Posted on 04/20/2010 9:07:39 AM PDT by NMEwithin
Gay rights protesters interrupted President Barack Obama's speech at a fundraiser for California Sen. Barbara Boxer (D) Monday night in Los Angeles.
Activists from a group called GetEQUAL began shouting at Obama while he was speaking at the podium. They expressed frustration over the slow progress of repealing the ban on openly gay people serving in the military.
The protests brought the speech to a halt, and the protesters did not lower their voices after others in the crowd urged them to end their shouting. "What about 'Don't ask, don't tell?'" one protester shouted, according to a White House pool report. Obama yelled back: "We are going to do that."
Obama then raised his voice to speak over the protesters. "We are going to repeal don't ask, don't tell," Obama said.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
He was really ticked off because he couldn’t give his speech. You should have seen the look in his eyes. I’m surprised he didn’t call out security.
Will the media portray the protesters as violent and anti-government?
It was pretty interesting to watch. You could almost see the steam coming out of his Dumbo ears. Dear Leader ‘was not amused’.
This is a BS show to give cover to Obami so that we get the impression he isn’t that radically leftist.
Oh man. They probably stay awake all night dreaming about those tight, little, mean, lean killing machine butts in the military. They want to give the term "military service" a whole new meaning!
Where was the “Tea-Baggers Disrupt President” headline?
they showed a clip on fox this morning where obama in his arrogant attitude pointed a finger and said to them...you want to come down here...??...almost like he challenged them even though he new they would never make it to the podium....
That’s hilarious.
Obama yelled back: "We are going to do that."
"We are going to repeal don't ask, don't tell," Obama said.
"Can I just say again Barbara and I are supportive of repealing don't ask, don't tell," Obama responded.
Now contrast that with how he responds to Mom and Pop Americana as they show up at the public Tea Party events to give voice to their desire to stop 0bama's socialists in their tracks.
IIRC, there is a law that was passed by Congress and signed by Clinton that requires the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy.
I don’t think Obamao can overturn a law with an Executive Order.
Of course, violating the law seems to be awfully easy for this particular bunch of crooked lawyers.
Were they mostly white and mostly male?
Well, that must be the problem. :)
we noticed that too. He gets very angry. That comes with the job. Now he knows how President Bush and others have felt when that happens.
LOL My thinking exactly
I cannot believe the lack of civility !! Interupting the President of the United States as he is trying to speak!
/snark
On the subject of “don’t ask, don’t tell”, I sent the following letter to U.S. Naval Institute Proceedings.
Regarding homosexuality, Lieutenant Whipps and LtCdr Craven III rely for foundational credibility on the 1973 decision by the American Psychological Association (APA) to remove homosexuality from its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM). Removal responded to a two year campaign Newsweek described as ongoing disruptive, chaotic attacks on psychiatrists and physiologists. Yet at this annual meeting and throughout this period of disruptive attacks, no papers were presented refuting any research previously done. Eventually a third of APA’s 17,000 plus membership voted for removal. The under-voting and public attacks support the understanding that the decision came through intimidation, and not as a result of scientific reasoning. Now rather than undergoing the mental stress and discipline of research, an interest group could publicly market their claim and tailor the DSM to fit their agenda.
After this mercurial, but unsubstantiated, decision a task force was established to ensure perpetual sanctity for this APA action. No papers would again arise to confirm the extensive prior research substantiating 7 of 10 homosexuals could walk away from the lifestyle forever. This new task force would set standards for peer review of articles to ensure appropriate flexibility in design definitions, outcomes, and analytical models. Acceptable pre-ordained theses would compile selected human data points, using selected questions and behaviors, and arrive at pre-approved incites.
Psychology and Psychiatry have always had a tenuous hold on claims they were sciences with the standing of Chemistry and Physics. On the scale of intellectual rigor, their research more often resembles oral history, and seldom, if ever, approaches the determinism found in a Chemistry laboratory.
The developments in statistics should have enabled them to a least determine there is a marginal or significant propensity for a particular disorder. Careful studies could have identified and graded methods of treatment. Given persistence in searching for correct methods of analysis, even accumulated episodic events could be sifted for transformation into valid information. Research would have proceeded more slowly and conclusions would have been less intuitive, but more stable. The disciplines would more often have adhered to the medical principle of “first of all, do no harm”. Responsible research should also acknowledge those pesky humans, who in spite of their genetics and upbringing, decide to live positive lives without APA professional help.
Instead, Psychology and Psychiatry have chosen to abandon all pretense of scientific rigor in exchange for popular societal and political acclaim. The barriers erected to meaningful research about homosexuality remind me of Genesis 3:23-24. In these verses the Lord God banished humanity from the Garden of Eden and placed an angel in the Garden to keep humanity away forever. By their actions, Psychology and Psychiatry appear content within their own Garden of Eden. They seem to consider the accoutrements of a religion to be more attractive than those of a science.
The current debate languishes for the inability of these two disciplines to make a meaningful contribution. They should lead a debate, which would examine whether any mental disorders are acceptable for people seeking or retaining military service. Military service should always be the ultimate meritocracy to compete successfully against enemies unconcerned with social engineering.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.