For Gays in the Military, Obama's Good Intentions Not Enough
Sunday morning on ABC's This Week, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff told George Stephanopoulos that they'd been talking about "don't ask, don't tell" in the Pentagon. Admiral Mullen said, "The President has made his strategic intent very clear. . . . I've had discussions with the Joint Chiefs about this. I've done certainly a lot of internal, immediate staff discussions about what the issues would be and . . . ."
Sounds like a plan? No, it doesn't, and without a strong push from the White House, it won't be. Nonetheless, it does show considerable progress from last Tuesday when the Pentagon's press secretary Geoff Morrell (a deputy assistant secretary of defense and Secretary Gates's personal spokesman as well as another holdover from the Bush Administration) was still spouting the old message at Tuesday's Pentagon briefing: "no internal planning efforts underway in anticipation of a change in that [DADT] law," and so on. Business as usual. As to his attitude, here's the video. You can judge for yourself. (The DADT discussion begins about eight minutes in.)
The White House changed his mind, however, and Morrell, who said Secretary Gates believed his Tuesday comments had been "mischaracterized," asked him to release a "statement of clarification," something like what Catholics might call an act of contrition. Fox News reported that Morrell gave it to a few Pentagon reporters Thursday night and to the rest of the world Friday morning.
At the White House briefing the day before (around the time Morrell first released his "clarification"), in response to a question by Ana Marie Cox, Obama's press secretary Robert Gibbs said he believed "the Pentagon did correct that statement on efforts regarding . . . 'don't ask, don't tell.'" Well, if they hadn't done it before, they got right on the case and it was done that night.
And Chairman Mullen did make it clear on This Week that he knew what the President wanted to accomplish with respect to repealing DADT. "The President has made his strategic intent very clear," he said. "That it's his intent at some point in time to ask Congress to change the law."
"At some point in time . . . " Now what do you suppose that means? Time is a pretty nebulous notion, and there are an infinite number of points in it. I'd like to know what particular point in time Admiral Mullen and the other deciders at the Pentagon have in mind. This month? This year? Next year? This term? Next term? Somehow, Admiral Mullen didn't convey a sense of urgency to it.
Stephanopoulos reminded him that one of his predecessors, General John Shalikashvili, who was chairman in the early '90s, now says he believes "if gay men and lesbians served openly in the United States military, they would not undermine the efficacy of the armed forces. Our military has been stretched thin by our deployments in the Middle East, and we must welcome the service of any American who is willing and able to do the job."
George asked, "Is he right?"
"He's certainly entitled to his own personal opinion," Admiral Mullen replied, quickly adding "And certainly, I have the greatest respect for him." Hardly a ringing endorsement. In the next sentence he noted, "There are also lots of retired generals and admirals on the other side." I can see Elaine Donnelly now, exchanging high fives for the gratuitous plug with her crew of aging flag officers that Admiral Mullen referred to.
If you review Admiral Mullen's brief, it sounds like he learned a lesson from his immediate boss, Secretary Gates, who famously said, "Let's kick that one down the road a little bit." It also sounds like Admiral Mullen took a leaf from Martin Luther King, Jr., and Mahatma Gandhi. Passive resistance. That seems a bit odd coming from a Bush appointee who would like to be reappointed to another term as Chairman of the JCS when his term expires in October.
I'm all for a "measured, deliberate" path, as Admiral Mullen put it, but at some point the White House has to have a plan to get repeal through this Congress. We have to get beyond mere intent. "Intent" is not a plan and it isn't action and so far President Obama hasn't asked Congress to change the law. The President sent his Defense Department budget up to Congress a couple weeks ago and there was no repeal language in it. That budget will be working its way through Congress over the next several months. There's still time to fix it.
What we don't need is yet another study or national commission to look at repeal. We all know those commissions involve delay and more delay and "kicking it down the road" more that a little bit. I say, put together a working group within 30 days. Have them focus on implementing open service and charge them to report back to the President within 90 days with a detailed plan and a timeline and how to get it done in this Congress.
