RECENT  POSTS:  » Fox News pays this person for his opinions » Pat Buchanan doubles down on 1983 column claiming AIDS is nature's punishment » Is NOM really going to push for a constitutional convention on marriage? » Video: Great piece from 'CBS Sunday Morning' highlights sweet success » Yes, the American marriage equality fight is over—the rest is just bluster » Goodnight from the White House to your house » AL Chief Justice Roy Moore calls marriage equality worse than segregation decision » And by opposition 'from all sides,' FRC means exclusively from the (R) side » Video: What it looked like when that thing happened today » Hillary vows to keep fighting for full LGBT equality; et tu, GOP rivals?  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

07/28/2009

Gillibrand: DADT firebrand

by Jeremy Hooper

This letter just hit the G-A-Y inbox:

Picture 8-153

Hillary Clinton's shadow is certainly a formidable one. But it's good to see that as Sen. Gillibrand seeks her own time in the sun, she's remembering to respect the rainbow. We applaud the junior senator.

**EARLIER: 7/27 Asking and telling may still be out of line. But as for hearing? [G-A-Y]
7/23: Don't ask about Gillibrand's bill -- signs don't tell her that there's cloture [G-A-Y]
7/13: Clinton's successor vs. Clinton era policy [G-A-Y]

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

OK, I'm willing to give her the benefit of the doubt.

Posted by: Sandy | Jul 28, 2009 1:19:23 PM

I would think there's a lot more important thing on the table then some BS about the gay thing. Or maybe these left wingers are using the real issues for cover while they sneak in all there little socialist perks.

Posted by: Joe Richthammer | Jul 28, 2009 2:24:25 PM

"some BS about the gay thing."

You're certainly right, Joe: The right and far-right's BS about the gay thing certainly is unimportant. That's why Sen. Gillibrand is trying to do something about it.

Posted by: G-A-Y | Jul 28, 2009 2:31:50 PM

Being able to serve in the military is now a "socialist perq"? Usually it would be considered the opposite...

Posted by: therealistmom | Jul 28, 2009 3:42:02 PM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails