Prediction for the repeal of DADT

[Devildog]

[YOUTUBE]nNEskfjlyDY[/YOUTUBE]

[LA Ute]

I'm glad DADT finally ended. I don't see how we can allow people to sign up for military service that includes putting their lives on the line for the country and then kick them out based on their sexual orientation.

The deeper aspects of my rationale have been oft-stated and attributed to many sources.

[pellegrino]

What I'm most glad about is that it went through the proper channels of government. In this day and age it seems like every civil right we have has to be defined or "created" by the courts.

[Jeff Lebowski]

This is a happy day. Chalk one up for progress and common sense.

[mUUser]

tax cuts for the extremely wealthy

cause that's the right thing to do too.

I'm glad DADT finally ended.

me too.

[Devildog]

[YOUTUBE]5j2F4VcBmeo[/YOUTUBE]

[Portland Ute]

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?

Tax cuts aren't expensive. Spending is expensive. Tax cuts don't COST a thing.

[Portland Ute]

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.

They STILL do!

[LA Ute]

They STILL do!

Avatar thief.

[Moliere]

Tax cuts aren't expensive. Spending is expensive. Tax cuts don't COST a thing.

Unless you are paying interest on over $10 trillion in debt. I'd say losing out of those taxes is expensive just from the fact that that debt will just continue to be rolled and we'll continue to pay interest on it.

As for DADT, it is great that this went through. I think DADT served its purpose well. Some are poopooing DADT by saying it was unnecessary and a horrible/discriminatory law, but I see it as more of a bridge law that served its purpose. It allowed many people the opportunity to serve in the military while the nation continued to find its place on this issue. Now that progress has happened on that front, it is time to repeal the law.

[San Juan Sun]

Does not caring at all one way or another on DADT make me a a bad person?

[il Padrino Ute]

Does not caring at all one way or another on DADT make me a a bad person?

No. It demonstrates honesty on your part.

[U-Ute]

Tax cuts aren't expensive. Spending is expensive. Tax cuts don't COST a thing.

First of all, tax cuts are, by definition, cutting the income to government to pay for things like wars and interest on debt. If you don't think cutting income costs a thing, feel free to send me half your paycheck and only pay the minimum on your credit cards so you can afford to live with your new income level.

Second, this isn't a tax cut. It is not a tax increase. Splitting hairs for sure, but the fact remains.

The argument for not increasing the taxes is that small businesses will invest in jobs increasing payrolls, which will eventually lead to increased tax revenue in the long run. By that logic, if you don't get a raise this year, I'm sure you'll spend more in response.

FWIW, I don't think we should increase the taxes. What we really need to do is fix the corporate tax loopholes for companies that move their headquarters offshore for tax purposes. But we all know that that won't happen since all of our Senators/Representatives are beholden to companies now.

[happyone]

Like SJS I'm ambivalent about it. Given the changes in our society, I think it was inevitable and this is a whole lot better way to do it than by judicial fiat.

The services will do their damnedest to make the changes as smooth as possible but their will be problems.

However I don't think this type of thing should be done during a shooting war. When the service chiefs talk about unit cohesion and combat readiness being affected - it is another way of saying somebody is going to get killed.

I think the combat support and combat service support units will make the transition a whole lot easier that the combat units - the grunts, dats and gun bunnies

[Uncle Ted]

Ah, an explanation for all those dead birds...

A good Friend of Unfair Park sends along a video presently making the rounds in which Red Oak's own Cindy Jacobs, self-proclaimed "respected prophet," says there's a very good explanation for why those 5,000 birds died in Arkansas on New Year's Eve. And, no, it had nothing to do with a loud noise. Sorry, science. Instead, says Jacobs, it was the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell.

Let's talk about this Arkansas pattern and say, could it be a pattern? We're going to watch and see. But the blackbirds fell to the ground in Beebe, Arkansas. Well the Governor of Arkansas' name is Beebe. And also, there was something put out of Arkansas called "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" by a former Governor, this was proposed, Bill Clinton. As so, could there be a connection between this passage [Hosea 4] and now that we've had the repeal of the Don't Ask, Don't Tell, where people now legally in the United States have broken restraints with the Scripture because the Scripture says in Romans 1 that homosexuality is not allowed.