Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 3:53 PM ET, 12/17/2010

GOP Senator to Dems: If you try to pass DADT, Republicans won't pass START

By Greg Sargent

UPDATE, 4:11 p.m.: In an interview with me just now, Senator Bob Corker doubled down on his contention that if Dems move on DADT, Republicans will be less likely to support START.

"I felt like momentum was growing for START," Corker said, adding that since Reid announced he was holding votes on DADT and DREAM, it has had a "chilling effect."

"I'm watching support for the treaty erode, because of highly partisan political issues being brought up solely because activist groups in the Democratic Party want this done," he continued.

Corker said he wasn't issuing a personal threat, and was merely commenting on the reaction of his Senate GOP colleagues. When I pressed Senator Corker on whether Republican Senators would really base their decision on START on whether Reid held a vote on DADT, Corker didn't answer directly.

"That being thrown into the middle of this debate is causing many Republicans to want to see START pushed back and candidly is causing them to oppose it," Corker said. "This is hardening them against passage of this treaty at this time."

UPDATE, 4:46 p.m.: Corker just called back to clarify that a DADT vote won't lead his GOP colleages to oppose START permanently.

"I just want to make sure it's clear they're not going to oppose the treaty permanently," he said. "But it's hardening them against doing it right now."

From the administration's point of view, it's unclear how much of a difference this will make. It's top priority for Obama to get START done before the end of the year.

*****************************************************************

ORIGINAL POST:

For days now there have been rumors circulating on the Hill that Republican Senators are privately threatening to derail the START treaty if Dems go through with plans to vote on the repeal of don't ask don't tell. I had chalked this up to the usual mix of paranoia, spin and misinformation that always intensifies when a major vote looms.

But on the Senate floor a few moments ago, Senator Bob Corker basically said this publicly: He said that moving forward with DADT "poisons the well" on START, adding that it would make it less likely that the START treaty's future is going to be "successful."

According to a transcript sent over by Corker's office, the Senator first referenced Harry Reid's announcement last night that he would be holding votes on DADT and DREAM. He then proceeded to deride those issues as "partisan" payoffs on campaign promises, and added that he had met with GOP colleagues this morning and left persuaded that proceeding with those votes were putting START at greater risk:

"I have to tell you what this has done. I've been in three meetings this morning. What's happening is it poisons the well on this debate on something that's very, very important. I don't want to see that happen. I'm not someone who comes down here and says fiery things to terrorize and divide. But I'm hoping that saner minds will prevail...

These issues that have been brought forth are absolutely partisan political issues, brought forth to basically accommodate activist groups around this country. I'm hoping that those will be taken down or I don't think the future of the START treaty over the next several days is going to be successful...I'm hoping that's going to change.

This isn't really a threat on Corker's part. Rather, he's saying -- in a more-in-sorrow-than-in-anger way -- that his GOP colleagues will be less likely to support START unless Reid drops his plan for DADT and DREAM votes right away.

More in a bit.

By Greg Sargent  | December 17, 2010; 3:53 PM ET
Categories:  Senate Dems, Senate Republicans, gay rights  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Looks like Olympia Snowe will vote Yes on DADT repeal
Next: Happy Hour Roundup

Comments

And there you have it.

What's Reid going to do? What does the President want more? Repeal of DADT, or START? If I were a betting person, I'd go for START.

Posted by: CTVoter | December 17, 2010 3:58 PM | Report abuse

Screw the GOP. Americans overwhelmingly support DADT repeal and START.

Why do Republicans hate America?

Posted by: Ethan2010 | December 17, 2010 3:59 PM | Report abuse

I am shocked I tell you, shocked!

Cue SBJ to soon show up and explain how it is all Harry Reid's fault, because he should have scrapped all attempts to get START ratified.

Posted by: Liam-still | December 17, 2010 4:06 PM | Report abuse

God Bless our GOP Senators for making sure that Obama cannot pass anything. The goal is to make him a one-term President.

You have not even begun to see the bag of tricks we're going to pull out to obstruct anything and everything he tries to do.

Posted by: Seethelightofgod | December 17, 2010 4:10 PM | Report abuse

This is a measure of just how petty the Senate Republican caucus is: they're ready, willing, and happy to throw national security away to get their way on restricting personal liberty.

What more could need to be said?

Posted by: lonquest | December 17, 2010 4:14 PM | Report abuse

I have to agree with CTVoter. The Dems would be nuts to jeopardize a major treaty just to get DADT repealed. DADT doesn't matter to the average voter - just the left-wing base. Sure polls show that most Americans favor repeal but they don't really care about it, contrary to 'conventional wisdom'.
If the Dems want to have any standing with the voters, they need to focus on issues that really matter to America - not divisive folly like this.

Posted by: miyago123 | December 17, 2010 4:16 PM | Report abuse

Anyone who thinks removal of this policy is about discrimination is being played for a sucker. Keeping it is in the best interest of the military and soldiers, getting rid of it only benefits one group and one group only: Homosexuals.

Posted by: scooby_doo2010 | December 17, 2010 4:17 PM | Report abuse

"Why do Republicans hate America?"

LOL - how much time ya got?

Actually, when it comes to the Dream Act, it may be to Obama's benefit that it not pass now. This can be a major issue for 2012, when Obama and the Dems can blame the GOP for stalling on the vote in 2010. This will energize many Latino voters, especially in the western states that Obama will have to carry again.

Posted by: filmnoia | December 17, 2010 4:21 PM | Report abuse

It would be awful to kill a national security treaty because you don't want to see another piece of legislation that you oppose get passed. But that's not even what Corker is saying.

What he's saying is that he wants to kill a national security treaty because he wants to prevent Democrats from having any political success. He is literally admitting that he is putting partisan politics ahead of national security. It is an embarassing, pathetic, and shameful display.

Posted by: RS22 | December 17, 2010 4:21 PM | Report abuse

Wow, they REALLY hate the gays.

It must be exhausting to hate so much. They are willing to put the world's security (nuclear war won't just effect one country) on the line in order to deny people who live in a "free" country their rights.

Wow.

They should all burn in hell.

Posted by: HansSolo | December 17, 2010 4:22 PM | Report abuse

Do we really need gays in the military in time of war? I would say no. It's like the old saying goes, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it."

Well, some folks have been trying to "fix" things since the 1960s, and instead maybe they should just leave well enough alone and stop creating these social experiments.

Posted by: Seethelightofgod | December 17, 2010 4:22 PM | Report abuse

The Dems should work on START and get that done. It's important for us, our allies, and being able to work with the Russian on nonproliferation.

It time is left, call votes next week or the week after Christmas. If no time is left for that, withdraw their appeal in the CA case.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | December 17, 2010 4:23 PM | Report abuse

Also, since when is the Department of Defense an "activist group within the Democratic Party"? Since when is 77% of the country an "activist group within the Democratic Party"?

I really cannot fully express how utterly disgraceful this conduct is.

Posted by: RS22 | December 17, 2010 4:23 PM | Report abuse

How many of you people have gay coworkers? Many of you, I would expect. They have not changed the morale of your work place, have they, and they have not turned all the heterosexuals into a bunch of cowards, have they?

I find it amazing that the big objection coming from Right Wing Homophobes is that a few gay soldiers would completely unnerve all hetro soldiers, and turn them into easy prey for the Taliban.

Why are Right Wing Homophobes disparaging the courage and fighting abilities of our brave troops?

Posted by: Liam-still | December 17, 2010 4:25 PM | Report abuse

The American public had better get used to the GOP shafting the USA.

@seethelightofgod: Do we really need Christians in the military at any time? Christians molest little boys, and we can't have the troops worrying about the safety of the children.

And BTW, the South lost the War of Southern Treason. Those colored folks get to vote now.

Hope you're not too upset.

Posted by: Garak | December 17, 2010 4:27 PM | Report abuse

Do we really need gays in the military in time of war? I would say no. It's like the old saying goes, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it."

Well, some folks have been trying to "fix" things since the 1960s, and instead maybe they should just leave well enough alone and stop creating these social experiments.

Posted by: Seethelightofgod | December 17, 2010 4:28 PM | Report abuse

Cue Senate Dems cave in 4, 3, 2...

Posted by: Malvoe1 | December 17, 2010 4:28 PM | Report abuse

Senate Dems have to decide what they care more about. Obama want's that START treaty in the worst way but I think the Dem caucus wants DADT repeal more so they might just go ahead with it and take their chances on START. Actually they kind of have to now that Reid said they were voting on it. If he pulls it we'll know it's because of the WH and liberals will go bananas. If you think they are mad about tax deal wait till they throw DADT overboard for START. I don't see it happening

Posted by: Truthteller12 | December 17, 2010 4:28 PM | Report abuse

"He is literally admitting that he is putting partisan politics ahead of national security."

But this is SOP for the GOP. As long as white male Southerners have any say in national policy this country will continue on it's way down the drain. What these people want is the type of feudalism and top to bottom social hierarchy that we had in the pre Civil War South. An environment where everyone knew their place and ruled by an oligarchy.

Posted by: filmnoia | December 17, 2010 4:29 PM | Report abuse

DADT a partisan issue? Corker and his Southern White Liners will always be against any civil rights issue. Notice that the GOP Senators that are supporting the repeal are all non-Southerners.

Posted by: dozas | December 17, 2010 4:29 PM | Report abuse

"Do we really need gays in the military in time of war? I would say no. "

We already have gays in the military. Get a clue.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | December 17, 2010 4:29 PM | Report abuse

Someday Bob Corker will be able to look his grandchildren in the eye and explain to them how he held up a nuclear arms treaty in order to make sure gay people aren't able to serve openly in the armed forces. That takes courage and humility.

Posted by: willows1 | December 17, 2010 4:31 PM | Report abuse

POISON THE WELL!

Posted by: clawrence12 | December 17, 2010 4:34 PM | Report abuse

CNN reported last night that the GOP were going to make Obama choose between DADT repeal and START by holding START hostage if DADT comes to the floor.

I don't know what the White House is saying behind the scene but with DADT about to be voted on tomorrow I just can't see Obama telling Harry Reid to pull DADT at the last minute.

That would DESTROY the base.

I suspect that Obama will make sure that there is a vote on DADT and spend the rest of the weekend and week next week to pressure Senators to vote for START with the help of Gates and the military.

Posted by: maritza1 | December 17, 2010 4:37 PM | Report abuse

Gee, republicans playing politics with national security -- what a surprise. Not. There isn't anything they won't stoop to in order to further their agenda of destroying this country.

Posted by: fiona5 | December 17, 2010 4:37 PM | Report abuse

Republicans do not want to repeal DADT, because that would limit their ability to continue to play the anti-gay card every election.

It is the one remaining bigotry that this National Political party can still use, to sway votes, and they even get major religious leaders to support them.

Once gay people become accepted as brave soldiers, it would become much harder for Republicans to keep attacking them, and portraying them as sub-humans.

That is why Republicans will pull out all stops, to try and prevent cloture.

Republicans do not want to discard their Unholy Trinity: GGG. God, Guns, and Gays.

They work great to distract the simpletons, and keep them from noticing that Republicans are stealing their lunches, and feeding them to all their fat cats.

Posted by: Liam-still | December 17, 2010 4:39 PM | Report abuse

I think Craig Ferguson might have great fun with the name Bob Corker.

Posted by: Liam-still | December 17, 2010 4:45 PM | Report abuse

Bring up the bills, hold the (cloture) votes, let the chips fall where they may. Given Senator Wyden's hospitalization, I expect they won't get 67 votes for START.

Democrats may wish to reconsider their leadership choices for the next Congress.

Posted by: jnc4p | December 17, 2010 4:45 PM | Report abuse

maritza1,

The other thing that would be interesting is if Obama tells Senate Dems to pull DADT for START and they refuse and then it leaks to the press that that's what he wanted. That would be fun.

Posted by: Truthteller12 | December 17, 2010 4:47 PM | Report abuse

What a bunch of petty, vindictive little piss-ants. 70% of the public supports repeal of DADT. I thought the GOP was all about "respecting the will of the voters"??

And this playing with national security nonsense has got to stop. Why isn't their obstructionism on START leading news on all the networks? instead, we get [crickets]

Do we really need gays in the military in time of war? I would say no. It's like the old saying goes, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it."

Actually, since we already have thousands of gay service members, many of them highly decorated combat veterans, I'd say yes.

Posted by: lcrider1 | December 17, 2010 4:49 PM | Report abuse

For those of you saying Obama shouldn't imperil START over DADT, I think you're wrong.

We've got the votes for DADT. We've got the military and the public behind the repeal. Pass it, sign it and then keep the WATBs in the senate in session until they pass START. And that includes Christmas day. Hey, it's national security, what's more important than that? Some GOP jack*ass getting a holiday or american children being kept safe from rogue nukes?

Posted by: lcrider1 | December 17, 2010 4:52 PM | Report abuse

The assumption that the liberals make is that somehow the absence of a START treaty has dramatically increased the threat of nuclear attack from Russia.

I've seen no evidence of that presented by proponents of the treaty here.

In addition, the right could make the same argument. If the republicans allow passage of START in order to kill something else many on the right will proclaim that the Senate played politics with national security by passing a treaty that weakens America.

Posted by: skipsailing28 | December 17, 2010 4:52 PM | Report abuse

Corker said he wasn't issuing a personal threat, and was merely commenting on the reaction of his Senate GOP colleagues. When I pressed Senator Corker on whether Republican Senators would really base their decision on START on whether Reid held a vote on DADT, Corker didn't answer directly..

.....................
Greg,

Did you ask him if he would vote against repealing DADT, and if it were to pass, would he then vote against START?

If not, could you get in touch with him, and just get him to take a personal stand. Is he for passing START or not, and would he let how repealing DADT turns out, determine how he would vote on START.

Pin him down please. I hate bastards like Corker, who come out and make these bold declarations, but then claim that they are not talking about where they stand.

Make him declare himself now.

Posted by: Liam-still | December 17, 2010 4:53 PM | Report abuse

Re: update.

Oh, So they aren't going to oppose it "permanently." Nice. Corker deserves to have his *ss kicked all the way back to Tennessee.

Posted by: lcrider1 | December 17, 2010 4:54 PM | Report abuse

Seethelightofgod (btw, interesting hypocritical username):

"Do we really need [blacks] in the military in time of war? I would say no. It's like the old saying goes, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it."

...maybe they should just leave well enough alone and stop creating these social experiments."

You do realize that's pretty much exactly what many people were saying when President Truman integrated the Armed Forces, right? Hey, the segregated military had just won WWII. If it ain't broke, don't fix it, right? Why start a "social experiment" in the military when many parts of America are still segregated, right?

Posted by: mpl2 | December 17, 2010 4:55 PM | Report abuse

skippy: "The assumption that the liberals make is that somehow the absence of a START treaty has dramatically increased the threat of nuclear attack from Russia."

Lack of ratification of START will lead the Russians to be even less likely to cooperate with us on Iran and North Korea, and the missle shield in Europe...which they just got done indicating cooperating with us on.

Get out much, skippy?

Posted by: suekzoo1 | December 17, 2010 4:57 PM | Report abuse

The assumption that the liberals make is that somehow the absence of a START treaty has dramatically increased the threat of nuclear attack from Russia.

Moron. No, the assumption thinking people make is that the absence of a new START treaty and the absence of inspections raise the increase the threat of nuclear material falling into the wrong hands and endangering the entire planet.

Posted by: lcrider1 | December 17, 2010 4:58 PM | Report abuse

Bigotry and homophobia is running rampant in the Republican Party as they face the horror of equal rights for all.


With the 60 votes needed for cloture on the bill to repeal of DADT in the bag, the Republican leadership is left with extortion threats. Which leaves Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid with only one option ... bring "don't ask, don't tell" up for a vote as soon as possible. You don't negotiate with terrorists.

.

Posted by: DrainYou | December 17, 2010 4:58 PM | Report abuse

Well now, this tells us all we need to know about the GOP of the 21st century.

It hates America. And it loves power. A dangerous combination.

It hates America so much, it is willing to destroy it's future through the strong possibility of a new arms race leading to WWIV (III already happened on 911) and a major thermonuclear holocaust - just because they hate gays so much, they can't see straight.

Today must be one of the most disgusting days of my entire life.

A party that is willing to utterly destroy the security of the nation in it's relentless bid for power is a party that no longer deserves to exist. The GOP needs to die. It has become a threat to America itself.

And Corker is a racist a***ole.

Posted by: bonncaruso | December 17, 2010 4:59 PM | Report abuse

skipsailing28: "The assumption that the liberals make is that somehow the absence of a START treaty has dramatically increased the threat of nuclear attack from Russia."

Um, not exactly. The fear with Russian nukes is more about them getting into the hands of Iran or rogue states, terrorists. That's why it's important that we have monitors on the ground to keep tabs. Loose nukes are dangerous, ya know.

Posted by: mpl2 | December 17, 2010 4:59 PM | Report abuse

This is absurd. Both of these should undoubtedly be passed without question, especially with the support of the American people backing them. If the Democrats were to concede one of these bills in favor of the other, then I will have lost what little faith I have in both parties.

A few Republican senators, such as Corker, have somehow managed to try to establish a demoralizing and pathetic legislative bargaining process. The Democrats are just as guilty for playing along in this "take" and "give" bureacracy. Gays in the military may seem like a "highly partisan" issue to some, but its matter of unquestionable common sense and basic human rights for most.

I already am wondering what kind of pandering rhetoric FOX will use if the Republicans actually decide to try and delay START from going through. Ah, yes... "the socialists are finally dealing with the communists as part of a global plot to take away American jobs and REDISTRIBUTE their wealth." Puh-lease...

Posted by: jon_malley | December 17, 2010 5:00 PM | Report abuse

Wait, Republicans hate gays so much that they are threatening to vote against a Treaty that is in our national security interest. Seriously, wtf is wrong with these people?!

Posted by: omgomgwtfbbq | December 17, 2010 5:00 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: miyago123: "I have to agree with CTVoter. The Dems would be nuts to jeopardize a major treaty just to get DADT repealed."

-------------

I'm sorry, but this is the same bass-ackwards line of "reasoning" the Republicans WANT us to have.

THEY'RE the ones jeopardizing a major treaty. It's been in committee, discussed, written up and available to Congress, etc. for MONTHS and the Repubs have found countless excuses to postpone the vote.

Just like they have the innumerable bills stagnating in the Senate that were readily passed by the more functional House (thanks to the oft-vilified Nancy Pelosi, vilified because she CAN get things done).

Posted by: kayjay503 | December 17, 2010 5:02 PM | Report abuse

Respecting the will of the voters? Did someone mention respecting the will of the voters? Get a clue, you might want to!

Dems' problem is they believe (or make believe) these silly polls about DADT and imagine they should dictate military policy. Ask yourselves why the absurd Rand study was such a small sample and so skewed in its sampling. Ask yourselves what other result a Pentagon under intense political pressure was going to come back with. Ask yourselves whether the public surveys you cite have a shred of credibility about what people really think.

And for the love of pete, don't argue "the will of the voters." The voters kicked Dems in the rear and threw them out the door. This is just a series of final insults by Dems before they hit the pavement.

Posted by: quarterback1 | December 17, 2010 5:03 PM | Report abuse

highly partisan political issues being brought up solely because activist groups in the Democratic Party want this done


_______________


Sounds like the entire dem agenda

Posted by: RainForestRising | December 17, 2010 5:03 PM | Report abuse

Since the START treaty has expired, we have not been able to conduct any verification inspections in Russia, for some time now. If they get the message that we care more about keeping gay people out of the military, than we do about making sure that we do not get caught up in another Nuclear arms race, they will start to feel that they we might be using gays, as an excuse to mask a secret nuclear arsenal expansion, and they will decide that they better start expanding their arsenal also, just to be on the safe side.

After all; if they told us, that they were not going to ratify START, because of their internal dispute about having gays serve openly, and also no inspections are going to conducted, would we not assume that they were up to something? Of course we would.

Republicans are behaving very recklessly just to appease their Right Wing Ayatollahs.

Posted by: Liam-still | December 17, 2010 5:05 PM | Report abuse

The Dem Senate was repudiated by the voters. Republicans won 24 of 37 seats that were on the ballot. Now the defeated or retiring Dems are trying to push through some more of their liberal agenda before they're gone. This is illegitimate. The Republicans must insist that these matters wait for the newly elected, more conservative Senate.

Posted by: eoniii | December 17, 2010 5:06 PM | Report abuse

diabolical lie of the year


___________________

Well that does not qualify It's not a lie

Posted by: RainForestRising | December 17, 2010 5:07 PM | Report abuse

"You do realize that's pretty much exactly what many people were saying when President Truman integrated the Armed Forces, right?"

You do realize that your argument is a fallacy, right? No, I guess you don't.

Posted by: quarterback1 | December 17, 2010 5:09 PM | Report abuse

BTW, "seethelightofgod" (I doubt you can see it from where you are) and other bigots... are you aware that the very first soldier injured in the Iraq war in 2003 is (gasp!) gay? He is a Marine named Eric Alva. He lost a leg.

Posted by: mpl2 | December 17, 2010 5:09 PM | Report abuse

WHY do gays think it is so important to tell people they are gay ?????


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | December 17, 2010 5:09 PM | Report abuse

I don't think Al Qaida is just going to waltz into Russia and drag an ICBM out of there with donkeys and then launch it at an American city if we don't pass this treaty next week. I'm not going to be stocking up on bottled water and canned goods or digging a bunker or anything.

Posted by: Truthteller12 | December 17, 2010 5:10 PM | Report abuse

eonii spewed the following nonsense:

"The Dem Senate was repudiated by the voters. Republicans won 24 of 37 seats that were on the ballot. Now the defeated or retiring Dems are trying to push through some more of their liberal agenda before they're gone. This is illegitimate. The Republicans must insist that these matters wait for the newly elected, more conservative Senate."