Good intentions and warm handwritten notes from the President will not carry the day. They certainly did not save the career of Lieutenant Sandy Tsao who was scheduled for discharge last week. The Arabic speaking Lieutenant Dan Choi is now at risk of being discharged. Sign his petition. Urge Air Force Secretary Michael B. Donley to allow Lieutenant Colonel Victor Fehrenbach to keep flying. Sign the petition here. Hundreds more service members will be discharged over the next few months unless Congress and the President, and, yes, the Pentagon act.
Good intentions are no substitute for the change our service members are counting on, especially those who might like to be relieved from a third or fourth or fifth tour in Iraq or Afghanistan. They really don't care much if the person who relieves them is gay. Would you?
Obama aide: Gays in military policy under review - Boston.com
Obama seeks assessment on gays in military - The Boston Globe
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
The timing of Obama revealing his Supreme Court nominee is utterly transparent.
It's obvious that the President revealed this pic today because the didn't want the top news story to be gay marriage demonstrations over the revelation of the Prop. 8 verdict. The timing of this is a transparent attempt to sideline and marginalize the gay community... again.
As a community, we can no longer afford to wait for Obama to be our leader on this fight, for he is showing himself to be a triangulator.
We need to put pressure on Congress and our state legislators to pass this social justice legislation and then embarrass the President into keeping his campaign promise once it reaches our desk.
Ignore the people who tell you to "wait". The establishment ALWAYS tell you to wait. They ALWAYS have something more important on the agenda. They NEVER give you the green light to pursue social justice.
Social justice only comes when you shake off your low self-esteem and begin demanding it. That's not the end, but that's where social justice begins.
Speaker Pelosi's website states that she will "support" the efforts to change the law.
HOW ABOUT A LITTLE LEADERSHIP NANCY? FOR ALL THE GLBT IN SAN FRANCISCO WHO SUPPORTED YOU?
Not another cent!
Seriously? Do you think the next representative will do any better? They're politicians., cminca. They all take the path of least resistance.
I work with military people who are "not telling" and they are the higher of the highest as far as willing to place their bodies in the front of another human to save their life. These people do the best job over many who are hetero and do so with pride. Some of those htye work with make fun and it is sad because they are allowed to by those who rank up from them. If the don't ask don't tell was off the books there would be less if not a total stopping of the behavior which is like a small child's naa naa naa! The very best nurses my deceased daughter ever had were homosexual and I would place my life in the hands of them any time any day. It is very wrong to prevent those who have the inner strength to walk the walk and love their country as much as anyone can be denied this chance to serve. How many hundreds, thousands are in the military, have been in the military and been trained to the highest levels? Too many have been yanked out of service after doing the jobs they have trained for even to officer ranks and it is time to stop the nonsense and fill the military with those who wish to serve and love their country!!!
No, good intentions are not enough, but I personally believe that he will act to change this issue, and unlike many, I believe it's a bit soon be condemn Obama for not cleaning up this mess.
Republicans will fight to sustain DADT.
After all, it's a requirement for GOP membership.
For those who decided to "come out of the closet" before DADT was repealed, I don't feel sorry for them. As long as that law is in place, those who are willing about their sexual orientation, will have to pay the price!! It takes time, just like any other lssue. The president's intentions are to get rid of that law, but if gays and lesbians think its okay to open up about their situation, before the matter has been resolved, then they have to understand that there are consequences.
How come no one ever holds the "askers" accountable.
The military is still going to gay bars and checking license plates.
Don't kid yourself. "Don't Tell" may still bet he law, but there is still plenty of "asking" going on.
The President has firmly committed to repealing DADT. He has made this statement many times.
There has been progress. For example Benefits to gay diplomats and the military is studying how to repeal DADT. Work is being done. Intent has been expressed. Nothing can be done immediately. We are not children. Lobby if we must, but deranged impatient anger as expressed by some below does not honor us.
The President has firmly committed to repealing DADT.
Written your Congressional representatives yet?
"Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is a congressional matter to resolve. Once that's done, then the executive branch can put in place a rewritten UCJ and issue the appropriate Commander-in-Chief level orders.
Is Congress really so pathetic that it has to be led by the hand by the Good Shepard Obama? Can't they take action on this on their own? Or is it just easier for you to attack the President for not doing his part to rewrite the laws of this country? If so, you realize he gave up his right to author Senate bills when he resigned his seat in the Senate, yes?
