Sign Up to Receive Email Action Alerts From Issa Exposed

BREAKING: Repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” blocked in Senate vote

Don't Ask Don't Tell

By Adam Bink

Updates will scroll from the bottom

Just now, the motion to reconsider regarding the National Defense Authorization Act, including repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” was defeated, 57-40. An extremely frustrating defeat. Votes were along party lines along with newly inaugurated Sen. Manchin (D-WV) voting no and, in a surprise, Sen. Collins (R-ME) voting aye.

Prior to the vote, Majority Leader Harry Reid took the floor to announce he would move forward on the motion to reconsider. I watched him live on C-SPAN2 and typed his comments quickly. His comments consisted of:

  • Describing how “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is a thing of the past and should be a thing of the post; how we have to match our policy with our principle, repealing it will make our military stronger
  • Describing the tax cut letter and lamented how Republicans had signed it and stood by it, asking what sense did it make when “we” have as many things to do as we do
  • Noting that “we tried every possible way to move forward on ["Don't Ask, Don't Tell"]
  • Describing the other parts of the defense authorization bill
  • Casting blame upon the Republicans, saying, “[Republicans] want to block a vote on this issue on all costs; “they’re doing all they can to stand in the way of this bill”
  • Key lines: “We’ve gone through all these different iterations on amendments… we can’t do it. I offered to bring it up this summer with no restrictions, the Republicans refused. No matter what I did, I couldn’t win because the rules kept being changed… we don’t have time for unlimited debate. Some of the requests have been really unusual. Seven days of debate. Think about it! Seven in this lame-duck session… Over the last 20 years we’ve had roll call votes on as many as 20 amendments on the NDAA. I offered 15 amendments, 10 from Rs, 5 from Dems- which by the way the Dems weren’t happy about- ample time for debate on each amendment, never could get enough time, an hour, no, that’s not enough [I'd be told]… it’s quite clear that they’re trying to run out the clock.”
  • He continues, “I want to be clear that my remarks should in no way be taken as criticism of my colleague, Sen. Collins. Quite the contrary, she’s tried… I believe she has been doing her very best, and I don’t want her to receive any criticism. But at the same time, [members are her caucus] are working to defeat this bill… I don’t know how I could have been any more reasonable. I regret to say that it’s our troops who will pay the price.”
  • Collins steps forward and asks for recognition. She said she rushed to the floor once she heard Reid was speaking. Collins says she understands what Reid is proposing, so she would ask if Reid is proposing a procedure where there would be no amendments, or whether he’s proposing an agreement that she/Reid/Lieberman discussed yesterday that would allow for 10 amendments for Rs, and 5 for Dems, to “fill the tree”. She says she’s received conflicting information about how Reid intends to proceed on this important bill.
  • Reid responds that he would fill the amendment “tree”, yes, as it’s the only way to control the amendments.
  • Collins asks if it’s true he would allow 10 Republican amendments that are of the Republicans’ choice, so long as they are germane to the bill. This, as I wrote this morning, is one of Collins’ demands.
  • Reid responds that he’s made a number of different offers. He reiterates the problem of the tax letter and how it’s blocking everything.
  • Collins responds that it “seems evident to me that the Majority leader is not pursuing the path we discussed… I think that’s so unfortunate. I want to vote to proceed to this bill. I was the first Republican to announce my support for the carefully constructed language in the Senate Armed Services Committee that would repeal ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’… I just do not understand why we can’t succeed along a path… that would allow us to get those 60 votes to proceed… I thought we were extremely close to getting a reasonable agreement yesterday that would allow us to proceed, I was even willing to consider a proposal by the Majority Leader that we would start on the DOD bill, got  to the tax bill, finish that bill, then return to the DOD bill… so I think there was such a clear path to be able to get this bill done, and I am perplexed and frustrated that this important bill is going to become a victim of politics. We should be able to do better, and Sen. Lieberman and I have been bargaining in good faith with the Majority Leader, he too has been creative in his approaches. I just want to say I am perplexed with what happened and why we’re not going forward in a constructive way that would lead to success.”
  • Reid: “This is not any kind of legislative wrangle I’m having with my friend from Maine. She’s the only person I could talk to about this legislation. But this is the only way we could do it. I fill the tree, and we try to work through amendments. This has been taking months to do this. And the time has come to stop playing around.” He then proceeds to direct the clerk to call the roll on the motion to reconsider.

It appears the Majority Leader may not have been able to reach a compromise in the time spent negotiating today. Reading between the lines, it appears the biggest sticking point was whether the Majority Leader would “fill the tree” by selecting Republican and Democratic amendments for consideration, or the Republicans would select their own amendments so long as they were germane. The amount of debate time also appeared to be a sticking point, as did the problem of getting Republicans who signed the now-infamous tax cut letter to agree to proceed prior to the tax legislation being resolved. And it may all be up to the courts now. However, Collins voting aye may be a ray of hope.

I’ll update this thread with further news/statements that come out today.

Update: I learned Sens. Lieberman/Collins/Udall are holding a press conference, presumably to either declare efforts to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” dead, or to announce talks are continuing… or something else.

Update 2: On the floor, Sen. Mark Udall says he is willing to stay through the holidays to pass repeal as a stand-alone bill. Something everyone should be for.

Update 3: At the press conference, which appears to be the former of the options in Update 1, Collins said, “The Majority Leader walked away from negotiations in which we were engaged and which were going well.  There was clear path to action to action on this bill.”

Update 4: Given that the SASC has already voted in support of repeal itself, and there are 60 apparent votes to repeal the law on the floor, a stand-alone bill seems prescient. Which, over Twitter, is exactly what Sens. Lieberman and Collins plan to do.

@JoeLieberman: @SenatorCollins and I and others are introducing a free standing bill to repeal #DADT today.

I will be updating with more info on procedure/timeline on such a bill. To the best of my knowledge, it would need to pass both houses. Not clear on whether that includes committees in both houses. Such language has already passed the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Update 5: According to Sam Stein of Huffington Post, Sen. Reid will co-sponsor the stand-alone bill and bring it to the floor in lame duck. So, we’ve got another  shot at this. “Not dead yet!”-Monty Python. Also, Sam speaks to a senior Hill aide, who says Manchin might not have voted the way he did if he were the 60th vote. Very inspiring. That aside, if that’s true, and Collins didn’t vote aye just for show, then we would be one vote short. All this might be moot, though, if there’s no movement to reconsider and we move onto the next game plan, which is a stand-alone bill.

Update 6: Lincoln just took the floor to say she would have voted aye if present, by the way. Brownback and Cornyn didn’t show, but we know they’re nos. That would have made the final vote count 58-42 if all were present.

Update 7: Sen. Lieberman tweeted that the Majority Leader just told him he will “Rule 14″ a free-standing bill, meaning it can come to the Senate floor without having to go through committee. The Armed Services Committee would have voted in favor of such legislation, but now this saves time.

