.
The fact remains - he threatened the Military Joint Chiefs with firing if they did not go against settled US Law and in any book ..... that's WRONG.
Ehm - read the OP again. He told them, in effect, that the policy was going to change and that he expected them to back him in changing it. That is perfectly correct behavior.
And as pghquest's link (thanks!) points out, the administration was in full swing dismantling DADT in cooperation with the military. The Log Cabin Republicans then decided to file a lawsuit to effectuate an immediate change, and the easily-led concluded that "Obama fought for DADT", which once again goes to prove that a half truth is better propaganda than a full lie.
You do realize that you can agree that a policy is wrong, and not violate it right ?
It is not a violation of your oath to simply say you disagree with a policy, it isnt a violation until you well,violate the policy.
A LAW passed by Congress and signed into LAW by a President is not "policy" .... it's the Law of the Land. The President of the United States and all of the Military say an Oath to respect and defend the Law of the Land. Until they rewrite the Constitution so that it reads "I will defend only those Laws I agree with", he has a obligation to uphold that Oath ..... or perhaps he could just feed all copies into a shredder and the citizens and media will Shrug. Once Again.
Although I do hope it went down just as portrayed.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.