Trump bans transgenders from military service

[Badger]

IIRC, General Mattis was the driving force behind this, no?  

He pushed back against an outright ban but helped to delay a decision on it. I'm assuming Trump in his tweet "with the generals" was the JCS and SecDef. Curious to see how that one was decided, split or unanimous.

Yeah I mean I'm not really behind this decision but I doubt Trump just decided on his own without both the JCS and Mattis supporting it.

I doubt JCS and Mattis had much to do with the decision. I mean after all...Trump knows more than the generals

This is true. C'mon. George. I know you enjoy and endlessly defend Trump's ability to trigger libs with $hitty governance and beliefs, but even you have to admit he has shown less than zero ability, let alone interest in seriously consulting anyone actually involved or knowledgeable about policy as opposed to his innermost circle or knee jerk instinct.

I believed this even BEFORE reading the quote from a Trump spokesman that this isn't just simple old guy transphobia, but using such bigotry for naked electoral politics.

Bluntly put, as usual he's lying, and I suspect because you're far from stupid that you reluctantly know it.

[Badger]

Meh, when I enlisted you couldn't even be openly gay. This isn't that controversial to me or many other people.

Because you have repeatedly demonstrated not just lack of empathy, but outright outright hostility towards anyone different than you.

Maybe if you hadn't washed out and gotten to actually know people of different backgrounds long term, you wouldn't be so blaise about so many soldiers and potential soldiers being fu%#ed by the their own Commander in Chief. As it stands though, feel free to remain in your safe little bubble.

[Badger]

Meh, when I enlisted you couldn't even be openly gay. This isn't that controversial to me or many other people.

So what? It's controversial for people who are now barred from serving.

I'm sorry but I feel these things are just social experiments of the left.

I'm sorry, but considering this situation apparently hasn't been a problem recently,  how is this not a social expediment of the right?

Not a hypothetical question. I urge you to try,for once go defend yourself beyond buzzwords.

[Badger]

Meh, when I enlisted you couldn't even be openly gay. This isn't that controversial to me or many other people.

Because you have repeatedly demonstrated not just lack of empathy, but outright outright hostility towards anyone different than you.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ALE6ENavvJQ

So you admit to basing your personal views on someone who was a meant to be a parody of a know-nothing bigot?

I would normally accuse someone of trolling, but unfortunately your entire Post history indicates that you really truly are that dense.

[Badger]

Either Badger or Reaganfan needs to change their avatar or just quit arguing.  I can't figure out who is who.  

Good to know I am not the only one who has this issue.

It's easy. I'm not a bigoted moron

[Badger]

uhh...it turns out that Trump may have just been lying as usual:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm shocked I tell you. Shocked!

[Badger]

Meh, when I enlisted you couldn't even be openly gay. This isn't that controversial to me or many other people.

Because you have repeatedly demonstrated not just lack of empathy, but outright outright hostility towards anyone different than you.

Pot, meet kettle.

If you mean people of different ideologies or backgrounds, I have very close friends and people whom I respect across the ideological Spectrum, from people who make you look like a Sanders supporter, to my partner who is an avowed Democratic Socialist dash dash I'll be at a gun-toting veteran as well. I deal with people every week if not every day from every racial and cultural background needing help, and have never treated any of them differently, right down to the client whose mother angrily called me a cracker white ass b**** because I didn't make the serious drug charges that the cops caught hit her son on tape red-handed and he confessed to all go away instead he wanted up serving five and a half years instead of the maximum 40 theoretically could have gotten

Now if you mean I don't deal with people different from in that I have an extremely low tolerance for bigots, fools, and morons who rely on catchphrases rather than anything approaching actual intellectual rigor, then yes absolutely.

Which is incidentally why you and I don't talk much.

(Drops mike)

[Badger]

NYT article on it https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/26/us/politics/trump-transgender-military.html

They pointed out that this was done on the anniversary of Truman's integration order. Doubtful that that was just a coincidence.

Oh, that would assume Trump or anyone in his administration has a clue about history. It was instead just a happy coincidence reminding people that bigots have always been on the losing end of History

[Badger]

I can see the court case (if one happens) to base it on discrimination of procedures, singling out one vs. allowance of all care, esp if done via TriCare/VA/base hospitals. Does the DoD have the right to prefer certain care in the overall structure as opposed to all? Would be an interesting SCOTUS case.

This one's not getting fast tracked to SCOTUS.......and it will be interesting to see if they even want to go there.

When Slick Willy created Don't Ask Don't Tell he repeatedly won in the federal courts!

Good thing it's still 1994, right Stormfront?

[Badger]

Now if you mean I don't deal with people different from in that I have an extremely low tolerance for bigots, fools, and morons who rely on catchphrases rather than anything approaching actual intellectual rigor, then yes absolutely.

That's how you leftists (I know you're a Republican for some strange reason, but let's call a spade a spade) describe everyone who dares to disagree with you.

Ad hominems are not arguments.

Which is incidentally why you and I don't talk much.

Fine by me.

Patently wrong. There are intelligent conservatives on this forum whom I have no problem respecting their arguments.

When certain twats can't even put two coherent thoughts together, they are treated as fool's regardless of their ideology

This isn't a liberal conservative divide, trust me I'm not sure which side I'd be on there. Though definitely not the social conservative God is a Republican type you represent assuredly. This is simply the fact I don't suffer fools, and sadly most of them on this forum are in fact conservatives. Even when I disagree with liberals or even moderates, they are generally, though obviously not exclusively, much much much better with explaining their position coherently and persuasively to see at least the kernel of truth behind it than most conservatives here could manage in a thousand years

[Badger]

"Jesus Christ is the only way to Heaven. Accept Him as your Savior now."

Sounds "tolerant" to me!

What's ''intolerant'' about that? Anyone can accept that offer, including you.

At the risk of sounding like I'm pandering to Thomas just to prove him wrong in our spat a couple posts up, he's absolutely right about that hardly being representative of intolerance. Even though I am a Christian who believes there are many paths to the top of the mountain, seeking one to accept Jesus Christ it's hardly intolerant.

Now, seeking to impose governmental restrictions on a certain group of people because of a few select passages from the Old Testament to cloak just naked bigotry which many Christian denominations don't accept maybe another matter.

[Badger]

Edit: Why did you delete your previous comment? Are you scared of discussion or something?

I realized that it might be hypocritical for me to criticize Badger for his grammar right after criticizing him for using ad hominems.

If I were scared of debate, why would I be posting on a forum that is dominated by people who strongly disagree with my views?

Yeah, and I sort of owe you an apology for that this is why you and I don't talk crack. UC tamas though I disagree with your social conservatism and sometimes find your arguments defending them lacking, you do in fact rise above the moron category (usually ) if nothing else you have usually-- more often than I at least-- been a gentleman in your debates despite as you point out being on the distinct minority.

The fact that no one in the mod cave during my time there ever even whispered a word about banning you demonstrates that being a right-wing social conservative will never get you banned here, and the fact no one has ever brought up the subject of banning naso demonstrates being an a****** won't do it either.

[Badger]

Anyways, next order of business.

Yes. Reversing this order.

[Badger]

This is just pandering to social conservatives.

[Weak Theory - probably not true but interesting to think about] Maybe the GOP were worried about the more populist tone of the Democrats taking back some of the working-class going into 2018, so they wanted to pass this bill to increase the loyalty of working-class social conservatives.

Probably not. The party isn't at that point yet when they can take back a lot of populist leaning voters, especially with Schumer and Pelosi at the helm

What about non-Trump Republicans is populist again? Maybe SoCon populists for Evangelical nuts

As pointed out earlier in this thread, that's not a theory, but ugly fact.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Badger]

Making America Sane Again.

Really Stormfront?

[Badger]

What a disgrace from our Bigot-In-Chief.