Obama's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" Repeal To Be Delayed, Report

Washington Times :

President-elect Barack Obama will not move for months, and perhaps not until 2010, to ask Congress to end the military's decades-old ban on open homosexuals in the ranks, two people who have advised the Obama transition team on this issue say.

Repealing the ban was an Obama campaign promise. However, Mr. Obama first wants to confer with the Joint Chiefs of Staff and his new political appointees at the Pentagon to reach a consensus and then present legislation to Congress, the advisers said.

"I think 2009 is about foundation building and reaching consensus," said Aubrey Sarvis, executive director of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network. The group supports military personnel targeted under the ban.

Read the whole story: Washington Times

Comments

[BinKbar]

Another Barry back off.

[Actionmac]

are you folks gonna whine like this for the next 8 years... please let us know so we get put the ig on you.

Barry said this, Barry said that, Barry lied, Barry Barry Barry... rush has a blog go take that whiny sh*t there. We have to many REAL problems to work through. If bush had backed off we would be in a better position. So BACK OFF if your not going to be part of the solution.

[Lisa-G]

You don't think that equal rights is a REAL problem? Do you not recognize that your attitude is part of the problem, therefore YOU are the one who is not going to be a part of the solution?

Yes, you are going to hear some variation of protest forever until this matter of equality is solved to the satisfaction of those of us who are directly affected by this discrimination.

[Rosey]

Who cares about sexual preference? I am straight - but I don't care if you are not. Those who are fighting the rights of gays & lesbians to marry or serve in the military are the people who are probably and secretly gay or lesbian and too afraid to come out of the closet. Get a life people! Everyone has a right to live the life of his or her choosing as long as it is not illegal.

[Retro646]

This DADT policy is absolutely ridiculous­..
as a gay man most of my gay friends or ex boyfriends were all in the military..
about 50% of the gay people i run into served in the military..­.
get over it....
It's time to move on and include everyone in this country...­..
I'm tired of protesting but I will keep on

I hope he does away with this as quickly as possible and admits that he doesn't have a problem with gay marriage.(­not likely but i can hope).

[arspar183]

what's wrong with dadt? as a straight man it would never occur to me to ask any one about their sexual preference any way. it nver has come up any any conversation i have ever had with anyone.

ahh excuse me what;s ure sexual preference by the by. dadt seems ok to me.

[FlamingLibrul]

Obama is doing the right thing, in wanting to build a consensus before trying to repeal DADT. Progress is being made. Recently, over one hundred former high-ranking military figures signed a statement saying they didn't believe homosexuals serving openly was a detriment to military cohesion. Obama needs the support of congress; both Republicans and Democrats, to change the policy for good and avoid mass hysteria among the wingnuts.

[reliant1]

Clinton reversed it without handling it right and look what happened - here we are. Obama needs to do this thing the right way...not leaving loopholes in military law etc. Better to do it once and do it right.
If Clinton had cared as much this would all be old news.

[StephenDedalus82]

No matter how stupid their opinions, rightwingers always shout the loudest and whine the most. They're gonna be on Obama like hawks, looking for any leftward tilt in social policy so they can sound the alarm and plaster it all over Drudge and the Rush propaganda network. I'm so tired of their ignorant bullying delaying progress.

[snesich]

President Obama should eliminate this awful DADT restriction through Executive Order. Done. Then, when the extremist right-wingers scream, his people can calmly say, "It's time to move on and talk about our nation's economy." Then it will be over.

The biggest weapon that the homophobes and the conservatives can wield against the elimination is the fear of the unknown. "How bad it is going to be." "What will happen if?" "Our boys will be raped in the showers." "It will reduce troop morale." Etc. etc. etc....

If DADT is eliminated, on day one, and as the weeks and months go by, and people simply adjust to it, the argument for reinstating it becomes discredited every day. "Do you want to wallow in the past, or do you want to face the future. There are more important things in front of us. Do you hear any people in our armed services talking about a reduction in troop morale?"

