Prediction for the repeal of DADT

[oxcoug]

I support and have argued in favor of the move to repeal DADT.

But I expect one thing is going to happen that shouldn't:

At least a few gay people will join the armed forces with 'journalistic' expose intent - for the chance to live, provoke, then tell a story and make a name out of it.

I didn't dream this up. I saw it posted on a gay friend's FB thread that "someone should do this." I expect more than a few "someones" are going to do it and that a few homophobic Marine sergeants from rural America are going to get baited into reactions that will become big stories which will make celebrities out of the victims.

It will be interesting to see how this plays for the military.

[Devildog]

That might seem like a good idea to someone that has no idea what they are talking about.

They would find the flaws in that plan in short order.

[YOUTUBE]GAo06JHOtRk&feature=related[/YOUTUBE]

[RobinFinderson]

[Goatnapper'96]

I support and have argued in favor of the move to repeal DADT.

But I expect one thing is going to happen that shouldn't:

At least a few gay people will join the armed forces with 'journalistic' expose intent - for the chance to live, provoke, then tell a story and make a name out of it.

I didn't dream this up. I saw it posted on a gay friend's FB thread that "someone should do this." I expect more than a few "someones" are going to do it and that a few homophobic Marine sergeants from rural America are going to get baited into reactions that will become big stories which will make celebrities out of the victims.

It will be interesting to see how this plays for the military.

There is a time and place for all things. I hope and pray the Republicans do nothing stupid to lose the momentum they are gaining to significantly influence the next tax reform/deficit cutting phase that our country is gearing up for. After they reign victorious in that they are welcome to cater to the religious right and set up the progressives for another once in a lifetime opportunity that they can then screw like Ron Jeremy and Marylin Chambers!

In other words I agree. I don't see the Republicans falling on their sword for this one so I see repeal rather quick in the new congress. I think they will stop it in this Congress just to be petty and vindictive knowing that if they pass it in the first half of next year nobody will hold it against them and then they get more of the credit while controlling the terms.

[il Padrino Ute]

There is a time and place for all things. I hope and pray the Republicans do nothing stupid to lose the momentum they are gaining to significantly influence the next tax reform/deficit cutting phase that our country is gearing up for. After they reign victorious in that they are welcome to cater to the religious right and set up the progressives for another once in a lifetime opportunity that they can then screw like Ron Jeremy and Marylin Chambers!

In other words I agree. I don't see the Republicans falling on their sword for this one so I see repeal rather quick in the new congress. I think they will stop it in this Congress just to be petty and vindictive knowing that if they pass it in the first half of next year nobody will hold it against them and then they get more of the credit while controlling the terms.

Agreed. It's not worth risking another term for Obama and Co. to not repeal DADT.

[RobinFinderson]

At 18, all male US citizens have to sign up for the selective service, including the gays. What would happen if a gay was drafted? Could he simply announce his gayness, a la Klinger from MASH, and get out of his obligation?

As a straight who would have to serve his country, if drafted, DADT causes me PERSONAL HARM. Some straight should take this to the courts... it might work its way up through the system and put an end to DADT before the legislature ever gets around to doing anything about it.

[Surfah]

At 18, all male US citizens have to sign up for the selective service, including the gays. What would happen if a gay was drafted? Could he simply announce his gayness, a la Klinger from MASH, and get out of his obligation?

Klinger didn't get out of his service though.

[hopfrog]

I am overjoyed that repeal of DADT is on its way to President Obama. He said that he would accomplish this and he has kept his word. I will vote for him again.

[RobinFinderson]

Why is it that the Republicans get to bargain for super-expensive (i.e. massive debt increasing) tax cuts for the extremely wealthy (even when they are dead, and the money is going to be a windfall to a child who probably didn't work for it, making it more likely to stimulate the hooker and coke economy, rather than getting directed toward the rebuilding of our economy via the fixing of our failing infrastructure), and in return, the Dems get to fight for things like the repeal of DADT, which is just the right thing to do?

[Tex]

Why is it that the Republicans get to bargain for super-expensive (i.e. massive debt increasing) tax cuts for the extremely wealthy (even when they are dead, and the money is going to be a windfall to a child who probably didn't work for it, making it more likely to stimulate the hooker and coke economy, rather than getting directed toward the rebuilding of our economy via the fixing of our failing infrastructure), and in return, the Dems get things have to fight for things like the repeal of DADT, which is just the right thing to do?

