Obama and the Gay Military...

[BobTheDonkey]

The problem, of course, lies with a majority of the American people. The politicians and demagogues are enabled by and cater to these people.

Obama refuses to lead on these issues. He will be found deficient by history as a result.

While Obama was quite happy to accept support from gays, he has never embraced civil rights. He remains opposed to gay marriage. He is afraid to lead the military away from bigotry. He's already failed in my opinion.

I would argue that we're still early in his Presidency. There are only so many battles he can fight at any given time (given that the Republicans are staunchly against anything he suggests). UHC affects far more people than removing DADT - and while he could do away with it simply by Executive Order, he also promised that he would not excessively use EO's to accomplish his goals. The process for removing DADT has been put underway and is making inroads (a few months ago, top Pentagon Officers discussed DADT and recommended removing it).

I wouldn't say Obama has 'failed' at this undertaking - he's playing it smart. One issue at a time guys. He has to keep the Democratic base that allows him to push his agenda - and if he were to simply just change everything, not only would it be overwhelming to Him, his Cabinet, and the rest of the Gov't - it would be difficult to control the spin on it.

There's Politics afoot

 

[Complexity]

As one of the gays you are showing solidarity with, I ask you not to do this. Bill does not represent the US military and the culture is changing and becoming more accepting. It is not fully there yet, but change takes time, especially in such large organizations. your solidarity and openness will, if you do take a military contracting position, only help to expedite the change and make things better faster.

I spent most of my life pretending to fit in and accepting (through silence) the strictures that a bigoted populace enjoyed inflicting upon us.

I will no longer accept any strictures.

This country does not deserve the contributions and service of gays, lesbians, or anyone else that it treats with contempt.

Period.

I will do nothing to further the interests of this government or the people that it purports to represent and who enable it in its crimes and misadventures.

They don't want me, they don't get me.

 

[cwalner]

I spent most of my life pretending to fit in and accepting (through silence) the strictures that a bigoted populace enjoyed inflicting upon us.

I will no longer accept any strictures.

This country does not deserve the contributions and service of gays, lesbians, or anyone else that it treats with contempt.

Period.

I will do nothing to further the interests of this government or the people that it purports to represent and who enable it in its crimes and misadventures.

They don't want me, they don't get me.

Sorry, I misunderstood your earlier post as a straight showing solidarity, not as a pissed off fellow queer. While I obviously have taken a different position for my life, I understand your anger, and thus your position.

I still think the best way to change is from within by leading by example and showing them we are nothing to fear.

 

[Complexity]

I would argue that we're still early in his Presidency. There are only so many battles he can fight at any given time (given that the Republicans are staunchly against anything he suggests). UHC affects far more people than removing DADT - and while he could do away with it simply by Executive Order, he also promised that he would not excessively use EO's to accomplish his goals. The process for removing DADT has been put underway and is making inroads (a few months ago, top Pentagon Officers discussed DADT and recommended removing it).

I wouldn't say Obama has 'failed' at this undertaking - he's playing it smart. One issue at a time guys. He has to keep the Democratic base that allows him to push his agenda - and if he were to simply just change everything, not only would it be overwhelming to Him, his Cabinet, and the rest of the Gov't - it would be difficult to control the spin on it.

There's Politics afoot

I disagree. He shot his wad. He will never again have the legislative support that he wasted over the past year. This was his chance and he blew it.

 

[Complexity]

Sorry, I misunderstood your earlier post as a straight showing solidarity, not as a pissed off fellow queer. While I obviously have taken a different position for my life, I understand your anger, and thus your position.

I still think the best way to change is from within by leading by example and showing them we are nothing to fear.

A terminally pissed off fellow queer.




I seem to have lost all interest in and patience for attempting to persuade.

I don't mind that you want to try that path, but I don't think it is right for me any longer.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

I disagree. He shot his wad. He will never again have the legislative support that he wasted over the past year. This was his chance and he blew it.

