http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39637073/ns/us_news-life/

Maybe Lady Gaga will shut up now (she annoys me to no ened)

The Obama administration, although most of the people in it are for ending dont ask dont tell, might repeal this ruling. Obama's said he would like to see a legislative end to DADT but.. I don't think the Democrats would do anything to upset one of their key constituencies so close to an election.

I assume you mean "appeal this ruling".

You don't think that appealing this ruling would annoy democrats?

And maybe if Lady Gaga shuts up, leo-j will shut up about Lady Gaga.

We can only hope

It doesn't matter.  He's legally bound to appeal it.  As President of the United States it's his job and the Justice Departments Job to argue that all of their laws are in fact legal.

He'd be in a worse spot if he didn't appeal it.

The Justice Department would be accused of political bias... (which our justice department is already in a HUGE row about doing just that when it comes to the enforcement of hate crimes laws.)

Basically he'd get the blame for politicizing the Justice Department and basically the entire legal system.

This all stems from his general cowardess at approaching the issue in the first place... and in general gay rights, after a bunch of big promises he made some minor changes, then suddenly dug in his heels and actually hindered more then helped. 

He should of just put out a Presidential order on the matter.  Instead you end up with gay rights rallies getting shouted out by people saying "Yes We Can".   It's a complete mess.

There only positive you wouldn't expect too many gays to go Republican no matter how bad you treat them.

Scary thing is... Republican Gay groups are booming.

GOProud is the new group... it's surpassing the Log Cabin Republicans.

They know they won't get gay rights from the republicans, but figure if they won't get it from the democrats either, they may as well stop being 1 issue and support other policies they believe in.

How is this law constitutional? Can you explain that to me?

It's consitutional because there is nothing that makes it unconstiutional?

In a lot of states you can just fire someone from any buisness because they are gay.  There has never been a constiutional ammendment made to protect people based on sexual orientation.  Lots of things are consitutional that are horrible.  Like beating your children.

Either way, it doesn't really matter.  Personally, I think gay people should be able to serve in the military as openly gay as they want.

It still doesn't change the fact that due to Obama's cowardice on the matter he now has to defend a law he disagrees with or suffer a massive political blow.

He could of just used a presidential order to suspend don't ask, don't tell... but instead didn't want to upset more conservative democrats... it's what he SHOULD have done.  Instead he wanted to pass the buck off onto congress and force them to do it.   When he SHOULD of used a presidential order and then forced congress to do it, many people in congress being able to vote with their consciouses and having the excuse "well the president already got rid of it, so...".

Him not appealing this law would be like the ACLU not defending the free speech of the KKK. 

Neither actually want to do it, but they have to or be labeled hypocrits unfit to hold their positions... putting their own wishes ahead of their actual duties.

It's the US Justice Departments duty to defend US laws... no matter how horrible those laws seem to the people in the department or the administration.

The burden of proof is on those looking to repeal it. The constitution prohibits laws from affecting certain basic rights. It does not set out a list of what laws we are entitled to have.