Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 12:00 PM ET, 12/ 6/2010

Joe Lieberman agrees: keep Senate in session to repeal don't ask don't tell

By Jonathan Capehart

Last night, I called on Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) to keep the chamber in session until the repeal of don't ask don't tell is done. Late this morning, Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) endorsed that idea via Twitter.

WaPo's @CapehartJ hits the important point: "Keep #Senate in session until #DADT repealed. 'If not now when?'"

We have never been as close as we are to repealing the ban on gay men and lesbians from serving openly in the military. And failure to do so would cede to the federal courts Congress's authority over and responsibility for military policy. Why aren't more senators clamoring for Reid to keep the Senate as long as it takes?

By Jonathan Capehart  | December 6, 2010; 12:00 PM ET
Categories:  Capehart  | Tags:  Jonathan Capehart  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Who is reading about Sarah Palin -- and why?
Next: Obama, Republicans' ominous deal on Bush tax cuts

Comments

joe lieberman IMHO only took the stance as he knew/made a deal with McCain .. that McCain will do what joe does so often .. filibusterer .. joe is running for a bit of political cover .. but only doing so knowing full well the deal he an McCain made ...
politics ... what a mess this country has become .. no honesty ... and when the dishonesty is brought to light ... do we hold accountable the evil doers .. no we go after the messenger ... you know the drill ... IT is the National Security STate ... we must have secrets ...
good lord what a country ...
land of false choices and land of free to do as you are told ...
what a joke ... Lieberman is.

Posted by: AmericanSpirit | December 6, 2010 12:57 PM | Report abuse

There are much more urgent and critical items that must be addressed before the end of the year. Don't waste that time with a feel-good social issue.

Posted by: kitchendragon50 | December 6, 2010 12:58 PM | Report abuse

It's not a feel good social issue; it's an equal rights issue, something at the heart of our democracy.

Posted by: pathfinder12 | December 6, 2010 1:05 PM | Report abuse

How is allowing patriotic Americans to serve in their military considered a "feel-good social issue"? I know I would "feel better" if the military were open to anyone and everyone who is willing to put their lives on the line to defend my freedoms.

Posted by: SouthernerInDC | December 6, 2010 1:06 PM | Report abuse

Go for it, Joe. But the cost will be losing the Dream Amendment or something else worse for the Reid, such as what the Republicans have vowed to hold out for: The Reinstatement or Extension of the Bush Tax Cuts. Not that I think Bush alone is responsible for those cuts, but since he also get blame for things done Primarily by a Democratic Congress he had in his sunset days, Heck, I am willing to let him have credit as well.

The bad news for Harry and you Jonathan, is that the Vast Majority of Americans is FOR those tax cuts being extended. Sure, more *are* for limiting it to the lower income ranks, but more are *also* willing to Compromise on that point to get the Tax cut for *everyone* instead of nothing. John Kerry screams for *compromise* but ignores this very *compromise* that Americans are MANDATING that he and *his* crowd be willing to make.

In the End, I suspect AmericanSpirit may be quite correct and that Smoking Joe may just be making himself some political cover here. There are all sorts of Smoke Screens on the Hill. John Kerry is great at putting them up. So is President Obama, and yes, people like McCain and Brown, although I think that Snowe deserves kudos for being forthright and straight about her support hinging on tax cuts FIRST.

You can say that they are two separate issues and should *not* be linked. You would have made a small point. But that point is lost if you look at polls comparing the importance of DADT versus Tax Cuts. In that respect, the Republicans have High Ground that trumps any such point, since the Democrats *clearly* are not wanting to make the compromise that the Majority of Americans think it is more important for *them* to make first. If they compromise on the FULL TAX cuts being extended, even if only for 1 or 2 years, they can take back the high ground in this argument, although they will still probably have to open it up for debate and further amendments.

The truth is this: Even if they stay over late, this is a lame duck session doing things that people inside the system and outside the system generally see as inappropriate. John Kerry no longer has a Mandate. Obama is still president, but his presidency is seriously being questioned. There is more negative here for the Democrats than many of them seem smart enough to admit. That stupidity does not bother me, but those crying that the issue *must* pass have lost their grip on reality. Panic has set in.

