Today, we're all remembering what happened 13 years ago. And we're facing tough questions that harken back to the decisions made in the aftermath of September 11.
Not even a year after 9/11 and the start of the Afghanistan War, then President George W. Bush wanted to go to war in Iraq. We were initially told Saddam Hussein was personally responsible for 9/11. Then, we were told Saddam Hussein was providing safe harbor to al-Qaeda terrorists. Then, we were told Iraq was somehow part of the "Axis of Evil". Then, we were told of "smoking guns" and "mushroom clouds".
Ultimately, then President Bush got the war he wanted. Thanks to neoconservative allies in Congress like Senator
John McCain (R-Arizona), approval for the Iraq invasion was a snap. And Bush never had to worry about obtaining more funding for what later became a war of "liberation" and "spreading democracy".
Senator John McCain, along with so many of the other regular cable "news" talking heads and Sunday show pundits, have regularly been proven wrong on their constant assertions that all we need is another war in order for Americans to "feel safe".
But what if we don't need another war in order to "feel safe"? What if we don't need to repeat the mistakes from our last war in the region? What if we actually think before we act?
We can't afford to make the same mistakes we made in Iraq last decade. While Isis indeed poses a threat to regional stability in the Middle East, it's not the some rapidly approaching apocalypse for America. Yet if we make the wrong move there, we risk further destabilization of the region (and ironically, a stronger Isis).
Contrary to what certain "TEA" flavored media pundits like to say, sports analogies won't help. Neither will bombastic rhetoric. And probably neither will yet another full scale Middle East war.
Perhaps we should think some more before we act. We have no obligation to repeat the mistakes of the previous Iraq War. And we have no obligation to commit thousands more American troops to a geopolitical Pandora's Box that only promises more brutal & bloody mayhem if opened. However, there are 535 people on Capitol Hill who do have an obligation to hold a vote. We'd like for them to think and act on it.
Showing posts with label military. Show all posts
Showing posts with label military. Show all posts
Thursday, September 11, 2014
Wednesday, September 10, 2014
12-13
The vote was 12-13. Just 1 more vote could have made the difference for many thousands of American military/veteran families. But alas, it lost 12-13.
In June, Rep. Dina Titus (D-Paradise) introduced legislation to ensure LGBTQ military families have the same access to military spousal benefits as all other military families. Today, it finally had a vote in the House Veterans' Affairs Committee as an amendment to another bill. And it lost 12-13.
In an interesting twist, outgoing Rep. Jon Runyan (R-New Jersey) voted for Rep. Titus' amendment. He also signed on as a cosponsor of ENDA earlier this year. He actually wasn't the only Republican cosponsor of ENDA on that committee...
Yet he was the only Republican vote for Rep. Titus' amendment that would have simply guaranteed equal access to military spousal benefits regardless of which state one lives in. So the amendment failed 12-13.
They've tried "softer lighting". They've tried "softer language". And they've made endless attempts at "rebranding". However, no amount of "Republican rebranding" can truly obscure what all but one of them did today. (And he just happened to be the one who's retiring from Congress this year.)
Next time anyone tries to goad you into thinking "Republican rebranding" is anything more than the vacuous shtick it truly is, remind that someone of this vote. Go ahead and remind that someone that even the allegedly "pro-equality" on this House committee voted down this critical amendment that simply would have given thousands of military families the peace of mind they deserve. Remind that someone that thanks to their craven refusal to drop the "TEA" for once and do something useful for a change, actual soldiers/veterans and their loved ones were given the shaft.
The vote was 12-13. The lower House of Congress had yet another opportunity to prove to Americans that they can actually be productive. But yet again, House Republican "leaders" fail to provide any sort of leadership.
In June, Rep. Dina Titus (D-Paradise) introduced legislation to ensure LGBTQ military families have the same access to military spousal benefits as all other military families. Today, it finally had a vote in the House Veterans' Affairs Committee as an amendment to another bill. And it lost 12-13.
In an interesting twist, outgoing Rep. Jon Runyan (R-New Jersey) voted for Rep. Titus' amendment. He also signed on as a cosponsor of ENDA earlier this year. He actually wasn't the only Republican cosponsor of ENDA on that committee...
Yet he was the only Republican vote for Rep. Titus' amendment that would have simply guaranteed equal access to military spousal benefits regardless of which state one lives in. So the amendment failed 12-13.
They've tried "softer lighting". They've tried "softer language". And they've made endless attempts at "rebranding". However, no amount of "Republican rebranding" can truly obscure what all but one of them did today. (And he just happened to be the one who's retiring from Congress this year.)
Next time anyone tries to goad you into thinking "Republican rebranding" is anything more than the vacuous shtick it truly is, remind that someone of this vote. Go ahead and remind that someone that even the allegedly "pro-equality" on this House committee voted down this critical amendment that simply would have given thousands of military families the peace of mind they deserve. Remind that someone that thanks to their craven refusal to drop the "TEA" for once and do something useful for a change, actual soldiers/veterans and their loved ones were given the shaft.
The vote was 12-13. The lower House of Congress had yet another opportunity to prove to Americans that they can actually be productive. But yet again, House Republican "leaders" fail to provide any sort of leadership.
Tuesday, August 12, 2014
The Iraq Question
At one point, it seemed like it was beginning to fade from our memory. It was becoming "ancient history". And with so much to worry about at home, why must we think about it again?
But now, Iraq is back in the news. Isis (or "Islamic State") is on the move in Northern Iraq, and it may now have sights on Syria and Turkey as well. And now, fears are growing of a possible genocide in the region.
The US is moving back towards military engagement in Iraq. But before we debate what we should do there next, we must remember how we fell into this hot mess in the first place.
In October 2002, Congress voted to authorize the use of force in Iraq to combat the alleged stockpiling of "weapons of mass destruction" by then Iraqi Prime Minister Saddam Hussein. Before the vote, the Bush Administration made claims that Saddam Hussein was somehow involved in the September 11, 2001, (9/11) terrorist attack. There was never a formal declaration of war when the US led invasion began in March 2003. And after the invasion, it became painfully clear that there were no "weapons of mass destruction" prepared to be used against us... And that Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with 9/11.
After the invasion began, the Iraq War transformed from an allegedly "anti-terrorist operation" into some "armed humanitarian liberation of the Iraqi people". All of a sudden, our armed forces were in Iraq to initiate "regime change" and essentially force "democracy" at gunpoint. The neoconservatives who were advising then President George W. Bush on foreign policy were praising "freedom fighters" like Ahmad Chalabi and urging the US to expand our military presence into Iran, Syria, and elsewhere so we can spread "democracy" all over the Middle East. What was supposed to be a fast & easy "shock & awe" war to disarm terrorists was suddenly becoming a grandiose attempt to set up an American Empire halfway across the world.
Ironically, this war that was supposed to "disarm terrorists" actually succeeded... In arming terrorists. al-Qaeda never had a presence in Iraq before March 20, 2003. But after the US led "coalition of the willing" toppled Saddam Hussein's regime from power, an enormous power vacuum emerged. And by mid 2004, "al-Qaeda in Iraq" was wreaking havoc in the "Triangle of Death" around Baghdad.
US forces only succeeded in wresting control of the Baghdad exurbs from "al-Qaeda in Iraq" by arming Sunni militias who had grown uncomfortable with their continued presence in the region while providing "The Surge" of additional US soldiers into Iraq. But even then, "al-Qaeda in Iraq" was never fully eradicated. It only went dormant (until the inevitable "rebranding" that we'll get to in a moment).
What was supposed to be a "liberation of the Iraqi people" quickly devolved into a complete organizational clusterfuck as the US occupation of Iraq dragged on. Alleged "Iraqi Messiah" Ahmad Chalabi ran to Iran whenever they had money for him and became a nagging destabilizing force in the region. The Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) that took over after the end of Saddam's reign quickly emerged as a Keystone Kops style money laundering scheme. And the Shia led political bloc that ultimately took the keys from the CPA never seemed to unite the nation behind its government.
