Tweet
Over at Box Turtle Bulletin, Jim Burroway has little patience for those trying to place the blame solely on Republican obstructionism for the failure on Tuesday to move DADT repeal forward.
He points a good deal of the blame in the direction of Sen. Harry Reid, portrayed as the master of stagecraft (at our expense) in Jim’s post, “The DADT Repeal Repertory Theater.”
In the days leading up to today’s vote, Reid announced that he would allow a vote on only three amendments to the appropriations bill. One proposed amendment, which would have removed the DADT repeal language from the bill, would almost certainly not have garnered the sixty votes needed pass muster. A second proposed amendment, which would have provided a pathway to citizenship for immigrants who served in the U.S. military or who graduate from college, also likely would have failed due to Republican opposition and discomfort among some Democrats. A third proposed amendment would have placed limits on Senators being able to place holds on nominations.Those were the only amendments that Reid would allow to come up for a vote, all of which were chosen by Reid for the political advantage they would give the Democrats in tough mid-term election campaigns. His gamble wasn’t really a gamble at all. In fact, his gambit was a win-win for Democrats, at least in how they see their strategy unfolding. If Republicans upheld the filibuster, then Reid could go home and say that it was the Republicans who blocked DADT’s repeal and immigration reform. If the Dems had prevailed on the filibuster, then Reid would have been able to get the Republican caucus on record on these two issues ahead of the November elections. Either way, what Reid actually sought to accomplish was political gamesmanship, not Senatorial statesmanship.
…So if Reid had the votes to break the filibuster but squandered them in this procedural maneuver, why did he do this? The answer is simple. This was never a serious attempt to pass legislation in the best interests of the American people. It was nothing but political theater, and everyone on both sides were eager actors in the drama. All the Senators had a role to play, and everyone played to the audience. Even the White House was given a bit part. They issued a statement calling for an end to the filibuster, but according to SLDN’s Trevor Thomas, there was no lobbying behind the scenes.
…And what role do we in the gay community play? It’s the same role we always play. We’re the interesting and colorful plotline. It’s not much of a speaking part, but the dance moves are fabulous. And why should it be otherwise? It’s a role we’ve played so well over the years that it’s just expected of us. And we are happy to oblige. This time, we even have Lady Gaga making a guest appearance.
The bottom line is that 7 million Lady Gaga fans on their cell phones dialing the Hill couldn’t move any of the players on stage; the majority leader was making the moves, Jim’s conclusion is that the fix was in.
In this scenario, how does that make you feel? There certainly was enough ego-laden on-the-record and off-the record things going on that support the notion that the stagecraft was designed to play us. The Republicans were always in the obstructionist mode – what else should we expect? Why make it easier? Reid made it easy for them to do excel “on stage” in Jim’s thesis.
36 Comments
it all sounds very similarto the way the dems played the progressives on the public option. Obama sold it down the river at the very beginning of the process to get the hospitals on board but kept up the charade of being for it until the very end in an attempt to keep progressives hopeful.
The moment DADT failedI tweeted “DADT ‘repeal’ was just a scam to fool LGBT people into thinking the Obama administration and congressional dems cared about them.” It seems like I’m not the only one who came to this conclusion.
Dems get to say they tried, Republicans get to say they blocked it, and the political elite sustains itself another year…
Of course it’s Reid’s faultHe’s been operating with this 60-vote rule (not using reconciliation) since the beginning of Obama’s term.
DADT and ENDA are no different than every other progressive piece of legislation he’s stopped in the US Senate.
I honestly don’t know why anyone would vote for an incumbent Democrat (or Republican) for US Senate this year.
You could have plausibly believed in years past that this was part of normal logrolling to get legislation passed.
But with an historic majority given to them in the US Senate, the federal Democrats decided to push progressive legislation out of reach rather than finally act.
It’s time to make them pay a price at the polls. If that means crazy teabaggers in the US Senate like witchcraft woman from Delaware and insane Angle from Nevada, then so be it.
The US Senate is already a clusterf@ck. 59 in the Democratic Senate caucus, and they still leave DADT in place. What will Angle or O’Donnell do to us that we haven’t already lived through?