Horse**it. The DEMS still have a majority in the Senate. They are the MAJORITY party. So, take that and stuff it where your pride is. And the majority gets to set the agenda.

Posted by: bonncaruso | December 17, 2010 5:11 PM | Report abuse

"""Pass it, sign it and then keep the WATBs in the senate in session until they pass START."""

DING DING DING! Winnah!

"""Dems' problem is they believe (or make believe) these silly polls about DADT"""

GONNNNGGGGGGGG... Losah!

Posted by: Ethan2010 | December 17, 2010 5:12 PM | Report abuse

Do you ALL put down Pat Toomey???

Posted by: RainForestRising | December 17, 2010 5:15 PM | Report abuse

If we do not work on limiting our number of nukes, and Russia's, the rest of the world is not going to work with us to prevent other nations from also getting them. After all, we are already looking like hypocrites, when we have no objections to Israel already having a couple of hundred nukes ready to launch, while we and they threaten to bomb Iran, before it has even a single nuke at it's disposal.

If we want the world to help us curtail the spread of nuclear weapons, we better ratify START now.

Otherwise, we will look like some bloated glutton lecturing everyone else about staying thin.

Posted by: Liam-still | December 17, 2010 5:16 PM | Report abuse

Just a thought: Every time I have ever witness anyone who opposed something in such a negative hateful way, it has proved that the opposer is usually exactly what he hates. Do you think the GOPs are really gay?

Posted by: MsDp | December 17, 2010 5:16 PM | Report abuse

"Horse**it. The DEMS still have a majority in the Senate. They are the MAJORITY party. So, take that and stuff it where your pride is. And the majority gets to set the agenda."

The Senate was structured to make it difficult for temporary majorities to do rash things. Here we have a lameduck majority rashly pushing to enact a radical "reform" before they lose the votes to get it through next month.

You must have a big problem with the House, though, where your majority was thrown out in one of the electoral greatest repudiations in 75 years. Nevertheless, Pelosi jammed it through and spit in the public's eye.

Posted by: quarterback1 | December 17, 2010 5:19 PM | Report abuse

thanks for the daily dose of liberal snottiness guys. Really. It is important to remind Americans at every opportunity of just exactly why the repudiated your movement just a few short weeks ago.

Again, the assertions are made without proof. Basically there are two contentions liberals make:

(1) Absent a START treaty Russia won't co operate with us. Two questions: what language in the treaty mandates that they co operate? next, when have they ever, ever, done anything that wasn't in their own best interest? If co operating is in their best interest they will do it. If it isn't they won't treaty notwithstanding.

(2) Absent a START treaty Russian nuclear material will somehow be expropriated by nefarious actors will evil intent. What stops that from happening now? What specific language in the treaty is aimed directly at allowing Americans to thwart this dastardly deed?

Just too funny. Vacuous and snotty is no way to go through live kids.

Think much?

Posted by: skipsailing28 | December 17, 2010 5:19 PM | Report abuse

How many times to I have to explain this?
How many times?

Republicans want to pay their clients that is all.

They will do nothing "from the center" they will trade away nothing, they exist to get rich people richer.

Now their voters, why people who are not really rich vote Republican is somewhat more complicated, but not inexplicable.

Anyway, they got the tax cut for the rich. That is all they wanted.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 17, 2010 5:20 PM | Report abuse

eonii spewed the following nonsense:

"The Dem Senate was repudiated by the voters. Republicans won 24 of 37 seats that were on the ballot. Now the defeated or retiring Dems are trying to push through some more of their liberal agenda before they're gone. This is illegitimate. The Republicans must insist that these matters wait for the newly elected, more conservative Senate."

Horse**it. The DEMS still have a majority in the Senate. They are the MAJORITY party. So, take that and stuff it where your pride is. And the majority gets to set the agenda.

Posted by: bonncaruso | December 17, 2010 5:21 PM | Report abuse

WHY do gays think it is so important to tell people they are gay ?????

Posted by: RainForestRising | December 17, 2010 5:21 PM | Report abuse

And there you have it.

More adolescent school yard bulling from Republicans.

Obama should know better than negotiating with terrorists.

Posted by: areyousaying | December 17, 2010 5:23 PM | Report abuse

Being from Tn I knew this guy was looney!
For the man that said do we need gays in the military.. They've always been there..
And if the GOP thinks this will help them in two years.. I'm sure the "Lame Line media" as Ms Palin calls them will keep us reminded of just how partisian the GOP is and will be for the next two years.

Posted by: ridgeviewfarms | December 17, 2010 5:24 PM | Report abuse

Vacuous and snotty is no way to go through live kids.

Think much?

Posted by: skipsailing28 | December 17, 2010 5:19 PM
.........................

"Go through live kids"? What the hell are you talking about Skippy?. Better calm down and fix yourself a nice snot sandwich.

Posted by: Liam-still | December 17, 2010 5:24 PM | Report abuse

WHY do gays think it is so important to tell people they are gay ?????

Posted by: RainForestRising | December 17, 2010 5:26 PM | Report abuse

WHY do gays think it is so important to tell people they are gay ?????

Posted by: RainForestRising
---------------------------
Maybe the same reason theocons think it is so important to tell people how "Christian" they are.

Posted by: areyousaying | December 17, 2010 5:27 PM | Report abuse

Seeing as how the Republikkkans have p*ssed on the congressional agenda the last two years with their abuse of the filibuster, Reid should make them stay and finish the countries business until this congress officially adjourns on Jan 4th.

Give the Repugnuts ONE DAY OFF FOR X-MAS....just like most of the poor people whom they screw over get.

.

Posted by: DrainYou | December 17, 2010 5:29 PM | Report abuse

Republicans kill Child Marriage Bill because they're "pro-Life"

In the hours before the vote, Republicans circulated a memo to pro-life members of Congress alleging that the bill could fund abortions and use child marriage "to overturn pro-life laws."

[...]

S. 987 is short--the body of the bill is around ten pages long--and does not mention abortion ("family planning" isn't in there either). A quick read suffices to show that the bill is not dealing with abortion.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2010/12/child_marriage_bill_update.html

Screw the GOP. Frigging unbelievable. They opposed the CHILD MARRIAGE BILL.

How is it that the Republican Party of the United States of America is so openly evil? Why are they allowed to get away with it? I frigging hate what the Republican Party has done to this country. Scum.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | December 17, 2010 5:33 PM | Report abuse

Somehow it doesn't surprise me to learn that some Republican Senators would sacrifice national security for their petty narrow mindedness on social issues. What has happened to the party of the Dirksens and other like-minded patriots I was proud to support? I guess Senator Lugar is the only one left that I could imagine voting for. Instead what we seem to have now are the DeMints and his crowd of shallow-minded bigots.

Posted by: FarmerCharlie | December 17, 2010 5:34 PM | Report abuse

QB's definition of "radical reform":

"A reform supported by the President, the Secretary of Defense, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the House of Representatives, 70% of American adults, and a majority of those in our Armed Forces, and their families, that will allow willing and qualified Americans to serve and defend our country."

Posted by: bearclaw1 | December 17, 2010 5:36 PM | Report abuse

A little bit ago Dan Balz wrote,

'Whether the tax [cut for the rich] compromise proves to be a fleeting moment of bipartisanship or the beginning of a genuine turnaround in Obama's political fortunes won't be known until well into next year."

I don't think we are going to have to wait until next year. Wow, that sure was fleeting.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 17, 2010 5:38 PM | Report abuse

Republican Blackmail! If this is governance some of these bozos need to go back to their cave and chomp on their bone.

Posted by: hsolares | December 17, 2010 5:40 PM | Report abuse

What is it with you bigots anyway? There are ALREADY GAYS IN THE MILITARY. It's just now they are fired when they are outed.

Every one of our allies has militaries that include gays. You know, the vaulted Israeli Defense Force? It has gays...they serve openly without problems. They win wars with gays.

So essentially you bigots feel it's OK to not sign a nuclear arms treaty with Russia because you really really hate gays. You do realize we haven't had inspectors for over a year now don't you? None. Nada. But as far as you are concerned, your hatred & squeamishness about being around gays would cause you to kill a treaty that benefits America and is completely unrelated to gays....except in the minds of bigots.

Congradulations.....now go watch Fox some more where they will continue to lie to you.

Posted by: kindness1 | December 17, 2010 5:42 PM | Report abuse

A little bit ago Dan Balz wrote,

'Whether the tax [cut for the rich] compromise proves to be a fleeting moment of bipartisanship or the beginning of a genuine turnaround in Obama's political fortunes won't be known until well into next year."

I don't think we are going to have to wait until next year. Wow, that sure was fleeting.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 17, 2010 5:38 PM |
..........................

I would not have put it quite like Dan did. I would call it; A fleecing moment of bipartisanship! Rim shot. I will be here all weekend. Try the veal. Tip your wait staff, and don't be afraid of the dark or gay people.

Posted by: Liam-still | December 17, 2010 5:44 PM | Report abuse

"John Feehery, a Republican strategist and former senior House aide...

"It is quite obvious that he showed some political ruthlessness here," Feehery said in an e-mail. "He cares little about the concerns of House Democrats. If they stand in his way, he will trample over them at the drop of a hat. While that might be politically expedient now, it could prove to be his downfall should he need them later on in his presidency."

He doesn't have to worry about a primary. He is just going to be a President who failed the people who got him elected, not to mention the country. That is a time honored tradition in politics, but it is a bad thing.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 17, 2010 5:45 PM | Report abuse

And that's not all. Along with obstructing the child marriage bill, RepuBPlicans are also obstructing food saftey:

Washington (CNN) - A sweeping food safety bill that passed the House and Senate earlier this year before stalling because of a legislative technicality now will likely die because Republicans object to giving it quick approval in the waning days of the congressional session, Senate leadership aides on both sides of the aisle said Friday.

Let's hope all this obstruction and holding hostage American's safety will backfire on these bullies in 2010 after the people become sick of it like they did after eight years of Lord Cheney and his boy companion George the Dumber.

Posted by: areyousaying | December 17, 2010 5:47 PM | Report abuse

Obama knows that the House is lost to the Democrats for at least the next ten years, so they will not be in any position to help him, down the road. Feehery appears to think that the House works like the Senate, where the minority can gum up the works. It does not. The minority party in the House is powerless.

Posted by: Liam-still | December 17, 2010 5:49 PM | Report abuse

So is Obama.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 17, 2010 5:51 PM | Report abuse

HOSTAGE TAKERS


.

Posted by: RainForestRising | December 17, 2010 5:52 PM | Report abuse

At first I thought "seethelightofgod's" comment was a sarcastic one, but then I realized it wasn't. Sometimes the depth of such hatred and irrationality is shocking to behold.

But more to the point, I'm almost speechless over this turn of events. I thought for sure that once the President and the Democrats had acquiesced to Republican demands that tax cuts for the wealthy be passed before any other legislation, the country could move on to completing other essential priorities.