So Joe is smart in suggesting this, even if it is only for symbolic political cover. Those that take this seriously are not quite so smart, in my estimation...

;'{P~~~

Posted by: Clearbrook | December 6, 2010 1:29 PM | Report abuse

Only moronic libs would fiddle with social engineering as the UM continues to climb and the economy crumbling. Drug use and policy making don't mix.

Posted by: illogicbuster | December 6, 2010 1:29 PM | Report abuse

Poor illogicbuster. Poor, drooling, subnormal, trashbaggy illogicbuster.

Posted by: Observer691 | December 6, 2010 2:23 PM | Report abuse

Important issue, but NOT the key ones. That is extending unemployment insurance. Our nation's first priority has to be economic recovery.

Demos should keep the Senate in session 24.7, including, if necessary, on Christmas Eve day and on Christmas Day itself (ditto for New Years), and put everything else on hold, until the extension of unemployment insurance passes the Senate. Let the GOP take the heat of saying No and the disruption that not moving on to other actions could cause. Of course, the Prex and Democrats should concurrently wage a national information campaign about the need for economic stimulus value of extending unemployment insurance -- a very hefty positive return for every dollar of insurance benefits. (Showings and readings of Dickens' Christmas Carol" story could help to.)

The second priority should be the proposal of GOP Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels and others for a tax holiday from social security. Virtually eery worker pays the social security tax, and this tax is substantial for lower income workers. Virtually every employer pays social security tax on almost every employee, so this will give businesses a boost. The Nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office found extending unemployment insurance and the tax holiday virtually neck to neck in providing a substantial economic stimulus.

A tax credit targeted to small businesses for new jobs should be the third priority. This would stimulate and reward small businesses, the source of most new jobs in the US, to hire.

These actions mean borrowing, so we have to limit that to what will have a substantial economic benefit. Extending the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy do NOT have little economic stimulus impact. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office put these tax cuts at the bottom with a benefit of only about 33 cents for every dollar. So the only Bush cuts that should be extended are those for middle and lower income folks. So the stand has to be: Bush tax credits for middle and lower income folks,or no tax cuts at all. GOP -- it's up to you whether or not the middle and lower income folks get a tax increase.

Let's see how long the GOP can take the heat for acting like Scrooge (not passing the unemployment insurance extension)
and for not promoting economic recovery (not passing the tax holiday and the small business tax credit for new jobs) and for increasing the taxes on hard pressed middle and lower income folks (not passing an extension of the Bush tax cuts for other than the wealthy).

Once we get the GOP reworked with a good dose of heat, we should see a GOP that realizes that it needs to seek negotiation, e.g., offers to support repeal of DADT for something that it would like that benefits all Americans, not special interests.


Posted by: jimb | December 6, 2010 2:54 PM | Report abuse

Gay and lesbian activists aren't going to have many friends left on Capitol Hill come December 29th.

Posted by: blasmaic | December 6, 2010 3:31 PM | Report abuse

Keep booze and cigarettes away from Boehner, and he will kick McConnell's asset until it passes.

Posted by: OldUncleTom | December 6, 2010 4:55 PM | Report abuse

Lieberman is a liberal scoundrel.

He would take the chance of screwing up the greatest military the world has ever known for a social experiment with unkown results.

It is like opening Pandora's box. Once the demons are freed, there is no putting them back in.

Look at what happened the the Catholic priesthood when Catholics gave free reign to homosexuals in the church. It almost destroyed the church.

It is still paying out millions in reparations to the molested boys whose lives were ruined.

Posted by: battleground51 | December 7, 2010 6:34 AM | Report abuse

@ battleground51:
Your comparison of our great military (adults only) to the troubles of the Catholic church (children) is beyond absurd.

Your homophobia is obvious. Nothing like irrational fear to keep the GOP alive!

Posted by: grovelawoffice | December 7, 2010 10:08 AM | Report abuse

Proof Of Much MISSING In The Pentagon Study
Supports McCain's Demand For A Thorough And Complete Study Later!

