July 23, 2011 12:00 PM
President Obama: DADT Ends September 20th
At last, the DADT repeal certifications have been received from all branches of the military and President Obama has notified Congress that requirements for repeal have been met. As of September 20th, DADT will be no more.
From his email to those waiting for this day:
Today, in accordance with this law, I signed the certification that will end “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” once and for all. The Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff also have certified that the military is ready for the repeal. Sixty days from now, on September 20th, the repeal will be complete and gay men and women will be able to serve their country openly.
Many more to go.
He's got the gay vote locked, now he has to find his way out of this budget mess to get the rest of the population.
The book of the year...
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B0058KSKHW
Actually, he doesn't have this gay American's vote. Hell, I didn't vote for him in 2008, I voted against Senator McCain. I, like others, would prefer a real Democrat with real Democratic and liberal values as President. Not this Republican lite version.
Election 2012: Be Educated! Be Active! Vote!
www.PhoenixJustice.com
Obama has been annoying, if not outright too conciliatory to the Republicans on many issues. Having said that, barring having a truly more "progressive" democrat usurping Obama in a primary election (not going to happen and I do not know of one happening in the past), I still would rather take my chances with Obama than ANY type of Republican, even back in 2008.
I think Obama has approached too many issues by going right to the what he may believe would be the end-game of "typical" negotiation sessions. But instead of following basic negotiating tactics of starting at opposite ends and both sides coming to meet somewhere in the middle, the POTUS has started in the middle, either through a naive belief that by "being" the POTUS, he can dispense with the bull$!@# and get to the conclusion quickly or a worse scenario of a being DINO, which I don't think he is. Bypassing typical negotiating tactics will not help ones beliefs, not even for the POTUS.
Since Obama is more than likely the Democrat "representative" for PROTUS, I believe that Progressives should focus mainly on replacing DINO's (which we got rid of some but not all in 2010) and hard-core Republicans in 2012 in both sides of Congress, although more in the House needs ousted.
Well can you please name me ONE Republican, Lite or otherwise that would of made this happen?
THIS gay American is all in. And any gay american that isn't is just too damn stupid for words.
Yes, I'm sure the repeal of DADT would have just as easily occurred under McCain/Crazy Religious Lady. Obama has disappointed me on a number of fronts but the "they're all the same" chorus is not clever indie political insight, it's mental laziness.
I hope you don't take this as a put-down Astro, because i really do appreciate your insight and remark. But your caveat "Obama has disappointed me on a number of fronts" is the essence of the Democrats messaging problem. It is ingrained in our system that the only way you can say anything positive about this president is with some "I'm disapointed but- caveat".
People always complain about how the White House messages badly, but the truth is that progressives as a whole message badly. As horrendous as George Bush was how often do you see Republicans defending him by starting the sentence with "As disapointed as i am in him..."
I'm not saying we shouldn't speak out, but we should speak out on POLICY and we should never advance a meme.
It's one thing to say "I want the Public Option" it's another thing to say that "Obama caved to the insurance industry again!"
It's one thing to say "The tax cuts for the wealth should end" it's another thing to say that he's a DINO because he made a deal to continue them while securing unemployment for 10s of millions.
One technique concentrates on policy the other is messaging and it almost prevents people from even looking at the whole of what he's doing because we already KNOW he's a DINO, caver, nobomber craven capitulator and chief etc. etc.
Again, did you ever remember MLK giving a speech screaming "Why won't LBJ use his bully pulpit in favor of mixed marriages?!?" No, he knew who his enemies were and he didn't waste time going after his allies, even if they weren't perfect.
No offense taken, insipid. I do not mention my disappointment so much as a caveat, but because he genuinely has done so on a number of occasions. (I don't consider him a DINO, nor would I lightly toss around a term like Obamabot, etc.) I understand that my original comment may have come off as a bit of a non sequitur, however, since I didn't go into any details as to what my disappointments were.
I do take your point on tactics, but this is a left leaning site and therefore the right venue to discuss such issues "between friends." In terms of criticizing allies, I generally take my tack from FDRs admonition: "You've convinced me. Now go out and make me do it." Criticism from the left is a definite must in keeping Obama on the right track.
I should note that MLK did hold political allies' feet to the fire (including LBJs, both privately and publicly) a number of times, on the issues of civil rights, poverty and the Vietnam War.