Update 8: I need to go offline for a few hours, but the skinny is that I’m exploring a timeline and ways on which a standalone bill could be passed, as well as action by the other body. More to come later. This thread will no longer update.

174 Comments Leave a Comment

  • 1. Ann S.  |  December 9, 2010 at 6:08 am

    Booo! to the blocking of the vote.

  • 2. Meagan  |  December 9, 2010 at 6:10 am

    What a crock.

  • 3. Chris  |  December 9, 2010 at 6:10 am

    Procedure is irrelevant. Rhetoric is irrelevant.

    As is the case with every issue related to equality, the root of the opposition here is hate.

  • 4. Meagan  |  December 9, 2010 at 6:14 am

    It's pure and total disregard for service members and it's disgusting.

  • 5. Bob  |  December 9, 2010 at 6:16 am

    does the no vote block the whole defense authoriztion bill, including funding or spending for the military???

  • 6. Sagesse  |  December 9, 2010 at 6:18 am

    Once again, a minority is fated to be the bargaining chip… two minorities, actually. The young people, mostly Hispanic, who would have benefited from the Dream Act, and the LGBT servicemembers who would have benefited from DADT repeal. And indirectly, the entire LGBT community. The tyranny of the majority. There you have it.

  • 7. Meagan  |  December 9, 2010 at 6:18 am

    Yes. :(

  • 8. anonygrl  |  December 9, 2010 at 6:18 am


  • 9. Lauren  |  December 9, 2010 at 6:18 am

    I gotta say, equality in 7 days would be a lot better than none at all…

  • 10. Joel  |  December 9, 2010 at 6:21 am

    You know what? FINE! We'll leave it to the courts. A legislative action can be repealed. A court decision by the SCOTUS cannot. Those reps blocking the vote will go down in history as failing to uphold their oath to defend the Constitution, and our friend McCain will end up in a home for the demented.

  • 11. Bob  |  December 9, 2010 at 6:22 am

    NO PuBLIC OUTCRY silent accepance????

  • 12. Gary  |  December 9, 2010 at 6:22 am

    You nailed it Chris. If everyone involved wanted to do the right thing they wouldn't have let politics get in the way of doing it.

  • 13. Sharon Finnegan Terl  |  December 9, 2010 at 6:23 am


  • 14. Lesbians Love Boies  |  December 9, 2010 at 6:25 am

    Sadly – Yes – they hung the entire military out to dry.

  • 15. Kathleen  |  December 9, 2010 at 6:25 am


  • 16. Dave in ME  |  December 9, 2010 at 6:26 am

    I called Collins yesterday when I got the email from P8TT and sent it along to 40 others here in Maine. I'm glad to see she was supportive.

    Dave in Maine

  • 17. Ed  |  December 9, 2010 at 6:26 am

    Freaking idiots! 2 things….does this mean the survey (and the money it cost us) was for nothing? Next thing…..the courts!! DADT is going to fall one way or the other. People can surrpess equality for only so long….

  • 18. Bob  |  December 9, 2010 at 6:28 am

    Good, no spending for defense,,,, stop everything, we gotta convince the dems to hold fast on their opportunity to fillibuster , NO to anything the repubs want,,,,,,,,, stop everything……….

  • 19. Sharon Finnegan Terl  |  December 9, 2010 at 6:28 am

    A decision by SCOTUS *can* be reversed by a different SCOTUS, by amending the US Constitution rendering the previous decision unconstitutional, and by cleaving the present SCOTUS's heads in two with an axe thus paving the way for the first scenario to happen. As the last suggestion is decidedly sociopathic, making the first suggestion unlikely, I suggest we work on the second suggestion… :)

  • 20. Lightning Baltimore  |  December 9, 2010 at 6:29 am


  • 21. adambink  |  December 9, 2010 at 6:29 am

    New updates will scroll from the bottom, folks. Collins/Lieberman/Udall will hold a press conference soon.

  • 22. bJason  |  December 9, 2010 at 6:29 am

    It really sucks to be so NOT surprised and still be so disappointed.

    Thanks HRC and Mr. Prez. – you got what you wanted after all.

  • 23. Sharon Finnegan Terl  |  December 9, 2010 at 6:29 am

    Apparently you're not paying attention to Facebook and several other social activism websites…

  • 24. Poison Pero  |  December 9, 2010 at 6:30 am

    I've been in the military and know many current servicemen and allowing gays to be open in the military is a terrible idea. The service chiefs may be ok with it, but they are nothing but politicos. The low-mid level officeres, NCO's and grunts want nothing to do with it, though, and there will be hell to pay if DODT is repealed.

  • 25. Bob  |  December 9, 2010 at 6:31 am

    Ed, it's the republicans who are supressing equality, those who are bought and paid for dollar for dollar they voted the way they were told by the money from busines including the churdh…

    WE ARE THE PEOPLE, we only surpress ourselves if we remain silent now……

    where's the outcry?????

  • 26. Ronnie  |  December 9, 2010 at 6:32 am

    Like I said the RATpublicans choose their selfishness & greed over the well being of the American people…& most of all over the well being of the brave men & women risking their lives for these repugnant paper pushers….GOOD JON "PATRIATES" ….. > ( ….Ronnie

  • 27. bJason  |  December 9, 2010 at 6:32 am

    Maybe they will announce in the presser that they are reintroducing the MREA. Wouldn't that be something?

  • 28. Lauren  |  December 9, 2010 at 6:33 am

    I think you're confused. Review that study by the Pentagon again and see what the majority of military from all ranks wants.

  • 29. Bob  |  December 9, 2010 at 6:34 am

    not soo sadly,,,, that's a good thing, no money for the military, is now a bargaining chip for us, push the Dems to fillibuster any further vote on anything………….

  • 30. Lesbians Love Boies  |  December 9, 2010 at 6:34 am

    Sen. Udall just made a plea for them to stay (even if they have to through christmas) to get the vote done.

  • 31. Eddie  |  December 9, 2010 at 6:36 am

    If you want to live in a world where lying to yourself and others is okay – Go for it. If you want that world you can have it.

  • 32. Ronnie  |  December 9, 2010 at 6:39 am


  • 33. RJS West Hollywood  |  December 9, 2010 at 6:39 am

    Should any of us be surprised by the GOP's intransigence? Take a look back at what the Republicans have stood for: Opposed Social Security, the Civil Rights Acts of 1964, the Voting Rights Act, Medicare, and health insurance for all Americans, and that's just to name a few. All they care about is making it impossible for the federal government to do anything to provide an equal safety net for all Americans. And then they wrap themselves in the flag and call themselves patriots. Shame on them.

