December 16, 2010
— DrewM
URGENT URGENT Sen Harry Reid (D-NV) says he won't force vote on earmark-filled Senate Omnibus budget bill
Full story here.
Various reports are now saying Reid is going to talk to McConnell about a short term Continuing Resolution (which is what McConnell demanded earlier today).
Reid says he had commitments from 9 Republicans to vote for Omnibus but they walked away from it.
Well, they may not be committed to fiscal discipline but it seems they are scared. That's good enough.
On the downside...Reid is filing cloture on DADT and DREAM Act. He's likely to get DADT passed.
On the floor now...McCain and Mark Kirk are gloating over the death of the Omnibus. Kirk asked McCain, "Did we win?" McCain said yes in an oblique, not rub it in kind of way.
Apparently the GOP put together another letter that they all signed saying, 'no'. And so it died.
Now McCaskill is whining about how the GOP is taking all the credit for this. Heh. This is delicious.
I didn't see what McConnell said but it's got Democrats pissed off, so that's a good thing.
You have to give McConnell credit, he's held the caucus together on taxes and the budget.
Conservatives will probably lose on DADT repeal, so the big fight is DREAM Act.
Related: House passes rule and is now debating tax cut deal. It sounds like there will be no change except to perhaps allow a separate vote on the Death Tax and the overall package.
It will pass later tonight.
Added: As Mr. Wolf would say, let's not partake of the sodomy just yet.
It's great to kill earmarks but as a budget matter they aren't even a rounding error. Now that big spending decisions will be pushed over until the GOP has the House and more votes in the Senate, we need to do more...CUT SPENDING.
Posted by: DrewM at
04:05 PM
| Comments (279)
Post contains 328 words, total size 2 kb.
Posted by: CAC at December 16, 2010 04:08 PM (Gr1V1)
Posted by: gus at December 16, 2010 04:10 PM (C02p4)
Posted by: Jane D'oh at December 16, 2010 04:11 PM (UOM48)
It is a great thing when our Congresscritters are scared.
Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at December 16, 2010 04:11 PM (c0A3e)
That's nothing. I can't believe we have to worry about Republicans voting for legislation to build a permanent Democratic majority (DREAM).
Posted by: Benson at December 16, 2010 04:12 PM (qzcNU)
I don't think they can insert ObamaCare funding into START. It's a treaty vote and only the Senate votes on treaties.
Posted by: John P. Squibob at December 16, 2010 04:12 PM (6WwJk)
Posted by: AE at December 16, 2010 04:14 PM (kSfPT)
Posted by: CAC at December 16, 2010 04:15 PM (Gr1V1)
Posted by: Jay at December 16, 2010 04:15 PM (EKpAZ)
The DADT thing disgusts me, but hopefully the military is robust enough to survive it. But the DREAM thing is (another) economy killer.
Posted by: Y-not at December 16, 2010 04:16 PM (IDL9N)
It is a great thing when our Congresscritters are scared.
Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at December 16, 2010 08:11 PM (c0A3e)
Liberty exists when the government fears the people. Or however that quote goes.
Posted by: buzzion at December 16, 2010 04:16 PM (oVQFe)
Posted by: Psycho Guy from the movie Scream that refuses to die at December 16, 2010 04:16 PM (h2+O0)
Did that come from the book Shit that Jefferson Said?
Posted by: John P. Squibob at December 16, 2010 04:17 PM (6WwJk)
Posted by: CAC at December 16, 2010 04:18 PM (Gr1V1)
Posted by: cali grump at December 16, 2010 04:18 PM (hL0k8)
Posted by: cali grump at December 16, 2010 04:19 PM (hL0k8)
Posted by: Count de Monet at December 16, 2010 04:19 PM (XBM1t)
Drudge says Harry Pulls It.
That must piss his wife off to no end.
Probably tickles the shit out of her.
Posted by: Ronster at December 16, 2010 04:20 PM (9q4PA)
Posted by: Steph at December 16, 2010 04:20 PM (kOSds)
Posted by: Mr. Pink at December 16, 2010 04:20 PM (h2+O0)
Posted by: Jay at December 16, 2010 04:21 PM (EKpAZ)
Hey, Claire--remember this?
Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at December 16, 2010 04:22 PM (U6LOz)
Posted by: robtr at December 16, 2010 04:22 PM (hVDig)
I hate these Congressional cows and cocksuckers so much it's unhealthy.
I'm not usually a 'the end is nigh' kind of gal but I do believe DREAM & START together would be the nail in the coffin of this country.
Posted by: laceyunderalls at December 16, 2010 04:22 PM (7w5F2)
It allegedly "costs" 700 gazillion or something.
Have to change the channel...
Posted by: Jay at December 16, 2010 04:22 PM (EKpAZ)
Posted by: cali grump at December 16, 2010 04:23 PM (hL0k8)
A top Senate source tells National Review Online that “it looks like Harry Reid buckled under the threat of Republicans reading [the bill] aloud.”
Demint did it then. Hooo-ya
Posted by: dagny at December 16, 2010 04:23 PM (aTI8L)
Posted by: yarrrr at December 16, 2010 04:23 PM (GZTLk)
Posted by: Hannibal Smith at December 16, 2010 04:24 PM (gaCCg)
Posted by: CoolCzech at December 16, 2010 04:24 PM (tJjm/)
The D Senator from Alaska took a minute to say how frustrated he was. He never said by what. He was kind of lame.
Posted by: Jay at December 16, 2010 04:24 PM (EKpAZ)
Posted by: FlaviusJulius at December 16, 2010 04:25 PM (SJ6/3)
Posted by: Lindsey Grahamnesty licking Rahm Emanuel's salty shaven balls at December 16, 2010 04:26 PM (pfMMA)
Posted by: Jay at December 16, 2010 08:21 PM (EKpAZ)
Is that like crossing the streams? Doesn't Capitol Hill implode when that happens or sumpin?
Posted by: ErikW at December 16, 2010 04:26 PM (VLL29)
Most people from Alaska are kinda lame.
Posted by: Barbarian at December 16, 2010 04:27 PM (EL+OC)
Posted by: John P. Squibob at December 16, 2010 04:27 PM (6WwJk)
A top Senate source tells National Review Online that “it looks like Harry Reid buckled under the threat of Republicans reading [the bill] aloud.”
Demint did it then. Hooo-ya
Posted by: dagny at December 16, 2010 08:23 PM (aTI8L)
Guess I need to follow up my last pleading phone call to DeMint with a big, fat thank you. If I could get to him, I'd give him a wet, sloppy kiss!
Posted by: Steph at December 16, 2010 04:27 PM (kOSds)
Posted by: Y-not at December 16, 2010 08:16 PM (IDL9N)
FIFY
Posted by: Burn the Witch at December 16, 2010 04:28 PM (fLHQe)
Most people from Alaska are kinda lame.
Posted by: Barbarian at December 16, 2010 08:27 PM (EL+OC)
All of Congress is kinda lame.
Posted by: Tami at December 16, 2010 04:28 PM (VuLos)
They really are such sore losers and are insistent they have a divine right to govern.
Posted by: Jay at December 16, 2010 04:28 PM (EKpAZ)
Posted by: Mr. Pink at December 16, 2010 04:28 PM (h2+O0)
Good. That series sucked.
