Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
  the don

Just In Time For DoJ’s Supreme Court Plea, Pentagon Survey Results Leak: Gays Aren’t Worth Worrying About

As we get closer to the Dec. 1 deadline for the Pentagon to send Obama the results of its Big Gay Survey, results continue to leak! Just in time, because DoJ just asked Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy to ignore the Log Cabin Republicans’ request for an emergency halt of dismissals.

The timing of the two events couldn’t be more perfectly coordinated. In its filing, DoJ asserts court intervention into the military policy would cause instability, and only Congress can effectively and safely repeal the law.

Huh. Because the 370-page document about to land on the president’s desk states the exact opposite. Divided into two sections, the report will brief the White House on the results of polling a half million troops and their families, as well as a tentnative plan on how to implement repeal (read: tell gay soldiers they can tell people they are gay). And what is the commander-in-chief about to find out? That more than 70 percent of survey respondents believe repealing DADT would have a positive, mixed, or nonexistent impact on the military. It was enough to have the report’s authors, led by General Counsel Jeh Johnson and U.S. Army Forces Europe commander Gen. Carter Ham, conclude “objections to openly gay colleagues would drop once troops were able to live and serve alongside them,” reports the Washington Post, whose sources included one person who “felt compelled to share the information out of concern that groups opposed to ending the ban would mischaracterize the findings.” Among other things, the report “recommends few, if any, changes to policy covering military housing and benefits, because the military must abide by the federal Defense of Marriage Act.”

One interesting note: The report concludes gay and lesbian troops should not be placed in a special class immune to discrimination or equal employment opportunities, and that is supposedly based on gay troops themselves saying they didn’t want special protection.

The report is already making the rounds: Navy chief Adm. Gary Roughead has received a draft of the report, but hasn’t reviewed it. It calls for a review of the effects of repeal one year after the ban is lifted.

Oh, so what was DoJ just telling the Supreme Court in its Wednesday filing?

As the government explained to the court of appeals, the Working Group has visited numerous military installations across the country and overseas, where it has interacted with tens of thousands of service members on this issue. It has also conducted an extensive survey of approximately 400,000 service members. The Working Group’s review will result in recommended changes to Department regulations and policies that would be necessary to implement an orderly and successful repeal of the statute. The Working Group is also developing guidance to properly train military commanders and service members with respect to any change in policy. Without sufficient time for such training and guidance, an immediate court-ordered repeal of the statute would risk disruption to military commanders and service members as they carry out their missions, especially in zones of active combat. There is thus nothing “exceptional” in the court of appeals’ conclusion that a momentous change in military policy should not occur overnight as the result of a global judicial decree.

[...] Invalidation of the DADT statute implicates dozens of DoD and Service policies and regulations that cover such disparate issues as housing, benefits, re-accession, military equal opportunity, anti-harassment, standards of conduct, rights and obligations of the Chaplain corps, and others. Amending these regulations would typically take several months. To change all of the implicated policies and underlying regulations will require a massive undertaking by the Department and cannot be done overnight.

Actually, the report concludes there’s actually very little to do, materially, once DADT is repealed, because its effects will be so negligble. In fact, the report says that any military personnel who have a problem with newly out gay soldiers should register a complaint, and those complaints will be handled on a case-by-case basis.

EARLIER:
Defense Sec. Robert Gates: Courts Striking Down DADT Offers ‘No Flexibility’
Breaking: Log Cabin Republicans Asks Supreme Court To Toss Out 9th Circuit’s DADT Stay, Immediately Halt Discharges


  • 28 Comments
    • McMike
      McMike

      We’ve already had survey’s tell us 70% of our troops did not care.

      All I can say is I’m fully surprised these results weren’t a complete fabrication of the truth.

      Nov 11, 2010 at 2:04 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Harley
      Harley

      Is Queerty trying to tell us a Supreme Court justice is supposed to base his ruling on a newspaper writeup of a supposedly leaked report in which only a quarter of selected participants completed the survey, and where neither the newspaper writeup or the leaked report or the original survey itself was submitted as evidence by either side?

      Nov 11, 2010 at 3:00 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • reason
      reason

      @McMike: Why would there be a fabrication of the truth, the president already laid out what the point of the survey was. His real intention was to get real information from the force so he could make the transition with minimal safety risk to the GBLT members of the force, and make it as smooth as possible for the entire force. The past reviews by the pentagon have been so steeped in politics and lies it was impossible to truly understand what was going on without making their own assessment. The compromise enabled them to get their own fresh data instead of relying on those past reports. Gates is a straight shooter, if the president wanted to know the truth he would make sure the survey found that instead of some made up b.s. If the results were bad they still planed to repeal the law but setup safeguards to mitigate the effects on the force whether it involved safety or order. They took the smart objective approach that would make it difficult for any normal person to refute. We have all come to realize that the GOP is not normal. The people in the community need to understand just because the pace is slow doesn’t mean that the president is not true to the promises that he reinforced to this community several times. When one is dealing with huge bureaucratic systems with all of the backbiting, politics, and lies things go a little slower then one would expect. The focus now needs to be to make sure that Mr. Levin in the senate does not cave, and keeps the repeal language in the defense authorization bill. McCain could save face by saying he was just following the agreement and waiting for the report, but who knows, even Bush believes, McCain is a strange erratic unprincipled individual.

      Nov 11, 2010 at 3:50 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dallas David
      Dallas David

      @Harley: The USA has started wars on less information.

      Nov 11, 2010 at 4:50 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jason
      jason

      If DADT isn’t repealed by any means necessary, Obama is finished as President. Why’s that? Because the gay community will work passionately to have a primary challenger elected in his place. Obama will lost the support of gay people and thus will lose in the primaries.

      We bring a lot of passion to our causes, and we’re not prepared to tolerate the duping and scamming of our emotions.

      Nov 11, 2010 at 8:06 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Daez
      Daez

      I get so sick of Democrats throwing away their base in order to pander to conservatives that will never vote Democrat anyways.

      That is really what this is all about. Obama is in love with being president and would give a hand job to a crack dealer if that somehow meant it increased his chances of being elected in 2012. He is simply playing politics.

      At this point, I would vote for Sarah Palin over Obama in 2012 because I view her as at least being trustworthy as compared to Obama who has ran out of sides of his mouth to talk out of.

      Nov 11, 2010 at 9:29 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Daez
      Daez

      @jason: You must be smoking something if you honestly believe a sitting president will lose in the primary just because the gay community desires or works for it.

      Nov 11, 2010 at 9:31 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jon
      jon

      70% of Americans think it would be ok to repeal…so not a big shock that 70% of troops agree. American Forces are a reflection of America. Average Janes and Joes.

      Nov 11, 2010 at 9:45 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Nate
      Nate

      Since Baron Von Steuben helped George Washington train his troops, there have been gays in the American military.

      DADT has been a futile, embarassing exercise in homophobic denial. We all know that some of the most effective armed forces on the planet have open, active gays among their number.

      Happy Veteran’s Day everyone.

      Nov 11, 2010 at 9:58 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • the crustybastard
      the crustybastard

      Look everybody! The self-styled “reason” is right on time with his chuckwagon full of DNC talkingpoints bullshit!

      Everybody enjoy a nice big helping. Don’t rush the table.

      Nov 11, 2010 at 10:34 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • robert in nyc
      robert in nyc

      Jason, well, if DADT isn’t repealed based on this latest information leaked from the Pentagon, then so will the GOP be finished for filibustering it. Name one influential GOP big-wig who has vowed to fight for anything related to equality? Who is he or she and how many of them are there? Maybe the Log Cabin leader can tell us? We’d love to see the list, maybe we can support them.

      Daez, really? You’d vote for Sarah Palin, a woman who believes that gays can be cured through prayer and exorcisms? You’d get zero rights if she were in the White House. The woman has no intellectual curiosity or substance, no factual information on anything she blabs about much like the majority in the tea bagger movement and right wingers in the GOP who use fear to motivate their base without any factual evidence to prove their points. This woman barely reads a newspaper or a book for that matter, much like Bush. You want a moron like that running this country? I thought you would have learned from the last one we had who thought the country of Wales in the UK was in a state.

      Nov 11, 2010 at 11:26 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • the crustybastard
      the crustybastard

      TO: Evil Genius Department, Republican National Party
      FROM: the crustybastard
      RE: Military gay ban

      Well, if it was your guy’s plan to allow the Obama Administration boof this issue as thoroughly as they have, I gotta say that I’m pretty impressed. I actually thought they had a little traction on this one. They certainly had all kinds of goodwill.

      Had.

      The part where you let Obama try to keep his gay voters in line by delaying until after the midterm elections, then actually forcing him to appeal a federal court holding saying the law is unconstitutional mere days before that election?

      Wow.

      The fact that the style of the landmark case is Log Cabin Republicans v. Gates and “Republicans” is on the pro-gay side while the Obama Administration is on the anti-gay side?

      Double wow.

      So I’m curious: are you going to go for the coup de grace? Are you going to capitalize on this progress and repeal the ban at the moment where gays feel justifiably betrayed and abandoned by Democrats? I’m pretty sure you noticed what happened when gays quit showing up for the donks.

      It’d be pretty hard to argue the fact that Democrats put the ban in place and Republicans got rid of it. You’d look like heroes. Plus, the public overwhelmingly wants this so there’d be no substantial blowback.

      Seriously, if you did this, it’d be politically brilliant. Astonishing, even.

      crusty

      CC: John McCain

      Nov 11, 2010 at 12:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • robert in nyc
      robert in nyc

      So if the GOP filibusters it, who will the Log Cabiners and their followers blame? Even if Snowe and Collins cross the aisle and vote with the democrats, the GOP can still not take credit for repeal and neither can the Log Cabiners because it takes a majority of the vote in one party to overturn it, no matter if two republicans vote with them and Obama will have achieved what he said he would do, get it repealed via Congress.

      Nov 11, 2010 at 2:00 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com
      Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com

      “The
      report concludes gay and lesbian troops should not be placed in a
      special class immune to discrimination or equal employment opportunities, and
      that is supposedly based on gay troops themselves saying they didn’t
      want special protection.”

      TRANSLATION: the “gay troops” who allegedly told them that are FUCKING STUPID!

      Also “leaks” don’t equal “official report,” and that will come from Gates but will “say” only what he WANTS it to say. He was notorious while at the CIA for cooking the books to suit his own ends, and there is no reason this leopard has changed his spots.

      As for the his and Obama Mafia’s propaganda about the need and intention of “The Study,” consider these facts:

      1. Despite his testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee that another multimillion dollar “study” was required, there is more than half a century of research documenting open service would not be a problem

      2. Despite his repeated claims that passing the MREA before the “results” of his new “study” was released would not give the Pentagon adequate time to “implement” change, the MREA would have given them six months, the end of which would have fallen months after the “study” ends. In addition, that would have been two months longer than ANY of 25 other countries took to lift their bans without any problems. As noted above, when the White House backed his demands, our allies in Congress were forced to trash the MREA.

      3. Despite his repeated insistence that the “study” was not about IF the ban would unequivocally end but simply HOW to do it, even after the amendment was changed to give him total control over IF the ban would be lifted, IF discharges would EVER end, he has been insisting that even that should not be voted on until after the “study” is released. TRANSLATION: he’s been hoping that the “study” will indicate that discharges should NOT end [or simply planning to CLAIM it does] so that the amendment will fail to pass, thus taking the “blame” off of him AND guaranteeing that no similar amendment would be introduced in any foreseeable future.

      4. Despite his repeated insistence that the “study” was not about IF the ban would unequivocally end but simply HOW to do it, much of it was written like a “push poll”—suggesting “heterosexual only” combat units, that gay service members couldn’t control themselves when sharing barracks, showers, and toilet areas with nongays, and that any concern nongay “military families” might have about their children being around gay service members was legitimate.

      5. Despite his repeated previous claims that the still incomplete “study” was to discover IF there would be any problems ending the ban, both he and his Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness Clifford Stanley, in his brief to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, are NOW claiming they KNOW there would be “enormous consequences” and “irreparable damage” to military readiness, ad nauseum.

      6. In a a move Darth Vader Cheney would marvel at, retired Marine Asshat Stanley shamelessly and ludicrously asserted that the mere EXISTENCE of their charade proves the NEED for their charade, and that, therefore, the sky will, ipso facto, fall if discharges stop now: “The magnitude of repealing the DADT law and policy is demonstrated by the Department’s ongoing efforts to study the implications of repealing DADT.”

      “Those who take the point of view that there must be a long period of transition are simply setting up a straw man to hide their real agenda, which is to maintain the current ban. Given these arguments, it is critical that the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell not be perceived as a complicated puzzle requiring complex solutions to minor problems.” – Center for American Progress.

      “Everyone may not be comfortable, but the military is not about giving comfort to service members. It’s about obedience to the chain of command. It’s really not rocket science what needs to be done.” – Nathaniel Frank, expert on DADT, and author of the definitive book on its creation, “Unfriendly Fire.”

      7. To the contrary, Gates and Stanley know that there is already an entire taxpayer-funded DoD organization, the Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute [DEOMI], whose responsibility for nearly four decades has been to create and implement policies and programs to “maximize unit cohesion and maintain the highest degree of combat readiness while maintaining the DoD reputation as a place where all individuals have infinite dignity and worth” by “fostering positive human relations throughout diverse armed services,” and to promote “harmony among all military members and their families” in relation to race, gender, ethnicity, religious and political affiliation—to which sexual orientation could be easily and swiftly added.

      In fact, because DEOMI is also responsible for training the managers of 700,000 civilian DoD employees who are already covered by anti gay discrimination policies, they ALREADY have dealt with the issues for years. DEOMI has its own $24 million, two-story, 94,000-square-foot, state-of-the-art facility on Patrick Air Force base in Florida. In addition to classes taught there, in the field, and online, it publishes its own magazine, brochures, and training manuals; produces videos, podcasts, and satellite broadcasts. Its Director reports to…wait for it…USD Clifford Stanley.

      Nov 11, 2010 at 3:58 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      If Obama fails to address equality issues for LGBT people successfully then Michelle Obama will go down in history as Aunt Jemima in the White House forever.

      Nov 11, 2010 at 4:28 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brutus
      Brutus

      @Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com:

      2. Delayed implementation was fine. And we are not 25 other countries.

      3. This is total pessimistic conjecture on your part.

      5. That relates to the effect of a court order. You’re (deliberately?) conflating legislative repeal with a court reaching out to call the law unconstitutional.

      6. This is a wholly commonplace argument, and your credibility isn’t enhanced by citing a highly partisan institute.

      I appreciate your passion, but do try to be intellectually honest.

      Nov 11, 2010 at 6:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • tjr101
      tjr101

      @ewe: What?!?!?

      Nov 11, 2010 at 6:48 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      @tjr101: Obama is promoting inequality and it does not and will not ever serve ANY minority group. Michelle Obama will be the one to suffer with the legacy of being Aunt Jemima in the White House as a result.

      Nov 11, 2010 at 9:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • tjr101
      tjr101

      @ewe:And what is Laura Bush’s legacy, or Hillary or Barbara? Michelle Obama has nothing to do with his policies you stupid, racist prick!

      Nov 11, 2010 at 10:37 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Markie-Mark
      Markie-Mark

      @the crustybastard: #10 You made me laugh out loud. Reason is Obama’s favorite gerbil.

      Nov 11, 2010 at 10:57 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      @tjr101: I give what i get, you filthy racist prick. tsk tsk. tough shit about you. Get over it. It is a point that reminds idiots like you that no one is immune from discrimination particularly black people who shit on other minorities. What about Laura Bush you ask? Well for starters, she is the first librarian i know that doesn’t fucking read and that is quite obvious just listening to her.

      Nov 11, 2010 at 11:04 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • tjr101
      tjr101

      @ewe: Funny how easy it was for you to draw a derogatory remark on the first lady that happens to be black while completely ignore the other first ladies that shat on your rights…hmm, I wonder why? What makes you any different?

      Your comments are very reactionary with little thought. I certainly don’t mind being called an idiot by an ass.

      Nov 11, 2010 at 11:33 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      @tjr101: You are manipulative. I have no doubt you live an insulated life and tout your progressive ideas that your politically correct culture promotes while knowing no one of color. I did not ignore anyone. I was talking the current occupant. Save it Bitch. I live in a world where these comments are thrown around for discussion and sometimes it gets heated and sometimes it’s just funny. I am gonna pass on taking any advice from the likes of you. It is you that do not think. You go around being dismissive because you think reality has to banned if it isn’t pretty. Well it isn’t pretty. Fuck off.

      Nov 11, 2010 at 11:45 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • tjr101
      tjr101

      @ewe: “You are manipulative. I have no doubt you live an insulated life and tout your progressive ideas that your politically correct culture promotes while knowing no one of color. I did not ignore anyone. I was talking the current occupant.”

      What a load of crap! You now absolutely nothing about what you’re talking about. This coming from a person of “color.”

      Nov 12, 2010 at 12:38 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • tjr101
      tjr101

      @ewe: “You are manipulative. I have no doubt you live an insulated life and tout your progressive ideas that your politically correct culture promotes while knowing no one of color. I did not ignore anyone. I was talking the current occupant.”

      What a load of crap! You know absolutely nothing about what you’re talking about. This coming from a person of “color.”

      Nov 12, 2010 at 12:39 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ewe
      ewe

      @tjr101: mmh hmm. Spare me. I suggest you stop eating pancakes. You are a dismissive cunt and you are going to go elsewhere.

      Nov 12, 2010 at 1:28 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • tjr101
      tjr101

      @ewe: tsk tsk motherfucker

      Nov 12, 2010 at 1:38 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • irony
      irony

      its all bullshit. i met with a white man who is in the bnp for Gay sex an im young black male, he raped me, that was my first ever encounter with a man, the system is corrupt.

      Nov 17, 2010 at 2:41 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Queerty now requires you to log in to comment

    Please log in to add your comment.

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.

  • POPULAR ON QUEERTY

    FOLLOW US
     



    GET QUEERTY'S DAILY NEWSLETTER


    FROM AROUND THE WEB

    Copyright 2014 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.