BREAKING: DADT cloture vote goes down to defeat

September 21, 2010 at 12:19 pm 149 comments

By Eden James

We just lost the cloture vote in the Senate — on a 56-43 vote — to bring debate on the Defense Authorization bill to an end. Click to the extended entry for the full Senate roll call.

From MSNBC, as it happened, along with commentary from Rachel Maddow:

It appears that Sen. Reid will likely bring it back up for a vote after the election:

Sen. Joseph Lieberman (I-Conn.) said he’s received assurances from Democratic leadership that major defense legislation containing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal would come again after Election Day if cloture isn’t invoked today.

“If for some reason, we don’t get the 60 votes to proceed, this ain’t over,” Lieberman said. “We’re going to come back into session in November or December. I spoke to Sen. Reid today. He’s very clear and strong that he’s going to bring this bill to the floor in November or December.”

The Courage Campaign released the following statement, joining the Human Rights Campaign in calling on the Justice Department not to appeal the recent federal court decision ruling DADT unconstitutional.

More statements and updates to come.

—–
Courage Campaign Blasts Senate GOP for Filibuster of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” Repeal

Joins Human Rights Campaign in calling on Attorney General Eric Holder to not appeal recent court decision ruling DADT unconstitutional

LOS ANGELES — Today, U.S. Senate Republicans blocked a cloture vote on the 2011 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). Among other things, NDAA would fund the troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and repeal the military’s “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” policy, which has led to the discharge of more than 14,000 qualified service men and women at a cost of more than $1.3 billion, and was ruled unconstitutional by a federal court on September 9th.

The legislation also includes the “DREAM Act,” which allows the children of undocumented workers to qualify for a conditional path to citizenship by completing a college degree or committing to two years of military service.

In response, Courage Campaign Chairman and Founder Rick Jacobs has issued the following statement:

“Today a small minority of ‘conservative’ U.S. Senators put partisan politics ahead of the lives and careers of our military men and women by blocking consideration of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). The legislation includes a repeal of the military’s failed “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” policy, funding for our nation’s military, including those in fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, and incentives for military service and academic achievement in the DREAM Act.

Three quarters of Americans support elimination of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” because it is unconstitutional, un-American, and un-safe. We had a vote today because millions of Americans made their voices heard, and we will continue to keep the pressure on until this policy is relegated to the dustbin of history where it belongs. This is not a matter of right and left, it’s about right and wrong.

The disappointing message that Senate Republicans and the extremists vying to join them in November delivered today is that supporting our troops — like creating jobs, cutting taxes for the middle class and building a 21st century workforce — are simply NOT priorities in their America.

That’s why we are also joining the Human Rights Campaign in calling on the Department of Justice to recognize the injustice of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and honor the service of these soldiers by not filing an appeal of the September 9th ruling by a federal judge that found this policy to be unconstitutional. We applaud the Log Cabin Republicans for initiating this case and we hope the Justice Department recognizes that it’s time to consign this discriminatory law to the dustbin of history.”

On Monday, prior to the cloture vote, the Courage Campaign delivered 557,293 signatures from members across America calling for the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell to targeted Senators who were previously uncommitted on breaking the filibuster: Susan Collins (R-ME), Olympia Snowe (R-ME), Mark Pryor (D-AR), Richard Lugar (R-IN), Judd Gregg (R-NH), Jim Webb (D-VA), George Voinovich (R-OH), and Kit Bond (R-MO).

UPDATE: Text of Letter to Attorney General Holder from the Human Rights Campaign:

September 21, 2010

Dear Attorney General Holder:

On behalf of the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), I respectfully write to request that the Department of Justice (DOJ) refrain from appealing the federal district court decision in Log Cabin Republicans v. United States, which declares the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT) law unconstitutional based on the U.S. Constitution’s guarantees of due process and free speech.

After gathering significant evidence, including testimony by six discharged service members and seven expert witnesses, the decision states that DADT does not further the government’s interest in military readiness or unit cohesion. In addition, the decision acknowledges that the military is discharging qualified service members, including those with skills critical for the military’s success, during a time of troop shortages. Since the DADT law was passed in 1993, over 14,000 service members have been discharged because of DADT, nearly 1,000 of whom were specialists with vital mission critical skills. This discriminatory law hurts military readiness and our national security while putting American service members fighting overseas at risk.

While enactment of DADT was originally based on the mistaken premise that openly lesbian and gay service members would weaken our national security by hurting military readiness and unit cohesion, the President has acknowledged that this premise is false. On June 29, 2009, President Obama declared, “reversing this policy [is] the right thing to do [and] is essential for national security.” In addition to the President’s acknowledgement that repealing DADT is “essential for national security,” the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff have also recognized that the discriminatory DADT law should be repealed. The leaders of our nation’s armed forces understand that DADT serves no purpose in the laws of our nation; it is time for the DOJ to stop defending this law.

We understand that the DOJ is currently evaluating whether to appeal this decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The facts presented in the case add to the ever-growing list of evidence illustrating that Congress lacked even a rational basis for enacting DADT. Based on the mounting evidence, we urge the DOJ to refrain from appealing the case to the Ninth Circuit.

This decision affirms what the vast majority of the American people know to be true – that it’s time for DADT to be sent to the dustbin of history. We appreciate the Administration’s support of the legislative efforts to repeal DADT, but we expect the DOJ to recognize the overwhelming evidence that proves DADT is unconstitutional. Thank you for your attention this matter. We look forward to a day when DADT no longer exists in our nation’s laws.

Sincerely,

Joe Solmonese, President
Human Rights Campaign

UPDATE: Washington Post with reactions from SLDN and Richard Socarides:

“This issue doesn’t go away,” said Aubrey Sarvis, executive director of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, a group providing legal assistance to troops impacted by the gay ban.

“The Senate absolutely must schedule a vote in December when cooler heads and common sense are more likely to prevail once midterm elections are behind us,” he said.

Other gay leaders struck a less optimistic tone, blaming the White House, Congressional Democrats and gay rights groups for not pushing for repeal of the policy sooner.

“The Democrats have been against ‘don’t ask don’t tell’ for more than a decade and why we allowed this law to remain in effect for another two years is beyond me,” said Richard Socarides, a former gay rights adviser to President Bill Clinton. “I think we as a gay community all bear a significant share of responsibility for not insisting that the unconstitutional and discriminatory policy not be ended right away.”

