Pelosi: ‘Don’t ask’ will be ‘memory by end of this year’

From The Hill:

“The Pentagon’s “Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy will be nothing but a memory by year’s end, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) declared Wednesday.

Pelosi, in an interview with The Hill, stopped short of laying all of her strategic cards on the table. She wouldn’t say whether the House will take the lead on the issue or predict when the Clinton administration-era tenet would be repealed.

But she made it clear ending “Don’t ask, don’t tell” is at the top of her agenda.

“I don’t have any doubt that ‘Don’t ask, don’t tell’ will be a memory by the end of this year,” she said.”

As The Hill notes, the bill that would end DADT still has just 192 co-sponsors, 24 short of a majority. But Pelosi has shown a willingness to fight for what she wants, and if she’s willing to make statements as stark as this, she must be pretty confident that the votes will be there.

Some conservative Democrats have said they don’t want to vote on the controversial bills, especially in the wake of tough votes on healthcare and climate change.

225 comments Add your comment

stands for decibels

May 21st, 2010
8:07 am

Well about damn time. This is a political no-brainer, unless the Dems manage to somehow stage-manage this so’s to pry defeat from the jaws of victory.

Road Scholar

May 21st, 2010
8:12 am

So if the Repubs (and the Demos) don’t want to debate, construct and vote on controversial bills, why are they voted back into Congress? They don’t seem to have a problem obsessing over abortion and guns!

Normal

May 21st, 2010
8:17 am

Got dead threaded downstairs, but I needs ta know…

A question to ponder…and I hope someone will answer.

It costs thousands of dollars to make a household (including cars) self suffienct in energy usage. How long will it take to recoup those dollars with savings in energy/gas bills?

As for DADT, I stand with Stands. It’s a no brainer. I think it says somewhere that all Americans regardless of who or what they are, have been granted equal rights in life, liberty, and persuit of happiness.

RB from Gwinnett

May 21st, 2010
8:19 am

Jobless numbers continue to rise and DADT is at the top of her agenda??? I guess if she had an R by her name, that would matter to Jay.

Something tells me her re-election chances will be only a memory by the end of the year too.

godless heathen

May 21st, 2010
8:23 am

C’mon Nancy, Get a pair!

stands for decibels

May 21st, 2010
8:26 am

If you want a quick batch o’ polls on the topic, have a scroll here:

http://www.pollingreport.com/civil.htm

I find very little in there to disavow me of the notion that there is broad public support for ending this discriminatory policy.

I also believe that the right wing moles in the military working furiously to gin up poutrage from the Corporal Scouts so’s to preserve their little mostly-boys/all-straight/Gods-Guns-Republicans vision of our armed forces are not as bright nor as powerful as they think they are.

But be prepared for a lotta noise from that element.

=======

Normal @ 8.17, as to your dead-threaded question, I’ve got but a little time so I’ll keep it general. It’s always a difficult, delicate balance between carrots and sticks. You provide tax credits and positive incentives for people to change, but you also provide penalties to those who stubbornly don’t. And some otherwise decent people will wind up getting hurt in the process; there are always winners and losers. But I don’t think we have much of a choice here, it’s gonna happen sooner or later so we might as well try to plan for it humanely.

Outhouse GoKart

May 21st, 2010
8:30 am

Yes…lettuce Hope Ms Nasty Pelosi will be a “memory by end” of this years. What a nice Change.

AmVet

May 21st, 2010
8:32 am

Good morning, Normal and others.

Way to go liberal traitors!

At this rate, that “overwhelming percentage (LOL) of people in the military who identify themselves as Republicans” will have to join the Iranian army” where, there are of course, NO homosexuals.

Then we’ll have a helluva time getting the manly and godly *true* patriots to leave their comfy stations in the 101st Chairborne and get their valorous butts out there on the front lines where they can kill a whole bunch of towel heads.

Like King George (who for gawdssakes gave up golf!) said, We must make sacrifices.

