Tag Archives: president

AcroWar Part 2

When I did the post about Naked Vicky In A Temple With A Sword, I noticed that only one other definition of the acro was posted besides the famous one. So how about using N V I A T W A S for this round in the game? 24 hours from now the winner will be declared. added by: Argon18

Obama Transforms Innocent Americans Into Islamist, Anti-Colonial Nazis!

The Kenyan Islamist, Anti-Colonial, Nazi President Threatens National Security! added by: Progresshiv

UK teen banned from US for sweary email to Obama

After watching a documentary about September 11th, a drunk Luke Angel got angry and decided to send an email. This usually happens when people get drunk, though it is probably best to email a close friend and not the White House, since the email response caused Luke to meet local police along with a lifetime ban on visiting the US. “Luke Angel was reprimanded by police on both sides of the Atlantic after firing off a drunken message to the White House calling the president a “p****”. The FBI intercepted the message and contacted police in the UK who went to see the 17-year-old at his home in Silsoe, Bedfordshire.”-Sky News In the story, Luke states he doesn't care about the ban but mentioned his parents are not happy. http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/Luke-Angel-Teenager-Banned-from-America… :_Teenager_Banned_from_America_For_Life_For_Sending_Abusive_Email_To_Barack_Obama_ added by: Mcellie

CBS: Eric Holder ‘Ignoring Political Pressure;’ Given ‘Hero’s Welcome’ After Bush ‘Cronyism’