Posted by: Alex at December 16, 2010 04:28 PM (yY28H)
Correct - they'll change the demographics to libtard forever while effectively disarming us against a resurgent Bear and Dragon.
/In the end, there will be only chaos.
Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at December 16, 2010 04:29 PM (c0A3e)
Well, they may not be committed to fiscal discipline but it seems they are scared. That's good enough.
Ayup. That'll do-er.
Posted by: rdbrewer at December 16, 2010 04:29 PM (gaCCg)
Posted by: Barbarian at December 16, 2010 04:29 PM (EL+OC)
Posted by: FlaviusJulius at December 16, 2010 04:29 PM (SJ6/3)
Posted by: Zombie John Murtha at December 16, 2010 04:30 PM (5boRB)
Did you see Harry whining earlier today that he wanted the omnibus passed, because he didn't want to give up the spending power to the WH?
I swear he looked like a 98 year old man's limp willie.
Posted by: Steph at December 16, 2010 04:30 PM (kOSds)
I hate to say it, but our only hope is that those two decide to fight it out against each other first.
Posted by: Alex at December 16, 2010 04:30 PM (yY28H)
Posted by: Ted Kennedy's Gristle Encased Head at December 16, 2010 04:30 PM (+lsX1)
Posted by: Lindsey Grahamnesty licking Rahm Emanuel's salty shaven balls at December 16, 2010 08:26 PM (pfMMA)
Not a shock. Amazing that a show doesn't do well when its solely based on the misery and unhappiness of characters. And the moment you give them a little bit of joy you do everything you can to crush them down even farther than they were before.
Posted by: buzzion at December 16, 2010 04:31 PM (oVQFe)
And who saw JJ 'Shakedown' Jr. whining on the House floor?
He's bitching about the 'vault of opportunity' we're missing out on by extending the Bush tax cuts for the eeeeeevil wealthy.
These sick twists actually believe it's their money. That Pimp Daddy Uncle Sam should keep it and give us an allowance or something.
Posted by: laceyunderalls at December 16, 2010 04:31 PM (7w5F2)
Posted by: Jay at December 16, 2010 08:21 PM (EKpAZ)
He seems to be confused as to which election was the most recent. Transparency was sooooo 2008. The last election was STOP FUCKING SPENDING.
Posted by: Burn the Witch at December 16, 2010 04:31 PM (fLHQe)
okay, everyone, prepare yourselves to be happy with only half-a-fuckin'
because, oh gee willickers, it's the best we can hope for
Posted by: lolsoothsayer at December 16, 2010 04:31 PM (waTiq)
My Alaskan natives were counting on that money.
The D Senator from Alaska took a minute to say how frustrated he was. He never said by what. He was kind of lame.
Posted by: Jay at December 16, 2010 08:24 PM (EKpAZ)
From Gateway Pundit:Multiple Alaska Native groups combined to form a PAC that spent $1.7 million to assist Senator Lisa Murkowski in her bid for reelection last month. Now we find out that in earmarks alone in the pending omnibus bill Senator Murkowski has paid her supporters back over to 10 to 1.
-------
At least that bitch is unhappy.
Posted by: Ed Anger at December 16, 2010 04:31 PM (7+pP9)
Posted by: Zombie John Murtha at December 16, 2010 08:30 PM (5boRB)
Me first.
Posted by: Zombie Robert "Sheets" Byrd at December 16, 2010 04:32 PM (6WwJk)
Posted by: Murkuntski at December 16, 2010 04:34 PM (h2+O0)
Posted by: nike who likes interesting things at December 16, 2010 04:34 PM (5I0Yr)
He's bitching about the 'vault of opportunity' we're missing out on by extending the Bush tax cuts for the eeeeeevil wealthy.
These sick twists actually believe it's their money. That Pimp Daddy Uncle Sam should keep it and give us an allowance or something.
Posted by: laceyunderalls at December 16, 2010 08:31 PM (7w5F2)
He actually used those words? 'vault of opportunity'? My God.
Posted by: Steph at December 16, 2010 04:34 PM (kOSds)
Can we at least hope for Weiner going b-a-n-a-n-a-s and stroking out on the House floor?
At least give us that!
Posted by: laceyunderalls at December 16, 2010 04:34 PM (7w5F2)
Posted by: lowandslow at December 16, 2010 08:31 PM (GZitp)
Yeah, much improved over the German spam last thread.
I miss caterpillar filters.
Posted by: Burn the Witch at December 16, 2010 04:35 PM (fLHQe)
These sick twists actually believe it's their money. That Pimp Daddy Uncle Sam should keep it and give us an allowance or something.
They sure do. If they could get away with it, they would get everyone's income first then send each of us an equal amount of what little is left.
Posted by: Annabelle at December 16, 2010 04:36 PM (Zeljq)
Posted by: CoolCzech at December 16, 2010 04:36 PM (tJjm/)
Posted by: Gwen Stefani at December 16, 2010 04:36 PM (h2+O0)
I want to see their heads explode.
Posted by: Holger at December 16, 2010 04:36 PM (V9Q+f)
They sure do. If they could get away with it, they would get everyone's income first then send each of us an equal amount of what little is left.
Posted by: Annabelle at December 16, 2010 08:36 PM (Zeljq)
We're almost there!
Posted by: The U.K. Caliphate at December 16, 2010 04:37 PM (fLHQe)
Biting words. Weiner's ass. No assembly required.
Posted by: John P. Squibob at December 16, 2010 04:37 PM (6WwJk)
Posted by: Chicago Jedi at December 16, 2010 04:38 PM (WZFkG)
Posted by: Alex at December 16, 2010 04:38 PM (yY28H)
I mean, really...this close to the election to have something like these even be considered and possible is a sad commentary on who we have sent to Washington over the last 30 years.
If your project is so important, bring it up as a stand-alone. Better yet, if your project is so important, let the fng people of your fng state vote on and pay for it.
As for the argument that Congress is abdicating their spending authority to the Presidency...well, you still have the overall power of the budget...just don't budget anything, you fng f's.
When it's all said and done, unfortunately, this type of stare-down between the voters and congress (even some of the Rs) is going to have to be an almost daily occurrence. They really think we'll lose interest.
Posted by: The Hammer at December 16, 2010 04:40 PM (32ubA)
Posted by: Steph at December 16, 2010 04:40 PM (kOSds)
Posted by: Alex at December 16, 2010 08:38 PM (yY28H)
That would work if the Republicans were going to be in charge of the Senate. But they aren't.
Posted by: buzzion at December 16, 2010 04:40 PM (oVQFe)
Would DADT repeal really damage the military that much? What if we just instituted more stringent fraternization regulations? No asking your squad leader out on a date, that sort of thing?
Posted by: Techie at December 16, 2010 04:40 PM (SzvZF)
If they could get away with it, they would get everyone's income first then send each of us an equal amount of what little is left
Well not equal. Because you and I have had our 'fair share' over the years. It's more important that someone else get a turn.
Remember you and I? Well at a certin point, we've made enough money.
But not Beyonce, Jay Z, and LeBron.
Posted by: laceyunderalls at December 16, 2010 04:41 PM (7w5F2)
Posted by: fluffy at December 16, 2010 04:41 PM (SwkdU)
They really are such sore losers and are insistent they have a divine right to rule.
Posted by: Jay at December 16, 2010 08:28 PM (EKpAZ)
FTFY
Posted by: Book Geek at December 16, 2010 04:41 PM (1+OO5)
Posted by: Tommy DeVito at December 16, 2010 04:42 PM (hL0k8)
Posted by: kansas at December 16, 2010 04:42 PM (4FGpb)
There is the fatal flaw to your otherwise brilliant plan.
Is it too much to ask to have Republican higher-ups willing to engage in political combat with even a quarter of the intensity that the Dems do?
Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at December 16, 2010 04:42 PM (c0A3e)
Posted by: LolGangster at December 16, 2010 04:44 PM (SwkdU)
Posted by: Techie at December 16, 2010 04:44 PM (SzvZF)
Posted by: Lady in Black at December 16, 2010 04:44 PM (x9xik)
Would DADT repeal really damage the military that much? What if we just instituted more stringent fraternization regulations? No asking your squad leader out on a date, that sort of thing?
That doesn't work now. Fraternization between male and female soldiers is a problem right now. In order for leadership to crack down on fraternization, they'd have to have enormous and intrusive powers over a soldier's private life. That is never going to happen.
Posted by: Alex at December 16, 2010 04:45 PM (yY28H)
Would DADT repeal really damage the military that much? What if we just instituted more stringent fraternization regulations? No asking your squad leader out on a date, that sort of thing?
Posted by: Techie at December 16, 2010 08:40 PM (SzvZF)
Would you want to have to spoon with a gay man for days to keep from freezing on the front line? Want to be front or back?
Posted by: Steph at December 16, 2010 04:45 PM (kOSds)
Posted by: CoolCzech at December 16, 2010 04:45 PM (tJjm/)
108 I mean, forgive me if I'm mistaken, but I think the Republic has far more pressing issues than whether or not Corporal John Doe can admit he bats for the other team
Posted by: Techie at December 16, 2010 08:44 PM (SzvZF)
Then why does it need to be passed RIGHT NOW!!!!!11111!!!!!!
There are more pressing matters, which is exactly why their shouldn't be a lame duck vote on it.
Posted by: buzzion at December 16, 2010 04:45 PM (oVQFe)
Posted by: Freddy Krueger and Jason at December 16, 2010 04:46 PM (5I0Yr)
Posted by: Count de Monet at December 16, 2010 04:47 PM (XBM1t)
Posted by: Chicago Jedi at December 16, 2010 04:47 PM (WZFkG)
Posted by: nerdygirl at December 16, 2010 04:47 PM (mg7ZJ)
Posted by: Dan at December 16, 2010 04:47 PM (1jzSs)
DADT and the DREAM act both have to pass through the House as well. We can kill them completely, or at least offer the chance for debate and alternatives.
Posted by: Alex at December 16, 2010 04:48 PM (yY28H)
Posted by: Lemon Kitten at December 16, 2010 04:48 PM (0fzsA)
Look, even we have limits, you sick fuck.
Posted by: fluffy at December 16, 2010 08:41 PM (SwkdU)
srsly, I just ate carrot caekz, and now I feel a little green.
Posted by: Unclefacts, Confuse A Cat, Ltd. at December 16, 2010 04:48 PM (eCAn3)
Posted by: CoolCzech at December 16, 2010 04:49 PM (tJjm/)
Wow, one of these things is not like the other.
Posted by: Techie at December 16, 2010 04:49 PM (SzvZF)
On this day in 1773, a group of colonists disguised as Indians boarded British merchant ships and dumped into the Boston Harbor an estimated £10,000 worth of tea as a protest against British colonial policies..
Heh.
Posted by: Guy Fawkes at December 16, 2010 04:49 PM (xQAv5)
-----------
New slogan for the NO LABELS crowd?
Posted by: Lady in Black
LOL - YES! Of course, the no-labels crowd are assholes too-- Anti-free speech assholes -the worst variety of asshole.
Posted by: Lemon Kitten at December 16, 2010 04:49 PM (0fzsA)
Posted by: fluffy at December 16, 2010 04:50 PM (SwkdU)
please turn on CSPAN NOW.
look at this asshole's bowtie. tells you everything you need to know abuot these paintywaists.
Posted by: laceyunderalls at December 16, 2010 04:50 PM (7w5F2)
"Conservatives will probably lose on DADT repeal"
Perhaps, but as soon as it becomes very obvious, and it will happen very quickly that the repeal is hurting the military, as warned by the heads of the Armed forces, then the blame will come fast and furious...... against all these irresponsible a-holes who don't even think about long term affects of changing major policies in the middle of wars.
Posted by: johnc_recent_EX-dem at December 16, 2010 04:50 PM (ACkhT)
Posted by: Alex at December 16, 2010 08:48 PM (yY28H)
If I'm not mistaken DADT passed the house yesterday.
Posted by: Steph at December 16, 2010 04:50 PM (kOSds)
Posted by: kansas at December 16, 2010 04:50 PM (4FGpb)
Posted by: Ohio Dan at December 16, 2010 04:51 PM (GNhXz)
You'll get nothing and like it!
Posted by: Judge Elihu Smeals at December 16, 2010 04:51 PM (8lSIO)
The issue is whether or not having openly homosexual Corporal John Doe is going to cause serious problems in morale and discipline among our soldiers. The effectiveness and cohesion of the armed forces should be among the highest priorities for any nation.
Posted by: Alex at December 16, 2010 04:51 PM (yY28H)
Posted by: johnc_recent_EX-dem at December 16, 2010 04:52 PM (ACkhT)
That sort of begs the question: How much of the Armed Forces isn't Telling?
Wrecking the Army during a war? The entire Army? What, is 20% of the Infantry coming out of the closet?
Posted by: Techie at December 16, 2010 04:52 PM (SzvZF)
Would DADT repeal really damage the military that much? What if we just instituted more stringent fraternization regulations? No asking your squad leader out on a date, that sort of thing?
Posted by: Techie at December 16, 2010 08:40 PM (SzvZF)
What is your major mal function techie? Did your mother make you sleep on the porch? You want me to change the motto of my Corps to The Few, The Proud and the Gay Marines!
Lean forward and put your throat in my hand techie.
Posted by: Gunny Lee Ermey at December 16, 2010 04:53 PM (hVDig)
Posted by: Hedgehog at December 16, 2010 04:55 PM (Rn2kl)
Posted by: Lady in Black at December 16, 2010 04:55 PM (x9xik)
Dat's true - Earmarks are essentially unfunded* but take priority over all other items in the budget. So, a buch of shiite which was suppossedly justified/needed and had a benefit / cost > 1 gets bumped for a total waste.
* 7 cents on the dollar I have been told.
Posted by: Druid at December 16, 2010 04:55 PM (RnujI)
Nothing wrong with this. A lot of politicians are about getting themselves reelected. The way to control them is to scare them into thinking they won't get reelected if they don't do right by us. Assuming they will control spending out of altruism is naive.
Posted by: nerdygirl at December 16, 2010 08:47 PM (mg7ZJ)
Agreed. In fact, it's better. I'd rather not rely on the good graces of politicians. Of course, with this Lame Duck bullshit, they can't be held to account.
One thing this blog hasn't covered yet is that the Wisconsin legislature brought a legislator out of jail on a drunk driving charge to be the deciding vote to approve a sweetheart deal with the state employee unions before the Republicans take over.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 16, 2010 04:55 PM (BvBKY)
Posted by: fluffy at December 16, 2010 04:56 PM (SwkdU)
Would that not have also been an accurate argument for the desegregation of the Armed Forces back in the day? Is Pvt. N. Bedford Forrest IV going to take orders from a black Sargent?
(And ....I'm threadjacking....... of a sorts. Yeah, dead Porkzilla bill! And stay dead).
Posted by: Techie at December 16, 2010 04:56 PM (SzvZF)
Posted by: Lady in Black at December 16, 2010 04:56 PM (x9xik)
The best bit of delicious sweet irony is the Dems crying about not getting to keep the Bush tax cuts.
Posted by: Unclefacts, Confuse A Cat, Ltd. at December 16, 2010 04:57 PM (eCAn3)
If I'm not mistaken DADT passed the house yesterday.
Posted by: Steph at December 16, 2010 08:50 PM (kOSds)
Yup, by a legislature full of representatives whom the American people have rejected at the ballot box. Even if the incoming class votes entirely against DADT, it would still pass, based on the numbers. However, it would have legitimacy that the current repeal does not.
Posted by: Alex at December 16, 2010 04:57 PM (yY28H)
Posted by: Americans that weren't part of the 13% that currently approve of Congress. at December 16, 2010 04:57 PM (7w5F2)
Posted by: Ronster at December 16, 2010 04:58 PM (9q4PA)
Posted by: Lady in Black at December 16, 2010 08:55 PM (x9xik)
Hey, I tried that and look where it got me!
Posted by: Zombie Elvis at December 16, 2010 04:58 PM (XBM1t)
Question? for those military personnel who will leave if DADT passes, even if they served honorably and bravely, will they be insulted by the lame stream media?
will the LSM be calling military persons "homophobes" if they disagree with the repeal of DADT? has this happened already? I don't watch much TV so am curious if this is already starting.
As for Scott Brown, *shaking head*, the man is worse than Collins and Snow.
Posted by: johnc_recent_EX-dem at December 16, 2010 04:58 PM (ACkhT)
Posted by: Charlie Rangel & Maxine Waters at December 16, 2010 04:59 PM (tJjm/)
That sort of begs the question: How much of the Armed Forces isn't Telling?
Wrecking the Army during a war? The entire Army? What, is 20% of the Infantry coming out of the closet?
Posted by: Techie at December 16, 2010 08:52 PM (SzvZF)
I'll echo fluffy's sentiments, explain to me, in small words since I'm a Moron, hot repealing DADT improves combat effectiveness in the armed services? When are people going to get it through their thick fabulous skulls, that the military does NOT exist for the left to perform social experiments on?
Posted by: Unclefacts, Confuse A Cat, Ltd. at December 16, 2010 04:59 PM (eCAn3)
Posted by: cali grump at December 16, 2010 04:59 PM (hL0k8)
I prefer something more along the lines of FIMA.
Fucking
Illegals
Milking
America
Posted by: Lady in Black at December 16, 2010 05:00 PM (x9xik)
Seems how we have an extreme shortfall on meeting recruiting goals (just coincidentally matching the percentage of homosexuals chomping at the bit to serve, if they only could do so openly) and repeal of DADT is expected to return a benefit / cost > 1.0, combat effectiveness will be improved as a function of $$$.
Yeah, I just made that shiite up, and not a single slag voting on this has even considered it.
Posted by: Druid at December 16, 2010 05:00 PM (RnujI)
Posted by: CoolCzech at December 16, 2010 05:00 PM (tJjm/)
Ace knows I have been harping on the Dream Act in private e-mails.
These bastard democrats are all about political calculi versus what's best for the country. I suspect we were pushed to the wall on the budget that the dems knew was outrageous and now they will hype up their own "magnimity" and push the Dream Act like crazy.
How in the hell can cloture be reached on the Dream Act? Folks, we cannot keep our eye off of these nefarious dem players.
What are the current votes on the Dream Act?
Posted by: journolist at December 16, 2010 05:00 PM (LwLqV)
Posted by: Chicago Jedi at December 16, 2010 05:00 PM (WZFkG)
Posted by: CoolCzech at December 16, 2010 05:02 PM (tJjm/)
Posted by: Samuel Adams at December 16, 2010 05:02 PM (Jx0x6)
Posted by: fluffy at December 16, 2010 05:02 PM (SwkdU)
Posted by: CoolCzech at December 16, 2010 09:00 PM (tJjm/)
Yeah I know, I donated to his campaign just to make sure a repub would get teddy's seat. Won't be donating again.
I'm just tired of all these jerks. I don't expect they to vote the way I want 100% of the time, but at least for the major issues and even that isn't happening.
Posted by: johnc_recent_EX-dem at December 16, 2010 05:03 PM (ACkhT)
I suspect Reid has votes for cloture for repeal of DADT, but not for the DREAM act.
Wouldn't be the first or last time the jacka$$ has/will lie.
Posted by: johnc_recent_EX-dem at December 16, 2010 05:05 PM (ACkhT)
will the LSM be calling military persons "homophobes" if they disagree with the repeal of DADT? has this happened already? I don't watch much TV so am curious if this is already starting.
As for Scott Brown, *shaking head*, the man is worse than Collins and Snow.
Posted by: johnc_recent_EX-dem at December 16, 2010 08:58 PM (ACkhT)
Well, let's just say they aren't very happy with the Marine Corp Commandant right now.
Posted by: Steph at December 16, 2010 05:05 PM (kOSds)
Question? for those military personnel who will leave if DADT passes, even if they served honorably and bravely, will they be insulted by the lame stream media?
There won't be a mass exodus in protest. It's just that new recruits won't sign up and current servicemen won't bother to re-sign. It'll just be one more straw on the PC camel's back.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 16, 2010 05:05 PM (BvBKY)
He loathes Obama that much. He has a long memory.
Posted by: Chris in Va at December 16, 2010 09:03 PM (uCjoj)
Yeah, I think Obama turned McCain into a conservative.
Posted by: robtr at December 16, 2010 05:06 PM (hVDig)
I can't watch this anymore.
It's like a parade of mentally retarded adults blowing kazoos.
And it sounds just awful.
Posted by: laceyunderalls at December 16, 2010 05:06 PM (7w5F2)
No way in hell. McCain will vote against just about anything Obama wants for the rest of time. Whether he wants to or not.
cough, cough, "Start", cough, "Treaty" cough!
Posted by: runningrn at December 16, 2010 05:06 PM (ihSHD)
Posted by: fluffy at December 16, 2010 09:02 PM (SwkdU)
This.
Posted by: DPR VIII at December 16, 2010 05:07 PM (4XUD3)
Folks, we are being set up on the Dream Act!
I know I sound like a broken record but we are being set up here.
Here's why. Reid had a test vote last week on the Dream Act. When it was tabled, he allowed members to make a public "no" vote but just watch, the dynamic is going to change with Reid's bill.
If cloture was reached on the Dream Act, that means a deal may have been cooked up here.
I'm smelling a rat.