  • 34. Bob  |  December 9, 2010 at 6:44 am

    are you clarifying that this is not a social activism website,,,,, please point me to them, any links???

    websites won't actually cut it either, this calls for a riot in the sreets, hope one of those acitivist sites is orgainzing that.

    which brings me to my point, this is so hateful, in most countries individuals wouldn't be orgainzing, they would just congrate with their anger on the streets, the movement would begin from within, and work it's way out…. who's banging on the senate door….. why are no people being dragged off to jail,,,,,,, the politicians and the senate, just pissed on us………and we;re sitting here blogging about it….. oh you poor americans,,,,,,,,,wish you would line up in the streets to look those people in the eye when they leave that building, or in fact block them from doing so,, where is the outrage……. oh right, you always got the courts,,,,,,

    that does nothing about changing the way your elected officials conduct themselves, pandering to themelves and the money,,,,,,,,,,,

  • 35. Peterplumber  |  December 9, 2010 at 6:44 am

    I was in the Army before DADT. They asked. I lied.
    I wish DADT was repealled, and it will be someday. After the old farts are out of congress, maybe.

  • 36. adambink  |  December 9, 2010 at 6:46 am

    Please explain how this is what HRC and the President wanted.

  • 37. wohdin  |  December 9, 2010 at 6:46 am

    Welcome to America.

  • 38. charles m  |  December 9, 2010 at 6:51 am

    I have not understood the optimism on repeal shown here. A few weeks ago the President could have accomplished repeal by doing nothing at all… It seems to me the window was open and is now closed. The next congress will be even worse. Fairness has lost, and a promise has been broken.

    The vote is over and we lost.

    (moved from previous thread, as it belongs here)

  • 39. Repeal Now!  |  December 9, 2010 at 6:51 am

    So would this be Timothy Jay Caruthers Phoenix, AZ | 40 years old? the former Air Force Medic that is now an office manager of a medical clinic?

  • 40. Lesbians Love Boies  |  December 9, 2010 at 6:53 am

    What's DODT?

  • 41. Lightning Baltimore  |  December 9, 2010 at 6:59 am

    Nice blog you have:

    Could it be that homosexuality is actually a learned trait? Could it be these institutions believe they can 'create' homosexuals by teaching their deviancy? I have no doubt this is exactly the case

    Bigotry and hatred are learned traits, Sexuality is inborn. Get over it.

  • 42. Matt  |  December 9, 2010 at 7:03 am

    Normally I'd be happy that DADT is going to finally get the straight up-or-down vote it deserves, free of the politicking, the game-playing, and the attaching-to-other-bills nonsense.

    But at this rate I wouldn't trust a single member of Congress to find their genitals with both hands, let alone get this one passed.

  • 43. Lee777  |  December 9, 2010 at 7:04 am

    is there anyway around this without 60 votes?

  • 44. Lesbians Love Boies  |  December 9, 2010 at 7:05 am

    The courts

  • 45. Lee777  |  December 9, 2010 at 7:09 am

    is it possible that we do it like we did with health care?

  • 46. StraightForEquality  |  December 9, 2010 at 7:10 am

    The Republicans should be hung with a "won't support our troops in time of war" label as they would brand the Democrats if the situation were reversed. They are supposed to be pro-military. I sure hope the Dems make political points on this. If they can do that and DADT can be repealed in a separate bill, then that is a double win.

  • 47. Patrick  |  December 9, 2010 at 7:10 am

    Yes, there is. Judicial "edict" or whatever it is they're trying to avoid. Also known as The Supreme Court will have to overturn DADT and there'll be nothing that the lame duck Congress can do about it.

  • 48. Rhie  |  December 9, 2010 at 7:11 am


  • 49. rocketeer500  |  December 9, 2010 at 7:11 am

    The DADT repeal should have always been a stand-alone bill. It was risky to add it as an amendment.

  • 50. Mackenzie  |  December 9, 2010 at 7:12 am

    I say we push through the stand alone vote, and just say forget the rest of it. Obviously the Repubs want to through a fit about anything and everything, at least this way they no longer have leverage.

  • 51. Alan E.  |  December 9, 2010 at 7:12 am

    Break out the cots. Call their bluff!

    Back to work.

  • 52. NetAmigo  |  December 9, 2010 at 7:13 am

    The courts are the only hope at this point. The courts lately have been very helpful. In fact, Republican appointed judges have often been the leaders in striking down many of these discriminatory laws. The problem here, though, is the Obama administration fights the courts every step of the way.

  • 53. Edie  |  December 9, 2010 at 7:13 am

    I'm so sorry to hear this. I've been following this discussion for quite some time now and yesterday I thought that you had a chance to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell".

    Even though you may be disappointed, please don't be discouraged. This WILL be changed, just like you have changed the things mentioned in RJS West Hollywoods post.

    /The Scandinavian

  • 54. Sagesse  |  December 9, 2010 at 7:15 am

    To quote the ever-articulate sage, Yogi Berra, “it ain`t over til it`s over.` That said, it would be symbolically wonderous if DADT passed as a stand alone bill.

  • 55. charles m  |  December 9, 2010 at 7:15 am


    About the courts- now we have a good appeals court ruling, but it will end up in SCOTUS. It doesn't inspire hope, does it?

    About 'idiots,' I understand the feeling you express, but you are referring to folks who are justifiably upset.

  • 56. fiona64  |  December 9, 2010 at 7:16 am

    Oddly enough, the study (with questionnaires directed at low-mid level officers, NCOs and grunts) determined exactly the opposite of what you state.

    Gosh, I wonder why that would be.

    And why would there be "hell to pay"? Because the homophobes in the service would no longer be able to go gay-bashing?


  • 57. fiona64  |  December 9, 2010 at 7:17 am

    Oh, our little friend TImothy/Poison Pero is worried about "emasculating" the services. Have a look at his "website."

    Why do you feel threatened, Timmy? Afraid that the mere possession of male privates makes you a person of interest to the evil gays?



  • 58. Joe  |  December 9, 2010 at 7:18 am

    Yes. The whole d-mn thing, and for the first time in 58 years it's been blocked. The obstructionism is absolutely unprecedented.

  • 59. fiona64  |  December 9, 2010 at 7:18 am

    I think Timmy is frightened by how hot he found the guys in "300."

    (There's no shame in it, Timmy. This straight gal is right there with ya …)

  • 60. Andrew_SEA  |  December 9, 2010 at 7:21 am

    I agree. If the Reps want a fight – take the dam gloves off and fight dirty.

    Send them a letter all signed by the Dems that if DADT does not get signed, their tax cuts doesn't get signed!

    Now we will have 2 letters, 2 big babies crying for their way – and NOTHING getting done!

    Can we impeach our elected representatives? Give me the dam papers… I will get started! Each and every one of them OUT!

  • 61. Mike  |  December 9, 2010 at 7:27 am

    How EMBARASSING for America. When Mexico City now recognizes gay marriage, how EMBARASSING that US Senators still cannot recognize and vote away blatant discrimination and hate.

