You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #56: Rich, isn't it? [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
CakeGrrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jun-19-11 05:01 PM
Response to Reply #25
56. Rich, isn't it?
Clinton: He was forced to do it.

Obama: He's a weak Republican appeaser.

What crap.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
  -There seems to be some revisionist history when it comes to Clinton and gay rights Very_Boring_Name  Jun-19-11 03:12 PM   #0 
  - Wow that was big stretch.  craigmatic   Jun-19-11 03:32 PM   #1 
  - Like I said, Obama has the luxury of popular support and congressional support  Very_Boring_Name   Jun-19-11 03:35 PM   #2 
  - Congressional support? when?  johnaries   Jun-19-11 03:42 PM   #4 
  - The public option wasn't supported by the dem majority  Very_Boring_Name   Jun-19-11 03:43 PM   #6 
     - So why didn't the Dem majority repeal DOMA?  Alenne   Jun-19-11 03:49 PM   #8 
        - For one thing - the WH (Justice Dept.) was busy defending it.  DURHAM D   Jun-19-11 03:52 PM   #10 
        - It's the job of the Justice Dept. to defend passed laws.  pnwmom   Jun-19-11 04:00 PM   #15 
        - Is that all you got?  DURHAM D   Jun-19-11 04:03 PM   #18 
        - You don't like facts?  BklnDem75   Jun-20-11 08:49 AM   #102 
        - you mean facts? that post has a fact in it, yes.  dionysus   Jun-20-11 09:12 AM   #104 
        - Bush, Reagan & Clinton all filed briefs against current fed laws at the time  justiceischeap   Jun-20-11 05:29 PM   #130 
        - The JD did what it had to until it crafted an argument with the right legal footing to stop.  phleshdef   Jun-19-11 04:03 PM   #19 
        - Speaking of black and white...  DURHAM D   Jun-19-11 04:06 PM   #21 
           - Just admit you are wrong. Its not hard.  phleshdef   Jun-19-11 04:15 PM   #26 
        - the WH has said they will NOT defend DOMA  mkultra   Jun-20-11 10:29 AM   #111 
        - Because they would have to include Pelosi...  SkyDaddy7   Jun-20-11 05:00 AM   #98 
  - Deleted message  Name removed   Jun-19-11 03:44 PM   #7 
  - Right. Both Clinton and Obama are heads and shoulders above  pnwmom   Jun-19-11 04:00 PM   #16 
  - I applaud what Clinton did, but I disagree that Obama  pnwmom   Jun-19-11 03:58 PM   #13 
  - Oh give me a break, that is such a straw man argument  Very_Boring_Name   Jun-19-11 04:07 PM   #23 
  - And if there had been turmoil as a result of a backlash to what was perceived  pnwmom   Jun-19-11 06:49 PM   #64 
     - The only backlash would be from republicans  Very_Boring_Name   Jun-19-11 07:48 PM   #72 
        - The military is full of Republicans, and we needed the help  pnwmom   Jun-19-11 09:23 PM   #82 
  - You do know that Obama capitulated on the anti discrimination language  ruggerson   Jun-19-11 09:11 PM   #80 
     - That possibility is a lot less likely since Obama brought the military leaders onboard with this.  pnwmom   Jun-19-11 09:25 PM   #83 
        - I agree  ruggerson   Jun-19-11 09:28 PM   #84 
  - "prodded to act" You've got to be kidding me.  vaberella   Jun-19-11 11:10 PM   #90 
  - Yes! (Also, see comment #24 for more) n/t  Tx4obama   Jun-19-11 11:19 PM   #92 
  - While I agree that opinion has shifted on these issues, there is a reason  karynnj   Jun-20-11 08:22 AM   #99 
  - Some of us were there.  okasha   Jun-19-11 04:16 PM   #29 
     - What political risk?  Drunken Irishman   Jun-19-11 04:21 PM   #33 
     - Yes we were - and some of see that Clinton, who had many political gifts, was not someone who took  karynnj   Jun-20-11 08:32 AM   #100 
     - Hilarious to give Clinton a pass...  BklnDem75   Jun-20-11 09:23 AM   #105 
     - then you should remember Clinton saying he did NOT support same-sex marriage  mkultra   Jun-20-11 10:34 AM   #112 
     - Bill Clinton was against marriage equality, too.  Starbucks Anarchist   Jun-20-11 05:10 PM   #127 
  - I think we need to lay off both Clinton and Obama. Neither are even close to being the enemy here.  phleshdef   Jun-19-11 03:42 PM   #3 
  - Sadly I think some of the people most vocal and  DURHAM D   Jun-19-11 03:43 PM   #5 
  - You want the list?  great white snark   Jun-19-11 03:52 PM   #9 
  - Deleted message  Name removed   Jun-19-11 03:56 PM   #12 
     - Theres no doubt that bigotry against gay people has softened significantly.  phleshdef   Jun-19-11 03:59 PM   #14 
        - Huh?  DURHAM D   Jun-19-11 04:02 PM   #17 
           - He led the repeal of DADT. That is factually undeniable in every single way.  phleshdef   Jun-19-11 04:04 PM   #20 
              - right  DURHAM D   Jun-19-11 04:07 PM   #22 
                 - He ran on it. He ORDERED his people to pursue it. He asked Congress to repeal it at a joint session.  phleshdef   Jun-19-11 04:13 PM   #24 
                    - You are 100% correct! n/t  Tx4obama   Jun-19-11 04:15 PM   #28 
                    - You mean the study where they asked the straight spouse (and parents) what they thought about it?  DURHAM D   Jun-19-11 04:19 PM   #31 
                       - Yes indeed, I mean that study. It was a good study and it served a good purpose.  phleshdef   Jun-19-11 04:24 PM   #37 
                       - Did Truman ask the parents and spouses of white people if their kids could serve with blacks?  DURHAM D   Jun-19-11 04:26 PM   #41 
                          - No. He also didn't have to repeal any existing laws. And it still took SIX YEARS  phleshdef   Jun-19-11 04:35 PM   #49 
                          - Actually he did  SpartanDem   Jun-20-11 03:08 PM   #119 
                       - Do you have any proof to support your claim?  Drunken Irishman   Jun-19-11 04:26 PM   #40 
                       - I know! He took 2 whole years to repeal over 200 years of oppression against gay soldiers.  phleshdef   Jun-19-11 04:27 PM   #43 
                       - Deleted sub-thread  Name removed   Jun-19-11 04:28 PM   #44 
                       - You think everybody surveyed was straight?  boppers   Jun-19-11 04:47 PM   #54 
  - Any First Lady running would change the dynamics of how her husband is treated  karynnj   Jun-20-11 09:01 AM   #103 
  - Recommend  xchrom   Jun-19-11 03:53 PM   #11 
  - It's funny some of you are okaying Clinton's compromising...  Drunken Irishman   Jun-19-11 04:14 PM   #25 
  - Clinton compromised. Obama capitulates.  Very_Boring_Name   Jun-19-11 04:18 PM   #30 
  - Uh huh...  Drunken Irishman   Jun-19-11 04:20 PM   #32 
  - What were you doing in the 90s? nt  DURHAM D   Jun-19-11 04:22 PM   #34 
  - Not signing into laws taking away rights of gay Americans.  Drunken Irishman   Jun-19-11 04:24 PM   #36 
     - In other words - nothing.  DURHAM D   Jun-19-11 04:25 PM   #38 
        - I was in elementary in the 90s...  Drunken Irishman   Jun-19-11 04:27 PM   #42 
           - Its clear you are not.  DURHAM D   Jun-19-11 04:29 PM   #45 
              - Why?  Drunken Irishman   Jun-19-11 04:30 PM   #46 
                 - Deleted sub-thread  Name removed   Jun-19-11 04:35 PM   #48 
  - Uh, DI  ruggerson   Jun-19-11 08:50 PM   #78 
     - I do not think 38 states would have ratified it...  Drunken Irishman   Jun-20-11 12:17 AM   #94 
     - I do  ruggerson   Jun-20-11 05:39 PM   #131 
        - I'm glad we'll never know too...  Drunken Irishman   Jun-21-11 01:43 PM   #145 
     - Not to mention - even to the Advocate, in July months before the vote in September,  karynnj   Jun-20-11 09:23 AM   #106 
     - Very well said.  stevenleser   Jun-20-11 02:08 PM   #117 
  - Clinton failed. Obama is getting the job done. n/t  Tx4obama   Jun-19-11 04:22 PM   #35 
  - Clinton didn't fail at all. He set up the groundwork for change. There's a reason the gay community  Very_Boring_Name   Jun-19-11 04:25 PM   #39 
     - People like me?  Tx4obama   Jun-19-11 04:32 PM   #47 
     - Deleted message  Name removed   Jun-19-11 04:39 PM   #50 
     - Having DADT/DOMA implemented on his watch was the groundwork to repealing it.  CakeGrrl   Jun-19-11 05:51 PM   #62 
     - Having DOMA/DADT instead of constitutional amendments was groundwork  Very_Boring_Name   Jun-19-11 07:35 PM   #70 
     - So Clinton  ProSense   Jun-19-11 07:52 PM   #74 
     - A totally unprovable hypothetical: "Never would have had the guts"  CakeGrrl   Jun-19-11 07:53 PM   #75 
     - Was it gutsy when Clinton *bragged* about signing DOMA in radio spots for religious networks?  Starbucks Anarchist   Jun-20-11 05:55 PM   #134 
        - Damn. You just killed this thread.  Number23   Jun-20-11 06:46 PM   #140 
     - That's some funny stuff alright.  AtomicKitten   Jun-20-11 03:03 AM   #97 
     - how very interesting  Number23   Jun-19-11 07:48 PM   #73 
  - LULZ---you're posts keep on making me laugh.  vaberella   Jun-19-11 11:12 PM   #91 
  - Rich, isn't it?  CakeGrrl   Jun-19-11 05:01 PM   #56 
     - It's amazing  ProSense   Jun-19-11 05:06 PM   #57 
  - a little more fleshed out, if you will:  xchrom   Jun-19-11 04:15 PM   #27 
  - Unrec.  CakeGrrl   Jun-19-11 04:39 PM   #51 
  - What a surprise!  Very_Boring_Name   Jun-19-11 04:41 PM   #52 
     - Back atcha.  CakeGrrl   Jun-19-11 04:46 PM   #53 
  - What absolute  ProSense   Jun-19-11 04:59 PM   #55 
  - Deleted message  Name removed   Jun-19-11 05:19 PM   #58 
  - Nice wide brush ya got. Care to give examples?  great white snark   Jun-19-11 05:35 PM   #59 
  - That actually makes more sense in reverse.  CakeGrrl   Jun-19-11 05:36 PM   #60 
  - Double braided pretzel logic.  Patriot 76   Jun-19-11 05:40 PM   #61 
  - you right on here, VBN  nashville_brook   Jun-19-11 06:02 PM   #63 
  - More revisionism  ProSense   Jun-19-11 06:53 PM   #65 
     - Deleted message  Name removed   Jun-19-11 09:39 PM   #86 
        - Here  ProSense   Jun-19-11 09:43 PM   #87 
  - Unrec for obvious reasons.  Tarheel_Dem   Jun-19-11 07:21 PM   #66 
  - What is Bill Clinton's personal view on gay marriage? Has he ever said? nt  Honeycombe8   Jun-19-11 07:22 PM   #67 
  - This should help to answer your question...  TriMera   Jun-19-11 07:27 PM   #68 
  - In a June 1996 interview  Alenne   Jun-19-11 07:32 PM   #69 
     - At least he "evolved" in the right direction. n/t  TriMera   Jun-19-11 07:44 PM   #71 
     - That's awesome.  Alenne   Jun-19-11 07:53 PM   #76 
        - I don't doubt it. n/t  TriMera   Jun-19-11 08:05 PM   #77 
