May 27, 2010
GOP PREPARED TO FILIBUSTER TROOP FUNDING OVER DADT.... With Democrats likely to add a provision to the Pentagon appropriations bill to end the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy, Republicans are moving forward with Plan B: blocking the vote on troop funding.
Senate Armed Services ranking member John McCain said Thursday that he would "without a doubt" support a filibuster if the bill goes to the floor with language that Sen. Joe Lieberman (ID-Conn.) plans to offer as an amendment during today's markup.
"I'll do everything in my power," the Arizona Republican said, citing letters from the four service chiefs urging Congress not to act before a Pentagon review of the policy is complete. "I'm going to do everything I can to support the men and women of the military and to fight what is clearly a political agenda."
Another Armed Services Republican, Sen. Roger Wicker, also said he would support a filibuster if the repeal language makes it into the version of the bill that goes to the floor, possibly during the post-Memorial Day work period.
Just so we're clear, consider exactly what Senate Republicans are saying here. The GOP is prepared to refuse an up-or-down vote in the Senate on a bill that funds the troops during two wars because Americans will eventually be able to serve in the Armed Forces, regardless of their sexual orientation. That the policy has been endorsed by the Secretary of Defense and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs -- both Republican appointees -- is irrelevant.
What's more, as Dante Atkins added, "The funny part about this whole ordeal? The compromise that the Republicans are threatening to filibuster allows the Pentagon to have the final say in the issue, which is precisely why it is not receiving the broadest support in activist circles. And yet, despite the fact that the Pentagon and the Joint Chiefs get to be the ultimate arbiters of whether the policy is repealed, that's not good enough for today's homophobic Republican Party. Today's Republicans don't want gay people to be able to serve in the military -- even if the Pentagon says it's okay."
I seem to recall Republicans screaming that those who oppose funding the troops during two wars are necessarily unpatriotic terrorist sympathizers, aiding and abetting the enemy. Now these same Republicans are boasting about their intention to prevent the Senate from even voting on troop funding.
It's funny how GOP standards change, isn't it?
—Steve Benen 9:55 AM
Permalink
| Trackbacks
| Comments (30)
Okay, Dems. Here is yet another gift-wrapped issue with which to run to another election victory against Republicans.
Will you run, or will you cave?
I mean, dammit, you're getting too many silver platters to keep letting them tarnish (e.g., Wall Street reform, universal healthcare).
Posted by: terraformer on May 27, 2010 at 10:02 AM | PERMALINK
The Republicans are going to filibuster troop spending over DADT? I guess that means we have to bring the troops home from Iraq and Afganistan. Wow, think of all the money available for the jobs bill. Talk about PAYGO.
Posted by: Ron Byers on May 27, 2010 at 10:02 AM | PERMALINK
I seem to recall Republicans screaming that those who oppose funding the troops during two wars are necessarily unpatriotic terrorist sympathizers...
I seem to recall that too. In fact, I actually recall that. Sometimes, things are exactly what they seem.
Posted by: Grumpy on May 27, 2010 at 10:05 AM | PERMALINK
"It's funny how GOP standards change, isn't it?"
the gop has no standards. or morals. or ethics.
Posted by: just bill on May 27, 2010 at 10:05 AM | PERMALINK
This is just the sort of 'no win' vote we should have been forcing on the repugs from the time we took over Congress. This is a legitimate issue, but our side should have been manufacturing situations to force the bad guys display their foot dragging, to say nothing of thier knuckle dragging.
Posted by: BillFfromPA on May 27, 2010 at 10:14 AM | PERMALINK
Giving the Pentagon final say on DADT means nothing.
Senior officers know which side ther bread is buttered on and which decision on DADT will give them a promotion, at least until sanity returns.
Posted by: Al on May 27, 2010 at 10:20 AM | PERMALINK
"I seem to recall Republicans screaming that those who oppose funding the troops during two wars are necessarily unpatriotic terrorist sympathizers..."
I seem to recall these same jerks used to be "dixiecrats" who were certain that negroes had no place in our military.
