Last week when the Ninth Circuit federal court told the government to stop enforcing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, the Pentagon reportedly stopped discharging homos and started allowing openly gay soldiers to enlist (though many recruiting offices continue to turn them away).
The White House had ten days to decide whether or not to defend Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell in federal court. But the Department of Justice just filed an emergency motion asking the 9th Circuit court it to reconsider last week’s order. Why the heck would Obama do that, unless he wanted to get political credit for the repeal process rather than letting the glory go to the judicial system and to the Log Cabin Republicans who carried the lawsuit through to begin with? Hmmm…
Cam
Cue all the Obamabots and the HRC-ers to come in here and tell us how appealing the courts stikedown of DADT is in reality a fantastic thing for the gay community and that Obama is really only doing this for our best interests.
Fact is, if Congress repeals it, then a GOP Congress could reinstate it. If the courts strike it down it’s dead and burried forever.
christopher di spirito
Oh, that Barry. What a worthless piece of shit.
grayyoung
I am an officer in the military and I think this is actually a really good move on the Administration’s part. Here is why: There is no precedent by any federal court that yet distinguishes Gays as a group deserving higher scrutiny because of a history of discrimination against the class of people. That is the argument the admin is making in dropping the DOMA defense. Appealing this case so a ruling is actually passed down by the court will give it the opportunity to set that precedent, which they have already indicated that they will likely do. In a worst case scenario, in which the court rules that it is constitutional, the status quo will be the law, certification will occur and repeal will be complete. Basically the Obama administration is fishing for support from a federal court on the argument that gays are a protected class. Here is this argument in a much more fleshed out legal version on towleroad: http://www.towleroad.com/2011/07/dadtwaldman.html
DJM
Legal privileges obtained legislatively are less weighty than basic human rights defined by courts. Rights defined by courts tend to be all-encompassing. Obama has always wanted gay privileges defines through legislation, and not addressed by the U.S. Constitution. Legislation protecting gays could later be repealed. The U.S. Constitution, on the other hand, could not be repealed at a later date. Therefore, Obama is always going to ask courts to put off court decisions until the decisions can by handled through legislation.
ewe
Vote third party. Do it for integrity if for nothing else.
CJ
I prefer the courts striking it down. History will more easily show that discrimination occurred against the LGBT community BY our own federal government.
xjt
Barry the Republican is even worse than I thought he’d be. And I thought he’d be pretty damn bad.
Cam
@grayyoung: said…
“I am an officer in the military and I think this is actually a really good move on the Administration’s part. Here is why: There is no precedent by any federal court that yet distinguishes Gays as a group deserving higher scrutiny because of a history of discrimination against the class of people. That is the argument the admin is making in dropping the DOMA defense. Appealing this case so a ruling is actually passed down by the court will give it the opportunity to set that precedent, which they have already indicated that they will likely do”
________________________________________________
The courts have already made that ruling. If the Administration doesn’t applea the decision, then the courts ruling sticks.
Dave
The good news is that whether they challenge the ruling or not, it at least doesn’t lose any value as a precedent.
The case has gone as far as it will go. Under their own rules, there’s no way the SCOTUS will hear a case when there’s a legislative solution in the works. And while the case will be moot once the legislative repeal is complete, the Ninth Court’s ruling will stand. That will make it binding precedent in the 9th and persuasive precedent elsewhere should a later Congress try to reinstate it.
That’s not as solid as a SC affirmation, of course, but should the policy come back, there’s already precedent against it, and at least a split in the circuits should another circuit allow it to stand.
And of course the grounds on which it was decided can be used as precedent in other cases that don’t involve DADT even if the policy is legislatively repealed.
But yeah, dick move on Obama’s part—particularly considering that, after DOMA, he can’t really pull the “but we have to defend the law!” stunt any more.
B
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2011/07/14/national/a190021D50.DTL&tsp=1 :
‘The Department of Justice lawyers said in the motion that ending the ban now would pre-empt the “orderly process” for rolling back the 17-year-old policy as outlined in the law passed and signed by the president in December.’
Whether you agree or not, that seems to be the reason for the motion.
CJ
As I think about this more, he’s basically telling the court to DEFER to the military for working out their procedures vs. letting the courts reaching in too deep. It’s not like the military isn’t going to implement it. It’s just that Obama wants the military to remain in control of military things. Many Presidents have tried to keep the courts and congress away from certain Executive and military powers. In this way, DOMA is different than DADT.
At the same time, the courts should be the ones to protect civil rights 24/7 WHICH MEANS not delaying giving equality to all, regardless of whether you’re in the military or not.
mikenola
@Cam
The courts have already made that ruling. If the Administration doesn’t applea the decision, then the courts ruling sticks.
—————
that is not quite correct, if Obama and the DOJ do not appeal the ruling then Congress has the right and authority, either house, to step into the case.
Think people think, the Service Chiefs just submitted their findings for Certification, one day after this instruction from the 9th demanding a response in 10 days.
What the DOJ has requested is a review of the ruling, that is not an appeal. They simply have asked the court to think about it before signing off on it.
That delays any possible action by Republican/tea bagger controlled House of Representatives.
All of us, the haters included, are expecting the Submissions of the Service Chiefs will start the 60 day clock for the repeal to go into effect.
The 9th rarely has ever done anything in less than 60 days, and while they prodded Obama to make a stand it is doubtful they will do anything before that happens. If only to prevent further obfuscation of the facts in the political games run by the haters.
Once the law is finally repealed, then it would take a Republican House and Senate and an anti-gay President (read republican president) to enact it again. That is years away and the American Public will no longer stand for it and neither would SCOTUS. Though the haters that you non-supporters of Obama want to give poser to a.k.a. the freaking teabaggers and religous nuts who hate your very existence because you are (in their words) just a faggot, will try and force those despicable rules on us again, and they are doing it WITH YOUR HELP!
All you posters, other than grayyoung, are morons for trying to “blame” Obama for having to play it this way. Your whining is insulting and you show exactly where your bigotry lives. He is the only person who has worked this hard for the LGBT community in the history of our Presidents. Clinton tried but gave up and gave us DADT and DOMA, both of which are insults.
grayyoung
@Cam: Actually, Cam, you are completely wrong. The court that has ruled on it is a Federal district judge, Virginia Philips, not the 9th circuit. They just stayed her order barring the continued enforcement of DADT. The ninth circuit has now released that stay. What will happen if the administration does not appeal is that the Ninth Circuit already made clear that it would seek out amicus curiae (third parties with an interest in the case) to make the pro-DADT case. That suggests that, if at all possible, the Ninth Circuit wants to rule on the merits. Therefore, the Obama admin is trying to ensure that a federal appeals court sets a precedent for treating gays as a protected class. That is it simply. They have not ruled yet and they will wether or not the Admin controls the appeal.
Shannon1981
Obama is pissing me off, but anyone else in office is downright frightening. Why the fuck would he do this if he wants to be oh so pro gay? I admit, he’s better than the rethugs by far, but he’s showing himself to be a big old ‘phobe in a lot of ways. Orderly fashion my ass. People from all over have already been saying they knew who the gays were in their units and didn’t fucking care. What part of that did he miss?
Rainfish
As it stands, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, using the DOJ’s own briefs filed to justify no longer defending DOMA (due to its conclusion that DOMA is unconstitutional), has accepted the DOJ’s assertion that invidious discrimination against members of Gay and Lesbian community should not be permitted — hence, the court’s stay on DADT’s enforcement. Furthermore, the DOJ claims that any adjudication of civil rights disputes regarding the Gay and Lesbian community should be subject to heightened scrutiny — the same as in race related matters.
So why is Obama and the DOJ fighting this, one might ask?
Obama is either crazy as a fox by kicking this up the ladder (possibly to the Supreme Court) for an ultimate ruling — hopefully, granting full minority status and full civil rights protections for the Gay and Lesbian community — or he is fighting the idea (at the behest of homophobic bigwigs at the Pentagon and in Congress) of allowing a final judicial determination of full equality for the Gay community, which could quite possibly take this political football out of the legislative arena for all time.
Not knowing the schizophrenic thought processes of our Commander-in-Chief, it is foolhardy to even endeavor to guess where that answer lies. Consistency is not one of President Obama’s virtues. Either way, with the current arch-conservative makeup of the Supreme Court, it is a risky venture to play with the lives and freedom of tens of millions of Gay and Lesbian American citizens at this point simply for political cover.
First pushing the repeal of DOMA to the Supreme Court may yield more predictable and favorable results on equal protection grounds, but the Supreme Court has historically differed to the military on administrative matters. I do not see this ending well by initially getting a determination of the constitutionality of DADT ahead of DOMA; especially, if DADT reaches the highest court first and those same equal protection arguments to be made for DOMA’s repeal are rejected.
That could create a horrible precedent which, in turn, could negatively impact the repeal of DOMA; tossing it back into biased legislative hands. I really hope I am wrong on this. I think that it is a terrible gamble to make, and Obama is risking the future civil rights status of all in the GLBT community because of it.
“Any court-ordered action forced upon the military services so close to the completion of this repeal policy pre-empts the deliberate process established by Congress and the President to ensure an orderly and successful transition of this significant policy change,” the Justice Department said.
That is as silly as fighting over whether someone should show up to work at 7:50 or at 7:55 when work starts at 8am. On that great and anticipated “appointed day” of DADT’s demise, in a few weeks or in a few months, are we suppose to have a great “reveal” or unveiling of those who are gay or lesbian in the military? Has all this foolish foot-dragging on the repeal been to slowly ease into and to prepare all non-homosexuals for that day of doom and ultimate culture shock to the heterocentric military system? No, I think not. Actually, it will go something like this: “Oh, it’s Monday. No more DADT. So what. Time to get back to work killing terrorists and making the world a little safer for corporate interests overseas.”
Yes, and its time for those petty, immature, navel-gazers in Washington, as well as in the administrative branches of the Pentagon, to grow up and quit playing these destructive and pointless games with other people’s lives, and quit soiling the reputation of America by preventing our country from achieving the status of being a fair and a just place to live for all of its citizens.
…Time to just move on.
Jon
@grayyoung: How is the Obama administration helping the court set this precedent? It just seems that Obama is trying to get the credit for the repeal. And why shouldn’t he? True, the setting this precedent in the courts would be a huge boon for other cases to come, but where were these rulings in 2010? Funny how the courts are only now intervening after months of military preparations for Certification. Obama signing the Repeal Act is what really got the ball rolling, and now the court is trying to swoop in the eleventh hour and get the credit. It would be better for us if they did, but I understand Obama’s position.
Plus, even if Obama didn’t defend it, you know Boehner and the House GOPs would. Yes, Obama has not been the “fierce advocate” he promised, but no other president has done as much as he has. In the end, it’s the President being another politician, and that includes looking out for his own interests. Why is that so surprising?
TanyaHyde
@mikenola:
Quote: “All you posters, other than grayyoung, are morons for trying to “blame” Obama for having to play it this way. Your whining is insulting and you show exactly where your bigotry lives. He is the only person who has worked this hard for the LGBT community in the history of our Presidents. Clinton tried but gave up and gave us DADT and DOMA, both of which are insults.”
Well said mikenola.
+1,000,000
Ted B. (Charging Rhino)
The Obama Administration doesn’t want DADT ended yet since it still need DADT to shake the G/L money-tree and get the Gay ATM solidly-contributing to the Obama 2012 campaign.
It’s about the money…not about what right.
Rainfish
In spite of Obama’s Obstructionism, Reid and Pelosi Finally Got DADT Repealed.
After almost two years of Obama insisting that Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid put off repeal of DADT, and with very little involvement from the White House, Gay and Lesbian military personnel may eventually be able to serve openly to fight to the death for the freedoms they are still denied; which every other American takes so casually for granted.
Originally, the House bill had a non-discrimination clause attached to the legislation which would protect Gay and Lesbian military personnel from discrimination in the military or, at least, give them a legal tool in order to seek to remedy blatant acts of discrimination based on one’s real or perceived sexual orientation in military such as being passed over for promotion and other forms of unequal treatment related to sexual orientation discrimination. Obama, at the urging of the Pentagon, demanded that the non-discrimination clause be removed from the final version of DADT. Apparently, Obama still isn’t ready for patriotic Gay and Lesbian Americans to be treated as equals and their rights of citizenship fully protected just yet.
Still, some Obama sycophants wonders why the Democratic Party’s progressive base is repulsed by this duplicitous fraud in the White House. And, naturally, Obama has taken full credit for this stripped down and gutted repeal of DADT which is still being “slow walked” into existence with plenty of inequities still left standing in place because of Obama’s insistence that the non-discrimination clause be removed from the bill.
Sorry, Obots, this “I was for same-sex marriage, before I was against it, before I don’t know how I feel about it yet until I evolve” fraud in the Oval Office does not have, has not earned, and will not receive the respect of any member of the GLBT community who has an ounce of self-esteem left in them. Obama has so disdainfully used us to his advantage and then tossed us aside like a dirty rag when it became politically convenient for him to do so.
But, with a close election on the horizon, he needs us now. That is why his DOJ suddenly did an about-face after the DEMS took a shit-kicking in the midterms, and they decided that perhaps comparing loving Gay and Lesbian couples to pedophilia and incest wasn’t a good idea after all in their former defense of DOMA. Likewise, making the (Bush/Cheney) argument that having open service in the military by Gay and Lesbian military personnel would be a threat to union cohesion wasn’t making nice either with the same community which carried his ungrateful ass to the inauguration platform where Rev. Rick “Prop 8” Warren let Obama kiss his ring and said a prayer for him.
Rainfish
In spite of Obama’s Obstructionism, Reid and Pelosi Finally Got DADT Repealed.
After almost two years of Obama insisting that Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid put off repeal of DADT, and with very little involvement from the White House, Gay and Lesbian military personnel may eventually be able to serve openly to fight to the death for the freedoms they are still denied; which every other American takes so casually for granted.
Originally, the House bill had a non-discrimination clause attached to the legislation which would protect Gay and Lesbian military personnel from discrimination in the military or, at least, give them a legal tool in order to seek to remedy blatant acts of discrimination based on one’s real or perceived sexual orientation in military such as being passed over for promotion and other forms of unequal treatment related to sexual orientation discrimination. Obama, at the urging of the Pentagon, demanded that the non-discrimination clause be removed from the final version of DADT. Apparently, Obama still isn’t ready for patriotic Gay and Lesbian Americans to be treated as equals and their rights of citizenship fully protected just yet.
Still, some Obama sycophants wonders why the Democratic Party’s progressive base is repulsed by this duplicitous fraud in the White House. And, naturally, Obama has taken full credit for this stripped down and gutted repeal of DADT which is still being “slow walked” into existence with plenty of inequities still left standing in place because of Obama’s insistence that the non-discrimination clause be removed from the bill.
Sorry, Obots, this “I was for same-sex marriage, before I was against it, before I don’t know how I feel about it yet until I evolve” fraud in the Oval Office does not have, has not earned, and will not receive the respect of any member of the GLBT community who has an ounce of self-esteem left in them. Obama has so disdainfully used us to his advantage and then tossed us aside like a dirty rag when it became politically convenient for him to do so.
But, with a close election on the horizon, he needs us now. That is why his DOJ suddenly did an about-face after the DEMS took a $hit-kicking in the midterms, and they decided that perhaps comparing loving Gay and Lesbian couples to pedophilia and incest wasn’t a good idea after all in their former defense of DOMA. Likewise, making the (Bush/Cheney) argument that having open service in the military by Gay and Lesbian military personnel would be a threat to union cohesion wasn’t making nice either with the same community which carried his ungrateful posterior to the inauguration platform where Rev. Rick “Prop 8? Warren let Obama kiss his ring and said a prayer for him.
Rainfish
What’s up with all the silly hyper-sensitive auto-flagging crap? Whose setting the filters, the Family Research Council or the DNC? I even washed my own mouth out with soap and suppressed my very conservative use of expletives in my last “censored” post. What gives?
robert in NYC
I would have thought the 14th amendment of the constitution would have taken care of it, including same-sex marriage. It is quite clear to me that the amendment has been violated by denying equal protection guaranteed to the minority.
Politically Incorrect Thug
@Ted B. (Charging Rhino): Bravo to you, sir, for being the only person here who seems to see the light: Obama is running scared, and he wants sole credit for being the pro-gay president so that we wouldn’t dare support anyone else in 2012. The man has shown his true attitude toward us time and time again, so what else do we need? To see him protesting alongside the Westboro Baptist Church? Come on, people, B.O. don’t like him no ‘mos, we all know this, so why keep trying to convince yourselves otherwise?
Rainfish
No, of course the military didn’t want DADT in the first place. They wanted the old outright ban to stay in place. So, with a little tweaking here and there, they slapped some lipstick on a pig, and, lo and behold, they turned DADT into a dressed up version of the old ban. So, let’s see. Before you could serve if no one knew…then, after DADT, you could serve if, now get the distinction here …hmmmm…if no one knew your “terrible secret”.
The witch-hunts still continued, and we lost 15,000 good men and women to this farce since its shameful implementation — with hundreds more since Obama took office. Another ugly stain on American history and another reason for the next generation of kids in our nation to revile their predecessors.
robert in NYC
Which of the candidates running on the republican ticket are pro-gay? Don’t say civil libertarian(republican) Ron Paul is because he’s not going to get the nomination. He may support same-sex marriage, state by state, but he’s NEVER run a campaign on it or included it in his campaign agenda. He hasn’t even called out Bachmann, Pawlenty, Romney, Huntsman, Gingrich and Cain on their opposition to it. When all is said and done, gay republicans will vote for whoever gets the nod when push comes to shove because they hate democrats and don’t want another one in the White House, ever, let alone a half black one. The majority of the GOP voted against repeal of DADT and Ron Paul up until recently opposed it. If John McCain had beaten Obama, we wouldn’t even be having this discussion. NO repeal under any republican watch.
The crustybastard
The answer is simple:
The legislative “repeal” allows discrimination. Perhaps it’s more accurate to say “requires” discrimination. The court isn’t likely to accommodate such bigotry.
Barry likes a little anti-gay discrimination. Always has.
Jeffree
The costs of DADT alone — investigations, hearings, training, personnel, etc. — make it untenable. The military trained, removed, & replaced mission-critical staff based on a criterion that had no neg. impact on readiness or cohesion.
@Rainfish: +1 on the “witch hunt” & “stain” comment. I share your frustration with the autoflag moderation having seen several comments of mine go MIA. It’s amazing how many remarks that violate TOS sail through, & how many comments that are above-board get lost. Frustrating!
Jeffree
HTML fail: sorry — I need caffeine!
Jewed Law
@Rainfish: FYI, it was Democratic hero Bill Clinton who imposed DADT, so don’t blame the country as a whole. And a note to all of you America haters: Leave. Now. You don’t like us, and we don’t like you, so go someplace else. One of the “better” places you love to laud. Like Pakistan. Or Nigeria. Then you won’t have to worry about all of us poor victims of American culture (because your new neighbors will have beheaded you for being into dudes). See how simple a solution that is?
Spike
God all you gays just don’t get it, he is Commander In Chief, he is following a process that was originally put in place, this is all part of the process. Thou gotta love how quick you are all ready to abandon him on something so minor without stepping back and looking at the big picture. Yea, go vote third party, and when a repubulican is elected in 2012 and nominating the next S.court judge, it will be YOUR fault, you silly clowns!
robert in NYC
Jewed Law, FYI… Clinton’s hands were tied! Both the House and Senate voted in a veto-proof majority to ban gays from service entirely. Without having passed DADT, NO gays would have been allowed to serve. It was a necessary evil if you will. Are you that naive to think that under a republican administration DADT would have been repealed. Just take a look at how many of them supported repeal compared to the democrats.
Rainfish is absolutely correct. 15,000 discharges is a shameful stain on our country, some of whom shed their blood and the next generation needs to learn from our past mistakes otherwise, you’ll see it reinstated once right wing republicans take the White House and DOMA will be the law of the land, in every state. Under whose watch did DOMA happen? Another shameful stain on our country. Why don’t gay republicans take some responsibility for persistently voting for a republican president who doesn’t want you to have any semblance of full equality. Many don’t even want us to have civil unions, let alone marriage. I’m not exactly enamored of Obama but he’s a hell of a lot better than anyone running on the other ticket who wants gays to remain second class citizens, permanently.
robert in NYC
No. 28, Spike…your last sentence goes right to the heart of the matter. Get another right wing republican on the SCOTUS and DOMA will NEVER be repealed. It’s already overturned precedent in the Citizens United abomination.
christopher di spirito
Any peep about this from the Human Rights Campaign? What’s that? Crickets, you say?
TanyaHyde
@Spike:
Quote “Yea, go vote third party, and when a repubulican is elected in 2012 and nominating
the next S.court judge, it will be YOUR fault, you silly clowns!”
To me, they are more like a bunch of willfully ignorant Howler Monkeys……
Cam
@grayyoung: said..
“@Cam: Actually, Cam, you are completely wrong. The court that has ruled on it is a Federal district judge, Virginia Philips, not the 9th circuit. ”
___________________________
No, actualy you are wrong. I never said that the 9th circut ruled on the case. I said that if the Adminstration doesn’t appeal it then the case is done because the last ruling will be the one that applies. I get that you once read a law book and were just dying to quote from the index, but you may want to read more than the first few words in a post before jumping in.
TanyaHyde
@Ted B. (Charging Rhino):
Quote: “The Obama Administration doesn’t want DADT ended yet since it still need DADT to shake the G/L money-tree and get the Gay ATM solidly-contributing to the Obama 2012 campaign.
It’s about the money…not about what right.”
Typical gay-male egocentricity. Life in the gay-is-everything bubble.
The 2012 campaign hasn’t really hit full stride yet, and already Obama has shattered the record for fund raising in the 2nd Quarter, with over 80 million in contributions. Some pundits have predicted that he might be on track to become the first to raise one billion dollars for a US Presidential campaign.
So you might what to rethink your position as well as the existence of a much coveted huge, mythical and magical G/L money tree which is so productive, that everyone wants it. Because not everyone wants it, and apparently Obama doesn’t need it.
So, go give your money to the Republicans. They’ll take it, all the while holding their nose….