But criticizing him or calling him names was NOT what FDR meant when he said make me do it. He meant things like organizing pro-union rallies, or in LBJ's case civil rights rallies, protesting working standards, making the ISSUE so big that he HAD to do something about it. He certainly didn't mean "call me names until the point where I do something for you just to shut you up."
Yes, hold their feet to the fire, don't try and destroy them as a potential ally by discouraging as much of the base as you can.
I'd say we are more-or-less on the same page.
I'm a gay Canadian and I think political treatment of gays in the US is deplorable.
Don't Ask, Don't Tell never should have been in the first place. It's OK if you want to die on the battlefield, but spare us images of your bedroom.
I will credit to Obama for finally ending it, but still lots more work to do yet.
far left loon >.<
It is good that this is finally taking place, but the fact it won't finally be undone until roughly one year before the November elections makes it that much more "repealable" should disaster strike and one of these GOP numbnuts makes their way into office after having campaigned on its repeal.
The more time that passes, the more it will prove to have been a bunch of nonsense, with no justifiable reason for its repeal.
* There are two types of Republicans: millionaires and suckers.
"Mugsy's Rap Sheet": Recording history for those who seek to rewrite it.
" . . . the fact it won't finally be undone until roughly one year before the November elections makes it that much more "repealable" should disaster strike and one of these GOP numbnuts makes their way into office after having campaigned on its repeal . . ."
I don't understand the logic behind what you're saying here.
I know the GOP would like to reverse the repeal DADT, but it if was repealed on Jan 21, 2009 the GOP would still be campaigning to reinstate it in 2010 and 2012. Probably for a few more elections after that too.
They have no good policy ideas. Wedge issues are all they have to make people vote against their own best interest. They'll keep at it regardless for 2 or 3 more elections cycles at least.
I do agree with you that with the passage a time the GOP position will begin to look more and more ridiculous to a larger majority of Americans.
It'll help cut down on the draft dodgers in 2014.
Humpty Dumpty was pushed.
(good one!)
actually the draft will probly start around this x-mas is my guess...
audit-prosecute-incarcerate
... a lot of people should be leaving the military in droves now. That might mean combat operations might be forced to stop in the near future! Take that, neocons!
How dare you imply that gay folks can't get the job done...! (shame on you)
Gay people are perfectly able to hate and kill "Taliban al CIA duh" ...just as good as hetero folks are!
I bet after all the redneck homophobes are gone that "teh gay" will actually really start to kick ass and finally catch that Been Laden guy...(oh wait)
audit-prosecute-incarcerate
(Not a small victory, of course, for those serving that it impacts, but...) Never would have occurred under a McPalin presidency.
"Parachutes are allowed in checked or carry-on baggage, but may not be worn in flight."
---Southwest Airlines
(silly me) I thought DADT was a game they play on FOX and MSNBC!
Media "don't ask" the important questions...
and politicians "don't tell" anyone anything.
And don't we all wish that would be over soon!?
p.s. (maybe) since DADT will no longer be a law? ...we can now use the four letter acronym for the situation I described above?
example: I am sick of the DADT policy that exists between Keith Olberman and John Boener.
....?
audit-prosecute-incarcerate
I never saw Keith Olbermann interview John Boehner. Did boner have the cojones to answer questions and did Keith OIbermann have the cojones to actually ask substantive ones? Most of the time, (R)'s don't go on Keith's show. Or Rachel's.
Thank you President Obama!
I am a lesbian AND an honorably discharged member of the National Guard who had to live under DADT so, although I am no longer in uniform, am happy to see America come closer to "a more perfect union" and join the rest of her allies in the civilized world.
That said, you ever notice that every time the President betrays his economic campaign promises - something that has far more serious impact on the question as to whether the middle class survives and the American Dream is gone forever - that he tries to appease us by doing something like allow gays and lesbians to be open about their sexual orientation when he sends them to fight and die in transnational corporate America's wars?
I believe that when he capitulated to the extension of the Bush tax giveaways, he announced that he wasn't going to have the Justice Department defend DOMA cases.
As much as I appreciate these advances in civil rights, the truth is, if we worked hard creating a more egalitarian society in general, we would eventually wind up with the same result.
If I were truly cynical, I would say that the President IS playing chess - but not against Republicans - against it's HIS PROGRESSIVE BASE.