How in the world could the Dream Act not be fricking filibustered by the GOP?
Something is going on here.
Damn it. I can feel it.
Posted by: journolist at December 16, 2010 05:07 PM (LwLqV)
Posted by: CoolCzech at December 16, 2010 09:02 PM (tJjm/)
I heard him say the other day on TV that he got the message, and won't be voting on any type amnesty bill until the border is secure. We'll see, I guess.
Posted by: Steph at December 16, 2010 05:08 PM (kOSds)
Posted by: MrTea at December 16, 2010 05:10 PM (ytCsK)
Posted by: George O at December 16, 2010 09:00 PM (32ubA)
Sorry. That went way over my head.
Posted by: Ronster at December 16, 2010 05:10 PM (9q4PA)
There won't be a mass exodus in protest. It's just that new recruits won't sign up and current servicemen won't bother to re-sign. It'll just be one more straw on the PC camel's back.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 16, 2010 09:05 PM (BvBKY)
My son is planning on going into Air Force ROTC, this will give him pause. He has an alleged gay friend in High School even. (alleged meaning to me how the fuck can a 16 year old kid decide his own ADULT sexuality.) My son's issue as well as the rest of us sane responsible citizens, is that this is an open door to force the gay issue down our fucking throats.
Posted by: Samuel Adams at December 16, 2010 05:10 PM (Jx0x6)
Would DADT repeal really damage the military that much?
Posted by: Techie at December 16, 2010 08:40 PM (SzvZF)
It would make it the 'who walks point' decision much easier.
Posted by: Barbarian at December 16, 2010 05:11 PM (EL+OC)
Posted by: CoolCzech at December 16, 2010 05:13 PM (tJjm/)
Re-signing people are a main source of our military's strength - experienced military personnel willing to return to continue the fight are more than worth their weight in gold.
Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at December 16, 2010 05:14 PM (c0A3e)
Posted by: CoolCzech at December 16, 2010 05:14 PM (tJjm/)
Father: Son, did you go enlist in the Army like dear ol' Dad once did?
Son: Well, Pops, I was going to, but then I read on the newspaper that DADT was ending, so I figured I needed to get the hell out of there, lest I catch the gay.
Father: Good call, son, that was a close bullet you dodged there. What are you going to do now?
Son: I'm going to move to the city and work for a company. Because one place where I will never encounter a homosexual will be a large urban area or amongst my co-workers.
Father: I'm so proud.
{end scene)
Seriously? That's how it's going to go?
(alleged meaning to me how the fuck can a 16 year old kid decide his own ADULT sexuality
Yes, because SEX is the furthest thing from a 16 year olds mind.
Posted by: Techie at December 16, 2010 05:14 PM (SzvZF)
If you live in Rochester or Williamsville NY you've got a good rep in Chris Lee.
He basically just called the Donks a bunch of hypocritical assholes.
Neat!
Posted by: laceyunderalls at December 16, 2010 05:15 PM (7w5F2)
Posted by: AmishDude at December 16, 2010 09:05 PM (BvBKY)
Yes, you are correct, I can see that happening. The reenlisted will go down as well as those that can retire early will retire early. And the enlisted of new recruits will go down, one of my wife's friend's son has already expressed some doubts being a combat personnel in that situation, exactly what the Marine Head of Services had testified to last week.
Posted by: johnc_recent_EX-dem at December 16, 2010 05:16 PM (ACkhT)
I heard him say the other day on TV that he got the message, and won't be voting on any type amnesty bill until the border is secure. We'll see, I guess.
Posted by: Steph at December 16, 2010 09:08 PM (kOSds)
To me that smells like bullshit from McCain. I can see him saying his 'Concerns have been met' as long as whatever bill up for vote includes "border security" in it.
Posted by: buzzion at December 16, 2010 05:18 PM (oVQFe)
Posted by: Schools on Michelle Obama's Let's Move Tour at December 16, 2010 09:16 PM (uCjoj)
Chris Matthews?
Posted by: Delta Smelt at December 16, 2010 05:18 PM (aUE7j)
No. Not good enough.
As long as these thugs are even thinking of atrocities like the fucking "DREAM" Act, they should be so afraid that they can't leave the Capitol grounds without being surrounded by angry mobs.
They need to fear ugly public trials in which all their wrongdoings are exposed. They need to fear long prison terms in desert hellholes where they are under the control of sadistic ex-constituents.
Posted by: MrScribbler© at December 16, 2010 05:18 PM (Ulu3i)
Posted by: Techie at December 16, 2010 09:14 PM (SzvZF)
How the fuck can a 16 year old know if they are gay or not, or if they are just following the latest fad or the latest cool thing. They do not know shit other than what that particular penis or vagina of their's do.
Posted by: Samuel Adams at December 16, 2010 05:18 PM (Jx0x6)
Posted by: Techie at December 16, 2010 05:18 PM (SzvZF)
Would that not have also been an accurate argument for the desegregation of the Armed Forces back in the day? Is Pvt. N. Bedford Forrest IV going to take orders from a black Sargent?
Being gay and being black are two different things. Race is usually apparent, and the underlying culture and behaviors can still be very similar, allowing for an easier time assimilating. However, if there were serious concerns about the ability to integrate the armed forces and maintain the necessary level of readiness, then yes, Congress should hesitate. The armed forces exist to defend this country, and that requires a different condition than exists in civilian society. For the record, integration has produced problems, even while being beneficial overall. PC and EO programs have become all consuming in some places, and cries of "RACISM!" are threats that I've seen used to protect scumbag soldiers and bully commanders.
With regards to the integration of women, it has changed how commanders deal with their troops, often imposes greater burdens on units, has led to whole host of double standards in regards to grooming standards, PT scores and such, and has added a sexual harrassment/fraternization problem to the mix.
Posted by: Alex at December 16, 2010 05:19 PM (yY28H)
Posted by: fluffy at December 16, 2010 05:19 PM (SwkdU)
Posted by: johnc_recent_EX-dem at December 16, 2010 05:19 PM (ACkhT)
Posted by: Techie at December 16, 2010 09:14 PM (SzvZF)
You're a fucking dipshit. And yes that is the extent of a response that idiotic post you just wrote deserves.
Posted by: buzzion at December 16, 2010 05:19 PM (oVQFe)
If you live in Rochester or Williamsville NY you've got a good rep in Chris Lee.
He basically just called the Donks a bunch of hypocritical assholes.
Neat!
Posted by: laceyunderalls at December 16, 2010 09:15 PM (7w5F2)
Rochester is owned by Louise Slaughter. Chris is east of there on over towards buffalo and has batavia and a couple smaller burgs. but he is one of the good guys.
Posted by: Unclefacts, Confuse A Cat, Ltd. at December 16, 2010 05:19 PM (eCAn3)
How the fuck can a 16 year old know if they are gay or not, or if they are just following the latest fad or the latest cool thing. They do not know shit other than what that particular penis or vagina of their's do.
Posted by: Samuel Adams at December 16, 2010 09:18 PM (Jx0x6)
Well, I think it might make a difference if it's only standing at attention for another guy.
