DADT Repeal Passes in Senate

[Craig234]

This will go down in history books as a huge victory for America and Civil rights and Liberty thanks to DEMOCRAT PRESIDENT OBAMA!

Yes, it's a great and historic - not accomplishment exactly, but ending of a wrong, a major step towards removing one the remaining unjust bigotries in our law.

Landed whites only voting - a pretty small percent of 'We, the People' - has indeed seen our country become a 'more perfect union' for women, all race, and increasingly gays.

This is an unthinkable result for most of our nation's history, with its deeply rooted bigotry and understandable ignorance about gays.

Those past Americans - and most of today's Republican leaders - were and are wrong on this issue. It's great for the progress to happen and the injustice to be reduced.

Now, marriage.

Note, even as this is happening, the radical right in America has led Uganda to introducing a bill with life imprisonment for gays. It calls for executions, which its author says would be the ideal, but because of 'democratic and international pressures', he's willing to give that up and instead only have life in prison. This repeal is one battle for justice.

(To be clear, the anti-gay bigotry is in Ugandan culture; the bill, however, with the criminal punishments comes from the influence of the American radical right group 'The Family'.)

 

[ProfJohn]

psst Craig... there are more Republicans in the Senate today than at any time in the last two years. So how is it that it passed today, but was blocked before??

BTW after Arlen Specter switched sides the Democrats had a 60 seat majority and could have passed anything they wanted, but skipped on DADT, why?

The truth seems to be that this bill gives the military control of when and how DADT is ended and is not a blanket ending of the policy.


Personally I am glad this issue is done and over with and we can move on to more important things.

 

[ProfJohn]

Craig, read up and educate yourself on Klinger.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxwell_Klinger

Klinger first appeared in the episode "Chief Surgeon Who?". In that episode's original script, Corporal Klinger was written as an effeminate gay man. However, the writers subsequently decided that it would be more interesting to have Klinger be heterosexual, but wear dresses in an attempt to gain a Section 8 discharge.

Series writer Larry Gelbart stated during the M*A*S*H* 30th Anniversary Reunion special that Klinger's antics were inspired by stories of Lenny Bruce attempting to dodge his own military service by dressing himself as a WAVES member.

As I said, Klinger never tried to act like he was gay, he tried to act like he was crazy.

 

[Jhhnn]

You have got to be kidding. Usually it's idiocy or ignorance, but sometimes, it's both.

*Republicans filibustered this for the entire session*.

Remember 'wait for the military's study' as the demand from Republicans and the compromise position when Democrats tried to pass it over a year ago?

That study was *just released*. And you attack THE DEMOCRATS.

You are shameless, but you hurt your cause as an embarrassment to it.

Well, yeh, of course. Repubs held the whole session hostage to keeping the Bush taxcuts for America's wealthiest. Once that was in the bag, once the ransom was paid, they'll allow other matters to proceed.

This never would pass the soon to be Repub HOR, bet on that...

 

[Craig234]

Craig, read up and educate yourself on Klinger.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxwell_Klinger

As I said, Klinger never tried to act like he was gay, he tried to act like he was crazy.

Yes, I remember all that. And similar to my comments on conflating gay and cross-dressing, is conflating crazy and cross-dressing.

America had very little clue about cross-dressers at the time - and that's actually still the case, just somewhat less so.

My point stands, that you missed HIS point, that he was joking that 'poor Klinger would not have as much of a case to get discharged with his cross-dressing antics'.

But while we're at it, there's a bit of 'life imitates art' in that David Ogden Stiers, who played Winchester, recently revealed he's gay, but was secretly gay while in the MASH 'army'.

 

[Craig234]

psst Craig... there are more Republicans in the Senate today than at any time in the last two years. So how is it that it passed today, but was blocked before??

BTW after Arlen Specter switched sides the Democrats had a 60 seat majority and could have passed anything they wanted, but skipped on DADT, why?

The truth seems to be that this bill gives the military control of when and how DADT is ended and is not a blanket ending of the policy.

Personally I am glad this issue is done and over with and we can move on to more important things.

For a variety of reasons. First, Democrats always had the majority support to repeal DADT. Republican deserve full blame for abusing the filibuster to require 60 votes.

Second, in an earlier attempt, which passed by a majority vote with no Republicans, Arkansas' two Democratic Senators voted with Republicans.

They said the bill 'needed more time' for difference reasons.

Also, the Democrats had plenty on their legislative plate. Gays did attack them for dragging their feet - which saw the failed vote mentioned above happen.

So, if the Democrats did 'drag their feet' and pass this later than sooner - something that the vote above argues against with Republicans abusing the filibuster - we have a situation that the Democrats passed this later than earlier in the term, in contrast to Republicans who filibustered it and opposed it the entire session, and OVERWHELMINGLY voted against the final bill, and you say NOT ONE WORD against the Republicans and attack the Democrats who passed it. Disgusting.

 

[Carmen813]

Both sides are to blame for this not getting done sooner.
/thread



Craig,
YGPM.

 

[ProfJohn]

Craig, the truth is that the bill didn't pass because the Democrats tied it to something else and that allowed the Republicans to march in lockstep and oppose it.

Only after it became a separate bill did it pass. Why the Democrats didn't try to pass it on its own is anyone's guess. To many other things that they thought were more important most likely.

 

[Lemon law]

The only thing that has changed hands in the election of 2010 is control of the house. While the Dems still control the Senate and the Presidency.

So basically ole wheeping John Boehner can ram anything through the House, but the GOP does not even control the 51 votes in the Senate needed to pass anything the House passed on even a party line vote. The GOP now has an enhanced filibuster ability, but the GOP have overused the filbuster ever since the election of 11/2006.

Only one thing is somewhat different, by in large the DINO and Bluedog democrats who bet they could win re-election by pandering to the GOP lost their gamble and lost anyway.

Which somewhat implies two things.

1. The American voting public bought the GOP line that they could make things better.
And if instead, the same ole same ole GOP makes things worse instead, the GOP may be facing another dope slap come 11/2012.

2. And if the democrats get another mandate come 11/2012, the already diminished Dino's and bluedog Democrats may finally learn their lesson, that they have to becomes a unified party to get positive things done. And if getting positive things done that result in a bigger democratic majority in 11/2014 means its requires a united front of democrats against an already united GOP minority, well, that the democrats may well have to do.

Because the American voting public wants positive government action and not inaction.

 

[Ackmed]

So 33 Republican Senators support bigotry, discrimination, and are for playing politics with these issues - and no doubt many of their constituents. That's disgusting.

Good news that enough of the country has shifted for this to finally pass.

Now, if gays had the good judgement not to enlist in an oversized military that can make them commit violence some of which is not moral, they'd be better off.

Congrats to the Democrats who got this passed.

Wow, you're ignorant.

 

[fskimospy]

psst Craig... there are more Republicans in the Senate today than at any time in the last two years. So how is it that it passed today, but was blocked before??

BTW after Arlen Specter switched sides the Democrats had a 60 seat majority and could have passed anything they wanted, but skipped on DADT, why?

The truth seems to be that this bill gives the military control of when and how DADT is ended and is not a blanket ending of the policy.


Personally I am glad this issue is done and over with and we can move on to more important things.

And if the Democrats had done that you would have accused them of pushing a highly partisan agenda without conducting studies on it, etc. etc. All because your political sports team opposed it.

Just be glad that a horrible policy was struck down today, and be ashamed for the 33 pigfuckers who were too backwards to see it.

 

[UberNeuman]

And if the Democrats had done that you would have accused them of pushing a highly partisan agenda without conducting studies on it, etc. etc. All because your political sports team opposed it.

Just be glad that a horrible policy was struck down today, and be ashamed for the 33 pigfuckers who were too backwards to see it.

Amen.:thumbsup:

 

[manimal]

And if the Democrats had done that you would have accused them of pushing a highly partisan agenda without conducting studies on it, etc. etc. All because your political sports team opposed it.

Just be glad that a horrible policy was struck down today, and be ashamed for the 33 pigfuckers who were too backwards to see it.

Its astonishing to me how badly the repeal has been handled. What still amazes me is John Mcain's decision to make this his last big stand....

 

[K1052]

Its astonishing to me how badly the repeal has been handled. What still amazes me is John Mcain's decision to make this his last big stand....

His questioning of Gates and Mullen was hugely embarrassing. He had nowhere to go and it was more than obvious to everyone.

 

[Craig234]

Wow, you're ignorant.

No, actually you are. If you had a point, your attack would be followed with the information to support it - the missing information, arguing your point. You don't.

The only time it might make since just to make the attack is when the point is clearly evident from the context, like responding to 'gays are all molestors' with 'you're ignorant'.

That's not the case here. You are just an irrational person venting your irrational emotion of anger based on your ignorance by misusing the word ignorant, most likely.

 

[her209]

His questioning of Gates and Mullen was hugely embarrassing. He had nowhere to go and it was more than obvious to everyone.

I heard John McCain was flailing around throwing tantrums during the debate of the bill.

LOL... what a tool he's become.

 

[dawp]

I heard John McCain was flailing around throwing tantrums during the debate of the bill.

LOL... what a tool he's become.

And to think I had considered voting for him in 2000. He might have been worse than bush.

 

[Thump553]

I heard John McCain was flailing around throwing tantrums during the debate of the bill.

LOL... what a tool he's become.

I watched a portion of his performance. Unfortunately your harsh summary is spot on. Cherry picking and outright gross distortion of statistics, repeated calls of rushing to judgment, calls for yet more studies and yet more hearings, and even a last ditch position that it's a shame the Senate is wasting it's time on this stuff when it should be creating jobs. All the while claiming he is impartial and has an open mind.