Thanks. Hadn't thought about it from that perspective.
Corruption favors the wealthy.
Not surprising.
Cheap shot, I know.
Speaking of cheap shots. How is it you've were consistently denying any Barack Obama connection to cuts in Medicare, Social Security, and Medicaid last night? You were claiming such busllshit like it was an "anonymous" administration official, and pretending that we didn't know Obama's personal position.
I hadn't seen the presser, but you knew quite well that the President admitted exactly that in his press conference yesterday. I know you watched it as well as I know my niece would never miss a Hanna Montana episode.
Yet you pretended every source that alluded to that was lying. You even quoted John Boehner's press conference because it buttressed your denial that Obama did anything of the sort.
And all that time, you were well aware that Barack Obama himself, on video, had admitted to offering many hundreds of billions of dollars of cuts in those programs.
Or are you now claiming the video was a fake? Was that just a muppet of the president?
Corruption favors the wealthy.
I didn't claim they were lying, i'm saying i don't know what the full deal was. I'm basically saying what Obama himself said "no deal is done until a deal is done." Obviously whatever was floated wasn't final, because it all fell through and all this hand-wringing "oh my godsing!" and "the sky is falling" was all for naught.
Again, i never said they were lying just that they don't know and that they're anonymous. John Per in the other thread says that his experience working in the white house tells him that 95% of reports are lies and that is ESPECIALLY true in major negotiations.
In fact even last night i consistently said that perhaps there were cuts but that i'm not going to yell and scream until i know what it is.
And since when is "I want to see it for myself before i decide" this radical extremist to-be-condemned position?
. . . but nothing whatsoever about Obama's press conference?
I call major, unadulterated, out and out, rampant bullshit.
Other Obama fanboys and even high priests run from the title when you're around because they know the absolute strength of your faith.
But you want to pretend you passed up a chance to watch/read/quote/worship your hero to go quote John Boehner?
Really?
Corruption favors the wealthy.
Here's what i ACTUALLY wrote last night:
So i was consistent then, and i'm consistent now. 1. Just because someone is discussing "cutting" or saving money on a program doesn't mean they're ending it and 2. let's wait and see what it is we're talking about, before we talk about it.
Barack Obama flat out stated that he called for $650 billion in cuts to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.
And you knew he did it when you wrote that particular bs about "anonymous" sources. You knew exactly what Obama's proposal was. You even "LOOKED" at it. And that was hardly the only time you pretended you didn't.
But go ahead, claim that you didn't know about Obama's presser while at the same time you knew all about Boehner's.
Or maybe you could admit that you knew all about it and were just full of "it."
Corruption favors the wealthy.
Look if you change the way Medicare is paid that all by itself will save over 100 billion. Is that a cut or a savings? I'd argue savings.
But yes, he said he said that he called for cuts of 650 billion to social security, medicare and medicaid. He also said that the cuts he made did not alter the institutions. I never said that he didn't propose cuts, i said that i have to know WHAT the cuts are before i get mad. I even provided a link where deaniac of the peoples view spelled out a "cut" to medicare which i felt perfectly acceptable.
To be honest, i haven't looked at the deal he proposed because it isn't reality, but again, i am NOT going to get mad at proposed cuts to SS or Medicare or Medicaid or ANY program until i know what he's proposing to do.
Unless if you're saying "These are perfect programs and we should NEVER discuss changing them ever ever ever ever ever" then i'm not sure of your quarrel with my statement.
Again, i'll reiterate, the only ACTUAL thing Obama has done to entitlements so far is expand them. It seems like you want me to act the way you act- and so many act -concerning the budget deal. To ONLY consider ONE part of the bill (the giveaway to the top 2%) and not the other parts of the bill (the benefits to the poor and middle class) and just blindly condemn him based on one thing only. Sorry, i won't oblige.
. . . you were lying and misleading for pretty much all your tenure on the boards on this subject yesterday.
You knew all about Obama's presser, but didn't "LOOK" at the deal.
Why would you "LOOK" at and quote Boehner's presser but not "LOOK" at Obama's?
I'm sure the folks at Frum'sForum and the other right wing site you cited to support Obama do pretty much the same thing.
But you didn't; you just pretended you did.
Corruption favors the wealthy.
