The Progressive Puppy

Alabama Cops Taser Mentally Disabled Deaf Man in Restroom

Antonio Love, 37, has the mental capacity of a 10-year old.  Last week when he developed an upset stomach, he went into a restroom at a Dollar Store in Mobile, Alabama.  He had been inside the toilet for about an hour when store employees called the police.  Cops arrived at the scene and started banging on the door, demanding that he come out.  But he couldn't hear what they were saying.   Besides being mentally disabled, Antonio is also deaf.  So what do the police do?  They squirt him with pepper spray and then Taser him.  These sterling examples of law enforcement justified their use of excessive force because Love was carrying a lethal weapon ... an umbrella.  From Associated Press:  Police spokesman Christopher Levy said Tuesday store workers called officers complaining that a man had been in the bathroom for more than an hour with the door locked.  Officers knocked on the door and identified themselves, but the person didn't respond.  Officers used a tire iron to open the door, but the man pushed back to keep it shut. Officers saw the umbrella and sprayed pepper spray through a crack trying to subdue the man, Levy said.  They shot the man with a Taser when they finally got inside, he said.  Officers didn't realize Love was deaf or had mental problems until he showed them a card he carries in his wallet, Levy said... Phyllis Love said her son, who has worked in the garden department at a Lowe's store for several years, was scared when he realized someone was trying to get into the bathroom with him. He put water on his face and on the floor after being hit with pepper spray, she said.  "He didn't know it was a policeman until they busted the door in on him," she said. "He had a knot on his head from where it hit him."

Rachel McCarthy Jones at Deeply Problematic writes:  After they realized he was deaf and disabled, what did they do? Did they apologize profusely and let him go?  Was disciplinary action taken against the authorities who overused force?  No.  They laughed at him.  And proceeded to charge him on disorderly conduct.  The right of disabled persons to function fully and exist with respect in our society is consistently deprived of them.  This is obviously a difficult situation to navigate, but it's the responsibility of the authorities to be calm and careful and to restrain themselves from using force in a situation where there is no apparent harm.

Levy says an internal investigation will determine whether or not the officers laughed at him after they realized he was deaf.  And whose version of events do you suppose will be believed?  The mentally disabled deaf man?  Or the cops who Tasered him and then laughed about his disability.  From Pam's House Blend:  God almighty, it makes me sick to keep reporting on this bullsh*t police brutality state because we all know there are so many good law enforcement officers putting their lives on the line every day.  But they are working alongside some seriously disturbed/power-mad sadists with a badge who clearly have no skills, training or desire to properly subdue or communicate with civilians - they reach for the Taser, which is meant as a substitute for a GUN, and blast people into submission.

If there are as many "good law enforcement officers" out there as everybody claims, then why the fuck don't they ever report these bad apples?  They know which of their fellow cops use excessive force on a regular basis.  They're privy to the bragging that goes on inside the station house.  They are all aware of the "loose cannons" in the department.  Just once I'd like to hear about the police policing themselves - proactively, not after the fact.

Another chance to end DADT nixed by Obama

Earlier in the week, Congressman Alcee Hastings of Florida added an amendment to the Defense Appropriations Act that would have prevented the government from using your tax dollars to continue kicking gays and lesbians out of the military.  The following day the amendment was quietly withdrawn due to pressure from the Obama administration. 

The Servicemembers Legal Defense Network responded in a statement:  "We hope it's not true that the White House pressured Representative Hastings to withdraw his amendment to stop funding 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' investigations.  Such a move would surely go against President Obama's commitment to end DADT.  Now we need to see some positive action, some follow through from this White House."  (Empty podium, sound of crickets.) 

Hastings appeared on The Rachel Maddow Show Wednesday to confirm that the Obama Administration did in fact kill the amendment.  He expressed his disappointment over the decision.  When Maddow asked the lawmaker how it  went down, Hastings replied that although he didn't speak personally with the President, "liaisons" from the White House attended a meeting to discuss the appropriations bill and demanded that the amendment be removed.  They cited, once again, Obama's shopworn excuse of "the time is not right."  (Is there a "right time" for equality?)   