Gray
@Cam: That’s not the point, Cam. The point is that the Obama Admin wants a federal appeals court to establish this precedent. That holds a lot more weight with scotus than a federal circuit judge’s singular opinion. 9th circuit already announced they will seek out amicus curiea to defend the law, but if that happens the ruling will be delayed until after the implementation is done and the 9th will likely not then rule. By the admin defending the law now they can control the timing of repeal and ensure it doesn’t happen before they get a decision support the heightened scrutiny of gays as a protected class. Do you understand how valuable that precedent would be when doma and prop 8 finally get to scotus? From an appeals court it would pretty much male our case for us. That is the key legal classification our community has been missing for the entirety of our fight. If the this case is decided negatively for us nothing changes! The law will still be the law of the land and dadt will be gone with certification. If we win, the impact will be enormous. This reasoning seems pretty straightforward to me and I don’t understand why people are flipping out on Obama. He is easily the greatest ally we have ever had in the white house. And much better than anyone who is challenging him with regards to our issues. Lay off him
robert in NYC
No. 35…well, let them vote third party, let them vote for Ron Paul who is a republican under the civil libertarian label who will NEVER get the nomination. As I asked earlier, who among the republicans running for the presidency are supporting us? NONE! If they win the White House, kiss repeal of DOMA goodbye and same-sex marriage(SSM) will be overturned in the six states that allow it. Bachmann and her allies in NOM are already looking to overturn SSM in Iowa, next stop, New Hampshire. What astounds me is gay republicans voting for these clowns, a party that does NOT want them to have full equality ever… and you know, it doesn’t bother them, it’s just not that important to them.
Erik
A legislative solution has been passed by Congress and is in the process of being implemented. The Administration and the Pentagon want to complete said process on their own time table and not be rushed by the courts. That’s all this is about. Certification is likely to occur before the 9th Circuit has a chance to hear this case.
There’s nothing to get emotional about.
Dallas David
@robert in NYC: True, true.
Without DADT, the Republican dominated Congress and Senate were ready to pass some very ugly stuff that would have been a lot harder to get rid of. Clinton settled for DADT instead of the worse stuff.
Markie-Mark
Possible reasons:
(1) Not only would this court ruling instantly and permanently end DADT, but it would establish a precedent that civilian Federal Courts have jurisdiction over the military. That all soldiers (including glbt) have constitutional rights that the military cannot take away from them. None of this would be what the military wants or what their puppet, Obama, wants.
(2) Obama is playing a 12 dimensional chess game and his brilliant strategy can only be understood by a few geniuses when they drink enough kool aid.
You choose.
Right On
@TanyaHyde: You screeched, “To me [the Republicans] are more like a bunch of willfully ignorant Howler Monkeys.”
Wow, such wit! Such a natural cut-up, you are! And your IQ, it obviously must be through the roof! You really, really, really need to take your show on the road, your humor is so fresh and original. And your comment about “typical gay male egocentricity” was so intelligent and insightful that I know your mailbox must be overflowing with fan mail, because angry, name-calling lesbians are just SO popular.
Brian
@DJM: “Legal privileges obtained legislatively are less weighty than basic human rights defined by courts. Rights defined by courts tend to be all-encompassing.”
Are you kidding? Do you think courts can legislate things like ENDA, the 1964 Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act, or the Americans with Disabilities Act?
Statutory rights and legislative victories are every bit as valuable as court cases and you don’t have to worry about the right wing complaining about “activist judges.”
Constitutions can’t be repealed, but they can be amended. Take California’s Prop 8 for instance. And Iowa will eventually vote on a marriage amendment.
alan Balehead
Obama just man up already!!!
Rainfish
@Jeffree: Yep, I know, Jeffree. I was wondering if an innocent typing error would get “autoflagged” on Queerty, such as “People point to the bible as a moral guidepost in their lives, “butt whole” text encourage us that it is ok for parents to murder their disobedient children and for people to do other illegal things, from a modern perspective.”
…I guess we will never know. 😉
————–back to the subject at hand—————
Still, some Obama sycophants wonders why the Democratic Party’s progressive base is so repulsed by this duplicitous fraud in the White House. And, naturally, Obama has taken full credit for this stripped down and gutted repeal of DADT which is still being “slow walked” into existence with plenty of inequities still left standing in place because of Obama’s insistence that the non-discrimination clause be removed from the bill.
Sorry, Obots, this “I was for same-sex marriage, before I was against it, before I don’t know how I feel about it yet until I evolve” fraud in the Oval Office does not have, has not earned, and will not receive the respect of any member of the GLBT community who has an ounce of self-esteem left in them. Obama so disdainfully uses us to his advantage (votes, fund raising, etc.) and then tosses us aside like a dirty rag when it becomes politically convenient for him to do so.
Abirdwillingtobeitself
@Right On: Are you saying the Republicans are NOT howler monkeys? Who want to keep the peaceable monkeys from getting their legal rights?
