To give credit where credit is due (even though it embarrasses me to do so), I believe "Buffy The Vampire Slayer" truly started the trend of adding "-ey" to just about any word under the sun, to make it more cool (in an adverb-ey kind of way, if you'll excuse the circular-logic semantics). Buffy is a silly show, but the dialog was indeed top-notch. If you've ever seen Joss Whedon's "Firefly" or "Serenity" (sci-fi), you'll know what I'm talking about.

Two points on DADT. One, you are correct, if the report is favorable, and Dems punt, they will lose EVERY SINGLE DOLLAR of gay donations in the next election cycle. It will be absolutely the LAST straw for the big gay donors. They're already mistrusting of the Dems, but have been waiting to see what happens on DADT. If Dems have the chance, and blow it, then this natural Dem constituency is going to absolutely SIT OUT the 2012 election, if they don't actually throw their weight behind an Obama challenger.

See the news today? I just KNEW I should have tossed down some Quatloos on this one...

From the Washington Post today:

A Pentagon study group has concluded that the military can lift the ban on gays serving openly in uniform with only minimal and isolated incidents of risk to the current war efforts, according to two people familiar with a draft of the report, which is due to President Obama on Dec. 1.

More than 70 percent of respondents to a survey sent to active-duty and reserve troops over the summer said the effect of repealing the "don't ask, don't tell" policy would be positive, mixed or nonexistent, said two sources familiar with the document. The survey results led the report's authors to conclude that objections to openly gay colleagues would drop once troops were able to live and serve alongside them.

This leads me to two conclusions: (1) this "leak" was authorized from the top, and the "unnamed" sources may have been either the SecDef or the Joint Chiefs chair, and (2) the report is going to be pretty overwhelmingly positive towards dropping DADT. In this case -- assuming the Dems get it through the lame duck (I know, big assumption, that) -- Obama will have indeed pulled off a "13-dimensional chess" move brilliantly. He allowed the military time to get used to the idea, HE asked THEM for how he should do it (rather than dictating it by fiat), and he gave them plenty of time. This effort is going to pay off when the military actually makes a fairly smooth transition to a post-DADT world, that's my guess (assuming, again, the lame duck passes it).

-CW

"They don't seem very Ancient-ey to me."
-Lt Col John Shepard, STARGATE ATLANTIS

:D

Michale.....

Great answer on both questions.. :D

So, let me expand on the DADT question...

1. What do you think the reaction from the Left will be if Dems punt the DADT question with AND without a supportive December report? To clarify, what will the reaction be from the Left if Dems punt even though the Dec report supports repeal of DADT and what will the Left do if Dems punt and the Dec report DOESN'T support repeal of DADT?

2. Do you think the Left even CARES what the Dec report will say???

Michale

Interesting article about Kirk. But that means it is the state law's fault, not any nefarious plot. And, if memory serves, Harry Reid actually expedited a similar situation for a Republican already (the guy who won Kennedy's seat up in MA, I think, his name escapes me... Scott Somebody?). So I bet if Republicans whine loud enough, Reid and even Obama will push IL to get the paperwork together as fast as possible. If anything happens in the Senate, my guess is it's going to happen right before Xmas, anyway, and not in the first few weeks.

OK, I guess it's somewhat subjective the way you first phrased your question about the DoD report, but I know what you're essentially asking -- "if the Pentagon report says that repealing DADT just isn't possible right now, what would the Dems do?"

Well, the short answer is "it doesn't matter." (1) Dems would likely cave and not even bring it up in the DoD budget in the Senate (rumors abound that this is already happening anyway, search "DADT" and "Levin" to see these rumors). (2) Even if they didn't cave, they would not be able to get the votes in the Senate, so the military budget would wait until next year, and be passed without the DADT repeal by Republicans with some Dems voting with them. And (3) -- the big one -- even if Congress does nothing, Obama could still end the policy, or the courts could still end the policy anyway.

So, like I said, I bet the Dems will choose (1) but I bet it won't matter because one way or another DADT won't be repealed by Congress by January either way if the DoD report is strongly against it.

But I'm betting that it won't be. I'm betting it's going to shock the Right more than it'll shock the Left. I am basing this on the leaks about what's in the report, and just my gut feeling, I admit. We'll see in a few weeks...

[Actually, reading your comment, you got "affect" right, just had to say that.]

Americulchie -

I spent two years in Europe back in the 1990s, and I have to say that after having done so, you look at America through different eyes. You also laugh long and loudly whenever any right-winger tries to bring up "European socialism" or use "European-style" as some sort of monster under the bed. Sure, they pay higher taxes. But they get a lot more for their money, too. Their unions are strong, everyone gets like 5-6 weeks off PAID VACATION every year (even minimum wage type workers), nobody goes bankrupt when they get sick (the very concept shocks Europeans), and they're generally a lot happier than average Americans with their governments.