Posted by: Steph at December 16, 2010 05:20 PM (kOSds)
Posted by: Techie at December 16, 2010 05:20 PM (SzvZF)
Posted by: Techie at December 16, 2010 09:18 PM (SzvZF)
Yeah that's right. "I don't want to start a fight after I've spent my time implying that you're all a bunch of homophobes that believe you can 'catch the gay'"
Posted by: buzzion at December 16, 2010 05:20 PM (oVQFe)
Posted by: Techie at December 16, 2010 09:14 PM (SzvZF)
Let me repeat myself from earlier today: One of the things that I've noticed about "pro-gay" heterosexuals is their tendency to de-anthropomorphize gays. That is, to de-humanize them.Most of the arguments against DADT repeal are of the form, "If I, as a heterosexual, were placed in a position in which I would be sexually attracted to the people I bunk, shower and live with 24/7 in close quarters, there would eventually be a problem because of my own personal weaknesses and those of all human beings."
But you, Techie, and others, seem to feel as if gays are not normal people, that their sexual desires aren't actually sexual or desires, that it's more philosophical, like some sort of watered-down new-age pseudo-Buddhism.
To you, they aren't people and you don't truly accept their homosexuality. Instead, they are alien children whom you pity from afar. Or they are handicapped and so to be pitied in that way.
Unlike you, I don't think that homosexuals are so mentally ill that we need to engage in legal gymnastics for no other purpose than allowing the state to serve as a force for psychological reinforcement. It's condescending and it's bigoted and you should be ashamed.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 16, 2010 05:21 PM (BvBKY)
that was precious. still haven't answered the very basic question of how does repealing DADT increase combat effectiveness?
Posted by: Unclefacts, Confuse A Cat, Ltd. at December 16, 2010 05:21 PM (eCAn3)
Eh. Chris was sane at one point in time. I used to love of his show years and years ago. Then he went off the deep end and hit his head in the process.
True. I used to watch him in the late 90s all the time. Back when Fox was still brand new. He even subbed for Rush a few times. I blame the booze.
Posted by: Delta Smelt at December 16, 2010 05:22 PM (aUE7j)
Isn't she the dipshit who started whining about teeth from dead people?
Posted by: Andrew P. Sullivan, Physician, Philosopher, Life Coach at December 16, 2010 09:21 PM (uCjoj)
and the originator of the "deemed and passed Slaughter Rule".
Posted by: Unclefacts, Confuse A Cat, Ltd. at December 16, 2010 05:22 PM (eCAn3)
Yes. That's just what the front line troops need when they're under fire- someone running around crying and flapping their arms.
Posted by: Allahpenis at December 16, 2010 05:22 PM (EL+OC)
please turn on CSPAN NOW.
look at this asshole's bowtie. tells you everything you need to know about these paintywaists.The correct term is pantywaste. Make sense now?
Posted by: Druid at December 16, 2010 05:23 PM (RnujI)
But the reason that I'm pissed about DADT repeal is not that I think having fruits flounce around in fatigues will hurt our military. I think they'll continue to kick ass. I just want Obama to disappoint his base yet again. I wanted to be able to find the nearest liberal and say "Obama sold you out AGAIN, motherfucker!" Then I would laugh and thrust my hips in a joyous humping motion.
Oh well.
Posted by: Masturbatin' Pete at December 16, 2010 05:23 PM (l3r2S)
Well, I think it might make a difference if it's only standing at attention for another guy.
Posted by: Steph at December 16, 2010 09:20 PM (kOSds)
Look, when my daughter was in High School, the cool fad when she was a Junior was that a lot of girls considered themselves bi-sexual, when I didn't even think they knew what the fuck that meant. Personally, I only think 50% of gays and lesbians are so-called gene homosexuals, the other 50% are sexual addicts who can't or won't stop their disruptive behavior. In other words, narcissists who can't make up their fucking minds.
Posted by: Samuel Adams at December 16, 2010 05:23 PM (Jx0x6)
Well, I think it might make a difference if it's only standing at attention for another guy.
Posted by: Steph at December 16, 2010 09:20 PM (kOSds)
Heh, Dad told me that when he was in boot camp in the 70's, the DI told them that if they got all tingly in the showers, they might need to reconsider their commitments.
Posted by: ErikW at December 16, 2010 05:23 PM (VLL29)
(alleged meaning to me how the fuck can a 16 year old kid decide his own ADULT sexuality
Yes, because SEX is the furthest thing from a 16 year olds mind.
Posted by: Techie at December 16, 2010 09:14 PM (SzvZF)
God damnit techie, it isn't about encountering a homosexual. It's about being forced to go camping with them in the fucking jungle for a year, listing to them talk about their boyfriend they left at home. It's about having to live with that kind of crap when you really don't have the will or desire to deal with it.
Your analogy with blacks is just plain horseshit. Blacks are no different than whites, they have girlfriends, wives kids whatever. I served with blacks 40 years ago, they were fine Marines, loved their country, wives and girlfriends and had some good music sent to them you could listen to.
Posted by: robtr at December 16, 2010 05:24 PM (hVDig)
I wanted to be able to find the nearest liberal and say "Obama sold you out AGAIN, motherfucker!"
I wonder when the African American community will notice that Obama really only pulls out all the stops for the gay community.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 16, 2010 05:26 PM (BvBKY)
Posted by: Andrew P. Sullivan, Physician, Philosopher, Life Coach at December 16, 2010 09:19 PM (uCjoj)
I think Tweety lost it during Clenis's Monica problems. You could see at the beginning he was disgusted by it but as Snakehead Carville and cocksuckers like Conason, Teh Forehead, Podesta and other assorted stains on humanity began trying to change the subject to the eeeeeeeeeevil Ken Starr and "it's only sex" he caved like the twatty four-flushing douche he always was. He's never been lucid or coherent since then.
Posted by: Captain Hate at December 16, 2010 05:27 PM (kOMUP)
Posted by: texette at December 16, 2010 05:27 PM (Bl4NH)
No, I just happen to have had a long-time friend come out after years of him being terrified of doing so.
You paint homosexuals as being some sort of automatic sex machines, incapable of professional restraint or suppressing desires. I'm as straight as a meter stick, but does that give me license to not work with females? I can't work long hours with female co-workers, lest I just lose it?
If I make sexual advances on an unwilling female, it's harassment and I'm libel to be punished. I am utterly non-convinced.by protestations that similar circumstances couldn't be dealt with. Brass won't allow for it, then sounds like your problem is with the brass.
Posted by: Techie at December 16, 2010 05:27 PM (SzvZF)
Posted by: Louis Tully at December 16, 2010 05:28 PM (BZEkR)
I wonder when the African American community will notice that Obama really only pulls out all the stops for the gay community.
Don't forget about us.
Posted by: Hispanics at December 16, 2010 05:29 PM (EL+OC)
Instead of looking for salvation from a liberal state that is home to Boston (South End for the boyz who like south ends), Cambridge (birthplace of gay marriage), NoHo (the lesbian capital of America) and P-town (the premier summer destination for the gheys), shouldn't "real" conservatives be pressuring senators from redstates.
Jim Webb does not want to support this. Ben Nelson should be crucified for supporting this.