"Obama won't do this. He won't do that. He didn't do exactly what we wanted right NOW!"
The number of people in this country who obviously never took, or didn't pay attention in, civics class, never ceases to amaze me.
Yes, Congress needs to change the law. But pending that, Obama can order the military to stop discharging soldiers under "DADT." The very law that established the policy gives the President the power to stop enforcing it.
Have gays asked Barney Frank to do anything about these issues? He is a member of Congress. Has he introduced any legislation for gay rights?
The President cannot order the military to ignore federal law. DADT is LAW and it has accompanying regulations. Once the regs were promulagated, according to its terms,it must be implemented.
The only way to stop the ravages of DADT is to follow the law until it is repealed.
Uhh... No, he can't order the military to do something illegal. He, and they, would be up for criminal charges.
The most he could do is to order that all future cases be carefully analyzed, and that the exception for "this person is too important to get rid of and they don't really act gay" be applied as liberally as possible. That won't stop some career officer from deciding that they don't want "the gay" in their unit, and rubber-stamping them out the door anyway, but it would slow things down a bit.
What is the overiding human right: food, shelter/housing, health care, clear air and reliable water supply, education, sexual orientation ..........etc?
All of the above.
Obama's going to be LA to raise money for the dems. Why aren't Gay rights leaders organizing protests outside the hotel where he's speaking? The're reneging on their leadership by not doing so. I think individuals will be there though to protest Obama's lazy "fierce advocacy" of Gay rights.
I agree. I hope that Obama will be greeted by an angry crowd. Especially, as seems likely, if the California Supreme Court upholds Proposition 8. At some point, we have to quit asking politely for our rights and start demanding them.
hmmmm....so what would demanding get you? I think this is what is going on currently. Demanding has produced not one thing. Strategic thinking would be helpful.
I hope Obama is greeted by an intelligent crowd, making cogent arguments why DADT needs to be repealed now rather than later.
You have the same rights as every other human being, but marriage to someone of the same sex, shouldn't be his first priority. I believe that he will repeal the law, but it's not going to happen today!! I'm sick of gays and lesbians demanding rights that are not theirs to demand! I don't agree with those who feel that gays and lesbians should have the right to marry.
Will you be there advocating for gay rights and repeal of DADT or are you simply waiting for others to do so.
The President has committed to repealing DADT, legislatively. He has expressed his intent over and over again. Just this weekend, we have Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's "leaked" e-mail granting equal benfits to gay diplomats and we have Mullens saying that the military is studying how to go about repealing DADT within the military.
The problem I have with this issue is not its rightness and need for a repeal of the current law. My problem is with the methodology being employed to bully the President to act now without regard to the many priorities on his plate. I'm sorry, this change is important, but not the highest priority we face as a Nation.
"Good intentions and warm handwritten notes from the President will not carry the day. They certainly did not save the career of Lieutenant Sandy Tsao who was scheduled for discharge last week. The Arabic speaking Lieutenant Dan Choi is now at risk of being discharged. .... Urge Air Force Secretary Michael B. Donley to allow Lieutenant Colonel Victor Fehrenbach to keep flying. .... Hundreds more service members will be discharged over the next few months unless Congress and the President, and, yes, the Pentagon act."
These servicemen came out on national TV and knew the consequences of doing so. They sacrificed their careers to push the agenda of changing the law. The fact is they violated the current law and they will suffer the consequences. Right fight, wrong strategy. This President is a strategic planner and he is at work to change this law, but he also has to be realistic and handle the priorities of the day. I am in agreement with the community that DADT is wrong. I support the Service Members Legal Defense Fund (sldn.org). Do not despair.
Anyone who does not put human rights as the highest priority, doesn't put humans as the highest priority.
What POSSIBLE priority are we facing now, that history tells us we won't be facing 20 years from now?? The ONLY reason why people want to put off confronting this issue is because they are afraid to face their own fears and ignorance.
its as
What about those who really need the economy addressed?
