BREAKING: Senate Republicans block repeal of DADT

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Again, I think this goes back to the fact that Reid is a terrible Majority Leader.  Republicans blocked it because of a failure to agree to the number of amedments that would be allowed to be introduced as well as the timing of the debate.  If Reid would have just talked to them on that, we'd be moving forward with this.

Although, the GOP not voting on anything until taxes gets solved isn't helping either.  It's not like we're taking debate time away from that issue... neither side needs to debate (unless you take Rep. Weiner's stance on the issue, but the amount of Reps. who want to debate is minimal... what needs to happen is a sit-down and an agreement).

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Here's the thing... you guys are acting like DADT is the only thing in this bill.  It's 849 pages long... if Reid really wants this to pass, he would allow for the Republicans to have some amendments to it.  It's only fair.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Here's the thing... you guys are acting like DADT is the only thing in this bill.  It's 849 pages long... if Reid really wants this to pass, he would allow for the Republicans to have some amendments to it.  It's only fair.

Reid wasn't blocking the GOP from adding amendments to the bill.  The issue was over the time allotted for the bill.  The GOP was demanding a ton of time to add amendments and no agreement was made about exactly how much time would be allotted.   Collins did vote for repeal.

Everything I read indicated the GOP wanted the ability to add more amendments.  Unfortunately I wasn't able to watch any of this on C-SPAN, but that was my understanding.

And Collins didn't vote for repeal.  Nobody voted for repeal... this was a cloture vote on the ENTIRE Defense Authorization bill.  You people are acting like DADT was all that was in this bill...

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Here's the thing... you guys are acting like DADT is the only thing in this bill.  It's 849 pages long... if Reid really wants this to pass, he would allow for the Republicans to have some amendments to it.  It's only fair.

Reid wasn't blocking the GOP from adding amendments to the bill.  The issue was over the time allotted for the bill.  The GOP was demanding a ton of time to add amendments and no agreement was made about exactly how much time would be allotted.   Collins did vote for repeal.

One thing to note is it seems the DADT will get a stand alone vote, its something Collins and Lieberman are working on and Reid has said he will support bringing it to the floor and while no timetable is set when a vote will be held, it will be prior to the lame duck session ending.  

Why does the GOP even bother making these lame excuses? It about amendments or budgeting or that I can't do votes on Tuesdays on months with an r in them. It's perfectly obvious where they stand.

In that case, why did Scott Brown vote against invoking cloture, when he has previously said he will support the repeal of DADT?

I don't see why Reid is trying to repeal DADT with this bill.  If he did it on its own, simply amending 10 U.S.C. § 654, I think it'd easily pass.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Republicans will not allow any bills to come to the Senate floor in the lame duck session until the Senate passes a tax bill and continuing resolution to fund the government.

That I disagree with.  It's not like we need more debate to fix the tax bill... the GOP and Dem heads just need to sit down and hammer out an agreement.  Unless they plan on being on the floor debating the bill, let's move on to other issues.  That's the entire reason there's a dual track for legislation.

I gotta say... I disagree with the GOP on this one.  Although, their other reasons (amendments and time) I see as valid.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

  Mind you, I'm not a fan at all of the GLBT lifestyle

WTF is the gay "lifestyle"? Don't just repeat stupid talking points.

On an off topic(ish) note, why has there been such a crossover from "LGBT" to "GLBT"?  I see it the latter way a lot more... is there a reason for that?

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

In that case, why did Scott Brown vote against invoking cloture, when he has previously said he will support the repeal of DADT?

I don't see why Reid is trying to repeal DADT with this bill.  If he did it on its own, simply amending 10 U.S.C. § 654, I think it'd easily pass.

Republicans will not allow any bills to come to the Senate floor in the lame duck session until the Senate passes a tax bill and continuing resolution to fund the government.  Collins seems to have forgotten this, but it didn't matter.  Given who will control the House next year, it is a very good strategy for Republicans - running out the clock on the Democratic agenda, largely (but not exclusively) featuring wish list of goodies for their special interest groups that don't stand a chance of passing the House next year. 

Democrats don't like this and have resorted to call Republicans and the President names, but elections have consequences.

http://wglb-tv.blogspot.com/2010/12/new-cbs-poll-repeal-dadt-says-31.html

What's your point?

