At Netroots Nation in Las Vegas, the just-discharged Lt. Dan Choi handed Sen. Harry Reid, who’s leading the effort to repeal DADT, his West Point ring on stage before a crowd of liberal types. Reid told Choi he’s going to give it back to him. When DADT is repealed.
And that could be a long time: Republican Sen. James Inhofe says he’s going to introduce legislation to strip the Pentagon spending bill from including DADT repeal language.
Queer Supremacist
Mormon filth.
craig
Must we continue to kiss Reid and Pelosi’s azz? Reid has already broken his promise to us on DADT and ENDA. We are sick and tired of waiting on our Do Nothing Democrats and President.
Reid – dum dum dum dum dum.
obiwan
If DADT is repealed, there will be repercussions like there always has been always been. There were political repercussions during the high stake civil rights decisions during the 40’s through the 70’s. I hope that the Congress does the right thing and repeals this hypocritical law.
AndrewW
This was moving and I think Choi deserves credit for being persistent. But, there is a problem. This is being widely reported as “Reid Promises to Repeal DADT.” He never did. Not in his letters to Gates or the President or during this exchange with Choi.
This is important because Choi and GetEQUAL continue to suggest they are “holding politicians accountable” with their stunts. Reid, Pelosi and others have said repeatedly they “support” the real of DADT and DOMA and the passage of ENDA. In those numerous statements there is no “promise.”
Reid and Pelosi have a problem – there are not enough votes in the US Senate to pass anything LGBT-related. That is OUR fault, not theirs. We need to change enough minds to get enough votes in the Senate.
GetEQUAL’s attacks on our friends based on the misrepresentations that they have “promised” something, is counterproductive. Even the attacks on Obama are misplaced. He didn’t promise to repeal DADT, he “promised to work with Congress to repeal DADT.” That is an important distinction.
We can make progress and gain public support when we are HONEST – claiming all these “promises,” especially considering politicians know better than to actually promise anything, hurts us. The idea that we can hold somebody accountable for something they didn’t even say or promise is delusional. It is why these faux attempts to hold someone accountable by embarrassing them are hurting our movement. Pissing on our friends in an effort to “hold them accountable” for something they didn’t say is both childish and stupid.
In politics you get what you vote for – effort. Everybody knows “political promises” are not very reliable – it’s even worse when we simply make them up. Just because politicians are dishonest it doesn’t mean we need to be.
Kieran
Let’s see, for the past 2 YEARS we’ve had: Democratic president + Democratic supermajority in congress + Democratic supermajority in the senate = plenty of lip service but No Action. How’s that Vote Democrat no matter how they treat you strategy working out for you?
Ken S
I wonder.. I mean, I like symbolism as much as the next guy– lib arts taught me to pay attention to them– but this seemed to be pushing the theatricality envelope a little. I don’t doubt that this image was intended sincerely, but did Mr. Choi contemplate in advance “this might really look like a crass stunt and end up being interpreted more as ‘behold-Dan-Choi-as-activist’ than a statement– capable of standing on its own– about unjust public policy?”
I guess my concern is just that proponents of DADT– as much as I morally despise them with their disingenuous tactics and their sniveling stupidity and as much as I see them as illegitimate– will see this scene, as self-aware and theatrical (almost camp) as it is, and say “oh, you see? Teh gayz are in this fight for the opportunity to self-promote, not because they love ‘the noble service of their country’ (c)!”
Brian Miller
Yeah, Ken, because conservatives NEVER do self-promotion.
Good on Choi for holding the do-nothing Dims’ feet to the fire on the issue.
L.
I don’t have time to watch the video (I need those 2:12 to click through the 317 pages of Morning Goods) but it seems you’re letting your pun writers come up with the headlines, since I fail to see where Choi “forces” or Reid “confiscates”.
Clint
good for dan.
Rob Moore
Democrats have by and large lived up to their rep for being a bunch of pussies in the face of right wing bully tactics and outright lies.
The typical response is “Please, don’t be mean to us. We will drop anything from the bill you don’t like. No public option? Done. No regulation of derivatives? You got it. Oh yeah, we said we would repeal DADT or DOMA, but we were just saying all that stuff to get the fags to give us money and their votes. We didn’t mean it, and we knew you cool right-wing nutjob people wouldn’t care if we got rid of the ban on people with HIV coming into the country, and the fags were about to become upset and stop giving us money and votes if we didn’t do something. Just don’t say nasty things about us and maybe make an appearance at our lame party because you right wing nutjobs are the only cool people in Congress. Even some of the fags like you and want to be cool like you, but it might be because they just want to have sex with Mr. Boehner. I think they like to think his name is pronounced like boner and it makes them hot.”
Michael
The very last person I’d entrust with a hunk of gold is an elected DC official. These are the same people who swear to uphold the Constitution. How’s that going for ya?
Ken S
@Brian Miller: Thanks, I *love* how you snidely mis-characterized and reduced my argument to “Dan Choi badd, Republicans guud.” Did you *read* my whole statement? Like the part where I said that I don’t doubt his sincere intention, or the part where I suggested that the people who would try to twist the scene around were crass, cynical fucktards? Do you suppose I was just being specific to them, or do ya think maybe I have an equally dim view of any smarmy, simplistic, reductionist arsehole?
My point was exactly that the people who *specialize* in that bullshit– taking the very thing that they do shamelessly and then preemptively accusing the other side of it whenever possible while shrilling “shame!”– are going to watch this and try to distort the optics to reflect negatively on those involved; and that these same people are *so* fucking predictable that anyone who knows how they operate could have taken that into consideration in choosing their own actions. Having made a sincere and symbolic gesture, when Reid got up for a photo op Choi *could* have thought “now isn’t the time for a picture and some buzzwords that the other side will try to turn into some caricature” and kept his seat. Not accepted any further personal attention, just turned down that ‘moment’ and kept the focus on the message rather than the man. Because the message is harder to attack. If you don’t get this you just don’t get it.
GrrrlRomeo
When this headline showed up in my news reader, I thought for sure it was a GOP blog.
Nice way to frame this for the Republicans Queerty. Which side are you on?
WalkderDC
@AndrewW:
Andrew, why do you consistently try to rewrite history. You said as fact that there are not enough votes in the senate to pass anything gay related. Are you ignoring the Hate Crimes Legislation and the recently passed beginning of DADT repeal, both voted on by the current Congress, on purpose because it doesn’t fit with your point or did you seriously forget about them?
AndrewW
@WalkderDC: The Senate didn’t pass the “Hate Crimes Bill,” it held the Defense Authorization hostage. That was gamesmanship, not 60 votes for an LGBT-related Bill. If the Hate Crimes Bill was the only thing they were voting for it would have failed.
Look it up.
We do not have 60 votes in the US Senate for anything LGBT-related. We never have. The silly DADT Compromise is also going to try to hold Defense Spending hostage – we’ll see what happens. I think it will fail. The Senate hasn’t voted yet.
AndrewW
@Kieran: We don’t have a “Democratic Supermajority.” We have 8 Anti-LGBT Democrats. Do the math with that fact in mind.