NickCole
Student of Human Nature
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2004
- Posts
- 11,925
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
dadt was a bad blow. He could have ordered the policy change, but like Obama, made the same mistake of trying to negotiate with the repubs. In the end it was Nunn that stabbed us in the back and clinton went along with it.
not very pretty but true, and the reason I resent him as president.
I have many problems with republican politicians, but at least they have the balls to just step up to the plate and act on their social agenda.
the Dems need to as well.
That's the reason you resent Bill Clinton as President? Well that explains a lot about your thought process because your characterization about Clinton and DADT is wrong, and when it was explained to you a month ago you responded to the post and didn't dispute the correct characterization.
Here's how construct wrote it out on June 15:
Your characterization of the Clintons is completely unfair. Let's start with DADT. The President didn't have the added pressure from a complacent gay community to push through non-discrimination in the military. He tried in a matter of weeks after taking office. Sen. Sam Nunn responded with six months of hammering in Senate committee. Nunn was aiming to codify the Reagan policy which was even worse than DADT. DADT was a compromise worked out in coordination with gay leaders like David Mixner and Barney Frank. It's intent was to ameliorate the darconian order already in place by forbidding witch-hunts. That much appears to have worked. It was inadequate but unavoidable given Sen. Nunn's dogged opposition.
[I don't know how to post links to JUB posts, so in case I mess this up it's post 33 in Pelosi Shelves ENDA] http://www.justusboys.com/forum/showthread.php?p=6188662&highlight=dadt#post6188662
























