This is why Obama repealed DADT through Congress...

[Drunken Irishman]

Pres. Obama repealing DADT through Congress makes it impossible for a sitting president to reinstate it.

That's good. Because Tim Pawlenty, if elected in 2012, says he'll reinstate it.

http://crooksandliars.com/karoli/pawlent...state-dadt

Quote:In an interview with the most hateful Bryan Fischer of the American Family Association Pawlenty tagged a conversation about "traditional values" by saying he would reinstate the DADT policy if he was elected.

Of course, I don't know what's more shocking - that he doesn't understand the president lacks power to reinstate anything voted down by Congress, or that he thinks this is a popular view.

But it does show how important it was for Congress to repeal DADT and not for Pres. Obama to strike it down with an executive order.

For starters, had Obama done the latter, Pawlenty could, I guess, reinstate it via a similar executive order. Not good. But more importantly, had Obama proved executive order precedence to overrule a law of the land, it would open the door to potentially other presidents doing the exact same thing.

So, let's say in 2012 Gingrich wins (unlikely as it is) and he decides that Social Security should be repealed - using the executive order established under Pres. Obama, he would be able to overturn what Congress voted on decades ago.

It's unlikely that would hold up in any court - but it would have left a messy situation that, years from now, could have voided Obama's executive order to kill DADT, thus making it, once again, part of the law of the land.

Our guy did it right. He did it right because, after all, he probably knows more about the U.S. Constitution than any political hack who said he wasn't moving fast enough.

Well this is why.

[JuniperLea]

It was hard to get anyone to listen... the rhetoric was so harsh. The end result is a very good thing, however, and historically we've never seen a piece of human rights legislation reversed. That leads me to think just one thing. Pawlenty is going for the hate and bigotry vote.

[pappy]

As a Republican I would suppose that Pawlenty subscribes to the theory of the "unitary" or "imperial" presidency. (Except, of course, if the President is a Democrat.)

Under that Constitutional(?) theory the President would have the ability to make any rules regarding how the military operates including DADT. This would set up a Constitutional conflict between Executive and the Legislative branches. That conflict could only then be resolved by the Supreme Court which at the present time is dominated by Justices that seem to support the unitary Executive theory.

I can see the next Republican President (if the "tea party" types prove dominant in that party) to test this theory and given the current SCOTUS leanings my feelings are that they might well succeed.

[Drunken Irishman]

(01-14-2011 07:14 PM)pappy Wrote:  As a Republican I would suppose that Pawlenty subscribes to the theory of the "unitary" or "imperial" presidency. (Except, of course, if the President is a Democrat.)

Under that Constitutional(?) theory the President would have the ability to make any rules regarding how the military operates including DADT. This would set up a Constitutional conflict between Executive and the Legislative branches. That conflict could only then be resolved by the Supreme Court which at the present time is dominated by Justices that seem to support the unitary Executive theory.

I can see the next Republican President (if the "tea party" types prove dominant in that party) to test this theory and given the current SCOTUS leanings my feelings are that they might well succeed.

It would be difficult. The President, while seen as the true head of the military, still has limits to his power. It's why, back in 1950, Congress had to vote on the Uniform Code of Military Justice - which outlawed gays from serving in the military. It was ultimately signed by Harry Truman (funny how many on the left used Truman's executive order to desegregate the Armed Forces as a shining example of leadership - yet it was his WH that established the foundation for DADT).

To Clinton's credit in the 90s, he was backed into a corner, again, by Congress. The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1994 required the military to continue its ban.

That's where his compromise came from and in 1994, DADT was born.

But it was all an act of Congress. The President alone would find it very difficult to reinstate such a law - especially since it was a law voted down by the Congress.

This is just Pawlenty playing politics. It's really a shitty way of gaining votes. But he is a Republican, so what do you expect?

[atomic]

In the face of all the sniveling and horseshit, President Obama directed a PERMANENT REPEAL of DADT.

"You're welcome."

[Julie]

This is such and important point! There were many who stomped their feet and ranted all day long about how Obama could so easily do away with DADT if he actually wanted to! I knew all along Congress was the way to go to make it stick for good but some were too hysterical to hear such words and not accuse you of homophobia. It was an excellent example of how the tone of political discourse has gotten out of hand.

