Welcome To CT

My Left Nutmeg

A community-driven blog featuring news and commentary on local, state, and national politics.

Ads on My Left Nutmeg

Contact Info
To contact the site admin email ctblogger at ctblogger@yahoo.com

My Left Nutmeg

Thank you Sen Lieberman for your work on the repeal of DADT

by: ctkeith

Sat Dec 18, 2010 at 19:20:35 PM EST

(I can't believe I'm promoting this... - promoted by ctblogger)

Your work on getting this bill repealed will no doubt be remembered as indespensible in moving this country of ours foward on civil rights for all. For that you deserve praise from everyone everywhere,even on the pages of MLN.


ctkeith :: Thank you Sen Lieberman for your work on the repeal of DADT
Tags: , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

Well put ctkeith. (0.00 / 0)
I agree. Thank you, Senator.

That being said... (4.00 / 2)
...this doesn't change anything about 2012.

Just sayin!

2006... (4.00 / 3)
...wasn't just about the war. There were numerous reasons to retire Holy Joe then.
2012 won't be just about DADT. There are still loads of reasons to fire his sorry ass.

[ Parent ]
This repeal could have happened years ago, (4.00 / 2)
Except for Republican-leaning "moderates" like Joe Lieberman.

So one has to wonder why it's only happening now....

Anything to do with Joe's hopes of re-election? (Nah, Lieberman is a man of pure principle.)

Anyway, if it's winning points with CTKeith, you do have to wonder. "But Joe is so good on civli rights." Will that be the talking point for 2012?

PS -- We are talking about Traitor Joe, the same D.C. insider, who went to Minneapolis to speak on behalf of the McCain/Palin ticket, -- with Lieberpuke's BFF, John McCain, being the recent chief opponent of the Senate legislation. Joe Lieberman a friend to McCain/Palin, but a friend to Connecticut gays? Is that what we're supposed to swallow?

A "Come to Jesus" moment, revisited (4.00 / 2)
This is purely a pragmatic move on Lieberman's part imho and it would be a mistake as interpreting it as a civil rights stance.

Let's see if any reporters goes to the Second Star of Jacob Christian Church, virulent opponents of gay marriage who supported Lieberman in 2006, for a reaction quote:


The NH Indie piece above also points out that  
Lieberman voted for a measure proposed by Republican then-Sen. Jesse Helms (Senate Amendment no. 2434 to bill number 1513) to deny federal funding to schools that counsel students, even suicidal gay students, that it's OK to be gay.

[ Parent ]
My Diary said NOTHING about Sen Liebermams motives (4.00 / 1)
and I'm certain had the Senators most important  constiuency (the Pentagon and the arms industry) not given him permission to get this done he wouldn't have.My Praise is for the result,period.


[ Parent ]
2 things (4.00 / 4)
anyone who has been following this story closely(like I have) knows that DADT was going to end either by a vote of our 2 Houses of Congress and a Presidential signature or by a court imposed order.
That Fact is what made this possible.

Everyone here also knows that I an no fan of Joe Lieberman and should he decide to see reelection I will do everything in my power to defeat him but I still believe Sen Liebermans role in getting this done was pivitol and that deserved to be acknowledged,especially on the pages MLN.

PS-Thank You CtBlogger for Promoting this diary.

[ Parent ]
I don't understand this (0.00 / 0)
On the one hand you acknowledge here that "DADT was going to end either by a vote of our 2 Houses of Congress and a Presidential signature or by a court imposed order.  That Fact is what made this possible."  Yet you then praise Lieberman for his "pivotal" role.  Well, either this was going to happen anyway, in which case it was irrelevant what Lieberman did or didn't do; or it was not "going to end" anyway, in which case, Lieberman should receive praise for his actions.  It has to be one or the other, not both.

I think that Lieberman was cynical in his exploitation of this issue, and it was another example of cynical indulgence of Lieberman by spineless Democrats to permit him to pretend to take the lead on something that was about to end anyway, probably through judicial action.  It's too bad that Obama doesn't have the guts of Harry Truman who simply ended segregation in the military by a presidential order.  And he did that at a time when racism was much stronger than today's bigotry against homosexuals.

Obama should have used the power of the presidency to eliminate DADT.  Too bad that he didn't do the right thing.  But Lieberman deserves little in the way of praise for doing this; it was coming anyway.

[ Parent ]
A legislative solution was the best solution in this case (0.00 / 0)
 as it is in most cases.The Congress of the United States Represents We The People and having a legislative victory instead of a Presidential order or a Judicially imposed solution means this is the will of "we the people".

