Way To Go: GOP Blocks Ideology-Laden Defense Bill

When I heard that the Democrat leadership was playing politics by inserting the amnesty-granting DREAM Act into a bill ostensibly to fund our troops in Afghanistan and Iraq, I hoped Republicans would block it.  And then the Democrats decided they weren’t being ideological enough in their partisan politics, and added a provision forcing the military to embrace homosexuality whether it hurt national security or not.

What Democrats wanted to do was force Republicans to either vote for the bill, or be the side that “opposed funding our troops.”

And the fact that Democrats started a game of political chicken with our troops’ lives would get conveniently overlooked by the mainstream leftwing media.

Thank God, our Republican Party stood up to this vile game and said no to frankly vile measures that had nothing to do with troop funding.

Republicans block bill to lift military gay ban
By ANNE FLAHERTY, Associated Press Writer Anne Flaherty, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON – Senate Republicans on Tuesday blocked an effort by Democrats and the White House to lift the ban on gays from serving openly in the military, voting unanimously against advancing a major defense policy bill that included the provision.

The mostly partisan vote dealt a major blow to gay rights groups who saw the legislation as their best hope, at least in the short term, for repeal of the 17-year-old law known as “don’t ask, don’t tell.”

If Democrats lose seats in the upcoming congressional elections this fall, as many expect, repealing the ban could prove even more difficult — if not impossible — next year. The Senate could take up the measure again during a lame-duck session after the elections, but a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said he hasn’t decided whether to do so.

“The whole thing is a political train wreck,” said Richard Socarides, a White House adviser on gay rights during the Clinton administration

Democrats included the repeal provision in a $726 billion defense policy bill, which authorizes a pay raise for the troops among other popular programs. In a deal brokered with the White House, the measure would have overturned the 1993 law banning openly gay service only after a Pentagon review and certification from the president that lifting the ban wouldn’t hurt troop morale.

But with little time left for debate before the November ballot, the bill had languished on the Senate calendar until gay rights groups, backed by pop star Lady Gaga, began an aggressive push to turn it into an election issue.

Reid agreed to force a vote on the bill this week and limit debate, despite Republican objections. A Nevada Democrat in a tight race of his own this fall, he also pledged to use the defense bill as a vehicle for an immigration proposal that would enable young people to qualify for U.S. citizenship if they joined the military.

Republicans alleged that Reid was using the defense bill to score political points with the Democratic base.

“This is not a serious exercise. It’s a show,”
said Senate GOP leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky.

You read it right.  The intellectual and moral power behind the Democrat Party is Lady Gaga.  The Democrat Party reached the sewer, and just kept right on digging.

I don’t doubt for a second that Republicans have done this themselves in the past.  But it is vile.  And it is the kind of thing that any party that is worthy of the title “reformers” will pledge to stop doing and then never do again.

The funding for our soldiers – and most especially during time of war – should be off-limits to anyone who would politicize it.  Because every time a soldier is wounded or killed in action, he is wounded and killed for every American; not merely Democrats or Republicans.

And our politicians damn well better start respecting that.

You want your ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ repeal?  Then have the simple integrity to vote for it straight up.  Because otherwise, you are nothing more than an evil, vile weasel.  And the same thing applies with leftwing OR rightwing immigration proposals.

Both Democrat proposals would transform our society.  And to try to sneak them through under the guise of supporting our soldiers is undemocratic and in fact un-American.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

8 Responses to “Way To Go: GOP Blocks Ideology-Laden Defense Bill”

  1. tiny Says:

    It is obvious that OBAMA did not learn to be FAIR and
    HONEST at his mother’s knee. Any decent human being
    would have contacted Congress immediately and told
    them that this is not the AMERICAN WAY!

  2. alanstorm Says:

    I note that the AP piece didn’t mention the DREAM act at all. Apparently, nobody opposed that part – it was all pure homophobia on the Republican’s part.

  3. Michael Eden Says:

    Let’s see:

    UPDATE: Republicans Filibuster Defense Authorization Bill & DREAM Act

    DREAM Act showdown: Dems hold defense bill hostage to social justice

    And thus your theory of demonization dies a quick, but hopefully painful death.

    Essentially your mindset is, “If the liberal media does or doesn’t report something, then that’s the way it happened.”

    And if the media slants an article in such a way to attack Republicans as “homophobic,” then you go goose-stepping along with the demonization.

    I’d actually feel sorry for you, if you weren’t so rabidly dangerous.

  4. Michael Eden Says:

    Glenn Beck once ran an hour on Obama’s upbringing. The guy never got a chance.

    His father abandoned him almost immediately. And totally abandoned him.

    His mother wasn’t much better. She left to do her socialist anthropology studies, and Obama was left with his grandparents – who were ALSO Marxists.

    But you’re right; Obama and any AMERICAN concept of “fairness” (I say “American” because “fairness” for Marxists is redistribution of wealth rather than playing by the rules of acceptable conduct) or “honesty” have nothing to do with each other.

  5. alanstorm Says:

    Mr. Eden, are you speaking to me? If so, you completely misunderstood my comment. I clicked the link to the AP story, and nowhere did it mention the DREAM act. Its entire focus was on DADT.

    My point was that there were several objectionable amendments in the bill, not just one., and as usual the MSM focused on one aspect of a story and missed the larger point, which is that adding unrelated amendments to a bill to score political points is:

    A) business as usual, and

    B) SHOULD NOT BE business as usual.

    I’d actually feel sorry for you, if you weren’t so confused.

  6. Michael Eden Says:


    I get a LOT of comments from liberal pains-in-the-butt.

    So when I write an article – in which I mentioned the DREAM Act in my first paragraph – and get this from you:

    I note that the AP piece didn’t mention the DREAM act at all. Apparently, nobody opposed that part – it was all pure homophobia on the Republican’s part.

    I’ll let other people decide whether I had reason to take your comment as a leftwing attack accusing the Republicans of being homophobes. And that, if you intended the meaning you say you intended in your response, you sure could have been a hell of a lot more clear.

    That said, as I read what you now say you intended, and as I re-read your first comment, I admit that more than one meaning was possible in that first comment, and I made an unwarranted rush to judgment by jumping to a particular conclusion.

    And for that, I apologize to you.

  7. HL Says:

    Thanks Michael for posting this info. I knew about the DREAM ACT and had called Senator LeMeiux about it but had no knowledge of what the Libs were attempting to do with the ‘lifting the ban’ provision.
    I’m glad the R’s blocked it. You’re right, troops should be funded without all these political shenanigans.

  8. Michael Eden Says:

    I’m okay with the concept of immigrants securing a path to citizenship by means of military service.

    The kind of people we WANT in America are the kind who would serve their country in the military.

    But a) I believe it should be longer than the 2 years of the DREAM Act (it should be a MINIMUM of six years); and the provision of 2 years of college has no place in such an act.

    How about if we try to encourage more of our own citizens to get educated, instead of spending US resources to educate other country’s citizens and then reward them for consuming our benefits?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: