RSS Feed for This PostCurrent Article

“Obama To Tackle Gay Law, Aide Says”

That’s the headline I saw Monday morning at AOL . Of course my response was, “Whaaa” For real?? How fortuitous since General McChrystal is saying we need more troops in Afghanistan! Is this true??” And then I read the article. The short answer is, “No.”

Here is the article:

President Barack Obama will focus “at the right time” on how to overturn the “don’t ask, don’t tell” ban on gays serving openly in the military, his national security adviser said Sunday.

“I don’t think it’s going to be — it’s not years, but I think it will be teed up appropriately,” James Jones said.

The Democratic-led Congress is considering repealing the 1993 law. Action isn’t expected on the issue until early next year.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., recently wrote Obama and Defense Secretary Robert Gates asked to share their views and recommendations on the contentious policy. In Sept. 24 letters, Reid also asked for a review of the cases of two U.S. officers who were discharged from the military because of their sexuality.


So far, this is absolutely nothing we have not heard before, is it? No. But wait, there’s more:

“At a time when we are fighting two wars, I do not believe we can afford to discharge any qualified individual who is willing to serve our country,” Reid wrote.

Jones said Obama “has an awful lot on his desk. I know this is an issue that he intends to take on at the appropriate time. And he has already signaled that to the Defense Department. The Defense Department is doing the things it has to do to prepare, but at the right time, I’m sure the president will take it on.”

As a candidate, Obama signaled support for repealing the law. To the disappointment of gay-rights supporters, he has yet to made a move since taking office in January. The White House has said it will not stop the military from dismissing gays and lesbians who acknowledge their http://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gifsexuality.

Last year, 634 members of the military were discharged for being gay, or .045 percent of the active-duty U.S. force, according to an Aug. 14 congressional report.
The largest number of gays who were ousted under the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy came in 2001, when 1,227 were discharged, or .089 of the force.
The House is considering legislation to repeal “don’t ask, don’t tell” and allow people who have been discharged under the policy to rejoin the military.
Jones appeared on CNN’s “State of the Union.”

Wait, what did General Jones say? John “It Is Hard For Me To Feel Sorry For This Former Obama Cheerleader” Aravosis was none too happy about the pronouncement by the National Security Adviser in this post:

Apparently, General Jones would have us believe that President Obama wasn’t aware that we were fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan when he promised to lift the gay ban during the campaign in exchange for our votes. So, Jones tells us today, Obama can’t get to that particular promise right now because he’s busy fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Uh huh.

So when exactly are both of those wars going to be over? I’m guessing some time after Obama leaves office. And that of course assumes that we don’t have more wars to “distract” the president.

Jones just set us back. Again. He just gave the Republicans, and conservative Dems, the perfect talking point. Should anyone – members of Congress or the administration – move to lift the ban any time before these wars are over, our opponents will simply quote General Jones saying that to lift the ban during war time would be too distracting.

What could Jones have said? How about, there’s a new analysis from a Department of Defense-related publication that same the ban can be lifted without hurting morale and cohesion. Or how about saying that the President just wrote to Senator Reid, agreeing to work together to lift the ban?

Once again, let me just interject that those of us who were paying attention BEFORE the Election, during the Primaries, were very much aware that Obama wasn’t going to do a damn thing for us, at least not in a timely fashion. There were clues: Never marching in one Pride parade EVER, unlike Hillary Clinton; Donnie McClurkin, “Cured homosexual”; State Senator The Rev. James Meeks; Doug Kmiec; and Pastor Rick Warren, to name just a few. The information was there for those who were willing to see. I’m just sayin’. Back to Aravosis:

Nope. None of that. All we got was another reason why the president may never be able to keep his promise. The Obama administration is doing next to nothing – and perhaps nothing altogether – to move the ball forward on repealing DADT. This isn’t the kind of policy you just wake up one morning and say “ah, today is the day to lift the ban.” Bill Clinton found that out the hard way. It takes months, if not years, of preparation. Working the PR angles, the media, the grassroots, the public at large, the Pentagon. While we have no idea what if anything Obama is doing to work the Pentagon – though Jones’ repeated unhelpful remarks suggest that whatever the president is doing, it isn’t working – we certainly do know what he’s doing on the Hill. Zippo. Harry Reid had to write Obama a letter last week begging him help. And in terms of lobbying the public, we get unhelpful statements like what Jones did, again, today.