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

  Mind you, I'm not a fan at all of the GLBT lifestyle

WTF is the gay "lifestyle"? Don't just repeat stupid talking points.

On an off topic(ish) note, why has there been such a crossover from "LGBT" to "GLBT"?  I see it the latter way a lot more... is there a reason for that?

People like gays more than lesbians? -shrug- there's no difference.

On this forum..? I'd have strong doubts about that.

No... I've noticed it in news articles more than anywhere else.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Republicans will not allow any bills to come to the Senate floor in the lame duck session until the Senate passes a tax bill and continuing resolution to fund the government.

That I disagree with.  It's not like we need more debate to fix the tax bill... the GOP and Dem heads just need to sit down and hammer out an agreement.  Unless they plan on being on the floor debating the bill, let's move on to other issues.  That's the entire reason there's a dual track for legislation.

I gotta say... I disagree with the GOP on this one.  Although, their other reasons (amendments and time) I see as valid.

House Democrats voted to oppose the tax bill today.   (Or since "hostage taking" seems to be the over-the-top political rhetoric of the day, should we call that holding tax cuts for the poor hostage to engage in class warfare?)  It is not a done deal.  No done deal.  No votes on anything else - that's the Republican position.  The side benefit of that is that some liberal agenda items that won't see the light of day in a divided Congress won't get passed if there is no time.  The clock is ticking.

It's a win-win for Republicans.  Not so much for Democrats, who have been used to getting their own way for the past 2 years.

I realize why the Republicans are doing it.  I just disagree with it.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

It's simply crazy that a policy with this broad base of support [~70%, more than basically every other "controversial" issue combined], has trouble being passed by itself, let alone attached to an important defense authorization bill.   Seems like every remotely moderate Senator should be behind not filibustering funding our military, even if it means allowing our troops to be as gay as Israel's, Australia's or the UK's.

Come on Lunar... there are even Democrats who want to offer amendments to the bill.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

It's simply crazy that a policy with this broad base of support [~70%, more than basically every other "controversial" issue combined], has trouble being passed by itself, let alone attached to an important defense authorization bill.   Seems like every remotely moderate Senator should be behind not filibustering funding our military, even if it means allowing our troops to be as gay as Israel's, Australia's or the UK's.

Come on Lunar... there are even Democrats who want to offer amendments to the bill.

Yeah, we'ere not in space though, we live in the real world.  You're one of one hundred, you shouldn't filibuster every bill of importance you're presented with just because you don't get absolute control over the process.  The repeal has to be passed before the next session to have a chance, and the repeal is a matter of national security and moral righteousness.

The question is: does the ability to insert amendments outweigh not passing the repeal?  It does not, even ignoring the whole funding the military thing.

So, why not pass the repeal as it's own separate bill, where Republicans have NO EXCUSE not to support it?  And, fwiw, I think it will pass next session.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

But the DADT repeal isn't even the majority of this bill.  The bill is HUGE... amendments should be able to be offered, and doing this in December is just dumb on Reid's part.

Maybe I have too much faith in the GOP, but I think there are enough Snowes, Browns, and Collins in the Senate that they'll outweigh the McCains who truly just want to keep stalling forever and never repeal DADT.

But lumping DADT in with a bill that's close to 1000 pages was not the way to repeal it.  And to simplify this bill down to "The repeal of DADT" is dishonest and it means that you're ignoring the other 800-some pages of the bill when you describe it.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

But the DADT repeal isn't even the majority of this bill.  The bill is HUGE... amendments should be able to be offered, and doing this in December is just dumb on Reid's part.... a bill that's close to 1000 pages was not the way to repeal it.  And to simplify this bill down to "The repeal of DADT" is dishonest and it means that you're ignoring the other 800-some pages of the bill when you describe it.

So why aren't you talking about the other parts of the bill?  What are the parts of it that you are unsatisfied with or feel should be debated further?  Surely you don't just want to talk about the size of what needs to be discussed further?

Because I don't know all of the other parts in the bill (I've read some, and skimmed some, but not the whole thing).

I've never said I'm unsatisfied with it... I'm simply saying that I think the GOP has legitimate desires if they want to offer some amendments.

