If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Talking Points Memo)   Joe Lieberman (I-CT) introduces a bill to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," don't think we forgot about health care Joe, but today, you're not a total dick   (tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com) divider line 126
    More: Spiffy  
•       •       •

732 clicks; posted to Politics » on 04 Mar 2010 at 11:02 AM (4 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



126 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2010-03-04 09:56:52 AM
Credit where credit is due is only fair.

I wonder how his buddy McCain feels about this?
 
2010-03-04 09:58:33 AM
Diogenes: I wonder how his buddy McCain feels about this?

All butthurt probably.
 
2010-03-04 09:59:06 AM
ozone: All butthurt probably.

They should hug it out.
 
2010-03-04 10:15:13 AM
Diogenes: Credit where credit is due is only fair.

Lieberman is due no credit. He isn't putting anything on the line. He's introducing a change that's inevitable.

The Right's anti-gay crusade will soon be a thing of the past, but their policies will still be harmful to our country and Lieberman will still collude with them.
 
2010-03-04 10:22:16 AM
He campaigns for Republicans who oppose the repeal, so the two acts cancel each other out. All that leaves is his dick moves.
 
2010-03-04 10:23:13 AM
Diogenes: Credit where credit is due is only fair.

I wonder how his buddy McCain feels about this?


You know the third member of the Action Justice Squad is Lindsay Graham. I'm sure he's feeling quite fabulous about it.
 
2010-03-04 10:36:36 AM
Geez...teach me to extend an olive branch! ;-)

Agree he's still a dick.

Racht: You know the third member of the Action Justice Squad is Lindsay Graham. I'm sure he's feeling quite fabulous about it.

And he's for the repeal, too, right?

I swear, the three of the exemplify the haphazard and inconsistent ideologies of today's GOP.
 
2010-03-04 10:47:57 AM
He's just throwing a tampon into his ocean of dickishness, it's not really going to change the level noticeably.
 
2010-03-04 10:53:14 AM
Diogenes:
And he's for the repeal, too, right?


He's not a cosponsor but I'm sure he'd vote for it. It's not a big secret here in SC that he, uh, has good reason to be in favor of gay rights.
 
2010-03-04 11:00:19 AM
Serious question - what exactly does this repeal? Does it repeal the anti-sodomy laws also?

If you just repeal DADT and don't repeal anti-sodomy laws, you're just making the situation worse, not better.
 
2010-03-04 11:04:23 AM
No. He still is a total dick that should be investigated for impropriety like the rest of the farking crooks up there.
 
2010-03-04 11:04:52 AM
Racht: Diogenes:
And he's for the repeal, too, right?

He's not a cosponsor but I'm sure he'd vote for it. It's not a big secret here in SC that he, uh, has good reason to be in favor of gay rights.


His war hawkishness is his beard.
 
2010-03-04 11:05:18 AM
Standing up to Obamacare and repealing DADT? Sounds like someone I'd vote for.
 
2010-03-04 11:05:18 AM
The real question is will he vote for his own bill when it comes to a vote, or will he pull a McCain.
 
2010-03-04 11:05:37 AM
I have never seen so much liberal butthurt because someone didn't pass the 'purity test'.
 
2010-03-04 11:06:15 AM
DamnYankees: Serious question - what exactly does this repeal? Does it repeal the anti-sodomy laws also?

If you just repeal DADT and don't repeal anti-sodomy laws, you're just making the situation worse, not better.


what anti-sodomy laws are you referring to?
 
2010-03-04 11:07:13 AM
Not all that classy, as it's going to happen and he just wants to attach himself to it for political gain among the folks he regularly, gleefully screws over...
or, if you're really cynical, he's doing this to hobble the issue early, before their's an insurmountable wall of support, so that the issue dies before it could stand on its own.

Either way, I don't see why we're giving credit to Lieberman for anything other than managing to swindle Connecticut, and from what I hear, Connecticut likes the abuse anyway.
 
