*UPDATE* DADT Repeal Breaks Repub Filibuster

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

Nordic Einar
Posts: 783
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 7:21 am UTC

*UPDATE* DADT Repeal Breaks Repub Filibuster

Postby Nordic Einar » Thu Dec 09, 2010 11:11 pm UTC

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/12/09 ... sk-repeal/

Spoiler:
Senate Republicans blocked repeal of "Don't ask, Don't tell" Thursday, significantly dimming prospects that the ban on gays serving openly in the military will be lifted during this lame-duck session of Congress.
The 57-40 vote came on a motion to bring the giant defense budget bill, which included repeal of "Don't ask, Don't tell" (DADT), to the floor, with Democratic Majority Leader Harry Reid unable to muster the 60 votes to launch debate.
Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates had pinned his hopes on the Senate for an orderly implementation of the change in military policy. The House voted this fall to repeal the 17-year-old law, and a positive Senate vote would have allowed the Pentagon to begin a lengthy process to actually lift the ban.
Unless the Senate acts this month, it is likely the courts will order an immediate repeal, an outcome Gates has said would lead to chaos and precisely the kind of disruption of morale and combat readiness many critics of repeal have feared.
Reid and Maine Republican Susan Collins had tried this week to reach a deal to allow debate on the defense budget legislation. Collins was one of three Republicans, including Scott Brown of Massachusetts and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, who had said they would vote for repeal of DADT. But Brown and Murkowski joined other Republicans in voting to bypass debate on the defense legislation until after the Senate considers extending the Bush-era tax cuts and other matters.
The vote coincided with the release of a new Gallup poll showing that two-thirds of Americans want the DADT law off the books.
Related Stories

* Senate Delays Votes on 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' and DREAM Act
* Repeal of 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Unclear After Brass Asks Senate for Time
* Pentagon to Release 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Report Early

The Defense Department had reached a similar finding with a yearlong study which surveyed 255,000 of the 2.5 million service members, as well as their families. It found the majority would not oppose serving with gays or lesbians and did not think it would disrupt combat readiness or unit cohesion.
In urging the Senate to take up repeal of DADT, Reid said the law banning gays from serving openly in the military was "obsolete, embarrassing and weakens our military ... repealing it will make our country stronger.''
The vote was taken without debate.
Advocates of repeal say there is less chance the new Congress, which takes office in January, will act favorably on repeal. The Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, which supports repeal, urged Reid to keep the Senate in session to try again for a vote.
"While difficult, realistic options still exist for advocates and senators to move repeal this year,'' said Aubrey Sarvis, an Army veteran and executive director of SLDN.
A U.S. District Court judge has already ruled the gay ban unconstitutional and ordered an immediate worldwide lifting of all Defense Department regulations providing for investigation and discharge of gay and lesbian service members. The 9th District Court of Appeals is currently weighing a Justice Department appeal to stay that order and overturn the lower court decision. A ruling from the appellate court is expected in March.
The Pentagon has prepared an 86-page plan to rewrite regulations and educate the troops before repeal of the law is implemented. Defense Department officials said the process would take months, in part because 97,000 military personnel currently serving in Afghanistan could not receive the training until they return home after their tours, which last from four to 12 months.
Language in the legislation that failed Thursday would prohibit any change until the president, defense secretary and chairman of the Joint Chiefs certify that implementation would not harm morale or readiness.
"I believe it would be unwise to push ahead with full implementation of repeal before more can be done to prepare the force -- in particular those ground combat specialties and units -- for what could be a disruptive and disorienting change,'' Gates told reporters Nov. 30.
Similar reservations were expressed by the military chiefs in a lengthy and contentious Senate hearing Dec. 3, during which they expressed much the same reservations as Gates. Of the four military service chiefs, the Marine commandant, Gen. James F. Amos, was most outspoken: " My recommendation is that we should not implement repeal at this time,'' he told the committee.
Some 14,000 gay and lesbian service members have been discharged in the 17 years since the gay ban was enacted during the Clinton administration.


Fuck.

**UPDATE**

http://www.metroweekly.com/poliglot/201 ... n-dad.html
Spoiler:
On a 63-33 vote, and with six Republicans voting "yes," the U.S. Senate -- at a little before noon today -- voted for cloture on the stand-alone bill aimed at repealing the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" law, overcoming the largest hurdle remaining for repeal of the 1993 law banning openly gay, lesbian and bisexual military service.

The House approved the bill overwhelmingly this past week, and President Barack Obama has expressed his strong support for the bill and is expected to sign it.

The cloture vote, which required the approval of at least 60 senators, means that only 30 hours of debate remain before DADT repeal comes up for a final vote. Usually, because the vote for final passage only requires a simple majority vote of the senators, the 30-hour requirement is waived. It was not clear, however, whether Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) would allow the requirement to be waived regarding the DADT repeal bill.

