Subscribe to Breaking NewsVanasco: Obama caving on Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell?
This is what I was worried about.
According to the Washington Times, Obama’s team is saying that even ASKING for a repeal of the ban on open gays in the military may not happen until 2010. First, he wants to build consensus.
Fair enough.
But it seems to me that consensus is already built – or at least as much as it’s going to be. Earlier this week, 104 retired generals and admirals called for DADT’s repeal.
A former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff spoke out against DADT in 2007. So did a former Secretary of Defense. 143 members of the House have co-sponsored a bill to overturn the policy; a bill approved by the House Committee on Armed Services.
We know the US military needs more soldiers to fight the two wars we are engaged in – last year alone, 627 servicemembers were dismissed under the DADT. The military needs servicemembers and gays want to serve.
You know what else? DADT is expensive. In February 2006, a University of California Blue Ribbon Commission concluded that so far, it has cost the government (meaning, us, the taxpayers) $363 million.
Don’t Ask is a failed policy. The only people who don’t think so are homophobes.
I understand what Obama is trying to do here. He’s trying to avoid a Clintonesque debacle like the one that gave us DADT in the first place.
But of everything we’re fighting for, DADT seems like it’s the least controversial and would make the most sense. If this isn’t even being looked at until 2010, then when is he going to start making good on his campaign promise of federal civil unions? When (if) he’s re-elected?
I’ve got a better idea. Why doesn’t Obama name a gay person – like Col. Margarethe Cammermeyer, say – as Secretary of Defense? That would signal real change – and give gays and lesbians real hope.
In 1992, Bill Clinton promised to roll the Chiefs and everyone else and ban discrimination against gay men and lesbians in the armed forces with a stroke of his pen. Anyone else remember what an unalloyed triumph that turned out to be?
Wake up, people. OF COURSE the groundwork has to be laid before a statute is repealed!
blacksteel, yes I am a Libertarian. I want the government to stay out of my life and out of my pocket. (Something I fear that Obama will completely ignore.)
And yes. I was actually recruited away from a social work job that I had held for over 7 years. Apparently, one of the directors did not know that I was gay and asked that I be “laid off.” It hurt and it sucked when it happened. But ya know, I took the opportunity to go in a completely different direction. The profession that I now hold is with a company that has a perfect score on gay rights. I also am well respected and make more than I could have ever made doing social work.
And the Dems are throwing the non het community under the bus yet again; how predictable.
DADT and DOMA are both acts of congress so any pressure on their repeal should be on Rep. Pelosi and Sen. Reid. So they will bring the issue up before their respective house in congress.
Obama needs only to sign the repeals passed by both houses of congress (assuming they pass). Then Obama would be responsible for executing them.
Change is a great slogan to campaign under. Unfortunately, like most politicians it seems Obama will fail to follow through when he meets any kind of resistance. He may have won the American people with his charisma and empty promises – but to keep them on his side he’s going to have to follow through.
Nikki, Obama is changing. He’s changing everything back to the days of Bill Clinton. With all the former Clintonites being named to his cabinet, it’s like Deja Vu all over again.
The man wants to be Bill Clinton So Bad That I have one word of warning for him….
Watch out where you shoot when there are blue dresses around.
2010 is only one year after he begins office. Sounds reasonable to me.
But lets hold Obama to 2010 and start demanding of our congresspeople at this time that we see a dropping of Don’t Ask in the year 2010. And in 2010, I expect and demand one antigay law after another to fall like dominos. And I plan to keep up the pressure on my congreespeople like I always have in the past on gay issues.
Almost every western country permits gay men and women to serve openly in their military forces. Even our closest ally, the UK, permits it and whose military actively recruits gay men and women to sign up. What is the excuse for the U.S. to drag its heels on this one? There is absolutely NONE! Prior to the UK enacting the civil partnership law in 2005, a law that confers all the rights of marriage without the name at the national level, foreign born partners of British gay people were and still are allowed to enter the UK, reside and work there. We don’t even have that, let alone the eradication of DADT. What is wrong with us, why are we so behind the rest of the civilized world? We should be the leaders, not the followers if we claim to be the greatest nation on earth. Seems like the greatest “wuss” nation on earth to me. Our nation needs to grow a pair, grow up and move on and get with the program.
We’re in a weird period. Consensus *is* built outside of the military, but it is *not* built *within* the military community. Plus, the military community has a culture of control, where they feel that they are the masters of their own destination. So, I’m imagining that something needs to be set up to create the appearance that the military themselves have come up with the idea to do away with DODT and will get rid of it themselves. I know how twisted that sounds, but it’s politics (read: “human and group emotional dynamics”).
Robert, exactly!!
Even more so,, why are gay people so happy with the fact that we’re behind every western country!?! Why do they seem to think moving at slower than a snail’s pace is progress?!? Why?
This is going to sound cheesy and patriotic so bare with me. The United States of America has the overwhelming capacity to innovate, to create, to surpass and to lead. Our country, for all its faults and there are plenty, is the home to most of the modern technological innovations from the planes to the internet. There is no excuse under the sun, for us not to demand and fight for IMMEDIATE progress, because we’ve had it before. We have been force fed the tranquilizing drug of gradualism for far far far too long. We were told back in the 1990s that Clinton was the best we could get and that we needed to wait wait wait and wait some more. Then when Al Gore picked that horribly homophobic insurance industry lobbyist Lieberman, who sponsored DOMA and voted down most gay rights legislation, of course people voted for Nader. From Clinton to Bush, most countries have zoomed past us at the speed of light, banning not only employment discrimination but also passing laws granting marriage equality. Spain, which had been a dictatorship in the 1970s, went from Catholic theocracy to modern nation in less than 25 years. South Africa had apartheid until the early 1990s, they had a sodomy law until 1999, but now even they have marriage equality. Spain has plenty of Roman Catholics and tons of people to resist gay rights legislation and marriage equality, yet with unbelievable speed they elect Zapatero and have marriage equality the next week. Why not here?
Change can be as RAPID or as slow as we want, but change will never happen unless we push NOW. If we keep saying let’s wait until 2009, 2010, 2012 or 2072,, it will take us longer. We need to work for change NOW, not next year, not next decade, NOW. It may take a while for change to happen, but nothing will happen unless we work for change NOW and not later. There will NEVER be perfect conditions for change, there will always be resistance, so we must continually push ahead with all deliberate speed.
In 1960, when President Kennedy was elected, the Soviets were launching satellites and people into space. Yuri Gagarin was the first man in space. President Kennedy pushed for the US to put a man on the moon in that decade, not to wait longer. He wanted the US to win the space race and to stay ahead of the Soviets. People scoffed at him, we had to deal with disasters, yet despite those challenges we put a man on the moon. Kennedy didn’t live long enough to see the fruits of his efforts. But I believe that if he had won re-election in 64, he would have pushed for NASA to move faster. Just like putting a man on the moon, which is a costly task, we need to forge ahead on gay rights legislation and marriage equality. We don’t need to wait for history to catch up, we need to be the ones making history. If America can invent the internet, the plane, put a man on the moon, then there is no reason why we should think America needs 100 years or more to pass meaningful gay rights legislation and marriage equality.
>The Obama apologists are blind to reason.
Let me get this right: through your closed minds and “he’s bad” colored glasses, you judge the guy before he’s done one official task as president, and you’re some kind of beacon of reason? Give me a break.
You might turn out to be right, but please stop pretending that you *know* and we don’t. We’re all trying to figure this out as we go, but none of us *know*.
Get out of Conjecture Land and come back into Reasonable Land.
I was reading this wonderful article on the Military Brat. I myself am a military brat twice over, my dad was in the USMC and my step dad was in the Army. My mom had a thing for military guys I guess. But anyway. This article explained how kids of military servicemen and women often develop a culture around the base and their lifestyle. They talked about the extreme patriotic sentiment, but what I really found interesting the culture of anti-racism. In the military, due to the mix of cultures and races represented, the US armed forces not only prohibits discrimination, but enforces strict rules against slander and slurs based on race. The kids who grow up in this environment not only are they not racist, they’re anti-racist, meaning they will actively confront racist behavior, words and actions. While I never grew up on a base, I know plenty of people, gay and straight, black, white, latino, Muslim, Jewish etc who did and they fit the bill to the t. When I came out, it was my dad who was the most accepting. The military was once a very segregated institution, yet when they were forced to embrace integration they did so and they imposed a culture of non-racism. What we need the military to do NOW is to embrace non-discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and impose anti-homophobia in the same way the armed services embraced anti-racism. The military brats I know, are often some of the most forward thinking people I’ve met, so the resistance will come mostly from the usual suspects not so much from the military itself.
The Israeli Defense Forces which have been taking gays in for years, has become part of the gay scene in Israel. Gay kids from the country side, often serve in the IDF and this is where they develop strong bonds with their other soldiers gay and straight, who often support them when they come out. Israel, like the US, has more than their fair share of religious lunatics, but the IDF itself is a bubble against sexism, racism and homophobia. There is NO legitimate and logical reason behind maintaining DADT other than pure animus against gay and lesbian persons. All this talk about showers and close living quarters, etc is nothing but balderdash(aka bullshit).
Anyway.
Gerry – I *know* he said he doesn’t believe in gay marriage. That alone is enough for me not to trust the man on gay rights.
Gerry said: “Get out of Conjecture Land”. –Obama has made it very clear that he wants to segregate gays into a 2nd class marriage status. The Supreme Court of Connecticut recently ruled that Obama’s favored policy of civil unions are in fact DISCRIMINATORY TO GAY PEOPLE. That is not the land of “conjecture” that is a fact!
If someone’s opposition to marriage equality isn’t enough to withhold support, what is? Marriage is a fundamental right, FUNDAMENTAL right. To believe gays and lesbians don’t have the right to marry is to believe we’re not human beings.
Believing that gays and lesbians shouldn’t have the right to marry is akin to saying we shouldn’t be issued birth certificates, passports or even driver’s license. It is a basic fundamental right of a human being to have the right to marry. People have fought, killed and died for lesser rights than marriage, and you believe that we should support someone who OPPOSE the most human of human rights? How fucking dare you!!?!?
Marriage equality is about more than just a word, more than just a concept, it is about gay and lesbian persons being human beings equal in rights and dignity to heterosexuals. Marriage is and has always been a civil contract, and thus it is a civil right. Marriage is among those rights so basic, so fundamental, so elementary in their scope that most law books don’t even have them written down because they expected people to understand them without needing help. For Obama to oppose marriage equality is akin to white people opposing black marriage. Gay people are not asking for special rights(ie civil unions or domestic partnership) but more and more so we are demanding equal rights. If Obama cannot understand that marriage is a fundamental human right then he cannot be trusted on any other issue regarding gays and lesbians.
What you said, is very much like saying “Just because Mr Duke wants to lynch black and interracial couples doesn’t mean he can’t be trusted to enforce civil rights”. In fact, anyone who doesn’t understand and support marriage equality cannot be trusted on any issue.