RSS Feed for This PostCurrent Article

Some Dems Don’t Want To Wait; And A Thank You

This is an interesting turn of events. Recently, I reported that Obama is starting to face some real push back from Gay Rights groups over his lack of concrete action on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” He had hecklers the other day, as well as military personnel discharged under this policy handcuff themselves to the White House fence (and the Lafayette Park police refusing to allow reporters access to do their jobs), and finally, Robert Gibbs, Obama’s SpokesWeasel, admitting that the “study” Obama implemented on DADT will not even be finished until December 1, 2010.

Well, Gay Rights groups aren’t the only ones upset about the lack of action on DADT. Honestly, I was a bit surprised by this article, but I am glad for it:

Dems In Congress Unwilling To Wait On Lengthy Repeal Of Military “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”

WASHINGTON — The White House is facing a budding revolt over its carefully crafted strategy for repeal of the ban on gays serving openly in the military that would have pushed the decision past the November election.

Democrats in the House and Senate — including two key lawmakers from Colorado — say they are unwilling to wait for completion of a 10-month Pentagon study on repeal of the policy known as “don’t ask, don’t tell” and are instead moving to include immediate repeal in the defense reauthorization bill, scheduled for mark-up next month.

Sen. Mark Udall, D-Colo., among the Democrats on the Senate Armed Services Committee backing the move, said the committee was “within a vote or two” of including repeal in the must- pass legislation. He met with three discharged members of the military Tuesday, using their stories to highlight the need for repeal this year.

Rep. Jared Polis, a Boulder Democrat and one of three openly gay members of Congress, holds a key position on the Rules Committee that he is willing to use to insert a similar provision in the House version of the spending bill, he said Tuesday.

Congressional aides said both approaches are likely to face opposition from the White House, which in February laid a timetable built around an extensive Pentagon study that won’t be completed until Dec. 1, pushing a final move on the contentious issue past what’s expected to be Democrats’ toughest election cycle in years.

That’s just it – this study, which is basically reinventing the wheel in terms of openly homosexual military personnel since many other countries already have LGB people serving openly. Not to be too cynical or anything, but it does provide cover for Obama to NOT have DADT repealed. If the study isn’t completed until AFTER the elections, when Republicans are expected to at least reclaim the House, he can blame THEM for it not being repealed down the road.

Meanwhile, real people are being affected by DADT:

3 tales of careers ended

But the White House is facing pushback on several fronts at once. On Monday, repeal activists heckled President Barack Obama for several minutes at a fundraiser for Sen. Barbara Boxer in California.

“The sooner we can end this policy, the better,” Polis said. “There have been plenty of studies about this policy and how it continues to weaken our military every day that it exists.”

The three former military personnel gathered in Udall’s Senate office Tuesday each had stellar careers cut short when officials discovered they were gay.

Mike Almy was an Air Force major commanding a sensitive communications unit in the Middle East when a colleague discovered personal e-mails sent to relatives back home. After a 16-month investigation, he was discharged and escorted from the base by police “as if I were a common criminal or a threat to national security,” he said.

David Hall spent five years loading bombs and missiles on F-15 fighter jets when he was accepted into an officer-training program, with a chance to become a fighter pilot. Ranked No. 1 in his cadet class, he was discharged when a female cadet told his superiors he was gay.

Stacey Vasquez had a career as a distinguished noncommissioned officer, including being named the top recruiter in the Army. It ended when a colleague’s wife saw her kissing another woman in a club in Dallas, she said.

“Once I was discharged, I remember a distinct feeling as I was driving away from Fort Hood thinking, How could my country let me down like this?” Vasquez said.

“How could I give 12 years, how could I go out and tell kids how great the service was, and then one day — due to no misconduct — my country tells me that I’m not a valuable asset?” she said.

Udall cited the record of each and called repeal “the most common-sense step we could take to enhance our national security.”

There are so many stories like these, TOO many stories like these. How is it that these people who have sacrificed so much, and are willing to make the ultimate sacrifice, be turned away like common criminals from serving? It is heartbreaking to hear these stories, to endure one’s country turning its back on years of service.

What will it take to repeal this law then? The article continues:

Backers’ strategy

Opponents of repealing don’t ask, don’t tell, which allows gays to serve in the military as long as their sexual orientation remains a secret, make the opposite argument: Allowing homosexuals to serve openly in the military presents of risk of significant disruption in the midst of fighting two wars.

Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., who chairs the Senate Armed Services Committee, supports including immediate repeal in the defense spending bill, aides said, a strategy that would require a super majority of 60 votes to remove it. Two or three Democrats on the committee are opposed, which means supporters will have to pick up some Republican allies.

But the most significant factor may be how far the White House is willing to go in opposing the idea.

“I’m going to push everybody possible to see this happens this year. We’ve had this discussion long enough,” Udall said.

“The Pentagon has taken some big forward steps that they’ve never been willing to take,” he said. “I don’t under estimate the steps they’re taking, but in the end we need to change the law.” (Michael Riley: 303-954-1614 or mriley@denverpost.com)

I think we have already seen how far the White House is willing to go. Obama commissioned a study to end AFTER the mid-term elections. I think that says it all.

I continue to marvel at the intestinal fortitude of those who continue this fight to serve their country when their country has let them down, when their Commander in Chief has let them down. This speaks volumes about them, and the stuff of which they are made.