UPDATE: Full statement from Aubrey Sarvis at SLDN:

““Today’s Senate vote was a frustrating blow to repeal this horrible law. We lost because of the political maneuvering dictated by the mid-term elections. Let’s be clear: Opponents to repealing ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ did not have the votes to strike those provisions from the bill. Instead, they had the votes for delay. Time is the enemy here. We now have no choice but to look to the lame duck session where we’ll have a slim shot. The Senate absolutely must schedule a vote in December when cooler heads and common sense are more likely to prevail once midterm elections are behind us. Servicemembers Legal Defense Network will continue to take this fight to the American people, the vast majority of whom support repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.’”

UPDATE: Statement from AFER:

“Our Constitution requires that every American is treated equally under the law and by our government. It is shameful that Congress did not act accordingly. Still, given the attention paid to this debate, as well as the recent federal court decisions regarding Prop. 8 and DOMA, I am hopeful that we are growing closer to meeting the promise of equality upon which our nation was founded,” said Chad Griffin, Board President of the American Foundation for Equal Rights.

UPDATE: To read the Senate roll call of votes as well as more updates and statements, click over to the extended entry:

UPDATE: Sen. Reid’s statement:

“Republicans are again playing politics with our national security. Today they blocked the Senate from debating a bill that would give our troops the resources they need to keep America safe – stopping not only funding for combat vehicles and bulletproof vests or measures to improve our military’s readiness, but even a well-earned pay raise to help our troops and their families make ends meet.

“I am disappointed that my Republican colleagues put partisan politics ahead of the best interests of the men and women who courageously defend our nation. Democrats will continue to fight for our troops and will work to ensure that our troops have the resources they need to do their jobs.”

Note that Sen. Reid voted “NAY” as a procedural move so that he could bring it back up for a vote at a later date.

YEAs —56

Akaka (D-HI)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Begich (D-AK)
Bennet (D-CO)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Burris (D-IL)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Conrad (D-ND)
Dodd (D-CT)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Durbin (D-IL)
Feingold (D-WI)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Franken (D-MN)
Gillibrand (D-NY)
Goodwin (D-WV)
Hagan (D-NC)
Harkin (D-IA)
Inouye (D-HI)
Johnson (D-SD)
Kaufman (D-DE)
Kerry (D-MA)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Kohl (D-WI)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (ID-CT)
McCaskill (D-MO)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Merkley (D-OR)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murray (D-WA)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Reed (D-RI)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Sanders (I-VT)
Schumer (D-NY)
Shaheen (D-NH)
Specter (D-PA)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Tester (D-MT)
Udall (D-CO)
Udall (D-NM)
Warner (D-VA)
Webb (D-VA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)
Wyden (D-OR)

NAYs —43

Alexander (R-TN)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Bennett (R-UT)
Bond (R-MO)
Brown (R-MA)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burr (R-NC)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coburn (R-OK)
Cochran (R-MS)
Collins (R-ME)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hatch (R-UT)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Isakson (R-GA)
Johanns (R-NE)
Kyl (R-AZ)
LeMieux (R-FL)
Lincoln (D-AR)
Lugar (R-IN)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Pryor (D-AR)
Reid (D-NV) (NOTE: Sen. Reid voted “NAY” as a procedural move so that he could bring it back up for a vote at a later date)
Risch (R-ID)
Roberts (R-KS)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shelby (R-AL)
Snowe (R-ME)
Thune (R-SD)
Vitter (R-LA)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Wicker (R-MS)

Not Voting – 1

Murkowski (R-AK)

UPDATE (2:50 p.m. PT): Alex Nicholson, from Servicemembers United, is on Hardball with Chris Matthews right now (starting at 2:48). Show re-airs at 4 p.m. PT.

UPDATE: From Rex Wockner:

GetEQUAL responded by calling on Obama to issue an executive order suspending discharges under DADT between now and the time that repeal is achieved.

“Four months ago, we asked the president to stop military discharges while the U.S. Congress haggled over our rights,” the group said. “He didn’t respond, and we’re now seeing the result of this complete lack of presidential leadership and courage. So we’re taking the fight back to the White House.”

“We need volunteers to help us hold the president accountable and meet him head-on during this election season, asking him at each campaign stop and at each fundraising party, ‘When will the discharges end?'” the direct-action group said. “Now it’s time for our ‘fierce advocate’ to step up to the plate for us.”

UPDATE: Joe.My.God posts what McCain said on the Senate floor:

Entry filed under: DADT trial.

DADT CLOTURE VOTE AT 2:30 p.m. ET NOW (DADT Open Thread) VIDEO: Graham doesn’t care what Lady Gaga thinks; McCain doesn’t care what Kerry Eleveld thinks

149 Comments Add your own

  • 1. Seraphiel  |  September 21, 2010 at 12:24 pm

    How does this factor in with the recent federal court decision that ruled DADT unconstitutional?

    I suppose an optimistic person might analyze it this way: Obama coordinated with Reid. The admin will decline to appeal the ruling, while Reid poisons the bill to make Republicans “vote against the troops” and get an easy campaign slogan.

    On a good day I’d like to think they were that smart and that decent…

    Reply
  • 2. AndrewPDX  |  September 21, 2010 at 12:25 pm

    Okay, just to make sure I got this… today’s vote was whether or not more debate is needed on the bill. That vote passed. It doesn’t mean the end of the bill, just that it’s not going to be voted into law (or not) today…

    Do we know when they plan to debate the bill? When could they finally get around to voting on the bill itself?

    Liberty, Equality, Fraternity
    Andrew

    Reply
    • 3. Alan E.  |  September 21, 2010 at 12:27 pm

      Need 60 votes to prevent a filibuster.

      Reply
    • 4. Anonygrl  |  September 21, 2010 at 12:38 pm

      It would not have gone ito law today anyway. They were voting on whether or not they were going to bring the bill itself to the floor for a vote, probably during the lame duck session in November. The vote today was just a sort of adminstrative thing that would guarantee the bill would get on the calendar and would be voted on.

      There was no way the bill itself would have been voted on today… just whether the bill would be put on the calendar and voted on by this congress or not. Now it looks like, unless Reid brings it to the floor anyway and outlasts a filibuster, that the bill will not be voted on till after the elections? At least, that is my understanding.

      Reply
      • 5. BK  |  September 22, 2010 at 7:48 am

        I think it’s hilarious how they Republicans think we’re so stupid as to listen to them, and wait until they (as they likely will) have a majority in the house & senate. Really?

        Reply
    • 6. AndrewPDX  |  September 21, 2010 at 3:51 pm

      It’s pleasing to me to note that both of Oregon’s Senators (Merkley and Wyden) voted Yea. I’m going to send them thank you letters as soon as I can.

