Apologies in advance if this is hard to read through, I did a boatload of cut and paste to try and capture some of the lunacy of the exchange while at the same time not wanting to copy EVERY comment nor link to a discussion which also includes some offensive homophobic language and the like. It's easy enough to find in its' entirety on the Hannity Forums if anyone wants to wade through there (it's some 20 pages and growing...mostly typical right wing garbage if you ask me).
The debate centers around whether or not the Federal Judge who struck down DADT has jurisdiction over "military matters".
What I found most fascinating was the way that they argue with no regard for facts being piled up high PROVING their argument to be ridiculous. Nope, can't let facts stand in the way! Just keep yelling louder "YOU'RE WRONG!". Really, fascinating. And a good example of why it's an exasperating excersise in futility to try and have a real discussion with these people.
The capper, of course, is when the Moderator steps in to "fix" the argument, a novel solution to say the least! Unfortunately, the reasonable guy in his exasperation gave all the reason they needed to pull the plug on his fact filled argument...but then again that's also how those guys roll instead of ever admitting they might be wrong, and worse, ignorant of the facts they are trying to argue against.
The exchange begins below (screen names were adjusted, mostly for my amusement, but I didn't add anything else except a couple of ( ) informational notes...
Dumbass - The judge has no powers over military matters.
That is how the judge's ruling is UNCONSTITUTIONAL...but you didn't care about facts
Moron - Somebody help me out here, when did DADT become LAW? I thought it was just a DoD policy. And if that's the case, what jursdiction does this judge have over it?
Moron - Don't Ask Don't Tell was *never* a LAW.
The judge has absolutely NO JURISDICTION over it.
Liberals though...they make **** up as they go along. Try to play along if you can
Informed Person - I'd suggest reading Article III Section II again
Dumbass - (first pastes Article III, Section II for reference) Nothing there giving authority to this judge over military matters.
What did you think made it such a thing?
Fairly Reasonable Guy - My god you are ignorant.
Federal courts have the authority to review ALL federal laws.
DADT is a federal law.
The judge did not order a military exercise, she adjudicated solely on the question of constitutionality of a federal law. That is very clearly within her power.
Dumbass - "Can anyone show how this law..."
IN order for there to be such a law, there needs to be a Senate Bill, a House Bill, and the bill sent to the President.
Moron - DADT isn't a law.
You really don't know what you're talking about at all. Your claim that I'm "ignorant" is too ironic.
Sadly, you just can't grasp the issues at hand. You don't even know what the issues *are*..
Dumbass - You've proven you don't understand the Constitution, yet again.
Fairly Reasonable Guy - “DADT isn’t a law” Huh?
Your ignorance just pegged out the absurdo meter man.
You are clearly unqualified to give any opinion on this issue.
DADT most certainly is a federal law. 10 U.S.C. § 654
It was signed into law by President Clinton in 1993.
Moron - My god you are ignorant.
It's not ANY type of law, much less a federal one. It's a Department of Defense POLICY. (rolls eyes icon)
Fairly Reasonable Guy - Good grief, how many totally ignorant people do we have on this forum?
DADT IS A FEDERAL LAW.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/10/654.htmlAgain, it was signed into law by Clinton in 1993.
Moron - What's worse is that you're even MORE ignorant than him. 10 U.S.C. § 654 : US Code - Section 654: POLICY concerning homosexuality in the armed forces
Fairly Reasonable Guy - LMAO. Anything in the US Code is federal law.
"Policy" is the title of that subheading. It's still a law.
If it was just a military policy Obama could have gotten rid of it on day 1, since he is the CiC.
That's the whole reason why the debate in Congress has been going on over whether to repeal it? It's a law so it required legislative (or court) action to repeal it.
Random Idiot - Now this is FUNNY...Your link states POLICY....NOT law...read it again...NO where in there does it say LAW!
Fairly Reasonable Guy - Holy crap!
Everyone on this forum is a damn idiot!
DADT is a federal LAW. It was signed into law by Clinton.
Good lord I'm out of here, I can't take this level of ignorance. It's useless to even have a discussion on this when people start from this level of ignorance.
Informed Person - So, Article III makes it clear: This judge is not acting improperly.
Dumbass - Yeee gawd you're thick. Okay, let's take baby steps. Moron asked Informed Person a question which hasn't been answered. I'll relay it to you.
House bills have an HR suffix
Senate bills have an SR suffix
Before any bill can be signed into LAW by the President they must pass the House and Senate. What are the House and Senate bill numbers that passed DADT and the President signed into law?
Fairly Reasonable Guy - You need a history lesson.
http://www.cmrlink.org/HMilitary.asp?docID=336DADT was signed into law by Clinton in 1993, yes after passing the House and Senate.
That's the whole reason Congress has been debating whether to repeal it. It is a federal statute. That's why it was up to Congress and not the President.
The President has control over the military, if it was just a military directive he could have changed that anytime.
Informed Person (a bit confused) - I answered the question. It was never signed into law. It was added as policy in the Defense Authorization Act in 1994.
Fairly Reasonable Guy - It was added as an amendment to that bill, which was SIGNED INTO LAW BY CLINTON in 1993!
What is so freaking hard to understand about this?
The US Code is federal law. DADT is a federal statute.
good grief this is not that hard.
"Originally Posted by
Fairly Reasonable GuyHoly crap!
Everyone on this forum is a damn idiot!
DADT is a federal LAW. It was signed into law by Clinton.
Good lord I'm out of here, I can't take this level of ignorance.
It's useless to even have a discussion on this when people start from this level of ignorance."
Stupid Moderator To The Rescue! - Well since you are too stupid to read and adhere to our rules I will help you out with your departure....
Banned for abuse and contempt of the entire board.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