If we keep rolling over for the federal Democrats, they’re going to keep doing this to us.
Vote out ANY incumbent in the US Senate — including Democrats.
I agree with Jimand go into more details on my own blog about (1) how I think the democrats are happy with keeping LGBT issues never resolved and (2) how as a community we need to reassess what we are doing:
http://michael-in-norfolk.blog…
The smoking gun…….Check out this link which everyone has forgotten about.
http://thehill.com/news-by-sub…
Obama needed the Repugs to block this appropriation because otherwise he would have to chose to veto the bill now including DADT repeal and piss off fatally the entire progressive base or let this massive pork he opposed happen.
If he is smart, he has already told the DOJ not to appeal the recent Federal court decision that declared DADT unconsitutional and he gets rid of it without being directly involved allowing him to talk out of both sides of his mouth on gay issues in the future.
If the Dems are smart (and they are not) they will immediately start a party wide unified declaration that the Repugs are against the military, defense spending and the security of the US. That the Repugs in the Senate are essentially traitors.
Hopefully Anybody Still Left Will Close The DoorFrom the very beginning on the campaign trail until now there has been virtually nothing. A couple of changes which are significant in one way, but more like a dog biscuit in other ways (passports are one) have been given to us. But, anything major, forget it.
Obama and Congress have not been interested in us except for $$$. There are a handful of legislators willing and ready to work for our equality, but only a handful.
I too believe the DADT vote was a setup. Most likely to give cover to the worst senate majority leader ever so he can go around saying “we tried, but those nasty R’s were way too powerful – give us more money”.
The better question is……why does this surprise anyone?
There are very few people sitting on Capitol Hill who are actually interested in statesmanship. Nearly every one of them is more invested in protecting their re-election and their donation stream.
Feeling a little more bruisedthis morning? That’s because we, as the perennial political football, have sustained yet more punches below the belt by both “friends” and foes. As Rachel Maddow said, the culture wars are alive and well. The Obamanation of America continues.
WHO WOULD EVER HAVE IMAGINED THIS DAY WOULD COME:
“Pam Spaulding, Shill for the Log Cabin Republican Party Line”
Sorry, Pam, but even the brightest like you and Burroway can be infected by a nonsense virus goin’ round. Whatever Burroway’s personal leanings and frequent contributions to the Movement, his screed is built upon the sophomoric rant and undocumented claims of Log Cabin Republican, self-declared expert on Congress, and mentalist Alex Nicholson.
NOTA BENE: the immature indictment is built upon an undocumented assertion: “Reid had the votes to break the filibuster but squandered them in this procedural maneuver.”
Even WERE the LCR propaganda correct, that, WHICH four Senators can we BELIEVE would have voted differently? Certainly not Dems Lincoln and Pryor? And Lawrence O’Donnell, unlike Burroway and Nicholson, a former member of Congress, says that Susan Collins’ vote had nothing to do with principle as she claimed, but the pressure of following the GOP herd.
COMPROMISE???? Rabidly antigay Senate Minority Leader Repug Mitch McConnell wanted to add at least TWENTY amendments …TRANSLATION: kill the vote on NDAA before midterms by debate after debate after debate running out the clock on the remaining time before midterms OR kill the vote on NDAA before midterms by claiming the Party of No was being shat upon. SAME result…and it had NOTHING to do with Harry Reid.
Perhaps everyone should review Rachel’s documented revelations before drinking the LCR Kool-Aid, and she doesn’t spare the REAL plotter among the Dems either:
Meanwhile, in other news…Joe Solmonese has just booked a ballroom for a big shindig on Jan. 19, 2017.
Correction:
Lawrence O’Donnell did not serve in Congress himself, but was a key legislative aide to Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan and staff director of the United States Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, and the United States Senate Committee on Finance.
Here’s his history lesson on what happened yesterday and Repug hypocrisy:
And that will fool who, exactly?Seriously. Do you even believe that, or is it just another cynical political propaganda piece? Just like the ones from both sides that they use as a cover for never actually accomplishing anything but transferring taxpayer’s money to the Nomenklatura?
