TPMDC
Dems Reach Deal To Repeal 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell'
President Barack Obama with Defense Secretary Robert Gates (left), and Navy Admiral Michael Mullen (right)
Share
Send to a friend!
In a major breakthrough just in time to energize the Democratic voter base for the fall, the White House has given its blessing to a compromise repealing the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" ban on gays serving openly in the military. The measure, which could face a vote this week, would allow the Pentagon to move forward with its review of the best way to end the Clinton-era policy.
The change would come in the form of an amendment to the defense spending measure, a process which the White House's Office of Management and Budget said late last night it will support. The Pentagon also backs using this method while it completes the review, OMB Director Peter Orszag said in a letter to Sen. Joe Lieberman, who is working on the issue on the Senate side. Orszag said the amendment would allow for "comprehensive review, enable the Department of Defense to assess the results of the review, and ensure that the implementation of the repeal is consistent with standards of military readiness, effectiveness, unit cohesion, recruiting and retention." Democrats on the Hill accepted the compromise last night.
[TPM SLIDESHOW: GAY RIGHTS MARCH IN WASHINGTON]
The new agreement comes following a private White House meeting for gay rights groups and after months of protests that included Lt. Dan Choi chaining himself to the gates at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue to draw attention to the sluggish pace of President Obama's promise to repeal the policy. Sen. Carl Levin told TPMDC yesterday that the White House came around "in the last few days."
The Associated Press reports that Rep. Patrick Murphy, an Iraq war veteran, is expected to introduce the legislative proposal Tuesday, with a vote possible as early as Thursday. Republicans say they'll fight the proposal. Murphy (D-PA) on Monday sent the White House a letter from military leaders citing a Gallup poll from earlier this month showing 70 percent of Americans favor overturning the ban.
As we have reported, most Americans want the policy dropped, though the wording of the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" question influences how people respond to pollsters. Young vets from the two current wars are more supportive of ending the ban.
Metro Weekly has more on the timing and early reaction here, reporting that Lieberman (I-CT) will introduce his version of the amendment later this week. Read the text of the amendment here.
Comments (135) | Join the Conversation!
Leave a comment
Follow us!
Most Popular
TPM Stories Now Surging on Digg.com
TPM Top News
© 2010 TPM Media LLC. All Rights Reserved.
conniptionfit
May 25, 2010 9:38 AM
Sounds like more foot dragging to me... but with an end in sight at last.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
conniptionfit
May 25, 2010 9:40 AM
If Obama has an ounce of presidential pride or political sense left, he will tell Lieberman to go f*ck himself, and his "alternative".
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
calbearinillinois
May 25, 2010 10:08 AM in reply to conniptionfit
It isn't Lieberman's alternative, it is the joint proposal of Lieberman, Levin and Murphy on an amendment. Essentially it sets a process for killing DADT instead of doing it now for political gain even as the military doesn't have its house in order for the changes it will have to make, particularly in educating troops on the policy revisions.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
alyoshakaramazov
May 25, 2010 9:50 AM
I'm sure they're also doing a study on the effects on "military readiness, effectiveness, unit cohesion, recruiting and retention" of the Iraq debacle.
No?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
calbearinillinois
May 25, 2010 9:56 AM in reply to alyoshakaramazov
Yes, that's a standard aspect of the military's internal review process. There have been several such studies to date, in fact, pointing out at various times the woeful state of readiness to deal with new threats, the tremendous strain on equipment and the lack of critical parts.
It just doesn't get much press when it happens unless there's a sensationalist headline that can come out of it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
bondwooley
May 25, 2010 9:52 AM
If you know any military folks who are suffering emotionally because of DADT policies, then you have probably learned that (a) we should not let the people who devoted their lives to America to be alienated from her unnecessarily, (b) we should not let people with guns become emotionally frustrated, and (c) it's not like they're "telling" major state secrets - to the contrary, they're just "telling" about their relationships.
My medium is video, and this one summarizes, at least for me, summarizes the absurdity of allowing any form a communication gap to exist in the military (of all places).
http://bit.ly/9YNli3
Let Congress make the repeal official once and for all.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Indie Pro
May 25, 2010 9:54 AM
If it is up to the military and their studies, is there a time limit? Can they take 10 years studying and preparing before implementing it? Another 20?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
calbearinillinois
May 25, 2010 10:04 AM in reply to Indie Pro
The study is to be complete in December, per the letters associated with this proposal. All Gates has been asking for is an orderly process. None of the major personnel policy changes of the last 60 years, from unit integration to admitting women to the academies to broadening the roles of women in the military (which sadly still tries to draw lines between combat and noncombat roles that don't reflect reality) have happened overnight, and the most successful have required siginifcant planning. When done right, the change isn't even noticed by most people (like the fact that women are now serving on submarines, after just such a review and planning process).
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Indie Pro
May 25, 2010 10:13 AM in reply to calbearinillinois
I mean in the language of ammendment, is there a date?
I understand the need for an orderly process, what I'm wondering is if there are time limits on this trigger?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Indie Pro
May 25, 2010 10:18 AM in reply to Indie Pro
this from anthoer article:
A proposal to step up the repeal of the ban on gays and lesbians serving openly in the military but still allow the Pentagon time – perhaps even years – to implement new policies
is there a timeline set? a drop dead date?
or is this a dazzling kick of the can down the road?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
dtOZONE
May 25, 2010 10:24 AM in reply to Indie Pro
DECEMBER, are you deaf?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Indie Pro
May 25, 2010 10:30 AM in reply to dtOZONE
I can't hear you, so maybe so.
Again, he refers to a letter. I point towards another article showing that it could take years.
"The proposed amendment will allow for completion of the comprehensive review, enable the Department of Defense to assess the results of the review, and ensure that the implementation of the repeal is consistent with standards of military readiness, effectiveness, unit cohesion, recruiting and retention," budget chief Peter Orszag wrote in identical evening letters
See, that goes beyond December.
Can you show me in the language of the amendment where it has a time limit? If any?
There may be, but December is not it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Indie Pro
May 25, 2010 10:34 AM in reply to dtOZONE
nevermind snarky, I found it myself:
(b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by subsection (f) shall take effect only on the date on which the last of the following occurs:
ARM10802 S.L.C.
(1) The Secretary of Defense has received the report required by the memorandum of the Secretary referred to in subsection (a).
(2) The President transmits to the congressional defense committees a written certification, signed by the President, the Secretary of Defense, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, stating each of the following:
(A) That the President, the Secretary of Defense, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff have considered the recommendations contained in the report and the report’s proposed plan of action.
(B) That the Department of Defense has prepared the necessary policies and regulations to exercise the discretion provided by the amendments made by subsection (f).
(C) That the implementation of necessary policies and regulations pursuant to the discretion provided by the amendments made by sub-section (f) is consistent with the standards of military readiness, military effectiveness, unit cohesion, and recruiting and retention of the Armed Forces.
the answer is, there is no time limit.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Indie Pro
May 25, 2010 10:42 AM in reply to Indie Pro
some see it as a dazzling kick the can down the road, cynical amendment, designed to dupe the base in time for the election:
http://gay.americablog.com/2010/05/text-of-dadt-repeal-legislation.html
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
dtOZONE
May 25, 2010 10:58 AM in reply to Indie Pro
You know, what the fuck ever, none of you cynical assholes matter anyway. Even when this does happen, you'll all find a way to shit on it anyway.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreeRider
May 25, 2010 11:07 AM in reply to dtOZONE
Absolutely! You can't reason with these pricks. When something good happens, they spend days trying to find something negative to complain about.
Fuck 'em.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Marinus van der Lubbe
May 25, 2010 11:36 AM in reply to FreeRider
Cut & paste, baby...no brain, just keypad functions...
What's new with your nut jobs in NC? We have some doozies up here in VA!!!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreeRider
May 25, 2010 11:40 AM in reply to Marinus van der Lubbe
Hey, Marinus! Did you hear about the NC Republicans saying one of their candidates to take on Kissel is not fit for elected office? The story is here. It's hilarious. I hope he wins because he's soooooo crazy bad.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Marinus van der Lubbe
May 25, 2010 11:45 AM in reply to FreeRider
He's like Beyond the Valley of the Dolls he's so weird. I did have a good lauhg at this...then wondered what sort of meds Indie Pro is on.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Cornelius
May 25, 2010 11:54 AM in reply to FreeRider
"When something good happens" you say? You mean like finding a job, with a living wage, the economy recovers, housing prices stabilize, the country starts to manufacture products again, outsourcing is prohibited, banksters go to jail, politicians get a conscience, ...? Oh, you mean DADT. You're right, DADT should be priority #1! And if I'm gay and out of a job, and 6 mo behind on my mortgage payment, well, I should be thrilled anyway. Well, it's nice to see a President who cares.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreeRider
May 25, 2010 12:55 PM in reply to Cornelius
You're right. Gays don't care about DADT now. That's why gays were chaining themselves to the White House fence.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Cornelius
May 25, 2010 1:26 PM in reply to FreeRider
Well, I must admit, SOMEBODY is physically protesting again. Nice to see. Surprised they let them get that close - you know, 'national security' and all. must have been a flash protest - fuck the permits. Otherwise they're across the street behind the buses.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Burnsey
May 25, 2010 12:39 PM in reply to FreeRider
You REALLY should read the legislation, it is a serious of "If, and When's" with absolutely no timeline for repeal. Really, read the legislation it is posted in full at Americablog. Read it before saying people are looking for something to complain about. I believe it's people like you who are looking for something to praise in legislation that has nothing but "down the road maybe's" in it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreeRider
May 25, 2010 12:56 PM in reply to Burnsey
Dude, STFU! AmericaBlog is the biggest bitch whine place on earth.
You've been complaining that DADT was being ignored. Now, you're complaining that it's not being ignored.
IOW, you're complaining. yawn.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Burnsey
May 25, 2010 1:08 PM in reply to FreeRider
You might not like Americablog, but the entire legislation is posted, so argue with the legislation not with me. I notice you still have not mentioned that YOU have actually READ the legislation. I have, so my opinion of what was written is valid. AFTER you READ the legislation, then you should comment. Odd, someone tells someone to stfu simply because that person actually read what they were commenting on.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreeRider
May 25, 2010 1:10 PM in reply to Burnsey
You're whining. You'd be whining regardless of what the legislation says because that's what you do--whine.
When DADT is repealed in December, 2010, you will continue to whine because it wasn't repealed on January 20, 2009.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Burnsey
May 25, 2010 1:14 PM in reply to FreeRider
You still HAVE NOT READ THE LEGISLATION, and I'm sure of it. You blindly follow without even reading what you comment on. When you read the legislation THEN you should comment. Until you do, you are just mouthing off about something you know nothing about. Again, READ THE LEGISLATION.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreeRider
May 25, 2010 1:18 PM in reply to Burnsey
bitch, bitch, bitch. whine, whine, whine.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Burnsey
May 25, 2010 1:20 PM in reply to FreeRider
Keep burying your head in the sand. It's obvious you are all opinion with no knowledge. You can't even be bothered to read the proposed legislation so that you can make an INFORMED decision on it. Please, read it and then post exactly where it states an end date or disprove that it could NEVER be repealled. It has a set of criteria that must be met in order to be repealled, but has no timeframe for it to be done. Goodness, but you are certainly up to your neck in sand.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
May 25, 2010 1:49 PM in reply to Burnsey
I just read it and I can't find anything that says it won't be implemented or can be repealed later. Where the fuck did you see that?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
human
May 25, 2010 1:58 PM in reply to chameleon
it's from their "Obama Sux" handbook.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
May 25, 2010 2:20 PM in reply to human
Yeah and it's getting fucking boring if you want to know the truth. They are so fucking predictable. Some of them only show up when they see a story about Obama so they can jump right in and bitch. From my point of view he is systematically working on all the issues he said he would - all the while trying to deal with this oil spill catastrophy as well as all the other major issues on his place - and this is not good enough. I have been around a while and I have never known any other president to work this hard and get so much accomplished in such a short time. He gets a B+ in my book so far and this is less than 2 years at the helm. The economy is moving in the right direction - unfortunately the jobs are the last to recover but it is recovering. I don't know anyone who thought realistically he was going to be able to fix everything overnight and those that did - well too bad folks. Change doesn't happen overnight but at least changes are being made in the right direct.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Burnsey
May 25, 2010 2:36 PM in reply to chameleon
I come here all the time, not only when there are Obama Articles. I just do not poswt often. You can verify that info with Josh, as he and I have had some pretty heated email exchanges about coverage of some Gay issues. I, overall, feel Obama is doing ok. This, however, is not Obama's legislation, but Congressional issues with mandates that contain no deadlines or timeline guidance. It is legislation that provides for an open door to foot dragging. I would have fully supported this legislative "compromise" if it had ANY sort of deadline. As written this could feasably be a 30 year process as they iron out how to implement it. I do not understand how anyone can support legislation that DOES NOT contain a deadline for implementation.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CyberDuckie
May 25, 2010 3:08 PM in reply to chameleon
Thank you! My thoughts exactly! It just seems that the Bush meme of "If you're not with me, then you're against me" has been inherited by some on the left. Things don't happen overnight. It's complicated to run a government, especially with the current political climate. I, for one, think the President is doing quite a good job. I may not agree with everything he says or does, but I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. He's getting things done and moving in the right direction, and that means a lot to me.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Measure for Measure
May 25, 2010 8:53 PM in reply to CyberDuckie
Nothing to add here, I just want to see my precious words displayed in a thin column.