The Republicans voting "yes" were: Sens. Scott Brown (R-Mass), Susan Collins (R-Alaska), Mark Kirk (R-Ill.), Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) and George Voinovich (R-Ohio). Collins had co-sponsored the repeal bill.

In a statement issued immediately after the vote, Human Rights Campaign president Joe Solmonese said, "Today, America lived up to its highest ideals of freedom and equality. Congress recognized that all men and women have the right to openly serve their country. Plenty of people had already planned the funeral for this legislation. Today, we pulled out a victory from what was almost certain defeat just a few days ago."

In a statement, Servicemembers United executive director Alex Nicholson said, "This vote represents an historic step forward for this country, and it will very likely be a life-changing moment for gay and lesbian troops.

"While we still have a long road ahead, including a final passage vote, the certification process, and a yet-to-be-determined implementation period, those who defend our freedom while living in fear for their careers will finally breathe a sigh of relief tonight, and those who have fallen victim to this policy in years past will finally begin to see true closure and redemption on the horizon."

Aubrey Sarvis, the executive director of Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, said in a statement, "Gay, lesbian and bisexual service members posted around the world are standing a little taller today, but they’re still very much at risk because repeal is not final."

Sarvis went further, though, pointing to the fact that the policy remains in effect.

"I respectfully ask Defense Secretary Robert Gates to use his authority to suspend all 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' investigations during this interim period. Until the President signs the bill, until there is certification, and until the 60-day Congressional period is over, no one should be investigated or discharged under this discriminatory law," he said. "Even with this historic vote, service members must continue to serve in silence until repeal is final."

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.V.) did not vote and issued a statement saying that he cannot support DADT repeal at this time. Three Republicans did not vote: Sens. Jim Bunning (R-Ky.), Judd Gregg (R-N.H.) and Orrin Hatch (R-Utah).

The vote came less than 10 days after the Senate failed to achieve cloture on a motion to proceed to debate on the National Defense Authorization Act, which contained the DADT repeal provision.

It also came just moments after the Senate failed to achieve cloture on the DREAM Act, an immigration bill that had been a key goal of liberals for passage in the lame-duck session, on a 55-41 vote.


DADT will be put to a vote within the next 30 hours - and all we'll need is 51. We have between 57-63. We've done it. DADT is essentially dead and gone. I wept when I saw that vote. 2 long fucking years...
Last edited by Nordic Einar on Sat Dec 18, 2010 5:18 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

The Reaper
Posts: 4008
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 5:37 am UTC
Location: San Antonio, Tx
Contact:

Re: DADT Dies on Senate Floor

Postby The Reaper » Thu Dec 09, 2010 11:20 pm UTC

-sigh-

No, america. No freedoms for you! Bad america! Don't make me get the paper!

User avatar
mmmcannibalism
Posts: 2150
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 6:16 am UTC

Re: DADT Dies on Senate Floor

Postby mmmcannibalism » Fri Dec 10, 2010 12:18 am UTC

damn
Izawwlgood wrote:I for one would happily live on an island as a fuzzy seal-human.

Oregonaut wrote:Damn fetuses and their terroist plots.

User avatar
Ortus
Fluffy
Posts: 569
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 7:09 am UTC

Re: DADT Dies on Senate Floor

Postby Ortus » Fri Dec 10, 2010 12:22 am UTC

Awww, shiiiiiiiiiiiii-.
roband wrote:Face, yes. Chest, probably. Pubic area, maybe. Scrotum, not a fucking chance.

User avatar
Amora
Posts: 53
Joined: Sun Jan 18, 2009 2:28 pm UTC
Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan
Contact:

Re: DADT Dies on Senate Floor

Postby Amora » Fri Dec 10, 2010 1:42 am UTC

I'd recommend changing the topic title. It implies the law died, not the debate. I got really excited when I saw it.

Our congress is a disgrace.
Bloody Orange lover.

User avatar
netcrusher88
Posts: 2166
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 4:35 pm UTC
Location: Seattle

Re: DADT Dies on Senate Floor

Postby netcrusher88 » Fri Dec 10, 2010 2:33 am UTC

Democrats need to get on that messaging thing. Republicans are blocking funding for the military! It wouldn't be false to say they're trying to dismantle it!

Misleading, sure, but it's truer than most of the fabrications Republicans often politick against Democrats with.
Sexothermic
I have only ever made one prayer to God, a very short one: "O Lord, make my enemies ridiculous." And God granted it. -Voltaire
They said we would never have a black president until Swine Flu. -Gears

User avatar
Telchar
That's Admiral 'The Hulk' Ackbar, to you sir
Posts: 1937
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 9:06 pm UTC
Location: Cynicistia

Re: DADT Dies on Senate Floor

Postby Telchar » Fri Dec 10, 2010 3:12 am UTC

Democrats: Our statements are less misleading than the Republicans.

Not exactly a rallying cry.
Zamfir wrote:Yeah, that's a good point. Everyone is all about presumption of innocence in rape threads. But when Mexican drug lords build APCs to carry their henchmen around, we immediately jump to criminal conclusions without hard evidence.

User avatar
Lucrece
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:01 am UTC

Re: DADT Dies on Senate Floor

Postby Lucrece » Fri Dec 10, 2010 3:21 am UTC

Republicans with the exception of Sunsan Collins filibustered it. Democrats can't do any better--you're always going to have dissenters, and theirs are few still. The issue, as always, is that Republicans walk lockstep. They like to blame Democrats for unwavering, negotiation-resistant purism, but it is Republicans who always refuse to make concessions.

And why? Not because they opposed DADT. Brown, Snowe, and Murkowski were all Republicans who announced support for the repeal. But they filibustered the defense bill-not DADT alone-- just because they gotta extend tax cuts to their corporate sugar daddies.

Lieberman and Collins have announced intent, with the majority leader, to bring in DADT as a stand-alone bill instead of being on the defense authorization bill.
Belial wrote:That's charming, Nancy, but all I hear when you talk is a bunch of yippy dog sounds.

User avatar
Brooklynxman
Because I'm Awesome
Posts: 609
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 4:27 pm UTC
Location: Here
Contact:

Re: DADT Dies on Senate Floor

Postby Brooklynxman » Fri Dec 10, 2010 5:59 am UTC

I read the title, thought hurrah it died, then read the article, and realized it was the attempt to kill it that died. I am now sad. I have a question though, why is DADT even a law*, Clinton had to sign off on it why didn't he just make it a standing order, he is Commander and Chief, and it makes it less complicated to undo.

*legal question, not a why the fuck did this even start question
We figure out what all this means, then do something large and violent

The thing about changing the world...once you do it the world's all different.

I'm Angel. I beat the bad guys.

Spoiler:
Image

User avatar
Xeio
Friends, Faidites, Countrymen
Posts: 5101
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:12 am UTC
Location: C:\Users\Xeio\
Contact:

Re: DADT Dies on Senate Floor

Postby Xeio » Fri Dec 10, 2010 6:04 am UTC

Telchar wrote:Democrats: Our statements are less misleading than the Republicans.

Not exactly a rallying cry.
Doesn't really matter, the democrats don't have the balls to pull something like that anyway. "Hey, let's compromise, we only have a majority"

User avatar
Lucrece
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2008 12:01 am UTC

Re: DADT Repeal Dies on Senate Floor

Postby Lucrece » Fri Dec 10, 2010 7:22 am UTC

Brooklynxman wrote:I read the title, thought hurrah it died, then read the article, and realized it was the attempt to kill it that died. I am now sad. I have a question though, why is DADT even a law*, Clinton had to sign off on it why didn't he just make it a standing order, he is Commander and Chief, and it makes it less complicated to undo.

*legal question, not a why the fuck did this even start question


Because it was not his law. Clinton didn't have that option because it was anti-gay animus and the opportunity to exploit anti-gay sentiment by straight people (which half the country still maintains) for political campaigns by themembers of Congress.


Bill Clinton was just a coward who jumped on the bandwagon, but even if he had lifted his finger it would've done little to stop the anti-gay train of laws Congress would pass. Ditto with DOMA.
Belial wrote:That's charming, Nancy, but all I hear when you talk is a bunch of yippy dog sounds.

badmartialarts
Posts: 51
Joined: Sat Sep 18, 2010 1:51 am UTC

Re: DADT Repeal Dies on Senate Floor

Postby badmartialarts » Fri Dec 10, 2010 7:43 am UTC

Lucrece wrote:
Brooklynxman wrote:I read the title, thought hurrah it died, then read the article, and realized it was the attempt to kill it that died. I am now sad. I have a question though, why is DADT even a law*, Clinton had to sign off on it why didn't he just make it a standing order, he is Commander and Chief, and it makes it less complicated to undo.

*legal question, not a why the fuck did this even start question


Because it was not his law. Clinton didn't have that option because it was anti-gay animus and the opportunity to exploit anti-gay sentiment by straight people (which half the country still maintains) for political campaigns by themembers of Congress.


Bill Clinton was just a coward who jumped on the bandwagon, but even if he had lifted his finger it would've done little to stop the anti-gay train of laws Congress would pass. Ditto with DOMA.


Before Don't Ask, Don't Tell, gays weren't allowed to serve at all. It is somewhat incorrect to call it 'anti-gay' in the regard of service. But it was and is definitely a 'separate but equal' type of distinction, which
the courts will shoot down if no one else will....I hope...

Dark567
First one to notify the boards of Rick and Morty Season 3
Posts: 3686
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 5:12 pm UTC
Location: Everywhere(in the US, I don't venture outside it too often, unfortunately)

Re: DADT Repeal Dies on Senate Floor

Postby Dark567 » Sat Dec 11, 2010 12:34 am UTC

badmartialarts wrote:Before Don't Ask, Don't Tell, gays weren't allowed to serve at all. It is somewhat incorrect to call it 'anti-gay' in the regard of service. But it was and is definitely a 'separate but equal' type of distinction, which
the courts will shoot down if no one else will....I hope...

Although DADT is bad, it wasn't nearly as bad as the law before it existed, which was an absolute ban on homosexuals.

At the time, per the December 21, 1993 Department of Defense Directive 1332.14,[5] it was legal policy (10 U.S.C. § 654)[6] that homosexuality is incompatible with military service and persons who engaged in homosexual acts or stated that they are homosexual or bisexual were discharged.[4][7] The Uniform Code of Military Justice, passed by Congress in 1950 and signed by President Harry S Truman, established the policies and procedures for discharging homosexual servicemembers
I apologize, 90% of the time I write on the Fora I am intoxicated.


Yakk wrote:The question the thought experiment I posted is aimed at answering: When falling in a black hole, do you see the entire universe's future history train-car into your ass, or not?

Nordic Einar
Posts: 783
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 7:21 am UTC

Re: DADT Repeal Dies on Senate Floor

Postby Nordic Einar » Sat Dec 11, 2010 2:07 am UTC

Those laws are functionally identical. A ban on gay military members period isn't that different from a ban on openly gay members - in both cases, gay men and women join the military by lying about their sexuality.

Also, during periods of low recruitment and/or war (Korea, Vietnam) the military has a long standing tradition of ignoring someone's sexuality, throwing them at the front lines, and only discharging them once recruitment has picked up again.

Dark567
First one to notify the boards of Rick and Morty Season 3
Posts: 3686
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 5:12 pm UTC
Location: Everywhere(in the US, I don't venture outside it too often, unfortunately)

Re: DADT Repeal Dies on Senate Floor

Postby Dark567 » Sat Dec 11, 2010 2:24 am UTC

Nordic Einar wrote:Those laws are functionally identical. A ban on gay military members period isn't that different from a ban on openly gay members - in both cases, gay men and women join the military by lying about their sexuality.
In one case they were allowed the authority to attempt to determine your sexuality, in the other they weren't. I would definitely the latter is preferable, although not completely idea.
I apologize, 90% of the time I write on the Fora I am intoxicated.


Yakk wrote:The question the thought experiment I posted is aimed at answering: When falling in a black hole, do you see the entire universe's future history train-car into your ass, or not?

Nordic Einar
Posts: 783
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 7:21 am UTC

Re: DADT Repeal Dies on Senate Floor

Postby Nordic Einar » Sat Dec 11, 2010 2:56 am UTC

Dark567 wrote:
Nordic Einar wrote:Those laws are functionally identical. A ban on gay military members period isn't that different from a ban on openly gay members - in both cases, gay men and women join the military by lying about their sexuality.
In one case they were allowed the authority to attempt to determine your sexuality, in the other they weren't.* I would definitely the latter is preferable, although not completely idea.

*But they largely continued to do it anyway, since if you protested you'd out yourself. So practically, they're basically identical.



FTFY

Роберт
Posts: 4285
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 1:56 am UTC

Re: DADT Repeal Dies on Senate Floor

Postby Роберт » Mon Dec 13, 2010 7:54 pm UTC

Nordic Einar wrote:
Dark567 wrote:
Nordic Einar wrote:Those laws are functionally identical. A ban on gay military members period isn't that different from a ban on openly gay members - in both cases, gay men and women join the military by lying about their sexuality.
In one case they were allowed the authority to attempt to determine your sexuality, in the other they weren't.* I would definitely the latter is preferable, although not completely idea.

*But they largely continued to do it anyway, since if you protested you'd out yourself. So practically, they're basically identical.



FTFY

Except, you forgot to fix "idea" to "ideal".
The Great Hippo wrote:[T]he way we treat suspected terrorists genuinely terrifies me.

User avatar
Oregonaut
Posts: 6511
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 9:58 pm UTC
Location: Oregon

Re: DADT Repeal Dies on Senate Floor

Postby Oregonaut » Mon Dec 13, 2010 9:16 pm UTC

Actually, I protested DADT. There was even a higher-ranking NCO that saw me protesting. He attempted to call into question my sexuality, and my commander (rightfully) said that since I wasn't in uniform, I broke no laws. There could be no investigation, because the evidence amounted to "I was in $city, where there was a gay protest group." And that was hearsay.

Protesting doesn't mean an automatic outing, and this is still preferable to the old laws where I would have had to discharge four of the finest women I ever served with for prefering the taste of women to men.

It still sucks compared to the ideal, but it gives more leniency than otherwise would be expected.
- Ochigo the Earth-Stomper

The EGE wrote:
Mumpy wrote:And to this day, librarians revile Oregonaut as the Antichrist.

False! We sacrifice our card catalogues to him in the name of Job Security!