Now we learn that, after the tax cuts for the wealthy have passed, Republicans are planning to hold the New Start Treaty hostage to maintaining discrimination against gays in the military. Does the extortion never end? For the life of me, I have never seen such faithless bargaining in American politics.

On top of the double-dealing, risking our nation's nuclear security just to maintain a nonsensical "Don't Ask/Don't Tell" policy (which harms national security in and of itself by preventing competent Americans from serving their country), represents a confluence of counter-productive, anti-American Republican policies that could threaten our very existence.

In all my years of watching politics, never have I seen such outrageous insanity manifest itself. Republicans, first with their tax-cuts-for-the-wealthy in a time of war, and now with their bigoted, anti-Obama roadblocks preventing oversight of Russian nuclear weapons and materials, seem to relish putting the country at risk.

My advice to the Democratic leadership is this: Don't deal with the extortionists. Repeal DADT, and then we'll pray that either the Republicans are bluffing, or the Russians are capable of securing their arsenal.

Perhaps right-thinking Americans will see how thoroughly bankrupt and bereft of reason Republicans have become in their betrayal of America's national security interests, as well as the legacies of Ronald Reagan and subsequent Republican presidents. If they fail to realize it, all may be lost anyway.

Posted by: tjshire | December 17, 2010 5:55 PM | Report abuse

Corker represents the classic, old south, "I was raised a bigot and I'll always be a bigot until I die" mindset that still permeates thru Southern society today.

All you need to do is pack up your stuff, spend a month on the road.. Start with an icy cold beer in Denver and end your visit in Miami... You never be the same and you'll be better informed WHY beck and limberger do what they do; why texas is SO focused on why all history textbooks should be done in San Antonio; why Mississippi is still the poorest state in the union; why the clay is red in Georgia (has to do with blood stains); why Corker says what he says and HE believes it to be ordained truth; why the US forgot that New Orleans was actually part of the US; why Atlanta gets very little publicity nationally or among the business press (has to do with why they don't want you there); and finally, why they - just today - started plugging in vending machine in Florida for GOLD BARS! This should help you with any confusion that's left about that beck and limberger thing..

Here's the link to the Gold Bar dispenser...
http://money.cnn.com/2010/12/17/news/companies/gold_atm_boca/

If you're still confused about WHY Corker's mindset is not like others that you know, move overseas. Northeast Spain or Southern France should be just the ticket.. If you're a bit more adventurous, hit Scandinavia... You'll never be the same. AND, you'll understand why Corker WANTS to take you back to 1800... You can't get there from here.

Posted by: rbaldwin2 | December 17, 2010 5:57 PM | Report abuse

"Congradulations.....now go watch Fox some more where they will continue to lie to you."

LOL . . . nice going. Thoz stoopid peepel whu wach Foks. Btw, it is "vaunted."

"A reform supported by the President,"

yes, a radical President who defrauded his way into office

"the Secretary of Defense,"

a good company man feeling the pc winds and pressure from the boss

"the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,"

ditto

"the House of Representatives,"

no, only the repudiate, Lamedem Pelosi house

"70% of American adults,"

not impressed

"and a majority of those in our Armed Forces,

don't make me laugh

"and their families,"

ditto, and so what

"that will allow willing and qualified Americans to serve and defend our country."

debatably and at a higher price


Posted by: quarterback1 | December 17, 2010 5:57 PM | Report abuse

Shrink,

The Republicans might save him, from himself. Those teabaggers that went to Washington are going to drive them farther and farther to the right.

They scared the hell out of Mitch, and forced him to back out on the deal he had cut with the Dems, on the omnibus figure of 1.1 trillion. The Dems met his asking price, and the Teabaggers forced him to not go through with it.

Keep your eye on McCain; he has been working hard to try and grab the the steering wheel of the tea party express. I still believe that old daft coot is contemplating taking another run at the Presidency, and he knows that he needs to get the activist tea party on his side. Stay tuned.

Yes, I know he is too old. You know he is too old, but I doubt if he does. The Presidency has become his: "My Precious". Look at how much he kissed up to Bush for eight years, just to get another shot at the nomination. I see him doing the same thing now, with the Tea Party. He is even using their language, and calling for them to "get out their pitchforks".

Posted by: Liam-still | December 17, 2010 6:02 PM | Report abuse

skippy,

You are total entertainment on this board, and I hope you don't ever go away.

LOL

Posted by: suekzoo1 | December 17, 2010 6:03 PM | Report abuse

@liam: "Cue SBJ to soon show up and explain how it is all Harry Reid's fault, because he should have scrapped all attempts to get START ratified."

I've only been saying that START should wait until the next session for three days now. There's no reason START has to be a high priority right now - it's been gathering dust for 8 months.

Greg has already said:

"What's more, if worst comes to worst, START could be resolved early next year."

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/12/how_harry_reid_can_make_time_f.html

Posted by: sbj3 | December 17, 2010 6:04 PM | Report abuse

Here we have another thread filled with inflamed rhetoric about bigotry and hatred and irrationality and blah blah blah, but the only hatred and bigotry and rage on display is from the leftists.

That just never changes.

Posted by: quarterback1 | December 17, 2010 6:04 PM | Report abuse

SBJ,

START needs 67 votes. There will be less Democrats in the Senate in 2011, in the next session, and there are barely enough Republicans willing to vote for it now, to get to 67 votes. So, where are the extra Republican votes going to come from, to replace people like Russ Feingold etc.

It is easy to say that START will be passed next year, but how?

Posted by: Liam-still | December 17, 2010 6:09 PM | Report abuse

Greg,

Saturday Prediction: Cloture for DREAM will be voted on first and fail. It has *not* got the backing of the majority of americans right now. The Vote on the Repeal of DADT *will* pass cloture, but the talks and amendments will reach into next week anyway. It should still pass, but by a nail biting margin. Other stuff will be talked about and a temporary spending bill will pass.

The START threat will get pushed to back burner by McConnell and despite Obama's desire to get this through before the end of the year, they have no deal on that specifically, so it will not happen.

My best guess is that, Greg. Sound close to what you expect? I am probably wrong on a point here or there, I am sure. Just for fun though, what to you *really* expect the total outcome of this Congress to look like?

;'{P~~~

Posted by: Clearbrook | December 17, 2010 6:10 PM | Report abuse

Look, I am not saying anything good about Republicans as I try to find out who pulled the plug on Obama, or whether his hope and change 'from the center' was a sincere wish. I still have a candle lit with political genius next to it.

I still think Republicans don't matter, or they wouldn't if Obama didn't make them matter. They have no program, no agenda other than to pay off rich people and get rid of Obama so as to make paying off rich people less expensive.

They have to beat him in 2012 and if they do, it will be a catastrophic failure of judgement on my part, oops I mean everyone else, obviously. Romney? Palin? The Republicans have no leaders.

He must believe he has 2012 in the bag so he is still trying to bring along the center right. I can't figure it out. Ask me something about health care...

Maybe I'll have the veal.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 17, 2010 6:12 PM | Report abuse

The Toon Town Lawyer is outraged that Raging Homophobes are being treated with disrespect.

Hey Toon Town Lawyer; have you hugged a Homophobe today, and hugging yourself does not count?!

Posted by: Liam-still | December 17, 2010 6:12 PM | Report abuse

Fox News: GOP on 9/11 Responders are "National Disgrace", "National Shame"

"Who's going to hold these people's feet to the fire? We're able to put a 52-story building so far down there at Ground Zero, we're able to pay for tax cuts for billionaires who don't need them and it's not going to stimulate the economy. But we can't give health care to Ground Zero first responders who ran right into the fire?"

"It's disgusting," he continued. "It's a national disgrace, it's a shame and everybody who voted against it should have to stand up and account for himself or herself."

Chris Wallace agreed: "It's a national shame."

http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/12/fox-news-shep-smith-wallops-gopers-for-911-responders-bill-its-disgusting-video.php

I agree entirely. The Republican Party is both a national disgrace and a national shame. Republicans are pure evil. They kill 9/11 Responders Bill, they kill COLA adjustment for senior citizens, they kill Child Marriage Bill. No way around it. No other word describes it. They are EVIL.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | December 17, 2010 6:13 PM | Report abuse

The Department of Defense is an activist group in the Democratic Party?!

Posted by: veritasinmedium | December 17, 2010 6:16 PM | Report abuse

@liam: "There are barely enough Republicans willing to vote for it now, to get to 67 votes... It is easy to say that START will be passed next year, but how?"

They are just effin' with Obama and the Dems right now. They don't want to give him any "victories" before the new congress is seated. Kyl has been indicating that it's just a matter of time until they work out a few issues with START. It has broad support amongst party elders and the military so you can bet that it will get ratified eventually. (It's called politics, and I *do* hope the world is not lost in a nuclear conflagration before it is ratified...)

Posted by: sbj3 | December 17, 2010 6:17 PM | Report abuse

I hope those brave Republicans can hold out against that evil mob of dead duck losers for a few more days. Americans are sick and tired of the feckless Obamacrats jamming all those stink-bomb bills into their faces.

This is the most hated congress in the history of America. The reasons why are obvious.

Posted by: battleground51 | December 17, 2010 6:20 PM | Report abuse

Ethan,

Did you see Jon Stewart last night? If not, please watch it. He devoted the entire show to the 9/11 First Responders, had 4 of them on who all have cancer, and then interviewed Mike Huckabee, and pretty much challenged him to get the story of the blocked legislation out on Fox.

Maybe Stewart will finally get something going on this bill. That's my prayer, anyway.. ...

Posted by: suekzoo1 | December 17, 2010 6:21 PM | Report abuse

Republican Party to 9/11 first responders:

Hey, we tried to get the Muslim center moved. What more do you want from us? Stop bothering us with your health care demands. We give and we give to you, and this is the thanks we get.

Posted by: Liam-still | December 17, 2010 6:21 PM | Report abuse

I'm actually watching it right now, Sue. Horrendous.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | December 17, 2010 6:23 PM | Report abuse

It is horrendous, Ethan. But Jon Stewart is a hero if what he's done for the last couple weeks can finally get some action.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | December 17, 2010 6:25 PM | Report abuse

Re 9/11 and the Corker insanity above, here's the appropriate quote from Yglesias (on another subject really, but broadly applicable)...

"To a large extent our political system is already biased toward promoting power-crazed sociopaths into positions of authority"

http://yglesias.thinkprogress.org/2010/12/mitt-romney-and-olive-garden/

Posted by: bernielatham | December 17, 2010 6:28 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, that's what I meant :)

Horrendous that we even have to talk about this as an "issue".

Thank God for Jon Stewart.

This whole thing makes me ill.

The Republicans make me ill. They are true evil.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | December 17, 2010 6:28 PM | Report abuse

Compare and contrast;

How The Republicans treat the living sick 9/11 First Responders, as opposed to how they handled the Brain Dead Terri Schiavo situation.

Pro-Lifers, My Arse!

Posted by: Liam-still | December 17, 2010 6:29 PM | Report abuse

Good point, Liam!