In the end, don’t think that Jones is simply freelancing. There is no way a senior administration official goes on TV and keeps screwing up like this. At first it’s a screw up. After this many times, it’s part of the plan. And the plan is to move the goal posts again and again and again until Obama can pass his gay rights promises to the next president, assuming we get a Democrat elected again this century.

No, there isn’t any way a senior administration official goes on CNN and says something like this all on his own. Seeing what the General really said is what made that AOL headline so incredibly misleading (the Yahoo link for General Jones was far more accurate). That seems to be a bit of water-carrying to me, a hope that it will deflect some of the frustration being voiced about Obama now, including on SNL this past Saturday night (10/3).

In other words, not only does it appear Obama isn’t getting to DADT in a timely fashion, he may not be getting to it at ALL. I wish I could tell you I am surprised, but unlike Mr. Aravosis, this is what I feared was going to happen under Obama.

As of Monday, October 5th, 439 service members have been discharged under “DADT” under the Obama Administration. For how long will those numbers go up? Will it indeed be until Obama is out of office?

  • Brodie

    Oh, give me a break! This idiot hates gays & lesbians- that should be pretty damned apparent by now. Our civil rights don’t count. After all, someone has to be the one that everyone else is better than. What’s new??? Never trust a closet case. That’s my opinion, and I’m sticking with it.

  • Brodie

    excuse me, but my comment has fallen into spammy… could you please retrieve it?

  • Witzend

    Rev. Amy, how utterly fitting that we, the shining city on a hill, the cradle of democracy, the beacon of hope, the bellwhether of liberty and equality, should share this benighted policy with just one segment of the world’s population… Muslim countries.

    • http://www.rabblerouserruminations.blogspot.com/ Rabble Rouser Reverend Amy

      Wow, Witzend – that is a startling comparison.

      And Brodie, right on target…

    • Ferd Berfle

      Excellent comparison, Witzend. Hell, when I was in the service in Germany during the 70s, there were gays serving and we didn’t make an issue of it and neither did the commanders. We needed everyone who could carry a rifle or keep a missile computer system operational. We simply had too many other things to worry about–like the Warsaw Pact over the next hill.

      • Witzend

        An increasing number of Jewish Americans are volunteering for the Israeli army. As an IDF veteran, this fact doesn’t really surprise me; what does is the number of gays who are choosing to serve there rather than here for the same reasons you outline.

        • Ferd Berfle

          You were in the IDF? That speaks volumes. I salute you.

          I was actually in the US Army (USAREUR) stationed in a small village in the Fulda Gap in the former West Germany named Wildflecken, about as far off the beaten trail as one could get in Germany (or even Europe). My comment applies–no one bothered the gays and we all knew who they were and didn’t care. They were just soldiers. Of course, if one wanted to get out, it was a convenient excuse, but I never saw that in my 3 years there. A certain camaraderie developed between all of us due to the length of the tours and the complete isolation.

          • Ferd Berfle

            What I said in this comment perhaps sounded a bit crass. When I used the word “one”, I meant any person, not just a gay service member. My apologies in advance.

            • Witzend

              I read it precisely as you meant it. The alternative would have never occurred to me. Something to do with the way I’m wired, I suppose.

          • Witzend

            You were in the IDF? That speaks volumes. I salute you.

            Not sure what to make of that remark, but thanks…. Just paused to return your solute.

            After his residency, my dad enlisted in the USAF for 2 years – the first in Morocco, the second in France. It always sounded like he and my mom had way too much fun to call it “service” (at 25, they left NY with one child and returned with three), but, then again, I never saw anyone as thrilled as was to receive his draft notice from the IDF.

            Although I’m very much a product of both cultures, the sum total of my experience there has clearly shaped my world view in ways that few Americans can understand. Frankly, as unfit as Obama was and is for the presidency, it was that secondary title of Commander-in-Chief that made his election an outrage. Granted, this country is accustomed to electing leaders who have never served in the armed forces. But now? In wartime? I just don’t get it. Nor do I get why the families of our troops in Afghanistan have not yet stormed DC to demand that BO furnish the additional support McChrystal is requesting.
            How many casualties are considered acceptable to this Administration? To Congress? To the general public?

            My two brothers and I served in the First Lebanon War. We lost friends, but we survived. In ’91, an Iraqi scud landed not 30 yards from my front door. I survived. But it wasn’t until two of my nephews fought in Lebanon and Gaza, respectively, that I truly got it. Forget about eating and sleeping, I could hardly breathe until they came home.

            • http://www.rabblerouserruminations.blogspot.com/ Rabble Rouser Reverend Amy

              Witzend, thank you for sharing your experience with us. Speaking for me only, I am honored.

              And I agree – Obama’s hemming and hawing abt what to do in Afghanistan, after all of the stuff he said while he was campaigning abt listening to the generals, blah, blah, blah, to now, with our soldiers dying there now. Unconscionable.

              Thanks again, Witzend – moving story. You and your family have certainly done more than your share in military service. Wow.

              And Ferd, thank you for your service to our country.

              • Witzend

                Rev. Amy, much as I appreciate the kind words, my family’s experiences and service appear remarkable only from this side of the Pond. Over there, we get the draft notice and report for duty. It’s that simple.

                Nevertheless, here’s a little known tidbit you might appreciate. On the last day of basic training, we have a swearing-in ceremony that’s usually held by torchlight after sundown. There’s nothing quite like the sound of 500 voices (male or female) piercing the darkness with a collective “I swear,” but, for them – as for every soldier before them – it all comes together when each is given a copy of the Old Testament in one hand and a rifle in the other. The former is the history of our land and people; the latter is the means to DEFEND them. It’s not about religion, politics or power. It’s just about survival, plain and simple.

                But, to the matter of your post, which has vexed me all evening. I remember reading an article a year or two ago about the U.S. military furnishing “moral waivers” to new recruits with criminal records, who make up between 10%-15% of our armed forces. So, to be clear: A soldier with a criminal record can’t be discharged, but a soldier with a criminal record who reveals s/he’s gay is finished. It gets even stranger when you factor in the estimated 1500 cases of rape or sexual assault committed annually against female service members by their fellow soldiers or officers. Call it a shot in the dark, but I’m guessing none of those perpetrators was gay.

                “Stupid is as stupid does.”

                • http://www.rabblerouserruminations.blogspot.com/ Rabble Rouser Reverend Amy

                  What an image you have painted, Witzend. And you write beautifully, I might add.

                  Oh, you know that has vexed me as well. I wrote abt that some time ago, that our military is taking in CRIMINALS, but kicking out West Point graduated, war decorated soldiers because they are gay or lesbian. So you can be a gangbanger and serve, but not if you’re gay. Or you can be a drug dealer. Whatever – as long as you aren’t GLB, you’re A-Okay.

                  And you are ABSOLUTELY right abt the increase in sexual violence within our military. It is both infuriating and saddening that it has gotten so bad, and so little is being written/done abt it.

                  Thank you for your comment, Witzend.

          • Witzend

            Ferd, it’s so past my bedtime, but I just had to thank you. I’ve spent a couple of thoroughly intriguing and enjoyable hours learning about the USAREUR and Wildflecken. From the veterans’ web sites to the history of the town, I couldn’t stop reading. Your experience is as remote from mine as Wildflecken was from civilization. Now, it is I who must solute YOU.

  • ~~JustMe~~

    Oh this will come out again just before 2012 voting comes around. It will be left dangling in the air and many will look at that as though he’s rooting for their cause.

    Let’s move on nothing to see here just now he’s too busy!

    So true Witzend seems so ironic!

    • http://www.rabblerouserruminations.blogspot.com/ Rabble Rouser Reverend Amy

      ~~Just Me~~, no doubt – and no doubt, they’ll want to believe him all over again, even though he has a Super Majority now.

      Ferd, excellent point – and thank you. One would think that with the need for more troops, this would have been the FIRST thing Obama would want to tackle, not something that is perpetually on the back burner.

  • propertius

    Now, now, President Obama (TM) has too many Very Important Things (TM) to do, like pitching Chicago to the IOC, to have time to handle trivial stuff like wars, financial crises, health care, or keeping campaign promises to GLBT voters.

    He’ll get around to it when he gets around to all the other stuff he swore he’d do “his very first day in office”, like ending torture and closing Guantanamo.

  • barry bums a ciggie

    Yep, and just in time too. He’ll throw a few crumbs to the gay and lesbian community to keep everyone quiet and happy until he needs them again. He and his minions are pissing off the senior citizen voting block so he must campaign (again) to not lose the GLBT community. Pander pander pander.

    And don’t forget that SF Chronicle article where Willie Brown swears that Barack wouldn’t pose a photo with Gavin Newsome. mmmhhhmmm. Maybe he was still working on fine tuning that dazzling one-pose smile of his.

    • http://www.rabblerouserruminations.blogspot.com/ Rabble Rouser Reverend Amy

      Oh, I don’t think I can forget abt that snub of Mayor Newsome. But your reason is pretty funny!

      Absolutely – pandering is one of the things Obama does do well!

  • wbboei

    This AOL is corrupting the news. They are joined at the hip to Obama. This is AOL Time Warner which owns CNN and hates Hillary and the United States and Israel. They have a number of business deals with Mr. Obama so that is where they are coming from here. The headline is intentionally misleading because they believe most people will not read the text just the headline. And the headline if true would be a plus for their light of love whereas the truth most definitely is not.

  • Tammy

    Why doesn’t Obama just overturn “don’t ask don’t tell”? He SAID he would. What? You mean his Word means nothing?

    Look, I’m straight, and I don’t care who serves in the Military. If you want to defend this country, you should have a RIGHT to do so, no matter what your sexual preference.
    How ridiculous.
    I love our men and women in the military and send packages on a regular basis, do volunteer work and benefits for our wounded.

    ANYONE WHO WANTS TO SERVE SHOULD HAVE THAT RIGHT. PERIOD.
    Sorry for the shouting…

  • yttik

    One article I read really showed how this was all about Obama rather then actually tackling any laws:

    “On the eve of the National Equality March, Obama will speak at the Human Rights Campaign fund raising dinner gala, to mollify an uneasy Democratic constituency.”

    Let the royal mollification process begin.

    • http://www.rabblerouserruminations.blogspot.com/ Rabble Rouser Reverend Amy

      Oh, spare me. WTH is he going to say, “Uh, um, uh, Look, I WANT to give you equal rights, except, um, that marriage thing, but, uh, um, it’s Bush’s fault!”

      And here’s a difference. He’s speaking at the dinner – Hillary was HONORED at the dinner for all of er work on behalf of the LGBT community.

      I still haven’t forgiven HRC for endorsing Obama – a 20+ yr membership was terminated over that. Sellouts.

  • http://www.lesstalkmoreactivism.blogspot.com whoframedrudy

    “…assuming we get a Democrat elected again this century”

    Look at that thinking. We’ve got a Dem President now who is giving us nothing, yet he still thinks the Dems are our only hope — for the rest of this century!

    100 years? Despite their past, I have no fear that Republicans will try to repeal the Civil Rights Act. We keep pointing out they used to make the same arguments against integrating the army or inter-racial marriage. If they came around on race, why does this guy say they will never come around on gay rights?

    Look at the Supreme Court from Hardwick to Lawrence. The same conservative judges who ruled gays had no constitutional rights reversed that horrible decision — once we educated them.

    We got to watch these self-promoters. Saying the Republicans won’t change in 100 years is basically the same self-serving tactic as saying all conservatives are racist. “All Republicans are Evil. Ca-Ching!”

    • yttik

      It’s quite true. In fact, it has often been Republicans who have actually delivered on so called liberal things. Roe v Wade was given to us by mostly Republican appointed judges. Gay marriage in Ca was upheld by Republican appointed judges (before the vote). Palin appointed a pro-choice Alaska SC judge, Obama delivered us a pro-life Tim Kaine to head the DNC.

      But of course it wouldn’t be profitable for these two parties if people started viewing them in shades of gray, instead of an evil versus good type of thinking.

      • http://www.lesstalkmoreactivism.blogspot.com whoframedrudy

        The Dems lost me for good when Joe Biden said to Palin in the VP debate, ‘there’s no difference between us on gay rights.’ That’s code for ‘Sarah Palin is soft on queers.’

        It’s one thing for Dems to do nothing on gay rights. But to try to punish Palin with her religious base for not being virulently anti-gay! Biden actively hurt gay rights for his own benefit. He got away with it because so many of us were blinded by ‘I Hate Sarah Palin.’

    • Tammy

      Did you read my post above? I’m a conservative, but I’m pro gay rights. Nobody here asked me about that.
      The people on this site that assume that all Republicans are EVIL and gay haters are WRONG.

      That’s a false theory that has been perpetuated by the media. You know, the same media that called Hillary a racist and call all Republicans born again Christians and gay haters.
      THAT IS A LIE, people.

      • NoBamaNoWay

        i don’t think that anybody here thinks that all conservatives are anti-gay, and as time goes on, more and more are supporting gay rights. i think that more of them are anti-gay than the percentage among left of center people who are anti-gay, but it certainly isn’t 100% one way or the other. Ozero’s waffling on gay rights, and the strong anti-gay positions of many of his black and hispanic supporters proves this.

        • http://www.rabblerouserruminations.blogspot.com/ Rabble Rouser Reverend Amy

          I agree with NBNW, Tammy. I certainly hope you haven’t been treated like that here. If you have, I would say, blame the trolls! :-)

          Seriously, I think if there is one thing we have learned from this past Primary Season, the media lies. Remember their depiction of Hillary as being cold, impersonal, and humorless? That is the EXACT OPPOSITE of how she appears, but it suited their purpose, just like it suits their purpose to depict conservatives as gay-bashers. John McCain is MUCH better on GLBT rights than Obama because HE walks the walk. When two of his friends in politics came out, McCain stepped in and made it clear they were still the same people they always were, and were to be treated with dignity and respect. He has not surrounded himself with homophobes the way Obama has, and then expected us to believe he was pro-GLBT people like Obama does.

          IMHO, that is.

  • TeakWoodKite

    I have an issue with the use of “tackle gay law.”

    Is “Gay Law” a tight-end that just was cut?

    Or is it that the guy with the ball?

    (Remembering that Hillary has the other one)…?

    Also while Gen Jones has a professional poker in the fire, why is he speaking for the Joint Chiefs or Sec Def?

    Why is it that anyone in their right mind would think BO was going to DO ANYTHING for the GLBT community? Especially when he sat in a church for twenty years that spared no expense to cap on Gay people? Or the Fact that the TUCC gay chior director was shot execusion style, case remaining unsolved and did BO say anything about it? Nope.

  • Tammy

    Obama is a hater. He hates gays. He hates whites(even his “typical white grandma” and his own mother). He hates rich people(unless it’s him) and he hates dogs(who takes 4 months to pick one unless you hate ‘em).

    Add on to his list of hates. There are many, many more.

  • glennmcgahee

    Contrary to popular belief, Obama does not hate rich people, he is one. He’d actually like for the poor people to shut up and be quiet while he works on getting his family set for life. He and Mechelle love the almighty dollar. Imagine the favors that await him when he retires or rather when we retire him.

  • Beez_Waxing

    Gays already serve in the military, and everyone knows it. Those discharged are those who want the right to flaunt it in everyone else’s face, when no one else really gives a shit. Commanders are in fact ordered not to go on witchhunts for gays and lesbians, but that’s not enough for the gay-left. What they really want is the right to make their homosexuality public, which, if you think about it, doesn’t add up to anything really important. It’s just so much more fun to portray yourself as a victim than act like a real soldier: lose your narcissistic political agenda and commit to serving anonymously like everyone else.