In a big, rousing, emotional ceremony this morning, President Obama signed legislation that put an end to DADT.
Mr. Obama began the ceremony by telling the story of a brave WWII soldier who risked his life to save the life of a fellow soldier. Years later, the soldier whose life was saved came to learn that the man who rescued him was gay. Today, the saved soldier's son was at the historic signing ceremony.
President Obama thanked everyone who worked hard to get this bill passed, while the crowd wildly cheered after he mentioned each legislator's name as well as the military and civilian personnel who worked selflessly to end the dishonorable DADT.
The crowd was high on happiness and pride for this country.
Well done, America!
Except for this nutty news from the state of Virginia:
"A state lawmaker from Virginia is so upset about the Congress repealing Don't Ask, Don't Tell that he wants to institute a mini-DADT banning gay men and lesbians from the Virginia National Guard.Has someone put stupid in the drinking water of that state? Because that would be the only explanation for the cringingly idiotic statements in that news report.
"It's a distraction when I'm on the battlefield and have to concentrate on the enemy 600 yards away and I'm worried about this guy whose got eyes on me," the lawmaker, Delegate Bob Marshall (R), told WUSA9. "If I needed a blood transfusion and the guy next to me had committed sodomy 14 times in the last month I'd be worried."
Marshall says he's working on legislation to institute a DADT-style state law. His authority to do so, he claims, comes from the clause of the U.S. Constitution which reads, "reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia."
But Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell (R), who as the authority to deploy the state National Guard in a state emergency, says no way.
"Whatever the final guidelines are from the Department of the Defense, I expect the Virginia National Guard Bureau to adhere to them," McDonnell said during a WTOP radio show today."
This statement is especially dumb and jaw-droppingly ignorant,
"If I needed a blood transfusion and the guy next to me had committed sodomy 14 times in the last month I'd be worried."
and is a sorry example of how people, who should know better, use stupid lies and absolute erroneous hypotheticals to scare people who don't know better. Virginia Republican state legislator Bob Marshall and Governor McDonnell are examples of why I have no respect for a party that elevates people to positions of power who continue to support inequality and pander to the worst in people's nature. They are on the wrong side of history, along with Republican Senator John McCain and all the other dinosaurs in the Republican party who bitterly cling to their hatreds and fears.
They lost this fight, and we're a better country because they did.
9 comments:
IMHO opinion there is no need for the cheer leading. DADT should have been repealed, it was, and now we shall see the impact if any. I suspect there won't be any.
I find it fascinating that a hero receives special recognition for his bravery because... he was gay?
More pandering to special interests to make political points that need not be made.
I am just comfortable the right thing was done. That speaks louder than the cheer leading or grandstanding.
Merry Christmas, Happy Holidays, and a Prosperous and Happy New Year!
Shaw, and now word comes that there is a deal on the First Responders Bill.
This has turned into a pretty good session for President Obama.
Too bad the GOP couldn't support the Omnibus Spending Bill because of the earmarks they themselves put into it.
Any day Sen. Graham is saying Harry Reid whupped 'em, is a good day.
Merry Christmas to you and yours. The picture you have up of Boston makes me want to visit.
RN USA: "I find it fascinating that a hero receives special recognition for his bravery because... he was gay?"
No. I didn't take that implication from the story. I understood it to mean that in battle, when life and death decisions are made, no one knows or cares what one's sexual orientation is. The story also showed, contrary to some people's prejudiced ideas, that gays are not weak or unable to perform heroic deeds.
The reason this was highlighted in this ceremony, IMO, is that for too long, our gay brothers and sisters have been denigrated and dehumanized by a majority of Americans who have been unwilling to extend to them equal rights.
There is no pandering here IMO, just long overdue recognition of years of keeping a group of people in second class status just because of sexual orientation. That is unAmerican, and I guess people want to be proud of this moment.
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to you as well.
Merry Christmas, Feliz Navidad, Buon Natale, to you and your family, Dave.
I would love to show you around Beantown should you ever make the decision to visist.
I've been trying to get Pam up here for a visit, and we may be able to do that this spring.
Peace in the New Year.
Shaw - Well getting Pam up to NE would be great! Thanks for the tip, I shall be sure to encourage her to do so in any small way I can.
Check this out:
http://rationalnationusa.blogspot.com/2010/12/one-for-barney.html
""If I needed a blood transfusion and the guy next to me had committed sodomy 14 times in the last month I'd be worried."
But no worries if it were 13 times or 15 times. Got it.
Dave said: "Too bad the GOP couldn't support the Omnibus Spending Bill because of the earmarks they themselves put into it."
Long forgotten is candidate Obama's excellent promise to veto any bill with this crap in it.
So much for the people who claim Obama is no better than a Republican. There aren't many plausible Republican Presidential candidates I can imagine doing this.
RN: IMHO opinion there is no need for the cheer leading. DADT should have been repealed, it was,
But it wouldn't have been, if Republicans were still dominant in the government. As for the impact -- the impact is that there will no longer be thousands of perfectly capable military personnel discharged for no good reason.
dmarks: "Long forgotten is candidate Obama's excellent promise to veto any bill with this crap in it."
You must have missed the speech President Obama gave that addressed this. Too bad. He explained why this campaign promise was not feasible when the stimulus bill was passed.
You're not under the misconception that presidents are able to keep all the promises they make when they're candidates, are you?
If you are, I refer you to Mr. Bush, the presidential candidate, who declared in a presidential debate that in his administration there would be no nation building and that America, under his presidency, would be humble in dealing with other countries.
Here are some other presidential promises that were broken:
* Woodrow Wilson promised to keep the United States out of World War I
* Herbert Hoover pledged to end poverty and promised, a chicken in every pot and two cars in every garage.
* Franklin Roosevelt promised to keep the US out of World War II
* Lyndon B. Johnson promised to win the war on poverty
* Richard Nixon promised to quickly resolve the Vietnam War
* George Herbert W. Bush said, Read my lips, no new taxes.
Here're some broken promises made by George W. Bush:
"There are 43 million uninsured Americans – 4 million more than when the current administration took office. George W. Bush will reverse this trend by making health insurance affordable for hard-working, low-income families." [Source: Bush-Cheney 2000 website]
This one is hilarious, since GWB didn't veto any spending bills until the few that he did in the last two years of his administration:
"To restore confidence in government, [George W. Bush] will...attack pork-barrel spending." [Source: Bush-Cheney 2000 website]
As President, Governor Bush will pay the debt down to a historically low level." [Source: Bush-Cheney 2000 website]
dmarks, you bring up the earmarks promise all the time, but I never see you bring up the fact that every president who has assumed office has had to adjust or abandon some of the promises made while he was a candidate and not privy to presidential realities.
You can go to this site and actually track Mr. Obama's promises kept and promises broken.
Shaw: "You're not under the misconception that presidents are able to keep all the promises they make when they're candidates, are you?"
G.W. Bush is bad for breaking promises. Or was. Now there is a current President, who is breaking a good promise to veto such waste spending. I'm sharply critical of him just as I am on the House Republicans who are trying to play both sides of the issue.
The list of past Presidential promises broken (completely irrelevant) reads like an excuse to excuse the current one for breaking them. But no. He can do better than this. It makes it no less bad that Obama signs earmark bills into law whether or not Johnson or B.F.Pierce broke promises. The "presidential reality" is that there's a budget problem.
And there's no excuse for a President to break a promise to do good things by doing bad things.
Post a Comment