Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 12:17 PM ET, 12/ 8/2010

In blow to DADT repeal, talks with Senator Collins hit wall

By Greg Sargent

Senior Senate Democratic aides are in a panic this morning about the prospects for repeal of don't ask don't tell, because talks with Senator Susan Collins over her procedural demands have hit a wall, with the Democratic leadership dismissing her requests as unreasonable and counterproductive, a senior Dem aide close to the talks tells me.

The talks are continuing as we speak, so all is not lost yet. Indeed, the logjam in the discussions comes as Dem leaders have stepped up their efforts to get moderate Republicans to agree to vote for cloture on repeal, with President Obama personally calling Senators on both sides, the aide says.

Collins has said she supports repeal, but won't agree to vote for cloture on the Defense Authorization Bill containing repeal if Harry Reid doesn't allow ample time for open debate and amendments on the bill.

In private discussions between Collins and Reid this morning, and between their staffs over the weekend, Collins has demanded that Reid allow what's known as "unlimited debate" on the bill in order for her to vote for repeal, the aide close to the talks says.

Reid has rejected this demand, the aide continues. The problem is that this could allow any Senator to hijack the proceedings by introducing a "non-germane amendment," thus holding the floor.

Reid does not think Collins herself intends to do this, the aide continues. Rather, he worries that another GOP Senator who strongly opposes repeal, such as Tom Coburn or Jim DeMint, could take advantage of unlimited debate in this fashion to run out the clock.

"He can't trust Coburn or DeMint," the aide says. "He can't agree to that deal."

Reid has offered Collins a total of 15 amendments in order to get her to vote Yes -- 10 for Repubicans and five for Democrats, the aide continues. Reid views this as a reasonable offer, because previous debates on defense authorization bills have had roughly this number of amendments offered, the aide adds.

But as of now, Collins has indicated this offer is "unsatisafctory," the aide says. A Collins spokesperson denied this account in an email, but declined to elaborate.

Adding to the urgency, Reid announced this morning that he will bring the Defense Authorization Bill to the floor for a vote this evening. Proponents of repeal worry that this could scuttle repeal, because Republicans have insisted they will not support it if the debate over the tax cuts is not resolved, meaning that repeal could be defeated tonight.

But the aide close to the talks defended Reid's decision, arguing that it's just as risky to postpone the vote on repeal. "There's concern that members of her caucus will be out the door as soon as we pass everything Republicans want," the aide says.

More when I learn it.

UPDATE, 12:41 p.m.: A spokesman for Collins flatly denies she asked Reid for unlimited debate. Rather, the spokesman says, Collins has pointed out to Reid that the average number of days spent debating previous defense authorization bills has been 11 days, with an average of 14 or so amendments considered. Collins has asked Reid to come up with a comparable offer, the spokesman says.

No one appears to be disputing that the talks have hit a snag, though.

UPDATE, 1:26 p.m.: Senator Joe Lieberman, who has been working hard behind the scenes to bring GOP moderates aboard, issues a statement denying that Collins has been operating in bad faith and defending her approach to ongoing talks:

"Senator Collins has been working in good faith to achieve an agreement on the process to move forward with the defense bill that contains the repeal of 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell.' I categorically reject reports by uninformed staffers who have suggested otherwise. As she always does, Senator Collins is working diligently and across party lines to find solutions to the challenges that confront our country. I call on those responsible for such baseless allegations to stop immediately and instead work to get to an agreement to bring this critical bill to the floor for Senate action.

"We are making progress toward an agreement to move forward on the defense bill that includes the repeal of 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' and I remain confident that we can reach an agreement, which is necessary before any vote on the motion to reconsider is taken. I am working closely with Senator Reid and Senator Collins and other members who want to reach a fair and reasonable agreement to move the defense authorization bill that that is so essential to the needs of our troops, veterans, and their families.

"It is now more clear than ever that we have 60 or more votes in support of repealing 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell,' so it is vitally important to reach agreement on the right process to move forward."

No one, however, has said that Collins is operating in bad faith. In fact, the source close to the talks specifically told me that Reid doesn't think Collins is deliberately scheming to scuttle the process; he just thinks her demands are unreasonable.

At any rate, this from Lieberman is a good development, because it suggests the talks are continuing.

By Greg Sargent  | December 8, 2010; 12:17 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: Does Obama have contempt for the left?
Next: Is Obama triangulating? Naah, not really.