User avatar
22/7
I'm pretty sure I have "The Slavery In My Asshole" on DVD.
Posts: 6475
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 3:30 pm UTC
Location: 127.0.0.1

Re: DADT Repeal Dies on Senate Floor

Postby 22/7 » Tue Dec 14, 2010 3:06 am UTC

While I can understand your hesitancy to throw the baby out with the proverbial bath water, to be honest, any discussion about how DADT isn't as bad as it could be ends up tasting a little bit too much like "well, at least we're calling them Negroes now, that's quite an improvement over what we were calling them 20 years ago."
Totally not a hypothetical...

Steroid wrote:
bigglesworth wrote:If your economic reality is a choice, then why are you not as rich as Bill Gates?
Don't want to be.
I want to be!

User avatar
Oregonaut
Posts: 6511
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 9:58 pm UTC
Location: Oregon

Re: DADT Repeal Dies on Senate Floor

Postby Oregonaut » Tue Dec 14, 2010 3:06 pm UTC

I can agree with that assessment. I just can't agree with people who say that the military engages in witch hunts when in my experience the military has done a great deal of shoulder shrugging. More people got out on DADT because they didn't want to be an Arabic linguist, or because they didn't want to deploy. So "OOPS" you caught me in bed with a dude. I'm not saying that people who are honestly interested in the same gender aren't hurt by the current system, I'm just saying that in a massive conservative organization like the military you don't get instantaneous change. The last 20 years under DADT has opened the door for "open" service, whereas without it, I doubt that the military would be ready as a system to accept it.

I'm not shocked that the heaviest complaints are coming from the Marines. They're the flag-bearing standard for their motto, "God, Corps, Country."
- Ochigo the Earth-Stomper

The EGE wrote:
Mumpy wrote:And to this day, librarians revile Oregonaut as the Antichrist.

False! We sacrifice our card catalogues to him in the name of Job Security!

User avatar
netcrusher88
Posts: 2166
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 4:35 pm UTC
Location: Seattle

Re: DADT Repeal Dies on Senate Floor

Postby netcrusher88 » Tue Dec 14, 2010 4:19 pm UTC

Three things:
First: The facts say witch hunts happen. Or, in a less slanted manner of speaking, that people are in fact actively pursued in violation of the "don't ask" part. A lot of people aren't, but that doesn't excuse the proactive investigations that do occur.

Second: The military does not make instant changes, no, but the fact some people have a problem with it does not mean a policy does not need to end now. In the late 1940s, about 80% of white soldiers in the military opposed racial integration, according to a poll. In 1948, Truman signed Executive Order 9981 ordering integration. The military proceeded to take it slow, though when integration was forced by circumstances in the Korean War, it was found that, as it turns out, instant wartime changes like that were just fine.

Third: Do not tell people they need to wait for civil rights because other people are just not ready to give them to them. It's bullshit, it's counterproductive, and it's insulting. Dr. King wrote about that nearly 40 years ago, and it's no less true now.
Sexothermic
I have only ever made one prayer to God, a very short one: "O Lord, make my enemies ridiculous." And God granted it. -Voltaire
They said we would never have a black president until Swine Flu. -Gears

User avatar
podbaydoor
Posts: 7548
Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 4:16 am UTC
Location: spaceship somewhere out there

Re: DADT Repeal Dies on Senate Floor

Postby podbaydoor » Tue Dec 14, 2010 4:25 pm UTC

On the other hand, storming about demanding things at the top of your lungs is only effective up to a point at convincing conservative pricks occupying the current seats of power to change things.
tenet |ˈtenit|
noun
a principle or belief, esp. one of the main principles of a religion or philosophy : the tenets of classical liberalism.
tenant |ˈtenənt|
noun
a person who occupies land or property rented from a landlord.

User avatar
netcrusher88
Posts: 2166
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 4:35 pm UTC
Location: Seattle

Re: DADT Repeal Dies on Senate Floor

Postby netcrusher88 » Tue Dec 14, 2010 4:43 pm UTC

So shut up and sit down because all this advocacy is just going to work against you?

Yeah, uh, are you stupid or grasping at straws?
Sexothermic
I have only ever made one prayer to God, a very short one: "O Lord, make my enemies ridiculous." And God granted it. -Voltaire
They said we would never have a black president until Swine Flu. -Gears

User avatar
podbaydoor
Posts: 7548
Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 4:16 am UTC
Location: spaceship somewhere out there

Re: DADT Repeal Dies on Senate Floor

Postby podbaydoor » Tue Dec 14, 2010 5:12 pm UTC

Projecting much? Now you've put words in both mine and Oregonaut's mouths.
tenet |ˈtenit|
noun
a principle or belief, esp. one of the main principles of a religion or philosophy : the tenets of classical liberalism.
tenant |ˈtenənt|
noun
a person who occupies land or property rented from a landlord.