Jeffree
@robert in NYC: (#29, #36) & Dallas David: Co-sign on how Clinton’s compromise leading to DADT was the lesser of two or more ëvils. We can’t rewrite history.
The Republican party is so far removed from their roots: they’re focused on electioneering around social issues rather than fiscal / employment ones, because they know that the hard-right wing & fundies are more worried about marriage equality & gay soldiers than anything in the economy !
@Rainfish: There are glaciers that move faster than Obama.
p.s. Yet the word “b~tt” passed through the fïlter this time, lol.
Cam
@Gray: said…
“@Cam: That’s not the point, Cam. The point is that the Obama Admin wants a federal appeals court to establish this precedent. That holds a lot more weight with scotus than a federal circuit judge’s singular opinion.”
___________________________-
No, that isn’t what is going on at all. The Administration has said over and over that they do NOT want this decided by the courts. Why do you folks keep making this up?
If they let the District Court ruling stand, then it stands, and DADT is done. It doesn’t need to go up to the 9th circut unless the Adminstration applealed it up to them. DADT could be struck down by any Federal court, it’s only a continuing issue because the administration keeps insisting on appealing it.
An Ella Fan
@Right On:
TanyaHyde: “To me [the Republicans] are more like a bunch of willfully ignorant Howler Monkeys.”
Personally, I don’t see anything wrong with that statement. As a matter of fact, I kindof like it. It works!
LOL
Rainfish
@An Ella Fan: I was thinking more along the lines of poo-throwing Chimpanzees, but “Howler Monkeys” works too. :p
“Planet of the Congressional Apes”, what a cheesy horror story America has become, and with us as the captive audience. Who needs Netflix? Pass the popcorn and the Quaaludes.
…Pathetic.
———-but back to thread topic——–
Let it go, Obama. Just let it go. We don’t need this pushed up to the Supreme Court for a judicial determination of our equal protection rights before they have had a chance to adjudicate first on the constitutionality of DOMA. A negative ruling against equal protection regarding DADT could set a very bad precedent in any future DOMA case to reach them. That could have more far reaching consequences, such federal recognition of our legal marriages along with federal benefits than DADT right now.
So, shoo, be gone Obama and DOJ! You two are nothing but pesky biting horseflies on the buttocks of the GLBT community trying in every way you can to stampede our hopes off a cliff and forever sabotage our struggle for civil rights in America.
With “friends like these”….well, you know the rest.
the crustybastard
@Spike: God all you gays just don’t get it, [Obama] is following a process that was originally put in place, this is all part of the process.
Nope. The federal court ruling the military gay ban was unconstitutional happened before Obama signed the so-called legislative “repeal”… which still hasn’t happened 200+ days after the fact.
go vote third party, and when a repubulican is elected in 2012 and nominating the next S.court judge, it will be YOUR fault, you silly clowns!
With Democratic senators routinely voting to confirm absurdly hard-right judges, it scarcely matters who appoints.
What you don’t seem to get is that while Republicans aren’t going to do anything for gay rights, Democrats aren’t going to either. They jumped into this at the eleventh hour on the military gay ban BECAUSE the court already decided in our favor — not because they regard civil rights as a legislative priority.
If Democrats were working on our behalf, we wouldn’t be behind Europe and most of our hemisphere on gay rights. Uruguay. We’re behind Uruguay—not because we haven’t helped Democrats. Because Democrats haven’t helped us.
That’s why I’ve lost interest in helping Democrats.
the crustybastard
@mikenola: Once the law is finally repealed, then it would take a Republican House and Senate and an anti-gay President (read republican president) to enact it again.
LOL. But it took a Democratic House and Senate and a “pro-gay” president to enact the gay ban the first time, right?
Kev C
Next year, let’s remember the orderly process known as Voting the Bum Out.
Rainfish
UPDATE (July 15, 2011): Ninth Circuit Keeps Bar on DADT Discharges In Effect While Considering DOJ Motion on Stay in Log Cabin Case…
“Although “temporarily reinstating” most of its stay of the injunction in the Log Cabin Republicans v. United States case tonight, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit kept in place the part of the injunction that bars the military from “investigating, penalizing, or discharging anyone from the military pursuant to the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy.”