By 2011, what had previously been known as "al-Qaeda in Iraq" "rebranded" itself as Isis. And when Isis decided to disobey al-Qaeda Central's orders to limit civilian deaths when it jumped into Syria's civil war, the 2 terrorist networks divorced this past February. But now that Iraq's government is as unstable as ever, President Obama faces tough choices on how to prevent a horrid genecidal bloodbath in the region.
Oh, and so does Congress. But already, many of the same neoconservatives who misled the nation into the Iraq War in 2002 want to criticize just about anything & everything President Obama decides to do now. Some of the current G-O-TEA hotheads on Capitol Hill even want to return US ground troops to Iraq and revive the US occupation. And to make matters even more bizarre, some Democrats (who happen to be the same ones who voted for military force authorization in 2002) are harping about the Obama Administration's caution in arming rebels, even as many of the rebels the neoconservatives have wanted to support actually have ties to Isis.
As we ponder what to do next about Iraq, it's critical for us to remember the history of this war. It's crucial for us to remember the many painful errors and brutal blunders made in the 12 years so that we don't repeat them. And as Members of Congress decide what parameters to set on this latest mission into Iraq, they must remember their Constitutional duty and their precedecessors' big mistake.
But now, Iraq is back in the news. Isis (or "Islamic State") is on the move in Northern Iraq, and it may now have sights on Syria and Turkey as well. And now, fears are growing of a possible genocide in the region.
The US is moving back towards military engagement in Iraq. But before we debate what we should do there next, we must remember how we fell into this hot mess in the first place.
In October 2002, Congress voted to authorize the use of force in Iraq to combat the alleged stockpiling of "weapons of mass destruction" by then Iraqi Prime Minister Saddam Hussein. Before the vote, the Bush Administration made claims that Saddam Hussein was somehow involved in the September 11, 2001, (9/11) terrorist attack. There was never a formal declaration of war when the US led invasion began in March 2003. And after the invasion, it became painfully clear that there were no "weapons of mass destruction" prepared to be used against us... And that Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with 9/11.
After the invasion began, the Iraq War transformed from an allegedly "anti-terrorist operation" into some "armed humanitarian liberation of the Iraqi people". All of a sudden, our armed forces were in Iraq to initiate "regime change" and essentially force "democracy" at gunpoint. The neoconservatives who were advising then President George W. Bush on foreign policy were praising "freedom fighters" like Ahmad Chalabi and urging the US to expand our military presence into Iran, Syria, and elsewhere so we can spread "democracy" all over the Middle East. What was supposed to be a fast & easy "shock & awe" war to disarm terrorists was suddenly becoming a grandiose attempt to set up an American Empire halfway across the world.
Ironically, this war that was supposed to "disarm terrorists" actually succeeded... In arming terrorists. al-Qaeda never had a presence in Iraq before March 20, 2003. But after the US led "coalition of the willing" toppled Saddam Hussein's regime from power, an enormous power vacuum emerged. And by mid 2004, "al-Qaeda in Iraq" was wreaking havoc in the "Triangle of Death" around Baghdad.
US forces only succeeded in wresting control of the Baghdad exurbs from "al-Qaeda in Iraq" by arming Sunni militias who had grown uncomfortable with their continued presence in the region while providing "The Surge" of additional US soldiers into Iraq. But even then, "al-Qaeda in Iraq" was never fully eradicated. It only went dormant (until the inevitable "rebranding" that we'll get to in a moment).
What was supposed to be a "liberation of the Iraqi people" quickly devolved into a complete organizational clusterfuck as the US occupation of Iraq dragged on. Alleged "Iraqi Messiah" Ahmad Chalabi ran to Iran whenever they had money for him and became a nagging destabilizing force in the region. The Coalition Provisional Authority (CPA) that took over after the end of Saddam's reign quickly emerged as a Keystone Kops style money laundering scheme. And the Shia led political bloc that ultimately took the keys from the CPA never seemed to unite the nation behind its government.
By 2011, what had previously been known as "al-Qaeda in Iraq" "rebranded" itself as Isis. And when Isis decided to disobey al-Qaeda Central's orders to limit civilian deaths when it jumped into Syria's civil war, the 2 terrorist networks divorced this past February. But now that Iraq's government is as unstable as ever, President Obama faces tough choices on how to prevent a horrid genecidal bloodbath in the region.
Oh, and so does Congress. But already, many of the same neoconservatives who misled the nation into the Iraq War in 2002 want to criticize just about anything & everything President Obama decides to do now. Some of the current G-O-TEA hotheads on Capitol Hill even want to return US ground troops to Iraq and revive the US occupation. And to make matters even more bizarre, some Democrats (who happen to be the same ones who voted for military force authorization in 2002) are harping about the Obama Administration's caution in arming rebels, even as many of the rebels the neoconservatives have wanted to support actually have ties to Isis.
As we ponder what to do next about Iraq, it's critical for us to remember the history of this war. It's crucial for us to remember the many painful errors and brutal blunders made in the 12 years so that we don't repeat them. And as Members of Congress decide what parameters to set on this latest mission into Iraq, they must remember their Constitutional duty and their precedecessors' big mistake.
Wednesday, August 6, 2014
The Grift That Keeps On Taking
It's time for us to embark on another archeological dig. Today, let's jump back to July 2010. Back then, Sharron Angle was running her outrageously delusional campaign for US Senate. And back then, she was relying on help from some rather shady friends.
One of her shady friends from that remarkable 2010 campaign was Sal Russo. And he had his crew of shady friends help him prop up Angle and their other endorsed candidates for that cycle. In July 2010, we warned everyone about them.
Back when Howard Kaloogian ran for a San Diego, California, based Congressional seat in 2006, he defended his vigorous support for extending the Iraq War by showing all the progress he witnessed firsthand there. The problem with his "firsthand" account was that it was a complete lie. You see, Howard Kaloogian's photos of a "peaceful Iraq" were actually photos of an Istanbul, Turkey, suburb.
And that's not all. Later in that 2006 campaign, Howard Kaloogian was caught falsifying his list of endorsements. Several Republicans came forward to announce they never actually endorsed Kaloogian. So there was also that.
However, not even that was enough to keep Sal Russo. Nope, they teamed up to start a slew of PACs, including the now notorious Tea Party Express.
Tea Party Express has come under scrutiny in recent months over just how much of the money it collects from donors ends up in the pockets of Sal Russo and his top lieutenants. But now, there's evidence showing that the "TEA" tinged gravy train doesn't stop at Tea Party Express.
When Howard Kaloogian wasn't trying to buy a seat in Congress with a phony "Iraq" photo, he was joined at the hip with Sal Russo at Move America Forward. Move America Forward was originally designed to promote continuing American involvement in the Iraq War. But in 2008, it shifted gears and became yet another anti-Obama PAC...
Except that it didn't want to be known as just another anti-Obama PAC. It wanted to be known for "supporting the troops". So Move America Forward started its own "charity" to "support" active duty military serving abroad. But now, we have a better sense of who Move America Forward's "charity" is actually supporting.
Surprise, surprise! Sal Russo, Howard Kaloogian, and the rest of the Move America Forward grifter crew were only using their charity to further enrich themselves. Oh, and of course, it didn't hurt that they successfully conned a whole lot of "TEA" flavored media pundits into endorsing the grift. (We're being charitable here, as this story would be even more disgusting if we were to discover all these pundits were also in on the grift.)
There's so much irony to be found throughout this story. However, we must end on this note. Senator Harry Reid (D) had been working tirelessly to pass a VA bill to help veterans access the health care they need. He's also worked with Rep. Steven Horsford (D-North Las Vegas) to open a badly needed VA clinic in Pahrump. And Sal Russo dispatched his Tea Party Express tour buses to attack Senator Reid for "failing the troops"?
Ah, Sal Russo & his network of "TEA" tinted con artists. They're the grift that keeps on taking.
One of her shady friends from that remarkable 2010 campaign was Sal Russo. And he had his crew of shady friends help him prop up Angle and their other endorsed candidates for that cycle. In July 2010, we warned everyone about them.