This is a HUGE victory for Pres Obama and Justice and Sen Lieberman deserves praise for his role in it.Those who deny that expose their own blind spot in their views.

[ Parent ]
Wait a minute (0.00 / 0)
Barack Obama was also elected by "we the people".  In fact, he is the only official elected by all Americans on a national basis.  So suggesting that his issuing a presidential order eliminating bigotry in the armed forces would not have been better than a legislative solution just doesn't make sense to me.  Did Harry Truman do the wrong thing in integrating the armed forces in 1947?  I don't think so.  And had he waited for a "legislative victory", the country would have had to wait many more years.  Should the Warren Court have ruled against Brown in Brown v Board of Education, simply because a "legislative victory" would have been better than their "judicially imposed solution"?  I would disagree with you on that.  

Sometimes it takes courage to overcome prejudice and eliminate institutional bigotry.  Barack Obama should have shown that courage; too bad that he didn't.  And no, I don't see my opinion on this as exposing a "blind spot in my views".

[ Parent ]
Well (0.00 / 0)
I'm sorry you don't understand History, our Constitution or our form of Government.

The answer to both of your questions (Trumans executive order ending discrimination and the Warren Courts decision in Brown v Board of Education) is a resounding YES.Those decisions would have been much better and much more easily accepted and implemented if they were passed by both Houses of Congress and signed into Law by the POTUS.If you don't understand that you don't understand the political history of the last 50 years or so.  

[ Parent ]
still against him in 2012 (0.00 / 0)
i am glad gays will serve openly in the military. that said i will be supporting chris murphy, courtney or whoever the dems nominate against this turncoat.  remember everyone, if joe's choice for president(mccain) would have won the gay ban never would have seen the light of day to be repealed.

obama/biden 2012, chris murphy 2012

[ Parent ]
Keith - (0.00 / 0)
a while ago you discovered that CT receives one of the lowest returns back from the federal government based on what we pay in taxes.
Do you remember anything more about it?

thanks (0.00 / 0)
and thanks for this diary (I'm hearing nails on a chalkboard heard while typing this).

[ Parent ]
I do. The data can be found at Tax Foundation (0.00 / 0)

Here's the page:


But they haven't updated the info since October 2007.  At that time you see that CT was ranked #48 from the top.

[ Parent ]
As we shoud (0.00 / 0)
WE are one of the richest states - so we may more in taxes than we get back - there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.  It's like Greenwich complaining about not getting enough from the State of Connecticut.

[ Parent ]
I don't disagree (0.00 / 0)
But I do get tired of all those deep red states Senators and congressman talking about how the Federal government should be shrunk while at the same time being the real "welfare recipients" when it comes to Federal money.

[ Parent ]
My 2 Cents, FWIW (2.25 / 4)
I don't get it. And reading the comments here just increases my confusion.

Now, I'm a middle-aged guy, and I've been straight all my life. But I just happen to have many many gay friends that I treasure deeply. They call me "gay-cool," apparently treasure my friendship also, and have brought me to places that straight people usually don't ever see (I spend a lot of time up in Provincetown, MA and will be there today as a matter of fact).

The overriding thing I've learned from these experiences is this: Gay men don't seem to me at all to be the type of person who would pick up a weapon and follow an order to murder another man. Gay men are the least bigoted or prejudiced people there are. I can't imagine any of my friends even making it through boot camp... If I were a military commander they would be of NO use to me.

Which is why I don't get it.

"It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so." ~ Mark Twain

Stereotype much? (4.00 / 1)
There is so much wrong with this comment I'm embarassed it's connected to a diary with my name on it!

[ Parent ]
This IS My Experience, I'm Not Making It Up (0.00 / 0)
What more can I say about it? Let's see if I've chosen the wrong words, Keith. I'll run this by some of my friends this afternoon. I'll let THEM post their critique if they like, so there may be something more from "artisan" by this evening, but it won't be my words next time.

You know, folks, it's almost impossible to be on the outside of something and comment on it without falling into a trap of: "Sure, I like ___ people, some of my best friends are ___ Someone please tell me how to express it better.

On another note, and no doubt I'll catch flak from someone for this, but it seemed somewhat arrogant for lieberman to make a big deal of insisting that legislators be willing to "work through the Holiday Season on repealing DADT" right after the last candle was lit.

"It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so." ~ Mark Twain

[ Parent ]
It is honestly (4.00 / 2)
Talking all the control I have not to go off with the most profane working I know on you right now.

I recently attended a talk by Staff Sgt. Eric Alva. Never heard of him? He was the first person to be wounded in Iraq. He's also gay.