And so, I would like to conclude by thanking those service members who have been discharged under this policy for their service; for those who are fighting to serve their country; and to all who put on the uniform for this country, past and present. I know this isn’t Veterans Day, or Armed Services Day, but it doesn’t mean this cannot be a “Thank Our Military” Day, especially for those who are fighting to stay in the service:

  • confused American

    Gays should have been allowed to serve long ago. 
    This crazy study is just some stupid delaying tactic.  DADT has supposively been in the works for many years and they are still not done with the study. 
    What happened to all of Obama’s promises about this during the campaign.  Hadn’t he done a study it then prior to making all of his promises on DADT?

    To me if we have any American that wants to serve our nation, who gives a Frick what their gender-orientation is?  It should not matter what your gender-orientation, ethnicity, gender, or one is if they want to serve in the military. 

    Obama is a Huge  let down to so many groups that voted for him. About the only groups he has done anything for is the SEIU, and Wall Street. (Well and now he’s trying to help the Hispanics, but I think that is in order to get votes).

    RRRA I really enjoy reading your insightful articles.  We are lucky here are NoQuarter to have you as one of the writers. 

  • creeper

    I am reminded of the words of a Viet Nam vet who was busted out of the army for being gay:  “They gave me a medal for killing one man and a discharge for loving another.”

  • Rabble Rouser Rev. Amy

    Thanks so much, CA – and I appreciate your insightful, thoughtful comments.  Thank you.

    And yes, Obama is a huge letdown.  I almost feel sorry for his supporters – except we tried to tell them, and our nation is being affected horribly by his “leadership…”

    You said it – who gives a frick?  Let them serve!

  • Rabble Rouser Rev. Amy

    Wow, creeper – that is profound – thank you for that…

  • Ferd Berfle

    That’s it, exactly, CA and RRRA. When I was in the service, there were gays who served with us. My only concern then and now is about competence and not sexual orientation. It is all about whether one can perform required assigned duties and nothing else. And the argument about cohesiveness is specious. When someone is shooting at you, you really don’t care who has your back so long as they can cover you.

    And That One is a conniving liar.

  • ANonOMouse

    The truth is gays and lesbians are serving now, have always served in every branch and have paid the ultimate price in the service of this country in every military conflict. The oppostion that arises has nothing to do with whether or not gays should serve, because we are serving, the questions are “where do they shower”, “where do they sleep”,
    “where do they change clothes”, silly, phobic concerns that have nothing to do with the issue. When you hear the word “special” alongside the words ”treatment” or “consideration” you are hearing homophobia. 

    The people who argue that serving with gay people who are OUT of the closet will somehow require “special” considerations and accomodations for G&L obviously have no grip on the reality that gays have long served without “special” consideration or accomdations. 

    Now get off the stick Barack and Congress, this needs to be done, NOW! 

  • Sassy

    Thankfully, the effort to stiffle the reporters who tried to cover the White House protestors failed.
    Megan Kelly covered it with the Fox reporter who was on scene. LOL!
    Start naming names of democrats who oppose repeal.
    Incidentially, my favorite republican, Gen. Petraeus, supports the right of gays to serve openly!

  • creeper

    You’re welcome, Rev. Amy.  I heard that forty years ago and have never forgotten.

    (Small correction necessary–”killing two men”.)

    That brave man was Leonard Matlovich.  Those words are inscribed on his tombstone.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonard_Matlovich

  • confused American

    FB that is true…The only concern should be a person’s competency to serve, and their ability to perform their duties. 
    Being in the military is not an easy job and often a very thankless job. 
    Look at how long it took for us to finally erect some type of national memorial for the WWII vets…
    How often do people purposely thank a vet or military man  for what they are doing or did for us.
    Since Desert Storm I for one have gotten in a habit of thanking any military personnel I pass, as politely as I can.  I for one realize that if not for these men who so proudly serve and often put their lives on the line, we would not be the country we are.

    Here is an interesting site on Facebook. Let’s find 1 million people who actually SUPPORT our Veterans
    http://www.facebook.com/pages/Lets-find-1-million-people-who-actually-SUPPORT-our-Veterans/357365774114?v=wall

  • confused American

    FB that is true…The only concern should be a person’s competency to serve, and their ability to perform their duties. 
    Being in the military is not an easy job and often a very thankless job. 
    Look at how long it took for us to finally erect some type of national memorial for the WWII vets…
    How often do people purposely thank a vet or military man  for what they are doing or did for us.
    Since Desert Storm I for one have gotten in a habit of thanking any military personnel I pass, as politely as I can.  I for one realize that if not for these men who so proudly serve, we would not be the country we are.Here is an interesting site on Facebook. Let’s find 1 million people who actually SUPPORT our Veterans
    http://www.facebook.com/pages/Lets-find-1-million-people-who-actually-SUPPORT-our-Veterans/357365774114?v=wall

  • I’m a Linda too

    Excellent post RRRA.

    And just those 3 examples show exactly how this law doesn’t even work as they claim, let alone that the law shouldn’t exist.  These 3 service persons didn’t out themselves.  They didn’t “tell”, private information was gathered and outted them.  This so sucks.

    What does it say that the military is willing to hire criminals, known rapists etc, to join, but they won’t dare have decent, hard working, law abiding, SKILLED Gays?  OMG

    I think it’s time to start campaigning some Republican Senators.  Like Voinovich in Ohio and Lemieux of FL, both R’s.  Two very strong choices for many reasons.  And of course, others.