Russo runs a PR firm in Sacramento, and utilizes his right hand men (and women) in Tea Party Express. There's "grassroots coordinator" Joe Wierzbicki, the same guy who works at Russo's high priced Sacramento PR firm, the same guy who tried to help George Bush drum up support for the Iraq War, tried to swiftboat Barack Obama the same way John Kerry was swiftboated, and is now organizing his luxury coach buses to go across the country and spread lies about Democrats like Harry Reid.
And then there's Howard Kaloogian. He aligned with the radical right and corporate powers that be in the California Legislature. And in 2003, he teamed up with Russo's PR firm, Enron pollster Frank Luntz, talk radio "shock jock" Melanie Morgan, and Newt Gingrich to engineer the recall campaign that ousted California's duly elected Governor and replaced him with Arnold Schwarzenegger.
And in 2006, Kaloogian himself ran for Congress in a special election in San Diego County. Russo joined him yet again, hoping that he'd slip in. But oops, one of Howard's lies about his "time in Iraq" caught up with him. [...]
[...T]hey lied about Bush's war in Iraq, they lied about what they actually saw there, they lied their way into the California Recall that saddled that state with "Arnold", and now they're lying about what their little "tea party" is really up to.
Oh, and now they're trying to dupe us into believe Harry Reid is some sort of "Satan Incarnate" and Sharrontology is our only way to salvation. But when we look behind the curtain, we have to notice the corporate fat cats funding the "Tea Party, Inc." gravy train supporting Sharrontology.
Back when Howard Kaloogian ran for a San Diego, California, based Congressional seat in 2006, he defended his vigorous support for extending the Iraq War by showing all the progress he witnessed firsthand there. The problem with his "firsthand" account was that it was a complete lie. You see, Howard Kaloogian's photos of a "peaceful Iraq" were actually photos of an Istanbul, Turkey, suburb.
And that's not all. Later in that 2006 campaign, Howard Kaloogian was caught falsifying his list of endorsements. Several Republicans came forward to announce they never actually endorsed Kaloogian. So there was also that.
However, not even that was enough to keep Sal Russo. Nope, they teamed up to start a slew of PACs, including the now notorious Tea Party Express.
Tea Party Express has come under scrutiny in recent months over just how much of the money it collects from donors ends up in the pockets of Sal Russo and his top lieutenants. But now, there's evidence showing that the "TEA" tinged gravy train doesn't stop at Tea Party Express.
When Howard Kaloogian wasn't trying to buy a seat in Congress with a phony "Iraq" photo, he was joined at the hip with Sal Russo at Move America Forward. Move America Forward was originally designed to promote continuing American involvement in the Iraq War. But in 2008, it shifted gears and became yet another anti-Obama PAC...
Except that it didn't want to be known as just another anti-Obama PAC. It wanted to be known for "supporting the troops". So Move America Forward started its own "charity" to "support" active duty military serving abroad. But now, we have a better sense of who Move America Forward's "charity" is actually supporting.
Surprise, surprise! Sal Russo, Howard Kaloogian, and the rest of the Move America Forward grifter crew were only using their charity to further enrich themselves. Oh, and of course, it didn't hurt that they successfully conned a whole lot of "TEA" flavored media pundits into endorsing the grift. (We're being charitable here, as this story would be even more disgusting if we were to discover all these pundits were also in on the grift.)
There's so much irony to be found throughout this story. However, we must end on this note. Senator Harry Reid (D) had been working tirelessly to pass a VA bill to help veterans access the health care they need. He's also worked with Rep. Steven Horsford (D-North Las Vegas) to open a badly needed VA clinic in Pahrump. And Sal Russo dispatched his Tea Party Express tour buses to attack Senator Reid for "failing the troops"?
Ah, Sal Russo & his network of "TEA" tinted con artists. They're the grift that keeps on taking.
Thursday, June 12, 2014
Personal Responsibility
All this year, we've heard nothing but excuses from House Republican "leaders" when asked about comprehensive immigration reform (CIR). Even though they've been the ones blocking a floor vote, they've always tried to blame someone else for their own inaction.
Once again, they're passing the buck on CIR. Once again, they're trying to blame President Obama instead to take any personal responsibility. (Didn't they use to preach that?) But this time, they're stooping to the new low of blaming both President Obama and returning Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl for their failure to advance CIR.
Oh, yes. That's right. They're going there. Not only are they claiming that Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl is some sort of "double agent TERRORIST!!!" (way to "support the troops", jack@$$es), but they're now also claiming he's some legendary political mastermind who somehow killed CIR all the way from a US Military hospital in Germany.
Never mind that the very Congressional Republicans trying to turn #Bergdahl into the new DC scandal du jour were the same ones who were demanding that the President do everything possible to #BringBoweHome before President Obama accomplished just that. They're craving a new haute faux scandal to "investigate" to death. And in their twisted, demented minds, they actually believe they've found it in the return of a prisoner of war who suffered 5 years of Taliban captivity.
And not only that, but House G-O-TEA "leaders" now want to use #Bergdahl as their latest excuse for dropping the ball on CIR. Again, whatever happened to that time honored "conservative value" of "personal responsibility"? When did "The Buck Stops Here" become "Not My Fault, Mommy!"?
For the past year, Rep. Joe Heck (R-Henderson) has become notorious here in Nevada for his excuses and flip-flops on immigration reform. Who knew he was just setting an example for the rest of the Republican Party? (Or is it the other way around?) He and his House G-O-TEA colleagues still refuse to take any personal responsibility for their own inaction. And ultimately, millions of American families will continue to pay the price for this latest bout of irresponsible immaturity inaction from the usual G-O-TEA suspects.
Once again, they're passing the buck on CIR. Once again, they're trying to blame President Obama instead to take any personal responsibility. (Didn't they use to preach that?) But this time, they're stooping to the new low of blaming both President Obama and returning Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl for their failure to advance CIR.
Oh, yes. That's right. They're going there. Not only are they claiming that Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl is some sort of "double agent TERRORIST!!!" (way to "support the troops", jack@$$es), but they're now also claiming he's some legendary political mastermind who somehow killed CIR all the way from a US Military hospital in Germany.
Never mind that the very Congressional Republicans trying to turn #Bergdahl into the new DC scandal du jour were the same ones who were demanding that the President do everything possible to #BringBoweHome before President Obama accomplished just that. They're craving a new haute faux scandal to "investigate" to death. And in their twisted, demented minds, they actually believe they've found it in the return of a prisoner of war who suffered 5 years of Taliban captivity.
And not only that, but House G-O-TEA "leaders" now want to use #Bergdahl as their latest excuse for dropping the ball on CIR. Again, whatever happened to that time honored "conservative value" of "personal responsibility"? When did "The Buck Stops Here" become "Not My Fault, Mommy!"?
For the past year, Rep. Joe Heck (R-Henderson) has become notorious here in Nevada for his excuses and flip-flops on immigration reform. Who knew he was just setting an example for the rest of the Republican Party? (Or is it the other way around?) He and his House G-O-TEA colleagues still refuse to take any personal responsibility for their own inaction. And ultimately, millions of American families will continue to pay the price for this latest bout of irresponsible immaturity inaction from the usual G-O-TEA suspects.
Wednesday, June 4, 2014
Leave No Soldier Behind
As faithful readers here know, we try our best to avoid "Campaign Silly Season". But sometimes, the season becomes so silly that we can't avoid it any longer. Today happens to be that kind of day.
And we're not alone. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D) couldn't hold back any longer. In fact, he tweeted this earlier today.
Whenever an American Prisoner of War has been taken, our armed forces always go all in to ensure the safe return of that POW. Always. Never before has this been "controversial"... Until now.
Rep. Mark Amodei (R-Carson City) tweeted, "Best news I've heard in a long time! #standwithbowe", soon after news broke of the Taliban's release of Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl. That tweet was later deleted, and one of Amodei's staff then "blamed" the earlier tweet on another staff member who sent it "without knowing the terms of the release or consulting the congressman".
Believe it or not, Amodei isn't the only Republican who's flip-flopped on #standwithbowe. Senators John McCain (R-Arizona), Jim Inhofe (R-Oklahoma), and Kelly Ayotte (R-New Hampshire) all called for the safe return of Sgt. Bergdahl... Until President Obama announced the prisoner exchange. And then, all of a sudden, a common wartime practice became some "ACT OF TREASON!!!!!111111!!!!!11".
Oh, yes. That's right. They're going there. Move over, #Benghazi. #Bergdahl is the G-O-TEA's newest & hottest haute faux scandal.
And just like their previous favorite haute faux scandals, they're not even bothering to check the facts on Bowe Bergdahl. Rather, they're just leaving it to Republican campaign consultants and hypocritical blowhard scumbags to attack Bergdahl without any actual facts. Because, of course, Obama.
Whatever happened to "leave no soldier behind"? Whatever happened to due process? And hell, whatever happened to "country first"?
We don't know exactly how and why Sgt. Bergdahl went missing. We just know President Obama made sure he was brought home safely. And ultimately, that's what matter. He made sure to leave no soldier behind. Why does anyone want to punish him for that? There's "Campaign Silly Season", but this goes way beyond that pail.
And we're not alone. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D) couldn't hold back any longer. In fact, he tweeted this earlier today.
"We rescue our soldiers first and ask questions later. If action by justice system is needed, I prefer American justice over Taliban justice."
Whenever an American Prisoner of War has been taken, our armed forces always go all in to ensure the safe return of that POW. Always. Never before has this been "controversial"... Until now.
Rep. Mark Amodei (R-Carson City) tweeted, "Best news I've heard in a long time! #standwithbowe", soon after news broke of the Taliban's release of Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl. That tweet was later deleted, and one of Amodei's staff then "blamed" the earlier tweet on another staff member who sent it "without knowing the terms of the release or consulting the congressman".
Believe it or not, Amodei isn't the only Republican who's flip-flopped on #standwithbowe. Senators John McCain (R-Arizona), Jim Inhofe (R-Oklahoma), and Kelly Ayotte (R-New Hampshire) all called for the safe return of Sgt. Bergdahl... Until President Obama announced the prisoner exchange. And then, all of a sudden, a common wartime practice became some "ACT OF TREASON!!!!!111111!!!!!11".
Oh, yes. That's right. They're going there. Move over, #Benghazi. #Bergdahl is the G-O-TEA's newest & hottest haute faux scandal.
And just like their previous favorite haute faux scandals, they're not even bothering to check the facts on Bowe Bergdahl. Rather, they're just leaving it to Republican campaign consultants and hypocritical blowhard scumbags to attack Bergdahl without any actual facts. Because, of course, Obama.
Whatever happened to "leave no soldier behind"? Whatever happened to due process? And hell, whatever happened to "country first"?
We don't know exactly how and why Sgt. Bergdahl went missing. We just know President Obama made sure he was brought home safely. And ultimately, that's what matter. He made sure to leave no soldier behind. Why does anyone want to punish him for that? There's "Campaign Silly Season", but this goes way beyond that pail.
Friday, September 6, 2013
What Will Congress Do on Syria?
This week, we've been talking plenty about the crisis in Syria. President Obama wants a limited military strike to prevent Syrian President Bashar al-Assad from instituting any sort of mass genocide and/or causing any more problems for American allies in the Middle East (like Israel and Turkey). But with growing skepticism at home, the President will have to deliver a nationally televised address on Tuesday to try to convince a war weary public and jittery Congress to go ahead and authorize the strike.
So will it work? At this point, no one knows for sure. Even AIPAC whipping in favor of Syria military intervention hasn't seemed to move many Members of Congress in their direction. And typically, very few on Capitol Hill have been willing to endure the "anti-Israel" and "weak on defense" lines of attack that AIPAC and other hawkish outfits wield at those who don't adhere to their foreign policy goals.
According to the latest whip count, Rep. Joe Heck (R-Henderson) has moved to a definite Nay while Reps. Mark Amodei (R-Carson City, and finally announced something), Steven Horsford (D-North Las Vegas), and Dina Titus (D-Paradise) remain undecided. We're now hearing conflicting reports on Senator Dean Heller(R), since one lists him as a likely Nay while others still count him as undecided. Only Senator Harry Reid (D) so far is a firm Yea.
There's a real possibility Congress won't authorize any use of military force in Syria. Perhaps that’s why Secretary of State John Kerry sat down for an interview with MSNBC's Chris Hayes to make the Administration's case for military action.
Clearly, he and the President are worried about the consequences of not striking. However, most Americans are now more worried about the consequences of striking. They just don't want to see more US troops dying in yet another mistaken war.
This weekend, I'll explain my own take on Syria. For now, I'll just say I can see the logic in Chris Hayes' and Joan Walsh's respective arguments. This is a messy situation that may not even get cleaned up with US military action.
So what can we do? And what should we do? Again, I'll get into more detail on that this weekend. And in the mean time, I'll update this space if we hear more breaking news on Syria.
So will it work? At this point, no one knows for sure. Even AIPAC whipping in favor of Syria military intervention hasn't seemed to move many Members of Congress in their direction. And typically, very few on Capitol Hill have been willing to endure the "anti-Israel" and "weak on defense" lines of attack that AIPAC and other hawkish outfits wield at those who don't adhere to their foreign policy goals.
According to the latest whip count, Rep. Joe Heck (R-Henderson) has moved to a definite Nay while Reps. Mark Amodei (R-Carson City, and finally announced something), Steven Horsford (D-North Las Vegas), and Dina Titus (D-Paradise) remain undecided. We're now hearing conflicting reports on Senator Dean Heller(R), since one lists him as a likely Nay while others still count him as undecided. Only Senator Harry Reid (D) so far is a firm Yea.
There's a real possibility Congress won't authorize any use of military force in Syria. Perhaps that’s why Secretary of State John Kerry sat down for an interview with MSNBC's Chris Hayes to make the Administration's case for military action.
Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Clearly, he and the President are worried about the consequences of not striking. However, most Americans are now more worried about the consequences of striking. They just don't want to see more US troops dying in yet another mistaken war.
This weekend, I'll explain my own take on Syria. For now, I'll just say I can see the logic in Chris Hayes' and Joan Walsh's respective arguments. This is a messy situation that may not even get cleaned up with US military action.
So what can we do? And what should we do? Again, I'll get into more detail on that this weekend. And in the mean time, I'll update this space if we hear more breaking news on Syria.
Thursday, February 14, 2013
Filibuster FAIL
Last month, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nevada) secured a "Gentlemen's Agreement" with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Kentucky) on filibuster reform. Basically, they agreed to a few minor changes and no real reform. And it was supposed to settle the matter of running the US Senate.
But now, the issue is being reopened. Now that Senate Republicans have at least temporarily succeeded in sustaining a filibuster of one of their own former colleagues, Chuck Hagel (R-Nebraska), as Defense Secretary, many progressives are demanding that Reid reexamine filibuster reform.
So now, America has no Defense Secretary. President Obama now has no one to represent our country when NATO meets in Brussels later this month to plan withdrawal of NATO members' troops from Afghanistan. And we have no one in charge of The Pentagon because the G-O-TEA is (mis)using US Senate rules to grind Congress to a halt.
But now, it's more than that. America is being embarrassed on the world stage. And the Commander-in-Chief is lacking a Defense Secretary. And this is all because of silly political games on Capitol Hill.
As expected, advocates of filibuster reform are having their "We Told You So" moment.
Right now, Republicans are on a "fishing expedition" in hopes of catching an "OBAMA SCANDAL!!!" No really, they're still fighting Mitt Romney's outrageous and despicable battles. And because of this, America has no Defense Secretary.
This is something Harry Reid has to think about now. Can Mitch McConnell and his G-O-TEA Caucus be trusted any further to honor that "Gentlemen's Agreement"? Or is this perhaps the most glaring reminder of the failure of the contemporary filibuster?
I've said this before, and I'll say this again. Harry Reid is a big believer in the institution that is the United States Senate. And he's hesitant to allow dramatic changes to the way the Senate works.
But in a way, the Senate has already been dramatically changed. This is the first time that the President's Nominee for Defense Secretary has been filibustered. Even the most basic functions of government often can't get a vote on the Senate floor, let alone major pieces of the President's agenda. Is it finally time for a change?
But now, the issue is being reopened. Now that Senate Republicans have at least temporarily succeeded in sustaining a filibuster of one of their own former colleagues, Chuck Hagel (R-Nebraska), as Defense Secretary, many progressives are demanding that Reid reexamine filibuster reform.
Look, we should have seen this all coming. Indeed, Jonathan Bernstein did see it coming, noting recently that GOP conduct throughout Obama’s first term clearly suggested the likelihood that Dems would need 60 votes to get Hagel confirmed. And here we are.
[... I]t’s hard to imagine anything happening that makes as eloquent a case for Reid and Democrats revisiting filibuster reform than this affair will have done. Remember, the watered down filibuster reform deal Reid agreed to was at least partly premised on the idea that both sides were at least somewhat committed to ending some of the abuses that rendered the Senate dysfunctional during Obama’s first term. We now see that Republicans are making a mockery of that arrangement. This goes well beyond Hagel; as always, it goes to the question of whether we are going to have a functional Senate.
Memo to Harry Reid: Time to revive the threat of filibuster reform. Make it absolutely clear that this won’t be tolerated.
So now, America has no Defense Secretary. President Obama now has no one to represent our country when NATO meets in Brussels later this month to plan withdrawal of NATO members' troops from Afghanistan. And we have no one in charge of The Pentagon because the G-O-TEA is (mis)using US Senate rules to grind Congress to a halt.
But now, it's more than that. America is being embarrassed on the world stage. And the Commander-in-Chief is lacking a Defense Secretary. And this is all because of silly political games on Capitol Hill.
As expected, advocates of filibuster reform are having their "We Told You So" moment.
Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Oregon), a leading champion of filibuster reform, issued a statement Thursday lamenting Republican efforts to perform an unprecedented filibuster against a cabinet-level nominee, Chuck Hagel.
“Merely weeks after the Senate came together in a good-faith effort to fix the Senate’s problems, Senate Republicans are now engaging in the first-ever filibuster of a Secretary of Defense nominee," said Merkley said in a statement. "It is deeply disappointing that even when President Obama nominates a former conservative colleague of the GOP caucus, the minority is abusing the rules and the spirit of ‘advise and consent.’ If our step we took last month is to be successful, extraordinary stunts like today’s filibuster can’t happen.”
Right now, Republicans are on a "fishing expedition" in hopes of catching an "OBAMA SCANDAL!!!" No really, they're still fighting Mitt Romney's outrageous and despicable battles. And because of this, America has no Defense Secretary.
This is something Harry Reid has to think about now. Can Mitch McConnell and his G-O-TEA Caucus be trusted any further to honor that "Gentlemen's Agreement"? Or is this perhaps the most glaring reminder of the failure of the contemporary filibuster?
I've said this before, and I'll say this again. Harry Reid is a big believer in the institution that is the United States Senate. And he's hesitant to allow dramatic changes to the way the Senate works.
But in a way, the Senate has already been dramatically changed. This is the first time that the President's Nominee for Defense Secretary has been filibustered. Even the most basic functions of government often can't get a vote on the Senate floor, let alone major pieces of the President's agenda. Is it finally time for a change?
Friday, July 22, 2011
Good Bye, Good Riddance!
It's here. It's finally here.
This long nightmare is finally coming to an end. Soldiers can simply serve their country, regardless of who they are and who they love. This is most definitely long past due, and it's a great high note ending an otherwise difficult and confusing week on Capitol Hill.
This reminds me that all really is not lost here in America. Good bye, DADT & military discrimination. Go ahead and let the door hit your ass on the way out. :-D
President Obama certified on Friday the repeal of "Don't ask, don't tell," which bans gays from serving openly in the military.
"Today, we have taken the final major step toward ending the discriminatory ‘Don’t ask, don’t tell’ law that undermines our military readiness and violates American principles of fairness and equality," Obama said in a statement. "In accordance with the legislation that I signed into law last December, I have certified and notified Congress that the requirements for repeal have been met. ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ will end, once and for all, in 60 days — on September 20, 2011." [...]
"I want to thank all our men and women in uniform, including those who are gay or lesbian, for their professionalism and patriotism during this transition," Obama continued. "Every American can be proud that our extraordinary troops and their families, like earlier generations that have adapted to other changes, will only grow stronger and remain the best fighting force in the world and a reflection of the values of justice and equality that the define us as Americans." [...]
In a statement, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) hailed the certification.
"From now on, our military commanders and our nation can be sure we will have the best and brightest service members defending our nation, regardless of ethnicity, creed, or sexual orientation. This is a great victory for justice, civil rights and our national security," Reid said.
This long nightmare is finally coming to an end. Soldiers can simply serve their country, regardless of who they are and who they love. This is most definitely long past due, and it's a great high note ending an otherwise difficult and confusing week on Capitol Hill.
This reminds me that all really is not lost here in America. Good bye, DADT & military discrimination. Go ahead and let the door hit your ass on the way out. :-D
Monday, May 2, 2011
So Obama Got Osama... May We Now Bring Our Troops Home?
The morning after the big news dropped, the nation is still in awe of what's happening.
Osama bin Laden, the charismatic mastermind and founder of al-Qaida, a global terrorist network that radically reshaped American foreign policy and propelled the country into two bloody, long-term wars in Muslim countries, was killed Sunday in a firefight with U.S. troops in a compound outside the Pakistani capital of Islamabad.
President Obama, in a rare televised address to the nation late Sunday, announced that a small team of U.S. troops had killed bin Laden and seized his body earlier in the day in a helicopter-borne commando operation.
Senior U.S. officials said no other countries were involved in the raid, raising the potential for diplomatic fallout once the initial celebration and congratulations are over.
The United States considers Pakistan a key ally in the war on terror, but the relationship between the two is a complicated and tenuous one at best.
According to President Obama, U.S. intelligence officials determined last August that bin Laden was likely hiding "within a compound deep inside Pakistan," Obama said during his address from the White House late Sunday.
And Nevadans are starting to react to what happened.
"Tonight, Americans join the world in marking the end of this symbol of hatred who died with the blood of thousands on his hands," Nevada Congresswoman Shelley Berkley said in a statement Sunday night. "The U.S. pledged it would hunt down and kill Osama bin Laden for the crimes he committed and nearly a decade after the tragedy of September 11, justice has been served. This is a tremendous victory for America and a promise kept to the families of the 9-11 victims."
“As the face of global terrorism, bin Laden will forever be a reminder of how deeply we must cherish our freedom, and so it is fitting we come together as Nevadans and Americans to remember the victims of the 9-11 attacks,” Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval said in a statement. “We are also grateful for the relentless courage and dedication of our Armed Forces who continue to keep us safe from harm.”
“This is the most significant victory in our fight against al-Qaida and terrorism, but that fight is not over," Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said in a statement Sunday night. "As we remember those who were killed on that dark day in September and their families, we also reaffirm our resolve to defeat the terrorist forces that killed them and thousands of others across the globe. Because of courageous Americans in our military and intelligence community, their leader is now gone.”
This most certainly is a great development. It now looks like The Obama Administration will follow through on its plan to begin withdrawing troops from Afghanistan. Osama bin Laden's death may force us to rethink our view on both Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Oh, and did I mention it may be wise to rethink our presence in Afghanistan?
After all, hasn't the mission actually been accomplished? It supposedly was 8 years ago, after George Bush quickly lost interest in capturing bin Laden as invading Iraq suddenly became his cause du jour. There really wasn't any reason for invading Iraq, and now we're learning bin Laden was hiding out in Pakistan... NOT Afghanistan. So what are our troops now doing in Iraq and Afghanistan?