Posted by: suekzoo1 | December 17, 2010 6:33 PM | Report abuse

@liam: "Graham told National Review Online earlier in the week that given sufficient time to debate and add amendments, he envisioned 15 to 20 Republican would vote yea in 2011, more than enough to get to the 67 needed for ratification."

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/255599/graham-if-start-fails-dont-blame-gop-andrew-stiles

Posted by: sbj3 | December 17, 2010 6:34 PM | Report abuse

~Chamber Of Commerce Lobbied To Help GOP Kill Bill To Provide Health Care To 9/11 First Responders~

The Chamber fought to help kill the 9/11 compensation bill because it was funded by ending a special tax loophole exploited by foreign corporations doing business in the United States.

In September, the Chamber sent a letter officially opposing the 9/11 first responders bill, called the “James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act of 2010.” The Chamber warned that ending the tax loophole would “damage U.S. relationships with major trading partners” and “aggravate already unsettled financial markets.” A lobbying disclosure filed with the Senate confirms the Chamber contacted lawmakers to help kill the bill.

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/12/17/chamber-911-responders/

Fk Republicans. Just F em.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | December 17, 2010 6:36 PM | Report abuse

"*‘U.S.’ Chamber Of Commerce Lobbied To Help GOP Kill Bill To Provide Health Care To 9/11 First Responders*"

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/12/17/chamber-911-responders/

Know the enemy.

Posted by: bernielatham | December 17, 2010 6:39 PM | Report abuse

Repeal DADT and call the GOP's bluff about START. If the GOP is really foolish enough to make ratification of START contingent on leaving DADT in place, it will show even more clearly that their true interests are not concerned with this country's well being, and will tarnish the public's perception of them even more than it already is.

Posted by: apn3206 | December 17, 2010 6:42 PM | Report abuse

"Know the enemy."

Canada!

Posted by: sbj3 | December 17, 2010 6:43 PM | Report abuse

From Jon Kyl's current website:

START, considered by many to be the most important nuclear arms reduction treaty in history, dramatically reduced the number of nuclear warheads in the U.S. and Russian arsenals, and provided the means for each country to effectively verify the other’s nuclear activities.

With the expiration of the treaty last year, the United States and Russia have lost key means to monitor one another’s nuclear forces. http://bit.ly/eNrIav

Posted by: sprung4 | December 17, 2010 6:43 PM | Report abuse

NBC News is reporting that a delegation of Republican Senators went to the White House today, to try and get Obama to persuade Harry Reid to not call repeal of DADT up for a vote, and to bring up the START treaty instead.

Reid is reported to have said, that he has the votes to repeal DADT now, so he must go ahead with it, because he will not have enough votes to pass it, next year.

Posted by: Liam-still | December 17, 2010 6:44 PM | Report abuse

All, Happy Hour Roundup posted:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/12/happy_hour_roundup_149.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | December 17, 2010 6:46 PM | Report abuse

"Reid is reported to have said, that he has the votes to repeal DADT now, so he must go ahead with it, because he will not have enough votes to pass it, next year."

Well, duh!

And there will plenty of votes to ratify START next year.

Posted by: sbj3 | December 17, 2010 6:47 PM | Report abuse

Oliver Cromwell to the Harry Reids and Nancy Pelosis of his day:

Dissolution of the Long Parliament by Oliver Cromwell given to the House of Commons, 20 April 1653

It is high time for me to put an end to your sitting in this place, which you have dishonored by your contempt of all virtue, and defiled by your practice of every vice; ye are a factious crew, and enemies to all good government; ye are a pack of mercenary wretches, and would like Esau sell your country for a mess of pottage, and like Judas betray your God for a few pieces of money.

Is there a single virtue now remaining amongst you? Is there one vice you do not possess? Ye have no more religion than my horse; gold is your God; which of you have not barter'd your conscience for bribes? Is there a man amongst you that has the least care for the good of the Commonwealth?

Ye sordid prostitutes have you not defil'd this sacred place, and turn'd the Lord's temple into a den of thieves, by your immoral principles and wicked practices? Ye are grown intolerably odious to the whole nation; you were deputed here by the people to get grievances redress'd, are yourselves gone! So! Take away that shining bauble there, and lock up the doors.

In the name of God, go!

Posted by: eoniii | December 17, 2010 6:57 PM | Report abuse

ACCORDING TO RELIGIOUS LAWS AND CUSTOMS, WOMEN CAN'T SIT AS JUDGES,ie SCOTUS 3 OF 9 ARE
I DO NOT CONSENT AND WAIVE THE BENEFITS TO ALL IMF IRS 501 (c)(3) LLC- RELIGIOUS CORP. LAWS.
AS A US CITIZEN ,I AM ALWAYS *AMICUS CURIAE *A FRIEND OF THE COURT 264F.276,279,, 64N.Y.S.2d510,512, AND AS WELL AS *QUI TAM* 21N.W.2d287,289

FOREIGN RELIGIOUS COUNTRIES AND THEIR INHUMANE LAWS/CUSTOMS, REJECTS THE US CONSTITUTION, SO WHY SHOULD WE BEND TO THEIR ARCHAIC INHUMANE DEATH CUSTOMS AND LAWS, SUCH A SHARIA LAW WOULD PRESENT A " CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER " TO US CITIZEN AND ALLOW WARS IN THE STREETS AS IN OTHER COUNTRIES, IT'S NOT ABOUT PEACE, IT'S ABOUT PIECES

"COLOR OF LAW" THE MERE SEMBLANCE OF A LEGAL RIGHT/DUTY 202NW144,148, AN ACTION DONE UNDER THE COLOR OF LAW IS ONE DONE WITH THE APPARENT AUTHORITY OF LAW BUT ACTUALLY IN CONTRAVENTION OF LAW, A FEDERAL "CAUSE OF ACTION" MAY BE MAINTAINED AGAINST A STATE OFFICER WHO UNDER "COLOR LAW" DEPRIVE A PERSON OF HIS "CIVIL RIGHTS 42USCss1983

Posted by: shaiarra | December 17, 2010 7:09 PM | Report abuse

have you hugged a Homophobe today, and hugging yourself does not count?!

Posted by: Liam-still | December 17, 2010 6:12 PM
-------

I doubt that you've been hugging yourself. Maybe your proctologist should check you out.

Posted by: Brigade | December 17, 2010 7:26 PM | Report abuse

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

GOP: except gays! except gays!

Posted by: baldinho | December 17, 2010 7:28 PM | Report abuse

Under the circumstances... Do START. DADT can wait.

Posted by: binkynh | December 17, 2010 7:31 PM | Report abuse

Only in America would we allow politicians to use access to equal protection under the Constitution as a bargaining chip for a treaty.

Corker is typical of the social conservatives in Congress who will use any and all tactics to press their 18the century view of the world on the rest of us.

Unfortunately, a large percentage of Tennessee is populated by Christian fundamentalists who will see Corker's act as one to applaud. Like it is often said, all politics is local and Corker is playing to his constituents even if he did take an oath to defend the Constitution; first things first and getting re-elected is, obviously, most important to Bob Corker.

Posted by: bobfbell | December 17, 2010 7:34 PM | Report abuse

baldinho, I miss you people, but there were some there who don't miss me and that was pretty lethal.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 17, 2010 7:39 PM | Report abuse

@sbj - Careful, young fellow. You might presume that your Marines are tough. And they probably are, compared to most other groups of aggressive beer-glass-eating males. But junior hockey leaguers from Portage La Prairie are in a different category all together.

Posted by: bernielatham | December 17, 2010 7:41 PM | Report abuse

Don't you love the GOP? They hold national security hostage to keep a vote from happening on DADT. Why not vote on both and let the vote fall as it will? I, for one, am tired of everything being manipulated to thwart the will of a majority of Senators. I think most Americans are sick of the Senate and its arcane undemocratic rules.

Posted by: tinyjab40 | December 17, 2010 7:48 PM | Report abuse

Don't do DREAM, DADT, or START. None are good for the nation.

Posted by: gun313 | December 17, 2010 7:52 PM | Report abuse

Hey shrink2. How's stuff. You can come on back at any time. I've been busy and have had that blog on the back burner lately. There are a few blowhards that go off a bit. At times it is easier to just move on.

Posted by: baldinho | December 17, 2010 7:58 PM | Report abuse

Shaiarra, your mind is in pieces. Please accept help, I am sure people care about you.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 17, 2010 7:59 PM | Report abuse

Yes indeed, it is a lovely group hug all the time and I felt divisive, especially wrt matters of politics. In a place like this who cares, but I really don't want to mess with a healthy process. Tiptoeing around other people who lay waiting for an insensitive remark upon which to pounce is exhausting. I lurk, it works. But I do miss it. All the best.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 17, 2010 8:06 PM | Report abuse

This idea Bob Corker mentioned sums up the Republicans pretty well: they don't really care about national security. How is it, that you can threaten to not re-enact a nuclear arms and inspection treaty with Russia, something that's pretty vital in a world where not only is there loose nuclear material out there, but that it doesn't take much to destroy an American city or any city anywhere. All to keep openly gay and lesbian soldiers from serving. Many are already soldiers, after all.

How homophobic do you have to be to screw the country over? They should be happy anybody wants to serve to protect their cowardly @sses, many of whom got out of service or chose not to serve. All this repeal really does it make it illegal to discriminate against a gay or lesbian soldier in firing them if they are "outed". How ridiculous. On both these fronts, Republicans are willing to play political games to keep this country from being safe.

You wanna talk about being childish, Republicans the past two years in Congress have been just that - CHILDISH, while getting practically everything they wanted and more, but still acting like spoiled brats. Congress used to be worth something. Then again, so did the presidency.

Posted by: fbutler1 | December 17, 2010 8:21 PM | Report abuse

God Bless our GOP Senators for making sure that Obama cannot pass anything. The goal is to make him a one-term President.

You have not even begun to see the bag of tricks we're going to pull out to obstruct anything and everything he tries to do.

Posted by: Seethelightofgod
*******************************************
i see the light of god alright....and it is not light...but a rather opaque shade of stupidity.