This was another perfect opportunity to begin the process of ending the military's unfair (and staggeringly expensive) policy of firing qualified soldiers who happen to be gay.  The administration's latest delaying measure is sadly remindful of that insulting legal brief the White House used to make its case for preserving The Defense of Marriage Act.  You'll recall that administration apologists defended the DOMA brief, which likened committed same-sex unions to incest and adults marrying children, by saying that the President wasn't personally responsible for the inflammatory language adopted by his own Department of Justice.  But how is Obama not responsible for highhandedly blocking Hastings' amendment?  It has become increasingly clear that Obama not only has no plans to promote LGBT equality, but that his administration is working against advancing any substantive rights for gay and lesbian Americans.  If this is the "Change We Can Believe In," we'd do just as well to pin our hopes on The Tooth Fairy.   (Image courtesy of Mark Behm)

Thursday Bite-Sized Pieces

Pepin Tuma, a 33-year-old attorney in Washington, D.C., was thrown in jail for saying singing, "I hate the police."  As with Henry Louis Gates, Tuma was arrested and charged with "disorderly conduct" (which of course means whatever a cop wants it to mean at any given moment).  There are allegations that the arresting officer called Tuma "a faggot." 

Homobigot Matt Barber is outraged that Home Depot sponsors a children’s craft area at Nashville Gay Pride and at other pride events around the country.  He claims the home improvement store is "facilitating the exposure of children to sinful behavior."  (They're making toy airplanes out of balsa wood for chrissake, not participating in orgies.)  Timothy Kincaid at Box Turtle Bulletin notes that the only children being 'exposed' are those attending the celebrations with their parents:  "It is either children of gay parents or of those who support our rights."

A spokesman for the Democratic Party has responded to Senator David Vitter's recent comment that Southern senators are responsible for keeping the GOP committed to "core conservative values."   Says Kevin Franck:  "Last time I checked, you don't find core Southern values in the places David Vitter has been found.  If David Vitter can lead his party back to their conservative values, maybe Larry Craig can give them tips on bathroom etiquette and Mark Sanford can recommend a really good restaurant in Buenos Aires."  (Meow.)

According to a study on executive compensation released by New York State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, financial giants that received federal bailout money in 2008 have awarded bonuses to their employees exceeding the amount of profit generated by the banks.  (Let's hope Tim Geithner remembers this the next time they come begging for cash.)

There are reports that Sarah Palin is open to the possibility of hosting her very own talk radio program.  Caribou Barbie wouldn't be the first failed politician to belch opinions into a microphone.  Former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee’s commentaries are broadcast on more than 400 stations via Citadel Media.  (Just what this country needs, another right-wing fanatic on the radio.)  Clear Channel, the nation’s largest radio conglomerate, has already turned her down.

A wingnut named Jason Hommel is offering $100,000 to anyone who can prove that Barack Obama is a natural born citizen of the United States "to his satisfaction."  (And I'll offer 100K to anyone who can prove that Jason Hommel is motivated by something other than resentment over the outcome of the presidential election - to MY satisfaction.)

As if the Birthers weren't crazy enough for the GOP, now they have Deathers, conservatives who play on the fears of elderly Americans by falsely claiming that Obama's health care reform will, quite literally, kill them.  (It's no surpise that these rumors are being generated by Republican lawmakers and the private insurers who pay them to maintain the status quo.)

Steve Ensley of American Family Online is calling for a boycott of Google because "every major financial announcement" by the popular search engine is "issued from the Playboy Mansion."  He says he's also upset that Google doesn't allow pro-life ads to be purchased or placed on its website.  (Which is a lie.)  Ensley claims that his group has been approached by representatives from Bing who are interested in cultivating the family values crowd.  (We'll have to keep an eye on that.  If Bing starts pandering to Christianists, progressives might be tempted to do their searching elsewhere.)