It's not the party of "no," it's the party of "wrong."
Posted by: jim Pharo on May 27, 2010 at 10:26 AM | PERMALINK
What McCain meant to say:
"I'm going to do everything I can to ignore the men and women of the military and to advance what is clearly my political agenda: getting my miserable, unprincipled ass elected again over J.D. Hayworth. Jesus! Doesn't he understand this seat is mine until I croak?"
Posted by: Screamin' Demon on May 27, 2010 at 10:30 AM | PERMALINK
A modest proposal. Standards don't change. It IS sedition. The President has the executive power to declare any citizen a terrorist.
Filibusters are terrorist acts. Guantanamo isn't shut and can be expanded to hold at least 50,000 indefinitely. By 2020 we should be able to figure out how to conduct the trials. [Might as well get some political advantage for doing what you are accused of doing.]
Posted by: gdb on May 27, 2010 at 10:31 AM | PERMALINK
Don't you like it? The Republicans--the party of peace, de-funding wars. The 2010 campaign commercials practically write themselves: "John McCain (or insert name of local Republican Congressional candidate) voted against Defense appropriations in May. Vote McCain (or local Republican) in November to give peace a chance!"
Charles
Posted by: Charles Moore on May 27, 2010 at 10:59 AM | PERMALINK
So the Republicans were for it before they were against it?
I don't understand.
Ed
Posted by: Ed Drone on May 27, 2010 at 11:04 AM | PERMALINK
Dems wouldn't be bringing it up if they didn't have the votes. Grandpa McCain (Get Off My Lawn!) and the others are just howling about this to be able to use their opposition as more red meat to toss to the the drooling members of the base in their campaigns.
Posted by: dcsusie on May 27, 2010 at 11:05 AM | PERMALINK
"I'm going to do everything I can to support the men and women of the military and to fight what is clearly a political agenda."
Got it.
Throwing dedicated American servicemen and women out in a time of war, based on arguments of morale and unit cohesion which the creators of the policy now admit were based on no evidence whatsoever is principled patriotism.
Ending discrimination that serves no purpose, weakens our military and has the support of 80% of the public is "clearly a political agenda."
Get off my lawn, Grandpa McCain!
Posted by: Redshift on May 27, 2010 at 11:09 AM | PERMALINK
America was once a great nation. Now it is known for it's greatness in causing global financial debacle; environmental debacle, congressional /political debacle and immigration debacle. All for corporation greed and power.Because for politicians, stalling techiques and skillset we are doomed.
Thanks Congress for the destruction of America and it's Greatness. It makes you wonder what the Iraq and Afghanistan military have died for. Oils supremacy must be maintained by any means.
Posted by: MLJohnston on May 27, 2010 at 11:16 AM | PERMALINK
Rules, principles, ethics, morals, for the Rethugs are whatever they say they are when they say it. No questions.
Reality is relative to the Rethugs. They make reality and history up as they go along, and expect everyone else to see it their way no matter how often they choose to change it.
The stenographic brain dead MSM will merely report it without comment or pointing out the blatant contradictions.
Posted by: rrk1 on May 27, 2010 at 11:17 AM | PERMALINK
The GOP is prepared to refuse an up-or-down vote in the Senate on a bill that funds the troops during two wars because Americans will eventually be able to serve in the Armed Forces, regardless of their sexual orientation.
People of all sexual orientations are already serving. The Republicans will filibuster just to keep (some of) them from talking about it.
It's another battle in The Republican War Against Honesty.
Posted by: Peter on May 27, 2010 at 11:17 AM | PERMALINK
If things continue to go downhill on the Korean Peninsula, will Republicans embrace the Communist regime for political gain? Will they obstruct America's commitment to the ROK government, and filibuster a declaration of war?
Will Seoul be burned to ash for the pomp of John McCain's ballot-box preening?
Posted by: S. Waybright on May 27, 2010 at 11:24 AM | PERMALINK
Check out Glenn Greenwald's column today about a last-minute provision that was added to this defense act. It directs the Pentagon Inspector General to investigation the conduct and practices of lawyers who have represented Gitmo detainees and then report back to Congress. This will certainly result in the intimidation and deterence of attorneys for detainees.
Posted by: winddancer on May 27, 2010 at 11:37 AM | PERMALINK
As long as Harry Reid doesn't roll over and allow a cloture vote to substitute for the actual fillibuster, I would be very happy to see it. The great patriotism of our disloyal Republican opposition deserves maximal public exposure.
Posted by: keith on May 27, 2010 at 11:42 AM | PERMALINK
What standards? The Republicans are a desperate bunch of flailing morons, who will do anything - anything - they think might work. Throw it all on the wall and see what sticks.
If this bunch of drooling morons manage to win a majority in Congress in November, it really will prove that the American people are idiots and that Mencken was right when he said "nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people."
Posted by: TCinLA on May 27, 2010 at 11:45 AM | PERMALINK
Wholesale and retail all kinds of world brand shoes,apparel,jeans,t-shirts,hoody,jackets,coats,pants,handbags,wallets,watches,sunglasses,belts,caps etc..
$30 Air Jordan shoes,Shox shoes,Gucci,LV shoes
$33 True Religion jeans, Ed Hardy jeans,LV,Coogi jeans,Affliction jeans
$15 Ed Hardy ,LV ,Gucci Bikini
$15 Polo, Ed Hardy, Gucci, LV, Lacoste T-shirts
$25 Coach,Gucci,LV,Prada,Juicy,Chanel handbag,
$10 Gucci,Ed Hardy sunglasses
$9 New Era caps.
Welcome to ---------------olapparel.com
Posted by: wzmhqgzydlp on May 27, 2010 at 11:46 AM | PERMALINK
Once again, Obama compromises pre-emptively so the base rightly is angry, and once again he gets shit from Republicans.
Isn't the definition of insanity often used here that you keep doing the same thing and expect better results?
Posted by: mnpundit on May 27, 2010 at 11:47 AM | PERMALINK
mpundit, you keep saying that even though the White House refuses to listen. Doesn't that make you a little, y'know, coo-coo?
Posted by: Grumpy on May 27, 2010 at 12:07 PM | PERMALINK
The really ridiculous part of this argument is that Republicans think that gays have not been part of the armed services since the birth of the nation. Unfortunately we will never know the true numbers but certainly there have been countless gays who have fought and died for the freedoms that these idiots are now abusing. Regardles of one's personal standards or religious beliefs, hopefully all reasonable Americans can understand and accept that all of us have the same rights in this country and isn't it total insanity to tell someone that CAN'T put their life on the line and serve their country with the ultimate sacrifice? Who would support anyone with such illogical sense of right and wrong?
Posted by: Vandal on May 27, 2010 at 12:09 PM | PERMALINK
Didn't they call Dems 'unpatriotic' for doing that?
Posted by: J on May 27, 2010 at 12:22 PM | PERMALINK
McCain is boring, wrinked, unattractive, and looks sick but his wife dresses with fabulous style. I hope Hayworth wins... yes Az would lose a powerful senator but nobody that's nothing compared to what our Governor and state legislature have done and are doing.
And the democratic candidate might just be elected
Posted by: KurtRex1453 on May 27, 2010 at 3:24 PM | PERMALINK
But... without funding, won't the DOD be forced to "turn out the lights"? And in the ensuing darkness, won't there be some sort of fellatio outbreak?? I suspect that this is what those sneaky Republicans really want.
Posted by: josef on May 27, 2010 at 3:55 PM | PERMALINK
Standards? More like the stank of freshly dropped doodoo. Just follows the wind.
Posted by: ComradeAnon on May 27, 2010 at 10:29 PM | PERMALINK
Excellent read, I just passed this onto a colleague who was doing a little research on that. And he actually bought me lunch because I found it for him smile So let me rephrase that: Thanks for lunch!
Posted by: webcamgirls on November 16, 2010 at 8:42 PM | PERMALINK
I have no idea
Posted by: internet bureau on December 28, 2010 at 2:28 PM | PERMALINK