The Garden City Telegram
Email this story | Add Your Comment
| Read (1) Comments
What they're saying
Published 2/5/2010 in Commentary : Editorial
The (Cleveland) Plain Dealer on President Obama's State of the Union speech:
President Barack Obama often speaks to the need to change the tone of Washington. He did so again during last week's State of the Union speech. That is why it was so startling to see him commit a breach of both tone and etiquette during his annual address.
With six members of the Supreme Court seated before him on the floor of the House of Representatives, Obama pointedly criticized the court's recent decision on corporate campaign spending and urged Congress to revisit the issue. Democratic lawmakers and Cabinet members surrounding the justices stood and applauded vigorously.
The black-robed guests sat impassively -- as they routinely do at this event -- except for Justice Samuel Alito, who appeared to wince and mouth the words, "not true" when Obama described the ruling. ...
To almost literally finger the justices arrayed before him was simply -- and uncharacteristically -- ungracious. Yes, past presidents have criticized Supreme Court decisions during State of the Union speeches, but the event has become such a political pep rally that Obama put his guests in an impossible position. ...
San Diego Union-Tribune on gays and lesbians in the military:
President Barack Obama's State of the Union address had a retro feel to it when he broached a controversial subject that has been on the back burner for the last 16 years: gays and lesbians in the military. Obama wants to repeal the existing policy, known as "Don't ask, don't tell." He calls making the change "the right thing to do."
It is. And it's about time the country did right by gay and lesbian service members. The current policy ignores a basic inequity that is not cured by politically convenient half-measures that don't solve anything.
Speaking of politically convenient half-measures, it was in December 1993 that President Bill Clinton issued an executive order that established the current policy. The idea began as a compromise proposed by Clinton's defense secretary, Les Aspin, who opposed Clinton's campaign promise to drop the ban on gays and lesbians in the military. Aspin suggested prohibiting the military from asking recruits about their orientation and allowing gays and lesbians to serve in uniform, as long as they didn't declare their orientation or engage in homosexual behavior.
Problem solved? Well, not exactly. The compromise was heavy on pragmatism and light on principle. Clinton had gotten himself into a tight spot by making a promise that he had trouble keeping. This policy was intended to help him wiggle out. But, ultimately, the gay and lesbian communities weren't happy. ...
They should listen to Bill Mynatt of Knoxville, Tenn., who discussed the idea of repealing "don't ask, don't tell" last year while a senior at West Point. "I really don't think it's going to be that big of a deal," Mynatt told The New York Times. "There are gay soldiers serving and doing their jobs well, and it's not going to change."
Found 1 comment(s)!
President Obama
Our President had EVERY right to talk about the mistake that the judges made. The judges are NOT above the law!!!! H-E-L-L-O!!!!!!!!!!
You are in the wrong!!!!!
Posted by: Sharon Edwards on 2/5/2010
Twitter Updates