Oh, and I am outraged that Obama has yet deliver me everything I want, when I want, how I want, starting with a pony. There's nothing stopping him, other than the two other branches of government, the Republican party, and the majority of Americans who disagree with me and whom I haven't bothered to try to convince.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CyberDuckie
May 25, 2010 9:20 PM in reply to Measure for Measure
LOL!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Leftflank
May 25, 2010 10:35 PM in reply to chameleon
A frickin' men. Nobody elected superman or should ever have thought that they were. The contrast of Obama to bush is so huge it that it's almost to big to fail, (joke). Legislating is of course a top priority, but how about the feeling, the general good feeling. I feel it, the world feels it, the guy is for real, his heart is in the right place & he exudes that & great confidence. The man is growing & we should all grow with him, one issue or challenge at a time. If people, like me, want there issues resolved, they should stick with Obama & our party. We've seen what the other side is about & the cloud of gloom that they will inevitably always hang over us.
There is room for complaining about the administration & always will be, with any one of them. Obama's got a lot of praise coming to. It's a focus thing. See the good!!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CyberDuckie
May 26, 2010 1:07 AM in reply to Leftflank
Absolutely! Although I personally believe that there is room to think outside party lines, I pretty much agree with everything else you said. :)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Leftflank
May 26, 2010 10:30 AM in reply to CyberDuckie
Thank you, & hell yes, we should never even get in a boxed in way of thinking, or not thinking, really. Our potential is one of our greatest assets.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
May 25, 2010 11:58 PM in reply to chameleon
sorry for all those typos!!!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lotl
May 26, 2010 12:09 AM in reply to chameleon
"I don't know anyone who thought realistically he was going to be able to fix everything overnight and those that did - well too bad folks. Change doesn't happen overnight but at least changes are being made in the right direct."
^^^ THIS ^^^ is what's getting fucking boring. Or maybe that's, annoying. Instead of complaining so much about the complainers, and exclaiming about what complainers they are, and continually repeating this, maybe you should just ignore them.
"They are so fucking predictable."
They aren't the only ones.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
May 26, 2010 10:04 AM in reply to lotl
What's the matter? Truth hurts doesn't it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Burnsey
May 25, 2010 2:49 PM in reply to human
I voted for Obama, I donated money to Obama, I campaigned for Obama, so I have every right to question how he does his job. You sound like you are promoting the same attitude the freepers did with Bush, "anyone that questions dear leader is an enemy". Obama requested that we hold him accountable for how he governs, that we object when we feel the need, that we not just go along with everything because he is Obama. You complained that the republicans blindly followed Bush, but now expect democrats to blindly follow Obama. Dissent on issues is not something that makes one your enemy. We are on the same side, we just have differing views of what legislation we find important and what we consider the right way to go about it. I'm personally sick of folks saying any criticism is tantamount to being in the enemies camp. Last I looked, Obama was still human, still has to deal with the f'd up spineless members of Congress, and as such is still prone to make compromises that need not be made. Even supporters are allowed to dissent about the process. It is rather embarassing that so many "liberals" get upset because there are differing liberal views. I've never voted anything but Democrat, so you have no place demonizing my differing opinion on tactics, and legislative language.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lotl
May 25, 2010 9:59 PM in reply to Burnsey
+1000
and they have to be nasty in telling you so. A result of defensiveness, probably, because truth hurts.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Burnsey
May 25, 2010 2:29 PM in reply to chameleon
http://gay.americablog.com/2010/05/text-of-dadt-repeal-legislation.html
Page 4 lines 1-6.
If the requirements are not met, it does not get repealed. There are no timelines included in the legislation, and they can take as long as they want. It COULD drag out, study after study after study, and never be implemented. If you read page 2, which is the effective date, you will see that the date is only when all the reqirements are met, and not before. Without a timeline or deadline there is nothing to this. The military can take as long as it wishes to review the policy, come up with how it is to be implemented, and drag their feet as long as they wish and still be in compliance with this legislation. This leaves it open for as long as they wish to take, and until this is completed, and IF this is completed, they are still allowed to discharge people. I like that there is an attempt to address the issue, but this leaves the door wide open to stalling and foot dragging. Without timelines or deadlines, this is just kicking it down the road in an attempt to open up the GayTM.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Michael
May 25, 2010 9:42 PM in reply to Burnsey
I have read the legislation. I am a gay male living in Florida. Speaking for myself, I am extremely proud of this president for acting. I have complete confidence that full repeal will happen by the end of the year.
It's about damn time that there is movement on DADT. The process of getting it done may not be what I would have liked, however, the end is the goal and it is in sight. FINALLY.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Indie Pro
May 25, 2010 12:19 PM in reply to dtOZONE
I'm used to the attacks, so no worries. But let me know when you guys get around to the actual issue, instead of attacking me.
From Richard Socarides, a lawyer, and former senior adviser to President Clinton:
"I know we are all thrilled tonight that there may be a break in the logjam over DADT legislation. And it is always important to keep focused on the art of the possible. This has been a long fight and it is not over.
"I am concerned, however, that the bill released tonight is being mis-characterized. I was expecting to see a bill providing for repeal of DADT now with delayed implementation. As far as I can tell, the proposed legislation instead makes repeal conditional on a future discretionary certification which may or may not occur.
"It may be the best we can get, and if so, I say let's grab it. But it is not repeal with delayed implementation. It's conditional future repeal."
http://gay.americablog.com/2010/05/socarides-on-dadt-deal.html
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Michael
May 25, 2010 9:47 PM in reply to Indie Pro
Wecan match quote for quote all night. From Andrew Sullivans Blog:
By keeping a low public profile on issues that were not yet ripe -- by which I mean ready for actual meaningful action, such as a mark-up or a floor vote, not in the more abstract sense -- Obama is able to see which issues really do have constituencies who care, one way or another. Perhaps if advocates of repeal had put most of their energy into other issues, and perhaps if outcry among pro-ban groups had been louder, Obama might have changed course. But it seems to me pretty obvious that repeal has been his intended course from the beginning.