Comments

LOL

Posted by: clawrence12 | December 8, 2010 12:22 PM | Report abuse

"Senior Senate Democratic aides are in a panic this morning about the prospects for repeal of don't ask don't tell"
--------------------------------------

With the econ crashing, THIS is what Senior Dems are in a panic about? Send them ALL to the insane asylum, now.

Posted by: illogicbuster | December 8, 2010 12:23 PM | Report abuse

If Dems offered Senate GOPs an 70/30 split they would say no. 80/20 - NO.
90/10 - NOOO!!!
99.9/.1 - Now the GOP can begin negotiations.

Posted by: larrybellinger | December 8, 2010 12:25 PM | Report abuse

Republican lie and Obama keeps giving them what they want anyway. At least we know they'll be there to "compromise" when he's ready to gut Social Security. Let them eat tax cuts!

Posted by: Bullsmith1 | December 8, 2010 12:26 PM | Report abuse

Once again the Queen of the Bigots shows her true colors. This is exactly the same game Susan Collins was playing before the elections. Of course some Senator (DeMint or McCain) will be offering non-germane after non-germane, holding civil rights hostage to their own bigotry. Susan Collins knows she never has to vote on this issue because DeMint and McCain have her back, and she has theirs. Shame on her.

Posted by: boloboffin1 | December 8, 2010 12:27 PM | Report abuse

Susan Collins = Lucille van Pelt

Posted by: clawrence12 | December 8, 2010 12:31 PM | Report abuse

I am allowed to say this?

Reid is a rear end.

I hope everyone who supports repeal out there understands exactly who is stopping repeal - hint: It ain't Collins.

Posted by: sbj3 | December 8, 2010 12:32 PM | Report abuse

Senator Collins (Teabagger-Looneytown)

I never ever EVER want to hear "MODERATE" and this slug used in the same sentence again.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | December 8, 2010 12:39 PM | Report abuse

Harry reid can't say it, but Susan Collins is about the dimmest bulb in the Senate. I mean, have you ever heard this woman talk? It's like she's come out of a coma.

Posted by: filmnoia | December 8, 2010 12:47 PM | Report abuse

Looks like my prediction a couple of months ago was correct.

Posted by: illogicbuster | December 8, 2010 12:47 PM | Report abuse

I don't think that Obama supporters/liberals/progressives (with the excpetion of Greg) understand what is happening here.

Harry Reid is preventing the repeal of DADT.

Posted by: sbj3 | December 8, 2010 12:50 PM | Report abuse

What a surprise. Lucy promised that this time she would not pull the football away, at the last minute.

Posted by: Liam-still | December 8, 2010 12:50 PM | Report abuse

That's right SBJ. Harry Reid is preventing Republicans from passing the repeal, because we all know how much the Republicans favor equal rights for gay people.

Posted by: Liam-still | December 8, 2010 12:53 PM | Report abuse

John McCain is against repeal of DADT. SBJ voted for John McCain, but SBJ claims that it is Harry Reid who is preventing Republicans from emancipating gay people.

Posted by: Liam-still | December 8, 2010 12:55 PM | Report abuse

@sbj: "Harry Reid is preventing the repeal of DADT."

Why do you say this?

It is abundantly clear that Collins is taking marching orders from Jim DeMint.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | December 8, 2010 12:58 PM | Report abuse

Remind anyone of the prolonged Healthcare wooing of Senator Olympia Snow Job?

Posted by: Liam-still | December 8, 2010 1:02 PM | Report abuse

"Send them ALL to the insane asylum..."

Just fyi, the nation's psychiatric hospital capacity can't possible handle the need. Beds are so rarely available, even as the growth in jail and prison beds has kept pace, the mentally ill tend either to be ignored in jail or under a bridge.

Posted by: shrink2 | December 8, 2010 1:04 PM | Report abuse

SBJ? Any evidence to back up your claim, or no?

Posted by: Ethan2010 | December 8, 2010 1:07 PM | Report abuse

None of this should surprise anyone on the Left. Other than making sure that they extended the tax cut to their rich donors, McConnell and company had no plans to let START, DADT or the Dream Act pass in this lame duck session.

Posted by: filmnoia | December 8, 2010 1:09 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Liam-still "because we all know how much the Republicans favor equal rights for gay people."
----------------------------------------

Kinda like how Obumbler is against gay marriage.

ROFLMAO @ myopic libs.

Posted by: illogicbuster | December 8, 2010 1:09 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Liam-still: "That's right SBJ. Harry Reid is preventing Republicans from passing the repeal, because we all know how much the Republicans favor equal rights for gay people."
-------------------------------------

Yep, JUST like Obie being against gay marriage. ROFL

Posted by: illogicbuster | December 8, 2010 1:14 PM | Report abuse

Republicans will never allow the repeal to pass. because they prefer to always run against gay rights. It works for them. Every time they run an anti gay marriage referendum, they win, so they are not about to discard their last acceptable American Bigotry Card.

Posted by: Liam-still | December 8, 2010 1:15 PM | Report abuse

Message for Right Wing Homophobic Morons:

Obama is not in the US Senate.

Posted by: Liam-still | December 8, 2010 1:17 PM | Report abuse


IS DADT REPEAL POSSIBLE? NO.

It is absolutely inconceivable that the Republicans will hand Obama a banner of victory to carry in his triumphant and outstretched hand, to rally his base, in the 2012 election.

At the same time, it is absolutely inconceivable that the Republicans will send a smashing left hook into the jaw of their own political base, making sure there will be zero enthusiasm to go to the polls to elect a Republican president in the 2012 election.

The Republicans have made the political calculation, that in the final analysis, if they don’t block DADT Repeal here and now, that they will give Obama the edge in the 2012 presidential election, first, by giving him a banner of victory that he can carry before his troops, and second by delivering a heavy blow against the morale of their own troops, a one-two punch that would deny them the one or two percentage points they need to make the difference between victory or defeat in their quest for control of the White House in 2012.

The Republicans have the votes to block this. And they will block this. That is what the famous 42 signature letter was all about.


Posted by: GoldenEagles | December 8, 2010 1:17 PM | Report abuse

@ethan/Liam: The evidence is right in front of your eyes! Brown, Collins - Lieberman all say there are 60 votes for cloture provided Reid provides adequate/traditional time for debate and amendments. Ask Greg for cryin' out loud!

Reid has refused for several weeks now (where have you guys been?) to schedule the defense authorization for normal/standard debate and amendments. We can get this done but instead he insists on bringing it up with these foolish limits. All he is trying to do is get rubes like you to blame the GOP so that he can use DADT in 2012 to paint all conservatives as homophobes. Reid, quite obviously to anyone with a working brain, is going to defer to the courts to force repeal so that he can use DADT for purely political and cynical purposes. It is just as sickening, if not more sickening, than anything the GOP has ever done to scapegoat gays. The difference this time is that the votes are there to repeal it but Reid won't bring the bill up for normal order.

C'mon now! How can Greg make it any more clear for you?

Posted by: sbj3 | December 8, 2010 1:18 PM | Report abuse

The death of DADT repeal is more Kabuki; everyone knows what is going to happen, the art is in the styling, the choreography, the phrasing and articulation of the inevitable...but here is some drama with a twist.

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2010/12/08/us/politics/AP-US-Supreme-Court-Employer-Sanctions.html?hp

Jan Brewer and the Obama administration versus corporate interests and civil libertarians, now playing at the Roberts Court.


Posted by: shrink2 | December 8, 2010 1:19 PM | Report abuse


IS DADT REPEAL POSSIBLE? NO.

It is absolutely inconceivable that the Republicans will hand Obama a banner of victory to carry in his triumphant and outstretched hand, to rally his base, in the 2012 election.

At the same time, it is absolutely inconceivable that the Republicans will send a smashing left hook into the jaw of their own political base, making sure there will be zero enthusiasm to go to the polls to elect a Republican president in the 2012 election.

The Republicans have made the political calculation, that in the final analysis, if they don’t block DADT Repeal here and now, that they will give Obama the edge in the 2012 presidential election, first, by giving him a banner of victory that he can carry before his troops, and second by delivering a heavy blow against the morale of their own troops, a one-two punch that would deny them the one or two percentage points they need to make the difference between victory or defeat in their quest for control of the White House in 2012.

The Republicans have the votes to block this. And they will block this. That is what the famous 42 signature letter was all about.

Posted by: GoldenEagles | December 8, 2010 1:21 PM | Report abuse

From TPM:

"Christine O'Donnell: "Tragedy comes in threes. Pearl Harbor, Elizabeth Edwards' passing and Barack Obama's announcement of extending the tax cuts, which is good, but also extending the unemployment benefits."

Posted by: Liam-still | December 8, 2010 1:24 PM | Report abuse

"John McCain is against repeal of DADT. SBJ voted for John McCain, but SBJ claims that it is Harry Reid who is preventing Republicans from emancipating gay people."

LOL! Thanks for the best laugh of the day.

"Lieberman all say there are 60 votes for cloture provided Reid provides adequate/traditional time for debate and amendments."

