<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The divided McCains</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/11/12/27879/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/11/12/27879</link>
	<description>News, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 22:00:30 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ryan</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/11/12/27879/comment-page-1#comment-83023</link>
		<dc:creator>Ryan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Nov 2010 21:05:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=27879#comment-83023</guid>
		<description>You may be right, John, we&#039;ll never know for sure. We do know, however, if the &quot;study&quot; had been released in August, McCain would still be rejecting it, and all 41 republican senators still would&#039;ve voted against it. Obama&#039;s leadership style has been to naively seek bipartisan consensus after consensus. I think this is another one of those times. There&#039;s no upside for Obama to fail at repeal. He knows this, and the republicans know this, which is why there will be no repeal.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You may be right, John, we&#8217;ll never know for sure. We do know, however, if the &#8220;study&#8221; had been released in August, McCain would still be rejecting it, and all 41 republican senators still would&#8217;ve voted against it. Obama&#8217;s leadership style has been to naively seek bipartisan consensus after consensus. I think this is another one of those times. There&#8217;s no upside for Obama to fail at repeal. He knows this, and the republicans know this, which is why there will be no repeal.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John in the Bay Area</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/11/12/27879/comment-page-1#comment-83021</link>
		<dc:creator>John in the Bay Area</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Nov 2010 20:42:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=27879#comment-83021</guid>
		<description>Ryan,

The president (who is not officially a Republican) is the originator of this unneccessary study that was deliberately designed not to be finished until the lame duck Congress.  He knew that his party would be loosing seats (it almost always happens to the party in charge).  He knew that it would be harder to pass after the election.

Although the Republicans (along with a few Democratic Senators) are blocking this, Obama set it up to be blocked. He and his Defense Secretary did everything they could to get this blocked.  It is hard to look at the way that this has been handled and not view the President as synically manipulating this so Don&#039;t Ask Don&#039;t Tell doesn&#039;t get repealed, and he can appeal to gay voters to re-elect him in 2012 to &quot;get the job done.&quot;  Unfortunately for him, his duplicity has been so obvious that it is quite likely that gay voters will be so disgusted with Obama come 2012, that they sit the election out.

I am no fan of McCain or the rest of the Senate Republicans (particularly the two that represent Maine), but this orchestrated dance to keep Don&#039;t Ask Don&#039;t Tell on the books has been a team effort.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ryan,</p>
<p>The president (who is not officially a Republican) is the originator of this unneccessary study that was deliberately designed not to be finished until the lame duck Congress.  He knew that his party would be loosing seats (it almost always happens to the party in charge).  He knew that it would be harder to pass after the election.</p>
<p>Although the Republicans (along with a few Democratic Senators) are blocking this, Obama set it up to be blocked. He and his Defense Secretary did everything they could to get this blocked.  It is hard to look at the way that this has been handled and not view the President as synically manipulating this so Don&#8217;t Ask Don&#8217;t Tell doesn&#8217;t get repealed, and he can appeal to gay voters to re-elect him in 2012 to &#8220;get the job done.&#8221;  Unfortunately for him, his duplicity has been so obvious that it is quite likely that gay voters will be so disgusted with Obama come 2012, that they sit the election out.</p>
<p>I am no fan of McCain or the rest of the Senate Republicans (particularly the two that represent Maine), but this orchestrated dance to keep Don&#8217;t Ask Don&#8217;t Tell on the books has been a team effort.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ryan</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/11/12/27879/comment-page-1#comment-83019</link>
		<dc:creator>Ryan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Nov 2010 20:08:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=27879#comment-83019</guid>
		<description>Anyone paying even the slightest bit of attention knows that the &quot;study&quot; is an irrelevant bit of nonsense and McCain and every other Republican who claim to want to wait until the results of the study come before voting on repeal are lying through their bigoted teeth. What we didn&#039;t know was how McCain and the rest of the Republicans planned on justfying their continued opposition to equality after the results were released. Now we know. This morning on Meet the Press, McCain has said that we wants a •second• study done that &quot;asks the right questions&quot;. When the study is released, this will be the Fox News talking point for December and the new reason why it will be filibustered by every Senate Republican. It&#039;s fun to say it&#039;s Reid&#039;s fault that repeal didn&#039;t happen and a few Republicans wouldn&#039;t have filibustered repeal if he had allowed them to submit their own amendments. But increasingly, that seems less and less likely. Republicans will ALWAYS vote anti-gay. Always. We need to realize that and focus exclusively on the courts.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Anyone paying even the slightest bit of attention knows that the &#8220;study&#8221; is an irrelevant bit of nonsense and McCain and every other Republican who claim to want to wait until the results of the study come before voting on repeal are lying through their bigoted teeth. What we didn&#8217;t know was how McCain and the rest of the Republicans planned on justfying their continued opposition to equality after the results were released. Now we know. This morning on Meet the Press, McCain has said that we wants a •second• study done that &#8220;asks the right questions&#8221;. When the study is released, this will be the Fox News talking point for December and the new reason why it will be filibustered by every Senate Republican. It&#8217;s fun to say it&#8217;s Reid&#8217;s fault that repeal didn&#8217;t happen and a few Republicans wouldn&#8217;t have filibustered repeal if he had allowed them to submit their own amendments. But increasingly, that seems less and less likely. Republicans will ALWAYS vote anti-gay. Always. We need to realize that and focus exclusively on the courts.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Amicus</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/11/12/27879/comment-page-1#comment-82984</link>
		<dc:creator>Amicus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Nov 2010 02:46:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=27879#comment-82984</guid>
		<description>See section 654 a 8 &quot;Military life is fundamentally different from civilian life... &quot;
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/10/654.html