In a puff piece on Attorney General Eric Holder on CBS’s Sunday Morning, correspondent Rita Braver praised his professionalism: “…ignoring political pressure is Holder’s constant message as he talks to Justice Department lawyers…. Though he was a key advisor to the Obama campaign and considers the President a friend, Holder says he now keeps it purely professional.” [Audio available here ] Throughout the interview, Braver portrayed Holder as lacking any political agenda: “And when he took office last February, he got a hero’s welcome. It was in part, he believes, a reaction to cronyism and questionable policies advocated in the Bush-era Justice Department.” As Braver mentioned Bush “cronyism,” a photo of former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales appeared on screen. Holder proclaimed: “Waterboarding, things like that, from my perspective, inconsistent with the great traditions of this department.” Braver began with some gentle criticism of Holder: “And with controversies over everything –  from his pushing to quickly close the U.S. prison at Guantanamo to his very public condemnation of the new Arizona law that cracks down on undocumented immigrants – even some Holder fans are saying, ‘he’s honest, he’s smart but sometimes he can be a little tone deaf about how things play out in public.'” That gave Holder the opportunity to declare: “I don’t have the same latitude that other politicians might have to put my finger up to the wind and figure out what’s going to be popular….So it’s not tone deafness. It’s a commitment to justice and a commitment to the law.” Braver then touted Holder “ignoring political pressure.” Near the end of the segment, Braver noted how “Holder raised a lot of eyebrows with his own comments on race last year.” After playing the clip of Holder calling America a “nation of cowards” on racial matters, Braver announced: “But he says he stands by those remarks.” Holder argued: “I mean that comment was really urging people to get out of what I call their – the safety of their cocoons.” Braver never questioned the offensive and unprofessional nature of the comment nor did she ever bring up the Justice Department’s refusal to prosecute members of the Black Panthers for voter intimidation during the 2008 election. Instead, she continued with a more sympathetic tone: “Because you’re the first African-American attorney general, do you put any extra pressure on yourself?” Braver concluded the interview by wondering: “And as for Eric Holder’s legacy? Is there one thing that you kind of keep in mind about how you see this job all the time?” Holder replied: “It’s what I tell the people in this department all the time. Do the right thing.” Here is a full transcript of Braver’s interview with Holder, aired on September 12: 9:33AM ET SEGMENT: CHARLES OSGOOD: This weekend’s anniversary of the 9/11 attacks focuses our attention once more on America’s war against terrorism. Attorney General Eric Holder plays a key role in that fight. And this past week he fielded questions from our Rita Braver. ERIC HOLDER: It’s something that I start my day with. It’s something that I end my day with. It’s the thing that I spend most of my time on. RITA BRAVER: For Attorney General Eric Holder, it’s not just ceremonies like this one- HOLDER: Today as we read the names of these fallen heros- BRAVER: Honoring law enforcement officials who died on September 11. Every day for him is a reminder of terrorist threats. So this is where you meet with your staff and what else here? HOLDER: We have a meeting every morning. BRAVER: But outside the confines of the Justice Department, Holder has been subject to criticism for his handling of trials of accused terrorists. JEFF SESSIONS: I believe this decision is dangerous. I believe it’s misguided. LINDSEY GRAHAM: I think you’ve made a fundamental mistake here. BRAVER: Especially for the decision he announced – and then had to retract after it provoked an outcry – that Khalid Sheik Mohammed and four other alleged September 11 plotters would be tried in New York City. HOLDER: I’m not scared of what Khalid Sheik Mohammed has to say at trial. BRAVER: The trial date and place are now in limbo. And with controversies over everything –  from his pushing to quickly close the U.S. prison at Guantanamo to his very public condemnation of the new Arizona law that cracks down on undocumented immigrants – even some Holder fans are saying, ‘he’s honest, he’s smart but sometimes he can be a little tone deaf about how things play out in public.’ HOLDER: No, I’m not tone deaf. But I understand what the nature of being attorney general is. I don’t have the same latitude that other politicians might have to put my finger up to the wind and figure out what’s going to be popular. BRAVER: Does the criticism- HOLDER: So it’s not tone deafness. It’s a commitment to justice and a commitment to the law. It is not tone deafness. BRAVER: That got you. HOLDER: Yeah, it does. Because I think that is a criticism that is fundamentally unfair and is political in nature. We want to make sure that this department of justice is true to its great traditions. BRAVER: In fact, ignoring political pressure is Holder’s constant message as he talks to Justice Department lawyers in places like Mobile, Alabama. HOLDER: The only thing that I want you to do is to make sure that you do justice. BRAVER: At 59, Eric Himpton Holder Jr. is the first U.S. attorney general to spend most of his career at the Justice Department. Starting just out of Columbia Law School. HOLDER: I mean, this Department of Justice formed me as a lawyer. BRAVER: And when he took office last February, [cheering crowd] he got a hero’s welcome. It was in part, he believes, a reaction to cronyism and questionable policies advocated in the Bush-era Justice Department. [ON-SCREEN: PICTURES OF ALBERTO GONZALES] HOLDER: Waterboarding, things like that, from my perspective, inconsistent with the great traditions of this department. And when I say traditions, I really want to stress under Republican as well as Democratic attorneys general. Let’s go look. BRAVER: May we go see? So in Holder’s personal office- HOLDER: As you can see, it’s not very large. BRAVER: -there’s a portrait of Attorney General Janet Reno, the Democrat for whom he served as deputy. HOLDER: He is the ultimate symbol of independence. BRAVER: But in his conference room, Holder has a portrait of Republican Elliott Richardson, fired by President Nixon when he refused to stop the Watergate investigation.                                              HOLDER: There are times when you have to do what Elliott Richardson did, which is too simply to say, no. And resign. BRAVER: Though he was a key advisor to the Obama campaign and considers the President a friend, Holder says he now keeps it purely professional. Do you and the President ever get into it? HOLDER: Without characterizing what they are, I will say we have heated conversations. BRAVER: Holder says the person who keeps him on an even keel is his wife, Dr. Sharon Malone, an OBGYN. And he cheerfully admits that she made a lot more money than he did for many years. HOLDER: You know, I’m a 21st century guy, secure in who I am. And so I was more than happy to have these great government jobs while she was bringing in all the money that she made and was giving birth to three children. BRAVER: Holder says his sense of what is right comes from his parents, immigrants from Barbados. You have said that your father faced discrimination. How so? HOLDER: While he was in the service in the South and in Oklahoma, he was refused service at a couple of places where he was in uniform and was told that African-Americans, blacks, negros, were not served. And in spite of that, I have never known a man who loved this country more than my father did. BRAVER: Holder raised a lot of eyebrows with his own comments on race last year. HOLDER: In things racial, we have always been and we, I believe, continue to be, in too many ways, essentially a nation of cowards. BRAVER: But he says he stands by those remarks. HOLDER: I mean that comment was really urging people to get out of what I call their – the safety of their cocoons. BRAVER: Because you’re the first African-American attorney general, do you put any extra pressure on yourself? HOLDER: Yeah, I certainly feel that. I feel there’s a certain responsibility I have, a pressure that I feel that I think is not something that’s been imposed on me as much as it is internal. BRAVER: And as for Eric Holder’s legacy? Is there one thing that you kind of keep in mind about how you see this job all the time? HOLDER: It’s what I tell the people in this department all the time. Do the right thing.

