BREAKING NEWS! Senate Votes to Repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell Bill 63 - 33!

@High Seas,

High Seas wrote:

snood wrote:

Wow! this is huge! I hardly believe it - I guess the fence hangers finally saw the inevitability (or, more likely, the political expediency). John McCain is below despicable.

This is a fascinating post. "Fence hangers" written instead of "fence sitters". The mental association with hangers is revealing.

High Seas, what the **** are you babbling about? "mental association with hangers"? Is it barely possible that I simply flubbed the colloquialism, Sigmund Fraud?

4 Replies

@snood,

Sure it's possible you just flubbed the colloquialism - it's just very highly improbable. Chances are you know you're lying about something, or you wouldn't be flubbing. Stress from lying becomes apparent in all manner of expression; you don't need high tech equipment to detect it.

0 Replies

@snood,

Don't lower yourself.

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

John McCain always had that title. Now it's just official! What a major douche he is.

0 Replies

@georgeob1,

georgeob1 wrote:

Thomas wrote:

[On what experience with commanding openly gay soldiers are you basing this opinion?

Much more than you have my friend.

I asked you what experience you based it on, not how much. There's a reason for that: Claiming that one has much experience is a lot like claiming that one has a big dick. If one doesn't have to show it, chances are it ain't there. That's why I asked you to show yours---your experience, that is.

0 Replies

@snood,

Ignore her.

0 Replies

@snood,

Snood got it right the first time. A fence sitter is one divided on the issue. A fence hanger wants to remain on the fence, but in this case bowed to the inevitable.

1 Reply

edgar, ehBeth, dlowan, ...thanks. I forgot for a moment who (what) I was dealing with.

0 Replies

@edgarblythe,

So you, too, think he's lying when he says he flubbed it? Couldn't agree with you more Laughing

1 Reply

@High Seas,

I don't see that he lied about anything. I think he might have been unprepared to get attacked gratuitously for the remark.

2 Replies

@edgarblythe,

Which is a diversionary tactic, designed to lead away from the real topic in question.

0 Replies

@edgarblythe,

edgarblythe wrote:

I don't see that he lied about anything. I think he might have been unprepared to get attacked gratuitously for the remark.

There's nothing gratuitous about exposing a liar. And for this particular liar (as you say so "unprepared" he would last 3 seconds at the outside is captured and questioned) to be calling McCain (a hero, who lasted years) "below despicable" (sic) is quite simply monstrous.

1 Reply

@High Seas,

So now we see your true motivation. Miffed because Snood told the truth about McCain, as he sees it. Mystery solved. Carry on. Nothing else to see here.

1 Reply

@edgarblythe,

edgarblythe wrote:

So now we see your true motivation. Miffed because Snood told the truth about McCain, as he sees it. Mystery solved. Carry on. Nothing else to see here.

I have to say that I think HighSeas may be reading more into Snood's choice of phrases than he intended. Even if it was a sub-consciously deliberate flub, he can hardly be called a liar if he denies he consciously meant it in the way HighSeas has interpreted it.

However, if anger and disgust is her reaction to the scurrilous attacks that have been made against McCain on this thread, I would say she's reacted entirely appropriately.

I'll need to keep this line in mind for future threads edgar

Quote:

because Snood told the truth about McCain, as he sees it

Somehow HighSeas reaction to Snood's derogatory remarks about McCain is to be sarcastically dismissed, while the reactions to HighSeas telling the truth about Snood, as she sees it are rightfully indignant.

At what point does telling the truth as one sees it, become vile slander?

0 Replies

Where did you see me voice indignant? I merely spoke up for Snood against a scurrilous attack. As for the rest of the thread, you can easily see that I have not been following most of it. This is where you, Finn, and I meet so much friction. You always charge in with a cruise missile to bring down a gnat.

0 Replies

@snood,

Quote:

I guess the fence hangers finally saw the inevitability (or, more likely, the political expediency).

Regardless of whether they were hanging or sitting on the fence, here's the local feed on Kirk's (R-IL) decision and his interaction with McCain prior to the vote.

Quote:

Kirk had been noncommittal on the 17-year-old ban-known as “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” throughout his heated Senate campaign. He wanted to wait, he said, for a Pentagon study to be complete. On Dec. 9, Kirk voted against advancing a repeal tacked on to a defense funding bill because he had signed a GOP pledge on the day he was sworn in, Nov. 29, to first deal with tax and budget measures.

...

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who led a drive against repeal, confronted Kirk on the Senate floor during the debate. According to two people I talked to who witnessed the incident, McCain urged him in very strong terms not to vote “yes’’ and told him he was making a mistake.

I asked Kirk about this as he was entering the Senate chamber for the final vote. Did he have words with McCain? “We always talk,” Kirk said.

Did he ask you not to vote in favor of repeal? “He’s on one side, but I decided that this is the right time to . . . take this action,” said Kirk, who noted that McCain was “pretty passionate” on the issue.

Congress acted after a Pentagon study on gays serving in the armed forces in November recommended the ban be lifted, with objections raised most strongly from the Marine Corps. Kirk said he voted yes after he reviewed the Pentagon study and consulted with Admiral Gary Roughead, the chief of Naval Operations.

While Kirk was keeping his head down on how he would vote on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,’’ behind the scenes, he told Lieberman and Collins last week they would likely have his support on a stand-alone bill — giving them confidence to push ahead. As a matter of tactics, Kirk’s name did not surface as a supporter in order to insulate him from pressure, I was told, and to preserve his backing.

“His vote was a key vote and it was one that we knew going into the vote that we had today,” Collins said when I asked her about Kirk.

Lieberman told me “I found out definitively yesterday” that Kirk was a “yes.’’ “But I will tell you during and after the vote last Thursday he was pretty encouraging about the fact that if it came up on stand alone, he was likely to be favorable.” Chicago Sun Times

1 Reply

@JPB,

Interesting to me is to what degree Kirk seems to want to avoid internal GOP politics. He played his cards with a good poker face.

A
R
T

1 Reply

@realjohnboy,

People have always been beaten down in the military - like frat hazing - but, I think there's generally a code of silence. I suspect the biggest change is that we will be treated to a parade of beatings/hazings that have a distinct homo flavor in the media for the forseeable future. I do think facing reality is a step forward. Interested to see what it brings...if anything.

And, I KNEW I didn't like John McCain. Weirdo.

0 Replies

@engineer,

Well, plus - he may have a disgusting opinion - but no one has to lurk about wondering what it is. He certainly owned his vote.

Sen. Obama could have taken a page out of McC's playbook. I remember him ducking a multitude of votes in anticipation of his presidential run.

0 Replies

@Finn dAbuzz,

I think you're missing the big picture here, Finn.

This is a very important issue. It is just one more strike against discrimination toward people who don't look, worship, or select partners in the same way as a majority. These issues should not and do not necessarily affect anyone's performance in the military or anywhere else for that matter. The arguments against discrimination are the same bad arguments that were used against racial discrimination. Refusing the right to serve their country to a whole class of individuals simply because of their sexual orientation is wrong. It is time for it to end.

And believe me, Fox News will select the best news events that support their political agenda of making the current administration look bad.

1 Reply

BREAKING NEWS! Senate Votes to Repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell Bill 63 - 33!

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know