iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

"Don't Ask Don't Tell" Repeal: This Day Has Finally Come


First Posted: 12/18/10 03:29 PM ET Updated: 05/25/11 07:20 PM ET

He was unconscious but still alive, gargling up blood. His face was so disfigured no one was sure of his race, much less his name. Patrolman Anthony Aptimes got a pulse, then lost it. He wiped the blood out of the sailor's mouth with a T-shirt and pressed on his chest, trying to restart his heart. With each compression, blood trickled from the sailor's mouth and bubbled out of a gash on the bridge of his nose. It would have expedited the rescue if the ambulance had been directed to come up behind the indoor swimming pool on the road that paralleled the Navy base or had parked out on the road itself. But the one landmark U.S. military personnel know along the liberty trail, which connects U.S. Fleet Activities in Sasebo to the five-dollar-a-beer karaoke bars in Sailor Town, is the Albuquerque Bridge, the suspension walkway across the Sasebo River. That's where the ambulance was directed, and that's why the dying sailor was moved. Two shore patrolmen, a base security cop, and Seaman Jonathan Witte slipped a jacket under his body and carried him about a hundred yards, through the camphor trees of Sasebo Park, where elderly blue-smocked women tend gardens by day and spermy gaijin romance local maids at night. He was six feet one, weighed about 180 pounds, and had blond hair. To Seaman Witte, the eyewitness who'd sounded the alarm, it looked as if the sailor's nose had been shaved clean off his face. Witte cradled the man's head and stared at the tattoos on his arms. When the group reached the bridge, they set the sailor down and flung the blood off their hands. A crowd gathered. The ambulance arrived. A corpsman rushed up with a breathing bag, another unloaded the gurney. The sailor wasn't breathing; his heart wasn't beating.

"Schneider?..." said a shore patrolman squinting at the military ID he'd found in the sailor's waist pack. "Schluter?.."

"Schindler!" cried Seaman Witte, suddenly remembering the tattoos.

--Chip Brown, "The Accidental Martyr," Esquire, December 1993


Seventeen years ago, then-President Bill Clinton had a crazy idea that all of the men and women serving in the United States Armed Forces were human beings, regardless of their professed sexual orientation. Clinton was motivated, in part, by a man named Allen Schindler, a radioman in the U.S. Navy who was stomped into unrecognizability and, ultimately, murdered by two of his fellow sailors because Schindler was gay. And so he promised to undertake a massive effort to make it so that gay soldiers could serve in the military without fear or discrimination.

Congress, as well-populated with jerkoffs then as they were at anytime in their history, fought this effort with the tenacity they typically reserve for fundraising their own elections. At the time, there were many pretty sounding reasons for keeping gays out of the military. Many of them -- "unit cohesion" and "morale" -- sounded suspiciously similar to the reasons proffered long ago by those who wanted to keep the military from being integrated racially. The rest of the reasons were incredibly stupid ones -- Someone might get a boner in a foxhole! Someone's junk might get ogled in a shower! -- that were embarassing to see taken seriously.

Still, what was to be done about the gays in the military? Well, after all the wrangling, everyone agreed to a compromise that came to be known as "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." What did it all mean? Well, for gay soldiers, it meant that they could continue to serve their country, so long as they didn't tell anyone they were gay. If they "told," they would be discharged.

It was never really clear what the "Don't Ask" side of the equation amounted to. When you look at this training guide on the "homosexual conduct policy" published in comic book form -- yes, comic book form -- by the Department of the Army's Assistant Secretary for Manpower and Reserve Affairs, it makes it clear that once the Rumors Of Gay start floating around, a whole lot of "asking" starts. And while it may be a trick of memory, I cannot recall anyone ever getting tossed from the military for ASKING whether someone was gay. Mostly, it was the telling!

(By the way, eventually, a "Don't Harrass" measure had to be instituted as well, because years after DADT went into effect, gay soldiers, like PFC First Class Barry Winchell, were still being harrassed and murdered by their comrades. Why no one thought to consider whether it was the harrasser/murderers, and not the gay soldiers, that were the threat to "unit cohesion," is something that deserves to be explained.)

At any rate, "Don't Ask Don't Tell" became law, and it mainly achieved a pretty way of talking about a problem that had been swept under the rug by ostensible grown-ups. In theory, it was the way that members of the LGBT community could continue to serve in the armed forces. In practice, however, the law wasn't so much "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" as it was "Do Lie About Who You Are, Do Hope That You Never Get Caught."

At the time, I think that people found this acceptable only because they imagined that military service to be a brief period of time. Surely, the gay soldier could just chill out for a few years, cool it on the gay, and wait until they had rejoined civilian life to come out to everybody. What's left out of these considerations were the careers that the military offered, the health care that military service entitled you to, the college scholarships, the teaching positions, the pensions, that line on your resume that permanently enshrined a lie...

Mostly, I think people just were happy that a palatable sounding solution had been achieved. Those guys who started that "No Labels" thing last week about ending partisan rancor? If they'd been around in 1993, they would be precisely the sort of people to loudly campaign for "Don't Ask Don't Tell" as a "reasonable" solution that promoted "civility."

Of course, activists who recognized the stultifying unfairness of "Don't Ask Don't Tell" never stopped fighting it. And over the years, attitudes toward members of the LGBT community slowly started to shift in a more positive direction. But nothing has helped refocus attention on the stupidity of the "Don't Ask Don't Tell" policy as actually going to war. See, once we were off on out long, interminable, costly wars against "terror," and all hands were on deck in the fight that would definee our future, it became really untenable for the military to be kicking out what few Farsi translators they had because they also happened to be gay.

Yeah, let's face it: that was a moment where even a lot of people who had previously been not-too-sharp in the issue finally had to say, "Well, that sure sounds like some bullshit."

And so, as President Barack Obama assumed office, here's a breakdown of where the country was, in terms of wanting to end Don't Ask Don't Tell.

--By large majorities, Democrats wanted to end Don't Ask Don't Tell.
--By large majorities, Republicans wanted to end Don't Ask Don't Tell.
--By large majorities, self-described liberals wanted to end Don't Ask Don't Tell.
--By large majorities, self-described conservatives wanted to end Don't Ask Don't Tell.
--By large majorities, self-described independents wanted to end Don't Ask Don't Tell.
--By large majorities, evangelical Christians wanted to end Don't Ask Don't Tell.
--By large majorities, atheists wanted to end Don't Ask Don't Tell.
--The Secretary of Defense wanted to end Don't Ask Don't Tell.
--Many of the figures who did not support gays serving in the military, like Sam Nunn and Colin Powell, wanted to end Don't Ask Don't Tell

And this guy, Admiral Mike Mullen, the Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff really, REALLY wanted to end Don't Ask Don't Tell.

For anyone fighting to preserve the policy -- and there remained some hollow-eyed, dagger-hearted zombies in the land that did -- the walls were coming down. Even as public pressure to end the policy mounted, judicial decisions were coming down that doomed its future. Because the administration wanted to end the policy in the most enduring way possible, President Obama wanted Congress to bring the matter to a close. This rankled many people -- like me! -- who would have liked the policy done away with by the imperial stroke of his pen. But the President is right -- whatever immediacy you'd gain by dispensing with the policy by executive order comes at a cost: the permanence provided by legislative action.

In my defense, I never considered the possibility that Congress might be capable of doing the right thing. That's obviously something that the White House thought as well, because to make repealing DADT as easy as possible for Congress, the Pentagon undertook a massive survey, with utterly unimpeachable statistical standards, that sussed out where current members of the U.S. Armed Forces stood on the issue. And by large majorities, they told the Pentagon that they didn't care if the people they served alongside were gay.