And I'm emphasizing that there's a lot more to this bill than DADT, ranging from funding for building ships to a "plan on sustainment of liquid rocket propulsion systems industrial base" (whatever that means).

The main bill should be one bill.  And the more controversial (although it's stupid that it's controversial) DADT repeal should've been separate.  And it doesn't help that this bill includes a repeal of allowing military medical facilities to be used to perform abortions.  Obviously that was going to be a controversial part of the bill, and no hard-core pro-life Senator will vote for this bill, even if he wants DADT to be repealed knowing that Right to Life would be scoring the bill.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Here's the thing... you guys are acting like DADT is the only thing in this bill.  It's 849 pages long... if Reid really wants this to pass, he would allow for the Republicans to have some amendments to it.  It's only fair.

Reid wasn't blocking the GOP from adding amendments to the bill.  The issue was over the time allotted for the bill.  The GOP was demanding a ton of time to add amendments and no agreement was made about exactly how much time would be allotted.   Collins did vote for repeal.

One thing to note is it seems the DADT will get a stand alone vote, its something Collins and Lieberman are working on and Reid has said he will support bringing it to the floor and while no timetable is set when a vote will be held, it will be prior to the lame duck session ending.  

Why does the GOP even bother making these lame excuses? It about amendments or budgeting or that I can't do votes on Tuesdays on months with an r in them. It's perfectly obvious where they stand.

In that case, why did Scott Brown vote against invoking cloture, when he has previously said he will support the repeal of DADT?

Because he's a cynical asshat.

Or, he wants to repeal DADT but also wants to have the ability to offer more than 10 amendments to this bill.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Many members of this forum on both sides of the issue place much greater importance on gay issues than the general public.  In reality, the repeal of DADT ranks very low on most Americans' list of priorities.  Blocking repeal simply doesn't have the negative political effects that many Atlasians think it does.

Not when the issue is the economy.  Then again, in 2012, the focus may have shifted off the economy.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Many members of this forum on both sides of the issue place much greater importance on gay issues than the general public.  In reality, the repeal of DADT ranks very low on most Americans' list of priorities.  Blocking repeal simply doesn't have the negative political effects that many Atlasians think it does.

The amount of time it would take if people really wanted to repeal it would be a matter of days or hours. It's not like repealing DADT takes 6 months of constant work and focus. It's only been this difficult because people refuse to cooperate and make excuses.

I seriously doubt minority rights will ever be very high on "most Americans' list of priorities." It doesn't mean that ignoring such a thing is the right thing to do, especially with such large public support for DADT's repeal.

To my knowledge, a simple repeal of DADT hasn't been introduced in the recent past.  I'm talking a one-issue bill that deals just with 10 U.S.C. § 654.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Some would--there's no doubt about that.

My prediction is at least 65-35 passage, if not 70-30 as a stand-alone bill.

Even if you're right, and it can't be passed as its own, this bill certainly isn't the bill to do it in--not with the Burris Amendment in there removing the ban on abortions at military medical facilities.  That's already one strike against it for some Republicans, and when you add DADT to it, it makes this bill certain to fail by the hard-core conservatives who would oppose a DADT repeal.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

My prediction is at least 65-35 passage, if not 70-30 as a stand-alone bill.

65-35?  that's 7 out of 42 GOP Senators....no way.  every GOP member knows whoever votes for repeal of DADT will be primaried.  at most, you'll have 2-3 GOP defections.  The GOP is simply trying to stall until January, when there wont be a snow ball's chance of this passing.  They should be honest and state their opposition.

but, again, probably only half of the GOP Senators are social conservatives at heart.

1. Collins
2. Snowe
3. Brown
4. Murkowski
5. Graham
6. Hatch
7. Paul

That's at least 7.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

My prediction is at least 65-35 passage, if not 70-30 as a stand-alone bill.

65-35?  that's 7 out of 42 GOP Senators....no way.  every GOP member knows whoever votes for repeal of DADT will be primaried.  at most, you'll have 2-3 GOP defections.  The GOP is simply trying to stall until January, when there wont be a snow ball's chance of this passing.  They should be honest and state their opposition.

but, again, probably only half of the GOP Senators are social conservatives at heart.

