»» Columnists

‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ Repeal Fails Key Senate Vote

video

by Michael Triplett | 4:25 pm, September 21st, 2010

» 57 comments

Despite the Lady GaGa’s best efforts, an attempt to get “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” to a vote in the Senate has failed, with moderate Republican supporters of repeal joining with the rest of their party to continue a fillibuster on a defense funding bill.

The 56-43 vote to end debate means both the attempt to end the policy barring gay and lesbian servicemembers and a larger defense funding bill may not receive a vote again until after the November elections. Democrats opposing “cloture” that would have brought the bill to the floor included Sens. Blanche Lincoln and Mark Pryor of Arkansas. Lincoln is considered a long-shot to keep her seat in the upcoming election.

“Today’s Senate vote was a frustrating blow to repeal this horrible law. We lost because of the political maneuvering dictated by the mid-term elections. Let’s be clear: Opponents to repealing ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ did not have the votes to strike those provisions from the bill. Instead, they had the votes for delay,” said Aubrey Sarvis of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network after the vote.

Democrats had hoped to persuade a group of moderate Republicans–led by Susan Collins of Maine–to join them in stopping the fillibuster of the bill which also includes a provision dealing with the children of undocumented immigrants. In the end, however, none of the moderates could be persuaded to help stop debate.

The Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins blamed Democrats for listening to Lady GaGa instead of members of the military, saying “[w]hile Democratic leadership took their cues from pop singer Lady Gaga, Republicans and a few Democratic colleagues instead considered the views of all four military service chiefs who have urged Congress to keep the current law.”

Here’s Rachel Maddow on the fillibuster

don't ask don't tell, Lady Gaga, Rachel Maddow

Azarkhan

This sort of discrimination is worse then the Holocaust or…Genghis Khan!
timzank

Blame ol Horrible Harry Reid for loading up the amnesty rider on it.
The_Reasonable_Lib

This is a lie!!! Everybody knows the Republicans are the champions of civil rights!!!!!
1stamendmentlost

It’s also worth noting that Harry Reid voted against it.
Big Eddie

DREAM not . http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5C9jF3BJxy8&feature=related
sticks

Maybe next time they vote for DADT, they can leave the dream act out of it… They didnt have a snowballs chance in hell getting that one through…
stoogedudes

Downright shameful.
The_Reasonable_Lib

1stamendmentlost said:
It’s also worth noting that Harry Reid voted against it.

It’s also worth noting that the entire republican party which claims to be the party of individual and civil rights voted against it. Maybe the states can decide on voting to repeal it?
1stamendmentlost

Reasonable Lib, The outcome may have been different if the Dem’s didn’t add the DREAM ACT, giving illegals amnesty, as sticks points out. The old, “republicans don’t care about civil rights” only works on those that are too stupid to know their history.
timzank

1stamendmentlost said:
It’s also worth noting that Harry Reid voted against it.

That’s a procedural manuever, by knowing it’s tanking and voting against himself, as leader he automatically gets to bring it back up for review…

sneaky little fucker that he is…
Michael Triplett

Harry Reid voted against it in order to maintain the right to bring it up again. His was a procedural vote that didn’t reflect his position on DADT
1stamendmentlost

MIchael, I don’t care why he did it, he voted against it. Thanks for sticking up for him, though! I’m sure he appreciates it.
Azarkhan

This was about Harry Reid getting the Hispanic vote in Nevada. Reid doesn’t give a shit about DADT. If he did, he would have pushed for abolishment in 2009, when the Democrats had a filibuster-proof Senate.
timzank

Azarkhan said:
This was about Harry Reid getting the Hispanic vote in Nevada. Reid doesn’t give a shit about DADT. If he did, he would have pushed for abolishment in 2009, when the Democrats had a filibuster-proof Senate.

Hope Harry had enough dead people to pull voter registration info from to give to his new amigos.
Fox News: We proudly pander to Teabaggers

Michael Triplett said:
Harry Reid voted against it in order to maintain the right to bring it up again. His was a procedural vote that didn’t reflect his position on DADT

No need to clarify Michael. We know the tea party chickenshits will distort the position not only of their own movement, but of specific representatives in congress.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Stephen-Hogan/179500970 Stephen Hogan

timzank said:
Blame ol Horrible Harry Reid for loading up the amnesty rider on it.

Don’t you think that citizenship for defending the nation or becoming an educated civilian in good standing is a fair trade?
http://www.facebook.com/people/Stephen-Hogan/179500970 Stephen Hogan

sticks said:
Maybe next time they vote for DADT, they can leave the dream act out of it… They didnt have a snowballs chance in hell getting that one through…

DREAM actually had bi-partisan support. Once.
Azarkhan

Stephen Hogan said:
Don’t you think that citizenship for defending the nation

How does a non-citizen get into the Army?

Stephen Hogan said:
or becoming an educated civilian in good standing is a fair trade?

No. That just means the non-citizen competes with the citizen for better-paying jobs.
Fox News: We proudly pander to Teabaggers

Time will eventually

Azarkhan said:
How does a non-citizen get into the Army?

No. That just means the non-citizen competes with the citizen for better-paying jobs.

Or start new businesses that hire people.
Azarkhan

Fox News: We proudly pander to Teabaggers said:
Or start new businesses that hire people.

You know, it’s amazing how many times I walk into Chinese restaurants and see whites and blacks working there. Or not. From what I see, most foreigners hire other foreigners.
Hugo Daun

Azarkhan said:
That just means the non-citizen competes with the citizen for better-paying jobs.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLni3wbndls

:)
Fox News: We proudly pander to Teabaggers

Azarkhan said:
You know, it’s amazing how many times I walk into Chinese restaurants and see whites and blacks working there. Or not. From what I see, most foreigners hire other foreigners.

Oh okay These Mexican immigrants who are educated in our colleges or trained in our military would only hire their own people. Only good white people like you are benevolent enough to hire a minority.

Your comment reminds me of Jack Burkman.
libra blue

I am totally in favor of repealing DADT, but when Reid added the Dream Act onto the defense bill he made it impossible.
Azarkhan

Fox News: We proudly pander to Teabaggers said:
Only good white people like you are benevolent enough to hire a minority.

That wouldn’t be me. That would be the upper-middle class and upper class white liberal who lives in an all white neighborhood and sends his kids to private schools. He lets Juan do his yard work and Juanita babysit the kids.
ChuckfromTacoma

I find it a bit queer that so many of you are pegging the defeat of this action to DADT when, if the piece of shit from Nevada had not stuck his amnesty crap in the bill, it might have passed. Maybe not, but we will never know. Old Harry could have gone back to Nevada proudly proclaiming that felching is OK on post and everybody owes him for it.
Thanks to Lincoln, Collins, Pryor and the Republican caucus for standing firm for the best interests of the nation. We all know what a deceitful liar Harry Reid is and the stifled his tactics and efforts to further harm our nation.
http://gordonbloyershow.com gordonbloyershow

This has NOTHING to do with “civil rights”. No one has the RIGHT to be in our military.
This is about the RIGHT of the military to decide who they want to fight along side with in a battle.
The Court has decided that they have the right to choose who best would defend our country. Each branch has there own rules. Everyone that wants to join the Marines does not get in.
Our military is not and should not be a social experiment.
We should not allow women in combat. I can live with DADT but I don’t like it.
We should not fall for the nonsense from the left that this about civil rights. We need to make sure we have judges that will defend the right of the military to choose their members.
TfT

Is there an editor on this board? My goodness, what a horrific article.

Starts out with this:
blah, blah, blah “with moderate Republican supporters of repeal joining with the rest of their party to continue a fillibuster on a defense funding bill.” as if to imply that only republicans filibustered, then we learn that two democrats voted with the democrats making the vote bi-partisan, but alas, one has to dig for facts.

Really mediaite, can you start attempting some truth.

Had the dream act not been included, it probably would have passed, but Harry was playing politics.

In fact, if mediaite had any cajones the headline would have been:

Harry plays politics with DADT

now that would have been an honest headline.

Fer shame Dan that you allow this kind of garbage to continue.
LibsFailAtLife

gays can join the military, they just cant go all carmen miranda in the barracks. thats not a civil right.
sticks

Stephen Hogan… Bi-partisan support for this exact dream act ?… Dont think so… I know they’ve dabbled in immigration reform a time or 2, but never really given it any serious thought on either side of the party lines… It being a pretty big block of voters and all… Yes, I know illegals dont vote but they all have a relative or 2 that does… But the fact is nobody wants to say or do what needs to be done… At this point the only way to get illegals to go home and/or not come to the U.S. is to cut off their freebies… No medical, no food stamps, no rent, no free education for their kids… And since Im being honest here… This policy would actually cost us nothing and save us billions, that frankly, we just cant afford anymore… AND… Its what would happen to me, or anyone else here, were we to go to their country, wherever that may be…
RichS

Stephen Hogan said:
Don’t you think that citizenship for defending the nation or becoming an educated civilian in good standing is a fair trade?

One of the moves that doomed the Roman Empire was when they brought barbarians from outside the Empire or those already living in the Empire into the Roman Army. A country should defend itself.
http://www.nukethefridge.com MartiniShark

~~Interesting~~ Telling that the the whole issue of the DREAM rider was not mentioned in the article. This is simply a way for the Dems to demaogogue the issue and say Reps were against the issue, when Reid making his riders were behind it.

The whole “controversy” is mitigated by Maddow’s comments in the last few seconds of the clip. The military is looking into a study and will have a result in December. Why then was it so crucial to vote on this now? Because Lady Gaga opened her soup-cooler on the issue?! It is a military issue after all, let the military finish their study and then make the call on it, not people like Maddow with a rooting social-interest political football in the issue.
greg454

“How does a non-citizen get into the Army? ”

—He can if he has a greencard, not a tourist visa, not a student visa, and certainly not if he came to the country illegally. The Dream Act is an insult to every greencard resident that has served this country in the military.
notsofast

Michael Triplett said:
Harry Reid voted against it in order to maintain the right to bring it up again. His was a procedural vote that didn’t reflect his position on DADT

Sure. Of course. Whatever you say. I believe you! (pushes button to summon Security).No, seriously, I do (continues to press button for Security.) We will discuss it 1st. thing in the morning.
Quick, get the sedative!
http://www.libertarianism.com/ Burnnotice

Them damn Repulicrates! A Dog is going to do what a Dog does. But Harry Reid. Voted against it!!! As well as two other Democratic Freedom Robers! People need to join me in the Libertarian Movement. We don’t care if your gay or if you want to Mary someone of the same sex or you would like multiple partners. And if you all want to be in the military thats just fine… We don’t judge anyone. Thats up to God. We just want freedom for everyone!!!
The_Reasonable_Lib

gordonbloyershow said:
This has NOTHING to do with “civil rights”. No one has the RIGHT to be in our military.
This is about the RIGHT of the military to decide who they want to fight along side with in a battle.
The Court has decided that they have the right to choose who best would defend our country. Each branch has there own rules. Everyone that wants to join the Marines does not get in.
Our military is not and should not be a social experiment.
We should not allow women in combat. I can live with DADT but I don’t like it.
We should not fall for the nonsense from the left that this about civil rights. We need to make sure we have judges that will defend the right of the military to choose their members.

People have the RIGHT to serve their country and to defend their loved ones openly whether they be gay, straight, black white, blue, puerto rican, haitian or a f*cking martian. This is a type of discrimination, pure and simple, you don’t have to be heterosexual to fire a gun, you don’t have to be white to fire a gun, you don’t have to be a man to fire a gun, ANYBODY can defend this country. There is a difference between physical requirements and sexual, you idiot. Like it or not it is discrimination and therefore a violation of civil rights.
http://www.thecobraslair.com Cobra

1stamendmentlost said:
Reasonable Lib, The outcome may have been different if the Dem’s didn’t add the DREAM ACT, giving illegals amnesty, as sticks points out. The old, “republicans don’t care about civil rights” only works on those that are too stupid to know their history.

“This debate simmered in 2003 when we learned that one of the first U.S. soldiers killed in combat in Iraq had been an illegal immigrant. Marine Lance Cpl. Jose Gutierrez died in a firefight March 21, 2003. The Guatemalan was 14 when he left behind his dead parents and trekked 2,000 miles to cross into the U.S. illegally. At the time, the U.S. didn’t deport Guatemalan children who arrived without family. He was allowed to stay and became a legal resident at age 18.”

“The U.S. government re-paid this commitment in 2002, when President Bush signed an executive order allowing immigrant soldiers to apply for citizenship as soon as they enlist. They previously had to wait three years.

Altruistic reasons alone did not motivate the Bush administration. The armed services have suffered from longstanding recruiting problems. Tapping into the growing supply of immigrants — many of whom are poor and minority — is an easy way to meet recruiting quotas. And dangling fast-track to citizenship as a carrot is a sure-fire way for Uncle Sam to attract immigrants.”

http://blogs.chron.com/immigration/archives/2008/03/post_98.html

State your position clearly 1stamendment. Did Marine Lance Cpl. Jose Gutierrez and the THOUSANDS of others like him NOT earn their right to be American citizens by risking and LOSING life and limb in service to this nation?