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451c45669e20133ee8db88c970b
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Burnsey
May 25, 2010 12:33 PM in reply to dtOZONE
Really, WTFever? The actual proposed legislation does NOT have a date as you insisted it did, the facts are presented that show there is NO timeline, and that the legislation can take as long as it takes (YEARS OR NEVER) for the Pentagon to implement, and you get your panties in a bunch because YOU got an answer wrong and others showed you that what you believe is incorrect. WOW talk about a hissy fit. The fact is that this legislation mandates NOTHING. If the conditions are not met, and they are allowed to take as long as they wish, then DADT will not be considered repealled, and still people are being discharged. Get mad at the idiots that wrote this POC legislation that legislates noting. And next time, read the actual legislation before you pretend to know what is in it. The full legislation under consideration is posted in full at AmericaBlog. Read it and THEN make a comment.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreeRider
May 25, 2010 12:57 PM in reply to Burnsey
bitch, bitch, bitch. yawn.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Burnsey
May 25, 2010 1:12 PM in reply to FreeRider
blind following without reading the legislation. No wonder this country has so many problems, people don't actually read what they are commenting on. READ THE LEGISLATION, then you should comment.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreeRider
May 25, 2010 1:18 PM in reply to Burnsey
whine, whine, whine. bitch, bitch, bitch.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Burnsey
May 25, 2010 1:23 PM in reply to FreeRider
You really should change your profile picture to that of an Ostrich. You obviously buried your head in the sand and are afraid to actually read what you make comments on. You are part of the reason so much crap goes on in the US. BLINDLY FOLLOWING, never educated.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Geoff Johnson
May 25, 2010 4:15 PM in reply to Burnsey
You are right of course, but it's a complete waste of time to try to point this out to Free Rider or other similar commenters here at TPM. I spent a few hours a couple weeks back trying to have an actual debate/discussion about the Kagan nomination with Free Rider et. al. and all I got was snide remarks and personal attacks with no substance whatsoever.
Hard as it may be at times, it's best to ignore anyone who comments here (regardless of their beliefs, and it's not just the "defend Obama" folks who do it) that offers only vitriol and "screw you, you're stupid" type commentary. Unfortunately there's a lot of that.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Michael
May 25, 2010 9:49 PM in reply to Burnsey
From the Human Rights Campaign:
"We are on the brink of historic action to both strengthen our military and respect the service of lesbian and gay troops,” said Human Rights Campaign President Joe Solmonese. “Today’s announcement paves the path to fulfill the President’s call to end ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ this year and puts us one step closer to removing this stain from the laws of our nation."
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
It's Pat
May 25, 2010 12:41 PM in reply to dtOZONE
Exactly.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
May 25, 2010 1:43 PM in reply to dtOZONE
Isn't that the fucking truth. There is nothing this administration can do that will appease these whiners and complainers.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
larsvanness
May 25, 2010 10:32 PM in reply to chameleon
Hey chammy, there is no "y" on the end of catastrophe. Nice post by the way. Great to see that you have rekindled the old fire again. Not that it ever went out.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
May 25, 2010 11:55 PM in reply to larsvanness
LMAO!! I do know that. No excuse for not spell checking.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
larsvanness
May 26, 2010 12:39 AM in reply to chameleon
I got your typos. Just so you know that I read every word you write.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
May 26, 2010 10:01 AM in reply to larsvanness
I am so glad to hear that!!!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
human
May 25, 2010 2:04 PM in reply to Indie Pro
The Human Rights Campaign hailed the deal, and the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network announced that it is "enthusiastically" urging members of Congress to support it.
--So the Human Rights Campaign and SLDN are just suckers for some cynical political ploy? Sorry if this doesn't fit with Indy's "I hate Obama and nothing he does will ever be good enough" storyline.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
human
May 25, 2010 2:11 PM in reply to Indie Pro
"some" say Obama was born in Kenya. Oh wait, you probably believe that too.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Burnsey
May 25, 2010 2:57 PM in reply to human
Dan Choi is against this too. He made comments via twitter today, and will be on Joy Behar tonight. I respect HIS opinion more than the cocktail set at the HRC.
http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2010/05/tweet-of-day-lt-dan-choi.html
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
human
May 25, 2010 3:16 PM in reply to Burnsey
And the SLDN? They just part of the cocktail circuit carrying water for the congressional Dems as well?
Nevermind, just let one person do your thinking for you.
Amazing how Nancy Pelosi continues to get elected from a district in San Francisco--I wonder if all her constituents realize that they're just pawns in her cynical political game.
They'll never be as enlightened as you are.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Burnsey
May 25, 2010 4:21 PM in reply to human
As one of Nancy's constituents, I often wonder the same thing.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FreeRider
May 25, 2010 7:13 PM in reply to Burnsey
Of course, Choi is against it. If he said he liked it, then he wouldn't be on TV tonight. Choi has become such a predictable fame whore.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Progressive Party
May 25, 2010 9:59 AM
Does this deal include "no enforcement" clause to stop the horrid discrimination? Gays are already in the miltary so does this deal stop the mess this policy created?....
just sayin...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Why oh why
May 25, 2010 10:07 AM
After the military completes this difficult study, maybe they can start a study on the feasibility of maybe thinking about leaving Iraq in a decade or five (unless something bad happens or some random general objects).
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
bdog207
May 25, 2010 10:46 AM in reply to Why oh why
I love how are government spends so much time & money on all these studies, that maybe they should do a study on that.
Getting out of Iraq in the next decade wouldn't be a bad idea either.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Ugg the Repug
May 25, 2010 10:26 AM
Repugs say gays should continue to pretend they not gay. That way Repugs troll. Har har har.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Red XIV
May 25, 2010 1:22 PM in reply to Ugg the Repug
Their thinking is "our staffers and evangelical ministers pretend they're not gay, so why shouldn't soldiers do the same?"
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
bdog207
May 25, 2010 10:44 AM
It's interesting to note that our own allies who allow gays in the military says it has caused NO problems. In fact, letting gays serve openly increases retention rates & even boosts recruitment.
I think the naysayers of repealing DADT are just homophobes with pent up homoerotic tendencies.
If a gay or lesbian wants to serve his/her country in the military, they should be able to do so without having to lie about who they are.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Bloggin
May 25, 2010 10:49 AM
Since the whole 'gay' concept is all about SEX, and that sex is not what the military is all about, it should not matter what 'TYPE' of sex a person has, but that they can do their job.
However, 'don't ask, don't tell' should go, because the men and women in the military need to know who' they are sleeping and showering with.
Since it is all about 'sex', the 'gays' should have their own barracks, showers, etc. Because just as females don't want to strip naked with males looking for 'heterosexual' TYPE sex, the males seeking 'heterosexual' TYPE sex don't want to strip naked with the males looking for 'homosexual' TYPE sex.
They could even put the 'gay' males and females together. Because the issue is really not about 'gender', but about SEX and personal privacy for Everyone(Male, Female, Gay/Intersex/Hermaphrodite).
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CyberDuckie
May 25, 2010 11:59 AM in reply to Bloggin
You're an idiot. Your idea of separating gays and lesbians from non-gays and lesbians is akin to the segregation of the south in the 1950s and 60s. It's appalling!
Being gay isn't about "sex". It's about personal identity. You make it sound like every homosexual man in the military is trying to hook up with every heterosexual man in the military, which is absolutely ridiculous. These are professionally trained men and women. They are also human beings, and as such they deserve the same respect and treatment as everyone else. Lifting DADT does not equate to "Open Season."
Also, do you really think that, just because DADT is repealed, every gay man and woman will automatically admit their sexual identity? Do you always introduce yourself as a straight person to everyone you meet? I'm sure there are many men and women who will keep it to themselves for purely private reasons. I'm sure there are others who may not have come to terms with it themselves. And I'm sure there are still more who might choose to keep it to themselves out of pure survival instinct due to how or where they grew up. Who knows? Certainly not you. Everybody is different.
Of course, until you realize that sexual orientation isn't only about sex, then none of what I have said will mean anything to you.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
gayinmt
May 25, 2010 12:18 PM in reply to Bloggin
Actually being gay is not just about sex. Gay people love each other just like straight people do.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
human
May 25, 2010 2:07 PM in reply to Bloggin
Bloggin obviously gets all its "knowledge" and advice about homosexuality from the Family Research Council, and possibly the Ron Paul campaign.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Michael
May 25, 2010 9:59 PM in reply to Bloggin
Your post may be the dumbest thing I have ever read. Did you attend the "Sarah Palin School for the Ignorant?"
As a gay man, I wish it were all about sex. It that were true, why am I working 50+ hours a week at my job? Why am I paying taxes? Why am I volunteering in my community? I wish it was all about sex.
I can tell you one thing. My fraternity brothers in college were more about sex than I could ever wish to be.
Grow up you idiot.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lotl
May 25, 2010 11:37 PM in reply to Bloggin
Straight (oops, pun) out of the right-wing bigot book, with a pathetically thin true concern veneer over it: "We all know what sex maniacs those homos are! They have no self-control!"
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
again
May 25, 2010 10:50 AM
In a major breakthrough just in time to energize the Democratic voter base for the fall...'
are they kidding? Are they kidding?
Why is this admin so totally tone deaf in the face of the worst environmental disaster in us history?
THIS is what they think will recapture the base?
Repealing DADT is important, but for the past month virtually everything has been made into tiddlywinks by the BP disaster.
Note to TPM: I AM the base. And dealing with this when the gulf is being destroyed is frankly so out of it that it makes me not want to vote AT ALL this fall.
Pull your heads out of your collective beltway derrieres, sirs.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Bloggin
May 25, 2010 11:00 AM in reply to again
Remember, our current government can handle more than one issue at a time. Only if you are stuck watching TV news, is the BP Disaster constantly on your mind, which is what the media wants, to increase ratings. Understanding there is very little you can do, but watch and complain about our government or BP not doing enough during the entire process.
Also, you would be one vote as part of the base, not the base.
However, there is a portion of the base of Democratic voters that this issue is important to. Not only for the millions of gay people in America, but the voting parents and family members of those millions of gay people, along with the largest young voter population under 25 in our history, who may be Democrat/Independent or Republican.
So yes, this is another 'Big F*cking Deal'! lol
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
again
May 25, 2010 11:11 AM in reply to Bloggin
'Only if you are stuck watching TV news, is the BP Disaster constantly on your mind, which is what the media wants, to increase ratings.'
uh, no.
Anyone who has to smell the fumes from the leak, anyone who works in health care or conservation, anyone whose business or home is affected by the disaster has this on their mind Not because of the media, BUT BECAUSE IT IS THE WORST ENVIRONMENTAL DISASTER IN US HISTORY.
Stop dissembling. The administration is NOT dealing with the disaster -it is proving itself incompetent
and it is simply using gay soldiers this week to make themselves look better
but all it points out is that they haven't done diddly for a month in the bp disaster, which to point out the stunningly obvious, is time-critical and has been since inception
gay soldiers are just having their chains yanked by the obama admin, just like the WH has done with the rest of us
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
May 25, 2010 1:35 PM in reply to again
Please tell me what the Administration is supposed to do other than keep their feet on BP's throat. The Administration has every agency available to deal with this problem but it does not have the wherewithall to stop the leak. Only BP can do this. What makes you think they don't want this taken care of as soon as possible? It is a catastrophe and these bastards should never have been allowed to drill that deep if they weren't able to deal with a malfunction, but having said that - THIS IS NOT OBAMA'S FAULT. His administration is actually trying to do something but short of offering all government assistance to BP, there is nothing else he can do. What do you propose since you complain so much, WHAT IS YOUR SOLUTION, and if you have on, then perhaps you need to go get a job with BP. If you don't have a solution SHUT THE FUCK UP..
You are a fucking whining bitch asshole =looking for any excuse to blame Obama for this. In the meantime, is he supposed to sit in his office and not do anything other than deal with the oil spill. You are really an idiot.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Cornelius
May 25, 2010 2:27 PM in reply to chameleon
who's this guy again? I'm laying low for a while. Did you see my apology? good luck with again.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Red XIV
May 25, 2010 10:34 PM in reply to again
What the hell is Obama supposed to do about the oil spill? Change into a set of tights, dive down to the bottom of the Gulf, and use heat vision to seal the well? Then fly up and use freeze breathe to stop the oil on the surface from moving any further? Sorry, but Obama isn't Superman. He's just the POTUS. There's nothing that can be done about the spill that's not already being done.