2010-03-04 11:07:15 AM
skullkrusher: what anti-sodomy laws are you referring to?

Those in the UCMJ.
 
2010-03-04 11:08:03 AM
DamnYankees: Serious question - what exactly does this repeal? Does it repeal the anti-sodomy laws also?

If you just repeal DADT and don't repeal anti-sodomy laws, you're just making the situation worse, not better.


This. Details are important. DADT was a good temporary fix at the time, remember before DADT you could be asked if you were gay, and be kicked out, no matter how good a Soldier you were. That was a bad system. Going back to that is a bad idea.

They need to repeal DADT, and at the same time make it legal for gay Soldiers to serve openly.
 
2010-03-04 11:08:37 AM
To paraphrase Chris Rock, if gays want to be in the military let them. Cause I ain't fightin'. If we're actually invaded then I'll pick up a gun but I'm not fighting for Haliburton's stock numbers. So let the gays in, what's the harm? I mean, they don't have to be flaming about it. A pink feather boa would fark up their camouflage. But what they do on shore leave or whatever it's called is their business.
 
2010-03-04 11:10:23 AM
Nemo's Brother: I have never seen so much liberal butthurt because someone didn't pass the 'purity test'.

Oh puhlease. Don't even try to turn that back on the Dems.

Lieberman is sore loser, who actively campaigned for his former party's opposition candidate for the presidency. And he reversed all his opinions on health care once he decided to be the GOP's butt buddy.

You want him? You can have him.
 
2010-03-04 11:11:58 AM
DamnYankees: skullkrusher: what anti-sodomy laws are you referring to?

Those in the UCMJ.


ah... isn't having any sex with anyone while on active duty at a military installation against the UCMJ?
 
2010-03-04 11:12:14 AM
What the hell does that have to do with Israel?
 
2010-03-04 11:13:05 AM
skullkrusher: ah... isn't having any sex with anyone while on active duty at a military installation against the UCMJ?

No idea.
 
2010-03-04 11:13:25 AM
Duke Phillips' Singing Bears: What the hell does that have to do with Israel?

hehe, I think it's really a nod to Isaac Mizrahi
 
2010-03-04 11:14:34 AM
DamnYankees: skullkrusher: ah... isn't having any sex with anyone while on active duty at a military installation against the UCMJ?

No idea.


just read that the majority of people punished under the anti-sodomy laws have been straight. Send these guys off to war but they can't legally get a BJ. Just ain't right.
 
2010-03-04 11:14:48 AM
yes, he still is a total dick. jumping in and trying to take lead on a process that has been in the works for months now, submitting what is not even the first bill attempting to repeal DADT, all in hopes of saving your own ass next time you're up for reelection, is a total dick move.

thanks joe, for jumping on the bandwagon after you know it's inevitable. the real leaders were the people who got it to this point.
 
2010-03-04 11:18:57 AM
I see Lieberman's out to show Bunning how to wear the trollface.

/"Now see here, this is how you do it."
 
2010-03-04 11:18:58 AM
PanicMan: DamnYankees: Serious question - what exactly does this repeal? Does it repeal the anti-sodomy laws also?

If you just repeal DADT and don't repeal anti-sodomy laws, you're just making the situation worse, not better.

This. Details are important. DADT was a good temporary fix at the time, remember before DADT you could be asked if you were gay, and be kicked out, no matter how good a Soldier you were. That was a bad system. Going back to that is a bad idea.

They need to repeal DADT, and at the same time make it legal for gay Soldiers to serve openly.


Wouldn't that have already been taken care of with Lawrence V. Texas?
 
2010-03-04 11:19:35 AM
Barbigazi: Wouldn't that have already been taken care of with Lawrence V. Texas?

Doesn't apply to the military.
 
2010-03-04 11:20:49 AM
Nemo's Brother: I have never seen so much liberal butthurt because someone didn't pass the 'purity test'.