So you chickenhawks go sacrifice yourselves and I’ll go shopping.

If you’re not prone to nausea watch this bungling POS “explain” it all…

http://www.revver.com/video/146167/george-bush-definition-of-sacrifice/

AmVet

May 21st, 2010
8:36 am

stands for decibels

May 21st, 2010
8:36 am

RB, Outhouse, I don’t suppose you could actually comment on the topic at hand, rather than fantasizing yet again about what you’d like to do with Nancy Pelosi?

If you think keeping DADT is swell, bring it. Be manly men. Don’t wait for Corporal Scout to do your dirty work with his musty collection of Readers Digest era copy/pastes and tea-tard homilies.

Otherwise, admit that DADT needs to be taken out back and shot.

Gale

May 21st, 2010
8:38 am

RB, DADT is just a C item on the to do list. The sooner it’s history, the sooner it becomes a non-issue.

Soothsayer

May 21st, 2010
8:39 am

md

May 21st, 2010
8:39 am

OG – beat me to it, but highly doubtful her district will change its thought process any time soon. Best hope is she at least loses her speaker position if the dems lose the house.

Her head cheerleading position was especially despicable yesterday when Calderon bashed AZ for doing what she and the rest of the misfits choose not to do. That was sickening to watch – our lawmakers standing and applauding for the lack of enforcing the very laws that come out of that very chamber.

md

May 21st, 2010
8:44 am

Normal,

Longer than most folks plan to stay in their homes these days, and with home prices continuing to fall, recouping gets even tougher.

Outhouse GoKart

May 21st, 2010
8:47 am

sfd…suffice is to say…lettuce Hope Ms Nasty Pelosi will be a “memory by end of this year.” What a nice Change.

PS…an even nicer memory will be that of Barry goin down in flames.

Scooter

May 21st, 2010
8:47 am

It costs thousands of dollars to make a household (including cars) self suffienct in energy usage. How long will it take to recoup those dollars with savings in energy/gas bills?

I have no hard facts Normal, but, you and I are too old to ever see any savings from it.

Scout

May 21st, 2010
8:50 am

…………… and our military will be less because of it …… “an Army of two”.

So be it.

Yoohoo

May 21st, 2010
8:51 am

Still, for all their ambition, lawmakers left some gaping questions on how to tackle some of the most significant financial sector weaknesses exposed by the 2008 financial meltdown — from mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to unsettled disputes over banks and their derivatives business and requirements that they hold more capital. And in the rough and tumble give and take of writing laws, they rejected tougher measures that would have forced behemoth banks to downsize, required securitizers to retain some credit risk in their loans, and compelled home buyers to put a downpayment on their loans.

Move along, nothing to see here. Political pomp at its best.

david wayne osedach

May 21st, 2010
8:53 am

She hasn’t done too badly. Don’t ask. Don’t tell.

md

May 21st, 2010
8:58 am

Don’t Ask Don’t Tell – wasn’t that the healthcare bill?

Just another “show pony” bill for political points. A toothless finance bill, a credit card bill that raised everybody’s rates, and a PayGo bill that has done nothing but collect dust since passage.

Smoke and mirrors in an election year.

Moderate Line

May 21st, 2010
9:01 am

Average Satisfaction Survey with how things are going in the US?
1982-24%
1986-60%
1990-40%
1994-33%
1998-60%
2003-53%
2006-31%
2010-23%

Perhaps the Dems should be worried about something other than Don’t ask don’t tell.

AmVet

May 21st, 2010
9:03 am

Vis a vis, the senior senator from California, I never thought much of her as a politician. Crooked, craven, pro-corporation, pro-crime and self serving like virtually all of them in Washington are now.

But the final straw came in 2006. After the Democrats took every single, solitary, contested election – an historic and epic 36 out of 36 race sweep from the hemorrhaging neo-cons – what did she and Barry and Hillary and Harry do?

They “took off the table” the impeachment of those two deadly f___ups in the White House!

