![]() |
|
Current Events Help understand the world by talking about things happening in it |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
![]() |
#1 | |
Person who doesn't update the user title
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Bottom lands of the Missoula floods
Posts: 6,402
|
The Obama Administration is not shooting themselves in the foot...
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
“Hypocrisy: prejudice with a halo”
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Savannah, Georgia
Posts: 21,393
|
I don't need you to quote the oath. Obama promised to do away with DADT. The simple solution would have been for the CIC to issue an order the day after he took office. The military does not need some orderly transition. It is no different from the integration of blacks and women. There were plenty of top down orders that came from the leadership that people didn't like and don't like. But you take your marching orders and make the appropriate change. Screw the lower court rulings, they are not needed and I don't think carry much weight when it comes to establishing policy and procedure in the military.
__________________
Anyone but the this most fuked up President in History in 2012! |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
Person who doesn't update the user title
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Bottom lands of the Missoula floods
Posts: 6,402
|
Well, the oath Obama took is the basis for what is happening now.
There is a pretty good editorial in the NY Times today about this business, and another possible route the CIC could possibly take. But there does seem to be unanimity among the legal dogs that since DADT is in a law passed by Congrees, it is not like the integration of Blacks and women in the services to be voided by executive order. At least that is how I understand and accept what is going on now. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | |
I think this line's mostly filler.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: DC
Posts: 13,575
|
Quote:
It's possible that if he had issued the executive order, there would be less impetus for Congress to act, so maybe it's better in the long run to not issue the order. The same might be true for the judicial order. It's a lower level court, so it can be overruled. If the Justice Department had declined to appeal, Congress may have thought that there was no longer any hurry to repeal the law, only to have another case come through later and put it back in effect. Appealing to the Supreme Court is tricky. While it would be best for them to get to the Supreme Court and lose, that puts them in the position of actively supporting a Constitutional right for the government to discriminate against gays, which is not a defensible position. And given the makeup of the court, they could win, which would be the worst outcome. Even if Congress repealed the law, there would be Supreme Court precedent that homophobia is a valid government position. I would have thought that leaving the anti-DADT judicial order in place might have been the best option. Enter the Supreme Court battle with months of openly gay military service already in place.
__________________
_________________ |...............| We live in the nick of times. | Len 17, Wid 3 | |_______________| [pics] |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 | ||
barely disguised asshole, keeper of all that is holy.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 23,401
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
"like strapping a pillow on a bull in a china shop" Bullitt |
||
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|