Berkeley council tells Marines to leave

[king6]

I would expect that from Berkley. Berkley is the Meca of liberal hippie fvcks.

[brewerpi]

Nope.

The Marines should get over their fear of gay people.

True or False-
"Don't ask don't tell" the law that the Marines are following was given to us by a congress controlled by the Democrats and signed in to law by the "gay friendly" president Bill Clinton?
Perhaps Berkeley should take it up with the Democrats?

[brewerpi]

We will all have some excitement come this time next year (in Feb. 2009). The Democratic presidential candidates have all said they'll undo the Don't Ask Don't Tell law, and integrate the military. My guess is that we'll have a Democratic President next January, and a Democratic Senate and Congress, and they won't threaten to retaliate the way the Republican Senate and Congress did back when Clinton tried to integrate the military.

And a lot of gays and lesbians are gonna get hurt, some are gonna be murdered, all because some heterosexuals can't stand gays.

? The Republicans did NOT control congress when Clinton was elected-look it up...

[Tock]

True or False-
"Don't ask don't tell" the law that the Marines are following was given to us by a congress controlled by the Democrats and signed in to law by the "gay friendly" president Bill Clinton?
Perhaps Berkeley should take it up with the Democrats?

Clinton said he was going to issue an Executive Order requiring the military to integrate the military. The Senate and Congress both said that if he did, they'd undo his Executive Order, and then make things a lot worse for gays who were in the military. And yes, both the Senate and the Congress were controlled by Democrats.

Before DADT, if a gay soldier volunteered that he was gay, then they'd usually kick him out with an honorable discharge, as long as he wasn't having sex with anyone. But if they found out about him first, then they'd kick him out with a dishonorable discharge (try getting a job with something like that on your DD214), unless he was caught having sex, and then they might put him in a military prison for a while, before kicking him out. And then give him a dishonorable discharge.
Me, I told the USAF that I was gay back in 1977, and that I wanted to stay in (I kept a diary during that little adventure; one of these days I'll have to tell my story). They took 3 months to figure out what they were going to do with me. Meanwhile, I continued to live in the barracks, and whenever anyone asked me why they Commanding Officer releived me of duty and had me doing yardwork, I told them what was going on. Without exception, they were 100% supportive.

Clinton had the Pentegon work up a compromise between his position and the Republican's. They came up with DADT. Clinton asked the two openly gay congressmen at the time for their opinion. Barney Frank said take the compromise, Gerry Studds said don't compromise. The rest is history.


Here's an interesting look at what was going on at the time:
http://dont.stanford.edu/regulations/briefing.pdf


And here's an interesting article on the subject by Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don%27t...C_don%27t_tell



And, yes, the Marines need to get over their fear of gay people.
NATO countries allow gays to serve in their Armed Forces, so whenever NATO troops and US troops work together, US troops will be in contact with gay people anyway . . .

[breacherup]

I was doing an exchange with the US Army at the time, therefore I don't have any trouble remembering what was going on at the time.
The Democrat's were in charge-Sam Nunn a Democrat from Georgia was Chairman of the Armed Services Committe, he opposed gays in the military. You can blame the Republicans all you want, but the Democrats were in charge, they held a majority in both the House and the Senate, therefore they are responsible for what happened.

By the way if you think Hillary or Obama are going to expend political capitol on repealing DADT, you are dreaming.

[Tock]

Tock this is the National Guard....you were talking about the Marine Corps. I could have told you that the Army's recruiting standards have lowered somewhat.

Here's more information about declining standards at the US Army. Since the Army is bigger than the Marines, that means that the problem is that much worse.

If you prefer that the military "scrape the bottom of the barrell" to find recruits, and kick out gay soldiers with outstanding service records instead, well, good for you. But it won't be good for the country.


http://www.slate.com:80/id/2182752/?gt1=10935

Dumb and DumberThe U.S. Army lowers recruitment standards … again.

By Fred Kaplan
Posted Thursday, Jan. 24, 2008, at 5:25 PM ET

The Army is lowering recruitment standards to levels not seen in at least two decades, and the implications are severe—not only for the future of the Army, but also for the direction of U.S. foreign policy.

The latest statistics—compiled by the Defense Department. and obtained through the Freedom of Information Act by the Boston-based National Priorities Project—are grim. They show that the percentage of new Army recruits with high-school diplomas has plunged from 94 percent in 2003 to 83.5 percent in 2005 to 70.7 percent in 2007. (The Pentagon's longstanding goal is 90 percent.)

The percentage of what the Army calls "high-quality" recruits—those who have high-school diplomas and who score in the upper 50th percentile on the Armed Forces' aptitude tests—has declined from 56.2 percent in 2005 to 44.6 percent in 2007

In order to meet recruitment targets, the Army has even had to scour the bottom of the barrel. There used to be a regulation that no more than 2 percent of all recruits could be "Category IV"—defined as applicants who score in the 10th to 30th percentile on the aptitude tests. In 2004, just 0.6 percent of new soldiers scored so low. In 2005, as the Army had a hard time recruiting, the cap was raised to 4 percent. And in 2007, according to the new data, the Army exceeded even that limit—4.1 percent of new recruits last year were Cat IVs.

These trends are worrisome in at least four ways.

First, and most broadly, it's not a good idea—for a host of social, political, and moral reasons—to place the burdens of national defense so disproportionately on the most downtrodden citizens.

Second, and more practically, high-school dropouts tend to drop out of the military, too. The National Priorities Project cites Army studies finding that 80 percent of high-school graduates finish their first terms of enlistment in the Army—compared with only about half of those with a General Equivalency Degree or no diploma. In other words, taking in more dropouts is a short-sighted method of boosting recruitment numbers. The Army will just have to recruit even more young men and women in the next couple of years, because a lot of the ones they recruited last year will need to be replaced.

Third, a dumber army is a weaker army. A study by the RAND Corporation, commissioned by the Pentagon and published in 2005, evaluated several factors that affect military performance—experience, training, aptitude, and so forth—and found that aptitude is key. This was true even of basic combat skills, such as shooting straight. Replacing a tank gunner who had scored Category IV with one who'd scored Category IIIA (in the 50th to 64th percentile) improved the chances of hitting a target by 34 percent.
Today's Army, of course, is much more high-tech, from top to bottom. The problem is that when tasks get more technical, aptitude makes an even bigger difference. In one Army study cited by the RAND report, three-man teams from the Army's active-duty signal battalions were told to make a communications system operational. Teams consisting of Category IIIA personnel had a 67 percent chance of succeeding. Teams with Category IIIB soldiers (who had ranked in the 31st to 49th percentile) had a 47 percent chance. Those with Category IVs had only a 29 percent chance. The study also showed that adding a high-scoring soldier to a three-man team increased its chance of success by 8 percent. (This also means that adding a low-scoring soldier to a team reduces its chance by a similar margin.)

Fourth, today's Army needs particularly bright soldiers—and it needs, even more, to weed out particularly dim ones—given the direction that at least some of its senior officers want it to take. When the Army was geared to fight large-scaled battles against enemies of comparable strength, imaginative thinking wasn't much required except at a command level. However, now that it's focusing on "asymmetric warfare," especially counterinsurgency campaigns, such as those in Iraq and Afghanistan, the requirements are different. The crucial engagements—in many ways, the crucial decisions—take place in the streets, door to door, not by armored divisions or brigades but by infantry companies and squads. And when the targets include hearts and minds, every soldier's judgment and actions have an impact.

The Army's 2006 field manual on counterinsurgency, which was supervised by Gen. David Petraeus (who is now trying to put its principles into action as U.S. commander in Iraq), emphasized that successful counterinsurgency operations "require Soldiers and Marines at every echelon to possess the following"—and then the authors recite a daunting list of prerequisites, including a "clear, nuanced, and empathetic appreciation of the essential nature of the conflict," an "understanding of the motivation, strengths, and weaknesses of the insurgent," rudimentary knowledge of the local culture, and several other admirable qualities.
Some of the officers and outside specialists who helped Petraeus write the field manual expressed concerns to me, at the time, that the Army—which was just beginning to lower its standards—might not be up to the demands of this kind of warfare. Given that standards have dipped quite dramatically since—and add to that the problems the Army has had in retaining its most talented junior officers—the concerns now must be graver.


It's well-known that the Army might not have enough combat troops to conduct sustained counterinsurgency campaigns. Now it seems the problem may soon be about quality as well as quantity (brains as well as boots).

The main reason for the decline in standards is the war in Iraq and its onerous "operations tempo"—soldiers going back for third and fourth tours of duty, with no end in sight. This is well understood among senior officers, and it's a major reason why several Army generals favor a faster withdrawal rate. They worry that fewer young men and women—and now it seems fewer smart young men and women—will sign up if doing so means a guaranteed assignment to Iraq. They worry that, if these trends continue, the Army itself will start to crumble.


So, there's a double spiral in effect. The war keeps more good soldiers from enlisting. The lack of good candidates compels the Army to recruit more bad candidates. The swelling ranks of ill-suited soldiers make it harder to fight these kinds of wars effectively.

Petraeus and officers who think like him are right: We're probably not going to be fighting on the ground, toe-to-toe and tank-to-tank, with the Russian, Chinese, or North Korean armies in the foreseeable future. Yet if the trends continue, our Army might be getting less and less skilled at the "small wars" we're more likely to fight.

So, we're facing two choices. Either we change the way we recruit soldiers (and, by the way, cash bonuses are already about as bountiful as they're going to get), or we change the way we conduct foreign policy—that is, we engage more actively in diplomacy or, if war is unavoidable, we form genuine coalitions to help fight it. Otherwise, unless our most dire and direct interests are at stake, we should forget about fighting at all.

[peteroy01]

I have been on the other side of the fence, and your the kind of guy that goes over to Iraq to prove something to himself, then comes home and thinks everyone owes you something and no one else is as good as you. You want my opinion since you said everyone else that didn't go over doesn't matter. Well my opinion is your an arrogant, asshole! Have some F'n respect for someone that served. What was your MOS? Who where you with? For all we know you were a Marine, that sat at IPAC and played on the computer all day. The Airforce was there when we called in Fixed Wing support around Fallujah and Ramadi. The airforce brought us in to Al asad Airbase to get into the fight, and flew us back out of country. They dropped supplies, did logistics, provided all kinds of things what made the Grunt's jobs possible. You think 6-10 mags of 5.56 and a pair of NVG's are all you need to fight the good fight. Your wrong and you don't give credit where its due. We talked a lot of Sh#t to the Navy Corpsmen, but when my buddy lost both of his arms when an RPG hit his SAW mount it was the Navy guy and not the Marines that kept his cool and got on the Helo and probably saved his life. We can't do it with out them, and they can't do it with out us.

you pulled my card so, my MOS was a USMC Scout/Sniper 1bn 2nd mar with 2 tours. what was yours? and i dont owe anybody anything and nobody owes me anything. im not the guy that thinks he is better than everybody else. i dont even tell people i was in but the big hole in my arm is always something that gets questioned? hell when people ask me what i did i always say, just a grunt, or i was in the 32nd type writer batt. cause if i say sniper then i get loads of dumb azz questions like-whats your count? what does it feel like? blah blah blah.... and i didnt say anything about the navy. your right about the docs, they are the sh1t. but what im getting at is the USAF is ran more like a business then a branch of the military. and the phrase "fighting for your country" is just getting a little to diluted from what it used to mean. and of course there are always exceptions, but for the most part im sticking to my guns. and as for your demanded of respect, ill give it out when i think its been earned.

[peteroy01]

another thing. your the one that said "your the kind of guy that goes over to Iraq to prove something to himself, then comes home and thinks everyone owes you something and no one else is as good as you." but it seems your the one that is demanding that respect(the owe people part) be given out to anybody that has signed the line. so..........

[thegodfather]

and whats seriously wrong with saying that i think the USAF is a joke? have you guys served? if not, then your opinion means chicken sh1t to me. you guys are flaming me on my opinion and ive been on the other side of the fence. have you? so go put another little yellow ribbon magnet on the back of your cars and ill go buff my purple heart license plate.

I dont recall "flaming" you. That would entail name calling and rude behavior. I was simply refuting your OPINION about another branch of the military, or more specifically your logic behind it. It's a very narrow minded viewpoint to be honest. We could argue the semantics of whos contribution is worth more all night. You call them a joke, do you think the same of logistics positions in the Army? Marines? Etc... I would argue that all of those positions are essential for you to have been able to do your job. I think ANYONE who signs up to serve, and to be away from their families for 1+ year is has made a worthwhile contribution. It doesn't take me actually having served to be able to realize that. Dont patronize me because I made the choice to goto college directly out of high school, to be a doctor no less.

I thank you for your contribution. However, I refuse to ignore ignorance and disrespect when I see it, and I will call it out when I do and make my stance known. Perhaps you should use the G.I. Bill and become a little more educated yourself, so as to become more tolerant of other people and their backgrounds, and maybe more appreciative of the lives that other people have chosen. Then you might realize that no matter what path any of us chose, we all make a worthwhile contribution to society in some manner, be it joining the military and defending our country, becoming a laborer, carpenter, electrician, doctor, lawyer, politician, scientist, and the list goes on.

I get rather annoyed when I hear people that served saying that others opinions "mean nothing" until they have served either. I had hoped that the people defending my freedoms had more tolerance and integrity than you have shown. I would hope the people defending the principles that this country was founded on would actually espouse those principles in their thinking, personality, and conduct in conversation with others. So my hopes seem to be unfulfilled.

[dhriscerr]

you pulled my card so, my MOS was a USMC Scout/Sniper 1bn 2nd mar with 2 tours. what was yours? and i dont owe anybody anything and nobody owes me anything. im not the guy that thinks he is better than everybody else. i dont even tell people i was in but the big hole in my arm is always something that gets questioned? hell when people ask me what i did i always say, just a grunt, or i was in the 32nd type writer batt. cause if i say sniper then i get loads of dumb azz questions like-whats your count? what does it feel like? blah blah blah.... and i didnt say anything about the navy. your right about the docs, they are the sh1t. but what im getting at is the USAF is ran more like a business then a branch of the military. and the phrase "fighting for your country" is just getting a little to diluted from what it used to mean. and of course there are always exceptions, but for the most part im sticking to my guns. and as for your demanded of respect, ill give it out when i think its been earned.

I'll give you that and I understand your feelings towards the Airforce, because of the differences between the branches, we both know the difference in living conditions and attitude, especially the fact that a lot of them use first name basis and rank structure is often tossed out the window.

However I never demanded your respect at all for me! I don't need anything from anyone. I'm saying to take his service out of context because he served in the Air Force is kind of bull sh#t. You don't have to give him respect in that you have to look highly upon him, but you don't need to down play his contributions to the service just because of the branch he was in. Maybe it is some misscomunication and misconception on how I and others precieved your comment and how you ment it but from my vantage point it looked like your saying his contributions being in the A.F. don't mean sh#t becasue it's not hard. So maybe he doesn't have a C.A.R or whatever the equivalent is for the A.F. or maybe he doesn't even have a campainge badge, but that doesn't mean he didn't give his contribution to defending the country.

I'm not going to try to get in a pissing contest with you, Im sure you saw some crazy shit being a scout sniper and god knows your people saved us more than once. As far as my MOS 0352, attached to 1st Tank BN on the initial invasion in March of 03, and attached to 1st Recon BN during May 04 to Dec 04, Routes Mobile, Boston, Chicago In both Ramadi and Fallujah including the Battle for Fallujah. I got shot in the back in the Turret of our humvee but the SAPI stopped it so I don't have a Purple Heart so you can say you bleed more for our country than me.

[southmadejd]

I got shot in the back in the Turret of our humvee but the SAPI stopped it so I don't have a Purple Heart so you can say you bleed more for our country than me.

Awwwww good ol SAPI plates.....hey were any of you guys over there when they started issuing the side sapi plates....I was a gunner with an MP battalion and it was so funny how none of us wanted them until we all became short timers. They were so freakin uncomfortable. Sorry to stray from the topic a little bit. And to peterroy.....I know when we were all in the Marine Corps, we used to talk a lot of sh-t about the Air Force, but we have to kind of mature out of that at some point. I mean are they pampered way more than us....yes, is their bootcamp only 6 weeks long....yes(that is if you want to call it boot camp). But they play an integral part in supporting OIF and OEF.

[peteroy01]

hey guys, i apologize for being unappreciative for other branches. and i know that everybody contributes to the mission at hand. just been stressed out lately and i shouldnt have taken it out on fellow members here. so again, sorry.

[dhriscerr]

Awwwww good ol SAPI plates.....hey were any of you guys over there when they started issuing the side sapi plates....I was a gunner with an MP battalion and it was so funny how none of us wanted them until we all became short timers. They were so freakin uncomfortable. Sorry to stray from the topic a little bit. And to peterroy.....I know when we were all in the Marine Corps, we used to talk a lot of sh-t about the Air Force, but we have to kind of mature out of that at some point. I mean are they pampered way more than us....yes, is their bootcamp only 6 weeks long....yes(that is if you want to call it boot camp). But they play an integral part in supporting OIF and OEF.

No we didn't have them, none of us wore the nut covers or neck collars either. We didn't even have up armor humvee's either time! The first time we rolled around with the doors off, and the second time after 3 months we got these sapi plate pads, that you hung on the doors! No other armor at all!, Ofcourse the first time IED's weren't really a threat and the second time, they were really just starting to come around, my friends that have been there in 2006-7 and where also there in 2003-04 when I was said the IED's are 100 times worse than before, and their technology with placing them is getting damn good too. They said the fire fights are down alot though, before we were getting into fire fights almost every other or every 3rd time out the gate, but now they are getting all IED's and Suicide bombers. I'll find a picture of the sapi plates on the doors and post it. I know the feeling about short timers, when we were a month out and less from leaving Iraq, everytime we heard motors drop in the tubes outside the gates and heard that good old incoming sound whistling through the air
we were sprinting for the bunkers and shit cowering like little bitches. When the 7 months before we would just stand next to a wall or something. No one wants to make it through 7 months of firefights, ambushes, IED's and everything else to get taken out by a F'n Motor a few days before you return stateside!

[Tock]

Berkeley council tells Marines to leave


Hey-hey, ho-ho, the Marines in Berkeley have got to go.

That's the message from the Berkeley City Council, which voted 6-3 Tuesday night to tell the U.S. Marines that its Shattuck Avenue recruiting station "is not welcome in the city, and if recruiters choose to stay, they do so as uninvited and unwelcome intruders."

Anyway, getting back to the original topic . . .

They passed a resolution stating that the Marine's recruiting station "is not welcome." The City Council didn't tell them, as the news story reports, "the Marines in Berkeley have got to go." They did not tell the local police to put their stuff in a moving van, and dump it on the outskirts of town.

If anyone would care to make a note of it, there's a big difference. It's like the difference between acknowledging that you have an undesirable habit, and actually doing something about it.

[southmadejd]

It's like the difference between acknowledging that you have an undesirable habit, and actually doing something about it.

Tock did you just compare the Marine Corps to being an "undesirable habit"? Come on man. Listen I am sure you have a grudge about what happened to you while you were in the military and for that I am really sorry. I believe if you want to serve your country it shouldn't matter if you are gay or not. Unfortunately I am in the minority about this. And in a perfect world the military would accept gays and let them be open about it in the military....but that day is still far off.

[southmadejd]

A little bit off topic....but were one of the monitors that bored that they felt they had to move this topic to the news and discussions forum where the average of people viewing is like 40 compared to the Lounge where it is around 400 people. How come all of the dumb ass superbowl topics weren't moved to the sports forum. Just seems weird to me.

[RA]

You talk as if this board were a democracy. Let me clue you in...its not

A little bit off topic....but were one of the monitors that bored that they felt they had to move this topic to the news and discussions forum where the average of people viewing is like 40 compared to the Lounge where it is around 400 people. How come all of the dumb ass superbowl topics weren't moved to the sports forum. Just seems weird to me.

[Tock]

Originally Posted by Tock
It's like the difference between acknowledging that you have an undesirable habit, and actually doing something about it.

Tock did you just compare the Marine Corps to being an "undesirable habit"?

Nope, not so much an "undesirable habit" as much as an organization with an undesirable habit.

[RA]

quite so...defending our country, what an undesirable habit

Originally Posted by Tock
It's like the difference between acknowledging that you have an undesirable habit, and actually doing something about it.


Nope, not so much an "undesirable habit" as much as an organization with an undesirable habit.

[Tock]

quite so...defending our country, what an undesirable habit

The undesirable habit I had in mind is the habit of pig-headed bigotry. Blacks, women, and other folks have had a tough time getting into the military. Now it's gay folk's turn. 100 years from now your great-grandkids will wonder what the fuss was all about.

[RA]

Marines are run by the govt...govt elected by us..

Getting mad at the Marines is like getting mad at the mailman who brought you a bill. Stupid.

The undesirable habit I had in mind is the habit of pig-headed bigotry. Blacks, women, and other folks have had a tough time getting into the military. Now it's gay folk's turn. 100 years from now your great-grandkids will wonder what the fuss was all about.

[thegodfather]

Marines are run by the govt...govt elected by us..

Getting mad at the Marines is like getting mad at the mailman who brought you a bill. Stupid.

Did any of those officials ask you your feelings on the Steroid Control Act of 1993?

I know that none of them asked me.

Did President Bush and the rest of his cabinet ask your feelings on whether we should goto war with Iraq and lose 4,000 American lives and kill 1,000,000 Iraqi Civilians?

I dont recall them asking for my input.


Point and case, government officials do whatever the hell they want once they're elected, and after that point aren't accountable to the people for 4 years. Kind of puts your proposed theory right out the window.

[Logan13]

Did any of those officials ask you your feelings on the Steroid Control Act of 1993?

I know that none of them asked me.

Did President Bush and the rest of his cabinet ask your feelings on whether we should goto war with Iraq and lose 4,000 American lives and kill 1,000,000 Iraqi Civilians?

I dont recall them asking for my input.

Point and case, government officials do whatever the hell they want once they're elected, and after that point aren't accountable to the people for 4 years. Kind of puts your proposed theory right out the window.

We live in a Republic, not a Democracy. Whining about the parameters of said system that has been in place since this country was founded accomplishes nothing.

[RA]

I agree with what logan said but Id also like to add that you and I may not like it but most people think steroids should be illegal...

..also most were for the war...

So my "theory" still holds tight.

Did any of those officials ask you your feelings on the Steroid Control Act of 1993?

I know that none of them asked me.

Did President Bush and the rest of his cabinet ask your feelings on whether we should goto war with Iraq and lose 4,000 American lives and kill 1,000,000 Iraqi Civilians?

I dont recall them asking for my input.


Point and case, government officials do whatever the hell they want once they're elected, and after that point aren't accountable to the people for 4 years. Kind of puts your proposed theory right out the window.

[thegodfather]

I agree with what logan said but Id also like to add that you and I may not like it but most people think steroids should be illegal...

..also most were for the war...

So my "theory" still holds tight.

Close to 70% of the population of this country is now opposed to the war, now that the blinders have been lifted from their eyes, and the real numbers on casualties are coming in. Yet, our elected President who is supposed to represent out viewpoints, is continuing on in his warmongering Imperialism... He is really accountable to the people isnt he?

[Tock]

Marines are run by the govt...govt elected by us..

Getting mad at the Marines is like getting mad at the mailman who brought you a bill. Stupid.

So, are you saying that if our elected representatives screw up, since they are our representatives, if they screw up, we can only blame ourselves?

[RA]

I agree things have changed now that the dems have effectively demonized the war..but staying is called leadership. We cant just pull out now and leave that entire country in chaos. That would be really stupid.

But like I said, most people were in favor of the war, including the dems.

Close to 70% of the population of this country is now opposed to the war, now that the blinders have been lifted from their eyes, and the real numbers on casualties are coming in. Yet, our elected President who is supposed to represent out viewpoints, is continuing on in his warmongering Imperialism... He is really accountable to the people isnt he?

[RA]

If something is banned from the military it reflects the popular sentiment of the country, that was my point. Its not the Marines fault.

So, are you saying that if our elected representatives screw up, since they are our representatives, if they screw up, we can only blame ourselves?

[kfrost06]

I really respect you goodcents and you've said a lot of good things, and contributed heavily to this board,

are you joking? unless of course you mean porno and gay sex playing with dsm as contributing to the board.

[kfrost06]

Close to 70% of the population of this country is now opposed to the war, now that the blinders have been lifted from their eyes, and the real numbers on casualties are coming in. Yet, our elected President who is supposed to represent out viewpoints, is continuing on in his warmongering Imperialism... He is really accountable to the people isnt he?

Yes he is accountable to the people and thats why he was re-elected.

[kfrost06]

I'm sorry. I think this is the most ridiculous thing I've ever read... Kicking the Marines out? The very men and woman who've fought for our country since the beginning? Who without their efforts (as well as the other branches of course) we wouldn't be our own little country... Someones not very appreciative of their country, regardless of what is going on now. Some people just don't have any respect at all.

^^^execellent post!

[thegodfather]

If something is banned from the military it reflects the popular sentiment of the country, that was my point. Its not the Marines fault.

Lets not hide our opinions behind the 'popular senitment of the country,' lets hear your opinion on this issue.

[spywizard]

That city has a law prohibiting discrimination against gays. The Marines discriminate against gays. So, they essentially told them that they are not welcome, because they are breaking their law.

Until the Marines can demonstrate why they should prefer convicted felons, thugs, illiterates, and Sabbath-breakers over well-qualified gays (which they do), then IMHO, the city has a reasonable law.

I'd vote the same way, if I was there.

You know it wasn't too long ago that Illegal laws were on the books allowing men to beat their wives.. maybe we should bring that law back to..

There are many laws that are illegal, this is just another incident.. if the Pinks don't like it, sue in court the US Marine Corp..

oh wait, that's already been done.. the corp won.. I think it went to the supreme court.. can't remember now..

[kfrost06]

I remember and the law that President Clinton signed, "Don't ask, don't tell" has been upheld five times in federal court, and in a recent Supreme Court case, Rumsfeld v. Forum for Academic and Institutional Rights, the Supreme Court unanimously held that the federal government could withhold funding in order to force universities to accept military recruiters in spite of their nondiscrimination policies.

Berkley can not make their own laws that "supercede" federal laws, they are a bunch of screwballs with nothing better to do than harrass the men and women that are currently fighting for them.

[Tock]

. . . anyway . . .

The Berkeley city council didn't vote to kick them out. Re-read the original post carefully, and you'll agree . . .

[Logan13]

So, are you saying that if our elected representatives screw up, since they are our representatives, if they screw up, we can only blame ourselves?

yep......
But something tells me that you will complain until the end of days, it is just who you are.

[Logan13]

are you joking? unless of course you mean porno and gay sex playing with dsm as contributing to the board.

lol.....!
keeping it real bro!

[RA]

Youve heard it several times in this thread. Only a drooling retard would get mad at the Marines over this.

Lets not hide our opinions behind the 'popular senitment of the country,' lets hear your opinion on this issue.

[39+1]

That shit hole receives federal money so the marines are good to go where ever they want there.

[dhriscerr]

are you joking? unless of course you mean porno and gay sex playing with dsm as contributing to the board.

Well, I haven't been around in awhile, so maybe he's been lounging a bit more than usual, but you have to admit, the salon stories aren't always bad LOL