Posted by: swamp yankee at December 16, 2010 05:29 PM (3DIBw)
Posted by: texette at December 16, 2010 09:27 PM (Bl4NH)
That would require the liberals to address the fact that HIV affects homosexuals at higher levels than heterosexuals. They want to keep believing in the lie of "HIV affects everyone equally"
Posted by: buzzion at December 16, 2010 05:30 PM (oVQFe)
You paint homosexuals as being some sort of automatic sex machines, incapable of professional restraint or suppressing desires.
Oh, not at all. You're the one who dehumanizes them.
I'm as straight as a meter stick, but does that give me license to not work with females?
Go to the gym. Go into the women's locker room. Tell them you can control yourself just fine.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 16, 2010 05:33 PM (BvBKY)
You paint homosexuals as being some sort of automatic sex machines, incapable of professional restraint or suppressing desires. I'm as straight as a meter stick, but does that give me license to not work with females? I can't work long hours with female co-workers, lest I just lose it?
Let us know when bathrooms and public parks stop becoming defacto gay pick up places.
Posted by: buzzion at December 16, 2010 05:33 PM (oVQFe)
Fine, I DON'T KNOW. There? I'm not going to write a dissertation about it for the War College. In fact, the whole beginning of this line of thought was how DADT was the LAST THING on my mind with this lame-duck session.
Guess what, all the adamant objections to DADT Repeal have been noted and logged. And If/When, upon repeal, morale collapses, recruitment lags far behind targets and the entire Pentagon budget goes to settling class-action suits, then you will all have full right to immediately re-instate and proudly proclaim "I told you so".
So, to answer the pointed question again, no, I don't have an answer, but I just have a hard time believing the DOOOOM! consequences. That's all.
Posted by: Techie at December 16, 2010 05:34 PM (SzvZF)
Posted by: Anonymous Cthulhu follower, former republican at December 16, 2010 05:34 PM (NLWij)
This is relevant to my interests. Please provide more details, as well as any photographs or webcam videos that you might have.
Posted by: Masturbatin' Pete at December 16, 2010 05:34 PM (l3r2S)
Posted by: dagny at December 16, 2010 05:35 PM (aTI8L)
10 incoming Senators send letter to Reid requesting he wait until they are seated before action on START. God love 'em.
Posted by: Steph at December 16, 2010 05:35 PM (kOSds)
They want to keep believing in the lie of "HIV affects everyone equally"
Well, it's not really a gay issue in Africa.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 16, 2010 05:37 PM (BvBKY)
Totally lose heart, or rally round the flag and try and pass anything? Sounds to me like the Dem leadership is starting to lose their internal conflicts.
Posted by: Techie at December 16, 2010 05:41 PM (SzvZF)
Posted by: Techie at December 16, 2010 09:27 PM (SzvZF)
You just don't get it, do you? No, I think you just don't want to. Tell me. Could you sleep/spoon with a woman for days to keep warm & not wake up with a woody in her back?
Posted by: Steph at December 16, 2010 05:42 PM (kOSds)
yeah, let's just throw them in there and find out if it gets servicemen and women killed because of lower morale right? we're talking about life and death here. not who's looking at someone's ass by the fucking watercooler here. and gee, if a few of them get killed because of it, well, oopsie right?
do you not understand the military does not exist for social experimentation?
Posted by: Unclefacts, Confuse A Cat, Ltd. at December 16, 2010 05:42 PM (eCAn3)
Amishdude. That was the Assembly. It passed by one one, his. In the senate the vote was tied, so it was defeated. The tie vote was the Dem leader, who was removed by his party immediately after the vote. The senate promptly adjurned before they could do any more damage.
Wis. just had both houses and governor go from dem to pub last month. Scott Walker is the donkies worst nightmare.
Posted by: bigred at December 16, 2010 05:42 PM (cX9pO)
They want to keep believing in the lie of "HIV affects everyone equally"
Well, it's not really a gay issue in Africa.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 16, 2010 09:37 PM (BvBKY)
Lucky for us we're not in Africa. And I don't think many in the states would think having sex when the woman is um dry results in better sex.
Posted by: buzzion at December 16, 2010 05:43 PM (oVQFe)
You paint homosexuals as being some sort of automatic sex machines, incapable of professional restraint or suppressing desires.
I paint gays that way. On the one hand, gays want to be treated as normal. On the other hand, they want preferential treatment.
I know how I would react if I bunked and showered with young, fit women whose "bit and pieces" were bouncing around if we showered together.
Sexual compulsion is natural. When I was 18 years old, I always thought about sex. Even if I supressed those desires, they were in my mind. It most certainly was a distraction in the work place. But working in offices and cubicles shuffling papers and answering phones, it was not a big deal.
To accept gay sexuality is normal is to accept that is the preoccupying thought of every gay teen male between 18-21, who just happens to be surrounded by remarkably fit and in shape males, who are often semi-naked or naked
Posted by: swamp yankee at December 16, 2010 05:43 PM (3DIBw)
Sexual compulsion is natural. When I was 18 years old, I always thought about sex. Even if I supressed those desires, they were in my mind. It most certainly was a distraction in the work place. But working in offices and cubicles shuffling papers and answering phones, it was not a big deal.
You're also not at the office 24/7
Posted by: buzzion at December 16, 2010 05:48 PM (oVQFe)
Posted by: lasue at December 16, 2010 05:51 PM (S25IC)
Posted by: Craig at December 16, 2010 05:55 PM (xP8Aq)
Posted by: Craig at December 16, 2010 09:55 PM (xP8Aq)
Think of it this way: Each page is used to get another legislator on board or to hide unpopular provisions.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 16, 2010 05:58 PM (BvBKY)
Posted by: shoey at December 16, 2010 06:00 PM (yCH89)
Posted by: Craig at December 16, 2010 09:55 PM (xP8Aq)
To me it always seemed like its so people don't read them. And along with it that a lot of the shit would not get passed if it had to stand on its own. That's why it gets used as a bribing mechanism. Most Senators aren't going to waste time voting on funding Hippie Museum in Bumfuck Massachusetts. But if its just one item in a bill to continue funding everything else, then "oh well"
Posted by: buzzion at December 16, 2010 06:02 PM (oVQFe)
Posted by: swamp yankee at December 16, 2010 06:02 PM (3DIBw)
Max Baucus (MT) - (202) 224-2651
Kent Conrad (ND) - (202) 224-2043
Joe Manchin (WV) - (202) 224-3954
Nelson (NE) - (202) 224-6551
Mark Pryor (AR) - (202) 224-2353
Tester (MT) - (202) 224-2644
Kay Hagan (NC) - (202) 224-6342
Claire McCaskill (MO) - (202) 224-6154
Mary Landrieu (LA) - (202) 224-5824
Posted by: arhooley, conflicted Californian at December 16, 2010 06:03 PM (Mpz9c)
Key word is valid. Answer is no.
Posted by: arhooley, conflicted Californian at December 16, 2010 06:04 PM (Mpz9c)
How the fuck can a 16 year old know if they are gay or not, or if they are just following the latest fad or the latest cool thing. They do not know shit other than what that particular penis or vagina of their's do.
Posted by: Samuel Adams at December 16, 2010 09:18 PM (Jx0x6)
Heh, reminds me listening on tv to some lez broad saying she knew she was gay at age 4...I called BS on that the instant I heard it.
Posted by: Flammenwerfer at December 16, 2010 06:06 PM (FIDMq)
Security through obfuscation. Odds are people won't find your $50,000 earmark to refurbishing the local Deer Tick Museum until it's too late.