The homophobes and the haters----and those Republicans who would try to gain from this politically---will have the rug pulled out from under them if President Obama swiftly and decisively eliminates DADT by executive order.

There won't be a "gay issue" for the right-wing to run on in the future, if Obama has the courage and the insight to eliminate this backward, dumb and counterproductive policy.

[Hawka]

Isn't DADT a law though? You need Congressional approval, so its not going to go out on day one and until he builds a consensus anyway, and with the way most of the GOP is sqwaking that isn't happening anytime soon.

[weatherwaxx]

I clearly recall seeing Obama answer questions on this issue in more than one interview. He said he wanted to eliminate the military gay ban in a way that would be effective and permanent -- through law.

An Exec Order can cancel an Exec Order -- Obama's planning to lift the birth-control gag order, the stem-cell research ban, and several other of Bush's more obnoxious edicts.

If he elminates DADT by EO, another EO could undo it. Obama will be facing a bunch of very angry Bible-bangers in 2012, and you KNOW there are thousands who would vote against Obama -- no matter how good a President he is -- if the Republicans could promise to sign a gay ban back into effect on Jan 20, 2013.

If he takes it through Congress, educates the American public (demonstrating that, for instance, NATO troops have been integrated for over a decade), and gets support from the military brass, there's a much better chance of making the change stick.

I think lasting change is better than instant change that could be cancelled with another stroke of the pen.

[JohnnySmith]

I don't think an executive order could overturn it. It's been established by the Supreme Court that all sodomy laws are illegal. What constitutional grounds could a later president use for removing a group's constitutional rights?

[Grunty1]

Another president who, like Bush, sees the Constitutuion has a "d@mn piece of paper" and a supporting party more interested in power and wealth than rule of law.

[DarkandStormyNight]

Unfortunately the same knuckle heads who put them there in the first place. Using the law instead of executive order is the best way to go for a long terms solution and fairness to our service men and women. Unfortunately, the right to due process is not applied the same way to the military. There are strikingly harsh differences between a Court Martail and a trial by jury.

[jsarets]

It takes an act of Congress to reform the Uniform Code, which holds that sodomy is grounds for dishonorable discharge. An Executive Order is not sufficient.

The only reasonable arguments against gays in the military are basically that it would disrupt squad unity and that the armed services should not be used as an instrument of social change. But those who agree with this must also note that the same arguments were made decades ago against blacks in the military. Did they disrupt the unit? Perhaps initially, but the unit got over it, and the unit got better. Since then, millions of black Americans have served honorably, and blacks have risen to the ranks of four-star General, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and very shortly Commander in Chief.

We send our young men and women -- sometimes not very judiciously -- to fight for the ideals of a nation born from the will to be free. What can be more important than the right to serve your country without compromising or hiding who you are and what you believe? Ahmadinejad claims that Iran doesn't have any gay people, and the military forces committed to opposing such repressive regimes hold themselves to the same low standards. So what exactly are we fighting for?

[zepfan81]

From what I've been told by friends of mine most of the people in the military don't care about it anyway. It's usually just the older officer corp that make a big deal about it. The problem I've heard is the parents of the soldiers write their congress persons in opposition to it. We must remember the military is made up mostly of poor and middle class small town whites, blacks, and Hispanics all of which tend to be a bit more homophic than other groups.

[weatherwaxx]

Um.. if "the military is made up mostly of poor and middle class small town whites, blacks, and Hispanics all of which tend to be a bit more homophic than other groups," that contradicts "most of the people in the military don't care about it anyway. It's usually just the older officer corp that make a big deal about it."

There have been enough gay-hate murders in the military to prove that there is a problem. But problems are not insurmountable.

If the trouble mostly comes from Sonny Boy writing home to Mamma to complain that he thinks one of the men in his squad is gay ... I'm sorry, I expect you're 100% correct, but that's just silly. Are his parents more worried that one of his bunkmates will ask him for a date than they are about him getting shot in combat? Weird priorities.

[weatherwaxx]

Um.. if "the military is made up mostly of poor and middle class small town whites, blacks, and Hispanics all of which tend to be a bit more homophic than other groups," that contradicts "most of the people in the military don't care about it anyway. It's usually just the older officer corp that make a big deal about it."

There have been enough murders in the military to prove that there is a problem. But problems are not insurmountable.

If the trouble mostly comes from Sonny Boy writing home to Mamma to complain that he thinks one of the men in his squad is gay ... I'm sorry, I expect you're 100% correct, but that's just silly. Are his parents more worried that one of his bunkmates will ask him for a date than they are about him getting shot in combat? Weird priorities.

[JohnnySmith]

Actually, Texas v Lawrence struck down all sodomy laws. The only thing that Obama would need to do is give an executive order, but he won't. Just like his new hawkish, neocon administration and a Democratic majority willing to stick a knife in the backs of union members who helped elect them, Obama said what he needed to say to get elected. We're all on our own now.

[weatherwaxx]

Military law, too? That's a bit different from civilian law.

[reliant1]

Sodomy laws mean nothing. He can reverse it and then another President can reverse it back. Obama wants to do it right this time. Some other consequences to be ready for
will be a return to keeping all the fraternization laws and maybe increases in penalties.

Give Obama time. He needs to not be hijacked into making the big choices for the instant newsy flourishes only to lose it all later.

[JohnnySmith]

In Lawrence v Texas, the United States struck down all sodomy laws, which would include the Uniform Code. All Obama has to do is sign an executive order.

[Grunty1]

From what I understand of it, the military code holds that any sexual relationship between members is banned due to its potential effects on morale and infighting. So how is any sodomy rule even relevent?

[zepfan81]

Come on people, don't be selfish. Do you have any idea what this guy is going to have to deal with right off the bat? He has to prioritize. Lifting the ban on gays isn't as simple as it sounds.

[ProudLiberalDan]

I know, I know. Get to the back of the bus with us.

[hortonhearsawho]

Odd how bullets do not discriminate.

[DarkandStormyNight]

Here, here.

[canobserv]

Wow we all need to stop listening to the "advisors" ....of anyone... and be a little patient...­.you know....to see what ACTUALLY happens


Man I am starting to get a headache

[ensure]

EU wants early foreign policy focus from Obama: http://www.sefermpost.com/sefermpost/2008/11/eu-wants-early-foreign-policy-focus-from-obama.html

[MargaretO]

This comment is pending approval and won't be displayed until it is approved.

If you read the entire article you might understand it is more than just a stro.ke of a pen. There needs to be a lot of thought into policies to protect people along with a lot of other issues. There are still many in the military who don't take kindly to gays. I know it sounds du.mb, but it's true.

[liberaldemdave]

we in the glbt community have spent our entire lives surrounded by people who "don't take kindly to gays". it's time for politicians, including O, to stop pandering to us for votes and then not following through on their promises.

[Dave01]

Dave, I understand and share the frustration. I lost my partner in 2000. He died in a car accident, his mother sued me for HIS half of the house and was successful because we weren't, gasp......­married. I was booted out of the military in 1992 for being gay. None of the members of my unit cared about my sexual orientation because they knew that 1. I was in a relationship, and 2. I believed in the "brootherhood" that is developed among peers in the military.

BUT, give him time. He thinks things through. He wants to make sure that we are safely serving in the military. He understands that if all of the gays "came out" all at once, there would be havoc run a muck. He wants to make sure this is done right.

Anyway, when it comes to military issues, NOTHING is done quickly it is one of the largest bureaucracies that exist in the US. It will take time, but he will get it done.

[harriscrl3]

Obama doesnt do anything without thinking it through something else that his supporters dont seem to get about him. He is a very careful and deliberate decision maker not all impulsive

Carol

[MargaretO]

If you read the entire article you might understand it is more than just a stroke of a pen. There needs to be a lot of thought into policies to protect people along with a lot of other issues. There are still many in the military who don't take kindly to gays. I know it sounds dumb, but it's true.