US Senate blocks debate on gay military policy repeal
Under current policy, gay people are expelled from the military if they reveal their sexual orientation US senators have rejected attempts to open a debate on a bill which included a provision allowing the repeal of the ban on openly gay military personnel.Just 56 senators voted in favour of debating the defence authorisation bill, four short of the 60 required.Gay people can serve in the military, but face expulsion if they reveal their sexuality. US President Barack Obama has promised to scrap the policy.Democrats could still try again later this year to pass the legislation.Reacting to the vote - which split largely along Republican-Democrat party lines - White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said: "We're disappointed at not being able to proceed on the legislation, but we'll keep trying."The BBC's Paul Adams, in Washington, says the vote is a setback for Mr Obama, who had hoped to deliver on a campaign promise to repeal the law - known as "don't ask, don't tell".The Pentagon is conducting a study into how repeal might be implemented, but Republicans, and many in the military, fear that it could damage morale at a time when the armed forces are fighting two wars, our correspondent adds.Procedural tacticEarlier, the only Republican senator to support repealing the law, Susan Collins, said she was withdrawing her support.Her vote was seen as the crucial 60th vote needed to limit debate and advance the bill in the 100-seat Senate.In the event Democratic senators Blanche Lincoln and Mark Pryor both sided with Republicans to block the bill, while Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Democrat, also voted against the measure as a procedural tactic.It is not clear how the Democrats intend to respond to this setback in the Senate, but it seems highly unlikely that President Obama will get his way on gays serving openly in the military before November's mid-term elections.If the Republicans retake control of one or more houses of Congress, then the president may never get his way, our correspondent says
No conservative who goes to bed on Election Night with a tiny lead should rest safe. John Thune learned that against Tim Johnson in South Dakota in 2002. Dino Rossi actually was certified as the winner of Washington state's gubernatorial race in 2004 before having it snatched away. Norm Coleman was upended by Al Franken in Minnesota in 2008. And in Indiana's "Bloody Eighth" district in 1984, Democrats swiped a seat for incumbent Frank McCloskey even after the official count showed Republican Rick McIntyre had won by hundreds of votes.
In short, conservatives can't just win; they need to win each race beyond a steal-able margin. Otherwise, Eric Holder's brigades will find a way to snatch elections away the way armed goons snatched Elian Gonzalez from his Miami relatives, at Holder's orders, in the dark of night.
THESE ARE ALL reasons for concern. They are not, however, reasons for despair. Never in our adult lifetimes have the American grassroots been so on fire, on its own, in a bottom-up movement -- and a movement for all the right things, so well motivated, and so well informed. Never has the choice between mainstream American traditions and radical leftism been so starkly obvious -- not even when George McGovern ran in 1972. And never have the polls for conservatives looked so good for so long. There is much reason to hope, as long as conservatives and Tea Partiers keep their campaign work ethics, keep their energy up, and keeping moving resolutely forward while continuing to swivel their necks enough to watch their backs.
But because the expectations now are so high, a failure to oust the current congressional leadership in at least one House will be treated, universally, as a major defeat, even if conservative ranks grow greatly. Such a "defeat" could be tremendously dispiriting. And that's all the more reason to avoid over-optimism now, so as not to be demoralized later. Optimism is fine right now, but not euphoria.
In sum, conservatives should remain upbeat -- but also sober, and ever-vigilant. Toil and sweat can lead to electoral sunlit uplands. But the latter continues to depend on the former