Ok. Seriously. Chill out. This is (was?) a friendly discussion. No need to be combative. We're, mostly, on the same side.

You're frustrated because the U.S. doesn't treat you the same as everyone else - I get that. But for some reason you think your cause is greater than the cause of any other - even a cause that extends far beyond your (relatively) small group.

Obama doesn't need a great amount of political backing to repeal DADT as there's no real laws he must have passed - he does, however, have to play his hand right. He has an incredibly strong amount of backing - enough backing to accomplish something that's not been accomplished for many generations.

Of course, this just brings us to: even if we agree that he has squandered his political backing - which of the two issues is the greater one: One that affords rights to the entire population of the Nation or one that affects a (relatively) much smaller percentage?

Give it time.

 

[cwalner]

Ok. Seriously. Chill out. This is (was?) a friendly discussion. No need to be combative. We're, mostly, on the same side.

Are we in the same thread. For the last 10 pages (at least) this 'discussion' has been Bill Thompson making stupid comments about DADT and everybody else piling on him, or just outright mocking him. Fun, but hardly what I would consider a 'friendly discussion'

I was where Complexity is about 15-20 years ago. Age has mellowed me, as I imagine it will mellow Complexity. The movement needs both the pissed-off firebrands like him and the wise old farts like me.

 

[Complexity]

Ok. Seriously. Chill out. This is (was?) a friendly discussion. No need to be combative. We're, mostly, on the same side.

You're frustrated because the U.S. doesn't treat you the same as everyone else - I get that. But for some reason you think your cause is greater than the cause of any other - even a cause that extends far beyond your (relatively) small group.

Obama doesn't need a great amount of political backing to repeal DADT as there's no real laws he must have passed - he does, however, have to play his hand right. He has an incredibly strong amount of backing - enough backing to accomplish something that's not been accomplished for many generations.

Of course, this just brings us to: even if we agree that he has squandered his political backing - which of the two issues is the greater one: One that affords rights to the entire population of the Nation or one that affects a (relatively) much smaller percentage?

Give it time.

Trust me, this is me being chilled. Still a friendly conversation.

It isn't just Obama's dismal record on civil rights. I think that he has failed on at least half a dozen major issues that have nothing in particular to do with gays. Any of these issues is sufficient for me to withhold my support from Obama and his creatures in congress. Taken together, Obama is already a grave disappointment. Since I don't think his behavior will improve, I am not anticipating voting for him or any of his crew that have disappointed me.

I will never vote for a Republican candidate at any level, but that doesn't mean that I'll vote for many Democratic candidates, either. I'll continue judge them individually, but few have made the cut.

I hope that your next-to-last sentence is unworthy of you.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

Are we in the same thread. For the last 10 pages (at least) this 'discussion' has been Bill Thompson making stupid comments about DADT and everybody else piling on him, or just outright mocking him. Fun, but hardly what I would consider a 'friendly discussion'

I was where Complexity is about 15-20 years ago. Age has mellowed me, as I imagine it will mellow Complexity. The movement needs both the pissed-off firebrands like him and the wise old farts like me.

I've had Bill on ignore for the past...oh...how many pages are in this thread?

 

[Complexity]

Are we in the same thread. For the last 10 pages (at least) this 'discussion' has been Bill Thompson making stupid comments about DADT and everybody else piling on him, or just outright mocking him. Fun, but hardly what I would consider a 'friendly discussion'

I was where Complexity is about 15-20 years ago. Age has mellowed me, as I imagine it will mellow Complexity. The movement needs both the pissed-off firebrands like him and the wise old farts like me.

I'm in my 50s and don't expect to get much past 60, so I suspect this is as mellow as I'll get. I've been getting harsher and less accomodating over the past few years.

I've been reading this thread today. Been gone for about two years and just catching up now. I've had more than enough of Bill Thompson for today.

