Not that my opinion matters, but my problem was not with DaDT, but with how Clinton presented it—as a "reasonable compromise/MORALE ETC"...
-
-
Replying to @emilynussbaum
rather than, "This compromise is meant to protect gay soldiers to the extent that we can right now, but they deserve full civil rights."
2 replies 1 retweet 13 likes -
Replying to @emilynussbaum
People may respond "But it was a different time!" Not really. The polls before Clinton showed SUPPORT for gay rights in the military...
1 reply 1 retweet 10 likes -
Replying to @emilynussbaum
It was actually the one gay rights issue w support, because it was an employment issue & there were these public, out heroic media figures.
3 replies 0 retweets 8 likes -
Replying to @emilynussbaum
After he was elected, media pushback started, all those stories about "what about the showers??" I get the compromise, but not the rhetoric.
2 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @emilynussbaum
Sorry I'm rambling on this, I've just never liked the hand-waving, Oh well, the 90s, very homophobic. That's way simpler than what happened.
3 replies 0 retweets 16 likes -
Replying to @emilynussbaum
Anyway, none of this has to do with Hillary. It has to do with BILL. But I do think it's important not to hand-wave it all away.
5 replies 0 retweets 10 likes -
Replying to @emilynussbaum
@emilynussbaum I actually think the "compromise" answer is ~far~ more legitimate a response as to DADT than it is to DOMA.2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes
@emilynussbaum Clinton was stuck between the Republicans, the generals, & Sam Nunn — all of whom were ready & willing to make a fool of him.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.