  • postmaster

    Obviously I just don’t get it.  What is there to study?  If everyone is held to the same standard of conduct, where is the problem?  Is someone afraid of sexual harassment?  Shhsh, get on with it already.  Stop the crap. No one should have to hide…leave it to the government to complicate matters with their studies.  In the meantime, the people mentioned in the above article were tossed out of the military, humiliated and put out of a job for no good reason.  All the more reason to throw the ‘bums’ out of the Whitehouse, Senate and Congress.

  • Ferd Berfle

     What is there to study?
    ==================
    Postmaster–this isn’t about a study or even about gays serving in the military. This is only about a POTUS who is more interested in covering his exposed backside and maintaining the Democrats phoney-baloney jobs in Congress beyond November. It nothing more than a cynical and calculated decision on his part. So much for the change and new politics we were promised. Looks and smells like the old kind to me.

  • ANonOMouse

    Every Congress Critter, who opposes repeal of homophobia, needs to be called out, no matter what their party affiliation. Pampering the homophobic inclinations in some people is why this and every other gay civil liberties issue has taken so long. Finally LGBTQ’s SEE that waiting for people to “come around” without nudging is a futile tactic. L&G’s have been the object of scorn for thousands of years and cowering in the corners doesn’t serve our interests because as long as we cower those who support us intrinisically will not feel called upon to take our back. We MUST step up, step out, come out and the goodness and fairness of those who silently support us will step up with us. We must demonstrate courage before we call upon the courage of others.

  • Ani

    It would be nice if a news organization other than FOX bothered to report this so that those who only listento CNN, MSNBC, CBS, etc. can see this is happening — does anyone here know if they did, in fact, cover this?  That would be a great start in getting the word out.

    Many thanks for any info.

    Great piece, Rev. Amy.

  • Robb

    Same Shit, Different Day

  • Ferd Berfle

    The kicker is that this government treats the LBG community “fairly” when it is tax time. So they’re expected to pay for a department that will still not allow them to serve openly.

  • Katmoon

    Beautiful remarks, by so many. I am the daughter of a Gay man. I think the he is one of the greatest people I have ever had the priviledge of knowing. He served, way back during Korea. What I have never understood since the time I knew my Dad was gay(10), is this: can people not see the pure bigotry, in how the Gay, Lesbian and Bi community are treated, in almost every facet of life? Is someone less of a parent because they are Gay? No! IS someone less of a soldier because they are Gay? No! Is a gay person less capable of having a loving relationship than straight person? No! Seems to me, if people are taxed without notice of their orientation, employed, schooled, and live as citizens, then why must there be a policy that has to differentiate, one’s orientation, it should not make any difference, any more than eye color, height, gender and so forth. It pisses me off there have to be studies and all this bullshit to tell me what I have always known from a very loving gay parent; People are People-that’s it, and that’s all. Until someone chooses to make another human being separate(which is done to serve someone somewhere) than Equality must apply. Period end of discussion. I do not care what oreintation any professional I hire is, I care about their ability to do the task I am paying for. I do not care if my friends have a partner of the same gender, I care that they are a good friend. I do not care if my neighbors look different or have different political beliefs than I do, I care if they starve their animals, hurt their kids, or let their home fall to ruin. I never thought about my patient’s sex, orientation, age, race,etc, when I was a nurse unless it had a profound effect on what they were being treated for.

    I have spent a lifetime watching ”Bullying by Bigotry”, all disguised by convienient political, administrative and religious generated ideologies.

    Bless our troops, one and all. We are so quickly becoming a people who have no compassion, no applied understanding, and no ability to grow in our opinions. So many are satisified to stay in their swamp of bigotry, ready to accuse and point fingers and probably harm others who don’t fit into their nice little categories. Fu$k-Em! Thankful once again, for No Quarter, a sanctuary of broad-minded bloggers who actually think and care beyond their “person space”.

  • ANonOMouse

    You are special Katmoon and your Dad is a very fortunate man to have you.

  • Diana

    Thank you for this RR. Amazing if the dems actually decide to go ahead and do what’s right and leave Obama behind. If only the dems could do just one thing right and repeal dadt, I might just be a little less disgusted with them.

  • Ferd Berfle

    Do we have any elected officials who are willing to take a principled stand on any issue? This isn’t just a rhetorical question. Give and take in a political process can be understood. Wholesale capitulation due to greed or thirst for power cannot be.

  • Katmoon

    Some Inetresting history from Native Americans regarding “Two-Spirit” people.

    All tribes were aware of the existence of two-spirit people, and each still has a name for them. The Dinéh (Navaho) refer to them as nàdleehé one who is ‘transformed’, the Lakota (Sioux) as winkte, the Mohave as alyha, the Zuni as lhamana, the Omaha as mexoga, the Aleut and Kodiak as achnucek, the Zapotec as ira’ muxe, the Cheyenne as he man eh. [5]  This abundance of terms testifies to the familiarity of Native Americans with gender-variant people. For proof of the sacred role they held, and hold, in Native society we again turn to Native sources. Terry Calling Eagle, a Lakota man, recounts: “Winktes have to be born that way. People know that a person is going to become a winkte very early in his life. At about age twelve parents will take him to a ceremony to communicate with past winktes who had power, to verify if it is just a phase or a permanent thing for his lifetime. If the proper vision takes place, and communication with a past winkte is established, then everybody accepts him as a winkte.” [6]

  • Katmoon

    (Continued)

    Claire R. Farrer, an anthropologist who has “gone native” in the best sense of the term, reports on the present situation among the Mescalero Apache: “Multigendered adult people at Mescalero are usually presumed to be people of power. Because they have both maleness and femaleness totally entwined in one body, they are known to be able to ‘see’ with the eyes of both proper men and proper women. They are often called upon to be healers, or mediators, or interpreters of dreams, or expected to become singers or others whose lives are devoted to the welfare of the group. If they do extraordinary things in any aspect of life, it is assumed that they have the license and power to do so and, therefore, they are not questioned.” [7]
    In everyday life the two-spirit male typically would wear women’s clothes and do women’s work. He would be accepted as “one of the girls.” He might take a husband from among the men of the tribe, or might have affairs with several, or both. Generally two-spirit males were not expected to have sexual relations with women. None of these “rules” however were ironbound. [8]  Again and again we see that variation from the norm, change, transformation, and fluidity of roles for those who felt called to that path was welcomed and appreciated. Here we have to confront a very real epistemological problem: it is impossible to define precisely what two-spirit experience is. Though all agree such individuals exist, “the particulars of that identity remain variable.” [9]  We may have to content ourselves with the explanation offered by P.K., one of Carolyn Epple’s Dinéh teachers, who said that we need to “… see nàdleehé as human beings responding to situations.” [10]
    Besides their spiritual abilities, their capacity for work also figured into the high status of two-spirit people. Even though a two-spirit male would have taken on the gender identity of a woman, he would still have the endurance and strength of a man. Thus his productivity was greater than that of most women, and for that reason also he would have been valued as a marriage partner. Other characteristics that Natives associate with two-spirit people and that help explain their desirability as partners are a highly developed ability to relate to and teach children, a generous nature, and exceptional intellectual and artistic skills.

  • Katmoon

    Last Portion:

    As mentioned before, many of the ancient two-spirit ways are no longer being practiced. Nonetheless Native two-spirit peoples are experiencing a re-awakening to the validity, and to the cultural and spiritual roots, of their inner calling. Many who, as a result of the cultural scorched-earth policies of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, had sought escape from isolation and rejection by adopting modern “gay” identities are now reconnecting with their heritage by way of groups like the Native Gay and Lesbian Gathering. They are re-interpreting their identity in terms dictated neither by white culture nor by ancient customs, or perhaps by both. The result is a mix peculiarly their own, which by breaking with both traditional as well as modern forms remains true to the essence of the two-spirit life. As Michael Red Earth tells it: “In today’s world it is easy to become confused by titles: gay, straight, bi, winkte or queer. For me, once I realized that my family was responding to me and interacting with me with respect and acceptance, and once I realized that this respect and acceptance was a legacy of our traditional Native past, I was empowered to present my whole self to the world and reassume the responsibilities of being a two-spirited person.” [11]
    Though, due to the nature of this site, the discussion so far has been limited to the male experience in Native American societies, this should not be construed to mean that the two-spirit path was, or is, closed to women. If any conclusion can be drawn from what we know about gender variation in traditional Native society it is that gender flexibility in any individual is welcomed as a rare and precious aspect of human experience, a special talent to live life in a fresh, spontaneously authentic way that enriches and empowers the lives of all in the community. It is a lasting testament to the psychological sophistication of Native tribes that they recognized two-spirit people as being engines of creativity, change and innovation (much as they have been in other cultures and continue to be in ours) and co-operated in creating the sacred space in which such people could manifest. As Joe Medicine Crow, a Crow traditionalist, told Walter Williams, “We don’t waste people the way  society does. Every person has their gift.” 

  • Ferd Berfle

    MSNBC had some buried articles about this issue but, of course, couched it in terms of hecklers “bothering” the TelePrompTer reader. I found an older single article on CNN. The MSM simply isn’t covering this very well.

  • creeper

    Bravo, Katmoon.  You said it all.

  • I’m a Linda too

    And what still shocks the sh!t out of me, is the unbelievable HUGE amount of bigotry towards Gays…in the minority communities…that are the first to claim racism with no proof.

  • Katmoon

    Thank-You, but without the eample of my father that piece would be missing. It was he, as my living touchstone, that gave me my definition and understanding, of people, as well as a very loving and smart Grandmother. :-D . I am grateful I can hold to those teachings, I have had my moments, in younger, fear filled years being made fun of, but have always rturned to what I know first hand and understand.

  • Diana L. C.

    RRRA,

    I have to respond because Mark Udall is the senator from my district and Jared Polis is the Representative from my district.  I really do like both these men, and during the primaries and GE I actually worked to elect both these men.

    Here’s the thing, though,  Colorado just this last election turned deep blue for the first time in as long as I can remember.  (I am now offically old as dirt for many of the younger generation, so that’s a long time.)  Many of us were Hillary supporters who worked for these two men, and so we became leary when they did the party thing and supported O. 

    I wrote them both twice about the HC Bill and received nothing but pre-written responses.  I am pretty sure I was not the only person writing either.  I have NOT noticed much support of the HC Bill here in Colorado, and since its passage, you wouldn’t believe the surge the state Republican Party has received in terms of financing and poll approval.  (Colorado has some very good healthcare insurance options.  As I’ve pointed out.  The Kaiser Plan here in Colorado is ranked as the #1 Medicare provider in the nation and #13 as far as regular healthcare plans, and Obummer made a point of going to Grand Junction on the Western Slope while working on healthcare all those long annoying months because The Rocky Mountain Healt Plan also has an excellent reputation.  Just a month ago, as I was waiting in the MVD to help my son who could not get off work so he coult get the title for and to register and license the vehicle they bought for his girlfriend, I had a long conversation with a woman who came here for a visit, and then stayed–her husband quitting his job and moving from Texas–because while she was here she became very sick with something that has bothered her since she was very young.  In Texas, her parents were poor, and she could never really get a good diagnosis, so she was very surprised when they even let her into the emergency room here, worked hard to figure out her problem, and then worked hard to figure out ways to help with financing.  Maybe it’s where I live that causes me to be so surprised about all the fear in regard to healtccare, since I’ve just not seen much fear here.)

    Polis’ support of this bill is a no brainer, and Udall’s is not surprising because it is in his character to support something like that because it is just so right. 

    But part of me is just a bit suspicious that this now “surprising” stand against the O administration by two Dems may have more to do with the fact that they see what is happening in Colorado–a notoriously think-for-yourself and be financially sound state.

    The primary rival against Senator Bennet, Andrew Romanoff, soundly defeated Bennet.  He was outspent 10-1 and still won.  It was because no one here liked the fact that Bennet had been appointed to that seat after NEVER campaigning or winning an election.  His good work trying to turn around the Denver Public School System and, I think most importantly, his Washington deep money pockets were the reason Gov. Ritter appointed him over Romanoff, and that pissed off many Dems.

    Andrew Romanoff is pretty liberal, but he is also as honest and as hard working a politician as you can get.  He’s a young Colorado native.  He’s not married, and when he was Speaker of the House here in CO, they made fun of him because he seemed to camp out in his office since he just worked so damn hard.  He was instrumental in getting a huge legislative compromise on some important tas and financial issues during the last few months of the term of Republican Gov. Bill Owens.  Both papers, because we had two at the time, praised his work across the aisle.

    Well, there’s my report from CO.  These two legislators in CO KNOW they are being closely watched here.  And I, for one, am finding myself in the surprising situation of actually working with the Independence Institute, a notoriously right-wing group here in CO, to obtain signatures on a ballot proposal that would exempt CO from the HC Bill provisions, and they know that too.

  • Diana L. C.

    Please, please forgive my many typos that result in crazy misspellings,  :-[   And I meant Udall’s and Polis’ revolt in regard to DADT was not surprising, not their support of the HC Bill as my one sentence might be read.

  • creeper

    Um….Grassley, maybe?  He busted his butt trying to come up with a good health care compromise bill.  They didn’t want to hear what he had to say.  They wanted to shove Obamacare down our throats.  Grassley, who does support access to health care for everyone, voted “No” because he knew it was a bad bill. He, at least, listened to his constituents in a state that went solidly for Obama.  Too bad Harkin’s still drunk on the kool-ade.

    At least Grassley’s not a complete knee-jerk Republican homophobe.

    “Some conservative Republicans are upset with Senator Chuck Grassley for his recent remarks on the gay marriage issue.  A Des Moines Register reporter asked Grassley this week whether he supports amending Iowa’s constitution to ban same-sex marriage and Grassley said he needed a month to think about it.”

    http://www.radioiowa.com/2009/04/10/some-gop-conservatives-upset-with-grassley/

  • Diana L. C.

    Katmoon–yes, it’s very, very good to be reminded about how the real native Americans lived and thought.

  • Ferd Berfle

    Yeah, creeper, Grassley is not a bad sort. I lived in Nebraska for many years and didn’t like Grassley (or Jepsen, the other Senator) at the time. I’ve reconsidered my opinion about Grassley.

    That being said, I’m not just speaking to this single issue but of a much broader issue, namely the possession of a spine and the ability to take a stand based solely upon principle. I respect those whose opinions differ from mine if they are genuinely held and are not spun for consumption by the masses. Grassley seems to be doing just that.

  • Jackie

    Obviously, the solution is to vote Republican.  They LOVE gay people!

  • Ferd Berfle

    Yeah, creeper, Grassley is not a bad sort. I lived in Nebraska for many years and didn’t like Grassley (or Jepsen, the other Senator) at the time. I’ve reconsidered my opinion about Grassley. 
     
    That being said, I’m not just speaking to this single issue but of a much broader issue, namely the possession of a spine and the ability to take a stand based solely upon principle. I respect those whose opinions differ from mine if they are genuinely held and are not spun for consumption by the masses. Grassley appears to be just such a politician as he will buck the GOP when necessary and does appear to be consistent.

  • Peggy Sue

    It should be clear by now that Obama didn’t come to DC to help ordinary Americans, despite all the promises.  When it comes to DADT, we are really cutting off our nose to spite our face.  The idiotic idea that you would dump skilled, trained personnel because of sexual orientation makes no sense whatsoever.  And then there’s the moral component.  It’s okay for these men and women to put their asses on the line–to bleed for the country–but not value them enough to accept who they are.

    That’s wrong.  It’s unAmerican.  It’s morally bankrupt.

    I hope the gay community keeps pushing Obama and his minions until they push them out of DC for good.  Because I have no faith that the man is prepared to act on their behalf or anyone else’s, for that matter.  Unless, of course, you’re a billionaire.

  • Ferd Berfle

    Spot on, Peggy Sue.

  • Diana L. C.

    (Ferd, please forgive that I accidentally deleted my original post.  Now, I’m going to try to do it better.)

    I am writing because I am from Colorado.  Senator Udall and Representative Polis are the legislators from my districts in CO.  I actually worked on both their campaigns in the primaries and GE,  I live in a pretty liberal part of CO, so the thing I should mention is that here the idea of keeping DADT for even another day seems just ridiculous.  I did not really noticed much homophobia as I grew up in Northern Colorado and especially where I live now in the North suburban area on the turnpike toward Boulder.  I know there are those narrow minded people, in CO and especially in the Colorado Springs ares, the home of Focus on the Family.  But here, it’s just not a concern.

    So here is the point.  I don’t find it surprising that Polis and Udall would take this stand.  Polis’s position is a no-brainer, and Udall is usually an honest Senator who takes his constituents’ wishes to heart.

    But, here’s my belief about another good reason they have for taking this stand.  They are being closely watched by the citizens here.

    Most of the campaign workers that I worked with for them during the presidential primary and GE were Hillary supporters, so naturally we were a little miffed about their seemingly easy decisions to support Obummer.

    Then when this HC Bill became an issue, many of us became REALLY miffed about their goose-stepping to O’s commands on that.

    Colorado turned deep blue this last GE for the first time I can remember.  I am considered old as dirt by many young people around here, so that’s a long time to remember.  Colorado has always prided itself on it’s think-for-yourself attitudes and its financially responsible attitudes.  I have noticed very little support of the HC Bill here, even in this pretty liberal part of Colorado.

  • Diana L. C.

    (cont.)

    And perhaps my constant surprise about all the fear that O drummed up to get this abomination of a HC Bill passed is because of WHERE I live.  My Kaiser plan is ranked #1 in the nation for its Medicare coverage and #13 for its general coverage.  I am completely happy with it.  And Obummer even made a point during his long annoying drive to get that bill passed to stop off in Grand Junction on the Western Slope because the Rocky Mountain Health Plan with headquarters there also has an excellent reputation.

    I was just a month ago spending a long morning at my son’s MVD because he could not get off work.  I was waiting to pay for the title, registration and license plate for the car they recently bought for his live-in girlfriend.  I had a long conversation with a women who was also there waiting.  She had come to CO for a visit from Texas, had experienced a terrible medical emergency, and had been treated in one of our excellent hospitals.  Her medical problem is one that she’s had her entire life, but since her parents were poor and she lived in Texas and had no insurance, she had never received an actual diagnosis or any good treatment for the problem.  When it happened here, she was completely surprised that they let her into the emergency room, worked hard to diagnose and treat her, and arranged financing since it was going to take a series of treatments to work on the problem.  Her husband quit his job and moved the family to CO because of this.  I was not surprised at her story, but I was surprised to learn that she had so much trouble in Texas.  I had just assumed that things worked there as they do here.

    This long digression into the HC issue comes because I know Udall and Polis have received many letters like the one I sent each giving them verbal kicks in the butt for helping to pass that HC bill.  And Senator Bennet is in deep trouble trying to get elected.  He was never elected in the first place because Gov. Ritter appointed him to fill Salazar’s seat.  Most of us here in CO were NOT happy about that.  We were all thinking he would appoint Andrew Romanoff.

    Andrew Romanoff just recently out did Bennet handily in the primary to get on the ballot, and he did it while being outspent 10-1.  Ritter appointed Bennet, he said, because of Bennet’s good work trying to get the Denver Public Schools turned around, but most thought it was really because of Bennet’s Wahington background and deep money pockets.

    Since the HC bill’s passage there has been a real surge in donations to the Repulican party here and an upsurege in their polls.  Romanoff is a well-liked young man.  He’s not married.  He was our last Speaker of the House before he was unable to run because of term limits.  He was praised in that position by the two local papers (though we have only one now) because of his hard work to get some major tax and budget issues completed by working hard across the aisle with then Governor Bill Owens, as neo-con (but hypocritical) Republican.  But even that reputation and genuine good work may not be enough now to help him win election simply because CO is pretty damn unhappy about the HC bill.  I even find myself in the surprising position of working with the Independence Institute, as right-wing a group as you can find, helping them get signatures to get a bill on the ballot that would counter the HC bill.

    I think our two legislators are feeling the NEED to remove themselves from the stench of Obummer as much as they are deciding to stand up for what is right.

  • candymarl

    When I was still active duty one of my best friends was gay. No, I don’t mean that in the cliched sense. He really was my best friend.

    We shopped together, went to the club together, went to the movies etc.  I could tell him anything.  Our boss actually asked us one day if we were having an affair!  We played it off in true soap opera fashion (frankly I think we both deserved an Emmy for that one). 

    He finally came out to me after he left the service. He left out of fear. This was long before the days of DADT but not much different. Anyway, he called me asked if I was sitting down. Then he told me he was gay. I told him I already knew. He cried and asked if I hated him.  I let him know that of course I didn’t and that I loved him because he was my friend.

    Anyway, he and his partner ended up vistiing my husband and me and we had a blast.

    We’ve lost touch over the years and I still miss him.

    DADT is unecessary and harmful. I think Clinton tried to do the right thing and it backfired. That shows that even truly intelligent, competent, Presidents can make mistakes. So when it comes to this President we’re in trouble just as we were with GWB.

  • Peggy Sue

    I for one, Jackie, have no intention of voting Republican.  Nor will I vote Democratic. 

    Both parties are corrupt to the core and need a major housecleaning.  Ping-pong politics makes no sense and that’s what we’ve been witnessing over the last decade.

    So no.  Republicans will not fight for the gay community or any of the issues I care about.  The tragedy is that the Democratic Party will flap its lips about the little guy but basically stand down when it really counts.

    Why?  Follow the money.

  • Ferd Berfle

    Thanks, Diana. Yours was a detailed, well-considered, and appropriate commentary.

    “I think our two legislators are feeling the NEED to remove themselves from the stench of Obummer as much as they are deciding to stand up for what is right.”
    ==============
    It is a shame that the desire to maintain one’s position is considered on a par with actually doing the correct thing.

  • Diana L. C.

    Thanks, Ferd!  Again sorry for the accidental deletion.

  • PssttCmere

    We all know bigotry toward gays is just plain wrong….For those who saw “A Day Without A Mexican”, think “A Day Without Gays”…. :)   As a person who worked many years in West Hollywood, CA and has many gay friends, this is unconscionable….live and f’n let live!!

    Call me cynical, but are these dems truly concerned for dems or just hoping this will get gays to help keep them in office?

    “Say What You Will…It Feels So Good”

  • Craig Della Penna

    This seems to be following the observed Obama operating plan. Take an issue on which BO(zo) has a strong opinion (he doesn’t believe that LGBTs have any rights). Call for an extended study  – due after the mid-terms as people above have pointed out.  The mid terms are likely going to ba a debacle in the House and maybe the Senate, this of course will give another excuse to delay; he will blame LGBT rights, at least in part, as the reason for Democratic reverses at the polls. After the study has been delivered, he will have to ‘carefully consider’ the report, for as long as possible – probably several months – until he can’t possibly avoid making a statement. That will take us to mid-2011.
    At this point, he has several more options for delay: he will ask the joints chiefs to do another high level study and he will attempt to shuck the responsibility off on congress by declaring that this is a matter of law rather than executive responsibility (keep in mind that he is CiC and could end this discussion with 10 words:”DADT is no longer the policy of the armed forces”). This round of bullshitting will take us to the end of 2011.
    We’re then in re-election mode. LGBT rights are a goldmine for Obama in the 2012 election: he’ll be able to attract the anti-gay  and conservative vote by tacitly refusing to grant Gay rights for anyone. LGBT riots will only get him more conservative votes. As for the gays: where else will they have to go? Every time they protest, he’ll point to the (utterly useless) visitation rights he allowed a few months ago as proof that he really has done something for them. And if they vote against him, they’re not a very big voting block in the grand scheme of things, so who cares?
    After he wins re-election (sad to say, I think this is the most likely scenario) he will have no incentive whatsoever to do anything at all for the LGBT crowd and he will revert entirely to his natural homophobic proclivities and never deal with DADT or anything else involved with gay rights.
    I won’t engage in any recriminations but I do have to say that LGBT rights is the gift that keeps on giving so far as Obama is concerned but not in a way that will do them much good.

  • Diana L. C.

    PssttCmere,

    Read my post above for my take on Udall and Pols”s move on the DADT issue.

  • Rosa

    Once again the gays have shown courage and conviction of standing up for what they are and what they beleive, while many others are very cowardly and following in lock step with ideas formed for them by others.

  • jwrjr

    It does seem likely that Obama is delaying repealing DADT so that if it goes well he can claim credit for it, and if it goes badly he can blame the Republicans.  The MSM will back him to the hilt in either case.

  • PssttCmere

    I will….thanks

  • foxyladi14

    =-X

  • candymarl

    The LGBT community gave Obama a free pass for his association with McClurkin and others like him. I tried to say look at what he does not what he says. So, I’m sorry it’s not that I don’t stand with them.. I do. But they chose blind faith over facts. Kinda like some black folks during the Civil Rights movement wanted MLK Jr. and others to go away and just wait. These same folks, Obama included, are enjoying the fruits of that sacrifice.

     To quote someone I saw once say about being gay – “It’s not a choice. It’s how I was born.”

  • eurogirl70

    I want to know why this colleague’s wife was in a club where she would see this soldier kissing another woman?  Especially in Dallas, of all places!  I am sure that Stacey Vasquez was careful about public display’s of affection; not that she should even have to be!!  I hope karma bites that woman (the colleague’s wife) right in her hypocritical ass!

  • Rabble Rouser Rev. Amy

    You may have seen the Spokesweasel try and blame the police for being “overzealous” in not allowing the reporters.  He said the WH had nothing to do with it.  So, we are supposed to believe that police officers who deal with prosters there all the time, all of a sudden, weren’t going to allow reporters.  Okay…

    Thanks, Ani – I appreciate it!

    Great comments, everyone – as Ferd said, the concern SHOULD be competency…

  • Rabble Rouser Rev. Amy

    You said it, Ferd and Robb!

  • Rabble Rouser Rev. Amy

    Katmoon, talk abt a beautiful comment!  Thank you so much for sharing your story, and your passion, with us.  Well said indeed!  I bet your dad is so, so proud of the person you are, as well he should be.  What a gift you have given us!

  • Rabble Rouser Rev. Amy

    Wow, Katmoon – that is FASCINATING!!  Thank you so much!  This is so interesting.  I would love for you to write something up abt this, if you’re interested in doing so!

