Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: 240 is Back on February 02, 2010, 09:37:30 AM
-
Another populist move. Also will re-energize his pissed off 10% left base.
Completely meaningless in the bigger scheme for 99.9999% of Americans, but it sure does take the news cycles off 'real' news.
Obama's offensive continues.
-
Another populist move. Also will re-energize his pissed off 10% left base.
Completely meaningless in the bigger scheme for 99.9999% of Americans, but it sure does take the news cycles off 'real' news.
Obama's offensive continues.
Yeah 240, Obama's offensive continues:
1. Against anyone who gets up in the morning and goes to work.
2. Against all NY'ers.
3. Against future generations.
-
hahaha again, you're mixing up what is right for america and what is right for winning elections :)
-
How is this a populist move?Americans have PROVEN time and time again they don't like fags.Its why gay marriage has been on the ballot 31 times and been defeated 31 times.This will piss off the electorate and REAAAALY piss off the military and veterans.Just another example of his radical left wing bullshit.
-
Yeah 240, Obama's offensive continues:
1. Against anyone who gets up in the morning and goes to work.
2. Against all NY'ers.
3. Against future generations.
Your Boyfriend and Major General Barry Goldwater disagrees with you and would call you a moron over the Gays in the military issue. :)
criticized the military's ban on homosexuals: "Everyone knows that gays have served honorably in the military since at least the time of Julius Caesar."[42] He also said, "You don't have to be straight to be in the military; you just have to be able to shoot straight."[43] A few years before his death he went so far as to address the right wing, "Do not associate my name with anything you do. You are extremists, and you've hurt the Republican party much more than the Democrats have."
-
hahaha again, you're mixing up what is right for america and what is right for winning elections :)
Bro - he aint winning shit. He is a marxist/communist radical who wants our nation transformed into a USSR like society.
Just this morning I attended a business speech with over 300 business owners about the economy, marketing, etc.
The speaker, a well known business guy who is always on TV etc, said "If you think Obama is going to do anything but hurt your business and the economy, wake the hell up. Call your congressman and tell them to get the hell out of your way".
EVERYONE WAS CHEERING AND APPLAUDING!
We have one liberal jewish guy who walked out he was so upset, but that is one out of 300 in this group.
People are not going to take this shit anymore 240. You are all into the MSNBC spin and hype, but real deal people are sick of this communist fraud.
-
Your Boyfriend and Major General Barry Goldwater disagrees with you and would call you a moron over the Gays in the military issue. :)
criticized the military's ban on homosexuals: "Everyone knows that gays have served honorably in the military since at least the time of Julius Caesar."[42] He also said, "You don't have to be straight to be in the military; you just have to be able to shoot straight."[43] A few years before his death he went so far as to address the right wing, "Do not associate my name with anything you do. You are extremists, and you've hurt the Republican party much more than the Democrats have."
Why dont you ask some soldiers if they want openly gay men in the barracks with them.Once again,we know you love queers,but the rest of the country OBVIOUSLY disagrees as gay marriage is CRUSHED everytime on the ballot.
-
This is another side show issue to avoid dealing with the daily failures, lies, dostortions, hoaxes, and treason, of this admn.
If the soldiers want it fine, if they dont want it, fine.
Its a non-issue to me.
-
BILLY - 2009 Quinnipac poll:
In a new poll, the Quinnipiac Polling Institute has found that 56 percent of Americans, including 50 percent of voters with family in the military, believe that “the ban on openly gay men and women in the military should be repealed.”
So yes, particularly among the LEFT where obama needs a nice bump with his base, this is politically a wise move.
-
"People are not going to take this shit anymore 240. You are all into the MSNBC spin and hype, but real deal people are sick of this communist fraud. "
I know you see me as the personification of MSNBC, but that's not accurate.
Of course he's full of shit and yes, I'm not at all happy about the shitload of taxes I just had to pay :( :( :( despite making less $ last year.
But politically, tossing "Dont ask" into the limelight while sneaking in this tax hike on people like us is a smart move. Hell, FOX is falling for it too. "Dont ask" is the headline, with smaller story headline about budget underneath it. They'd also rather appeal to gay like/dislike with viewers (better ratings) than a much more relevant story about the true nature of obama's tax plan.
-
BILLY - 2009 Quinnipac poll:
In a new poll, the Quinnipiac Polling Institute has found that 56 percent of Americans, including 50 percent of voters with family in the military, believe that “the ban on openly gay men and women in the military should be repealed.”
So yes, particularly among the LEFT where obama needs a nice bump with his base, this is politically a wise move.
Obamas base is already with him.As both Mass. and New Jersey proved,independants are SPRINTING away from him and his left wing loon policies as fast as they possibly can.This will drive them further away,the tax increases will drive them off the earth.
-
Obamas base is already with him.As both Mass. and New Jersey proved,independants are SPRINTING away from him and his left wing loon policies as fast as they possibly can.This will drive them further away,the tax increases will drive them off the earth.
I think Scott Brown has the formula personally. Hard hard right fiscally, socially moderate, and all for capping terrorists.
-
"Obamas base is already with him."
I can look up a LOT of getbig quotes from the last week where many people posted that obama's base is fading rapidly.
I can play clips of Maddow and Ed and Mathews and Olbermann chiding Obama and talking about how his base is pissed.
Or you can keep believing he hasn't alienated his base in the last year. What do you think, 333386?
-
"Obamas base is already with him."
I can look up a LOT of getbig quotes from the last week where many people posted that obama's base is fading rapidly.
I can play clips of Maddow and Ed and Mathews and Olbermann chiding Obama and talking about how his base is pissed.
Or you can keep believing he hasn't alienated his base in the last year. What do you think, 333386?
He has alienated a lot of his base, but that is because those communists dont think he has gone far enough. Go to DU or HP and you would be shocked at what those thieves really wish for Obama to do.
The more left he goes the happier that freak show is.
However, he will piss off the center and November 2010 will be a tsunami for the GOP if they run Brown like candidates across the board.
-
They don't have 35 Browns to run.
They dont have 35 issues like healthcare where Brown is magic number 41 to vote against it.
They don't have 35 Coakley's to run against.
Mass was the perfect storm - a mandate on healthcare.
-
They don't have 35 Browns to run.
They dont have 35 issues like healthcare where Brown is magic number 41 to vote against it.
They don't have 35 Coakley's to run against.
Mass was the perfect storm - a mandate on healthcare.
Not true - Crap & Tax and Terrorists are a bog issue as well.
Additionally - there are many Senate seats now in reach of the GOP. Just this morning they said in the local news that Schumer and Gillibrand are both highly vulnerable because of the perception that they are sock puppets for obama and dont care about NY.
This was in NYC!
240 - I know Obama came to your home town last year anbd gave you a rub and tuck, but for most people, they are FREAKING SICK OF HIS LIES!
-
They don't have 35 Browns to run.
They dont have 35 issues like healthcare where Brown is magic number 41 to vote against it.
They don't have 35 Coakley's to run against.
Mass was the perfect storm - a mandate on healthcare.
Ummm,the democrat party is nothing but Coakleys.From Boxer to Reid on down,they are all dunces.You add to that a health care bill which I believe democrats will slam through by reconcilliation,this assanine budget,tax increases,incredible unemployment and the overall arrogance of democrats,republicans can run corpses and win.All the republican has to say over and over is 'Im for cutting spending,lower taxes and against health care".As long as they havent killed a boyscout or had sex with a ten year old,they will win.
-
"but for most people, they are FREAKING SICK OF HIS LIES!"
Why is he still at 50% on Gallup today?
-
"but for most people, they are FREAKING SICK OF HIS LIES!"
Why is he still at 50% on Gallup today?
50% do not show up in midterms. Only the hardcore voters like Billy, myself, and others show up.
You would have to shoot me dead to stay home this November.
-
"but for most people, they are FREAKING SICK OF HIS LIES!"
Why is he still at 50% on Gallup today?
You keep bringing that up as if its a good number.ITS THE LOWEST NUMBER EVER FOR ANY PRESIDENT THIS FAR IN HIS TERM!!The WORST!!!He has also dropped further then any president in history.On top of that he has a media that "forgets hes black" and "gets tingles up his leg" AND STILL dropped like that.Im amazed hes only at 50 the way TIME magazine NBC,CBS,ABC etc. gulps this guys loads everyday.
-
After 1 year in office, Obama is at 50% today 9and bottomed out at 47% before his offensive)
After 1 year:
Clinton 52%
Reagan 49%
Did these guys have any trouble getting re-elected? You're celebrating too quickly :(
-
After 1 year in office, Obama is at 50% today 9and bottomed out at 47% before his offensive)
After 1 year:
Clinton 52%
Reagan 49%
Did these guys have any trouble getting re-elected? You're celebrating too quickly :(
Unreal 240 - the thing you dont get is that Clinton was saved by triangulating the GOP and the Dems in the congress. Plus he had the web boom.
Reagan actually implemented policies likely to work and was a hardcore patriot. Obama is niether Reagan or Clinton. He is at best a black Carter and doing things that will result in a fiscal horror show in the next few years.
-
Top uniformed officer: Gay ban should be lifted
By ANNE FLAHERTY and ANNE GEARAN
WASHINGTON -- The military's top uniformed officer declared Tuesday that gays should be allowed to serve openly in uniform, arguing that it is "the right thing to do."
Adm. Mike Mullen's statement was the strongest yet from the uniformed military on this volatile issue, although he stressed that he was "speaking for myself and myself only." He told the Senate Armed Services Committee Tuesday he is deeply troubled by a policy that forces people to "lie about who they are in order to defend their fellow citizens."
Mullen said he knows many will disagree about abandoning the "don't ask, don't tell" policy and said there are practical obstacles to lifting the 1993 ban. But he said he thinks the military can handle it. Mullen is chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and chief military adviser to President Barack Obama.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates told the panel he is tapping his chief legal adviser and a four-star Army general to lead a landmark study on how the military would lift its ban on openly gay service members.
Pentagon counsel Jeh Johnson and Gen. Carter Ham, who leads Army forces in Europe, will conduct the yearlong assessment.
Sen. John McCain, the ranking committtee Republican, publicly bristled at the Pentagon's decision to launch a yearlong study into allowing gays to serve, saying he is "deeply disappointed" and calling the assessment "clearly biased" because it presumes the law should be changed.
McCain, the top Republican on the Armed Services Committee, said the current policy is not ideal, but that it has been effective.
McCain said he wanted to hear more from the military on this issue. But Defense Secretary Robert Gates suggested that lawmakers keep the intensity of debate in tow until the military can get a better handle on how to proceed. He told the panel: "Keep the impact it will have on our forces firmly in mind."
Ham is a former enlisted infantryman who rose through the ranks to eventually command troops in northern Iraq in 2004 and hold senior positions within the Joint Staff. Recently, he helped conduct an investigation into the shootings by a soldier at the Fort Hood Army base in Texas.
As the Pentagon's top legal counsel, Johnson has played an integral role into the effort to try to close the military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.
Gates' announcement marked a measured step toward President Barack Obama's goal of eliminating the military's policy against gays, which is based on a 1993 law.
-
and obama may well be saved by the same thing in congress. or the gop might implode, as evidenced by the silly tea party meltdown - they got greedy :(
I'm saying you're celebrating too early. I'd love nothing more than to see Thune win 40 states. But if the election were held today, the same machine that exposed palin as a dumbass would show up. Repubs need to be as united as the dems were - and they're not. They need to be as hungry as the dems were in 08 - and they're NOT. The infighting shit is weak, the 'we already won back the hosue in 2010 baby!" shit is weak.
-
and obama may well be saved by the same thing in congress. or the gop might implode, as evidenced by the silly tea party meltdown - they got greedy :(
I'm saying you're celebrating too early. I'd love nothing more than to see Thune win 40 states. But if the election were held today, the same machine that exposed palin as a dumbass would show up. Repubs need to be as united as the dems were - and they're not. They need to be as hungry as the dems were in 08 - and they're NOT. The infighting shit is weak, the 'we already won back the hosue in 2010 baby!" shit is weak.
November is 8 months off, which is a long time. Obama is going to push amnesty ofr illegals, crap & tax, possibly card check, etc.
The tea party thing is only going to grow, despite the blips. 240 - I have never ever seen my fellow business people so irate with the govt., on all levels.
I think the GOP will take back the congress personally. The Dems are onthing more than a communist clown car at their core and people know it.