See original here:
CBS: Eric Holder ‘Ignoring Political Pressure;’ Given ‘Hero’s Welcome’ After Bush ‘Cronyism’

MRC-TV: Brent Bozell on Hannity: ‘Obama Needs the Media to Pull His Chestnuts Out of the Fire’

MRC President and NewsBusters founder Brent Bozell appeared on Friday night’s Hannity and knocked a soft Obama interview by George Stephanopoulos and Harry Smith ‘s contention on CBS that the stimulus bill wasn’t “big enough.” He quipped, “Obama needs the media to pull his chestnuts out of the fire.” Tackling the media’s most egregious examples of liberal bias, Bozell joked, “Just a couple hundred billion dollars more.” He added, “Only a liberal Democrat like Harry Smith believes that a spending bill of $862 billion isn’t big enough.” The Media Mash segment also featured a clip of Stephanopoulos deriding House Republican leader John Boehner for his “deep tan.” Bozell wondered why reporters, on the eve of the 2006 elections, didn’t ask Nancy Pelosi “where she got her botox?” Other topics discussed, Richard Engel’s musing on the Today show that Saddam Hussein was becoming “more moderate” before the Iraq war.

Continued here:
MRC-TV: Brent Bozell on Hannity: ‘Obama Needs the Media to Pull His Chestnuts Out of the Fire’

Bob Schieffer Bashes Boehner for Smoking and Taking Tobacco Money

President Obama and the Democrats began a full court press this week smearing House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Oh.), and CBS’s Bob Schieffer made it crystal clear Sunday that he’s going to do his part to stop the Ohio Congressman from replacing Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) as Speaker in January. In a hard-hitting interview about a variety of subjects on “Face the Nation,” Schieffer actually hammered his guest for smoking cigarettes and taking campaign contributions from the tobacco industry. “How do you square that with the fact that cigarette smoking is the leading cause of preventable deaths in this country; 435,000 people — their deaths are linked to cancer. That`s one in five,” scolded Schieffer. “How do you justify that in your own mind?” (video follows with transcript and commentary):   BOB SCHIEFFER, HOST: Mr. Boehner, I`m going to ask you this question because I`m not objective about this. I`m — I`m a cancer survivor. I used to be a heavy smoker. Do you still smoke? JOHN BOEHNER, HOUSE MINORITY LEADER (R-OHIO): I do. SCHIEFFER: You have taken $340,000 from the tobacco industry. They`ve been the largest contributor to your political campaigns over the year. How do you square that with the fact that cigarette smoking is the leading cause of preventable deaths in this country; 435,000 people — their deaths are linked to cancer. That`s one in five. How do you — how do you justify that in your own mind? BOEHNER: Bob, tobacco is a legal product in America. And the American people have the right to decide for themselves whether they want to partake or not. There are lots of things that we deal with and come in contact with every day, from alcohol to food to cigarettes, a lot of things that aren`t good for our health. But the American people ought to have the right to make those decisions on their own. SCHIEFFER: Well, I mean, they have a right to shoot themselves if they choose to. Actually, Bob, suicide is against the law in America. Nice try!  SCHIEFFER: But, I mean, shouldn`t we do something to try to encourage them not to? I mean, do you think that`s a good example? BOEHNER: Well, listen, I wish I didn`t have this bad habit. And it is a bad habit. You`ve had it. You`ve dealt with it. But it`s something that I choose to do. And, you know, at some point maybe I`ll decide I`ve had enough of it. SCHIEFFER: Well, I mean, if you should become speaker, you could set a good example for the country by saying, I`m going to try to stop smoking. Maybe you could get the president. I understand he smokes too. Maybe the two of you could find a way to try to stop smoking. That would be kind of a good thing, wouldn`t it? BOEHNER: Bob, I appreciate your suggestion. The hypocrisy on display here was astounding. After all, as Schieffer noted, Barack Obama is a cigarette smoker. But something Schieffer didn’t mention was that in 2008, Obama took more money from the tobacco industry than Boehner did . Yet, according to LexisNexis, Schieffer has never scolded Obama for his smoking or asked him to quit in order to “set a good example.”  Why might that be, Mr. Schieffer? Is this something else you’re not “objective about?” 

