‘
lol,, Matt sounds a little testy about the prez
HA!

Irrelevant indeed. An embarrassment to our political system.

At what point does McCained become a verb to describe an unprincipled empty suit? For example, after seeing an old friend after many years: “You know, I was looking forward to seeing you and talking about a lot of this stuff, but you’ve really mccained over the years.”

‘
I cant wait ’till Sarah comments on this!
ONLY THEN will we know what direction we should take on this issue!
IF Sarah says to keep ‘DADT’ then we keep it!
lol
Mediaite,, go get me her quote!

With all Mccains experience, he allowed himself to be convinced in choosing Sarah, which destroyed his credibility for being President.

Just like you don’t raise taxes during a recession, you can’t make major cultural military shifts in the middle of two wars. This should have already happened, it didn’t, now we’re stuck until Afghanistan is stable and in similar shape to Iraq is today. The liberal left needs to see reality, and accept that it’ll take more time. Obama deserves credit since really, DADT is essentially on-hold since it can only be enforced at the top level. Likely it won’t be enforced.

DADT is going nowhere. No one has the right to be in the military. I am amazed that loons on the left think this is a done deal.
Matt clearly has the liberal gene. He really believes that allowing gays to openly serve is just dandy and of course everyone agrees. He also believes we should just force the military to buy into that nonsense.

If anyone proposed making men and women shower together and sleep in the same rooms together, everyone would know they were crazy. But it is ok to make men that are sexually attracted to other men sleep and shower with men that don’t want that, is JUST FINE? How dumb are liberals?

gordonbloyershow said:
But it is ok to make men that are sexually attracted to other men sleep and shower with men that don’t want that, is JUST FINE?

What’s the problem?
Are you afraid gay men will fantasize over the naked body of straight men?

I have news for you…most straight military men fantasize about the naked body of a fully clothed woman, undressing them with their minds. That’s what happens when you have a large group of horny men.

Gay men will stop checking out the asses of straight men when straight men stop checking out the asses of women.

While the issue of repealing Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell is certainly open to debate, especially since changing policy in the midst of two wars might not be an effective strategy, the time for that debate should by now have come and gone, since military leaders have now commented and studies are ready to be presented to Congress this week.

The studies being presented seems like a good time to start the debate, not end it.

McCain also continually stressed the “all-volunteer” nature of our forces, which hopefully was not a hint that if gays in the military do not like the current policy they should quit, and instead was a concern that repealing the policy might result in other members of the military quitting.

Gays who can’t live with the policy ought not join the military as long as it exists. Why would they?

Big_F-ing_Deal said:
I have news for you…most straight military men fantasize about the naked body of a fully clothed woman, undressing them with their minds. That’s what happens when you have a large group of horny men.

That’s why they segregate them.

“If anyone proposed making men and women shower together and sleep in the same rooms together, everyone would know they were crazy. But it is ok to make men that are sexually attracted to other men sleep and shower with men that don’t want that, is JUST FINE? How dumb are liberals?”

Having served in the Air Force, I could not agree with you more. Gays that insist on hanging out in the showers cause a major problem. Even under current rules it is difficult to get rid of them. The Air Force keeps transferring their gay problems to other bases.

“If anyone proposed making men and women shower together and sleep in the same rooms together, everyone would know they were crazy. But it is ok to make men that are sexually attracted to other men sleep and shower with men that don’t want that, is JUST FINE?”

Actually, gay men are sleeping and showering with non-gay men right now. Doesn’t seem to be a problem.

In fact, our society virtually never segregates out gay people from non-gay people. We are socialized by gender, not by sexual orientation.

In every high school in America, gay kids are sharing locker rooms, showers and bathrooms with non-gay kids of the same gender. Without any complaints or calls for separate facilities. And many gay high school kids are “out”.

Had you never realized that?

DADT serves no purpose whatsoever. It’s dumb and immoral. And here’s a prediction that I feel pretty confident in making: once it’s lifted, it will make absolutely no difference to anyone except to those brave service members who happen to be gay and wish to serve their country without having to play pretend about the rest of their lives.

old soldiers never die…they just get senile and stupid…he talks out of both sides of his mouth….he makes no sense at all…..this is the viewpoint of an old man still fighting the last presidential election…..

This really makes no sense because Obama id in the courts trying to keep DADT in effect.

Qhats up with Mccain, can’t even notice he and BO are on the same side. Ask the DADT protesters in front of the white house and the hecklers at his rally.

Obama is just treading water, waiting for the 2012 campaign. That’s all he knows how to do. He is already going downhill so fast he ought to be on skis. DADT will help sink him with the political middle, although it will be a big hit with Rachel Minnow.

Whats up with Mccain, can’t even notice he and BO are on the same side. Ask the DADT protesters in front of the white house and the hecklers at his rally.

Atticus Draco said:
The supposed gays didnt take showers until the rest of us normal ones were done
That is,, if they took any showers at all
It was an efficient policy when i was there

Well, whenever that was, it wasn’t when I was in high school– nor is it the case now.

Gay kids shower with the others all the time without a problem.

I suppose they also never went to the bathroom?

As for “beating the hell out of them,” maybe you think that’s “normal.”

I think it’s the sign of really insecure bullies–at least that’s what bullying was all about when I was in high school.

Peace.

Big_F-ing_Deal said:
What’s the problem?Are you afraid gay men will fantasize over the naked body of straight men? I have news for you…most straight military men fantasize about the naked body of a fully clothed woman, undressing them with their minds. That’s what happens when you have a large group of horny men. Gay men will stop checking out the asses of straight men when straight men stop checking out the asses of women.

You have out done youself. This the dumbest comment you have ever made. Do you even know what you just said?

Linguist said:
“If anyone proposed making men and women shower together and sleep in the same rooms together, everyone would know they were crazy. But it is ok to make men that are sexually attracted to other men sleep and shower with men that don’t want that, is JUST FINE?” Actually, gay men are sleeping and showering with non-gay men right now. Doesn’t seem to be a problem. In fact, our society virtually never segregates out gay people from non-gay people. We are socialized by gender, not by sexual orientation. In every high school in America, gay kids are sharing locker rooms, showers and bathrooms with non-gay kids of the same gender. Without any complaints or calls for separate facilities. And many gay high school kids are “out”. Had you never realized that? DADT serves no purpose whatsoever. It’s dumb and immoral. And here’s a prediction that I feel pretty confident in making: once it’s lifted, it will make absolutely no difference to anyone except to those brave service members who happen to be gay and wish to serve their country without having to play pretend about the rest of their lives.

Wow, if you want an example of how dumbs libs are read the above comment.

Actually, gay men are sleeping and showering with non-gay men right now. Doesn’t seem to be a problem. In fact, our society virtually never segregates out gay people from non-gay people.

gordonbloyershow said:
Wow, if you want an example of how dumbs libs are read the above comment.

Which of the above statements is untrue or “dumb”? Thanks.

How do the gays, who voted for Repubs, to spite PBO feel now?

Atticus Draco said:
was really no big deal,, only a hand few were ever identified as being gay

So just curious: Was this bullying reserved for innocent kids some of you thought might be”queer”–or was it general bullying of others? You know, kids with glasses, kids who were overweight, etc?

Blower, the word around here is that you were never in the military bit I would bet a paycheck that if you took PE in high school or have ever belonged to a gym you have already showered with a gay man. Of course considering you are who you are they would have not even taken a look at your ass. You and most of you old men on here that are in denial don’t have to worry about gays coming after you.

Now that they want to come out of the closet you men (some of you) are all of a sudden scared. Bigority is nothing but fear.

truthrose1 said:
How do the gays, who voted for Repubs, to spite PBO feel now?

The Log Cabin Repubs are the ones who have filed a law suit that will end up in the SC.

Atticus Draco said:
‘Hey,, I’m just tellin’ ya how it was.It was really no big deal,, only a hand few were ever identified as being gay“Queers” is what we called ‘em back thenI dunno about your neck of the woods,,Just about weekly in my local paper,,A gay gets his butt whipped around hereIt makes big news when they doFor a day or two,, then its kinda forgotten,, move on to the next one

Who beat the hell out of you that you are so mean??

truthrose1 said:
How do the gays, who voted for Repubs, to spite PBO feel now?

how do gay people who voted for obama because they thought he would be a champion for ending DADT, and DOMA feel now? (besides refusing to just sign an executive order to suspend them, he is in court fighting to keep them both in place)

Linguist said:
So just curious: Was this bullying reserved for innocent kids some of you thought might be”queer”–or was it general bullying of others? You know, kids with glasses, kids who were overweight, etc?

I was a jock so,, that’s a question best reserved for someone in the Glee Club or somethin’
IF I didn’t like your looks,, I made it known,, you don’t want to be around me,,
simply put
I really didn’t hafta worry about the everyday squabbles of high school life
I’m Not kidding ya tho,, if you were gay,, it was best to STFU about it
If you were gay,, you better pretend you’re not,, was the best policy
Did I personally kick the hell out of any of ‘em,,no I didn’t, NOT specifically for being gay at least
Did I threaten ‘em to keep the hell away from me,, yeah I did,, if that’s what you are askin’
But in all honesty,, I rarely talked to him
It really wasnt a big issue for me, nor a concern

O’Reilly: Obama should ‘sign the executive order’ ending DADT, ‘it’s just not fair, we should stop this nonsense.’
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/07/28/oreilly-dadt-not-fair/

White House Rejects CAP’s Recommendations To Suspend DADT Through Executive Order
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/06/25/gibbs-cap-dadt/

“America is ready to get rid of the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy. All that is required is leadership.” ~ Obama 2007
http://www.hrcbackstory.org/2007/11/senator-barack-obama-pledges-to-end-dont-ask-dont-tell-and-to-help-reinstate-gays-and-lesbians-kicked-out-of-the-military-due-to-this-policy/

So….?

Atticus Draco said:
It really wasnt a big issue for me, nor a concern

Understood.

So I guess I don’t understand what the “big issue” is about gay soldiers continuing to serve in the Military, either.

As I’ve already said, there are gay soldiers there now, and really, it doesn’t seem to be an issue. I don’t see why it suddenly becomes an issue if you actually are sure who is gay and who is not instead of just speculating.

And, of course, in the Military, you have to be with all sorts who you might not get along with: a fundamentalist Christian might have to serve alongside a Muslim, for example. There is no “DADT” policy for them. Why not?

True story: I knew two guys who looked so much alike they could have been brothers, both from a small town in the Midwest, both Baptists, both good at sports in high school and both fairly popular. One of them ended up dating the other’s girlfriend. From that point on, they acted like mortal enemies of each other.

And somehow, they ended up in the same unit. Right next to each other all the time. They ended up fighting. Their sargeant lay down the law: get over it or else.

They did.

So if they could, not sure why we’d have a blanket policy against one group of people who haven’t done anything and, as far as we can tell, are doing a good job. I mean, at the very least, you’d want to get rid of the one who is acting up, right?

You simply cannot make a policy getting rid of every group who someone else might not like. If you did, we’d have no one left!

DADT makes no sense to me. Your attitude of “it really wasn’t a big issue for me” DOES makes sense. Let people serve who want to serve.

And those who cause problems, for whatever reason, should be told to “get over it or else.”

Peace.

sarainitaly said:
O’Reilly: Obama should ‘sign the executive order’ ending DADT, ‘it’s just not fair, we should stop this nonsense.’

So….?

You certainly are the queen of the links. I hope somebody rewards you by actually clicking on them.

sarainitaly said:
O’Reilly: Obama should ‘sign the executive order’ ending DADT, ‘it’s just not fair, we should stop this nonsense.’http://thinkprogress.org/2010/07/28/oreilly-dadt-not-fair/ White House Rejects CAP’s Recommendations To Suspend DADT Through Executive Orderhttp://thinkprogress.org/2009/06/25/gibbs-cap-dadt/ “America is ready to get rid of the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy. All that is required is leadership.” ~ Obama 2007http://www.hrcbackstory.org/2007/11/senator-barack-obama-pledges-to-end-dont-ask-dont-tell-and-to-help-reinstate-gays-and-lesbians-kicked-out-of-the-military-due-to-this-policy/ So….?

Your life would be an empty shell without Google, wouldn’t it?

This day just gets better. LOL

gordonbloyershow said:
No one has the right to be in the military.

Indeed, and as we know from last night there are people who go to great lengths to avoid the military.

George C said:
This day just gets better. LOL

it’s all they can do….

sarainitaly said:
it’s all they can do….

What? Get Better? Guilty as charged. Some of us are a fine Cabernet Sauvignon whilst others are Boone’s Farm Strawberry Hill.

sarainitaly said:
it’s all they can do….

Now you know the weight that it carries , none .

Cheers !

Atticus, you’re a pathetic person. What goes around…

The Real Royal King said:
What? Get Better? Guilty as charged. Some of us are a fine Cabernet Sauvignon whilst others are Boone’s Farm Strawberry Hill.

Hey Everybody, The Real Royal College Kid is clamoring for attention!! Glad your back junior, we missed your “manufactured” life and many funny made up anecdotes. So what’s on the agenda now that your back at school?

Linguist said:
Atticus Draco said:
It really wasnt a big issue for me, nor a concern

Understood.

So I guess I don’t understand what the “big issue” is about gay soldiers continuing to serve in the Military, either.

Dont hen peck or pigeon hole my remarks
i was elaborate in my description in how things was
The ‘queers’ were put in their position,, and held at bay,, as it were
I DIDNT HAFTA BE CONCERNED WITH ‘EM
IF they ever intersected my ‘orb’,, which was a rarity,,
we didnt hang out in the same places,, including at school,,
ALL I HAD TO DO was say,, GIT THE F’ AWAY FROM ME,,
and that pretty much handled it
I didnt hafta to be violent towards ‘em
or pretty much be that threatening
THEY KNEW THEIR PLACE
So i didnt hafta deal with it on a daily basis

The Real Royal King said:
What? Get Better? Guilty as charged. Some of us are a fine Cabernet Sauvignon whilst others are Boone’s Farm Strawberry Hill.

Judging from your infamous YouTube hit , you are a Colt 45 type of guy ..

murf said:
Judging from your infamous YouTube hit , you are a Colt 45 type of guy ..

what’s the link to his youtube hit?

Atticus Draco said:
THEY KNEW THEIR PLACE
So i didnt hafta deal with it on a daily basis

And it sounds like you would have to deal with it just fine in the Military. Shrug. You get over things. If you don’t, you’re out. What’s the big deal?

Linguist said:
Atticus Draco said:
THEY KNEW THEIR PLACE
So i didnt hafta deal with it on a daily basis

And it sounds like you would have to deal with it just fine in the Military. Shrug. You get over things. If you don’t, you’re out. What’s the big deal?

Okay,, you pigeon’d hole my remarks,, now you’re reading into them?
I didnt say one way or another about the present day situation!

The Real Royal King said:
Your life would be an empty shell without Google, wouldn’t it?

Fact: Your life wouldn’t be whole unless you had some wood up your ass! woodinit?

sarainitaly said:
how do gay people who voted for obama because they thought he would be a champion for ending DADT, and DOMA feel now? (besides refusing to just sign an executive order to suspend them, he is in court fighting to keep them both in place)

First sara let me congratulate because with the time difference between here and Italy one might think you never sleep but you seem to always be wide awake.

Now on the the executive order part. Yrs, he could have done that but that is like putting a bandage on something that needs stitches to heal. Executive Order could always be changed by na future president. It needs to be done right and for good. If the President is nothing as you people say the one thing I will say is he does something like this by the book and well he should.

Linguist said:
Which of the above statements is untrue or “dumb”? Thanks.

If they are they don’t know they are. Duh. That is the purpose of DADT isn’t it?

BlackWidow said:
Now that they want to come out of the closet you men (some of you) are all of a sudden scared. Bigority is nothing but fear.

The real WORD around here is that you are pretty stupid. I would confirm that.

Just4thefax said:
Fact: Your life wouldn’t be whole unless you had some wood up your ass! woodinit?

NUTSO don’tyou get a headache going back and forth???

gordonbloyershow said:
The real WORD around here is that you are pretty stupid. I would confirm that.

If you wern’t hating on me I would not have a good day.

BlackWidow said:
NUTSO don’tyou get a headache going back and forth???

Fact: Look wrinkles don’t pull out your false teeth and try giving me a blow job!

timzank said:
what’s the link to his youtube hit?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eEg_qLi0vaU

Forget him – let’s talk about Qadaffi’s voluptuous Ukranian nurse/dominator!

BlackWidow said:
Yrs, he could have done that but that is like putting a bandage on something that needs stitches to heal.

Obama could have signed the executive order two years ago and have stopped hundreds of soldiers from getting kicked out under him.

“First sara let me congratulate because with the time difference between here and Italy one might think you never sleep but you seem to always be wide awake.”

One might think at “your age” you would sleep more.
It’s 2am here. Why do you care when I sleep? What business is it of yours?

murf said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eEg_qLi0vaU

lol,, That is one very delusional ‘bubba

John McCain said:
DATD is “Political Promise” Of An “Inexperienced President”

Wow! We had a very experienced Senator and Republican nominee in 2008 pick Sarah Palin for VP. And McCain has the balls to talk about poor decisions. What a jackass.

sarainitaly said:
It’s 2am here. Why do you care when I sleep? What business is it of yours?

Sarah is Mediaite’s international woman of mystery.

Fox News: Better that we sell Hate than Crack said:
Sarah is Mediaite’s international woman of mystery.

I know she is a mystery but not sure about the international part. I am going to nickname her Ms. Google. By the way sara I answered your question about the executive order business but apparently you didn’t hear me because you just repeated your question. That is fine.

BlackWidow said:
Yrs, he could have done that but that is like putting a bandage on something that needs stitches to heal.

sarainitaly says:
Obama could have signed the executive order two years ago and have stopped hundreds of soldiers from getting kicked out under him.

bandaid, or not, hundreds of soldiers have been kicked out since obama took office and he hasn’t signed the executive order to stop it. he can sign the order, halt the dismissals, and work on getting it overturned for good.

(Black Widow, Fox News: Better that we sell Hate than Crack and RRk are the same person – it is so obvious. same comments, same lines of attacks… )

SARA !!!!!!! <3 <3 <3 !!!!!!!!!!!!! LOL You learn well grasshopper .

George C said:
SARA !!!!!!! <3 <3 <3 !!!!!!!!!!!!! LOL You learn well grasshopper .

gawd, what a psycho! who does that? you were SO right!!

sarainitaly said:
(Black Widow, Fox News: Better that we sell Hate than Crack and RRk are the same person –

I admit it. But I ask you and others to respond to the merit of our arguments rather than our names or avatars.

you have not made a arguement

I have as BlackWidow.

Fox News: Better that we sell Hate than Crack said:
I admit it. But I ask you and others to respond to the merit of our arguments rather than our names or avatars.

if you ever made one, we probably would.

sarainitaly said:
BlackWidow said:Yrs, he could have done that but that is like putting a bandage on something that needs stitches to heal. sarainitaly says:Obama could have signed the executive order two years ago and have stopped hundreds of soldiers from getting kicked out under him. bandaid, or not, hundreds of soldiers have been kicked out since obama took office and he hasn’t signed the executive order to stop it. he can sign the order, halt the dismissals, and work on getting it overturned for good. (Black Widow, Fox News: Better that we sell Hate than Crack and RRk are the same person – it is so obvious. same comments, same lines of attacks… )

Sara you give me more credit than I deserve. If I had a clue on how to be all those people I would. And will you quit whining about it anyway. Dan, please please stop these nasty people from picking on me!!! signed sara the only one on here with only one screen name! Grow up!

Fox News: Better that we sell Hate than Crack said:
I have as BlackWidow.

Now I would NEVER mention FOX news in my name. Nope not me!

I wonder if Michele ( Kansas ) is at Gretawire tonight ?

Just4thefax said:
Fact: Look wrinkles don’t pull out your false teeth and try giving me a blow job!

I think you meant pull out my teeth. You are an idiot.

BlackWidow said:
If you wern’t hating on me I would not have a good day.

I just respond to your attacks. If you can’t take stop attacking ME.

sarainitaly said:
Obama could have signed the executive order two years ago and have stopped hundreds of soldiers from getting kicked out under him.

Actually that is not the truth. The President can’t order a branch of government to disobey a law enacted by congress. Otherwise we would be a military dictatorship.

So Sara (who loves America so much that she lives in a foreign country that allows Gays to serve openly in the military) are we to take it that you support the repeal of don’t ask, don’t tell? And if you do, why are you not more critical of Republicans who are blocking the repeal?

======\\\ http://www. betterwhol es al er.us///===========
handbag $33

AF tank woman $17

puma slipper woman $30

90X Extreme Fitness System ONLY ONLY 42$$$$$$$

George C said:
I wonder if Michele ( Kansas ) is at Gretawire tonight ?

So George sounds like you just come here to stalk women!

JamesA1102 said:
Actually that is not the truth. The President can’t order a branch of government to disobey a law enacted by congress. Otherwise we would be a military dictatorship. So Sara (who loves America so much that she lives in a foreign country that allows Gays to serve openly in the military) are we to take it that you support the repeal of don’t ask, don’t tell? And if you do, why are you not more critical of Republicans who are blocking the repeal?

You go James. Shhhhh I think sara is sleeping. Afterall it is 4 in the morning in Italy.

gordonbloyershow said:
I just respond to your attacks. If you can’t take stop attacking ME.

Ahhhh Blower I never attack you. You must have me confused with someone else.

BlackWidow said:
So George sounds like you just come here to stalk women!

Says the guy pretending to be a woman. BWAHAHAHAHAHHAHA

George C said:
I wonder if Michele ( Kansas ) is at Gretawire tonight ?

” She ” will be as soon as BlackWidow goes to bed !

JamesA1102 said:
So Sara (who loves America so much that she lives in a foreign country that allows Gays to serve openly in the military)

BlackWidow said:
I think you meant pull out my teeth. You are an idiot.

Fox News: Better that we sell Hate than Crack said:
I admit it. But I ask you and others to respond to the merit of our arguments rather than our names or avatars.

skyfet said:
With all Mccains experience, he allowed himself to be convinced in choosing Sarah, which destroyed his credibility for being President.

Whats the count on sock puppets at ?

Ah murf , If I could give you a list LOL .

gordonbloyershow said:
If they are they don’t know they are. Duh. That is the purpose of DADT isn’t it?

What’s the difference whether they know or don’t know as long as they’re doing their job well and minding their own business? I REALLY don’t see why it matters.

Just4thefax said:
Fact: No one likes taking a piss in a 10 head restroom when you’re in the stall farthest to the right and a flaming limp wrist faggot steps into the stall next to you trying to look at you JUNK!

Well, I am gay, and if the person next to me peeing –whether a limp-wristed stereotype of whatever you think it is or a “macho” non-limp-wristed non-”faggot” tried looking at my “junk” (“junk”? What? Is this sixth grade?), I tell him to mind his own business.

Urinals are for peeing. Geez.

Who knows WHY he is staring? Maybe he’s straight and just wants to make sure he’s bigger than you. It’s STILL no excuse.

I REALLY don’t get your point. So your solution to some idiot who for WHATEVER reason can’t help looking at your privates is to kick out an entire group of people who haven’t done anything and never would?

Makes no sense. Maybe it does to you, but it really doesn’t to me, and I am gay.

Linguist said:
Who knows WHY he is staring? Maybe he’s straight and just wants to make sure he’s bigger than you. .

Sounds like you have a alibi for when you get caught …

murf said:
Sounds like you have a alibi for when you get caught …

I, like most people, gay and straight, understand that urinals are for peeing.

The question is: what do all these people who are apparently so terrified of standing next to gay people think they are for?

And what’s with this idea of staring at people’s genitals? Is that someone’s idea of a good time? You’ll forgive me for saying so, but I think that’s pretty sad.

Linguist said:
The question is: what do all these people who are apparently so terrified of standing next to gay people think they are for?

Yeah , I usually go one over if I can.. too many experiences with the meat– gazer dude..gives me stage fright , if ya know know what I mean…Lol

murf said:
gives me stage fright , if ya know know what I mean…Lol

I guess. I just mind my own business, so I really don’t get being frightened by what’s on either side! ;-)

Take care.

Linguist

sarainitaly said:
Obama could have signed the executive order two years ago and have stopped hundreds of soldiers from getting kicked out under him. “First sara let me congratulate because with the time difference between here and Italy one might think you never sleep but you seem to always be wide awake.” One might think at “your age” you would sleep more.It’s 2am here. Why do you care when I sleep? What business is it of yours?

Not all of us fall for the Italian shtick. That’s the relevance.

BlackWidow said:
First sara let me congratulate because with the time difference between here and Italy one might think you never sleep but you seem to always be wide awake. Now on the the executive order part. Yrs, he could have done that but that is like putting a bandage on something that needs stitches to heal. Executive Order could always be changed by na future president. It needs to be done right and for good. If the President is nothing as you people say the one thing I will say is he does something like this by the book and well he should.

JamesA1102 said:
Actually that is not the truth. The President can’t order a branch of government to disobey a law enacted by congress. Otherwise we would be a military dictatorship. So Sara (who loves America so much that she lives in a foreign country that allows Gays to serve openly in the military) are we to take it that you support the repeal of don’t ask, don’t tell? And if you do, why are you not more critical of Republicans who are blocking the repeal?

Very good points, both.

“It should be readily apparent that this President’s lack of passion and decisiveness on major issues is resulting in a public that is fast boring of him”

Well at least he’s racially uniting us. Listen, I want the policy repealed. But electing this fool because he’s black or that he ‘promised’ to repeal the policy is now starting to become a savory opportunity for everyone who didn’t vote for him to say ‘I told you so’.

“ALL I HAD TO DO was say,, GIT THE F’ AWAY FROM ME.”

I get the impression that the only gays you encountered were weak and tolerated that behavior. We’re talking about guys that join the military. Many of whom are tough as nails no matter what their sexual orientation. They’ll kick your ass. So it boils down to this. How will grown men act when they find out someone they’ve been working with turns out to be gay. Will they react like this guy? Or will they just go to work tomorrow like they did yesterday. Repealing DADT just means that guy that’s been there all along won’t lose his job cause somebody found out. Here’s my recommendation to flaming gay guys. Don’t try to join the military if this is policy is repealed! You’ll prove that the idiots that opposed the repeal were right. But if you can behave yourself, go ahead and volunteer to serve your country.

JamesA1102 said:
Actually that is not the truth. The President can’t order a branch of government to disobey a law enacted by congress. Otherwise we would be a military dictatorship.

So Sara (who loves America so much that she lives in a foreign country that allows Gays to serve openly in the military) are we to take it that you support the repeal of don’t ask, don’t tell? And if you do, why are you not more critical of Republicans who are blocking the repeal?

Actually, you’re wrong.

The President has the authority to issue an
executive order halting the operation of “don’t ask, don’t tell.” Under 10 U.S.C. § 12305
(“Authority of the President to Suspend Certain Laws Relating to Promotion, Retirement,
and Separation”), Congress grants the President authority to suspend the separation of
military members during any period of national emergency in which members of a
reserve component are serving involuntarily on active duty.
http://www.palmcenter.org/files/active/0/Executive%20Order%20on%20Gay%20Troops%20-%20final.pdf

Ending “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”
Practical Steps to Repeal the Ban on Openly Gay Men and Women in the U.S. Military
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/06/dont_ask_dont_tell.html

But a presidential suspension on further dismissals on the basis of DADT is not only within the authority of the president but is necessary to begin the process of repealing this counterproductive, costly, and unnecessary law.
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/06/25/gibbs-cap-dadt/

I believe people are born gay, and should be treated equally. Not special, not better, or worse, but equal. I think the fact that gays are currently serving shows that they can serve side by side.

I do understand concerns how someone might feel uncomfortable having to share quarters/bathrooms with someone who might be sexually attracted to them… such as a woman might feel having to share a bathroom and bunks with men. But they already are…

I also understand the concerns of sexual harassment, sexual assaults (both ways). It is also a slippery slope wrt privacy quarters. Will gays, once openly serving demand private quarters, will straight people demand private quarters and bathrooms. Will the military become like Boeing, with separate facilities for gays, straights, transgenders, transexuals… What do you do with service people who want to undergo sex operations? What happens if someone complains of sexual harassment by a gay person, or vice versa? Will gay service people start demanding special treatment/separate quarters, etc.? (and don’t say it won’t happen, because it very well could).

That’s why I understood Clinton signing the thing to begin with. It opens up a whole lotta new issues to have openly gay service members.

I think anyone who wants to serve their country should be able to do so. And I believe gay people are born that way. I don’t believe they should be treated differently or worse, or better. Just human. And if anyone, straight or gay, is harassed, they should be discharged, or punished.

I don’t think most people really have *issues* with gay people – it is the stereotypical *flaming queen* that I think causes those *issues*. Mr. Brady was gay. Lots of great people are/were gay.
http://www.famousandgay.com/

But, anyway, I think if all these countries can have openly gay service members, so can the USA.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_orientation_and_military_service

The Real Royal King said:
Very good points, both.

no, they’re not. they are both wrong.

No, Tumbleweed, they are not wrong, and the Executive Order argument is particularly strong. This is very much like the difficulty we got into when W went in to his anti-science mode and effectively limited embryonic stem cell research. One would think you might have learned something from that. Now, go Google for a bit and come back with some more inane and irrelevant links devoid of any meaningful analysis. After you polish you tiara, of course.

The other point, the efficacy of an EO contravening statutory law is sound as well.

Here may be found the sorry law codified as 10 USC 654:

http://web.mit.edu/committees/rotc/code.html

So, why was President Truman able to desegregate the armed services by EO? Simply put: segregation of the services was never made statutory. Only an EO was necessary. To that end, the following is helpful:

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2010/02/03/on-dont-ask-dont-tell-and-executive-orders/

But remember that The SCOTUS shot down President Truman’s EO to seize and operate the steel mills during the Korean “War”. Youngstown Sheet and Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 US 579 (1952) as a violation of the Due Process provision. However, other EO’s have been stricken solely on the basis of contravention of existing statutory law, as well. United States Chamber of Commerce, et al. v. Reich, 74 F3d 1322 (US Court of Appeals – DC, 1996).

We’ve been through all of this before. If you’d merely use PRIMARY sources you wouldn’t spread so much misinformation.

Atticus Draco said:
‘

“Queers” is what we called ‘em back then
I dunno about your neck of the woods,,

Yeah… back in the day, when all the queers and spooks knew their place.
The fact that you think physical violence is justified because of how someone acts or looks is beyond stupid. You ARE the problem. Why would you need to beat up someone that is gay? Why? Explain what kind of threat someone is to you because of their sexuality or outward appearance. Don’t you think long term social isolation is punishment enough?
I went to a high school where guys like you thought it was OK to pick on kids who they “knew” were gay. I was a transfer from the catholic school up the street and, ya know, kids who wear ties, obviously queer. Anyway, long story short… when is a broken nose not a broken nose to a school district? When it is the result of long-term harassment and intimidation. I wish someone had “not broken” your nose when you were a kid, maybe you’d have learned something.

p.s. why the hell is this the front page Mediaite? One of the biggest intelligence-media bombshells is fragging the news coverage across the world and we are getting this babble from that guy who brought us Sarah Palin?

Andrew K said:
p.s. why the hell is this the front page Mediaite? One of the biggest intelligence-media bombshells is fragging the news coverage across the world and we are getting this babble from that guy who brought us Sarah Palin?

Oh shucks, Y’all showed me…. I make this comment and you are sure to immediately give… oh wait, that’s an article about the Simpsons taking a swipe at Fox News. Why not grab an intern or something have them sit down and go back through the DVDs of the first few hundred episodes and see how many times Groening and Co. have taking a stab at “the hand that feeds them”.

Really, isn’t there a press secretary or a secretary of state in major CYA mode? No one from intelligence is sitting down to talk to anyone?

Linguist said:
Well, I am gay, and if the person next to me peeing –whether a limp-wristed stereotype of whatever you think it is or a “macho” non-limp-wristed non-”faggot” tried looking at my “junk” (“junk”? What? Is this sixth grade?), I tell him to mind his own business. Urinals are for peeing. Geez. Who knows WHY he is staring? Maybe he’s straight and just wants to make sure he’s bigger than you. It’s STILL no excuse. I REALLY don’t get your point. So your solution to some idiot who for WHATEVER reason can’t help looking at your privates is to kick out an entire group of people who haven’t done anything and never would? Makes no sense. Maybe it does to you, but it really doesn’t to me, and I am gay.

Fact: As being in the moral majority party here is something that may help with your special needs. Try it if it helps you can thank me later, good luck.

http://gayrights.change.org/blog/view/walmart_to_sell_book_about_curing_gay_people

sarainitaly said:
I think anyone who wants to serve their country should be able to do so. And I believe gay people are born that way. I don’t believe they should be treated differently or worse, or better. Just human. And if anyone, straight or gay, is harassed, they should be discharged, or punished.

Anyone can serve their country just not in the military. You can’t serve if you are too old, too young, too fat, have a health problem, can’t pass IQ test, can’t see, can’t hear and if you are openly gay.

NO one has the right to be in the military and the military should decide. They are there to defend this country and they should determine how to do it. They are not a social experiment.

sarainitaly said:
no, they’re not. they are both wrong.

RRK is always wrong. He is a failed divorce attorney.

Andrew K said:
Atticus Draco said:
‘

“Queers” is what we called ‘em back then
I dunno about your neck of the woods,,

Yeah… back in the day, when all the queers and spooks knew their place.
The fact that you think physical violence is justified because of how someone acts or looks is beyond stupid. You ARE the problem. Why would you need to beat up someone that is gay? Why? Explain what kind of threat someone is to you because of their sexuality or outward appearance. Don’t you think long term social isolation is punishment enough?
I went to a high school where guys like you thought it was OK to pick on kids who they “knew” were gay. I was a transfer from the catholic school up the street and, ya know, kids who wear ties, obviously queer. Anyway, long story short… when is a broken nose not a broken nose to a school district? When it is the result of long-term harassment and intimidation. I wish someone had “not broken” your nose when you were a kid, maybe you’d have learned something.

DON’T pigeon hole my remarks,,
Jeeze,,
I’ve said nothing of condoning beating up on gays
I’m just conveying to you how it was
It was a socially accepted practice back then
I didn’t make the rules

gordonbloyershow said:
Anyone can serve their country just not in the military. You can’t serve if you are too old, too young, too fat, have a health problem, can’t pass IQ test, can’t see, can’t hear and if you are openly gay.

NO one has the right to be in the military and the military should decide. They are there to defend this country and they should determine how to do it. They are not a social experiment.

As Lard Limbaugh has told us, one can’t even serve if he were to have a boil on his butt.

gordonbloyershow said:
RRK is always wrong. He is a failed divorce attorney.

Marceaux, I mean Blower, how can you say that after my remarkable explanation of Youngstown Sheet & Tube thoroughly dismantled Tumbleweed’s feeble Google-based “splanation”?

The President has the authority to issue an
executive order halting the operation of “don’t ask, don’t tell.” Under 10 U.S.C. § 12305
(“Authority of the President to Suspend Certain Laws Relating to Promotion, Retirement,
and Separation”), Congress grants the President authority to suspend the separation of
military members during any period of national emergency in which members of a
reserve component are serving involuntarily on active duty.
http://www.palmcenter.org/files/active/0/Executive%20Order%20on%20Gay%20Troops%20-%20final.pdf

Ending “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”
Practical Steps to Repeal the Ban on Openly Gay Men and Women in the U.S. Military
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/06/dont_ask_dont_tell.html

sarainitaly said:
Actually, you’re wrong. The President has the authority to issue anexecutive order halting the operation of “don’t ask, don’t tell.” Under 10 U.S.C. § 12305(“Authority of the President to Suspend Certain Laws Relating to Promotion, Retirement,and Separation”), Congress grants the President authority to suspend the separation ofmilitary members during any period of national emergency in which members of areserve component are serving involuntarily on active duty.http://www.palmcenter.org/files/active/0/Executive%20Order%20on%20Gay%20Troops%20-%20final.pdf Ending “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”Practical Steps to Repeal the Ban on Openly Gay Men and Women in the U.S. Militaryhttp://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/06/dont_ask_dont_tell.html But a presidential suspension on further dismissals on the basis of DADT is not only within the authority of the president but is necessary to begin the process of repealing this counterproductive, costly, and unnecessary law.http://thinkprogress.org/2009/06/25/gibbs-cap-dadt/

I’m not wrong. The President cannot issue an executive order to the military to break a law that was enacted by Congress. Now you can throw as many links up as you want but they all refer back to one review by the University of California which treated DADT as a military policy not a a law which it is.

gordonbloyershow said:
Anyone can serve their country just not in the military. You can’t serve if you are too old, too young, too fat, have a health problem, can’t pass IQ test, can’t see, can’t hear and if you are openly gay.

yes, you are correct about the limitations wrt age, health, IQ, etc….
good point.

i still don’t think if someone is within age, and health requirements, and are willing to die for their country, they should be denied just because they were born gay. it’s like denying them the right because they are black…and if i am not mistaken, they had separate quarters for black men at one time.

sarainitaly said:
The President has the authority to issue anexecutive order halting the operation of “don’t ask, don’t tell.” Under 10 U.S.C. § 12305(“Authority of the President to Suspend Certain Laws Relating to Promotion, Retirement,and Separation”), Congress grants the President authority to suspend the separation ofmilitary members during any period of national emergency in which members of areserve component are serving involuntarily on active duty.http://www.palmcenter.org/files/active/0/Executive%20Order%20on%20Gay%20Troops%20-%20final.pdf Ending “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”Practical Steps to Repeal the Ban on Openly Gay Men and Women in the U.S. Militaryhttp://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/06/dont_ask_dont_tell.html

No he doesn’t. We don’t live in a dictatorship where the President can order the military to disregard the law. Just saying it over and over again doesn’t make it true.

sarainitaly said:
i still don’t think if someone is within age, and health requirements, and are willing to die for their country, they should be denied just because they were born gay. it’s like denying them the right because they are black…and if i am not mistaken, they had separate quarters for black men at one time.

So if you really feel this way why are you not critical of the Republicans in the Senate who are blocking the repeal of the law? Why are you giving John McCain a pass when he has completely reversed his position and is leading the filibuster against the repeal? Why are you only attacking the President, who is trying to repeal it, on the matter?

sarainitaly said:
The President has the authority to issue an
executive order halting the operation of “don’t ask, don’t tell.” Under 10 U.S.C. § 12305
(“Authority of the President to Suspend Certain Laws Relating to Promotion, Retirement,
and Separation”), Congress grants the President authority to suspend the separation of
military members during any period of national emergency in which members of a
reserve component are serving involuntarily on active duty.
http://www.palmcenter.org/files/active/0/Executive%20Order%20on%20Gay%20Troops%20-%20final.pdf

Ending “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”
Practical Steps to Repeal the Ban on Openly Gay Men and Women in the U.S. Military
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/06/dont_ask_dont_tell.html

If you are content with a temporary, patchwork, bandage solution, fine. Just say so. Don’t take us through the pretext that this accomplishes anything beyond the current engagements or beyond the Obama presidency. That’s what happens when sloppy research vests you in an “answer” from which you are too narrow-minded or stubborn to move.

JamesA1102 said:
No he doesn’t. We don’t live in a dictatorship where the President can order the military to disregard the law. Just saying it over and over again doesn’t make it true.

I commend you, but you’ll never convince her. Stubborn as a mule and when armed with misinformation, as she always is, a real danger ….

JamesA1102 said:
So if you really feel this way why are you not critical of the Republicans in the Senate who are blocking the repeal of the law? Why are you giving John McCain a pass when he has completely reversed his position and is leading the filibuster against the repeal? Why are you only attacking the President, who is trying to repeal it, on the matter?

Thank you for your reasoned response. This is an important, dicey issue. We need more than a thick coating of Max Factor Pancake 129 to deal with this matter.

the president has the legal authority to end gay discharges with an executive order.

There are two different arguments for why Obama could choose not to enforce the law. The first one: he could say it was unconstitutional. At the time that DADT was passed, it was constitutional because there was no Supreme Court precedent establishing that homosexual relationships are protected under the implied privacy rights of the Bill of Rights……..Given that top military leaders have said that DADT is harmful to the military, Obama could have simply announced that, absent the state interest to justify DADT, it is now unconstitutional and will no longer be enforced.

Obama’s other option: simply using his executive power to decide how the laws will be, or won’t be, executed. So Obama could simply order the military to stop applying the law, or to use it much more narrowly and infrequently. “There are a lot of laws on the books he doesn’t rigorously enforce,” notes Geoffrey Corn, a military law expert who teaches at South Texas College of Law. “The courts have recognized that while Congress has full authority to pass laws, the president has authority over when to enforce laws,” says Turley. Many criminal statutes, for example, are often unenforced and prosecutors have a lot of discretion on when to bring charges and what sentence to seek.

If Obama didn’t pursue one of those permanent solutions, he could temporarily let gays serve while waiting for the courts or Congress to act by using his stop-loss power, which was explicitly granted by Congress in 1984 to override military discharges if troops are needed. “Stop-loss authority is a statutory authority enacted by Congress,” Mazur explains. “It gives the president authority to suspend any law that involves the discharge of service members. In times of national emergency there might be lots of reasons.”
http://www.newsweek.com/2010/10/19/is-obama-s-excuse-for-not-repealing-don-t-ask-don-t-tell-legitimate.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/aaron-belkin/obama-to-fire-his-first-g_b_199070.html

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=1998_register&docid=fr02jn98-135.pdf

Executive Order 8802, issued by U.S. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt on June 25, 1941, banned discrimination in the government and defense industries. Executive Order 8802 was the first significant presidential action on behalf of African American civil rights since Reconstruction.
http://www.milestonedocuments.com/documents/view/executive-order-8802/

On July 26, 1948, President Harry S. Truman signed this executive order establishing the President’s Committee on Equality of Treatment and Opportunity in the Armed Services, committing the government to integrating the segregated military.
http://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=old&doc=84

The Real Royal King said:
If you are content with a temporary, patchwork, bandage solution, fine. Just say so. Don’t take us through the pretext that this accomplishes anything beyond the current engagements or beyond the Obama presidency. That’s what happens when sloppy research vests you in an “answer” from which you are too narrow-minded or stubborn to move.

Why don’t you learn to stop and read, and quit just trying to attack attack attack!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

sarainitaly said:
BlackWidow said:
Yrs, he could have done that but that is like putting a bandage on something that needs stitches to heal.

sarainitaly says:
Obama could have signed the executive order two years ago and have stopped hundreds of soldiers from getting kicked out under him.

bandaid, or not, hundreds of soldiers have been kicked out since obama took office and he hasn’t signed the executive order to stop it. he can sign the order, halt the dismissals, and work on getting it overturned for good.

(Black Widow, Fox News: Better that we sell Hate than Crack and RRk are the same person – it is so obvious. same comments, same lines of attacks… )

JamesA1102 said:
So if you really feel this way why are you not critical of the Republicans in the Senate who are blocking the repeal of the law? Why are you giving John McCain a pass when he has completely reversed his position and is leading the filibuster against the repeal? Why are you only attacking the President, who is trying to repeal it, on the matter?

what are you, a little mouse in my pocket? how do you know i’m not?

this post is about the political promises of an inexperienced candidate obama – promises that he hasn’t kept and his overall “lack of passion and decisiveness on major issues”. He could sign an executive order and stop hundreds of soldiers from getting discharged. he’s not.
http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2008/11/10/the-law-blog-goes-back-to-school-executive-orders-101/

JamesA1102 said:
No he doesn’t. We don’t live in a dictatorship where the President can order the military to disregard the law. Just saying it over and over again doesn’t make it true.

wrong-o.

sarainitaly said:
Executive Order 8802, issued by U.S. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt on June 25, 1941, banned discrimination in the government and defense industries. Executive Order 8802 was the first significant presidential action on behalf of African American civil rights since Reconstruction.
http://www.milestonedocuments.com/documents/view/executive-order-8802/

On July 26, 1948, President Harry S. Truman signed this executive order establishing the President’s Committee on Equality of Treatment and Opportunity in the Armed Services, committing the government to integrating the segregated military.
http://www.ourdocuments.gov/doc.php?flash=old&doc=84

Why don’t you learn to stop and read, and quit just trying to attack attack attack!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

All the Marys in Heaven. No one disputes that President Obama could sign such an order. It is the efficacy of signing such an order. Do you understand what that means?

The Order will most certain be subject to a lawsuit because it contravenes statutory law. Go back and read the ***** PRIMARY SOURCES *****, Youngstown Sheet and Tube and US C of C v. Reich. Please, for accuracy stick to ***** PRIMARY SOURCES ***** and stop cluttering up cyberspace with these endless links and copies and pastes from SECONDARY SOURCES. Do you understand the difference?

And, even the lawsuit aside, an Executive Order will most assuredly be subject to a new Executive Order when President Obama’s term ends. Any Executive Order is subject to a new Executive Order. Any fix will be subject to restoration of the current draconian law. Do you understand that?

Lastly, Kan the Krap about attack. Yes, I am attacking your hare-brained, schmear on some Pancake Make-up approach, but it is your approach. It is you who is attacking, non-substantively, by your persistent bleating, kvetching, moaning and whining, every time anyone makes an informed, articulate argument which doesn’t parrot the Krap you gave served.

sarainitaly said:
Black Widow, Fox News: Better that we sell Hate than Crack and RRk are the same person – it is so obvious. same comments, same lines of attacks…

And now for a perfectly legitimate attack of another nature: You, Tumbleweed, are a damn liar! Unless and until you offer documentary evidence I have ever posted under a name other than the Real Royal King at Mediate, shut your blow hole!

Try blabbering old fool, trrk..
It would fit you very well.

There, there, King. Having been in Navy JAG during Vietnam, you must be in your seventies, and we know you old timers can get cranky. Tell the attendant to start mashing your oatmeal up a little better.

The Real Royal King said:
And now for a perfectly legitimate attack of another nature: You, Tumbleweed, are a damn liar! Unless and until you offer documentary evidence I have ever posted under a name other than the Real Royal King at Mediate, shut your blow hole!

Could just be they all live in the same dorm with TRRK.

sarainitaly said:
what are you, a little mouse in my pocket? how do you know i’m not?

Really? You have been? Where? You’re good with links so post a few where you condemn McCain and the Republicans for blocking the repeal of DADT. Let’s see of you are true to your word or just looking for another excuse to bash the President.

JamesA1102 said:
Really? You have been? Where? You’re good with links so post a few where you condemn McCain and the Republicans for blocking the repeal of DADT. Let’s see of you are true to your word or just looking for another excuse to bash the President.

she supports the repeal of DADT moron.

The Real Royal King said:
Unless and until you offer documentary evidence I have ever posted under a name other than the Real Royal King at Mediate, shut your blow hole!

They blew the shit outta your “cover” at olby watch didn’t they junior?

timzank said:
she supports the repeal of DADT moron.

That’s the point. She supports is and so does the President. Why is she not criticizing McCain and the other Republicans who are block its repeal.

The Real Royal King said:
As Lard Limbaugh has told us, one can’t even serve if he were to have a boil on his butt.

There you go lying again. That story only exists in the loony libs minds.

JamesA1102 said:
No he doesn’t. We don’t live in a dictatorship where the President can order the military to disregard the law. Just saying it over and over again doesn’t make it true.

The Real Royal King said:
All the Marys in Heaven. No one disputes that President Obama could sign such an order.

JamesA1102 said:
I’m not wrong. The President cannot issue an executive order to the military to break a law that was enacted by Congress.

The Real Royal King said:
All the Marys in Heaven. No one disputes that President Obama could sign such an order.

Good morning sara. You are up early this morning still fighting the executive order stuff. YES we know he can but we also know why he won’t.

gordonbloyershow said:
No it is not. Being black is not a defect. Yes people are born gay that doesn’t mean it is not a defect. It is not normal no matter how much they claim it is. There is a gay gene and when we can repair it we will. Even gay people will tell you that no one would CHOOSE to be gay. That is why they say it is NOT a choice. Someone can be born without an arm. That is not NORMAL, it is a defect. Do you think they should be able to join with that defect?

Blower please tell what defect you were born with???

JamesA1102 said:
She supports is and so does the President.

why hasn’t obama signed an executive order? why is he in court asking to uphold DADT?
http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2010/11/obama-administration-asks-supreme-court-to-keep-dont-ask-dont-tell-in-effect-during-appeal.html

he SAID he supported it, and then he got elected.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9uizdKZAGE

BlackWidow said:
Blower please tell what defect you were born with???

LOL, YOUR defect stands out everytime you post, you are yelling, “HEY look at me I am stupid.”

Shouting. duh LOL

The Real Royal King said:
And now for a perfectly legitimate attack of another nature: You, Tumbleweed, are a damn liar! Unless and until you offer documentary evidence I have ever posted under a name other than the Real Royal King at Mediate, shut your blow hole!

YOU telling ME to shut up? That’s rich. HA

CosmosDan said:
How do you know all this?

sarainitaly says:
he has been outed at other sites, and banned for it. people have posted links to all of his aliases, and the sites. I think they are Olbermann watch and Johnny Dollar, at least those two sites. The site owners know because of his IP. He had like 30 aliases at J$.

http://www.olbermannwatch.com/archives/2008/01/olbermann_credi.php
http://www.olbermannwatch.com/archives/2008/01/playboy_publish.php
http://www.reddit.com/r/johndollarfullofcrap/comments/9lz2e/we_read_j_so_you_do_have_to/?sort=new
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/glenn-beck-a-cannibal-eats-a-weiner-on-the-oreilly-factor/

Numerous people have emailed me and told me about his tactics, and many aliases.

It’s also obvious here because he posts the same exact attacks on me under different names, BW, RRk, etc. It’s a theme for the day with him and his many aliases. It’s a new theme every day, that all his aliases use.

gordonbloyershow said:
LOL, YOUR defect stands out everytime you post, you are yelling, “HEY look at me I am stupid.”

Apparently you have never met a GAY you like or you would look at this differently. Another rigid thinker. You are comparing apples with oranges. Not having an arm is somewhat different than being gay.

BlackWidow said:
Good morning sara. You are up early this morning still fighting the executive order stuff. YES we know he can but we also know why he won’t.

it’s 6:30 pm.

sarainitaly said:
YOU telling ME to shut up? That’s rich. HA CosmosDan said:How do you know all this? sarainitaly says:he has been outed at other sites, and banned for it. people have posted links to all of his aliases, and the sites. I think they are Olbermann watch and Johnny Dollar, at least those two sites. The site owners know because of his IP. He had like 30 aliases at J$. http://www.olbermannwatch.com/archives/2008/01/olbermann_credi.phphttp://www.olbermannwatch.com/archives/2008/01/playboy_publish.phphttp://www.reddit.com/r/johndollarfullofcrap/comments/9lz2e/we_read_j_so_you_do_have_to/?sort=newhttp://www.mediaite.com/tv/glenn-beck-a-cannibal-eats-a-weiner-on-the-oreilly-factor/ Numerous people have emailed me and told me about his tactics, and many aliases. It’s also obvious here because he posts the same exact attacks on me under different names, BW, RRk, etc. It’s a theme for the day with him and his many aliases. It’s a new theme every day, that all his aliases use.

sara you are totally losing it!! calm down girl!

sarainitaly said:
it’s 6:30 pm.

You are certainly obsessed with this place. 6:30 and you are on here and your last post was 3 in the morning. You need serious help.

sarainitaly said:
why hasn’t obama signed an executive order? why is he in court asking to uphold DADT?http://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2010/11/obama-administration-asks-supreme-court-to-keep-dont-ask-dont-tell-in-effect-during-appeal.html he SAID he supported it, and then he got elected.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9uizdKZAGE

He hasn’t signed an executive order because we don’t live in a dictatorship where the President can order the military to break a law enacted by congress.
The President does support the repeal of the law but that is being blocked by Repubilcan Senators. So the question is why you’re not criticizing those Senators and supporting the President on repealing the law?

gordonbloyershow said:
LOL, YOUR defect stands out everytime you post, you are yelling, “HEY look at me I am stupid.”

I unlike you have never said I was the brightest bulb in the box.

JamesA1102 said:
He hasn’t signed an executive order because we don’t live in a dictatorship where the President can order the military to break a law enacted by congress.The President does support the repeal of the law but that is being blocked by Repubilcan Senators. So the question is why you’re not criticizing those Senators and supporting the President on repealing the law?

James she is like many republicans in that she votes against her own beliefs. Typical.

BlackWidow said:
You are certainly obsessed with this place. 6:30 and you are on here and your last post was 3 in the morning. You need serious help.

you are certainly obsessed with me. Do you want to mail me a time card and i can fill it out for you whenever i am here?

BlackWidow said:
sara you are totally losing it!! calm down girl!

one might say the same thing to you…. calm down? i’m calm. you are the one with her/his panties in a bunch because i am posting here.

Numerous people have emailed me and told me about his tactics, and many aliases.

It’s also obvious here because he posts the same exact attacks on me under different names, BW, RRk, etc. It’s a theme for the day with him and his many aliases. It’s a new theme every day, that all his aliases use.

So you give your personal email out to people so they can report to you what posters on here do and say. Yea, right. You are getting as looney as Michele-in-Utah.

BlackWidow said:
James she is like many republicans in that she votes against her own beliefs. Typical.

But Sara claims she is not a hypocritic. She supports the repeal of the law and so does the President, yet she attacks the President because she disagrees with his tactics while not saying a word against McCain and the Republicans who are blocking the repeal. Sounds very hypocritical to me.

BlackWidow said:
BlackWidow says:

So played .LOL

sarainitaly said:
YOU telling ME to shut up? That’s rich. HA

CosmosDan said:
How do you know all this?

sarainitaly says:
he has been outed at other sites, and banned for it. people have posted links to all of his aliases, and the sites. I think they are Olbermann watch and Johnny Dollar, at least those two sites. The site owners know because of his IP. He had like 30 aliases at J$.

http://www.olbermannwatch.com/archives/2008/01/olbermann_credi.php
http://www.olbermannwatch.com/archives/2008/01/playboy_publish.php
http://www.reddit.com/r/johndollarfullofcrap/comments/9lz2e/we_read_j_so_you_do_have_to/?sort=new
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/glenn-beck-a-cannibal-eats-a-weiner-on-the-oreilly-factor/

Numerous people have emailed me and told me about his tactics, and many aliases.

It’s also obvious here because he posts the same exact attacks on me under different names, BW, RRk, etc. It’s a theme for the day with him and his many aliases. It’s a new theme every day, that all his aliases use.

So, you have no proof?

Do you care to put your man pants on and apologize, or will you simply continue lying?

BlackWidow said:
You are getting as looney as Michele-in-Utah.

I actually think more so.

gordonbloyershow said:
Also, the poor guy with one arm can’t hide his defect. Gays can choose to hide their defect. They don’t have to go around waving their arms and jumping up and down shooting, “Hey everyone, LOOK AT ME I AM GAY and I am going to shove it in your face.” La la la la la.

why should someone who was born gay have to hide who they are? that’s a sad way to look at life, Gordon. There are plenty of gay people who do not shove anything in anyones face. What’s your solution? mass genocide or mandatory abortion of all gay people? how about all people born with defects? What about people with bad eye sight? That’s a defect….do you want them to hide their defect? Obese people? Should we lock them away? Deny them equal rights?

gordonbloyershow said:
No it is not. Being black is not a defect. Yes people are born gay that doesn’t mean it is not a defect. It is not normal no matter how much they claim it is. There is a gay gene and when we can repair it we will. Even gay people will tell you that no one would CHOOSE to be gay. That is why they say it is NOT a choice.

Someone can be born without an arm. That is not NORMAL, it is a defect. Do you think they should be able to join with that defect?

i agree it is not a choice. do i think people are less than because they are born with a “defect” or not whole? No. People are people, and they are born who they are. Unless someone personally wrongs you, you should not wish them any ill will simply for being born.

It can be a painful, terrifying, lonely existence growing up feeling *different*. It isn’t a choice. Why punish them or hate them for something they can’t control? No one should have to live in the shadows/deny who they are because it makes someone else uncomfortable.

I know many wonderful gay people and also know of their struggles growing up.

JamesA1102 said:
BlackWidow said:
James she is like many republicans in that she votes against her own beliefs. Typical.

But Sara claims she is not a hypocritic. She supports the repeal of the law and so does the President, yet she attacks the President because she disagrees with his tactics while not saying a word against McCain and the Republicans who are blocking the repeal. Sounds very hypocritical to me.

i am not a republican.

The Real Royal King said:
So, you have no proof?

I have as much proof as is possible on the net, you are remarkably predictable.

BlackWidow said:
Numerous people have emailed me and told me about his tactics, and many aliases. It’s also obvious here because he posts the same exact attacks on me under different names, BW, RRk, etc. It’s a theme for the day with him and his many aliases. It’s a new theme every day, that all his aliases use. So you give your personal email out to people so they can report to you what posters on here do and say. Yea, right. You are getting as looney as Michele-in-Utah.

You can e-mail her website/blog numnutz.

oops, i hit send, wasn’t done.

i am not a republican. i voted for mccain. i will never vote for Dems again.

i support gay rights, and am pro-choice but they are two issues that will not control my voting decisions any longer. they are not *my* issues any longer, i support them, but won’t let them rule my decisions.
women and gays threw their weight behind Obama. they wanted him, they got him. they can deal with his inactions.

George C said:
I have as much proof as is possible on the net, you are remarkably predictable.

Right. No proof.

I do find your remark odd. Are you Tumbleweed’s alter-ego?

sarainitaly said:
oops, i hit send, wasn’t done.

i am not a republican. i voted for mccain. i will never vote for Dems again.

i support gay rights, and am pro-choice but they are two issues that will not control my voting decisions any longer. they are not *my* issues any longer, i support them, but won’t let them rule my decisions.
women and gays threw their weight behind Obama. they wanted him, they got him. they can deal with his inactions.

Do other Italians feel the same way?

The Real Royal King said:
So, you have no proof?

Do you care to put your man pants on and apologize, or will you simply continue lying?

you have been busted repeatedly on other sites for using 30+ aliases to launch the same types of attacks that you use here. do i have access to mediaite’s IP records? no. do i have access to your history at other sites? yes. do i have experience being on the receiving end of your numerous personalities via repetitive, similar themed attacks? yes.

you lie about me all the time, say i don’t live in italy, and all kinds of other crap. you will never get an apology from me, Sybil.

The Real Royal King said:
Right. No proof. I do find your remark odd. Are you Tumbleweed’s alter-ego?

Are you the horse-fluffer? My money is still on college kid, but I don’t know, seems to be a lot of evidence via links pointing to you as the horse-fluffer….not that theres anything wrong with that.

sarainitaly said:
oops, i hit send, wasn’t done. i am not a republican. i voted for mccain. i will never vote for Dems again. i support gay rights, and am pro-choice but they are two issues that will not control my voting decisions any longer. they are not *my* issues any longer, i support them, but won’t let them rule my decisions.women and gays threw their weight behind Obama. they wanted him, they got him. they can deal with his inactions.

So in other words you’re ruled more by you’re hatred of the President than by any principle that you claim to believe in. Is that why you’re giving a free pass to all the Republicans who are blocking the repeal of DADT that you claim to support?

sarainitaly said:
you have been busted repeatedly on other sites for using 30+ aliases to launch the same types of attacks that you use here. do i have access to mediaite’s IP records? no. do i have access to your history at other sites? yes. do i have experience being on the receiving end of your numerous personalities via repetitive, similar themed attacks? yes.

you lie about me all the time, say i don’t live in italy, and all kinds of other crap. you will never get an apology from me, Sybil.

So, you still have no proof.

You certainly are getting shrill about it. Please continue.

sarainitaly said:
you have been busted repeatedly on other sites for using 30+ aliases to launch the same types of attacks that you use here. do i have access to mediaite’s IP records? no. do i have access to your history at other sites? yes. do i have experience being on the receiving end of your numerous personalities via repetitive, similar themed attacks? yes.

you lie about me all the time, say i don’t live in italy*****, and all kinds of other crap. you will never get an apology from me, Sybil.

I said some say ….

The Real Royal King said:
I do find your remark odd. Are you Tumbleweed’s alter-ego?

Hardly. Your online life though has been distilled to 3 principles , with 2 proofs . LOL

Sybil. LOL

writer said:
Sybil. LOL

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IGJ94wVaUdU

Well, that explains it.

JamesA1102 said:
He hasn’t signed an executive order because we don’t live in a dictatorship where the President can order the military to break a law enacted by congress.
The President does support the repeal of the law but that is being blocked by Repubilcan Senators.

The Real Royal King said:
All the Marys in Heaven. No one disputes that President Obama could sign such an order.

obama could have signed an executive order that would have stopped hundreds of service members getting discharged. he didn’t. and he won’t. he also had control of the congress and could have got this overturned when he first came into office. he didn’t. he went to court to ask the courts to keep it in place, because of the log cabin republicans law suit.

you can claim he supports the repeal all you want, but actions speak louder than words. Or, I should say inactions….

Did McCain campaign/promise that he would repeal it within his first year of office?
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/feb/04/john-mccain/mccain-flips-dont-ask-dont-tell/

Is McCain president?

The Real Royal King said:
Not all of us fall for the Italian shtick. That’s the relevance.

JamesA1102 said:
So in other words you’re ruled more by you’re hatred of the President than by any principle that you claim to believe in. Is that why you’re giving a free pass to all the Republicans who are blocking the repeal of DADT that you claim to support?

no, i said my priorities on issues have changed.

sarainitaly said:

Exactly my point. Thanks for a bit of intellectual honesty.

timzank said:
You can e-mail her website/blog numnutz.

FU I didn’t know she had a blog/website.

sarainitaly said:
you are certainly obsessed with me. Do you want to mail me a time card and i can fill it out for you whenever i am here? one might say the same thing to you…. calm down? i’m calm. you are the one with her/his panties in a bunch because i am posting here.

Sara you can dish it out but you sure can’t take it. Now why in the world would I want you off of here? Think about how insane you are. I don’t expect you to have a time card either.

BlackWidow said:
FU I didn’t know she had a blog/website.

What a foul and filthy mouth you have , GrannyWidow.

sarainitaly said:
no, i said my priorities on issues have changed.

Right now the priority is bashing a President for whom you have an irrational hatred rather than standing up for any principle that you claim to believe.

sarainitaly said:
no, i said my priorities on issues have changed.

So you are a lefty on moral issues. I get that. But what issues are you on the side of the republicans? I am a repub when it comes to fiscal issues and personal liberty. But that does not make me a republican.

George C said:
What a foul and filthy mouth you have , GrannyWidow.

And you probably get excited when someone says bad words. Now come on admit it!

sarainitaly said:
obama could have signed an executive order that would have stopped hundreds of service members getting discharged. he didn’t. and he won’t. he also had control of the congress and could have got this overturned when he first came into office. he didn’t. he went to court to ask the courts to keep it in place, because of the log cabin republicans law suit. you can claim he supports the repeal all you want, but actions speak louder than words. Or, I should say inactions…. Did McCain campaign/promise that he would repeal it within his first year of office?http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/feb/04/john-mccain/mccain-flips-dont-ask-dont-tell/ Is McCain president?

So in other words you prefer a temporary solution that is legally questionable and could be reversed by the next president rather than a permanent solution that completely repeals the law. Yeah, that makes sense.

JamesA1102 said:
Right now the priority is bashing a President for whom you have an irrational hatred rather than standing up for any principle that you claim to believe.

Then why do you spend most of your time playing Planet of the Apes ?

JamesA1102 said:
Right now the priority is bashing a President for whom you have an irrational hatred rather than standing up for any principle that you claim to believe.

You got it. Some people just love to hate!

BlackWidow said:
So you are a lefty on moral issues. I get that. But what issues are you on the side of the republicans?

Blind hatred of the President, that’s about it.

The real Royal Gnome said:
Then why do you spend most of your time playing Planet of the Apes ?

Because they remind me of you! LOL!

I never heard of anyone hating George Bush.

JamesA1102 said:
Because they remind me of you! LOL!

Am I the Lawgiver that you loving have displayed in the glass case !

BWAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA !!!!

Go play with your dolls .

i can see how using facts and the president’s own words to demonstrate his inactions can be viewed by you as irrational hatred and bashing… *eyeroll*

i have to go make dinner.

it would make it a lot easier if Sybil combined all of her aliases, and just replied under one. it makes it difficult trying to reply to so many *personalities*.

JamesA1102 said:
But Sara claims she is not a hypocritic. She supports the repeal of the law and so does the President, yet she attacks the President because she disagrees with his tactics while not saying a word against McCain and the Republicans who are blocking the repeal. Sounds very hypocritical to me.

I believe she calls herself an Independent. Good way of having it both ways. Hide behind the word Independent. Is that kinder than saying hypocritic? I just can’t imagine a person that believes in gay freedom and choice could ever vote for McCain/Palin. That is like cutting off your nose to spite your face.

JamesA1102 said:
So in other words you prefer a temporary solution that is legally questionable and could be reversed by the next president rather than a permanent solution that completely repeals the law. Yeah, that makes sense.

sarainitaly said:
sarainitaly says:
Obama could have signed the executive order two years ago and have stopped hundreds of soldiers from getting kicked out under him.

bandaid, or not, hundreds of soldiers have been kicked out since obama took office and he hasn’t signed the executive order to stop it. he can sign the order, halt the dismissals, and work on getting it overturned for good.

sarainitaly said:
obama could have signed an executive order that would have stopped hundreds of service members getting discharged. he didn’t. and he won’t. he also had control of the congress and could have got this overturned when he first came into office. he didn’t. he went to court to ask the courts to keep it in place, because of the log cabin republicans law suit. you can claim he supports the repeal all you want, but actions speak louder than words. Or, I should say inactions….

Did McCain campaign/promise that he would repeal it within his first year of office?http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/feb/04/john-mccain/mccain-flips-dont-ask-dont-tell/ Is McCain president?

Sounds to me like you prefer absolutely no action at all.

The Real Royal King said:
I said some say ….

Make dinner. I thought you just woke up! Time flys when you are having fun. Sara I don’t ever want you to leave here. You are so much fun to pick on.

BW, maybe there were other issues besides the McCain/Palin views on gays. It also seems incongruous to me that anti-semite Louis Farrakhan and jews such as Stephen Spielberg and Sarah Silverman could back the same candidate. Talk about a big tent.

ok, off to make dinner.

feel free to continue obsessing over me.
i am clocking out now.

Again, thank you , for the validation.

She said it was 6:30 pm a few posts back numnutz. It’s now 7:55 pm in Italy. YOU said “she was up early” not her, she clarified.

writer said:
BW, maybe there were other issues besides the McCain/Palin views on gays. It also seems incongruous to me that anti-semite Louis Farrakhan and jews such as Stephen Spielberg and Sarah Silverman could back the same candidate. Talk about a big tent.

Yeah, basically as long as you’re into baby killin’, assless chaps parades, and openly denigrate any organized religion EXCEPT Islam, you’re in.

sarainitaly said:
No one should have to live in the shadows/deny who they are because it makes someone else uncomfortable.

Yes they should if the person they are making uncomfortable is responsible for protecting my life. I want to make that person comfortable anyway I can. That is why the Supreme Court has said the military has the right to make their own rules. It is not a place to make people feel good about themselves and play PC games. If they did not want left-handed red heads, that would be okay with me. NO ONE has the right to serve in the military. Join the Peace Corps if you want to cuddled.

Gordon – you have made some points that I can understand, and are somewhat valid…. It does however still feel like work place discrimination, which is not allowed. Women were (are still) discriminated against, too. Weren’t allowed to work, or vote or join the military….

They didn’t want women in the military and they’re there now. They didn’t want blacks in, and they are now.

Why should straight white men have all the power and control over who can and can’t serve?
If blacks, and women and gays join the military, and some straight white guys have issue with it, aren’t they free to not join themselves?

There are a lot of military people who don’t care if gays are there, and knowingly serve alongside them now.

If someone has issues with gays in the military, they have the option to not join, don’t they?

If someone enlists in the military, and risks their life to defend mine, and their fellow soldiers, I don’t care who they are sleeping with at night.

BlackWidow said:
Make dinner. I thought you just woke up! Time flys when you are having fun. Sara I don’t ever want you to leave here. You are so much fun to pick on.

no, you said it. i said it was 6:30pm.
it’s now 8:30pm.

pick on? aren’t you a grandmother? do you think that’s very grandmotherly of you?

timzank said:
She said it was 6:30 pm a few posts back numnutz. It’s now 7:55 pm in Italy. YOU said “she was up early” not her, she clarified.

oh, thanks! haha

I have a headache….it’s like trying to have a conversation with a walnut. :OS
HA

“President in the past week was him getting a fat lip, then it should be readily apparent that this President’s lack of passion and decisiveness on major issues is resulting in a public that is fast boring of him”

The idiots in the MEDIA choose, with all presidents, to concentrate on the inane and silly moments, not the President. Obama gets much blame, but never for the silly choices pundits and news folks choose. The stupidity of the media defines the president, just look at the polls…..

The real Royal Gnome said:
Go play with your dolls .

They’re action figures and they still make more sense than you! LOL!

sarainitaly said:
i can see how using facts and the president’s own words to demonstrate his inactions can be viewed by you as irrational hatred and bashing… *eyeroll*

It is irrational when you bash a President who supports repealing a law that you claim to support repealing also but stay silent about those who are blocking the repeal of the law.

Ahh, alcoholic McCoward speaks again!!

sarainitaly said:
Did McCain campaign/promise that he would repeal it within his first year of office?http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2010/feb/04/john-mccain/mccain-flips-dont-ask-dont-tell/ Is McCain president?

No but McCain has completely reversed his position as your own link shows and is leading the charge to block the repeal. You claim to support the repeal that McCain is preventing. So why are you defending McCain?

Until the “don’t ask; don’t tell” policy, discovered homosexuals were summarily discharged from the United States’ military service. Some military leaders, politicians, and religious groups continue to support legislation to remove all homosexuals from military service. None of these groups dispute the right of homophobes to be in the military. Yet, homophobes can threaten military discipline, good order, and preparedness. Homophobes, whether heterosexual or homosexual, often have clinically relevant depression, paranoia, or other mental illness adverse to military performance and mission effectiveness. There is no evidence from research homosexuals should be removed from military service.
The ban on homosexuals appears to be an extension of the military’s differential treatment of females. In Australia lesbians are more prevalent among female military personnel (>30%) than male homosexuals among male military personnel. Effeminate males and masculinized females, whether homosexual or heterosexual, are the likely targets of military investigations. In fact, the “don’t ask; don’t tell” policy does not appear to have reduced the numbers of “homosexual discharges” or the number of homosexual witch-hunts. Although military officials have postulated military personnel are particularly offended by homosexuality, research does not bear out such opinion.
Arguments that open homosexuals in the ranks will lead to a compromise in the United States’ defense posture, exorbitant personnel expenditures, civilian distrust of military leadership, disruption in the ranks, wholesale retirement or resignation of key personnel, etc. are unfounded. Homosexuals, who enter military service, even under the “don’t ask; don’t tell” policy, must be highly motivated to realize a fulfilling military career. Pentagon and independent research shows sexual orientation expression is the only difference to be found between homosexuals and heterosexuals. Sexual orientation does not significantly influence loyalty, performance, ability, community service, and dedication to high ideals. In allied countries, where homosexuals are accepted in the armed services, the uproar predicted by dogmatic military leaders did not occur.
Heterosexuals entering military service are aware that homosexuals are in the military and homosexuals entering military service know they may face negative reactions from undisciplined, unprofessional, and homophobic bigots–homosexual and heterosexual. While some homosexuals and heterosexuals display socially inappropriate public displays of sexual or affectionate behavior, those who desire a military career are unlikely to engage in such behavior.
Many legal issues are raised by the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy. The call for differential treatment of “open” and “closeted” homosexuals challenges the rights to free expression, association, and privacy and may inculcate prejudice. Only through contact and understanding can we raze the walls of hatred and bigotry. In summer, 1999, the Department of Defense initiated a plan that would put the investigation of homosexuals in the hands of senior Judge Advocate General officers and have all military personnel take sensitivity training to reduce or eliminate sexual orientation harassment. Based on scientific materials presented to an Air Force Board, in the early 1970′s at McChord AFB in Washington State, a homosexual male was asked to remain in the service to help others in their acceptance of homosexuals. Some military officers can come ro rational decisions not weighted with propaganda or bigotry. Based on a number of factors, the airman chose to be honorably discharged from the military.

gordonbloyershow said:
DADT is going nowhere. No one has the right to be in the military. I am amazed that loons on the left think this is a done deal.
Matt clearly has the liberal gene. He really believes that allowing gays to openly serve is just dandy and of course everyone agrees. He also believes we should just force the military to buy into that nonsense.

If anyone proposed making men and women shower together and sleep in the same rooms together, everyone would know they were crazy. But it is ok to make men that are sexually attracted to other men sleep and shower with men that don’t want that, is JUST FINE? How dumb are liberals?

How many times do I have to hear “the liberal gene”? As if it holds some sort of scientific relevance? Scientists probably found a gene that makes is so you don’t become violently angry when your beliefs are challenged… it’s called THE LIBERAL GENE. I’m sorry you don’t have it. It would make your comments less retarded.. and maybe even make you less retarded.

Conservatism is a fear of the future. Which makes sense, the whole conservative movement is based on fear. What does it feel like when your whole life is swallowed by the fear of things? This guy with the liberal gene wants to know!

Something tells me if I had the ‘Conservative gene’ I wouldn’t care what people thought, just my own narrow-minded opinion.. and if anyone dared say anything different, I would use my false arguments and insults to show that, although that person may be right, he’s not strong enough to withstand my words, so he’s nothing… and somehow, that will convince me that my opinion is right… not because I was able to prove anything but merely because I received the satisfaction of making someone I disagree with, feel bad.

Jon Martin said:
How many times do I have to hear “the liberal gene”?

As many times as it takes to sink in, whitch is apparently forever.

Scientists Find ‘Liberal Gene’
Study conducted by researchers at UCSD, Harvard
By ERIC S. PAGE
Updated 5:16 PM PDT, Wed, Oct 27, 2010
Researchers have determined that genetics could matter when it comes to some adults’ political leanings.
According to scientists at UC San Diego and Harvard University, “ideology is affected not just by social factors, but also by a dopamine receptor gene called DRD4.” That and how many friends you had during high school.
The study was led by UCSD’s James Fowler and focused on 2,000 subjects from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health. Scientists matched the subjects’ genetic information with “maps” of their social networks. According to researchers, they determined that people “with a specific variant of the DRD4 gene were more likely to be liberal as adults.” However, the, subjects were only more likely to have leanings to the left if they were also socially active during adolescence.
“These findings suggest that political affiliation is not based solely on the kind of social environment people experience,” said Fowler, who is a professor of political science and medical genetics.
The researchers also said their findings held true no matter what the ethnicity, culture, sex or age of the subjects were.
First Published: Oct 27, 2010 5:04 PM PDT

Just4thefax says:
November 29, 2010 at 8:23 am Just4thefax(Quote)…Fact: As being in the moral majority party here is something that may help with your special needs. Try it if it helps you can thank me later, good luck.

With respect, been there, done that, didn’t work.

In fact, like many (maybe most?) gay people, when I was young and first coming to the realization that I was gay, I would have done ANYTHING to change my sexual orientation to heterosexuality.

In fact, I spent several decades of the early part of my life in a sometimes desperate effort to change my sexual orientation (celibate the entire time). That, after all, is what society primed me to expect –and to want.

Apparently, there are some things in life we don’t get to choose. I also wanted to be incredibly handsome, witty and a math genius.

Never did become a math genius. ;-)

What did change was my understanding of what it means to be gay and what really matters (and what doesn’t) in life: eventually, I fell in love with the most wonderful person that God could ever have set me up with. My life is truly blessed.

I could live without many things in my life (including sex–as proven by all those years when my heterosexual peers couldn’t control themselves, but I did!).

But love? And a life parttner? No thanks. That enriches our lives and embues it with meaning and purpose.

You wished me good luck. And I thank you for the kind wishes.

I have had incredible luck in my life.

What do I wish for you? I wish that you find as much love and commitment and true joy in your life as I have in mine!

Peace.

Linguist

November 29, 2010 at 12:18 pm gordonbloyershow(Quote)”…Yes people are born gay that doesn’t mean it is not a defect. It is not normal no matter how much they claim it is. ..Someone can be born without an arm. That is not NORMAL, it is a defect. Do you think they should be able to join with that defect?”

With respect, I am not sure this adds much to our discussion. Whether you view being gay as a “defect” or not, the only real question here is whether that “defect” matters when serving in the Military.

Clearly, it doesn’t. Gay people are serving today, right now, virtually all of them doing a fine job and serving without problems. No one is even discussing whether they are capable of serving. We all agree that they are doing a fine job– even Senator McCain says as much.

The only issue is whether they need to be kicked out if anyone should find out this oh-so-”vital” “defect”. It’s indetectable, usually! How can it POSSIBLY be an important enough “defect” to keep them out if it’s completely indetectable???!

But if a gay servicemember has a spouse or partner back home, it is pretty difficult to PRETEND he or she is single. We don’t usually ask adults to pretend like little kids.

We don’t ask heterosexuals to play pretend and say they are single when they are not. It’s kind of stupid to ask grown men and women who are willing to risk their LIVES for us to have to lie about such an important thing as whether or not they have someone waiting for them back home, wouldn’t you say?

Yet gay servicemembers have been dismissed when e-mail messages have come to light that indicate they have a partner. It’s actually against DADT for a gay servicemember to marry, LEGALLY, in those states that recognize same-sex marriages. That seems kind of…well, stupid, not to mention obnoxious, to me.

So this isn’t about “waving around” stumps to get attention. It’s about people living their lives and having a stupid and counterproductive law that forces them to pretend about a part of their lives that no one else has to pretend about.

It’s time for DADT to be lifted. Finally.

Peace,
Linguist

Linguist said:
With respect, I am not sure this adds much to our discussion. Whether you view being gay as a “defect” or not, the only real question here is whether that “defect” matters when serving in the Military.
Clearly, it doesn’t. Gay people are serving today, right now, virtually all of them doing a fine job and serving without problems. No one is even discussing whether they are capable of serving. We all agree that they are doing a fine job– even Senator McCain says as much.

What part of, THEY KNEW THE RULES WHEN THEY SIGNED UP, don’t you understand?

I am not joining the gay bowling league if I am not gay. Duh, I know the rules.

“What part of, THEY KNEW THE RULES WHEN THEY SIGNED UP, don’t you understand?”

With respect, I understand a stupid rule when I encounter it.

DADT is, to be blunt, beyond stupid. It’s offensive. And worse: it’s counterproductive, harming military readiness and unit cohesion.

When my uncle tried to get a job that had a Jewish quota, he understood the rules. The rules were offensive, anti-American, and stupid. So is DADT. Time to say goodbye to it.

Linguist said:
But love? And a life parttner? No thanks. That enriches our lives and embues it with meaning and purpose.

You wished me good luck. And I thank you for the kind wishes.

I have had incredible luck in my life.

What do I wish for you? I wish that you find as much love and commitment and true joy in your life as I have in mine!

Peace.

Linguist

Very nice post. I hope you always remain as happy as you are now.