Actually, he said there "MAY" be 60 votes. The "adequate time" thing is the hang-up point. "Adequate time" may mean just running out the clock in GOP speak. But why bother posting if you don't read the article SBJ? Seems you come pre-loaded with your own propaganda and don't even read the article to which the posts are attached.

Posted by: Alex3 | December 8, 2010 1:29 PM | Report abuse

sbj, I have no clue how you can twist this into Reid preventing DADT from passing. If this is how you deal with your inner self in trying to justify siding with Republicans then that's fine, but don't try and pawn your nonsense off on the rest of us.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | December 8, 2010 1:30 PM | Report abuse

IF the Dems had WANTED to repeal DADT, they would have spend the 5 minutes necessary on Feb. 1 2009. END of STORY.

Posted by: illogicbuster | December 8, 2010 1:31 PM | Report abuse

@SBJ: "The difference this time is that the votes are there to repeal it but Reid won't bring the bill up for normal order."

Allowing the minority party 10 amendments is not "normal order"?

If not, what is it then?

Posted by: Ethan2010 | December 8, 2010 1:34 PM | Report abuse

ethan/mike/liam: Are you guys even reading Greg's posts?

Posted by: sbj3 | December 8, 2010 1:34 PM | Report abuse

Oh and, if I see anything less than Obama swinging around the halls of Congress like Tarzan, King of the Jungle, directing the Tarzan yell at anyone now allowing debate and ultimately a vote on this, he's not showing leadership.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | December 8, 2010 1:35 PM | Report abuse

@alex: "It is now more clear than ever that we have 60 or more votes in support of repealing 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell,' so it is vitally important to reach agreement on the right process to move forward."

Posted by: sbj3 | December 8, 2010 1:36 PM | Report abuse

@alex: ""It is now more clear than ever that we have 60 or more votes in support of repealing 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell,' so it is vitally important to reach agreement on the right process to move forward."

Posted by: sbj3 | December 8, 2010 1:37 PM | Report abuse

yes sbj, but apparently you're reading them backwards and upside down.

Do you miss entire parts that state Republicans will tie up the debate endlessly? Or do those just get in your way of breathlessly supporting the party that overwhelmingly and openly doesn't support equality for gays?

Posted by: mikefromArlington | December 8, 2010 1:39 PM | Report abuse

"""Despite weeks of questions and deliberations with Democrats, Collins has yet to signal her final intentions or to clarify what a "fair debate process" means, according to Senate aides and others familiar with the negotiations."""

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/federal-eye/2010/12/senate_to_take_procedural_vote.html

There is no "fair debate process" when there is no definition of "fair debate process". This is how the SBJs of the world play their immature head games.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | December 8, 2010 1:40 PM | Report abuse

If Reid brings this forward without reaching an agreement on process then he will be scuttling repeal of DADT in 2010. He will be to blame, not Collins, not the GOP, not the gay lobby. The 60 cloture votes are there if Reid will agree to a normal process. Greg is making it as plain as day for y'all to read. Lieberman is making it clear. Collins and Brown have both said they favor repeal and will vote for cloture provided an agreed-upon process.

Reid is preventing repeal of DADT.

Reid is betting that the courts will overturn it and that he can fool folks like ethan/mike/liam into thinking it was the GOP that prevented a vote. Greg is seemingly trying his hardest to get his readers to understand the awful truth but I don't think they are getting it.

Posted by: sbj3 | December 8, 2010 1:45 PM | Report abuse

@sbj: "If Reid brings this forward without reaching an agreement on process then he will be scuttling repeal of DADT in 2010. He will be to blame, not Collins, not the GOP"

So he should do anything the GOP says or else it's his fault, right? Good luck with that line of "logic."

Btw, you never answered my question. Is 10 amendments "normal order" or not?

Posted by: Ethan2010 | December 8, 2010 1:48 PM | Report abuse

Susan is playing from the same play-book that Olympia Snowe Job used during the Health care negotiations(Hah!)

Fool me once, and have W. tell you the rest of that bit of of folk wisdom.

Posted by: Liam-still | December 8, 2010 1:49 PM | Report abuse

"If Reid brings this forward without reaching an agreement on process then he will be scuttling repeal of DADT in 2010."

No actually, jerks like DeMint who could give a crap about homosexuals and is probably grossed out by them are preventing an agreement.

Not sure what it'll take to hammer into your head Republicans overwhelmingly are preventing the debate from even happening, not Democrats.

All the spin by you or anyone else in the world won't change that fact, sorry.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | December 8, 2010 1:50 PM | Report abuse

Greg, please settle this.

Challenge Reids claim and get confirmation from those he's concerned about they won't try and bog this debate down and ultimately run the clock out.

Then maybe sbj will finally get it through his thick skull homophobic Republicans overwhelmingly are preventing this debate and ultimately a vote to even happen.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | December 8, 2010 1:53 PM | Report abuse

@mike: Let me refresh your memory with a Greg Sargent post from awhile back:

"My worry is that Dem leaders think that if they schedule just a few days of floor debate, and Collins balks, they'll be able to blame her unreasonableness for the failure of DADT repeal. If they do that, they will have a plausible case. The only problem will be that DADT will remain in place.

"If Dem leaders don't give Collins the floor debate she wants, there's no chance DADT will be repealed this year. If they do, there's some chance it will be repealed. And there's no serious downside to holding a week of debate, except that it might complicate the travel plans of a few dozen Senators who already have pretty comfortable lives. The latter option is clearly worth the tradeoff.

"If repeal is going to have any chance at all of happening, it's largely on Reid and Obama."

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

Wake up!

Posted by: sbj3 | December 8, 2010 1:54 PM | Report abuse

Perhaps Harry should just offer to extend the Bush Tax Cuts for Struggling Billionaires, until 2112, in order to get Susan to agree to pretend to be open minded about repealing DADT.

Posted by: Liam-still | December 8, 2010 1:54 PM | Report abuse

@mike: Let me refresh your memory with a Greg Sargent post from awhile back:

"My worry is that Dem leaders think that if they schedule just a few days of floor debate, and Collins balks, they'll be able to blame her unreasonableness for the failure of DADT repeal. If they do that, they will have a plausible case. The only problem will be that DADT will remain in place.

"If Dem leaders don't give Collins the floor debate she wants, there's no chance DADT will be repealed this year. If they do, there's some chance it will be repealed. And there's no serious downside to holding a week of debate, except that it might complicate the travel plans of a few dozen Senators who already have pretty comfortable lives. The latter option is clearly worth the tradeoff.

"If repeal is going to have any chance at all of happening, it's largely on Reid and Obama."

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

Wake up!

Posted by: sbj3 | December 8, 2010 1:56 PM | Report abuse

Excellent post by Benen with a great graph on Obama's tax proposal.

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_12/026982.php

Posted by: suekzoo1 | December 8, 2010 1:58 PM | Report abuse

All, my take on why Obama's attack on the left does NOT constitute triangulation:

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

Posted by: Greg Sargent | December 8, 2010 1:59 PM | Report abuse

SBJ,

What floor debate does she want?

Is 10 amendments "normal order" or not?

Thanks.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | December 8, 2010 2:02 PM | Report abuse

SBJ knows that his Republicans, including John McCain will not let repeal of DADT pass, so he is busy trying to bury that fact. He is like a cat trying to bury it's feces on a tin roof.

Republican will pay no price for not passing the repeal, but some of them would pay a price with their right wing religious fanatics, if they were to vote for repeal.

That is why it will not pass, and SBJ knows that full well, so he is just trying to shift the blame onto the party that is actually trying to get the repeal passed.

He truly is a self loathing gay man.

Posted by: Liam-still | December 8, 2010 2:02 PM | Report abuse

I'm not going to base this off of what Greg 'thinks.'

I'm basing this off the reality that DeMint and others in the Republican party have shown time and time again, they will do anything to bog down and kill legislation if there is a way to do it.

Like I said, Reid is probably right but I'd like to see a confirmation or denial from Republicans on if they will tie this up on the floor until the new Congress convenes, thus proving Reid's concerns.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | December 8, 2010 2:03 PM | Report abuse

Given that Reid's position is being promulgated by unnamed aids while Collins spokesman and Lieberman are willing to go on the record makes me tend to question Reid's veracity. Having said that, the outline of the offer described, 10 amendments for the Republicans and 5 for Democrats strikes me as reasonable assuming enough time is allowed for debate. The 11 days cited by Collins strikes me as also reasonable.

I wonder if Reid is doing some sort of sabotage here to due to the problems the Senate Democrats are encountering with Obama's tax compromise with the Republicans and the need to roll all of next years spending into an Omnibus bill and include the earmarks rather than doing them as individual bills. I.e. they don't have time to do the other things if Collins gets the amendments and the debate time so Reid wants to blow it up without leaving any fingerprints. Regardless, Collins position has been well known for weeks. Between her and Scott Brown, Reid could get a deal on this if he wanted it and if the Senate Democrats are willing to go along with the tax proposal that Obama and the Republicans put forth on Monday.

Posted by: jnc4p | December 8, 2010 2:07 PM | Report abuse

@ethan: I don't know what she's asking for - but Lieberman says she is bargaining in good faith. Reid and his staff, on the other hand, were caught in a lie. There's little downside to agreeing to whatever her demands are.

Read the Sargent piece above - it strongly argues that repeal of DADT this year depends on Reid. Greg is correct and you are being taken by Reid for a fool.

Posted by: sbj3 | December 8, 2010 2:08 PM | Report abuse

It's funny how the Democrats saved all the stinkers for the dead duck session.

It's as if they really didn't want to make them so but wanted to get some extra credit anyway.

Clever!

Posted by: battleground51 | December 8, 2010 2:09 PM | Report abuse

Republican Secretary Of Defense, Robert Gates requested that the vote be held off, while his survey was being conducted. That is why the vote was not held earlier.

The Democrats honored his request, to allow his Dept. time to lay the groundwork on the issue.

Posted by: Liam-still | December 8, 2010 2:15 PM | Report abuse

SBJ, so in other words you're full of it.

Duly noted.

Btw, is 10 amendments for the minority party "normal order" or not?

Posted by: Ethan2010 | December 8, 2010 2:16 PM | Report abuse

@battleground: And the lib posters here are swallowing it hook, line, and sinker!

Very well put by jnc4p:

"Collins position has been well known for weeks. Between her and Scott Brown, Reid could get a deal on this if he wanted it and if the Senate Democrats are willing to go along with the tax proposal that Obama and the Republicans put forth on Monday."

Posted by: sbj3 | December 8, 2010 2:16 PM | Report abuse

@sbj,

Okay, so basically you have nothing and you're going to lie no matter what. Go it!

Why are you ignoring my question about "normal order"?

Is 10 amendments for the minority party "normal order" or not?

Posted by: Ethan2010 | December 8, 2010 2:19 PM | Report abuse

MORMON Harry Reid wants DADT Repeal to fail. This is a great show, but it isn't going to be repealed. It is only intended to make us believe Democrats and the LGBT-advocacy industry is effective - they are not.

Soon, we will hear "we were soooo close" and "please send more money." That request should be ignored.

Posted by: AndrewW1 | December 8, 2010 2:21 PM | Report abuse

@andrewW: I'm not much for the whole gay activism thing but I *will* plead with my brethren to not send any more money to Reid or Obama if they don't do the right thing here. It's on them. The 60 votes are there. Agree to her request and let's see what happens. As Greg wrote, "If Dem leaders don't give Collins the floor debate she wants, there's no chance DADT will be repealed this year." Give it a chance, Harry, you rear end.

Posted by: sbj3 | December 8, 2010 2:25 PM | Report abuse

There is nothing stopping Republicans like Collins from doing the right thing. What the hell debate more does she need to determine where she stands on the issue. She is either a homophobe or she is not. She already knows which she is.

Posted by: Liam-still | December 8, 2010 2:25 PM | Report abuse

SBJ, here's your chance to put up or shut up on DADT repeal!

Call/email Susan Collins and ask her to vote for cloture and repeal:

202-224-2523

http://collins.senate.gov/public/continue.cfm?FuseAction=ContactSenatorCollins.EmailIssue&CFID=64467623&CFTOKEN=34690839

Posted by: Ethan2010 | December 8, 2010 2:25 PM | Report abuse

Andrew, you trying to take cheap shots at Mormons because of Reid's religion? Nice.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | December 8, 2010 2:30 PM | Report abuse

SBJ send many donations to Sharron Angle, a raving Homophobe, but now he is pretending that he is disappointed with Harry Reid!

SBJ is the most pathetic self loathing gay person in the entire nation.

Posted by: Liam-still | December 8, 2010 2:34 PM | Report abuse

But, but they got their precious tax cut...

The GOP will do whatever it takes to win. And "win" in this case means getting those amendments. IF they get them, you can count on all sorts of anti-liberal amendments. A ban on abortion in the military, regardless of who pays for it? Check. Ban on gay troops in combat forces? Check. Ban on same-sex couples in military base housing? Restatement of DOMA? Check. Etc., etc.

Their goal is to turn the segments of the liberal base against each other and united only in their opposition to the Dem leadership (for opening up the amendment process in the first place). It will be a cluster**ck of immense proportions.

And GOP senators will be grinning from ear to ear.

Posted by: rmnelson | December 8, 2010 2:36 PM | Report abuse

@ethan: You don't seem to be understanding what is going on here. I just called Reid's office (202/224-3542) to tell them to accede to Collin's demands and to bring the defense authorization to the floor per her terms - whatever they are. The nice assistant told me that Reid *still* doesn't know what he is going to do. That means that if you and other call, you might be able to influence Reid to do the right thing. Please do call Reid's office and urge him to bring the bill to the floor per Collins' terms.

Posted by: sbj3 | December 8, 2010 2:40 PM | Report abuse

"Please do call Reid's office and urge him to bring the bill to the floor per Collins' terms."

I will if you call/email Susan Collins and ask her to be reasonable with her demands.

Simple as that. Deal?

Posted by: Ethan2010 | December 8, 2010 2:44 PM | Report abuse

SBJ,

Be sure to call your preferred candidate, that you send many donations to; Raging Homophobe, Sharron Angle, and ask her to make some calls to Republican Senators on behalf of the repeal you claim to desire.

Posted by: Liam-still | December 8, 2010 2:45 PM | Report abuse

@ethan: Collins' voicemail was full so I sent an email.

So now you need to call Reid's office and ask his assistant to tell him to accept her terms and bring the defense authorization to the floor.

And please, let's get everyone who supports repeal to call Reid's office and tell him to bring this to the floor no matter what the terms. This may be our only chance to get DADT repealed for a long time.

202/224-3542

Posted by: sbj3 | December 8, 2010 2:53 PM | Report abuse

Again:

SBJ,

Be sure to call your preferred candidate, that you send many donations to; Raging Homophobe, Sharron Angle, and ask her to make some calls to Republican Senators on behalf of the repeal you claim to desire.

Posted by: Liam-still | December 8, 2010 2:57 PM | Report abuse

Well Congress can repeal DADT and give the military plenty of lead time to implement or they can let it go in which case it will certainly be overturned in court and allow the military NO lead time.

The whole law is completely ridiculous on its face and should never have been passed. It was Congress meddling in a policy dispute that should have been left to the military in the first place.

Posted by: MarcMyWords | December 8, 2010 2:59 PM | Report abuse

Angle's got no juice!

C'mon, Liam. Give Reid a call and ask him to bring this to the floor at her terms. It won't hurt and it's our only chance to repeal DADT in 2010.

202/224-3542

Posted by: sbj3 | December 8, 2010 2:59 PM | Report abuse

SBJ, what did you say to Collins? Why don't you post your letter here. Do that and I'll do the same for my email to Leader Reid.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | December 8, 2010 3:03 PM | Report abuse

@Liam: Angle's got no juice!

Not sure where this message went but Liam, please, get on board and call Reid's office (202/224-3542). Ask him to please move the defense authorization to the floor on Collins' terms.

Posted by: sbj3 | December 8, 2010 3:03 PM | Report abuse

SBJ,

Have you called John McCain, the guy that you voted for President, to urge him to stop trying to block repeal of DADT. Well, have you?

Posted by: Liam-still | December 8, 2010 3:05 PM | Report abuse

Your message has been received by Senator Collins's office. We will be in touch with you shortly if you requested a response. Your message has been reprinted below.

[personal info redacted]

Regarding negotiations with Harry Reid about debate terms for Defense Authorization: Please be reasonable in your requests. It is important that we get a chance to vote on repeal of DADT this year and we don't want to give Reid any excuses. Thank you.

Posted by: sbj3 | December 8, 2010 3:07 PM | Report abuse

@ethan: You can go ahead and call Reid's office - they actually answered the phone. More effective than an email.

Posted by: sbj3 | December 8, 2010 3:09 PM | Report abuse

Again:

SBJ,

Have you called John McCain, the guy that you voted for President, to urge him to stop trying to block repeal of DADT. Well, have you?


By the way: Joe Leiberman now claims that they have more than sixty votes for repeal, so call Harry Reid and urge him not to waste time catering to Dithering Susan's stall tactics.

Posted by: Liam-still | December 8, 2010 3:19 PM | Report abuse

sbj,

Fair enough, here are my letters fwiw.

Letter to Reid:

Please be reasonable in accepting Senator Susan Collins' requests with regards to scheduling the Defense Authorization Bill with DADT repeal. It is important that we get a chance to vote on repeal of DADT this year and we don't want to give the Republicans any excuses that you didn't allow reasonable requests. We must pass DADT repeal this year. Thank you.

Letter to Collins:

Please VOTE FOR CLOTURE on the Defense Authorization Bill which contains DADT repeal. Just do it already. Vote for cloture and vote for repeal. Please get this done, Senator Collins. Thank you.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | December 8, 2010 3:30 PM | Report abuse

@Liam: McCain's still alive?

