Comments on: The Lieberman/Collins DADT repeal

By: Brieuse

Brieuse — Mon, 13 Dec 2010 10:27:37 +0000

Who would believe that in the year 2010 going on 2011, US of America the Land Of Freedom, is still encouraging discrimination, where my little 3rd world country can actually claim more freedom?

By: justsearching

justsearching — Sun, 12 Dec 2010 18:34:43 +0000

Ahh yes, the honorable Chambliss who endured an entirety of three minutes on the phone with a gay guy to apologize to Joe Jervis for the death threat that emanated from his office, and then endured a few more minutes to alert the press about his honorable act.

I expect absolutely nothing in the way of actual substance on LGBT issues from Chambliss. On the contrary, on this issue he’ll undoubtedly reason and vote like most of his fellow Republicans.

Fingers crossed for a repeal of DADT.

By: Mihangel apYrs

Mihangel apYrs — Sun, 12 Dec 2010 00:14:44 +0000

On the substance of this: politicians demand and claim authority in the nation they practice. Is it unreasonable to demand that they commit their time to completing thir tasks rather than accommodating themselves?

Sometimes the thought of the last politician being hanged with his/her own guts is attractive

By: Mihangel apYrs

Mihangel apYrs — Sun, 12 Dec 2010 00:11:07 +0000

it comes down to: if an LGB is retained because of specialised skills and thence deployed WITHOUT CONCERN FOR COHESION and then allowed to die or return and be expelled, then the US DoD is practising blatent hypocrisy, and the politicians that aren’t talking about it are party to it.

This may be a useful stick to use: ask them why they don’t demand discharge every time, rather than when it’s convenient

By: Bruno

Bruno — Sat, 11 Dec 2010 22:04:50 +0000

I have 2 major concerns with how this has been going down. The first is that it’s being referred to committee when Lieberman said it wouldn’t be. This may be a non-issue, I don’t know how these procedures actually work. The second is that there seems to be no true sense of urgency, considering the Senate has been adjourned for the weekend. Unless they really think this can go fast.

I did read, however, that it could be voted on by Tuesday or Wednesday, which would be pretty awesome.

By: Pender

Pender — Sat, 11 Dec 2010 20:12:17 +0000

Really hope I’m wrong, but I suspect this standalone bill is just a way to give Democrats cover for passing a defense authorization bill that does not include DADT repeal, and doesn’t have much hope of success.

By: customartist

customartist — Sat, 11 Dec 2010 16:53:51 +0000

Don’t just sit there – Lift a finger – call your Senators.

(202)224-3121

Tell them to “Vote FOR DADT Repeal”

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

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

Key Senators:

Lisa Murkowski (R-AK): 202-224-6665
George Voinovich (R-OH): 202-224-3353
Olympia Snowe (R-ME): 202-224-5344
Richard Lugar (R-IN): 202-224-4814
Judd Gregg (R-NH): 202-224-3324
Scott Brown (R-MA): 202-224-4543
Kit Bond (R-MO): 202-224-5721
Mark Kirk (R-IL): 202-224-2854
Joe Manchin (D-WV): 202-224-3954

By: Ryan

Ryan — Sat, 11 Dec 2010 06:01:07 +0000

Why is Lindsey Graham considered an “unknown vote”? He’s stated quite clearly he doesn’t think the votes are there for repeal, and he’s never stated a pro-repeal position.
Is it really possible for a bill to go to Committee and get out of committee and be voted on the floor within one week? I guess we’ll know soon, and if Brown is telling the truth or not based on his vote in the Committee.

By: Timothy Kincaid

Timothy Kincaid — Sat, 11 Dec 2010 04:12:40 +0000

johnathan

thanks, fixed.

By: johnathan

johnathan — Sat, 11 Dec 2010 02:42:31 +0000

As a point of correction, Senator Lieberman is from Connecticut, not Delaware. (You currently have him listed as being: I-DE.) Understandable, however, with so many politicians to keep track of.