Jeez, I’m starting to talk like a Far Lefty, spouting about the “looter classes”. The thing is, a stopped clock is right twice a day, and this is one of the most Dysfunctional, if not the most dysfunctional Congresses in US history. What was it, 19% approval, last time I looked?
The Republicans can point to the many Democrats caught red-handed with their fingers in the cookie jar. The Democrats can point out that the Republicans don’t just steal cookies, they steal the whole bakery.
And you know what? They’re both right.
Where he’ll make some announcements:That DADT will be repealed by the end of the year, he’s confident about that.
And a fully-inclusive ENDA will be right behind, as soon as the Dems have gotten inflation and unemployment under control after the terrible Palin years.
The status quoMichael-in-Norfolk’s blog pegs it just right:
But it’s not just LGBT issues, it’s deep and systemic and cancerous and goes to the whole nature of our ever-expanding military empire and over-militarized culture.
Andrew Bacevich’s brilliant and disturbing book Washington Rules is must reading because he carefully lays out the ways in which both parties are invested in the military/industrial/media/political/lobbyist core of the country which is destroying our values but lining countless pockets.
Our battle is just part of the carnage being waged against the Republic by interests so entrenched they cannot be shaken. Doesn’t matter which party is in power in the larger sense because each endorses the same unquestioned assumptions.
Fool who?If the Dems pull a Rovian “Repugs hate the troops” then the Tea bagger types, who don’t think very well in the first place but love jingoism, might not bother to show up for the midterms feeling betrayed. Apply liberally to the media.
Obama gains all around, demonized Repugs with his hands clean, LGBT support if the judicial DADT decision is allowed to stand and done without having to come out all gay supportive to cost him with his beloved blue dogs.
Am I a cynic about American politics?, hell yes, but I am also a realist who occasionally has peeked behind the political curtains. Why is an Aussie considering herself such an expert on American politics anyway? You are wrong far more often than right where I’ve had direct knowledge.
Whatever, MichaelGo ahead and send all your money to the DNC and hold your breath until they grant you equality.
DADT repeal was dead this year the day the White House deliberately set the “study” deadline for December–too late for action.
He is not smartHe is not smart and has undoubtedly already told the DOJ to appeal.
Buzz off!
I’ve repeatedly dissed the DNC, including supporting the $$$ boycott, and I’ve posted in enough of the same places you do that you should know that, as well as that I’ve never held my breath nor my opinion, e.g., I was one of the few to condemn “the study” from the MOMENT it was announced February 2nd.
So take your psychotic hatred for ALL things Dem, and shove it until you can offer a viable alternative.
Fine, so per VP BIDEN we ‘sold’ the STOP-LOSS for votes…Which guaranteed passage of the bill. We didn't get passage, do we get the STOP-LOSS now, oh spineless CIC?
That’s right. The Dems are suckers.
My only quibblewith any of this is that there are “countless” pockets being lined. I think it’s actually a relatively small number, and they have very, very, very big pockets.
But to the bigger status quo and systemic points — absolutely.
There is one thing the LCRs have rightThere will never be any progress on DADT through legislative means. It will have to go through the courts.
If this lowest hanging fruit with overwhelming public support can’t be picked, what chance do we have for DOMA repeal? What chance for UAFA? What chance for ENDA?
And while UAFA will fall with DOMA through legal challenges eventually (likely after Scalia, Thomas, and Alito finally keel over because their limited wattage brains can no longer force their grinchy hearts to keep beating), we’ll be stuck in a crappy banana republic dunghole where people can be fired for an innate characteristic.
The Republicans suck. The Democrats suck. Both of them are sure that they’ll garner a small amount of stupid LGBT people. The rest of us are stuck with no voice in the political dialog now or ever, unless a third party should somehow break the D-R stranglehold.
That’s right, Michael.Anyone with a point of view different from yours is psychotic. You, by contrast, are the soul of reason and sanity. Right.
Is this the result of some birth defect? Were you born full of bile, or did the condition develop in adulthood?