"Joe Leiberman now claims that they have more than sixty votes for repeal."

Even more reason for Reid to bring this up in a manner that gives no one an excuse to vote No.

Please, let's get everyone who supports repeal to call Reid's office and tell him to bring this to the floor no matter what the terms. This may be our only chance to get DADT repealed for a long time.

202/224-3542

Posted by: sbj3 | December 8, 2010 3:30 PM | Report abuse

SBJ

Is refusing to call John McCain, the guy he voted for, to urge him to stop trying to block the repeal of DADT, so folks; just ignore SBJ. He is a complete hypocrite.

Posted by: Liam-still | December 8, 2010 3:34 PM | Report abuse

So very preferable to continue filling the military with bottom quartile hicks who can't figure out which end of a soldering iron they're supposed to hold.

Pentagon is OK with it, the voters have moved on, gays are ubiquitous . but there's the GOP, still pandering to the stupidest and most intolerant people in America: their base.

McCain already has a penthouse reservation in Hell for letting that Palin thing off its leash, what more does he want now? Yeah, John, troops troops troops troops troops troops troops.

Republicans. Bad for America.

Posted by: caothien9 | December 8, 2010 8:39 PM | Report abuse

Delay, attack and destroy. Even Susan Collins who should know better is now behaving like Jim Demint.

And who would want the US to look anything like his vision of America. Check this out:http://jimdemints-southcarolina.blogspot.com

Posted by: joel27 | December 9, 2010 6:23 AM | Report abuse

When has there ever been a fricking lame duck congress try to ram through so much crap at odds with the results of the immediately preceding election.

Who cares about the economy? We have to ram through the radical gay agenda!

Posted by: standard_guy | December 9, 2010 7:37 AM | Report abuse

My view on whether homo­sex­u­als should be allowed to openly serve in the mil­i­tary has sig­nif­i­cantly evolved since I first joined the navy in 1983. I believe, and have for some time, that homo­sex­u­als should be allowed to serve openly. I came to this con­clu­sion for many rea­sons but here are the pri­mary ones:

1. It is in the best inter­est of our national secu­rity. Our coun­try is engaged in two active mil­i­tary cam­paigns in Iraq and Afghanistan while still keep­ing all of the other national secu­rity concerns–terrorism, Iran, North Korea, and many others–in check. Our nation sim­ply can­not afford to waste valu­able resources in any form, par­tic­u­larly its mil­i­tary resources. Our most valu­able national and mil­i­tary resource is our patri­otic cit­i­zens who vol­un­teer to serve and pro­tect our nation. Deny­ing our mil­i­tary the ser­vice of patri­otic vol­un­teers because of their sex­ual ori­en­ta­tion is not only short­sighted and stu­pid, it is poten­tially dam­ag­ing to mil­i­tary readi­ness and our national security.

2. It is in the best inter­est of our national psy­che. We all know very well that we are a coun­try founded on the truth that all men are cre­ated equal under the laws of nature and of God. This is deeply instilled into our national psy­che. Yet, we have had a painfully psy­cho­log­i­cal, and at times very phys­i­cal, strug­gle try­ing to turn this national belief into a national real­ity. We have learned from our long his­tory of attempt­ing to rec­on­cile our fun­da­men­tal beliefs with our country’s orig­i­nal sin of slav­ery, that when we as a nation say that we all are to receive equal rights under our laws while at the same time deny­ing these rights to a seg­ment of our soci­ety based on the color of their skin, our national psy­che suf­fered deeply from it. We became dys­func­tional, self-hating, and even came close to com­mit­ting national sui­cide over it. The cog­ni­tive dis­so­nance that occurs when say­ing one thing–that all men are cre­ated equal and are guar­an­teed equal rights under our laws–and then doing another–denying these equal rights based on race, sex, reli­gion, national ori­gin, or sex­ual orientation–is not only detri­men­tal to our national psy­che, it is damn­ing to our national soul.

Much more work still needs to be done to ensure homo­sex­u­als receive equal rights under our laws, but as a nation, we can go a long way to secur­ing our national secu­rity and improv­ing the health of our national psy­che sim­ply by allow­ing them to serve openly in the military.

To those who commented that our representatives in Congress should be only focusing on one issue and one issue only, my response is that is a very short-sighted and wasteful position to hold. We pay our politicians too much money for them to be so singularly focused. It's the 21st Century...we multitask now and so should our representatives.

More at bojiki.com

Posted by: kurtbrindley | December 9, 2010 10:04 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