House Republican aims to put brakes on repeal of 'Don't ask, don't tell' (Congress, soldiers)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A member of the House Armed Services Committee plans to introduce legislation next week designed to put the brakes on repeal of the military’s ban on openly gay troops.
The measure by Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.) would add the four military service chiefs to the list of those who must sign off on repealing the policy before it can be officially scrapped.
All I can guess is that he's throwing a bone to his constituents in suburban San Diego, many of whom are probably old, retired military guys. Why else would he attempt this? It's going nowhere.
Last edited by AnUnidentifiedMale; 01-14-2011 at 07:06 PM..
All I can guess is that he's throwing a bone to his constituents in San Diego, many of whom are probably old, retired military guys. Why else would he attempt this? It's going nowhere.
It's the same as the republicans trying to repeal health care, child labor laws, and trying to mandate guns in congress. They are wasting time and tax payer dollars to give a stroke job to their corporate owners and voters.
It's the same as the republicans trying to repeal health care, child labor laws, and trying to mandate guns in congress. They are wasting time and tax payer dollars to give a stroke job to their corporate owners and voters.
Because everyone knows that anything designed to stop senseless spending or to make changes to our military that will hurt moral shouldn't be done. Instead they should keep on finding new and useless ways to put our nation further and further in debt, right?
I thought these people were wearing, carrying, studying and reading and otherwise engrossed in the study of the Constitution because obviously they are not if they think that this piece of legislation is anything other than an absurd encroachment upon the separation of powers. The Congress does not have the power to require a subordinate part of the Executive Branch to either endorse or negate a piece of legislation before the Congress effectively usurping the power of the Presidential veto.
You know, this so absurd on so many levels that I can't believe that I am actually trying to respond rationally to the totally irrational.
It's probably not what his constituency wants. A minority of his constituency wants it, but he is doing it because that is what he believes is the best policy. This debate is getting really old. The military is streched thin. Gay soldiers don't commit any more sexual crimes than straight soldiers. Let them serve. It's their country too.
It's probably not what his constituency wants. A minority of his constituency wants it, but he is doing it because that is what he believes is the best policy. This debate is getting really old. The military is streched thin. Gay soldiers don't commit any more sexual crimes than straight soldiers. Let them serve. It's their country too.
Actually military is already at quota and looking at reduction of forces now.
All I can guess is that he's throwing a bone to his constituents in suburban San Diego, many of whom are probably old, retired military guys. Why else would he attempt this? It's going nowhere.
Looks like he is ready for retirement, stupid pandering such as this is a quick way to be shown the door.
Casper
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.