Read more:
Bob Schieffer Bashes Boehner for Smoking and Taking Tobacco Money

Social Engineering Bill In Senate

A social engineering bill to restrict residence in the suburbs and rural areas and force Americans into city centers has passed the United States Senate Banking Committee and is on the fast track to passage in the Senate. The bill is called the Livable Communities Act (SB 1619) and it was introduced by corruptocrat outgoing Senator Christopher Dodd (D-Conn.). It seeks to fulfill the United Nation’s plan Agenda 21, adopted at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 and signed onto by “New World Order” President George H.W. Bush. This bill is designed to destroy your community. According to the non-profit American Policy Center the bill: • Is a blueprint for the transformation of our society into total Federal control. • Will enforce Federal Sustainable Development zoning and control of local communities. • Will create a massive new “development” bureaucracy. • Will drive up the cost of energy to heat and cool your home. • Will drive up the cost of gasoline as a way to get you out of your car. • Will force you to spend thousands of dollars on your home in order to comply. A carrot and stick policy will be used to get your local government to sign on. The carrot is billions of dollars in grants available if your local government agrees to amend zoning laws that restrict housing in outlying areas, forcing people to give up their homes and land and move into the city center. The stick will be denial of the funds and bad publicity generated by “Green” organizations criticizing government officials for turning down free money. The rub is the grants will come with strings attached that force local governments to bend to the will of the Feds. The idea of these social engineering initiatives is to force people to live in a congested area in high rise buildings with housing on the upper floors and stores on the bottom. The whole area will be linked by mass transit creating the “utopian” communities loved by socialists. The result will be higher costs for housing (because overcrowding will make housing space a premium) and goods and services (because of less choice and competition) and less freedom to move about (because cars won’t be necessary and parking space will be prohibitively expensive). As we pointed out here President Barack Obama is — not surprisingly — an advocate of this type of nonsense. And his cabinet is populated by elitists who think they know better than you how you should live. It is imperative that you call your two Senators immediately and tell them to oppose Dodd’s SB1619. http://www.personalliberty.com/conservative-politics/liberty/social-engineering-… Library Of Congress http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c111 :1:./temp/~c111C4MupU:e7553: added by: ReverandG

Gainor Column: Nine Years After September 11 — United We Stood, Divided We Now Stand

