Sen. Lisa Murkowski announces *support for repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”

December 8, 2010 at 12:59 pm 101 comments

By Adam Bink

Newest updates at the bottom

On the good side, our pressure is working!

On the less good side, the asterisk next to “support”, of course, is the same tune everyone is singing- support for repeal is contingent on the amendment process. Here’s Greg Sargent (bolding mine)

GOP Senator Lisa Murkowski has decided to support repeal of don’t ask don’t tell, her spokesman tells me, potentially adding another crucial GOP vote to the Yes column and putting 60 votes within reach.

“Her vote will depend on how free and open the amendment process is, but she has reached the decision that don’t ask don’t tell ought to be repealed, provided that proper preparations are implemented,” Murkowski spokesman Michael Brumas tells me.

With the Senate set to vote tonight on DADT repeal, this statement does not guarantee that she will vote Yes. Murkowski has given herself some wiggle room here by insisting on a “free and open” amendment process.

It’s excellent news that tracks with earlier reports this month that she would. But, it doesn’t guarantee an aye vote tonight in support of the motion to reconsider, which requires 60 votes.

I wrote this past week on whether Scott Brown, who just announced the same thing with the same caveats as Murkowski, would become the new Dave Reichert, Reichert being the Republican House member from Washington State who voted no on repeal over the summer and then to tell everyone he just oh-so wanted to get to an aye vote, but couldn’t get there. He tried to have in both ways.

So I’ll repeat Joe Solmonese’s statement at the time:

The largest gay rights organization, Human Rights Campaign, said in a statement that Brown’s announcement was “welcomed” but ultimately “of little value” without a commitment to advance the underlying bill.

“The true measure of whether or not one supports an end to this policy will come as the Senate considers if they will begin debate on the defense bill. Make no mistake, a vote against the motion to proceed is a vote against DADT repeal,” HRC President Joe Solmonese said.

The same is true here. If Murkowski votes against the motion to proceed, that’s not good enough.

Word from multiple public sources now is that Reid is offering 10 amendments for the Republicans and 5 for Democrats. Assuming adequate, not unlimited, debate time on each (30 minutes or more), that should be more than good enough for everyone. In fact, as Aravosis points out, that has been standard operating procedure the last three years. Things have clearly moved from September, when the Majority Leader refused to allow amendments. So the process should be fair enough for everyone. And if it’s not, then we know who’s playing political football with us.

In the meantime, Murkowski remains on the now-updated call list, as do the rest of the folks below. But she’s halfway there in part because of you!

The number is 202-224-3121. You all have been doing a fantastic job calling and reporting in the comments in today’s earlier thread. Courage Campaign sent action alerts to its membership today, as did our team at, as did SLDN and other major organizations and blogs. It’s all hands on deck.

Let’s keep it up. Our pressure is working. Ask these Senators to support a motion to proceed on the defense authorization bill, which includes repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. Then leave a comment with how it went.

–Susan Collins (R-ME) * (announced support for repeal, but not for motion to proceed)

–Olympia Snowe (R-ME)

–Richard Lugar (R-IN)

–Judd Gregg (R-NH)

–Scott Brown (R-MA)* (announced support for repeal, but not for motion to proceed)

–George Voinovich (R-OH)

–Kit Bond (R-MO)

–Lisa Murkowski (R-AK)* (announced support for repeal, but not for motion to proceed)

–Mark Kirk (R-IL)

–John Ensign (R-NV)

Update: I’ll add that Murkowski’s announcement puts it beyond a doubt that we have our 60 votes on the policy- which also ensures that an amendment from someone like McCain to strip repeal itself would fail- but not yet on the process. So when you call, please especially emphasize that you want the Senator to support the motion to proceed.

Update 2: White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs just commented:

“The president — I’m not going to get into a list of who — but the president has through the course of the past several days made calls to Democrats and Republicans on two very important issues: passage of the DREAM Act and repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.’

“I think we are — on ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ — I think we are very, very close to seeing that repeal happen. We’ve had important endorsements over the past few days that I think in many ways is the result of the process and survey that the Pentagon issued last week. The president is hopeful and encouraging Democrats and Republicans to get behind that.”

I don’t always agree with Gibbs, but he’s right today- we are very, very, close. And this time, unlike in September, the President is in the ball game. Now it really is all hands on deck. Keep hitting those phones!

Update 3: TPM talks to Collins’ spokesperson, who says negotiations on the process are making progress and continuing. Her staff is on the defense about the process, putting out statistics that don’t exactly tell the whole story on amendments, time spent debating the bill, etc. Which is interesting.

Also, Money part of Murkowski’s full statement:

“However, my support for moving the Defense Authorization bill forward, which includes a repeal of the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy, will depend on whether the majority allows for an open and fair amendment process. This is a weighty, policy-laden bill that normally takes several weeks to debate and amend. If the majority attempts to push it through allowing little or no debate or votes on amendments, I will be inclined to oppose those efforts.”