      Liberty, Equality, Fraternity
      Andrew

      Reply
  • 7. Ronnie  |  September 21, 2010 at 12:25 pm

    I repeat…..Sue the Federal government for stealing our money to fund Homophobia, discrimination, & unconstitutional behavior….. >I ….Ronnie

    Reply
    • 8. BrianD  |  September 21, 2010 at 1:40 pm

      As odd as it sounds, I would LOVE to sue the federal government for this kinda behavior. Lol, if only I were independently wealthy and had the time to devote to it…

      Reply
  • 9. Alan E.  |  September 21, 2010 at 12:27 pm

    You should let John McCain talk all the way through the filibuster. If he wants to filibuster, then let him talk. Call his bluff!

    Reply
    • 10. Ann S.  |  September 21, 2010 at 12:29 pm

      Shame on John McCain. Shame, shame, shame.

      Reply
      • 11. Ann S.  |  September 21, 2010 at 12:31 pm

        shame on me for not clicking the box . . .

        Reply
    • 12. Joel  |  September 21, 2010 at 12:31 pm

      There aren’t enough Energizer batteries to keep his heart running.

      Reply
      • 13. Chris in Lathrop  |  September 21, 2010 at 3:09 pm

        What heart? >:)

        Reply
    • 14. fiona64  |  September 21, 2010 at 2:05 pm

      Didn’t someone once read the whole of “David Copperfield” for a filibuster? (Or did I see that on “West Wing”? I’m having a crappy day and don’t recall.)

      Love,
      Fiona

      (“Chapter One – I Am Born.”)

      Reply
      • 15. Elizabeth Oakes  |  September 21, 2010 at 2:58 pm

        “Bleak House” would have been a better choice.

        Reply
      • 16. bJason  |  September 21, 2010 at 3:19 pm

        Or The Cider House Rules (which includes David Copperfield)! BE OF USE!!!

        Reply
    • 17. Rhie  |  September 21, 2010 at 5:18 pm

      I want to see the rules change on that point. A person can’t just say “I’m filibustering”. they actually HAVE TO stand there and read the phone book or Dickens or something. Otherwise, the vote goes through.

      Reply
      • 18. Lesbians Love Boies  |  September 21, 2010 at 5:24 pm

        lol…unfortunately they might enjoy reading the phone book, since they love to hear their own voices.

        Did you see McCain after the last time he spoke (I think it was after the vote, and he was saying how sorry he was because of the Dream Act) when he left the podium, he looked over at someone and actually snickered. I need to find that moment on video. I was disgusted.

        Reply
      • 19. Rhie  |  September 21, 2010 at 9:49 pm

        ah ha yea. I would love to see that video.

        Reply
    • 20. BK  |  September 22, 2010 at 7:50 am

      If I had voted for McCain (as I nearly did), I would not be able to live with myself. Blegh blegh blegh! *puke*

      Reply
  • 21. Lesbians Love Boies  |  September 21, 2010 at 12:28 pm

    Scrying…

    Reply
    • 22. JonT  |  September 21, 2010 at 6:28 pm

      Bumming (And subscribing)

      Reply
  • 23. Sagesse  |  September 21, 2010 at 12:31 pm

    Maybe in the fullness of time, we’ll understand what just happened. I believe the DOJ will appeal, and I’m not sure that’s the wrong answer. For DADT to fall by a court ruling, it has to be able to survive appeal.

    Reply
  • 24. Lesbians Love Boies  |  September 21, 2010 at 12:34 pm

    I thought they were going to vote again after the discussion they are having right now??

    Reply
    • 25. Anonygrl  |  September 21, 2010 at 12:45 pm

      Who knows? The analysts are all talking in circles. McCain is talking now. Somebody throw things at him.

      Reply
      • 26. Lesbians Love Boies  |  September 21, 2010 at 1:13 pm

        I have an old iMac I just set back up…I have printed the Nay sheet and I have a straw…

        Spit wads at McCain if he talks again.

        And for those of you that think that this is immature…it sure is : ) I am allowed to have fun at my own expense and no one will really get hurt!

        Reply
      • 27. Anonygrl  |  September 21, 2010 at 1:37 pm

        It made ME laugh and laugh, so I approve this message.

        Reply
      • 28. Kate  |  September 21, 2010 at 1:39 pm

        LLB, just make sure that monitor is spayed, remember???

        Reply
      • 29. Lesbians Love Boies  |  September 21, 2010 at 1:59 pm

        lol @ Kate…it’s too old to reproduce!

        Reply
      • 30. Elizabeth Oakes  |  September 21, 2010 at 3:01 pm

        Couldn’t you breed it just once, so we can all have one of the cute little baby iPhones?

        Reply
      • 31. JonT  |  September 21, 2010 at 6:57 pm

        LLB, just make sure that monitor is spayed, remember???

        Oh sure.. one typo… :)

        I too am disappointed by this, but I could see it coming last night. Reid voted ‘No’ as well, which gives him the option of bringing it up again, if he can finagle the votes. But… :(

        Reply
      • 32. Kate  |  September 21, 2010 at 7:01 pm

        Elizabeth — We decided in the “spayed monitor” discussion of a day or so ago that no, they can’t be allowed to procreate. Then we might have to let teh gayz adopt the little ‘uns….

        Reply
  • 33. James  |  September 21, 2010 at 12:39 pm

    totally confused now…..

    Reply
  • 34. Joel  |  September 21, 2010 at 12:40 pm

    I think Harry Reid did this on purpose, and for purely selfish, political reasons. He’s up against ultra social conservative whack job fascist Sarron Angle, and they’re neck and neck. If this bill passed before the election, Angle could use it as fodder for the largely social conservative citizenship here.

    This way, Harry can say he did everything he could, but Angle can’t accuse him of getting the bill passed.

    Angle is a very very scary person, but it’s going to be hard to forgive Reid. What do I do? Abstain? Put in a write-in? Is that still even possible?

    Canada, here I come.

    Reply
    • 35. Straight Ally #3008  |  September 21, 2010 at 1:04 pm

      If I were you, I’d hold my nose and vote for Reid. Think about what Angle would do in office. Meanwhile, find another race you care about, where you can feel good about supporting your candidate, even if it’s out of state, and donate/work phone banks for that person.

      Reply
      • 36. Kate  |  September 21, 2010 at 2:43 pm

        May I suggest Jerry Brown for CA governor? Meg is outspending him so much (because she can) that I’m afraid the mindless will vote for her just because they’ve heard her name so much.

        Reply
      • 37. fiona64  |  September 21, 2010 at 3:55 pm

        There was an article in the SacBee today in which NutMeg said that she would not hesitate to use her personal fortune, if elected, to advance her agenda.

        http://www.sacbee.com/2010/09/21/3044468/whitman-willing-to-take-pension.html

        Love,
        Fiona

        Reply
      • 38. fiona64  |  September 21, 2010 at 3:55 pm

        I meant to add that I took her remarks to mean that she was not only willing to buy the office but also to buy legislation.

