The Gay Thing: Living With Success and Setbacks

Back when I started this blog (almost 6 years ago now), I did a series of Behind the Blogger posts to introduce myself to whatever scant readership was around in those early days. I titled those segments in a similar way, The Politics Thing, The Religion Thing, The Writing Thing, The Debt Thing and ultimately The Gay Thing. I started the blog as an outlet for my frustrations during the second George W. Bush administration, not as a gay rights blog, neither primarily or even secondarily.

As the blog has evolved, and as news has more often been about The Gay Thing, there have been days--hell, sometimes whole weeks--where it seemed like this was full-on gay rights news blog. For some reason, I feel compelled to apologize for that, and explain it away with humor. This isn't due to some sort of lingering shame or self-loathing, it's just not the mission I set out for the blog. But maybe it should be.

My turn was 1996. A lifetime ago!

Or rather, maybe I should just allow the subject to be more front-and-center. Oh, I doubt things will change too much around here. In fact the extent of the changes are thus: the banner above has been created, and will be used for most stories with this subject. And I'm not apologizing or explaining the reason for the posts anymore. They are just part of the blog. I started making banners for different subjects a few years ago, and continue to add them when I recognize that I'm continuing on a theme. It's time The Gay Thing was it's own thing here at Greenlee Gazette.

Being gay in America has always had its challenges. I became an adult in a very scary era for gay people, the birth of the AIDS crisis. It kept me fairly monk-like in my behavior through much of the 1980s, which I can credit for a very lonely early 20s, and with potentially saving my life. I also never experienced the mass death of a circle of friends, because I was not in or of the community. I was unplugged, and am in some ways removed from my own generation.

But I was always clued in to any scrap of news, so it's not like I didn't know what was going on. And by the time I came out to the world at large at age 30, America was an easier place to be gay than at any earlier time. Sure, we were still used as a wedge issue, a scare tactic. Don't Ask, Don't Tell (DADT) had only been law--by Bill Clinton of all people--for a couple of years. But friends and family were immediately (or almost immediately) accepting and supportive. It was practically painless.

Married for almost 5 years now, legally, though not in NV.
One reason that it is frustrating to have the topic of gay
marriage treated as a hypothetical. We've been getting
married for almost a decade now.

There was a dark time not long after that, for gay people across the country. There were rumblings of activity in Hawaii, where it appeared that gay marriage might become legal. In a panic--or in a shrewd fundraising/electoral move--the right wing went into heavy demonizing mode. In states across the country, they started passing preemptive laws and constitutional amendments that barred gay marriage. Often times, the laws were redundant, where marriage was already defined as "one man, one woman." Didn't matter, it was time to make a stand. The biggest move--again, by Bill Clinton--was the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). The most head-scratching was the constitutional amendment in Nevada, home of the quickie marriage and quickie divorce.

All through this, the right maintained that it wasn't an anti-gay movement, no, no. They were merely "protecting marriage."  This focus-tested phrase came straight from groups with likewise focus-tested names, usually including the word "Family." But their motives have always been transparent. It doesn't take much effort to find a "traditional marriage" crusader's core motives, if you simply engage them in conversation. It's largely a fundamental inability for them to separate holy matrimony from civil marriage. And an inability to truly get them to acknowledge a separation of church and state.

A lot rests in SCOTUS's hands. Not scary at all. . .

But the tide has turned! The wave of anti-gay marriage measures seemed to not only recede, but race in the opposite direction. In April, we were up to 9 states plus the District of Columbia with full marriage equality. In this month alone, we've gained 3 more, with the possible inclusion of Illinois by month's end, plus very likely regaining California in June.

June is when the Supreme Court announces their rulings on DOMA and Proposition 8 (the referendum that rescinded same-sex marriage rights in California). Most SCOTUS followers believe we will get modest gains for marriage equality at the very least, with the possibility for a broader ruling. And this happens on my 5th wedding anniversary, which is very cool!

But any celebration is tempered by reality. In recent days, there have been reminders that gay people are not fully equal, or sometimes even safe in our own country. There's a teenaged girl whose girlfriend's parents conspired with police to arrest as soon as she turned 18, because the girl was dating their 15-year-old daughter, the motivation being that they didn't want their daughter to be gay. A Texas lesbian with a child by a previous marriage was ordered that she cannot reside with her partner and retain custody. There was a man shot in the head in New York City, killed just for being gay. There has been a rash of assaults in that city, all motivated by anti-gay animus.

A veritable anti-gay crime wave has hit NYC
Read about it here.

Gays are routinely viciously maligned on Twitter, Facebook, message boards, blogs, letters to the editor, and any other forum when a gay related issue is being discussed. "Good Christian" business owners are fighting for the right to refuse the sale of goods and services to gay people, because they "disagree with the lifestyle." Organizations like the "Family" ones mentioned above and the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) exist solely or primarily to actively fight gay civil rights. The Boy Scouts--who, to their credit just decided to allow gay scouts to be members--won't allow gay leaders. Arguments on that subject (and many others) falsely equate homosexuality with pedophilia. And finally, gays were used as a weapon again by the GOP, who held the immigration reform bill hostage, so long as it allowed gay married bi-national couples to be covered under it.

In short (I know, too late), there are still many mountains to climb for full civil equality.  And while I haven't been silent by any stretch, I have been reserved, timid even, though less so lately. I'm going to stop shying away. This is my blog after all, and it isn't as if I have an enormous and dedicated following anyway. So, expect to see the subject covered without apology from now on. Thank you.

Romney and Ryan: Really Not into "The Gay"

For two guys who could be catalogue models, they sure are anti-gay.
Image from source, The Advocate.

If the Log Cabin Republicans and their hardcore off-shoot GOProud endorse Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan (assuming they haven't already done so), you are free to stop taking them seriously (assuming you haven't already done so). Honestly, there's just no excuse for any gay person to support or vote for this particular same-sex couple.

[Excerpt]

Paul Ryan as VP Matches Mitt Romney on Homophobia

Paul Ryan has voted to ban same-sex marriage and adoption by gay couples, and he voted against repealing the "don't ask, don't tell" ban on gays serving openly in the military. . .

Read more at: The Advocate

The Kissing Marines Speak! (Video)

Image from Miami Herald

Surely, by now you've seen the photo of the kissing Marines, one of them returning from Afghanistan, to his boyfriend in Hawaii. There are some notable things about the picture: 1) the returning Marine was climbing his boyfriend (who is very tall); 2) to gays, the photo is romantic and/or hot; 3) to some straights, the photo is icky, gross, yucky, sick, revolting, disgusting, and the two men are going to hell; and 4) if it were a photo of a straight couple, we'd never have seen or heard of it.

The reality is, while the photo is destined to become iconic, it would hardly be newsworthy if it weren't two men, right after the lifting of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." And, while there are some frothing at the mouth homophobes declaring it to the most vile image ever lensed, and a sign of the end times, I think they're going a bit overboard, don't you? "It's a violation, he's in uniform!" they declare, ignoring the fact that the rule is regularly waived for returning troops.  "God says. . ." NO, stop right there. Your religion does not rule the land.

Anyway, this photo did get some nasty--and shouldn't that be telling?--comments, but also a huge amount of gushing praise. I'd say on the whole, it will be remembered along with the abolition of DOMA, of this moment in history. And the two men--who say they had no idea this would take off this way--seem like great guys. Haters are going to hate, but they're not the ones who will be remembered here.

Rick Perry's Homophobic, Dishonest Ad

I know that politics is dirty. I know that many politicians play fast and loose with the truth. But in addition to being homophobic--criticizing active-duty gay soldiers--it also is outright dishonest. Kids can't celebrate Christmas or openly pray in school? Yes. They. Can. Organized, school-led prayers are not allowed. Teaching the Christmas story as truth is not allowed, because it is largely (or totally) a myth. Is this Rick Perry's plan to inch back up in the polls? Lie a couple of times and take potshots at soldiers? Great plan. Douche.

And finally, what's with this "Obama's war on religion?" Is that part of, or in addition to the fake FOX "News" War on Christmas?

Crowd at GOP/Google/FOX "News" Boos Gay Soldier

Each of these Republican debates seems to have a defining moment, doesn't it? One was the crowd cheering capital punishment. One had the crowd cheering "let him die" over a hypothetical man without health insurance. And Thursday's had the crowd booing a soldier. Nice. Apparently, they only  "support the troops" if they aren't gay.

And it must be pointed out that a) the question was only asked of irrelevant Rick (don't Google me) Santorum, and b) Santorum's answer was nonsense. "Any type of sexual activity has no place in the military. . ."  Really Rick?  Lifting  Don't Ask, Don't Tell was about letting people have sex in the military? What a douche. Oh, and c) that soldier could probably kick any of the boo-ers' asses. And lastly, it should be pointed out that in all of the above GOP debate audience ass-holisms, nobody on the dais uttered one word of admonishment to the crowd.

Gay Soldier Comes Out to His Dad

I know this video is everywhere. But to cap off my "coverage" of the end of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," I couldn't resist posting this. It's a tough thing for anyone to do, coming out to a parent. But I'd wager a bit tougher for a military man.

AOL Highlights End of DADT With Sexy Photo?

Yeah, I still use AOL, both for mail and for browsing. I don't care to go into why, I just do, okay? Anyway, since Arianna Huffington's Huffington Post squerged with AOL, there is a lot more "front page" content highlighted, with today's top stories easy to get to, and encapsulated. Not surprisingly, on Tuesday, the welcome screen's #1 story was the repeal of the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy. But Arianna, please tell me why the story used a super-sexy photo of two guys smooching? REALLY?!?

 

Don't Ask, Don't Tell is OVER!

Image from source, The Advocate

I would have been kept out of the military for plenty of reasons besides the gay thing. Uncoordinated. Lazy eye. I'd have made a lousy soldier. But I'm thrilled that the ridiculous "Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Don't Persue" (DADT) policy is finally consigned to the dustbin of history. 

Yes, I know that the policy was born in the Clinton presidency. I also know that Clinton wanted to allow gays in the military from the beginning, but was a decade and a half too early for his wish to be politically viable.  A gay Republican (I know, right?) friend of mine gleefully leaves this at Clinton's feet. But truth be told, it was pressure from Republicans that forged DADT. And they've been squealing like stuck pigs about the end of the policy. GOP presidential candidates are actually saying they'd reinstate the policy. There were futile attempts to gum up the works for 60 days. But it is over now, and my guess is, it will stay that way. Now, on to ENDA and the repeal of DOMA!

[Excerpt]


DADT is Dead

The military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy, one described in 1993 by President Bill Clinton as “an honorable compromise” that eventually destroyed thousands of careers, ended Tuesday at 12:01 a.m., nine months after Congress repealed the law. . .

Read more at: The Advocate

Kathy Griffin Asked Michele Bachmann if She Was Born a Bigot

Which is a damned good question! Michele didn't have an answer.

Congressman Barney Frank Takes on Stupid DADT Questions

Yeah, I know there's a lot about "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" on the blog of late. I'm sure the news cycle will move in in a fairly big hurry, so no worries. In the mean time, here's a fantastic response by Congressman Barney Frank, when asked some pretty stupid (and sadly, standard) questions about the DADT repeal. Good stuff.

President Obama's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" Repeal Speech

It is historic, but it isn't yet complete, I know. It's still a big deal, and with all the nay-saying by people like me about President Barack Obama's "fierce advocate" status on gay rights issues, credit where it's due.

Captain Obvious: Yet Another Gay Primer

I've spent some time--perhaps too much time--reading some of the right-wing reaction to the repeal of the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (DADT) policy.  As is usual, there is a lot of homophobic name calling, and sub Jr. High School-level attempts at "humor." But mostly, there is a level of obsession over the sex aspect of homosexual, that even most gay people themselves don't indulge in. To live in right-wing world is apparently to know no gay people, and to believe only the most damning, negative things about them.

By far, the biggest theme on right-wing sites about the lifting of DADT is that the military will now be "homosexualized." In their feverish dreams, they envision soldiers holding hands, wearing pink uniforms, smooching in the commissary, a-doin'-it in the barracks, fondling in the showers, and horrors imposing themselves upon the uber-macho straight soldiers against their wills.  There is also a lot of cognitive dissonance at work. For instance, they'll insist that gays make up less than 1% of the population (ha!), but that they're all-powerful, and "taking over" the military. They'll portray us as mincing queens, flitting about, while simultaneously portraying us as predatory animals, overpowering the defenseless straights. It's all a little crazy. Okay, a lot crazy.  So here, is one more attempt to set the record straight. . .uh. . .so to speak.

1. There have always been gay people in the military - The only difference now is that gay soldiers won't have to hide that fact.  Until now, they've been forced to lie, by deed or omission. That can create a very stressful situation, with all sorts of attendant problems.

2. Gays in the showers and bunks is thus nothing new - But now, if you're a service member who has a real aversion to teh gay, you'll know who to avoid! This is a win for you guys, though it's pretty dumb. The military isn't the only place where same sex groups of people bunk or shower together. Do you belong to a gym? Then you've showered with gay guys, trust me.

