Comments on: Liveblogging Day 12: Daily Summary

By: Pearl

Pearl — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 17:14:18 +0000

I'm sorry it was Ken Starr not Ted Starr. What was I thinking??

By: Pearl

Pearl — Fri, 29 Jan 2010 17:12:22 +0000

I have a question. A while back I thought I read somewhere that Ted Starr had signed on to the Yes on Prop 8/Protect Marriage case. Haven't heard anything from or about him lately. Are they saving him for the eventual argument before SCOTUS?

By: Ronnie

Ronnie — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 19:43:24 +0000

Bingo!

By: Ozymandias

Ozymandias — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 19:35:14 +0000

I'd like to add some comments concerning Obama's DADT statement last night…

Apparently back in November, Rep. Barney Frank announced that the Democrats had a plan to repeal DADT via the Defense Authorization budget – as they did with the Matthew Shepherd Act.

In December, 96 Representatives sent an 'open letter' to the Pentagon, requesting all of 2009's data on DADT discharges – this list included Rep Patrick Murphy and Jim Moran.

The Senate Armed Services Committee's chairman, Sen. Carl Levin had called for hearing into DADT (and here's how sick and twisted this policy is – Gay soldiers would have to have special protection from Congress to testify ABOUT DADT without fear of being prosecuted BY DADT!) but they were asked to delay those hearings until after last night's State of the Union address.

One interesting thing about the address last night – based on stuff I'm reading, White House staffers had actually decided it better for Prez. Obama NOT to discuss DADT – he decided to proceed despite their advice, which is why there was some confusion over whether it would actually happen or not.

Now… now we have the Pentagon drawing up actual plans for how to integrate homosexual soldiers who wish to serve openly into the different branches – Secretary of Defense Gates is apparently on board, and the DADT hearings are scheduled for February 9th!

Lots of cool stuff concerning DADT repeal here: http://www.palmcenter.org/

I'll be honest, there's a part of me that doesn't want to be optimistic, and keeps looking for reasons to be pessimistic about DADT repeal (or Prop H8 being overturned) but… that small flame of optimism is slowly growing brighter!

By: erasure25

erasure25 — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 18:54:58 +0000

@fiona64
Totally! That's they Repubs strategy. Just say no. Don't let Obama pass anything so he can't claim "victory." Oppose everything and say Obama is ineffective.

Dems need to just call them out on it. Forget being polite and trying to do the right thing. Just point fingers and call them out and say out loud that Repubs are purposefully opposing all legislation that will benefit Americans all because they don't want Obama to get a second term.

By: TheColu.mn » Blog Archive » The National: DADT Rhetoric Is Nothing New

TheColu.mn » Blog Archive » The National: DADT Rhetoric Is Nothing New — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 18:04:43 +0000

[...] – David Boies again turns ProtectMarriage.com’s witnesses against them. As the head of Focus on the Family said at the start of the trial, Prop 8’s proponents are [...]

By: Steffi

Steffi — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 13:42:38 +0000

Rick: if you EVER gonna read this, or anyone else from Courage Campaign: PLEASE let us know if it were his original words or your addition or mind-reading! I think most of us want to know!

By: Ronnie

Ronnie — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 13:03:06 +0000

I think maybe hew was just trying to be impartial considering he had entire statement that focus on one of LGBT rights fight (however small it was).

He chose his words very carefully not to single anybody out.

By: Mary Ellen

Mary Ellen — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 12:07:31 +0000

ronnie are you being factitious? he is the prez he has all the time he wants. If he was to just add on to that statement you pulled out above….that that is for all citizens gays and lesbians too. I then would love that he said it.
Come to think of it I dont think I have ever heard him say the word lesbian?

By: Mary Ellen

Mary Ellen — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 12:00:43 +0000

gosh it is easy to lurk here in the comments!
Paula I perked up when i heard him say this line too. I was just waiting for him to include gays and lesbians. I thought ok here it comes he is gonna say gays and lesbians. But no another disappointment. Actually a gaping hole in this part of his speech. A big enough hole that the rest of the speech got sucked into it. If this case can be going on in CA and gay marriage struggles across the nation and he can not even through us one freakin bone. I keep on remembering the horrible Obama admin brief filed in mid june about the DOMA in CA.
If he did not include gays and lesbians in that part of his speech I am pessimistic anything about any of our rights will be done. I hope i am proven wrong.