Skip to main content

Today a group of progressive and LGBT blogs are having a blog swarm aimed at getting the Human Rights Campaign directly involved in the push to get the White House to repeal Don't Ask Don't Tell this year.

AMERICAblog's Joe Sudbay explains:

Besides us, these blogs are also participating: Pam Spaulding, Pam's House Blend, Michelangelo Signorile, Sirius OutQ & the Gist, Markos Moulitsas [mcjoan on behalf of Markos], DailyKos. Andy Towle, TowleRoad, Joe Jervis, Joe My God, Bil Browning & Phil Reese, Bilerico, Taylor Marsh, TaylorMarsh.com and Dan Savage, Slog

We need leadership from the White House to get the repeal of DADT. The President can include repeal language in the Defense budget he sends to Capitol Hill. There's still time for that. In addition, Servicemembers United have crafted a repeal plan that would meet the needs of all the key players. If Obama wants the repeal in his budget, the Senate Armed Services Chair, Carl Levin, can include the language in his Committee's Defense Authorization bill. That way, the repeal can be moved in a way that doesn't require overcoming a 60-vote filibuster. It can be done. It should be done.

Michelangelo Signorile on why now:

As you know, the president said in his state of the union that he'd "work to repeal" DADT "this year," and Defense Secretary Gates and Admiral Mullen backed repeal but announced yet another study, which will take a year.

We do not have a year to wait and there is no need for another study. Democrats and supporters of repeal will lose seats this fall. We have momentum now, but it is being lost and there is no leadership on repealing the policy now. And if it is not repealed now it may be years away. There is no reason why, as Barney Frank as said, and as I and other opinion makers have stated, that we cannot have a vote now. The repeal can be pending the completion of the study. The repeal can be added as an amendment onto the Defense Authorization bill. It will be summer by the time that is voted on, and the study completion will then be just a few months away.

We must have a vote before the fall, but the Democratic-controlled Congress doesn't move on anything without leadership from the Democratic president. The White House has been vague, saying it is waiting until Congress passes a bill. That's unacceptable. We need leadership from the president.

Pam Spaulding explains why the HRC is key to this effort.

The largest LBGT organization in the country, the Human Rights Campaign -- with nearly a million members, according to president and executive director Joe Solmonese -- is seen by the White House, Congress, and the mainstream media as the community's official representative inside the Beltway. HRC had the ear of the White House -- attending strategy meetings on LGBT policy, and appeared numerous times at public social and political events, such as the signing of the hate crimes bill....

Tax-paying LGBTs have pulled out their wallets for the Human Rights Campaign for years, waiting for the day their investment would result in action once a gay-friendly administration and Congress were finally in place. Now is the time time to act. We need the full force of HRC flexing its political muscle to call for the President to publicly press for repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell.

And Dan Savage adds the why the netroots part of the equation:

Now maybe you need "radicals"—like these dangerous bomb-throwers—to scare politicians and "safer" groups and more "moderate" leaders in D.C. that politicians believe that they can work with. But there are times when the entire movement—the supposed "radicals" and our "moderate" leaders—need to speak with one voice. This is one of those times. We have an opportunity to end an injustice—and for the president to fulfill one of his campaign promises—but it's not going to happen if the Democrat in the White House and the Democrats on Capitol Hill think they can get away with punting on this issue—punting on another one our issues—indefinitely....

               

It's time. It's time to this discriminatory, counterproductive, and damaging policy. Doing so isn't even controversial anymore particularly within the military. It's time. Call the HRC and ask them to get on board. Ask them to publicly demand that President Obama take the lead in getting DADT repealed this year.

HRC Front Desk: (202) 628-4160
TTY: (202) 216-1572
Toll-Free: (800) 777-4723

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Tue Feb 16, 2010 at 08:30 AM PST.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Dream on..Would be great but will not happen..! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    emsprater

    Too much excess baggage to not ask, pay for or tell about..

    "Course I'm respectable. I'm old. Politicians, ugly buildings, and whores all get respectable if they last long enough." Noah Cross - Chinatown

    by LakePipes on Tue Feb 16, 2010 at 08:32:41 AM PST

  •  YES! Yes yes yes! (9+ / 0-)

    Anything we can do besides call? I stutter a lot so calling is difficult.

    But really I'll do what I have to do.

    "Everybody lies... except POLITICIANS? House, I do believe you are a romantic."

    by indiemcemopants on Tue Feb 16, 2010 at 08:34:33 AM PST

  •  Oh, THAT HRC... (6+ / 0-)

    "I'm not sorry that you destroyed our middle class by voting against your interests and mine just to keep the gay out of your Jesus." - MoT

    by stunzeed on Tue Feb 16, 2010 at 08:34:53 AM PST

  •  A year long review, gotcha. (5+ / 0-)

    The administration has just put this out of reach for another several years without appearing to actively kill it.  In a year we will have a less friendly if not downright hostile Congress.  Our fierce advocate strikes again...

    No politician ever lost an election by underestimating the intelligence of the American public. PT Barnum, paraphrased...

    by jarhead5536 on Tue Feb 16, 2010 at 08:36:11 AM PST

    •  Right and folks like Lt Choi are being called (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      GN1927, emsprater

      back to active duty in the mean time because Obama doesn't want this policy to end? There may not be a better time to get rid of this policy. I'm sure Obama is playing this politically. He'll have deniability if it passes (gee, I really didn't push for it but SO many people were against I had to do something) or fails (gee, I really tried to kill it but even the HRC didn't ask me to end it).

      I stand by the truth, that way I don't have to be near any Republicans.

      by ontheleftcoast on Tue Feb 16, 2010 at 08:45:54 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  I see the carrot, but we will feel the stick for (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Clarknt67

      decades..What a cynical ploy this whole DADT thingy was..Dont place us among the dumb and dumber

      "Course I'm respectable. I'm old. Politicians, ugly buildings, and whores all get respectable if they last long enough." Noah Cross - Chinatown

      by LakePipes on Tue Feb 16, 2010 at 08:46:38 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Repeal can, and should precede review (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      craigkg

      No reason the repeal can't happen soon and scheduled a year hence. Gates's says it's not a review of "if" but "how." It's a compromise I'd endorse.  

      "I've always depended on the kindness of corporations." --Blanche Lincoln, D-Wal Mart

      by Scott Wooledge on Tue Feb 16, 2010 at 10:05:58 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  we're just silly progressives, (7+ / 0-)

    the White House doesn't consider us adults. And the HRC can't be tarnished by associating with mere bloggers.

    Sign our petition- http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/honor-eudy-simelame-corrective-rape-victims-at-the-2010-fifa-world- cup-in-south-africa

    by tnichlsn on Tue Feb 16, 2010 at 08:37:41 AM PST

  •  On this ,although it is HRC (11+ / 0-)

    I'll be shocked if they put down the martini glasses and actually do some work for the cause they allegedly advocate for.

    (engaging in stereotypes? Well, they do that all by themselves.)

    Or, I'll go support the work at Lambda Legal and the Courage Campaign instead.

    BlackKos Tu/Fri. It could be worse for progressives. We could be in Port-au-Prince.

    by terrypinder on Tue Feb 16, 2010 at 08:39:32 AM PST

  •  HRC (10+ / 0-)

    Ugh.  Ok, I'll call.  But they are a big, worthless money-sucker.

    "To be afraid is to behave as if the truth were not true." -- Bayard Rustin

    by Joelarama on Tue Feb 16, 2010 at 08:41:43 AM PST

  •  I'll give them a call, but (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    craigkg, emsprater, nokkonwud, jpmassar

    I don't expect the HRC to really do anything.  I've been sorely disappointed with them for a few years now.

    Passed the NY Bar! On my way to becoming a lawyer.

    by AUBoy2007 on Tue Feb 16, 2010 at 08:42:56 AM PST

  •  Why? Given the progressive dislike of HRC (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Pd, BehrHunter

    ...why not leave them out of the loop?  I don't see how including them will hasten a positive policy outcome, and it just throws them a lifeline they appear not to deserve.

    Enrich your life with adverbs!

    by Rich in PA on Tue Feb 16, 2010 at 08:45:22 AM PST

  •  Better chance of being killed by a Swarm of (0+ / 0-)

    Killer Bees than this DADT ever passing..
    Hey, how about a Executive Order...? ?
    Hahahaa

    "Course I'm respectable. I'm old. Politicians, ugly buildings, and whores all get respectable if they last long enough." Noah Cross - Chinatown

    by LakePipes on Tue Feb 16, 2010 at 08:50:30 AM PST

  •  There are too many HCRs... (0+ / 0-)

    When I read the headline, I first thought, "Get health care reform on board? That makes no sense." And then I thought, of course, get Hillary Rodham Clinton on board, since she is Sec. State and all. Then I realized what we were talking about here -- when I actually started reading. This is why we need to pass health care reform. We need to remove an HCR from the equation.

  •  Wait, wait, wait! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    craigkg, emsprater

    Why is it gays have to wait for equal rights?  They serve in the military and always have.  Repeal the policy now by adding it on as an amendment to the denfense Authorization bill.  And like Truman integrating the military, why can't President Obama sign an executive order to have the Pentagon and Congress move quicker?  Decency and public opinion require swiftness.

  •  More false narratives (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Glen Maxey, thoughtful3

    That POTUS hasn't made progress towards GLBT rights, including signing landmark hate crimes laws, and having a historical number of GLBT presidential appointees, including the first ever transexual woman, and straight into reversing the Bush administration's reading of DOMA in order to allow GLBTs who consider themselves married to mark themselves as such on the census after which this information will be reported.

    But blogs need to "push" the WH on something.

    climate.gov---POTUS' New Science-Based Climate Change Agency

    by GN1927 on Tue Feb 16, 2010 at 09:03:48 AM PST

    •  With the exception of the hate crimes law... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      GN1927

      I personally feel those are all relatively minor.

      I'd like not to be able to be fired JUST for being gay.
      I'd like for my GLBT brethren to be able to serve in the military openly, to be able to get married to the person they love...

      Y'know, the same things any straight American can do.  That's all.

      I voted for Obama because I felt he would do use the bully pulpit to pass these things, and now he's not.  I am disappointed.

      "I hope they'll know that fools with megaphones or runny mouths just don't count." - Donal Og Cusack

      by Texas Blue Dot on Tue Feb 16, 2010 at 12:29:02 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Well, I don't want to tell someone (0+ / 0-)

        else how they have to feel or not feel in terms of disappointment.  But I do think that there's a tendency to under-report about what has been accomplished, because people think that giving credit for what has been done will stop more from being done.  I personally think that applauding progress even while advocating for more is the better idea, Texas.

        climate.gov---POTUS' New Science-Based Climate Change Agency

        by GN1927 on Tue Feb 16, 2010 at 01:28:08 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  The problem here is that (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          GN1927

          we have an opportunity right now with a majority in both houses and it is being squandered.

          The diarists' point is valid, in that what is supposed to be the largest GLBT advocacy group on the country is NOT advocating for more in the way that its membership would like it to do.

          "I hope they'll know that fools with megaphones or runny mouths just don't count." - Donal Og Cusack

          by Texas Blue Dot on Tue Feb 16, 2010 at 01:38:49 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

  •  On thing I have to wonder about ... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    craigkg

    in regards to HRC's role.

    You quote:

    seen by the White House, Congress, and the mainstream media as the community's official representative inside the Beltway. HRC had the ear of the White House -- attending strategy meetings on LGBT policy, and appeared numerous times at public social and political events, such as the signing of the hate crimes bill....

    but given how things have gone since even before the inauguration, one has to wonder if HRC has the 'ear of the White House' just why did they either choose or get assigned the 'tone deaf' ear, and why did the HRC assign someone fluent only in ASL to 'talk' to that ear?

    I do see movement on DADT finally, albeit still more 'kicking the can down the road a bit', but  GLBT issues have been a distant, 'third plate' agenda item for our fierce advocate, and 'our own' HRC has been no champion of moving that third plate forward at all.

    Democrats left unsupervised from the very top are incapable of governing in any meaningful way. That's the bottom line.

    by emsprater on Tue Feb 16, 2010 at 09:05:31 AM PST

  •  Could you revise the last part to include (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Clarknt67

    the word "end" (or something similar) in the last paragraph? As of right now, it reads: It's time to __ this discriminatory, counterproductive, and damaging policy. It appears to be missing a word or two in that last crucial part. Sorry to be a pain, but the last section seems unclear. It's the teacher in me :-)

    Please support equality in California: http://www.couragecampaign.org

    by Curiosity on Tue Feb 16, 2010 at 09:05:43 AM PST

  •  Seems like a better (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Clarknt67

    or at least additional campaign, would be an organized swarm of calls to Senators to demand that they vote on repealing DADT.

  •  As a gay Vietnam veteran who served (9+ / 0-)

    honorably pre-DADT, and in a time when there were many gay men who had been drafted and who were not living under the extreme threat of someone else reporting them  (during the Vietnam era, especially in my service, the USAF), I knew many gay men and women who did serve honorably and with distinction - and the threat of exposure was not on one's mind 24/7 - as gay bars near USAF, Army and Navy bases, were filled each weekend with military members who did not hide their orientation in that venue.  Yes, I realize some in the US military may have had a different experience, depending upon the location.  I was stationed at Charleston AFB, SC and McGuire AFB, NJ (near Philadelphia and NYC), both with active gay communities off base.  But I did live a satisfying life off base as a gay man within the gay community, and I know I was not the only one.

    Gays and lesbians have served in all militaries since the beginning of time.  The unit cohesion argument against gays and lesbians is bullshit.
    Whatever it takes to get this done tomorrow morning, needs to happen.  President Obama has the chance.  I don't give a damn what the Republicans think or say or do.  They are irrelevant.

    •  Thank you for your service! (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      craigkg, tommyfocus2003

      No one should doubt that a gay man can both serve his country and make love to another man. I'm sick and tired of all of these heterosexual chicken hawks blathering on about homosexuals serving in the military. From george washington on, all true military people will tell you that our great service people throughout our history have been homosexual men and women.

  •  Maybe we could throw a diversionary (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Texas Blue Dot, emsprater

    cocktail party...

  •  Typical (3+ / 0-)

    Leadership HAS been provided.  I mean look at Gates, Mullen, Powell, Obama all coming out for DADT repeal.  

    Perhaps this effort should focus on Congress?  Which seems to lack the legislative will?  No, that's too common sense, right?

    •  So what's the plan on the vote? (0+ / 0-)

      Because Lt. Dan Choi's return to drill duty is worth the paper it's printed on, for him and every other GLB Servicemember.

      What exactly is so objectionable about the community lobbying for a specific strategy that could turn this from good press to good actual policy?

      Is it the message that offends you or just the messengers?

      "I've always depended on the kindness of corporations." --Blanche Lincoln, D-Wal Mart

      by Scott Wooledge on Tue Feb 16, 2010 at 11:27:40 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  It's who it's directed at (0+ / 0-)

        We don't have 60 votes in the Senate and we don't have 218 in the house.  Until you have both of those, Obama could be leading as much as he wants, it would be POINTLESS.

        Congress has to have leadership too.  Until they have the legislative will to do things, then nothing will change.  Going at Obama does nothing to solve that problem.

        •  It's directed at Human Rights Campaign (0+ / 0-)

          (That's who picks up the phone at the numbers provided.) I can't imagine what's objectional about asking people to contact a lobbying organization that presumes to speak for them.

          "I've always depended on the kindness of corporations." --Blanche Lincoln, D-Wal Mart

          by Scott Wooledge on Tue Feb 16, 2010 at 11:46:34 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Yes to Pressure the WH (0+ / 0-)

            Again, that is stupid.  I would be very willing to sign up if the HRC were told to pressure the Congress.  It's more important to get 60 votes in the Senate and 218 in the House than asking for more leadership from the WH.  Leadership is there.  All that is needed is Congressional will, and that is lacking.

            •  Well, you are free to assert lobbying our (0+ / 0-)

              elected officials "is stupid" even when done indirectly through an intermediate lobbying organization. I don't see how "it's stupid" to ask Obama to consider this strategy;

              If Obama wants the repeal in his budget, the Senate Armed Services Chair, Carl Levin, can include the language in his Committee's Defense Authorization bill.

              Or ask HRC to get behind it and tell him so. I'm not a put your eggs all in one basket kind of strategist, myself.

              "I've always depended on the kindness of corporations." --Blanche Lincoln, D-Wal Mart

              by Scott Wooledge on Tue Feb 16, 2010 at 12:13:21 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  It's more important to get 60 votes (0+ / 0-)

                and 218 in the House.  Again, leadership is there.  All that's needed is the legislative will.  Obama could come out for the public option today, and it wouldn't get passed.  That's my friggin point.  

  •  Good! Mission is NOT Accomplished! (4+ / 0-)
    All reports to the contrary not withstanding. Lt. Dan Choi is not back in Active Duty and his discharge order is still pending, hanging over his head as this law does every GLB service member.

    The hearings were a huge success, evidenced by McCrank being the sole vocal GOP critic, and even Cheney suggesting it's bad idea to fight it. A huge symbolic hopey-changey victory is at the 10-yard line.

    No matter how people feel about the policy, the world will recognize it as a DEMOCRATIC victory over the GOP, (Hint: voters like winners, not losers.)

    But it is every bit as DONE as health care reform.

    And the window for repeal will be slammed shut in Nov 2010 if GOP capture control of a house. Even losing a few seats could make it very difficult, with the trouble Dems have disciplining their caucus.  

    "I've always depended on the kindness of corporations." --Blanche Lincoln, D-Wal Mart

    by Scott Wooledge on Tue Feb 16, 2010 at 09:21:40 AM PST

  •  HRC's million members (5+ / 0-)

    is the biggest scam around.  They count anyone who ever contributed $5 at a Pride event a member, even if it took place 10 years ago and that person never contributed again.  The organization is far more interested in DC cocktail parties than actually advocating anything.

    I am not surprised that HRC hasn't been in the forefront taking a stand on overturning DADT.

    It's about time I changed my signature.

    by Khun David on Tue Feb 16, 2010 at 09:31:49 AM PST

  •  OK, what? So HRC has *not* been on this? (0+ / 0-)

    And here i thought that the only reason DADT was as  high on the radar as it is was because the mainstream gay organizations had been hyping it. Now you tell me this organization has been so focused on marriage that they dropped the one other issue they had? OK. Nevermind. The fact that the Defense  Secretary and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs have testified to Congress that they favor a repeal is just proof to me that HRC  is a total dinosaur of an organization. I say we call them and tell them to go do some real work.

    Republican "party": Party like it's 1929.

    by noabsolutes on Tue Feb 16, 2010 at 09:39:39 AM PST

  •  This isn't Obama bashing (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    craigkg, terrypinder, Texas Blue Dot

    To those making that claim. This is the GLBT Community being called on to lobby one of OUR own lobbying organizations to ask Obama to pursue a particular strategy:

    We need leadership from the White House to get the repeal of DADT. The President can include repeal language in the Defense budget

    It seems people telling us we're bashing the President object to us:

    1. Speaking to organizations that presume to speak on our behalf
    1. Offer our own opinions on implementation strategy.

    Apparently the only acceptable way to "support the President" is to shut up and remember he calls all the shots. It is incumbent on all "good supporters" to remember democracy and participation in the process ends on election day.

    "I've always depended on the kindness of corporations." --Blanche Lincoln, D-Wal Mart

    by Scott Wooledge on Tue Feb 16, 2010 at 09:51:16 AM PST

  •  why does the pentagon (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    craigkg

    need a year to do a study? that only gives the opposition time to whip up opposition. this is healthcare reform effort revisited. i'm sick & tired of issues being set up to fail.

    •  Its DADT part II (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Texas Blue Dot, stolen water

      In 1993, initial public polls showed support for Clinton's desire to end the ban on gays in the military, but they dragged the process out too much and let the opposition organize and crystalize and stage despicable media op like the one homobigot Sam Nunn did on a U.S. submarine implying having even just of TEH GAY on a sub would result in every straight man being raped and forced into sexual slavery at the hands of TEH GAY.

      Giving the opposition a year to get ready and organize this time is even worse because there is no way that next year Speaker Boehner  and his House or "Majority" Leader McConnell and his 40-something to 50-something super duper "majority" in the Senate will take the issue up. This must be the year to repeal DADT and pass ENDA. This is the opportunity and the White House has shown a dearth of leadership in getting it done. They used stalling tactics last year to "push it down the road a bit" to this year and are using yet another damn study (as if the thirteen prior ones by one count aren't enough) to delay further action.