  • 62. Anonygrl  |  December 9, 2010 at 7:31 am

    Really? Hell to pay? How do you figure?

  • 63. Repeal Now!  |  December 9, 2010 at 7:32 am

    If anyone wants to know something about this troll, follow this one-

  • 64. Anonygrl  |  December 9, 2010 at 7:34 am

    I am sorry you had to lie. And it will be repealed some day, so that others who follow after you won't have to lie.

  • 65. Jenny  |  December 9, 2010 at 7:37 am

    Congress **especially congress republicans** are being so counter-productive I want to scream. Do they really think blocking every single bill is going to make the public happy with them? Even more important, do they realize how much it's hurting the country in the meantime. Not allowing the Defense Authorization Bill to come to a vote due to petty politics is irresponsible. Plain and simple. I'm disgusted.

  • 66. Lesbians Love Boies  |  December 9, 2010 at 7:38 am

    Just so everyone knows – not everyone in Phoenix (or Arizona) are like this person. Pero points towards the extreme.

    Just sayin'…

  • 67. Straight Ally #3008  |  December 9, 2010 at 7:39 am

    OK friends….I just logged on to see this, and I refuse to process it right now. Just wanted to give a big middle-finger salute to the Senators who are kowtowing to the willfully ignorant, pro-theocracy bigots of the Religious Right. Congratulations, you've kicked it to the court system, which is what Sec. Gates and Adm. Mullen specifically didn't want. You're just such great supporters of the U.S. armed forces, aren't you. Send them out to face snipers and IEDs, but heaven forefend they think another man is looking at their pee-pee. I'll check the vote tally later.

  • 68. bJason  |  December 9, 2010 at 7:42 am

    I'll admit to lashing out a bit. However, I do think that a case could be argued (and has by many) that, while the President has used pretty words, he has done very little overall to make this happen.

    Obama things we could go on for days about:

    1. No stop-loss order issued
    2. He caved on the language of the amendment – not a repeal, no anti-discrimination language (with the help of the HRC)
    3. He at least agreed to the time table for the study (after the mid-terms)
    4. He called the WNBA champs when he should have been calling senators
    5. He's fighting this in court
    To name a few.

    Actions speak louder than words, maybe?

    And as for the HRC: I know that CC is partnering with them in some way now. I hope this speaks well of them. I am trying to remain open. But I have come to see them as rather ineffectual when comparing their budget and standing/”clout”/access against what they actually have accomplished/fought for/taken a stand for on LGBT rights. I don't think they represent ALL LGBT individuals so much as the “A-Gays”. As if our fight is their cash cow. I realize all angles must be covered but they present themselves as the spokes-group for all. Can we please throw (give me two seconds to go and grab this – an easy find) “The Human Rights Campaign is America's largest civil rights organization working to achieve lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender equality. By inspiring and engaging all Americans, HRC strives to end discrimination against LGBT citizens and realize a nation that achieves fundamental fairness and equality for all.” into the “dustbin of history” and “under the bus”???!!!!???

    When we get our rights, "Fashion-Plate Joe" is out of a job. Not in his best interest. Or so it seems to me.

    I'm just sayin'.

    BTW, Adam, thanks for all that you are doing. Seriously.

  • 69. JonT  |  December 9, 2010 at 7:49 am

    Exactly Jason. Pissed off, but not surprised.

    As long as that Muslim Kenyan™ is in office, I expect this to be pretty much SOP for the republican teabaggers going forward.

    You get the shit you vote for, assuming you voted (not you personally) in the first place.

    I must admit, Update 7 from Adam seems interesting…

  • 70. Bob Miller  |  December 9, 2010 at 7:50 am

    trying to figure out what would the vote count needed to pass DADT as a stand alone bill?

    Would it still be the 60-40

  • 71. nightshayde  |  December 9, 2010 at 7:52 am

    Don't Ogle, Don't Tell?

  • 72. bJason  |  December 9, 2010 at 7:52 am

    Force whomever to ACTUALLY filibuster. I don't understand why these lazy asses don't do this. Oh yeah, 'cause they're lazy asses!!!

  • 73. adambink  |  December 9, 2010 at 7:54 am

    Yes. More later.

  • 74. Diane  |  December 9, 2010 at 7:55 am

    Optimist that I am while I see a defeat I also see the numbers, looking back 5-10-15-20 years the numbers wouldn't have been so close.. I consider it a baby step in the right direction an indication of public opinion shifting….

    Now to keep that momentum going in the right direction. 20 years ago I would have laughed in the face of someone who said I could see this shift in my lifetime but now it's here…

  • 75. Patricia Gracian  |  December 9, 2010 at 7:55 am

    It's beyond me, why sites like this- so clearly concerned with this issue- do not include a SET of actions to take to PRESSURE the obstructionist Republicans to vote properly on this matter of great importance!!!!
    You could have included sets of links to the Senate or to specific Senators and their contact numbers like:


  • 76. bJason  |  December 9, 2010 at 7:55 am

    Thank you!!
    Seriously, make them ACTUALLY filibuster!

  • 77. Freddy  |  December 9, 2010 at 7:56 am

    I agree, the republican senators need to be brought up on charges for dereliction of duty, if they were in the armed forces and pulled a stunt like that, they would have been on the carpet in front of the commander. During the next election cycle, people need to be made aware of what the GOP did when there was real work that had to get done. Remind the people that they were the ones that blocked the assistance to the oil platform workers families. Make sure they realize that it was the GOP that blocked the payments to the people afflicted with illness from the 9/11 relief effort. Remind everyone that it was the GOP that continues to increase the deficit. Sorry, another rant, I need to shoot my computer so I don't dwell on the U.S. Government being totally worthless.

  • 78. Freddy  |  December 9, 2010 at 7:58 am

    Adam, the suspense is killing me, make them repeal it now!

  • 79. JonT  |  December 9, 2010 at 8:01 am

    Agreed. Lets go back to real filibustering. Not this lazy shit our rich senators seem to play with.

  • 80. Freddy  |  December 9, 2010 at 8:02 am

    As Bob would say, Call your Senators and demand they vote to repeal DADT!!!!!
    As Rick Jacobs said in a letter, this is what you say.
    Calling your senators is as easy as 1-2-3. And it only takes a few minutes. Just use this sample script below or modify it in your own words:

    Hello, my name is __________ and I'm calling from __________ (city, state).

    I know that the Senate may vote today on the repeal of the military's failed "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy. On behalf of our troops and their families, I'm calling to tell the senator that "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" needs to be repealed before this session of Congress adjourns. This discrimination is wrong and I believe that it is critical that the U.S. Senate bring an end to "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" immediately.

    Will Senator _________ vote to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" today?

    Thank you.

