Comments on: DADT updates

By: Paul J. Stein

Paul J. Stein — Sat, 20 Nov 2010 11:06:27 +0000

So lets see, polite as in “Get your head out of your ass, take a fresh breath, and get on with a FAIR, HONEST, DECENT Military to fully represent the true AMERICAN way of life! Before the comments fly…I was fighting this crap since 1975, 16 yo, personally and in the open!

By: Ryan

Ryan — Fri, 19 Nov 2010 19:26:18 +0000

@customarist–That’s what I’m worried about. What’s this full amendment process entail? Is that their stalling tactic? The Pentagon refuses to release the study early, all the GOP has to do is keep submitting amendment after amendment in order to run out the clock until January. There’s almost certainly a catch here. Murkowski has already walked back her pledge to vote for appeal. I just don’t see Republicans suddenly abandoning their principles out of nowhere.

By: customartist

customartist — Fri, 19 Nov 2010 18:16:40 +0000

Keep up the pressure.

Email Congress:
https://writerep.house.gov/writerep/welcome.shtml

Email Senate:
http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm

Call the Congress and Senate: (202)224-3121

*The Operator will direct you if you do not know your representative

*IMPORTANT*
Make your calls and letters to Congress polite and to the point.

By: customartist

customartist — Fri, 19 Nov 2010 18:11:07 +0000

Republicans will go down in History on this.

Republican House and Senate Members will be held fully accountable for voting against the will of the American People, against the Military Survey, and against DADT Repeal.

They will try to abate progress by overwhelming the process with numerous amendments, but they have had a full year to “debate’ this and all of the related issues. Keeping in mind that Repeal has already passed the House.

Bigots are seen clearly for what they are, and their names will be made public in perpetuity, I assure you. History is already written for all practical purposes. Which Members will attach their names to it is just yet the unknown dynamic.

By: Ryan

Ryan — Fri, 19 Nov 2010 14:49:42 +0000

Why are you assuming Lincoln and Pryor would change their votes? And Manchin is basically a Republican. Does anyone know how he would vote?

By: Stefan

Stefan — Fri, 19 Nov 2010 08:27:09 +0000

“But we’ll need four Republican votes, not just two.”

Assuming Lincoln and Pryor vote to sustain the fillibuster (especially Lincoln), which I think is highly unlikely. I also doubt Manchin will vote to sustain fillibuster as well.

So, there are 56 Yes votes left over from September. Assuming Pryor and Lincoln change votes, we would need 2 Republicans. Collins, Lugar, Murkowski, and Ensign have all said they will vote to break fillibuster barring a more open amendment process. Other promising votes to our side include Brown, Bond, Kirk, Gregg, Voinovich, and Snowe.

By: BobN

BobN — Fri, 19 Nov 2010 05:42:56 +0000

Thank you, Amicus! The media keeps talking about the GOP wanting amendments but can’t manage to indicate what those amendments might be.

By: Lost Choi

Lost Choi — Fri, 19 Nov 2010 03:52:35 +0000

Timothy,
Dan Choi chained himself to the White House fence YET AGAIN this week. This silly stunt of his is getting real old. What I find curious is that Box Turtle didn’t cover it, and your DADT story didn’t mention it. Could it be that even Box Turtle is getting annoyed and tired of Choi’s antics too?

By: Dan

Dan — Fri, 19 Nov 2010 00:41:43 +0000

Maybe they were waiting til after the election.

By: Amicus

Amicus — Thu, 18 Nov 2010 23:47:02 +0000

2 weeks?

Let the logrolling and earmarking begin!

That seems to be the general way to get things past the full Senate.

However, opening up the amendment process doesn’t seem like it favors DADT.

In particular:

SA 4624. Mr. INHOFE submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 3454, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2011 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

Strike section 591.

[This is an amendment to get ride of the DADT section.]

SA 4625. Mr. INHOFE submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill S. 3454, to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 2011 for military activities of the Department of Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe military personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other purposes; which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

Strike section 713.

[Section 713 limits funds for use in abortion only in the case of danger to the life of mother and limits facilities to same use plus case of rape and incest...]