Posted by: kiler616 | December 17, 2010 8:25 PM | Report abuse

IT IS GENETICS BEING RE-ENFORCED BY NATURE ie ESTROGEN IN FOOD/ WATER/ AIR/PLASTICS/ and mercury etc. GOOGLE: Study: Mercury pollution causes birds to act gay : IT'S IRONIC THE IRIBIS/ BENNU/ PHOENIX BIRD REPRESENTS THE DIVINE BI-SEXUAL CHILD CALLED RIBIS/ REBIS IN ALCHEMY OF WHICH IT SAYS MERCURY MUST BE JOINED TO MERCURY, IBIS=THOTH, THOTH = MERCURY/HERMES= HERMAPHRODITUS= HERMAPHRODITE ie, ....INTERSEX/ XXY MALES.... IS GENETICS..... THEREFORE A RACE ....379US184,191.... AS ALCHEMY TEXT SAY THERE ARE THREE SEXES MALE-FEMAL-& HERMAPHRODITE, SEE .....AMERICANS WITH DIABILITIES ACT..... ON GENETICS PROTECTIONS....., AGAIN RELIGIOUS LAWS ARE NO EXCUSE TO BE INHUMAN NOR A TERROTIST PERIOD

SIN INVOLVES A CHOICE, ESTROGEN IN THE FOOD -WATER-AIR SOURCES AND IN GENETICS IS NOT A CHOICE, ITS NOT A SIN OR "GOD" WOULD BE UNJUST IN THESE TWO MAIN AREAS ( FOOD/ GENES) : THEREFORE IT'S NOT A SIN (-CHOICE)

GOOGLE/ YOUTUBE /Wikipedia the terms: "INTERSEX" AND "XXY /XXXY MALES " IT'S ALL SCIENTIFIC FACT, ((ADA)AMERICANS with DISABILITIES ACT Civil Rights Section LAW ) BIOLOGICAL GENETIC VARIANTS, people ARE BORN with both fully, ENVIRONMENTAL ESTROGEN RE-ENFORCES IT Complete AIS means that the person will look absolutely FEMALE OR MALE from the outside. However AIS is only one of about 75 KNOWN different intersex GENETIC conditions ,and 'INTERSEX/ XXY/ XXXY MALES" occurs in ALL RACES. (ADA) PROTECTS NORMAL HUMAN BIOLOGICAL GENETIC VARIANTS

SEEING THAT SCIENCE AGAIN HAS CLEARED THE WAY THEN, THEREFORE RELIGIOUS/ POLITICAL AND OTHERS etc MAY BE LIABLE FOR THEIR INHUMANE HATE SPEECH THAT BOTH INSIGHT TERRORIST VIOLENCE & CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATIONS , SEE THE (ADA) FED LAW & KKK CASE LAW PRECEDENCE, THE US PATRIOT ACT AND NATIONAL SECURITY ACT FOR TERRORISM AGAINST ANY US CITIZEN

THE AMERICAN DISABILITIES ACT (ADA) COVERS BIOLOGICAL GENETIC VARIANT WITH REASONABLE ACCOMMODATIONS " INTERSEXED/XXY MALE etc" ARE BIOLOGICAL GENETIC VARIANTS, MUST SHOW THEY CAN DO THE JOB, THAT ALSO IS WHAT BASIC TRAINING IS FOR, A LOT OF HETERALS GET FLUSHED OUT FOR NOT BEING ABLE TO ACCOMMODATE/ NEGOTIATE THE PHYSICAL OBSTICLE DEMANDS, ALSO MORE THAT SAME SEXERS


* GOOGLE AND YOUTUBE: RELIGION MENTAL ILLNESS: AND YOU'LL SEE THE PSYCHOLOGY REPORTS ON EXTREMISM SELF RIGHTIOUSNESS DELUSIONAL AND SELF INDUCED HALLUCINATIONS AND DEADLY VIOLENCE,...GOOGLE: RELIGIOUS EXTREMISM CAUSES MENTAL ILLNESS...THEIR CRAZIES PERIOD

Posted by: shaiarra | December 17, 2010 8:46 PM | Report abuse

"ADAM KADMON" THE IMAGE OF "YHVH GOD" WAS CREATED AN HERMAPHRODITE AND MANKIND WILL BECOME THAT AGAIN, ie MARRIAGE IS THE CONTRACTUAL CEREMONY FOR THE HERMAPHRODITE FUTURE OF MANKIND ie (THE TWO BECOME ONE FLESH AS IN THE BEGINNING), TO SQUARE THE CIRCLE, MALES =TESTO ANGULAR SQUARE IN FACE (MARS) AND FEMALE= ESTRO ARE ROUNDISH CIRCLE (VENUS), THE HERMAPHRODITE IS BOTH=T-ESTRO (ANDROGENIC DHEA) ie OCTOGENARIAN IN FACES (HERMES/ DIANA), =BOTH STATIC AND MOVABLE AT THE SAME TIME AND PLACE ie THE 2SPIRIT BEING CAN TRAVEL WITHOUT MOVING ie HERMETIC LIBERAL ARTS AND SCIENCES (LAW/ CIVILIZATION)


TO THE JEWS THE SHEKHINAT EIL /ISLAM ALLAT ( SHEKINAH/ASHERAH/ASHERAT/ELOAH ) ARE THE FEMININE (6) TERMS FOR YHVH GOD OF ISRAEL WHOM THE XTIANS CALL THE HOLY GHOST OR HOLY SPIRIT:GOOGLE IT OK, SEE IT AND READ IT FOR YOURSELF (=to saying Ms. Mrs. etc.)

JEWS/ ISLAM AND XTIAN SEMINARIES KNOW THAT ADAM WAS CREATED AN HERMAPHRODITE (INTESEXED MALE =REBIS/RIBIS ie PHEONIX THE PERFECT DIVINE INTERSEXD CHILD) AND CALLED PERFECT AND GOOD, SURA AL KAYAMA (KORAN) FROM ONE BLOOD HE (ALLAH) MADE HIM (ADAM), AND FROM HIM (ADAM), HE (ALLAH ) MADE BOTH MALE AND FEMALE, GENESIS :EVE CAME OUT OF ADAM, FEMALE IS ALSO THE IMAGE OF YHVH (THE INTERSEXED BEING XX/Y)

FYI A LOT SAME SEXERS AND BISEXUALS BOTH HAVE BIOLOGICAL CHILDREN OK (AKIN/ RICKY MARTIN/ CHENEY'S DAUGHTER exp) THEIR ARE MANY MORE ,INDIA HINDI ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE A LEAST ONE CHILD THEN LIVE THEIR LIFE

GOOGLE: "GOD BIBLE ADAM ANDROGYNY/ HERMAPHRODITE" AND "ALCHEMY REBIS"

ROSICRUCIAN DOCTRINE (THE 3 SEXES HERMAPHRODITE REBIS THE PHEONIX BEING THE FIRST SEX AND THE END DIVINE CHILD OF THE LIGHT)
Concerning the Material of the Stone
The Alchemy web site on Levity.com ... On the same subject, there are in humankind three sexes, masculine, feminine and hermaphrodite. ...
www.levity.com/alchemy/arsenal


COMITY (COMITAS) LAW DOCTRINE IS A RULE OF COURTESY, BUT NOT A RULE OF LAW,
RELIGIOUS/FOREIGN LAWS FAILS THE TEST OF EQUALITY/ BILL-CIVIL RIGHTS OF US CITIZENS, " In the exercise of one's religion one, CANNOT INSIST ON CONDUCT WHICH THREATENS important interest on the society in an UNREASONABLE MANNER. The courts must, therefore, BALANCE the Importance of a religious exercise claim against the State interest involved in a rule or practice which prevents or hinders the exercise 367US488,489. LEVITICAL/SHARIA DEATH LAWS ARE UNREASONABLY CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENTS , OF WHICH THE FOUNDING FATHERS LEFT EUROPE BECAUSE OF RELIGION.


AS IN A DIVORCE DECREE OF A FOREIGN COUNTRY, BUT, THE COURTESY CANNOT REVOKE ANY OF THE US CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISION OF BILL OF RIGHTS NOR EQUAL PROTECTION OF SECULAR LAWS, NOR THE PASSING OF FOREIGN LAWS ONTO US CITIZENS, NOR THE STATUES OF CIVIL RIGHTS, PATRIOT /NATIONAL SECURITY ACT

Posted by: shaiarra | December 17, 2010 8:54 PM | Report abuse

GENETICS: GENDER IS A SPECTRUM OF RANGES NOT A CHOICE NOR A CONSENT, JUST LIKE ANY OTHER SPECTRIAL RANGES IN GENETICS, ie HAIR/EYE SHAPE-COLOR/SKIN TYPE-TONE/ HEIGHT /WEIGHT/ VOICE SIGHT/ HEARING/ TOUCH/ SMELL/ EYES/ NOSE /EARS/BODY/ ALLERGIES/ NOSE etc

Phenotype


IN THE FIRST TRIMESTER ALL EMBRYOS (X/Y) that come out of ALL MALES TESTIS SPERMATICS ARE GENETIC FEMALES, yes sir even you started out female before the sex change to male (an X/Y maker and carrier) while in the womb, THATS WHY MEN HAVE TEETS, & FEMALE DO HAVE PROSTATES LIKE MALES WHEN YOUNGER MALES START THIER "FLOW" IT CONTAINS A LARGE % OF XXY/XXXY SPERM

GOOGLE: "FEMALE PROSTATE G-SPOT" found in THE NEW SCIENTIST MAGAZINE ARTICLE BY DR.SHARON MOALEM AT MT. SINAI SCHOOL OF MEDICINE NYC,NY, 30 MAY 2009 Pg33 paragraph #7, and also GOOGLE:(Adam Hermaphrodite/ Adam Androgyny) ie Fe-MALE, Wo-MAN, S-HE, HE-R, ie she is the Image of "YHVH" ALSO, A MATHMATICAL INVERSE TO THAT OF MALES ( INTERSEXED BEING X/Y)

Google:Estrogen Feminizing Men/Males and "Estrogen in Foods/Water/ AIR/ PLASTICS /Environment"
GOOGLE: Study: Mercury pollution causes birds to act gay,

KNOWING WHAT ESTROGEN DOES TO MALES, WHY "GOD" PUTS IT IN 90% of the known vegan/meat/ air/ water sources?? " THE ALL KNOWING OMNISCIENCE/ OMNIPRESENT/ OMNIPOTENT GOD KNOWS THIS?"

THERE ARE SIX KNOWN GENETIC SEX COMBINATION: EACH HAS ITS OWN SPECTRAL RANGES
GOOGLE/WIKIPEDIA YOUTUBE THE TERMS: "INTERSEX" AND " XXY MALES" ITS MEDICAL SCIENCE

Female=XX (normal) , XXx (super female) , XXy (tom boyish andro)

Male=XY (normal) , XYy (super male) , XYx (Andro)

BIBLICAL: ADAM WAS CREATED AN HERMAPHRODITE ,(ADAM HAD THREE WIVES IN HIS LIFE)

FYI IT WAS ADAM AND STEVE FIRST THEN YHVH SEX INVERSE STEVE INTO EVE ie THE TISSUE , CLONING WILL ALWAYS PRODUCE A SAME SEX TWIN, TRUTH ON EVE IS THE S-HE IS BOTH ADAM'S CLONED TWIN AND CHILD, FOR ADAM EXISTED FIRST, S-HE IS CALLED WO-MAN ie WOMB OF MAN, S-HE'S ADAMS FIRST BEGOTTEN SO ADAM IS BOTH MOTHER AND FATHER AS WELL AS HUSBAND TO st-EVE.

EVE CAME OUT OF HIM, CLONING TECHNOLOGY=SAME SEX TWIN SO ie "GOD" DID THE FIRST MATHEMATICAL SEX CHANGE, FEMALES HAVE EVERYTHING MALES HAVE BUT THEIRS INVERSE MATH,

AND THE "SEED OF THE WOMAN" IS SAME SEX CLONING THE MATHMATICAL CONVERTION TO MALE


RELIGIOUS DEATH LAWS DOSE NOT PASS THE 14AMEND. EQUAL PROTECTION OF THE LAWS, LAW DOCTRINES OF [RATIONAL BASIS TEST 431US471,489 427US307,314, STRICT SCRUTINY 403US365, 405US330, 411US1,16-17 , COMPELLING INTEREST 394US618,634 AND SUSPECT CLASSIFICATION 411US1,28, INTERSEX/ XXY MALES IS GENETICS THEREFORE A RACE 379US184,191 AS ALCHEMY TEXT SAY THERE ARE THREE SEXES MALE-FEMALE-& HERMAPHRODITE CALLED THE REBIS SPICES WHICH IS BOTH THE OLDEST FROM WHICH "ADAM" WAS CREATED AS, AND WHAT MAN WILL BECOME AGAIN, SEE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT ON GENETICS PROTECTIONS, AGAIN FORIEGN/ RELIGIOUS LAWS ARE NO EXCUSE TO BE INHUMAN NOR A TERRORIST AND JIM CROW LIKE PERIOD

Posted by: shaiarra | December 17, 2010 9:09 PM | Report abuse

Romens Chapter 2:1-4 is a continuation of the "letter" which also says to the "xtians" KJV "Google: King James Bible Gay"

"Thou art inexcusable O MAN WHOSOEVER THOU ART THAT JUDGEST : for wherein thoujudgest another, thou condemnest thy self : FOR THOU THAT JUDGEST DOEST THE SAME THINGS

ROMANS CHP ONE AND TWO AS CHAPTERS DONT EXISTS, THEY ARE ONE LETTER CHP 2:1-4 GOES ONTO SAY THAT XTIAN CANT JUDGE THEM BECAUSE THE XTIANS DO&GUILTY OF THE SAME THINGS, so romans chp1&2 IS NOT ABOUT SAME SEX, IT'S ABOUT THE FINGURE POINTERS BEING GULTY OF THE SAME THINGS, SO STOP CHERRY PICKING, XTIAN ARE VERY UNJUST AND BIASED PERIOD

What did Jesus say about SAME SEX?
Not a word from Jesus has been recorded in the New Testament. Nothing!

Since when did "JESUS" avocate death penalties???, YOUR THE SO-CALLED SATANIST NOW!!! PETER PUT AWAY THAT SWORD, YOU WILL DIE BY THE SWORD!!

But what did Jesus say about two men lying together in one bed?

From the Gospel of LUKE 17:verses 30, 34, Jesus said,

"In the day the Son of man is revealed, in that night there shall be two men in one bed, the one shall be taken, and the other left.",

So ok 2 GROWN MEN in 1 Bed {TOGETHER}? (what does this sound like?...AT THE RAPTURE SAME SEX "JESUS" says he takes one and leave the other in the same bed on that night ON THE RAPTURE, HMMMMM, ok?)

SEE LUKE 17:30-34, TWO GROWN MEN "LYING" IN BED TOGETHER AT NIGHT, HE TAKES ONE AND LEAVES THE OTHER...IT DID NOT BOTHER "JESUS"

Men are told to KISS Each other!!! ( BIBLE NEW TESTAMENT ) ROM16:16, 1Cor 16:20, 2Cor13:12, 1Thes5:26 1Pet5:14


THE US CONSTITUTION 1ST AND 11TH US CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS

NO FOREIGN LAWS OVER US CITIZENS PERIOD,( RES IPSA LOQUITUR, RES JUDICATA) IT BARS THE INCORPORATION OF ANY FOREIGN LAWS INCLUDING RELIGIOUS LAWS (SHARIA-LEVITICAL- VATICAN etc) FREE EXERCISE CLAUSE they must be of HUMANE CIVILITY (SECULAR in purpose and effect see Law Doctrines ESTABLISHMENT CLAUSE/ IN TO THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION, BY ANY OF THE 4 SEPARATE POWERS (EXECUTIVE/ CONGRESSIONAL/ JUDICIAL AND BY VOTE OF THE US CITIZENS ) FOREIGN INHUMANE DEATH LAWS, IT'S PROHIBITED AND US CONSTITUTIONALLY INAPPROPRIATE

STATES CAN NOT CONSIDER FOREIGN LAWS (ART.1sec.9Cl 3& sec10 Cl 1&3) ( RES JUDICATA )

AS THE US CONSTITUTION PROHIBITS INAPPROPRIATE LAWS WHICH ARE NON-SECULAR HUMANE CIVILITY IN THEIR PURPOSE AND EFFECTS ON US CITIZENS, SHARIA-LEVITICUS ARE NOT SECULAR
SEE BILL OF ATTAINDER, EX POST FACTO, ART.1sec.9Cl 3& sec10 Cl 1&3 " NO STATE SHALL...ENTER INTO ANY TREATY, ALLIANCE OR CONFEDERATION.....NO STATE SHALL...ENTER INTO ANY AGREEMENT OR COMPACT WITH ANOTHER STATE, OR WITH A FOREIGN POWER,....., 381US437,448, AS A RELIGIOUS LAW WOULD BE A SUBTLE JUDICIAL TREATY OF WHICH BOTH NO STATE NOR JUDGE CAN DO , BOTH FOREIGN /RELIGIOUS INEQUALITY/ DEATH LAWS-CUSTOMS ARE CRUEL,UNCONSTITUTIONAL

Posted by: shaiarra | December 17, 2010 9:24 PM | Report abuse

Take your pick Obama you can have one not both. Want to bet STAET wins over DADT?

Posted by: Desertdiva1 | December 17, 2010 9:37 PM | Report abuse

( FYI ABRAHAM FOUGHT ALONG SIDE THE KINGS OF SODOM/GOMORAH GENESIS CHAP.14, WHY )

Ezekiel (16:48-49) states: THE ADONI YHVH SWEARS ON HIS OWN LIFE, NOTE NO SEX IS MENTIONED BECAUSE IF IT WAS THEN HE WOULD HAVE SAID IT UP FRONT ,"This was the guilt of your sister Sodom: she and her daughters had pride, surfeit of food and prosperous ease, but did not aid the poor and needy."

Wisdom (19:13) states that the sin of Sodom was: "bitter hatred of strangers" and "making slaves of guests who were benefactors." Jesus said in Matthew (10:5-15) that the twelve angels sent to Sodom were sent with the following instructions: " Whatever town or village you enter, find out who in it is worthy, and stay there until you leave If any one will not welcome you or listen to your words, shake off the dust from your feet as you leave that house or town. Truly I tell you, it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah "

Further confirmation of this is found in Isaiah 1:10-17 and 3:9; Jeremiah 23:14; and Zephaniah 2:8-11. It is ironic that those who oppress gay people today are the true violators of the lesson of Sodom.

The bible specifically admonishes homosexuality a total of 6 times, and people today use those verses, mostly from Leviticus, out of context in order to suit their own political agendas.

The Bible admonishes heterosexual couples a total of 362 times...(ADULTRY/FORNICATION, BUT NOT PEDOPHILIA) 362/6=60.33 AND SO ON THEREFORE HETERO IS MORE HATED BY HIM LEV.15:30-36
That means your mythical sky god hates you about 60 times more than he hates homosexuals.

Etymology Look up secular in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

Secular and secularity derive from the Latin word saecularis meaning of a generation, belonging to an age. The Christian doctrine that God exists outside time led medieval Western culture to use secular to indicate separation from specifically religious affairs and involvement in temporal ones. This meaning has been extended to mean separation from any religion, regardless of whether it has a similar doctrine.

This does not necessarily imply hostility to God or religion, though some use the term this way (see "secularism", below); Martin Luther used to speak of secular work as a vocation from God for most Christians.

(US CONST.AMEND.14sec1) "RELIGIOUS LAWS [SHARIA/ LEVITICAL etc] GIVES NO EQUAL PROTECTIONS OF THE LAWS, NO FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION, by privilege and law I AM immune from Religious Sharia/ Leviticus Laws the US/a State can not abridge this right, for such Legislation would be INAPPROPRIATE AS CHILL CHILLING EFFECTS LAW DOCTRINE 380US479:472US491,503, (20th AMEND.sec4) "ONLY CONGRESS CAN AUTHORIZE DEATH PENALTIES, NOT RELIGIOUS LAWS AND NOT FOREIGN LAWS ON US CITIZENS", I DO NOT CONSENT TO RELIGIOUS LAWS (LEVITICAL/ SHARIA) AND WAIVE THE BENEFITS (.)


ART.6 CL.2, AND IN CL.3, ( STAR E'

Posted by: shaiarra | December 17, 2010 9:40 PM | Report abuse

So, the next time you want to diagnose each other on line, or anywhere else, remember don't invoke schizophrenia; is a brutal illness, you wouldn't wish it on anyone.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 17, 2010 9:41 PM | Report abuse

"You do realize that your argument is a fallacy, right? No, I guess you don't."

(avuncular chuckle) There you go again.

What fallacy does it represent?

The parallels between racial civil rights and gay civil rights are perfectly apt, and the only defense you bigots can muster is to pull some population misconception about choosing to be gay out of the trash.

You might bind your head with duct tape for a night and go check out a gay bar in a military town like Norfolk. You'd have quite the eye-opening experience at how many regulation haircuts you'd see in there.

What the hell is wrong with you people? Do you realize that the number of Arabic translators ALONE expelled for being was enough to save a substantial number of troops' lives? You guys are f*cked in the head.

Posted by: caothien9 | December 17, 2010 9:42 PM | Report abuse

Here we have another thread filled with inflamed rhetoric about bigotry and hatred and irrationality and blah blah blah, but the only hatred and bigotry and rage on display is from the leftists.

==

This from the cretin who denies credible polls operating under scrupulous methodology and who classifies the military top brass as lying leftists. As are the majority of soldiers. Wow.

Can't deal with the fact that your bigotry has become passe. Your denials are purely comical. Just find a nice fossil bed, lay down in it, and cross your arms over your chest, Close your eyes and stop breathing.

Posted by: caothien9 | December 17, 2010 9:52 PM | Report abuse

MOST SAME SEXERS DETEST ANAL BUT PREFER GIVING ORAL SEX WITH SOME PEROXIDE MOUTH WASH ITS MORE SANITARY

The Blow By Job "ORAL JOB" and "NATURAL SEX INSIDE MARRIAGE" (man & woman) IS AN ABOMINATION ALSO....ITS UNCLEAN AND SIN IN "GOD" OWN WORDS According to LEVITICUS 15:16-30,and DEUTERONOMY 23:20-22, there is only ONE acceptable use of "reproductive fluids", and that is reproduction. Any christian that has received a "trouser friendly kiss", and "spilled his seed" has committed a sin against the lord. AND THE NATURL SEXUAL ACT IN MARRIAGE IS UNCLEANS AND SINFUL [And if marriage is so "special", then why "GOD" calls it "UNCLEAN=TAME" or just outlaw divorce.]

The Hebrew word "TOEVAH" was used in Leviticus 18:22 and Leviticus 20:13. "TOEVAH" has been translated in our Bibles as "Abomination" or "Detestable". The "TOEVAH" was used throughout the Old Testament for activity involving ethnic contamination and religious idolatry. "TOEVAH" refers to things that were ritually unclean - like eating pork.and "TAME"(Taw-May=Infected/ Filthy)

It is significant that another Hebrew word, "ZIMAH" also translated "ABOMINATION," which means intrinsic evil or evil by its very nature, was not used in Leviticus 18:22, or Leviticus 20:13. BUT "TAME" IS USED BY LEVITICUS 15:16-30 "MARRIAGE SEX ACTS"

From the Gnostic Gospels

But the youth, looking upon him, loved him and began to beseech him that he might be with him. And going out of the tomb they came into the house of the youth, for he was rich. And after six days Jesus told him what to do and in the evening the youth comes to him, wearing a linen cloth over his naked body. And he remained with him that night, for Jesus taught him the mystery of the kingdom of God. And thence, arising, he returned to the other side of the Jordan.[2

INSULTING REALESTATE LAWS

Lev 25:23-28 - "The land shall not be sold in perpetuity, for the land is mine; with me you are but aliens and tenants. 24Throughout the land that you hold, you shall provide for the redemption of the land. 25If anyone of your kin falls into difficulty and sells a piece of property, then the next of kin shall come and redeem what the relative has sold.

26If the person has no one to redeem it, but then prospers and finds sufficient means to do so, 27the years since its sale shall be computed and the difference shall be refunded to the person to whom it was sold, and the property shall be returned. 28But if there is not sufficient means to recover it, what was sold shall remain with the purchaser until the year of jubilee; in the jubilee it shall be released, and the property shall be returned."

The teaching was instructing against oppressiveness.

The Bible opposes throughout itself the abuse of heterosexuality. Likewise, condemnation of arsenokoitai (mistranslated: "sodomy") does not forbid gay sex. In the 1st Century, throughout the Greek-speaking, Jewish Christianity culture, the word "arsenokoitai" (mistranslated: "sodomy") referred to explo

Posted by: shaiarra | December 17, 2010 9:59 PM | Report abuse

I don't think he's in a position to complain about democratic "activists" considering the fact that the only reason this stupid law was even made was because bigoted activists on the right wanted to keep gays out of the military in the first place. If they had just abolished the ban on gays in the military way back in the 1993, the country would have moved on by now.

Way to create more unnecessary problems, cons! But I guess your irrational gay hatred is more important then the countries safety. Just ask all those gay translators that got kicked out because of you!

Posted by: Kal-L | December 17, 2010 10:47 PM | Report abuse

Go figure. Apparently Republicans hate gays more than they love national security.

Posted by: curtisjasper | December 17, 2010 10:49 PM | Report abuse

And seeing as how no one on the right is a christian anyway, I really don't see why they have an opinion of homosexuality one way or the other.

Posted by: Kal-L | December 17, 2010 10:53 PM | Report abuse

And for all the bigots who are too stupid to figure this out on their own: There already are gays in the military! The fact that you don't know that means your too stupid to be commenting on this issue in the first place!

Posted by: Kal-L | December 17, 2010 10:56 PM | Report abuse

Washington Post homosexual article number 2,595.

That's four homosexual articles in one day Washington Post. Impressive. Your Homosexual Department needs to commended on burning the midnight oil.

The Washington Post is not a news organization, it is a political activist organization.

Posted by: FormerDemocrat | December 17, 2010 11:18 PM | Report abuse

Oh look, it's the Yoosta Bee troll.

Ah, memories.

Posted by: caothien9 | December 17, 2010 11:40 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, former Democrat. I bet.

Let me guess when you jumped ship .. around the time LBJ signed the Civil Rights Act, right?

Posted by: caothien9 | December 18, 2010 12:15 AM | Report abuse

Re: "Saturday Prediction: Cloture for DREAM will be voted on first and fail. It has *not* got the backing of the majority of americans right now."

Yes it does. It has 54%.

Posted by: sunnyday1 | December 18, 2010 1:57 AM | Report abuse

Re: "Saturday Prediction: Cloture for DREAM will be voted on first and fail. It has *not* got the backing of the majority of americans right now."

Yes it does. It has 54%.

Posted by: sunnyday1 | December 18, 2010 1:58 AM | Report abuse

@caothien9

Go back to your commie dictatorship and tell them where they're wrong. I can't wait to hear from you in their re-education camps.!

@sunnyday1

Unless it's Gallup, no poll means anything.

Posted by: djman1141 | December 18, 2010 3:47 AM | Report abuse

It's time to start calling Republicans bluffs. As long as Democrats cave in to Republican stupidity, they are no better than Republicans. The republican party has shown itself to be morally bankrupt to anyone who has the ability to think.

Unfortunately, there seem to be a great many Americans who have either given their ability to think over to the propagandists of their party, or they have never possessed the ability to think for themselves at all.

Posted by: GrayAlan | December 18, 2010 3:58 AM | Report abuse

It's time to start calling Republicans bluffs. As long as Democrats cave in to Republican stupidity, they are no better than Republicans. The republican party has shown itself to be morally bankrupt to anyone who has the ability to think.

Unfortunately, there seem to be a great many Americans who have either given their ability to think over to the propagandists of their party, or they have never possessed the ability to think for themselves at all.

Posted by: GrayAlan | December 18, 2010 3:59 AM | Report abuse

I was disgraced by Adm. Mullen, but expected it. The branch of service that a sodier is affiliated says alot about how they see the world. I could see the Army CoS crunging everytime he said the word combat experience and that gay troops are essential. Since about 80% of the military does not service in combat and 20% does it doesnt surprise me that Mullen came up with those figures. Actual combat troops, meaning those in the most forward areas and with less privacy than most in the showering facilities, like infantry and FO's and combat medics would be more opposed than those sitting back on a large FOB (Forward Operating Base) With adepquate privacy during showers and personal hygiene. I do not know why this is up for debate by the public anyway. The military needs to handle this in house and listen to the voices of all the soldiers and service members involved instead of seeking and worrying about public approval. I as a former infantry soldier can safely tell you that in the units I was in the army with do not want or need gay soldiers. I am waiting for a news story from the actual soldiers instead of gay officers who claim they know how the army works and never been on the level of the SGT or Privates and forced to live with such insane policies.

Posted by: jason_stewart6 | December 18, 2010 4:35 AM | Report abuse

Funny how you guys who see disaster in ending DADT always end up talking about showers. You always work it in somewhere.

Heh heh heh.

Posted by: caothien9 | December 18, 2010 5:03 AM | Report abuse

Compromise - Compromise
- another 30% drop in taxes for those earning over $250K - Capital Gains 0% - Estate Tax 0% - all workers earning under $250K will tithe 10% of their salary to those earning over $250K (redistribution of wealth the correct way)

- in return there will be a separate GAY military (Tuskegee Airmen - segregate the gays so they cannot contaminate) - after all the bible says that homosexual behavior is an abomination - and after all Republicans are doing the Lords work.

Further demands - Palin must be appointed to Richard Holbrook's position and must do any negotiations on the Oprah network. Her pay is .05c for every word she utters - to be paid into her Swiss Bank account.

Then, and only then can we CONSIDER debating the START
Treaty. Of course, this would be dependent on getting Rush's blessing and an affirmative voice vote by the ditto heads.

No need to WORRY about 2012 elections as there will not be a country to govern. Congress will go into recess - The Fortune 500 will take any decisions needed. God save the RICH

Posted by: plijyger | December 18, 2010 5:17 AM | Report abuse

Seethelightofgod | December 17, 2010 4:28 PM says....Do we really need gays in the military in time of war? I would say no. It's like the old saying goes, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." Well, some folks have been trying to "fix" things since the 1960s, and instead maybe they should just leave well enough alone and stop creating these social experiment....

Sigh....... there are gays in the military. they have been wounded, received metals, and have retired as well. The majority of soldiers don't care, the majority of American's approve of repeal. The VAST majority. Also I suspect by your statement that Truman's order to integrate blacks you would oppose under the guise of social experiment... Put away the white sheets and pillow case and do as your moniker says, move into the light.

Posted by: mjcc1987 | December 18, 2010 7:19 AM | Report abuse

Everyone knows that all Republicans are homophobic, racist, child molesters who hate America and love terrorists.

Posted by: unrest | December 18, 2010 10:30 AM | Report abuse

As the Post editorially becomes more and more obviously right-wing, I'm amazed they continue to have PlumLine.
As to the Republican threats...if any Dem but Harry Reid was Majority Leader and Obama was actually leading instead of holding seminars on bipartisanship, DADT and START would have been passed long time ago. And, if Obama hadn't also aborted the health insurance reform leadership to clowns like Baucus and Rahm Emmanual. good bet we'd have some form of public option and the Dems would still have clear majorities in both houses of Congress. Bullies like Repubs keep on bullying until someone confronts them for the moral and financial hypocrites they are.

Posted by: RBShea | December 18, 2010 10:57 AM | Report abuse

I guess that means that START ain't getting ratified now. Oh, well, pick your poison(ed well).

Posted by: clawrence12 | December 18, 2010 12:18 PM | Report abuse

Do we really need gays in the military in time of war? I would say no. It's like the old saying goes, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it."

Posted by: Seethelightofgod

If you've seen the light of God it obviously burnt out your brain. Ten years of war in Afghanistan against primitive people who 13 years ago were asking for foreign aid because the Soviets had destroyed their country? And how far has this "ain't broke" military gotten? Even if we have killed 200,000 "insurgents," it's cost us over $5 million a corpse. You really don't see God at all. But he does see you, hypocrite.

Posted by: edwcorey | December 18, 2010 1:26 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Perkins is a joke.
Justice has been done, especially for those who did follow the law but were investigated and kicked out anyways.

Posted by: Texan78 | December 18, 2010 4:47 PM | Report abuse

See? This is one reason I have lost all respect and credibility for Republicans over the last 16 years. They are petty, indictive, arrogant, childish, and, frankly, do not do their jobs. They play games, divisive and destructive games, focused on Power for the sake of Power, only, and not the business of the country. They are angry all of the time. They devise false issues, use up resources, and never produce anything of lasting legislation that is for the common good. They spent the entire tenure of Clinton Administration, trashing him, and then, the last four years, on an impeachment hearing, and put this country through hell, while foreign terrorists were plotting 9/11, hate was fomenting abroad.
In truth, all of this strategy is very much like when one works for a bully manager. They do not know the job; they cannot do the job; they know it and so that no one else discovers them, they create and feed conflicts with employees--usually those they perceive as knowing more than they know, targeting one at a time, creating issues with them, so that it looks like they are "handling things". In the end, they are discovered because their incompetence affects the bottom line, and they are escorted out the building. Problem is, they show up somewhere else. And they repeat the history. Incompetence breeds this kind of behavior.
Republicans are not what they used to be, for sure. Their hero, Reagan, is what began their downfall.

Posted by: nana4 | December 19, 2010 9:53 AM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company