Majority support repeal of DADT

[CowboyBob]

The majority has spoken. But we are ruled by the minority of the GOP and Religious Right......

... and the richest 2% of Americans who purchased the Republican politicians. The billionaire$ own them now so their orange and chinless slaves are doing their bidding.

 

[BostonPirate]

the republicans have just vowed to vote as a block against any legislation of any sort until they get the tax cut for the rich.

so that would mean no repeal of DADT

brought to you by your friends at the GOP

pathetic

 

[jackoroe]

the republicans have just vowed to vote as a block against any legislation of any sort until they get the tax cut for the rich.

so that would mean no repeal of DADT

brought to you by your friends at the GOP

pathetic

There is no tax cut being considered. What is being considered, is allowing taxes to increase during a recession. Bad idea. If DADT is that important to the democrats, extend the current rates, fund the government like you are supposed to and then vote on DADT which is in an appropriation bill anyway. Not too difficult.

 

[BostonPirate]

There is no tax cut being considered. What is being considered, is allowing taxes to increase during a recession. Bad idea. If DADT is that important to the democrats, extend the current rates, fund the government like you are supposed to and then vote on DADT which is in an appropriation bill anyway. Not too difficult.

no

the measure was passed by parliamentary procedure and as a result the tax cutg needs to be renewed, or it goes away.

that is the truth and you can't spin it any other way.

The country is in dire straights and revenue needs to come from somewhere.

If that tax cut is extended then tell me where the money will come from?

 

[JB3]

no

the measure was passed by parliamentary procedure and as a result the tax cutg needs to be renewed, or it goes away.

that is the truth and you can't spin it any other way.

The country is in dire straights and revenue needs to come from somewhere.

If that tax cut is extended then tell me where the money will come from?

You're both right. What's being considered is whether to raise taxes or whether to keep the cuts.

 

[jackoroe]

no

the measure was passed by parliamentary procedure and as a result the tax cutg needs to be renewed, or it goes away.

that is the truth and you can't spin it any other way.

The country is in dire straights and revenue needs to come from somewhere.

If that tax cut is extended then tell me where the money will come from?

The government doesn't have this money, the people do. It belongs to the people, not the government. The government would like to take this money from the people, so they can continue their spending spree.

If you are anticipating a raise at work, and it get's cancelled, what do you do? You don't take the vacation you thought you could afford. You don't buy the new furniture. Well, it is time for the government to learn to live within it's means, just as we all do.

 

[BostonPirate]

The government doesn't have this money, the people do. It belongs to the people, not the government. The government would like to take this money from the people, so they can continue their spending spree.

that assumes that the government is not of and by the people.

where have we lost our american values and sense of fiscal responsibility?

this stuff is not fluff. kids toys need to be tested and regulated. food does as well. huge bouts of salmonella contaminations in vegetables has been a big issue. We are fighting two wars, posibly three soon. Should the soldiers just run up to people and scream BOOO? that needs to be paid for. Do you want to work until you die? Do you want your granny to lose her health care?????

what ARE you talking about with this spending spree, beyond republican rhetoric?

where are WE going to get the cash for the stuff we as americans expect? The power grid? the streets and highways? the sewage systems?

who will pay for the shit we as humans create?

what programs will you cut and how?

And precisely what spending spree are we talking about jack?

PRECISELY which?

 

[jackoroe]

that assumes that the government is not of and by the people.

where have we lost our american values and sense of fiscal responsibility?

this stuff is not fluff. kids toys need to be tested and regulated. food does as well. huge bouts of salmonella contaminations in vegetables has been a big issue. We are fighting two wars, posibly three soon. Should the soldiers just run up to people and scream BOOO? that needs to be paid for. Do you want to work until you die? Do you want your granny to lose her health care?????

what ARE you talking about with this spending spree, beyond republican rhetoric?

where are WE going to get the cash for the stuff we as americans expect? The power grid? the streets and highways? the sewage systems?

who will pay for the shit we as humans create?

what programs will you cut and how?

And precisely what spending spree are we talking about jack?

PRECISELY which?

The answer is to be found in the Constitution. If it isn't specifically enumerated, it can go. Not real complicated. The Department of Energy has yet to produce a single drop of oil. The Department of education has yet to teach a child to read. The Department of Homeland Security can stop squeezing people's balls at the airport. All could go tomorrow and few, other than the bureaucrats employed by them, would miss them. NPR, NEA small potatoes, but get rid of them anyway. The government has no business producing art or news.

Maybe you can tell me what it is we're still doing in Iraq or even Afganistan. Our soldiers aren't even too sure about that. How about Germany or S. Korea? We can leave those two places tomorrow. They can fend for themselves. Then we can reduce the size of the military.

We can try not handing out Trillions to banks here and in Europe. Think about it. Trillions to Citigroup, we borrowed from the Chinese. Does that make sense? And you want more of the people's money to piss down these ratholes? No, that's all got to stop.

 

[BostonPirate]

The answer is to be found in the Constitution. If it isn't specifically enumerated, it can go. Not real complicated. The Department of Energy has yet to produce a single drop of oil. The Department of education has yet to teach a child to read. The Department of Homeland Security can stop squeezing people's balls at the airport. All could go tomorrow and few, other than the bureaucrats employed by them, would miss them. NPR, NEA small potatoes, but get rid of them anyway. The government has no business producing art or news.

Maybe you can tell me what it is we're still doing in Iraq or even Afganistan. Our soldiers aren't even too sure about that. How about Germany or S. Korea? We can leave those two places tomorrow. They can fend for themselves. Then we can reduce the size of the military.

We can try not handing out Trillions to banks here and in Europe. Think about it. Trillions to Citigroup, we borrowed from the Chinese. Does that make sense? And you want more of the people's money to piss down these ratholes? No, that's all got to stop.

so the laxed regulations that brought us the BP oil spill are OK with you? how many jobs were lost in florida because oil companies in louisiana refused to follow the rules?

The department of education??? are you serious??? that doesn't even need an answer. Boston has thirty five universities within its metro area, and we are a very wealthy city.

And at the end of the day, Are you even aware of what those cuts would garner us? not a whole lot.

this is what 2009 looked like...

your ideas would reduce the budget by about two percent.... so what spending spreee are you talking about and once again.... where is the money coming from if not through cuts and taxes?

the military does need to be reduced and the wars must end, but will the republicans and mccain go for that??? never.

 

[rareboy]

This thread is about the repeal of DADT....the issues of whether the US is bankrupting itself by maintaining the kind of army that ancient Rome used to is a diversion from the issue of denying civil rights to those who would fight for their country.

 

[Stardreamer]

Half an hour from now the report drops.

In advance:



http://chattahbox.com/us/2010/11/30/dadt-report-favors-repeal-but-will-gop-homophobes-accept-it/

So how will the apologists for the party of No manage to invalidate the report?

Thoughts please.

And how will the reactionary element on this forum manage to reconcile their support for a party that appears to be dead set against their civil rights?

They intend to focus on the numbers for the Marine Corp and the troops in combat zones which were the highest figures resisting the change. The argument will be that troops in combat don't want the change and are more relevant that troops back home.

Admittedly troops on the front lines don't want anything that complicates their lives more and thus will resist any change but that is not reason enough.

 

[chrisrobin]

Senate discussion taking place as I post: Senator McCain, there you go again:

McCain Calls Study on Gays in Military Flawed

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/201...US-Gays-in-Military.html?_r=1&ref=global-home

McCain is a flaw expert. How many planes did he have to ditch during his tour with the Navy?

 

[Ninja108]

I'm sick of McCain. He is a coward who sold his soul to the religious right. Being a war hero doesn't shielf you from being call a bigot.