    Then call your other Senator. Then hand the phone to a friend or co-worker and ask them to call.
    Here is a link to the phone numbers

  • 81. JonT  |  December 9, 2010 at 8:03 am

    Wow. Where have you been for the last week. There have been DOZENS of comments, in several posts with links and email addresses of senators. Seriously.

  • 82. Andrew_SEA  |  December 9, 2010 at 8:06 am

    Just thinking out loud, we need to put a face on this.

    Do we have a means to know or understand the number or individuals whom are LGBT service members whom have fallen?

    Putting a face on an issue is usually effective. Couple ideas:

    1) Monument/Memorial. We have Vietnam vets, Korean vets, WWI vets, WWII vets, this vets and that vets, black vets, jewish vets, etc:, etc:. But no LGBT vets? We need a monument for our community just like everyone else! Where we could lay a wreath on the monument for our fallen brothers and sisters and recognize them for the heros that they are even in SILENCE! Recognize their spouses as well for the support and issues they have faced!

    2) Having fallen LGBT partners (if they are willing to be public) holding pictures of their spouses as giving their lives for this country and serving in slience can be very powerful. Or their parents!

    Just the image of LGBT people whom have died for us to be free. March them through the senate halls. Through the large room. Just have them stand in silence.

    Sometimes the best way to instill shame is to have them look into the eyes of fellow Americans and see that truly – ALL are created equal.

    (that is – assuming they can be made ashamed. Some are so filled with religious zealotry, it does not matter what the issue. Their belief system is their belief system)

  • 83. Freddy  |  December 9, 2010 at 8:07 am

    I have to say, I am liking this state, (aside from McLame being my senator now), I went out earlier and recovered my trash can from the end of the driveway and it dawned on me that I could be laying out working on my tan (and it does need work) I mean really, 75 and sunny in December?

  • 84. Lesbians Love Boies  |  December 9, 2010 at 8:07 am

    What I find truly sad is constituent's short-term memories. Politicians always come up with some do-good-to-change-the-public-perception just before the vote.

    Last year everyone in AZ was talking about ousting/removing/voting out McCain – he's done virtually nothing for AZ during his terms. But he got on Gov. Brewer's witch hunt bandwagon and suddenly he's a hero.


  • 85. bJason  |  December 9, 2010 at 8:12 am

    It has BEEN the MO of the rePUBaggers for a while now. It amazes me that more people don't see that. I could send my 10 year old nephew into a group of people just to say "NO".
    If my boss sent a coworker out with me and said "do that" and we returned to my coworker saying "I tried, but he said NO" my boss would fire me! How do they not "get fired"???

    I do vote. :) But you are right.

    Rule 14 sounds good to me!!

  • 86. Freddy  |  December 9, 2010 at 8:20 am

    OK, so does anyone know of the conversion rate from "dollars" to "hell", I think we could take up a collection from all that want to see this repealed, just let us know who we remit payment to.

  • 87. Gregory in Salt Lake  |  December 9, 2010 at 8:26 am

    bring it on! Oh wait! the court already ruled its unconstitutional….

  • 88. Chris in Lathrop  |  December 9, 2010 at 8:27 am

    Untruth, injustice and the Republican way.

  • 89. Jeffrey Weekley  |  December 9, 2010 at 8:30 am

    Imagine if all the gay, lesbian, and bisexual service members all made official statements of their homosexuality? There are an estimated 60,000 of them! They are in health care, intelligence, logistics, special forces and combat roles of all kinds.

    The military would then have to confront this brazen hypocrisy and discrimination.

  • 90. TAS  |  December 9, 2010 at 8:32 am

    Andrew_SEA makes a great point. For the commenters, Courage has posted videos of several LGBT vets and straight allies here:, and you can check out the comments of many vets about this policy here:

    Naturally, if you know of anyone who wants to post a video or share their story, this is a great place to do it.

  • 91. Gregory in Salt Lake  |  December 9, 2010 at 8:37 am


  • 92. Gregory in Salt Lake  |  December 9, 2010 at 8:41 am

    that would be AWESOME!

  • 93. Steve  |  December 9, 2010 at 8:42 am

    Technically, it's mostly the Senate that gets nothing done. The House decides hundreds of things only for them to die in the Senate.

  • 94. Mouse  |  December 9, 2010 at 8:43 am

    Hell is imaginary. It doesn't exist. Therefore having to pay hell means having to pay nothing except crazy made up nonsense that exists to scare people who are too lazy to think for themselves and get them to do what we tell them to.

  • 95. Bob  |  December 9, 2010 at 8:48 am

    right on, call your senator, DON'T ASK TELL THEM TO REPEAL DADT NOW, and even more, march on washington,
    when you tell them to repeal DADT, tell them to refuse any vote of any kind until it's done..

    this is not something to be fucked with, they need to end discrimination NOW if they do not stand for ending discrimination,,,,,,, they no longer act on behalf of American values,

    Yes, this has been happening yesterday, and today again, and tomorrow if necessary, but I also think it requires the people to take to the streets,,,,,,

    wouldn't they feel the pressure if t.v. screens were filled with angry people demonstrating in the streets of America,,,

    Greg, you posted a great video on the thread of 62,000 reasons, maybe you could repost it here,,,,, those advocates in the streets stated point blank, no one has ever gotten equality without fighting for it……..

    Thanks Adam for whatever it is (the skinny) you;re working on re the repeal process left to pursue…

    It's so great if they detach that from the defense bill, cause if they vote no on a separate issuue of repeal, we got them by the balls,

    and for however it was that said they couldn't trust their congressperson to find their balls with both hands, I say, what about the people who can't find their way to the senate door or even their own street to raise a rucus,,,,

    if this doesn't happen now, it's gonna happen another way, but it's gonna happen,,, may as well put our shoulders together and press forward right NOW…..

  • 96. Mouse  |  December 9, 2010 at 8:50 am

    Also, the Republicans – like NOM – aren't hindered with the truth when it comes to getting votes.

    If you embrace evil, you can be a destructive force of nature, but leave it to your PR guy to blame the other side for your fall out.

    They aren't concerned with things like honor, they are only concerned with things that pay them well.

  • 97. bJason  |  December 9, 2010 at 8:51 am

    That would be awesome. However, I could not in good conscience ask these brave people to further risk their livelihoods in such an economic time.

    They have been fighting for us. We should fight for them!! And not just sitting here bitching (of which I am doing a great deal). I don't run the risk of losing my job if I stand up and make noise. I could, at the very minimum, do that for them.

    When/where is/are the protests?

    It is time for us to get off our asses!!!

  • 98. Bob  |  December 9, 2010 at 8:52 am

    hey Peterplumber, thanks for the comment, are you still IN the army???

