Do Obama's Private Promises on Don't Ask Don't Tell Matter?

Second Lieutenant Sandy Tsao is being discharged from the military for informing her chain of command that she is gay. She wrote in a letter to President Obama that she could not live according to one of the "seven army values" of personal integrity and not be truthful about the issue -- even though a legal provision of the military, passed by Congress, and signed by President Clinton promotes and protects a safer choice for gay military staff: duplicity.

Remarkably, Sandy Tsao received the letter from Obama above.

Handwritten, Barack Obama's letter reads:

Sandy - Thanks for the wonderful and thoughtful letter. It is because of outstanding Americans like you that I committed to changing our current policy. Although it will take some time to complete (partly because it needs Congressional action) I intend to fulfill my commitment. -- Barack Obama

Obama's administration has been silent on the expansion of same sex marriage -- and his White House team has in an Orwellian, image-shifting way softened the language on the president's website about Don't Ask Don't Tell. The Rick Warren inaugural invocation still rankles.

But we have the private letter to Sandy Tsao -- who despite Barack Obama's own views is about to lose her job. Dan Choi is too.

I hope that David Geffen gets on the phone to the President and to Rahm Emanuel and tells them that this is not an issue that they can leave way back in the White House closet.

-- Steve Clemons writes the popular political blog, The Washington Note

Comments

[sprtakis69]

03:19 PM on 05/11/2009

Second Lieutenant Sandy Tsao needs to take her letter from POTUS with her to her hearing and I'm sure she's going to. I just hope that letter will carry some weight during the hearing process!

[sprtakis69]

03:14 PM on 05/11/2009

If DADT isn't repealed. It leaves to question...

How do you protect straight service members from gay and lesbians they serve with from other countries or even worse, how do you protect them from gay and lesbian Americans while they're on leave?

How do you protect straight service members from the gay and lesbian civilians they work with every day who are government employees?

I shudder to think!

[IntellectuallyHonest]

12:39 PM on 05/11/2009

Gay soldiers in America get treated like dirt.

[sprtakis69]

02:04 PM on 05/11/2009

Not usually by their peers though, but by the rules they have to abide by.

I served in NATO alongside many Soldiers and Airmen and knew many gay service members who never had any problems within their units, even though people suspected them of being gay. Sometimes there were issues, because just like with racists which you find in the military, just like in society, you also have your homophobes.

That being said, our military is made up of people from our American society, so in or out of the military gays are treated the same.

[Sumocat]

10:31 AM on 05/11/2009

In this letter, the president stated "it will take some time to complete." Clearly, he made no promise of snapping his fingers and undoing DADT. If we want to hold the president accountable for his promise, great. But we should hold him to his full promise, not just the part we like. Press him for forward action, not instant results.

[KJLSanDiego]

08:48 PM on 05/11/2009

Changing laws is the job of congress, Sum!
Do you not want a checked and balanced government?
Or do you need a refresher in Civics?

[hapiday]

07:22 PM on 05/10/2009

The other day on one of the news shows they had the broke down log cabin republicans on. They were saying they were loyal republicans that wanted the republican party to look at gay issues more seriously.
Once seeing them it made me wonder if they voted for President Obama in hopes that he would change DADT, approve of gay marriage and simply make all their dreams come true. If the president was able to make the gay community happy with all of their issues, I wondered if these same people would turn around and vote republican in the next election.

[sprtakis69]

08:19 AM on 05/11/2009

Trust me, as a 20 year retired gay Navy veteran, and a democrat, with a best friend who is a lesbian republican.

My friend, the republican and many other misguided gay and lesbian republicans voted for McCain.

I have another best friend (the ex-gf of the above Rep.), 20 year Navy and still going, mid grade officer, who is a democrat and has always voted democrat, who this year voted republican. Both of them did so because of Obama's stance on abortion.

So gay and lesbian people who believe in gay marriage, repealing DADT and other gay issues don’t just vote for the guy who may, or may not, better our lives as gay Americans! There are other issues at hand.

Myself, I don’t believe in abortion, and I don’t believe I have a right to tell a woman what to do with her body. If asked for advice by a female friend I’d never support the abortion side, that would be her cross to bear. In the end I voted for a man that may give RIGHTS to American. After all, all American’s are tax payers, or at least we should be!

[Scott Baker]

07:16 PM on 05/10/2009

You know, another way to look at this is that it's a way for a Gay person to decide when to leave the military. As far as I know, you can depart with full benefits at any time just by announcing you're Gay.
We need to close the Gay loophole! Why should str8 people be discriminated against in the military and made to serve the duration of their term, just because they are str8! Don't Ask, Don't Care must replace Don't Ask, Don't Tell.

[SD Indy]

09:53 PM on 05/10/2009

"As far as I know, you can depart with full benefits at any time just by announcing you're Gay."

------

Wrong. First of all, you must be in for a certain length of time to receive full benefits. Second, If you take the "punishment" silently (meaning don't fight the discharge it is an honorable discharge), however, if you fight the discharge it goes on your record as a dishonorable discharge.

[sprtakis69]

10:41 AM on 05/11/2009

Actually, that loophole has been used by thousands of str8 people to get out of the military. The government and SLDN know this and want the military to stop booting people out who the government has put hundreds of thousands of dollars in to training.

I just retired from 20 years of Naval service and I witnessed str8 people using the loophole many times. Gay people join to serve their country like anyone else, and do so honorably. Then they’re forced to lie about themselves in order to stay in the military. Why would they then turn around and use the loophole the Government created? America tries to be such a moral country by saying gay is wrong. America is morally right, but if you’re in the service of your country will you lie to us because lying is the law.

Then the country says don’t lie to us about what happened at GITMO, tell us the truth. Lie about sexuality, but be honest about GITMO.

[jonbw]

02:47 PM on 05/10/2009

He is already planning to give up on many of his biggest public promises so I dodn't know why his private promise should care more weight.

Health care reform debate is happening behind closed doors. Promise broken

A mandate has a 98% chance of being part of reform. Promise soon to be broken

Some health benifts would likely be taxed. Promise very likely to be broken

Public plan option is not a red line and it looks like he will not fight for it. Promise likely to be broken

[jcwtts1]

01:35 PM on 05/10/2009

Here is an example of bad politics. Miss California, no one heard what she said, not really. A completely unscientific sampling, my circle, no one even knew the pagent happened, no one spoke about it, then Perez Hilton, someone else no one I know has ever heard of called her a C*** and B****. Then it was actual news. That next day everyone I know was talking. But you know what they were saying, some guy called Miss California a C not she was a bigot, not that she was insane, not that she was a jerk. No, a group of highly educated men and women all talked about a guy calling her a C. Hilton made her an victim. Hilton got the opposite of what he wanted, he made a pretty blonde, who by the way makes her living talking on TV, into the innocent victim of this story. I heard people say things like, "Why ask that kind of question at a beauty pageant," and "Isn't she allowed to think what she wants?" and "how do you mark her down for being honest." And each of these people is FOR GAY MARRIAGE, we all are. This is not a civil rights issue, none of the LGBT community issues are. They are political issues and the only way to get them passed is through politics. So for the love of mike start acting like you are in a political fight so that you can win.

J

[Tanyars5]

10:28 PM on 05/10/2009

You are correct in your statements. The gay movement is in need of strong leadership. They lack organization and focus, The sooner they understand they are in a POLITICAL fight not a civil rights fight the sooner they may get their issues to the forefront. They attack the wrong people at the wrong times for all the wrong reasons.

[jcwtts1]

01:27 PM on 05/10/2009

There is a hierarchy of priorities. An old professor of mine described politics as the allocation of scarce resources. Well political capital is about as scarce as it comes. So my question is DADT or gay marriage. If you want them both you will probably get nothing. If you pick what you want and hammer it there is a chance, not a promise, a chance. What the LGBT community has done is pick multiple fights simultaneously. What you get when you do that is what you get. Yes no maybe so. DADT was a doable issue until the freak out and meltdown after prop 8 passed. What happened was the LGBT community (this is an outsiders perspective) got scared they would get blanked and they lost sight of the plan. A friend of mine always says plan the work work the plan. What he means is sit down, think long and hard and come up with the best plan. Then work that plan even in the face of adversity. The military integrated in the 50s during the Korean War, America integrated 5-10 years later. What I am saying is that the military is one of the best places to begin the process. You are winning your state cases on gay marriage so simply be quiet about it, refocus your energy if it isn't too late, on DADT and push it through. You had enough votes, you had enough advocates, now, I don't know if you do.

[Truthahn]

01:06 PM on 05/10/2009

If we wait til late this year we'll be getting into campaign season for the 2010 midterms. There's no way Congressional Democrats will want to handle a political hot potato like DADT while campaigning for reelection. They'll delay until after midterms, but then it will be time for Obama to start getting ready for 2012. Which means that if DADT is not addressed before winter 2009 it is not likely that it will be addressed until the next presidential term. Obama is politically astute enough to know that. I think he's intentionally stalling. He doesn't give me the impression that he wants to expend political capital on this issue. He'll keep dithering and delaying and asking for patience until it's too late to get anything done, then he'll trust that gullible liberals will be satisfied that he'll get around to DADT in his second term.

[zest]

11:27 AM on 05/10/2009

Homosexuals can marry and they cannot serve in the armed forces.

[zest]

11:26 AM on 05/10/2009

Let's see, as a homosexual I can get married and I cannot serve in the armed forces.

[TheBaffler]

10:27 AM on 05/10/2009

Obama's apologists forget that actions speak louder than words. They're soothed by his sensible rhetoric, and forget that he doesn't follow through. Wait, they say, wait. One day he'll magically start doing the right thing, you'll see. We're supposed to shut up and give him a free pass until then.

[spacester]

01:20 PM on 05/10/2009

Good points, in a general sense. I can see that if you are not an Obama fan, that could easily be your perspective.

No free passes, that's not the deal he made with us. We must hold him accountable: it's important we do that.

But I'm one of Obama's biggest fans, in terms of understanding and agreeing with his decisions, and have found very little to find fault with. I suppose that makes me an apologist.

See, I think he's following thru just fine, and as POTUS he started doing the right thing on Jan 20.

Yes, the LGBT community is being asked to wait (or pick up their game a notch) while the huge mess Obama inherited is cleaned up.

But No Free Passes. I stand ready to criticize him on any future decision.

I take it you think he's been given free passes so far?

[Doofus]

09:15 AM on 05/10/2009

Hopefully, the Commander in Chief will get around to making good on his
promise a.s.a.p. Unfortunately, in the mean time, there will still be (in effect)
scapegoats.

Ironically, one of the difficulties in this situation, is that the Supreme Court,
even in the best of times, does not intervene in the relationship & prerogatives
of the C-in-C and US military personnel. It's beyond their pay grade, as it turns out.
Hence, for example, one finds that the military are regulated by what's called 'The
Uniform Code of Military Justice' which is entirely outside the Constitution and the
ordinary expectations of civilian Americans. It's not entirely fair, and it's not exactly
'just' either. Although soldiers actually pledge to uphold the US Constitution when
they enlist, they don't quite receive its full protection.

[rhubardpi]

01:21 AM on 05/10/2009

I have to think that since folks know the rules going in that some of them speak up that they are gay as a handy way to remove themselves from the military. I hope the rule is not changed. "Nam vet 67-68.