-
and obama may well be saved by the same thing in congress. or the gop might implode, as evidenced by the silly tea party meltdown - they got greedy :(
I'm saying you're celebrating too early. I'd love nothing more than to see Thune win 40 states. But if the election were held today, the same machine that exposed palin as a dumbass would show up. Repubs need to be as united as the dems were - and they're not. They need to be as hungry as the dems were in 08 - and they're NOT. The infighting shit is weak, the 'we already won back the hosue in 2010 baby!" shit is weak.
Thune is a religious extremist, worse than Palin, possiblly as mentally retarded as well. Surely you don`t really want him do you? He actually thought that the War in Iraq was a good idea for the spread of Christianity.
-
Thune is a religious extremist, worse than Palin, possiblly as mentally retarded as well. Surely you don`t really want him do you? He actually thought that the War in Iraq was a good idea for the spread of Christianity.
And Obama is a thief stealing our money every day. Whats your point?
-
And Obama is a thief stealing our money every day. Whats your point?
He hasn`t taken a dime from me. My stocks are up and improving.
-
and obama may well be saved by the same thing in congress. or the gop might implode, as evidenced by the silly tea party meltdown - they got greedy :(
I'm saying you're celebrating too early. I'd love nothing more than to see Thune win 40 states. But if the election were held today, the same machine that exposed palin as a dumbass would show up. Repubs need to be as united as the dems were - and they're not. They need to be as hungry as the dems were in 08 - and they're NOT. The infighting shit is weak, the 'we already won back the hosue in 2010 baby!" shit is weak.
You keep saying Republicans are overconfident.I dont agree,I think we are scared to death.This man is purposely trying to destroy the economy.There might be nothing left by the time Obama leaves office either in three years or 7.With a normal democrat Id agree,but with this man,there is something everyday that he does that stokes the fire.
-
He hasn`t taken a dime from me. My stocks are up and improving.
Serious TA - read a damn economics book.
When the gov't prints money to finance the deficit, they are stealing your money by devaluing the purchashing power of your exsiting dollars. Its called a hidden tax.
________________________ ________________________ ______________
The Hidden Tax
There are basically two kinds of taxes you need to be aware of as an American taxpayer - the kind of taxes the masses can see, and the kind of taxes the masses CAN’T see.
The “inflation tax” is of the second kind - an invisible tax.
Whenever a politician promises you more free stuff than the guy he’s running against, whenever the masses think they’re getting something for nothing, whenever our government engages in deficit spending, whenever we borrow the prosperity of tomorrow to spend today, it comes back to haunt us in the form of an infation tax, which insidiously, and invisibly, confiscates our wealth.
When you begin to account for the stealth tax of inflation, in 1966 the Dow Jones Industrial Average began a long, slow crash that would see it lose value over the next sixteen years. Chances are, you never heard of the crash of 1966, but you can be sure it happened.
And this crash resulted in the raging price inflation of the 1970s, eating away at investor profits. Economists refer to it as “The Invisible Crash” because investors in stocks never knew what hit them.
The Dow failed to substantially surpass 1,000 points from 1966 to 1982. If you had put $100,000 in the Dow in 1966, by 1982 your $100,000 was still $100,000 - but due to inflation it would only buy you $34,000 worth of goods and services as measured by the 1966 Consumer Price Index.
That represents a 66% loss in value! That is how the inflation tax can cause an invisible crash.
Many who invested in the Dow between 1966 and 1982 felt they were making a safe and prudent investment decision. They bought into the pundit hype that investments in stocks do well over long periods of time. All the while their currency was losing its value at an average rate of 6.52% per year (a 66% loss spread over sixteen years).
A smart investor would have recognized the ravaging effects inflation was having on their portfolio, and would have moved their money into investments that exploited the weakness of the U.S. currency, like precious metals.
Beyond any shadow of a doubt, the U.S. stock markets are crashing, and have been since as early as 1999 and as late as 2001, depending on how you measure it.
Even though the Dow is going up in price, its value is falling. If everything else is going up in price faster than the Dow, then it stands to reason that the Dow is crashing in relative terms. Just as there was an invisible crash from 1966 to 1982, there is an invisible crash happening right now - and the hidden tax of inflation is the cause.
An invisible crash is a product of a fiat currency system and/or rampant credit creation.
It requires a rapidly expanding currency supply to obscure the fact that an overvalued asset class is correcting and reverting to fair value, or less. It has happened numerous times throughout history when a country leaves an asset-backed currency for a fiat currency - and it started in the United States when President Lyndon Johnson started to fund the Vietnam War by cheating our financial system through deficit spending and President Nixon took us off the gold standard in 1971.
The primary cause of inflation is the rising of prices due to the expansion of the currency supply. With inflation, everything gets more valuable except currency.
So when inflation occurs, the value of your money decreases - which means you are able to buy less with it. The primary cause of inflation in the U.S. is the creation of currency by the U.S. government and banks.
When the U.S. wants to pay for something, it prints more money after its spent all the tax revenue it’s collected. That is how the government is able to fund these billion dollar projects.
When banks give loans, it creates money in its balance sheets thanks to the use of fractional reserve banking, which allows the bank to loan out 90% of all money that is deposited. (i.e., it can loan out $9 for every $10 it has in its vaults) This is where credit creation comes into play.
Under An Obama Economics Plan, Inflation Will Increase
Obama’s plans for the United States include a dramatic increase in spending. This includes increases in entitlement programs like Social Security, Medicare, Medicade, Welfare, and even nationalized healthcare. He also has many investment plans which require the government to shell out even more money to try and “stimulate the economy.”
To see how an Obama Administration would lead the country into a time of hyperinflation, you need to look no further than congressman Barney Frank, a Democrat from Massachusetts who is chairman of the House Financial Services Committee - which oversees the entire financial services industry, including the securities, insurance, banking, and housing industries.
You can be sure that under President Barack Obama, Congressman Frank would be free to do exactly what he just described in the video above.
Barack Obama also plans to spend money on new public works projects, and with the help of newly nationalized banks, make credit more available for lower-income people.
You can find a list of some of his spending plans here.
As spending increases, and more currency is created, the U.S. dollar’s value will be debased, and your money will be worth less.
This means someone making $40,000 per year may really only have $12,000 per year worth of value from their income.
That also means that the individuals and small businesses who make over $250,000 per year won’t really be making $250,000 per year - since their money will be worth less - yet they will still be taxed at a greater level.
As you can see, this “hidden tax” of inflation affects everyone in the United States - especially the low-income workers, who’s meager income is worth even less in the long run.
-
Thune is a religious extremist, worse than Palin, possiblly as mentally retarded as well. Surely you don`t really want him do you? He actually thought that the War in Iraq was a good idea for the spread of Christianity.
What is your deal with religion?You love queers but hate Christians.Obama sat in a church for twenty years AND BELIEVED EVERY WORD preached by a wild eyed,kook!!!Every word he believed!Yet you support Obama.Bill Clinton carried a Bible everytime he got in trouble.Jimmy Carter was a religious guy.This idea that Christians are nuts BUT GAYS ARE GOOD IS FOOLISH.
-
What is your deal with religion?You love queers but hate Christians.Obama sat in a church for twenty years AND BELIEVED EVERY WORD preached by a wild eyed,kook!!!Every word he believed!Yet you support Obama.Bill Clinton carried a Bible everytime he got in trouble.Jimmy Carter was a religious guy.This idea that Christians are nuts BUT GAYS ARE GOOD IS FOOLISH.
Gays can be Christians too you know.
-
Great move by Obama. We need all the troops we can get.
-
Gays can be Christians too you know.
::) ::)
However, when they throw condoms at the stoop of St. Patricks Cathedral, in my mind they are no longer Christians, but hedonistic barbarians.
-
Great move by Obama. We need all the troops we can get.
Yeah, I'm sure you will be all in favor of an invasion of Iran, the surge in Afhg, and ramping up the bombings in Pak.
-
Yeah, I'm sure you will be all in favor of an invasion of Iran, the surge in Afhg, and ramping up the bombings in Pak.
If we can get unilateral military help vs Iran i'm all for it. If we try to run in there without international support we will suffer. I support a bombing strategy of their nuclear facilities. Iran though is in a weird spot right now. The people there want change but that doesn't mean they want American troops on the ground. By invading we risk alienating that side because we will be outsiders. All if takes it one wrong target and public support turns against us.
I've always supported the surge into Afghanistan and attacks in Pakistan. We must be careful to have the support of Pakistan though, that is not a country we can risk losing in this fight.
-
If we can get unilateral military help vs Iran i'm all for it. If we try to run in there without international support we will suffer. I support a bombing strategy of their nuclear facilities. Iran though is in a weird spot right now. The people there want change but that doesn't mean they want American troops on the ground. By invading we risk alienating that side because we will be outsiders. All if takes it one wrong target and public support turns against us.
I've always supported the surge into Afghanistan and attacks in Pakistan. We must be careful to have the support of Pakistan though, that is not a country we can risk losing in this fight.
So you are ok with Obama going "cowboy" on Iran?
-
So you are ok with Obama going "cowboy" on Iran?
What did i just say? I'm okay with invading Iran if it is a unilateral international force. You didn't read what i said at all which isn't surprising you cherry pick everything to fit your warped sense of reality.
-
What did i just say? I'm okay with invading Iran if it is a unilateral international force. You didn't read what i said at all which isn't surprising you cherry pick everything to fit your warped sense of reality.
Were you ok with Bush invading Iraq?
-
Were you ok with Bush invading Iraq?
It wasn't a unilateral invasion. It was a fu*k you world i'm doing what i want and i'm lying to boot.
-
It wasn't a unilateral invasion. It was a fu*k you world i'm doing what i want and i'm lying to boot.
Wasnt there tons of UN orders violated by Saddam?
BTW - where is the evidence IRAN is seeking to nuke us?
-
Wasnt there tons of UN orders violated by Saddam?
BTW - where is the evidence IRAN is seeking to nuke us?
There isn't. I haven't said there was. Like i said i only support an invasion if there is unilateral forces. That's it.
Saddam wasn't a good man and him being out of office is a great thing, but to lie about why and to disregard all international UN protocol is really why Iraq was never a popular war.
-
Gays can be Christians too you know.
Jesus Christ saves you FROM your sin,NOT in your sin.
-
Thune has made it his mission to end this whole "tax & spend" way of thinking that Obama has championed. He's got my vote.
-
"Wasnt there tons of UN orders violated by Saddam? "
The UN got their inspectins, and made it a point to search all of saddam's personal toilets and bedrooms for the WMD, along with all the spots Powell "knew" existed.
There were none.
The only WMD we ever found were the ones Rummy sold him in 1979 before leaving the private sector. Mustard gas, etc. Not exactly the shit we claimed.
-
Thune has made it his mission to end this whole "tax & spend" way of thinking that Obama has championed. He's got my vote.
Sad. Just Sad. For many reasons. :-\
-
McCain shifting stance on 'don't ask, don't tell' policy?
By Michael D. Shear
Three years ago, Republican Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) was pretty clear about his stand on the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy.
A former war hero, McCain said he would support ending the ban once the military's top brass told him they were okay with it.
"The day that the leadership of the military comes to me and says, 'Senator, we ought to change the policy,' then I think we ought to consider seriously changing it because those leaders in the military are the ones we give the responsibility to," McCain told an audience of college students during the "Hardball" college tour on MSNBC.
That day arrived Tuesday, with Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and Joint Chiefs Chairman Mike Mullen testifying to senators following President Obama's announcement that he would seek a congressional repeal of the controversial 15-year-old policy.
Mullen called repealing the policy, which bans openly gay men and lesbians from serving, "the right thing to do" and said he was personally troubled by effectively forcing service members to "lie about who they are in order to defend their fellow citizens."
Gates told the Armed Services Committee, "I fully support the president's decision.
"The question before us is not whether the military prepares to make this change, but how we best prepare for it. We have received our orders from the commander in chief, and we are moving out accordingly," Gates said.
In response, the Arizona senator declared himself "disappointed" in the testimony by Mullen and Gates. The senator said Gates should be asking whether to repeal the ban, not acting as if it had already been repealed.
"At this moment of immense hardship for our armed services, we should not be seeking to overturn the 'don't ask, don't tell' policy," McCain said bluntly, before describing it as "imperfect but effective."
Since losing to Obama in the 2008 election, McCain has become a consistent critic of the president.
He also has, for the first time in years, a serious primary fight on his hands. J.D. Hayworth, a former Republican congressman, is considering a challenge, and Chris Simcox, a founder of the Minutemen anti-immigration group, has already said he wants McCain's job.
-
Sad. Just Sad. For many reasons. :-\
Why TA - Maybe you would be happier in your precious Norway or Sweden?
So far as I can tell the majority of people who actually pay the bills, ie taxes, dont have dreams of your socialist utopia and actually feel a bit pissed over slaving 50% of the year fo the thieves, criminals, and greedy pigs in govt.
-
Sad. Just Sad. For many reasons. :-\
Whats sad is Hussein Obama just put out a budget that will bankrupt this nation and there isnt rioting on the streets.THATS sad.Whats sad is that people like you support this man in his desire to destroy this country.
-
You are 100% right billy.
But even FOX... their top 3 stories today?
Palin and Rahl Feuding
Don't Ask Don't Tell backlash
Tea party infighting.
NONE of that matters to americans nearly as much as the tax hikes... yet FOX and MSN are both ignoring it. It should be the top story. But that's not a sexy enough story, huh?
-
GALLUP
79% of americans support gays and lesbian
61% of weekly churchgoers support it as well!
58% of conservatives support repeal of Dont Ask.
-
This should have been repealed long ago. Other armies allow gays in their ranks and nothing catastrophic has happened to them.
-
None of those people have to live with gays...and I don't mean a cubicle across...I mean shower, eat sleep....basically spend every waking moment with them. The military is by and large conservative and alot of people will have a major heart burn with this. The MSNBC douchebags keep pointing to some letter signed by over 100 senior flag officers saying repeal it...they don't mention another one with over 500 saying don't do it. We don't need this right now...Don't ask works...leave it alone.
-
None of those people have to live with gays...and I don't mean a cubicle across...I mean shower, eat sleep....basically spend every waking moment with them. The military is by and large conservative and alot of people will have a major heart burn with this. The MSNBC douchebags keep pointing to some letter signed by over 100 senior flag officers saying repeal it...they don't mention another one with over 500 saying don't do it. We don't need this right now...Don't ask works...leave it alone.
This is just:
1. A rouse to get the base excited.
2. A distraction from the horrific budget figures.
-
I would agree except the DOD is moving ahead so they have been planning this for awhile. Obama is a douchebag. Homosexual activity is incapable with the US military. Everybody doesn't have a right to serve...if ur deaf or retarded or blind or old..u can't serve. That lifestyle is not compatible with the culture.
-
Obama isn't ending anything. This has to go through Congress, first. It will take at least a year for Gates' "study" to be completed.
By that time, the Dems (who passed "Don't Ask; Don't Tell" in the early 90s) might not be in power.
The attempt will likely be to try and sneak a repeal bill through the works, ala the "Hate Crimes" bill. But, I don't see that flying, especially during an election year.
-
it's funny timing that obama announces this long-planned action - on the same day his sneaky budget dropped ;)
Whe Bush did this on shit, we just called it a coincidence.
-
it's funny timing that obama announces this long-planned action - on the same day his sneaky budget dropped ;)
Whe Bush did this on shit, we just called it a coincidence.
After the beating he took two weeks ago, Obama needs to rally the troops. That's what this whole "Don't Ask; Don't Tell" flap is about.
He's blown health care, the economy, national security, and a host of other issues. At this pace, the Dems are primed to take the worst beating, perhaps, in political history.
We're now at the 9-month mark. He has to do something drastic and quickly, or it's a trip to the woodshed for Team Obama.
-
After the beating he took two weeks ago, Obama needs to rally the troops. That's what this whole "Don't Ask; Don't Tell" flap is about.
He's blown health care, the economy, national security, and a host of other issues. At this pace, the Dems are primed to take the worst beating, perhaps, in political history.
We're now at the 9-month mark. He has to do something drastic and quickly, or it's a trip to the woodshed for Team Obama.
Plus, he is retreating on Crap & Tax, the KSM Trial, and on other matters.
Poor 240 must be deeply saddened.
-
it's funny timing that obama announces this long-planned action - on the same day his sneaky budget dropped ;)
Whe Bush did this on shit, we just called it a coincidence.
Yeah your right.The media always gave Bush a pass.They are MUCH harder on Obama. ::) ::)
-
I think 240 just spins to get people worked up.
-
Another populist move. Also will re-energize his pissed off 10% left base.
Completely meaningless in the bigger scheme for 99.9999% of Americans, but it sure does take the news cycles off 'real' news.
Obama's offensive continues.
long delayed but still necessary.
-
long delayed but still necessary.
Its just a move to shut up the drama queens on the left after HCR died and a cynical move to divert from the budget disaster he unloaded on us.
Anyone who believes a damn thing he says is a complete idiot.
-
Its just a move to shut up the drama queens on the left after HCR died and a cynical move to divert from the budget disaster he unloaded on us.
Anyone who believes a damn thing he says is a complete idiot.
Again, when Obama Girl falls out of love with you, you KNOW you got problems.
Let's not forget the laundry list of "low-hanging fruit" items that Obama botched, including (BUT NOT LIMITED TO):
- Healthcare debate on C-Span
- No lobbyists in his administration
- No earmarks
- Gitmo closed by January 2010
- "Shovel-ready jobs" (unless you count paying people to shovel the BS he's been dishing).
-
Colin Powell Favors Repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’
By PETER BAKER
Gen. Colin L. Powell, who as the nation’s top military officer in the 1990s opposed allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military, switched gears today and threw his support behind efforts to end the “don’t ask, don’t tell” law he helped shepherd in.
“In the almost 17 years since the ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ legislation was passed, attitudes and circumstances have changed,” General Powell said in a statement issued by his office. He added: “I fully support the new approach presented to the Senate Armed Services Committee this week by Secretary of Defense Gates and Admiral Mullen.”
Robert M. Gates, the defense secretary, and Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told lawmakers on Tuesday that they supported President Obama’s proposal to repeal the 1993 law forbidding gay men and women to be open about their sexuality while serving in uniform.
Admiral Mullen was the first Joint Chiefs chairman ever to take that position, signaling the evolution in attitudes both inside the military and in the broader society since the debate under President Bill Clinton.
When Mr. Clinton tried to end the ban on gay soldiers, General Powell was the Joint Chiefs chairman and opposed the move on the grounds that it would undermine discipline and order in the military but he supported the “don’t ask” compromise. In his statement on Wednesday, General Powell said “the principal issue has always been the effectiveness of the Armed Forces and order and discipline in the ranks.”
He noted that he has said for the past two years that it was “time for the law to be reviewed,” but his new statement of unequivocal support for the effort by Mr. Gates and Admiral Mullen could be an important factor as the debate moves forward this year.
After retiring from the military, General Powell went on to become an active Republican and joined the cabinet of President George W. Bush as secretary of state. But he bolted from the party and endorsed Mr. Obama in 2008.
-
So now Powell has cred with the left? I thought after the WMD fiasco he was persona non grata with the left?
-
So now Powell has cred with the left? I thought after the WMD fiasco he was persona non grata with the left?
we loves dat man
-
how many of you gay rights activists are for unisex locker rooms and bathrooms?
-
Mullen deserves medal for Senate testimony backing open military service by gays
By Dana Milbank
Mike Mullen's 42 years in the military earned him a chest full of ribbons, but never did he do something braver than what he did on Capitol Hill on Tuesday.
In a packed committee room, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff looked hostile Republican senators in the eye and told them unwelcome news: He thinks gays should be allowed to serve openly in the armed forces he commands.
"Speaking for myself and myself only, it is my personal belief that allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly would be the right thing to do," the nation's top military officer told the members of the Senate Armed Services Committee. "No matter how I look at this issue, I cannot escape being troubled by the fact that we have in place a policy which forces young men and women to lie about who they are in order to defend their fellow citizens. For me personally, it comes down to integrity -- theirs as individuals and ours as an institution."
People in the audience looked at one another. At the press tables, computer keys started clicking. Reporters consulted the time on their digital recorders.
If opponents prevail in their effort to repeal the "don't ask, don't tell" policy, which bars gays from serving openly in the military, they will doubtless point to those strong words -- until now heresy for a top military officer -- as a turning point. Supporters of the policy evidently grasped that, too, for they turned against the admiral with caustic words.
On the dais, Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), the Republican Party's 2008 presidential standard-bearer, accused Mullen and the other witness, Defense Secretary Robert Gates, of trying to repeal the "don't ask, don't tell" law "by fiat." Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) accused the admiral of obeying "directives" from President Obama. Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) accused Mullen of "undue command influence."
As the challenges to his integrity continued, Mullen pursed his lips, then put his forearms on the table, displaying the admiral stripes on his sleeves. After Sessions's provocation, the Joint Chiefs chairman glared at the diminutive Alabamian. "This is not about command influence," Mullen said. "This is about leadership, and I take that very seriously."
It made little sense to accuse Mullen of currying favor with the president. Nominated for a first term by George W. Bush, Mullen was renominated by Obama and began his second two-year term in October. Joint Chiefs chairmen traditionally serve only two terms, so the lame-duck Mullen is freer than ever to speak his mind.
That made the admiral's words all the more striking. Just three years ago, Mullen's predecessor as chairman, Gen. Peter Pace, gave a very different view on gays in the military, saying, "We should not condone immoral acts." Challenging that view, held by many top brass, couldn't have been easy. "Admiral Mullen, I want to salute you for the courage of what you said," offered Sen. Jim Webb (D-Va.), a former Navy secretary and a classmate of Mullen's at the U.S. Naval Academy.
McCain, who once said he would support repeal of the law if top military brass did, instead challenged the candor of Mullen and Gates before they spoke. He held up a letter from retired officers who favor the current law and said they "can speak more frankly" than those still serving. McCain then protested when the committee chairman, Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), announced that senators would have three minutes each to ask questions.
"We need more than three minutes," McCain growled. He turned to Sessions and gave a derisive laugh.
"This schedule was shared with everybody here," Levin pointed out.
"Not with me," McCain retorted.
"It was indeed," Levin maintained.
"You're the chairman," McCain said bitterly.
In the end, three minutes proved more than sufficient. McCain and four Republican colleagues left before the hearing ended, and the other six GOP members of the panel didn't show up at all.
After McCain's performance, Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.) reminded him, and the rest of the room, about the different view on the topic held by McCain's late political mentor from Arizona. "Barry Goldwater once said, 'You don't have to be straight to shoot straight.' "
The next three Republicans were all Southern white men, and all opposed to Mullen's view. After Sessions and Wicker took their shots at the admiral, it was time for Sen. Saxby Chambliss (Ga.). "In my opinion, the presence in the armed forces of persons who demonstrate a propensity or intent to engage in homosexual acts would very likely create an unacceptable risk," he said, putting homosexuality in a category with "adultery, fraternization and body art."
Mullen did not bend. He said he knew of no studies indicating that repealing the law would undermine morale. He said he knew of no harm to the British and Canadian militaries from the decision to allow openly gay troops to serve.
"Sort of a fundamental principle with me . . . is everybody counts," he told the senators. "Putting individuals in a position that every single day they wonder whether today's going to be the day" -- that they are kicked out for being gay -- "and devaluing them in that regard is inconsistent with us as an institution."
If they awarded decorations for congressional testimony, Mullen would have himself a Medal of Honor.
-
Let Mullen take squat and shower with some gays and he might change his tune.
-
how many of you gay rights activists are for unisex locker rooms and bathrooms?
Not that sh*t again. You have this fantasy of being the object of every males desire or of being able to stare at naked girls without their consent that no one, gay or straight supports.
-
Yes, lovely. Too bad Colin Powell sold his soul to Bush and the Republicans years ago and has zero credibility.
Someone should explain to him that you don't just get it back. This is too little, too late.
--SKV
Real brave. Powell. Nice to wait 17 years after supporting this ban.
You probably would have told Rosa Parks to stay in back of the bus for a few more years.
--sweinst254
Well, better late than never I guess. Would be nice if Powell actually had the courage of
his convictions and stood by them at the time. Might have averted the little skirmish in Iraq.
--sipa
Whether his policy of gays in the military is helpful or not, nothing that Colin Powell says should be taken seriously. There are lots of military people with integrity we can get advice from. He lost all credibility selling Bush's War on what we now know were untruths. And his acting "the good soldier" (which he wasn't at the time—he was Secretary of State) probably was a significant factor in the onset of the current recession (how many trillions spent—and for what?). Look back at his enthusiastic and energetic sell for pre-emptive bombing before the UN. This guy should just go away. Retire. He should ask forgiveness for all the death and destruction he was responsible for. How do you live with yourself, Colin Powell?
--No News Good News
Too late, Colin. I'll never forgive you for undermining your Commander In Chief Clinton's Executive Order abolishing discrimination against gays & lesbians in the military. But then under George W. you became a good soldier, vehemently trying to convince the U.N. and the U.S. that Iraq had WMDs. Why didn't you obey President Clinton's orders? The absurd and demeaning DADT law is basically YOUR doing.
--Paul
Is this newly formed support, as Colin Powell says, simply a matter of attitude changes 17 years later? Or is it really an admission that the failed policy was just as narrow-minded prejudice back then as it is now?
Our country's leaders cannot take a role of leadership by waiting 17 years while others to make the first move, like Britain and Canada.
This kind of outspoken support appears more like that made by a tepid follower who emerges only when the coast is clear.
--Maxim
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/02/03/powell-favors-repeal-of-dont-ask-dont-tell/?hp
Ouch! :'(
-
how many of you gay rights activists are for unisex locker rooms and bathrooms?
I am.
-
Not that sh*t again. You have this fantasy of being the object of every males desire or of being able to stare at naked girls without their consent that no one, gay or straight supports.
way to miss the point, for some reason you think its wrong for males and females to be in the same locker room but you think its perfectly acceptable to have gay males with other males in the same locker room...
Explain the difference to me, why does one situation end in arrest and the other doesnt everyday without you bitching and moaning about equality?
again you dont want equal rights you want SPECIAL RIGHTS...
and good for you TA if you really are
this question is for bay's ass too as Ive posed it to him multiple times yet he never answers...
-
Not that sh*t again. You have this fantasy of being the object of every males desire or of being able to stare at naked girls without their consent that no one, gay or straight supports.
I am.
Actually many on both sides do...see TA's response and try to answer the question I posed in the post before this one ;)
-
Excerpts from the current "Don't ask"......policy. Oddly Powell doesn't serve, Mullen will NEVER have to hotbunk with a fag...shower with a fag....etc etc etc. The outright anger this is causing every time we see this crap on the news is amazing. I've had every media outlet I've ever given an email to, contacting me looking for a quote. The average soldier doesn't want to deal with this crap. Don't ask works.....leave it alone. This is th left's agenda being cramed down the last bastion of tradition, honor and patriotism left in this country. My hate for the Left is undying. U want to suck a cock...be my guest...but u don't get to do it openly, u don't get to do anything that will endanger my life, or lower the morale of my unit.
Taken from Blackfive.net
2) There is no constitutional right to serve in the armed forces.
(3) ... it lies within the discretion of the Congress to establish qualifications for and conditions of service in the armed forces.
(8) Military life is fundamentally different from civilian life in that ... the military society is characterized by its own laws, rules, customs, and traditions, including numerous restrictions on personal behavior, that would not be acceptable in civilian society.
(12) The worldwide deployment of United States military forces, the international responsibilities of the United States, and the potential for involvement of the armed forces in actual combat routinely make it necessary for members of the armed forces involuntarily to accept living conditions and working conditions that are often spartan, primitive, and characterized by forced intimacy with little or no privacy.
(13) The prohibition against homosexual conduct is a longstanding element of military law that continues to be necessary in the unique circumstances of military service.
(14) The armed forces must maintain personnel policies that exclude persons whose presence in the armed forces would create an unacceptable risk to the armed forces’ high standards of morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion that are the essence of military capability.
(15) The presence in the armed forces of persons who demonstrate a propensity or intent to engage in homosexual acts would create an unacceptable risk to the high standards of morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion that are the essence of military capability.
The entire policy can be found here. And it is well worth reading.
So exactly what about homosexuality has changed since 1993? Do openly gay soldiers all of a sudden not damage "morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion?
-
Excerpts from the current "Don't ask"......policy. Oddly Powell doesn't serve, Mullen will NEVER have to hotbunk with a fag...shower with a fag....etc etc etc. The outright anger this is causing every time we see this crap on the news is amazing. I've had every media outlet I've ever given an email to, contacting me looking for a quote. The average soldier doesn't want to deal with this crap. Don't ask works.....leave it alone. This is th left's agenda being cramed down the last bastion of tradition, honor and patriotism left in this country. My hate for the Left is undying. U want to suck a cock...be my guest...but u don't get to do it openly, u don't get to do anything that will endanger my life, or lower the morale of my unit.
Taken from Blackfive.net
2) There is no constitutional right to serve in the armed forces.
(3) ... it lies within the discretion of the Congress to establish qualifications for and conditions of service in the armed forces.
(8) Military life is fundamentally different from civilian life in that ... the military society is characterized by its own laws, rules, customs, and traditions, including numerous restrictions on personal behavior, that would not be acceptable in civilian society.
(12) The worldwide deployment of United States military forces, the international responsibilities of the United States, and the potential for involvement of the armed forces in actual combat routinely make it necessary for members of the armed forces involuntarily to accept living conditions and working conditions that are often spartan, primitive, and characterized by forced intimacy with little or no privacy.
(13) The prohibition against homosexual conduct is a longstanding element of military law that continues to be necessary in the unique circumstances of military service.
(14) The armed forces must maintain personnel policies that exclude persons whose presence in the armed forces would create an unacceptable risk to the armed forces’ high standards of morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion that are the essence of military capability.
(15) The presence in the armed forces of persons who demonstrate a propensity or intent to engage in homosexual acts would create an unacceptable risk to the high standards of morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion that are the essence of military capability.
The entire policy can be found here. And it is well worth reading.
So exactly what about homosexuality has changed since 1993? Do openly gay soldiers all of a sudden not damage "morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion?
YOUR job is to Follow orders, not make them.
-
No asshole my job is to preserve the integrity and fighting spirit of my unit and the US Army. I didn't take an oath to barry..my oath is to the Constitution. My job is not to bow to some fringe left-wing group thats serves to further its own sexual agenda by shoving the rest of us with their bullshit. My job has been for 3 tours to ensure the safety of my soldiers. This policy, if lifted will at some point imperil both the lives of them as well as any gay person wishing to serve. I'm sure the vast majority of serving gays wish to remain in the closet and get on with their careers. I look with suspision on any openly gay person wishing to join an organization that built upon goals, values and ideals completely foreign to them and their way of life. Plenty of gays have served honorably from the closet. This is the left's attempt to damage a values based organization that they neither understand nor like. Fuck them..,...
-
Bro - you wouldnt last a day in the military.
-
I know..I'm doomed. In other news I actually got hit by a truck yesterday. An IP (police) truck ran through a crowd while I was talking to a reporter. Rolled over my leg and heel. Managed to get out before any real damage was done. I about put my fist through the windshield. I fully expect this to make UTUBE...they got it all on tape. It should be captioned...US soldier attacks helpless police truck with fist. The two morons driving looked at me like a pic staring at a wrist watch. Our terp was screaming at them....all I got out was a string of fuck u's...in rather unique combinations. If things unravel in Iraq its my fault. ;D
-
I know..I'm doomed. In other news I actually got hit by a truck yesterday. An IP (police) truck ran through a crowd while I was talking to a reporter. Rolled over my leg and heel. Managed to get out before any real damage was done. I about put my fist through the windshield. I fully expect this to make UTUBE...they got it all on tape. It should be captioned...US soldier attacks helpless police truck with fist. The two morons driving looked at me like a pic staring at a wrist watch. Our terp was screaming at them....all I got out was a string of fuck u's...in rather unique combinations. If things unravel in Iraq its my fault. ;D
Getting a sick chit?
-
I know..I'm doomed. In other news I actually got hit by a truck yesterday. An IP (police) truck ran through a crowd while I was talking to a reporter. Rolled over my leg and heel. Managed to get out before any real damage was done. I about put my fist through the windshield. I fully expect this to make UTUBE...they got it all on tape. It should be captioned...US soldier attacks helpless police truck with fist. The two morons driving looked at me like a pic staring at a wrist watch. Our terp was screaming at them....all I got out was a string of fuck u's...in rather unique combinations. If things unravel in Iraq its my fault. ;D
Stay safe you fucker!
The driver was probably a communist, homosexual that's been monitoring your posts on GetBig. :)
-
It might well have been. I got lucky...bruise on hammy...perfect tire print on my damm near 160.00 Oakly boots..and sorta bruised heel. I was worried about my knee but the ashfault had sand on it so I slide as he went into me. I hit legs today...no permanant damage. I love these people sooooo much. Things have heated up a bit since we're closing in on the elections.
-
It might well have been. I got lucky...bruise on hammy...perfect tire print on my damm near 160.00 Oakly boots..and sorta bruised heel. I was worried about my knee but the ashfault had sand on it so I slide as he went into me. I hit legs today...no permanant damage. I love these people sooooo much. Things have heated up a bit since we're closing in on the elections.
You seem like the knife type.... strider or emerson?
-
haha....thats funny. I brough 3 or 4 small ones but I never carry them..even my leatherman...I'm always borrowing somebodies. I have a small Smith@Wesson flip knife thats as sharp as the day I bought it. Its on my bodyarmour and expect it to collect dust until I redeploy. Some guys love em. Alot go with Benchmark knives.
-
how many of you gay rights activists are for unisex locker rooms and bathrooms?
all for unisex bathrooms. have used them before. usually much cleaner than the men's.
-
all for unisex bathrooms. have used them before. usually much cleaner than the men's.
Ha,ha,how is it possible to pee on the floor at urinal?Yet everyday,there is the same puddle of piss at the urinal in the mens room at work.
-
what strikes me as rather amusing is that everyone thinks, HH6 included, that he doesn't already shower with gays, bunk with them etc. Hate to break it to you bro but there are probably a few gay guys in your platoon right now.
-
what strikes me as rather amusing is that everyone thinks, HH6 included, that he doesn't already shower with gays, bunk with them etc. Hate to break it to you bro but there are probably a few gay guys in your platoon right now.
Yeah, and maybe they value their jobs and career more than being flaming homos and disrupting the morale of those they serve with.
-
Yeah, and maybe they value their jobs and career more than being flaming homos and disrupting the morale of those they serve with.
What a misconception you have there 333. Not everyone who is gay is a 'flaming homo' and wishes to flaunt it. I'm sure most military people will choose to keep their sexuality their own business. Just now they can't be fired if anyone finds out.
-
what strikes me as rather amusing is that everyone thinks, HH6 included, that he doesn't already shower with gays, bunk with them etc. Hate to break it to you bro but there are probably a few gay guys in your platoon right now.
Thats a silly argument.I also think my food in restraunts may be dropped on the floor every once in a while,as long as I dont know,it somehow makes it better.
-
What a misconception you have there 333. Not everyone who is gay is a 'flaming homo' and wishes to flaunt it. I'm sure most military people will choose to keep their sexuality their own business. Just now they can't be fired if anyone finds out.
I will take HH6 version before yours any day since he actually serves in the Corps and has been through it all.
-
I will take HH6 version before yours any day since he actually serves in the Corps and has been through it all.
You can take his version all you wish, he's homophobic so he's always going to have bias. Fact is the President gets final say. The military leadership is for this, perhaps HH6 should write them a letter showing his displeasure with their stance. They are his superiors and they are all for this. That's all i need as further confirmation that this is a good decision.
-
I will take HH6 version before yours any day since he actually serves in the Corps and has been through it all.
I'd rather shower with women if they aren't fat or ugly.
Tommy makes good sense. It's not simple as "just because someone's gay doesn't mean they want to be gay with you", in the military men shit, shower and shave together daily. That level of intimacy is hard to maintain if there's any sexual tension, real or imagined. Besides, even if you're fat, ugly or whatever someone will still hit it if times are tough. :)
Anyone who believes the rule has anything to do with homophobia is either a liar or idiot. Most of these idiots hate America anyways so having a weak, dysfunctional military is 100% OK in their books.
-
Excerpts from the current "Don't ask"......policy. Oddly Powell doesn't serve, Mullen will NEVER have to hotbunk with a fag...shower with a fag....etc etc etc. The outright anger this is causing every time we see this crap on the news is amazing. I've had every media outlet I've ever given an email to, contacting me looking for a quote. The average soldier doesn't want to deal with this crap. Don't ask works.....leave it alone. This is th left's agenda being cramed down the last bastion of tradition, honor and patriotism left in this country. My hate for the Left is undying. U want to suck a cock...be my guest...but u don't get to do it openly, u don't get to do anything that will endanger my life, or lower the morale of my unit.
Taken from Blackfive.net
2) There is no constitutional right to serve in the armed forces.
(3) ... it lies within the discretion of the Congress to establish qualifications for and conditions of service in the armed forces.
(8) Military life is fundamentally different from civilian life in that ... the military society is characterized by its own laws, rules, customs, and traditions, including numerous restrictions on personal behavior, that would not be acceptable in civilian society.
(12) The worldwide deployment of United States military forces, the international responsibilities of the United States, and the potential for involvement of the armed forces in actual combat routinely make it necessary for members of the armed forces involuntarily to accept living conditions and working conditions that are often spartan, primitive, and characterized by forced intimacy with little or no privacy.
(13) The prohibition against homosexual conduct is a longstanding element of military law that continues to be necessary in the unique circumstances of military service.
(14) The armed forces must maintain personnel policies that exclude persons whose presence in the armed forces would create an unacceptable risk to the armed forces’ high standards of morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion that are the essence of military capability.
(15) The presence in the armed forces of persons who demonstrate a propensity or intent to engage in homosexual acts would create an unacceptable risk to the high standards of morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion that are the essence of military capability.
The entire policy can be found here. And it is well worth reading.
So exactly what about homosexuality has changed since 1993? Do openly gay soldiers all of a sudden not damage "morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion?
To add to your statement, the Armed Forces differ in that they can throw you out for violating other behavior, typically deemed to be immoral, like adultery, which is a direct violation of the UCMJ.
You can get thrown out for whoring around, for being too fat, for being too weak, for being a crackhead, or a drunk (under certain conditions), etc.
And, it's really dumb for guys to complain about "Don't Ask; Don't Tell", suc as that dope "Lt" Dan Choi, ESPECIALLY when he signed paperwork, stating that HE AGREES TO COMPLY with the DoD policy on homosexual behavior.
In particular goes the part that, if he comes out and says he's a homosexual, the Army can THROW HIM OUT. He agreed to play by those rules.
As to what's changed about homosexuality, the claim is that the younger generation is more accepting of homosexuality than their senior leadership. That may be true to a point. But, they are hardly as accepting as the left would have you to believe.
Heck, this website is a prime example of that. Even among people don't have religious faith or beliefs, what's THE NUMBER ONE way that GetBig posters insult other GetBiggers on this and other forums?
They accused them of being GAY (i.e. they've been "outed", they "love the cock", etc.,).
-
I'd rather shower with women if they aren't fat or ugly.
Tommy makes good sense. It's not simple as "just because someone's gay doesn't mean they want to be gay with you", in the military men shit, shower and shave together daily. That level of intimacy is hard to maintain if there's any sexual tension, real or imagined. Besides, even if you're fat, ugly or whatever someone will still hit it if times are tough. :)
Anyone who believes the rule has anything to do with homophobia is either a liar or idiot. Most of these idiots hate America anyways so having a weak, dysfunctional military is 100% OK in their books.
I just asked my buddy who is a Army Captain about this and he is pissed off! He said DADT is fine. BTW is is black and hates what obama is doing.
-
You can take his version all you wish, he's homophobic so he's always going to have bias. Fact is the President gets final say. The military leadership is for this, perhaps HH6 should write them a letter showing his displeasure with their stance. They are his superiors and they are all for this. That's all i need as further confirmation that this is a good decision.
WRONG!! The President does NOT have the final say, for one simple reason: "Don't Ask; Don't Tell" (DADT) wasn't an executive order. It is a law, and at last check, CONGRESS must make the bill, not the President. All he does is sign them to make them laws.
Remember this: A DEMOCRATIC Congress passed the DADT bill, which a Democratic president signed into law. I seriously doubt that the makeup of Congress has changed that drastically, to the point where there's a wholesale shift in view about homosexuality and the military.
On top of that, by the time Gates gets done with his "study", the Dems may no longer be in power, anyway.
Basically, as stated earlier, this was merely to throw the gays a bone, in an attempt to rally the troops and recover from the beating they took two weeks ago, having lost the supermajority in the Senate (and, ObamaCare, along with it).
-
No asshole my job is to preserve the integrity and fighting spirit of my unit and the US Army. I didn't take an oath to barry..my oath is to the Constitution. My job is not to bow to some fringe left-wing group thats serves to further its own sexual agenda by shoving the rest of us with their bullshit. My job has been for 3 tours to ensure the safety of my soldiers. This policy, if lifted will at some point imperil both the lives of them as well as any gay person wishing to serve. I'm sure the vast majority of serving gays wish to remain in the closet and get on with their careers. I look with suspision on any openly gay person wishing to join an organization that built upon goals, values and ideals completely foreign to them and their way of life. Plenty of gays have served honorably from the closet. This is the left's attempt to damage a values based organization that they neither understand nor like. Fuck them..,...
Blah Blah Blah, you follow orders and if the order comes down that you have to bunk with gays....Guess what, you bunk with gays.
Live with it Shirley, you chose to be an order follower in the military.
-
Ha,ha,how is it possible to pee on the floor at urinal?Yet everyday,there is the same puddle of piss at the urinal in the mens room at work.
precisely my point. most men are pigs and slobs. the unisex bathrooms i've used are much cleaner.
-
This would be a non issue if we reinstated the draft.
-
Blah Blah Blah, you follow orders and if the order comes down that you have to bunk with gays....Guess what, you bunk with gays.
Live with it Shirley, you chose to be an order follower in the military.
But there's a chain of command. And, it's got to come from Congress and the Senate, first.
And, the Dems on the bubble ain't risking their political livelihood for the sake of gays being open in the military.
If the Dems get beat up in November, as some expect, this issue (like ObamaCare) is pretty much dead.
-
But there's a chain of command. And, it's got to come from Congress and the Senate, first.
And, the Dems on the bubble ain't risking their political livelihood for the sake of gays being open in the military.
If the Dems get beat up in November, as some expect, this issue (like ObamaCare) is pretty much dead.
Which renders Headhunter6`s pontifications meaningless. He has to follow orders regardless of what happens and he does not get to make the orders.
-
Which renders Headhunter6`s pontifications meaningless. He has to follow orders regardless of what happens and he does not get to make the orders.
He has to follow lawful orders.
People's choice to serve shouldn't be politicized to this extent. But again we have the no draft issue. If there was even a slim chance of people like you getting drafted (with no exemptions whatsoever) this wouldn't be a political issue.
-
He has to follow lawful orders.
People's choice to serve shouldn't be politicized to this extent. But again we have the no draft issue. If there was even a slim chance of people like you getting drafted (with no exemptions whatsoever) this wouldn't be a political issue.
Again, why try to make social experiments with people whose lives are on the line every day and this type of thing might be disruptive to that end?
-
Again, why try to make social experiments with people whose lives are on the line every day and this type of thing might be disruptive to that end?
The experiment outcomes can't possibly affect their lives. That's why.
-
The experiment outcomes can't possibly affect their lives. That's why.
I would ask those whose lives are on the line that question first and foremost.
-
I would ask those whose lives are on the line that question first and foremost.
Why would you ask input from people affected by policy changes?!
That's crazy, bigoted and probably racist. :)
-
You can take his version all you wish, he's homophobic so he's always going to have bias. Fact is the President gets final say. The military leadership is for this, perhaps HH6 should write them a letter showing his displeasure with their stance. They are his superiors and they are all for this. That's all i need as further confirmation that this is a good decision.
What is it with you and just making shit up? The president doesn't have the final say, in fact, that's why he addressed the issue with the congress. And the military leadership does not support it. You could find at most a minority of military leaders that have said they support it. Military leadership is very conservative. Aren't you the one often accusing others of exaggerating bullshit?
-
He has to follow lawful orders.
So does that gay "Lieutenant" Dan Choi, who's on the brink of getting the heave-ho. He agreed to play by the "Don't Ask; Don't Tell" rules. He read the DoD policy on homosexual conduct, signed the paperwork, and AGREED to follow it.
-
What is it with you and just making shit up? The president doesn't have the final say, in fact, that's why he addressed the issue with the congress. And the military leadership does not support it. You could find at most a minority of military leaders that have said they support it. Military leadership is very conservative. Aren't you the one often accusing others of exaggerating bullshit?
EXACTLY!!!
The President is the LAST one who get the say on it. And, NOW, with Scott Brown (who supports DADT, at least some on the left claim he does) officially a Senator of the USA, I don't see any law being passed to repeal it, unless the Dems try to sneak it in, which likely won't fly.
-
So does that gay "Lieutenant" Dan Choi, who's on the brink of getting the heave-ho. He agreed to play by the "Don't Ask; Don't Tell" rules. He read the DoD policy on homosexual conduct, signed the paperwork, and AGREED to follow it.
He probably saw something more lucrative in the private sector.
The problem some have with "Don't ask, Don't tell" is that it works too well. In real life, very few people actually give a damn about homosexuals or what they do. A policy which essentially says "we don't care and please don't force us to" robs attention whores what they desire. :)
On some level they know people don't care. Marriage, military, the superbowl, and other things people actually give a shit about are always attacked so people will pay attention to them. :)
-
Gaying up the military would be a great thing. That would mean more parades.
-
Yeah...well there's a war on and we don't need this crap. KC...I'm not in a platoon...don't "bunk" withanybody and right now, we can say what we want without worry about some fag and his feelings...because if he bitches..he's done. I've had a gay soldier, in a combat zone. We did "bunk' with him. We delt with it by regulation and at the end of the deployment he was discharged. It was made clear to him that if he did his job, kept his gay bullshit to a non-existant level...I would not discharge him without his college benefits. He did his job...he's at Ohio State now. Unlike most of u on this issue.....guys like me and Skip and even Gare, who says he doesn't care..will have to deal with it. This issue is much bigger then the military.
If a gay soldier is on recruiting duty in Mass and marries his gay lover....then moves to FT Bragg...that marriage isn't real. Thats a court case. Plus what about benefits....the US doesn't recognize gay marriage....its a states rights thing. If ur in the military and want to get married...u won't be able to? Thats another lawsuit.
-
Yeah...well there's a war on and we don't need this crap. KC...I'm not in a platoon...don't "bunk" withanybody and right now, we can say what we want without worry about some fag and his feelings...because if he bitches..he's done. I've had a gay soldier, in a combat zone. We did "bunk' with him. We delt with it by regulation and at the end of the deployment he was discharged. It was made clear to him that if he did his job, kept his gay bullshit to a non-existant level...I would not discharge him without his college benefits. He did his job...he's at Ohio State now. Unlike most of u on this issue.....guys like me and Skip and even Gare, who says he doesn't care..will have to deal with it. This issue is much bigger then the military.
If a gay soldier is on recruiting duty in Mass and marries his gay lover....then moves to FT Bragg...that marriage isn't real. Thats a court case. Plus what about benefits....the US doesn't recognize gay marriage....its a states rights thing. If ur in the military and want to get married...u won't be able to? Thats another lawsuit.
Uh, if you knew he was gay whilst in the active military, isn`t that against regulation and against Don`t Ask Don`t tell?
Also, were you or any of the others magically attracted to him after you and the others found out he was gay?
-
Did u read the post....we followed the Reg to the letter. And among other things, this soldier would have stayed in the Army longerr do to the ensuing investigation. He was stoplossed as it was. He was also a big pussy, so we decided that based on the "Commanders discretion" portion of the reg...he would continue to do his job and be allowed to be discharged under honorable conditions, if he stopped crying about going outside the wire and doing his friggen job. The JAG who handled his case is the civilian POC for Pentagon of DADT.
Nobody was magically gay...I know all u left-wing douchbags want gay to break out everywhere, but its not going to happen.
-
Uh, if you knew he was gay whilst in the active military, isn`t that against regulation and against Don`t Ask Don`t tell?
NOPE!! Try reading the DoD policy on homosexual conduct. It will answer some of these silly questions of yours.
What behaviors are NOT homosexual acts as defined by the DoD Policy? Associational Behavior. Examples of associational behavior include:
•associating with known homosexuals;
•marching in a gay rights rally in civilian clothes;
•possessing or reading homosexual publications; and
•going to a gay bar, etc.
http://www.jackson.army.mil/SJA/Files/AdLaw/HCP.CLASS(MAR01).pdf (http://www.jackson.army.mil/SJA/Files/AdLaw/HCP.CLASS(MAR01).pdf)
-
NOPE!! Try reading the DoD policy on homosexual conduct. It will answer some of these silly questions of yours.
What behaviors are NOT homosexual acts as defined by the DoD Policy? Associational Behavior. Examples of associational behavior include:
•associating with known homosexuals;
•marching in a gay rights rally in civilian clothes;
•possessing or reading homosexual publications; and
•going to a gay bar, etc.
http://www.jackson.army.mil/SJA/Files/AdLaw/HCP.CLASS(MAR01).pdf (http://www.jackson.army.mil/SJA/Files/AdLaw/HCP.CLASS(MAR01).pdf)
Why bother? You know damn well he won't understand it.
-
Why bother? You know damn well he won't understand it.
Call me an eternal optimist!!
;D
-
Call me an eternal optimist!!
;D
TA will never accept anything other than what he learns over at DU.
-
TA will never accept anything other than what he learns over at DU.
I thought he attended CPU with Judi.
Cut & Paste University.
-
I thought he attended CPU with Judi.
Cut & Paste University.
He actually gradutated from somewhere? Last I heard, he didnt even finish BOCES.
-
He actually gradutated from somewhere? Last I heard, he didnt even finish BOCES.
He's a BoTard, LOL!
-
Ha,ha,how is it possible to pee on the floor at urinal?Yet everyday,there is the same puddle of piss at the urinal in the mens room at work.
LOL I feel that same way, when i walk into the bathroom there is always that puddle of piss under and around the urinal...WTF?
how do these ppl who do this not piss on themselves with their ineptitude...
-
what strikes me as rather amusing is that everyone thinks, HH6 included, that he doesn't already shower with gays, bunk with them etc. Hate to break it to you bro but there are probably a few gay guys in your platoon right now.
and im checking women out at the gym that doesnt mean I should have the right to openly see them naked does it?
ya ya ya "im a pervert" and "should spend more time working out instead of looking at women"
I work out plenty hard and Jamie eason works out at my gym from time to time so go fuck yourself
-
and im checking women out at the gym that doesnt mean I should have the right to openly see them naked does it?
ya ya ya "im a pervert" and "should spend more time working out instead of looking at women"
I work out plenty hard and Jamie eason works out at my gym from time to time so go fuck yourself
Jamie Eason= Dennis the Menace
(http://www.spitefulcritic.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/dennis-the-menace.jpg)
-
and im checking women out at the gym that doesnt mean I should have the right to openly see them naked does it?
ya ya ya "im a pervert" and "should spend more time working out instead of looking at women"
I work out plenty hard and Jamie eason works out at my gym from time to time so go fuck yourself
Dammit you do have the right to see them naked!!
How else can you decide which ones to sexualize.
-
Dammit you do have the right to see them naked!!
How else can you decide which ones to sexualize.
Evolutionary speaking this is correct. He needs to see them naked.
-
Evolutionary speaking this is correct. He needs to see them naked.
Homosexuality may be an evolutionary method of limiting a population's ability to use up resources.
-
Homosexuality may be an evolutionary method of limiting a population's ability to use up resources.
Its not. Its present in nearly every single organism for many different reasons. For instance, Dominance or even for practice or as in Bonobos just because it feels good.
-
Its not. Its present in nearly every single organism for many different reasons. For instance, Dominance or even for practice or as in Bonobos just because it feels good.
Did you learn that in BOCES?
-
Did you learn that in BOCES?
No. From Dr. McCann and Dr. Bagemihl and observations of Gibbons and Bonobos and Giraffe just to name a few of many species.
-
(http://images.amazon.com/images/P/031225377X.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg)
-
Its not. Its present in nearly every single organism for many different reasons. For instance, Dominance or even for practice or as in Bonobos just because it feels good.
FACT is we arent sure why it presents itself, we simply have a plethora of theories.
"Jamie Eason= Dennis the Menace"
I can see that she does have chipmonk cheeks in certain pictures but trust one set of stiff legged dead lifts or squats and youll be in love ;) ;D
-
FACT is we arent sure why it presents itself, we simply have a plethora of theories.
"Jamie Eason= Dennis the Menace"
I can see that she does have chipmonk cheeks in certain pictures but trust one set of stiff legged dead lifts or squats and youll be in love ;) ;D
No. We are definite in Bonobos that its for pleasure, group cohesion and as a way to diffuse tension amongst the group. We know why for hundreds and thousands of other species of animals as well. Even fish.
Male Giraffes engage in homosexual behavior much higher than humans. The interesting thing here is that Female Giraffe do not engage in homosexual behavior as much at all.
Giraffes
Male giraffes have been observed to engage in remarkably high frequencies of homosexual behavior. After aggressive "necking", it is common for two males giraffes to caress and court each other, leading up to mounting and climax. Such interactions between males have been found to be more frequent than heterosexual coupling.[61] In one study, up to 94% of observed mounting incidents took place between two males. The proportion of same sex activities varied between 30 and 75%, and at any given time one in twenty males were engaged in non-combative necking behavior with another male. Only 1% of same-sex mounting incidents occurred between females
-
No. We are definite in Bonobos that its for pleasure, group cohesion and as a way to diffuse tension amongst the group. We know why for hundreds and thousands of other species of animals as well. Even fish.
Male Giraffes engage in homosexual behavior much higher than humans. The interesting thing here is that Female Giraffe do not engage in homosexual behavior as much at all.
Giraffes
Male giraffes have been observed to engage in remarkably high frequencies of homosexual behavior. After aggressive "necking", it is common for two males giraffes to caress and court each other, leading up to mounting and climax. Such interactions between males have been found to be more frequent than heterosexual coupling.[61] In one study, up to 94% of observed mounting incidents took place between two males. The proportion of same sex activities varied between 30 and 75%, and at any given time one in twenty males were engaged in non-combative necking behavior with another male. Only 1% of same-sex mounting incidents occurred between females
Priceless.
-
No. We are definite in Bonobos that its for pleasure, group cohesion and as a way to diffuse tension amongst the group. We know why for hundreds and thousands of other species of animals as well. Even fish.
Male Giraffes engage in homosexual behavior much higher than humans. The interesting thing here is that Female Giraffe do not engage in homosexual behavior as much at all.
Giraffes
Male giraffes have been observed to engage in remarkably high frequencies of homosexual behavior. After aggressive "necking", it is common for two males giraffes to caress and court each other, leading up to mounting and climax. Such interactions between males have been found to be more frequent than heterosexual coupling.[61] In one study, up to 94% of observed mounting incidents took place between two males. The proportion of same sex activities varied between 30 and 75%, and at any given time one in twenty males were engaged in non-combative necking behavior with another male. Only 1% of same-sex mounting incidents occurred between females
Adonis,
I realize you cannot comprehend even the simplest of shit unless cut and pasted. That being said, cut and past the rationale behind how my simple theory applies to giraffes before running back to Wikepedia:
Consider how thinly stretched resources needed to accommodate the giraffe's highly specific diet would be without the negative impact of homosexual behavior.
Jake
-
Priceless.
I take it next time you go to the zoo, you just won`t see Giraffes the same way.
-
Adonis,
I realize you cannot comprehend even the simplest of shit unless cut and pasted. That being said, cut and past the rationale behind how my simple theory applies to giraffes before running back to Wikepedia:
Consider how thinly stretched resources needed to accommodate the giraffe's highly specific diet would be without the negative impact of homosexual behavior.
Jake
Homosexual Behavior does not suppress the birth rate of the Giraffe nor does it hinder reproductive rates. The same male that mounts another male will often the next hour mount another female and so on.
A female Giraffe also has to be in Estrus and they only have ONE calf at a time with the gestation period taking about 15 months, much longer than Humans.
Homosexual behavior has zero impact on the birth rate nor does it have an impact on limiting necessary resources. Also Giraffes DO NOT have a highly specific diet at all.
Your theory, which is based on nothing, is wrong.
-
I take it next time you go to the zoo, you just won`t see Giraffes the same way.
Definately. When I see two gay animals screwing each other I will think of you. ;D
-
Definately. When I see two gay animals screwing each other I will think of you. ;D
Mirror Neurons do operate across species and I wouldn`t doubt you may be aroused at the zoo after viewing the Giraffes at the Acacia Station. Sorry though, I have a girlfriend. :-\
-
Mirror Neurons do operate across species and I wouldn`t doubt you may be aroused at the zoo after viewing the Giraffes at the Acacia Station. Sorry though, I have a girlfriend. :-\
I am about two minutes from the Bronx Zoo. The only problem is that there are more animals outside the gates than in it.
-
I am about two minutes from the Bronx Zoo. The only problem is that there are more animals outside the gates than in it.
ROFLMAO. Agreed.
-
No. We are definite in Bonobos that its for pleasure, group cohesion and as a way to diffuse tension amongst the group. We know why for hundreds and thousands of other species of animals as well. Even fish.
Male Giraffes engage in homosexual behavior much higher than humans. The interesting thing here is that Female Giraffe do not engage in homosexual behavior as much at all.
Giraffes
Male giraffes have been observed to engage in remarkably high frequencies of homosexual behavior. After aggressive "necking", it is common for two males giraffes to caress and court each other, leading up to mounting and climax. Such interactions between males have been found to be more frequent than heterosexual coupling.[61] In one study, up to 94% of observed mounting incidents took place between two males. The proportion of same sex activities varied between 30 and 75%, and at any given time one in twenty males were engaged in non-combative necking behavior with another male. Only 1% of same-sex mounting incidents occurred between females
LOL again you misunderstand and resort to cut and paste, I didnt say that we dont have theories as to what purposes homosexual behavior serves only that we are uncertain of WHY homosexual behaviour presents itself. Primates mount each other as a greeting and to display dominance but that doesnt explain why it is there...
Also if you believe homosexuality presents itself for those reasons we as developed beings dont need to rely on such primitive actions and you would likely see a decline in homosexuality as we can express ourselves in a more constructive and concrete manner.
-
Still trying to get in the womans bathroom aye Tony? Maybe we should call you TonymcCreeper or TonymcShitstain because there is nothing you won't crawl through to peek at those ladies!
-
Still trying to get in the womans bathroom aye Tony? Maybe we should call you TonymcCreeper or TonymcShitstain because there is nothing you won't crawl through to peek at those ladies!
just want my equal rights is all, why do you have to be such a bigot?
discrimination is only bad when its against gays I guess ;)
you still never answered the question Ive posed to you multiple times, that speaks volumes of your views and comprehension of them :o
-
just want my equal rights is all, why do you have to be such a bigot?
discrimination is only bad when its against gays I guess ;)
you still never answered the question Ive posed to you multiple times, that speaks volumes of your views and comprehension of them :o
Oh yeah it's def on par with gay rights YOUR right to perv is totally up there with your misconception that anyone gay or straight would wish to check you out ::) nice try mcshitstain
-
Oh yeah it's def on par with gay rights YOUR right to perv is totally up there with your misconception that anyone gay or straight would wish to check you out ::) nice try mcshitstain
LOL again brain child its not whether they do or not is that they have the right toooooooooo....
just b/c you dont have a gun doesnt mean you dont have a right to by the 2nd ammendment...
you want to deny me rights gays have but then bitch about rights that I have that gays dont...real fair ::)
p.s. have you posted a pic? I have and I do ok for myself ladies wise
p.p.s. the mcshitstain doesnt really go, McCreeper is better but keep working on it ;)
-
LOL again you misunderstand and resort to cut and paste, I didnt say that we dont have theories as to what purposes homosexual behavior serves only that we are uncertain of WHY homosexual behaviour presents itself. Primates mount each other as a greeting and to display dominance but that doesnt explain why it is there...
Also if you believe homosexuality presents itself for those reasons we as developed beings dont need to rely on such primitive actions and you would likely see a decline in homosexuality as we can express ourselves in a more constructive and concrete manner.
Beneficial to survival. There is no mystery here at all.
-
This oughta help a bit.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13674-evolution-myths-natural-selection-cannot-explain-homosexuality.html
There are numerous evolutionary mechanisms that might explain homosexual behaviour, which is common in many species of animals
"Simple reasoning shows that evolution cannot explain homosexuality - how would a homosexuality gene get selected for?" "Why have the genetic traits predisposing to homosexuality not been eliminated long ago?"
Such arguments are surprisingly common - and completely wrong.
Homosexual behaviour has been observed in hundreds of species, from bison to penguins. It is still not clear to what extent homosexuality in humans or other animals is genetic (rather than, say, due to hormonal extremes during embryonic development), but there are many mechanisms that could explain why gene variants linked to homosexuality are maintained in a population.
A common assumption is that homosexuality means not having children, but this is not necessarily true, especially in cultures other than our own. Until it became acceptable for same-sex couples to live together in western countries, many homosexual people had partners of the opposite sex. In some traditional societies, various forms of non-exclusive homosexuality were common.
Reasons why
Among animals, homosexual behaviour is usually non-exclusive. For instance, in some populations of Japanese macaques, females prefer female sexual partners to male ones but still mate with males - they are bisexual, in other words.
It has also been suggested that homosexuality boosts individuals' reproductive success, albeit indirectly. For instance, same-sex partners might have a better chance of rising to the top of social hierarchies and getting access to the opposite sex. In some gull species, homosexual partnerships might be a response to a shortage of males - rather than have no offspring at all, some female pairs raise offspring together after mating with a male from a normal male-female pair.
Another possibility is that homosexuality evolves and persists because it benefits groups or relatives, rather than individuals. In bonobos, homosexual behaviour might have benefits at a group level by promoting social cohesion. One study in Samoa found gay men devote more time to their nieces and nephews, suggesting it might be an example of kin selection (promoting your own genes in the bodies of others).
For your health
Or perhaps homosexuality is neutral, neither reducing nor boosting overall fitness. Attempts to find an adaptive explanation for homosexual behaviour in macaques have failed, leading to suggestions that they do it purely for pleasure.
Even if homosexuality does reduce reproductive success, as most people assume, there are plenty of possible reasons why it is so common. For instance, gene variants that cause homosexual behaviour might have other, beneficial effects such as boosting fertility in women, as one recent study suggests, just as the gene variant for sickle-cell anaemia is maintained because it reduces the severity of malaria. Homosexuality could also be a result of females preferring males with certain tendencies - sexual selection can favour traits that reduce overall fitness, such as the peacock's tail (see Evolution always increases fitness).
-
Beneficial to survival. There is no mystery here at all.
LOL please explain to me how homosexuality is beneficial to survival...
-
LOL please explain to me how homosexuality is beneficial to survival...
See above. It will be different for each species of animal.
-
See above. It will be different for each species of animal.
LOL in your own words please ;)
and if its different from each species of animal then in some animals it will have less or zero benefits...so tell me what the benefits of homosexuality are in humans specifically?
p.s. I mean in terms of evolution...and please respond to the initial question as to how it benefits any species in the terms of evolution and then humans...IN YOUR OWN WORDSSSS ;)
-
LOL in your own words please ;)
and if its different from each species of animal then in some animals it will have less or zero benefits...so tell me what the benefits of homosexuality are in humans specifically?
p.s. I mean in terms of evolution...and please respond to the initial question as to how it benefits any species in the terms of evolution and then humans...IN YOUR OWN WORDSSSS ;)
Let me get the groundwork started with a few points and I will add more later as it is getting a bit late here and I want to finish reading my book.
1. Homosexual monogamy is a relatively new thing which is based on cultural norms and values. In today`s society most tend to think Gay or straight, Homosexual or Heterosexual. This is meaningless as far as our ancestors are concerned as both behaviors have been freely engaged in. A male Homo sapien may have sex with another male in his group and then the next day have sex with a female in his group and so on.
2. Heterosexual monogamy is a relatively new thing as well amongst Homo sapiens. Archaic Homo Sapiens of 400,000 years ago would certainly not have engaged in strict monogamy. There certainly were not enough Homo sapiens around for that to even be possible. That would continue all the way up to our recent history and recent population explosions (recent meaning since the diffusion of language and culture, 50,000 years to the present).
3. Human Homosexuality did not have a negative effect at all as far as Homo Sapien survival is concerned. How do we know? We are still here and so is Homosexuality. There is not a negative pressure nor has there ever been when concerning Homosexuality. We have not gone extinct and any genes associated with Homosexual behavior have ridden along just fine throughout our evolutionary history. Homosexuality is not new and has been with us for hundreds of millions of years in all of our ancestors, mammal or fish and so on.
Continued until later...
-
And this has to do with gays in the military how. We aren't going to allow Giraffes in...or monkeys in...more bullshit to confuse the issue.
-
And this has to do with gays in the military how. We aren't going to allow Giraffes in...or monkeys in...more bullshit to confuse the issue.
Gay is here to stay.
Perhaps there should be all gay or Gay Only regiments. Would that be a problem or even feasible?
-
Gay has been and will always be here, thats not the issue. So have both blind and retarded people, neither can serve and nor should OPENLY gay people. We made the concession with DADT. The policy works. The issues with this are legion...
As for all gay units, that would defeat the purpose of openly gay people serving. Its not that millions of gays want to serve, its that the left-wing wackjobs want to push their agenda. If they could squeeze votes out of the Giant Panda population...I'd have large black and white bears in my unit. They want to poke the Conservative bear and this is the way to do it. The left hates the military, hates standards, hates anything that has a promotion system based on a meritocracy, hates special...hates elite unless its them.
-
Gay has been and will always be here, thats not the issue. So have both blind and retarded people, neither can serve and nor should OPENLY gay people. We made the concession with DADT. The policy works. The issues with this are legion...
As for all gay units, that would defeat the purpose of openly gay people serving. Its not that millions of gays want to serve, its that the left-wing wackjobs want to push their agenda. If they could squeeze votes out of the Giant Panda population...I'd have large black and white bears in my unit. They want to poke the Conservative bear and this is the way to do it. The left hates the military, hates standards, hates anything that has a promotion system based on a meritocracy, hates special...hates elite unless its them.
Promotion system based on meritocracy I like. Its true Socialism. :)
-
Are u an idiot....u work hard and do ur job u get promoted. Socialism..u show up and u get ur cookie. It people like you who believe everybody ought to get a trophy for participation. If u really find a need to social engineer..do so at your own workplace.
-
LOL please explain to me how homosexuality is beneficial to survival...
He's probably talking about prison. :)
-
Let me get the groundwork started with a few points and I will add more later as it is getting a bit late here and I want to finish reading my book.
1. Homosexual monogamy is a relatively new thing which is based on cultural norms and values. In today`s society most tend to think Gay or straight, Homosexual or Heterosexual. This is meaningless as far as our ancestors are concerned as both behaviors have been freely engaged in. A male Homo sapien may have sex with another male in his group and then the next day have sex with a female in his group and so on.
2. Heterosexual monogamy is a relatively new thing as well amongst Homo sapiens. Archaic Homo Sapiens of 400,000 years ago would certainly not have engaged in strict monogamy. There certainly were not enough Homo sapiens around for that to even be possible. That would continue all the way up to our recent history and recent population explosions (recent meaning since the diffusion of language and culture, 50,000 years to the present).
3. Human Homosexuality did not have a negative effect at all as far as Homo Sapien survival is concerned. How do we know? We are still here and so is Homosexuality. There is not a negative pressure nor has there ever been when concerning Homosexuality. We have not gone extinct and any genes associated with Homosexual behavior have ridden along just fine throughout our evolutionary history. Homosexuality is not new and has been with us for hundreds of millions of years in all of our ancestors, mammal or fish and so on.
Continued until later...
LOL this gave none, not one benefit of homosexuality in terms of evolution in humans or other species...still waiting TA...
-
LOL this gave none, not one benefit of homosexuality in terms of evolution in humans or other species...still waiting TA...
The only one I have ever seen benefit from gay sex is my friend who is a surgeon who has to sew up torn assholes in the ER.
She makes great money from gay men sticking their peckers everywhere is doesnt belong.
-
LOL this gave none, not one benefit of homosexuality in terms of evolution in humans or other species...still waiting TA...
STILL WAITING TA...
-
STILL WAITING TA...
So far Gays should be happy they cant marry. Once those queens get to deal with divorce court they will be begging for the country to ban gay marriage.
-
STILL WAITING TA...
Relax, Man.
Finding the perfect statement to cut and paste takes time. :)
-
LOL this gave none, not one benefit of homosexuality in terms of evolution in humans or other species...still waiting TA...
Reciprocal Altrusim, Sexual alliance, Social Bonding Mechanism, Hierarchical dominance in competing groups, Sexual practice,Group bonding, Group cohesion, Pleasure as in Bonobos and other Primates, Tension Diffusion among groups. All of these things have furthered the spread of Homo sapien genes as a sort of result from such behavior. (No Homo!) I will go into more detail later. I am eating Key Lime Pie and having some fun on here before its off to the gym.
-
Also, I think you are confused about the terms Necessary and Beneficial and the difference between the two.
-
Let me get the groundwork started with a few points and I will add more later as it is getting a bit late here and I want to finish reading my book.
1. Homosexual monogamy is a relatively new thing which is based on cultural norms and values. In today`s society most tend to think Gay or straight, Homosexual or Heterosexual. This is meaningless as far as our ancestors are concerned as both behaviors have been freely engaged in. A male Homo sapien may have sex with another male in his group and then the next day have sex with a female in his group and so on.
2. Heterosexual monogamy is a relatively new thing as well amongst Homo sapiens. Archaic Homo Sapiens of 400,000 years ago would certainly not have engaged in strict monogamy. There certainly were not enough Homo sapiens around for that to even be possible. That would continue all the way up to our recent history and recent population explosions (recent meaning since the diffusion of language and culture, 50,000 years to the present).
3. Human Homosexuality did not have a negative effect at all as far as Homo Sapien survival is concerned. How do we know? We are still here and so is Homosexuality. There is not a negative pressure nor has there ever been when concerning Homosexuality. We have not gone extinct and any genes associated with Homosexual behavior have ridden along just fine throughout our evolutionary history. Homosexuality is not new and has been with us for hundreds of millions of years in all of our ancestors, mammal or fish and so on.
Continued until later...
I'm calling bullshit. This is opinion, nothing more. How could we have any clue as to the sexual proclivities of humans 400,000 years ago. Or in animals millions of years ago?
-
I'm calling bullshit. This is opinion, nothing more. How could we have any clue as to the sexual proclivities of humans 400,000 years ago. Or in animals millions of years ago?
Something called Anthropology and Paleo-Anthropology. You might want to look into it.
-
Something called Anthropology. You might want to look into it.
Exactly, you've got no clue. It's speculation at best. When you can post some hard evidence demonstrably showing homosexuality in animals millions of years ago, then you might actually have an argument.
-
Exactly, you've got no clue. It's speculation at best. When you can post some hard evidence demonstrably showing homosexuality in animals millions of years ago, then you might actually have an argument.
Easy. Pick an animal that has stayed relatively the same for millions of years and observe it. Its behavior will not be any different especially in something like a DragonFly or a Whiptail Lizard or Shark.
Of course you wouldn`t even have to do that as you could observe an animal, its mating habits, ecology and then compare with its closest ancestor and do the same and so on. You could even anaylze at the Molecular level and compare DNA and divergence of living or even extinct animals. We are all cousins of every living thing you see on earth and share the same DNA. The more similar the DNA, the closer we are related and the less and more recent we have diverged.
You do realize that Humans lived at the same time as Many other species of humanoid (Homo) Such as Neanderthalensis which we could not mate with and which did outnumber us initially until they died out. They were nearly as intelligent as we are now and we both competed for the same resources. In fact, their large brains and bodies needed around 4000-5000 calories a day and once we encroached, they could not sustain themselves whatsoever as we gobbled up their resources and hence we watched them die out so to speak.
(http://i.livescience.com/images/060508_human_evolution_02.jpg)
-
Easy. Pick an animal that has stayed relatively the same for millions of years and observe it. Its behavior will not be any different especially in something like a DragonFly or a Whiptail Lizard or Shark.
Nothing easy about. We've only been studying animals for a relatively short amount of time, and their behaviors for an even shorter amount of time. In fact behavioral changes in species may very well be the reason that they've changed or haven't changed overtime, as opposed to environmentally adaptive changes. It's one of the fundamental flaws of predictive behavior.
When getting my undergrad degree, a good example was butterflies changing their mating seasons to overcome predation, leaving them physically unchanged.
Fact remains, behavior of animals millions of years ago is nothing more that speculation. Observed behaviors in the present day may very well have not existed millions of years ago. It's speculation, and you know it.
Of course you wouldn`t even have to do that as you could observe an animal, its mating habits, ecology and then compare with its closest ancestor and do the same and so on. You could even anaylze at the Molecular level and compare DNA and divergence of living or even extinct animals. We are all cousins of every living thing you see on earth and share the same DNA. The more similar the DNA, the closer we are related and the less and more recent we have diverged.
You do realize that Humans lived at the same time as Many other species of humanoid (Homo) Such as Neanderthalensis which we could not mate with and which did outnumber us initially until they died out. They were nearly as intelligent as we are now and we both competed for the same resources. In fact, their large brains and bodies needed around 4000-5000 calories a day and once we encroached, they could not sustain themselves whatsoever as we gobbled up their resources and hence we watched them die out so to speak.
None of this has anything to do with what we're talking about. You're just attempting to muddle the issue.
I'm a staunch believer in evolution, so spare the bullshit. The issue is behavioral speculation of species millions of years ago, and at this point in our understanding it's just that - speculation.
You can offer absolutely no scientific proof that homosexuality has existed for millions of years.
And aren't you the one always droning on about how there's only fact vs no fact? ::)
-
Exactly, you've got no clue. It's speculation at best. When you can post some hard evidence demonstrably showing homosexuality in animals millions of years ago, then you might actually have an argument.
Finding something on Wikipedia will take time. :)
-
Nothing easy about. We've only been studying animals for a relatively short amount of time, and their behaviors for an even shorter amount of time. In fact behavioral changes in species may very well be the reason that they've changed or haven't changed overtime, as opposed to environmentally adaptive changes. It's one of the fundamental flaws of predictive behavior.
When getting my undergrad degree, a good example was butterflies changing their mating seasons to overcome predation, leaving them physically unchanged.
Fact remains, behavior of animals millions of years ago is nothing more that speculation. Observed behaviors in the present day may very well have not existed millions of years ago. It's speculation, and you know it.
None of this has anything to do with what we're talking about. You're just attempting to muddle the issue.
I'm a staunch believer in evolution, so spare the bullshit. The issue is behavioral speculation of species millions of years ago, and at this point in our understanding it's just that - speculation.
You can offer absolutely no scientific proof that homosexuality has existed for millions of years.
And aren't you the one always droning on about how there's only fact vs no fact? ::)
You have convinced yourself that only a time machine will do and I do not have one of those.
-
You have convinced yourself that only a time machine will do and I do not have one of those.
And you've convinced yourself that you can pass off speculation as fact. Ironic it is that when the facts don't exist to support your political beliefs, it's still OK for you to make suppositions.
-
And you've convinced yourself that you can pass off speculation as fact. Ironic it is that when the facts don't exist to support your political beliefs, it's still OK for you to make suppositions.
Sorry but you are wrong regarding animal behavior. Take a Coleacanth for instance, it has not changed in 365 million years whatsoever, nor its habitat it survives in.
-
And you've convinced yourself that you can pass off speculation as fact. Ironic it is that when the facts don't exist to support your political beliefs, it's still OK for you to make suppositions.
Here you are:
Fruit flies
Male Drosophila melanogaster flies bearing two copies of a mutant allele in the fruitless gene court and attempt to mate exclusively with other males.[77] The genetic basis of animal homosexuality has been studied in the fly Drosophila melanogaster.[78] Here, multiple genes have been identified that can cause homosexual courtship and mating.[79] These genes are thought to control behavior through pheromones as well as altering the structure of the animal's brains.[80][81] These studies have also investigated the influence of environment on the likelihood of flies displaying homosexual behavior.[82][83]
-
-
THIS is the Video to Watch Skip and others
-
Male Bottlenose Dolphins often form lifelong pair-bonds with each other. Adolescent and younger males typically live in all-male groups in which homosexual activity is common; within these groups, a male begins to develop a strong bond with a particular partner (usually of the same age) with whom he will spend the rest of his life. The two Dolphins become constant companions, often traveling widely; although sexual activity probably declines as they get older, it may continue to be a regular feature of such partnerships.
Paired males sometimes take turns guarding or remaining vigilant while their partner rests. They also defend their mates against predators such as sharks and protect them while they are healing from wounds inflicted during preclators' attacks. Sometimes three males form a tightly bonded trio. On the death of his partner, a male may spend a long time searching for a new male companion—usually unsuccessfully, since most other males in the community are already paired and will not break their bonds. If, however, he can find another "widower" whose male partner has died, the two may become a couple...
The lives of male Bottlenose Dolphins are characterized by extensive bisexuality, combined with periods of exclusive homosexuality. As adolescents and young males, they have regular homosexual interactions in all-male groups, sometimes alternating with heterosexual activity. From age 10 onward, most male Dolphins form pair-bonds with another male, and because they do not usually father calves until they are 20-25 years old, this can be an extended period—10-15 years—of principally same-sex interaction. Later, when they begin mating heterosexually, they still retain their primary male pair-bonds, and in some populations male pairs and trios cooperate in herding females or in interacting homosexually with Spotted Dolphins.[/color]
(Excerpt from the book "Biological Exuberance: Animal Homosexuality and Natural Diversity" by Bruce Bagemihl.)
-
THIS is the Video to Watch Skip and others
You're on a spamming spree because you can't back up your bullshit. None of this has to do with what I've taken issue with you on, and I've haven't said homosexuality does not occur in animals. But, if the whole cut & paste thing makes you feel better, knock yourself out.
-
You're on a spamming spree because you can't back up your bullshit. None of this has to do with what I've taken issue with you on, and I've haven't said homosexuality does not occur in animals. But, if the whole cut & paste thing makes you feel better, knock yourself out.
So your claim is that Homosexuality is a "New" behavior? What exactly is your issue?
-
What do gay dolphins have to do with gays in the military. What do any of these ridiculous cut and paste jobs have to do with the subject at hand. Your so good at answering what you think the question is. Nobody cares about gay dolphins, gay dolphins aren't forcing their way into the US Military. Further, if gay dolphins want to serve. skip will have to deal with that and not me...yet neither of us will be forced to live with the gay dolphins so they can gay it up as much as they want. Do u feel like when u post this crap, we think ur smart or something?
-
What do gay dolphins have to do with gays in the military. What do any of these ridiculous cut and paste jobs have to do with the subject at hand. Your so good at answering what you think the question is. Nobody cares about gay dolphins, gay dolphins aren't forcing their way into the US Military. Further, if gay dolphins want to serve. skip will have to deal with that and not me...yet neither of us will be forced to live with the gay dolphins so they can gay it up as much as they want. Do u feel like when u post this crap, we think ur smart or something?
Why bother with the obvious HH6? TA wouldnt last the 1st day of boot camp yet has all the policy answers for how the military should work.
Typical liberal garbage.
-
TA wouldnt last the 1st day of boot camp yet has all the policy answers for how the military should work.
whose opinion should we support? the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff and Defense Sec. or an anonymous poster here?
-
whose opinion should we support? the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff and Defense Sec. or an anonymous poster here?
I have always said, if the military wants it, I am fine with their decision. If they chose to repeal it based on the militarys' needs and position on the issue, thats fine by me.
-
What do gay dolphins have to do with gays in the military. What do any of these ridiculous cut and paste jobs have to do with the subject at hand. Your so good at answering what you think the question is. Nobody cares about gay dolphins, gay dolphins aren't forcing their way into the US Military. Further, if gay dolphins want to serve. skip will have to deal with that and not me...yet neither of us will be forced to live with the gay dolphins so they can gay it up as much as they want. Do u feel like when u post this crap, we think ur smart or something?
Actually Dolphins have been used by the US military.
-
No shit......hence an issue for a Skip, a Navy guy. But I don't have to live in a tank of water with a dolphin.
-
I'm a civilian, often working for a Navy captain in logistics.
And as to chadstallion, the opinions of more than just a minority of members in the military should be considered.
-
Your not seeing alot of gay servicemembers coming out and saying they want this, ur seeing alot of ex-servicemen coming out. These people broke a reg and got bounced, they have an axe to grind. Until massive amounts of below flag rank officers and senior NCO's say they want it, then the fight will be intense. Retired military who will never have to deal with this crap don't really impress me. They don't have to deal with it. Barry could bring gays "out" with an executive order, much like Truman did but he won't. Obama is not a leader he's a telepromoter addicted creation of the Far Left dem machine.
-
Your not seeing alot of gay servicemembers coming out and saying they want this, ur seeing alot of ex-servicemen coming out. These people broke a reg and got bounced, they have an axe to grind. Until massive amounts of below flag rank officers and senior NCO's say they want it, then the fight will be intense. Retired military who will never have to deal with this crap don't really impress me. They don't have to deal with it. Barry could bring gays "out" with an executive order, much like Truman did but he won't. Obama is not a leader he's a telepromoter addicted creation of the Far Left dem machine.
I can only imagine what goes through your head "serving under" this Pretender-in-Chief.
-
I'm a civilian, often working for a Navy captain in logistics.
And as to chadstallion, the opinions of more than just a minority of members in the military should be considered.
unless the minority are your superior officers... ;)
-
Your not seeing alot of gay servicemembers coming out and saying they want this, ur seeing alot of ex-servicemen coming out. These people broke a reg and got bounced, they have an axe to grind. Until massive amounts of below flag rank officers and senior NCO's say they want it, then the fight will be intense. Retired military who will never have to deal with this crap don't really impress me. They don't have to deal with it. Barry could bring gays "out" with an executive order, much like Truman did but he won't. Obama is not a leader he's a telepromoter addicted creation of the Far Left dem machine.
at the time, I doubt that if servicemen were asked, a majority of them would have said NO to have blacks in the forces.
-
I can only imagine what goes through your head "serving under" this Pretender-in-Chief.
probably: what are his orders and jobs and what are the best way to carry them out.
-
at the time, I doubt that if servicemen were asked, a majority of them would have said NO to have blacks in the forces.
Many didn't like it and we had major issues with this through Vietnam. U can't revise history on this one...we had issues. It was better that it was done prior to Korea. But Black soldiers had served...and done very well. There aren't all gay battalions of truck drivers..or infantry units or p-51 fighter squadrons. This won't be gradual...this will be all or nothing and minority groups inside the US Military aren't gonna find kinship with gays because they're minorities...people are uncomfortable with gays, regardless of color.
-
Sorry but you are wrong regarding animal behavior. Take a Coleacanth for instance, it has not changed in 365 million years whatsoever, nor its habitat it survives in.
The Coeclacanth was supposed to be either extinct or evolved into some other critter. But that was shown to be patently false.
-
The only one I have ever seen benefit from gay sex is my friend who is a surgeon who has to sew up torn assholes in the ER.
She makes great money from gay men sticking their peckers everywhere is doesnt belong.
Are you saying homos have bigger dicks than heteros?
-
Are you saying homos have bigger dicks than heteros?
I should have phrased that differently since its not only that that caused the assholes to rip apart.
-
Are you saying homos have bigger dicks than heteros?
SHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH !!!! that's supposed to be a secret!
-
Reciprocal Altrusim, Sexual alliance, Social Bonding Mechanism, Hierarchical dominance in competing groups, Sexual practice,Group bonding, Group cohesion, Pleasure as in Bonobos and other Primates, Tension Diffusion among groups. All of these things have furthered the spread of Homo sapien genes as a sort of result from such behavior. (No Homo!) I will go into more detail later. I am eating Key Lime Pie and having some fun on here before its off to the gym.
LOL the same could be said for any action could you be any more vague...
also alot of the things you mentioned are socially engineered homosexuality is genetic remember?
-
So wait, the military is now a democracy where a majority get to vote on issues? Because that's kind of what skip etc are trying to say. Here i was thinking it was the heads and commanders who made the decisions. Weird. So what happens when you are under fire? Do you all vote on the appropriate action now?
-
Easy. Pick an animal that has stayed relatively the same for millions of years and observe it. Its behavior will not be any different especially in something like a DragonFly or a Whiptail Lizard or Shark.
Of course you wouldn`t even have to do that as you could observe an animal, its mating habits, ecology and then compare with its closest ancestor and do the same and so on. You could even anaylze at the Molecular level and compare DNA and divergence of living or even extinct animals. We are all cousins of every living thing you see on earth and share the same DNA. The more similar the DNA, the closer we are related and the less and more recent we have diverged.
You do realize that Humans lived at the same time as Many other species of humanoid (Homo) Such as Neanderthalensis which we could not mate with and which did outnumber us initially until they died out. They were nearly as intelligent as we are now and we both competed for the same resources. In fact, their large brains and bodies needed around 4000-5000 calories a day and once we encroached, they could not sustain themselves whatsoever as we gobbled up their resources and hence we watched them die out so to speak.
(http://i.livescience.com/images/060508_human_evolution_02.jpg)
LOL WOW :o the very fact you think these are facts is amazing :-X
I dont know what theory you are working with but the idea that an animal acts exactly like it does now as it did millions of years ago is asinine. The idea that humans act as we do now millions of years ago is impossible as we modern humans didnt come about until about 250k years ago...nice try though
Neanderthals were no where near as intelligent as we are now ::) but you are right I believe they did have the biggest brain sizes but brain size doesnt correlate to intelligence a prime example being your grandiose sized dome and your average intelligence. Nobody knows exactly why the neanderthals died out that is unless you get your facts from the history channel or wiki. There is actually a theory that neanderthals did indeed breed with modern humans in small mostly unsuccesful amounts which have led to immunity to certain diseases, red hair etc...
Seriously TA have you ever tried sales bro? Im certain you would make a great sales man, even when your facts are wrong you present them with confidence and certainty which is the main part of sales. If your facts were spot on then I think you would be very succesful in some type of sales field.
-
Still trying to get in the womans bathroom aye Tony? Maybe we should call you TonymcCreeper or TonymcShitstain because there is nothing you won't crawl through to peek at those ladies!
finally, Tony can have his request about women's showers/lockers.
2 pics as evidence that co ed showers are already here. Its up to you to find the gyms that allow it.