Comments on: If There’s a Plan to Repeal DADT Next Year, HRC Doesn’t Know About It

By: Norm D Plume

Norm D Plume — Fri, 08 Jan 2010 23:27:06 +0000

Hey, Puck, pull your head out of your ass. DADT is still the law of the land. Frank ain’t done shit yet. Quit sucking his cock and fight for your rights.

By: Rich

Rich — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 12:20:03 +0000

Meanwhile, gay and lesbian servicemembers suffer through another year of lies and deception in their personal lives in order to serve their country.

Does anyone really believe that Congress is going to vote to repeal DADT one month before contentious 2010 elections? I have no confidence in Rep. Frank, or any other member of Congress, that they will have the guts to make that vote — regardless of the legislative tactic employed.

Rep. Frank’s are nothing more than an effort to kick this can further down the road, buy some time, and then hope that the gay and lesbian community accepts his apologies next year when he explains that the political environment and elections are just too toxic to risk Democratic congressional seats on a vote for gay civil rights.

Every day, gay and lesbian servicemembers are deploying to Iraq and Afghanistan. They go with the knowledge that their possible death on the battlefield will not be directly communicated to their same sex partners. They go with the knowledge that their same sex partners get none of the homefront support that other military spouses and families receive. They go to the battlefield with the burden of lying to their chain of command as the price for service. It’s time to end this policy now.

By: andy_d

andy_d — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 01:36:25 +0000

@ Puck:

WHEN/IF it happens, THEN I will believe it.

By: poster

poster — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 20:37:13 +0000

DADT was attached to a Defense Authorization bill in 1993. It’s only fitting it will be killed via one too. And HRC is right not to broadcast its legislative strategy. It wouldn’t be very strategic if they did.

By: RS

RS — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 19:58:02 +0000

I’ve never been a fan of tacking on unrelated issues to other bills, especially appropriations bills, though as a former lobbyist I know it happens routinely. That said, at least there’s a logical basis for coupling DADT with a military appropriations bill.

By: Kdogg

Kdogg — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 15:59:22 +0000

Silly Queerty, trix are for kids!

You write as if we live in a world without politics. An insider only remains an insider if they don’t broadcast what’s on the inside.

Great article though. Thank goodness the end is in sight. Hang on LBGT Vets! I’m wearing my rainbow/american flag combo for you today! Thank you for your service.

By: Brian NJ

Brian NJ — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 15:51:11 +0000

HRC — always on the receiving end. It is bad enough that they are prostitutes for the DNC, it is even worse that they are clueless about getting paid up front. No wonder our rights always wind up dead in the dumpster.

By: Puck

Puck — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 15:45:28 +0000

oh, look Barney Frank came through for the gays. Smoke that you naysayers. Yay for Barney.

By: Brian

Brian — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 15:44:52 +0000

HRC doesn’t have an LGBT strategy. Holding the defense spending bill “hostage” in order to force-feed an LGBT issue is NOT progress.

Maybe it’s fairly called an accomplishment, but certainly nothing to be proud about.

HRC simply looks for events – good or bad – that enable their fund-raising. They are not trying to create equality – they are making sure they stay in business. The longer, the better.