Certainly, al Qaeda is still alive and efforts must still be made to thwart them and other terrorist groups. But at this point, do we still need to fight two wars that were sold on the premise of "taking out bin Laden"?
Friday, November 19, 2010
DADT: Wherein I Give Thanks for Harry Reid... AND John Ensign??!!
In case you missed it on my Twitter yesterday, I got a bomb dropped on me... In a good way! I'll get to that a little later, but first I want to give some background on what's been happening.
(Disclosure: I sit on the board of the Stonewall Democratic Club of Southern Nevada, as well as the Nevada Stonewall Democratic Caucus.)
A group of us from various local LGBTQ advocacy organizations, including Stonewall and PLAN, went to Senator Harry Reid's office to thank him for his commitment to repeal Don't Ask Don't Tell and discuss next steps in making it happen. Reid will be working his hardest within The Senate chambers to gather the votes, negotiate with Republicans on the amendment process, and get it done from the inside.
Meanwhile, it's our duty as equality activists to work from outside on reaching out to those Senators still on the fence and educate them on why most Americans want to see this done, why most soldiers want to see this done, and why this must be done by the end of this year so that this policy can come to an end and our military can stop letting go of good soldiers just because of who they are. While I was thinking about those Senators in other states that local activists there need to talk with, someone else in our group had an idea on one more office we needed to visit.
State Senator David Parks (D-Las Vegas), Nevada's first out state legislator and an Air Force veteran himself, was among our group yesterday. And after we finished meeting with Harry Reid's Las Vegas staff, he suggested we go across the hall and meet with Senator John Ensign's staff.
Yep, you heard me right. He said it was worth a try for us, so we all just did it.
When Rachel Maddow mentioned The Washington Blade report...
She mentioned Laura Martin, Stonewall's Communications Director. She was there with us, and we both broke the news on Twitter yesterday as our jaws were dropping and we were wondering if we were dreaming.
Basically, we went into the office. We were then greeted by the receptionist at the front desk, who told us someone would be out shortly when we asked about scheduling an appointment to talk with them about Don't Ask Don't Tell repeal. We weren't even expecting to have a meeting that day, but all of a sudden Margot Allen stepped out, greeted us, and told us that Ensign wants to read through the official Pentagon report as soon as it's released... But once it's released and he looks through it, he intends to vote for the defense authorization bill with the Don't Ask Don't Tell repeal provision included.
Again, we were all floored. But as Allen was explaining how Ensign is approaching this, we caught it again and realized our ears weren't playing a trick on us. Yes, it's happening. Yes, Ensign will support DADT repeal. And yes, we citizens can still make a difference.
Frankly, this is what we need more of. Despite what you may have heard, our members of Congress still have to pay attention to those letters we write them, those calls we make to their offices, and the office visits we make. Citizen lobbying matters. And right now, as we're looking to firm up support from Senators like Ensign and Lisa Murkowski who are all of a sudden very open to DADT repeal, we need to keep those lines of conversation open and keep encouraging them to listen to us, listen to the troops, and listen to their consciences.
We're closer to getting at least 60 Senate votes to repeal DADT than ever before. Call Ensign's office at (202) 224-6244, email him here, and thank him for supporting DADT repeal while encouraging him to follow through on it. And of course, call Reid's office at (202) 224-3542, email him here, and thank him for all the work he's done to make this all happen. All this personal contact we've been making is really making a difference. It is here in Nevada, and it can across the country.
Despite all the Beltway chatter you may have heard over the last few weeks, local community activists kept talking with Harry Reid and his staffers about DADT repeal. And despite premature notices of its "death", Reid is following through on his promise to us to keep pursuing it until DADT gets repealed. And now, we may end up with Ensign on board as well. That's the power of our voices.
(Disclosure: I sit on the board of the Stonewall Democratic Club of Southern Nevada, as well as the Nevada Stonewall Democratic Caucus.)
A group of us from various local LGBTQ advocacy organizations, including Stonewall and PLAN, went to Senator Harry Reid's office to thank him for his commitment to repeal Don't Ask Don't Tell and discuss next steps in making it happen. Reid will be working his hardest within The Senate chambers to gather the votes, negotiate with Republicans on the amendment process, and get it done from the inside.
Meanwhile, it's our duty as equality activists to work from outside on reaching out to those Senators still on the fence and educate them on why most Americans want to see this done, why most soldiers want to see this done, and why this must be done by the end of this year so that this policy can come to an end and our military can stop letting go of good soldiers just because of who they are. While I was thinking about those Senators in other states that local activists there need to talk with, someone else in our group had an idea on one more office we needed to visit.
State Senator David Parks (D-Las Vegas), Nevada's first out state legislator and an Air Force veteran himself, was among our group yesterday. And after we finished meeting with Harry Reid's Las Vegas staff, he suggested we go across the hall and meet with Senator John Ensign's staff.
Yep, you heard me right. He said it was worth a try for us, so we all just did it.
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
When Rachel Maddow mentioned The Washington Blade report...
Laura Martin, communications director for the club, said she and other activists on Thursday met with Margot Allen, Ensign’s regional representative on military issues, who informed the group of Ensign’s opposition to “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and intention to vote for the fiscal year 2011 defense authorization bill, which contains repeal language.
“The first question was about ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ and his staffer said he supports repeal,” Martin said. “We asked her to clarify three times and she said he will vote in the affirmative on the defense authorization with ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ repeal in it.”
Martin said the question they asked was based on the condition that the vote would come up in December after the Pentagon working group completes its report on implementing repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
“We said after Dec. 1, when that report is out, and the defense authorization act is up for a vote with the repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’ will the senator vote in the affirmative to pass it?” Martin said. “And she said, ‘He will.’ And we asked her to clarify that two more times and she said, ‘Yes, he wants it repealed.’”
She mentioned Laura Martin, Stonewall's Communications Director. She was there with us, and we both broke the news on Twitter yesterday as our jaws were dropping and we were wondering if we were dreaming.
Basically, we went into the office. We were then greeted by the receptionist at the front desk, who told us someone would be out shortly when we asked about scheduling an appointment to talk with them about Don't Ask Don't Tell repeal. We weren't even expecting to have a meeting that day, but all of a sudden Margot Allen stepped out, greeted us, and told us that Ensign wants to read through the official Pentagon report as soon as it's released... But once it's released and he looks through it, he intends to vote for the defense authorization bill with the Don't Ask Don't Tell repeal provision included.
Again, we were all floored. But as Allen was explaining how Ensign is approaching this, we caught it again and realized our ears weren't playing a trick on us. Yes, it's happening. Yes, Ensign will support DADT repeal. And yes, we citizens can still make a difference.
Frankly, this is what we need more of. Despite what you may have heard, our members of Congress still have to pay attention to those letters we write them, those calls we make to their offices, and the office visits we make. Citizen lobbying matters. And right now, as we're looking to firm up support from Senators like Ensign and Lisa Murkowski who are all of a sudden very open to DADT repeal, we need to keep those lines of conversation open and keep encouraging them to listen to us, listen to the troops, and listen to their consciences.
We're closer to getting at least 60 Senate votes to repeal DADT than ever before. Call Ensign's office at (202) 224-6244, email him here, and thank him for supporting DADT repeal while encouraging him to follow through on it. And of course, call Reid's office at (202) 224-3542, email him here, and thank him for all the work he's done to make this all happen. All this personal contact we've been making is really making a difference. It is here in Nevada, and it can across the country.
Despite all the Beltway chatter you may have heard over the last few weeks, local community activists kept talking with Harry Reid and his staffers about DADT repeal. And despite premature notices of its "death", Reid is following through on his promise to us to keep pursuing it until DADT gets repealed. And now, we may end up with Ensign on board as well. That's the power of our voices.
Thursday, November 18, 2010
Thank You, Senator Reid.
Do the right thing. Let the consequences follow.
It's long past time for action on repealing DADT and passing the DREAM Act.
