Obama likely to veto Hate Crimes and DADT Bills if they pass as planned this week

[FreeState]

http://www.pamshouseblend.com/diary/12046/connecting-the-dots-on-the-defense-authorization-bill

So now we have two of the LGBT community's biggest legislative issues – Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell and the Matthew Shepard Act - being addressed this week. As riders on the Defense Authorization Bill. Which Obama has vowed to veto over F-22 funding....

snip...

I have a suggestion for Congressional Democrats: Want to lead on LGBT issues (since Obama refuses to)? Stop the spineless candyassery, pay attention to little details like veto threats before attaching legislation about our lives to bills, present a united front, and sponsor standalone bills that will actually mean something. Don’t keep dragging us around the dance floor like this.

[lindisfarne]

1. Obama long ago expressed his unwillingness to fund F22. So why are these amendments been tacked onto

it?
From OP's link:
Obama has threatened to veto the Defense Authorization bill if it contains funding for an expanded F-22 fighter program. The Air Force has said they don’t want more funding for the F-22, that they’re happy with the ones that have already been paid for. The Pentagon doesn’t want more F-22s; they’d rather spend the money on better armor for troops on the ground. Obama has said he doesn’t want the F-22s, senior Dems have said they don’t want the F-22s, but are fighting with Democrats whose states have employment interests in the companies that manufacture parts for and assemble the F-22.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

2. Because Congressional Dems hope Obama can't veto those amendments...

and thus accepts the F-22 as a consequence.

[lindisfarne]

3. Won't happen. The OP's title is very misleading, probably deliberately, because the quotes in the OP

should have led the OP not to use the title s/he did.

Read the full link. The OP's title is not really what the original source was saying.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

13. No, I know what you mean, and you're right - it's totally misleading.

Still, I don't doubt that's what some of them hope - that they'll keep the F-22 because of the DADT and other, non-GLBT related amendments that Obama definitely does want to see go through. It's an extremely common tactic with appropriations bills.

But to paint it as Obama specifically vetoing those amendments is entirely disingenuous... and precisely what the F-22 people want to have happen.

[Toasterlad]

34. It Says "If They Pass As Planned". What Part Of That Bothers You?

It's not like the gay community could think any LESS of Obaman, you know.

[FreeState]

4. Because Reid, Obama etc all are a bunch of imbeciles that are triangulating again

I dont believe for a second that they did not know the bill will be vetoed as stands. Obama knows it and so does Senate leadership - just another way to say see were working on it knowing that it was never planned to pass in the first place. If you do a search in this forum you can find a post of mine from a month or two ago about Reid doing this last time around as well. The Matthew Sheppard act had this exact same thing happen to it last year (attached to a funding bill that they knew had no chance).

[lindisfarne]

5. You're no better. Your thread title is not representative of the perspective presented in the linknt

[FreeState]

8. Care to point it out rather then disrupt the thread then?

Where am I wrong with links and quotes please - everyone can click on the link and read the article - it clearly says what the thread title states.

[lindisfarne]

9. Is there a hate crimes bill? or is it an amendment to another bill. You're being disingenuous.n/t

[FreeState]

10. Good god - welcome to ignore

it was a bill in the House thats being attatched as an amendment in the Senate - thats all in the article.

Im done with posting on GLBT issues with people who attack. Welcome to my ignore list.

[lindisfarne]

14. Your title is misleading. What Obama would veto is a Defense appropriations bill that includes

DADT and Hate Crimes amendments - which you refer to as bills.
It's very different.
If they were individual bills that he was vetoing, I'd be upset.
He's been clear all along he doesn't think F-22 should be funded (nor does Air Force).

[Toasterlad]

35. The Hate Crime Bill Was Attached To the F-22 Bill.

You could just as easily ask, "Is there an F-22 bill? Or is it an ammendment to another bill?"

Try pulling your nose out of Obama's ass and looking at the real world.

[sandnsea]

7. We've been saying the problem is Congress

What will it take to start putting the pressure where it belongs. Obama is not the problem.

[maglatinavi]

15. congress

every day i feel more and more disappointed with congress and obama ...hope obama stands on principle ...

[lindisfarne]

19. See #17. Great to see Cong. Dems working with Exec. Dem. Get the F22 funding out of the bill -*that*

makes it much harder for Obama to veto the bill. It should be a no-brainer since the Air Force has said it's not necessary.

But the question is: do the Cong. Dems really want DADT repealed, or the Hate Crimes amendment to pass?

[sandnsea]

6. Obama does the right thing

On the F-22, forces Congress to do the right thing and pass these bills as the triumphant legislation it should be - and still gets bashed.

[FreeState]

11. Because he should be working with the Senate as he promised

clearly he isnt if things like this happen. I hold everyone accountable for it who has made a promise to the GLBT community.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

16. Clearly, you have no idea what you're talking about.

This has happened with nearly every major appropriations bill that has ever been passed (meaning Defense, Emergency, and Omnibus bills). Non-related policy riders get added to funding bills in order to make the bill difficult or embarassing to veto or vote against. Remember John Kerry's "I voted for it before I voted against it"? Same thing here.

If you think this is a unique thing that only happens on Obama's watch as it relates to the GLBT community, you are sorely and entirely misinformed.

[FreeState]

18. I never stated such a thing. Seriously

why is it so hard to discuss GLBT rights here without people projecting and personal attacks? Do a search on my name and you will see where I have talked about this being done before - hell I did it up thread.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

20. So are you then just simply saying that the existence of these amendments eliminate the veto threat?

Because if you understand what's going on and you're STILL blaming Obama on this one, it seems that's what your position would be. That would be equally perplexing and infuriating, however.

[FreeState]

22. Im blaming all parties involved

I never once have only blamed Obama. Obama has said repeatedly he is working with the Senate to get this passed and is urging them to work with his administration as well. Clearly something is not working. Both the Senate leadership and Obama have to take responsibility for these bills being shoved into an appropriations bill they both know is not likely to be signed.

http://www.towleroad.com/2009/04/obama-urges-congress-to-pass-federal-hate-crimes-act.html

"This week, the House of Representatives is expected to consider H.R. 1913, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009. I urge members on both sides of the aisle to act on this important civil rights issue by passing this legislation to protect all of our citizens from violent acts of intolerance – legislation that will enhance civil rights protections, while also protecting our freedom of speech and association. I also urge the Senate to work with my Administration to finalize this bill and to take swift action."

[dsc]

12. I see no reason why ending DADT should be stand alone legislation

DADT was enacted via a defense spending bill in the first place. I admit the hate crimes bill is a different matter.

[lindisfarne]

17. But including it in a bill which has F22 funding - which neither the Air Force nor Obama think is

necessary - is sheer stupidity. And possibly, the Dems trying to create an image of doing something, when in fact, they can reasonably expect the bill to be vetoed over the F22 funding.

Including the F22 funding in the bill is sheer stupidity - it begins to look like the legislative Dems are trying to undermine the executive Dem. If they DADT to be repealed, get the F22 funding out of the bill.

See Barney Franks comments in #2 here (monopoly money; Pentagon lowballing; weaponized Keynesianism)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8529635&mesg_id=8529713

[Pirate Smile]

21. Attach it to a bill the President hasn't already said he will veto based on defense funding.

This is really f#$ked up.

Congress want to keep funding crap. The President and Pentagon are finally trying to stop it and Dems in Congress are being idiots. Then they want to add DADT to the issue. Ugghhh. Don't attach DADT to a Bill that already has a poison pill in it. Attach it to something we want to pass.

[TheWraith]

27. There's a VERY good reason it should be: Public opinion.

The best way to knock down any extant fearmongering is to make it a clean bill with no legislative trickery.

[dsc]

28. I really don't see that mattering

People who don't like us still won't people who do won't care.

[TheWraith]

29. The world doesn't break down into absolute "yes" and "no" camps. nt

[FreeState]

23. Update on the F-22 funding bill

http://www.reuters.com/article/vcCandidateFeed7/idUSN15339323

WASHINGTON, July 15 (Reuters) - U.S. Senator Carl Levin on Wednesday temporarily withdrew a bid to kill $1.75 billion in funding for more F-22 fighter jets in a massive defense spending bill but senators leading the charge vowed they would try again soon.

The Senate has been tied up in knots this week over Lockheed-Martin's (LMT.N) performance-plagued F-22 as well as by a bid by Democrats to attach an unrelated amendment to the bill that would broaden hate crimes laws to address gender and sexual orientation.

"That's going to have to be resolved and then we're going to come right back" to the amendment to eliminate funding for buying seven more F-22s, Levin, the Senate Armed Services Committee chairman and a Michigan Democrat, told reporters.

It was not immediately clear when a vote would occur on the F-22 money but Senate aides suggested it could be put off until next week. Lockheed's shares were up 39 cents to $81.58 in midday trading on the New York Stock Exchange.

[Deep13]

36. Jesus Christ!

There is already a replacement for the F22s in the factories. Stop playing patronage games and cancel that program.

[allanrbrts]

24. Designed to fail

The F22 was tacked onto the bill on purpose, to create a situation where Obama will veto the bill and the LGBT measures thus fail.

[ShadowLiberal]

25. He's not vetoing it because of those gay rights parts, it's for the F-22 pork project

Bush tried to end the F-22 project as well, and failed (though I don't think he ever vetoed the defense bill over it).

Also I had no idea that they were throwing the hate crime bill into the defense funding, glad to hear they're trying to pass that soon to.

[indigo32]

26. ughhh what a mess - nt

[jcarterhero]

30. I hope he does

We can't let any more of those hatemongering idiots have their way.

[Q3JR4]

31. Well....

I'm one of those who is pretty hard on the dems on glbt issues, but right now I'm kind'a torn about the whole thing. After thinking about it for a second I've decided that if it's a choice between DADT the Matthew Shepard Act and continued funding of instruments of war....I'd have to say that I'm okay with a veto.

Q3JR4
F%!#ing politicians and their damn obfuscation.

[JTFrog]

32. President Obama to Sign Hate Crimes Bill Wednesday

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/10/promises-kept-obama-to-sign-hate-crimes-bill-wednesday.php?ref=fpb

Promises Kept: Obama To Sign Hate Crimes Bill Wednesday
Christina Bellantoni | October 26, 2009, 6:20PM

One of those big changes President Obama and the Democrats promised during the election is about to become law.

Last week the Senate gave final passage to the bill authorizing spending for the Department of Defense, which included a provision creating a hate crimes designation.

An administration official tells TPMDC Obama will sign the bill at the White House Wednesday. It is named for Matthew Shepard, a gay college student who was beaten to death in 1998.

He also will host a reception with gay rights groups and civil rights leaders commemorating the occasion. TPMDC has learned that Matt's mom Judy and brother Logan will attend the signing ceremony.

Last week, the president kept another campaign promise by signing a bill authorizing advanced funding for the Veterans Administration.

I know it's hard to take it one day at a time, but may the days pass quickly and may this President lead us more justly than those before him.

[cecilfirefox]

33. Thread necromancy, lol!