Mullen Testimony On DADT Puts Senior Republicans In A Bind

Testimony on Tuesday by Adm. Mike Mullen that the time has come for the military to repeal its "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy has forced the hand of many prominent Republican figures who stalled for time on the issue by saying the matter was up to the military itself.

GOP lawmakers have avoided taking a stand on the 15-year-old policy -- which bans gay service members from serving openly -- by deferring to the opinions of the military brass. This week, it became crystal clear where the brass stands, with Mullen, the current chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, declaring that it is his "personal belief that allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly would be the right thing to do" and Colin Powell -- the former Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman who was instrumental in writing DADT into law -- echoing those sentiments.

The spotlight, naturally, now turns to those who have used the military command as a crutch to defend their own skepticism.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said in October 2009 that for a reversal of DADT to be successful, there would have to be a "buy-in by the military."

"They should be included in this," said Graham. "I am open-minded to what the military may suggest, but I can tell you, I'm not going to make policy based on a campaign rally."

Former Massachusetts governor and presidential candidate Mitt Romney in a November 2007 debate was asked if he looked forward to "a day when gays can serve openly in the military?"

"I look forward to hearing from the military exactly what they believe is the right way to have the right kind of cohesion and support in our troops and I listen to what they have to say," he replied.

In another Republican presidential debate a month later, former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee joined Romney in insisting that the country needed to hear first from military command.

"I probably would let the military make that decision," he said, when pressed. "One thing I don't think you need is a president who's trying to tell the military how to run the military, other than set broad policy agenda. The Uniform Code of Military Conduct is the best way to handle that and I would leave it to -- to those who run the military."

Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okl.) has insisted, as recently as 2009, that he would "defer in large part to our military leaders on matters of military readiness and code of conduct. This includes the impact changing the 'don't ask, don't tell' policy would have, especially since military leaders note that this issue is fundamentally about military readiness."

In a 2008 interview, Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) defended DADT as a sound military policy by arguing that he had not "sensed that the military is calling for a change."

It is now.

The conundrum facing all of these Republican leaders is simple: coming out against the repeal of the DADT policy now would represent a de facto admission that the opinions of the military brass never really mattered in the first place.

But that doesn't mean they'll suddenly support the repeal. In fact, in a widely observed reversal yesterday, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said that he was "disappointed" in Mullen's testimony, and expressed concerns that overturning DADT at a time of "immense hardship for our armed services" would be problematic.

This despite the fact that he once declared that: "the day that the leadership of the military comes to me and says, 'Senator, we ought to change the policy,' then I think we ought to consider seriously changing it."

Comments

[johninferndale]

03:10 PM on 02/12/2010

DADT was enacted DESPITE President Clinton's wishes, by a Republican congress. Clinton was trying to remove the ban on gays entirely, DADT was a compromise.

[Faith James]

11:37 AM on 02/05/2010

That is an insult to 12 year olds....let us just get it done, no more excuses

[OldHick]

06:28 AM on 02/04/2010

I am in total agreement with John McCain. This imposition on the military is senseless, and based only on what some politicians are calling a change in general public sensitivity on the subject. This is based on what is been presented in the media re homosexuality. . Actually, despite this, most people do not smoke cigars and they do not accept homosexuality as an alternate lifestyle. These people are detached from reality, and mistake movies for the real thing.

[Julia Bailey]

09:11 AM on 02/04/2010

What cave did you crawl out of? Homosexuality is totally accepted by many people.

[nananance]

03:06 PM on 02/04/2010

Too bad John McCain's not in total agreeement with John McCain.
Three years ago, he said if the top military brass came to him and said "Senator, we ought to change the policy,' then we should change it.
Of course, three years ago, he was hoping to appeal to the majority of people in our country, 69 percent, who oppose DADT, now he's just trying to win over the far right in Arizona who support his primary opponent, JD Hayworth.

[Johnnyfeelgood]

04:08 AM on 02/04/2010

Let me see, the Don't Ask Don't Tell came to be during the Clinton administration and it was also before the Republicans took over Congress. All you libs can do is lie. Here's another lie, we could not put everything on Cspan because Republicans have been filibustering the bill. C'mon, with a super majority and you're having a hard time passing whatever you want!?! The American people can see right through your lies and that is why your year in power is coming to an end. A liberal agenda is not as popular as you thought, goodbye and good riddance.

[sprtakis69]

05:05 AM on 02/04/2010

WOW - a GOoPer who is calling other people liars! Wow! That is rich!

[Julia Bailey]

09:13 AM on 02/04/2010

Who has claimed the DADT bill didn't happen under Clinton?

Clinton did a lot of things wrong. Obama isn't perfect either.

That's what its like to be progressive, you don't accept things as being black or white/ good or bad. But better/worse. Obama is better than McCain would have been.

[Wingit]

03:58 AM on 02/04/2010

DADT has been turned on its head and Gates, Mullen and even Powell understand that.. Field officers are now the ones who cannot tell or ask. What officer in the military would start processing a gay soldier out of his unit? What would he gain; a lost position that won’t be filled anytime soon considering all the red tape. Would that lost position be the medic that could save another soldier’s life? Would it be the language specialist that could communicate with civilians, so that we could gain cooperation rather than opposition? Would it be the intelligence analyst that could interpret satellite photos to make our troops aware of enemy locations?
Our military people are not stupid. Straight people have gaydar too. When you work and live with people every day you understand who is gay and who is not. It doesn’t bother them, it only bothers politicians.

[sprtakis69]

05:03 AM on 02/04/2010

Exactly! Very well put!

What's the percentage of old coots, I mean politicians, who have even served in the military? And to be fair I mean served longer than John Boehner's 8 weeks in the Navy. They speak as if they have a CURRENT working knowledge of the military. Only very few politicians these days are still serving via the reserves or have recently finished serving. A majority have NEVER served our country's military or served for a very, very (8 wks) short time.

Boehner - 8 weeks in the Navy, years ago, doesn't not give you insight to today's military!!!!

McCain - granted you served decades ago, you need to face the facts. The military has changed! The military is NOT full oh homophobes any longer. The military is a reflection of our country. Today's military grew up watching Will & Grace and they are not afraid of the same things you fear.

[1murillo]

03:34 AM on 02/04/2010

The military called the Republicans' bluff, but they'll (Republicans) merely say something else (as McCain already has).
However, continuing to call their bluff is the only way to get them off their 41-seat horse.

[Sharon Corcoran]

11:18 PM on 02/09/2010

I am not sure that they care about DADT- as much as they care about Obama failing and keeping their base happy

[RButler]

02:11 AM on 02/04/2010

Don't ask those republicans, and don't tell them either. Just do it.

[ChicagoSuz]

01:49 AM on 02/04/2010

Because it was a stupid - & probably unconstitutional - law & it's the right thing to do.

[pbinh]

01:23 AM on 02/04/2010

'Bout time the White House boxed in these jerks. This kind of hardball should've started on Jan. 20, 2009 with real health care reform (not the compromise of a compromised compromise they started with).

[Vxx]

12:38 AM on 02/04/2010

This is the wonderful thing about the spotlight and laying your cards on the table -- the military has called these pompous nitwits on their documented stances and they're waffling. They're waffling because their base now consists almost entirely of the most extreme and unpleasant factions of American culture.

[DallasDon]

11:58 PM on 02/03/2010

Today in Congressional Cemetery there's a unique tombstone because it doesn't have a name on it. These words etched into the tombstone:

"When I was in the the military, they gave me a medal for ki//ing two men and a discharge for loving one."

The soldier buried there is Sergeant Leonard Matlovich, decorated with a Purple Heart and the Bronze Star.
In the '70's he fought to stay in the Air Force, had a movie made about his life and was on the cover of Time magazine.
I kinda think it'd be nice to have a Leonard Matlovich Bill repeal DADT once and for all.

