Since we’re mere plebes, could someone help explain how President Obama’s logic works? Here we’ve been lallygagging about, thinking the president could (must?) issue an executive order to halt Don’t Ask Don’t Tell dismissals, but he keeps insisting there’s nothing he can do until Congress takes action. Then how come he’s already broken his own promise to have Congress take action on a different matter — and instead is gearing up to issue an executive order to get his way?
The economy, health care, immigration … all controversial areas, sure, but one singular policy issue that really has no right answer is what to do about suspected terrorist detainees. Closing down Gitmo, as Candidate Obama promised to do as president, only means we have to figure out whether to release or relocate detainees. (Pictured above, on his second day in office Obama signs an executive order to close Gitmo.)
Obama originally promised that his “Administration will work with Congress to develop an appropriate legal regime” to handle the detainees. But now Obama is said to be “crafting language for an executive order that would reassert presidential authority to incarcerate terrorism suspects indefinitely.” Sound familiar? Ah, right, because that’s what President George W. Bush would’ve done. So much for all that transparency Obama promised Americans.
The excellent Glenn Greenwald raises some obvious questions about what the executive order would do (Would it apply “only to current ‘War on Terror’ prisoners at places like Guantanamo and Bagram, or would they also apply to future, not-yet-abducted detainees as well? Would these powers apply to detainees picked up anywhere in the world, far away from ‘war zones’?”), but also makes this succinct conclusion: “There has now emerged a very clear — and very disturbing — pattern whereby Obama is willing to use legal mechanisms and recognize the authority of other branches only if he’s assured that he’ll get the outcome he wants. If he can’t get what he wants from those processes, he’ll just assert Bush-like unilateral powers to bypass those processes and do what he wants anyway.”
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
Forget for a moment the ethical quandary and the Bush comparisons this move creates, because we want to point out one glaring contradiction in Obama’s approach to policy:
When it comes to terrorist detainees, he’s comfortable issuing an executive order to get his way. But Obama — who keeps insisting that he really, truly, absolutely wants to repeal DADT — refuses to issue an executive order to “get his way” with gays in the military, and use his pen to keep more gay servicemembers from being kicked out.
Back to the subject of detainees, then, just for this grotesque, but appropriate, comparison. Greenwald:
[Obama will] indulge the charade that people he wants to keep in a cage are entitled to some process (a real court or military commissions) only where he knows in advance he will get what he wants; where he doesn’t know that, he’ll bypass those pretty processes and assert the unilateral right to keep them imprisoned anyway.
With DADT, Obama is working in reverse — he’s passing the buck to Congress, knowing the uphill battle there is steeper than it needs to be. But he’s still keeping a certain group of people in a cage.
If he really wanted to stop the dismissal of military gays, it’s clear he has no problem issuing executive orders that bypass Congress — making his argument that his hands are tied on DADT, well, absolutely moot.
D-Sun
Obama 2012: “Yes we can! But we won’t.”
galefan2004
Bush Lite…Bush 2.0
The day Bush gave the office over to Obama he figured out a way to transfuse his brain into Obama. Obama the candidate and Obama the president are two very different people like I always believed. I’m starting to looking forward to our first woman president, President Sarah Palin in 2012. If Obama had made his campaign promises under oath, he would have been impeached by now.
dgz
i’m no apologist, but the author (per usual, uncredited) of this post is making bad parallels. DADT is statutory, but there’s no statute creating the legal obligation for the executive to administer Gitmo, for example. essentially, he’s using his E.O.s to counter Bush’s.
if you’re going to criticize (and Obama is very worthy of criticism) you should try to make sense. otherwise your position is undermined, and you resemble a shill.
InExile
@galefan2004:
Lets just call him BARACK BUSH.
Thus far the only difference is he has a brain and can speak other
than that, it’s business as usual. Nothing done to help the common
man but plenty to help Wall Street and the gays, what gays?
Brittancus
If the administration–SEALS THE BORDER–according The People, not half measures as favored by the open border, free traders. Then after ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION is more or less eradicated through using such powerful tools as E-Verify, and even a National ID card and other major enforcement application. Then we can start recruiting the cream of PH.d, Scientist, Engineers and other professional people and introduce this point system, as used by Australia, New Zealand and other industrialized countries.. American has been overwhelmed with the destitute, uneducated and handicapped that has cost the US taxpayers trillions of dollars through the 4 prior Presidents, and still accelerating at an alarming rate.
In border states the occupancy of foreign nationals has become so prevalent, that I’m surprised to see the United States flag flying and schools, hospitals, government buildings and prison compounds. At the speed of this occupation of illegal aliens and their families, California, Texas and Arizona will have urban sprawl even into the deserts. California–THE SANCTUARY STATE fell foul to illegal immigration, many the years back and has been suffering under the Liberal Sacramento assembly pandering to them ever since. Now they are hurting with a $24.billion dollar budget, that according to City Manager 11 billion can be directly attributed to the the illegal immigrant invasion. For more factual data, not propaganda or naked lies go to NUMBERSUSA JUDICIALWATCH to stop 2nd AMNESTY? STOP FUNDING TO SANCTUARY STATES! NO MORE RAISED TAXES TO PAY ILLEGAL ALIENS & FAMILIES! IMMIGRATION LAWS ARE NOT BROKEN—JUST NOT ENFORCED! CALL YOUR SENATOR OR REPRESENTATIVE NOW.
dgz
@Brittancus: um, way to stay on topic.
rrr
@dgz: DADT is statutory but is includes a provision allowing the president to issue a stoploss order in times of war.
dgz
@rrr: i know he’s capable of issuing the order (and i wish he would), i’m just pointing out that Gitmo and DADT aren’t similar situations. Obama [ostensibly] has a philosophy that legislation shouldn’t be negated by executive order, but should be repealed.
i happen to disagree with the prez in this instance, but Queerty’s anonymous writers should exercise some logic — it’ll improve their credibility when they criticize.
TANK
@dgz:
That’s a selective philosophy…inconsistent, given that he violates it.
Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com
For the record, his ability to issue a stop-loss order is not a part of DADT. It’s a separate statute entirely and wasn’t created in relation to the military ban on gays, but applies to it and ANY law applying to the military.
Now, everyone please go to the link below and read a new, outrageous Washington Post editorial OPPOSING a stop-loss order. Then e-mail them and tell them how stupidly written it is because 1. contrary to what it asserts, Obama’s DOJ already has DEFENDED DADT in their brief to the Supreme Court, and 2. they claim that there would be a backlash if Obama issued one just like the backlash Clinton experienced, and then, unintentionally, makes the case why that WOULDN’T happen because of the many ways attitudes about gays in the military in 2009 are the reverse of what they were in 1993 [save for some dinosaurs in the Jurrassic Park that is the Pentagon].
They, in fact, make NO case for opposing stop-loss because there ISN’T any. They don’t even question the legality of such an order, as some have tried in the past, because it’s entirely legal and various forms of stop-loss re gays goes all the way back to WWII.
Their anti stop-loss/let’s just work on repeal blah blah blah angle could have been written by WH Excuse-Maker-in-Chief Robert Gibbs, and totally ignores that while repeal is stuck in the mud gays like those referenced in this demo are being discharged daily.
It’s mindboggling coming from the Post which has been progressive on so many gay issues, and when their main competitor, the NY Times, has said that stop-loss SHOULD be considered, and countless others, including Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid [hardly a Molotov cocktail thrower] and at least 77 Congressmen have said Obama should just do it!
Hopefully, someone will point out to the WAPO’s editorial board the 265 WH demo and stop THEM from playing word games with peoples’ lives.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/26/AR2009062603985.html
[img]http://15.media.tumblr.com/hCydJPNAnmafn4vrh5DTZRYso1_500.jpg[/img]
wondermann
@dgz: true, this makes no sense. please stop this foolishness
galefan2004
@Brittancus: You know instead of blaming the illegals maybe we should blame the people giving them jobs. Maybe we should also work with Mexico to make our neighbor to the south not an absolute shit hole that its own citizens want to leave. We have no problems exploiting illegals yet we blame illegals for being exploited. I LOVE that logic.
SM
Barack Obama made over 500 Campaign Promises…he should just sign 500 Executive Orders and be done with it….oh wait…its just for YOUR ISSUES.
Someone should e-mail this website to whitehouse.gov and tell the democrats to move on with their agenda.
strumpetwindsock
@galefan2004:
And you could start with the american companies that have factories in mexico and exploit their poor labour standards.
But that isn’t likely to happen, because that’s part of what free trade was all about.
The other side of this is that our economies depend on illegals.
THose border states you talk about would grind to a halt if all the illegals were rounded up. They are kept illegal not because anyone wants to get rid of them, but so they can be forced to work for shit with no protection.
Slamming your border shut would only ensure that this recession would crash into a deep depression
strumpetwindsock
@strumpetwindsock:
that last comment was FYI too galefan,but it was really directed at Brittanicus
SM
@Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com:
Health Insurance Companies play with people’s lives in America too. People don’t get fired because of it…they die.
Screw Obama for not pushing every single LGBT issue THIS VERY SECOND even if it could cause an firestorm of backlash if he does.
TANK
The message managers are derailing and sidetracking the issue again.
TANK
@Brittancus:
Um, you’re aware of what this is about, right nutjob? Reign it in, wacko.
And those addressing the nut’s splutterings are even worse. It’s like second hand white noise.
SM
@TANK:
It’s not derailing the issue at all. LGBT know NOTHING about politics. Its bloody obvious proven by the Prop 8 disaster everyone blew off.
If you all had brains, you would be behind the Democrats on Health Care reform right now and cool your jets. If the Democrats push through excellent health care reform for all Americans -You are home free and the people who vote against your rights are in trouble for a very long time.
TANK
Ignore the shrub above me.
strumpetwindsock
@TANK:
Speaking of managing people’s messages.
Buddy made a comment and I responded to it.
Get your own damn website if you want to play administrator. You and I are both off-topic often enough and you know it.
SM
@TANK:
You are nothing but an attention seeking child.
LGBT Americans want the Democrats to take on explosive wedge issues that DIVIDE this country. You all want us to go up against the Republican attack machine, the money of the Religious Right and Churches….and you can’t stand behind the Democrats when they have to make power moves like Health Care Reform so they CAN TAKE ON WEDGE ISSUES.
I got it.
TANK
@SM:
You’re crazy. This is simply white noise. It’s as if you just accessed a random obama comment generator.
Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com
Ladies and Germs, please do not feed the troll hiding behind the initials SM.
At first one thought he/she/it was just another Obamazombie but the psychosis apparently goes much deeper than, probably predates that.
InExile
@SM: Be behind the democrats when we have no equality? Are you nuts? ALL ISSUES become mute when you do not have equal rights! Sorry buddy, my equality comes BEFORE whatever the democrats agenda is!
Equality first! Then we will help democrats!
DuttyBarb
Queerty, honestly!
You are a media outlet and have a responsibility to report like one. All these sleazy..Perez Hilton type topics are reactive and silly
Bruce
What’s next for Gitmo?
Find out at http://gitmotourism.blogspot.com
SpookyNNC
Let’s face it…he lied to us all just to get in office. I really had a lot of hope in him but now it’s gone. He lied…just like all the rest…Say what you have to just to get in office…
Brian Miller
@Brittancus: Ummm, yay. A right-wing spambot who saw “immigration” and proceeded to post a right-wing xenophobic rant.
Brian Miller
@SM: If you all had brains, you would be behind the Democrats on Health Care reform right now and cool your jets.
This LGBT man doesn’t want a socialized medical system. I lived under two — Canada and the UK — and the idea of soaring taxes plus six-month waiting periods and 100 mile journeys to see a specialist just doesn’t appeal to me. Been there, done that.
I definitely value my constitutional rights to equal protection under the law over failed trillion-dollar government health systems. Your opinion on the issue doesn’t matter, because you already have your constitutional rights.
InExile
A letter to the DNC:
“Dear DNC,
I truly “support” Democrats being elected in 2010 and 2012. I am a “fierce advocate” of the Democratic Party after all. I know that I have promised you my support over the past few decades and have done my best to follow through.
Even now I am “working towards” a financial donation to the Party. I do have to ask for your “patience” though, because as a gay man, my family and I are still second class citizens and are having to funnel our resources towards causes that protect and honor our basic civil rights. “We have a lot on our plate.”
We are “proceeding” towards lifting the denial of funds to the DNC and are “developing a strategy” that will get us there by the end of Obama’s time at the White House. As a matter of fact, my family has planned several “meetings” to discuss these very important donations and will be sending out a press release shortly to announce our “cocktail party” celebrating Democracy.
Thanks for understanding. And hang in there!
Sincerely,
(your name)”
rick
listen up bitchers, HE CAN’T DO EVERYTHING OVERNIGHT! 5 months in and you want him to mess up the next 8 years. SIT DOWN AND SHUT UP! THERE ARE LARGER PROBLEMS!
YOU KNOW PERFECTLY WELL WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF HE JUST EXCECUTIVE ORDERED EVERYTHING.
IF YOU THINKTHE SCREAMS OF JUDICIAL ACTIVISM ARE BAD YOU CAN JUST IMAGINE WHAT THEY WOULD DO WITH OBAMA BYPASSING CONGRESS.
i have to agree with camille lapaglia on this one.
rick
@SpookyNNC: i have read that same crap on numerous sites written by fake demo’s now claiming they are switching to republithugism.
Orlando
Go to youtube and watch the obama deception.
wise up.
M Shane
As far a I know the perpetuation of massTORTURE prisons like GITMO which the entire world abhors, which was not an act of CONGRESS but an administrative decision and the virtual reversal of an act of Congress are two very very different things. There is a whole section at GITMO populated by prisoners who had been electorcuted so many times that they were permanently damaged.
If Obama changed DADT by an executive order and then congress did not vote it down he would be FUCKED. This could not happen with Gitmo.
THINK. These are different sorts of issues
M Shane
p.s.Obama is SAID TO BE “crafting language for an executive order that would reassert presidential authority to incarcerate terrorism suspects indefinitely.”
in other words you have no basis for this assumption. Even if he was it would be very unlike Bush, and would be with established, proven terrorists, and he would be within his administrative powers, unlike DADT.
I dislike DADT as much or more than anyone, but I seem to be more concerned with following Constitutional courses than a lot of juvinile people.
Again, I don’t know wherethe gay community was when Clinton came up with such a clearly deranged law that required gay people to stay in the closet. Where were you?
jason
So long as we gays continue to blindly vote for the Democrats, we’ll continue to be their politically useful pity class. Because that’s what we are to them – a politically useful pity class.
InExile
This man has no soul, just an empty suit full of empty promises.
InExile
@InExile: THERE IS NOTHING MORE IMPORTANT THAN LGBT EQUALITY, NOTHING! If everyone is not free, then no one really is.