It is an eye-opening experience, that's for sure. Not saying Europe is perfect, but neither is it the hell-hole caricature the Righties love to paint it as.

-CW

You're slipping, you screwed up TWO tags in that comment.

:-)

All fixed.

And, before I answer your substantive points, "effect" is a noun, "affect" is more verb-ey.

Whenever you use "an" or "the" you also use "effect."

"The effects of CrapCare..." (to use an example familiar to you...)

"CrapCare will have the following effect..."

Whenever it is used as an action (verb), it's always "affect."

"CrapCare will affect my life in the following ways..."

To make it simpler, remember:

"This will affect me.
This will have an effect on me."

Or maybe someone knows a mnemonic? Um... E? Um...

"An effect is a thingie, because it starts with E.
An affect is an action, because it starts with A."

OK, that second one is probably better...

-CW

"...but lately, I've become aware that there are fewer days ahead than there are behind."
-Captain Jean Luc Picard, STAR TREK VII, Generations

I feel for ya...... :D

Michale.....

While I too feel for the circumstances, I am constrained to point out that Unemployment was never meant to sustain a person for a long period of time..

On the other hand, since the current government has royally screwed the job market, it only makes sense that the government should be paying the ranks of the unemployed...

But, on the third hand, it AIN'T the government that is paying the ranks of the unemployed, it's the taxpayers..

So, I am somewhat cornfused as to how to feel about it....

Michale.....

Michale.....

Are you kidding? I haven't heard anything about this. Provide a link, please, as this sounds like right-wing paranoia to me.

Nope... Serious as a heart attack...

Republican Senate candidate Mark Kirk

SPRINGFIELD, Ill. (AP) - Illinois Republican Mark Kirk won't be seated in the U.S. Senate in time for the start of the lame duck session of Congress this month - unlike two other newly elected senators.

The session begins Nov. 15. But state officials say the paperwork officially declaring Kirk the winner of the Senate race won't be delivered until Nov. 29.

That should still allow Kirk to participate in two weeks of the session in December. He argued strongly during the campaign that voters needed to send him to the Senate quickly so he could help block spending and tax increases.

Two Democrats are expected to be sworn in at the start of the lame duck session. Chris Coons of Delaware will fill the remainder of Vice President Joe Biden's term, and Joe Manchin of West Virginia replaces the late Robert Byrd.

http://www.wlsam.com/Article.asp?id=2011666

Also, please use the correct "Democratic" when appropriate (just a bugaboo of mine, sorry).

Picky picky.. :D J/K hehehehehe

I will turn your final question around:

Well, you could at least ANSWER it first.. :D

What if the DoD report says that the Pentagon may have slight problems here and there, but that they will be resolved in a "Can do" manner, and that they have an implementation plan to move forward and they're all on board with it?

As I have stated all along, I personally don't have a problem with the repeal of DADT as long as it doesn't adversely affect the military and it's various missions.. (as an aside, when the hell does one use "effect" or "affect"???)

Consequently, if the December report comes out in favor of the repeal and there is NO indications of any political machinations or maneuverings then I will happily support and endorse the repeal of DADT..

Now....

What happens if the December report states that now is not the time for a repeal of DADT...

Will the Left accept such findings and be patient??

Somehow, I kinda doubt it.. :D

Michale.....

I feel for your circumstances, but I have to wonder if what you say will come to pass. Republicans have already blocked unemployement benefits repeatedly this year, but the Dems dropped the ball when it came to making a big stinking political deal out of it with the public. So, again, I have to wonder if it will result in people realizing who is responsible. Maybe that's too cynical, I dunno.

-CW

The Democrat winners of these races will be seated immediately..

The Republican winner of these races won't be seated for about a month..

Are you kidding? I haven't heard anything about this. Provide a link, please, as this sounds like right-wing paranoia to me. Also, please use the correct "Democratic" when appropriate (just a bugaboo of mine, sorry).

I will turn your final question around:

What if the DoD report says that the Pentagon may have slight problems here and there, but that they will be resolved in a "Can do" manner, and that they have an implementation plan to move forward and they're all on board with it?

What then? John McCain has said all along that if this were the case, he'd vote to go ahead and repeal DADT. Are you going to condemn his hypocrisy if he now flip-flops on this promise?

-CW

Correction..

The Democrat winners of these races will be seated immediately..

The Republican winner of these races won't be seated for about a month..

Strange how that is, eh?? :^/

Second, I think you might put too much faith in the "sure thing" of a DADT repeal..

There is still the December report pending from the DoD... What if it shows that there would be massive moral issues if DADT were repealed??

What then??

Should Congress and/or Obama simply ignore the report and do what they want against the wishes of the military???

Michale....

I hope I'm wrong but I don't think so...
-Stan