I won’t spend time pointing out the spin in that, but I’m posting it to make the point to keep hopping on that phone.

Update 4: Following the Senate caucus meeting today, Reid made the following comments. Frankly, it’s what he should be doing- let it out in the open and dare the Republicans to show they’re not being unreasonable. We’ll have to see if/how Collins responds. The baseline appears to be 15 amendments, one hour each, which is more than reasonable. Reid’s remarks are below.

Let me talk about the defense authorization bill. We know the issue that’s created a lot of heartburn for my Republican colleagues is the “don’t ask/don’t tell.”

I have worked a lot with Senator Lieberman, Senator — and Senator Collins. Senator Collins has been most helpful in trying to figure a way to get this done.

There was some stuff in the paper today that mean it — that said that she couldn’t make up her mind what she wanted to do. That’s really not true. She had made up her mind what she wanted to do. I just thought it was too much time.

So we’ve been talking. I haven’t worked this out with either Lieberman or Collins. But the average number of amendments we’ve had over the last many years that we’ve voted on is about less than 15.

So I’m considering making it so it would be possible to offer 15 amendments. We would have an hour time agreement on those. Republicans would get 10, Democrats would get five.

We would also, if the Republicans felt that they needed extra time on a couple amendments, they could choose those. And that would give them an extra four hours. That is, they would have four hours on those two amendments rather than — than two hours.

So, again, I have — I said I have to talk to Senator Lieberman and Senator Collins. But I would hope that that — I don’t know how, with Christmas staring right down our throats, we have to do START, these other things I’ve mentioned, I don’t know why that wouldn’t be reasonable.

Update 5: This isn’t the final word yet, but Ed at the Washington Post tweeted that Collins told reporters she wouldn’t  vote for the motion to proceed tonight, apparently until the tax cut thing is resolved (per the letter). Stay tuned.

Update 6: Lugar says he’s a no on the process if there’s no agreement on having a “full debate” as he terms it. That doesn’t mean he can’t eventually vote aye if there’s an agreement on amendments/debate. He also hedges on whether he’s for the policy itself.

Update 7: TPM’s Brian Beutler reports Collins (a) wants something more than what the Majority Leader is offering in terms of amendments/time (b) wants to do this after tax cuts is done. Collins’ comments;

“The majority leader’s allotment of time for to debate those amendments was extremely short, so I have suggested doubling the amount of time, assuring that there would be votes, and making sure that the Republicans get to pick our own amendments as opposed to the Majority Leader.”

“If he does that I will do all that I can to help him proceed to the bill. But if he does not do that, then I will not,” she added.

No word yet from Reid’s office on whether he’d be amenable to this, or whether he plans to press ahead with a test vote tonight. Collins told reporters this evening that, whether or not Reid accepts her offer, she’d prefer it if he delay tonight’s vote until after the tax cut deal is finalized and voted on.

“Everyone on the Republican side wants to see the tax package completed first,” she said. “So I have urged the majority leader to postpone the vote…so that we could get the tax bill considered first — which I believe could be on the floor tomorrow — and completed by Saturday, and then move immediately to the DOD bill, but under a fair agreement.”

Even if Reid agrees to her terms tonight, she says, she’s only the 59th vote, and the filibuster would succeed. “If we’re in the same situation that we are now, I don’t see how I could vote for it. But I’m obviously going to think further. But frankly they won’t get to 60 votes even if I did vote for it. So why not take the path that would lead to 60 votes”

I’ll have more analysis later, but it appears if there’s even a vote tonight, it won’t pass given where things currently lay in terms of the count.

Update 8: Multiple sources are reporting a vote has been postponed. This thread will no longer update and I’ll have some analysis later tonight. Thanks everyone for the calls- they helped.

Entry filed under: Don't Ask Don't Tell.

BREAKING: DADT repeal likely to come up for a vote tonight Judge Reinhardt’s question: Which is worse? Taking rights away or never providing them?

101 Comments Add your own

  • 1. Straight Ally #3008  |  December 8, 2010 at 1:08 pm

    Might I also suggest keeping up the pressure on certain Democrats? I was very happy to hear that Sen. Mark Pryor (D-AR) is now on board to support NDAA with DADT repeal, but I’m worried about Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, who asked a lot of questions about chaplains during the DADT hearings. Arkansans and West Virginians, don’t let up!

    • 2. Kathleen  |  December 8, 2010 at 3:05 pm

    • 3. Martha  |  December 8, 2010 at 5:09 pm

      I really hope I am wrong, but I really feel badly about what is going on. I do not believe for an instant the Repubs will honor there commitment to vote for DADT. The will get there trillion dollar tax cut and turn around and still not vote for it. The Dems are such such wimps.

  • 4. Mackenzie  |  December 8, 2010 at 1:08 pm

    I am so nervous about this!

    • 5. John  |  December 8, 2010 at 1:30 pm

      Me too. People are being hurt. We are telling soldiers that lying to their superiors and living a double-life is good for national security. We’re telling other soldiers that we don’t expect them to be able to be civil around LGBT folks, but it’s okay for them to shoot people because we’re sure they’ll pick the right ones. And we’re not giving same-sex spouses of military members support while their loved ones are deployed, causing these soldiers to be worried about their family at home instead of the enemy. In many cases, the loved one of a soldier who dies heroically will not be the one to get officially notified. It’s simply horrible policy, and very, very sad that this is even an issue of debate.

  • 6. Ann S.  |  December 8, 2010 at 1:08 pm

    Repeal it already!

    • 7. Lesbians Love Boies  |  December 8, 2010 at 1:13 pm

      Second that Motion!

      • 8. Gregory in Salt Lake City  |  December 8, 2010 at 1:18 pm


        • 9. Gregory in Salt Lake City  |  December 8, 2010 at 1:19 pm


          • 10. Freddy  |  December 8, 2010 at 1:25 pm

            What they said, I can’t stand the suspense, and I just re-enlisted for 18 more years today

          • 11. Lesbians Love Boies  |  December 8, 2010 at 1:28 pm

            Wow Freddy! Thanks so much for your continued service in keeping our country protected.

          • 12. Bob  |  December 8, 2010 at 1:32 pm

            woot woot to Freddy, thanks for checking in, I’ve been thinking about you,,,,,,,,

          • 13. Freddy  |  December 8, 2010 at 1:50 pm

            LLB and Bob, your welcome 22 down 18 to go then out at 60, If I’m not worn out by then.

  • 14. Sagesse  |  December 8, 2010 at 1:12 pm

    The amendment and review process seems to be there. Fingers and toes crossed.

  • 15. Richard A. Jernigan  |  December 8, 2010 at 1:15 pm

    I just got through calling both of my senators from NC. Hagan supports the repeal, Burr is in McLame’s corner on repeal. But I let Burr’s staffer know that if Burr puts his vacation ahead of our national security, I will not only take to the streets and airwaves of NC to make sure he is tossed out of his cushy job, but also the Internet. One way or the other DADT has got to GO!

  • 16. Bob  |  December 8, 2010 at 1:18 pm

    keep calling , keep phoning, all afternoon, work on seeing who else we can sway,

    don’t stop till the day isfinished, PHONE PHONE PHONE great work,,,,,,,,,,but we gotta keep at it………

  • 17. Bob  |  December 8, 2010 at 1:24 pm

    re Murkowski’s statement, that if they try to push it through she’ll reisit, she wants open debate, as do most of them….

    our first job is to push to get it to the senate, then like SMDL says they may have to rally to keep them in the house until they take all the time necessary for the debate and amendments…

    • 18. adambink  |  December 8, 2010 at 1:32 pm

      By the way, 3 cheers for Bob’s driving the family car here in the comments!

      • 19. Lesbians Love Boies  |  December 8, 2010 at 1:33 pm


  • 20. Freddy  |  December 8, 2010 at 1:34 pm

    This is a list of all the senators from all the states with the direct phone numbers, has a bit of other info as well.

    • 21. Freddy  |  December 8, 2010 at 1:37 pm

      Forgot to mention, at the top of the list, you can choose the state or sort by party or state, Keep it up Bob great work.

    • 22. Freddy  |  December 8, 2010 at 1:58 pm

      OK, so I was looking at the previous thread and noticed this is the same link that LLB had posted earlier.

    • 23. Bob  |  December 8, 2010 at 2:00 pm

      that’a a great list Feddy, I’ve been using that for e-mails, figure it can’t hurt to plug that hole too,,,,,, and at least that won’t show up later on my phone bill………

      also e-mails allow you to be more expressive,,,,,,,,,,for those uncomfortable talking on the phone,

  • 24. Freddy  |  December 8, 2010 at 1:43 pm

    Sen. Reid is now addressing the Senate after the vote for Public Servants Unions, yes 55/no 43 failed to move past cloture

  • […] repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” which, according to Adam Bink, “puts it beyond a doubt that we have our 60 votes on the policy,” but not on the […]

  • 26. Carpool Cookie  |  December 8, 2010 at 1:59 pm

    Re: Marriage Equality, I saw this at HuffingtonPost:


    Somebody Bad Stole De Wedding Bell

    Somebody Bad Stole De Wedding Bell
    Somebody Bad Stole De Wedding Bell
    “Now nobody can get married
    Who got de ding dong
    Who got de bell
    Who got de ding dong
    Who got de bell
    Somebody know
    But Nobody Tell
    Cause Somebody Bad Stole De Wedding Bell”

    The Prop 8 haters stole de wedding bell and we want it back!

