[GeneV]

There is nothing new under the the sun:

"Give us Barabbas!"
Matthew 27:15-23

It is an interesting contradiction how these folks who oppose the tax penalty in the ACA for failing to purchase insurance seem so enthusiastic about effectively making the same transgression a capital offense. When you combine it with the reaction to the executions in Texas, you could almost conclude these debate crowds want to go back to hanging horse thieves.

[boriscleto]

From America's last progressive lawmaker.

Daily Kos: Is Poverty a Death Sentence?

[jeffkrol]

Texas Gov. Rick Perry apparently will not be the one to preside over Thursday's scheduled execution of an African American man who was sentenced to die after jurors were told that blacks are more likely to pose a future danger to the public.

Perry won't preside over scheduled Texas execution - latimes.com
Followup..........

[boriscleto]

This story says it all: conservatives really don't care about anyone who isn't rich. Even the people working for them. When Ron Paul was asked by Wolf Blitzer if a person should simply be left to die in his world view, the audience cheered and Paul gave a sickening response.

That's What Freedom is All About: Ron Paul's Former Campaign Manager Had No Health Insurance, Got Sick and Died in Debt | Crooks and Liars

[Nesster]

"You have brains in your head. You have feet in your shoes. You can steer yourself in any direction you choose. You're on your own. And you know what you know. You are the guy who'll decide where to go.” -Dr. Seuss, the closet libertatian.

[jeffkrol]

"You have brains in your head. You have feet in your shoes. You can steer yourself in any direction you choose. You're on your own. And you know what you know. You are the guy who'll decide where to go.” -Dr. Seuss, the closet libertatian.

Thanks.. You now made the Scott Walker- Dr. Seuss connection for me............
The Scott Walker Reading Club: Inadvertently subverting our kids with leftist ideas | Uppity Wisconsin

Beyond all that, the huge irony here is that Dr. Seuss is pretty far to the left of Walker in his stories and themes, according to Michael Kazin, professor of history at Georgetown University, who calls the late Theodore Geisel, who wrote as Seuss, one of his favorite American leftists. From Salon.com:

I have been made fun of recently for saying this, but I think Dr. Seuss has been greatly overlooked as a leftist. He wasn't a propagandist, but many of his best-selling books -- like "Yertle the Turtle," "The Lorax" and "The Butter Battle Book" -- show that he had a leftist political message. Most successful political messages come from people who aren't very closely associated with a particular left-wing group.

Trick-sy these Hobbits............

[GeneV]

They are at it again, booing a pretty tough-looking Iraq veteran who asked a video question about his need to hide the fact that he is gay.

[Jasvox]

The hatred and embarrassment keeps on rolling. I wonder how many of those who boo'd, in the audience or at home would develop a sudden lisp and sense of style if the draft was reinstated?

Jason

[newarts]

Santorum's initial response contained a sound logical core I thought. The fundamental issue is not one of gayness or straightness; rather he implied it was a matter of avoiding sex in a unit. I'd modify that to be a broader issue of romantic bonds within a unit.

Tight (esp secret) romantic bonds within a unit will certainly lead to divided loyalties which are clearly to be avoided in times of peril.

The inclusion of gay men (or straight women) into male units will increase the probability of romantic entanglements; it is such entanglements which must be avoided.

DADT increased the probability of secret romantic relationships in units so it is wise to discontinue the practice and replace it with strict prohibition of romance/sex within an operational unit.

[Chwisch87]

Santorum's initial response contained a sound logical core I thought. The fundamental issue is not one of gayness or straightness; rather he implied it was a matter of avoiding sex in a unit. I'd modify that to be a broader issue of romantic bonds within a unit.

Tight (esp secret) romantic bonds within a unit will certainly lead to divided loyalties which are clearly to be avoided in times of peril.

The inclusion of gay men (or straight women) into male units will increase the probability of romantic entanglements; it is such entanglements which must be avoided.

DADT increased the probability of secret romantic relationships in units so it is wise to discontinue the practice and replace it with strict prohibition of romance/sex within an operational unit.

Umm.. Where to start? Mr. Santorum has never made logical argument in his life. When you talk about a gay person, Mr. Santorum only seems two men kissing one another. He can only think of it in the context of sex. And trust me it is a fundamental issue to him.. He would love nothing more than to insure that gays and lesbians had absolutely no legal recognition or protection as a minority.

The fact that many of these men will now come out of the closet will mean that there will be no secrets .. or divided loyalist hah (thats a good one lol). The military had a study all the way back in the 1950s that concluded having gay men and women in the army would basically be a complete non-issue. And I can promise you there has been love in the trenches since the man kind first discovered war... doesn't seem to cause much of an issue.

Gays in the military has been studied to death and there is not a SINGLE peer-reviewed study that has shown there would be any detrimental effects to allowing gay people in the military.

The problem is not romance.. god knows we need more of it. The problem is sexual assaults... It is a staggering statistic of how many people have been raped by a fellow solider.

You cannot ban sex... thinking you can is just ... stupid.

[grhazelton]

The problem is not romance.. god knows we need more of it. The problem is sexual assaults... It is a staggering statistic of how many people have been raped by a fellow solider.

And with the prevailing climate until the demise of Don't Ask Don't Tell those rapes and assaults were overwhelmingly heterosexual. I wonder what Mr Santorum has to say about that?

[GeneV]

Honestly, these debates are starting to be infomercials for the President's re-election.

Most sex between members of the military is heterosexual. This goes all the way back to those wacky movies about WWII GIs ogling the WACs and WAVEs. There have always been gay and lesbian soldiers. If any soldier makes an unwelcome advance on any other soldier of any gender, the result should be the same.

[newarts]

Honestly, these debates are starting to be infomercials for the President's re-election.

Most sex between members of the military is heterosexual. This goes all the way back to those wacky movies about WWII GIs ogling the WACs and WAVEs. There have always been gay and lesbian soldiers. If any soldier makes an unwelcome advance on any other soldier of any gender, the result should be the same.

Even individually welcome romantic relationships within an operational unit are to be avoided. That's even common wisdom even in business organizations.

What's fundamentally being avoided is what Chwisch87 derides as "divided loyalist" (divided loyalties). Especially in times of peril it is crucial that people in an operational unit act in a predictable manner defined by the rules of the organization - not by incidental affairs of the heart.

[Just1MoreDave]

Even individually welcome romantic relationships within an operational unit are to be avoided. That's even common wisdom even in business organizations.

What's fundamentally being avoided is what Chwisch87 derides as "divided loyalist" (divided loyalties). Especially in times of peril it is crucial that people in an operational unit act in a predictable manner defined by the rules of the organization - not by incidental affairs of the heart.

Exactly. We can't have this sort of thing, which was completely against orders.

Not to say that this Medal of Honor recipient did this for any reason except to help out his friends. But isn't that exactly the circumstances you suggest above?

[newarts]

Exactly. We can't have this sort of thing, which was completely against orders.

Not to say that this Medal of Honor recipient did this for any reason except to help out his friends. But isn't that exactly the circumstances you suggest above?

He did exactly what we'd hope to see - he went to the aid of his unit - his friends.

What we do not want to see is for him to unexpectedly abandon his unit and instead go to the aid of his lover.

A unit trusts and depends on the loyalty of all its members; an inter-unit romantic entanglement can break that trust.

I really don't see that anything I said relates to his heroic actions; please let me know.