  • 99. Bob  |  December 9, 2010 at 8:56 am

    wow bJason, you said exactly what I was thinking, what about allies standing up,,,,,, right now,,,,,,it might encourage some of them,,,,


    GREAT QUESTION,,,,, HOW ABOUT IF EVERYONE WENT TO THEIR LOCAL LGBT CENTRE FOR STARTERS,,,,,,, just get off the butt and out the door,,,,, instinct will take over…

    this is not a time to sit idle,,,,,, wonder who else would be in the street…. or knocking on the senate dooor……

  • 100. Bennett  |  December 9, 2010 at 8:59 am

    "People are starting to look more and more at those 2nd ammendment remedies." – Sharon Angle

  • 101. Freddy  |  December 9, 2010 at 9:00 am

    Bob, right now I just want to crawl into a bottle and drown my sorrows. To see this transpire in front of me is stressful and I don't know if I can watch anymore, to actually watch the vote process and see the senators vote away my freedom like it does not matter is something that for some reason, I don't want to miss but at the same time, I don't want to see any more. Oh well, I guess I will have to continue to wait. Thanks for your support.

  • 102. JonT  |  December 9, 2010 at 9:00 am

    Hmmm. Maybe that's a tack we could use. Since SCOTUS says corporations can spend unlimited money in elections now…

    Maybe we need a Google or Microsoft to offer 1 million dollars to every senator that votes yes on repeal.

    Yeah, that's the ticket!

    /sarcasm :)

  • 103. Bennett  |  December 9, 2010 at 9:02 am

    Give e an F. Give me an I. Give me and A. Give me a T. Whats that spell?

  • 104. JonT  |  December 9, 2010 at 9:04 am

    The problem with dumbasses like Angle is that they forget that we have guns too. :)

    I am *so* glad she lost.

  • 105. NetAmigo  |  December 9, 2010 at 9:20 am

    Who were the three not voting? I really have that nagging skepticism about why Reid brought this for vote before the tax bill was finalized.

  • 106. bJason  |  December 9, 2010 at 9:22 am

    Really, if we won't get off our own asses, how can we ask others (courts, legislature, executive, service members, HRC, etc) to get off their asses??? We just look stupid.

    We hear people say we are asking for "special" rights. From now on, I am going to take that to mean "rights I won't go out and get for myself". When viewed in that way, I look kind of whiny. That sucks. I'm not whiny.

    If we won't go out and get them ourselves, we should STFU asking others to give them to us.

    Is it time YET to demand our rights?

  • 107. Gregory in Salt Lake  |  December 9, 2010 at 9:26 am

    Done (the video) ! see further down in the comments

  • 108. Ray in MA  |  December 9, 2010 at 9:30 am

    No intelligence exposed here also:

  • 109. Gregory in Salt Lake  |  December 9, 2010 at 9:32 am

    Worth a watch! VERY powerful messages…watch to the end ! Love, Gregory (and Bob, who requested re-post it)

  • 110. fiona64  |  December 9, 2010 at 9:48 am

    Lousy design aesthetic: red type on blue background = painful to read.


  • 111. adambink  |  December 9, 2010 at 10:07 am

    See uphthread. Brownback, Cornyn, Lincoln. Lincoln has since announced she would have voted yes. The other two are definite no's.

  • 112. Kate  |  December 9, 2010 at 10:08 am

    Lincoln preferred going to the dentist to showing up to vote.

  • 113. adambink  |  December 9, 2010 at 10:12 am

    I read your entire comment, and what you seem to be saying is (a) Obama has taken the wrong advice from military leaders/legal counsel (b) He has also done a poor job advocating on this issue (c) As has HRC. Correct me if I'm wrong.

    If I had more time I would respond to all of that, but the only thing I would say is that those points are a continent's distance from "you got what you wanted after all." I just think it's important to be careful impugning bad motives.That's all.

    But thank you for the kind words, I appreciate them.

  • 114. Jenny  |  December 9, 2010 at 10:18 am

    I don't really see how putting the DADT repeal as a free-standing bill will change anything. Won't they still have to overcome the inevitable filibuster that Republicans will put up. Since they've all agreed to not allow anything to come to a vote until they get their tax cuts, there still won't be 60 votes- even with Sen Collins. Do they think other Republicans will go against the letter?

  • 115. Master David Goodmen  |  December 9, 2010 at 10:28 am

    Just tell them:
    You got it wrong, dude! You have a special right—I want equal rights! If you are against equal rights, then you are against the Constitution, and are UnAmerican. Why you believe you should have special rights is unimportant—equality is what is important!

  • 116. Master David Goodmen  |  December 9, 2010 at 10:41 am

    It spells "fiat". "Fiat" means "by order of the government".

    Great name for an automobile, bad reality for cash.

  • 117. Mackenzie  |  December 9, 2010 at 10:50 am

    I am not sure if every bill has to have 60 votes o proceed or just certain ones. I am interested in the answer to your question though.

  • 118. Evelyn J. Brooks  |  December 9, 2010 at 10:56 am


  • 119. Alex Gill-Gerards  |  December 9, 2010 at 10:58 am

    Mackenzie we really only need 51 votes to pass a bill in the senate but it seems the Republicans have changed that mark by filibustering anything. Which then means we need 60 votes to break a filibuster to pass a bill.

  • 120. Mackenzie  |  December 9, 2010 at 11:05 am

    Yeah I was not sure. Though I guess where we do stand a chance is after/if the Senate passes the extension for tax cuts. At that point those "beholden" to voting no to move on any other bill will no longer have that excuse. That should allows the remaining Senators….the few repubs that support it to vote in favor of bringing the motion to a final vote. In which case there would be no need for days of debate. It would still have to be passed by the house, but that would be the easy part. In reality this could work more to our benefit that the Defense bill because there really won't be a need for a joint committee to decide anything. It either passes or it doesn't.

    I wasn't sure though if there would be an alternate way around the filibuster, like we saw with the healthcare bill though.

  • 121. Kathleen  |  December 9, 2010 at 11:14 am

    The greatest talent the Republicans possess is their ability to get the average citizen to vote against his/her own best interest. I'm always in awe of the degree to which they manage this.

  • 122. Kathleen  |  December 9, 2010 at 11:22 am

    And I wonder what we have to look forward to when the Repubs take the House in Jan.

  • 123. Tigger  |  December 9, 2010 at 11:27 am

    Its only people's lives, jobs, and careers that hang in the balance of their "amendment" cat fight…. :(

  • 124. Kathleen  |  December 9, 2010 at 11:29 am

    HUGS for Freddy.

  • 125. Kathleen  |  December 9, 2010 at 11:42 am

    And there's Stuart Gafney (brother of Ann S) and his husband John Lewis! (@2:40)

  • 126. Kathleen  |  December 9, 2010 at 11:43 am

    Oops typo – Stuart Gaffney.

  • 127. MJFargo  |  December 9, 2010 at 11:45 am

    So "a house divided against itself cannot stand?" What about a house that can't do anything but keep from taxing the rich?

  • 128. Michael Ejercito  |  December 9, 2010 at 11:48 am

    I wonder if limiting the statutory authority to expel servicemen for homosexual behavior would be easier than fully repealing it.