There's only one way that's actually confirmed to work in stopping undersea oil spills, and that's drilling a relief well. Which is being done. The problem is that it's something that's impossible to do quickly. All the other ideas that are being attempted are all known to have a low probability of success. We're only trying them at all because a low probability is better than nothing.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
mezcalero
May 25, 2010 11:00 AM
About time.
On to DOMA
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Leftflank
May 25, 2010 11:12 AM
This is more like "Don't repeal, Don't tell". It's a stall on a half-measure, in order to wait & see if what is already fully known & should be ended, is used for the right political gain, at the right time.
If our Federal Gov't worked/didn't work on this same principle, we would be booting out Senators & Reps, left & right.
Do unto others, should be the theme, not, pretend & ignore.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
May 25, 2010 11:55 AM
Once upon a time, there was a farmer named Biddle in New England who was locally notorious for always complaining about his farming. Every year, he managed to make a good crop and sell it for a good price, but he nonetheless complained continually. One year it was too dry, another too wet. One year his crop would fall short because planting was delayed by rain or frost. The next, harvest had to come just a bit too early. One year, prices were too low, and if prices were high, he'd complain of how he missed the peak because he had to harvest too soon or too late.
Then finally, came a golden year. There was an early, warm spring with rains that came right after planting. Every day was sunny with plentiful rain in just the right aount that always seemd to come after sunset and abate before dawn. The the weather was perfect and, by coincidence, a drought in the south pushed crop prices to an all time high.
Throughout the year, Biddle's neighbors, more accepting of things as they were--always a desirable frame of mind for a farmer--and more than a little sick of Biddle's constant complaining, nursed a growing conviction that this year, finally, Biddle would finally be at a loss to find something to complain about and looked forward to the day.
After harvest was in and sold, Biddle's neighbors joined him at the fence and looked out over the stubble in their fields with satisfaction.
Finally, one said "well Biddle, I must say I've never seen finer weather or a more abundent crop and yours seemed to be the best of all this year."
Biddle looked out over his fields mournfully and said, "mighty hawd an th' soil."
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
again
May 25, 2010 12:02 PM in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
Let me know how your little story has ANY significance as we witness the slow-motion destruction of the Gulf Coast?
Your type of dissembling isn't going to cut it for the base, just the beltway.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
May 25, 2010 1:39 PM in reply to again
Sorry, I'm just putting the shoes on display today. I'm letting the customers decide for themselves if they fit.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Indie Pro
May 25, 2010 1:46 PM in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
that's a odd way to say you're being passive aggressive
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CyberDuckie
May 25, 2010 12:02 PM in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
I would just like to say that you, sir, are awesome! :)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
again
May 25, 2010 12:11 PM in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
What was it that biddle said when his fields were swamped by gulf oil, and the king rested in his castle as BP exercised criminal negligence in protecting the lands?
Because this has not exactly been the gentle weather you describe. Rather, it is a continuation of the bitter frost of the Bush years.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
LFC
May 25, 2010 12:18 PM in reply to again
Please list, in detail, just where you think the government should go for expertise on how to cap a 5,000 foot deep well. List companies and government agencies by name.
Guess what. There are NO gov't agencies that can handle this due to lack of expertise and zero, zippo, nada equipment for working at 5,000 feet. So who tops the list in private industry? BP and Halliburton, who are the ones working on it. Exxon and other large oil companies might be called in to replace BP, but would they even want to?
You want a magic fix for technology that simply doesn't exist. Sorry, but reality intrudes. The government hasn't taken over for the simple reason that there is nothing they are technologically capable of doing.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Indie Pro
May 25, 2010 12:23 PM in reply to LFC
Where the administration could provide leadership is here:
-BP refusing to take an accurate measure of the spill, for over 30 days now. Not doing so, has been shown to be in BP's interest, and the govt shrugs, hoping each next attempt to stop the leak will render the question of how much oil is gushing moot. The govt and BP are stalling for time on this one.
-BP or the govt not tracking the plumes of oil or marshalling the scietific resources to measure the impact, as stated by the frustration of scientists, recently in the news, about their inability to gain access, etc.
-BP turning away reporters from beaches and other affected areas. Locking down info all together. Who is in charge here?
-BP telling the EPA what dispersants they'll use, and even whether dispersants are a good idea, since it affects the whole water column. Who is in charge here? BP was ordered to stop, BP said no, the govt said, well ok.
-overall, BP is mounting a PR effort to minimize public sentiment and impact by controlling information from scientist and the general public, and making decisions about how we clean up this mess - when that is absolutely a public concern! they should pay for it, but we the people should be making the decisions, not based on what is best for BP.
What we need is leadership!
Granted, the govt should be using the expertise of BP, and other industry, but there is more going on than just plugging the well, and the govt seems to be allowing BP to callt he shots.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Indie Pro
May 25, 2010 12:27 PM in reply to Indie Pro
here's a good tpm blog to consider:
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/d/a/dan_k/2010/05/washington-has-the-authority-t.php?ref=reccafe
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
nbohlen
May 25, 2010 2:29 PM in reply to Indie Pro
You say we need leadership. Well, I would argue that we as voters need to provide that leadership, whether it is telling the government to be more active in resolving the BP oil spill or encouraging our senators to repeal DADT.
And since often times it is difficult for the lone voter, as an individual, to enact change and voice his or her opinion, that's why we have political groups and organizations to leverage and pressure our politicians in Washington. The best way to help those organizations? Make a contribution to fund their fights to lead politics in a progressive direction.
As a Vermonter, I'm partial to Democracy for America (though don't misunderstand me - they are nationwide, with over 1 million members). I've provided the link below so people who want to can contribute in action, not just in words (though both are SO important):
http://bit.ly/953POi
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Indie Pro
May 25, 2010 2:52 PM in reply to nbohlen
Right on!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
again
May 25, 2010 12:25 PM in reply to LFC
Hey, it might occur to you (and the obama admin) that if they lack the expertise to stop the 'leak' they could AT LEAST oversee the onshore protective buoys.
But even that hasn't been done.
You might have read in The NY Times (though not at TPM) that countries like Sweden with substantial experience in surface containment were begging to assist as early as three weeks ago.
But even that was refused.
AT the very least, the admin might suspend new permits, but as we've now learned, that also wasn't done.
Just how incompetent and feckless is this administration? Sadly, VERY.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
May 25, 2010 1:46 PM in reply to again
I hate liars and you are a fucking liar. No way did this administration refuse help- and you read no such thing in the times.
http://www.beaumontenterprise.com/news/local/13_nations_UN_offer_help_with_oil_spill.html
The State Department says officials are considering offers of assistance from 13 countries and the United Nations to help with the massive oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.
U.S. neighbors Canada and Mexico are among those offering equipment and experts in containing and cleaning up the leak from the BP oil rig that exploded April 20.
State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley said Wednesday that the Coast Guard is evaluating the needs of the cleanup operation and will decide what, if any, aid to accept in the coming days.
Also offering aid are Britain, Croatia, France, Germany, Ireland, the Netherlands, Norway, Romania, South Korea, Spain, Sweden and the U.N. Environmental Program.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
again
May 25, 2010 2:46 PM in reply to chameleon
Wow, they're considering accepting assistance from countries that volunteer their superior expertise?
For a month now they're Considering it?
That just confirms their fecklessness.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
May 25, 2010 9:37 PM in reply to again
If you don't understand by now that there are lots of red tape and channels to go through with any coordination with other countries on anything. I am sure there are tons of people working on this and yes, it seems like an eternity but just because things aren't going as fast as you would like, doesn't mean it isn't happening. What's the positive here for Obama not to act on this. He's not stupid. He knows the anger and frustration out there and I can bet you he's just as frustrated. Why would he endanger his re-election over this. Is is absurd to even think this. You just need to stop thinking there is something sinister in every fricking issue. Gosh what whiners and complainers.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
larsvanness
May 25, 2010 10:41 PM in reply to chameleon
Don't give up the expletives!!! Ya all ought to hear me carry on about the Repubs when I've had a load of Scotch...or not. Fucking Rebublikans!!!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
May 26, 2010 12:00 AM in reply to larsvanness
Yeah, but I was sober!!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
larsvanness
May 26, 2010 12:10 AM in reply to chameleon
LOL...yeah but then you have more class than I do.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lotl
May 26, 2010 12:13 AM in reply to larsvanness
get a room, you two
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
larsvanness
May 26, 2010 12:32 AM in reply to lotl
Jealous? Well you should be. A superior mind is a beautiful thing. The quality of chameleons intellect is far superior to anything that I've seen you display here. With all due respect of course.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
May 26, 2010 9:05 AM in reply to lotl
What a silly thing to say.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
again
May 25, 2010 2:51 PM in reply to chameleon
Btw, can you get a handle on your expletives ?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
human
May 25, 2010 3:19 PM in reply to again
and can you go start your own blog devoted exclusively to the one and only issue that you think everyone should care about, instead of spamming this thread?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
May 25, 2010 2:51 PM in reply to again
I'm sorry, but you seem to have wandered on to a story about a bill to end DADT under the impression that it was about the oil spill.
And that's kinda my point here, since my attempt to be gentle has apparently been lost upon you. Ending DADT is a good thing. It is a good thing that the left has been screaming and complaining about since forever. Now they're about to do it.
It might be valid to bitch about the fact that the bill does not foreclose the theoretical possibility that it won't really happen--though my subjective opinion is that once the inertial state is movement, it's silly to think it will stop.
What's absolutely fucking ridiculous is to say that because something terrible is happening on one front, all progress on all other fronts must be be brought to a screeching halt and/or must not be talked about and/or must not be acknowledged by anyone to be good and/or whatever the hell your point is.
And I'll be damned if I can see any actual valid point to dragging the nightmare into the gulf into this. Whatever you say, it looks an awful lot to me like you're just so deeply invested in being angry for the sake of being angry that as soon as they take away one of the things you've professed to being angry about, you find that in itself to be cause for anger and therefore you drag in another thing you're angry about.
And that's the thing with the left, these days. It hasn't accomplished a damned thing of any account in this country in the thirty seven years since the end of the Vietnam War because since that time, all it's done is play this ceaseless and destructive game of Anger Calvinball.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CyberDuckie
May 25, 2010 3:29 PM in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
I'm not sure there's any sense in feeding the Biddles (love it!). They are as bad as the teabaggers on the right, encompassing their own kind of extremism. Where there is extremism, there is no room for compromise. Without compromise, the ability to function in a civilized society and have honest debate is lost. Unfortunately, these Biddles do not allow for any opinions differing from their own, no matter if those opinions come from people in this forum or from the President of the United States. It honestly makes me sad.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
again
May 25, 2010 5:03 PM in reply to CyberDuckie
Actually, what you're calling 'extremist' is merely traditional Democratic platform. Clinton and now Obama have moved the party farther right than Nixon.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CyberDuckie
May 25, 2010 5:29 PM in reply to again
Clinton and Obama are not "platforms". Nor is what I described anywhere near a traditional democratic value. A key progressive and liberal strength has always been the ability to think outside the box and accept other ideas and opinions, at the very least for consideration. It's why we support things like gay rights and new science. It's why we don't yell "Drill, baby, drill!" It's why we support campaigns that say "Yes We Can!"
Progressives move forward. We accept and even encourage change. We try to see things from someone else's point of view. Unfortunately, the bashing I see of the President is consistent in its rigidity. There's never any room for giving the man the benefit of the doubt or applauding his accomplishments.
I don't care if you criticize the President. Government should be criticized. The President and Congress work for us and are, therefore, subject to our opinions of their job performance. But you only ever find something wrong and never speak positively in favor of what has been done. No compromise exists. Hence, Biddle extremism, and not a "traditional democratic platform."
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
again
May 25, 2010 5:44 PM in reply to CyberDuckie
'Clinton and Obama are not "platforms".'
I didn't write that they were. And I'm not a progressive, I'm a Democrat, and thereby I have certain expectations of Democratic leadership. That is, when the president seeks a 'compromise' position that is essentially a Republican/conservative position, I am not impressed.
And that, except for some cosmetic items, is all he has managed.
On issue after issue he sides with corporate leadership over the citizenry.
I will praise him if and when appropriate, but not before then.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CyberDuckie
May 25, 2010 8:15 PM in reply to again
Hmm, I believe I said liberal and progressive. Yes, yes, I just went back and checked. I said liberal and progressive. And in case you have forgotten or never really new, the Democratic party is the liberal party. So as a Democrat, I would think you'd understand the concept of thinking outside the box and compromising with others. But it seems you don't.
Btw, when you say, "...I'm not a progressive, I'm a Democrat, and thereby I have certain expectations of Democratic leadership," you seem to suggest that, as a progressive, I don't have similar expectations. You'd be wrong. I'm not a blind follower; I have my own moments of doubt and/or disappointment. But I choose to accept as many positives from each situation as I can and I fight for what I think is still needed. And I choose to give President Obama the benefit of the doubt right now.