Princess Marzipan
Posts: 7717
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 5:28 am UTC
Location: neither a road, nor an island

Re: DADT Repeal Dies on Senate Floor

Postby Princess Marzipan » Tue Dec 14, 2010 5:19 pm UTC

He definitely put words in Oregonaut's. He greatly extrapolated from your last post, but it was an accurate extrapolation *if* your post was anything more than voicing aggravation.

Oregonaut's probably actually correct that DADT did do a fair amount of paving the way for full open inclusion.
"It's Saturday night. I've got no date, a two-liter of Shasta, and my all-Rush mixtape. Let's rock!"
"I am just about to be brilliant!"
General_Norris, on feminism, wrote:If you lose your six Pokémon, you lost.

Dark567
First one to notify the boards of Rick and Morty Season 3
Posts: 3686
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 5:12 pm UTC
Location: Everywhere(in the US, I don't venture outside it too often, unfortunately)

Re: DADT Repeal Dies on Senate Floor

Postby Dark567 » Tue Dec 14, 2010 5:25 pm UTC

22/7 wrote:While I can understand your hesitancy to throw the baby out with the proverbial bath water, to be honest, any discussion about how DADT isn't as bad as it could be ends up tasting a little bit too much like "well, at least we're calling them Negroes now, that's quite an improvement over what we were calling them 20 years ago."

But its not "DADT isn't as bad as it could be", somebody asked why a law as stupid as DADT was ever passed, and it was explained that it was passed because the law before DADT was even stupider. Sometimes people assume that had DADT not been passed in favor of the status quo of '93, things would be better off, which quite frankly isn't the case. Would it have been better to completely open up the military for everyone? Yes.
I apologize, 90% of the time I write on the Fora I am intoxicated.


Yakk wrote:The question the thought experiment I posted is aimed at answering: When falling in a black hole, do you see the entire universe's future history train-car into your ass, or not?

User avatar
podbaydoor
Posts: 7548
Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 4:16 am UTC
Location: spaceship somewhere out there

Re: DADT Repeal Dies on Senate Floor

Postby podbaydoor » Tue Dec 14, 2010 5:37 pm UTC

Princess Marzipan wrote:He definitely put words in Oregonaut's. He greatly extrapolated from your last post, but it was an accurate extrapolation *if* your post was anything more than voicing aggravation.

Oregonaut's probably actually correct that DADT did do a fair amount of paving the way for full open inclusion.

I put in "up to the point" in my post to acknowledge that storming about and demanding things is effective on certain levels, but I suppose I didn't kowtow enough to it to make it clear. Mostly I was voicing aggravation at his accusations towards Oregonaut.
tenet |ˈtenit|
noun
a principle or belief, esp. one of the main principles of a religion or philosophy : the tenets of classical liberalism.
tenant |ˈtenənt|
noun
a person who occupies land or property rented from a landlord.

Princess Marzipan
Posts: 7717
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 5:28 am UTC
Location: neither a road, nor an island

Re: DADT Repeal Dies on Senate Floor

Postby Princess Marzipan » Tue Dec 14, 2010 5:51 pm UTC

Yeah, I figured you guys aren't dicks. =P But if I didn't have a mostly positive opinion of your posts I can easily see where your comment there could piss someone off.

I find netcrusher's first and second points to be both valid and relevant; the third point isn't relevant to what Oregonaut was on about, but is still worth keeping in mind during the discussion.
"It's Saturday night. I've got no date, a two-liter of Shasta, and my all-Rush mixtape. Let's rock!"
"I am just about to be brilliant!"
General_Norris, on feminism, wrote:If you lose your six Pokémon, you lost.

Heisenberg
Posts: 3789
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 8:48 pm UTC
Location: Uncertain

Re: DADT Repeal Dies on Senate Floor

Postby Heisenberg » Tue Dec 14, 2010 6:02 pm UTC

Honest question: If the 111th Congress (D,D) didn't vote to repeal DADT, and we assume that the 112th (R,D) won't either, is there a reason why President Obama should not use his authority as Commander In Chief to halt DADT?

Princess Marzipan
Posts: 7717
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 5:28 am UTC
Location: neither a road, nor an island

Re: DADT Repeal Dies on Senate Floor

Postby Princess Marzipan » Tue Dec 14, 2010 6:06 pm UTC

Yeah.

He's too much of a fucking wimp.
"It's Saturday night. I've got no date, a two-liter of Shasta, and my all-Rush mixtape. Let's rock!"
"I am just about to be brilliant!"
General_Norris, on feminism, wrote:If you lose your six Pokémon, you lost.

User avatar
podbaydoor
Posts: 7548
Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 4:16 am UTC
Location: spaceship somewhere out there

Re: DADT Repeal Dies on Senate Floor

Postby podbaydoor » Tue Dec 14, 2010 6:07 pm UTC

Princess Marzipan wrote:I find netcrusher's first and second points to be both valid and relevant; the third point isn't relevant to what Oregonaut was on about, but is still worth keeping in mind during the discussion.