Spineless lapdogs, who are nothing more than Republican-lites…

Scooter

May 21st, 2010
9:03 am

I know one person (a lesbian) that served 12 yrs. in the Army. She says she got out because straight women have no business being in the military. I’m still trying to figure that one out! :???:

But....

May 21st, 2010
9:04 am

What about homosexual urges in the fox holes, communal and bas Kmart restrooms? Non-gays should not be force to have to defend themselves against this.

And what about the gays recruiting our young soilders into a life of homosexual sodomy, which is against The Bible law.

Scooter

May 21st, 2010
9:07 am

Dang, Am Vet, just tell us how you really feel! :lol:

And,good morn to ya.

Gale

May 21st, 2010
9:09 am

Scooter, your lesbian acquaintance probably got tired of seeing straight service women get pregnant while serving.

Paul

May 21st, 2010
9:13 am

Morning, Jay

Hope the insomnia gets better. Or are you just an early riser?

It’ll be nice to have this behind us. Political risk? DoD’s on a six-month timeline for the study. The Spkr can just leave it ’till after the Nov elections, then call a vote.

What the Pres should do: Take all the administrative discharges over the last decade or so. Upgrade them to “Honorable” (other categories are such as “Under Other Than Honorable” and “General”). Then offer the people their jobs back. Can even sweeten the pot with no loss of rank or even a promotion. Let them decide.

Golly gee, we’d get back all those mideast language experts and fighter pilots and explosive ordinance disposal experts.

AmVet

May 21st, 2010
9:17 am

Hey Scooter!

How Mssrs. Bush and Cheney are not at this very moment in a nine by seven is a travesty of justice.

I know, I know. We’ve got a war on terror on our hands and we don’t have time for such quaint and outdated ideas as justice and habeus corpus and illegally spying on Americans and…

Duty calls. Seey’allafterawhile…

stands for decibels

May 21st, 2010
9:17 am

Paul @ 9.13, thanks for getting to the practical/implementation/legislative side of things. What you’ve posted makes sense to me.

And for the others, a reminder–the topic is not “Just How Much Does the He-Man Woman Haterz Club Hate Nancy?”

Soothsayer

May 21st, 2010
9:18 am

Scooter

May 21st, 2010
9:19 am

Gale

May 21st, 2010
9:09 am

She did mention that Gale, and said they are whiners that always expect special treatment.I still have a hard time understanding though. (being she is a woman)

Scout

May 21st, 2010
9:22 am

It will be amusing to see how the military handles the first “cross-dressing” sergeant ………. you know “transgenders” have protection under the law also. And of course the American taxpayer will then have to pay for the surgery.

BTW ……… I hope it’s the Air Force.

Redneck Convert (R--and proud of it)

May 21st, 2010
9:22 am

Well, ain’t there some room for compromise here? Maybe we could put all the gays in their own platoons and companies and such. I mean, you expect a little gayness in the Navy, but it’s too much for a soldier or a Marine to be wondering about if the guy that sleeps in the bunk below him is That Way. And when it comes to Bible study off duty, you’d have to skip over whole sections of the Bible.

Seems to me the libruls are going hog-wild. I mean, I remember back in my service days when the Sgt. would give a lecture about what bad things were going to happen to you if you got caught doing You Know What with another man. That kind of stuff is a Tradition and it would all be ruint. I’m just glad my service days are behind me. I’d hate to be in those showers and wondering if the guy next to me was lusting after my body.

Have a good day everybody.

Gale

May 21st, 2010
9:22 am

Scooter, It’s a woman thing. You wouldn’t understand. ;-)

Scout

May 21st, 2010
9:23 am

Jay:

I hope you are monitoring this morning as I know how you feel about this. The “off-topic” people are really abusing their privilege.

stands for decibels

May 21st, 2010
9:25 am

prolly gonna regret this but…

Spineless lapdogs, who are nothing more than Republican-lites…

yes, AmVet, I know, I know.