Responding to dueling requests from the Department of Justice and attorneys for the Log Cabin Republicans in the LCR v. United States challenge to “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” the appellate court in San Francisco this evening partially granted a request from the government to issue a temporary stay of the injunction of DADT put back in place by the Ninth Circuit since July 6 — with a big caveat that keeps discharges from moving forward.”
source: http://metroweekly.com/poliglot/2011/07/ninth-circuit.html
—————————-
In other words (regarding the latest development in this comedy of errors), the jacked-up court said, you can have your f*cking DADT President Obamanation, but you can’t enforce it. What a bunch of BS! So much hand-wringing and pearl-clutching over just giving us ‘MOs our goddamn civil rights. Jeeez! Grow up already you hateful morons and stop playing these destructive games with other people’s lives!
Will it never end? It seems that stupidity is self-perpetuating.
Queer Supremacist
So, is obstruction of justice still an impeachable offense or not?
It makes me sick to live in a world where Barack Obama is President and Michelle Bachmann is considered a viable opponent while Fred Karger and Gary Johnson are not even invited to debates.
And no, Republicans are not worse. When a Republican supports us, they mean it. When they don’t support us, they mean it. A fairweather friend who will stab you in the back is worse than an enemy who will attack you from the front.
robert in NYC
No. 53, realistically, do you actually believe Karger or Johnson stand a chance of getting nominated? I don’t. So, vote as you wish. Bachmann may be your next president or vice-president.
Civil Libertarians by the way, ARE republicans under a different name, skew it as you will. Ron Paul will NEVER be president either. When push comes to shove, if it means a republican in the White House, they’ll vote in lockstep to make it happen, no matter the label under which they vote. This country will never have a viable third party.
Rainfish
@robert in NYC: Without the fear of consequences from their constituents most politicians, like water, will take the path of least resistance. You get what you demand — if you ask for little, that’s what you’ll get. If there is a negative price to be paid at the ballot box from any pro-active constituent group, then, believe me, that group will be appeased before an election.
The tide of history is on our side with more and more people joining in the movement towards a more perfect union. If we excuse our so-called leaders for not supporting us openly, then why should anyone else feel motivated to do the right thing? Should we expect more commitment to our cause from our co-workers and neighbors and from those who do not know us than we do from those we elect to public office to represent us? Changing hearts and minds is one thing, but to insist that those leaders, which we have elevated to positions of political power, to follow suit and, dare I say, lead on issues of historical significance — is that really too much to expect?
Obama is a political weather vane without a moral center. He is incapable of leadership. More’s the pity, really. He’s a competent orator; too bad his carefully crafted, White House staff generated, words are just pandering poetic prose calculated to created a media image with no more lasting substance than the faint fading glow of a teleprompter.
And, no, claiming the “other guy” would be worst is no longer a good enough reason for giving this guy a free pass. The battered housewife syndrome kind of relationship which some in the GLBT community have had (and still have) with the Democratic Party is getting really tiresome. Enablers do not deserve pity nor any semblance of respect.
Third parties and Independents can, and do, win state and local elections, such as former Connecticut governor Lowell Weicker. Some have even won federal elections: witness Sen. Bernie Sanders of VT (a proud independent socialist for god sake) and Sen. Joe Lieberman. What about the Tea Party (an independent extremist right-wing subset of Republicans) who, although small in numbers, basically controls the House of Representatives by setting the agenda? Anything is possible, if you are motivated enough and have enough people to just say — let’s do it.
Rainfish
Queerty, your random autoflagging is getting ridiculous. Nothing in my last post was even remotely “obscene” or personally offensive to anyone. I simply wrote about the current turn of events surrounding the legal status of DADT. You really must review the incompetence of your filtering system and why no one is doing their job as moderators by reviewing innocuous comments which are being autoflagged for no rational reason whatsoever. That is not the way to encourage participation, but it does seem like a good way to alienate and to drive away viewers and contributors to this site.
Henry
@Rainfish: I like that Queerty allows you to say pretty much anything in a comment. Much better than kid-gloves sites that protect the bad guys.
Jeffree
@Rainfish: I’m still waiting for a few comments from last week to get reviewed. Very frustrating, especially when you see what does get posted.
Rainfish
@Henry: Apparently, Henry, you have not been autoflagged yet. I’ve known many people (myself included) who have had their comments “autoflagged” saying things just as innocent as your recent observations. Obviously, their insipid filters on the autoflagger must have some truly major flaws. Nevertheless, it is bordering on unnecessarily stupid, insulting, and really bad PR for this newly reincarnated site. If Queerty is the proverbial Phoenix reborn from its own previously inept ashes, then perhaps a little more scrubbing off of those user-unfriendly “ashes” might be in order. Ooops! Did I spell that right or is “ashes” now a naughty word that might trigger Queerty’s 1984 Big Brother-ish random, nonsensical, autoflagger? I guess we’ll know in a minute.
Over and out.
…Open the pod door, HAL.