In ADDITION to our focusing only on what's IN the Pentagon study's 256-page results – to be sure of a fair and objective evaluation of the Pentagon study itself – it also needs to be open-mindedly COMPARED side-by-side to other similar universally-recognized government studies. Only then can what is MISSING in the Pentagon study be clearly recognized and validated! Because we were so completely focused on what was IN that 256-page report last week, and wanting to get this thing over with, even our generals and Senators overlooked comparatively evaluating the Pentagon study.

"An Objective Evaluation Of The Pentagon Study" provides federal study proof of what is missing in the Pentagon study using a simple side-by-side comparison guide to quickly compare the Pentagon study to other similar government studies. A (long)list of what's unfortunately missing becomes immediately obvious in this federal study document located at: DontAskDontTellREPORT.blogspot.com.

Sadly, what COULD HAVE come out of a real objective government study is not even open for discussion today. We may never know unless we cool our jets during this lame-duck session and support McCain's demand for a thorough and complete study later.

To accept anything less than a complete study seriously disrespects our troops and shows how pop culture or what's politically correct at the moment can distort our duty to find out what's truly in the best interest of our military.

Posted by: richsaco | December 7, 2010 11:20 AM | Report abuse

Proof Of Much MISSING In The Pentagon Study
Supports McCain's Demand For A Thorough And Complete Study Later!

In ADDITION to our focusing only on what's IN the Pentagon study's 256-page results – to be sure of a fair and objective evaluation of the Pentagon study itself – it also needs to be open-mindedly COMPARED side-by-side to other similar universally-recognized government studies. Only then can what is MISSING in the Pentagon study be clearly recognized and validated! Because we were so completely focused on what was IN that 256-page report last week, and wanting to get this thing over with, even our generals and Senators overlooked comparatively evaluating the Pentagon study.

"An Objective Evaluation Of The Pentagon Study" provides federal study proof of what is missing in the Pentagon study using a simple side-by-side comparison guide to quickly compare the Pentagon study to other similar government studies. A (long)list of what's unfortunately missing becomes immediately obvious in this federal study document located at: DontAskDontTellREPORT.blogspot.com.

Sadly, what COULD HAVE come out of a real objective government study is not even open for discussion today. We may never know unless we cool our jets during this lame-duck session and support McCain's demand for a thorough and complete study later.

To accept anything less than a complete study seriously disrespects our troops and shows how pop culture or what's politically correct at the moment can distort our duty to find out what's truly in the best interest of our military.

Posted by: richsaco | December 7, 2010 11:22 AM | Report abuse

We have a retired military kid and one still in the National Guard. Both have served with gay people and think it is mainly a non-issue. Since having to cover up your sexual orientation encourages lying, they would be happier if DADT no longer governs.
Job performance is their criterion.
What IS a pain is the military's paranoia about any sex-related misbehavior which causes you to have to sit thru endless annoying sensitivity lectures, which, of course, are not too successful since only people who have a decent upbringing actually "get" respecting their associates.

Posted by: theartistgallery4 | December 7, 2010 12:15 PM | Report abuse

This push for homosexuals in the military to openly practice their
degenerate,destructive,disease spreading sexual acts will tear our elite highly trained and cohesive military apart!
Marine Corps commandant Gen. James Amos acknowledged that a clear majority of combat Marines oppose permitting open homosexuality in the ranks.
Those leaders who disagree with the repeal of DADT say this:
"The potential exists for disruption of the successful execution of our current combat mission- should repeal be implemented at this time," said Amos.

Further, such changes would put any Christian chaplain in an impossible situation.

"If you have strongly held religious beliefs you'll have cognitive dissonance, and it'll be very difficult to overcome. The military is ignoring privacy concerns, and you'll be told you'll have to room with a homosexual. Your commander will tell you that you will never be propositioned and your roommate will never leer at you, so your deeply held religious beliefs will be of no consequence," Maginnis said.

"Ever since George Washington the military has been programmed to believe homosexuals are disruptive to morale and unit cohesiveness, and are a readiness problem. You have to expunge all those negative thoughts you have about homosexuality and replace them with what you're told by the chain of command about what's right and wrong," he warned.
TELL THE TRUTH! NO OPEN SODOMY!

Posted by: lyn3 | December 8, 2010 12:32 PM | 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