You belong to j-nix’s charming club. The “Obama Sucks because he hasn’t fixed everything that sucks yet and it makes me hoppin’ mad, y’hear, mad!” club.

Out in the real world you need legislation and votes ‘n stuff. In the real world you get to hope for what Paul proposed as a reasonable outcome @ 9.13, actually coming true, and celebrating when/if it does.

And you guys can strum yer geetar and sing Phil Ochs’ “Love me I’m a liberal”, call the President Ima Gonna, and call me an incrementalist corporatist swine, but last I checked, that’s the way it works.

Paul

May 21st, 2010
9:25 am

Scout

“It will be amusing to see how the military handles the first “cross-dressing” sergeant”

I imagine they’d handle it the same as they’d handle anyone who showed up not wearing the uniform of the day.

Doggone/GA

May 21st, 2010
9:28 am

“It will be amusing to see how the military handles the first “cross-dressing” sergeant ”

Gee, they “deal” with them every day…all of those female sargeants wearing those MEN’s uniforms. Didn’t you know the women were not meant to wear PANTS?

And somehow I just seriously doubt the armed forces are going to issue special “female” uniforms to male cross dressers. They’ll just be stuck wearing the same uniform as everyone else they serve with.

kayaker 71

May 21st, 2010
9:29 am

Unemployment rising, foreclosures rising, the debt getting larger every day, more Mexicans crossing our borders, the majority of Americans with a less than favorable opinion of Bozo and his policies….. and Queen Nancy and Bookman are crowing about gay rights.
Unemployment, according to Business Insider today, is up to as high as 18% in some areas of the country and the value of homes has dropped as much as 65% in areas like South Florida and Vagas. And Bookman and Pelosi are worried about gay rights.

Doggone/GA

May 21st, 2010
9:31 am

“I imagine they’d handle it the same as they’d handle anyone who showed up not wearing the uniform of the day”

I wonder how the Scottish armed forces handle it?

Soothsayer

May 21st, 2010
9:32 am

Dow off 80 points in first minute of trading

Peadawg

May 21st, 2010
9:32 am

“But Pelosi has shown a willingness to fight for what she wants”

You got that right. We saw w/ the HC bill how low she’ll stoop to get votes.

Paul

May 21st, 2010
9:34 am

Scout

““cross-dressing” sergeant ………. BTW ……… I hope it’s the Air Force.”

I’ve noted before – we’re talking about an organization where men where patent leather shoes and polyester trousers; where pilots wear one piece jump suits with zippers and velcro, and where the elites in one or two services wear thigh-high boots with puffy-leg trousers tucked in.

And you’re about how they’ll look if gays can serve openly?!!?

Soothsayer

May 21st, 2010
9:35 am

Dow off 135 points in first 2 minutes

Paul

May 21st, 2010
9:35 am

Wear. not ‘where’. Where o wear is my focus this morning?

Scout

May 21st, 2010
9:35 am

Paul:

“I imagine they’d handle it the same as they’d handle anyone who showed up not wearing the uniform of the day.”

They can’t ……….. transgenders now have protection under the law. Just wait until it all goes to court.

Scooter

May 21st, 2010
9:38 am

Paul

May 21st, 2010
9:25 am

But what if they showed up at NCO Club after thier duty hrs. in drag? serious question Paul!

Scout

May 21st, 2010
9:38 am

Doggone/GA :

They don’t have to be “issued” uniforms. You can buy them. You have to buy your own after the original issue anyway.

This will get interesting. They will push the envelope as far as they can …….. they always do. Ever seen a gay pride parade? They don’t show them on television anymore …….. they can’t.

stands for decibels

May 21st, 2010
9:39 am

Unemployment rising, foreclosures rising, the debt getting larger every day, more Mexicans crossing our borders, the majority of Americans with a less than favorable opinion of Bozo and his policies….. and Queen Nancy and Bookman are crowing about gay rights.

Indeed! The very idea! Imagine, giving a good crap about those silly gay people! Silly patriotic, taxpaying, productive same-sexers! Imagine being concerned about their silly civil rights!

It’s not like they’re actual real human beings (who, by the way, are presumably impacted by all those issues you raised) or anything. Can’t they just wait another ten, twenty, forty years, until some other generation finds them less icky?

Jeez. Be back later. Try not to fire anyone on the basis of sexual orientation while I’m away. And maybe someone can ask Scout why he thinks about trannies so much–my bet is he got a little something extra than he paid for, once upon a time, if ya know what I mean.

RW-(the original)

May 21st, 2010
9:39 am

sfb,

While you’re busy scolding everyone for straying off topic because you think the topic is the merit or lack thereof of DADT I urge you to reread the column. People that are talking about Speaker Pelosi’s methods and their consequences to her party’s electoral chances are much closer to the topic than you are. I see nothing in Jay’s column that suggests the topic is the actual DADT law.

Scout

May 21st, 2010
9:40 am

Scooter:

Most of these posters have never been in the military and they don’t care how it’s affected. Some of them like “Private” Obama actually loath the military.

Scout

May 21st, 2010
9:41 am

RW-(the original):

Don’t get your “panties” in a wad. I’m just messing with him.

Compromised Position

May 21st, 2010
9:41 am

RB, Outhouse, I don’t suppose you could actually comment on the topic at hand, rather than fantasizing yet again about what you’d like to do with Nancy Pelosi?

If you think keeping DADT is swell, bring it. Be manly men. Don’t wait for Corporal Scout to do your dirty work with his musty collection of Readers Digest era copy/pastes and tea-tard homilies.

Otherwise, admit that DADT needs to be taken out back and shot.

Damn! I mean, just, damn! What a post! I ’bout fell out of my chair. :smile:

Outhouse GoKart

May 21st, 2010
9:42 am

The markets appear not very settled over the Greece bailout. Perhaps they know Spain is next to be followed by the EU.

RW-(the original)

May 21st, 2010
9:42 am

Well I nevah !

Scout

May 21st, 2010
9:42 am

Out on patrol for awhile. Check in later ……………

Ooo Rah ! (I wonder how you do that with a lisp) ?

Paul

May 21st, 2010
9:42 am

Scout

[[They can’t ……….. transgenders now have protection under the law. Just wait until it all goes to court.]]

But of course you know such nondiscrimination protections do not extend to such factors as deciding what mandatory-for-all uniforms will be worn.

Doggone/GA

May 21st, 2010
9:43 am

“They will push the envelope as far as they can ”

“They” won’t do it while on duty, period. On duty “they” will be subject to exactly the same rules and regulations that cover ALL soldiers. What they do when they are off duty is their business.

And I notice you didn’t address the issue that exists RIGHT NOW of all those female cross-dressing soldiers.

Curious Observer

May 21st, 2010
9:44 am

You have to buy your own after the original issue anyway.

You buy your own original issue, Scout—at least you had to when I was in. I remember how surprised I was that the cost of the uniforms issued at Parris Island was deducted in installments from my pay. Of course, I was surprised and delighted anyway when I got that first 10 dollar bill as my first month’s pay.

Paul

May 21st, 2010
9:44 am

Scooter

“But what if they showed up at NCO Club after thier duty hrs. in drag? serious question Paul!”

Why do you care? As I’ve already noted, the men at the Pentagon show up for work every day wearing patent leather shoes –

Or are you okay with some obviously gay apparel but not others?

Paul

May 21st, 2010
9:45 am

Scout

“They don’t have to be “issued” uniforms. You can buy them. You have to buy your own after the original issue anyway.”

Enlisted receive a monthly clothing allowance to replace worn-out uniform items, further strengthening the position that what one wears while on duty is not a matter of personal preference.

Paul

May 21st, 2010
9:47 am

Scout

“Ooo Rah ”

When I hear people making noises like that, I think “They should eat more fiber.”