Here's a picture of his tombstone for you to look at:
http://www.cslacker.com/images/file/mediums/gay_vietnam_veteran.jpg

[kev1000]

01:46 AM on 02/04/2010

Wow. Why is there no name on it?

[DallasDon]

01:59 AM on 02/04/2010

Well.......... I didn't know the man of course Kev.
But I think maybe Sergeant Matlovich probably wanted his life to be a tribute to all the gay men and lesbian women who so honorably served America.

He was understandably bitter and felt betrayed by the military, because the military to end his career and discharge him for being gay.
Sergeant Matlovich went on to be fierce advocate for gay rights and equality and died in the '80's I think.
He dedicated his life fighting for other people while in the Air Force and in civilian life. Perhaps this was his way of saying "It's not about me." but rather it's about all of us.

[Michael Bedwell]

12:18 PM on 02/04/2010

Thank you, Don, for the suggestion a DADT repeal bill be named after my friend Leonard Matlovich as the hate crimes bill was named after Matthew Shepard & James Byrd. Nothing could be more right; nothing could be more just.

Learn more at www.leonardmatlovich.com. The shorthand: Leonard was the first gay servicemember to ever fight the ban when he outed himself in 1975. He appeared on the cover of "Time" and a TV movie was made about him. That it was THIRTY-FIVE YEARS AGO they kicked him out despite his Purple Heart, Bronze Star, and 12 yrs. service further proves it’s insane it still exists. Today’s lead, Dan Choi, is also a friend. The irony is he wasn't even BORN yet when Leonard started his battle but is having to go through the same thing. Video of Dan speaking at a DADT protest/memorial is on the site.

The Associated Press said his epitaph, "When I was in the military they gave me a medal for killing two men and a discharge for loving one," is "as fresh as today's headlines." Yes, he created a memorial for all gay veterans. Other gay veterans have since chosen to be buried near him. He also tried to build a memorial to Harvey Milk.

I guarantee you were he alive he would be next to Dan Choi saying to the President, Gates & Mullen the same thing Dan is: "The time for talk is over. The time for ACTION is NOW!"

[DallasDon]

12:53 PM on 02/04/2010

Thanks for the link Me. Bedwell. I'm sure there's so much more to Sergeant Matlovich's life and legacy that many of us don't know about.

Thanks for caring and for your solidarity.

{{{Fanned!}}}

[Bobzmcishl]

11:51 PM on 02/03/2010

The military has called the Republican's bluff, and America now appears ready to accept gays in the military without the necessity of lying about it. Will the Republican's make this a wedge issue in the 2010 campaign. I don't think so. They would not only be up against Obama but their military friends. Maybe our homophobic days are about to be behind us after all.

[ManWithBrain]

11:35 PM on 02/03/2010

I can't for the life of me understand the whole DADT policy in the first place.
Anybody who knows anything about secret clearances knows that one of the absolute no-no's for someone trying to obtain a clearance is to have things in your life that could compromise the individual if disclosed, such as being a closeted homosexual. It's exactly the kind of thing that someone could use to bribe you.
Why is it OK to pretend someone's not gay, yet still give them clearance to know our nation's military secrets?
Nobody else thinks this is insane?

[Vxx]

12:42 AM on 02/04/2010

I used to have some interesting "clearances" and YES, it was insane to have DADT. The people giving clearances want to know you cannot be blackmailed -- you tell them *everything*.

Maybe we need some ancient warriors who bonded with their fellows to come back and kick the crap out of these insecure witless congressmen and the people who whimper about who sleeps with who.

[Amalek]

11:35 PM on 02/03/2010

This was so much easier in the Bush days. When a general did not agree with Republican policy, you just got another general. That way you could always say you listen to the military.

[ManWithBrain]

11:39 PM on 02/03/2010

Yeah, your analysis is dead on, unfortunately.

[Wood]

11:32 PM on 02/03/2010

That's why there's a Commander-in-Chief. The military takes orders..

Rethugs...

[TheBMChief]

12:40 AM on 02/04/2010

Nice!