Dems Won't Move On "Don't Ask Don't Tell" Very Soon

It looks like the Democrats won't be moving quickly on one particular issue that is favored by many in the party base, Roll Call reports: Repealing "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" and allowing gays to openly serve in the military.

"It ought to be re-examined and it ought to be on the agenda, but it shouldn't be very high on the agenda," said Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI). "There are just too many other more important things to do."

Read the whole story here.

Comments

[formerprosecutor]

My first 18 years in Criminal Justice was spend as a law enforcement officer in a large city. It never dawned on me to care or inquire what or who my shift partners were involved with in their private lives. As long as they had my back and did their job, they were OK by me. I will NEVER understand what gender, race, religion, or sexual perference has to do with competency in the field.

Obviously, the extortion issue would be moot, if everyone was free to come out of the closet without risking their job.

[ajax2]

It would be a neo-con wet dream to push DADT to the front burner. It appears that repug trolls are pushing it here. The question is not 'walking and chewing gum', but will it damage saving the constitution and the economy, yes it will.

[TheMoor]

This country has a lot bigger problems than worrying about who is sleeping with who...

[Coinyer101]

then dont ask and dont tell me you want my vote in the future.

[NCYvonne]

Yes, vote Republican next time. They are so loving and welcoming of gays.

[Thucydides Jr.]

Um.. the photo you have is of British soldiers, not American. You can tell by their helmets and collars, if not by their weapons.

If intentional, not sure how it relates.

[walleymr]

More brilliant editing by the editors.

[MBryant]

Recently Colin Powell said this needs to be revisited. This change is very overdue. "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" preserves prejudice in law by looking the other way. It is more of an affront than the denial of gay marriage rights because it protects a rule specifically targeting homosexuals not for what they do but for who they are. Further, progress for homosexuals is always advanced when more individuals work with homosexuals one on one and put a human face on this issue. Until gays can be gays in the workplace and in the church and on the street - gays continue to be "they". It is easy to opress some faceless nameless group you don't have contact with. But everyone has contact with gays, it's just that in many circumstances they can't let that be known. When "those people" become "those among us who are homosexual" progress is a lot easier.

That President Clinton and the congress institutionalized this unholy compromise is no progress at all - not fifteen years ago - not now.

"Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is a national embarrassment and must go... soon.

[walleymr]

Agreed. And, if you put a face on the issue, that face will be dishonorably discharged.

[Eric8869]

Powell didn't step up when it counted last time. He used the same arguments against black integration against gays. (Unit cohesion etc)

He's not hero - he's trying to clean up his legacy.

[JimR]

If he can be an effective voice in getting the policy overturned, who cares?

[Helzapoppin]

Welcome to the Triangulation Presidency version 2.0

[mergina]

This administration is NOT GOING TO GLT FRIENDLY AT ALL. Obama will do about as much for the GLT community as Reagan did.

[bobo5]

Yeah, wasting money and throwing away talent should be on the agenda first.

[trucap]

since obama won the election a huge noise begun to rise from the gay groups, and they really beleive they are the ones who gave obama the election win. they only think of one thing thats how to gay openly and change the difinition of marriage and family.what rights they are lacking ? they have the right to work , and some have better jobs than straights . i really don't see that they are stripped from any right . all they want is the marriage OPENLY. infact obama owes them nothing , and levi got to go with people important business.

[lippp]

Well, then why don't we take your right away to get married and have legal protection? Perhaps then you would begin to understand. Your lack of depth and understanding is, well, breathtaking to say the least.

[JohnFromCensornati]

"some have better jobs than straights"

The idiocy of your comments is impressive.

[formerprosecutor]

i guess they don't speak those words out loud before posting them, that is the most ignorant words I have seen since yesterday

[walleymr]

no, we don't believe we were the only ones supporting him.

this thread is about how we believe that if we fight for the country we are a part of (won't say our country because someone will say "it's not just your country") we shouldn't have to hide who we are.

there are many gays and lesbians (and those who haven't made up their minds) serving this country honorably, side by side with heteros, so we can sit here at our computers and tap away.

that's what this is about.

[formerprosecutor]

What law school did you attend? There is NO federal protection for GLBTG people. A gay person can be denied a job or housing because they are gay. An employer can outright say: we will never hire a gay here" and there is no federal remedy.

Of course, you don't "see" any rights stripped away , because you are not gay, so you have absoluetly no basis for your andecdotal statement. You remind me of the 70 year old upper class white males that say they have seen any gender or race discrimination at their job (composed of white males)
Just because YOU don't think so; doesn't make it a fact.

[Coinyer101]

moderates got no gonards. they dont want real change. they want to make excuses for no change.

[annieR]

I'm a 74-year-old heterosexual woman, and I think that allowing gays to serve openly in the military should be very high on the agenda of the new congress. This is a human rights issue, not a political issue. The world didn't end, and the sky didn't fall when bans against white people and black people marrying were overturned; neither when the military was integrated. We're facing the same issue with gays in the military. If there's a dust-up, it will be short-lived. This isn't rocket science. Let's give Obama an executive order and a pen.

[Eric8869]

amen

[Twopennygal]

I agree, but unfortunately, DADT was passed through the legislature so Obama can't just executive-order it away. It has to go through Congress.

[formerprosecutor]

Ah! The voice of wisdom that only comes with living a long life. Thank you for your views. I am not far behind you; and when I look back at issues we thought were so critical, dogma that must be followed, etc.; I re -vist those issues today and relaize that they made little if any difference. Just , like I look back now, and realize that if anybody I knew was closeted, I would have felt the same way as I did then; positive or negative. That their sexual preference made no diffrerence; just like it doesn't now.

[walleymr]

Wow, a day's worth of comments gone ...

[formerprosecutor]

what do you mean??

[Oonagh]

This is not a Democrat or Republican issue.... it is an issue for everyone in this country and as a nation we needs to grow up and show a little maturity... This don't ask don't tell" policy is plain stupid.. When the leader of Iran said there were no gays in Iran we all knew that was a lie but in our own country we cannot come to grips with the fact that some of our citizens are gay so we strip away some of their rights....just because they are gay.

[jeffrey678]

I think the military leaders may move on the issue now that a sympathetic ear is in the White House. Their tired of losing great soldiers.

[Ramirez]

The number of service members discharged under DADT peaked in 2001 and has been dropping every year since. The rate is now lower than during the Clinton-era.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Don't_ask,_don't_tell#Statistics