:-)

Scooter

May 21st, 2010
9:47 am

cross-dressing” sergeant ………. BTW ……… I hope it’s the Air Force.”

Hey Scout, I proudly served in the USAF and you can kiss my arse! :lol:

Curious Observer

May 21st, 2010
9:48 am

As I’ve already noted, the men at the Pentagon show up for work every day wearing patent leather shoes –

Officers had them, Paul, but enlisted men had to go through the tedious process of dying the issued dress shoes, then polishing them. Of course, I’m not even going to get into the “boondockers” that essentially looked like leather with the rough side out.

Doggone/GA

May 21st, 2010
9:50 am

“Or are you okay with some obviously gay apparel but not others?”

Of course he is…he’s only concerned with male cross dressers. Female cross dressers don’t bother him a bit, can’t you tell?

resno2

May 21st, 2010
9:51 am

Couldn’t we all just pray that the Pelosi itself will be a distant memory by the end of the year?

TGT

May 21st, 2010
9:52 am

“Some conservative Democrats have said they don’t want to vote on the controversial bills, especially in the wake of tough votes on healthcare and climate change.”

Many Dems (such as the one in Penn. 12) are running against almost the entire Obama/Reid/Pelosi agenda. See here: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/may/21/anti-obama-tack-buoys-some-democrats/

John Birch

May 21st, 2010
9:58 am

Pelosi owns her district and will be re-elected as long as she wants to serve. I detest most of her over-the-top liberalism, but on this issue she is absolutely correct. I see no correlation between sexual orientation and whether or not you are a good soldier. DADT was step one, it’s time to become fully enlightened and end the discrimination altogether.

Scooter

May 21st, 2010
9:59 am

Paul,I guess I don’t get out much these days. I know nothing about gay apparel. I do know that if a man showed up at the club with a dress on, he is probably gay. ???????

Paul

May 21st, 2010
9:59 am

Curious Observer

That must’ve been a pain. Guys I’ve known, enlisted, have been wearing the same patent leather shoes as officers for decades. I saw an AF enlisted guy the other day, wearing a BDU lighter in color with blue tones. Said it was the new one (out for a couple of years). And to show you how much things have changed, he said they’re wash and wear only, ironing and starch prohibited!

Doggone/Ga

“Female cross dressers don’t bother…a bit, can’t you tell?”

That’s always struck me as an interesting phenomenon. Not wanting anyone to pursue this, but it seems to me guys I’ve known, they get uncomfortable with the idea of two guys holding hands, but let it be two women and they start grinning and getting…. animated.

Sheesh. Talk about a double standard.

Paul

May 21st, 2010
10:01 am

Scooter

Actually, many, many cross dressers are confirmed heterosexuals.

I learned that by reading “Dear Abby.”

Doggone/GA

May 21st, 2010
10:01 am

“I do know that if a man showed up at the club with a dress on, he is probably gay. ???????”

Not necessarily, cross-dressing crosses all sexual orientation lines.

Outhouse GoKart

May 21st, 2010
10:01 am

I hope one day the military will see fit to allow enlistment of those involved in the ancient art form of beastiality.

Doggone/GA

May 21st, 2010
10:04 am

“I hope one day the military will see fit to allow enlistment of those involved in the ancient art form of beastiality.”

What makes you think they don’t allow it now?

Scooter

May 21st, 2010
10:05 am

Doggone/GA

May 21st, 2010
9:50 am

I know nothing about lesbian apparel either Doggone. I’m trying to be serious here, please save your smart remarks for someone else. Thanks in advance!

Outhouse GoKart

May 21st, 2010
10:07 am

What would make me think they do?

Mr. Right

May 21st, 2010
10:11 am

Obama, Reid and Pelosi Wow! Are we in trouble or what? This country has never had such inept leadership at all three branches of government before.

Doggone/GA

May 21st, 2010
10:11 am

“I’m trying to be serious here, please save your smart remarks for someone else.”

