A Deal on DADT?

[NickCole]

Um, no not really. Not if people care about their jobs. With the current plan, the military will put in place the nondiscrimination policy, so no gays cannot be discriminated against as that will be against the regulations. It will just not be against the law. The military has all sorts of rules that soldiers have to follow that are not laws.

Wrong.

The repeal will go into effect if Obama and the Secretary of Defense and Chairman of Joint Chiefs sign off on the review after December. And there's no timeline in which they're required to do so.

And there is no non-discrimination language included to protect gays and lesbians from discrimination based on sexual orientation.

 

[hotatlboi]

The repeal will go into effect if Obama and the Secretary of Defense and Chairman of Joint Chiefs sign off on the review after December. And there's no timeline in which they're required to do so.

And? You're seriously suggesting they would not sign it after they have all expressed support for repeal?

And there is no non-discrimination language included to protect gays and lesbians from discrimination based on sexual orientation.

Can you even read?

Once again, the non-discrimination language would be made via military regulation, not statute. It will exist, it would just not be as strong.

 

[NickCole]

And? You're seriously suggesting they would not sign it after they have all expressed support for repeal?

Oh please.

To anybody who's paid attention the past year and a half you sound ridiculous being all surprised at the suggestion Obama might not follow through with something he expresses support for.

Can you even read?

Once again, the non-discrimination language would be made via military regulation, not statute. It will exist, it would just not be as strong.

It needs to be in the law.

 

[hotatlboi]

Oh please.

Oh please is indeed the thought that comes to mind from your suggestion.

Yes, Obama has lobbied for more than half a year for movement on ending DADT, starting with his SOTU speech, to see all the preliminary testimony and hearings and negotiations with the military happen, to see Congress finally act, to see repeal progress to the point where it just requires his signature, and then.....

he doesn't sign!



That's off the absurdo meter even for you.

 

[NickCole]

And all this may be moot anyway, if the votes aren't there. Without the vigorous support of the President and Secretary of Defense, some votes may not come through.

Republican Susan Collins has said she'll vote for it. But Democrats Ben Nelson and Robert Byrd are still questionable. And Republican Scott Brown, being from MA, could be a swing vote if Obama and Gates lobbied him.

Now's the time for Obama to be our fierce advocate. We'll see if the support he expressed is what he delivers.

 

[NickCole]

Oh please is indeed the thought that comes to mind from your suggestion.

Yes, Obama has lobbied for more than half a year for movement on ending DADT, starting with his SOTU speech, to see all the preliminary testimony and hearings and negotiations with the military happen, to see Congress finally act, to see repeal progress to the point where it just requires his signature, and then.....

he doesn't sign!



That's off the absurdo meter even for you.

Sorry bub, I'm the one who was right about Obama.

Maybe someday you'll catch up.

Unlikely though.

 

[opinterph]

In 1992 gays were prohibited from serving under any circumstance by statute.

It is my understanding that the pre-DADT prohibition was based on DoD policy – not statute.


June 1992:

According to DOD officials, U.S. forces have had policies prohibiting homosexuals from serving in the military since the beginning of World War II. DOD’S current policy on homosexuality was formalized in 1982 and specifically states that:

Homosexuality is incompatible with military service. The presence in the military environment of persons who engage in homosexual conduct or who, by their statements, demonstrate a propensity to engage in homosexual conduct, seriously impairs the accomplishment of the military mission. The presence of such members adversely affects the ability of the Military Services to maintain discipline, good order, and morale; to foster mutual trust and confidence among service members; to ensure the integrity of the system of rank and command; to facilitate assignment and worldwide deployment of service members who frequently must live and work under close conditions affording minimal privacy; to recruit and retain members of the Military Services; to maintain public acceptability of military service; and to prevent breaches of security.

[GAO Report to Congress]

 

[thewiz]

There are several things that are in play on this repeal plan.

1. The Democrats are in trouble. They read the polls; I talk to their staffs. They are going to need the left, gays, and everyone else come this fall to retain control of Congress and beat off challenges in key districts. In other words, they need the gay vote. Both the president and the congressional leaders have been paying lip service and recent vocal challenges have them worried that they may need to deliver.