Cops in Mississippi now spin a "Wheel of Fortune" before deciding who to arrest on outstanding warrants.  They call their game show-inspired contraption "The Wheel of Justice."  (You'd think the police would prioritize these cases and go after the most dangerous criminals first.  But then, I suppose that wouldn't be as much fun.)

The Gay & Lesbian Victory Fund has announced that Obama will be awarding America’s highest civilian honor, the Presidential Medal of Freedom, to Harvey Milk, one of the country’s first openly gay elected officials.   Pam Spaulding writes:  "If only Harvey could be here to step up to the podium, receive the medal, and proceed to tell the administration and Congress to get off its asses and do something concrete and lasting that will help all LGBT people in America achieve equality."

Boston Police Officer refers to Gates as a "Jungle Monkey"

The Herny Louis Gates saga continues...

From the Boston Globe:  An officer in the Boston Police Department was suspended yesterday for allegedly writing a racially charged e-mail about Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. to colleagues at the National Guard...  The law enforcement official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said Officer Justin Barrett referred to the black scholar as a "jungle monkey" in the letter, written in reaction to media coverage of Gates's arrest July 16.  Barrett, a 36-year-old who has been on the job for two years, was stripped of his gun and badge yesterday and faces a termination hearing in the next week...  Barrett will receive legal representation from Boston Police Patrolmen's Association, the police officer's union.  A woman who answered the phone at the police association said that union president Thomas J. Nee was not available for comment, but said he would be releasing a statement this evening.  Barrett could not immediately be reached for comment.

Mayor Thomas M. Menino was quick to respond to the incident, comparing the officer to a cancer and saying that he is "gone, g-o-n-e'' from the force. 

Police spokeswoman Elaine Driscoll concurred:  "Yesterday afternoon, Commissioner Davis was made aware that Officer Barrett was the author of correspondence which included racially charged language.  At that time, Commissioner Davis immediately stripped Officer Barrett of his gun and badge, and at this time we will be moving forward with the hearing process."

Racism in Boston?  Perish the thought.  Although, reading through the comments left by Globe readers might indicate that there is a problem:

- "Amazing white people are not allowed an opinion! freedom of speech, or there mad because he was right."
- "I was not aware that it could be cause for termination at your job to be a racist? Here you have all these people out there claiming that Gates was within his rights to be abusive and a racist against a white police officer and yet the officer in this story (regardless of his personal integrity) can be suspended and/or fired for making a private communication about a very public event? So much for freedom of speech."
- "When will Gates be suspended for his racist views?"
- "african americans call each other the 'n' word all the time, and use it all the time around each other and myself numerous times during the work day, and for some reason its ok"
- "The politically correct "thought police" are out of control. Officer Barrett has the right to express his opinion, whether people agree with or not. And he should be able to express it without endangering his job."
- "great, let's find another police officer to vilify since the insanely biased media found a guy who did absolutely nothing wrong the first time around"
- "Instead of vilifying Officer Barrett we should be thanking him. Had the Harvard blow-hard just shown his ID to the Cambridge PD, Officer Barrett would never felt the need to send the e-mail."  (Felt the need?)
- "Give the guy a break he was probably a little tired from locking up primates all day."  (Classy.)
- "US citizens have a first amendment right to call people names. Firing him would be a violation of his rights. I guess we are only concerned with minority 'rights' in this country now though."

Needless to say, the police should be (but usually aren't) held to a higher standard than your average racist (white or black) since they have life and death authority over anyone who crosses their path.

UPDATE:  Now Barrett is apologizing.  He says he didn't mean to use the phrase "jungle monkey" in a racist way.

Senator with diaper fetish still hails "core conservative values."

I just love it when Republican Senator David Vitter opens his mouth and starts talking about family values.  The Louisiana lawmaker who once spent his evenings frolicking in nappies before the scornful gaze of D.C. hookers has so much moral certitude to offer America.  From Think Progress:  Earlier this week, Sen. George Voinovich (R-OH) told the Columbus Dispatch that the GOP was "being taken over by southerners" and that the party has "too many Jim DeMints and Tom Coburns." Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) responded today by slamming his colleague for being a "moderate, really wishy-washy" Republican.  Vitter decried the influence of "moderates" in his party, saying that the GOP has not stuck to "core conservative values." ...  After confirming his involvement with the "DC Madam" escort service in 2007, Vitter admitted to a "very serious sin" but refused to resign, despite having previously called upon Bill Clinton to resign for marital infidelity.  (The motto of the GOP has always been, "Do as I say, don't do as I do.")

Sayeth Baby Vitter:  "I’m on the side of conservatives getting back to core conservative values.  There are a lot of us from the South who hold those values, which I think the party is supposed to be about.  We strayed from them in the past few years (a glaring understatement) and that is why we performed so badly in the national elections."

Shove a pacifier in it, Senator Vitter.  The reason the Republican Party performed so badly is because it can't stop pandering to far-right religious fanatics and conspiracy theorists  - and, because of hypocrites like yourself who think adultery is a family value.   But please continue wearing those diapers, Davey Boy.  For someone as full of shit as you are, it's a good idea to have protection against seepage.

Hate Jock Michael Savage gets love from New Yorker Magazine

The New Yorker Magazine, whose cover illustration last summer depicted Barack Obama dressed as a Muslim and his wife as a terrorist, has decided to run a sickening "tribute" to hate radio personality Michael Savage in its forthcoming August issue.  African-American journalist Kelefa Sanneh, apparently oblivious to the talk show host's long history of racist comments, heaps gushing accolades on the far-right commentator.  This is a bromance made in publishing hell, and just one more example of the New Yorker's ever desperate attempts to boost sales by stirring controversy.  (Honestly, why don't they just merge with National Enquirer and be done with it?) 

Sanneh's puff piece is called "A Party of One:  Michael Savage, Unexpurgated."  Peter at Right Wing Watch collars the hound:  While Savage loves to hate the media and Media Matters, he’s found a friend in Kelefa Sanneh, author of the New Yorker profile (subscription required), which feels like a many-thousand word promo for Savage’s radio show.  Sanneh is smitten with Savage, "more days than not, a marvelous storyteller, a quirky thinker, and an incorrigible free-associator."  He calls Savage’s show "one of the most addictive programs on radio, and one of the least predictable."  Sanneh doesn’t ignore that Savage has a well-documented hatred of gays and that his central thesis is "that lefties are ruining the world, or trying to," and quotes some of Savage’s memorable moments, such as the one that got him thrown off MSNBC, when he told a caller "Oh, you’re one of the sodomites. You should only get AIDS and die, you pig."  But Sanneh finds Savage so weirdly charming and entertaining (he ruminates about death!) that he is quick to dismiss the host’s virulent rhetoric...  Sanneh seems uninterested in considering whether the kind of political rhetoric Savage specializes in has the potential to fuel hatred and violence.  Savage’s liberal-hating books were among those found on the shelves of the Tennessee man who opened fire in a Unitarian Universalist church last year to vent his hatred of liberals who he said were destroying the country.  Sanneh says that Savage’s best-selling books are "political polemics" but says "none capture the freewheeling sensibility of the show or the complicated personality of the man."

"Freewheeling sensibility" isn't the first phrase I'd apply to Michael Savage's obnoxious brand of hate entertainment.  In fact, any descriptor with "sense," "sensible," or "sensibility" in it should never be assigned to the man who says this about LGBT Americans: "When you hear 'human rights,' think only one thing: someone who wants to rape your son.  And you'll get it just right.  OK, you got it, right?  When you hear 'human rights,' think only someone who wants to molest your son, and send you to jail if you defend him."

It's nice that Kelefa Sanneh has made a new BFF, but he should remember that folks are judged by the company they keep and the people they admire.  Do loud-mouthed homobigots appeal to Sanneh?  I can hardly wait for his follow-up articles:  The Misunderstood Compassion of Fred Phelps; and Sally Kern's Persuasive Fabulosity. 

(Pictured: Savage, Sanneh)

U.S. Military Spies on Peace Groups, Violates "Posse Comitatus"

From Democracy Now:  Newly declassified documents reveal that an active member of Students for a Democratic Society and Port Militarization Resistance in Washington state was actually an informant for the US military.  The man everyone knew as "John Jacob" was in fact John Towery, a member of the Force Protection Service at Fort Lewis. The military’s role in the spying raises questions about possibly illegal activity. The Posse Comitatus law bars the use of the armed forces for law enforcement inside the United States.  The Fort Lewis military base denied our request for an interview.  But in a statement to Democracy Now, the base’s Public Affairs office publicly acknowledged for the first time that Towery is a military operative.  Their statement reads:  "John Towery performs sensitive work within the installation law enforcement community, and it would not be appropriate for him to discuss his duties with the media." 

Officials at Fort Lewis claim that an internal investigation into the matter has been launched.  (For what that's worth.)

Towery declined to appear on  Democracy Now's web broadcast, but some of the people he targeted weren't so shy.  Brendan Maslauskas Dunn, a member of SDS, appeared visibly upset when interviewed:  "John Jacob was actually a close friend of mine, so this week has been pretty difficult for me...  He wanted to start a chapter of Movement for a Democratic Society, which is connected to SDS.  He got involved with Port Militarization Resistance, with Iraq Vets Against the War.  He was, you know, knew a lot of people involved with that organization."   When confronted by Dunn, Towery admitted to being a spy:  "He said that the police in Tacoma and Olympia had been planning for a while on raiding the Pitch Pipe Infoshop and also the house I lived in with several other activists in Olympia.  And they had approached John several times, saying, you know, 'Do they have bombs and explosives and drugs and guns and things like that?' which is just disgusting to even think that they would suggest that.  They’re just trying to silence us politically.  They’re going after us for our politics and for our work, you know, around Port Militarization Resistance and around antiwar organizing.  And, of course, John told them, no, we didn’t have any of those stuff." 

ACLU National Security Policy Counsel Mike German believes that this is another case of the military violating the U.S. Constitution:  This is a pretty clear violation of Posse Comitatus.  Now, what the military would argue, and has argued, is that they have a right to engage in force protection, which obviously, in its normal understanding of that term, is a defensive sort of capability, i.e. they can put guards at the gates of military bases and protect from threats from without.  But they seem to have been, since 2002, considering that as an offensive capability, where they're actually sending operatives out to spy on community activists, which is, of course, prohibited and something that, you know, the First and the Fourth Amendment become engaged.

Bush opened this can of worms when he authorized federal agencies to spy on U.S. citizens who engage in peaceful demonstrations against the government.  Using service members for this purpose is deplorable.  It's also against the law.

Homeowners who don't evacuate can be arrested in Texas.

Republicans love to whine and complain about their "rights" being whittled away.  But while they're busy crying wolf over imaginary infractions by the Obama administration, lawmakers in their own party pull crap like this:

A new measure passed by the Texas state legislature says that anyone who chooses not to evacuate during a hurricane can be arrested and thrown into jail for 180 days.  The law was authored by Republican Frank Corte who (according to his official bio) has never resided on the Texas Gulf Coast and (according to me) doesn't know shit about hurricanes or the people affected by them.

My partner and I lived on Bolivar Peninsula for ten years.  Our house and everything in it was destroyed by Hurricane Ike.  These days, there's nothing on our property but mud and rubble.  Every tree was uprooted.  A heavy concrete cistern was sucked out the ground and smashed to pieces.  Even the massive pylons that supported the house were swept away by storm surge.  (You can read about our Ike experience here.)  So I have a very personal perspective from which to address this blatantly unconstitutional law.

