As Debate On DADT Rages, Robert Gates Looks For 'Humane' Stopgap

Spencer Ackerman flags a "curious choice of words" from Defense Secretary Bob Gates, apparently bravely stating the case that maybe, someday, someone ought to look into that whole "Don't Ask Don't Tell" stuff that people keep talking about.

And so one of the things we're looking at is is there flexibility in how we apply this law in terms of -- well, let me give you an example. Do we need to be driven when the information, to take action on somebody if we get that information from somebody who may have vengeance in mind or blackmail or somebody who has been jilted....

In other words, if somebody is outed by a third party, we have to -- does that force us to take an action? And I don't know the answer to that and I don't want to pretend to. But that's the kind of thing we're looking at to see if there's at least a more humane way to apply the law until the law gets changed.

Spencer notes the nonsense that's at work here, "But doesn't this kind of absurdity -- we may have to discharge a soldier who's being blackmailed -- just argue for expediting the process of overturning Don't Ask Don't Tell?"

It does, indeed! But I can go even further! Not only does it argue for the immediate overturn of "Don't Ask Don't Tell," it presents, to my mind, a great example for why this dimwitted, asinine rule should have never been implemented in the first place! I can think of no reason -- no reason under the sun! -- why any commander should have had to worry about the sudden dismissal of his soldiers because of "blackmail" from "jilted" lovers until they idiotically adopted the "Don't Ask Don't Tell" policy, which opened the door to this possibility.

The United States has the finest Armed Services the world has ever known, but its leaders -- BY CHOICE -- decided to make "gay panic" its Achilles heel. But Robert Gates is so full of concern! Let's see if there's a humane way we can apply this nonsense, he says. I think it would be really "humane" of Secretary Gates to stop degrading our national security apparatus by randomly discharging valuable personnel for stupid reasons, if he wants to know my opinion!

Meanwhile, there really is nothing in the world stopping President Barack Obama from ending this practice today, five minutes from now, if he wanted to, despite what you may have been told.

MORE:
A 'More Humane' Implementation of DADT? [Attackerman]

[Would you like to follow me on Twitter? Because why not? Also, please send tips to [e-mail] -- learn more about our media monitoring project here.]

Get HuffPost Politics On Facebook and Twitter!

Comments

[superstition]

Obama deputy campaign manager abandons DOMA & DADT as priorities
http://www.americablog.com/2009/07/obama-deputy-campaign-manager-abandons.html

"After two weeks of the Obama White House reeling over the gay backlash caused by the anti-gay DOMA brief, which compared gay marriage to incest and pedophilia, we now have...

First, that the burden for doing anything pro-gay in the remaining three and a half years of the Obama administration is now shifted to Congress. Obama has no role whatsoever, and no power to influence anything, even though he's still the leader of the free world.

Second, the three big gay rights priorities that Congress should be focusing on do not even include what have organically become the community's top two priorities: repealing DOMA and Don't Ask Don't Tell. They're not even mentioned in the Obama deputy's essay."

[TheBaffler]

"We got a kinder, gentler machine gun hand."
- Neil Young

[M1]

I am speechless. WTF? More humane????? Can this leadership look anymore in the wrong and
incompetent?

Even the cheezy HLN News text vote had 75% in favor of repealing DADT today.....­more humane A$%#^. Maybe while they are at it they can find a more humane way sticking a red hot poker where the sun does not shine.

[superstition]

"Can this leadership look anymore in the wrong and incompetent?"

This administration is beginning to remind me of satire of Stalinist Russia.

[Manx]

I agree. Obama could end DADT immediately if he really wanted to, but Obama is not a bold leader. He doesn't do anything unless he has political cover.

[NWBrunette]

More like a couple dozen political thermal blankets stacked upon one another. 75% of the people support repeal of DADT. What kind of political cover does he want? Why is leadership such a foreign concept to most Dems?

[David Christensen]

This is a copy of my post on the previous article about this who humane DADT affair. I want to post it on my facebook and I forgot to hit the publish button.

There are times that I miss being in the military. Sure it was rough and the Army had the ability to suck the fun out of anything but there times when you couldn't see yourself being anywhere else. But at the moment, it's nice to be out just so I could say this. What a load of crap.

