Comment: Re:This is why the Dems lost the House (Score 2) 828
Of course, I really wish he would grow some balls and actually do that - the people he would lose are already lost, and actually getting something done would, I think, energize his base and maybe sway some moderates. Unfortunately, he's just fobbing this off on Congress so there's less risk to his political image.
You say this right after he GOT this passed. And it had to be a bi-partisan effort (to some degree at any rate) due to the super-majority requirement caused by the GOP filibuster system. If he shat all over the GOP he wouldn't have been able to sweet talk any of them over the fence and would have never gotten this passed.
It sure ain't sexy but this is how it has to be with current political climate and filibuster rules.
Comment: Re:Yea America! (Score 1) 828
Don't ask ~~ pro gays
Don't tell ~~ pro homophobes
Now that we have no need for the stop gap measure that DADT represents gays will be allowed to serve openly.
To summarize:
No gays allowed --> 1993 DADT == gays ok, but stfu --> 2010 repeal == gays ok.
As for your lack of support for this repeal. We don't have a law against openly admitting you prefer coke over pepsi. Nor do we have one banning people that put the toilet paper w/ the paper coming under rather than over. And we don't ban people that prefer the PS3 to the Xbox. Why? Because it doesn't fucking matter. You are soldiers there to do a fucking job. The sexual preferences of your fellow soldiers affect your ability to shoot a gun as much as their taste for Justin Bieber. It is the exact same thing.
Comment: Re:Developing new batteries (Score 1) 77
Also, I was thinking about LiON not NiMH or lead which do last longer. I was under the impression that you could expect around 60% capacity by the 4 year mark. Which for a car that is already severely handicapped by range could mean the difference between making your daily trip and not.
If 8 years is typical for cars coming out I'll be impressed.