      Several months back I snarkily made a calendar of when it would be acceptable for the issue of GLBT rights to be brought up and so far my joke has been far more prescient than even I could have imagined:

      The Official DailyKos Obama-Apologist Calendar of When it is Acceptable to Bring up the Topic of Gay Rights

      1. He just got into office for f*ck's sake. Just STFU for now!
      2. It's still early and he has a lot more important things to deal with. Just wait your turn and we'll get around to it later.
      3. We've got midterm elections to win. You can't expect us to address gay rights and run for office at the same time so just STFU! We'll get get to gay rights after the election.
      4. We're exhausted. We just had an election. The new Congress hasn't even started yet. Just lay off on the "gay rights" stuff til later.
      5. We have to get Obama re-elected.  Presidential elections take up the full two years of the cycle and you can't expect Obama to kowtow to left wing GLBT activist extremists and expect win moderate votes, so just STFU!
      6. We just won re-election. Can you please just let us bask in the glow of that until after the inauguration?
      7. This Obama's last chance to really govern. We have real issues to deal with without making it seem we're beholden to some fringe special interest extremists like the GLBT community.
      8. Why are y'all just bring up gay rights now in the 7th year of President Obama's term? You guys didn't work for it and don't deserve to have your issues addressed on your terms. Besides, we haven't yet had a blue ribbon commission that will examine the issue for a year and issue a report, which will be followed by a peer reviewed study of the ramifications, which will be followed by a another commission which will examine the differences between the first commission report and the study. After that commission's report is studied, we'll make a recommendation to the President who will then have to have his advisors study the issue for a while. At that point, the President may add the recommendation to his State of the Union address. So give us another three years even though we only have one left.
      9. The commission is still doing its work behind closed doors, so don't talk about gay rights at all. We have another Presidential election to win and we can't be seen as being for gay rights in a Presidential election. Just STFU!
      10. Hey GLBT activists, we're on our way out. Half the President's advisors have already left for jobs in the private sector. Congress has adjourned until the new Congress begins. We are completely and utterly powerless lame ducks. What can the Obama Administration do for you? We're here to help.

      "So it was OK to waterboard a guy over 80 times but God forbid the guy who could understand what that prick was saying has a boyfriend."--Jon Stewart

      by craigkg on Tue Feb 16, 2010 at 10:50:59 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  They claim to be reviewing "how" not "if" (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      craigkg, stolen water

      the reapeal happens. Ergo, if their claims are being made in good faith, I can imagine no objection to attaching it to the next Defense spending bill, and scheduling the repeal one year hence. I'd add a moratorium on DADT investigations and expulsions for the year.

      It's a very reasonable compromise.

      "I've always depended on the kindness of corporations." --Blanche Lincoln, D-Wal Mart

      by Scott Wooledge on Tue Feb 16, 2010 at 11:33:04 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  I love how gay rights get little love (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    craigkg, Texas Blue Dot, Clarknt67

    by progressives.  

    For example, just compare the number of comments on this post with any other front page post.

    Listen kids, I'm not going to keep supporting your causes if you won't support mine.  

    Remember, we are a coalition.

  •  douchebags at HRC (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    craigkg

    I called as requested and - as has always been my experience with HRC - they were complete douchebags who are only interested in more membership/donations so they can pay their snobby staff their elite DC salaries.

    The minute I told the guy that answered the phone why I was calling ("I'd like to find out what HRC is doing to support repeal of DADT...")  He responded, "Hold on, I'll transfer you to our membership department."

    "Membership" was a recording of course and I was therafter unable to get a human to answer (because I wanted to tell them to their faces what douchebags they are).

    NOTE: I always like that: HRC = Human Rights Campaign AND Hillary ;-D  -- douchebags one and all

  •  It seems to me that the best way to ensure (0+ / 0-)

    success is to leave HRC out of this.  The only thing they're capable of organizing is a fundraiser.  Damn near worthless, in my opinion; a pathetic exercise in political masturbation.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site