This country is so absurd. DADT costs us a fortune in recruiting, undermines our National security (in the same way: it eliminates qualified people) and isn't even supported by the very troops who's morale it's repeal is supposed to undermine. This is a policy that exsists for no other other reason than to pander to the funny mentalists. And it's high time the whack-jobs were kicked to the curb. As far as I'm concerned, they don't even deserve a seat at the table, they should not even be allowed into this debate or any other, because they don't possess even an elementary understanding of the Constitution and how our laws our SUPPOSED to be made. Their opinions on matters of law have no validity and their differences are in no way legitimate.
Speaking of people who's differences are far from legitimate and who's opinions deserve nothing more that the most rank derision, check out the view from our hotel room when we were visiting my Brother-in -Law in Lynchburg...
Yes folks, we slept in the shadow of the late Reverend Jerry Falwelll's Orwellianly-named LIBERTY UNIVERSITY; truly one of the greatest temples of ignorance ever constructed by mankind.
(Young earth creationism is another viewpoint that deserves nothing but scorn, and whose proponents have no place in any debate either, as they do not possess even an elementary knowledge of how science works or how knowledge is created.)
God, I hate that place.
BUT... It's good to be back. Hope you all had a wonderful Thanksgiving.
I think it is interesting that the Republicans had asked for studies to be conducted before they make a decision and now that the results are in, they are asking for even more studies because the original ones they had asked for weren't the "right ones."
ReplyDeleteIt is time for DADT's repeal and I hope the Democrats make this an issue. The GOP is trying to sweep this under the rug and hope on their electoral gains to keep it there and Democrats need to take a play out of the GOP playbook and press on...
Also, I plan on sleeping in Falwell's backyard very soon too - my brother lives up in Lynchburg and works as an engineer for a local company. I will be attending his wedding, but becauce we don't want to go to a church for his bachelor party, it looks like we will have to go to the nearest real city to have some fun!
@Kevin,
ReplyDeleteThat's an interesing way to put it. It's kind of like they tried acting like Liberals, and it backfired on them horrendously! I guess that's the difference between ASSUMING you're right (Conervative philosophy) and KNOWING you're right (Liberal Philosophy). The EVIDENCE will tend to back you up without much doctoring. (You know... because we tend to gather it BEFORE cementing our position!)
And I'd say "Have fun in Lynchburg," but I just came from there, and I know that's a logistic impossibility, so... Have fun in Bedford, I guess!
Your right! We don't plan on having fun in Lynchburg -we have to go to Roanoake to do that!
ReplyDeleteHey Eddie,
ReplyDeleteLove the picture. Seems "Liberty" has to be fenced off in 21 Century USA, just as we have to confine our 1st Amendment rights to "free speech" zones.
To continue our conversation from today's (12/03/10) MMFA Beckthread: I defer to no one in my love of the 1st Amendment (two Constitution references in a minute; am I becoming a Teabagger? No, {whew} I've actually read it), but there is one element from the old Brehon Laws (look it up, you lazy sod) that I'd willingly resurrect in our culture. The ancient bards were as adept at satire as they were at praise singing, and their satire was said to be scalding. If the tales are true (and we all know the Irish NEVER exaggerate) it could raise blisters on the body, and destroy the legitimacy, of a king. Pissing off a bard was as dangerous to a petty king as was turning his back on a cousin or younger brother. The bards had free reign in their satire, except for one thing. Anything that a target of the satire had been BORN WITH was out of bounds. You think I speak like an elitist, stuck-up prig? Lambaste me all you like. I'm afflicted with a stutter? Back off.
I try, not always successfully, to keep that in mind when cracking wise.
Agreed. More as a matter of PRINCIPLE than LAW, but that really sums it up, doesn't it?
ReplyDeleteBTW, for anyone else, THIS is what COnchobhar is refering to:
http://mediamatters.org/mmtv/201012030012#1097711