Obama Does It Again. He Jumps On An Issue That Will Soon Blow Up In His Face

I was a soldier for 11 years. I go back to my point. This guy LIED to get in. He knew his lifestyle was against regulations, he chose to lie to get in, anyway.

And then he acted like he was the victim.

If a troop in my platoon had lied about something to enlist, I'd be the first one to sign off on his discharge papers.
And it continues.

That wasn't a gay soldier you are booing - and - now saying you would discharge because he is gay (he "lied" - according to your DODT sensibilities)

That is an American Soldier. And you should be ashamed of yourself.

You won't get through to him. See, much as in Palin felt she was justified to determine who the "real" Americans were back in 2008, these folks feel they are justified determining who the "real" soldiers are. Apparently, as was the case with Negro soldiers during the Civil War, only "striaght" bodies are able to stop bullets....
Too bad some of the conservatives forget the words of their ideological grandfather, Barry Goldwater:

"You don't have to be straight to be in the military; you just have to be able to shoot straight."
 
I think that he has to spend so much time sucking up (no pun intended) to people he already has the support of just shows his weakness.

Obviously, what was being booed (by one or two people) was not the soldier but the content of his question and the way he phrased it. That the bad old military "made him lie" about who he was.

Of course, Obama waited over two years to change the policy, after he lost Congress, and right before the courts would have overturned the rule to start with. "Profiles in Courage" this wasn't.

the courts DID overturn it. He then asked them to stay their decision so the military could overturn it and he could claim credit.

LIke I said, man, "profiles in Courage" this was not.

The sensible thing would be to go back to what the policy was before 1980. Leave the issue up to the discretion of the unit commanders.

I think the issue is history now.

Let's move on.

As to the isolated boo or two.....once again the left and this President are blowing it out of proportion for political gain.
 
Wow. And we have one here doing the internet version of a Boo.

Dissing a US soldier.

Disgusting.

I was a soldier for 11 years. I go back to my point. This guy LIED to get in. He knew his lifestyle was against regulations, he chose to lie to get in, anyway.

And then he acted like he was the victim.

If a troop in my platoon had lied about something to enlist, I'd be the first one to sign off on his discharge papers.
And it continues.

That wasn't a gay soldier you are booing - and - now saying you would discharge because he is gay (he "lied" - according to your DODT sensibilities)

That is an American Soldier. And you should be ashamed of yourself.

I'm booing a liar who had no integrity. Because he tricked the Army into giving him a uniform doesn't make him a soldier. It makes him a liar. Leavenworth if full of guys who tricked the military into giving them uniforms before they landed there.

Now, DADT (I think that's what you were grasping for) was a bad policy, because it created uncertainty. It pretty much encouraged the lying. I think that we should go back to what the policy was before 1980, where it was left tothe discretion of unit commanders whether a soldier's homosexuality made him unsuitable for service.
 
the courts DID overturn it. He then asked them to stay their decision so the military could overturn it and he could claim credit.

LIke I said, man, "profiles in Courage" this was not.

The sensible thing would be to go back to what the policy was before 1980. Leave the issue up to the discretion of the unit commanders.

I think the issue is history now.

Let's move on.

As to the isolated boo or two.....once again the left and this President are blowing it out of proportion for political gain.
Just in your little tiny thread we have booing.

That's telling me - for a number of conservatives, it's not as isolated a sentiment as you think.
 
And it continues.

That wasn't a gay soldier you are booing - and - now saying you would discharge because he is gay (he "lied" - according to your DODT sensibilities)

That is an American Soldier. And you should be ashamed of yourself.

Yea..... we've all seen the outrage from the left about our soldiers being spat at by the left wing hounds.... oh wait.... no, we haven't. Fucking hypocrites.

The left are like a swarm of fucking worker bees..... land on any shit and create an issue. The faux outrage is wearing a tad thin.
I have no idea what spitting you're talking about - and I have never, nor would ever condone such a thing.

But that won't stop you from broadbrushing and then running to the defense of the boo'ers.

Stay Classy.

He's talking about the spitting and the name-calling from kids while walking along the street or in airports during Vietnam.

I was the focus of such a situation personally.
 
I was a soldier for 11 years. I go back to my point. This guy LIED to get in. He knew his lifestyle was against regulations, he chose to lie to get in, anyway.

And then he acted like he was the victim.

If a troop in my platoon had lied about something to enlist, I'd be the first one to sign off on his discharge papers.
And it continues.

That wasn't a gay soldier you are booing - and - now saying you would discharge because he is gay (he "lied" - according to your DODT sensibilities)

That is an American Soldier. And you should be ashamed of yourself.

I'm booing a liar who had no integrity. Because he tricked the Army into giving him a uniform doesn't make him a soldier. It makes him a liar. Leavenworth if full of guys who tricked the military into giving them uniforms before they landed there.

Now, DADT (I think that's what you were grasping for) was a bad policy, because it created uncertainty. It pretty much encouraged the lying. I think that we should go back to what the policy was before 1980, where it was left tothe discretion of unit commanders whether a soldier's homosexuality made him unsuitable for service.
Lucky for you DADT is history now - and gays and lesbians can serve their country without the government policy of forced deception.

And it's not going to change anytime soon.

Too bad. So sad for you.
 
I was a soldier for 11 years. I go back to my point. This guy LIED to get in. He knew his lifestyle was against regulations, he chose to lie to get in, anyway.

And then he acted like he was the victim.

If a troop in my platoon had lied about something to enlist, I'd be the first one to sign off on his discharge papers.
And it continues.

That wasn't a gay soldier you are booing - and - now saying you would discharge because he is gay (he "lied" - according to your DODT sensibilities)

That is an American Soldier. And you should be ashamed of yourself.

You won't get through to him. See, much as in Palin felt she was justified to determine who the "real" Americans were back in 2008, these folks feel they are justified determining who the "real" soldiers are. Apparently, as was the case with Negro soldiers during the Civil War, only "striaght" bodies are able to stop bullets....

Hey, I've had a gay soldier in my platoon when I was in. There was the one time he tried to feel up some guy at the enlisted club while on pass, and they beat the shit out of him.

Absolutely hilarious. Especially when the MP woke me up at 0300 to bail his ass out of the brig.

"You Sergeant B***?"

"yes"

"Private S>>> in your squad?"

"He just got beaten up at the E-club."

Of course, after that, because he also had HIV, the guys he got into the fight with had to get tested for years, as did the two female medics who patched him up.

Now imagine how much less trouble for everyone involved if this guy hadn't lied to a recruiter.
 
LIke I said, man, "profiles in Courage" this was not.

The sensible thing would be to go back to what the policy was before 1980. Leave the issue up to the discretion of the unit commanders.

I think the issue is history now.

Let's move on.

As to the isolated boo or two.....once again the left and this President are blowing it out of proportion for political gain.
Just in your little tiny thread we have booing.

That's telling me - for a number of conservatives, it's not as isolated a sentiment as you think.

We are talkiing about one wittle boo or two. No fingers were bit off, nobody got spit on.

Just an isolated asshole....an unidentified asshole at that.
 
And it continues.

That wasn't a gay soldier you are booing - and - now saying you would discharge because he is gay (he "lied" - according to your DODT sensibilities)

That is an American Soldier. And you should be ashamed of yourself.

I'm booing a liar who had no integrity. Because he tricked the Army into giving him a uniform doesn't make him a soldier. It makes him a liar. Leavenworth if full of guys who tricked the military into giving them uniforms before they landed there.

Now, DADT (I think that's what you were grasping for) was a bad policy, because it created uncertainty. It pretty much encouraged the lying. I think that we should go back to what the policy was before 1980, where it was left tothe discretion of unit commanders whether a soldier's homosexuality made him unsuitable for service.
Lucky for you DADT is history now - and gays and lesbians can serve their country without the government policy of forced deception.

And it's not going to change anytime soon.

Too bad. So sad for you.

Forced Deception that William Jefferson Clinton signed into law.
 
Yea..... we've all seen the outrage from the left about our soldiers being spat at by the left wing hounds.... oh wait.... no, we haven't. Fucking hypocrites.

The left are like a swarm of fucking worker bees..... land on any shit and create an issue. The faux outrage is wearing a tad thin.
I have no idea what spitting you're talking about - and I have never, nor would ever condone such a thing.

But that won't stop you from broadbrushing and then running to the defense of the boo'ers.

Stay Classy.

He's talking about the spitting and the name-calling from kids while walking along the street or in airports during Vietnam.

I was the focus of such a situation personally.
I'm sorry to hear that mud.

I however, have no part of a terrible incident such as that, and would denounce anyone in a minute if they did such thing.

I don't see how an occurrence I had no part that happened some 40 years ago somehow impugns me.
 
And it continues.

That wasn't a gay soldier you are booing - and - now saying you would discharge because he is gay (he "lied" - according to your DODT sensibilities)

That is an American Soldier. And you should be ashamed of yourself.

I'm booing a liar who had no integrity. Because he tricked the Army into giving him a uniform doesn't make him a soldier. It makes him a liar. Leavenworth if full of guys who tricked the military into giving them uniforms before they landed there.

Now, DADT (I think that's what you were grasping for) was a bad policy, because it created uncertainty. It pretty much encouraged the lying. I think that we should go back to what the policy was before 1980, where it was left tothe discretion of unit commanders whether a soldier's homosexuality made him unsuitable for service.
Lucky for you DADT is history now - and gays and lesbians can serve their country without the government policy of forced deception.

And it's not going to change anytime soon.

Too bad. So sad for you.

I'm not in anymore, so I don't care. I feel bad for all the troops that are going to get in some kind of trouble because some predator feels them up and they have to defend themselves.

Although, after Obama loses, they'll probably come to the new Republican President and put in a more workable policy.
 