During the decade that Art and I lived on the beach, there were eight tropical storms and four hurricanes that made landfall along the northeast Texas coast.  Despite routine calls to evacuate, we only left the peninsula twice.  Under the rules just enacted, there were several times we might have been hauled off to jail for remaining at home to look after our property.  In their attempt to impose a "one size fits all" mandate on homeowners, Texas legislators refuse to recognize the following:

No one rides out a hurricane because they're "stubborn," which is how some GOP lawmakers describe the folks who choose not to evacuate.  There is looting to consider.  Texas law enforcement officers have shown time and again that they're incapable of protecting private property that's been abandoned.  Also, county officials frequently call for evacuation to be "on the safe side" - translation: cover their asses - when no real danger exists.  And once you've left your home, you're at the mercy of the state as to when you'll be allowed back into the area.  This could be much longer than is necessary.  Although it's generally believed that only wealthy people live on the beach, I can assure you that's not the case in Texas.  Many poor folks reside there, and they can't afford to uproot themselves every time state officials call for evacuation.  (Relocation expenses are promised but seldom provided.)  Most people who live in hurricane zones are cannily cognizant of when it's time to go.  They don't need the government telling them what to do and threatening them with arrest.   

Rep. Dennis Bonnen, another Republican who supports the bill, says:  "This is for heinous situations where people have refused to heed the numerous requests for evacuation and put first responders in serious danger."  For the record, first responders are under orders never to place themselves in situations where their own lives might be in jeopardy, even while they're rescuing citizens.  So this is just an excuse.

We can all agree that no house or property is worth a human life - but this isn't a decision that should be made by the government.

Some of our Backyard Birds

If you set a good table, they will come.  (The parrot showed up last week.)

Dog Killer Michael Vick "Truly Thankful" for NFL Reinstatement

From CBS News:  Michael Vick was reinstated by NFL commissioner Roger Goodell on Monday and could play in regular season games as early as October.  Vick can immediately participate in preseason practices, workouts and meetings and can play in the final two preseason games - if he can find a team that will sign him.  A number of teams have already said they would not.

Goodell wrote a congratulatory letter to Vick, part of which reads:  "Needless to say, your margin for error is extremely limited.  I urge you to take full advantage of the resources available to support you and to dedicate yourself to rebuilding your life and your career.  If you do this, the NFL will support you...  I accept that you are sincere when you say that you want to, and will, turn your life around, and that you intend to be a positive role model for others.  I am prepared to offer you that opportunity."  The commissioner also said:  "I do recognize that some will never forgive him for what he did.  I hope that the public will have a chance to understand his position as I have."

Sports fans understand his "position," Mr. Goodell - and they understand yours.  Vick behaved like a sadist, he was caught, he was sorry he was caught, and now, in an attempt to salvage his career, he's pretending to see the error of his ways.  Mark Bradley at AJC sums up Goodell's POV:  The NFL wants Vick back but it doesn’t want to appear as it’s welcoming him back.  And that’s understandable.  He’s a convicted felon...   But docking him six more games - eight if you count the two exhibitions - isn’t really a penalty.  It’s a nuisance.  

Michael Vick spent 23 months in prison for killing and mutilating 130 dogs.  This means he served approximately five and a half days behind bars for each dog he tortured and killed.  By Vick's own admission, dog fighting is something he had engaged in for many, many years.  This wasn't a temporary lapse in judgment.  He delighted in seeing dogs rip each other's throats out.  He brutally put to death dogs that didn't "perform" to his expectations.  And he made money from the suffering of these animals. 

Although the NFL is perfectly within its rights to reinstate Vick, it is our right (some would say, obligation) to boycott any team that's foolish enough to hire him, as well as any advertiser associated with that team. 

When Michael Vick's active participation in animal cruelty first came to light, I read literally hundreds of comments on news websites where people said things like "Stop persecuting Vick!" and "They're only dogs!"  And the very same statements of support are pouring in this time. 

Dogs are not ONLY dogs.  They are sentient creatures with a greater capacity for love, trust, and fidelity than most humans.  Vick's defenders do nothing but draw attention to that fact.

Wag of the Week - Rep. Neil Abercrombie

This is sweeter than puppy breath.

Representative Neil Abercrombie of Hawaii introduced a resolution in the House of Representatives today that was designed to put all those Republican legislators who clandestinely court  birth deniers in an uncomfortable position.  Abercrombie's resolution commemorates the 50th anniversary of Hawaii’s statehood.  Ah, but there's a wee catch...

Greg Sargent writes on Plum Line:  It describes Hawaii as Barack Obama’s birthplace.  "In the language of the resolution, there is a statement that Hawaii is the birthplace of the 44th President of the United States," Abercrombie spokesman Dave Helfert confirms.  That confronts House GOPers with a choice:  They can vote for the measure, and endorse the idea that Obama was born in Hawaii, which could earn the wrath of birthers.  Or they can vote against commemorating the 50th state’s joining of our blessed Union.  Or GOPers can skip the vote, but that could look nutty.  "Far be it from us to try to stir things up," Helfert said puckishly. "The president was born there, so what are you gonna do?  Not mention it?"

The resolution passed unanimously.  Take that, birthers!

DADT Fall Senate Hearings Likely

Despite Obama's lukewarm calls for repealing "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," there has been no reassessment of the policy in the Senate since Congress passed it into law back in 1993.  That might change in the coming months, according to an exclusive report on The Daily Beast...  

Jason Bellini writes:  After determining she didn’t have enough votes in support of a temporary suspension of the ban on gays in the military, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand tells The Daily Beast she has secured the commitment of Senate Armed Services Committee to hold hearings on “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” this fall... A statement from the Gillibrand’s office, shared exclusively with The Daily Beast, notes that "265 men and women have been unfairly dismissed from the Armed Forces since President Barack Obama took office."  Gillibrand’s fast-track proposal for halting DADT, an amendment to the Military Reauthorization Act that would have ordered the Defense secretary to stop investigating gay service members, was never introduced.  Even with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid expressing his support, Gillibrand couldn’t gather the 60 votes needed to avoid a filibuster...  Gay-rights leaders expressed high hopes that Senate hearings could bring reluctant legislators around. According to a recent Gallup poll, 69 percent Americans think gays should be allowed to serve.  "Almost all serious experts who used to argue against allowing gays in the military have either changed course or died," says Nathaniel Frank, author of Unfriendly Fire: How the Gay Ban Undermines the Military and Weakens America.

Bellini contends that regardless of the outcome of Gillibrand’s proposed hearings, the possibility of repealing "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is actually stronger in the House of Representatives, where Congressman Patrick Murphy, an Iraq War vet, is working on a repeal measure called the Military Readiness Enhancement Act.  Gay-rights advocates say that he’s close to getting the 218 votes needed to pass the bill (which won't affect whatever course of action the Senate might take).

Although SASC hearings will help keep the issue in front of the American public, it will also provide an opportunity for GOP legislators and religious wingnuts to spread fear and uncertainty.  Ever aware of C-SPAN's cameras, conservative lawmakers will sputter the usual banalities into their microphones and express misgivings about "sleeping arrangements" and "unit cohesiveness," never mind the fact that in the 25 nations where gays are allowed to serve openly, no problems have been reported.  I can only imagine the line of questioning the Republicans will pursue:   

- Tell me, Corporal Christian, have you ever accidentally dropped a bar of soap while standing in one of the military's communal showers?
- Yes, sir.  I have. 
- And is this a concern of yours?
- Yes, Senator.  It is.
- Why is that?
- Well, you can never be too cautious, sir, even under the best of circumstances.
- Does dropping a bar of soap cause you unnecessary alarm?
- A man's ass is sacred, Senator.  It's like his castle - but instead of a drawbridge, there's a sphincter muscle.  I prefer to keep mine tightly shut.
- Will your apprehension increase if gays and lesbians are allowed to serve openly in the military?
- Yes, sir, it will.  I will be tempted to take fewer showers.  I wouldn't want a homosexual to get any funny ideas while scrutinizing my buttocks.  So I would be inclined to remedy the situation by remaining unwashed.
- If I might add a personal observation, I think it's a damned shame that liberals are willing to place our fearless soldiers in such a terrifying position.  Now, when is your next deployment to Afghanistan?
- Two weeks, sir.
- Thank you for your bravery, son.  And go with God.