        That woman is scary.

        Love,
        Fiona

        Reply
      • 39. Ann S.  |  September 21, 2010 at 4:03 pm

        Fiona, that is very scary indeed. That woman is extremely dangerous.

        Reply
      • 40. Bryan  |  September 21, 2010 at 9:51 pm

        After she loses I say we start up a Meg Whitman Amendment forbidding canidates from funding more than x amount of the campaign with their own pocketbook. It would have to be heavily structured though so she couldn’t “gift” money to people to gift back to her campaign.. which I think is considered funneling anyway and is already illegal but who knows

        Reply
    • 41. bJason  |  September 21, 2010 at 2:42 pm

      When you start packing, let me know. We can carpool.

      Reply
    • 43. Elizabeth Oakes  |  September 21, 2010 at 3:02 pm

      You don’t ever get to vote for a politician you like, Joel….just the one who’s going to do the least damage.

      Reply
      • 44. JonT  |  September 21, 2010 at 7:01 pm

        You don’t ever get to vote for a politician you like, Joel….just the one who’s going to do the least damage.

        So true Elizabeth. That’s why I voted for Obama – I was under no illusion he would be the ‘Gay Savior’, but when I thought of McCain/Palin in charge, I got a little vomit in my mouth :)

        Vote for who will do the least harm to you. It’s far better than not voting at all.

        Reply
  • 45. Richard A. Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  September 21, 2010 at 12:47 pm

    When will they post the complete list of who voted which way on this? I want that list as soon as it becomes available!

    Reply
      • 47. ĶĭŗîļĺęΧҲΪ  |  September 21, 2010 at 12:59 pm

        I don’t understand: WHY HARRY REID VOTED NAY???

        Reply
      • 48. elliom  |  September 21, 2010 at 1:04 pm

        From what i understand of Senate procedure, if Reid votes no, then he has the right to bring the bill to the floor again for a revote.

        it’s not that he’s against the bill, it’s simply a procedural move.

        Reply
      • 49. elliom  |  September 21, 2010 at 1:05 pm

        Sorry about the caps issue….stuck key.

        Reply
      • 50. Richard A. Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  September 21, 2010 at 1:05 pm

        Thanks, LLB! This means I have what I need for Phase Two–contacting everyone in the Senate and demanding a new vote and that the new vote be this week.

        Reply
      • 51. Marc  |  September 21, 2010 at 1:10 pm

        Harry voted nay so that he could bring it up for a vote again. That’s a strategic nay.

        Reply
      • 52. Ronnie  |  September 21, 2010 at 1:29 pm

        My senators voted yeah. I will boycott all the rest. I will not fund homophobia & discrimination. Every penny spent in those states on tourism, etc is a penny spent on fascism. Those senators brought it on themselves. If their economy crashes…too f@#king bad…I don’t care…They don’t care about us so why should I care about them? If you treat me like a 2nd class citizen then you receive nothing from me. They have said today by this vote they don’t respect us…then they don’t deserve respect…they don’t deserve my money. I am a self employed struggling artist/fashion designer & my hard earned money is important to me & I will not allow it to be stolen so some homophobe can usurp his/her “moral” superiority over me.

        Today I am ashamed to be an American citizen…. >( …Ronnie

        Reply
      • 53. Elizabeth Oakes  |  September 21, 2010 at 2:46 pm

        Lady Gaga, get on your great big Fifty State asskicking boots….you’re gonna need ’em.

        Reply
  • 54. ĶĭŗîļĺęΧҲΪ  |  September 21, 2010 at 12:56 pm

    I wrote a long comment and realized it was just vile venting.
    The bottom line is: this Senate is not working honestly and efficiently, this Senate would not even vote for DADT repeal and DREAM Act, how can we hope for UAFA or marriage equality?  All we have is courts, and that’s really all we can honestly rely on and hope for.  Courts will have to deal with DADT, I’m afraid; and courts again will have to deal with marriage equality.

    — ♂KF

    Reply
    • 55. JefferyK  |  September 21, 2010 at 1:20 pm

      The courts are our only hope.

      Reply
      • 56. bJason  |  September 21, 2010 at 1:32 pm

        I have been saying that for a while now. No more money for ANY candidates. My donations will go to those organizations that work on our behalf through the Judicial Branch of our government!

        Reply
      • 57. Kate  |  September 21, 2010 at 1:34 pm

        I think you are correct, Jason. More $$$ to Courage Campaign! (Well, and Jerry Brown, since his election is so critical.)

        Reply
      • 58. Bob  |  September 21, 2010 at 2:20 pm

        HOPE incompasses, all things, it cannot be contained, hope springs eternal, even while it is being dashed upon the rocks, the spray flies up and each drop forms a new minute piece of the larger wave that just crashed. each drop contains the exact same makeup of the entire wave, smaller drops can enter places where the wave itself could not enter.
        And gently they errode new paths on their way back to their source.
        Hope cannot be focused only in one place, the courts are not our only hope, they may well be a significant part of fulfilling our hope,
        But placing our hope in places like the courts is to give our hope to the people who sit in those courts, and people have frailties, like religious beliefs, moral values , and judgements, that often get in the way of acting in accordance with the power bestowed upon them.
        The judges in the courts in this place and time are Catholic, and have that outlook or world view.

        So to as we’ve just witnessed the same goes for politics, and although again we must place hope in our political system,, The Constitution, our hope placed here, really again is given away to the people who act in those positions. This too is only a small portion of hope, drops which we fling hopefully with force, to have an impact in such a way that the people we soak in our hope will feel it, and act in ways that return it to us, fulfilled in our knowldege and acceptance as humans.

        Ultimately, HOPE lies in our hearts and minds, from their we send it out, but we do not give it away or place it in any insittuion to be accepted or denied. Our HOPE can never be denied, it can fall in unreceptive places (closed hearts and minds), and if so it simply returns to us, unacknowedged, we take it back, nurture it and reconfirm ourselves. We keep it alive, until the day when we send it out it is acknowledged, and comes back to us undiminished with joy and the ability to expand that hope.

        HOPE must know it’s home and place of honor, in our individual hearts and minds, keep it alive. It cannot be destroyed, we must honor it first for ourselves their where it lives, and eventually , ultimately, without a doubt we will see it mirrored in the systems we build around us, like the courts and politics, and religion.