I personally believe that this is at the heart of John McCain&#039;s phobia and anxiety.

Cindy McCain should rethink that there is an exception for &quot;military society&quot; from NOH8.

These &quot;finding&quot; have to be negated by the Pentagon&#039;s new study. 

&quot;Do the right thing&quot; and &quot;stop hate&quot; are good enough messages, but it would be smart to have a set of &quot;findings&quot; of our own.  The DoD was unable to defend these findings in court, btw.

&quot;Customs&quot; of the military that harm readiness, in general and in particular, are to be replaced, not preserved.

There is no &quot;greater good of military culture&quot; served by excluding gay soldiers and/or firing them (discharge).  Yes, some traditions may need to be tweaked but so what. 

One only has to look at the facts behind how - and how fast - Israel came to integrate openly gay service, to understand that this is true.  If someone is a good chemical engineer, you don&#039;t screw around worrying about their sexual orientation, when their work could translate into a national security advantage...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>See section 654 a 8 &#8220;Military life is fundamentally different from civilian life&#8230; &#8221;<br />
<a href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/10/654.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/10/654.html</a></p>
<p>I personally believe that this is at the heart of John McCain&#8217;s phobia and anxiety.</p>
<p>Cindy McCain should rethink that there is an exception for &#8220;military society&#8221; from NOH8.</p>
<p>These &#8220;finding&#8221; have to be negated by the Pentagon&#8217;s new study. </p>
<p>&#8220;Do the right thing&#8221; and &#8220;stop hate&#8221; are good enough messages, but it would be smart to have a set of &#8220;findings&#8221; of our own.  The DoD was unable to defend these findings in court, btw.</p>
<p>&#8220;Customs&#8221; of the military that harm readiness, in general and in particular, are to be replaced, not preserved.</p>
<p>There is no &#8220;greater good of military culture&#8221; served by excluding gay soldiers and/or firing them (discharge).  Yes, some traditions may need to be tweaked but so what. </p>
<p>One only has to look at the facts behind how &#8211; and how fast &#8211; Israel came to integrate openly gay service, to understand that this is true.  If someone is a good chemical engineer, you don&#8217;t screw around worrying about their sexual orientation, when their work could translate into a national security advantage&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ray</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/11/12/27879/comment-page-1#comment-82974</link>
		<dc:creator>Ray</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Nov 2010 22:25:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=27879#comment-82974</guid>
		<description>Cindi sounds like she has Battered Wife Syndrome. She loves the man who degrades her.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Cindi sounds like she has Battered Wife Syndrome. She loves the man who degrades her.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ryan</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/11/12/27879/comment-page-1#comment-82968</link>
		<dc:creator>Ryan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Nov 2010 21:06:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=27879#comment-82968</guid>
		<description>In light of Cindy&#039;s clearly coerced reversal, I think the post has become pretty ironic. Republicans clearly do NOT welcome this message, nor are they okay with the wife of a current politician voicing a view that can be perceived as gay friendly.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In light of Cindy&#8217;s clearly coerced reversal, I think the post has become pretty ironic. Republicans clearly do NOT welcome this message, nor are they okay with the wife of a current politician voicing a view that can be perceived as gay friendly.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: John in the Bay Area</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/11/12/27879/comment-page-1#comment-82963</link>
		<dc:creator>John in the Bay Area</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Nov 2010 20:33:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=27879#comment-82963</guid>
		<description>I think that it would be good to recognize that without Cindy, John McCain might never have become a Senator and subsequently a Republican nominee for the White House.  Cindy&#039;s millions were what gave John his political start.  Cindy&#039;s millions have paid for their homes in DC and Washington (as well as several others that Sen. McCain had difficulty recalling during the campaign).