No, i was not. What i wrote yesterday is entirely consistent with what i wrote today. And you're right i didn't look at the specifics of the deal because it's not been agreed to. When a deal is agreed to i'll look at it.
Frum is conservative, but not crazy right and the people in the article were obviously not all right-wing. Plus I did post an article from CNN that said something similar.
And yeah, there's just a ton of right wing sites that i cited that support Obama. Cause there's so damn many of them. Have you lost your mind?
Nor my principles.
But that's ok, 'cause you know that neither Bush nor his speech writers are "crazy right" when they agree with Obama.
George W. Bush and those who put the words in his mouth are "moderate" or "centrist" - just like you.
But even from that surreal viewpoint, CFIF is some radical right wing stuff, and even you shouldn't try to pass them off as reasonable. I'm not crazy about wading through that filth, but if you cite them again to back up your hero, I can guarantee you'll be embarrassed.
Corruption favors the wealthy.
Monday morning. Track 5. Don't miss it.
Humpty Dumpty was pushed.
Why the vague allusions? It's not Twitter, and even if it were, you're not even close to the character limit.
If you have something to say, spell it out.
Corruption favors the wealthy.
There's always a new shiny object coming along to misdirect your anger. Don't get so hung up on "the story of the day".
Humpty Dumpty was pushed.
It's good to know I give away my "excitement" by using a phrase like "The timing is certainly curious."
What gave away my anger? Was it the way I wrote "thank you"?
Anyway, I appreciate now knowing where you're coming from.
Corruption favors the wealthy.
Everytime we expect a shitball from one hand, out comes the other hand with a cute bunny. We'll hear about the shitball after the cleanup.
Humpty Dumpty was pushed.
Yeah, because everyone has completely forgot about the budget deal. He's tricksy one that Obama.
i tried. but i still don't get it. probably my bad. sorry
peace.
________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rIu5B3Fsstg&fe...
Corruption favors the wealthy.
Oh for goodness sakes he said TWO DAMN WEEKS AGO that it was a matter of weeks.
Jeez, no good deed goes unpunished i guess.
I'm a gay man, who also served in the military under DADT and since i'm unemployment going to school right now because of the changes he made i can say categorically that he didnot betray his economic campaign promise. If it weren't for that horrible terrible no good deal he made, i wouldn't be able to do either of those things.
And whether you like it or not, i'm cetainly as much of his PROGRESSIVE base as anyone else.
Exxxactly. Poifect. Ending DADT is a good thing, but in no way does it make him a hero in the gay community.
far left loon >.<
Actually this is bullcrap. There is still a 60 day waiting period during which the House Armed Services Committee and the generals can generate a firestorm of resistance. Mr Obama will not defy the generals on the troop levels. He will not defy them on this. I am taking bets that this, like all of the President's other "promises" will never happen.
I'm pretty sure the military leaders said "Hey, we're ready. Let's do this".
Humpty Dumpty was pushed.
Yes, that's exactly what it means. it seems that boiling blood has disabled my ability to be articulate.
Alan Grayson said that if Obama cured cancer they GOP would say he ruined doctors. I think the left suffers more from Obama derangement syndrome.
Not meant for me?
Humpty Dumpty was pushed.
The last refuge.
Bushies claimed "Bush Derangement Syndrome" when they no longer had even remotely coherent arguments to defend Bush on the merits.
There was then the popular "Hillary Derangement Syndrome" shortly after Clinton got caught repeatedly lying about enduring sniper fire with her teenage daughter.
Now Obamabots claim it.
Surprise, surprise.
Corruption favors the wealthy.
So you're saying that pragmatis_realist "this is bullshit" reaction was completely sane and not open to criticism at all?
I'm saying you got faced by your own hero yesterday. And instead of addressing his admitted attack on SS/MC/MC. You went up and down the boards denying it was true. That was pretty desperate; you knew you'd be caught.
So now you're stuck whining about
BushObama Derangement Syndrome.But maybe you could explain to pragmatis_realist why you feel it's necessary that openly gay people be denied admission to the military and that those already in the military should be removed from the military for being gay over the next sixty days.
Corruption favors the wealthy.
You're just wrong about what i said. I said many times that there are ways to save money with both programs that won't involve benefit cuts. There's also cuts to the wealthy that i might not think are such a bad idea. That's what i said many, many times.
