Lieberman to take lead on Don't Ask, Don't Tell repeal

[sabra]

Source: CNN

Washington (CNN) - The push to repeal Don't Ask Don't Tell will have an unlikely leader: Sen. Joe Lieberman.

The famously centrist senator from Connecticut said Monday that he would be a sponsor of legislation to be introduced next week.

"I will be proud to be a sponsor of the important effort to enable patriotic gay Americans to defend our national security and our founding values of freedom and opportunity," Lieberman said in a statement. "I have opposed the current policy of preventing gay Americans from openly serving in the military since its enactment in 1993.

"To exclude one group of Americans from serving in the armed forces is contrary to our fundamental principles as outlined in the Declaration of Independence and weakens our defenses by denying our military the service of a large group of Americans who can help our cause," he said. "I am grateful for the leadership of President Obama to repeal the policy and the support of Secretary Gates and Chief of Staff Admiral Mullen."

Read more: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2010/02/22/lieberman-to-take-lead-on-dont-ask-dont-tell-repeal/?fbid=VP2LgjjHQ1T

[SlingBlade]

1. "centrist senator" ? I call Bull Shit !

[Frances]

2. My first thought as well

So the author thought that Joe was in the center?

[sasquuatch55]

13. Me too.

nt

[No Elephants]

42. Joe is in the center-- of the Republican Party.

Campaigning for NcCain Palin after being on the Democratic Presidential ticket and threatening to filibuster the public option equals "centrist" these days?

Maybe Aaron Burr was not a traitor after all, only a centrist?

[GodlessBiker]

3. Oh, great. We're doomed.

[dmr]

40. No, he's on the record on this.

Personally, I can't stand the man, but I've heard him with my own ears; and he was quite passionate about the inequality.

[No Elephants]

43. Republicans and Democrats are both moderating their stance on the wedge issues of

GLBT and choice, and both for the same reasons--election and re-election.

[ThomCat]

4. He doesn't want us to have healthcare, but he is willing to let us

join the military and go fight and get hurt or maimed and killed.

Doesn't he see a discrepancy here? :wtf:

[John Kerry VonErich]

51. good point

nt

[MiniMe]

5. If the dems havn't learned that you can't trust Joe by now, they haven't been paying attention

[Democat]

6. Good for him - he can give other Senators cover.

I'm no Lieberman fan, but in this case he is right and his willingness to stand on the front lines of this fight will give cover to some other Senators who might be too chicken otherwise.

[Jennicut]

7. Lieberman has been against DADT since 1993 so it is not inconsistent but he wants the left to like

him a tiny bit to get reelected here. I doubt it will help him, his #'s are in the toilet here in CT.

[boycottfaux]

8. Smells sour . .

I just think LIEberman is hoping his approval rating will jump to at least 13% now . .

[ejbr]

9. As a gay American, I say

fuck you Joe. You're still a piece of shit in my book.

[seeinfweggos]

19. that's real smart. let's only accept the help of the good guys.

in fact i say we should only accept the vote of dennis kucinich. if you ain't dk, fuck you we don't want your help.

[ejbr]

23. Whatever....he's a dick and enough people are willing to help

without dicks like him trying to run for cover from progressive angst. Or are you stupid enough to believe his bullshit?

[seeinfweggos]

29. as someone has already pointed out

he will give cover to center, center-right dems. i would like to see it pass by a wide margin. yes he is a fucking dickhead. i agree. but so fucking what? doesn't make his vote worth any less.

[ejbr]

33. I just don't want to be a

"step and fetch" gay person because an asshole senator is throwing us some crumbs. DADT is less important than healthcare in my humble opinion.

[seeinfweggos]

36. so you will be obligated to him somehow? i won't be. but if fucking Boehner decided to co-sign i'd

be thrilled.

[ejbr]

37. no, I refuse to

be "obligated" to him under these circumstances, even though you want me to "STEP AND FETCH" for him. However, you can ignore his irresponsible transgressions if you wish. You must be a fan of Bill O'Reilly's since he told CPAC to lay off Obama?

[seeinfweggos]

38. so what exactly do you believe yourself being asked to step and fetch?

nobody (at least not me) has asked you to vote for him or give him money. i wouldn't do either. all i said was that it was good that he is on the right side of this one. big fucking deal. and i have no idea what cpac is and i am proud to say i have never watched bill o'reily. i have less important things to do.

[ejbr]

46. My point IS

Joementum is playing chess while the niave among us are playing checkers. If you think DADT needs the likes of Joe Lieberman to pass, then I have a bridge to sell you. The president, the top brass, the majority of Americans, even Dick fuckin' Cheney says it should be repealed. Joe sees an opening to fool gullible progressives into thinking he is on the cutting edge when he is only riding the wave. But you go ahead and praise the prick, I'd just as soon punch him in the face. K?

[seeinfweggos]

48. are you smoking crack? when did i praise him? who here said he was on the cutting edge?

never and nobody are the answers. you got nothing. what you need to step and fetch is a clue.

[No Elephants]

45. All ejbr said was that his or her opinion of Joe will not change bc of this.

EJBR said nothing about accepting or not accepting Joe's vote on DADT--as if there were any "acceptance" process on Senatorial votes anyway, besides voting for or against a Senator in the next primary or election.

[seeinfweggos]

50. no that's not all he said

"he's a dick and enough people are willing to help
without dicks like him..."

[AlinPA]

10. He will probably vote against the legislation like a loyal republican. nt

[LibDemAlways]

11. Lieberman will take cannon fodder anyway he can get it. I doubt if he

cares about equality for gay people as much as he does making everyone eligible to get killed in the many wars he heartily endorses.

[SlingBlade]

12. Lieberman, Obama's Front Man !

[sellitman]

14. He can still kiss my pasty white

He is like Nader.... A non entity.

[Jefferson23]

15. He finally does something right.

[yellowcanine]

16. Yeah well I say "Don't trust, verify" to that. Keep your eye on the snake in the grass.

[crazylikafox]

28. +1

[ck4829]

17. Lieberman just moved up a notch in my book if he sticks with this. Welcome to notch 1.

[newtothegame]

18. I'm not surprised. I don't think this is the polarizing issue it was on 1993.

Gay marriage still is, obviously.

[PHIMG]

20. Someone wants to make a withdrawl from the GA.Y-T.M.

[4_TN_TITANS]

21. You can be sure...

Liebersnake isn't doing this out of the goodness of his heart. If he's involved, there's something in it for him.

[lsewpershad]

22. Go to hell

ass-wipe. Do you think this will help the clean up your image?

[MisterP]

25. to loyalists it will: they'll yell "How dare you go against the Liberator of the Gays!"

and carefully erase his record of vile acts and sayings

Trujillo pulled the same stunt with his "I'll give the Jews a Dominican safe haven" after hacking a few dozen thousand Haitians to death

[Mithreal]

24. Truman, Obama, and the mythic 'executive order'

It's not that Obama cannot do anything about DADT. (He can send a bill to Congress and push for it, though it would mean putting other priorities, like jobs and the economy, climate change, etc., on the back burner while red state Senators cower under the threat of the renewed culture wars...) but to say that "with the stroke of a pen" he can do everything you want, right now, damn the torpedoes, is just not true.

Barack Obama is in fact, doing what Truman did -- giving the military the opportunity to lead on the policy, which Sec. Gates and Jim Jones have said they're doing. Once he has a buy-in with the Pentagon, he'll be in a stronger position with the generals, and versus more conservative members of the Senate. If he can do "job one," and kick-start the economy and jobs, which impacts every American, straight and gay, he'll be in a stronger political position to push forward on this issue. Until then, activists are asking him to sacrifice his presidency for a single constituency, at a time when most Americans are asking, what's in this "change" business for them.

http://open.salon.com/blog/joy-ann_reid/2009/10/11/truman_obama_and_the_mythic_executive_order

[No Elephants]

44. Truman integrated the military (as to race with an Executive Order, using his powers as CIC.

Obama could have done the same on Inauguration Day. It is tradition, not a Constitutional or statutory requirement, that the CIC step away after Congress has spoken on a specific subject. A well-worded Executive Order about national security, the needs of the military, etc. would have sufficed.

However, IMO, the better way would have been to use the power given Presidents under 10 U.S.C. 12305 to suspend DADT discharges indefinitely. If we can use that to keep returned members of the military to Iraq and Afghanistan until they lose their minds, we can use it to do the correct thing.

Once done, no one would have dared reverse it. That would have saved hundreds of discharges between Inauguration Day and today, allowed gay members of the military to serve with dignity, instead of fear and shame, and would also have made it much easier for Congress to repeal DADT. Tha would have begun to remove the stigma that always accompanies Jim Crow type laws--the stigma on the victims of such laws and the stigma on the makers of such laws and their nation.

[Mithreal]

47. Thank you for posting that. The President refuses to lead.

10 USC 12305 - Sec. 12305. Authority of President to suspend certain laws relating to promotion, retirement, and separation

(a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, during any period members of a reserve component are serving on active duty pursuant to an order to active duty under authority of section 12301, 12302, or 12304 of this title, the President may suspend any provision of law relating to promotion, retirement, or separation applicable to any member of the armed forces who the President determines is essential to the national security of the United States. (b) A suspension made under the authority of subsection (a) shall terminate (1) upon release from active duty of members of the reserve component ordered to active duty under the authority of section 12301, 12302, or 12304 of this title, as the case may be, or (2) at such time as the President determines the circumstances which required the action of ordering members of the reserve component to active duty no longer exist, whichever is earlier. (c) Upon the termination of a suspension made under the authority of subsection (a) of a provision of law otherwise requiring the separation or retirement of officers on active duty because of age, length of service or length of service in grade, or failure of selection for promotion, the Secretary concerned shall extend by up to 90 days the otherwise required separation or retirement date of any officer covered by the suspended provision whose separation or retirement date, but for the suspension, would have been before the date of the termination of the suspension or within 90 days after the date of such termination.

http://vlex.com/vid/president-suspend-retirement-separation-19218446

[seeinfweggos]

49. wrong. bad history fail.

DefenseLink.mil - Special Report - Military IntegrationWASHINGTON, July 22, 2008 – Not even a presidential order could accomplish the full and fair integration of African-Americans in the U.S. military. ...
www.defense.gov/home/features/2008/0708_integration/

[KamaAina]

26. Even a stopped clock is right twice a day

:eyes:

[proud patriot]

27. good hopefully that'll keep him busy

so he won't be on the TV dissng healthcare reform

[fascisthunter]

30. is he up for re-election or sometin'?

[AlinPA]

31. He is a slimy politician whom we can't trust with this issue. I trust the generals who spoke for

the repeal.

[Kber]

32. Uh - What?!

After publicly dissing the Generals who testified in favor of the repeal?

Someone needs to read the text of any bill he sponsors Very Carefully. I smell a rat.

On edit...
Not to mention that I resent his "taking the lead" after other Senators have actually risked real political capital by Actually Leading on this topic. Now that it's not controversial, he things he can just scoot up to the front of the line and get "credit"?

All I can say is that if the Senators who have actually risked their necks advocating for the repeal of DADT when it wasn't popular let Lieberman "lead", it must mean that they are willing to let this snake in the grass reap the political fruit of their labors because they feel that repeal of DADT is more important than playing politics, which I respect, but still resent.

[JerseygirlCT]

34. Too little, too late. nt

[IndianaGreen]

35. I don't care if he marries Elton John

Lieberman is still an untrustworthy and unreliable POS.

[PFunk]

39. Nice try Joe, but it wont help you get re-elected (or improve your so-called legacy)

You've PO'd to many folks to do otherwise. Just accept your fate and just fade away after you lose you seat (and get out of our hair) in 2012.

[Q3JR4]

41. You think old joe is finally seeing the writing on the wall?

I remember reading that, when you break it down, the "conservative" dems in the senate are in trouble while the more liberal dems are going to skate through their reelection.

Q3JR4.