2. Dems who truly care about repealing DADT and passing legislation such as EDNA realize that if they keep control of both houses, it is likely to be with much less superiority. They had a fillibuster proof majority and have literally blown that power because they could not keep everyone on the same page. I blame congressional leadership -- or lack thereof-- for the situation. They were handed the keys and then wanted to constantly try to ask others to drive...bullshit.

3. The Dems are worried because of the debacles that have taken place this year -- namely health care legislation and stimulus spending. I'm not sure who was doing their PR, but they should be fired. They were outmaneuvered and painted as "big" when they were trying to meet basic needs. They had the bully pulpit and yet couldn't deliver. Then when they did deliver, it was so larded up the president had to come in and practically start over.

4. Republicans are loving the self-imploding Dems. They are feeding the masses, particularly the right. At the same time, Democratic leaders are asking for input, they give it, the leadership ignores it and the Republicans can again scream "why bother."

With that background, this appears another way that something can be passed, but not really because it needs to wait for a study at some later time and then be implemented. I would agree with Gates that they should just wait and do it. But I also recognize they may have even less votes come the fall and gridlock may preclude even this much getting done.

In the meantime, I was just with a group of active duty military friends last night who are shipping out to Iraq, Afghanistan, and Central America -- seemed ironic that you can't ask or tell but you can bleed...

 

[metta]

GETEQUAL CO-FOUNDER KIP WILLIAMS ARRESTED AT OBAMA EVENT:
INTERVIEW, VIDEO

http://www.towleroad.com/2010/05/ge...illiams-arrested-at-obama-eventinterview.html

 

[metta]

Rep. Patrick Murphy Explains It All: Why The DADT Compromise Is Essential.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PPROndLY4No&feature=player_embedded[/ame]

 

[NickCole]

GETEQUAL CO-FOUNDER KIP WILLIAMS ARRESTED AT OBAMA EVENT:
INTERVIEW, VIDEO

http://www.towleroad.com/2010/05/ge...illiams-arrested-at-obama-eventinterview.html

At the end of the second video Obama says, about what Kip Williams said:

"... he said do it faster, man. It's like, I'm dealin with Congress here! It takes a little bit of time."

Obama is such a pathelogical liar he can't help himself.

Congress is trying to get it done now, it's Obama who's dragging his feet.

 

[metta]

Get over gay fear, U.S. allies advise

http://digg.com/d31SCjZ


http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/37787.html

 

[hotatlboi]

Sorry bub, I'm the one who was right about Obama.

Maybe someday you'll catch up.

Unlikely though.

No, you weren't. You screamed and cried about how Obama was not doing anything to help gays and that DADT would not be repealed. Well look now, it's just about ready to get repealed.

Obama could complete every single one of his campaign pledges on gay rights and it would still not be enough for you.

Let me remind you that this is the second major issue on gay rights that is now getting traction which would not have gone anywhere if Obama was not the president.

 

[hotatlboi]

It is my understanding that the pre-DADT prohibition was based on DoD policy – not statute.

Ok, my bad. However NickCole's post was still in error. In 1992 they were prohibited from serving by regulation, now they will be permitted to serve by regulation, so this is not a return to 1992.

 

[hotatlboi]

I'm trying to tell you that the conditions in the military after an administrative repeal of DADT will make it practically impossible to impose a ban like DADT ever again.

So really we agree then. As I've already stated I agree that it would be difficult, since open service would then be the norm. However it would not be out of the realm of possibility since nondiscrimination is not part of the law.

 

[NickCole]

No, you weren't. You screamed and cried about how Obama was not doing anything to help gays and that DADT would not be repealed. Well look now, it's just about ready to get repealed.

Obama could complete every single one of his campaign pledges on gay rights and it would still not be enough for you.

Let me remind you that this is the second major issue on gay rights that is now getting traction which would not have gone anywhere if Obama was not the president.

This is not happenning because of Obama, it's happening despite his resistance, with Obama's "grudging" approval.

This is happening because of a handful of tenacious gays pushing hard for it, and some members of Congress who've been willing to help us.

It's not because Obama is President, any Democratic President would have signed the hate crimes bill, and some other Democrats would have actually worked with Congress, not resisted them, to repeal DADT, and at least parts of DOMA.

 

[NotThatCreative]

It's not because Obama is President, any Democratic President would have signed the hate crimes bill, and some other Democrats would have actually worked with Congress, not resisted them, to repeal DADT, and at least parts of DOMA.

Have we ever had a president or candidate from one of the two major parties that favored same-sex marriage? That's just the way this country works. If you intend to get power, you can't favor that. The only 2008 Republican primary candidate who did was Congressman Paul and he supports DOMA. The only 2008 Democrat primary candidates who did were the ones like Congressman Kucinich who had no chance of getting the nomination.

On DADT, I don't see the harm in letting the DoD finish its study first. Seems kind of pointless to have a study on the effects of DADT repeal conducted after DADT was repealed. The study will be done this year, and DADT could be repealed after the midterms (which I'm sure the president would appreciate that...). Am I happy they're moving forward? Yes. But I don't begrudge them a few months for a study to be conducted. That's very much in President Obama's style anyway, to conduct a study on the effects of something before making a decision. And that's a part of his style I (by and large) approve of.

 

[NickCole]

Have we ever had a president or candidate from one of the two major parties that favored same-sex marriage? That's just the way this country works. If you intend to get power, you can't favor that. The only 2008 Republican primary candidate who did was Congressman Paul and he supports DOMA. The only 2008 Democrat primary candidates who did were the ones like Congressman Kucinich who had no chance of getting the nomination.

Doesn't matter if they support same sex marriage just like it doesn't matter if they'd have an abortion or approve of their wife having one. What matters is public policy and what the candidates say they'll do versus what they do.

Barack Obama is a liar, he says one thing and does another. He's been doing that since he was State Senator, and most likely long before. And he'll continue to because that's part of his character.

Obama and Clinton both said they'd repeal DADT and DOMA. Only difference was Obama said he'd repeal all of DOMA and Clinton said she'd repeal only parts of it, a distinction Obama and his supporters made a big point of highlighting. Then soon after becoming Secretary of State Clinton did everything she could to provide equal rights to gay employees of the State Department and their partners, the absolute most she could do with the power she had. Obama did nothing about DOMA and still hasn't. He only followed Clinton's lead about gay Federal employees when he had to placate gays after high profile gay donors refused to attend a Dem fundraiser (though that still is not law and Clinton's directive has been providing equal rights to gay employees of State for a year).

That's what we know. We also know Hillary Clinton was the first First Lady to march with gays at Gay Pride and that Mrs. Obama didn't follow Hillary's lead as First Lady.

Again, it doesn't matter what any of them think of same sex marriage, what matters is what they DO.

On DADT, I don't see the harm in letting the DoD finish its study first. Seems kind of pointless to have a study on the effects of DADT repeal conducted after DADT was repealed. The study will be done this year, and DADT could be repealed after the midterms (which I'm sure the president would appreciate that...). Am I happy they're moving forward? Yes. But I don't begrudge them a few months for a study to be conducted. That's very much in President Obama's style anyway, to conduct a study on the effects of something before making a decision. And that's a part of his style I (by and large) approve of.

The study is unnecessary. Studies have been done, results can be reviewed. The harm in waiting is that Dems are likely to lose a lot of Congressional seats in November and it'll probably be impossible to repeal DADT after that. It's revealing that Obama's study will be completed a month after the elections.

It'd be another lost opportunity brought to you by ObamaCo.

 

[hotatlboi]

This is not happenning because of Obama, it's happening despite his resistance, with Obama's "grudging" approval.

As usual, you're completely delusional.

Obama is not resisting DADT repeal, lmfao. He was the one who first called for its repeal. Had the White House not chosen to make it a priority for their agenda earlier this year, the Congress would not now be examining it.

Just because Obama has not referenced it in every speech he has given does not mean he does not support it.

As I stated previously, the White House told the Pentagon earlier this year that DADT repeal was on the agenda, and that they should proceed on a "when, not if" basis. Everything has proceeded from there.

 

[palemale]

I'm constantly amazed at the hypocrisy of those who have nothing but love and adoration for the president who signed DADT into law, and nothing but contempt for the president who will sign its repeal because it isn't being repealed fast enough.