I feel it's "necessary" for the next sixty days because without some kind of transition period, the whole bill woulld of failed and there'd be no repeal at all. It took 8 years for the military to be desegregated you know. I still think Truman did the right thing.
You're THIS determined to turn this unqualified victory into some kind of defeat and you say I'M totally off base applying the ODS label to you?
Wow! Why didn't you do that for the Lilly Ledbetter Act - the most progressive legislation evah!
Let's see: the military supported this; a Republican Secretary of Defense supported this; the Republican Party didn't block it; a Republican PAC actually had DADT declared unconstitutional (which the Obama DOJ has and still does oppose); but this is an Obama victory?
That's some really heavy lifting.
But maybe you could explain why Obama feels it necessary to continue to deny gays admission to the military and remove them if possible for the next sixty days?
Corruption favors the wealthy.
I've got an anacronym because i don't want to get carpal t.
Even THIS Republican party isn't a monolith. There were some that most certainly did try and block it, jut not enough to keep the filibuster.
The Military, and the Obama DOJ wanted the repeal, just on their own time line and not one mandated by the courts. That's what they got.
"Obama" doesn't feel it's necessary to continue to deny gays the right to serve openly (they can, like always be admitted to the military- i know i was one- in fact a decade before DADT existed). The LAW states that there be a transition period. It was necessary in order to pass the damn thing.
It's one thing for you to deny that the health care reforms and the banking reforms and the student loan reforms aren't real reforms because 1. they might not effect YOUR life like they do mine and 2. they're not fully implimented 3. It's hard to take credit for something that didn't happen like "he saved the auto industry" or "averted a depression". If you want to dismiss all that, you're not guilty of ODS.
BUT if you continue to credit the Republicans for this, or insist that this was an "easy" thing and that he really deserves no credit at all than i'm sorry you do suffer from ODS and you really should seek help.
Because a District Court already said that his position in continuing DADT in light of the change in the law and the DC finding that DADT is unconstitutional is, um, to use the legal term: absolutely fucking goofy.
But THE LAW didn't stop Barack Obama from going to war with Libya - you know, just because. THE LAW didn't stop him from immunizing torture and murder - you know, cause the torturers were patriots.
But THE LAW stops him from opposing the Court that said DADT ends now, and forces him to keep investigating and prosecuting gay soldiers for another two months.
When talking about this superhero, you might not want to mention the law - let alone the right wing troll version of THE LAW.
No President in my lifetime - including Nixon and Bush II - has had less regard for the law than Barack "We Can't See Crimes Against Humanity If We Look Forward Not Back" Obama.
Corruption favors the wealthy.
Yeah and an appeals court shot down the district court. I'm gay and was in the military and I do think there was some legitimate military concern in wanting to do this slowly.
We did spend some time in basic training covering what is sexual harasment, how to avoid it, how to address females and also how to work with people from different backgrounds. We spent a LOT more time on shooting, but these types of issues need to be addressed.
One court victory does not end DADT just as one victory did not break up microsoft nor did one victory re-instate marriage in California. Thanks to President Obama, we don't have to worry about appeal.
I'm not going to go around in circles with you on Libya. I think it more like Kosovo than Iraq is all i'll say. I certainly don't find any of his actions illegal.
As to your "superhero" comment Rush likes to say that supporters of Barack think of him as the Messiah, Hannity says we think he's the "annointed one". How are you not conservative again?
And before you bring up my wicked horrible no good right wing sites, again can you please say SPECIFICALLY what within the articles themeselves were terribly right wing?
If you do, and you stay away from wingnuttia, you'll find that the reason that the Appellate Court put DADT back into effect is because the Obama DOJ asked them to.
And we're not talking about some nonsense about training; that can begin as soon as feasible. We're talking about Obama demanding the right to continue disallowing gays from entering the military and the right to dishonorably discharge them for another sixty days.
Aside from fanboy worship of Obama, how does that make any sense at all?
And Obama did get to trot out his announcement in the middle of his efforts to cut Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.
Corruption favors the wealthy.
If you read the rest of the article it also said this:
So according to your own source, they're not continuing discharging anyway. Military gays took place in a gay pride parade for the first time in Chicago just a week ago. They're not in terror of discharge anymore.
He's not Demanding the right to discharge service member, but demanding the right to let the military do it their own way rather than having a court impose its will on it.
Either way, it's over in 60 days, my guess is there won't be one other service member kicked out (unless he wants to be). So, again, this is just an effort on your part to not give Obama credit.
Also in regards to his "mysterious" announcement 1. you'r fucking out of your mind if you think this is diverting attention away from the talks 2. He said in a speech a few weeks ago that it was just weeks away, if anything doing it now is bad for him because it's being overshadowed by the debt talks.
Plus your whole thesis is wacked. It is, as near as i can tell that Obama deserves no credit for the legislative accomplishment because the judiciary was going to do it anyway. This supposes 1. that it would never of been turned over on appeal to the SC and 2. that somehow Obama had a crystal ball and new that it would be turned over anyway and.... i'm not even sure where the hell the rest of your reasoning goes.
It's done, and your feeble attempts to say this isn't good or he doesn't deserve credit makes you look petty.
Those three airmen might mean nothing in comparison to the all important objective of making Obama look good, but, hey that's just the way it is, right? 'Cause it's all about Obama getting the "credit," right?
And why did he announce it yesterday? Coincidence? Kinda like passing the repeal of DADT at about the same time he continued the Bush/Obama tax cuts?
Corruption favors the wealthy.
I don't think those three airmen are going to be dismissed. Unless if they, like that marine, want to be.
This is largely because the Obama justice dept also changed the standards for throwing someone out, now they pretty much have to announce it like Lt. Choi.
He announced it yesterday because Pannetta said it was done yesterday and sent the report to him to verify.
No, they cannot "generate a firestorm of resistance". What this mean is that ALL the joint chiefs have certified that they're now ready to impliment the policy. DADT is dead. The time for objection was BEFORE this.
You're just clinging desperately to a meme. Obama is a betrayer Obama is not really going to do anything that he says and you'll ignore ANY evidence to the contrary.
If you are "taking bets" i'll call you on this. Name your price. And also, you're about the farthest fucking thing i've ever seen from a "pragmatic realitst".
Jeez.
Whatever papers the joint domesticated political generals and admirals signed under duress aren't worth beans. By the time the house committee has a couple of weeks of hearings, and the real old hard line opposition comes out, this thing is going to be thrown back into the bin for reconsideration and will never come out. Why do you think they put in the 60 day delay in the first place? I have all the evidence I need on the news every night.
What hearings? they've already happened? They're done. You're crazy.
Again, i'll take whatever bet you want to make. Hell, if you want to PM me your info i'll even make it a REAL bet and not a net-bet. That's how confident i am that come September 20th this thing is over for good.
Can they reinlist, or get some kind of backpay, or their records changed? Does this have any retrocative impact?
They can re-inlist, but i don't think they're elligible for back-pay.
Why would anyone re-enlist? I should think they've already suffered enough humiliation and damage.
far left loon >.<
I have a hunch one of the platforms the rapture right Republicans will run on next year is to try and force gays in the military back into the closet. It seems that gaybashing is one of the favorite Republican tactics to get conservative votes..
I don't think they'll touch it. I think they'll leave the "military" aspect out of their continuing gay-bashing agenda. The homophobia will go on, but soldiers will be removed from the discussion. And the media will see to it.
Humpty Dumpty was pushed.
"gay men and women will be able to serve their country openly"
and now go into the Russian roulette deployments in Afghanistan, where if you survive one, two, three or more, you'll still have a chance to have your life taken in one of Obama's wars.
As for having a lock on the gay vote, I would hope that the gay community is thoughtful enough to have concerns about their country and how it is governed to also do some critical analysis of Obomber's give aways to the Banksters, capitulation to the Rethugs on all things important and his being Bushs' third term, etc, etc.
Add this to the growing (and vastly unappreciated) list of accomplishments by this president in the face of a radicalized opposition:
Created the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
Extended benefits to same-sex Federal employees
Reversed Bush's aid ban to NGOs that provide abortions
Reversed Bush's ban on Federal funding for embryonic stem cell research
Increased fuel standards from 27.5 to 36.5 MPG starting in 2016
Required insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions
Expanded eligibility for Medicaid
Fully funded the Violence against Women Act
Lifted some restrictions on families visiting Cuba
Started full disclosure of White House visitors
Expanded Pell grants to low income students
The list goes on and on... Thank FSM for Obama!
Comments are closed on this entry