Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
  FUTURE PLANS

Obama Promises DADT Repeal “In A Matter Of Weeks, Not Months.” Really??!

First Dan Savage tells us that the President will come out full-throated for marriage equality in 2013. Then Metro Weekly‘s Chris Geidner says that the President has promised a full DADT repeal “in a matter of weeks, not months.” We hope he’s right, especially since the anti-gay law continues to discharge gay soldiers who actually want to stay in the military.

Thumbnail image via

By:           Daniel Villarreal
On:           Jun 30, 2011
Tagged: , ,

  • 13 Comments
    • Cam
      Cam

      Typical Politician says what he needs to say depending upon what aidience he’s in front of. When the White house officially says it, then I’ll believe he ment it.

      Jun 30, 2011 at 8:50 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • SteveC
      SteveC

      I’ll believe it when I see it.

      Obama is a typical, slimy, opportunist politician.

      Jun 30, 2011 at 10:42 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TMikel
      TMikel

      Yeah, yeah, we’ve heard all this before. His promises are worth nothing. He will diddle us as long as wel allow him to do so.

      Jun 30, 2011 at 12:05 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • iDavid
      iDavid

      There are gay soldiers using dadt to get out of the service. Maybe since we have no draft, yet, they want to rush things up to retain personnel? Fine go for it. A draft would cause a major upheaval i believe.

      Jun 30, 2011 at 12:43 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • That's not gonna work out well
      That's not gonna work out well

      Remember, kids, that Obama said that our involvement in Libya would take “days, not weeks.” Well, it’s been months now, with no end in sight. If you use that lie as a handy-dandy guide, DADT will still be in place when the sun burns out.

      Jun 30, 2011 at 1:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert
      Robert

      @That’s not gonna work out well: He said us leading the NATO involvement in Libya would take days, not weeks.. he didn’t say our involvement.

      Jun 30, 2011 at 2:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • gregger
      gregger

      Right, weeks away. Like Christmas and New Years are weeks away.

      Jun 30, 2011 at 4:06 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • CJ
      CJ

      Well be in and out of Libya in days and not weeks too.

      Jun 30, 2011 at 4:17 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Joetx
      Joetx

      Mr. President, “You lie!”

      Jun 30, 2011 at 4:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Rainfish
      Rainfish

      In spite of Obama’s Obstructionism, it was Reid and Pelosi who finally repealed DADT.

      After almost two years of Obama insisting that Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid put off repeal of DADT, and with very little involvement from the White House, Gay and Lesbian military personnel will eventually be able to service openly to fight to the death for the freedoms they are still denied; which every other American takes so casually for granted.

      Originally, the House bill had a non-discrimination clause attached to the bill which would protect Gay and Lesbian military personnel from discrimination in the military or, at least, give then a legal tool in order to seek to remedy blatant acts of discrimination based on one’s real or perceived sexual orientation in military such as being passed over for promotion and other forms of unequal treatment related to sexual orientation discrimination. Obama, at the urging of the Pentagon, demanded that the non-discrimination clause be removed from the final version of DADT. Apparently, Obama isn’t ready for patriotic Gay and Lesbian Americans to be treated as equals and their rights of citizenship fully protected — just yet.

      Still, some Obama sycophants wonders why the Democratic Party’s progressive base is repulsed by this duplicitous fraud in the White House. And, naturally, Obama has taken full credit for this stripped down and gutted repeal of DADT which will no doubt be “slow walked” into existence with plenty of inequities still left standing in place because of Obama’s insistence that the non-discrimination clause be removed from the bill. This insult, as well as Barry’s Department of inJustice via AG Holder’s hypocritical defense of DOMA which has recently resurfaced in federal bankruptcy courts had better be resolved if Obama has any hope whatsoever to see a second term as POTUS.

      Jul 1, 2011 at 1:03 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jeffree
      Jeffree

      @Rainfish: Good info, thank! Let me see if I got this right: Without the S.O. non-discrimination clause, the post-repeal military will provide LGB members *no* protection from anything except discharge.

      Am I close? If so, I’m appalled

      Jul 1, 2011 at 1:50 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Rainfish
      Rainfish

      @Jeffree: Technically speaking, from a legal standpoint, as I understanding it, you are one hundred percent correct.

      Read:

      http://www.queerty.com/dadt-repeal-lost-its-anti-discrimination-clause-as-a-practical-necessity-20110215/

      Jul 1, 2011 at 2:22 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • the crustybastard
      the crustybastard

      @Jeffree: Yes, that is precisely true. Homosexuality (with nothing more) would no longer be a basis for discharge if the repeal certification process is completed.

      If the certification process is completed, gay servicemembers will continue to be discriminated against on the not-job-related basis of their sexuality with respect to denial of earned benefits to themselves and their families, and they are not included as a class of people with specific protections against any form of jobsite discrimination.

      This is because President Obama — with his back to the wall because of his LCR v US loss and momentum in the House — finally dispatched Mr. Independent, Holy Joe Lieberman, to do an 11th hour “repeal” from the Senate, effectively killing the infinitely better House Murphy Amendment.

      @Rainfish: Bankruptcy court decisions, while conceivably persuasive, are not considered legally binding on any court.

      Jul 1, 2011 at 11:34 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your 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

    !-- Sailthru Horizon -->
    Copyright 2014 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.