        - I actually think he'll do it before he leaves office...  Drunken Irishman   Jun-20-11 01:57 AM   #96 
     - To be fair - it is 15 years later and public opinion has shifted enormously on this issue  karynnj   Jun-20-11 09:26 AM   #107 
  - I don't believe he actually issued an exec order  ruggerson   Jun-19-11 09:03 PM   #79 
  - I think it behooves the straight people here to listen and learn from gay folks  ruggerson   Jun-19-11 09:18 PM   #81 
  - Here  ProSense   Jun-19-11 09:29 PM   #85 
  - Well, I'm here to tell you that  CakeGrrl   Jun-19-11 10:01 PM   #88 
     - Can't help you with that  ruggerson   Jun-20-11 12:12 AM   #93 
  - But, but. If that's true (and it is) then the current  Jakes Progress   Jun-19-11 10:19 PM   #89 
  - I won't defend Clinton on economics, but I'll defend him on this.  w4rma   Jun-20-11 01:24 AM   #95 
  - Clinton was against same-sex marriage  mkultra   Jun-20-11 08:33 AM   #101 
  - It becomes a federal question, when gays married under state law don't get federal benefits  karynnj   Jun-20-11 09:35 AM   #108 
     - all issues of discrimination are federal issues.  mkultra   Jun-20-11 09:38 AM   #109 
        - Completely agree  karynnj   Jun-20-11 10:24 AM   #110 
  - Congress forced something down his throat?  treestar   Jun-20-11 11:50 AM   #113 
  - Obama has (had) a solid dem majority in congress.  Very_Boring_Name   Jun-20-11 01:42 PM   #114 
     - "Clinton didn't." More  ProSense   Jun-20-11 01:48 PM   #115 
     - Had is correct, don't know why you'd include has  treestar   Jun-20-11 04:39 PM   #124 
  - Deleted message  Name removed   Jun-20-11 02:06 PM   #116 
  - Yahtzee.  AtomicKitten   Jun-20-11 02:16 PM   #118 
  - and...Bingo!  CakeGrrl   Jun-20-11 03:20 PM   #121 
  - How so?  ohheckyeah   Jun-20-11 04:28 PM   #123 
  - No kidding. The premise of this thread is so damned absurd!  treestar   Jun-20-11 04:40 PM   #125 
  - I'll say again: DEFENDING Clinton for DOMA/DADT going in, ATTACKING Obama for not ending them yet.  CakeGrrl   Jun-20-11 05:26 PM   #128 
     - It's like blaming Obama for not ending the wars ASAP, but not blaming Bush for starting them.  Starbucks Anarchist   Jun-20-11 05:58 PM   #135 
  - DADT was progressive. DOMA was regressive.  ieoeja   Jun-20-11 03:20 PM   #120 
  - DADT was progressive?  ProSense   Jun-20-11 03:47 PM   #122 
     - Deleted message  Name removed   Jun-20-11 05:29 PM   #129 
        - There  ProSense   Jun-20-11 05:39 PM   #132 
           - Deleted sub-thread  Name removed   Jun-20-11 05:45 PM   #133 
           - Really? Were you gay and in the military prior to DADT? I was.  TriMera   Jun-20-11 06:02 PM   #136 
              - Again  ProSense   Jun-20-11 06:08 PM   #138 
                 - I'm not arguing that DADT was a good thing, but  TriMera   Jun-20-11 06:19 PM   #139 
  - The same Clinton who told John Kerry to support gay-marriage bans?  Starbucks Anarchist   Jun-20-11 05:05 PM   #126 
  - +1,000,000  MessiahRp   Jun-20-11 06:03 PM   #137 
  - Damn. This is the SECOND time you've killed this thread  Number23   Jun-20-11 06:53 PM   #141 
     - LOL, thanks.  Starbucks Anarchist   Jun-20-11 06:58 PM   #142 
  - Deleted message  Name removed   Jun-21-11 12:46 AM   #143 
     - Ah, so we should all 'THANK' Bill Clinton for signing into law DADT and DOMA?  Tx4obama   Jun-21-11 01:00 AM   #144 
 

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC