“Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, the only Republican to support repealing the law and widely seen as the crucial 60th vote, announced Tuesday that she would not support advancing the bill because Democrats wouldn’t allow the Republicans sufficient leeway to offer amendments.” “Now, gay rights advocates say they worry they have lost a crucial opportunity to change the law. If Democrats lose seats in the upcoming elections this fall, repealing the law will prove even more difficult – if not impossible – next year.” “Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., gave Republicans the chance to offer only one amendment to address GOP objections on the military’s policy on gays.” “Collins said she planned to vote against advancing the bill unless Democrats agree to extend debate so that her colleagues could weigh in on other issues.” “In another blow to the bill, Obama’s pick to lead the Marine Corps told a Senate panel on Tuesday that he worried that changing the policy would serve as a “distraction” to Marines fighting in Afghanistan.” “My primary concern with proposed repeal is the potential disruption to cohesion that may be caused by significant change during a period of extended combat operations,” Gen. James Amos said in a written statement provided to the panel for his confirmation hearing.” (Flaherty, Anne, 9/21/2010, Associated Press, Senate repeal of ban on gays in military falters, Retrieved from email@example.com). I am not too bothered by the events mentioned above because one has to expect this from those who really do not have a clue nor have they ever looked back into our history for any sort of guidance. Senator Collins says that she opposes because they were not able to weigh in on other subjects. Forget about the topic on the table and the fact that there has been 17 years to debate don’t ask don’t tell, she has bigger fish to fry on something different than what’s in front of her. The new Marine Corps general says he is concerned about “potential disruption to cohesion”. Does anyone remember the words spoken when the argument of allowing Blacks to serve in the military or women? If memory serves this same argument was used at that time as well. So much for a disruption to cohesion.
What really do bother me are the comments of Richard Socarides. This guy was supposed to be the point man back in the Clinton Administration and since he did not do his job then, he has the audacity to try and tell Democrats and this president how they should be doing theirs. He was quoted as saying “the whole thing is a political train wreck,” said Richard Socarides, a former White House adviser on gay rights during the Clinton administration.” “Socarides said President Barack Obama “badly miscalculated” the Pentagon’s support for repeal, while Democrats made only a “token effort” to advance the bill.” “”If it was a priority for the Democratic leadership, they would get a clean vote on this,” he said.” (Flaherty, Anne, 9/21/2010, Associated Press, Senate repeal of ban on gays in military falters, Retrieved from firstname.lastname@example.org). Well he should know because he failed 17 years ago. Really, it’s like Republicans trying to teach everyone else how to be fiscally responsible. This will pass because it not about gay rights but civil rights. This will pass because after the same things were said about Blacks and women, we still have the best military in the world. This will pass because for some time when I first enlisted, my biggest fear was not any enemy faced on the battlefield. It was those closet Klan members in my barracks. The same ones that I had to live with, shower with and trust with my life. The Marine Corps stresses honor but how can there be when you have to live a lie, there is no honor in that. The bully that used to tease you in the shower in school after gym may not have been gay so being ogled will only teaches you how many men currently treat all women. To fight and maybe die for your country is a noble cause but there is no nobility in being denied your wish to serve.