Originally Posted by BruceChris
But that to do so publicly would cost him too much political capital. Now if some powerful group, like a state, were to attack DOMA, progress with public opinion or in the courts could be made to happen without hurting him. And that would help us.
When a politician who is running for office wants the public to hear something very damaging to his opponent, but doesn't want to give the impression that he is going negative, he may use an Attack Dog, that can't be traced back to him.
Just a thought.
Namaste', Bruce Chris
And to continue that thought... A young heterosexual Iraqi War Vet in the House of Representatives has just introduced legislation in the House to repeal DADT with 150+ co-authors. Now, did the administration approach him and ask him to get the ball rolling so that the President could sign a bill that he says he supports but doesn't have to use his own political capital to initiate it? I guess we'll never know ... but if I wanted to get legislation through but didn't want to make it a presidential priority and draw all the lightening to myself ... I think I might do JUST that.
Who better to counter the arguments that it will interfere with military effectiveness than someone who was recently in an active duty combat unit? What better way for a young first term Representative to gain influence in the party than to take on a special mission from the head of his party (and the Commander in chief) ?
I'm just sayin that there are multiple ways to skin a cat ... and that's one of them.