How'd conservatives feel about Arlen Specter?

Note: This is not a "both sides are bad", it's an "of-farking-course they feel that way you farking idiot". A subtle difference that will, unfortunately, be ignored.
 
2010-03-04 11:21:18 AM
This might be brave if he were a Senator in Utah, but he's from Connecticut and likely on his way out. At this point, this legislation is about as politically risky for Joe as having cereal for breakfast.
 
2010-03-04 11:21:46 AM
PanicMan: DamnYankees: Serious question - what exactly does this repeal? Does it repeal the anti-sodomy laws also?

If you just repeal DADT and don't repeal anti-sodomy laws, you're just making the situation worse, not better.

This. Details are important. DADT was a good temporary fix at the time, remember before DADT you could be asked if you were gay, and be kicked out, no matter how good a Soldier you were. That was a bad system. Going back to that is a bad idea.

They need to repeal DADT, and at the same time make it legal for gay Soldiers to serve openly.


you know anything of how the anti-sodomy laws are enforced or when they apply? Does it apply to a couple living at their home on base or is it only when they're "at work"?
 
2010-03-04 11:21:52 AM
Barbigazi: Lawrence V. Texas

I guess you can mess with Texas.
 
2010-03-04 11:22:58 AM
Duke Phillips' Singing Bears: What the hell does that have to do with Israel?

I do believe the Isreali Defense Forces allows the gays.
 
2010-03-04 11:23:00 AM
skullkrusher: DamnYankees: skullkrusher: what anti-sodomy laws are you referring to?

Those in the UCMJ.

ah... isn't having any sex with anyone while on active duty at a military installation against the UCMJ?


No. You may just be thinking about deployed troops, but when they are at home, they are still on active duty and some live on-base with their families.

Everything is changing. When I was in the Navy, there were no woman on board the carrier I was on. A friend of mine was an officer on a destroyer where there were woman allowed (he is younger than me), and he said it was like the Love Boat. Of course, officers get some privacy, I would not have tried that as an enlisted.
 
2010-03-04 11:23:25 AM
skullkrusher: DamnYankees: skullkrusher: what anti-sodomy laws are you referring to?

Those in the UCMJ.

ah... isn't having any sex with anyone while on active duty at a military installation against the UCMJ?


Art. 125 of the UCMJ prohibits unnatural sex with men/men, men/women, or human/animal.

No BJ's from your wife, or you face the green table.
 
2010-03-04 11:25:18 AM
Duke Phillips' Singing Bears: What the hell does that have to do with Israel?

Israel allows openly gay soldiers.
 
2010-03-04 11:25:39 AM
GameSprocket: A friend of mine was an officer on a destroyer where there were woman allowed (he is younger than me), and he said it was like the Love Boat.

There was only one bartender? Harsh.
 
2010-03-04 11:25:45 AM
GameSprocket: skullkrusher: DamnYankees: skullkrusher: what anti-sodomy laws are you referring to?

Those in the UCMJ.

ah... isn't having any sex with anyone while on active duty at a military installation against the UCMJ?

No. You may just be thinking about deployed troops, but when they are at home, they are still on active duty and some live on-base with their families.

Everything is changing. When I was in the Navy, there were no woman on board the carrier I was on. A friend of mine was an officer on a destroyer where there were woman allowed (he is younger than me), and he said it was like the Love Boat. Of course, officers get some privacy, I would not have tried that as an enlisted.


I guess that was my question. Like civilian anti-sodomy laws, they are virtually impossible to enforce. If two servicepeople get caught farking in any fashion in the utility closet during "work" there probably should be some reprecussions. I just don't see how the military would hope to enforce a law banning a guy from going down on his wife at home.
 
2010-03-04 11:26:01 AM
IrateShadow: This might be brave if he were a Senator in Utah, but he's from Connecticut and likely on his way out. At this point, this legislation is about as politically risky for Joe as having cereal for breakfast.

failblog.files.wordpress.com
 
2010-03-04 11:27:51 AM
Before everyone starts on the Lieberman hate, it should be noted that he's had a pretty solid pro-gay rights record for a long time.
 
2010-03-04 11:30:46 AM
I think that this is all part of his Short-Timers Troll-a-Palooza tour (with opening act Jim Bunning) basically he knows he won't get re-elected this time around (if he even runs) and so after several decades of making nice and sucking up to political interests groups, Joe has a "Bucket List" of peopel and groups to piss off, and he's going to see if he can get to them all before his term expires. Having enraged the libs on helthcare, now his going to piss off the Religious right with DADT repeal
 
2010-03-04 11:32:26 AM
Aarontology: Before everyone starts on the Lieberman hate, it should be noted that he's had a pretty solid pro-gay rights record for a long time.

he's pretty solid on every left wing issue aside from his hawkishness and the Dem's current health care reform proposals.
 
2010-03-04 11:32:26 AM
Diogenes: Geez...teach me to extend an olive branch! ;-)

Agree he's still a dick.

Racht: You know the third member of the Action Justice Squad is Lindsay Graham. I'm sure he's feeling quite fabulous about it.

And he's for the repeal, too, right?

I swear, the three of the exemplify the haphazard and inconsistent ideologies of today's GOP.


If Joe Lieberman "extends your olive branch" ol' buddy, you really have to do something about your taste in men...
 
2010-03-04 11:34:02 AM
Adam West for President: skullkrusher: DamnYankees: skullkrusher: what anti-sodomy laws are you referring to?

Those in the UCMJ.

ah... isn't having any sex with anyone while on active duty at a military installation against the UCMJ?

Art. 125 of the UCMJ prohibits unnatural sex with men/men, men/women, or human/animal.

No BJ's from your wife, or you face the green table.



So women/women is OK then?

Sir, Giggity, Sir!
 
2010-03-04 11:35:54 AM
Magorn: If Joe Lieberman "extends your olive branch" ol' buddy, you really have to do something about your taste in men...

A pox on your house for bringing that idea to mind!

He's like Kermit the Frog, without the character.
 
2010-03-04 11:36:12 AM
DamnYankees: Serious question - what exactly does this repeal? Does it repeal the anti-sodomy laws also?

If you just repeal DADT and don't repeal anti-sodomy laws, you're just making the situation worse, not better.


Yes and no. Sodomy is conduct(and it applies to straight officers getting a Beej from their wife every bit as much as gay soldiers getting it on) Being gay is a status. Removing a status as a crime is a good, if incomplete, first step. Analogize it to the fact that being a drug addict ("habitual user of narcotics") was once, all by itself, a crime. Now that crime has been repealed and it is only actual possession of drugs that is the crime. It is still not decriminalization and the end of prohibition, but it is at least a step in the right direction
 
2010-03-04 11:37:24 AM
Magorn: Yes and no. Sodomy is conduct(and it applies to straight officers getting a Beej from their wife every bit as much as gay soldiers getting it on) Being gay is a status. Removing a status as a crime is a good, if incomplete, first step. Analogize it to the fact that being a drug addict ("habitual user of narcotics") was once, all by itself, a crime. Now that crime has been repealed and it is only actual possession of drugs that is the crime. It is still not decriminalization and the end of prohibition, but it is at least a step in the right direction

Was the status ever a crime? I thought it the anti-gay stuff was always based on the anti-sodomy statute. Has there ever been a law saying its illegal to "be a homosexual" in the military?
 
2010-03-04 11:39:10 AM
skullkrusher: he's pretty solid on every left wing issue aside from his hawkishness and the Dem's current health care reform proposals.

True. Although his disdain for the current form proposals seems a bit odd since he's run on platforms with universal health care with a public option before. Most notably in 2006.

Still, he should get some credit for this.
 
Displayed 50 of 126 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report