Julie

[mzmolly]

(01-14-2011 07:46 PM)Julie Wrote:  This is such and important point! There were many who stomped their feet and ranted all day long about how Obama could so easily do away with DADT if he actually wanted to!

Exactly. Not to mention the fact that a constitutional scholar, such as Obama, might be interested in actually honoring the U.S. Constitution.

[RoyGBiv]

Precisely.

At a time when I was still involved in other forums, I tried to make this point repeatedly, but those arguing against me could not break themselves away from their apparent idea that Obama is a dictator for life and that any actions he made as Executive would be permanent.

It makes me question how well many people genuinely understand the structures and functions of our government.

[OptimistesMaddie]

(01-14-2011 08:05 PM)RoyGBiv Wrote:  Precisely.

At a time when I was still involved in other forums, I tried to make this point repeatedly, but those arguing against me could not break themselves away from their apparent idea that Obama is a dictator for life and that any actions he made as Executive would be permanent.

It makes me question how well many people genuinely understand the structures and functions of our government.

This is why it's important to bring civics back to all highschools. People do not understand how government functions and it's a travesity.

[RoyGBiv]

(01-14-2011 10:22 PM)OptimistesMaddie Wrote:  This is why it's important to bring civics back to all highschools. People do not understand how government functions and it's a travesity.

And while I may be accused of paranoid conspiracy theories for suggesting it, this is, I believe, the precise reason why many right-wingers want to eliminate civics classes from both high school and college programs.

Actually understanding the way government works is not a positive advertisement for the way Republicans and other right-wingers want us to believe it works.

[Cha]

Pawlenty is pandering to the Michelle Bachmann sycophants or just psychos and not heeding what the military majority wants.

I absolutely dread the craven assholes on parade for the 2012 election..think it was bad in 2008? They'll have four years to dip their fangs in toxic spew.

Thank you for reiterating what we knew in the first place, Irish, but what so many kept their heads buried about.

[Number23]

That is mindblowing. With everything going on in the world right now, that this is such a priority for this idiot should be all it takes to run him out of office.

Astounding. And he actually thinks that this is a popular viewpoint to have.

[Willinois]

(01-14-2011 11:22 PM)Number23 Wrote:  That is mindblowing. With everything going on in the world right now, that this is such a priority for this idiot should be all it takes to run him out of office.

Astounding. And he actually thinks that this is a popular viewpoint to have.

I'm getting a little fixated on watching your avatar. And I swear I'm not stoned.

[Number23]

(01-14-2011 11:32 PM)Willinois Wrote:  I'm getting a little fixated on watching your avatar. And I swear I'm not stoned.

Yeah, right!

[nofurylike]

thank you for posting this, Drunken Irishman. it is very informative, and very important!
it also affirms what so many of us have tried and tried to educate others about. thank you for clarifying!

[pappy]

I hope Danny Hernandez is invited to the State of the Union address.

I will relish watching the Republicans giving a standing ovation to a gay Hispanic.

[The Desperate Blogger]

This also highlights how spineless the Republicans have always been.

A majority of their own party supported the repeal of DADT -- but as always the only thing that talks louder than a screaming Tea Partier, to them, is MONEY.

[NJMaverick]

These comments show the lack of intelligence of your average right winger. You can't go back to DADT after people were allowed to tell.

[RoyGBiv]

(01-15-2011 10:14 AM)NJMaverick Wrote:  These comments show the lack of intelligence of your average right winger. You can't go back to DADT after people were allowed to tell.

They way they look at it, though, is that now that people have been allowed to tell, they'll know who to kick out.

[Drunken Irishman]

Mzmolly!!!!!!!

[mzmolly]

Hey, my fellow DrunkenIrish friend! So nice to see you here.

< You and I sharing a cyber Guinness.

[Drunken Irishman]

(01-16-2011 03:51 PM)mzmolly Wrote:  Hey, my fellow DrunkenIrish friend! So nice to see you here.

< You and I sharing a cyber Guinness.