        In our attempts at changing hearts and minds, lets not forget the most important being our own, this ongoing struggle has kept me so incredibily engaged (addicted), the roller coaster ride acquaints me with the hieghts and depths of my emotions, I have known despair, and loss, repeatedly in my life, but always that flame which dies, can be kindled to flicker again, it burns inside, and nurtures my heart and mind, sometimes seemingly unnoticed, but eventually I am able to see the spark again in anothers eyes, and the flame flourishes again.

        In the words of Harvey Milk, “ya gotta give em HOPE” in order to give it we each first have to have it. We have ourselves to rely on, and we are the harbor for HOPE

        Reply
      • 59. JonT  |  September 21, 2010 at 7:05 pm

        @bJason: No more money for ANY candidates. My donations will go to those organizations that work on our behalf…

        Yeah, I’m with you there.

        Reply
      • 60. JonT  |  September 21, 2010 at 7:06 pm

        @Bob – right on! :)

        Reply
    • 61. candide001  |  September 21, 2010 at 1:23 pm

      And with such inept democratic political leadership, those courts may very well be packed with right-wing conservatives. Until the religious right is put on a leash in this country, welcome to Uganda, North American style!!

      Reply
    • 62. Anonygrl  |  September 21, 2010 at 1:47 pm

      Sadly, this is how things work. The House dicks around with things, then votes one way. The Senate putzes and votes another way. They spend time trying to reconcile the differences and everybody votes again. RARELY does anything go through quickly, if it is important, and even more rarely if it is a controversial issue. Everybody has to get their licks in, and attach their pet projects to it and sell their votes to the highest bidder…

      But with all that, it is currently the best system of government available to us. So while it needs a ton of work, it does not need to be thrown out, because there is precious little else out there to replace it with.

      Reply
      • 63. Marlene  |  September 21, 2010 at 2:14 pm

        There’s no government like no government.

        Reply
      • 64. AndrewPDX  |  September 21, 2010 at 4:36 pm

        We have the best government that money can buy. — Mark Twain

        Liberty, Equality, Fraternity
        Andrew

        Reply
  • 65. Bill  |  September 21, 2010 at 1:00 pm

    Fierce Advocate Barack Obama could end all of this with the swipe of a pen.

    Cowards, all.

    Reply
    • 66. fiona64  |  September 21, 2010 at 2:07 pm

      No, he can’t. This was gone over and over again in a different thread. You can’t undo a law with a presidential order. It has to be undone by Congress. :-(

      Love,
      Fiona

      Reply
      • 67. bJason  |  September 21, 2010 at 2:54 pm

        Correct.

        He can, unless I am mistaken, issue a Stop-Loss order to suspend the discharges. But, he cannot reverse the law.

        I think this is where people get confused.

        The military was integrated “with the stroke of a pen”. There was no LAW that said people of color could not serve in the military at that time. That is how it could happen. There is now a LAW that says gays can’t serve openly. That must be undone by Congress (or declared unconstitutional by a court).

        Someone correct me if I am wrong.

        Reply
      • 68. Straight Ally #3008  |  September 21, 2010 at 2:58 pm

        At the risk of dredging it up again….

        I completely get that argument, and I didn’t give it a second thought initially, but I wonder how politically popular it would be to overturn a presidential order to repeal DADT after a few to several years? The out LGBT troops are grandfathered in and allowed to stay, but no newly outed troops? How would that even work? Mind you, I don’t put anything past the Religious Right up to and including introducing stonings, but how would that fly with the ever-more-accepting American electorate?

        Reply
      • 69. Straight Ally #3008  |  September 21, 2010 at 2:59 pm

        Ah, I missed bJason’s post. If were stop-loss only that’s different… however, why not do stop-loss while pushing for repeal through Congress?

        Reply
      • 70. bJason  |  September 21, 2010 at 3:08 pm

        @ Straight Ally: That is the question!! Why no Stop-Loss order?

        Many believe that it is because our “Fierce Advocate” is a closet homophobe.

        Reply
      • 71. Sagesse  |  September 21, 2010 at 4:32 pm

        @bJason

        I believe the reason Obama has resisted making a stop-loss order is that it would take the pressure off Congress to pass repeal, and the act really is offensive and should be repealed.

        Where he stands on this today is open to question. He did not get involved in the run-up to today’s vote. That was intentional. He tends to keep his powder dry, let the legislators do their thing, and step in at the last minute when things (like health care) stall.

        Reply
      • 72. JonT  |  September 21, 2010 at 7:13 pm

        @bJason: ‘He can, unless I am mistaken, issue a Stop-Loss order to suspend the discharges. But, he cannot reverse the law.

        Absolutely correct. Clinton was actually going to allow open service ‘via the stroke of a pen’ (executive order). What he didn’t count on was the religious reich, and their enablers in congress coming up with the votes necessary to override his executive order and ban lgbt’s from serving at all.

        Hence DADT was born – a compromise, enacted by congress. He can order a stop-loss (which AFAIK can still be overridden by congress as well).

        It will have to be repealed by congress for it to last.

        :(

        Reply
  • 73. elliom  |  September 21, 2010 at 1:00 pm

    hyp·o·crite –noun
    1. a person who pretends to have virtues, moral or religious beliefs, principles, etc., that he or she does not actually possess, esp. a person whose actions belie stated beliefs.
    2. a person who feigns some desirable or publicly approved attitude, esp. one whose private life, opinions, or statements belie his or her public statements.
    3. John McCain

    Reply
    • 74. JonT  |  September 21, 2010 at 7:19 pm

      LOL…

      I was going to respond: ‘You mean John McCain‘, but then I continued reading your #3.

      I used to actually respect McCain around 2000. But when he decided he wanted to be president, and started sucking up to the religious right…

      Well, I no longer believe anything that guy has to say anymore. He’s a career politician, and will say and do whatever is needed to keep his job.

      Maverick my ass. He just an old, rigid asshole whose time has long passed.

      Reply
      • 75. elliom  |  September 22, 2010 at 8:13 am

        Glad to provide the chuckle.

        He’s not claiming to be a maverick any more. He’s maverickey.

        Reply
  • 76. Mark M  |  September 21, 2010 at 1:06 pm

    Reply
  • 79. Lesbians Love Boies  |  September 21, 2010 at 1:07 pm

    I think I am going to move to California…then I won’t have to worry about McCain, Kyle or Brewer!

    Reply
    • 80. Alan E.  |  September 21, 2010 at 1:12 pm

      Wait to make that decision until after this election. We may have Whitman, Cooley, or Fiorina in office.

      Reply
      • 81. Gregory in SLC  |  September 21, 2010 at 4:38 pm

        We are considering California depending on election, prop8…Where else to move? Suggestions? Who lives in Canada?? How is that?

        Very hard because my children and job is in Utah. but one can only take so much Senator Orin Hatch :/

        Reply
      • 82. Lesbians Love Boies  |  September 21, 2010 at 4:48 pm

        Gregory, I feel your pain. I was born and raised in SLC and my family is there. I managed to escape in the 80s…but it was very difficult. Now Arizona is no better than Utah. Perhaps I should buy a ranch in California and invite everyone – but first we have to help vote Jerry Brown into office.

        Reply
      • 83. Gregory in Salt Lake City  |  September 21, 2010 at 6:38 pm

        Ranch is good :) I’m in! I’m pretty disgusted with AZ too, as my partner is Hispanic (comes from a distinguished Chilean family).

        Interesting that you lived in Utah! …I find many things I like about Utah but lately with church prop 8 fiasco and recent pressure of local government to bring more hate to Hispanics its lost much of the charm it once held for me. CA just a short flight away for kids to come visit.

        Thank you dear LLB for your amazing contributions to this site….tears coming now…so much stress over these issues…and gratitude for a place to come where people, care, understand and sympathize.

        Reply
      • 84. Kate  |  September 21, 2010 at 6:39 pm

        That settles it then — LLB and Gregory will come to Calif. and buy ranches next to mine. We’ll call it Gay Acres.

        Reply
      • 85. Gregory in Salt Lake City  |  September 21, 2010 at 6:40 pm

        YAY!!!!!!

        Reply
      • 86. StraightForEquality  |  September 21, 2010 at 7:28 pm

        Don’t overlook NH. Same-sex marriage is legal and we have no state income or sales taxes. It’s pretty country, too.

        Reply
      • 87. Richard A. Walter (soon to be Walter-Jernigan)  |  September 21, 2010 at 7:57 pm

        And BZ and I will buy the one across the road from you and then we can fence it in and charge the haters an extravagant toll to pass through!

        Reply
      • 88. Gregory in Salt Lake City  |  September 21, 2010 at 8:48 pm

        Thanks! I’ll check out NH :) PS “Hi Richard” sounds nice to live by friends!

        Reply
      • 89. Bob  |  September 21, 2010 at 11:03 pm

        @Gregory, and the others ready to jump ship, I hear ya, and don’t know what to say, a person can only take so much,

        As for Canada, you all are welcome up here, check it out, we are already home to many americans who couldn’t stomache the uphill political battles back home. .

        The thing is you folks are so vital in that battle, you’re the ones doing it, you’d be a big loss in the culture wars there.

        But we would welcome you with open arms, maybe we need to get that undergound railway back up and running.
        It would be a big win for us in terms of increasing the numbers of Rainbow People here, and we could work together to form an even a stronger voice in our local communities.

        Heck Canada is much like the U.S. in the sense we have our so called right wing provinces, and I’m one of those who kept moving to find a very liberal spot, of which there are many. You don’t have to fight for equality, and can contribute on an equal basis in community orgaizations.

        We just had our fall fair, and a local queer won first prize for his stich work, incredible tapestry, not unusual for the women to loose out in these categories, and of course everyone displays there finest dahlias, fortunately the queen who wins every year was sick this time so someone else finally got a chance.
        And just so you know Richard there was challuha bread in the baking competion.

        Kate could enter her prized hens, there was a bee keeping demonstration, and a friend won ribbons for his goats, but I’m sure it was becaus they were the only pygmy goats this time round.

        Our local group is called GLOSSI, Gays and Lesbians of Salt Spring Island, on another thread someone asked me which island, that just answered that, anyway the group is active, and I don’t know how we get away with not including transgendered in the name, but they are invlovled.

        Our community service to the fall fair was to do securtiy duty, which meant you got to wear gear like vests with radio communication to police, They advertise that the community fair is well protected by the queers, and they pay our organiziton an honorarium .

        Just thought I’d throw that out there, cause Gregory asked,

        I know you’re at a low right now, but I know you all will come back swinging. recoup and rekindle HOPE for the next round. cheers from Canada

        Reply
  • 90. Lesbians Love Boies  |  September 21, 2010 at 1:20 pm

    Thanks for the updates Eden

    Reply
    • 91. Gregory in Salt Lake City  |  September 21, 2010 at 6:40 pm

      Yes!! thank you Eden! I don’t have the strength to sift through voluminous rhetoric. Your media consolidation is greatly appreciated!

      Reply
  • 92. Bill  |  September 21, 2010 at 1:30 pm

    This is especially tough to take given the recent news that the military was allowing openly gay service members to go into combat, delaying their expulsions until after they’d already fought for their country and completed their tours of duty.

    Reply
    • 93. fiona64  |  September 21, 2010 at 2:08 pm

      Or worse, in some cases suspending the DADT hearing, recalling them to duty and then picking up the DADT case again after their tour (if they survived).

      Love,
      Fiona

      Reply
      • 94. Kate  |  September 21, 2010 at 2:08 pm

        Yep. It’s the cannon fodder defense yet again.

        Reply
      • 95. JonT  |  September 21, 2010 at 7:23 pm

        Yeah fiona, that’s neat isn’t it… It’s ok to die for us, just don’t get all uppity demanding your rights or pension or anything like that.

        Assholes.

        Reply
    • 96. Straight Grandmother  |  September 21, 2010 at 2:48 pm

      That is sick, sick sick

      Reply
  • 97. Don in Texas  |  September 21, 2010 at 1:34 pm

    We must work diligently to defeat Lincoln and Pryor of Arkansas and to elect supporters of our cause in every election.

    Never give up.

    Fight on.

    We will triumph!

    Reply
    • 98. Straight Ally #3008  |  September 21, 2010 at 1:38 pm

      Lincoln is expected to lose – unfortunately, to Rep. John Booozman, who voted against ENDA and twice voted for a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage.

      Reply
    • 99. Straight Grandmother  |  September 21, 2010 at 2:56 pm

      I don’t know Don, I am so discourged right now.

      Reply
  • 100. Jeremy  |  September 21, 2010 at 1:36 pm

    Why should we be upset? We all knew this would happen, hell since last year.

    The law was declared unconstitutional– and now there is no chance the lawsuit will be mooted by an act of Congress. Judge Phillips can issue an immediate, global injunction barring enforcement of this evil law. While I am sure Obama will appeal, both the decision and the injunction, I am confident the injunction will survive the SCOTUS, since DADT is obviously harmful to LGB service members and the military. Also, the Federal government will not be able to come up with any good reason why it still needs to fire soldiers because of their sexual orientation.

    Reply
    • 101. JonT  |  September 21, 2010 at 7:25 pm

      You’re right Jeremy. DADT is being assaulted on many fronts.

