What, you're saying it wasn't the right-wing fighting tooth and nail to protect policies like DADT? It's not conservatives who were freaking out about the dire impact the DADT repeal would have on morale?
One of you will end up here next!
Rick Santorum and the people in the crowd are ridiculous. If you are going to tell me that a troop doesn't have a picture of their girlfriend posted up somewhere next to their bed, or wants them on their insurance or wants them to get their benefits you totally miss the point of the DADT repeals.
"We’re going to close the unproductive tax loopholes that allow some of the truly wealthy to avoid paying their fair share. In theory, some of those loopholes were understandable, but in practice they sometimes made it possible for millionaires to pay nothing, while a bus driver was paying ten percent of his salary, and that’s crazy." -Reagan
at the time is was passed, Democrat Sam Nunn led the opposition for keeping the total ban on homosexuals.. and Republican Barry Goldwater led the charge for full repeal... Clinton compromised with DADT.
what was that about historical revision again?
The president did not say that. He said the candidates should have stood up for the serviceman. This is a large, unsubtle difference. Code Pink and the Westborough Church have every right to make asses of themselves, but we should all stand up for our troops and call those 2 idiots for what they are.
the President is in campaign mode... I expect him to say such things.. especially standing in front of a gay rights group.
if i were to be disappointed every time a politicians stood silent when stupid things were said or done, i'd have killed myself in depression by now.
I mean come on, this stuff is silly and go on and on for day and days.
for instance.. why didn't Obama stand up for the FBI when Dick Durbin laid out his famous FBI -Gulag-pol pot comparison.. shouldn't the chief-executive-to-be stand up for his FBI agents?.. omgomgomg Obama hates the FBI!
don't bother answering the question, btw... it's not a "real" question.. just an example of how this partisan crap can go back and forth.
We should, yes, but the president shouldn't. How many times has Obama set WBC and Code Pink straight? Did Obama say anything when Jack Murtha falsely accused four Marines of murder?The president did not say that. He said the candidates should have stood up for the serviceman. This is a large, unsubtle difference. Code Pink and the Westborough Church have every right to make asses of themselves, but we should all stand up for our troops and call those 2 idiots for what they are.
I've never seen Obama set anyone straight, when they hoisted the most shameful of accusations and insults on our troops. But now, a couple cats boo a gay soldier and it's all of a sudden the president's job to say something about it?
How should we define this?
1) Political correctness run amuck?
2) Obama exploiting our troops to score political points?
3) Obama is just stupid?
4) Obama is so desperate to score some kind of political victory, that he's latching on to anything he can?
What should we call it?
Here's some history for you:
If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime--Pol Pot or others--that had no concern for human beings. Sadly, that is not the case. This was the action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners. --Dick Durbin (D)