just to re-iterate, the topic of the thread was a 1996 document signed by the then undersecretary of defense for personnel and readiness listing homosexuality as a mental disorder. as has been alleged in thread after thread, any action by the government can be laid at the feet of the president. in this case, in this specific case, evidently the president doesn't see homosexuality as a mental disorder and his administration has acted accordingly. bravo, mr. president.
Damn! I had a good zinger for this one too:
"Well, if anyone knows disorder, it's certainly the Pentagon."
Okay, so maybe a mediocre zinger.
It's awfully easy to get a "bravo" out of you, papa...and it's VERY disingenuous of you to try to blame the 1996 policy on Clinton--it's well-known and CITED IN THE ARTCILE that Clinton tried to lift the ban but was met with such opposition that made such a policy politically impossible.
And what does Clinton have to do with Bush anyway? GW has done exactly what he's wanted and I would think that he'd want to get as far from Clinton as possible, but I guess in this case, he agrees with him.
And why is it "alleged" that "any action by the government can be laid at the feet of the president"? If it's alleged, then where does the buck stop?
I'll reserve my, "bravo, Mr. President" for his next Rose Garden Address. You know, the one where he's going to walk out and say, "you know, I was wrong; homosexuality isn't a threat to marriage and I no longer support a federal marriage amendment."
lildogs, your argument contradicts itself.
the topic of the thread is not the ban on gays in the military, but the listing of homosexuality as a mental disorder by the pentagon.
the document doing so was signed in 1996 under then president clinton.
that document was de-certified in 2006 under current president bush.
and it's very disingenuous of you to try to blame the 1996 policy on clinton
and why is it "alleged" that "any action by the government can be laid at the feet of the president"? if it's alleged, then where does the buck stop?
so, if the buck stops at the president, then the 1996 policy can be laid at clinton's feet just as the 2006 reversal can be attributed to george bush. right?
babysteps, bway, babysteps.
Bush deserves no bravos. He had nothing to do with taking this "babystep."
All Bush and his cohorts have ever done in regard to gay men and lesbians is vilify, dehumanize and scapegoat us.
Your "bravo" itself is insulting.
just. stop. talking. about me.
go on, you can do it. take it one day at a time. even easier: do it one thread at a time.
just say: will. not. talk. about. [papalovesmambo]... will. ignore. what. he. says. about. [b]ush. or cheney. or karl. [or bill.]
then pat yourself on the head and give yourself a cookie.
you can do it, [paljoey]! you can do it!
Supreme Court Blocks Bush, Gitmo War Trials
Jun 29 10:21 AM US/Eastern
By GINA HOLLAND
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON
The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that President Bush overstepped his authority in ordering military war crimes trials for Guantanamo Bay detainees.
The ruling, a rebuke to the administration and its aggressive anti- terror policies, was written by Justice John Paul Stevens, who said the proposed trials were illegal under U.S. law and Geneva conventions.
The case focused on Salim Ahmed Hamdan, a Yemeni who worked as a bodyguard and driver for Osama bin Laden. Hamdan, 36, has spent four years in the U.S. prison in Cuba. He faces a single count of conspiring against U.S. citizens from 1996 to November 2001.
Two years ago, the court rejected Bush's claim to have the authority to seize and detain terrorism suspects and indefinitely deny them access to courts or lawyers. In this followup case, the justices focused solely on the issue of trials for some of the men.
The vote was split 5-3, with moderate Justice Anthony M. Kennedy joining the court's liberal members in ruling against the Bush administration. Chief Justice John Roberts, named to the lead the court last September by Bush, was sidelined in the case because as an appeals court judge he had backed the government over Hamdan.
Thursday's ruling overturned that decision.
Supreme Court Blocks Bush, Gitmo War Trials
This is now my new sig;
Dabadoll: Gotta agree with the lame sentiment. Maybe all the homosexuals should go on disability under the whole “mental disorder” label and live off government money. That would be ironic.
DG: If all the gays in the Navy did that, the Navy would sink.
I think this Supreme Court decision warrants its own thread, preferably one with no cross-talk.
kinda what i thought too. i was wondering how it belonged in this thread.
Yes, papa, the listing was in 1996, but WHY was it listed as such? If Clinton had truly had his way, the ban would have been lifted and such a listing would have been moot. That's what I mean and I suspect that's what you know I mean, unless you're far less intelligent than I assume you to be.
And I do blame Clinton for not sticking to his policy and sign the executive order and be done with it--it was a huge disappointment to his gay supporters.
And removing homosexuality from the list is not a reversal--a reversal would be to lift the ban.
What is this?:
"just. stop. talking. about me.
go on, you can do it. take it one day at a time. even easier: do it one thread at a time.
just say: will. not. talk. about. [papalovesmambo]... will. ignore. what. he. says. about. [b]ush. or cheney. or karl. [or bill.]
then pat yourself on the head and give yourself a cookie.
you can do it, [paljoey]! you can do it! "
If that's good advice for PJ, then it's just as good for you. ignore. what. we. say. about bush. cheney. clinton. Then you can have your cookie and your head pat as well--you're two of a kind whether you like it or not.
lil, i...wow. just wow. i hereby coin the term oblivosity.
Videos