It’s funny that Sen. Ben Nelson’s reported Yes vote will be considered “the one” that put the DADT repeal measure through the Senate Armed Services Committee, and Nelson will come off looking all heroic. But what about the 14 other senators who already committed to voting yes? They’re the ones who’ve been on board the longest, and here comes Nelson, the Nebraska Democrat, taking all the glory.
With Sen. Ben Nelson, Carl Levin Has His 15th Vote for DADT
Help make sure LGBTQ+ stories are being told...
We can't rely on mainstream media to tell our stories. That's why we don't lock Queerty articles behind a paywall. Will you support our mission with a contribution today?
Cancel anytime · Proudly LGBTQ+ owned and operated
mattsmith
The big let down is Scott Brown. 80% of Mass voters want him to vote yes. Call his office and let them know he needs to vote yes.
josh
Everyone should have known that Scott Brown would plan to vote no on a repeal of DADT. He is a Republican who was supported by the tea party!!
I hope the liberals in MA can get him to change his mind though.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Scott Brown ends up voting no on ENDA too.
delurker again
@mattsmith: An anti-gay Repub? The hell you say?!
delurker again
But seriously, the TP hates Brown right now for his votes on the jobs bill, financial reform, and in the future, the vote to confirm Elena Kagan. He has to throw them a bone somewhere and DADT is it.
spiritedrandy
Re: “here comes Nelson, the Nebraska Democrat, taking all the glory.”
It may be glory on THIS blog, but my guess is he’s not getting as much glory back home in Nebraska!
Republican
As I mentioned in reply to another post, Brown’s choice is a bit confusing, because it doesn’t make good political sense given the nature of his state. Sure, as Delurked mentioned, he has to pick something every now and then to show his supporters that he’s listening to them, but picking DADT is a strange choice when 80+% of MA voters support repealing it. Besides being a homophobic move, it’s also just plain stupid politically. Apparently he doesn’t want to get reelected.
josh
Most of the Republican Senators and Representatives are against gay rights in all areas and equated gays with pedophiles during the debates on the hate crimes bills.
I don’t understand how some gays can vote Republican.
Yet, I’ve been to gay porn forums that were dominated by gay conservative Republicans. Talk about cognitive dissonance!
Brutus
“Nelson will come off looking all heroic. But what about the 14 other senators who already committed to voting yes? They’re the ones who’ve been on board the longest, and here comes Nelson, the Nebraska Democrat, taking all the glory.”
Oh, kind of like how GetEqual comes along and Queerty gives it all the glory for DADT?
rainfish2000
Hmmmmm…since when did soldier get a vote on following orders or even policy? That also (supposedly, in a civilian controlled military) pertains to the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
As far as “disrupting” the lives of straight soldiers…well, that’s like saying when the 1964 Civil Rights Act was passed by Congress then the White people all over America (especially in the South) who thought that they were superior to Black people would need special counseling and endless town-hall meetings (at government expense – excluding Blacks, of course) so that they could express their “feelings” about whether to discriminate or not, and how not being able to do so might impact their lives and their families lives in a negative manner.
Jeeeze, what a morally perverse and ethically retrogressive country we live in.
The real bone of contention is really how the old sexually impotent dinosaurs in power feel about being forced to redefine the association of going to war, and being a warrior, with (in their limited understanding) being a “rite of passage” into the full bloom of heterosexual manhood when homosexuals excel at it as well. In their minds, how can a heterosexual man be a “real man” if a homosexual man can be one too? This, no doubt, causes them a lot of angst.
The same mindset applies to Lesbians in the military, because they threaten the heterosexual paternalistic power structure and their control over women, as well as offending heterosexuals in power by rejecting the premise that all women must, at the very least, be “potentially available” heterosexual breeding partners. All you have to do is look into how many woman have been reported as being “suspected” homosexuals, by enlisted men, for rejecting their sexual advances.
Insecurity at its worse. That is the cause of most wars; religion-based bigotry; social intolerance, and (along side greed) the root of most of the evil which men do unto others on Earth. Look at the majority of militaristic nations in this world and you will find that to be true — in one form or another.
Brutus
You take it for granted that (1) the Civil Rights Act was appropriately passed and (2) allowing gays to serve openly in the military is comparable.
I’m sure you believe strongly that both of those things are true, and I’m not saying you’re wrong, but it’s not an empirical fact that you’re correct.
Hyhybt
I don’t care about credit; any name I se on the ballot belonging to someone who helps this pass gets my vote, and any who opposes does not.
rainfish2000
There is no such thing as “kind of equal” anymore than a woman can be “sort of pregnant”. A historical comparison to the disenfranchisement of other minorities in this country to the civil rights abuses imposed upon Gay and Lesbians Americans by most states and by the federal government is appropriate. Of course, how that discrimination had manifest itself was (and is) different due to different circumstances, but to imply that disadvantaging one group suffering discrimination is some how less importance to another group being denied equality is specious to say the least.
neighborino
I live in Nebraska, and Nelson isn’t going to really take heat for this. Nebraska is more liberal than people give it credit for; about half the population live in Lincoln and Omaha, and we’re right next to Iowa, which is possibly the gay-friendliest state. Also, gay marriage isn’t a liberal/conservative issue like it continually gets made out to be. It’s framed as a privacy issue here, and that strategy is working. It’ll take time, but progressive Nebraska is a thriving movement.
Brutus
@rainfish2000: That begs the question of what “equality” is.
whatever
old man Bryd is a yes, too.