Reality hurts, doesn’t it? By “conventional” standards any woman who wears pants is a “cross dresser” By those same “conventional” standards a man wearing a kilt is a cross dresser. From you prior lack of response, I concluded that neither of those bothers you very much.

It appears that the thought of a male cross dresser IN UNIFORM is what bothers you the most. Well, get over it, they won’t be dressed in skirts and high heels. They’ll be IN UNIFORM just like every other soldier.

And just to bother you a bit more, during the Vietnam war a quite masculine friend of mine, wife, kids and all, wore his wife’s underwear while he was “over there.” Said it brought him good luck. He’s still alive, still married to the same woman, still got the same kids. But yes, he DID “cross dress” while in uniform.

Doesn’t that just make you want to squirm?

Doggone/GA

May 21st, 2010
10:12 am

“What would make me think they do?”

When was the last time you heard of someone being discharged for that reason?

Compromised Position

May 21st, 2010
10:13 am

This one goes out to all the cross-dressers scouting out the dives out there on swing street.

Southern Comfort

May 21st, 2010
10:13 am

If Pelosi feels that way, then there’s probably signs that lead her to believe the support is there somewhere. Personally, I don’t see the need for DADT anyway. It appears to be nothing but sanctioned discrimination anyway. In uniform, military personnel have a job to do and an image to conform to. Off duty, they still have to uphold guidelines and regulations. At some point, people should be able to live their private lives in private without government interference.

Some conservative Democrats have said they don’t want to vote on the controversial bills, especially in the wake of tough votes on healthcare and climate change.

If they don’t want to vote on them, replace them with someone who will. The reason for them being in office is to vote on legislation, whether they vote for it or against it. If anyone else decided they didn’t want to do their job they would get replaced. What’s so different or special about them?

Del

May 21st, 2010
10:16 am

Once again we have Polosei talking out from where the sun never shines. Of course she represents a district comprised mostly of left wing loon’s and her popularity begins and ends there. DADT is a perfectly good piece of legislation made better by recent changes making it difficult for a homosexual service member to be targeted out of hate or revenge. This liberal left theater of celebrating sexuality hasn’t a place anywhere and certainly not in our armed forces. Those who have never served in a combat arm have this delusional image of military culture they don’t understand, yet they want to make the military another playground for their misguided social experimentation. Hopefully, smarter more objective members of congress will continue to hold back Pelosi and the other hard-left idiots up on the Hill.

Shawny

May 21st, 2010
10:16 am

Pelosi’s constituents are San Francisco. She better push for this in an election year, given the anti-incumbent sentiment.

The more moderate dems fear revoking this Clinton era policy with their jobs on the line in November. Should be interesting to see how they side.

Doggone/GA

May 21st, 2010
10:16 am

“What’s so different or special about them?”

Unlike regular employees…we’re stuck with them until the next election, unless they do something stupid enough to warrant a recall election. Can they be impeached? I’m not even sure.

Outhouse GoKart

May 21st, 2010
10:16 am

They probably wouldnt want it getting out. Them being animal lovers and such. We need DADT for this issue.

Scooter

May 21st, 2010
10:17 am

Doggone/GA

May 21st, 2010
10:11 am

Maybe your mind reading ability needs to be honed just a bit. :roll:

Outhouse GoKart

May 21st, 2010
10:18 am

Bruce Hornsby? Please dont.

Paul

May 21st, 2010
10:18 am

SoCom

“people should be able to live their private lives in private without government interference.”

Sounds quite Libertarian.

To all the rest of you who cheer for Ron Paul and Rand Paul: isn’t this just the kind of minimalist government interference they champion?

Doggone/GA

May 21st, 2010
10:19 am

“Maybe your mind reading ability needs to be honed just a bit”

Has nothing to do with mind reading. Like it or not, we ALL reveal something about ourselves by what we do and don’t respond to, and how we respond when we do. You’re no different.

md

May 21st, 2010
10:23 am

“And for the others, a reminder–the topic is not “Just How Much Does the He-Man Woman Haterz Club Hate Nancy?””

And next those that disagree with Barry are gonna be racists – right.

My what a broad brush you use to label those you disagree with – walmart does carry smaller brushes – try one. In case you didn’t notice, the speaker happens to be a woman – hence the use of terms such as she and her. Had she been a man, she would be a he and we would probably not be “haterz”.

But I’m guessing that doesn’t fit your agenda.

And for the topic, last I haeard jay sets the rules and he doesn’t agree with you. We all get 2, but you don’t like it until you do it.

Rafe Hollister

May 21st, 2010
10:25 am

I worked with a guy who was a former Naval Intelligence Service Special Agent. He used to say that they tracked down homosexuals and put them in the brig for most of his career, then they changed and began tolerating homosexuals, and he was retiring before it became mandatory to be a homosexual. Times they do change.

Scooter

May 21st, 2010
10:26 am

Doggone/GA

May 21st, 2010
10:19 am

You lost me on that one Doggone! I thought I responded properly. ??????

RW-(the original)

May 21st, 2010
10:28 am

SoCo,

The job of legislators is far more complex than just voting for or against legislation. Crafting and compromising legislation often requires holding up votes through whatever means necessary to better the product before it comes for a vote. Had you said that voting “present” once a bill makes it to the floor then I would agree with you. We did get rid of the last legislator that continuously employed that tactic. Unfortunately he now works out of the Oval Office.

Southern Comfort

May 21st, 2010
10:28 am

Doggone

Some are probably up for re-election this fall. If they don’t want to participate and do their job, now would be the time to replace them. Treat them like batteries in the smoke detector. Replace them with some new legislators.

Paul

Notice I said, “At some point”. You’ll still need the government “interference” to keep pedophiles, rapist, and such in check. However, people should be able to enjoy some privacy.

Paul

May 21st, 2010
10:31 am

Rafe

Well, if that’s the most the guy could do to protect national security for the Navy, I’d say he’s on the right track by retiring.

SoCom

To me, that’s a given. But given the disconnect some Libertarians have between theory and the practical impact of reality….

John Birch

May 21st, 2010
10:32 am

Jay – It’s almost time to run another piece on how the economy is making such a strong recovery thanks to Obama’s great leadership. Then I’d like one on how the drug/violence/illegal alien issue has been solved by Obama publicly kissing Calderon’s behind.

Doggone/GA

May 21st, 2010
10:33 am

“If they don’t want to participate and do their job, now would be the time to replace them”

Yes, it would be…but I have very little faith that we would be getting anyone that’s any better. Different isn’t necessarily better. All these candidates with the signs that say “not a politician” are just lieing through their teeth. I don’t care what you were “yestereday” if you throw your hat in the ring for a political job today…you’re automatically a politician. And I don’t trust most businessmen (or women) as far as I could throw them. I trust politicians even less.

md

May 21st, 2010
10:33 am

“Some are probably up for re-election this fall. If they don’t want to participate and do their job, now would be the time to replace them.”

I doubt seriously it is as easy as “want to participate”. I can only imagine the level of pressure applied from the nice little party bosses – on both sides.

One pays dearly for those cushy committee seats, sometimes with their soul.

Southern Comfort

May 21st, 2010
10:35 am

RW

I may have misinterpreted Jay’s statement or something. I took “said they don’t want to vote on the controversial bills” to mean that the behind-the-scene legwork was already going on. I’m the son of a politician, so I have a pretty good understanding of how things are done, to include the stalling techniques. The statement Jay made makes it seem as if they’re saying that they don’t want to even engage in the debate to make those bills better, or at least that’s how I understood it.

Scooter

May 21st, 2010
10:39 am

Doggone/GA

May 21st, 2010
10:33 am

Now,THAT I can understand and agree with! (I know you hate it when I agree with you) :grin: