If you mean my critique of the poll on Daily Kos, it was simply a "consider the source" point. Since polling is, by its nature, an inaccurate science, you have to consider who commissioned the poll when looking at the numbers. I just don't think the figures seem accurate to me, just like I don't think Rasmussen's poll on whether the Republicans can win back congress (they said yes) is either.

DADT has always been an abomination, but its allowed gays to serve, and everyone knows they've served, without bringing chaos to the military. The "other soldiers would be afraid to live with them, much less trust their lives to them" arguments have been proven false—and the general public as well as servicemen and women know it.

It remains to be seen if Republicans will go where Democrats feared to tread, and tell the military that gay service-members are some sort of danger when the military now says that they are not, and never have been.

This shouldn't surprise anyone (given the name I use on here) but I'm actually one of the moderates who has issues with politicians being bigoted. My main reason for not really calling myself purely a "Republican" or "Conservative" is because I'm not homophobic, I'm in favour of full rights for gay people.

(There are other issues where I differ from the Republican core, like the Death Penalty, but that isn't the real hot-button issue for me; homophobia is)

I agree with you. The Republicans have to tread carefully on this issue, in fact I'd suggest those standing in November try and steer clear of it. Focus on the Healthcare debate (and propose alternatives, don't just berate Obamacare) or on the stimulus and unemployment levels, things where I think there is some traction for the Republican side. Hot-button social issues are no longer where the Republicans have an edge; far from it, it's the Democrats forte.

However I'd be careful about some of the assumptions being made about the Republican "base" by the left. I saw a Daily Kos poll suggesting that 39% of us Republican supporters think Obama should be impeached. There's no way the number is that high. Likewise I doubt the "birther" movement has 58% support in the Republican base, as the same poll shows. It's a fringe movement for the nutjobs, I don't think many mainstream Republicans truly believe that Obama was not born in the USA (apart from maybe Jean Schmidt).

The reason I bring it up was this same poll was the one used to show 73% of Republicans opposed gays teaching. Now I'm sure there's majority support for those sorts of things, but I'd be shocked if it was as high as 73%. I'd say these days the Republican base is fairly split, maybe 60-40 against homosexuality.

Not that that's much better, but what I hope it does show, for the Republicans in Congress, is that by taking a more moderate tone they can keep 40% of the core support on their side. Considering that a moderate tone on gay rights is likely to yield some "swing" voters from the left, that could be enough for the re election (or first-time election) bids in November, but more importantly, as you point out, would keep the GOP in touch with where the nation is.

If they have hopes of securing the White House back again in 2012 they can only do it by staying in touch with the nation on "hot-button" social issues.

This is where the mandatory use of the word "arcane" becomes necessary, as in "arcane Senate rules."

It's an interesting point. Budget bills are handled differently, I know that much. But do you think the Dems are bold enough to include the repeal in this year's military budget? Or do you think they'll punt it to next year?

It'll be interesting no matter how it plays out, that's for sure.

-CW

The other day at the Senate hearing where Sec. Gates and Adm. Mullen testified for repeal, Sen. Lieberman tried to play the filibuster card yet again by saying that any attempt to repeal DADT would need 60 votes. So there. But the committee chair, Sen. Levin, spoke up to say that if a repealer were included as part of a big military appropriation bill (which Rachel Maddow reminds us was how DADT was passed to begin with), then the repealer would have to be stricken by a separate amendment, and then it would be the move to strike that would need 60 votes. So HAHAHA!

Hey, maybe some of these guys do know how to play cards.