Stinky The Clown
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jan-27-10 10:15 PM
Original message |
A call to repeal DADT ...... why did it take so long? |
|
It has almost no financial downside. It is simply right. Why did we have to wait so long to hear this?
|
babylonsister
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jan-27-10 10:16 PM
Response to Original message |
1. Did you hear it? First time eva? nt |
Joe the Liberal
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jan-27-10 10:16 PM
Response to Original message |
2. Well because this is America...... |
|
and America is always dead last on issues like this.
|
ruggerson
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jan-27-10 10:16 PM
Response to Original message |
3. 80% of the country supports repealing it |
|
yet, in DC, it's somehow "controversial."
|
Rhiannon12866
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jan-27-10 10:16 PM
Response to Original message |
4. It's actually way too late... |
|
Considering how many Arabic speakers that they've lost. :-(
|
shadowknows69
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jan-27-10 10:19 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
9. I met one once. A woman, outed and discharged on nothing but hearsay |
Rhiannon12866
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jan-27-10 10:25 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
15. That's not just shameful, |
|
But it jeopardizes our security... :crazy:
|
shadowknows69
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jan-27-10 10:36 PM
Response to Reply #15 |
timeforpeace
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jan-27-10 10:17 PM
Response to Original message |
5. It's the big accomplishment of the first year so it's reasonable to save it for the big finish. |
shadowknows69
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jan-27-10 10:18 PM
Response to Original message |
6. We heard it on the campaign trail. He could still stop the discharges with a pen stroke. |
|
And there's no excuse that forgives why he hasn't
|
la la
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jan-27-10 10:19 PM
Response to Original message |
7. but--i'm seriously happy |
|
that is was finally done---let's not complain about why it 'took so long', let's celebrate that Obama said it and we go from there....
|
shadowknows69
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jan-27-10 10:21 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
13. He said it over a year ago. I'm with Stinky. WTF is taking so long? |
cliffordu
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jan-27-10 10:19 PM
Response to Original message |
onehandle
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jan-27-10 10:20 PM
Response to Original message |
10. And maybe some of teh gays will die on the battlefield. |
|
You would think that the GOP would be in favor of this.
|
HeresyLives
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jan-27-10 10:20 PM
Response to Original message |
11. He's been a little busy, ya know? |
falcon97
(343 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jan-27-10 10:20 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Edited on Wed Jan-27-10 10:21 PM by falcon97
:shrug:
It's here now.
|
Quantess
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jan-27-10 10:22 PM
Response to Original message |
14. Did you see how grumpy the generals looked when he said that? |
|
Stonefaced, no applause. Everyone else was clapping.
|
ruggerson
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jan-27-10 10:59 PM
Response to Reply #14 |
20. they don't applaud anything. They are supposed to remain apolitical. |
David Zephyr
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jan-27-10 10:39 PM
Response to Original message |
17. It's still only words. The same words we heard from him two years ago. |
shadowknows69
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jan-27-10 10:48 PM
Response to Reply #17 |
18. Thank you for confirming my sanity David. Apparently you and I |
|
Are the only ones not hearing this for the first time.
|
Rockholm
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jan-27-10 11:02 PM
Response to Reply #17 |
21. You are right. As always. |
Hippo_Tron
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Jan-27-10 10:54 PM
Response to Original message |
19. Serious answer: when Clinton tried it, it was a disaster |
|
While the majority of people do support it, the minority against it are loud and vocal. Unfortunately the minority contains a lot of people who has stars on their shirt. Clinton couldn't win a PR battle against the Pentagon's top brass, particularly since he had never served in the military.
Obama has this same problem to a certain extent. He has never served in the military. He's going to have people who have spent their entire careers in the military going on television telling saying that he's jeopardizing our national security by using the military as a vehicle for "social engineering". And because these people have spent their entire career in the military, people are going to take them seriously.
Fortunately it's not 1993 it is 2009 and the fact is that a lot of attitudes have evolved on this. But this PR aspect is still there and Obama is going to face a fight from a lot of people in the Pentagon over this.
I think one thing he should do (actually should've done tonight) is announced that he's appointing somebody like Wes Clark in charge of the task force to get this done. Associating the policy with somebody who is career military will be a good preemptive strike against the career military people that will oppose him.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Wed Apr 24th 2024, 08:21 AM
Response to Original message |