It's sad to think he was my preferred presidential candidate in 2000.

 

[zsdersw]

Craig, the truth is that the bill didn't pass because the Democrats tied it to something else and that allowed the Republicans to march in lockstep and oppose it.

Only after it became a separate bill did it pass. Why the Democrats didn't try to pass it on its own is anyone's guess. To many other things that they thought were more important most likely.

The truth is DADT repeal would *not* have passed in the next congress, as a stand-alone bill or not.

While Democrats dragged their feet, A Republican House wouldn't have done it at all. That's the key difference.

 

[alphatarget1]

There was no reason to oppose it once the Pentagon study came out. I agree with ProfJohn. One of the main reasons it didn't pass last time was because Democrats started sticking crap in the bill and blame Republicans (mainly the moderate ones) for voting against it.

I'm glad this issue didn't have to be resolved in the courts, unlike other wedge issues such as abortion. Resolving these things with legislation is always better since it's more or less the will of the people and the public (even though those against it) will have an easier time accepting it rather than having the court shove its opinion down everyone's throats.

IMO.

 

[Ackmed]

No, actually you are. If you had a point, your attack would be followed with the information to support it - the missing information, arguing your point. You don't.

The only time it might make since just to make the attack is when the point is clearly evident from the context, like responding to 'gays are all molestors' with 'you're ignorant'.

That's not the case here. You are just an irrational person venting your irrational emotion of anger based on your ignorance by misusing the word ignorant, most likely.

It wasnt an attack, it was a fact. Im sorry you didnt like it. Calling someone ignorant, isnt necessarily an insult. Let me give you just one definition of it, "Unaware or uninformed." Which I think you are in this case. As you can see, it wasnt a misuse.

Just because I dont think gays belong on the front lines of battle, doesnt make me a bigot. I dont think women generally do either. And I love women! Most of them...

Have you ever been deployed? Have you ever lived in the middle of know where, with nothing, with a squad of grunts? Doing everything together? Have you ever lived, breathed, and died with other men in battle?

I believe with no doubt that putting a gay Marine in such a situation would do far more harm, than good. People who are actually fighting the war, are under extreme stress. Adding one more thing on top of that, is not good for unit cohesion. Adding any additional stress on top of them, is in fact detrimental to them, in my opinion.

Now it is a different story in garrison. Where it is more like a civilian work place for some MOS's. Where the most stressful thing is making coffee in the morning.

 

[Red Dawn]

It wasnt an attack, it was a fact. Im sorry you didnt like it. Calling someone ignorant, isnt necessarily an insult. Let me give you just one definition of it, "Unaware or uninformed." Which I think you are in this case. As you can see, it wasnt a misuse.

Just because I dont think gays belong on the front lines of battle, doesnt make me a bigot. I dont think women generally do either. And I love women! Most of them...

Have you ever been deployed? Have you ever lived in the middle of know where, with nothing, with a squad of grunts? Doing everything together? Have you ever lived, breathed, and died with other men in battle?

I believe with no doubt that putting a gay Marine in such a situation would do far more harm, than good. People who are actually fighting the war, are under extreme stress. Adding one more thing on top of that, is not good for unit cohesion. Adding any additional stress on top of them, is in fact detrimental to them, in my opinion.

Now it is a different story in garrison. Where it is more like a civilian work place for some MOS's. Where the most stressful thing is making coffee in the morning.

Homosexual warriors..Hmmm well there was Alexander the Great and his army of Macedonians who conquered the know world at the time, there was also the Spartans and lets not forget the British Navy who ruled the Seven Seas for a few hundred years.

 

[feralkid]

Have you ever been deployed? Have you ever lived in the middle of know where, with nothing, with a squad of grunts? Doing everything together? Have you ever lived, breathed, and died with other men in battle?

Whether he or you or I have or have not served, thousands before us have; and among those brave soldiers, a certain percentage were gay, whether you knew it or not.

 

[zsdersw]

Just because I dont think gays belong on the front lines of battle, doesnt make me a bigot. I dont think women generally do either. And I love women! Most of them...

Perhaps not a bigot, but it does make you terribly misinformed. If you think "gays in the military" (or women, for that matter) are a bunch of flaming stereotypes you clearly have no idea what you're talking about.

Homosexuals are as diverse a group as the rest of society. The ones who open their mouth and a purse falls out are, in fact, a relative minority within the homosexual community.

I know gay guys, for example, who are more macho and fearless than a lot of straight men. Doubt it? Look up any gay leather bar in whatever bigger city is close to you... or go to IML (International Mr. Leather) sometime.

 

[HomerJS]

I shed a tear for the GOP bigots in this country and in this forum... nah just kidding. Suck it, conservatives

I predict your face, shirt, pants and shoes will get awfully wet