Because we eat babies. Just finished one during the game. Yum!

[RobinFinderson]

Because we eat babies. Just finished one during the game. Yum!

I guess I will add babies to the list, right after 9/11 first responders.

[Goatnapper'96]

Why is it that the Republicans get to bargain for super-expensive (i.e. massive debt increasing) tax cuts for the extremely wealthy (even when they are dead, and the money is going to be a windfall to a child who probably didn't work for it, making it more likely to stimulate the hooker and coke economy, rather than getting directed toward the rebuilding of our economy via the fixing of our failing infrastructure), and in return, the Dems get to fight for things like the repeal of DADT, which is just the right thing to do?

Because American's believe in many of the basic economic theories espoused by Conservatives. The far left was still believing in Communisim and Socialism 20 years ago. You might think it was a huge paradign shift to the center for the hard left when all them state run socialistic systems went tits up, but the rest of us wonder why there were such stupid dipshits for so long and hence we are real skeptical whenever they start talking about how they are going to rebuild the economy.

Then when they have their chance to rebuild the economy they choke it away by focussing upon socially liberal ideology that is not uniformaly wanted. So for all it is worth you team didn't try to fix the economy, probably because they don't know how. Their focus is how to take the goods when things are good to share with all. They don't really get the concept of incentive that is neccesary to jumpstart things.

[Devildog]

[YOUTUBE]InBXu-iY7cw[/YOUTUBE]

[RobinFinderson]

Because American's believe in many of the basic economic theories espoused by Conservatives. The far left was still believing in Communisim and Socialism 20 years ago. You might think it was a huge paradign shift to the center for the hard left when all them state run socialistic systems went tits up, but the rest of us wonder why there were such stupid dipshits for so long and hence we are real skeptical whenever they start talking about how they are going to rebuild the economy.

Then when they have their chance to rebuild the economy they choke it away by focussing upon socially liberal ideology that is not uniformaly wanted. So for all it is worth you team didn't try to fix the economy, probably because they don't know how. Their focus is how to take the goods when things are good to share with all. They don't really get the concept of incentive that is neccesary to jumpstart things.

This explains why conservatives support 'conservative' economic policy (I don't know what is 'conservative' about one of the biggest debt increasing moves since Bush started his wars, especially since the tax savings for the people who need it most (the lower and middle classes) would have been realized without extending the tax cuts to the wealthiest 2%), but it DOESN'T explain why the Democrats end up having to use GOOD POLICY (the repeal of DADT) as a bargaining chip.

The same goes for the Dream Act. It is good policy, and if Republicans supported it, they could probably make decent headway with Latinos, who are far from a lost cause for the GOP, yet it is the Dems who end up expending their political capital to push that bill forward.

The same goes for helping the first responders from 9/11. Republicans are blocking up their help as well. Hopefully, the next time Wall Street is literally attacked, the firefighters and police will take a vote requiring a super-majority before they decide whether or not the lives of the financial sector's finest are worth their own blood.

[oxcoug]

Why is it that the Republicans get to bargain for super-expensive (i.e. massive debt increasing) tax cuts for the extremely wealthy (even when they are dead, and the money is going to be a windfall to a child who probably didn't work for it, making it more likely to stimulate the hooker and coke economy, rather than getting directed toward the rebuilding of our economy via the fixing of our failing infrastructure), and in return, the Dems get to fight for things like the repeal of DADT, which is just the right thing to do?

Robin if you have a second try standing on your head and then taking a fresh look at the world.

How can a tax cut be "expensive"? Public expenditures are expensive. Tax cuts return money earned to the people earning it.

As for the "coke and hooker" economy - I guess that would be me since my company - which now employs about 25 people in SF and NYC - has been funded with the tax cut wealth of angel investors in the 2%. Super smart, super rich people who use their surplus income, as rich people always have, to invest in innovation and new profit-engines and sometimes even in things that they just LIKE which they believe in. W/o that marginal wealth generated by tax cuts there are a lot of companies like mine which would never have got off the ground.

Finally - I'd love it if more money were getting invested in REAL infrastructure rebuilding. Too bad such a ridiculous percentage of the original stimulus was siphoned off to special interests. Which gets to your question - the reason is that people don't trust government to spend money efficiently.