    • 27. Carpool Cookie  |  December 8, 2010 at 2:01 pm

      Dang it…the Eartha Kit viewing box didn’t appear!

      Well….click the link, anyway.

    • 28. Ray in MA  |  December 8, 2010 at 5:44 pm

      Love it! Howz about if the P8TT web site played this tune every time the site page is opened!!!

  • 29. JonT  |  December 8, 2010 at 2:14 pm

    Fingers and toes crossed. Subscription box checked.

  • 30. Freddy  |  December 8, 2010 at 2:14 pm

    OK, so lets just hope the NDAA cloture vote this evening does better than the last two did, they just had one to allow the police and firefighters to unionize and then one to give all seniors and vets a one time 250.00 payment, both went down 55/43, sounds like the GOP is trying to play hard ball, granted there weren’t people blowing up the senate switchboards in regards to these issues.

    • 31. Straight Ally #3008  |  December 8, 2010 at 2:28 pm


      First, thank you for your service. Second, the NDAA is, normally, a “must pass” bill – I believe it’s been over 40 years since the NDAA hasn’t been approved right off the bat. Yeah, that’s how much the Religious Right hates teh gheyz. With Webb, Lincoln, Pryor on board, and as long as Manchin doesn’t defect, all the Dems and Independents will go for this, so if I’m calculating correctly we start at 58-42. If we get at least two Republicans on board – and it could very well include Brown, Murkowski, Collins, Snowe, and Lugar – we’ve got this, and McCain can yell about it all he wants to no avail. That being said, the suspense is killing me.

      • 32. Freddy  |  December 8, 2010 at 2:48 pm

        Straight Ally #3008, first off your welcome, when I went on post this morning, I stopped by where my partner works to have him administer the Oath of Re-enlistment, after it was over with, I could sense that he wanted to give me a hug and a kiss but as he was in uniform it would not have been the best if ideas. I know, even if it is repealed, that still would not have been proper but no one would have been kicked out because of it, because of DADT, we could have both lost our jobs. This has to go down. When I came in the Army better than 22 yrs ago, the only thing that was going through my mind was “what if they find out I lied on my enlistment papers” (about the homosexuality part), then DADT came along and things got a little better for a while, now it is worse than before, we never go out to eat because we might be seen, we have to explain our way out of situations at the stores when we shop, we don’t socialize with many people from work. I am getting tired of it and I would really like to see this go away before I turn 60 and retire. Sorry about the rant, thanks for the support and keep up the work everyone, I know it has to help.

        • 33. Michelle Evans  |  December 8, 2010 at 3:05 pm

          Freddy, this brings up a good question that I am curious about. You mentioned having to lie on your enlistment papers. Did it actually ask you on those papers if you are gay?

          When I entered the Air Force there were no questions like that, that I recall, but that was also a way long time before DADT was ever in place.

          • 34. Freddy  |  December 8, 2010 at 3:23 pm

            Michelle, back in 1987 when I turned in my enlistment packet, there were 2 or 3 questions that about that information, I can remember the question “are you a homosexual, have you ever engaged in homosexual condut… while I can’t remember exactly what form it was on, I do believe that it was on the medical questionnaire, BTW, I can attest from personal experience, joining the military will not encourage those that are “questioning” into becoming straight.

          • 35. Richard A. Jernigan  |  December 8, 2010 at 9:03 pm

            They asked that question on my emlistment papers in 1981. Not only on my active duty enlistment papers, but also on my DEP enlistment papers.

        • 36. Sagesse  |  December 8, 2010 at 4:20 pm

          Freddy, for your sakes and the sake of all those serving in silence, I do hope the law is done away with so that you can live your lives. DADT disrespects all servicemembers.

  • 37. adambink  |  December 8, 2010 at 2:22 pm

    Reid made some public comments that clarify things. I updated the post above.

  • 38. Rhie  |  December 8, 2010 at 2:28 pm


  • 39. adambink  |  December 8, 2010 at 2:49 pm

    Several updates above, folks.

  • 40. Don in Texas  |  December 8, 2010 at 3:18 pm

    <a href=";. Local El Paso pastor says God tells him to "interfere" with local government to deny health care benefits to domestic partners of municipal employees.

    Tom Brown obviously believes he can violate the First Amendment’s separation of church and state because his “god” tells him to do so.

    The fight goes on.

  • 41. Don in Texas  |  December 8, 2010 at 3:19 pm

    Local El Paso pastor says God tells him to “interfere” with local government to deny health care benefits to domestic partners of municipal employees.

    Tom Brown obviously believes he can violate the First Amendment’s separation of church and state because his “god” tells him to do so.

    The fight goes on.

    • 42. Lesbians Love Boies  |  December 8, 2010 at 3:49 pm

      Apparently he and Jan Brewer have the same GOD. God talked to Jan too.

  • 43. Don in Texas  |  December 8, 2010 at 3:20 pm

    OOps. Please disregard #35 above.

  • 44. Freddy  |  December 8, 2010 at 3:32 pm

    And at this point I have to ask “Is there a Republican Senator that is worth the air that he/she breaths?”

  • 45. mackenzie  |  December 8, 2010 at 3:48 pm

    Once again you extend a peaceful hand. They bat it down and demand more with no justification. Yeah Saturday sounds great, at that point our time for passage will then have run out. I am once again disappointed.

  • 46. Gregory in Salt Lake City  |  December 8, 2010 at 3:51 pm

    If need a diversion, can always tune into Maggie & Andrew showdown, begins in less than 2 hrs:

    Catholic Family Conversation on LGBT Issues
    with Andrew Sullivan and Maggie Gallagher

    @Kathleen, yes it really is today ; )

    Wednesday, December 8, 2010; 8:30-10:00 PM (ET)
    Georgetown University ICC Auditorium

    • 47. Ann S.  |  December 8, 2010 at 3:57 pm

      I’d be interested in this, but we’re seeing the movie Daddy I Do and it will conflict, alas.

    • 48. Carpool Cookie  |  December 8, 2010 at 4:15 pm

      OMG…will they be screening the documentary Deliver Us from Evil as a warmup??? I’d really like to hear Maggie’s review of that…

      • 49. Ann S.  |  December 8, 2010 at 4:20 pm

        LOL, I don’t think there’s a warm-up, but the filmmaker will be there to take questions. There was some controversy here in our quiet little liberal suburb — it’s an indy theater and the filmmaker is local, but for some reason 2 of the board members objected when it was first scheduled, and they pulled it. There was a massive outcry, the board director was replaced, and now it’s been re-scheduled for tonight.

        It never was made clear what the objections were, or who precisely made them.

    • 50. Carpool Cookie  |  December 8, 2010 at 4:21 pm

      I just went there, anbd the page says:

      UPDATE: Due to concerns by the sponsoring Georgetown student groups, the event will not be broadcast live, but will be featured here for viewing and comments directly after the event concludes.
      Our Apologies.

      What is this about…do they need time to edit out any damning remarks….or some people may be afraid to speak live on camera (like was argued in Walker’s courtroom) and need to be assured an escape route before it goes national??

      • 51. Ann S.  |  December 8, 2010 at 4:28 pm

        That is very weird. Makes it sound as though they all want to beat a hasty retreat before anyone else views it.

      • 52. Sagesse  |  December 8, 2010 at 4:41 pm

        At least it will be posted. And it solves my problem of how to monitor the DADT vote (or not) in the Senate.

    • 53. Sagesse  |  December 8, 2010 at 4:30 pm

      I’m going to watch. Haven’t yet figured out how I will keep tabs on the doin’s in the Senate at the same time.

    • 54. Ray in MA  |  December 8, 2010 at 5:48 pm

      Due to concerns by the sponsoring Georgetown student groups, the event will not be broadcast live,
      but will be featured here for viewing and comments directly after the event concludes.
      Our Apologies

      Broadcast available after 10:30 (EST?)

      • 55. Ray in MA  |  December 8, 2010 at 5:56 pm

        and their web page had a stroke… looks totally corruptedand scramb;ed. It maybe repaired by the time you see it…

        • 56. Carpool Cookie  |  December 8, 2010 at 7:26 pm

          “and their web page had a stroke… looks totally corruptedand scrambled.”

          I got that, too! I was thinking, “Gee, my computer must be getting REALLY old…it can’t jump through the hoops and display anything right, anymore.”

          Still, I kept clicking around on various areas of the screen…in vain.

      • 57. Ray in MA  |  December 8, 2010 at 6:04 pm

        But you can get to Reddit:

        Questions for the Hag:

        • 58. Ray in MA  |  December 8, 2010 at 7:44 pm


          Turns out that there were questions over who was actually sponsoring the event itself.

          While Catholics for Equality claims that the event was being sponsored by the Georgetown College Democrats and College Republicans, the live feed was clearly being promoted and sponsored by Catholics for Equality. In an attempt to give the event an air of legitimacy, the Rainbow Sash Movement, another “Catholic” LGBT group, released a statement praising the Archbishop of Washington, D.C., Cardinal Wuerl, “for siding with common sense and reason by allowing ‘Catholics for Equality’ a newly formed Washington DC based Gay Catholic political organization, sponsored by the Human Rights Campaign Fund to host an event to be held at Georgetown University Intercultural Center…”

          Of course, the Archbishop did no such thing. According to an update from LifeSiteNews, “Susan Gibbs, communications director for the Archdiocese of Washington, called the Rainbow Sash press release a “nice piece of fiction” and asserted that Catholics for Equality was not a legitimate Catholic organization.”

          The Georgetown faculty sponsor of the event, Joseph Palacios, was quick to point out in a comment to the LifeSiteNews article the following:

          Your readers need to know that Catholics for Equality is not sponsoring this event. In fact I as a faculty member of Georgetown assisted the student organizations—the Georgetown College Democrats and the College Republicans—in getting the speakers and helping them with logistics. I have done this kind of thing for numerous student groups during my time at Georgetown. All of the speakers, including Maggie Gallagher, know of this relationship. In no way does Georgetown University endorse the opinions of any of the participants in the event. Georgetown University allows their students to engage in free speech and to be exposed to the widest range of public debate. I should hope your readers value academic freedom and the ability of young adults to form their own opinions on public issues, including LGBT issues in American public life. Every effort was made to provide a broad range of Catholic perspectives.

          There will not be a live webcast.

          Joseph Palacios

          By the way, in addition to being a faculty member at Georgetown, Joseph Palacios is a founding board member of – you guessed it – Catholics for Equality.

          The level of duplicity displayed by these phony “Catholic” groups cannot be understated. What else can we say?

  • 59. Alex Gill-Gerards  |  December 8, 2010 at 4:04 pm

    Does anyone know how much Rick Jacobs gets paid? HRC’s Joe Solmonese gets paid well over 300k and all the lower executives get paid well over 100k plus. Is this crap going on with the Courage Campaign as well?

    • 60. Anonygrl  |  December 8, 2010 at 4:13 pm

      No idea. Why don’t you ask Rick? :)

      By the way, do you happen to know how much Brian Brown makes a year?

    • 61. Freddy  |  December 8, 2010 at 4:14 pm

      Alex, I don’t think anyone from Courage Campaign is doing this to get rich, they do it because their hart tells them to. I believe Joe Solmonese has a personal agenda and doesn’t want anything to get passed otherwise they would be out of a job real soon and they would prefer to hang on like Brian Brown and Maggie Gallagher, everyone knows how much they try to raise funds like NOM does so in my opinion they have the same goals but with different agendas. On the other hand, I think Rick Jacobs actually funds things out of his pockets when things are tight or the rest of them take a cut when times dictate.

      • 62. Richard A. Jernigan  |  December 8, 2010 at 9:18 pm

        Also, I have never gotten as many letters and emails asking for money from Courage Campaign as I have from HRC. And when I have gotten emails from Courage Campaign, the amounts listed as suggestions are about 20% or less of the amounts suggested by HRC’s mailings and emails.

      • 63. Richard A. Jernigan  |  December 8, 2010 at 9:21 pm

        And let us also remember that Courage Campaign was behind this lawsuit challenging Prop H8 LONG before HRC was. HRC actually wanted to wait until there was a better time to pursue this, and only hopped on the bandwagon of support AFTER the trial started and it became obvious that there was a strong case for overturning Prop H8. HRC didn’t even want the LCR to file a lawsuit against DADT!

    • 64. Carpool Cookie  |  December 8, 2010 at 4:25 pm

      Well, I don’t know about anyone else’s salary, but I was upset that our rate for posting here was just CUT from $200 to $99.99 per post…but then, we all get different rates…did anyone else get that memo?

      I’ma PISSED! And with Xmas coming, too!

      • 65. Lesbians Love Boies  |  December 8, 2010 at 4:27 pm

        I didn’t get that memo. I was relying on that money to pay for my new Kitchen remodel.

        Was it through the email, or the intranet mail?

        • 66. Carpool Cookie  |  December 8, 2010 at 4:31 pm

          I’m trying to get the Gay Agenda Relief Counsel to intercede. They keep giving me links to the housewares selection webpage…but I want firm action!

          • 67. Lesbians Love Boies  |  December 8, 2010 at 4:33 pm

            Ask them if they will convert you to the Home Depot point value. It was in September’s GARC board notes.

          • 68. Carpool Cookie  |  December 8, 2010 at 4:34 pm

            I have so many appliances and stuff already….I need the checks! Come ON, Human Resources!

          • 69. Anonygrl  |  December 8, 2010 at 4:41 pm

            When is the next GARC meeting by the way? I missed the last one and the subcommittee report I submitted before hand wasn’t acted on then.

          • 70. Lesbians Love Boies  |  December 8, 2010 at 4:41 pm

            GARC’s next meeting is on Friday the 10th – you have the link to the webcast right Carpool?

          • 71. elliom  |  December 8, 2010 at 4:41 pm

            The committee meetiing will be held as communicated earlier in secure email. Webcast by secure server will commence as planned. Considerations for action will be entertained at that time.

          • 72. Carpool Cookie  |  December 8, 2010 at 5:01 pm

            “GARC’s next meeting is on Friday the 10th – you have the link to the webcast right Carpool?”


            Yes, I have the webcast link, thanks. They had BETTER not cut me off again, because I have a LOT to say. I hope you’ll all be backing me up. I know I got a little overexcited at the last meeting, but I’ll keep “personal comments” to a minimum this time, etc.

          • 73. JonT  |  December 8, 2010 at 5:06 pm

            Excellent. I am looking forward to presenting my Midwestern LGBT recruiting numbers for this quarter.

            Hopefully I’ll get a nice bonus.

          • 74. Carpool Cookie  |  December 8, 2010 at 5:15 pm

            Aside from our international posting fees, for my taste anyway, the talent show committee is becoming way to cliquey. How do you get on that thing? (I was stuck on “Garden Ornament: Subliminal Message(s)”….AGAIN!) Also the “Quorum of 10” rule is getting really complicated, Re: use of the L.A. Ward jet.

          • 75. anonygrl  |  December 9, 2010 at 7:12 am

            Cookie, you want to be careful during a full council meeting about getting so riled up. Remember the last time when you got out of control about the whole “Receive a Rotisserie for Recruiting a Redneck” campaign and we had to have the Sergent at Arms remove you? Well, the “10% is not Enough” recruitment drive swings into effect over the holidays, and we don’t want another unpleasant incident.

        • 76. Carpool Cookie  |  December 8, 2010 at 4:33 pm

          PS: it was Intranet…harder to hack. “For Our Protection”, they say. Ha! Protection?

      • 77. Anonygrl  |  December 8, 2010 at 4:36 pm

        Errr… I got a raise.


        • 78. Carpool Cookie  |  December 8, 2010 at 4:39 pm

          ? ! ? ! ? ! ? ! ? ! ? ! ? ! ? ! ? ! ? !

      • 79. Ray in MA  |  December 8, 2010 at 5:51 pm


  • 80. Ronnie  |  December 8, 2010 at 4:18 pm

    Like I said on the previous thread…..

    Collins is an un-patriotic (rhymes with witch)….been out all day looking at apartments in NYC…just to come home & find out this women is holding this bill hostage just to debate what has already been debated over & over & over & over & over again….REPEAL THE F@#KING LAW….& stop disrespecting the brave men & women who are risking their lives for you, you selfish shrew…..

    but I want to add…the Ratpublicans are really being selfish rats…..they would prefer to destroy the military just to hold onto their repugnant blood covered money while turning the American Military into the laughing stock of the world….GOOD JOB PATRIATES!!!!…..(rolls eyes) ….

    8 / ……Ronnie

    • 81. Carpool Cookie  |  December 8, 2010 at 4:38 pm

      “….been out all day looking at apartments in NYC…”

      Oh boy…hope the vodka’s chilled and you have a nice icepack for your little head! Don’t give up :)

  • 82. Alan E.  |  December 8, 2010 at 4:26 pm

    Too much work to do to read this.

  • 83. Sagesse  |  December 8, 2010 at 4:37 pm

    The ‘Maggie’s Advocacy’ post is still inaccessible.

    If the mind-bending logic of this has been noted before, apologies.

    Maggie Gallagher believes that, because Maggie Gallagher indulged in irresponsible procreation 28 years ago, gay and lesbian couples should not be allowed to marry.

  • 84. Martha  |  December 8, 2010 at 5:17 pm

    For those interested. Just wish I was a Canadian now. Any as our officials haggle over DADT, look what is going on north of us.

    Our neighbor to the north seems to be a far more civilized place in dozens of ways. Here is an example from a Canadian newspaper:

    “As U.S. politicians continue to debate whether to let gays serve openly in the American military, the Canadian Forces have issued a new policy detailing how the organization should accommodate transsexual and transvestite troops specifically. Soldiers, sailors and air force personnel who change their sex or sexual identity have a right to privacy and respect around that decision, but must conform to the dress code of their “target” gender, says the supplementary chapter of a military administration manual.”

    • 85. Carpool Cookie  |  December 8, 2010 at 5:20 pm

      A couple I know moved to Canada a few years ago so they could live as a married couple. They said they’d never imagined how nice it would be to live in a community where they’re actually wanted. I miss them : (

    • 86. Bob  |  December 8, 2010 at 7:13 pm

      we’re also following a court case right now, regarding a polygamist sect in B.C. it is interesting, cause it has to do with what they call their freedom to practice their religion, but there is so much evidence from women and children showing the harm it does to them,,,,,,,

      would be real cool if a persons rights to freedom and justice trumped the rights of (men) in this case to practice their religion…

    • 87. Zoe Brain  |  December 9, 2010 at 3:53 am

      Transsexual yes, transvestite no. They’re different things.

      Transvestites have no “target gender”, they just like wearing clothes of the opposite sex now and then.

  • 88. nightshayde  |  December 8, 2010 at 6:13 pm

    Why is the “Maggie’s Advocacy” thread missing? Did it get troll-bombed, hacked, or pulled because we got a little too close to the truth about something?

    • 89. Ray in MA  |  December 8, 2010 at 6:41 pm

      Good catch NIghty! Enquiring minds want to know!

  • 90. Bob  |  December 8, 2010 at 7:18 pm

    did anyone watch Rachel Maddow, she interviewed the guy from Uganda who drafted the kill the gays bill,,,,, wayyy overr the top,,,,,, he’s of course a member of C Street, and he is definite that it is about protecting the children, from our gay agenda of recruitment in their schools….

    • 91. Michelle Evans  |  December 9, 2010 at 12:20 am

      And Part 2 of her interview with Bahati will be on Rachel’s show on Thursday evening, so there’s more garbage to come. I really have to give it to Rachel for maintaining her cool as she proceeded with the interview.

      Got just shake your head at this guys’ position: basically that he and his country are not promoting hatred, but they have no choice but to proceed with this bill in order to protect all the children from being recruited and ruin procreation for everyone. Sounds very familiar, doesn’t it?

      What’s happening in Uganda is a direct extension of what people like NOM want to accomplish in the long run: elimination of anyone who is LGBT.

  • 92. Michelle Evans  |  December 9, 2010 at 12:24 am

    Probably too late in the cycle for anyone to even see this post, but thought I’d pass it along. This evening, Cherie and I went into a Starbucks to spend a gift card a teacher had given to us for talking with her class.

    Since neither of us drink coffee, we were looking over the pastries. It was late and their selection was very low, and Cherie just happened to ask about what happens to all their leftovers at the end of the day since they don’t carry over to the next day. The guy behind the counter told us that anything left over at the end of the day is given to Rick Warren at Saddleback Church–the bastion of anti-LGBT in Orange County.

    Have to say after learning this that I would hesitate to go to a Starbucks in the future, knowing who they support.

    • 93. BK  |  December 9, 2010 at 1:24 am

      It may only be that one local Starbucks manager, not the company, who support Warren. After all, isn’t Starbucks based (and founded) in Seattle, one of the liberal cities?

      • 94. Richard A. Jernigan  |  December 9, 2010 at 7:56 am

        I know the Stabucks here in this area were among the list of sponsors for our LGBT Pride rally in Durham, and some stores have donated prizes to Drag Bingo.

  • 95. Sagesse  |  December 9, 2010 at 5:01 am

    Ed O’Keefe at the Washington Post

    Senate procedural vote on ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ postponed

  • 96. Sagesse  |  December 9, 2010 at 5:05 am

    From Talking Points Memo

    Collins Hands Reid A Final Offer On Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell

  • 97. Mackenzie  |  December 9, 2010 at 6:18 am

    I hear that they will bring it up for a vote today at noon. In the event that it doesn’t get approved for closure today, does it still have any chance after the tax-cut issues is cleared up. All we need are two forsaken senators on the Repub side to just vote with a heart….why is this so hard?!

  • […] basic working theory, without doing too much tea-leaf reading, is that yesterday, even with the vote being pulled, ended up being positive for those of us who want to repeal this […]

  • 99. Andrew_SEA  |  December 9, 2010 at 8:09 am

    To be upfront, I think we need to devote our attention elsewhere. I don’t want to be pessimistic, but with the behavior I am seeing from politicians on the floor, I do not expect to see any progress on this issue whatsoever.

    I think we need to focus on a judicial repeal of the ban and simply get it done.

    If our politicians want to play games on any side of the process – let them play their games. People are serving and dying to protect this country and deserve the uttmost respect and benefits regardless of their background.

    In a court of law, it has already determined this policy as unconstitutional.

    If Congress cannot act – let the court judgement fall and it will force the military and the DOD to implement it immediately. They had the ability in their hands to control the implementation via Congress vote and instead ot taking that opportunity, they played politics.

    We have had many years of people doing their duty and professional excellence only to be stripped of their rights and careers due simply whom they love.

    Just end it now. Judicial ruling and let the military determine how to implement the law. They had their chance, and it appears that any wiggle room allows for the most ridiculous arguments to be made. (McCain)

  • 100. Barry Cameron  |  December 11, 2010 at 11:54 am

    If the Democrats are smart you will stay away from gay right issues – I have never missed an election since 1968 and have never ever voted for a Republican in all those years. I highly recommend that the Democrats stay away from such controversial changes that have to do with gay rights. This single subject has kept the Democrats out of office time in and time out through the decades. You never learn from the past and keep making the same mistakes over and over again. No wonder the GOP is irate over our parties’ policies. I urge you to vote in line with the GOP on this one.

    • 101. Ronnie  |  December 11, 2010 at 11:58 am

      no not really….. 8 / …..Ronnie


Leave a Reply

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

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


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

Follow us on Twitter @EqualityOnTrial

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


TWITTER: Follow us @EqualityOnTrial

Share this

Bookmark and Share

SITE STATS (by Wordpress)

  • 4,585,324 views of the Tracker and counting as of today...