Those “7 million Lady Gaga fans” would only matter if we lived in a democracy.We don’t. We live in a country whose class structure is as rigidly defined as medieval England’s. The robber barons, in which category I include the corporations and the churches, own everything and control everything. Their agents run the government for them and only for them. The 7 million Lady Gaga fans matter as little as the 80% of the population who want to see DADT ended. The people who own the country, the churches and the corporations, want to see DADT continue, so it continues. The rest of us are irrelevant.
ZZZZZZZZZZZZ
1. Cicada is “psychotic” because he/she misrepresents not just what I wrote here but have written, as noted, repeatedly here before and elsewhere, as he/she should be well-aware of unless he/she only stares at his/her own navel. I do NOT apologize for “bile” as a result of being reckelessly maligned.
2. Cicada is “psychotic” because of not just what he/she wrote here, but what he/she has repeatedly written elsewhere. It’s the “Throw Ourselves Off the Cliff” school of nonsense. Again, WHAT’s his/her alternative?
3. What’s your excuse?
Q.E.D.
F.A.I.L.
LOL
thenmaybe it’s time to think about the rise of the third party. Many progressives would support the greens, I think. In that case, maybe we should start seriously thinking about them in the urban areas, where the progressives are strong. Even if they will have similar conundrums to the liberal Democrats, they will not be subservient to the Democratic Party, will not depend on the President, and will act more along what their constituents want… If the Democrats like their majority (as can be seen through their pandering to the Blue Dogs), maybe that’s exactly where we should strike them – their majority – by pulling progressives into a new party.
If you start NOW….
…that should work in, oh, 50 or 60 years.
A shorter solution, which requires exactly the same kind of organizing and alliance and numbers building is taking the DNC away from its current status quo masters.
Wasn’t this already tried?I dunno… In 2000? And how did that go? What did President Nader get accomplished?
Thanks for the voice of sanity.The legislative process isn’t as easy as some think it is. It’s just ridiculous to assume the Republicans were “playing fair” on DADT. They just wanted to delay the defense bill endlessly with amendments so they could delay all other pending legislation. It’s the age old block tactic, and they’re trying to pass the buck to Reid.
And now with President Bush III we knowNader was absolutely, positively right.
How many times is the LGBT community supposed to come back to the Democrats like an abused spouse?
How about the environmentalists?
How about women, Latin@s, African Americans, union members, educators, etc.
There’s room for EVERYONE under Obama’s Hopey-Changey Bus.
Except Conservatives–they get every fucking thing they want.
When should we say that we’ve had enough?
Can’t be doneSadly, as appealing as the idea sounds, our political system is completely built around enforcing the two party system. The Republicans and Democrats have been in cahoots over this for well over a century, and the seeds of it have been in place since the formation of the republic. The last third party movement to be truly successful was the Republican Party itself, when darkhorse candidate Abraham Lincoln got elected by taking a centrist position in the highly devisive slavery issue. Third parties offer voters an opportunity to cast a protest vote and to push forward alternative political philosophies the major parties are slow to take up. After elections, the losing party tends to adopt the positions of third parties, so they can have an impact, but they will never gain any significant amount of power. The major political parties themselves evolve over time so that the parties as they exist today are very different than they were 100 years ago, and very different than they will be 100 years from now. Our government is condemned to forever be a tug of war between two massive, nebulous, fundamental political attitudes, shifting back and forth in power with the changes in the political winds, and changing form as time goes by. Changing the system now would mean a major overhaul of our experiment in popular government, and that would require a major rewriting of the Constitution. Nothing short of a Constitutional Convention is going to make that happen.
Take a look what I said this time last year re ENDA and DADTI’ve called it fairly accurately – though even I thought they’d get a house vote on ENDA.
— Zoe Brain | November 12, 2009 12:26 AM
The Presidential Veto of DADT is waiting in the wings, based on the J-35 engine issue.
Kabuki Theatre.
why?you can rant about ‘the churches’, that’s one thing, but ‘the corporations’ – you’ve lost me.
why on earth would a corporation care whether DADT or DOMA were repealed or not? how do either of those laws lead to increased profits ?