As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/

Fuck You And Your High Horse, Colin Powell

AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
edited September 2009 in Debate and/or Discourse
The bastard behind DADT now says it should be revised.

I've decided to revise the OP, in part to filter out some of the inchoate rage, and also to clarify exactly WHY hearing Powell say this sort of shit pisses me the fuck off. The original OP is in the spoiler below.

So, as some people have been saying, why am I not happy that Powell is changing his tune, and is now supporting the repeal of DADT? Well, for one, he's not actually saying that DADT should be repealed, but instead "reviewed". Furthermore, he continues to claim that DADT was a good policy for the time, and that the "review" is now possible because of a decade and a half of DADT.

Bullshit.

First off, that isn't changing his tune, it's playing to the changing political winds. DADT is a very unpopular policy these days, for a number of reasons. Therefore, it's very hard for Powell to get up and defend it these days, because he'd rightfully get called out as an ignorant bigot. But he's not coming out and saying it's a bad policy (which we have over a decade of empirical evidence that it is.) Instead, he's taking a middle of the road stance, saying that the policy should be "reviewed". It really doesn't get much more mealymouthed than that.

Second, he tries to avoid exactly how involved he was in the process that created DADT. While I will back off the claims I made where he directly challenged Clinton's authority as Commander in Chief, I do think that his approach to creating DADT is in ways more disturbing, as you have a uniformed military officer going to the legislature to try to circumvent the actions of the executive that he serves. Powell didn't just advise, but led the charge and pushed noted homophobic Senator Sam Nunn to create the DADT legislation. Furthermore, he attempted to justify his stance with blatant homophobia and patent nonsense. This HuffPost article back from December 2008 has several quotes from Powell circa 1993 which show how his stance was not based on any principled stance but his own biases. And while I am normally a critic of Barry Goldwater, his excoriation of Nunn and Powell is worth reading:
After more than 50 years in the military and politics, I am still amazed to see how upset people can get over nothing. Lifting the ban on gays in the military isn't exactly nothing, but it's pretty damned close

Everyone knows that gays have served honorably in the military since at least the time of Julius Caesar. They'll still be serving long after we're all dead and buried. That should not surprise anyone.

But most Americans should be shocked to know that while the country's economy is going down the tubes, the military has wasted half a billion dollars over the past decade chasing down gays and running them out of the armed services.

It's no great secret that military studies have proved again and again that there's no valid reason for keeping the ban on gays. ....

When the facts lead to one conclusion, I say it's time to act, not to hide. The country and the military know that eventually the ban will be lifted. The only remaining questions are how much muck we will all be dragged through, and how many brave Americans like Tom Paniccia and Margarethe Cammermeyer will have their lives and careers destroyed in a senseless attempt to stall the inevitable. . . .

And that gets to point three - the toll on the military and government that DADT has caused.
  • It has cost the US military $363 million to enforce DADT.
  • In addition, approximately 10,000 military personnel have been discharged under DADT. Many of these individuals had key skills, such being translators in languages we sorely needed observational capability in.
  • Replacing these soldiers also costs money, above and beyond the costs of enforcement. In addition, with the quality of recruits dropping in recent years thanks to the Iraq debacle, many of these soldiers have been replaced with inferior personnel.
  • Female soldiers are at more risk of sexual harassment under DADT, thanks to an odious practice called lesbian bating, where male soldiers demand sex from female soldiers, with the implied threat being that if they refuse, the male will use that as evidence of the female's homosexuality to "out" her to command.
  • President Obama has had to deal with significant fallout from DADT, most notably from the highly publicized case of Lt. Dan Choi. This has caused him to have to deal with the DADT issue, distracting him from his moves on the economy and healthcare.

And yet when Powell appears in the media, none of this is ever discussed, and his middle of the road approach is applauded.

So yes, I'm pissed when I hear Powell in the media talking about DADT. Because all I want to hear from him regarding DADT is a fucking apology. I want him to apologize to the American taxpayers for making us have to pay - literally - for his lack of moral courage. I want him to apologize to the soldiers that he was tasked to lead for his inability to put aside his own biases and lead by example to eliminate bigotry. And I damn well want him to apologize to the 10,000 GLBT men and women discharged under DADT who he slandered with his false words in defense of a bigoted policy.

Because he is wrong - nothing has changed. He was wrong then, he's wrong now, and he needs to man up and admit he was wrong.


Original OP below.
Clinton should have cashiered your ass, for what you did when he tried to end the ban on homosexuaals serving. The only reason DADT exists in the first place is because you flat out told Clinton that you would disobey a lawful order to end the ban, and the only reason you survived such a blatantly unlawful act was because Clinton was too weak to handle a Truman/MacArthur-level dustup - a fact that both of you knew.

And now you want to get to play the hero and say DADT should be ended? Please just go fuck yourself - because if it wasn't for you, we wouldn't have had DADT in the first place, but the end on the ban we should have had.

XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
AngelHedgie on
«1345678

Posts

  • DacDac Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    The bastard behind DADT now says it should be revised.

    Clinton should have cashiered your ass, for what you did when he tried to end the ban on homosexuaals serving. The only reason DADT exists in the first place is because you flat out told Clinton that you would disobey a lawful order to end the ban, and the only reason you survived such a blatantly unlawful act was because Clinton was too weak to handle a Truman/MacArthur-level dustup - a fact that both of you knew.

    And now you want to get to play the hero and say DADT should be ended? Please just go fuck yourself - because if it wasn't for you, we wouldn't have had DADT in the first place, but the end on the ban we should have had.

    So 16 years after DADT comes about, the person that suggested it because he thought it was "right for the time" changes his position and goes the other way.

    And you're upset about this... Why, precisely?

    Dac on
    Steam: catseye543
    PSN: ShogunGunshow
    Origin: ShogunGunshow
  • QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Do... do you think he's going to read this thread?

    Quid on
  • DoctorArchDoctorArch Curmudgeon Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    In almost 20 years people can change AngelHedgie.

    DoctorArch on
    Switch Friend Code: SW-6732-9515-9697
  • DacDac Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Quid wrote: »
    Do... do you think he's going to read this thread?

    ... I've been had!

    Dac on
    Steam: catseye543
    PSN: ShogunGunshow
    Origin: ShogunGunshow
  • JokermanJokerman Everything EverywhereRegistered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Quid wrote: »
    Do... do you think he's going to read this thread?

    Jokerman on
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Okay - what part of "he, as the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a sitting President of the United States he would not obey a lawful order" do you all not get?

    AngelHedgie on
    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • PicardathonPicardathon Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Yeah, fuck people who disagree with me and then change their minds! Fuck them!

    Picardathon on
  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Okay - what part of "he, as the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a sitting President of the United States he would not obey a lawful order" do you all not get?
    The fact that 15 intervening years can change opinions.

    He's allowed to say "we screwed up with DADT, and we need to fix it."

    OptimusZed on
    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. Now With Ninjas!

    They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
  • ED!ED! Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    The bastard behind DADT now says it should be revised.

    Clinton should have cashiered your ass, for what you did when he tried to end the ban on homosexuaals serving. The only reason DADT exists in the first place is because you flat out told Clinton that you would disobey a lawful order to end the ban, and the only reason you survived such a blatantly unlawful act was because Clinton was too weak to handle a Truman/MacArthur-level dustup - a fact that both of you knew.

    And now you want to get to play the hero and say DADT should be ended? Please just go fuck yourself - because if it wasn't for you, we wouldn't have had DADT in the first place, but the end on the ban we should have had.

    Indeed. Down with people growing!
    Okay - what part of "he, as the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a sitting President of the United States he would not obey a lawful order" do you all not get?

    And that has what to do with Powell maturing his position on the subject umpteenth years later?

    ED! on
    "Get the hell out of me" - [ex]girlfriend
  • QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Okay - what part of "he, as the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a sitting President of the United States he would not obey a lawful order" do you all not get?
    I'm more confused about why your post is addressing him in the second person.

    Quid on
  • DoctorArchDoctorArch Curmudgeon Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Okay - what part of "he, as the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a sitting President of the United States he would not obey a lawful order" do you all not get?

    He truly thought that it would lead to the the wholesale dissolution of order amongst the rank and file. Of course, he was laughably and ignorantly wrong about that, but that was where he was coming from.

    There are many, many things to be angry about, this just does not strike me as one of them.

    DoctorArch on
    Switch Friend Code: SW-6732-9515-9697
  • Der Waffle MousDer Waffle Mous Blame this on the misfortune of your birth. New Yark, New Yark.Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Okay - what part of "he, as the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a sitting President of the United States he would not obey a lawful order" do you all not get?
    I'm sorry we're not as righteously indignant about everything as you.

    15 years is a long damn time for a person, and a nation to change its views about something.

    He's a dick for doing it in the first place, but he clearly doesn't feel the same as he did before.

    Der Waffle Mous on
    Steam PSN: DerWaffleMous Origin: DerWaffleMous Bnet: DerWaffle#1682
  • HenroidHenroid Mexican kicked from Immigration Thread Centrism is Racism :3Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Yeah, fuck people who disagree with me and then change their minds! Fuck them!

    I would agree with your sarcasm, but the thing is politics are dirty and dumb. He might just be talking to look better. As in he may not be genuine. I don't trust this guy much.

    Henroid on
  • EvanderEvander Disappointed Father Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    So, wait.

    Colin Powell is a flip-flopper. That's the complaint?

    Evander on
  • JebusUDJebusUD Adventure! Candy IslandRegistered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Remember when he endorsed Barack Obama for president? Even though he is a republican! Fuck that guy!

    JebusUD on
    and I wonder about my neighbors even though I don't have them
    but they're listening to every word I say
  • EvanderEvander Disappointed Father Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Powell and McCain were the two republicans I liked. Bush's first term destroyed both of them.



    Powell began to redeem himself when he resigned from the cabinet. McCain just kept digging himself a deeper hole.

    Evander on
  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Henroid wrote: »
    Yeah, fuck people who disagree with me and then change their minds! Fuck them!

    I would agree with your sarcasm, but the thing is politics are dirty and dumb. He might just be talking to look better. As in he may not be genuine. I don't trust this guy much.
    I'm perfectly ok with public figures doing a 180 towards my belief system, regardless of reason.

    OptimusZed on
    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. Now With Ninjas!

    They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Archgarth wrote: »
    Okay - what part of "he, as the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a sitting President of the United States he would not obey a lawful order" do you all not get?

    He truly thought that it would lead to the the wholesale dissolution of order amongst the rank and file. Of course, he was laughably and ignorantly wrong about that, but that was where he was coming from.
    You mean he made the same argument that the generals in charge back in 1948 made regarding why military personnel like Powell himself needed to be kept segregated? (Which, by the way, is more evidence why his argument was bullshit in the 90s and he knew it.)

    Again, he's trying to come of as the elder statesman with this. I think that him trying that is bullshit, especially considering what the fuck he did.

    AngelHedgie on
    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • HenroidHenroid Mexican kicked from Immigration Thread Centrism is Racism :3Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    JebusUD wrote: »
    Remember when he endorsed Barack Obama for president? Even though he is a republican! Fuck that guy!

    Well hey, it could've been pandering. It could've been him telling the Repubs to eff themselves.

    Colin Powell is like a political anomally for me. I don't know what to think about him.

    Henroid on
  • EvanderEvander Disappointed Father Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Archgarth wrote: »
    Okay - what part of "he, as the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a sitting President of the United States he would not obey a lawful order" do you all not get?

    He truly thought that it would lead to the the wholesale dissolution of order amongst the rank and file. Of course, he was laughably and ignorantly wrong about that, but that was where he was coming from.
    You mean he made the same argument that the generals in charge back in 1948 made regarding why military personnel like Powell himself needed to be kept segregated? (Which, by the way, is more evidence why his argument was bullshit in the 90s and he knew it.)

    Again, he's trying to come of as the elder statesman with this. I think that him trying that is bullshit, especially considering what the fuck he did.

    Flip-flopping is worse than treason.

    Evander on
  • The Great American NovelThe Great American Novel __BANNED USERS regular
    edited July 2009
    Archgarth wrote: »
    Okay - what part of "he, as the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a sitting President of the United States he would not obey a lawful order" do you all not get?

    He truly thought that it would lead to the the wholesale dissolution of order amongst the rank and file. Of course, he was laughably and ignorantly wrong about that, but that was where he was coming from.
    You mean he made the same argument that the generals in charge back in 1948 made regarding why military personnel like Powell himself needed to be kept segregated? (Which, by the way, is more evidence why his argument was bullshit in the 90s and he knew it.)

    Again, he's trying to come of as the elder statesman with this. I think that him trying that is bullshit, especially considering what the fuck he did.
    So you're saying this:

    1) Colin Powell does something I disagree with. Fuck Colin Powell!

    2) Colin Powell does something I agree with. This is obviously a bullshit ploy. Fuck Colin Powell!

    I don't think you're being fair to the man, man.

    The Great American Novel on
  • HenroidHenroid Mexican kicked from Immigration Thread Centrism is Racism :3Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    Henroid wrote: »
    Yeah, fuck people who disagree with me and then change their minds! Fuck them!

    I would agree with your sarcasm, but the thing is politics are dirty and dumb. He might just be talking to look better. As in he may not be genuine. I don't trust this guy much.
    I'm perfectly ok with public figures doing a 180 towards my belief system, regardless of reason.

    Is the idea that no matter what their reasons, they help champion a cause you support?

    I guess that works, but I think the more genuine and consistent someone is, the more power they have in that effort.

    Henroid on
  • QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    You mean he made the same argument that the generals in charge back in 1948 made regarding why military personnel like Powell himself needed to be kept segregated? (Which, by the way, is more evidence why his argument was bullshit in the 90s and he knew it.)

    Again, he's trying to come of as the elder statesman with this. I think that him trying that is bullshit, especially considering what the fuck he did.
    So you wanted to make a thread to complain about something that happened in 1993?

    Quid on
  • The Muffin ManThe Muffin Man Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Dac wrote: »
    The bastard behind DADT now says it should be revised.

    Clinton should have cashiered your ass, for what you did when he tried to end the ban on homosexuaals serving. The only reason DADT exists in the first place is because you flat out told Clinton that you would disobey a lawful order to end the ban, and the only reason you survived such a blatantly unlawful act was because Clinton was too weak to handle a Truman/MacArthur-level dustup - a fact that both of you knew.

    And now you want to get to play the hero and say DADT should be ended? Please just go fuck yourself - because if it wasn't for you, we wouldn't have had DADT in the first place, but the end on the ban we should have had.

    So 16 years after DADT comes about, the person that suggested it because he thought it was "right for the time" changes his position and goes the other way.

    And you're upset about this... Why, precisely?
    Because goddammit, how dare he have a change of view on anything.

    It's not like peoples views and opinions change. Ever. Especially not over a decade and a half later.

    The Muffin Man on
  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Henroid wrote: »
    OptimusZed wrote: »
    Henroid wrote: »
    Yeah, fuck people who disagree with me and then change their minds! Fuck them!

    I would agree with your sarcasm, but the thing is politics are dirty and dumb. He might just be talking to look better. As in he may not be genuine. I don't trust this guy much.
    I'm perfectly ok with public figures doing a 180 towards my belief system, regardless of reason.

    Is the idea that no matter what their reasons, they help champion a cause you support?

    I guess that works, but I think the more genuine and consistent someone is, the more power they have in that effort.
    Whatever their reasons, they're publicly supporting the same cause as me. If they've been doing so all along, they've got the consistency thing. If they've pulled a 180, they've got the "I've seen the error of my ways" thing. Either way, they're doing the right thing and I'm glad to have them.

    OptimusZed on
    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. Now With Ninjas!

    They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Evander wrote: »
    Archgarth wrote: »
    Okay - what part of "he, as the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a sitting President of the United States he would not obey a lawful order" do you all not get?

    He truly thought that it would lead to the the wholesale dissolution of order amongst the rank and file. Of course, he was laughably and ignorantly wrong about that, but that was where he was coming from.
    You mean he made the same argument that the generals in charge back in 1948 made regarding why military personnel like Powell himself needed to be kept segregated? (Which, by the way, is more evidence why his argument was bullshit in the 90s and he knew it.)

    Again, he's trying to come of as the elder statesman with this. I think that him trying that is bullshit, especially considering what the fuck he did.

    Flip-flopping is worse than treason.

    Actually, treason is pretty damn close to what the man did.

    I don't think you all are quite getting how serious what he did was. He didn't just "oppose" lifting the homosexual ban - he told Clinton that if ordered to lift the ban - which, might I remind you, would have been a legal order at the time until Congress stepped in - he, as the highest ranking uniformed officer of the military, would have disobeyed said order.

    In other words, he precipitated a Constitutional crisis over the homosexual ban, and got away with it because he knew that Clinton was too politically weak to be able to cashier him a la MacArthur.

    AngelHedgie on
    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Quid wrote: »
    You mean he made the same argument that the generals in charge back in 1948 made regarding why military personnel like Powell himself needed to be kept segregated? (Which, by the way, is more evidence why his argument was bullshit in the 90s and he knew it.)

    Again, he's trying to come of as the elder statesman with this. I think that him trying that is bullshit, especially considering what the fuck he did.
    So you wanted to make a thread to complain about something that happened in 1993?

    Well, I do take Constitutional crises seriously. Your mileage may vary, though.

    AngelHedgie on
    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • DuffelDuffel jacobkosh Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Well, I do take Constitutional crises seriously. Your mileage may vary, though.
    What would Powell be required to do to redeem himself in your eyes, since changing his mind and publicly saying so isn't enough?

    Duffel on
  • QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Well, I do take Constitutional crises seriously. Your mileage may vary, though.
    Are you next going to make a thread about Bush stealing the election?

    Quid on
  • werehippywerehippy Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    I can't say I quite feel the same rage that Angel feels, but by the same token I can't say a feeling of "fuck you Powell" is completely unwarranted. Powell made a personal and frankly extraordinary effort to make sure Clinton was forced to go this road, and unless he's going to admit some personal culpability on that front he really should shut the hell up about the issue.

    Maybe the article doesn't convey his position properly, but I find myself hard pressed to read "it was right at the time" as anything other than a self serving cover for his actions then and a springboard to get on a bandwagon now. Attitudes were different then and have changed now, we should re-examine the issue and so on all have the feel of weaseling on an issue.

    If he was always for gay rights and he legitimately felt that the military and the country couldn't handle it, that would be one thing. If his own personal views have evolved and he's talking about the nations feelings on the issue as a proxy for his, that's fine too. Either of those cases I'd be willing to not hold his past actions too much against him and welcome him on board now that he's right on the issue. But he hasn't conveyed any of that, and for that I think a fuck you is a fair call.

    werehippy on
  • MorninglordMorninglord I'm tired of being Batman, so today I'll be Owl.Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Angel you don't really deal with the world you deal with how the world betrays your fantasy image of how it should work.

    All I get from your link is a really good thing happened and that the same man made it happen in the past.

    Well at least he has changed his mind.

    Morninglord on
    (PSN: Morninglord) (Steam: Morninglord) (WiiU: Morninglord22) I like to record and toss up a lot of random gaming videos here.
  • HenroidHenroid Mexican kicked from Immigration Thread Centrism is Racism :3Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    This thread is showing me how much more good faith people have in others compared to me. I'm always at least slightly skeptical.

    Henroid on
  • QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    He may very well be doing it to remain politically viable. Can't say I care.

    Quid on
  • AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Duffel wrote: »
    Well, I do take Constitutional crises seriously. Your mileage may vary, though.
    What would Powell be required to do to redeem himself in your eyes, since changing his mind and publicly saying so isn't enough?

    He can't. That's sort of the point. The issue isn't that he supported the homosexual ban, but how he did it. He broke the oath he swore as an officer, he violated the UCMJ, and he basically thumbed his nose at the Constitution. And him changing his opinion 15 years later doesn't change any of that.

    AngelHedgie on
    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • OptimusZedOptimusZed Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Quid wrote: »
    He may very well be doing it to remain politically viable. Can't say I care.
    Nor do I. I can't find any way to take the political necessity of supporting gay rights as a bad thing.

    OptimusZed on
    We're reading Rifts. You should too. You know you want to. Now With Ninjas!

    They tried to bury us. They didn't know that we were seeds. 2018 Midterms. Get your shit together.
  • QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    What, exactly, is it you want to discuss?

    Quid on
  • HenroidHenroid Mexican kicked from Immigration Thread Centrism is Racism :3Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Duffel wrote: »
    Well, I do take Constitutional crises seriously. Your mileage may vary, though.
    What would Powell be required to do to redeem himself in your eyes, since changing his mind and publicly saying so isn't enough?

    He can't. That's sort of the point. The issue isn't that he supported the homosexual ban, but how he did it. He broke the oath he swore as an officer, he violated the UCMJ, and he basically thumbed his nose at the Constitution. And him changing his opinion 15 years later doesn't change any of that.

    What's the UCMJ?

    Henroid on
  • The Muffin ManThe Muffin Man Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Quid wrote: »
    You mean he made the same argument that the generals in charge back in 1948 made regarding why military personnel like Powell himself needed to be kept segregated? (Which, by the way, is more evidence why his argument was bullshit in the 90s and he knew it.)

    Again, he's trying to come of as the elder statesman with this. I think that him trying that is bullshit, especially considering what the fuck he did.
    So you wanted to make a thread to complain about something that happened in 1993?

    Well, I do take Constitutional crises seriously. Your mileage may vary, though.
    Then why not make a thread about it sometime between 1993 and when he changed his mind?

    Now it's kind of a moot point. He changed his mind and realized DADT was ridiculous. Besides, shouldn't you be pissed at Clinton for NOT giving the order in the first place?

    The Muffin Man on
  • PicardathonPicardathon Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Discuss? Politics threads aren't about discussions, they're echochambers. We don't discuss politics here.

    Picardathon on
  • QuidQuid Definitely not a banana Registered User regular
    edited July 2009
    Henroid wrote: »
    What's the UCMJ?
    Uniform Code of Military Justice.

    Basically the rules every person in the U.S. military must follow.

    Edit: Which, had Clinton shown some balls and actually ordered him back in '93 would have meant he could be court martialed for disobeying.

    Quid on
Sign In or Register to comment.