Still, this was not a done deal. Let's remember: the Senate, it exists, and it is an awful place filled with some awful people. There, we've seen many obstacles on the road to repeal rear their head. There were supporters who've reneged because the vote didn't come up until other matters were settled. Supporters who couldn't do the right thing because the preservation of Senate procedure was more precious to them -- this despite the fact that no Senate procedure has ever been stomped to death by men in boots. There was new Senator Joe Manchin, who showed up for work a coward after parading around in campaign ads, with guns.

And of course, there was Senator John McCain and his decade-long passion project that closely resembles Andres Serrano's "Piss Christ," except that the "Christ" is replaced by "everything McCain ever had that vaguely resembled a principle or something in which a human being would normally take pride." McCain moved goalposts and shifted standards and broke promises and basically demonstrated himself to be an implacable heel.

But, you know what, the less said about McCain, the better. Let's hang another "L" around his neck and move on.

Briefly, we can talk about the people who helped push this matter through to the endgame today. Representative Patrick Murphy, who fought for this in the House, will get to see it enacted before he leaves office in January. Senators Joe Lieberman and Susan Collins -- who are typically the people who blow deals up as they near enactment -- took on the opposite role today, preserving the repeal as a standalone bill and keeping the votes whipped in favor. The House Democrats dug deep and provided their Senate colleagues with one last crutch, for auld lang syne, to get something enacted that the entire country wanted. And Harry Reid, who saw this Senate process through to the end, today.

And that's all we're going to say about those people, too.

For seventeen years, the military has had "Don't Ask Don't Tell" in place. And prior to that, gays have served in the armed forces with valor and honor and distinction. Isn't that amazing? We're talking about people who very easily could have opted out of serving their country -- and serving in a military that, at times, despised them, dishonored them, condoned their harassment, shrugged off their murder. If "Don't Ask Don't Tell" achieved anything, it gave gays and lesbians a pretty easy escape hatch from military service. It's not like getting killed in the Hindu Kush is something to which people aspire. It's not like our wars are getting more sensible. And yet through it all, gay men and women kept right on signing up to serve in the military. And those who have been discharged keep fighting to get back in.

Now why would they do a thing like that? Sign up to fight and die for a country that, at times, didn't seem to like them very much? Well, it's because these words -- "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" -- were part of the most successful viral marketing campaign in the history of the civilized world.

The men who wrote those words weren't the best at living up to them -- and none of us since have gotten it perfect, either. But someone wrote those words down on paper, and people read it, and when they read it, it made them want to fight for it.

And so today, it's important to remember that even as we have struggled and wrangled and argued over when and how we would actually start doing the right thing, men and women in the LGBT community have nevertheless continued to fight for us, and defend our right to live free and have these prolonged debates. It's important to remember that the argument we're concluding today continues the great American mission of forging a "more perfect union." It's important to remember that the argument we've concluded today was over territory that many gay soldiers fought to occupy. It's important to remember that some of the good people who formed that occupying force died in its defense. And today, seventeen years after they began their mission, reinforcements have finally arrived.

It's about time. But mostly, it's about justice.

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

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
He was unconscious but still alive, gargling up blood. His face was so disfigured no one was sure of his race, much less his name. Patrolman Anthony Aptimes got a pulse, then lost it. He wiped the blo...
He was unconscious but still alive, gargling up blood. His face was so disfigured no one was sure of his race, much less his name. Patrolman Anthony Aptimes got a pulse, then lost it. He wiped the blo...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 1,683
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (32 total)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BobSF94117
01:34 PM on 12/20/2010
I take issue with the claim that the repeal of DADT was supported by "large majorities" of conservatives and evangelical Christians. A few percentage points are called "bare majorities" not large ones.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
StealGeorgia
I am not boycotting the walrus
08:47 AM on 12/20/2010
What a wonderful day.
We kicked and screemed and fought.
Without the left pushing hard on this it would not have happened.

Good work!
Excelsior!
07:14 PM on 12/19/2010
so how long will it be till a gay soldier sues the united states army for his drill instructor calling him a girl in boot camp?
10:40 AM on 12/20/2010
You've got your name right.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
PresidentRobertBooth
12:42 PM on 12/20/2010
***so how long will it be till a gay soldier sues the united states army for his drill instructor calling him a girl in boot camp?***

Then the DI shouldn't say it.
 
Problem solves.
04:32 PM on 12/19/2010
Well said. I was in the Army from 1960 to 1963. I served at the National Security Agency at Ft. George G. Meade, Maryland during those years. I survived the constant witch hunts for homosexuals. I was gay. I wanted to serve my country. I was lucky because I got out without physical harm or a less than honorable discharge. I wanted to make the Army my career but I couldn't because I knew sooner or later the witch hunters would get me. This is no way to serve one's country. I am glad this nightmare has finally come to an end.
12:41 PM on 12/19/2010
While I'm elated that DADT has been legislatively repealed, the more nuanced and human nature focused side of me said ‘Oh no don’t get too excited, you know there’s going to be a catch…’

And sure enough, here it is - the White House won't commit to stopping discharges, they haven't an implementation plan, and we don't know how long it will take: http://www.metroweekly.com/poliglot/2010/12/white-house-wont-commit-to-hal.html

Not at all surprised, though. The President has proven throughout most of the 111th (read also: except for the very very end) Congress that repealing DADT was not a genuine priority. My take is that they only rammed it through after some serious reflection on how pissed off most of the base is at them. Sort of an “Oh look you filthy liberal whiners we CAN get things done now SILENCE’ so as to stoke enough people’s ‘well maybe we SHOULDN’T primary Obama or stay home in 2012… I mean after all they repealed DADT.’

The complete lack of a gameplan within the administration for handling DADT’s repeal just solidifies, in my mind, the notion that it was not a priority. HOWEVER, I will say that the administration will be all too happy to use repeal to their advantage in a ‘comeback’ narrative for 2012. "Vote for me, because a Republican would never implement full open service, and maybe I will!"
01:30 PM on 12/19/2010
the White House won't commit to stopping discharges­, they haven't an implementa­tion plan, and we don't know how long it will take:

__________Says an anonymous source. Oh wait, this IS Huffpo/National Enquirer for the Left, where such "sources" are trumpeted as hard fact.

This, we are to believe, is supposed to pass for "nuance", these days.

Dump progressives. They are an albatross around the neck of the left and take it upon themselvs to stand in the way of even the slightest progress.
I-US
Beware the monsters lurking in word swamps.
01:45 PM on 12/19/2010
Have you even read the Democratic Party Platform? It's progressive.
01:40 PM on 12/19/2010
the White House won't commit to stopping discharges­, they haven't an implementa­tion plan, and we don't know how long it will take

__________According to an anonymous "source". But wait, this is what now passes as "nuance" on the National Enquirer Left/Huffington Post: any old random internet story that allows you to wallow in the view that Obama hates the gays.

The left needs to cut the progressives loose. They're an albatross, ever-willing to stand in the way of actual progress, all while touting themselves as the true messiahs of humanity. Eff them.
photo
kornbluthwasright
LOYAULTE ME LIE
10:33 PM on 12/19/2010
Carmen, I wish I could fan you again, but at least I favorited you. Thank you so much for your crisply written, cogent, spot-on comments. (As a bonus, some of them have also provided me with a few much-needed laughs.) You give this HP newbie real hope for the future.
12:33 AM on 12/20/2010
"The left needs to cut the progressives loose."?

This is a misuse of the customary meaning of political terminology on the same order as referring to Ben Nelson as a "moderate Democrat".

Heck, I even agree with you that concern about implementation of the DADT repeal is probably overblown, but you really should be a little more careful in your use of words.

E.g., "The Democrats should cut the progressives loose", or "Those loyal to President Obama should cut the progressives loose". These statements would make sense, whether or not one agreed with them.

BTW, I've thought of myself as a liberal for forty-some years now, which probably makes me a "progressive". It's always interesting to learn what other people think of you, so thanks for expressing your opinion.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
buggedabouttheus
Liberal, Progressive & Christian unashamedly
09:10 AM on 12/19/2010
Towards a more perfect union.
I've always loved the Preamble to the Constitution almost as much as the first ten and especially as a black person Amendments 13 and 14. Finally, our gay brothers and sisters can fight and die for a country that does not penalize them for their sexual preference over their love of country.

J U S T I C E! Let it roll down like waters and righteousness as a mighty stream. Amos 5:24
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
evekendall
02:33 AM on 12/19/2010
Bravo, Jason, Bravo! This may be the best thing you've ever written. . . you made me cry.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
oblogdeeoblogda
www.visualcv.com/melnathan
01:01 AM on 12/19/2010
Time now for Civil Rights end DOMA and pass UAFA http://lezgetreal.com/2010/12/from-the-presidents-pen-dadt-down-acknowledges-civil-rights-struggle-continues/
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
dems08
Above all... avoid the moor
12:19 AM on 12/19/2010
"But the President is right -- whatever immediacy you'd gain by dispensing with the policy by executive order comes at a cost: the permanence provided by legislative action."
I-US
Beware the monsters lurking in word swamps.
03:35 AM on 12/19/2010
Heaven forfend the executive treats itself like a coequal branch of government. Oh wait, of course it does, in all other things like drone attacks.
01:42 PM on 12/19/2010
The executive branch is indeed co equal, which is why the Obama administration did not try to placate you leftier-than-thous with a meaningless EO ending DADT.

Clue up, pls. People's rights are at stake while you toy around with your pie in the sky, ahistorical ideals.
12:12 AM on 12/19/2010
Actually, November 2nd was a sad, sad day when McCain was re-elected.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
dems08
Above all... avoid the moor
12:10 AM on 12/19/2010
mccain is full of it
12:09 AM on 12/19/2010
Hmmm......­.. I guess the President is a good chess player after all despite all the haterade he has had to endure on this web site for the past two weeks. Let analyse what really happened here for a second. If Obama had decided to hell with the tax compromise and slugged it out with the Repubs into next year not only would every middle class family's taxes gone up by $3,000 but the Repubs in the Senate ( who all signed a letter ) would not have voted on anything else, therefore no repeal of DADT. We also all know that with more of them coming in next year anything that even smells a bit liberal will have zero chance of not being filibuster­ed. With the tax compromise the President basically created the time and space ( even if small ) for this ( and others ) to get finished. He sacrificed temporaril­y one liberal objective ( increasing taxes on the rich in order to help fix the deficit ) to permanentl­y grant another one ( repeal of DADT ). If he had also gotten the DREAM act I know he would be dancing in his living room today but nontheless he has had a good week. After his shellackin­g in November he has now reconnecte­d with independen­ts and also re-energiz­ed a large portion of his base in a matter of days. Who ever runs against him will now have a much harder time in 2012.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Rixar13
U.S. Coast Guard Veteran and University
12:00 AM on 12/19/2010
"John McCain On Don't Ask, Don't Tell Repeal Vote: 'Today Is A Very Sad Day'."

John McCain is a very sad man....
04:37 PM on 12/19/2010
John McCain is an Angry Old Man. He is like a child he didn't get what he wanted (the presidency) so now he's just going to hold his breath and turn blue.
11:59 PM on 12/18/2010
Jason, your best ever. And thank you for remembering Schindler and Winchell. I don't remember every crying over one of your posts, but this one did it.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ponderus
Enriched with lanolin.
11:50 PM on 12/18/2010
The people who have been crapping on the President for his lack of resolve on this matter should be eating their words tonight.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
StillIRise
The past, present and future are one
11:54 PM on 12/18/2010
Some of them are trying to have it both ways ...
 
They're celebrating the legislation, but still crapping on the President ... I guess because they hate to give the President credit , and hate the very thought that maybe now, the President is not despised as much as he was yesterday!