By next week, the Obama administration says it will have a more concrete plan to share about how it will move to work with Congress and the Pentagon to repeal Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. That news comes on the heels of a White House source that says military leaders signed off on Obama’s language used in his SOTU speech. And this, from Sec. Robert Gates’ office: “The Department leadership is actively working on an implementation plan and will have more to say about it next week.” Meanwhile, Carl Levin’s Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on DADT that went AWOL? It’s been scheduled for Feb. 9.
stratergizing
SHOCK: Actual Movement on DADT From the White House? ‘More Details’ Next Week + Senate Hearings a Go
Help make sure LGBTQ+ stories are being told...
We can't rely on mainstream media to tell our stories. That's why we don't lock Queerty articles behind a paywall. Will you support our mission with a contribution today?
Cancel anytime · Proudly LGBTQ+ owned and operated
Brian NJ
THAT is smart politics. If they succeed, they have a chance to rescue the midterms. With gays, their friends and everyone they infuence back on the president’s side, they could start to close this very, very serious rift.
reason
Where are the apologies for getting things absolutely wrong earlier, and trying to make the worst of peoples intentions.
reason
The work on DADT has been going on since the president walked into the white house. He has gone out of his way to forge a strong relationship with the military as did his wife, which is were Clinton messed up. It takes months of behind the scenes effort to get these people on board it is not something you do over night, so those that are suggesting that this is just election time politics are dead wrong. Politics is all about meticulous planning, and keeping an ungrateful public at bay while you lay the ground work to get things passed that will benefit them. The public wants things immediately which is impossible especially in places like Washington. Showing his hand on Jan 21 of last year would have pissed of the military and allowed the Republicans ample time to figure out how to destroy his plans. There is still a hard fight ahead.
reason
These are some of the things being discussed:
“Last summer, Gates asked the Defense Department’s general counsel to examine whether the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is implemented humanely — for example, should a jilted lover be allowed to expose someone’s sexuality.
This new, more humane implementation will likely be the interim policy until the U.S. military figures out what needs to be changed for a smooth transition.
Other questions they are looking at include:
– Is there a drop dead date that the policy will end?
– Will military members who were discharged under DADT be allowed back in?
– What, if any, new training will U.S. military members go through (ie sensitivity training, etc)? – Are any new or separate facilities necessary?
One critical question that neither Gates nor Mullen have answered yet: Do they believe repealing DADT will effect good order and discipline in the U.S. military? That will be the million-dollar question next Tuesday”
Republican
We shall see.
Josh_Texas
Repeal of DADT cannot pass the US Senate. End of story.
reason
@Josh_Texas: As a stand alone bill no, but as a rider on a defense appropriations bill it is possible.
JoeB
if this is the case, good. Frankly, it didn’t look like the military leaders signed off on the SOTU speech. They sat stone-faced and I’d say they looked angry.
Devon
I’ll believe it when I see it.
What I expect to see instead is “we couldn’t get it done this year because the mean old Republicans got in the way! Give money and we’ll TOTALLY pull it off next time, swearsies!”
Prove me wrong congress.
reason
@Devon:
“And so my fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you – ask what you can do for your country” Stop waiting around to see, go make it happen. Call your representatives, start a phone bank, go out and get supporters to write to their congressmen. If the polls are true and a majority of Americans support this, then it is up to the gay community to make it happen. The numbers are there get their letters to congress and put the fear of a primary challenge into them.
Michael W.
@JoeB: They sat stone faced during that portion of the address because it’s protocol. The same way that piece of shit Supreme Court Justice Sammy Alito was supposed to be.
Nonetheless most of them did hate that part, especially the man in all green: the Marine Corps Commandant James Conway. He might be the toughest nut to crack.
Jake from Boston
yes, it’s true Michael, the SCOTUS, and the Joint Chiefs of Staff are supposed to have no emotion during the SOTU address to show that they are “apolitical”. Too bad Alito tried to tarnish it. Didn’t you know that Marines are taught the 100 yard stare as part of boot camp? Just saying.
Jake from Boston
Well since corporations are people, it’s time for GAY INC to get off their asses and make some campaign ads.. I’m talking to you, HRC lol like that’s ever going to happen.
San Francisco Treat
@ Reason – your self righteous bullshit about how we should go out and be the change we want to see is annoying. The same goes for your incredibly shallow *read wrong* political analysis. The reason we will get a DADT repeal is because it is SUPER EASY to pull off politically and administratively. Those “other questions” you are concerned about I can answer for you.
1) Yes, obviously there will be a date when the policy is reversed. That’s what reversing the policy means.
2) Yes, obviously anyone that was forced out and is otherwise still eligible to serve will be allowed back in.
3) No, there won’t be sensitivity trainings. We’re not going to assume our service members have the maturity level of 7th graders. If someone demonstrates that they do have this problem, they will likely get some diversity training.
4) No, there won’t be a deleterious effect on “good order” and/or “discipline.” It’s the military you moron – they’re professionals.
ALSO – we’re not “acting” like he could have put a stop to this immediately – he COULD HAVE. The over 600 service members that have been discharged under DADT on his watch are ON HIM. Go tell those folks to be patient and I’ll meet you in the ER.
Daniel
@RF – Saint Lucia has 156,000 inhabitants. Should hundreds of millions of gay people even let the government of such a savage little island exist? That’s the real question at hand. No other group would be so merciful when faced with such human rights violations. Gay people, their friends and allies need to simply stop putting up with this crap. Take Jewish people, for instance. They don’t tolerate this kind of human rights violations, and they are tiny compared to the gay community, much less the combined gay and ally community. The gay community is simply too nice for its own good – expecting civility from two-thirds of the governments on Earth that are filled to the brim with corruption. And since when should governments that violate the human rights of millions of people be preserved? I thought World War II, the Holocaust, and all the other atrocities taught people that politicians and other governmental leaders who violate the human rights of millions of other people (regardless of whether those people are straight or gay, young or old, abled or disabled, etc.), those politicians and governmental leaders are the greatest source of evil on the planet. Does anyone even read the Universal Declaration of Human Rights? Simply read its preamble. Did all those people who died in the Holocaust die in vain? Did all the people who died in the USA just last year, who NEVER lived a day of their life knowing what it is like to live in a country that upholds their human rights, did those people die in vain? I commend those handful of countries that actually uphold human rights (there are less than 10 of them). They should be praised for honoring all who have suffered and died throughout world history. The rest of the nations – they can go to hell until they stop violating the human rights of hundreds of millions of people.
bystander
I am hopeful DADT will be repealed in the next defense appropriation bill, something like 60-70 percent of America support a repeal of DADT.
Transracial
What will this site write about when — horrors! — its editors finally no longer have obama-bashing as their sole goal
Cam
This is an easy out for the Dems. The GOP will threaten to fillibuster the bill, the dems will then agree to remove the DADT repeal in return for getting everything else they want. Then they can blame it all on the republicans.
Sam
@Josh_Texas: “Repeal of DADT cannot pass the US Senate. End of story.”
I doubt the Republicans are going to filibuster something that over 75% of Americans are in favor of. Plus, I’d bet that at least one of the ladies from Maine will be in favor, which would make it impossible to filibuster (if the Dems stay in line for once).
Michael W.
@Cam: If it’s apart of a defense authorization bill, they won’t be fillibustering anything.
Sam
“A source close to [Susan] Collins tells the Phoenix she is likely to become the lead Republican senator backing the Military Readiness Enhancement Act, which would reverse DADT and create a non-discrimination policy for the military.”
– Portland Phoenix
RomanHans
@Transracial: “What will this site write about when — horrors! — its editors finally no longer have obama-bashing as their sole goal”
I’m no Obama-basher. In fact, I think it’s great that Obama is doing absolutely nothing. It makes it so much easier for him to make promises for his second term.
San Francisco Treat
@Sam – Thank you for completely proving my “easy lift” argument.
reason
@San Francisco Treat:
These are the things being discussed: is some of the questions that the pentagon has leaked to the media, maybe your to daft to realize that I am not running the show or managing the pentagon. If you think your worthless one line answers are worthy of being presented to congress refuting thousands of pages of pentagon research, well you have got a lot to learn.
If you have been paying attention for the last fourteen years, or read about the last 50 you would know that no bill including civil rights is a cake walk or “easy lift.” One would think that a publicly popular bill introducing fair pay for women would be a walk in the park granted that women are like five classes ahead of gays and well liked in society, I mean there is a lot of people that even take them to bed. Well the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act was killed in the 110th congress. In the 111th it passed with only four republican senators all women voting out of pure self interest.
Now how many republican senators do you think will be interested in voting for gays, throw in old bigoted generals and the virulent religious right to boot. The democratic side has to contended to the blue dogs many in conservative states that only ran as democrats because of republican scandals or incumbent toxicity in there state taking advantage of a situation to slip into office. These people are already blanching at the thought of DADT and the dirty campaign ads they will face in midterms tying them to homos.
While the defense appropriations bill is the best avenue to take it throws in another monkey wrench, the anti-war democrats who are appeasing the rabid anti-war left wing of the part that wants us out of Afghanistan immediately. The previous factors already make things difficult, but then there is the generals. There is going to be a contentious debate in congress, the military trump card is unit cohesion if or when they slap down a 2000 page document outlining how out of the closet gays are going to destroy the military and cause lives, that is when things will heat up and we will find out who are allies are; one line answers are not going to cut it.
While I think it is the best avenue to purse, I darn well know it is not going to be an easy lift which is why I asked people to get involved in a constructive manner. If you are already involved constructively kudos to you.
soul_erosion
A question for the Queerty reader with a legal background; Should DADT be repealed, could that lessen our chances when the Perry appeal reaches SCOTUS? Wouldn’t that prove that we are not powerless and even more grounds that we are not a suspect class?
Chitown Kev
@reason:
“the anti-war democrats who are appeasing the rabid anti-war left wing of the part that wants us out of Afghanistan immediately”
You have a point here.
I remember freaking out for a sec when I noticed that Russ Feingold voted no on the Hate Crimes Bill. Then I remembered, it had nothing to do with the hate crimes bill, he was voting no because to the defense appropriations bill that the hate crimes bill was wrapped up in.
Josh_Texas
@Sam: National polling doesn’t matter to Senators – they only care what their constituents think. That’s why we have half the US Senate against us – despite your national polling numbers.
Josh_Texas
They are announcing a 10-year Plan to end DADT. Not a repeal, but a see-as-we-go phasing. It is supposed to include research and safeguards for heterosexuals that may be “afraid” of homosexuals. Separate showers, etc.
People are going to see the fraud of “working with the Congress to end DADT” when they see the details. Its just more political double-speak. We’re stupid if we continue to believe any of this political crap.
reason
@Chitown Kev:
Yeah right, people today that are not fully in-tune with the intricacies of politics and kids fifty years from now will probably be reading the votes unjustly thinking Feingold is a bigot.
@ Josh_Texas
We will work to get the best result, but with history as a marker these things take time. Politics is the quickest way to serve openly in the military, once this occurs, the interactions that we have with the soldiers will aid in changing perceptions; as the generations pass things will get easier and one day we may get a gay Chairperson of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Regarding civil rights the founders laid the ground work for Lincoln, who laid the ground work for Truman… Eisenhower… JFK… Johnson and so on. In their times a lot of these Presidents were viewed poorly by the oppressed and some even had bigoted views, but history has been kind to them, meritoriously so, because these leaders had the guts to lift up their hands and do something for the future, no matter how little it seemed at the time, that has made America the great country that it is. Why we may not be there yet, everyday the struggles that we bear are moving us closer.
Steve
@reason:
“Now how many republican senators do you think will be interested in voting for gays, throw in old bigoted generals and the virulent religious right to boot.”
That appears to be changing, if just slightly, in recent weeks.
I have seen several news articles about particular Republicans who have said they now support marriage equality. I don’t know if those represent true changes of heart, or just political triangulation. With the number and slant of recent news articles about the prop8 trial, a true change of heart seems possible. With a number of gays expressing disaffection for the Democrats, political triangulation also seems possible. I expect a similar movement on DADT might be easier, rather than harder.
As for the generals — most of them are pretty bright guys. You don’t rise through the selection process to O-7 or higher without being smart. A lot of them have PhD’s. Every one of them is capable of being a tough bastard when needed, but they are also capable of thinking, accepting facts, and making logical inferences.
When explaining the politics of university faculty, it is common to hear that “the facts have a liberal bias.” This is a way of explaining that people who do research, and who are open to being persuaded by facts (experimental results, etc.), usually find that the facts support ideas that are commonly considered “liberal”. When Republicans or Generals consider the same facts and evidence, some of them might be smart enough to be convinced.
Rob Moore
I will wait with bated breath. The wooden blockheads on the right will stop it as surely as they killed health care reform. I do not believe there is enough spine in the center to endure the thugs from the right when they start saying boo.
reason
@Rob Moore:
I hear what you are saying, but the republicans at least the ones that I know of so far are people that are not in power, thus they don’t have to face the wrath of the far right tea party types.
I also understand that most generals are extremely bright, and I have the utmost respect for their intellectual prowess. All things considered the powerful three and four stars on the block are old school, they came up in a different time, and after pouring over centuries of military history I could see a penchant toward maintaining the old view of who a soldier is and the moral code that goes along with valor. I have seen it in older soldiers that I have meet, the yearning to capture that romance of what an old warrior was believed to be, it is magnetic.
I do believe it is possible to get some of the intellectually driven ones to buy into it, but I think that it will deeply hurt something inside of them that is really, being truthful, possibly not fully driven by homophobia. I am not sure my previous statement is easy to understand, or if I should be delving into that.
reason
@Steve: The previous post was responding to you. I wish you could edit these things after you post.
rainfish2000
@reason: “I do believe it is possible to get some of the intellectually driven ones to buy into it, but I think that it will deeply hurt something inside of them that is really, being truthful, possibly not fully driven by homophobia. I am not sure my previous statement is easy to understand, or if I should be delving into that.”
No, I’d venture to say that a lot of their concerns may be driven by an innate fear, which is common to many straight men, of having to face that masculinity is not the sole province of heterosexual men. For many young men who join the armed services, the military is a Rite of Passage into manhood. Yet, while growing up, and especially in high school, the atom bomb of put-downs designed to emasculate another boy was to imply that they were homosexual. Now, suddenly, you are told that “fags” can be just as assertive, effective, and (horror of all horrors) just as brave and worthy of admiration as any heterosexual man in uniform. How that reality must rattle those men who are so unsure of their own masculinity or who depend so single-mindedly on a heterosexual-centric identity in order to feel self-worth.
As far as the stodgy old generals who fear this, well, it’s culture shock — pure and simple. But that is their weakness, not ours. And it doesn’t say much about their over-vaulted sense of values, but it does say a lot about their lack of courage in adapting to the realities of life, and it puts into serious question their sense of honor.
By the way, as far as “unit cohesion…order and discipline goes”, those white-knuckled, catch-phrases meant to stir up an unimaginable fear of the unknown if homosexual serve openly, with pride and honor, in the Armed Forces — well, it is nothing more than irrational and unfounded anti-gay jingoism.
All of our NATO allies (many of whom serve along side our troops overseas) have had openly Gay and Lesbian service members in the ranks for years now — with exception of Turkey (an Islamic country) in NATO. So, as usual, this great bastion of individual freedom and liberty, this America, is the last one on the block to get the message – to quote FDR: “There’s nothing to fear, but fear itself!” …. to that I’d add, GET OVER IT! It’s time to grow up, and stop being the insecure adolescent who is told that the price of membership into the Heterosexual Man’s Club is that you have to hate homosexuals or you are one.
In 1993, that abhorrent “compromise” of Lie and Hide aka Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell was cowardly passed into law, which basically did nothing as those homosexuals who wanted to join the military would lie anyway on the forms when asked that dehumanizing question about their sexuality. Sure, some easing of witch-hunts were noted, but the atmosphere of fear and suspicion remained — not to mention the intolerably inhumane and demeaning situation of having to deny who you are in order to appease the fear and stupidity of others. Yet, the same year when lifting the ban was debated in a Democratic-controlled Congress (I watched all of the committee hearings on C-Span at the time), a multi-million dollar research study done by the Rand Corporation was suppressed by the Pentagon.
All of which begs question, Why did no one, especially our Democratic “allies”, ever demand that the Rand Report be put on the record in the hearings? The Pentagon authorized it, and when the Rand Report came back and stated very clearly that there would be NO impact on “unit cohesion and good order and discipline in the military”, that is, if proper leadership was exercised, then, mysteriously the Rand Report disappeared.
When asked about it, the Pentagon, having already made up their conclusions, said that their own independently commissioned report was flawed. Hence, they suppressed the Rand Report because it contradicted their lies. Why didn’t the Democrats on the committee demand to see the report (which the taxpayers paid for) and why didn’t they enter it into the official record?
I believe many of us in the GLBT community are convinced that it was because the results of these sham hearings were already predetermined — example, General Powell et al were allowed to speak against equality in the Armed Forced scheduled right before the evening news broadcasts (to make sure their words against us were include in the daily news broadcasts), whereas the pro-equality witnesses were scheduled, at poorly attended hearings, to give testimony much later, usually after 6pm. It was an obvious sham, like I said.
So, it is 2010, and we shall see how Sen. Levin’s will be conducting these new committee hearings now — a shameful seventeen years later. Levin also ran much of the same kabuki show in 1993 with arch-homophobe, Georgia Dixie-crat, Sam Nunn at the helm. Unfortunately, we already have to cope with Ike Skelton (Blue Dog Democrat from Missouri), Sam Nunn’s evil twin, in the House of Representative, as Chairman of the House Armed Services Committee. Let us all hope that these hearings will not be the same reprehensible spectacles as they were nearly two decades ago.
San Francisco Treat
lol – ledbetter was the definition of an easy lift too. and i love that you call my answers to your questions “worthless” while not identifying any problems with them. opposing dadt is popular in every region of the country, maybe not with a primary electorate on the dark side, but there will be ZERO ad campaigns in the general that focus on dadt that are aimed at people that voted for repeal. watch and learn.
Jon Martin
Shocked that my first responser on my blog article about DADT called me a fag and this “military man” said he didn’t want to be raped by gays. I was shocked. Why the hate? He most likely doesn’t even know one gay person.