Nine years and it still seems like we just woke from a nightmare. September 11, 2001, is seared into the national consciousness like Pearl Harbor 60 years before – only worse because we watched it on television as it happened. A nation was transfixed while 3,000 of our friends, our neighbors, our co-workers, our classmates and our family members perished in violence and fire. They were killed in the Twin Towers, in a field in Pennsylvania and at the Pentagon itself. Police officers and fire fighters fell by the hundreds trying to save as many as they could. All were victims of the kind of terror Americans had grown used to hearing about elsewhere. But not here. A grieving America turned to images of the Statue of Liberty to find solace. Artists from around the world depicted the statue as sad or proud or a mother defending her child. Our nation rallied under the motto: “United We Stand.” Now we know we were never all that united. Soon after fire fighters raised a flag in the ruins of New York, the fingerpointing began. George Bush was to blame, though he only recently had taken office. America was to blame because of its longstanding friendship with Israel. Everyone was to blame it seemed, except the monsters driven by hate to harm the innocent. Not long after the Twin Towers fell, the crazy conspiracies rose in their place. The attack was an inside job we were told as the 9/11 truther industry spread like the plague it is. By 2004, “half (49.3%) of New York City residents and 41% of New York citizens overall say that some of our leaders ‘knew in advance that attacks were planned on or around September 11, 2001, and that they consciously failed to act,'” according to a Zogby International poll. Nearly a decade after these attacks, many crazies still believe America was involved or knew they were going to happen. A poll by Angus Reid Public Opinion from March 2010 claims 15 percent “think claims that the collapse of the World Trade Center was the result of a controlled demolition are credible.” Millions around the globe believe this garbage – blaming the U.S. or even Israel for the attacks. Journalism, the supposed “first draft of history,” has failed in one of the most important events in recent memory. It’s no wonder. Many of today’s talking heads have pushed this hurtful nonsense as a way to bash Bush. Hollywood’s own Rosie O’Donnell told “The View” that, while she didn’t blame government for the World Trade Center attack, one of the buildings fell in a way that “defies physics.” O’Donnell went on to say “it is impossible for a building to fall the way it fell without explosives being involved.” The same show also devoted some of its airtime to the equally despicable truther fantasies of former Minnesota Gov. and pro wrestler Jesse “The Body” Ventura. It wasn’t just the news. The FX show “Rescue Me” even included claims that a 9/11 conspiracy was part of of “a massive neo-conservative government effort.” Whether it’s former green jobs czar Van Jones signing a truther petition or loose cannon Florida Rep. Alan Grayson who said Bush “let it happen,” too many fringe elements have capitalized on our national misery. Just scant days before this year’s 9/11 anniversary, ABC’s “Nightline” profiled a talk radio truther who said the attacks were “an inside job” and “a staged event to launch the Iraq war.” Some crazies are laughing all the way to the bank. Search Amazon.com for “9/11 truth” and there are more than 200 items from books and DVDs to T-shirts with the slogan “9/11 was an inside job!” and a picture of the buildings burning with Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld laughing nearby. Far too many on the left and right believe such insanity. Their theories have thousands of their fellow Americans complicit in the evil scheme, because it would have taken a cast of thousands to accomplish such evil. They believe nonetheless. Others chastise us for responding at all. Newsweek International editor Fareed Zakaria recently blasted America’s response to the attacks. According to Zakaria, who will soon be moving his tripe to Time magazine, “September 11 was a shock to the American psyche and the American system. As a result, we overreacted.” Somehow I doubt Zakaria overreacted. It’s also unclear what would have satisfied him. Did Minute Men overreact after Lexington and Concord? We certainly could have tried harder to find peace with Britain rather than fight. Should we have forgiven Santa Anna his attack on the Alamo? I doubt those who died there would have wanted that. Did we overreact after Pearl Harbor? Perhaps America should have tried to find peace with Imperial Japan instead of fighting for freedom. That’s the kind of 20/20 hindsight easy for those in the media who think themselves so above the pain and anguish that they remove flags and patriotism from their broadcasts. This year, journalists will once again try to understand the lingering wound that is 9/11. And once again they will fail. Meanwhile, the vast majority of Americans want more. Nine years later and we are still seeking justice. Perhaps Bin Laden is already dead or we might never find him. One day he will answer for his crimes. The Bible tells us: ” Blessed are they that hunger and thirst after justice: for they shall have their fill.” This 9/11, perhaps that’s all is the comfort we can find. Dan Gainor is The Boone Pickens Fellow and the Media Research Center’s Vice President for Business and Culture . He writes frequently for the Fox Forum. Gainor can also be contacted on Facebook and Twitter as dangainor.

Read more:
Gainor Column: Nine Years After September 11 — United We Stood, Divided We Now Stand

Chris Matthews and Howard Fineman Have Mutual Obamagasm on Hardball

Chris Matthews and Howard Fineman on Friday had a mutual Obamagasm while cameras rolled on MSNBC’s “Hardball.” As the adorable couple chatted about the Koran burning scandal, and of course blamed the entire controversy on Republicans such as House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Oh.), former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, and former Alaska governor Sarah Palin, the Newsweek columnist unashamedly started the love-fest. “Well, sitting there in the press conference today with President Obama, you could almost hear sort of the classical music in the background,” cooed Fineman. “It was a stately thing, and a mature discussion.” “I get you,” echoed Matthews. “This is an Oxford don, he’s so well-turned, he comes in there elegantly, presenting himself elegantly, presenting himself on a very high-level tone.” One imagines both of these so-called journalists needed a cigarette and a shower during the break (video follows with transcript and commentary): HOWARD FINEMAN, NEWSWEEK: Well, sitting there in the press conference today with President Obama, you could almost hear sort of the classical music in the background. You know, I don’t mean to be facetious… CHRIS MATTHEWS, HOST: No, I get you… FINEMAN: But, you know what I mean. It was a stately thing, and a mature discussion, you could agree or disagree, let’s all be reasonable about this… MATTHEWS: This is an Oxford don, he’s so well turned… FINEMAN: Yeah! MATTHEWS: …he comes in there elegantly, presenting himself elegantly, presenting himself on a very high-level tone… FINEMAN: And he gave a very… MATTHEWS: …against this menagerie… FINEMAN: Yeah! MATTHEWS: …that’s biting at his heals. FINEMAN: That’s why I’m saying, those people that you cited, Boehner and Gingrich and Palin, are not playing the same ballgame that Barack Obama is. MATTHEWS: I shouldn’t them the Three Stooges, they’re a lot smarter than that. I think they know it. They’re not stooges. FINEMAN: Sure they know what they’re doing. MATTHEWS: Stooges are the people that buy their act. Honestly, do you think anyone  at MSNBC is the slightest bit embarrassed to see male journalists gushing and fawning over the president this way? Or do the folks running this pathetic “news” outlet share such sentiments and therefore think men behaving like teenage girls is appropriate? 

See the rest here:
Chris Matthews and Howard Fineman Have Mutual Obamagasm on Hardball

MSNBC’s Contessa Brewer Openly Supports Gay-Rights Cause in DADT Ruling

In a brief interview with the openly-gay former Army Lt. Dan Choi MSNBC anchor Contessa Brewer gave her vocal support to his cause, hoping that the military’s policy of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” ends soon. Brewer has covered the issue quite one-sidedly in the past on behalf of the gay rights side. She has hosted many gay-rights advocates on her news hour and has barely covered the other side of the DADT issue. Examples: here , here , and here . Brewer was covering the ruling of a federal judge in California that “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” is unconstitutional. The judge has not yet issued a final ruling, but plans to do so in two weeks. Brewer’s lone guest in the segment was Choi, an outspoken advocate and poster boy for the military gay-rights movement, who was arrested this past spring for chaining himself to the White House fence in protest of DADT. The news anchor first asked the lieutenant how he felt about the ruling. Then she commented that the DADT policy bans, which include bans on intimate conduct between gays and speaking about loved ones, act as a “severe impediment to dealing effectively” for soldiers far from home. At the end of the short interview, Brewer told Choi that she stands with him and thinks that “justice delayed is justice denied,” hoping that the final ruling on the matter comes soon. A transcript of the segment, which aired on September 10 at 12:47 p.m. EDT, is as follows: CONTESSA BREWER: It has been a long time coming, but this may be the end of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” A federal judge in California has ruled that the military’s ban on openly-gay service members is unconstitutional. The judge says she will issue a final ruling, ending the policy for good, in about two weeks. Former Army Lt. Dan Choi, an outspoken opponent of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” he’s an Iraq War veteran, and in April he handcuffed himself to the gates of the White House in a protest of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” Was arrested, spent a night in prison and was discharged from the military in July. Lt. Dan Choi joins me now. Good to see you, sir. DAN CHOI: Good to see you, Contessa. BREWER: What’s your reaction to this judge’s ruling? CHOI: It’s a victory today for the Constitution. The judge reiterated the Bill of Rights, and some of our most foundational principles of freedom, the freedom of expression, free speech. And when you have a policy as vicious as “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” that abridges that free speech and says “You cannot say the truth to your commander or to your best friends. You cannot say three words, ‘I am gay,'” or “You are not allowed to express your commitment to your lover or your partner by saying three words ‘I love you'” – that’s absolutely against not only the Constitution, but against America. It’s against integrity, it’s against our American values – BREWER: She says it actually bars people from enjoying intimate conduct, and bars them from speaking about their loved ones while serving in uniform, and it bans them from including information in a personal communication that could reveal their homosexuality. If you’re deployed, you’re away from your support system, that’s a severe impediment to dealing effectively, to operating effectively in our nation’s armed forces. But she says she’s not going to issue a final ruling for two more weeks. What should happen right now from our nation’s leaders, not just this judge? CHOI: Well you’re absolutely right. For the soldiers not only that are in combat, but the ones that come back home and have to deal with so many issues of Post Traumatic Stress or depression or even suicide – which is skyrocketing in the military – I don’t see how our leaders can stand by and do nothing.  But in this case, if the President and his Justice Department do nothing, do not appeal, do not lift a finger that will waste any energy, waste any statements, or waste any money defending “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” than what we might see is an absolute victory not only for gay veterans, but for our whole military. We don’t have to fire people for being honest anymore, and we can bolster and reiterate not only our Bill of Rights in our Constitution, but our American value of love. BREWER: Dan, I appreciate it. I stand with you. And I do think that justice delayed is justice denied, and I hope to see this policy end soon.    

See more here:
MSNBC’s Contessa Brewer Openly Supports Gay-Rights Cause in DADT Ruling