Gays and lesbians have human rights, but they shouldn't have the right to marry! And it is not an issue that has to be addressed right now. Most people aren't afraid or ignorant about gays and lesbians; if the law is passed to allow them to marry, then fine, but it isn't a rights issue. And for those who couldn't wait and went on national TV with their stories, too bad!! You tried to push your agenda and it backfired!!!
Obama told us in the campaign that he knew how to multi-task. Let him do it.
He is. Things just take time. There is no immediate answer to anything. Despite the Recovery Act, the economy is struggling. Despite the E-Order to close Gitmo, it is still open. Despite the President's commitment to repeal DADT, it is still the law of the land.
Obama has also asked us to be patient. We haven't done that.
Very well said.
Openly gay men in the military will have an adverse effect on enlistment.... as a straight women, I don't want to share locker rooms with Lesbians. I suspect men are more adamant on the subject.
Look, if you like sex with your own sex - you shouldn't be sharing sleeping quarters, locker rooms or bathrooms with your own sex.
People have a right to privacy where sexuality is concerned.
Gay men will hit on soldiers more openly.... there will be more violence... probably hate crime enforcement.... all because gays want more from us than we are willing to give.
The California Supremes are going to shoot down the marriages tomorrow...
MY money sez they will not over ride the voters on this subject.
Gays are going to have to suck it up.... and stay in the shadows with their idea of sex and marriage.
Society has spoken LOUDLY now in more than a handful of places.... and the military will be wrecked if we open this up to where there is no consequence for openly gay behavior and rhetoric.
Straight men will not tolerate it.
The rantings of a true homophobe with no basis in reality. Many other industrialized nations have open service and none of the dire predictions you allege have come to fruition. The fact is that many gay service people serve along side straight service people without incident. I hate to break it to you, but you've been sharing the world with gay people and that will continue to be true. This is that same tired mantra, the military will become a trolling place for gay members. What nonsense. There are more cases of straight military men trolling military women and fraternizing with them against regulations.
Preach Maryanne.
You seem to not have much respect for our military as you clearly see our service members as unprofessional. Why do you ha.te our troops?
I'm in the Navy and have known many homosexual sailors (male and female). I have never had a male homosexual hit on me and I have not known any straight sailors that have been hit on.
But, I would bet that if you are a female you have been hit on numerous times by hetero males.
It is all about teaching all people to control harrassment and assault.
Thanks for your service.
GG Marks: If the armed services do allow openly gay people serve, you could follow the example of a Senator who holds office in the 111th Congress. When the services integrated, he didn't like it. He wrote to a Sen from the Deep South to say that he couldn't serve with or live in a barracks with a black man. He never served in the US Armed Forces. If the armed services allow openly gay people to serve, do yourself & the USA a favor, don't enlist.
The armed services managed to continue to exist despite this man's refusal to serve among black people. The armed services will (Can you beleive it?) exist without homophobic troops.
FYI: the armed forces do not allow any sort of sexual activity in barracks, locker rooms, latrines & on duty. If you want to engage in any sexual act, you can't do it during your duty hours either. If you engage in sexual activity in your barracks or while on duty, you risk an Article 15 (nonjudicial punishment) or a Court(s) Martial & a less than honorable discharge.
Since you won't be able to get over it, please don't serve in the USA's armed forces.
So, what, you believe our troops aren't mature and professional enough to keep their hands and eyes to themself?
well, yeah, there was that whole tailhook scandal a few years back
Oh, but, wait, that was heterosexual men who couldn't keep their hands and eyes off women
So what is your point?? That gays and lesbians are LESS likely to be able to keep their hands and eyes off someone else?
And, gay or straight, who would pursue someone that they knew didn't want them, unless they were mentally ill...
Of course I suppose then you believe gays and lesbians are metally ill??
Boy your argument sure does have a lot of holes here. starting to look like swiss cheese
One person's priority is another one's important life-and-death issue
Yep, even his 'issues' page has added weasel words to give Obama an out on this.
http://daysofourtrailers.blogspot.com/2009/05/o-day-107-plethora-o-broken-promises.html
Under the bus, just like everything that becomes politically inconvenient.
Don't rely on 3rd party authority. Go to the www.whitehouse.gov website yourself. If you look at the press briefings on Thursday and Friday and most of last week, you will see that Press Secretary Gibbs has stated that the President is fully committed to repealing DADT. He even explain why it cannot be ignored via an E-order like desegregation of the military.
No one is thrown under the bus. People are, however, showing some ignorance and a lot of impatience. Inform yourself.
Amen on the good intentions is not enough!! What a bunch of baloney this is. Other countries have gays serving openly in the military and they are doing just fine.
Obama speaking of this "SACRED BOND" with the Military soldiers. Spouting American values and principals in every speech. He is starting to make me sick to hear because the backdrop is that Obama is actively allowing Gay soldiers to exits in a discriminatory environment and in fear of losing their pensions and careers. This goes against the core American value of liberty which encompasses the ideal of fairness and equality.
Obama can use the bully pulpit to motivate Congress to act. Short of that he could actually just ask them to act. He has done neither. Simply Outrageous in light of his own spoken words.
Our Gay American Military deserve a Commander and Chief with a Spine!
Absolutely, and the only reason Obama had Hillary announce equal rights for Gay diplomats now is because they have an idea of what's going to happen tommorow in California when the Supreme Court gives it's ruling on Prop H-8. In effect, those marriages that occurred can stand and Prop H-8 will stand too. The Gay diplomatic change is just a crumb offered to salvage what support Obama has left in the Gay community, a community that voted on the whole for him and helped with a financial boon to his campaign. He's no "fierce advocate" of Gay rights, just a fierce wuss. During the campaign there were plenty of signs that he would cave on DADT e.g.,and his promise to to do away with DOMA e.g., McClurkin, Rick Warren but his promises were so much smoke, as much smoke as it was when he promised to fillibuster FISA and then voted for it!
I haven't written him off completely as of yet - yet being the operative word. That is why I continue to send e-mails to my senators and congresswoman as well as the Whitehouse (although I'm not sure if they actually get read at the Whitehouse, but I send them nonetheless.)
What we need is to have so-called leaders of Gay rights organizations get serious and shout it out loudly that Obama has failed us. Obama's a political hack and that's the only thing he understands. They have a lot of responsibility about this. It's not enough for them to have private meetings with Obama and then go home for a cocktail and stay quiet. If they want to be in the forefront for our rights, they need to be upfront and in his face and they're not. They in effect become accomplices to doing nothing.
Silly move, kemosabe. Your one best hope is President Obama and his administration. No, he has not waved his magic wand and solved this inequity in the law yet, but he is better positioned than any other President has ever been to do so. He is working the Pentagon and Congress, but this issue, while important, is not his most pressing priority. I know the community is tired of being patient, but what is the alternative? Who are you going to get this change from if not President Obama? Do not despair, we're only 4 months into this administration. The cause is not lost, just delayed. Many of us have the community's back on this issue but we're a little more reasonable in our expectations.
We really need to rally the troops (yes pun intended) and start taking to the streets. Hundreds, or thousands of rallies and marches across the country, men and women in uniform standing side by side their LGBT Band of Brothers. If President Obama is waiting for there to be wide spread public support for this before he acts, let's really show him he's got the support. Ignore the bigots and naysayers who say he's got more important things to worry about. Nothing is more important than human rights, including the right to live our lives openly and honestly with genuine integrity. We must not stand for this any longer. If it takes taking to the streets and showing just how strong and loud our numbers are, what are we waiting for? Why are we putting all the responsibility for the policy changes on ANYONE in government, whether it be the president or congress. We must show that we support policy changes.
He wants bottom up support, lets give it to him!
What are we waiitng for, my LGBT brothers, sisters and allies??
If we want something, we must demand it ourself. It is our Personal Responsibility (Obama's words) to make sure congress passes this change in law. President Obama once said "if you want me to do something, make me do it"
so let's make him (and congress) do it!
This is not an issue that one should make Obama do. He made this an issue.
But I will help in any way that I can.
Organize a gay rights parade or event in your neighborhood. Hold a fundraiser for Human Rights Campaign, get out there and canvass the streets and poll people and talk to them. Vow to educate 10 people a day on human rights issues. (and call it Human rights, not civil rights)
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
