Two of President-Elect Barack Obama‘s advisors say that the new administration will not make overturning the military’s policy of “Don’t Ask-Don’t Tell” an immediate priority and may wait untl 2010 to act. Aubrey Sarvis, executive director of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network has spoken with Obama about the issue and came away with the impression that Obama believes “2009 is about foundation building and reaching consensus.” Another Obama advisor, Larence Korb told the Washington Times:
“The new administration should set up a Pentagon committee to make recommendations to Congress on a host of manpower issues, including the gay ban.
“If it’s part of a larger package, it has a better chance of getting passed,” he said”
Joe Moag
Obama’s approach makes complete sense to me. (I am now awaiting the massive amount of incoming flak from posters who will call me a self-hating fag, sell-out, etc…).
Truman signed an Exec. Order to “deseg” the armed services, but it took Ike, working WITH the Pentagon, to actually INTEGRATE the armed services.
Let’s try to remember Clinton’s shoot-from-the-hip approach to gays in the military. He built up no Pentagon support, no public support, had no credibility on military affairs (in his 1st year in office) and what did we get? Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. That’s what happens when you act before thinking.
Moreover, Obama’s position flows directly with the position taken by over 200 retitred military officers, including 4-star Rear Admiral Charles Lawson, in a signed statement calling for an end to DADT through deliberate yet goal-oriented work with the Pentagon. Not UPON the Pentagon. With the Pentagon.
This is what Obama seems to be saying he will do.
God forbid someone take their time, build support, and get it right.
J
I’m with Joe. The fact is, while I would like to make Gay Rights a national priority, and I think that that can be accomplished immediately on a state-by-state level, as far as the presidency goes, well, It’s the economy, Stupid!
james.p.p.
i’ve read blog after blog about how gay are feeling pissed about this – and frankly, i was pretty pissed at first as well. but honestly, Obama is bring up gay issues BEFORE he takes office. without out asking and without a pressure movement, he voluntarily brought up that one of the biggest gay controversies is on the table and will be discussed.
can anyone please let me know when another president-in-waiting brought up gay issues without being asked?? can anyone please tell that it would take UNDER a year to come up with a PROPER policy that would not only be fair to ALL our military and also have the support it needs to pass?
anyone?
last time we saw this “REACT NOW!” mentality was Clinton’s introduction of DADT, a Band-Aide to a hemorrhaging situation at the time. yes, it solved a very big problem at the time, but it did not solve THE problem, and left unchanged it has created more problems as the years go by.
Obama cannot even begin to discuss this until he gets some clout and respect from the Pentagon anyway – and that will be dependent on how he takes over the Iraq war. right now he’s just the “peace-loving diplomatic-talks-first gun-hating pansy who won the election.” come on! he’s going to need a LITTLE time to get in good with the Pentagon before he can start making changes.
again, though, i have to reiterate, i’m just glad this issue is even on the table. it gives all the homophobes in uniform over a year to cool down, and it gives Obama over a year to get it right for everyone – not just the gays.
so if Joe is a self-hating fag, sell-out, etc. then so am i.
Wayne
and the backtracking begins. Let’s all make excuses for Obama.
ChristopherM
If Obama brings up anything other than the economy or national security in his first year, he is going to spend all of his political capital and won’t get anything done. I’m sorry, but well over a million jobs have been lost this year. If he tried tackling DADT before or during the economy fix, we are going to lose. Better to actually have a plan this time around that will win.
FYI, this comes from the Washington Times, so perhaps we should be questioning the veracity of this story from the Moonies.
fredo777
Meh.
I’ve always appreciated a larger package.
Distingué Traces
I’ve been saying all along that DADT shouldn’t be a priority.
Remember Clinton? He felt that he had a mandate so he overreached in the first year of his presidency, and then he spent the rest of two terms compromising and placating the right to make up for it.
Not smart. Obama’s absolutely right that the first year should be about building consensus — and stopping the economic hemorrhage!
Joe Moag
@Wayne: Backtracking? Exactly when did Obama say he would reverse DADT upon Day One of an Obama Presidency?
othniel
@Joe Moag:
I might agree with you except I see this as a national security issue with civil rights implications. We have lost too many qualified service personel, especially translators, which is ludicrous with our armed forces already overextended.
Our professionals in uniform are not the issue – it is the culture warriors on the right who are in fact undermining national security. They ought be told so.
The Gay Numbers
I think your head line is potentially misleading.
What he actually seems to say is that when he does something he wants it be effective. I agree with this approach.
Meaning he wants to push the military behind closed doors rather than in front of the media to do this. That may not happen in 2009,but it will happen because he is pushing for it in a way that makes it matter of fact rather than a public spectacle
There is a difference. Its not about hiding in a closet. It’s about not making gay into a social issue, but one of getting business done.
Can I just say that your article is one of those areas in which we see the difference between those who want rights and those who want emotional validation from the people who have denied us in the past.
The later would occur by having a big splashy public spectacle of DADT repeal, and gaining support that way. But, then that’s what Clinton tried and that got us nothing.
The former- gaining rights- isn’t going to always be about making it a big deal. Sometimes it is. Sometimes not. It will depend. I don’t much care which approach works so long as it works. Shouldn’t that be our standard?
AfterElton, I think about a year ago (you can look it up), did this article about the number of gay kisses appearing in prime time.
They gave the example of Brothers and Sisters. There was no big campaign marketing it as a gay trumph like Melrose Place.
There was no big spectacle of any kind. They just had the two men kiss each other on prime time in a matter of fact way. Since then, I have seen this on several shows. Kissing, making out and generally being a couple.
This has taught me a small lesson. You can be out and proud, and still make your point, without it being a spectacle. I don’t know if spectacle is the right word, but I do know that what Obama is saying isn’t that bad. It’s that he wants to just get the ban repealed. Not worry about turning it into a media event. Diffrerent approach, but maybe more effective. Thus I want to give it a try.
Brian Miller
Man, are the responses from Obama partisans predictable.
In the boom times, there were “more important issues than gay rights” that had to be focused on by the Clinton administration. So we got DOMA, Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, and a raft of anti-gay state laws that the Democrats did nothing to stop.
Now, we’re in a bust and once again, there are “more important issues than gay rights” that have to be focused on by the Obama administration. So we got Proposition 8, a delay in the easiest-to-pass gay rights law in the country (repealing DADT), and people are busy explaining how we “need” to wait ANOTHER 20 years to get stuff that even the Nepalese and Mexicans have figured out.
I’m tired of partisan Democrats’ low expectations — and I’m especially tired of them being imposed on the community. So are lots of other gay folks, judging from the turnouts last weekend.
nokkonwud
Ok, I was angry about Obama seeming to leave us behind, but then I rememebered I voted for him to fix the mess George Bush has created. That means the economy and the war and healthcare first because, honestly, if he doesn’t fix those first, then our civil rights won’t matter a hill of beans when we’re all starving and homeless.
So I’ll give him a chance, but I’ll keep that number, 2010, in the back of my mind.
fredo777
@Brian Miller:
“Man, are the responses from Obama partisans predictable.”
About as predictable as those from his critics.
kevin57
I have no problem with trying to build consensus on this issue…with the HUGE proviso that consensus, especially with the cultural crusaders, will always certainly not happen. What will Pres. Obama do then? He’ll have to choose to have balls or back down. Now, I’m willing to look at the potential of genius here. If he can get a reasonably good consensus among the military (which is doable) and a coalition of Dems and moderate GOPers, then even the funny-mentalists won’t be able to stop it.
I totally reject the “the economy first” line of argument…Can we not chew gum and walk upstairs at the same time?
The Gay Numbers
@fredo777: It’s not about repealing DADT for the poster to whom you are talking. DADT is only the wedge he uses because for him its about Obama. It’s very old school Rovian. Obama’s strength is that he has a large group of followers. therefore, to defeat the policy spend time discussing the personality rather than whether the new strategy will suceed.
The Gay Numbers
@kevin57: Where does he mention trying to convince cultural conservatives? Do you mean the military brass?
james.p.p.
@Brian Miller:
“a delay in the easiest-to-pass gay rights law in the country (repealing DADT)”
yes, repealing it is rather easy… but then replace it WITH WHAT? it has to be replaced with SOMETHING. do you even remember WHY we had DADT in the first place? THAT was a horrible time where our brothers and sisters in the military were not only being brought to trial, but being forced to out everyone else and list who they had sex with or else be charged and found guilty of treason. it was a very scary time.
a “simple” repeal will send us back to the Reagen years. the replacement has to be done correctly.
again, everyone is bitching about having to wait when, in fact, he could have not said anything at all. i’m just glad it’s in the conversation – even if it is just penciled in.
Joe Moag
@The Gay Numbers: Exactly. The factual discussion at hand should be about strategic directions and strategic choices on HOW TO SUCCESSFULLY REPLACE DADT with GAY INTEGRATION. There is ZERO evidence that the Obama administration will do anything EXCEPT change DADT and integrate the armed services. How to do it so that it WORKS is the issue, and I agree with everything that I have heard coming from the Obama camp – as it comforms to advice given by hundreds of military brass in favor of repealing DADT and comports with my 44 years on planet Earth observing how things actually do and do not get changed for the better and successfully.
afrolito
The economy will be the most important issue during Obama’s presidency. Fags serving in the military is just not a priority right now.
The Gay Numbers
@Joe Moag: That’s the difference between you and some antagonist here. You are a pragmatist trying to get shit down. Like me, you probably don’t care how it gets done so long as its done.
The Gay Numbers
@afrolito: That’s not what Obama said either. You bitches need to leave your baggage at the door.
L
Thanks for the weekend update, Japhy.
John Smith
I told you so.
Doug Morrison
Whew… When there are so many issues to deal with and prioritize, gay issues are not at the top of the list to get to first! As with any group that struggles, fights, suffer and die to overcome inequality and mistreatment, our time too will come… But facts are that America is in deep shit and we need to let President elect Obama work to address what are our most pressing issues first and then address our segments fight after he stabilizes our country first! We need to back Obama and hope and pray he will be successful for all of America. WE TOO SHALL OVERCOME!!!
Charles J. Mueller
@Doug Morrison: Chew..Gum…Walk?
I’m a Mac user. ne 1 no how 2 get the ID after the @ sign 2 turn red?
fredo777
@Charles J. Mueller:
Yeah, babe.
Just hit “@Reply” after the post you want to reply directly to + it should automatically put the text into your comment for you, with link + all.
blake
Obama can’t sign an executive order to eliminate DADT. It’s law. To repeal DADT, Obama has to pass legislation. That takes votes.
The country’s financial system is falling apart. What legislation will legislators be willing to jump on first? Legislation to fix the economy or real DADT?
Frankly, I’m more concerned with ENDA than DADT. Sorry, ENDA, protection for all GLBT Americans from discrimination in employment and housing outweighs DADT. Why? Because, it lays groundwork and also benefits more people.
People need to look at the Civil Rights Era and understand how Lyndon Johnson pushed and prodded law after law. It took was a battle but it took political capital to succeed.
kevin57
If all this election was about was “fixing the economy” and wasn’t really about gay issues, why the hell vote for Obama? From every appearance so far, his program will not be a whit’s difference from what McCain would have offered.
fredo777
@kevin57:
What, exactly, did McCain offer us?
The Gay Numbers
@kevin57:Ditto what Fred said. McCain’s plan consisted of regurgitated talking points and telling us that things were n’t as bad as we thought. Seriously, you don’t wan tto go there between McCain and Obama regarding the economy. You would just embarass yourself.
kevin57
Gay Numeros…it’s you guys who should be embarassed. If you want to rename “queerty.com” to “economics101.com” then fine. But this is a gay site advancing that agenda. Jobs, budgets, GDP, all fine and good, but for a gay man to diminish himself in favor of economic stimulus is a mark of self-loathing.
Charles J. Mueller
@fredo777: Dun!
Now why didn’t I think to do that? Senility is definitely setting in. Heehee
I kept looking at that and asking myself what it was for and all the while wondering why everyone was using the @ So and So approach to answering?
Gay.com didn’t have feature. You had to type in the screen name of the person you wanted to reply to. Another reason I am glad I moved over to Queerty.
Thanks, good buddy. Very much appreciated
Charles J. Mueller
@kevin57:
With all due respect for your disappointment re: DADT, which I can understand, I think you are overlooking the fact that he did put out a plan of action for the LGBT community just last week. Correct me if I am wrong, but was this not the very first order of business on his agenda? And did he not put it out there even before his economy proposals?
I don’t believe that we should be moving into a space that demands miracles and moving mountains from a man who hasn’t even been inaugurated yet.
Give the guy a chance to soar before we shoot him down like a clay pigeon that hasn’t even gotten off the ground yet. We owe him that as our President.
After all, we elected him, didn’t we?
fredo777
@Charles J. Mueller:
No worries, mate.
I didn’t know what it was at first, either, + just figured it out by trial + error.
The Gay Numbers
@kevin57: So what you are saying is you got nothing to back up your claim regarding Obama versus McCain on economics issues? First step when cornered- distract the hunter so that you can get away.
Roland Basque
I think it’s really cool to be anti-gay.I mean what does “gay” entail?Is it about a bunch of heterophobes trying to advance their own intolerant and narcissistic agenda?Everyone I know enjoys mimicking and making sport of the self absorbed nebbish twits who consider themselves candidates for veneration just because they are so called gay.Nobody really likes queers they just consider them material for great comedy.
Charles J. Mueller
@Roland Basque:
Enter the troll!
Can we have a little fanfare, please?
sparkle obama
@Wayne
and the backtracking begins. Let’s all make excuses for Obama.<<
w*yne, you are so stupid!
the very definition of reactionary!
you singlehandedly destroyed the credibility of the WOW report blog.
you should be ashamed of yourself, you silly qu**n.
ps
who did you vote for?
did you even vote?
you are the worst: so negativ eand dishonest.
you represent the very Worst of Us.
you are going to be So Embarassed someday.
sorry to be negative here!
sparkle obama
ps
bitter!