1. Collins
2. Snowe
3. Brown
4. Murkowski
5. Graham
6. Hatch
7. Paul

That's at least 7.

LOL at Hatch. The guy has become worse than McCain (not that it will save him in the primary).

How so?

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

My prediction is at least 65-35 passage, if not 70-30 as a stand-alone bill.

65-35?  that's 7 out of 42 GOP Senators....no way.  every GOP member knows whoever votes for repeal of DADT will be primaried.  at most, you'll have 2-3 GOP defections.  The GOP is simply trying to stall until January, when there wont be a snow ball's chance of this passing.  They should be honest and state their opposition.

but, again, probably only half of the GOP Senators are social conservatives at heart.

1. Collins
2. Snowe
3. Brown
4. Murkowski
5. Graham
6. Hatch
7. Paul

That's at least 7.

Paul won't actually be sworn in until January though, right?

Sorry, I was thinking next session, but they'd need more than 7 by that point.  But that list was just the first 7 that came to my mind.  I think there are more out there, those are just some that I'm nearly positive would vote for it.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

My prediction is at least 65-35 passage, if not 70-30 as a stand-alone bill.

65-35?  that's 7 out of 42 GOP Senators....no way.  every GOP member knows whoever votes for repeal of DADT will be primaried.  at most, you'll have 2-3 GOP defections.  The GOP is simply trying to stall until January, when there wont be a snow ball's chance of this passing.  They should be honest and state their opposition.

but, again, probably only half of the GOP Senators are social conservatives at heart.

1. Collins
2. Snowe
3. Brown
4. Murkowski
5. Graham
6. Hatch
7. Paul

That's at least 7.

LOL at Hatch. The guy has become worse than McCain (not that it will save him in the primary).

How so?

How so what? Have you seen his voting record lately?

But Hatch has openly said he's willing to repeal DADT.  McCain has been a lot more anti-repeal.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

My prediction is at least 65-35 passage, if not 70-30 as a stand-alone bill.

65-35?  that's 7 out of 42 GOP Senators....no way.  every GOP member knows whoever votes for repeal of DADT will be primaried.  at most, you'll have 2-3 GOP defections.  The GOP is simply trying to stall until January, when there wont be a snow ball's chance of this passing.  They should be honest and state their opposition.

but, again, probably only half of the GOP Senators are social conservatives at heart.

1. Collins
2. Snowe
3. Brown
4. Murkowski
5. Graham
6. Hatch
7. Paul

That's at least 7.

Paul won't actually be sworn in until January though, right?

Sorry, I was thinking next session, but they'd need more than 7 by that point.  But that list was just the first 7 that came to my mind.  I think there are more out there, those are just some that I'm nearly positive would vote for it.

Keep in ming next session it would require it to pass in the House again, and that sure as hell isn't going to happen.

There's enough moderates in the House, for sure for it to pass.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

My prediction is at least 65-35 passage, if not 70-30 as a stand-alone bill.

65-35?  that's 7 out of 42 GOP Senators....no way.  every GOP member knows whoever votes for repeal of DADT will be primaried.  at most, you'll have 2-3 GOP defections.  The GOP is simply trying to stall until January, when there wont be a snow ball's chance of this passing.  They should be honest and state their opposition.

but, again, probably only half of the GOP Senators are social conservatives at heart.

1. Collins
2. Snowe
3. Brown
4. Murkowski
5. Graham
6. Hatch
7. Paul

That's at least 7.

Paul won't actually be sworn in until January though, right?

Sorry, I was thinking next session, but they'd need more than 7 by that point.  But that list was just the first 7 that came to my mind.  I think there are more out there, those are just some that I'm nearly positive would vote for it.

Keep in ming next session it would require it to pass in the House again, and that sure as hell isn't going to happen.

There's enough moderates in the House, for sure for it to pass.

Can we get over this myth of moderate Republicans?

So, what are Lisa Murkowski, Olympia Snowe, Scott Brown, and Susan Collins?

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

And you have moderate governors... Jodi Rell, Governor-elect Rick Snyder right here in Michigan...

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Smash, much of the objection there was that that DoD's report had yet to come out.  Now that it's out, I think we'll see more Republicans vote for it.