–Cobra
http://www.thecobraslair.com Cobra

greg454 said:
“How does a non-citizen get into the Army? ”

—He can if he has a greencard, not a tourist visa, not a student visa, and certainly not if he came to the country illegally. The Dream Act is an insult to every greencard resident that has served this country in the military.

Because domestic recruitment was so outstanding during the Bush Wars, right?

–Cobra
The_Reasonable_Lib

Cobra said:
“This debate simmered in 2003 when we learned that one of the first U.S. soldiers killed in combat in Iraq had been an illegal immigrant. Marine Lance Cpl. Jose Gutierrez died in a firefight March 21, 2003. The Guatemalan was 14 when he left behind his dead parents and trekked 2,000 miles to cross into the U.S. illegally. At the time, the U.S. didn’t deport Guatemalan children who arrived without family. He was allowed to stay and became a legal resident at age 18.”

“The U.S. government re-paid this commitment in 2002, when President Bush signed an executive order allowing immigrant soldiers to apply for citizenship as soon as they enlist. They previously had to wait three years.

Altruistic reasons alone did not motivate the Bush administration. The armed services have suffered from longstanding recruiting problems. Tapping into the growing supply of immigrants — many of whom are poor and minority — is an easy way to meet recruiting quotas. And dangling fast-track to citizenship as a carrot is a sure-fire way for Uncle Sam to attract immigrants.”

http://blogs.chron.com/immigration/archives/2008/03/post_98.html

State your position clearly 1stamendment. Did Marine Lance Cpl. Jose Gutierrez and the THOUSANDS of others like him NOT earn their right to be American citizens by risking and LOSING life and limb in service to this nation?

–Cobra

As I said before, anybody can serve an fight for this country. In my opinion, Mr. Gutierrez is more of a patriot than sanctimonious bastards like bloyer, notsofast or probably even myself could ever hope to be.
greg454

“Because domestic recruitment was so outstanding during the Bush Wars, right?”

—That has nothing to do with George W. Bush. America has a history of foreign nationals fighting since the time of George Washington, the difference is that our foreign soldiers were LEGAL IMMIGRANTS and not a bunch of goddamm illegal aliens.

Either way, serving in the army is an HONOR and a PRIVILEDGE, there are plenty of people who want to serve but they can’t for being old, fat, or having some weird medical disability. I have an athletic friend with a bad knee that couldn’t get a medical exception.
http://www.thecobraslair.com Cobra

greg454 said:
“Because domestic recruitment was so outstanding during the Bush Wars, right?”

—That has nothing to do with George W. Bush. America has a history of foreign nationals fighting since the time of George Washington, the difference is that our foreign soldiers were LEGAL IMMIGRANTS and not a bunch of goddamm illegal aliens.

Either way, serving in the army is an HONOR and a PRIVILEDGE, there are plenty of people who want to serve but they can’t for being old, fat, or having some weird medical disability. I have an athletic friend with a bad knee that couldn’t get a medical exception.

You didn’t answer the first question, so I’ll repeat it verbatim:

Did Marine Lance Cpl. Jose Gutierrez and the THOUSANDS of others like him NOT earn their right to be American citizens by risking and LOSING life and limb in service to this nation?

–Cobra
greg454

“Did Marine Lance Cpl. Jose Gutierrez and the THOUSANDS of others like him NOT earn their right to be American citizens by risking and LOSING life and limb in service to this nation? ”

—Did Gutierrez come to this country legally? No. So don’t compare Gutierrez with some patriotic American gay that is getting kicked out for the “crime” of having the wrong sexual orientation. Gays and illegal aliens are not the same!
Hugo Daun

Azarkhan said:
That just means the non-citizen competes with the citizen for better-paying jobs.

Aww, for all you humor-challenged dummies who got all pussy-hurt over my little South Park clip, here’s a little something by the great Doug Stanhope (on the same topic) that should REALLY bring the tears:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nW20EMJr6o4

Get the Kleenex ready, ya bunch of babies.
notsofast

The_Reasonable_Lib said:
As I said before, anybody can serve an fight for this country. In my opinion, Mr. Gutierrez is more of a patriot than sanctimonious bastards like bloyer, notsofast or probably even myself could ever hope to be.

Eat me, libby!
fallenchicken

gordonbloyershow said:

This is about the RIGHT of the military to decide who they want to fight along side with in a battle.

You so dumb

Gay people already have and do serve in our military. This isn’t the military deciding that gays are not capable of serving, this is politicians deciding that gay soldiers must hide who they are. Soldiers who serve our country and risk their lives for us.

Why don’t you man up and support our troops?
http://www.thecobraslair.com Cobra

Azarkhan said:
You know, it’s amazing how many times I walk into Chinese restaurants and see whites and blacks working there. Or not. From what I see, most foreigners hire other foreigners.

What makes them “foreigners? You know Chinese have been immigrating here since the 19th Century, so…what–you pulled a Jan Brewer and made them show you papers?

–Cobra
http://www.thecobraslair.com Cobra

greg454 said:
“Did Marine Lance Cpl. Jose Gutierrez and the THOUSANDS of others like him NOT earn their right to be American citizens by risking and LOSING life and limb in service to this nation? ”

—Did Gutierrez come to this country legally? No. So don’t compare Gutierrez with some patriotic American gay that is getting kicked out for the “crime” of having the wrong sexual orientation. Gays and illegal aliens are not the same!

And you know Gutierrez’s sexual orientation…how?

–Cobra
VRWC Destruction Machine

Azarkhan said:
This sort of discrimination is worse then the Holocaust or…Genghis Khan!

Don’t be such a drama queen. So you can’t march in a gay pride parade in you service uniform. It’s not the end of the world.
http://www.thecobraslair.com Cobra

VRWC Destruction Machine said:
Don’t be such a drama queen. So you can’t march in a gay pride parade in you service uniform. It’s not the end of the world.

But if a soldier is lying wounded on the battlefield they can’t have a message relayed to their partners that they love them.

I would pay good money to see one of these homophobic right wingers say this crap to gay military members. I’d have a You Tube hit watching these punks collect their teeth afterwards.

–Cobra
http://gordonbloyershow.com gordonbloyershow

The_Reasonable_Lib said:
People have the RIGHT to serve their country and to defend their loved ones openly whether they be gay, straight, black white, blue, puerto rican, haitian or a f*cking martian.

Being black, white, blue, puerto rican, haitian or a martian is not the same as being gay. Nobody knows you are gay if you don’t tell them.
Nobody has to know if you are an atheist, Jewish, Methodist, Catholic, Luthern or Muslim if you don’t tell them. Don’t ask don’t tell.
It is not a civil right and there is NO RIGHT to serve in the military. You can keep repeating it all you want but it won’t make it true.
http://gordonbloyershow.com gordonbloyershow

fallenchicken said:
Why don’t you man up and support our troops?

Hey dummy, the troops don’t want to serve with openly gay soldiers. Why don’t YOU support our troops.
fallenchicken

gordonbloyershow said:
Hey dummy, the troops don’t want to serve with openly gay soldiers. Why don’t YOU support our troops.

Gay troops are still troops. As far as I can tell you don’t support them. Why do you hate our troops so much?
StandUp

Cobra said:
But if a soldier is lying wounded on the battlefield they can’t have a message relayed to their partners that they love them.

Depends on if he was shot in the foxhole.
VRWC Destruction Machine

Cobra said:
But if a soldier is lying wounded on the battlefield they can’t have a message relayed to their partners that they love them.

I would pay good money to see one of these homophobic right wingers say this crap to gay military members. I’d have a You Tube hit watching these punks collect their teeth afterwards.

–Cobra

If a military person heard my opinion on the DADT issue, being a good soldier they would accept my opinion. He/she may not agree with my opinion, but their job is to defend the Constitutional right of free speech. You have a low regard for soldiers if you’d think they would try to kick that ass of someone who has a different opinion than theirs. But then again, most of the military men and women past and present I have known are not drama queens.
http://gordonbloyershow.com gordonbloyershow

fallenchicken said:
Gay troops are still troops. As far as I can tell you don’t support them. Why do you hate our troops so much?

Gay troops are still troops but I wouldn’t know they were gay if they would keep their mouth shut. No pun intended.
Nachi

Republiscum. Murcuh’s bridge to the 11th Century.
Some_Dude

The Republican party, still against civil rights after all these years.
linlin5

our website: http://www.fashionshoppong.us

BEST QUALITY GUARANTEE!!
SAFTY & HONESTY GUARANTEE!!
FAST & PROMPT DELIVERY GUARANTEE!!