Despite Cindy being the money behind the McCain machine, she has taken a decided back seat.  It seems very much that Sen. McCain is in charge, to the point that he has said some unbelievably offensive things to Cindy in front of other people.  

Marriages are complicated, and I am sure that Cindy gets something out of this, but it seems to this outsider that John McCain is the one who has most benefited from dumping his first wife and marrying the young heiress.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think that it would be good to recognize that without Cindy, John McCain might never have become a Senator and subsequently a Republican nominee for the White House.  Cindy&#8217;s millions were what gave John his political start.  Cindy&#8217;s millions have paid for their homes in DC and Washington (as well as several others that Sen. McCain had difficulty recalling during the campaign).</p>
<p>Despite Cindy being the money behind the McCain machine, she has taken a decided back seat.  It seems very much that Sen. McCain is in charge, to the point that he has said some unbelievably offensive things to Cindy in front of other people.  </p>
<p>Marriages are complicated, and I am sure that Cindy gets something out of this, but it seems to this outsider that John McCain is the one who has most benefited from dumping his first wife and marrying the young heiress.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: customartist</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/11/12/27879/comment-page-1#comment-82935</link>
		<dc:creator>customartist</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Nov 2010 14:38:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=27879#comment-82935</guid>
		<description>The premise of the article is certainly one of validity Generally, if not in this specific case.  Republicans calculate and say whatever needed to win - morals aside.

CINDY isn&#039;t the one voting on Gay rights issues.  We are but pawns to our legislators.

Summary:  Gay Rights will be gained via the Courts, not via the Legislatures.  We should be very vocal that Scalia recuse himself, as Sotomayor just has, when issues of Homosexuality come before the Supreme Court.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The premise of the article is certainly one of validity Generally, if not in this specific case.  Republicans calculate and say whatever needed to win &#8211; morals aside.</p>
<p>CINDY isn&#8217;t the one voting on Gay rights issues.  We are but pawns to our legislators.</p>
<p>Summary:  Gay Rights will be gained via the Courts, not via the Legislatures.  We should be very vocal that Scalia recuse himself, as Sotomayor just has, when issues of Homosexuality come before the Supreme Court.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: justsearching</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/11/12/27879/comment-page-1#comment-82934</link>
		<dc:creator>justsearching</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Nov 2010 14:36:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=27879#comment-82934</guid>
		<description>She says in the ad that it&#039;s wrong that religious/political leaders tell gays and lesbians that they can&#039;t serve openly (because it makes them seem like second-class citizens) and then a few days later states she stands behind her husband&#039;s positions on DADT. This makes no sense to me. I&#039;d like so see how she resolve this apparent contradiction on what her &quot;stand&quot; really is.

Also, I&#039;d note that this ad uses misleading stats which the highest-rated comment on youtube picked up on. The ad states that &quot;there is one suicide every 17 minutes.&quot; This is the suicide rate for the entire US population. Every suicide is a tragedy, but if you had watched the ad you would have guessed that they were referring to the suicide rate of LGBT youth.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>She says in the ad that it&#8217;s wrong that religious/political leaders tell gays and lesbians that they can&#8217;t serve openly (because it makes them seem like second-class citizens) and then a few days later states she stands behind her husband&#8217;s positions on DADT. This makes no sense to me. I&#8217;d like so see how she resolve this apparent contradiction on what her &#8220;stand&#8221; really is.</p>
<p>Also, I&#8217;d note that this ad uses misleading stats which the highest-rated comment on youtube picked up on. The ad states that &#8220;there is one suicide every 17 minutes.&#8221; This is the suicide rate for the entire US population. Every suicide is a tragedy, but if you had watched the ad you would have guessed that they were referring to the suicide rate of LGBT youth.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tony P</title>
		<link>http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2010/11/12/27879/comment-page-1#comment-82933</link>
		<dc:creator>Tony P</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Nov 2010 14:29:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/?p=27879#comment-82933</guid>
		<description>The party leadership knows that the Tea Bagger method is not the way to go so they&#039;re trying to get the younger set to be like Republicans of the old days.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The party leadership knows that the Tea Bagger method is not the way to go so they&#8217;re trying to get the younger set to be like Republicans of the old days.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
