Did Obama do the right thing in opposing the court decision declaring DADT to be unconstitutional?

[Better Believe It]

Poll question: Did Obama do the right thing in opposing the court decision declaring DADT to be unconstitutional?

[TexasObserver]

1. No.

He did the expedient thing.

[polichick]

2. Not if by "right thing" you mean the moral and ethical thing...

I have a feeling that some in the administration believe he is doing the right thing politically.

[Better Believe It]

4. Yes. I mean the moral and ethical thing to do in opposition to discrimination.

And I also believe it's the wrong thing to do politically.

There is no guarantee that Congress will repeal DADT in their lame duck session.

And it's even more unlikely that a new Congress with more Republicans next year will repeal.

I think the House vote was close and now McCain says he'll obstruct it in the Senate.

[polichick]

5. I think it's the wrong thing to do politically too...

But then I think the "pragmatic" strategy so often used by this administration is the wrong thing to do politically.

imo the prez would be much better off (and so would Dems and the country) if he governed much more like he campaigns.

[Tesha]

6. It wasn't even the politically-astute thing to do.

Polling is showing that the majority of Americans now support
gays serving openly in the military.

Obama is just being damned-fool stupid about this.

Tesha

[Better Believe It]

7. I don't think he's at all stupid. But, he's certainly demonstrated his

political inexperience in Washington. The Republicans have run circles around him and managed to turn public opinion against Obama among millions who voted for him and against the Republicans.

And they made it look easy!

People voted for what they hoped would be a dynamic and bold leader, not a moderate, boring, wishy-washy, bi-partisan compromising professor.

[Poll_Blind]

14. I wouldn't chalk up his moves to political inexperience. After all, Obama comes from....

...Chicago for Pete's sake. No, what we see here is a plan executed for a reason and, most importantly, representing a specific viewpoint which I believe should not be discounted merely as a misstep.

This message is not necessarily meant to be both barrels at you but it touched on something I've seen lately. I'm not even saying this is what you're trying to chalk it up to, but it brought the thought to a head in my mind.

Ahem.

The narrative:
When Repbulicans do something bad, they're evil and they mean to do it that way. When Democrats do something bad, they're merely misguided and didn't really mean to do whatever it was.

Is a false narrative.

PB

[Johonny]

13. it is not ethical to turn the civil institutions in our country into partisan operation

that is vastly less moral and certainly less ethical. Their job is to defend the laws passed by congress in our courts. Not just the happy feel good laws, but all the laws. They aren't suppose to have a political bias when defending them. Turning our civil institutions into houses of partisan politics is what Bush did. If you don't want the department of justice to have to defend crap ass laws, don't elect crap ass politicians to congress and the presidency.

What they did sucks. The law is immoral. But a department of justice they doesn't fight for the laws of our land if they conflict with the white houses political views would create vastly worse results for this country. Sometimes the job of being president sucks.

[Better Believe It]

21. So it's the duty of the federal government to fight for reactionary and discriminatory laws passed

by Congress.

"But a department of justice they doesn't fight for the laws of our land if they conflict with the white houses political views would create vastly worse results for this country."

Right. Especially if overturning such laws resulted in justice!

Thanks for the clarity.

Oh.

We have three branches of government for a reason.

[Dappleganger]

3. Hail No.

[ruggerson]

8. Interesting results

n/t

[QC]

9. Indeed. n/t

[ruggerson]

19. Pretty much reflects the nation's split on the subject

n/t

[QC]

22. It also suggests that The Sensible Pragmatics, despite their omnipresence and volume,

are a very small minority.

[Balbus]

10. Well, he finally got a win in his column...

Go-bama!

[kwenu]

11. DADT is wrong and it needs to go.

I don't care how.

[Poll_Blind]

12. If he fought this vigerously for healthcare maybe it wouldnt' sting so much. n/t

PB

[Mimosa]

16. That's true

If he would have stood up, boldly, for one huge issue which would really make a difference in our lives, Obama would have set the tone of how he will be perceived in history. (Remember, Obama is the one who talked about 'spending political capital.') But by compromising -behind closed doors- before there was any need to do so, Obama allowed his adversaries, to define him and shape an unflattering narrative. As one of Obama's early supporters I never expected miracles. I never expected to be this sadly disappointed and disillusioned so soon.

I intuit that some forces behind the curtains are in charge. If not, then the President isn't at all the man he projected in 2008. And no spin doctors can repair his image or fool me again. I hope Obama can find his backbone.

[Poll_Blind]

17. If we were sitting at a table, having this conversation leisurely over...

...a coffee or a beer or whatever- if we were in that setting, I'd like to think that my sentiment would, over that period, be expressed with a bit more nuance than what I am about to say.

Having said that, he is the President and if forces are behind the curtain he is the first and last human being on our Earth who has a decent chance to stop them. If he capitulates, we all (in some sense) as members of a representative-governed society...capitulate as well.

That is the pain of it.

PB

[Terra Alta]

15. Taking a stand against civil rights is never the right thing to do. nt

[Better Believe It]

18. Exactly. And it can't be justified.

[Unvanguard]

20. No. There are good rule-of-law reasons to appeal, but they are countervailed.

DADT needs to end, now.

[Better Believe It]

23. Taking a stand in support of discrimination can never be defended ....

at least not by serious and sincere liberals/progressives who support civil and human rights.