Joe Moag
@The Gay Numbers: Yup!
Joe Moag
@kevin57: Ah, I see it only took 31 comments before someone described a reasoned defense of the VALUE of a careful, planned approach to DADT as “self-hating”. In my original comment to this article – post #1 – I called it. I thought it would be, oh, around comment #38 or #39, so, GOOD JOB, Kevin! Way to push that Bullshit earlier than I thought someone would. Attaboy!
Hendrik
Most of you queers on this blog must be the dumbest cocksuckers on the planet. You have voted for an illegal alien muslim psychopath (a crook who does not want to show his birth certificate or how he profited from alien status when he was studying), to be used by president Emanuel as his puppet, to govern this colony of Israel called USA. You worry about gay rights when these psychopaths want to make 98% of the human population their slaves.
You deserve what you have coming to you!
Luckily you are used to take it up the arse, because that’s what’s going to happen BIG TIME should this psychopaths manage to pull this charade off. Wake up little queens and see the light before it is extinguished forever for you.
Don’t think for a second O or E give a toss about queers.
Wayne
So much for the “Change” candidate. Obama has never been a friend to the Gay community. Just ask Obama’s bigot friend Donnie McClurkin. Time will show that Obama will do nothing for the gay community, other than try to segregate gays into a 2nd class marriage status. And if you don’t beleive me, maybe you should review the recent Connecticut Supreme Court ruling which stated quite clearly that Obama’s favored position of “civil unions” are in fact DISCRIMINATORY to gay people. (But what does the Supreme Court know, right? Denial ain’t a river in Egypt, but it’s found a home a Queerty).
Wayne
Obama can’t sign an executive order to eliminate DADT. It’s law. To repeal DADT, Obama has to pass legislation. That takes votes.
—
That is NOT True. How do you think the military was integrated in the first place? They were forced to integrate, because Pres. Truman signed an Executive Order 9981, which ordered the military to racially integrate. Obama has the power to sign an Executive Order to end DADT immediately. But he doesn’t want to face the political fall out from doing so. Bill Clinton did the same thing! It’s how we got DADT in the first place! Don’t any of you know your history? Bill Clinton signed DADT as a compromise to his Executive Order. Obama could sign a new Executive Order on his first day in office and it would end DADT. The President is THE commander of the military, he has the power to end DADT, but because of political cowardice, Obama chooses not to.
Joe Moag
@Wayne:Since you brought up Truman and the deseg of the armed services, maybe you should look into how massively ineffective Truman’s actions were, and how it took Eisenhower, the ex-general turned President, working WITH the Pentagon to actually turn the Exec Deseg Order into real, lasting and successful INTEGRATION of the armed services.
I mean, unless you are happy living in a world of hyper-ventilated charges of political cowardice. Or, perhaps, you are one of so many arm-chair advisers on the political scape that have never actually worked in politics, worked in organizing or actually run an organization and had real responsibility for making change work.
Wayne
Joe,
History has shown that though it took another 10 years until full integration was achieved; but it is absolutely clear that it was Truman’s signing of Executive Order 9981 that forcefully instigated military integration. Historical scholars are very clear about that fact! Anyone who claims otherwise, or tries to deny the presidential power of Executive Orders, is being disingenuous.
And as to your question about if I am ” happy living in a world of hyper-ventilated charges..”
For your information, I don’t live in a “hyper-ventilated” world when it comes to DADT. I am ex-Army. I gave some very long YEARS of my life in service. DADT is a subject I am VERY familiar with. I served my country and remain proud of it. When did you serve?
Joe Moag
@Wayne: History is clear on a few things:
1. The Deseg order did little beyond making units integrate “officially”. Blacks and whites still were segregated in sleeping quarters, there were no black promotions of any meaning, and there was negligent indifference as the treatment of black ssoldiers by white officers in the armed services well after the Exec Order. When Ike put his foot down and made the Pentagon think through what it really means to INTEGRATE the services, it happened. I would think that you, as a gay ex-service member, would understand that there is a HELL of a lot more involved in integrating queers into the military than simply signing an order. Changing the culture and the structure of the military so as to address all of the things that gays will encounter when they serve openly is key to this, just as it was key to turning Truman’s deseg into Ike’s Integration. Get it?
2. I did not serve, and this is not some pissing contest about military service. It is a debate – argument if you want it to be – about how to achieve change. The fact that you bribng up that you served in the armed services may make you look good on this site, but does not say anything about whether or not you have any idea whatsoever about how to navigate real change in a politically heated and massively bureaucratic evnironment such as the Pentagon.
Wayne
Joe, You say a lot, but none of what you say detracts from the facts that I posted. The President is the commander of the armed forces and has the power through Executive Order to end DADT. Truman is historically recognized as being the president who instigated racial integration in the military by signing Executive Order 9981. The signing of that executive order forced the military unto a path of racial integration. These are FACTS. Did it take more than the executive order to achieve full integration? Yes, of course. But integration never would have began at all without the signing of Executive Order 9981. Would it take political courage and leadership to sign an Execitive Order ending DADT? Yes. But I guess that’s too much to ask of the man who promised “Change We Can Believe In”.
Joe Moag
@Wayne: Yes, Wayne, the integration of gays in the military will begin – must be begin – with the signing of an Exec. Order. And that is precisely what Obama will do, AFTER he has got a plan and a process in place WITH the Pentagon to make sure that it is more than mere facade, more than mere political payoff to opponents of DADT who, like yourself, seem to care more about the headline value of an Exec order than about the substance of its success.
Wayne
Changing the culture and the structure of the military so as to address all of the things that gays will encounter when they serve openly is key to this, just as it was key to turning Truman’s deseg into Ike’s Integration. Get it?
———
Joe, I know you will think I’m just being rude, but the reality is that you don’t really have a true understanding of military culture. You are speculating about a lifestyle you know nothing about. The military is nothing but Rules and Regulations! More regs than you can imagine. As it stands now, DADT gives military leaders a standing order to continue to discriminate against gay service members. An Executive Order ending DADT would be the first step towards gay integration because it would remove the order to discriminate by basis of sexual orientation; but even after DADT ends, it will be DECADES before gay military service members totally “come out” or are open about their sexuality. And it’s not because of fear of physical attack – believe it or not stuff like that is very rare. Moreover, it’s because the entire military system is based on achieving higher rank. To get promoted, you have to be a “good soldier” and that means not making waves and doing your best to be a good troop – fit in and follow orders. That culture won’t change for a VERY long time. If we wait for consensus, we will be waiting for forever, we absolutely should remove DADT to start the process! And that will never happen until we have a president with the political courage to act.
Joe Moag
@Wayne: And God forbid that Obama put a plan together and get top-brass committment and plans in place to address strucdture and culture and as much as possible BEFORE he signs the order, right? I am NOT talking about reaching consensus 1st. Shit, there is still not consensus in some parts of the military as to whether or not blacks should be allowed to serve. Fuck consensus. I ain’t talking about that. I am talking about a plan, and a committment, and processes and procedures, a review of the Uniform Code, etc… Get it?
That’s ALL THAT IS BEING SUGGESTED HERE. Nothing else. No retreat. No flip-flop. Stop trying to create a straw man argument here and turn it into something that it is not.
I mean, I know that you served, but shoot-first-ask-questions-later doesn’t apply to everything in life.
GET IT?
Wayne
One last question to everyone who is so comfortable with Obama waiting another few years before he will supposedly act on DADT. Do you know how many gay and women will have their military careers ruined in just one year by allowing DADT to remain in place? What about the thousands of proud gay men and women who will face discharge from service during those “consensus building” years?
Too bad so sad for them, huh?
Joe Moag
@Wayne: Tens and tens of thousands. So one last question to you: do you want to see that never happen again? THEN GET IT RIGHT FROM THE START!!!
Wayne
typo. I meant to say: Do you know how many gay men and women will have their military careers ruined in just one year by allowing DADT to remain in place?
Wayne
Joe, so you don’t mind tens of thousands being discharged as long as it gives Obama time? That is crazy. He should end the order to discriminate NOW and start the process! Your logic is warped.
Joe Moag
@Wayne: No, Wayne, I am not. But like a cop who can’t understand the difference between making a deal with a crook to get at a bigger crook, you seem completely unable to grasp having to forestall change now for REAL, LASTING change soon.
You want to sacrifice the good for the perfect. Only problem is, your view of “perfect” is false – even you admit it. You say that you agree, that after Truman’s Exec Order, it took years to make real change. So, the net effect of Truman’s order, in and of itself, was a headline. The bulk of real change was done through real work LATER. It didn’t have to be that way. If Truman had done the heavy lifting that Ike ended up having to do (like Obama ended up having to do with Clinton’s DADT bullshit), then history could have been a let different a lot quicker. How many blacks suffered in the armed services in the years following the great Exec Order but BEFORE Ike put his foot down? Want to see that again? seems like you do.
You seem to be happy with the headline approach. You claim to want to see something done to stop the harm against valiant gay men and women who are serving now, yet care only about the splash value of an Exec. Order, as if that would stop all manner of pernicious harm being brought on gays in the military in the ABSENCE of a PLAN!
Hey. I hope you get your headline. Me, I want to see substance.
Wayne
No Joe, you just seem more interested in giving Obama a chance to duck and cover than you are in halting discrimination against gays in the military. I want action. And the thousands of other gay service members who have sacrificed more than you will ever know for this country, sure as hell deserve some action! Obama will never build a consensus within the military about gay soldiers; for you to believe that shows your absolute lack of understanding about military culture. Just as with racial integration so it is with gay service members the military will have to be ordered to integrate, and that will come only when the President signs an executive order to do so. And to insult the thousands of gay men and women who will face discrimination and discharge because Obama doesn’t have the will to act is just plain sad.
Joe Moag
@Wayne: Keep shouting shiboleths Wayne. It’s Act 3 in your play book, isn’t it? I mean, you went from calling Obama a coward (even though he has not changed on this issue at all), to indicating that anyone who agrees with him is a self-hating fag (I called that one before you even got on line) to telling us who think that that Obama should wait and do it with a plan that we are co-enablers of a gay genocide within the ranks of the military. Nice job!
And you can keep doing all the straw man arguments you want – from claiming Obama is flip-flopping to claiming that I am seeking consenus from the military (when I am most certainly am not, as I have pointed out REPEATEDLY). It is just you screaming at your keyboard, pal. So, what are you going to do when Obama does announce the change in a year or two? Denounce it? Praise it? Don’t bother answering – as the only way that I could ever know what you will do would be for me to interact with you at that point in time, and I would rather chew barbed wire…
Wayne
Joe, you are the one who kept typing in all caps, if anyone is screaming it’s you. And to recap our conversation. You do not dispute any of the facts I posted. The military was initially forced to integrate by Truman signing executive order 9981. By your own admission you acknowledge that it will take a President to sign an executive order to end DADT. But you seem to feel it’s appropriate to allow thousands upon thousands of gay men and women to be discriminated against and have their military careers ruined while Obama supposedly builds a consensus that discriminating against gays is wrong. Where as I believe Obama should end the oder to discriminate now, and save the military careers of thousands upon thousands of gay service members. If anything pointing out the obvious fact that thousands of gay soldiers will face discrimination and discharge while you and Obama wait for consensus proves the fallacy of your argument.
Joe Moag
@Wayne: To recap your argument: Yes, you agree that the Truman order had little real effect. Yes, you agree, that it was only through years of planning and work with the Pentagon (under Ike) that things really changed for blacks in the armed services. Yes, you agree, that during those times between the Truman order and the work under Ike, thousands of blacks in the army had their careers and lives ruined. You agree that if Obama signed an Exec Order on Day One it would still leave thousands of gays completely vulnerable, discriminated against, and “glass ceilinged” all over the armed services. So what, is your argument?
You want that order. Period. Fuck what it means in real terms. Fuck that. Who cares? At least you would have your order. And then the next President would have to try it all over again.
But, you could give a rat’s ass, as you want your headline, you want your Exec Order, and you don’t give a fuck if it works, if it is greeted through massive military, Pentagon and public resistance, and thus, you don’t care if it works at all. You just want that headline, baby! To say that an Exec order will “end discrimination now” is the height of ignorance and completey devoid of historical fact. No goverment orders “end discriminaton”. They can, when properly done, counterbalance discrimination through agressive acts that force and reinforce integration.
As I said before, I hope you get your Order. I just hope that is accompanied by a plan that will make it work. You know, for the thousands of gays in the services that you claim that you and you alone care about.
Wayne
Joe, first you accuse me of “screaming” but now it appears you are the one who is ranting. You seem ok with Obama allowing thousands of gay men and women to be discriminated against and discharged from sevice just so Obama can “build consensus” that discrimination is wrong; instead of just ordering and end to the discriminatory policy immediately! You and Obama are wrong, and it will lead to the ruin of thousands of gay soldiers’ military careers. And the “care” I have for my fellow soldiers is proven by my years of service in the line of duty with them! Unlike you.
Joe Moag
@Wayne: I didn’t say that you didn’t care, Gomer, I said that just because you served and just because you have a narrow-minded position on the best way to make change work does not mean that you are the only one in this discussion who cares.
And, I might point out, that years of service does not, in and of itself, mean a Goddamn thing in terms of whether or not you are correct in your arguments let, alone whether or not you care about men and women in the services. There are tens of thousands of vets who don’t want to see gays serve, and they would all claim that they know best because they served and because they have proven that they care about men and women in the services, unlike people like me who never served.
Nice to see you adopt the rhetoric of the gay haters out there!
Wayne
You said ” claim that you and you alone care about”. I don’t claim to care, as I said my years of service prove it. And for one who seems to view himself as informed, your lack of service or even basic knowledge of military culture speaks very poorly of yours. You are the one that is all for allowing a standing order to discriminate against tens of thousands of gay people. You seem much more interested in seeing Obama succeed than you are in furthering gay rights. Maybe it’s you who should check their priorities. And I have to ask since you profess to care so much about them, if even one of the thousands upon thousand of soldiers that will have their careers ruined while Obama waits; if they came to you and asked Why? Why did you support discrimination against them and allow the careers that they spent their lives building to be ruined, when it was possible to end the discrimination now?
Joe Moag
@Wayne: Keep repeating the mantra that I and those who think like me are for discrimination. Keep saying it, maybe there are enough idiots on this site like yourself who will believe it.
And, either way, it sure makes you feel superior, don’t it?
It’s sure an easy substitute for thinking things through, ain’t it?
It sure makes a good headline, don’t it?
Wayne
Joe, I am right on this issue and you are wrong. I am trying to speak out against the open and on-going discrimination of thousands of gay servive members, a group I proudly served with. For whatever reasons, you want to allow that discrimination to continue. Placate yourself and your support of anti-gay discrimination however you want. It still won’t make it right.
Joe Moag
@Wayne: You must be right and I must be wrong because you have declared that it is so.
And that’s just the kind of bullheaded thinking that leads to the “Exec Order now, fuck if it works” argument that you have spent all morning espousing…
Wayne
The facts are that each years thousands of gay service members have their careers ruined and are discharged from service each year because of DADT. By supporting the continuation of DADT Obama is ensuring that thousands, to tens of thousands of gay soldiers will be openly discriminated against while he “builds consensus”. And you are supporting that discrimination against untold thousands of gay people each year. Those are facts. Or would you like to deny them?
Joe Moag
@Wayne: You can keep saying that I am calling for consensus, when I most definitely am not. I am calling for a plan. You’ve been in the military, and you of all people should know the difference between a plan of action and consensus. When your commander detailed a plan of attack (I am using attack in the broad sense of the word) to the troops, he didn’t seek consensus. Nor did he come out and say “just run forward and shoot because I said so”. If he did, he did not hold his rank long. He gave you a plan for how you would proceed. Get it?
Wayne
Joe, the fact remains that while you and Obama wait for a “plan” as you call it, tens of thousands of gay soldiers will have their careers ruined! The discrimination is happening now, and it continues to happen. I’ll ask you again, what would you say to the tens of thousands of gay people who have thier careers ruined because of DADT, while Obama takes years to “plan”, years of discrimination that you say you fully support. You don’t seem to want to face the fact that you are supporting the discrimination against thousands of gay people! It’s apparent that you are the one who doesn’t “GET IT”.
Joe Moag
@Wayne: I would tell that things will suck until they don’t. I would tell them that the armed services is a terrible place to be a gay person currently. I would tell them that there is every reason on Earth to believe that President Obama is serious about changing DADT once and for all and for the better.
I would tell them that he, in accordance with over 200 retired miltiary officers, agrees that DADT MUST be done away with and that it MUST be done away with in a manner that makes sure that it works, which will require a plan and some time. I would tell them that if that can’t take that time – which is totally understandable and terrible that they should have to – then they should either not join the military until it changes or should make plans to get out of the military if they cannot or will not wait.
I would tell them that history is made by those who keep their powder dry and live to fight on. That it goes to those who think things through.
I would tell them that the military is not the only place – not by a long shot – where life is tough and hard and ugly for gay people. That a fight must be fought all over our society, and that building support for your fights and coming up with a wholistic plan of action is a better stategy to winning than simply going for the quick-shot visceral.
I would tell them that this is how the world works. I would tell them that your enemies understand this and it is time that you did, too.
Robert
@james.p.p.:
DADT actually harmed gays and lesbians serving, I know because I was one of them.
While I will wait to see if/how Obama will follow through on his promises to the GLT etc. voters, I’m still cautious about any president that claims they will push for gay rights, after all his biggest job (and for any first term pres.) is to get reelected for another term… so that will definitely flavor his approach to pushing any agenda.
emb
There’s no question that DADT has been a disaster, both for gay and lesbian servicepeople as well as for the military/intelligence community as a whole. Still, let’s not demand that Obama immolate himself in the first months of his presidency on this issue, when there’s so much work to do on so many fronts. If he says 2010, then let’s see what happens then before we pillory him.
sparkle obama
@Wayne:
kiss my well-shaped, yellow ass w*yne!
you are desperately blinded by pride.
you fear Black power!
you are jealous and disgruntled and you can’t understand why gay rights aren’t the first order of the day, every day.
you are typing yourself into a hole.
we are moving beyond race, but your bitterness will not allow you to come along.
you identified too closely with hillary and now you are stuck in an idealogical cul de sac.
ps
no one wants to marry your dropped ass!
stay out of the sun; your face is next!
sorry for the negativity.
sparkle obama
>>let’s not demand that Obama immolate himself in the first months of his presidency on this issue<<
that’s *exactly* what w*yne wants.
selfish!
myopic!
shady!
John Smith
The Democrats in Congress need to pass a law repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and President Obama will sign it. Senator McCain told the Washington Blade that he would also sign a repeal if passed, were he to be elected. It’s in the hands of Congress now. Let’s see what they do.
Hmm
Obama…a politician? Shocking!
Trig Palin
I suggest you queens read a little history on what transpired when Bill Clinton followed through on his campaign promise to allow gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military.
rigso
@fredo777: Critics? Or just those are arent going to go ‘gaga OK’ over everything he does? He’s backtracking ALREADY, let’s see what happens… But i have the feeling the LGBT comm. will be thrown under again after being fooled in the primaries.
fredo777
@rigso:
Blah, blah, blah, blah…
+ so forth.
MCnNYC
We are gonna get a HATE CRIMES BILL through…and that’s about it.
THAT will be the only thing and most likely because it passed in the House and will most likely get through the Senate…and we will “have” to settle for that…
But how much you want to bet it is unfunded and therefore toothless.
rigso
@fredo777: that’s very mature and articulate, good job
rigso
I voted for Obama and am glad he won, but people defending him endlessly are just ridiculous. I hope you realize he hasn’t done ANYTHING but win an election… that’s it. No policy, not plans, no results or benefits for you or you’re family. Shitty and good people have won elections, it really says nothing, I will wait to see what he actually does before defending him against all critique. This isnt a cult of personalities, its policies and legislation
fredo777
@rigso:
That nonsense didn’t warrant an eloquent response.
Nick
I didn’t vote for him and it’s not because of his color. It’s because he is the most inexperienced person ever to run for president. He is not God. He is not Elvis. I was never on the Obama bandwagon. He is a new senator who happens to be intelligent, and most likely would have been elected in 4, 8, or possibly 12 years from now.
With that said, I think it’s hilarious how many think he’s a friend of gays. He’s not. But that doesn’t make him an enemy either. He aligned himself with Hollywood who has a friendly relationship with gays. They kind of have to considering how many gays work in Hollywood. Obama courted gay voters and like McCain and Clinton does not support gay marriage. Nothing will change for gays under his administration.
Obama is in for a rude awakening and so are his legion of fans. He’s privy to information that he never knew before regarding small things like “don’t ask, don’t tell”, to larger and more important things like what’s going on in Iraq.
If you watch closely you can already notice how he’s changed.
chuck
Anyone seen this yet?
http://washingtonblade.com/the…..g_id=22644
fredo777
http://washingtonblade.com/thelatest/thelatest.cfm?blog_id=22644
Perhaps some of you spoke too soon…
fredo777
Sorry, Chuck. I couldn’t get your link to work when I copied the abridged version from my e-mail + didn’t realize that it was a duplicate link I posted.
Bill Perdue
The only people who’ll be surprised at this latest proof of Obama’s bigotry are those who still watch Bambi. Obama’s bigotry has been open and consistent from his revival meetings with Donnie McClurkin until the time he torpedoed No on 8, 2, and 102 by trumpeting that “god’s in the mixâ€.
What’s really suprising is the arrogance of Democrat shills and Obamadolators who still think we’re going to treat them civilly as they betray us. I’m pleased to see that lots of activists are treating the ideas of these shills with the contempt they deserve.
As Obama moves further and further to the right so will the shills. Today they’re in favor of a few more years of loss of pensions and benefits, a few more years of beatings and the occasional murder because of Clintons DADT. Tomorrow when Obama says no to socialized medicine they’ll go along with it. When He imposes austerity measures on working people and continues bailing out the rich retards that wrecked the economy they’ll sigh and tell us to take our medicine. And when GI’s and muslims continue to die as He plays god from Palestine to Pakistan they’ll beat the drum, wrap themselves in flags and say it’s for ‘national security’, which is exactly what both Bushes and Clinton said, and just as wrong.
And incidentally, Moag, we don’t care if you’re self-loathing or not. Deal with it on your own. What we don’t like is your sick attempt to delay fighting for our agenda for a new more years.
Instead of Moags delaying tactics we need a mass action approach opposed to and independent of the Democrats and Republicans to compel them to recognize full equality for the GLBT communities.
BreederWatch
Critical thinking, PLEASE. What happened to “Change”? All appointee’s of the old guard? Lieberman calling Obama picks “near perfect”. HUH? We thought the “move to the center” was going to be just for the election. Now – since when are “civil rights” supposed to take a back seat to “money”? Obama is doing everything possible to be the next Bush – right down to maintaining many of the same Cabinet picks and doling out even more money for the finacial crisis with even less of a plan for regulation. I thought we voted for a minority minded President – and no – I won’t be taking the oath of silence as a democrat to support our President no matter what – much to criticize here – and I for one wonder what happened to the candidate we voted for?