A nicer way of discriminating against gays? Sorry it's hard to type with my face buried in one of my hands. Are you really going to tell me that the men and women you send to war can't handle the idea that a member of their platoon might be gay. I really can't tell who you are doing a greater disservice to. On the odd chance that there are soldiers, marines, airmen, sailors who don't want to serve with gays well don't fear General I have some advice for you. Just tell them what I was told every time I have given news about something I didn't like. Suck it up and drive on.

[David Christensen]

Just continuing my post....I should start a blog.

I mean how would this more humane DADT work anyways? Kick 'em out with a smile and a letter of recommendation? Or how about letting them finish out their contract; this way they'll have more time and you'll get your money's worth (how good for you). Or perhaps you're developing a way to let some of them stay it. Some kind of gay conversion chart, perhaps? Let's see you're rank about a level 5 gay so you can stay in but you have to buy a truck. Sorry you're an 8 and that's just too gay.

Sorry to rant but the idea the people in the Pentagon are actually trying to make this work makes me want to vomit. Seriously, the past couple of years I've seen you guys accept people who, I can only describe as, are below the bottom of the barrel and yet the thought of openly gay people serving makes you squimish? There was an article on this very site reporting that your recruiters have accepted people ranging borderline psychotics to guys whose hobbies include being members of hate groups.

I never thought I'd have to tell a General to man-up. If I were president I'd demand your Army Values Card. Remember LDRSHIP. You've already asked homosexuals to give up their respect, honor, and integrity. Which ones do you think you're failing at?

[larry278]

Humane DADT is an oxymoron similar to Military intelligence or Military justice or Military music, etc.

[We-Are-The-Ones]

A humane DADT would save Lt. Col. Fehrenbach who did not tell and wasn't asked but who was outed by a 3rd party.

If DOD passes this, it will save some, but not all.

DADT still needs to be repealed.

[AnotherTry]

Gee, you think? And you wonder why we lobby the LEADER of the democratic party to get something done. If congress won't listen to their president (not that he's even asking ), what makes you think they will listen to us?

[superstition]

He said that sexual orientation has no relevance regarding eligibility for military service. That means the firings should have ended on day one.

Decades of stonewalling, and still more from the Obama administration. DADT was undermined by the military's own studies, studies it stonewalled/buried before it was even put into place:

"The 1957 Crittenden report found that gay men posed no great national security risk in terms of susceptibility to extortion.

The 1988 PERSEREC/S­arbin-Karo­ls report concluded that homosexuality was as unrelated to military job performance, as was right- or left-handedness.

The 1989 PERSEREC/McDaniel study found that in terms of background characteristics prior to entering military service, gay men were "as good or better than the average heterosexual" in terms of suitability for positions of trust -- that is, gay men did not appear to be a national security risk."

"The 1993 RAND report was not the first time the research was ordered by politically accountable members of the executive branch rather than by politically insulated members of the military services. And the report was made public almost immediately, while the Crittenden report was buried for 32 years. The PERSEREC/S­arbin-Karo­ls report was tied up by the Pentagon for almost a year. The second PERSEREC report (McDaniel) was never submitted to DOD."

http://books.google.com/books?id=Go9XsJ47GswC

[sansainte]

What ever happened to the Bill of Rights.?..­you know We are all created equal.....­.Life Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness for All.. How about the last line of The Pledge of Allegiance that all the flag waving bigots of this nation throw at the rest of us? WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL..Neith­er of these documents say ONLY FOR THE STRAIGHT FOLKS . They both state ALL.. All citizens of this nation. What it all boils down to is that the sensitivities of the bigots of this nation are offended by their lifestyle .They volunteer to put their lives on the line to serve this nation and the thanks we give them is to tell them to live a lie. Disgraceful. Shame on all of us for allowing this.And I am sad to say shame on Mr Obama for allowing it to continue. The HUMANE thing to do would be to finally come to grips with the fact that it's archaic and foolish to associate our nation with this bigotry. Before I get hateful responses from the BE AFRAID crowd.. I know there are bad people, perverts etc within the Gay Community.­.just as there are bad people, perverts etc.within the heterosexual community. That's all it is.. bad people, perverts, jerks, idiots, child molesters etc .. It has nothing to do with being Gay or Straight. It has to do with being bad people.. A totally different issue.

[We-Are-The-Ones]

You mean the same bill of rights that allowed slavery and the total disenfranchisement of women, destruction of Native Americans, and discrimination against the Chinese?

[sansainte]

Yes I do. And we have learned that those things were wrong and have at least legislated corrections to those situations. Being part Native American I do have a stake in this discrimination thing too and as long as there is a Reservation and people have no choice but to live on them I will have a stake because it is wrong. It is anti American. It is against everything we stand for. Three wrongs don't make this right and we as a nation should realize the pain that discrimination cost millions of our citizens. Not just the Blacks or the Native Americans, or the Chinese or Japanese, or Irish, Italian, Jew or whoever. Discrimination should be unacceptable to any citizen this country.

[AnotherTry]

So you are saying that since some in the past didn't enjoy the protection of the bill of rights, that it is ok to continue this practice against gays?

Don't you just love allies like this?

[truthartbeauty]

I think mature , sophisticated adults can co exist peacefully with each other, straight or gay. It seems like the people with the big issues are the ones who are actually the weakest, most misinformed, most bigoted, etc......I have co existed for years in the real world with no issues because of my sexual orientation. Lets grow up, as a nation, not let the paranoid, religious hypocrites make policy for a society that is better than that!

[killpack]

"I think mature , sophisticated adults can co exist peacefully with each other, straight or gay."

Well, I hate to say this, but military folks aren't exactly "mature, sophisticated adults." They can barely coexist peacefully straight. Do you really think they can coexist gay? I mean, I only say this because I was in the military. People in the military (at least the military I was in) don't like gay people. I'm not saying that to sound harsh, I'm just saying the truth. That's just the nature of it. If you turned gay people loose in the military I was in, well, there wouldn't be any "coexistin­g."

[Foolacious]

That military you were in... did it have any black people in it? It DID? How is that possible?

People in the military in the 1940's didn't used to like black people. I'm not saying that to sound harsh, that's just the way it was. And yet, somehow, it changed. Someone decided that failing to do the right thing because we couldn't depend on our military personnel to accept it was not a good policy. And those military folks?

They got over it.

[Kevins]

It can't be the whole military who 'don't like gays'. What about the gay and lesbian people who are in the military--and have been in the US military on the side of the Nation in every war since the revolution?

What about Alan Turing who broke the German secret code in WWII, saving countless US soldiers' lives?

What about gay soldiers who died at Normandy, Korea, Vietnam.

Don't they like themselves?

[BringmeReason]

Jason, everyone thinks that the President will have to end the world in order to pass an executive order to end this non-sense of a policy DADT.

[SILVANUS]

Don't Ask Don't Tell is, finally, absurd.

Jeez, we are even behind Uruguay in evolving.

[cheyenne79]

On CNN I saw a report that said over 1000 military leaders signed a petition in support of DADT. Is this true ?

Supposedly they are worried that the straight servicemen might catch the gay or be uncomfortable due to sleeping in close approximately to each other.

[MissionHills]

The 1000 military leaders have an average age of 73 years old. One is actually dead but the letter was signed by his wife and one actually commanded ships during WWII. The letter was organized and written by a virulently homophobic organization called the Center for Military Readiness whose founder, Elaine Donnelly does not even support women in the armed forces.

[We-Are-The-Ones]

This is insane. A dead man is on the letter.

[BringmeReason]

I've had my laugh for today, thank you Chey.

[kindGSL]

I think it is a lot deeper than that,

"Cherry Marines" ~ Military wife speaks : Kay Griggs - Pt.1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sOaw45B-DWM&NR=1

[Coinyer101]

he needs to be replaced by Wes Clark, when Clark is eligible, in a few months.

[knosiswar]

Question, there is an ad for a gay-friendly social site, connexion, at the top of the page. Why is one of the three guys not wearing a shirt? And is it only friendly to gay guys?