The "Find" command in the Edit toolbar is their darkest foe.
Posted by: Techie at December 16, 2010 06:07 PM (SzvZF)
Yes, very bizarre reload fail. But what the hell -- REID IS GOING FOR CLOTURE ON THE DREAM ACT TONIGHT. Discuss.
Posted by: arhooley, conflicted Californian at December 16, 2010 06:09 PM (Mpz9c)
Posted by: steevy at December 16, 2010 06:09 PM (bmuIg)
Posted by: Techie at December 16, 2010 06:09 PM (SzvZF)
Ya, my post was partially there with another one taking over..
Posted by: beanervt at December 16, 2010 06:09 PM (OX78y)
And when I wrote earlier about needing a big reset button, I'm not talking about voting in another pack of rabid weasels, I'm talking about Bunker Hill.
Posted by: Craig at December 16, 2010 06:10 PM (xP8Aq)
Yo, Sam. Did you know if you were straight when you were 16?
Posted by: arhooley, conflicted Californian at December 16, 2010 06:11 PM (Mpz9c)
It's great to kill earmarks but as a budget matter they aren't even a rounding error.
Sorry, but if you don't understand that the system is built around bribing other Reps and Sens for Votes with OUT money... I can't help you.
I can't speak for others, but I'm tired of the blatantly corrupt system in Washington... and you seem to not care because when they are mis spending 100 of billions, a few billion more is unimportant???
Posted by: Romeo13 at December 16, 2010 06:21 PM (AdK6a)
He did a LOT of arm-twisting, calling, and talking to the press.
Let's praise these guys when they do something right!
Posted by: Miss Marple at December 16, 2010 06:25 PM (Fo83G)
Somebody want to explain to me where the Eskimos got the 1.7 million? I thought they're supposed to be completely third world, poor as church mice, or something.
The real question is how much of that earmarked return on investment would've found its way into the pockets of Big Frank and the CBC. Hint: most of it.
Posted by: VADM (Red) Cuthbert Collingwood RN at December 16, 2010 06:29 PM (UL/HQ)
He did a LOT of arm-twisting, calling, and talking to the press.
Let's praise these guys when they do something right!
I have not sung.
Posted by: Fat Lady at December 16, 2010 06:30 PM (EL+OC)
Sorry, but if you don't understand that the system is built around bribing other Reps and Sens for Votes with OUT money... I can't help you.
The problem is that the $1million earmark buys the vote of a legislator on a $1trillion bill.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 16, 2010 06:30 PM (BvBKY)
They've kicked that can down the road until there ain't no more road.
The total federal budget should be immediately reduced to 1950 levels so we can then get to work on cutting the waste.
Posted by: VADM (Red) Cuthbert Collingwood RN at December 16, 2010 06:35 PM (UL/HQ)
McDonnell did OK on this one, but there's a lot more work to do.
Posted by: AmishDude at December 16, 2010 06:40 PM (BvBKY)
Posted by: Passably Affable at December 16, 2010 06:40 PM (Uqkdm)
I t looks like McConnell twisted arms on appropriators that wrote the bill and got all of them, except 2 undecided, to vote against it.
That combined with DeMint threatening to read it, and McCain calling on all Tea Partiers & others to jam phone lines & emails might have been the tipping point.
Then to top that off, it appears that some of those Republican earmarks were included from requests that were made months ago, and asked to be pulled, but were included anyway.
It was just a shitstorm that Reid wasn't ready for. McCain said he's never seen, since he's been in the Senate, Republicans hold strong like that. I say it's about freakin' time they showed some balls.
Posted by: Steph at December 16, 2010 06:46 PM (kOSds)
Am I supposed to believe that Marine Corps DI's don't shout at recruits who are struggling on the obstacle course: "What are you, some kind of homo?"
After DADT repeal, will that method of motivating recruits be banned? And will that question result in the end of a DI's career?
(Not that I believe those who prefer the same sex can't finish an obstacle course or will make any less effective Marines, I just want to know what will be allowed and what won't under the new regime.)
And I'd like someone to tell me this before we vote to change things.
Posted by: Oschisms at December 16, 2010 07:05 PM (GqM5k)
I think - could be wrong - that the GOP said that they wouldn't do anything until there was a tax deal, not a budget.
Posted by: Masturbatin' Pete at December 16, 2010 07:07 PM (l3r2S)
Gay veteran chiming in here:
What the hell is wrong with "don't ask don't tell?" You get to keep your private life private, and there are no more witch hunts. Just shut up about it. I was proud to serve honorably, and I keep my business to myself.
Hell, I have co-workers that have known me for 10 years and have no friggin' idea that I am gay. What's the big problem?
Posted by: Log Cabin at December 16, 2010 07:10 PM (/EcIK)
Posted by: Jane D'oh at December 16, 2010 08:11 PM (UOM4
"Gird your loins."
That easy for you to say.
Posted by: The Chicken at December 16, 2010 07:15 PM (4xWeH)
Posted by: Chuck Norris IS Mr Smith, in... at December 16, 2010 07:18 PM (LFAxM)
Posted by: sybilll at December 16, 2010 07:34 PM (XiYY+)
It would seem that fear is one helluva motivator...
Posted by: Blacque Jacques Shellacque at December 17, 2010 01:39 AM (nD3Pg)
No fucking shit?
Damn, I need to step away from this keyboard and get out more....
Posted by: Blacque Jacques Shellacque at December 17, 2010 01:41 AM (nD3Pg)
Won’t choose to ‘deal with it’
STARS AND STRIPES
Letters to the Editor, December 15, 2010
So let me see if I understand this: The Defense Department is proposing to let people who choose to live a homosexual lifestyle serve “openly” in the armed forces (per the Dec. 2 article “DADT study group: Full integration is best”), but won’t allow Christians such as myself the freedom to “openly” share the good news of Christ with our co-workers — as the faith we’ve chosen requires?
DOD officials plan to tell servicemembers who have a problem with those living a homosexual lifestyle to “learn to deal with it,” but they are prepared to counsel and/or slap Christians with paperwork if someone feels “offended” by our witness? Wearing sexual lifestyle choices on your sleeve is OK, but not your faith?
Military chaplains who teach that homosexuality is antithetical to and incompatible with Christianity (which it is) can either muzzle their objections or “leave,” but gays will be permitted to parade their lifestyle choices in front of all?
Bottom line: So IÂ’m free to express myself if IÂ’m a homosexual, but not if IÂ’m a Christian? What disgraceful hypocrisy.
Here’s the truth: I will continue to witness to who I want, when I want and where I want. My commitment to my God supersedes my commitment to the DOD and, if officials are upset about that, then I guess they can “learn to deal with it.”
Department of Defense? More like the Department of Double Standards.
Lt. Col. Stacy L. Maxey
Afghanistan
Posted by: dickmalor at December 17, 2010 09:32 AM (wsHin)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.2738 seconds, 407 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
Omnibus wasn't going to pass. It was too politically suicidal. We could have run down the clock with its reading, debate, failure, repeat.
Now it's gone and the calender is cleared for DREAM Act, START, and DADT repeal.
Posted by: Benson at December 16, 2010 04:06 PM (qzcNU)