Think what you will. It's your right to like or dislike the President. But you appear to lack the ability to see things from someone else's point of view, instead displaying a type of political tunnel vision that puts you squarely in the category I previously described.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lotl
May 25, 2010 11:51 PM in reply to CyberDuckie
The Democratic party is SUPPOSED to be the liberal party. In actual fact, they really are not all that terribly liberal these days. You come off like a very smug hypocrite in that post, calling someone else intolerant. You want to really think outside the box? Stop defining all political discourse by the 2 major parties. This is why third parties have such an uphill struggle. The general attitude is oh, well, my Big Party doesn't really represent what I believe in, but I have to support one or the other of the Big Parties.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CyberDuckie
May 26, 2010 12:54 AM in reply to lotl
I never mentioned two political parties. In fact, I only mentioned the Democratic party in response to again. I originally talked of liberals and progressives, completely separate from any party affiliation. Maybe you should actually read what I wrote before calling me smug and hypocritical.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lotl
May 26, 2010 12:01 AM in reply to CyberDuckie
"Unfortunately, the bashing I see of the President is consistent in its rigidity. There's never any room for giving the man the benefit of the doubt or applauding his accomplishments."
Bullshit. If you're talking about extreme examples of a very small group of people who do this consistently, you, and "chameleon" and the rest need to address THEM. Instead you all seem to lump everyone who has a criticism or concern about an issue into this category and praise yourselves and each other as being superior for it. Maybe you should all stop complaining so much--about the complainers.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
CyberDuckie
May 26, 2010 1:02 AM in reply to lotl
I never lumped "everyone who has a criticism or concern about an issue" into a single category. Nor have I ever claimed to be superior. In fact, I defended again's right to dislike and criticize the President and anybody else s/he wants. I simply referred to the consistent need by some to find fault instead of giving any credit where credit is due. If you feel like you identify with that, then that's your problem.
Btw, in a previous post, you called me a hypocrite. Now you claim that I "lump" everyone who criticizes Obama together into one group, and then follow that up by "lumping" me in with a group. Pot meet kettle.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lotl
May 25, 2010 11:33 PM in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
"And I'll be damned if I can see any actual valid point to dragging the nightmare into the gulf into this. Whatever you say, it looks an awful lot to me like you're just so deeply invested in being angry for the sake of being angry that as soon as they take away one of the things you've professed to being angry about, you find that in itself to be cause for anger and therefore you drag in another thing you're angry about."
Yeah, he should stay on topic. However, if there are several things bothering people at once they have to only pick one? Because it seems to me (as long as we're all making assumptions about each other) that you're making light of the stress people are feeling about the problems the country and the world are facing. There is a lot of shit on our plate. Do people really need to be digging for things to be stressed/worried/upset/angry about? Sorry, but that's a ludicrious accusation.
"And that's the thing with the left, these days. It hasn't accomplished a damned thing of any account in this country in the thirty seven years since the end of the Vietnam War because since that time, all it's done is play this ceaseless and destructive game of Anger Calvinball."
And your side is entirely blameless in this, right? The posts on this thread prove it.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
May 25, 2010 2:24 PM in reply to The Commenter Formerly Known as NCSteve
Good one Steve but as you can see from the reaction by all the Biddles here, they don't like that the shoe fits.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Sailorbait
May 25, 2010 12:36 PM
hey Sailormarlowe, sweetie...
Looks like they will let you go back to the Navy.
Macho, macho man
You've got to be a macho man!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
chameleon
May 25, 2010 1:47 PM in reply to Sailorbait
Oh my goodness... that is some avatar. Love it. Go get that sailorman.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Sailormarlowe
May 25, 2010 1:23 PM
Oooohh, Bruce! This is my rifle(phooey!) And this is my GUN! This is for fighting(no way.) But this is for FUN!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Hobbes83
May 25, 2010 4:45 PM in reply to Sailormarlowe
Fuck you troll, don't ever disrespect my Corps like that. You're probably a chickenhawk who never had to make a commitment like military service.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lovesliberty
May 25, 2010 2:06 PM
Why doesn't Congress prohibit enforcement in the meantime, especially if the "tell" came from someone else or snooping. It would also be great if it would stop all court martials now and restore the personnel to active duty.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
johnnydoughey
May 25, 2010 2:35 PM
This is the military, not a gov't entity (apparently).
You just cannot punish important officers if they find a need to harass or discriminate against those who are protected everywhere else in this nation. Nor can you expel those fellow military folks. Having a large killing force is absolutely necessary for attacking the bad guys who are everywhere.
Therefore, the military has always found a need to keep Rambos (even though they may be hormone and drug induced) and get rid of the stereotyped homosexual (if the military lost its stereotype, it would most likely have to disband for a lack of enough young folk needing to prove themselves to be a "Man" or equal "woman" enlisting their rather than the local gang.
I believe members of congress (at least on the Republican aisle) are now having the same dilemma... IMHO
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
May 25, 2010 2:46 PM
Just another watered down "compromise" from this administration. Those are getting harder to take...
http://sunstateactivist.org/campaigncorner/?p=302
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
happydays
May 25, 2010 8:52 PM
The only reason Obama is doing this..."his ratings falling from the late reaction to the oil mess...the boarder mess...the terrorist mess....the tax lies...the cost of free health care...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Red XIV
May 25, 2010 10:38 PM in reply to happydays
What "terrorist mess"? What "tax lies"? Oh that's right, you're just a right-wing troll.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
larsvanness
May 25, 2010 10:49 PM in reply to happydays
Obama's ratings are falling? Approval/disapproval is roughly about even steven depending on the day of the week and who's making the phone calls. In my humble opinion that's not a bad start for a young black Democratic President. You either love him or you hate him so he must be doin' somethin' right.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
lotl
May 25, 2010 11:42 PM in reply to larsvanness
"You either love him or you hate him." Yes, it's that cut and dried. No middle ground. Spare me.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
ps2os2
May 26, 2010 1:14 AM
Sorry I am just too skeptical about this. Clinton sold us out and I basically do not trust Obama.
I would not jump on board until we see something in writing *AND* seeing what the military can do to essentially put the decision off forever.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
dtOZONE
May 26, 2010 2:04 AM in reply to ps2os2
Clinton didn't see anyone out, he got burned.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?