  • Rabble Rouser Rev. Amy

    What a story – thank you for that.  The thing is, and Hillary actually said this when being asked abt DADT, it used to be far WORSE before DADT.  People were often dishonorably discharged from the service, and mere rumor or innuendo was sufficient to get them kicked out.  Amazingly, DADT was an IMPROVEMENT.

    Still, it is simply wrong to force people who are tax paying Americans to live lives of secrecy and fear when they are willing to put on the uniform of their country.  It is immoral, and unethical, IMHO…

  • Rabble Rouser Rev. Amy

    candymarl, you are so right.  I just did not understand why SO many LGBT people were willing to give Obama a pass.  So many Dems demonized Sarah Palin for her stance on same sex marriage even though it is IDENTICAL to Obama’s.

    You said it, though – Obama has associates – check that – very close friends, like Rep. Rev James Meeks, who are ACTIVELY anti-gay, and yet the GLBT community thinks he cares ANYTHING for us?  Please.  It’s just complete and utter denial – and it is ending up costing us.  Hillary would not have engaged in all of this BS delay tacticts that Obama is using, that’s for sure!

  • AC

    Like alot!

  • EllenD

    I guess it should have been called “Don’t ask, don’t tell, don’t push me, I’ll get there eventually.”

  • EllenD

    All this nonsense about showering & sleeping and living with others is exactly what was used against having women in the military.

  • jwrjr

    Possibly “Don’t ask, don’t tell, and just let me eat my waffle”?

  • EllenD

    If you want to see how the native Americans handled it, rent “Little Big Man”, one of my favorite movies.

  • Katmoon

    Rev Amy, I have a site I can refer you to as well, The citation and writer is: (My apologies, I had thought this posted).
    CITATION: If you cite this Web page, please use the following form of citation:
    Andrew Calimach, World History of Male Love, “Homosexual Traditions”, The Two-Spirit Traditon, 2000 <http://www.gay-art-history.org/gay-history/gay-customs/native-american-homosexuality/two-spirit-native-american-gay.html>

    And there is further reading I can pass on as well.

  • ANonOMouse

    RRRA: I think a lot of gay people, especially the youngest, were not paying attention to how the rhetoric of Obama squared with the actions of Barack Obama. They just jumped on the bandwagon (many because their friends were) and pulled the lever for the Dem, because dems have traditionally, at least rhetorically, supported (some) gay rights.

    Hillary, had a demonstrated history of attending pride marches as well as a commitment to the repeal of DOMA & DADT.

    Sarah Palin almost but not quite, had the same position on gay marriage as Obama and Hillary, but wasn’t and isn’t for the repeal of DOMA or DADT and Palin both supported and voted for her states Constitutional Amendment banning gay marriage.

    Palin’s position on a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage
    http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1130123/constitutional_divide_mccain_and_palin.html

    Palin on the repeal of DADT:
    http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2010/0207/Sarah-Palin-hints-at-presidential-run-in-2012
    Repealing “don’t ask, don’t tell” not a priority: “I don’t think so right now,” she said on repealing the ban on gays serving openly in the military. She added, “I’m surprised that the President spent that on his State of the Union speech when he only spent about nine percent of his time in the State of the Union on national security issues.”

    I suppose as a gay person the truth is we have NO solid support in the Democratic Party and no support whatsover by the republican party. I didn’t vote for Obama in 2008 and I won’t vote for him in 2012 either, but I also won’t vote for someone who is actively working against full parity in the law for LGBTQ’s.

  • creeper

    Ferd, I’m new to Grassley’s party, too.  For years I disliked him because I bought the Dem catechism that he had to be bad because he was a Republican.

    Then we elected Bruce Braley and I got a good look at how bad a pol can be.

    One more lesson in watching what pols do, not listening to what they say.

  • Ferd Berfle

    “One more lesson in watching what pols do, not listening to what they say.”

    That is a great way to look at it, creeper. It is all about their actions.

  • creeper

    Funny, isn’t it, how enlightened these “savages” were.

    Homosexuality is also accepted by the San Blas indians of Panama.  Gay males spend their days with the women, making molas while other men to go farm and fish.  This situation isn’t considered remarkable or unique or even worthy of debate.  It’s just the way things are.

  • creeper

    CDP, put that Dem playbook away before some obot sees it and charges you with theft.

  • Rabble Rouser Rev. Amy

    Thanks, Katmoon!  I appreciate that.  It really is just amazing to read this.  Wow!

  • Rabble Rouser Rev. Amy

    Well, that is the truth of the matter right there: “I suppose as a gay person the truth is we have NO solid support in the Democratic Party and no support whatsover by the republican party.”

    No one was as supportive of us as Hillary.  Hell, she’s marched in more Pride Parades than I have.  Obama won’t get near them with a ten foot pole.  Palin is definitely more conservative, though she did sign into law a bill that gay state employees in AK have all the same rights as everyone else does, so there’s that.

    But here’s the thing – NOTHING has changed yet!  We still have DOMA, DADT, and far more states that have outlawed same sex marriage than allow it.  So, yeah – the Dems may pay more LIP service to our rights, but the proof, as they say, is in the pudding…

    Great comment!

  • http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/2010/05/01/defense-secretary-gates-to-gays-stay-in-the-closet-open-thread/ Defense Secretary Gates To Gays, “Stay In The Closet!” OPEN THREAD : NO QUARTER

    [...] Don’t Tell,” has been in the news a good bit of late, including a recent story that some Democrats do not want to wait for the study Obama proposed to conclude December 1, conveniently after the [...]

blog comments powered by Disqus