This isn't about "cronies" or "illegals", unless one considers brave military soldiers who happen to be gay "cronies" and kids who had no say in where they'd end up "illegals". This is about HUMAN BEINGS. This is about kids being unfairly shut out of jobs and colleges because they can't "go through the process like everyone else", as well as soldiers getting the fair treatment they deserve for fighting so hard for our country.
Under current law, soldiers are still being discharged from the military simply because of who they are. It doesn't matter that they're good soldiers. It doesn't matter that they are so patriotic that they enlisted to fight for our country. It doesn't matter that they have lived up to our military's standards of honor, courage, and service. All that matters under DADT is that they may be gay or transgender, so they can't serve. It's ridiculous, and needed to end yesterday.
And under current law, children who were brought into this country undocumented (by their parents, or perhaps by someone else) can't go through any sort of process because they're undocumented. But because they grew up here in America, learning English and going to American K-12 schools, it makes no sense to tear them away from their families and deport them. All the DREAM Act would do is give them the chance to "go through the process like everyone else", and give them a chance to get a job and/or get college education precisely so that they can become independent adults with no need for any sort of "special treatment" or "welfare".
It's long past time for these two measures to get done, and I'm glad to see Harry Reid working to get them done. Thank you, Harry Reid, for your courage and your resolve to get DADT repealed and get the DREAM Act passed! Thank you, Senator Reid. This is why I voted for you.
Republicans may not like it, but Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said Wednesday he’s going to go ahead with bills to repeal a ban on gays serving openly in the military and provide undocumented college students and military recruits a chance to become American citizens.
In September, Reid attempted to use the annual defense authorization bill as a vehicle to pass both a repeal of the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy that prevents gays from serving openly in the military, and the DREAM Act, which puts qualifying young undocumented adults who were brought to the country as children on a pathway to citizenship.
The must-pass measure to fund the military will serve once again as the backbone piece of legislation for the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell repeal, while the DREAM Act will be presented on its own for an up-or-down vote.
It's long past time for action on repealing DADT and passing the DREAM Act.
This isn't about "cronies" or "illegals", unless one considers brave military soldiers who happen to be gay "cronies" and kids who had no say in where they'd end up "illegals". This is about HUMAN BEINGS. This is about kids being unfairly shut out of jobs and colleges because they can't "go through the process like everyone else", as well as soldiers getting the fair treatment they deserve for fighting so hard for our country.
Under current law, soldiers are still being discharged from the military simply because of who they are. It doesn't matter that they're good soldiers. It doesn't matter that they are so patriotic that they enlisted to fight for our country. It doesn't matter that they have lived up to our military's standards of honor, courage, and service. All that matters under DADT is that they may be gay or transgender, so they can't serve. It's ridiculous, and needed to end yesterday.
And under current law, children who were brought into this country undocumented (by their parents, or perhaps by someone else) can't go through any sort of process because they're undocumented. But because they grew up here in America, learning English and going to American K-12 schools, it makes no sense to tear them away from their families and deport them. All the DREAM Act would do is give them the chance to "go through the process like everyone else", and give them a chance to get a job and/or get college education precisely so that they can become independent adults with no need for any sort of "special treatment" or "welfare".
It's long past time for these two measures to get done, and I'm glad to see Harry Reid working to get them done. Thank you, Harry Reid, for your courage and your resolve to get DADT repealed and get the DREAM Act passed! Thank you, Senator Reid. This is why I voted for you.
Tuesday, September 21, 2010
Does Sharrontology Hate Our Troops?
Yeah, this is just another ad. But in so many ways, it's so true. And not just of her, but of so many of her GOoPer pals. Look at what just happened.
A Republican-led filibuster on Tuesday blocked efforts to repeal the "don't ask, don't tell" policy on gays in the military, shelving an Obama administration priority at least until after the November election.
The measure repealing the military policy banning gays from serving openly was part of the 2011 Defense authorization bill. Democrats tried to bring the bill up for consideration but failed to get the 60 votes necessary to overcome determined GOP-led opposition. Supporters voted 56-43 in favor of starting debate on the Defense bill, short of the 60 needed. [...]
The Defense bill includes a 1.4% pay raise for the troops as well as funding for the campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan. Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.), the Senate Democratic whip, also vowed to bring the Dream Act back for another vote.
Both political parties have used the authorization bill in years past to advance other legislative goals, so the failure of the military spending plan was seen as unusual. But the process had grown politicized, especially in the limited time remaining before Congress was to adjourn to campaign full time.
The "don't ask, don't tell" law, enacted in 1993, has been targeted by President Obama for repeal, and a federal judge in California this month declared it unconstitutional. Under the proposed legislation, repeal would take effect 60 days after completion of a Pentagon report on steps needed to ensure military readiness. The report is due in December. The House passed the repeal in the spring.
This bill includes funding for our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan. It ensures that all our troops can serve openly and honestly. As I explained earlier, the Senate Republicans are endangering our country by injecting their partisan politics into this. And without a doubt, Sharron Angle would have supported these kinds of ridiculous games, as she had a history of doing this in the state legislature.
So just to spite LGBTQ Americans, Sharrontology would go along with Senate GOoP leadership to harm our country's national security by letting go of much needed soliders. And block cost of living pay raises for all our troops. And put VA funding to help our veterans at risk.
But hey, she has a history of supporting this. If you think that's bad, it just gets worse.
And yes, it's true. These are Angle's own words.
ANGLE: He's 87 years old and has Parkinson's and we have to pay more and more for his healthcare. I know he pays over 800 dollars a month in prescription drugs that we can't get through his VA nor through Medicare -- they just wont cover those things. And I know lots of seniors --
BECKER: Should they cover those things?
ANGLE: No, not if you're working towards a privatized system. And he can pay for them. That's my whole point. Even with the system we've got, it's broken, its not covering for every cost that he has. And if he were dependent upon that, he wouldn't be getting the healthcare he needs and that's why we need to fix the system.
Again, she actually said she wants to privatize the VA.
So does Sharrontology hate our troops? No, I won't go there.
However, yet again, we can not deny that Sharron Angle's dangerous radical right ideological extremism means she'll always put her laissez faire "ideas" over what's best for Nevadans. And yes, she doesn't even mind doing this to our active duty soldiers and our veterans.
Now contrast this to what Harry Reid has been doing.
Yet again, the choice can't be clearer. We have someone who puts his actions where his mouth is in terms of actually supporting the troops. And we have someone who just lies, contradicts, and puts her extreme ideology over real people's needs.
Tuesday, September 14, 2010
Thanks for Keeping Your Promise, Senator Reid
As promised, we're FINALLY getting a vote on DADT!
And here's the response from Servicemembers United, via Pam's House Blend:
So what happens next? In the next week, we'll have to focus on those Senators who need to come on board so Reid can get this passed. This could be close, so we need all the help we can get to round up the votes!
In the mean time, it feels great to see that Harry Reid is keeping his promise. He said he'd put an end to DADT, and that's what he's doing. It's long overdue that all our military servicemembers get the respect they deserve.
The Senate majority leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, told colleagues on Monday that he was planning to take up the annual Pentagon authorization bill next week. The bill includes a provision that would allow the Defense Department to end the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy in relation to gay and lesbian soldiers.
Mr. Reid informed the Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, of his decision during a meeting on Monday afternoon, aides said.
And here's the response from Servicemembers United, via Pam's House Blend:
So what happens next? In the next week, we'll have to focus on those Senators who need to come on board so Reid can get this passed. This could be close, so we need all the help we can get to round up the votes!
In the mean time, it feels great to see that Harry Reid is keeping his promise. He said he'd put an end to DADT, and that's what he's doing. It's long overdue that all our military servicemembers get the respect they deserve.
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
By the Way, DADT May Be Repealed Soon...
In case you missed this last week, we moved a little closer toward ending discrimination in the military and letting all our servicemembers serve openly, honestly, and proudly. Desert Beacon, as always, describes best the situation we're in with DADT.
Get it? Got it? Great!
And many thanks to our two fabulous Congresscritters, Dina Titus and Shelley Berkley, for co-sponsoring the DADT repeal legislation and voting for it late last week.
It's long past due for DADT to be repealed. It's harming our national security. It's incredibly unpopular. And it's flagrantly discriminatory.
It's time to let our brave LGBTQ soldiers to serve our country as all the rest of our armed forces do.
First, it's not IF the policy is repealed, the study is about WHEN. The March 2 memo leads with: "The President has requested that the Congress repeal 10 U.S.c. § 654, "Policy Concerning Homosexuality in the Armed Forces," and directed the Department to consider how best to implement a repeal of this law. " (emphasis added) [DoD pdf]
Secondly, the provisions of the amendment go into effect AFTER the Pentagon implementation review. "Under the proposal, Congress would repeal the statute this year, but the current military policy would remain in place until Obama, the Defense Secretary, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff certified that repeal is "consistent with the military's standards of readiness, effectiveness, unit cohesion and recruitment and retention." As the text of the amendment states, "Section 654 of title 10, United States Code, shall remain in effect [the DADT section] until such time that all of the requirements and certifications required by subsection (b) are met. If these requirements and certifications are not met, section 654 of title 10, United States Code, shall remain in effect." [TWR] (emphasis added)
Third, we're well behind our allies. Of all the NATO members, only the U.S. and Turkey ban homosexuals from service. [CSM] It's difficult to argue that "good order, readiness, and unit cohesion" will be horrific problems when the allied troops fighting alongside U.S. forces find the policy anachronistic and counterproductive. The DADT policy also puts the U.S. on one of those lists the other members of which aren't the world's best neighbors: Iran, North Korea, Pakistan, and Syria also ban service by homosexuals. [CSM]
Fourth, not only are some U.S. politicians behind the curve internationally, they seem behind the issue domestically. A 2008 Military Times poll asked service members about the possible repeal of DADT, and 71% of the respondents were positive. This year a Washington Post/ABC poll found 75% of Americans in favor of ending the policy; a New York Times poll found 70% favoring repeal; and a Gallup Poll confirmed the 70% pro-repeal support. [WaPo]
Get it? Got it? Great!
And many thanks to our two fabulous Congresscritters, Dina Titus and Shelley Berkley, for co-sponsoring the DADT repeal legislation and voting for it late last week.
It's long past due for DADT to be repealed. It's harming our national security. It's incredibly unpopular. And it's flagrantly discriminatory.
It's time to let our brave LGBTQ soldiers to serve our country as all the rest of our armed forces do.
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
DADT: Is This Repeal? Is This Fake? What's Happening?
So the odious "Don't Ask Don't Tell" policy banning LGBTQ soldiers from serving openly in the military may finally be repealed... Or will it? The language is quite squishy, and at best it will allow Congress to give The White House and The Defense Department the authority to stop the discharges after studies are done. So maybe we'll see DADT repealed, but not until 2011 at the earliest and that isn't even a guarantee so long as Defense Secretary Bob Gates keeps slow-walking this.
So what do we have? Progress? Maybe. Mission Accomplished? Certainly not. Equality? Not yet.
So what's to be done? I don't know.
I guess something is better than nothing... But really, aren't we tired of saying this? Didn't President Obama promise DADT would be repealed this year? I don't remember him saying that maybe Congress would pass a measure allowing for The White House to consider repealing DADT perhaps some time next year.
What about the good soldiers being discharged for no good reason?
You know what? Lt. Choi and the folks at GetEQUAL are right. This is a positive step, but it isn't enough. President Obama needs to commit NOW to stopping the discharges as the studies are underway and Congress passes this legislation. The President can do this, so he needs to do this to show he really cares about our national security and our equality.
78% of Americans now want DADT repealed. More and more military servicemembers want DADT repealed. And now, the Senate is finally moving on the legislation to start repealing DADT.
Now the ball is in Obama's court. And since Congress looks to be putting it there, The President must act to stop the discharges NOW and get the ball rolling on formal repeal ASAP.
So what do we have? Progress? Maybe. Mission Accomplished? Certainly not. Equality? Not yet.
So what's to be done? I don't know.
I guess something is better than nothing... But really, aren't we tired of saying this? Didn't President Obama promise DADT would be repealed this year? I don't remember him saying that maybe Congress would pass a measure allowing for The White House to consider repealing DADT perhaps some time next year.
What about the good soldiers being discharged for no good reason?
You know what? Lt. Choi and the folks at GetEQUAL are right. This is a positive step, but it isn't enough. President Obama needs to commit NOW to stopping the discharges as the studies are underway and Congress passes this legislation. The President can do this, so he needs to do this to show he really cares about our national security and our equality.
78% of Americans now want DADT repealed. More and more military servicemembers want DADT repealed. And now, the Senate is finally moving on the legislation to start repealing DADT.
Now the ball is in Obama's court. And since Congress looks to be putting it there, The President must act to stop the discharges NOW and get the ball rolling on formal repeal ASAP.
Thursday, January 28, 2010
The President, The State of the Union, & What Happens Next
So at last night's State of the Union speech, President Obama signaled he would not give up on comprehensive health care reform. Good. Our long-term economic viability depends on getting health care done soon and done right.
And again yesterday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi signaled that the easiest way to get health care reform done is by the President, the House, and the Senate agreeing to two companion bills for passage: the Senate bill that passed last month and a companion bill done through reconciliation that fixes the problems in the Senate bill (like the excise tax and the "Nebraska & Louisiana Purchase"). It seems Obama may now be open to this, since he does want "the whole enchilada" done this year. However, it also seems Pelosi will need to win over Shelley Berkley and Dina Titus, and convince them that health care reform means long-term economic stability. And we'll need to convince all of them that the only way this health care reform can be trusted by most Americans is if it's complete with a public option for us to choose.
Another major announcement in last night's speech was President Obama's promise to "work to end 'Don't Ask Don't Tell'".
So will it actually happen this time? Will LGBTQ Americans be allowed to serve openly in the military once and for all? No one knows for sure, but at least we now have an opening to take action and get Congress to do something about it.
Later in the day, I'll have more thoughts on the SOTU speech, the fallout, and what happens next. This will be incredibly important, especially for us in Nevada. Harry Reid's political future depends on it. Dina Titus and Shelley Berkley will be critical for whatever next happens in the House. And of course, we progressives will need a game plan for holding the President's feet to the fire and making sure he delivers on all these promises.
And again yesterday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi signaled that the easiest way to get health care reform done is by the President, the House, and the Senate agreeing to two companion bills for passage: the Senate bill that passed last month and a companion bill done through reconciliation that fixes the problems in the Senate bill (like the excise tax and the "Nebraska & Louisiana Purchase"). It seems Obama may now be open to this, since he does want "the whole enchilada" done this year. However, it also seems Pelosi will need to win over Shelley Berkley and Dina Titus, and convince them that health care reform means long-term economic stability. And we'll need to convince all of them that the only way this health care reform can be trusted by most Americans is if it's complete with a public option for us to choose.
Another major announcement in last night's speech was President Obama's promise to "work to end 'Don't Ask Don't Tell'".
Abroad, America's greatest source of strength has always been our ideals. The same is true at home. We find unity in our incredible diversity, drawing on the promise enshrined in our Constitution: the notion that we are all created equal, that no matter who you are or what you look like, if you abide by the law you should be protected by it; that if you adhere to our common values you should be treated no different than anyone else.
We must continually renew this promise. My Administration has a Civil Rights Division that is once again prosecuting civil rights violations and employment discrimination. We finally strengthened our laws to protect against crimes driven by hate. This year, I will work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are.
So will it actually happen this time? Will LGBTQ Americans be allowed to serve openly in the military once and for all? No one knows for sure, but at least we now have an opening to take action and get Congress to do something about it.
Later in the day, I'll have more thoughts on the SOTU speech, the fallout, and what happens next. This will be incredibly important, especially for us in Nevada. Harry Reid's political future depends on it. Dina Titus and Shelley Berkley will be critical for whatever next happens in the House. And of course, we progressives will need a game plan for holding the President's feet to the fire and making sure he delivers on all these promises.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)