It's certainly worth keeping in mind...and in another context, I would completely agree with everything netcrusher has said, and I've probably said the same thing in other arguments. I took issue briefly here because he was falsely accusing another poster of advocating something which the poster did not advocate - and in a nasty, insulting manner.

Heisenberg wrote:Honest question: If the 111th Congress (D,D) didn't vote to repeal DADT, and we assume that the 112th (R,D) won't either, is there a reason why President Obama should not use his authority as Commander In Chief to halt DADT?

I can't think of a reason why not. But I'd be surprised if this administration actually took that step. /pessimistic
tenet |ˈtenit|
noun
a principle or belief, esp. one of the main principles of a religion or philosophy : the tenets of classical liberalism.
tenant |ˈtenənt|
noun
a person who occupies land or property rented from a landlord.

Dark567
First one to notify the boards of Rick and Morty Season 3
Posts: 3686
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 5:12 pm UTC
Location: Everywhere(in the US, I don't venture outside it too often, unfortunately)

Re: DADT Repeal Dies on Senate Floor

Postby Dark567 » Tue Dec 14, 2010 6:10 pm UTC

Heisenberg wrote:Honest question: If the 111th Congress (D,D) didn't vote to repeal DADT, and we assume that the 112th (R,D) won't either, is there a reason why President Obama should not use his authority as Commander In Chief to halt DADT?

Obama's Justice Department continues to defend the gay ban in court, citing a "traditional" duty to enforce and defend all laws.

If you really believe in the traditional separation of powers, the job of congress is to make law, while the presidents is to enforce it. That seems like why is still willing to enforce it currently.
I apologize, 90% of the time I write on the Fora I am intoxicated.


Yakk wrote:The question the thought experiment I posted is aimed at answering: When falling in a black hole, do you see the entire universe's future history train-car into your ass, or not?

User avatar
Dauric
Posts: 3989
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:58 pm UTC
Location: In midair, traversing laterally over a container of sharks. No water, just sharks, with lasers.

Re: DADT Repeal Dies on Senate Floor

Postby Dauric » Tue Dec 14, 2010 6:18 pm UTC

podbaydoor wrote:
Heisenberg wrote:Honest question: If the 111th Congress (D,D) didn't vote to repeal DADT, and we assume that the 112th (R,D) won't either, is there a reason why President Obama should not use his authority as Commander In Chief to halt DADT?

I can't think of a reason why not. But I'd be surprised if this administration actually took that step. /pessimistic


If I'm reading the wiki right: DADT is an executive modification to the still current absolute ban on homosexual soldiers in the military ( National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994 (passed in 1993) requiring the military to abide by regulations essentially identical to the 1982 absolute ban policy), that prohibits officers from enforcing that ban by making active inquiries.

If the executive office removes the DADT instruction to the 1994 NDAA , the federal 'absolute ban' on homosexuals in the military still stands, except that now officers can (or may be/feel obligated to) actually ask about the soldier's sexuality.

So grand upshot is that if Obama pulls it the situation gets -worse- because the law on the books is still an absolute ban. DADT is just how the executive is telling the military to (not quite) enforce the 1994 NDAA provisions.
We're in the traffic-chopper over the XKCD boards where there's been a thread-derailment. A Liquified Godwin spill has evacuated threads in a fourty-post radius of the accident, Lolcats and TVTropes have broken free of their containers. It is believed that the Point has perished.

User avatar
podbaydoor
Posts: 7548
Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 4:16 am UTC
Location: spaceship somewhere out there

Re: DADT Repeal Dies on Senate Floor

Postby podbaydoor » Tue Dec 14, 2010 6:33 pm UTC

Insert <themoreyouknow.gif>

So...basically Congress, not Obama, has to change the law entirely to get rid of the absolute ban?
tenet |ˈtenit|
noun
a principle or belief, esp. one of the main principles of a religion or philosophy : the tenets of classical liberalism.
tenant |ˈtenənt|
noun
a person who occupies land or property rented from a landlord.

User avatar
Jessica
Jessica, you're a ...
Posts: 8337
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2007 8:57 pm UTC
Location: Soviet Canuckistan

Re: DADT Repeal Dies on Senate Floor

Postby Jessica » Tue Dec 14, 2010 6:38 pm UTC

Or, the courts will find it unconstitutional and it'll be repealed that way.
doogly wrote:On a scale of Mr Rogers to Fascism, how mean do you think we're being?
Belial wrote:My goal is to be the best brain infection any of you have ever had.

User avatar
Oregonaut
Posts: 6511
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 9:58 pm UTC
Location: Oregon

Re: DADT Repeal Dies on Senate Floor

Postby Oregonaut » Tue Dec 14, 2010 6:48 pm UTC

The courts doing it is second preference. Congress doing it is the first preference. Obama unilaterally doing it is just as bad as G-Dubb doing shit unilaterally. Pissing off people, leading to Congress possibly doing something worse, etc.

