Comments on: NY Sen. to introduce bill to stop gay military discharges?

By: planetspinz

planetspinz — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 18:32:11 +0000

Heterosupremacist in Chief Obama might not sign an amendment or any bill ending Don’t Ask Just Kick the Fags Out, as he is still asking the old white good old bad old boys military massahs what to do.

Obama would rather see fascists and felons replace fags, all in the name of military unity.

Obama is keeping his promises to his supporters who voted for Prop Hate in California.

By: CHARLIE

CHARLIE — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 18:25:50 +0000

John said: Kari-he would sign it if it reached his desk.
John. Have I got a deal for you! I have this historic bridge here in NYC that I can sell to you very cheap due to the harsh economic times. You can even use President Obama’s pen to sign the contract of sale! Get back to me asap as tnis deal, unlike DADT, won’t last long!

By: interested

interested — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 18:19:23 +0000

I agree with several of the commenters. This seems to me to be a very workable strategy.

A moratorium on dismissals in a time of war when the armed services are having trouble recruiting (and continuously lowering standards) is “easier” for people to either vote for or just not oppose than a complete dismissal of the DADT policy. Plus after time goes on, it makes it ever continuously harder for opponents to claim that ending DADT would harm the military.

From a purely strategic viewpoint, it would also be good strategy for those who support DADT to support a moratorium because if they really believe it would be a failure this would be a good way to prove it.

It may not be all that we want, but to me it seems like a pretty good strategy.

By: CHARLIE

CHARLIE — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 18:12:45 +0000

So, the appointed (to fill the term of the sainted Hilary) junior senator from conservative upstate NY has more guts and
and honor than our “Fierce Advocate”, the Commander-in-Bullshit! He could do this LEGALLY with a Stop/Lose order, which he should have done on day one in office. Our REAL allies are trying to force the coward’s hand while greasing the wheels in Congress to repeal DADT. The military brass abhor any change and I suspect, is riddled with fundies. While Obama studies the issue, careers, relationships and even the lives of our brothers and sisters in uniform are being destroyed. I wonder how long Ireland and South Africa studied the issue? Perhaps he should study Truman, who had SOME resistance to change from the brass and the war hero five star Gen. MacArthur. As Commander-in-Chief he ordered them and when they didn’t comply he fired them! During the Korean War BTW! Lead, Follow or get the hell out of the way! No Stop/Lose order, then how about Paterson/Gillibrand in 2012!

By: Gerry Fisher

Gerry Fisher — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 17:04:08 +0000

>More underwhelming advocacy from the political party that could rightfully claim itself to be the new GOP. We’ve traded an elephant for a jackass otherwise it’s all the same

I remember this rhetoric. It was 2000. Because both political parties are equivalent, a vote for Al Gore and George W. Bush is virtually the same. Many decided to register protest votes for Ralph Nader.

Worked real great in 2000.

You suggesting we try it again?

By: Gerry Fisher

Gerry Fisher — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 16:58:37 +0000

>I don’t see why this legistration is necessary. Instead wasting time, why don’t Congress just vote to repeal DADT now

Because, emotionally, both congress and the military are not ready to support a complete end to DADT. Emotions are a more powerful predictor of behavior than logic.

Passing this law could prevent damage to those already serving, and could buy a bit more time for those squeamish politicians and military people who are almost-but-not-quite-there yet.

By: Gerry Fisher

Gerry Fisher — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 16:56:31 +0000

This sounds like a good, interim step. Good idea!

By: Twisted Pride

Twisted Pride — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 04:11:06 +0000

What about all the gay men and women discharged in the last two decades, that lost their retirements and dignity? Are they going to be compensated and get an honorable discharge finally?

By: LOrion

LOrion — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 03:33:24 +0000

MoJo you are correct, if you are not following this on the Knights Out or another anti-DADT site there is not much here.
Also, this is correct:”The military is a lot more conservative than the general population. Obama is taking his advise from Gates and General Mullen who are both advocating a more cautious approach.”

…. BUT THIS IS WRONG.”Obama can sign a million executive orders, DADT is law and he can never undo it without Congress.”
By definition OBAMA can sign an executive Moratorium because we are at war, he signs it as Commander in Chief. But he will not spend ANY political capital on GLBT rights, because Rahm Emmanuel is still living in l993!

By: Rob

Rob — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 03:10:52 +0000

@Nick: Certainly Obama can issue Executive Order or even go as far to stop loss troops that are currently being discharged. Leadership doesn’t just have to come from the President. I had this conversation with a friend last week and basically told him that the problem with Congress is that they move slow and often get things wrong. What’s more important is not pushing someone else to fix the problem… It’s making sure the people responsible for creating it don’t allow the problems to continue. In the bigger picture… The process is what has to work. I think this is a great move… I would strongly encourage anyone reading this to write up an e-mail to their Congressman asking them to support it.