 

[cwalner]

I've had Bill on ignore for the past...oh...how many pages are in this thread?

I don't have anybody on ignore. Its just how I roll. Although, I briefly considered making an exception for Alferd_Packer. Not because I thought he was stupid, or mean, or a troll (he is none of these), but for some of the horribly nasty images he put in my head on the Orly Taitz birther thread <shudders>. There are some things you just don't say, not even in jest!!!.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

Trust me, this is me being chilled. Still a friendly conversation.

It isn't just Obama's dismal record on civil rights. I think that he has failed on at least half a dozen major issues that have nothing in particular to do with gays. Any of these issues is sufficient for me to withhold my support from Obama and his creatures in congress. Taken together, Obama is already a grave disappointment. Since I don't think his behavior will improve, I am not anticipating voting for him or any of his crew that have disappointed me.

I will never vote for a Republican candidate at any level, but that doesn't mean that I'll vote for many Democratic candidates, either. I'll continue judge them individually, but few have made the cut.

I hope that your next-to-last sentence is unworthy of you.

Only if you take it out of context. ETA:

I am not advocating the way Gay/Lesbians are treated. What I said is that he can only focus on one major issue at a time. Healthcare was also a campaign promise, one that involved providing a right to healthcare for all 330million people in the U.S. Even if he squandered his support, it's still a major improvement in civil rights.

Again, I'm not stating that repealing DADT should be dropped by the wayside. I'm explaining that Obama just spent over a year pushing through his healthcare and economic reforms. You think it would be better for him to have squandered his political backing on Gay/Lesbian rights. Fair enough.

I just think you're selling him short. He's not done, he has 2 1/2 more years before his term is up. These things you want done take time, thus, I say again, give it time.

 

[ponderingturtle]

Obama doesn't need a great amount of political backing to repeal DADT as there's no real laws he must have passed - he does, however, have to play his hand right. He has an incredibly strong amount of backing - enough backing to accomplish something that's not been accomplished for many generations.

This seems to be questionable. It is a law, and properly should be repealed not just not enforced. I am not sure if he can just have it not enforced, it is a law.

 

[Complexity]

So why all this problem with gay men seeing your penis? If you're been in the military, you've presumably showered with other men who've seen it.

I think that many homophobes are afraid that gay guy's won't scope them out in the showers and find them interesting.

Not being that interesting to the opposite sex, I think they've been harboring the hope that someone will find them attractive.

They prefer that the illusion of their desirability remain unbusted, however distasteful they pretend to find the gay option.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

This seems to be questionable. It is a law, and properly should be repealed not just not enforced. I am not sure if he can just have it not enforced, it is a law.

Lame duck, he can (and might) .

Let's be dreadfully honest though, right now Obama has the entire Republican party against him - and not just because of the Healthcare issue. They've been against him on everything he's accomplished/tried to accomplish. I think it shows remarkable stamina and support that he's accomplished so much this soon in his term.

The DADT repeal bill will be another polarizing issue (of course) and must be approached in such a manner. Throwing more than one of these polarizing issues on the fire at a time is unwise.

 

[cwalner]

Lame duck, he can (and might) .

Let's be dreadfully honest though, right now Obama has the entire Republican party against him - and not just because of the Healthcare issue. They've been against him on everything he's accomplished/tried to accomplish. I think it shows remarkable stamina and support that he's accomplished so much this soon in his term.

The DADT repeal bill will be another polarizing issue (of course) and must be approached in such a manner. Throwing more than one of these polarizing issues on the fire at a time is unwise.

Let us not forget that when Clinton did address the gays in the military issue early on, the result was not what he or gays wanted, but the comprise that we are now debating, DADT. it also had the result of energizing the Republicans against him and preventing him from getting his plan for UHC passed 15 years ago. I don't think that these facts are entirely lost on Obama.

 

[BobTheDonkey]

Let us not forget that when Clinton did address the gays in the military issue early on, the result was not what he or gays wanted, but the comprise that we are now debating, DADT. it also had the result of energizing the Republicans against him and preventing him from getting his plan for UHC passed 15 years ago. I don't think that these facts are entirely lost on Obama.

What's that saying about History: Those who don't know it are doomed to repeat it?

As we've seen, the Right is up in arms about UHC...but at least it's passed. I think now that the biggie is through, we'll see Obama start tackling the other stuff.

Again, the process is already underway. The heads of the Pentagon have already agreed that there would likely be no detriment to moral of the troops and (I may be wrong, but I do believe) a study is underway to verify this (?).

 

[Complexity]

Only if you take it out of context. ETA:

I am not advocating the way Gay/Lesbians are treated. What I said is that he can only focus on one major issue at a time. Healthcare was also a campaign promise, one that involved providing a right to healthcare for all 330million people in the U.S. Even if he squandered his support, it's still a major improvement in civil rights.

Again, I'm not stating that repealing DADT should be dropped by the wayside. I'm explaining that Obama just spent over a year pushing through his healthcare and economic reforms. You think it would be better for him to have squandered his political backing on Gay/Lesbian rights. Fair enough.

I just think you're selling him short. He's not done, he has 2 1/2 more years before his term is up. These things you want done take time, thus, I say again, give it time.

What economic reforms? He's helped continue Bush's disasterous policies, helped push this country immensely into debt, and further consolidated power in federal hands.

His healthcare reform? I'm not at all impressed. I think it was very hastily done, catered to special interests, and will most likely make things worse in most areas.

He persists in two wars that are simply bad. Graft, abuse, waste, and criminal behavior continue to flourish under his administration.

He has done nothing to reduce or eliminate the stranglehold that fundamentalist xians have on many aspect of the military, including the military academies.

He has continued and encouraged the expansion practices of the evilly misnamed 'Patriot Act'. He continues the Bush/Cheney strategy of reducing rights and freedoms in this country.

His administration has continue to persecute those involved in medical marijuana.

Transparency in government? Where?

What change? He's behaving more like Bush 3 than an agent of good and effective change.

I could go on, but I hope this persuades you that I have concerns with Obama other than his anti-gay views and behavior and his broken promises.

I don't judge the importance of a cause by the number of people that it appears to affect. I'd feel as strongly about civil rights if only one person were directly affected, or even if no one living were directly affected but those in a future generation might be.

 

[cwalner]

What economic reforms? He's helped continue Bush's disasterous policies, helped push this country immensely into debt, and further consolidated power in federal hands.

His healthcare reform? I'm not at all impressed. I think it was very hastily done, catered to special interests, and will most likely make things worse in most areas.

He persists in two wars that are simply bad. Graft, abuse, waste, and criminal behavior continue to flourish under his administration.

He has done nothing to reduce or eliminate the stranglehold that fundamentalist xians have on many aspect of the military, including the military academies.

He has continued and encouraged the expansion practices of the evilly misnamed 'Patriot Act'. He continues the Bush/Cheney strategy of reducing rights and freedoms in this country.

His administration has continue to persecute those involved in medical marijuana.

Transparency in government? Where?

What change? He's behaving more like Bush 3 than an agent of good and effective change.

I could go on, but I hope this persuades you that I have concerns with Obama other than his anti-gay views and behavior and his broken promises.

I don't judge the importance of a cause by the number of people that it appears to affect. I'd feel as strongly about civil rights if only one person were directly affected, or even if no one living were directly affected but those in a future generation might be.

Ah, youth! How I miss thee.

 

[Complexity]

Again, the process is already underway. The heads of the Pentagon have already agreed that there would likely be no detriment to moral of the troops and (I may be wrong, but I do believe) a study is underway to verify this (?).

The study is a delaying mechanism, nothing more.

The U.S. military will never do the right thing on its own, and Obama lacks the moral fiber to lead it and congress into better times.