3. Sex in the military is still against the rules - This is the big one. Many right-wingers seem to think that "serving openly" means "behaving as though life is a gay bar." The same rules that apply to straight soldiers will apply to gay ones. So, no sexy times on base. Sorry, you'll just have to look for it on the internet, just like everyone else.

4. There is no sex act practiced by gays that isn't practiced by straights - The ultimate in obvious, yes, but important to point out. For all of their supposed revulsion, FReepers in particular are unusually fixated upon gay sex acts, the more extreme the better. But if a gay person has done it, you can rest assured that a straight person has done it as well. What's more, at upwards of 90% of the population, there are probably more straight people doing it. Oh, and the gerbil thing? Nobody does that, unless they're trying to recreate an urban legend.

5. Gay couples won't be living on base together - Unless the military begins allowing unmarried straights to cohabitate on base, it won't happen with gays either. Since the US Government does not recognize any same-sex marriages, they won't be recognized by the military either.  If same-sex marriage should become legal federally, that could change, and it should.

That's if for now, but surely not the last time I'll write a post like this. The disinformation and willful ignorance of the right is sure to inspire yet another sequel, and Captain Obvious will once again have to point out what should already be. . .obvious.

Ann Coulter Blathers About "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" Repeal

I really don't care about much that Ann Coulter says. And based upon the last several months of news cycles, I must not be alone. When's the last time a Coultergasm caused waves in the news? Girlfriend's act is as tired and old as her little black cocktail dress. So, why am I posting a link to a story about Ann Coulter, and her lunatic ravings about the repeal of DADT? Because the attached picture is creepy and/or hilarious. That is all.

Image from source, MediaIte

[Excerpt]

Ann Coulter Engages In “Utterly Ridiculous” Duel With Red Eye’s Andy Levy Over DADT



On Fox News Channel’s Red Eye, Ann Coulter unleashed a fury of controversial comments in response to the repeal of the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell military policy. However, whether one finds her thoughts offensive or funny depends entirely on one’s own view of Coulter’s role in political discourse. For those who take her every word seriously, you probably will be justified in being upset with her comments. . .

 

Read more at: MediaIte

Repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" Has Freepers Freaking Out

When anything goes the Democrats' way, you can count on a collective shriek rising from Right-Wing World, particularly from internet outposts like FreeRepublic.com.  FR is kind of like Sophia from The Golden Girls, minus the humor. Sophia was said to have had a stroke which removed her "tact" filter. She said whatever came to her mind, whether or not it was fit for public consumption. FReepers are more likely than most right-wingers to speak without a filter. This is because if you don't toe their line, you'll be ejected from the forum.

An example of FReeper humor, from source

Xenophobia, racism and especially homophobia are rampant at FR. Worse is their shocking, seemingly willful ignorance on the subject of homosexuality, and their "11-year-old bully" senses of humor.  So, I knew that when word came down that the end of the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy is virtually assured, I knew that there would be rage among the FReepers. Remember now, this is one of the most frequented right-wing sites on the web, not some obscure little blog. Take a look.

"This will destroy the US military, just as it has destroyed the Israeli, UK, Australian, Canadian and Germnan armed forces."

EDITOR: Yep, everyone knows those militaries just crumbled. Especially Israel's. Idiot.

"So now that this has passed, I think they should make separate platoons of only openly homosexuals. This should be the first platoon in, as no one else would want to be in front of them."

EDITOR: An example of the oh-so-developed right-wing sense of humor. Can't stop laughing, can you?

"The utter demolition and incineration of the Republic and its institutions continues unabated thanks to ZERO supposed 'checks & balances.'"

EDITOR: Hyperbole much?

"By voting to repeal, it can probably be assumed that you are condoning consenting sexual encounters in the shower or the barracks. . .It means that the gay lifestyle language and physical mannerisms may be displayed while in uniform and that ‘flippy’ salutes must be tolerated. . ."

EDITOR: This is the type of ignorance I'm talking about. Apparently, gay people do not--in this person's view--have any control over their attractions or behavior. And rules against sexual behavior already in place won't apply to gay people. What? The rest of this person's statement (and there is more) is as utterly ridiculous.

"Second, sorry Dingy [Harry Reid], our precious country was not founded on queers and fagots. [sic]"

EDITOR: And here, ladies and gentlemen, is an example of bigotry and ignorance (or is it stupidity?). If you're going to type an insult, at least learn to spell it. Idiot.

"Kinda gives new meaning to never leaving your buddies behind......"

EDITOR: Ha, ha, ha, ha! Not.

"This isn’t about gays or rights. This is the liberal agenda telling regular Americans that our value system of family, God, country, and hard work is outdated and must be abolished in favor of the new."

EDITOR: Ah, yes. The alleged "ulterior motives" of the "gay agenda." I still want to know when and where the meetings were held, when it was decided how we were going to go about destroying America. And why I wasn't invited. This was entirely about rights. Idiot.

"Time for a BIG tea party."

EDITOR: Yeah, 'cause that doesn't sound even a little bit gay. . .

"Well, there goes the shelf price for Vaseline petroleum jelly over at every AAFES worldwide!"

EDITOR: What gay guy (or gal) uses Vaseline? Do they even still make it? Fails as comedy, because it has no relevance.

"The end game is the deconstruction of the military. The left is using the gay issue as a tool just as they use the environment as a tool, race as a tool, gender as a tool, children as a tool, food as a tool ..."

EDITOR: More feverish delusions. This guy really thinks that the left collectively set up a plan to "deconstruct" the military, and apparently America using diversionary tactics that only he and other FReepers have deduced. Yeah, as though Democrats had the ability to plan something that in-depth and secretive. Tell me another one.

"One look at Fairy Reid tells you he is a FAG."

EDITOR: Facepalm. . .

"Men and women can now hold hands on base
Men can now dress as women on base.
Chaplains will be targeted.
DOMA will now be asked to be overturned.
Feds now recognize homosexuality.
Homosexual parties can now happen on base.
Homosexuals can now kiss each other on base.
Homosexuals can now have their queer flags on the wall on base.
Homosexuals can now say and do anything in a shower , in their room etc
The list is endless and the ignorant pro commie homosexuals lovers.supporters say no big frigging deal.
Will we also see homosexuals parades now?
Will homosexual assaults happen?
Will homosexuals be promoted of their homosexual boyfriend or girlfriend?
If anyone thinks this is not the end then wake the hell up as they have done more than enough damage with their ignorance


EDITOR: This person has done entirely too much thinking about "teh gay," and thinks that the Uniform Code of Military Conduct won't apply to gays for some reason. He/she is an idiot. And probably a little gay.

There is more, and tons have been added since I started typing this. They're foaming at the mouth about this, and it is all supposition of what might happen. As you can see by the selections above, these folks are all id, with no particular reasoning ability, nor are they hampered by actual facts or logic. And they are thankfully now just noise. If you really want to see what else they have to say, I can't stop you from going to FreeRepublic.

UPDATED: I just had to add this one quote, because it sort of blew me away. . .

"To add, homosexuality is incompatable with military service, and starting today, military service will be incompatible with Christianity. From this day forward, I’ll have no respect for anyone enlisting or re-enlisting."

EDITOR: Wow. Just wow. So, for eight years it was "support the troops" or you were un-American. But now that a gay person will be allowed to serve without hiding? Not so much. Why is this attitude not considered un-American?

"Don't Ask, Don't Tell" Nearly Certain to be Repealed

Our Senate, as most of you know, is weird. Even though a bill can be passed and sent over from the House, the Senate still has to take a vote to find out if they can take a vote. It's baffling. But the first vote--in today's reality--must have a majority of 60 votes to pass. This is because Republicans have turned a rarely used procedural tactic known as the filibuster (which is really more the threat of a filibuster) into an every-day, almost-every-vote procedure. They vote against everything. They vote against voting against everything. And because they've gotten away with it, I'm sure that unless they change the rules on January 5, this will continue to be the way things get done.

But in a small miracle, the vote to allow a vote on the repeal the military's discriminatory "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy passed with 60 votes. This clears the way for an "up or down vote" (remember those?) in 30 hours, and it only needs 51 votes to pass. This virtually ensures the end of DADT. 

And while ultimately this law only effects a relative handful of people, it has much broader implications.  It is easier to hold on to prejudices and bigotry when there are institutionalized laws and policies that separate those same people out. DADT (and the "Defense of Marriage Act" or DoMA) are two things a homophobe could point to and say, "see, the government agrees with me."  With the repeal of DADT, we have one less institutionalized discriminatory law, and that is a very good thing.  As for the DREAM Act, I'm for it, but don't have a huge chip on my shoulder about it.  It sounds like a great idea, but it is not my fight.

[Excerpt]

Senate votes to advance 'don't ask, don't tell,' DREAM Act fails

The Senate voted 63-33 Saturday to proceed to a final vote to repeal the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy which bans openly gay people from serving in the armed forces. . .

