#26
Posted: 10/21/10 at 11:34pm
Obama administration preparing to appeal DADT ruling. — Page 2
#27
Posted: 10/21/10 at 11:38pm
Namo, I actually think he's passed the "it's too late, baby" territory and solidified it with this. I don't know how he can think we would ever trust him again after this. Imagine if the 2012 debates were taking place now and he was asked by his opponent why he blocked something he campaigned to repeal. The man is a liar, plain and simple and with this he's shown his true colors. He never had any intention of helping us. At least with Bush we knew we were going to get screwed. This one flat out lied to us and screwed us. It's like political rape.
#28
Posted: 10/21/10 at 11:46pm
In response to his video: HOW DARE HE!
How dare he tell Americas LGBT kids that it gets better when he's NOT MAKING IT BETTER. The person who has the chance to make these kids, us, ALL gays equal is doing everything in his power to do nothing, hence making others feel this bullying and harassment is acceptable. His sentiments mean nothing. They mean less than nothing and I can't remember the last time I was this offended. My blood is boiling.
How dare he tell Americas LGBT kids that it gets better when he's NOT MAKING IT BETTER. The person who has the chance to make these kids, us, ALL gays equal is doing everything in his power to do nothing, hence making others feel this bullying and harassment is acceptable. His sentiments mean nothing. They mean less than nothing and I can't remember the last time I was this offended. My blood is boiling.
#29
Posted: 10/21/10 at 11:49pm
The responses on YouTube to his video have been, for the most part, harsh. Scathing, even.
I think he deserves all of the criticism and more.
I think he deserves all of the criticism and more.
"Two drifters off to see the world. There's such a lot of world to see. . ."
#30
Posted: 10/22/10 at 12:23am
Defense Secretary Gates just released a memo that limits the discharge of gay military personnel. The only way it can happen now is if the Secretary of the Army, Navy, or Air Force consults with the Pentagon legal counsel and undersecretary for personnel, and all three agree to the discharge.
I'm in a "too late" state of mind about Obama, too, but this is nonetheless positive news. It sounds like a de facto moratorium on DADT discharges, or something pretty close.
NYTimes
I'm in a "too late" state of mind about Obama, too, but this is nonetheless positive news. It sounds like a de facto moratorium on DADT discharges, or something pretty close.
NYTimes
#31
Posted: 10/22/10 at 12:33am
Plum--someone told me that just last week, Obama's Department of Justice refused to appeal a lower court decision in case called Boardley v. U.S. Department of the Interior.
Know anything about that? Supposedly it shoots a hole in the president's claim that he "has to" defend the law through the appeal process.
Know anything about that? Supposedly it shoots a hole in the president's claim that he "has to" defend the law through the appeal process.
#32
Posted: 10/23/10 at 7:13pm
As I understand it, Boardely didn't challenge any law passed by Congress - it challenged a regulation of the Department of the Interior, which is part of the executive branch.
I can't say I know the fine points of how Justice determines this stuff, because most of my interactions with that department have been immigration-related, but my quick opinion is that the executive branch can decide which bits of executive branch regs it feels like appealing, but things get more troubled when it starts picking and choosing between legislative branch laws. It's a separation of powers issue.
I can't say I know the fine points of how Justice determines this stuff, because most of my interactions with that department have been immigration-related, but my quick opinion is that the executive branch can decide which bits of executive branch regs it feels like appealing, but things get more troubled when it starts picking and choosing between legislative branch laws. It's a separation of powers issue.
#33
Posted: 10/23/10 at 7:20pm
My eyes are crossing at the thought of people tracking down Justice's every appellate decision to point out possible "hypocrisies" in what it decides to appeal and what it decides to leave alone. That's...kind of a ridiculous way to go about things.
But that doesn't mean I disagree with the underlying sentiment.
"I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection."
Letter From a Birmingham Jail
But that doesn't mean I disagree with the underlying sentiment.
"I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection."
Letter From a Birmingham Jail
#34
Posted: 10/23/10 at 8:03pm
I can understand the theoretical argument that the DOJ is making on DADT, but I still don't like it and it leaves a very nasty taste in my mouth.
If Obama stops the discharges by executive order alone, and does not seek a legislative solution, then the discharges can be reinstated with another occupant in the white house. The fear is that by using an executive order he would give political cover to those who do not want to overturn DADT. But political tactics do not help those who want to serve, or who are being discharged wrongfully based upon bad law.
If DOJ does not appeal the decision, it will most likely result in another district court ruling DADT constitutional, and then you have to appeal the rulings to get some consistency.
I do understand the issue with respecting the other branches of government. While many on the left railed against Bush for his "Imperial Presidency" we want similar actions by Obama - and he is just not that guy. He is deliberative, and seems to have great respect how government is supposed to work (which is not how it actually works these days), as well as general respect for the role of the other two branches of government.
But, at this point, I think that even with the appeal, he should suspend all discharges pending the December Report. He should say that while this is the law, we believe it to be unconstitutional. He should push both a short term and a long term solution simultaneously because it is the right thing to do.
Plum, what you posted is just about perfect.
If Obama stops the discharges by executive order alone, and does not seek a legislative solution, then the discharges can be reinstated with another occupant in the white house. The fear is that by using an executive order he would give political cover to those who do not want to overturn DADT. But political tactics do not help those who want to serve, or who are being discharged wrongfully based upon bad law.
If DOJ does not appeal the decision, it will most likely result in another district court ruling DADT constitutional, and then you have to appeal the rulings to get some consistency.