As to Netcrusher, yes. Military necessity works wonders when confronted with unequivacable evil, and public support. Since public support doesn't exist for the current engagements, and military necessity was found to be a farce, making a sudden shift is going to end poorly. That's why DADT is a good first step, the next step would be for a repeal of the standing orders, making DADT moot by default. Pod is correct in that it is good to call for changes. It helps end things faster if everyone continues to pressure government, and works within the system to promote popular changes. I served 10 years with women I knew, because they told me, were lesbians. I didn't give two shits, and neither did anyone else. But that was where I worked, and where I was in the military. I knew that if those same ladies were in the Corps, they'd of had big issues. I also stated this is wrong that it is this way.

Now, I'll assume noble intent, and grant that you weren't calling me a liar when you said "Facts", because I stated "a great deal", not total, not absolute, just more than people think happens. There are good people in the military, there are great commanders, and neither of those would have happened if DADT didn't pave the way for integration, because "THEM FAG LUVERS" would never have been given those responsibilities. This isn't something we should be "proud" of, it's just recognizing that while things need to be better, they could have been a great deal worse.
- Ochigo the Earth-Stomper

The EGE wrote:
Mumpy wrote:And to this day, librarians revile Oregonaut as the Antichrist.

False! We sacrifice our card catalogues to him in the name of Job Security!

Dark567
First one to notify the boards of Rick and Morty Season 3
Posts: 3686
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 5:12 pm UTC
Location: Everywhere(in the US, I don't venture outside it too often, unfortunately)

Re: DADT Repeal Dies on Senate Floor

Postby Dark567 » Tue Dec 14, 2010 6:51 pm UTC

podbaydoor wrote:Insert <themoreyouknow.gif>

So...basically Congress, not Obama, has to change the law entirely to get rid of the absolute ban?

He could try an executive order. I mean, in the (paraphrased)words of Andrew Jackson, "[Some other branch] made the decision, let them enforce it". Basically the executive branch enforces all laws, including the absolute ban, if they just happen to not enforce it, congress can pass any law it wants and the President can ignore it, although thats possible grounds for impeachment.
I apologize, 90% of the time I write on the Fora I am intoxicated.


Yakk wrote:The question the thought experiment I posted is aimed at answering: When falling in a black hole, do you see the entire universe's future history train-car into your ass, or not?

User avatar
Dauric
Posts: 3989
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:58 pm UTC
Location: In midair, traversing laterally over a container of sharks. No water, just sharks, with lasers.

Re: DADT Repeal Dies on Senate Floor

Postby Dauric » Tue Dec 14, 2010 7:27 pm UTC

Dark567 wrote:
podbaydoor wrote:Insert <themoreyouknow.gif>

So...basically Congress, not Obama, has to change the law entirely to get rid of the absolute ban?

He could try an executive order. I mean, in the (paraphrased)words of Andrew Jackson, "[Some other branch] made the decision, let them enforce it". Basically the executive branch enforces all laws, including the absolute ban, if they just happen to not enforce it, congress can pass any law it wants and the President can ignore it, although thats possible grounds for impeachment.


With a soon-to-be Tea-Party-Republican executive I'd wager they'd be chomping at the bit to impeach if Obama gave them half a reason.
We're in the traffic-chopper over the XKCD boards where there's been a thread-derailment. A Liquified Godwin spill has evacuated threads in a fourty-post radius of the accident, Lolcats and TVTropes have broken free of their containers. It is believed that the Point has perished.

User avatar
Oregonaut
Posts: 6511
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 9:58 pm UTC
Location: Oregon

Re: DADT Repeal Dies on Senate Floor

Postby Oregonaut » Tue Dec 14, 2010 7:28 pm UTC

Who was the last Conservative president to be impeached by congress? Nixon?
- Ochigo the Earth-Stomper

The EGE wrote:
Mumpy wrote:And to this day, librarians revile Oregonaut as the Antichrist.

False! We sacrifice our card catalogues to him in the name of Job Security!

Dark567
First one to notify the boards of Rick and Morty Season 3
Posts: 3686
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 5:12 pm UTC
Location: Everywhere(in the US, I don't venture outside it too often, unfortunately)

Re: DADT Repeal Dies on Senate Floor

Postby Dark567 » Tue Dec 14, 2010 7:30 pm UTC

Oregonaut wrote:Who was the last Conservative president to be impeached by congress? Nixon?

He resigned before he got impeached. The only presidents ever impeached were Bill Clinton and Andrew Johnson. Although both remained in office.
I apologize, 90% of the time I write on the Fora I am intoxicated.


Yakk wrote:The question the thought experiment I posted is aimed at answering: When falling in a black hole, do you see the entire universe's future history train-car into your ass, or not?


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests