I saw this on the BBC news website yesterday. I immediately wondered what a friend of mine (who said that he was "done with Obama" if he tried to block this court decision) would do, given that this is a delay and not a block.
It is true that Obama is turning out to be one huge disappointment. This is a real shame, yet I still don't understand fully why he is backtracking so much.
Is it unexpected opposition from congress? A change of opinion on his part? Or fear that he might be seen as too extreme by the electorate?
I am reminded of the early Blair years. We were promised so much, and yet got so little. I tend to sum 13 years of Labour up as a decade of missed opportunities. I hope you don't end up viewing Obama's tenure in the same light. Sadly, from what I am reading on the blogosphere, it's looking that way.
Today's news is about requesting a stay, yes -- but they are in fact attempting to block the decision, by appealing the ruling in the first place.
Pres. Obama is a horrific disappointment. After the disaster of The Shrub, there was so much that needed to be fixed. But he has consistently failed in everything he promised. It is embarrassing, frankly.
Mix in a completely belligerent conservative front stopping damn near anything this administration has been trying to do, the fact that the extreme right is getting a huge boost because we're still a nation of narrow minded racist fucks, plus with mid-term elections coming up in just a few weeks which are on shaky ground
( ... )
Actually, you're wrong. There absolutely is a legal obligation for Obama to have the DoJ fight for legislation that the US Congress passed. It's part of the balance of powers, the PotUS and his executive branch can't just say "gosh, we don't like a law Congress passed, so we just won't enforce it". DADT is part of the US Code still, like it or not. The executive branch has to enforce and defend those laws vigorously until they're repealed or struck-down by the courts.
This is on the US Congress. One might as how the Democrats, who have been in charge for the past 4 years, part of that with a supermajority, have failed to repeal this. DADT is soooo 90s, it's time to continue with the progress, and there's no excuse for the impotent congress to have not acted. I suspect that many will be booted out on their asses, because unlike Conservitards, Liberals demand results, and if their reps don't delver because they're too nice or have been emasculated, we kick them to the curb.
"There absolutely is a legal obligation for Obama to have the DoJ fight for legislation ..."
"until they're repealed or struck-down by the courts."
The law has been struck down by a court. There is ABSOLUTELY NO REQUIREMENT for the Dept. of Justice to file an appeal of that decision. They can just let it stand, and DADT is gone. Period.
Comments 10
It is true that Obama is turning out to be one huge disappointment. This is a real shame, yet I still don't understand fully why he is backtracking so much.
Is it unexpected opposition from congress? A change of opinion on his part? Or fear that he might be seen as too extreme by the electorate?
I am reminded of the early Blair years. We were promised so much, and yet got so little. I tend to sum 13 years of Labour up as a decade of missed opportunities. I hope you don't end up viewing Obama's tenure in the same light. Sadly, from what I am reading on the blogosphere, it's looking that way.
Reply
Pres. Obama is a horrific disappointment. After the disaster of The Shrub, there was so much that needed to be fixed. But he has consistently failed in everything he promised. It is embarrassing, frankly.
Reply
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
Reply
This is on the US Congress. One might as how the Democrats, who have been in charge for the past 4 years, part of that with a supermajority, have failed to repeal this. DADT is soooo 90s, it's time to continue with the progress, and there's no excuse for the impotent congress to have not acted. I suspect that many will be booted out on their asses, because unlike Conservitards, Liberals demand results, and if their reps don't delver because they're too nice or have been emasculated, we kick them to the curb.
Reply
"There absolutely is a legal obligation for Obama to have the DoJ fight for legislation ..."
"until they're repealed or struck-down by the courts."
The law has been struck down by a court. There is ABSOLUTELY NO REQUIREMENT for the Dept. of Justice to file an appeal of that decision. They can just let it stand, and DADT is gone. Period.
Reply
Reply
No, it isn't. Let it stand. Then go to Congress and bitch-slap them till they repeal the whole damn thing.
Reply
Leave a comment