Yeah, he's ready to sit around and talk about it with Obama for a few more months. The hate crimes bill made me more conifdent, but so far the Democrats have proven highly ineffectual with the health care disaster and bow down to right-wingers just because right wing nutjobs are 99% of the time tough, old, and mean as hell.

What will we do after the bill comes to a house vote??
I know, we'll compromise on it with the Republicans!

Now that Army Secretary, John McHugh backs the repeal of DADT, who will Obama toss the ball to now for review?

Da Pope?

Of course! With dwindling enlistment, and troops strained to the breaking point they're now seeing the "reality" that gays serving isn't such a bad thing. If they think this will stop the hemmoraging though I think they're sadly mistaken. They just don't realize as a demographic we're not exactly flocking to sign up! (at least I don't think we are).

Slowly but surely… The military likes to say it's not into "social experiments," but it's actually been at the forefront of several socially relevant issues. Yeah, I'd rather have it done yesterday, but at least we know we're not beating our heads against a brick wall, here. Maybe a wooden, rotten one, but yeah. It'll get done.

Is there a DADT-repeal bill in either house?

It is more proof to all those Obama Borg that a simple repeal requires no work BEFORE it is repealed, and that if there is difficulty, it has to come AFTER the repeal.

HR 1283. 180ish co-sponsors.

"Throw in incoming (hopeful) Under Secretary of Defense Dr. Clifford Stanley, and it appears the White House is lining up top military support for the policy's demise." …. which is a good reason for Obama and Congress to take a little time to do it right. Favorable statements from top level defense department officials will make it harder for Republicans opposed to it to raise "national security" as an issue, and will protect supporters in Congress from some angry constituents. When some guy goes on in a constituents' meeting about being "soft on defense" and "reducing moral", that congressperson can simply reply by saying that the Secretary of the Army and various cigar-chomping generals all stated that the change would be beneficial. You can't aget away with accusing a congressman of not supporting the military for doing something the military thinks is beneficial.

This is great, but bottom line for me is ENDA. Without fairness in our ability to get and hang on to jobs, little else matters. I've been at the receiving end of job descrimination despite two graduate degrees. There is no conscience out there — we need it in writing.

No. 9 · romeo:
I agree. I astounds me that everyone wants to get in and fight some more illegal wars abroad presumably because they are lucky enough to be taken care of or think that descrimination does not exist. It does. As someone like you who has suffered serious job descrimination, (even despite local laws) the singular telling act is a working and strong law against Job descrimination. As long as gay people are daily descriminated against and suffer devastated lives, we will know that homophobia has won out.

@Brian NJ – I don't know what country you're from, but in the United States of America you cannot just waive a magic want, highlight-click-delete or in any other repeal a law without a) a law (through the usual legislative process, which isn't fast); or b) the law being stricken down as unconstitutional in court, for which there is also not a fast forward button. The legislative process involves the introduction of a bill that must run through committees and eventually get passed by both houses of Congress before it can be signed into law by the president (basic Schoolhouse Rock stuff). If your interested, you can follow the process here: http://www.govtrack.us/congres.....=h111-1283

If you want to know about the status of ENDA, DADT, or any other gay-related bill in Congress, you can go to:
http://www.actonprinciples.org/
On the left hand side of the screen is a listing of each topic. If you click on ENDA in the House for example, it will give you the number of co-sponsors, the number of yes votes, the number of congress members leaning yes, the number leaning no, the number of no votes, and the number of undecided.

You can do the same for any gay-related bill. Following, each one is a list of the members of Congress and their position on the bill. This allows you to check on your representative or senator to see whether or not they support the legislation.

It's a great web site to check on the current status of any gay-related bill in Congress.

Why would we want to serve a country that's declared war on us?

@GeoffM

"With dwindling enlistment"

Actually, all branches and components of the military have met their recruiting and retention goals. They've raised standards back up and moved away from granting exemptions.

yeah dude – 10% unemployment has a way of filling out the ranks.

Thanks for the useful link Prof!

@Mike Barton

You are right that on MOST issues, there is no magic wand to make something happen.

But, on DADT, there is a magic wand. Not to fully REPEAL the existing law, but to suspend its enforcement while congress continues to work on its repeal.

The legislation that enacted DADT has a provision in it that authorizes the president to suspend the enforcement of DADT with a stop loss order (magic wand) during a time of war.

So, Obama could easily issue that stop loss order (its actually been done in the past) and actually accomplish what he has said with his rhetoric on the campaign trail and in front of LGBT dinner / party audiences.

@Mike Barton

You are wrong about speed. I live on a planet where when Obama wanted NEW, complex and controversial bailout legislation, it was plopped right on his desk. He is about to get new, complex legislation on health care plopped right on his desk. A reorganization of a large sector of the American economy. Where are two simple repeals OF OLD LAW? What senator does not know how he or she will vote on DADT or DOMA? There is no work involved in these repeals. They have legally discredited, they have been morally discredited.

HOW DID GAYS GET ON THE BOTTOM OF THE LEGISLATIVE AGENDA! Gay excuses and complicity, that's how. They are having hearings on improving soldier education in the House Armed Services Committee. WHY ALL THE EXCUSES FOR THE GOVERNMENT??

"Brian NJ" wrote, "The legislation that enacted DADT has a provision in it that authorizes the president to suspend the enforcement of DADT with a stop loss order (magic wand) during a time of war."

Reality: stop-loss orders are controversial and not liked by military personnel (who want a predictable term of service). As the "Commander in Chief", Obama has a valid reason to not use them unless absolutely necessary. Furthermore, how do you justify a stop-loss order based on sexual orientation without ignoring anti-discrimination laws, at least in spirit? Remember that a stop-loss order would also prevent a gay soldier from leaving the military at the end of his term of service.

Stop-loss orders managed on an individual basis would set a precedent in which the president could keep a specific soldier in the military for as long as he wanted. You know, like extending the term of a senator's son if the senator does not play ball on specific legislation. Using it as Brian NJ's "magic wand" would set a bad precedent in general.

Finally, a stop-loss order based on sexual orientation would mean that the military wants gays only if there is a war going on where they might be killed, and once the war is over, they will be shown the door and denied any benefits associated with leaving after their enlistment is finished: the use of the stop-loss order as an exception to DADT does not apply once a war ends. This sort of abuse has happened before – gay soldiers came out during a previous conflict (e.g. in an attempt to end discrimination by showing the cost of it), were kept in for the shooting war, and booted out once the risk to life and limb ended.

@Mike Barton, Brian NJ:

A President and his staff may issue orders directing others not to enforce a law. It happens all the time, most recently exemplified by last week's order for prosecutors not taking to task CA's medicinal pot smokers, growers and sellers, despite the fact that they are in violation of Federal law.

The Palm Center has already outlined a plan for Obama to effectively kill DADT pending its outright repeal. And Obama hasn't moved.

It's Obama's fault it's taking so long. Plain and simple. He refuses to spend political capital on us.

(But fortunately he's realized that ENDA *had* to pass quickly, or "teh gays" would make good on their promise of rebellion.)

@B

Your concerns are outside of the scope of his Order, which will be to suspend discharges based on DADT, only.

The Order Obama will issue will be for the retention of gay soldiers in a time of war, and not relate to discharge at the end of their normal service. The legality of the Order is grounded in his Oath of Office and the Federal Constitution, consistent with his duty to protect the county, honor soldiers, and uphold the Equal Protection Clause.

The law will also have to be rescinded by Congress.

His response to any technical irregularities the Order would cause?
"Sue me." That is a great leader, and one who actually follows his Oath.

Brian NJ wrote, "@B Your concerns are outside of the scope of his Order, which will be to suspend discharges based on DADT, only." Unless you are advocating perpetual war, the concerns I raised are quite germane: as I said, "a stop-loss order based on sexual orientation would mean that the military wants gays only if there is a war going on where they might be killed, and once the war is over, they will be shown the door and denied any benefits associated with leaving after their enlistment is finished: the use of the stop-loss order as an exception to DADT does not apply once a war ends."

What you are suggesting is governing by gimmick. That is not happening because, after 8 years of perhaps the worst president in our history, we finally have some adult supervision.

Meanwhile http://content.usatoday.com/co.....20000517/1 indicates that Obama is most likely going to sign the Mathew Shepard and JamesByrd, Jr. Hate Crime Prevention Act some time tomorrow (Wednesday).

@B

Ridiculous.