Read more at: CNN

House Passes "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" Repeal

Image from source, The Advocate

Or rather, they passed an "It's okay to repeal DADT if a whole bunch of people agree it's okay." Or something. For the second time. It's a great step, but meaningless unless Harry Reid manages to overcome a sure-to-be-tried filibuster. There is no reason--short of homophobia--to keep this always archaic and ridiculous law in place. The military is for repeal, for the most part. The American public is for repeal in large percentages. And there are already gay people in the military, just as there always have been. That won't stop John McCain and Mitch McConnell from claiming that "America" wants DADT to stay. 

[Excerpt]

House Approves DADT Repeal



The U.S. House of Representatives Wednesday approved a stand-alone bill to repeal the 17-year-old law barring lesbian and gay service members from serving openly in the military by a vote of 250-175. . .
 
Read more at: The Advocate

ABC's This Week Covers "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"

As I usually do on Sunday mornings--though much less enthusiastically than I used to--I watched some of the Sunday political shows. Meet the Press with David Gregory was frustrating as usual, because I've never liked Gregory's interviewing style. FOX "News" Sunday was, as always, a train wreck, this time foisting both Dana Perino and Liz Cheney on their viewing audience.  By far the most interesting of the shows I watched was This Week with Christianne Amanpour, with much of the show taken up with a discussion on the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy.

The discussion was interesting, but did nothing to convince me that there is any study needed, any implementation necessary or phasing in of a policy change called for. This is rather binary: either end the policy or don't. The "military readiness" claim is malarkey. Gay people exist in virtually every walk of life, and coexist quite well with others. This "homosexual panic" that homophobes like the two on the panel, Lt. Col. Bob McGuinness and Elaine Donnelly (who looks like her entire body is clenched) seem to think straight soldiers suffer from is ridiculous.  The argument is basically saying that the gays themselves aren't the problem, it's the straights who will somehow lose the ability to fight if there is a gay person in their ranks. Ludicrous. Anyway, General Wesley Clark and the rest of the "good guys" on the panel presented themselves well.

I'm liking Amampour's show more and more each time I watch it. Her level of intelligence is obvious, and her approach to political news and commentary is several notches above Gregory's or (obviously) Chris Wallace's.

Gaypocalypse Now: Jon Stewart Rips John McCain

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Gaypocalypse Now
www.thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor The Daily Show on Facebook

GOP Threatens to Block All Senate Work Over Tax Cuts

Image of Mitch McChinless from source, TPM

So this is different from the way the Senate has done business for four years, how? I suppose the fact that all of the Republican Senators signed the memo, the belief is that they'd be bound by it. So, unless the rich folks get their tax cuts, nothing gets done, not DADT, not unemployment extensions. . .but again, this is different how? They were going to filibuster everything anyway.

Here's what I really don't get. Republicans have put their cards on the table. They want tax cuts for the wealthy--at the expense of everything else--and they don't want unemployed Americans to get relief at Christmas time. Wouldn't you think a healthy chunk of the non-rich, and the unemployed just might be Republican voters? Are they counting on the notoriously short American attention span to let this all fall into the memory hole in 2012? Or will they simply be emboldened, and continue the slash and burn for the next two years? Dunno. But I'll say this, Mitch McConnell is a dick, with no redeeming qualities. Pure and simple. (Hey, had to give Karl Rove something to chew on.)

[Excerpt]

DADT No More? Republicans Threaten To Block All Dem Initiatives


Just hours after Democrats and Republicans agreed to bargain on tax cuts, and fewer hours still after Defense Secretary Robert Gates implored Congress to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell this year, word leaked that Republicans aren't really interested in any of it -- a major repudiation of Gates' authority. . .

Read more at: Talking Points Memo

Maddow on "Don't Ask, Don't Tell": Irresponsible for Congress Not to Act

The only hurdle left to clear in the attempt to repeal the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (DADT) policy is the Republican Party in the Senate. The military basically says "no big whoop" to the repeal, though they very clearly want Congress--not the courts--to do it. The American people are behind a repeal. The House of Representatives already approved it. That leaves Grampy McCain and his stubborn, apparent homophobia. And also, a GOP that seems determined not to agree with anything the President wants done, even if it has popular support.

For liberals--particularly gay liberals--the most important thing beyond a success is that if it loses, it better all hang on the GOP. If Harry Reid can't caucus every single Democrat, there's going to be a firestorm.