I do understand the issue with respecting the other branches of government. While many on the left railed against Bush for his "Imperial Presidency" we want similar actions by Obama - and he is just not that guy. He is deliberative, and seems to have great respect how government is supposed to work (which is not how it actually works these days), as well as general respect for the role of the other two branches of government.
But, at this point, I think that even with the appeal, he should suspend all discharges pending the December Report. He should say that while this is the law, we believe it to be unconstitutional. He should push both a short term and a long term solution simultaneously because it is the right thing to do.
Plum, what you posted is just about perfect.
#35
Posted: 10/23/10 at 8:53pm
I do SO love Dr. King.
#36
Posted: 10/23/10 at 10:44pm
If DOJ does not appeal the decision, it will most likely result in another district court ruling DADT constitutional, and then you have to appeal the rulings to get some consistency.
That's a really, really important legal point. Appealing isn't just a way of saying, "we like DADT"; it's a way of getting a higher court to rule on the issue. When you think about it, it's a bit mad that one District Court judge can put a stopper on all DADT enforcement for the military. This is a trial-level court we're talking about here; it's not even a panel of judges. The higher the courts deciding on this, the more legitimacy any decision has.
This really needs to be settled before we get to a circuit split that requires Supreme Court scrutiny, though. The timeline for a litigation-based takedown of DADT is just too attenuated at this point. We can go faster than that legislatively. Or we would, if Congress had anything resembling moral courage.
That's a really, really important legal point. Appealing isn't just a way of saying, "we like DADT"; it's a way of getting a higher court to rule on the issue. When you think about it, it's a bit mad that one District Court judge can put a stopper on all DADT enforcement for the military. This is a trial-level court we're talking about here; it's not even a panel of judges. The higher the courts deciding on this, the more legitimacy any decision has.
This really needs to be settled before we get to a circuit split that requires Supreme Court scrutiny, though. The timeline for a litigation-based takedown of DADT is just too attenuated at this point. We can go faster than that legislatively. Or we would, if Congress had anything resembling moral courage.
#37
Posted: 10/24/10 at 1:32am
Exactly Plum.
I sometime think folks understandably do not appreciate how little legal weight a district court ruling has for anyone other than the direct participants.
It can be considered, but is not binding on any other court, and with something like DADT, which is clearly national in scope, to put all of your marbles in a Federal District Court ruling means you will lose your marbles.
Like many though, I am not concerned about the 9th Circuit but the SCOTUS. This Supreme Court is so crazy leaning to the right, that I think everything is on Kennedy's shoulders - For Prop 8, DOMA and DADT. I think Prop 8, DOMA and DADT will all be overturned by a 5/4 vote - but I think it all comes down to Kennedy.
I sometime think folks understandably do not appreciate how little legal weight a district court ruling has for anyone other than the direct participants.
It can be considered, but is not binding on any other court, and with something like DADT, which is clearly national in scope, to put all of your marbles in a Federal District Court ruling means you will lose your marbles.
Like many though, I am not concerned about the 9th Circuit but the SCOTUS. This Supreme Court is so crazy leaning to the right, that I think everything is on Kennedy's shoulders - For Prop 8, DOMA and DADT. I think Prop 8, DOMA and DADT will all be overturned by a 5/4 vote - but I think it all comes down to Kennedy.
Updated On: 10/24/10 at 01:32 AM
#38
Posted: 10/24/10 at 9:43am
We can go faster than that legislatively. Or we would, if Congress had anything resembling moral courage.
We had 2 years for that to happen and it didn't. Now it won't. No one knows what the makeup of Congress will be like next week, but it's unlikely to be MORE pro-gay or even AS pro-gay.
And the president will do nothing, for either of these issues.
Gay rights will have to happen through the courts.
We had 2 years for that to happen and it didn't. Now it won't. No one knows what the makeup of Congress will be like next week, but it's unlikely to be MORE pro-gay or even AS pro-gay.
And the president will do nothing, for either of these issues.
Gay rights will have to happen through the courts.
#39
Posted: 10/25/10 at 9:00am
Even if the Dems keep the Senate, their majority will be slim, and the GOP has promised to continue to filibuster the repeal of DADT, so it will be nearly impossible to get it through Congress.
"It does me no injury for my neighbour to say there are 20 gods or no god. It neither picks my pocket, nor breaks my leg."
-- Thomas Jefferson
#40
Posted: 11/8/10 at 9:50am
"The drive in Congress to repeal the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy appears all but lost for the foreseeable future, with action unlikely this year and even less likely once Republicans take charge of the House in January."
Link to article.
Link to article.
#41
Posted: 11/8/10 at 10:10am
So DADT is dead in the water, according to the WSJ.
Exactly as Obama planned all along, I'd say. He promised Fierce Advocacy, not Fierce Action.
If DADT continues, I think it is the duty of each and every gay man and woman to come out loud and clear and demand discharge. Defending a country that so aggressively denies basic equality is foolish in the extreme.
Exactly as Obama planned all along, I'd say. He promised Fierce Advocacy, not Fierce Action.
If DADT continues, I think it is the duty of each and every gay man and woman to come out loud and clear and demand discharge. Defending a country that so aggressively denies basic equality is foolish in the extreme.
"If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about the answers." Thomas Pynchon, GRAVITY'S RAINBOW
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." Philip K. Dick
My blog: http://www.roscoewrites.blogspot.com/
Updated On: 11/8/10 at 10:10 AM
Tickets From $59
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $71
Tickets From $95