Did you know that over 11,000 servicemembers have been ousted because of DADT, and that a disproportionate number were arabic translators?   Man, I'm sure you're right, what use would they be if you were a military commander?

I could go on and on, but you're clearly not worth it. Having gay friends doesn't make you any less of a bigot.

[ Parent ]
You can say you're sorry (0.00 / 0)
that you think so little of people you call your "gay freinds" and then take a little time and THINK about how deeply your comment just offended them and every other thinking human being on this planet.

Ponder this,Your comment could very well have been written by Jesse Helms as a reason DADT need not be repealed.

[ Parent ]
What I don't get (4.00 / 4)
What I don't get is what exactly it is that you are missing.  All there is to get is that people (grouped by their attraction and or love for members of their same sex) want to serve this country by entering and participating without being dishonest about their sexual orientation and because heterosexual America is uncomfortable with that they could not.  That is all there is.

If someone met me they probably would not think that I would be the type given to picking up a gun and shooting another man and they would be correct - I was enlisted for 8 years.  What does your perception of their disposition have to do with the reality that plenty of homosexuals have served this country and done a damned fine job of it.  That fact alone says all that needs to be said.  They have done it and done it well the least we could do is not make them have to pretend to be something they are not.  

When I was in we knew quite a few guys were gay and it didn't affect a thing.  Didn't need a report to know that.

By the way, not everyone in the military even uses a gun.    

[ Parent ]
The only reason I won't troll rate this insane comment... (4.00 / 2)
...because it seems like you're being honest without realizing how your comment is so off-base. Also, I hope you read the replies to your remark and reflect on what other MLN readers have said to you about your statement.

To all, I think it would be more productive (and educaitonal to those who share artisan's view) to skip troll rating this comment and reply to him/her directly about the insanity of his/her's homophobic remark.


[ Parent ]
As Usual,you're correct (0.00 / 0)
I changed my 0 to a 1 and will raise it further if need be to keep the comment from disapearing.

[ Parent ]
A man can also cry like a baby (4.00 / 1)
but doesn't make all men a pacifist or sensitive (thinking of John Bohner. Hilary never shed a tear when upset.

So, taking these two examples to a conclusion, girls rule and boys drool.

(Whoooh boy, here comes the mail).

[ Parent ]
Uprated To Let Everyone Read (0.00 / 0)
Not as a sign of approval!

[ Parent ]
It was pure opportunism by Lieberman (4.00 / 1)
This was an issue that had strong public support, which the Joint Chiefs had endorsed, that had strong and growing support in Connecticut.  So Joe Lieberman cynically climbs on the bandwagon of a can't-lose issue just to put a progressive feather in his cap.  It wasn't brave, it wasn't courageous, it wasn't a hard decision.

And it would have happened without him.

I agree! (0.00 / 0)
He doesn't deserve all this praise for something he waited to do when it became easy.  Will Liberman do the hard part and make the freak'n homophobes in the military act quicker to implement DADT, or will he sit on the side lines watching our gay and lesbian soldiers have to jump more hurdles?  

[ Parent ]
good point (4.00 / 1)
In 2006, when reviewing Lieberman's record, it took some time to sort out and understand that to get the whole picture, you had to know how he voted, when he voted, and what happened to the vote (pass/fail) to understand his M.O. and true priorities.

If he knew a bill he didn't necessarily like was going to fail, he waited till he was sure and then voted for it.  Sure boosted his appearance as more liberal than he turned out to be.  He was not a "go to" guy for championing those bills, but it sure helped his voting scores on groups that track voting records.

[ Parent ]
You know who was a vocal opponent of (4.00 / 2)
Don't ask don't tell?

John McCain.

I do give my thanks to Joe for talking on this issue, whatever his reasoning was he still was instrumental. But it seems hard to take him too seriously when is BFF was making an ass out of himself during the hearings.  

Exactly! (0.00 / 0)
And where was LIEberman's vaunted ability to "reach across the aisle" to bring over Republicans?  The Republicans still filibustered this, though it ultimately failed.  Lieberman spent an entire year campaigning for McCain who still opposes getting rid of DADT.  

Pure opportunism.  Nothing more.

[ Parent ]
Even a stopped clock . . . (4.00 / 3)
. . . is right twice a day.

Even Joe Lieberman can do the right thing from time to time.

And even a vindictive black-hearted bastard like CTKeith (and I mean that in the nicest possible way) can be gracious enough to say something nice about his opponent.

The spirit of kumbaya wafts over MLN and we can savor the joyous possibility of a new era of bipartisanship on the horizon.

Savoring done? Good.

Now lets get back to making sure we don't wind up having to say, "Oh well, we'll show him what's for in 2018."

Thanks To All (4.00 / 1)
Who replied to my comment. By the time I returned from P-town I noticed it had been rated low enough to be hidden, but I promised to you all that I would discuss it with my friends there, and have done so.

Where I went wrong the most was not making it clear that I do support equality, and ending DADT is a great victory for "gay pride." That's the most important thing I wanted to say now. Anybody should be able to be "out" whenever and wherever they please. Let's not forget in this holiday season that when you go see the Nutcracker ballet, the fact is it's composer killed himself over being outed, and we've come a long way since.

As  far as the idea of being a soldier, which is basically someone who has been trained and indoctrinated to kill people and destroy things, I personally have always been stridently anti-war. So are my friends, both gay and straight. I was eligible for the draft the last two years they were picking birthdates out of that big fishbowl back in the Vietnam era, and if my number had come up I would have fled north in a heartbeat with the full support of family and friends. I've never been ashamed to say it. Ultimately we lost and pulled out of there. Nowadays, our country is involved in two illegal occupations and the hawks are clamoring to get started in yet a third one, with our Senator practically leading the cry. There are so many who think it's wrong and bankrupting us, and I'm with 'em. If the generals didn't have enough bodies to do their bidding, it would stop, and I've spent time outside recruiting centers protesting.

To Bethel: Perhaps we don't really need those translators, could you take an hour to watch this film on-line:
(Reel Bad Arabs- How Hollywood Vilifies A People)

To Keith: As I stated above, I'm for it not against it, and my friends chuckled when I told them I was being accused of being homophobic. No doubt I'll be called Jesse Helms in jest...

To RepHolder-Winfield: Thanks. As you can see, I just was never military minded. And like you say, this is a situation that already exists; all our 'guvmint did was put their official stamp of approval on it as some kind of red-meat issue Xmas present.

To ctblogger: Yes, I've read them all, and am responding to each one. I hope I'm not making things worse by coming back to this thread again this morning. Thanks for letting me in here to do it.

To Sue: Yep, girls make me drool...

Thanks again all, and onward to a peaceful tomorrow if we can make it happen.

"It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so." ~ Mark Twain

0 user(s) logged on.

Make a New Account



Forget your username or password?


Use the Spotlight tool to send a diary to offline journalists, with your feedback or suggestions.
(What is Spotlight?)


My Left Nutmeg Feeds


Connecticut's War Dead

Powered By
- SoapBlox

Connecticut Blogs
- Capitol Watch
- Colin McEnroe
- Connecticut2.com
- Connecticut Bob
- ConnecticutBlog
- CT Blue Blog
- CT Energy Blog
- CT Local Politics
- CT News Junkie
- CT Smart Growth
- CT Voices for Civil Justice
- CT Voters Count
- CT Weblogs
- CT Working Families Party
- CT Young Dems
- Cool Justice Report
- Democracy for CT
- Drinking Liberally (New Milford)
- East Haven Politics
- Emboldened
- Hat City Blog (Danbury)
- The Laurel
- Jon Kantrowitz
- LieberWatch
- NB Politicus (New Britain)
- New Haven Independent
- Nutmeg Grater
- Only In Bridgeport
- Political Capitol (Brian Lockhart)
- A Public Defender
- Rep. David McCluskey
- Rep. Tim O'Brien
- State Sen. Gary Lebeau
- Saramerica
- Stamford Talk
- Spazeboy
- The 40 Year Plan
- The Trough (Ted Mann: New London Day)
- Undercurrents (Hartford IMC)
- Wesleying
- Yale Democrats

CT Sites
- Clean Up CT
- CT Citizen Action Group
- CT Democratic Party
- CT For Lieberman Party
- CT General Assembly
- CT Secretary of State
- CT-N (Connecticut Network)
- Healthcare4every1.org
- Judith Blei Government Relations
- Love Makes A Family CT

Other State Blogs
- Alabama
- Arizona
- California
- Colorado
- Delaware
- Florida
- Georgia
- Idaho
- Illinois
- Indiana
- Iowa
- Kentucky
- Louisiana
- Maine
- Maryland
- Massachusetts
- Michigan
- Minnesota
- Missouri
- Missouri
- Montana
- Nebraska
- Nevada
- New Hampshire
- New Jersey
- New Mexico
- New York
- New York
- North Carolina
- Ohio
- Ohio
- Oklahoma
- Oregon
- Pennsylvania
- Rhode Island
- South Dakota
- Tennessee
- Texas
- Texas
- Utah
- Vermont
- Virginia
- Washington
- West Virginia
- Wisconsin

Powered By
MLN is powered by SoapBlox
Powered by: SoapBlox