It won’t be much help for Dan Choi, but all of a sudden the Pentagon is talking about how it might relax the rules for Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. Wait — isn’t this the same Pentagon that said doing anything about the law would have to take place “down the road”?
Yes, yes it is. Defense Secretary Robert Gates said in March that he and President Obama were too overwhelmed the serious matter of warfare that repealing the military’s discrimination policy would have to be “push[ed] … down the road a little bit.” In remarks made in April, Gates said, “There is a law; we will uphold the law. If the law changes, so will our policies.”
But maybe his policies can change without the law changing? Sure sounds like it! Yesterday Gates told reporters, “One of the things we’re looking at is, is there flexibility in how we apply this law,” adding, “We’re talking about how do we move forward on this, achieve this objective which is changing the policy.”
Gates says he and President Obama discussed DADT just last week — maybe around the same time our commander-in-chief realized the gays were actually dead serious about protesting the Democrats.
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.
All of a sudden, Gates’ attitude on the whole thing has changed: “What I discovered when I got into it was it’s a very restrictive law. It doesn’t leave much to the imagination, or a lot of flexibility.” What this actually translates to: Gates had been making declarations about the policy without actually reviewing it.
But that’s not entirely accurate, either.
What we’re actually seeing is the Obama administration, and not just Pentagon leadership, changing course. Gates isn’t making this call on his own; he’s following a very strict, politically orchestrated machine that appears to be slowly shifting direction. And he’s taking orders about how to speak directly from the White House.
So just what did Obama, Gates, and all their senior advisers think about one they “got into it”?
The defense secretary said one possible modification might be consider the circumstances under which a service member is “outed” in determining whether or not he or she must leave the military.
Gates offered as an example “when we’re given information from someone with vengeance in mind or blackmail, somebody who has been jilted.
“If somebody is outed by a third party, does that force us to take action?” he said.
“That’s the kind of thing we’re looking at — seeing if there’s a more humane way to apply the law until it gets changed.”
Notwithstanding that there really is no “humane” way to apply the law — in any form. It is still Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, and it is still a policy that forbids gay soldiers from living openly without fear of retribution. Unless, of course, a contingent of gay soldiers can come up with this brilliant plan: EVERYONE OUT EACH OTHER, and then nobody can be kicked out!
(Photo: AP)
UPDATE: CNN speaks with Gates.
rohan
Didn’t they already do this with Matt Sanchez? After he was outted as a gay porn star and after he also admitted working as a prostitute Sanchez was investigated but never discharged.
I’ve never understood why the military discards honorable gay servicemen with distinguished careers and valuable skill sets when it chose to keep a dishonest rent boy.
Cam
The stupidest part of this, is that they would ever have kicked somebody out in the first place for being outed. Their supposed rules said “Don’t Ask, Don’t TELL”. Somebody being outed by an angry 3rd party isn’t TELLING. But they didn’t care and would still kick them out. And now…just when they KNOW that the public is in favor of getting rid of the policy they come out and say that they will now start only enforcing it the way they were supposed to have been enforcing it all along? Fuck that. end the policy you homophobic asses.
Cam
@rohan: you said “I’ve never understood why the military discards honorable gay servicemen with distinguished careers and valuable skill sets when it chose to keep a dishonest rent boy.”
___________________________________________________________
Probably because he had pictures of himself naked with all of the Generals and officers in charge of enforcing the policy.
bigjake75
More bullshit. Is anyone tired of small meaningless gestures from them just because they want the heat to stop? TURN UP THE HEAT.
What kind of assholes admit a law is not ‘humane’ yet still enforce it. To put this in a military context…you do not have to follow an unlawful order. You know, like the nazis who were just “following orders.” That did not fly in Nuremberg, and this bullshit should not fly now.
Commander in Chief = God when it comes to the military. Obama can stop all expulsions with a word.
JPinWeHo
Actually – the policy was originally coined “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell; Don’t Seek Don’t Flaunt” The Rule is much more complicated then merely not asking and not telling.
I think that this move shows major progress on DADT – many people have been forced out of the armed forces by being outed by other people who either had agendas (jealousy, revenge) and this would eliminate at least that part of the policy.
Although full repeal is necessary – this is definitely a change for the Obama administration who had refused to previously use the power of the pen to change how DADT is enforced. I give Obama at least partial credit for moving on this issue…
Cam
@JPinWeHo: “I think that this move shows major progress on DADT – many people have been forced out of the armed forces by being outed by other people who either had agendas (jealousy, revenge) and this would eliminate at least that part of the policy.”
___________________________________________________________
This doesn’t show major progress, they were NEVER supposed to kick out people that were outed by 3rd parties. Yet they started doing exactly that. As soon as the heat is off they will go back to doing exactly what they did before.
Fitz
Let’s view this in a positive light: it’s a frightened response from our enemy. (Obama). It shows that pressure works. KEEP IT UP GUYS. If you haven’t written a letter yet Do SO please!
Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com
@Cam:
With respect, you don’t understand that “don’t tell” doesn’t just mean “don’t tell anyone in the military”…it means “don’t tell ANYONE.” [Exceptions are your defense attorney and discovery that you’re gay during consideration for a security clearance—the latter the result of an Executive Order from Pres. Clinton.]
Say you told your mother before you enlisted. She mentions in a birthday card to you that the former boyfriend she liked so much said to tell you hello. The card falls out of your pocket at the ceremony where you’re to receive the Purple Heart. Someone else picks it up and reads it and tells your commanding officer what it says.
If, repeat IF he/she chooses, that commanding officer can then start the process to discharge you.
Which brings us back to this strange about face by Gates.
First, it’s transparently clear that the threat to continue to deny lavender money to the DNC and the public embarrassment of having even straight mainstream media repeatedly calling them out about DADT is working.
Second, Lt. Col. Fehrenbach is clearly whom they’re thinking of because he was “playing by the rules” for 18 years until he was outed by someone, apparently a civilian. His military record, his service to his country, his military poster boy look and articulation on TV makes them look like fools for discharging him.
But even as they try to do damage control they are simultaneously cracked more eggs on their own faces.
Gates is no dummy, so the abysmal ignorance about DADT he’s showing [note, so far, he’s only speaking about the policy generally not Fehrenbach specifically] reveals two disturbing things:
1. He’s never cared enough about DADT before to actually understand how it works;
2. That he’s gone from “kick it down the road” to “doing something humane” in four months while embarrassing himself by revealing his inexcusable ignorance about it proves that we have them on the run to DO SOMETHING FAST.
Not a lot of “flexibility,” Mr. Secretary??? Gates should ALREADY ENTIRELY understand that the choice of investigating anyone whom someone else has accused of being gay is ALREADY ENTIRELY up to the servicemember’s commander.
The term is “credible information.” If the commander says it isn’t “credible,” CASE CLOSED!!!!
“DoDD 1332.30, enclosure 8-1” — “A commander may initiate a fact-finding inquiry only when he or she has received credible information that there is a basis for discharge. Credible information exists when the information, considering its source and surrounding circumstances, supports a reasonable belief that a Service member has engaged in homosexual conduct. It requires a determination based on articulable facts, not just a belief or suspicion.”
Note it says, “MAY initiate a fact-finding inquiry” NOT MUST. So the flexibility is already there and Gates and all those attorneys he alleges are combing DADT for “flexibility” should have already found it.
Of course, for whatever reasons, Fehrenbach’s commander did choose to initiate an inquiry. Why, in relation to the kind of servicemember who very typically would be discretely given a “pass,” will be extremely interesting to learn. PLUS Fehrenbach, trusting in Obama’s promise to start working to overturn DADT the moment he took office, then admitted that he was gay to the world.
Hence, Gates, is trying to find a post-inquiry loophole. As noted, there IS one, but it’s mindboggling that they don’t see the trap they’re setting for themselves. The moment they start publicly admitting to arbitrary exceptions the insistence that others must be discharged is going to blow up in their faces…both in terms of credibility and triggering more lawsuits.
Mr. Secretary, don’t look for something “humane” in an inhumane policy…do the morally AND legally right thing for the President who two days ago unintentionally admitted to “weaken[ing] national security” by continuing to prevent “patriotic Americans from serving their country.” Tell him to freeze ALL discharges until this “unjust law” can be repealed.
Cam
@Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com: You said “With respect, you don’t understand that “don’t tell” doesn’t just mean “don’t tell anyone in the military”…it means “don’t tell ANYONE.” [Exceptions are your defense attorney and discovery that you’re gay during consideration for a security clearance—the latter the result of an Executive Order from Pres. Clinton.]
Say you told your mother before you enlisted. She mentions in a birthday card to you that the former boyfriend she liked so much said to tell you hello. The card falls out of your pocket at the ceremony where you’re to receive the Purple Heart. Someone else picks it up and reads it and tells your commanding officer what it says.”
____________________________________________________________
I absolutly understand it, the way it is written you absolutly can have told people before you were in the military, AND if the situation with the card existed, under the policy the military is not supposed to pursue because you had not exibited the behavior, your mother had mentioned it, but you hadn’t exibited it.
“The “don’t ask” part of the policy indicates that superiors should not initiate investigation of a service member’s orientation in the absence of disallowed behaviors”
But just like leaving the Klan in charge of an affirmative action policy, the military pushed the policy out to ridiculous limits. Even if somebody lied and said they were an ex, then were proven to have been lying, the military would continue searching and if they found evidence somebody was gay would still kick them out even though the charge had been proven false. They will go right back to doing this after the heat is off, so having the Pentagon SAY that they are going to back off is exactly the same as when Clinton said that this policy would protect gay servicemembers. Remember, after the this policy came into being, the number of personal kicked out for being gay went up dramatically and has stayed at those high levels.
Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com
@Cam:
OK, forget “respect”—you’re right about the ruthlessness of government homohaters in and out of uniform but you’re talking through your ass about what the combo law/policy permits AND discharge rates which have NOT “stayed at those high levels” since DADT for the very reason they’ve fluctuated since and during WWII…stop-loss when they’ve needed more bodies.
If I drew Camy a picture, would it help:
[img]
http://www.leonardmatlovich.com/images/831_DADT-numbers-94-08.jpg%5B/img%5D
Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com
[img]@Cam: [/img]
Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com
The picture doesn’t seem to be loading, so here’s the URL for anyone interested in facts:
http://www.leonardmatlovich.com/images/831_DADT-numbers-94-08.jpg
Cam
@Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com: you said “OK, forget “respect”—you’re right about the ruthlessness of government homohaters in and out of uniform but you’re talking through your ass about what the combo law/policy permits AND discharge rates which have NOT “stayed at those high levels” since DADT for the very reason they’ve fluctuated since and during WWII…stop-loss when they’ve needed more bodies.
If I drew Camy a picture, would it help: ”
______________________________________________________________
Look, go ahead and be as bitchy as you want. But after the policy was enacted discharge rates went up. Since it’s inception around 13,000 have been discharged under it. As for my not knowing about the policy. Not to go too far into personal lives here, But my ex was military, we sought out an attorney to find out what he could get kicked out for…i.e. can we live together, can he be seen out in the company of gay people etc… So again, be as bitchy as you want, and try to tell me what this policy supposedly says, but I would assume that the military specialist attornys we visited, paid, and took the advice of may know something about the policy and what can and cannot be done under it.
mk
I wonder if this will apply to cases already in progress or the decision to start investigations and dismissal proceeding in the future? If it applies to current cases it could save Lt. Col. Fehrenbach from dismissal. It’ll be a big public black eye on the administration if he is dismissed and loses his ability to work the last two years and retire with his pension and medical benefits.
princess johnson
>>What we’re actually seeing is the Obama administration, and not just Pentagon leadership, changing course. Gates isn’t making this call on his own; he’s following a very strict, politically orchestrated machine that appears to be slowly shifting direction. And he’s taking orders about how to speak directly from the White House.<<
apparently, the president has a “secret plan”…