      We lost a battle, we will not lose the war :)

      Reply
  • 102. Bill  |  September 21, 2010 at 1:36 pm

    Very interesting news about an ‘All Faggots Must Die’ post at Joe.My.God.

    They have traced the ISP to the United States Senate.

    Interesting…

    http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2010/09/all-faggots-must-die.html

    Reply
    • 103. Dave P.  |  September 21, 2010 at 2:00 pm

      This is indeed VERY interesting. It looks like there is quite a bit of activity starting up to track down the source. And even if there are not a lot of additional details revealed, the facts just as they stand right now have the making of a pretty blistering scandal. SPREAD THE WORD ABOUT THIS.

      Reply
    • 104. Dave P.  |  September 21, 2010 at 2:35 pm

      There is an update at Joe.My.God:

      UPDATE: According to a friend of JMG reader Sean Chapin, the comment appears to have actually come from the Atlanta office of Sen. Johnny Isakson, the OTHER Republican Senator in Georgia, whose offices are not far from Sen. Chambliss’.

      Check it out !

      Reply
      • 105. bJason  |  September 21, 2010 at 2:58 pm

        Great, the local office of one of my senators.

        I am filled with NOT-surprise!!

        Reply
    • 106. Straight Grandmother  |  September 21, 2010 at 2:53 pm

      That’s Nasty, I wonder if our friend Velveeta King was visiting and unsupervised…
      Honestly I justt don’t get the hatred, I really don’t.

      Reply
      • 107. Gregory in Salt Lake City  |  September 21, 2010 at 6:43 pm

        Amen :(

        Reply
  • 108. bJason  |  September 21, 2010 at 1:39 pm

    I am going to try not to rant.

    1. eff McCain

    2. eff Reid

    3. eff Obama

    4. eff Richard Socarides for blaming US (see above)

    Oh yeah, could we put one more thing in the “dustbin of history” or is it full, yet?

    Reply
  • 109. Brett  |  September 21, 2010 at 1:56 pm

    Why did the Democratic Senators from Arkansas vote no? It’s not wonder why Blanche Lincoln is losing her Senate reelection race.

    Reply
    • 110. Kerali  |  September 21, 2010 at 6:56 pm

      Obviously, you are misunderstanding Arkansas politics. Lincoln is losing due to the increasingly liberal legislation that she is voting for, as she represents a state that overwhelmingly voted for McCain in the presidential election. She knows, as do I, that she can not win if she votes for every thing that the national Democrats want her to.

      She’s already stated that she will vote to end DADT when the military completes their review and prepares their plan to transition, as that is what her constituents are largely comfortable with. Reid knew it would lose as he was just as unwilling to compromise as the Republicans.

      In the end, Congress is all politics. They have people that elect them to their jobs, and eventually, they have to answer to those people. That is why social issues often come back to the courts, because in theory, they are impartial.

      Reply
  • 111. Sarah  |  September 21, 2010 at 2:02 pm

    You’ll have to excuse my ignorance in the topic of law, but my roommate pointed out that since it’s unconstitutional, how can it even be blocked or voted on at all, shouldn’t DADT just be phased out? I know that it can still be appealed but I couldn’t really give him an answer either.

    Reply
    • 112. JonT  |  September 21, 2010 at 7:30 pm

      I’m not an expert Sarah, but my understanding is that the US government still has the right to appeal the decision. Possibly all the way to the Supreme Court if they want…

      Reply
      • 113. Alan E.  |  September 21, 2010 at 10:35 pm

        Just a thought, but if the DOJ decides to not appeal the case, would anyone else have standing to appeal? Would they have to be intervenors from the beginning?

        Reply
  • 114. Lesbians Love Boies  |  September 21, 2010 at 2:11 pm

    To take your mind off today’s vote…my favorite cover of this song.

    Reply
    • 115. bJason  |  September 21, 2010 at 2:16 pm

      Thanks, LLB. I, too, love that also! :)

      Reply
  • 116. Ryan  |  September 21, 2010 at 2:35 pm

    On a side note – Imperial County’s opening brief can be found here

    Reply
  • 117. Lesbians Love Boies  |  September 21, 2010 at 2:45 pm

    Kerry Statement on DADT/DREAM Act Filibuster on Defense Spending

    “Today a Republican filibuster blocked funding for our troops and blocked efforts supported by our military brass to end outdated policies that force service members into the shadows or reject them entirely from serving their country,” said Sen. Kerry. “Gay and lesbian Americans are forced to lie about who they are, and patriotic youth who want to enlist are barred from service simply because they were brought to this country illegally as children. That’s wrong.

    “Today, we had the chance to listen to Admiral Mullen, General Colin Powell, and Defense Secretary Gates, strengthen our military, and make our society more just. That didn’t happen, and that’s an affront to patriots who want to serve their country and put their lives on the line for our security. As a veteran, I’m deeply disappointed, and as a Senator I’m deeply angered and determined to keep fighting until the Senate does what’s right.”

    Full Article: http://www.veteranstoday.com/2010/09/21/kerry-statement-on-dadtdream-act-filibuster-on-defense-spending/

    Reply
    • 118. Straight Grandmother  |  September 21, 2010 at 2:59 pm

      Good for you John Kerry…

      Reply
    • 119. Gregory in Salt Lake City  |  September 21, 2010 at 6:46 pm

      Well said! grateful to have a fighter like Kerry!

      Reply
  • 120. jbf  |  September 21, 2010 at 2:49 pm

    This is all B.S. Reed lied to the whole community, He is expected to loose this november, how will he be able to bring it back after the elections? Reed planned this to fail by adding a hot imigration bill to the DADT repeal. Reed duped the LGBT Community, he duped our service men and women, he duped the nation. He should be ashamed of his actions as should the 2 democrats from Arkansas!

    Reply
  • 121. Lesbians Love Boies  |  September 21, 2010 at 2:58 pm

    I know you don’t want to see his face…but look at all the old men standing behind him…they all need to be ‘repealed’ (the facial kind)

    Reply
    • 122. Kate  |  September 21, 2010 at 3:02 pm

      Jeez, that photo should be in black and white.

      Reply
      • 123. bJason  |  September 21, 2010 at 3:12 pm

        It really, pretty much is. Isn’t it?

        Reply
      • 124. bJason  |  September 21, 2010 at 3:14 pm

        Or, at least, it is in white. Which is how they like it.

        Reply
      • 125. Chris in Lathrop  |  September 21, 2010 at 3:18 pm

        I bet they’d still look pasty.

        Reply
      • 126. Gregory in Salt Lake City  |  September 21, 2010 at 6:47 pm

        Yep BJason…spot on!

        Reply
      • 127. JonT  |  September 21, 2010 at 7:32 pm

        heh, yes, old and white. The way government was meant to be run.

        sigh.

        Reply
  • 128. Lesbians Love Boies  |  September 21, 2010 at 3:00 pm

    UPDATE: From Rex Wockner:
    “We need volunteers to help us hold the president accountable and meet him head-on during this election season, asking him at each campaign stop and at each fundraising party, ‘When will the discharges end?’” the direct-action group said. “Now it’s time for our ‘fierce advocate’ to step up to the plate for us.”

    Can’t we flood the whitehouse with emails?

    Reply
    • 129. Straight Grandmother  |  September 21, 2010 at 3:05 pm

      LLB who is Rex Rockner, what organization is he affiliated with? Got a link?

      Reply
      • 130. Lesbians Love Boies  |  September 21, 2010 at 3:07 pm

        SG, it’s an update within this article ^ scroll up.

        Reply
      • 131. Straight Grandmother  |  September 21, 2010 at 3:22 pm

        OMG, I jst went and read the update from GetEqual Rex Wockner, they are asking for volunteers to take direct action against Obama at each campaign stop, pushing O to stop the discharges NOW untilt he next vote.
        GOOD Idea! I hope they get a lot of volunteers. I am really in favor of Direct Action and GetEqual knows how to do that. Sometimes they get arrested but not every time. I jsut keep thinking back to Lt Dan Choi giving his West Point ring to Harry Reid.

        Reading the testimony of the witnesses during the DADT trial, and also reading the court records from that Air Force gal Witt, it really truly deeply hurts me.

        I know I can’t do anything tonight, it is after midnight my time, I am to sad at this moment, just overwhelmingly sad. Tomorrow is a new day and I’ll go back and read Don’s post again and perhaps that will get me out of this funk and get my ass back on the firing line.

        Reply
  • 132. ĶĭŗîļĺęΧҲΪ  |  September 21, 2010 at 3:55 pm

    Rachel Maddow
    GOP blocks defense bill, DADT

    — ♂KF

    Reply
    • 133. ĶĭŗîļĺęΧҲΪ  |  September 21, 2010 at 3:56 pm

      Oh, it’s already posted :( Sowwy

      Reply
      • 134. Lesbians Love Boies  |  September 21, 2010 at 4:00 pm

        : ) I would never tire seeing her name!

        Reply
      • 135. bJason  |  September 21, 2010 at 4:05 pm

        She could “turn me lesbian” any day of the week!!

        How much does Rachel Rock??!!

        I see a new bracelet: HDRR? :)

        Reply
    • 136. JonT  |  September 21, 2010 at 7:41 pm

      Thanks Kirille!

      I watch all Rachel vids :)

      Hey @Tim from a previos thread – you should watch this too :)

      Reply
  • 137. bJason  |  September 21, 2010 at 4:03 pm

    POOR MCCain. Check out HIS after-party.

    Reply
    • 138. Ann S.  |  September 21, 2010 at 4:06 pm

      He thinks if he repeats it often enough, that makes it true.

      Reply
      • 139. Kate  |  September 21, 2010 at 4:47 pm

        Yep. Like the DIs in Perry. Over and over and over…..

        Reply
    • 140. Sagesse  |  September 21, 2010 at 4:46 pm

      The man needs medication.

      Reply
    • 141. Lora  |  September 21, 2010 at 9:44 pm

      OMG!! After watching this…I’m speechless!! I just want to bitch slap him soo hard! He’s sounds like a little bratty child who sticks his fingers in his ears, shakes his head going “LA-LA-LA-LA, I can’t hear you!”

      I knew I shouldn’t have clicked on that! Just a couple weeks ago I was talking to 2 friends of mine…one was in the Army, the other in the Marines..both gay women, and they told me of the HORRORS of interrogation that they went through while being investigated! It was just awful! My blood is boiling right now!!

      Reply
  • 142. Felyx  |  September 21, 2010 at 4:11 pm

    CBS Poll on DADT Views. When I last looked it was 67 to 31. Just now it was 66 to 33. Nice to know 2/3rds of US citizens support rationality!

    http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20017167-503544.html?

    Reply
  • 143. Straight Ally #3008  |  September 21, 2010 at 7:41 pm

    Great quote from Howard Dean on The Rachel Maddow Show:

    I actually think it’s the last gasp of the far right. The Republicans know that the new generation isn’t going to buy any of this….Young people in this country can’t stand all of this anti-gay bigotry, the anti-immigrant bigotry, the crackpot Obama-is-a-Muslim stuff….The Republicans know that you could get to young people by being fiscally conservative; our kids are more fiscally conservative than we are. But you can never get to them by attacking their friends.

    I’ll quibble with him about the “last gasp” of the far right, but I do think it marks the beginning of the end of using LGBT issues as a GOP scaremongering tactic.

    Reply
    • 144. Gregory in Salt Lake City  |  September 21, 2010 at 8:58 pm

      Thank you Straight Ally :D I needed that thought as I sign off for the day.

      Reply
  • 145. Lora  |  September 21, 2010 at 9:48 pm

    If Reid intends to bring this back up for a vote after the election…what makes him think it will be any different with, probably, more republicans in office???

    Reply
    • 146. Ann S.  |  September 21, 2010 at 9:51 pm

      I could be wrong, but I thought he was going to bring it up in the lame-duck session after the election but before newly elected Senators are sworn in.

      I guess the theory is that it will be less political because no one will be running for reelection at that moment.

      Reply
      • 147. Lora  |  September 21, 2010 at 10:50 pm

        That makes sense…I hope that’s his strategy.

        Reply
  • 148. Dave  |  September 21, 2010 at 9:57 pm

    It wasn’t the DADT that failed to get the number of votes needed it was the DREAM ACT. They should simply remove the DREAM act ammendment and DADT repeal would pass.

    Reply
  • 149. DADT Stalls in Senate – NYTimes.com « Gay Faith  |  September 22, 2010 at 12:32 am

    […] updates have been posted here via courage […]

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


Support the Prop 8 Trial Tracker

Connect with us

Get to know your fellow Prop 8 Trial Trackers on Facebook.

Please send tips to prop8trial@couragecampaign.org

Follow us on Twitter @EqualityOnTrial

Sign-up for updates on the Prop 8 trial, including breaking-news alerts.

Categories

TWITTER: Follow us @EqualityOnTrial

Error: Twitter did not respond. Please wait a few minutes and refresh this page.

Share this

Bookmark and Share

SITE STATS (by Wordpress)

  • 4,585,293 views of the Tracker and counting as of today...