I think the issue is history now.

Let's move on.

As to the isolated boo or two.....once again the left and this President are blowing it out of proportion for political gain.
Just in your little tiny thread we have booing.

That's telling me - for a number of conservatives, it's not as isolated a sentiment as you think.

We are talkiing about one wittle boo or two. No fingers were bit off, nobody got spit on.

Just an isolated asshole....an unidentified asshole at that.
Right now, here in this thread, people are dissing an American soldier because he is gay, and you are not speaking up about it.

And unless you know of a way to bite fingers or spit through a computer screen, I'm not sure what your point is? To draw some kind of bizarre parallel?
 
I'm booing a liar who had no integrity. Because he tricked the Army into giving him a uniform doesn't make him a soldier. It makes him a liar. Leavenworth if full of guys who tricked the military into giving them uniforms before they landed there.

Now, DADT (I think that's what you were grasping for) was a bad policy, because it created uncertainty. It pretty much encouraged the lying. I think that we should go back to what the policy was before 1980, where it was left tothe discretion of unit commanders whether a soldier's homosexuality made him unsuitable for service.
Lucky for you DADT is history now - and gays and lesbians can serve their country without the government policy of forced deception.

And it's not going to change anytime soon.

Too bad. So sad for you.

I'm not in anymore, so I don't care. I feel bad for all the troops that are going to get in some kind of trouble because some predator feels them up and they have to defend themselves.

Although, after Obama loses, they'll probably come to the new Republican President and put in a more workable policy.
Thank you for your service.

It is good that you have left.
 
[Thank you for your service.

It is good that you have left.


So you've seen my service record?

Quick, what rank was I discharged at?

What medals and commendations did I receive?

What was my MOS?

What was in my EER's?

Oh, wait, you don't know THOSE things. You just know that I don't think repealling DADT was a good idea, and I think people who lie to enlist aren't doing themselves or the service any good.

You know, this is pretty much what happens when you let political correctness make military decisions.
 
every partisan hack including yourself works to "divide" the country every day also......and politicians doing it? falls on deaf ears. i knew this since i was like 13 though, glad you're finally catching up
 
I'm not in anymore, so I don't care. I feel bad for all the troops that are going to get in some kind of trouble because some predator feels them up and they have to defend themselves. Although, after Obama loses, they'll probably come to the new Republican President and put in a more workable policy.

That's erroneous. It's not against the code of conduct already? :cuckoo:
 
I'm not in anymore, so I don't care. I feel bad for all the troops that are going to get in some kind of trouble because some predator feels them up and they have to defend themselves. Although, after Obama loses, they'll probably come to the new Republican President and put in a more workable policy.

That's erroneous. It's not against the code of conduct already? :cuckoo:

sure it is.

And how many guys are going to rush into the C.O.'s office and say, "Private Snuffy tried to sodomize me in the shower, Sir!"

Hell, no. He's going to beat the ever living snot out of Private Snuffy. Then he's going to be up on charges, too. That's human nature, guy.

And of course, when the CO actually tries to bring Snuffy up on charges, just you watch, the ACLU and such will rush in and brand him a homophobe and tarnish his career.

Again, DADT was a bad policy because it confused the issue. This just makes it a bit worse.
 
[Thank you for your service.

It is good that you have left.


So you've seen my service record?

Quick, what rank was I discharged at?

What medals and commendations did I receive?

What was my MOS?

What was in my EER's?

Oh, wait, you don't know THOSE things. You just know that I don't think repealling DADT was a good idea, and I think people who lie to enlist aren't doing themselves or the service any good.

You know, this is pretty much what happens when you let political correctness make military decisions.
Doesn't matter. People with far more medals than you disagree. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Pentagon hold far more sway than you do.

As I said, thank you for your service.

Enjoy civilian life.

It is good that bigots leave the military.
 
I'm not in anymore, so I don't care. I feel bad for all the troops that are going to get in some kind of trouble because some predator feels them up and they have to defend themselves. Although, after Obama loses, they'll probably come to the new Republican President and put in a more workable policy.

That's erroneous. It's not against the code of conduct already? :cuckoo:

sure it is.

And how many guys are going to rush into the C.O.'s office and say, "Private Snuffy tried to sodomize me in the shower, Sir!"

Hell, no. He's going to beat the ever living snot out of Private Snuffy. Then he's going to be up on charges, too. That's human nature, guy.

And of course, when the CO actually tries to bring Snuffy up on charges, just you watch, the ACLU and such will rush in and brand him a homophobe and tarnish his career.

Again, DADT was a bad policy because it confused the issue. This just makes it a bit worse.

I think that you should wait and see the human nature take place before you go and try to predict such things.

For instance, people don't generally grope women as they walk by anymore. It's no longer accepted, it's not tolerated.

That you think gays are going to just go ahead and start doing it to Military men in the shower is sheer propoganda. The military is going to do just fine with the repeal.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top