    A possible reform would be to authorize discharges on the basis of homosexual behavior only if the behavior involved force, prostitution, minors, or public behavior, was otherwise prejudicial to discipline and good order, or otherwise brought discredit upon the armed forces. Furthermore, discharges on this basis must be approved by someone who has the authority to convene a general court-martial, and an admission of a homosexual orientation should not be considered as evidence that the serviceman had engaged in homosexual behavior. The fence sitters are concerned with the effect the proposed repeal would have on military discipline, and scaling back DADT in this manner would address those concerns.

    The very first successful; court challenge against a discharge on the basis of homosexuality (Meinhold v. United States Department of Defense) was decided on the basis that the Navy exceeded its statutory authority by discharging the plaintiff on the basis of an admission of a homosexual orientation.

  • 129. Kate  |  December 9, 2010 at 11:54 am

    Discharges for those behaviors should apply universally to all service members. Discharge for force, prostitution, minors, etc., ought to apply to everyone, gay or straight. They're already illegal.

  • 130. Straight Ally #3008  |  December 9, 2010 at 11:54 am

    A possible reform would be to authorize discharges on the basis of homosexual behavior only if the behavior involved force, prostitution, minors, or public behavior, was otherwise prejudicial to discipline and good order, or otherwise brought discredit upon the armed forces.

    No reform would even be required; everyone has to adhere to standards of professional conduct, regardless of sexual orientation. Too many people – even friends of mine – have this image of "serving openly" meaning converting the barracks to a traveling performance of La Cage Aux Folles.

  • 131. Straight Ally #3008  |  December 9, 2010 at 11:56 am

    Only if there is a threat of a filibuster from the minority party. However, this is being used far more often these days than in used to be (if anyone has the stats handy, please share them).

  • 132. Ronnie  |  December 9, 2010 at 11:56 am

    Go f@#k yourself you un-American piece of ungrateful trash…you don't deserve the freedoms the men & women of our army have risked their lives for…PIG!!!!…..FASCIST!!… > ( ….Ronnie

  • 133. Michael Ejercito  |  December 9, 2010 at 12:03 pm

    I agree.

  • 134. Michael Ejercito  |  December 9, 2010 at 12:08 pm

    No reform would even be required; everyone has to adhere to standards of professional conduct, regardless of sexual orientation.

    Under the current law, mere admission of a homosexual orientation is sufficient for a discharge.

    That portion of the law should be repealed.

  • 135. Ann S.  |  December 9, 2010 at 12:09 pm

    OMG, watching that — especially the very end — made my cry. Again.

  • 136. Ann S.  |  December 9, 2010 at 12:12 pm

    At last, something we can agree on.

    But if you think that would be sufficient, then we don't agree. I fear that many of those in control of the military still think that all homosexual conduct brings "discredit upon the armed forces".

  • 137. adambink  |  December 9, 2010 at 12:34 pm

    Jenny, I replied to this comment in the next post.

  • 138. adambink  |  December 9, 2010 at 12:35 pm

    I'm not sure who this is directed at, but please keep things civil in the comments. Time spent moderating is less time I can spend updating posts and working on repeal. Thanks all.

  • 139. Kate  |  December 9, 2010 at 12:36 pm

    Wonders never cease!

  • 140. Kathleen  |  December 9, 2010 at 12:40 pm

    I know. It's powerful stuff. Hugs.

  • 141. Ronnie  |  December 9, 2010 at 12:50 pm

    I have tried to be civil to this Ejercito guy…but I have just about had it with his disrespect & un-patriatism towards our LGBT Soldiers that he has displayed over & over again….sorry for the harsh words but it needed to be said…. <3…Ronnie

  • 142. Gregory in Salt Lake  |  December 9, 2010 at 12:59 pm

    I thought for certain some here were witness to this event in person : ) ..made me cry (again) too ….

  • 143. Richard A. Jernigan  |  December 9, 2010 at 1:04 pm

    Will read this in more detail later. Right now I am too damned steamed over this piece of idiocy and hostage-taking on the part of the people who are supposed to be representing US!

  • 144. Carpool Cookie  |  December 9, 2010 at 2:19 pm

    "A possible reform would be to authorize discharges on the basis of homosexual behavior only if the behavior involved force, prostitution, minors, or public behavior, was otherwise prejudicial to discipline and good order, or otherwise brought discredit upon the armed forces"

    Kind of creepy trying to tie all these criminal activities to gays and lesbians. Don't think that's really the image we're looking for, but thanks for sharing…(?)

  • 145. Lightning Baltimore  |  December 9, 2010 at 2:23 pm

    He appears to be on our side on this one, Ronnie.

  • 146. Ronnie  |  December 9, 2010 at 2:59 pm

    not entirely….

    "A possible reform would be to authorize discharges on the basis of homosexual behavior only if the behavior involved…..public behavior"

    in other words…you can be Gay just don't show it…don't talk about it……It is an underhanded insult that falls under "stay in the closet"…..besides that…..I don't forgive & forget easily…He has repeatedly disrespected our soldiers who are serving in silence as well as those who have been discharged under an unconstitutional & un-American law…He is an ingrate….<3…Ronnie

  • 147. Rhie  |  December 9, 2010 at 3:02 pm

    Well, yea. The Reps know that the Senate won't actually vote on bills or will veto bills. It's safe for them to vote for something because it won't matter. They can get credit without risk. They can go home to their districts and say "I voted for X in the House but the Senate wouldn't vote!" if they are in friendly territory. If they aren't they can simply not mention it since their vote didn't do anything anyway.

    I will bet that if the Senate does start getting things passed, we'll see more things get snarled in the House, no matter who is in the majority.

    Yes, this is very cynical. But then, this is DC we are talking about.

  • 148. Rhie  |  December 9, 2010 at 3:04 pm

    What about the 1st Amendment remedies of protests and investigative journalism? More damaging in the long run, too.

  • 149. Rhie  |  December 9, 2010 at 3:35 pm

    Well, with the current Republicans in the Senate, it's every vote. Originally, the filibuster was to be used sparingly for special occasion votes of weight. The Republicans have been using it for EVERYthing. So, every vote needs 60 – and we have it for DADT repeal.

    Despite what the movies show, they don't actually have to stand and do anything or say anything for a filibuster. They just have to file paperwork. Sometimes people will stand and talk for drama, but it's not necessary. There is a senator who is pushing for a filibuster reform that would make it necessary for a person to stand and talk. I hope it passes.

  • 150. Top Posts — WordPre&hellip  |  December 9, 2010 at 4:09 pm

    [...] BREAKING: Repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” blocked in Senate vote By Adam Bink [...]

  • 151. Why repeal of “Don&&hellip  |  December 9, 2010 at 6:55 pm

    [...] of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” this afternoon by a vote of 57-40 (more in this thread here), Sens. Lieberman, Collins, and Mark Udall have announced they would move a stand-alone bill [...]

  • 152. Sagesse  |  December 9, 2010 at 10:11 pm

    Succinct and to the point

    DADT didn't fail. The Senate did.

  • 153. Sagesse  |  December 9, 2010 at 10:15 pm

    DADT repeal failure: next steps

  • 154. BK  |  December 9, 2010 at 10:20 pm

    I think Bob may be describing how normal, everyday people might not see this issue in their daily lives. After all, we here are *already* enraged over this stuff. It's other people, who likely don't know about this issue, who we would try to reach and educate.

  • 155. Sagesse  |  December 9, 2010 at 10:20 pm

    'Don't ask, don't tell' vote fails: Reaction

  • 156. BREAKING: Senate Rejects &hellip  |  December 10, 2010 at 1:38 am

    [...] The Courage Campaign has a semi-transcript of their exchange. [...]

  • 157. Richard A. Jernigan  |  December 10, 2010 at 3:52 am

    Also, the behaviors you cite would also give someone a way to destroy someone's career simply because he or she did not like a particular individual in their unit. And while discharges based on these crimes should not be limited to one particular sexual orientation or another, we all know how the "sodomy" statutes were used. They were supposedly written to apply to any couple, but were used exclusively against LGBT individuals. The only reform that will truly be reform is to totally REPEAL DADT.

  • 158. 57-40 #DADTFAIL | America&hellip  |  December 10, 2010 at 4:07 am

    [...] the vote. COllins ultimately flipped to an “aye,” but it was ultimately not enough: BREAKING: Repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” blocked in Senate vote [...]

  • 159. Peterplumber  |  December 10, 2010 at 4:26 am

    No, I was OUT before DADT became policy. I was in when if you were gay, you had to lie. The question appeared several time on my application for military service.

  • 160. Gay Hater  |  December 10, 2010 at 3:01 pm

    Why does everyone blame religion for hate? Atheists would love some of that glory!

    HATE HATE HATE!!! Atheist America!

    Faggots are nasty!!

  • 161. Anonygrl  |  December 10, 2010 at 3:49 pm

    What a sad little person you are.

    I am afraid the only thing nasty around here is you.

  • 162. Dave in ME  |  December 10, 2010 at 10:21 pm

    The best thing to do with people like this guy who are itching for a fight is to ignore them.

    So, anonygrl, any plans for the weekend? I'm going to bake cookies, do laundry, go the gym, then church on Sunday and all day with my boyfriend to do nothing but antique shopping and tv watching!

    Dave in Maine

  • 163. Ronnie  |  December 10, 2010 at 10:54 pm

    Hitler wannabe….. : / ….Ronnie

  • 164. Ronnie  |  December 10, 2010 at 10:56 pm

    You're the nasty one as well as heartless, soulless, inhuman, & un-American….Hate is not an American value….

    P.S….there are no cigarettes around here so get a life loser…. : / ….Ronnie

  • 165. Ronnie  |  December 10, 2010 at 10:57 pm

    TROLL!!!!!!…… : / …..Ronnie

  • 166. Richard A. Jernigan  |  December 10, 2010 at 11:02 pm

    Hello, Adolph! which of your rights would you like to have everyone in America vote on next? And WRT your comment about blaming the atheists for homophobia, I would like to request that you stop insulting the rest of the atheists for your hate-filled attitude.

  • 167. Richard A. Jernigan  |  December 10, 2010 at 11:09 pm

    Actually, the fewer gays there are in
    America, the MORE child molestation there will be. Why don't you examine the honest statistics about child molestation. 98% of those who molest children identify as straight. Child molestation is another term for rape, and is nothing more than a power play by an adult who feels so powerless and weak that the only way he can feel any sense of power is to prey upon victims that they perceive as weaker than they are. Even those who are in prison for raping children will tell you that it had nothing to do with the gender of the victim, it was all about the weakness of the victim in comparison to themselves that provoked the attack. You claim to be an atheist, but you are proving yourself to be a member of the radical, pseudo-religious, CINO right wing who want us to live under theocratic rule.

  • 168. Richard A. Jernigan  |  December 10, 2010 at 11:10 pm

    Actually, bigots are nastier than homosexuals. At least we know what love really means, and what it means to commit to someone for our entire lives. That is more than I can say for you, you ignorant, mindless teenaged POSL!

  • 169. adambink  |  December 11, 2010 at 12:52 am

    While P8TT, unlike NOM's site, is open to all those who wish to offer reasoned and intellectually sound arguments of all stripes, hate speech is not tolerated. You are therefore now banned.

  • 170. Rhie  |  December 11, 2010 at 12:14 pm

    Exactly. The most common misconception I've found when talking with others is that they think it is just about sex. They get it once I explain it's much more than that. I tell them this:

    "Imagine that when you are at work you couldn't make friends with anyone because they might find out you have a partner.

    Imagine that you couldn't wear your wedding ring or any piece of meaningful jewelry at work.

    Imagine that you had to lie and say you were single or remember to change the gender of your partner every single time you talked about your relationship.

    Imagine that you had to hold yourself in while you heard others talk about how horrible a relationship like yours is, lest the guess you are in one.

    Imagine that you couldn't bring your kids to work, or introduce them to your coworkers because they might tell your secret.

    Imagine that you couldn't bring your partner to any work function, and had to watch other happy couples there.

    Imagine that you couldn't bring your partner to any restaurant, movie theatre, park, play, or other public place near your work or home because you might be spotted.

    Imagine that every time you went out with your partner you were scanning the crowd, hoping not to see a familiar face.

    Imagine that every time you were told to talk to your superior your stomach knotted, wondering if this was your last day.

    THAT is what DADT does. THAT is why it needs repeal.

  • 171. Rhie  |  December 11, 2010 at 12:18 pm

    I am watching an Indiana Jones marathon on TV right now. I was doing dishes and general kitchen cleaning earlier today.

    What kind of cookies are you going to bake?

  • 172. Rhie  |  December 11, 2010 at 12:20 pm

    Thanks! Sensible moderators for the gay or straight ever loving WIN!

  • 173. NOGAYS  |  December 13, 2010 at 2:18 am

    FUCK GAYS!!! I say NO to God & the nasty faggots!

    Please get blown up in Iraq!!! Everyone is sick and tired of you faggot parades in San Francisco.

    I egged a faggot's house yesterday!!!! hahahahaha

    hate is love and love is hate. it's in great? =)

  • 174. Ronnie  |  December 13, 2010 at 2:20 am

    TROLL!!!!!!!!……… 8 / …..Ronnie

Leave a Comment


(required), (Hidden)

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

TrackBack URL  |  RSS feed for comments on this post.

Having technical problems? E-mail equalityontrial AT couragecampaign DOT org for assistance!