Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
the don't tell show

Watch Republican Reps. Louise Gohmert + Todd Akin Crap All Over DADT’s Repeal (Updated)

You got to hand it to Reps. Louise Gohmert, of Texas, and Todd Akin, of Michigan, for their Golden Globes-worthy performances on the House floor today.

Screams Akin: “Is this the sort of thing George Washington or our founders would be proud of? … Why are we wanting to do this? Well, to tickle the fanices of a very vocal but a very small minority for political purposes. I will not betray my children or our armed services people just for mere politics.” Brava!

Earlier …:
The Senate Armed Services Committee hearing is all yours! [CSPAN]

By:           editor editor
On:           May 27, 2010
Tagged: , , , , ,
  • 19 Comments
    • Ty
      Ty

      I love Tammy Baldwin.

      May 27, 2010 at 2:04 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ChrisM
      ChrisM

      Did the amendment just get passed?

      I heard a committee member arguing about how “this” would block freedom of religion for chaplains who aren’t tied to the military but to their denominations. Then a vote was taken and the “ayes” had it to add the amendment. This could very well have been something else, but sounds like a last minute try to stop the DADT repeal. Can anybody confirm this was the amendment they were arguing about?

      May 27, 2010 at 3:25 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Lanjier
      Lanjier

      It is a thing of Beauty. But wouldn’t it be great if Rahm, Messina, and Obama would see the political gift sitting in their lap?

      Obama could frame this action as protecting gay vets. PROTECTING VETS. He should jump on the opportunity. “For those who say that protecting gay veterans, and non-veterans who wish to serve, I say damn you. Damn you for not honoring the men and woman of our military. Damn you for not honoring all of the contributions of all of the gay and lesbian Americans who work so hard to protect and honor our nation. Damn you.”

      May 27, 2010 at 3:48 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Sceth
      Sceth

      The last sentence in the above clip:
      “I would like to continue with my diatribe.”
      Perfect characterization of the entire clip.

      May 27, 2010 at 5:13 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • John (CA)
      John (CA)

      The Republicans are just spouting their bigoted, homophobic nonsense for the cameras because it will definitely pass.

      Pelosi doesn’t schedule votes unless she’s assured of passage.

      The Speaker hates surprises.

      May 27, 2010 at 6:40 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jason
      jason

      Oh, fuck off Gohmert and Akin. The Founding Fathers included some very intelligent homosexuals who contributed to this great country. You, on the other hand, are a waste of taxpayers money.

      At least the gay Founding Fathers didn’t mooch off the taxpayer like Gohmert and Akin.

      May 27, 2010 at 7:06 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Michael
      Michael

      Pence doesn’t listen to polls which tell us the American public actually are in favor of allowing gay to serve openly. Akin is a bit too clueless to realize George Washington is rumored to have been a homosexual himself. Supposedly he had a thing for Andrew Jackson, a SOLDIER in HIS army. I guess Frank isn’t bothered with insulting the gay soldiers who spill their blood for this country.

      It’s unreal the government has suddenly turned it’s armed forces more into a Club Med than a military for, God forbid, their soldiers might be offended but a policy.

      May 27, 2010 at 7:28 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mike
      Mike

      Todd Akin of Michigan?? He’s from Missouri! Please correct that and don’t insult my state! haha

      May 27, 2010 at 7:50 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • edgyguy1426
      edgyguy1426

      Well Mike you’re asking for fact checking and that doesn’t really happen much here.

      May 27, 2010 at 8:26 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Tessie Tura
      Tessie Tura

      Why did he have to bring George Washington into it? This man does not know his history.

      George Washington was trained in maneuvers by Baron von Steuben. If it were not for Steuben, we would have lost the war. Steuben was gay as a goose and emigrated to the US, boy in tow. Look it up.

      May 27, 2010 at 8:44 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • tjr101
      tjr101

      That video is a perfect example of why I will NEVAAAAA VOTE REPUBLICAN!

      May 27, 2010 at 11:16 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 10 · Tessie Tura wrote, “Why did he have to bring George Washington into it? This man does not know his history. George Washington was trained in maneuvers by Baron von Steuben. If it were not for Steuben, we would have lost the war. Steuben was gay as a goose and emigrated to the US, boy in tow. Look it up.”

      Well, he sure doesn’t want to bring up current events given that the House just passed a repeal of DADT according to
      http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2010/05/26/national/w125704D02.DTL&tsp=1

      May 27, 2010 at 11:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • John (CA)
      John (CA)

      Well, it passed quite comfortably.

      234-194.

      That’s a majority of 40.

      Lets see how much of this survives the grueling filibuster in the Senate though. Senator Byrd has already tinkered with the timing of repeal. His 60 day review period is not in the House version of the legislation. There will be more compromises before we get to the finish line. Some of it will, no doubt, cause quite a lot of pain.

      May 27, 2010 at 11:36 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jeffree
      jeffree

      @Lanjier: You got that right! Since this whole DADT debate revolves around military preparedness, then that needs to be ORahmaBama’s rallying cry for repealing it.

      May 28, 2010 at 12:16 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Lanjier
      Lanjier

      I agree. It is a great political issue.

      “This country was created on the principle of equality and maintained by the sacrifices of our American veterans. Allowing gay Americans to serve honors out country, and honors veterans. I was tired of watching gay vets ripped from their units and tossed out simply because they were gay. Ask those men and woman who have lost a buddy and a protector to this policy if they like it. It was the height of irresponsibility, and is not what this country is about. This nation is about unity and equality under the law.”

      May 28, 2010 at 7:57 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jason
      jason

      The Republicreeps hate any American who doesn’t conform to their narrow views. You can be a highly decorated patriot but heaven forbid that you might be gay. They don’t realize that they are harming their political party by forcing gay people into the Democrats’ side.

      The Republicreeps are too beholden to the religious fascists of the Christian right, a group of people who are not dissimilar to extremist Moslems in their beliefs.

      May 28, 2010 at 8:11 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • PLAYS WELL WITH OTHERS
      PLAYS WELL WITH OTHERS

      “Well, to tickle the fanices “…..sounds kinda Gay to me…… :-p

      May 28, 2010 at 10:16 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • do they want this?
      do they want this?

      The military and homos will certainly clash. I see the wrong glance/look off-duty from the homo to a straight = homo getting severely beaten. I see the the wrong glance/look in the showers from the homo to a straight = homo getting severely beaten. I see the homo disgrace the Honor of the military with gay parades/open gay behavior in uniform = homo getting severely beaten. Do they really want this?

      Jul 10, 2010 at 12:10 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jeffree
      jeffree

      @Do They Want This:

      Severely misinformed is no way to get through life. Gay men and women have been serving in the Armed Forces forever.

      At a time when we as a nation are fighting war on two fronts, do you think it’s wise to discharge otherwise well-trained and competent individuals solely based on their sexual orientation?

      No one is proposing gay pride parades on military bases. Do you think we should boot out linguists fluent in Arabic or Dari just because they have a samesex partner stateside? Should the cryptographer assigned to keep your unit out of harm’s way be fired because he’s adopted a child with his male partner?

      Think about it.

      Jul 10, 2010 at 12:28 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.



  • QUEERTY DAILY

     




    FROM AROUND THE WEB

    Copyright 2014 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.