Mark your calendar, readers, because November 30th marks the 14th anniversary of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. And, in honor of this dishonorable event, HRC asked Democratic presidential hopefuls how they’ll end the military’s gay ban.
The non-profit will feature a new response each day, starting with John Edwards.
Here’s HRC’s exact question: “If you are elected President, what concrete steps would you take to overturn ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell?’”. Now, we’re not sure if Edwards misunderstood the question or simply didn’t feel like giving a straight answer, but he definitely leaves us wanting more:
It is long past time to end the military’s ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy and to allow openly gay men and women to serve in the military. It is critical to our national security that we have the best people in our military. Gay men and women have continually served our country with honor and bravery, and we should honor their commitment and never turn away anyone who is willing to serve their country because of their sexual orientation.
This is an issue of fundamental fairness – and our military ought to treat everyone fairly. ‘Don’t Ask Don’t Tell’ did not become wrong. It was always wrong. Instead of fumbling when people question the morality of the 12,000 gays and lesbians who have unjustly lost military careers, we must repeal ‘Don’t Ask Don’t Tell.
Um, okay… We know DADT ain’t fair and hurts our military, we know it must be repealed, we that “it’s critical to our national security,” but we still don’t know how you, John Edwards, will do something about it. HRC asked, so why don’t you really tell?
[Image]
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.
David
I think he made it pretty clear that he’s committed to repealing this awful legislation. Does he have to spell it out in blood for you people to see that he’s taken a much more definitive stance than Obama or Hillarity will commit to?
And besides, he gets $400 haircuts, what are we queens doing giving him a hard time?
EDWARDS/BIDEN ’08
ProfessorVP
Edwards is a progressive compared to Hillary, whom I trust as far as I could throw Rosie O’Donnell. And speaking of lesbians…
http://bigheaddc.com/2007/10/31/la-times-sitting-on-an-explosive-prez-candidate-sex-story/
Martyzilla
He didn’t answer the question, and he was not “concrete” about what he would do to *change* it. Instead he tossed the usual rhetoric about and said not much of anything at all. It’s a press release, not an answer.
Leland Frances
So NOT a big deal. He could have given a blow-by-blow account and that wouldn’t prove that he would attempt what he said he would once in office any more than not spelling it out now proves that he won’t try to get it repealed. You either believe he’s sincere or you don’t and I believe he is.
The Human Rights Champagne fund could come closer to justifying their 30+ million dollar a year budget by ADVISING the candidates how it could be done instead of expecting them to come up with a strategy. Unlike HRC, all the candidates have quite a few other far more complicated issues on their plates to attempt to put together solutions for such as Iraq and health care and global warming to name three—PLUS winning the party’s nomination—than just gay issues.
As Michaelangelo Signorile observed in “Queer in America,” one of the reasons DADTDP got shoved down Clinton’s throat is that professional gay activists were too naive about the fight the Right would put up [including former Magic Negro and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Colon [sic] Powell threatening to resign] and too busy fighting for turf on the issue to adequately help him try to stand up to them. Members of Congress were flooded with calls, etc., from the Antigay Industry which played into the hands of Georgia Sen. Sam Nunn who, on top of being homophobic like most crackers, was eager to get even with Clinton for passing over him for Secretary of Defense.
Earn your keep, HRC!
ProfessorVP
It is an urban legend and old chestnut that Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell and later with the addendum Don’t Pursue was shoved down Clinton’s throat. Clinton campaigned in gay-rich urban states that he would end the homo ban with the stroke of his pen as an executive order as Harry S Truman had done with the equally illogical racial segregation in the military. No, I am not making that up. Once Clinton won, he began making nice-nice with the Republicans. He really had no intention of ending the ban. And we know how his cozying up to Republicans worked out.
Clinton could, in fact, have sat the generals down, Truman-style, and said, “The gay ban ends now– you get off your asses and implement this, that’s an order.” But there was the little matter of Bill’s having been a draft-dodger. Sidenote: why was Bill so aggressive in the hopeless War on Drugs? The small matter of his coke use. Well, at least one thing in common with GW Bush.
Leland Frances
As usual, the “Professor” is talking out his mangy ass, confusing Clinton Hating with the facts; doing his fake mind reading act: “He really had not intention of ending the ban.”
EVERY LGBT historian agrees that Congress would have acted to overrule any Executive Order—even those who criticized him for not issuing it anyway for purely symbolic reasons.