Monday, June 22, 2009
Politics / Homo Ending DADT: Yes He Can
Posted by Dan Savage on Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 11:21 AM
The president is not powerless:
In the most vocal plea for the White House to take the lead in allowing gays to serve openly in the military, 76 Democratic lawmakers today urged President Obama to use his executive powers to order a halt to military discharges under the controversial "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" law and work aggressively with Congress to pass new legislation to overturn what they describe as a discriminatory policy that harms national security."We urge you to exercise the maximum discretion legally possible in administering Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell until Congress repeals the law," states the letter, organized by Rep. Alcee Hastings, a Democrat of California. "To this end, we ask that you direct the Armed Services not to initiate any investigation of service personnel to determine their sexual orientation, and that you instruct them to disregard third party accusations that do not allege violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice."
The military has been discharging gay people at the rate of two a day since Obama took office—and President Barack "Fierce Urgency of Now" Obama has the authority to stop discharges under DADT today, right now, with the stroke of a pen. Yes he can. But will he?
Share via
2
If he wants his money, he sure as shit will!
(Remind me again why I ever thought Obama would do the right thing for free...?)
(Remind me again why I ever thought Obama would do the right thing for free...?)
3
Yes, as I pointed out some months ago here, and was immediately shouted down by various legal "experts", the Prez can indeed stop DADT ten minutes from now with a stroke of his pen. That's the phrase I used, "stroke of his pen". Turns out I was right. The President has a lot of power, more power than he should by rights have, but there it is.
Use The Force, Barry.
Use The Force, Barry.
4
If service men and women want their rights, get the fuck out of the military so you don't take the rest of us down with you.
7
During Clinton's debacle with his own party over striking down the ban on gays in the military (which resulted in DADT), I recall very clearly that Clinton went with DADT because it avoided having the anti-gay rules locked into law in such a way that repeal would be very very difficult. I guess the hope was that some future progressive president would have the nerve and the support of his party to try again. I suspect Obama has the nerve, but not the party support. Don't ever forget that the Dems created DADT and killed health care reform and a lot of other things because Clinton scared them and their voters. I don't think things have changed much.
8
5 and 6
These woe-is-me crybabies entered into the military on their own accord, thus clipping their own wings -- knowing what they were getting into, knowing they couldn't be out.
Now they want to clip the wings of the rest of the Democratic caucus by making a lot of noise and forcing our leadership to grant them what they could easily find if they had taken the logical/brave route to selecting careers that enabled them to be themselves.
I'm sorry but I don't see this as a front page issue. It is a personal choice issue.
These woe-is-me crybabies entered into the military on their own accord, thus clipping their own wings -- knowing what they were getting into, knowing they couldn't be out.
Now they want to clip the wings of the rest of the Democratic caucus by making a lot of noise and forcing our leadership to grant them what they could easily find if they had taken the logical/brave route to selecting careers that enabled them to be themselves.
I'm sorry but I don't see this as a front page issue. It is a personal choice issue.
9
Let's be honest.
Most of the people affected by DADT are, per capita, female serving soldiers. Gay males, other than Arabic translators, are normally not singled out for persecution.
You want to make this issue number one, but I don't see you making barricades in the public squares like they are in Iran, so I doubt you're that committed, since you won't put your own selves on the line.
Most of the people affected by DADT are, per capita, female serving soldiers. Gay males, other than Arabic translators, are normally not singled out for persecution.
You want to make this issue number one, but I don't see you making barricades in the public squares like they are in Iran, so I doubt you're that committed, since you won't put your own selves on the line.
10
So, just to be clear, he can't end the law - congress or the courts do that - but he can issue an executive order that ends enforcement of the law? Is that correct?
11
@8. Yep, they're all bastards. How dare those gays offer their services, health, limbs and lives to protect the interests of the US government.
14
This seems like such a no-brainer to me... I really can't figure out why Obama won't end enforcement and Congress won't act. The American people overwhelmingly support gays openly serving (polls over the last 4 years show 75-79% support), the military needs the people who are being dismissed (over 50 gay Arabic linguists dismissed! Come on....), and it's the right thing to do from a civil rights perspective.
I get that DOMA is more complicated because not as many Americans support action, the legal precedents/arguments, etc. But DADT? This should have happened months ago. And I'm really dying to know exactly why the administration and Congress haven't acted.
Keep the pressure on, and eventually they'll have to take meaningful action on GLBT issues, with DADT being the easiest significant issue they could take on, in my opinion.
I get that DOMA is more complicated because not as many Americans support action, the legal precedents/arguments, etc. But DADT? This should have happened months ago. And I'm really dying to know exactly why the administration and Congress haven't acted.
Keep the pressure on, and eventually they'll have to take meaningful action on GLBT issues, with DADT being the easiest significant issue they could take on, in my opinion.
15
@8 I joined the military knowing I risked being discovered and thrown out. But I also was not going to let that stop me from doing my duty for my country. Others may discriminate against me but that's no reason for me to enable ,encourage or to even let that make me think I was less than anybody else.
17
http://www.alceehastings.house.gov/index…
Gary Ackerman
Tammy Baldwin
Shelley Berkley
Tim Bishop
Lois Capps
Michael Capuano
André Carson
Kathy Castor
Donna M. Christensen
Yvette Clarke
William Lacy Clay
Emanuel Cleaver
James Clyburn
Joseph Crowley
Diana DeGette
Bill Delahunt
Lloyd Doggett
Donna F. Edwards
Keith Ellison
Eliot Engel
Anna Eshoo
Chaka Fattah
Bob Filner
Barney Frank
Marcia L. Fudge
Alan Grayson
Raúl Grijalva
Luis Gutierrez
Phil Hare
Jane Harman
Alcee L. Hastings
Mazie K. Hirono
Rush Holt
Mike Honda
Eddie Bernice Johnson
John Conyers, Jr.
Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick
Dennis Kucinich
James Langevin
John Larson
Barbara Lee
Carolyn Maloney
Edward J. Markey
Doris Matsui
Betty McCollum
Jim McDermott
James McGovern
Gwen Moore
James Moran
Jerrold Nadler
Grace Napolitano
Eleanor Holmes Norton
Ed Pastor
Jared Polis
Mike Quigley
Laura Richardson
Ileana Ros-Lehtinen
Gregorio Sablan
Linda Sánchez
Jan Schakowsky
Debbie Wasserman Schulz
Robert Bobby Scott
José Serrano
Joe Sestak
Brad Sherman
Louise Slaughter
Fortney Pete Stark
Bennie Thompson
Niki Tsongas
Nydia Velázquez
Diane Watson
Melvin Watt
Anthony Weiner
Peter Welch
Robert Wexler
Lynn Woolsey
David Wu
More...
Gary Ackerman
Tammy Baldwin
Shelley Berkley
Tim Bishop
Lois Capps
Michael Capuano
André Carson
Kathy Castor
Donna M. Christensen
Yvette Clarke
William Lacy Clay
Emanuel Cleaver
James Clyburn
Joseph Crowley
Diana DeGette
Bill Delahunt
Lloyd Doggett
Donna F. Edwards
Keith Ellison
Eliot Engel
Anna Eshoo
Chaka Fattah
Bob Filner
Barney Frank
Marcia L. Fudge
Alan Grayson
Raúl Grijalva
Luis Gutierrez
Phil Hare
Jane Harman
Alcee L. Hastings
Mazie K. Hirono
Rush Holt
Mike Honda
Eddie Bernice Johnson
John Conyers, Jr.
Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick
Dennis Kucinich
James Langevin
John Larson
Barbara Lee
Carolyn Maloney
Edward J. Markey
Doris Matsui
Betty McCollum
Jim McDermott
James McGovern
Gwen Moore
James Moran
Jerrold Nadler
Grace Napolitano
Eleanor Holmes Norton
Ed Pastor
Jared Polis
Mike Quigley
Laura Richardson
Ileana Ros-Lehtinen
Gregorio Sablan
Linda Sánchez
Jan Schakowsky
Debbie Wasserman Schulz
Robert Bobby Scott
José Serrano
Joe Sestak
Brad Sherman
Louise Slaughter
Fortney Pete Stark
Bennie Thompson
Niki Tsongas
Nydia Velázquez
Diane Watson
Melvin Watt
Anthony Weiner
Peter Welch
Robert Wexler
Lynn Woolsey
David Wu
18
Oh, whatever, #12... how does dadt help our military? Seriously. Would it be better if we started segregated brigades again, only instead of blacks it would be gays? The question would be similar, really: why would these people who have been so mistreated by their government be willing to go into service for that same government? If this isn’t an ideal you can grasp, perhaps this isn’t a subject for you at all.
19
@14 - Julie, on the subject of the Arabic linguists: I think Colbert (I think it was Colbert or Stewart…) put it excellently when he said: “water boarding may make them talk, but it won’t make them talk in English”.
20
"I also was not going to let that stop me from doing my duty for my country."
Hey 15 -- fuck all that "duty" bullshit. Just FUCK it. Tell the truth: you needed an easy out from your situation. You didn't do well enough in high school to go to college. Or you couldn't afford to leave on your own. Or you simply wanted to run from being gay.
So you made the decision to compromise yourself and join the military.
That is your problem, not mine or ours. Fuck you, you self-righteous hypocrites. If the urgency of your freedom to be yourself is so great, then LEAVE. I dare you.
Do what I did, do what Dan did, do what any other self-respecting gay man or woman does. GTFO so you can BE out.
21
@10, yes. The Executive Branch enforces the laws, so if they choose not to enforce it, it's pretty much so done. Also, as Commander-in-Chief, he directs all military resources, so if he tells the military not to use their resources to investigate, it's also done.
There are various separation-of-powers and "weak Executive" philosophies that argue against the President having these powers, but the current situation is that he does.
Think of it like states not enforcing those zany laws you hear about on the internet, while not removing them from the books.
And 12 (et al), no one forced them to offer their services, and they knew ahead of time that they couldn't be "out," but it's not like most of these people are being booted for making out in the barracks. Some homophobes make allegations, and great careers are ended. But more importantly, why are we firing linguists and other valuable service members we are sorely in need of over something like this? Personally I think it would have quite an impact if all the gay service members left the military, and everyone who didn't sign up because they were gay organized a well-publicized event, just to let everyone know what we are missing with this silly rule.
There are various separation-of-powers and "weak Executive" philosophies that argue against the President having these powers, but the current situation is that he does.
Think of it like states not enforcing those zany laws you hear about on the internet, while not removing them from the books.
And 12 (et al), no one forced them to offer their services, and they knew ahead of time that they couldn't be "out," but it's not like most of these people are being booted for making out in the barracks. Some homophobes make allegations, and great careers are ended. But more importantly, why are we firing linguists and other valuable service members we are sorely in need of over something like this? Personally I think it would have quite an impact if all the gay service members left the military, and everyone who didn't sign up because they were gay organized a well-publicized event, just to let everyone know what we are missing with this silly rule.
23
Ms. D: I couldn't agree more:
Personally I think it would have quite an impact if all the gay service members left the military, and everyone who didn't sign up because they were gay organized a well-publicized event, just to let everyone know what we are missing with this silly rule.
24
#20, your argument (almost) makes sense.
Unfortunately, it has nothing to do with whether DADT should be repealed.
Unfortunately, it has nothing to do with whether DADT should be repealed.
25
@20
Fuck you and your self-righteousness. I usually try to take a civil tone on here, but I think you're just an ass. DADT is a major issue for me because I do want to join the military without living a lie. Have since I was in 7th grade.
And who cares if the people that join do so for the reasons you listed, "You didn't do well enough in high school to go to college. Or you couldn't afford to leave on your own."- straight kids get to have the option to join for those reasons, so gay kids should get the chance too.
Fuck you and your self-righteousness. I usually try to take a civil tone on here, but I think you're just an ass. DADT is a major issue for me because I do want to join the military without living a lie. Have since I was in 7th grade.
And who cares if the people that join do so for the reasons you listed, "You didn't do well enough in high school to go to college. Or you couldn't afford to leave on your own."- straight kids get to have the option to join for those reasons, so gay kids should get the chance too.
26
Fuck yeah, @25. I may wish like hell nobody wanted to join the military, but I have to defend everybody's right to, which is a separate goddam thing.
27
Just one representative from Washington State (Rep. Jim McDermott) signed this letter. Like none of the rest of them have seen the polling on DADT?
• Baird, Brian, Washington, 3rd
• Dicks, Norman D., Washington, 6th
• Hastings, Doc, Washington, 4th
• Inslee, Jay, Washington, 1st
• Larsen, Rick, Washington, 2nd
• McDermott, Jim, Washington, 7th (signatory)
• McMorris Rodgers, Cathy, Washington, 5th
• Reichert, David G., Washington, 8th
• Smith, Adam, Washington, 9th
From the Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con…
"Seventy-five percent of Americans in a new Washington Post-ABC News poll said gay people who are open about their sexual orientation should be allowed to serve in the U.S. military, up from 62 percent in early 2001 and 44 percent in 1993."
If your representative isn't on the list and you think they should be, call e-mail, or write to them and explain to them what you want them to do and why. And if you're in Rep. McDermott's district, send him a note commending his action and offering your support.
• Baird, Brian, Washington, 3rd
• Dicks, Norman D., Washington, 6th
• Hastings, Doc, Washington, 4th
• Inslee, Jay, Washington, 1st
• Larsen, Rick, Washington, 2nd
• McDermott, Jim, Washington, 7th (signatory)
• McMorris Rodgers, Cathy, Washington, 5th
• Reichert, David G., Washington, 8th
• Smith, Adam, Washington, 9th
From the Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con…
"Seventy-five percent of Americans in a new Washington Post-ABC News poll said gay people who are open about their sexual orientation should be allowed to serve in the U.S. military, up from 62 percent in early 2001 and 44 percent in 1993."
If your representative isn't on the list and you think they should be, call e-mail, or write to them and explain to them what you want them to do and why. And if you're in Rep. McDermott's district, send him a note commending his action and offering your support.
28
@20. Yeah, I'm no fan of the military, but your arrogance sure rubs me (and obviously others) the wrong way. The military is not just a "last resort"; plenty of people who do well in school, and some that even have jobs already, join the military for various reasons. In this country, we (supposedly) have the right of self-determination, where you can lead your life as you choose. You come across as mean, nasty, and intolerant.
Even w/an exec order, can't congress then shove a new law thru overriding it? We don't have the votes in congress.
Health care is more my priority though.
Even w/an exec order, can't congress then shove a new law thru overriding it? We don't have the votes in congress.
Health care is more my priority though.
29
28 - you don't have the votes in Congress to do what? If the Congress actually punishes the President for nonenforcement, well, at least you know that the Democrats ain't your friends, either.
30
@20 acts as if there are no officers in the military. No one ever goes to West Point or the naval academy? There are no ROTC programs at top universities? People who join the military must be burn-outs, including those who decide to serve so the military will pay their med school tuition?
You're totally fine with gay people not being able to take advantage of programs like this that pay for your education exchange for service?
You're totally fine with gay people not being able to take advantage of programs like this that pay for your education exchange for service?
31
I joined for the reasons I stated. As a matter of fact I did go to college. I was on my own and I loved being gay. You know, I think you're angry, but not at me, at yourself. There is something that tells me you've made your own mistakes and can't face them so you lash out. That's o.k. I can live with me.
32
Hell; I say that if joining the military was someone's last resort as a means to put food on their table, all the MORE reason they shouldn't be able to be kicked out for being gay. And this is coming from someone who hates the poverty draft and US militarism in general.
Not that #20 should be taken seriously; he contradicts himself in almost the same sentence. "You guys probably joined the military as a last resort, but you should have done something else." See what's wrong with that statement?
Not that #20 should be taken seriously; he contradicts himself in almost the same sentence. "You guys probably joined the military as a last resort, but you should have done something else." See what's wrong with that statement?
33
Ummm, Hastings is a FLORIDA Democrat. How did everybody including the Boston Globe miss that? Did it just seem so, so, California?
34
Let's not forget all of the men and women who come from families with a long history of military service who wish to continue the tradition of serving their country.
Their reasons and rights to serve are no less that those of any other person who wishes to join the military.
Their reasons and rights to serve are no less that those of any other person who wishes to join the military.
35
If you want to serve your country, you should be allowed to do so. This is a good opportunity for the prez to step up.
37
Proud to say that that list of representatives includes a good number of Black and Latino representatives, including mine, Yvette Clarke. I've been of the opinion that Obama should have issued the order freezing these separations while Congress works on the repeal. I don't understand the lack of movement on that front. Like many of you have said, this would be one of the easier things to do at this stage, given all the public support there is. Who's giving advice in the White House??
38
@36, no, Alcee Hastings, as named in Dan's block quote. The Boston Globe has since corrected the on-line version of their story.
39
Nowadays, in 2009, how could repealing DADT be risky or unpopular? how many Americans are in support of DADT nowadays, %20?? sheesh
40
Is this part of some brilliant Obama chess-like maneuver strategy to deliver on his promises? Woo the middle so he can deliver in term 2? Or something? Please?
41
@40 Oh, if only… but he was elected while promising the repeal DOMA and DADT, so I doubt he’d lose any votes next time around, you know? So who would he be courting right now? If those in the middle love DADT, they wouldn’t have voted for him the first time and he still won.
Perhaps I’m being short-sighted, but I don’t see his strategy here, unless he’s waiting for Minnesota to finally get their act together, so he’s sure to have a strong majority?
Perhaps I’m being short-sighted, but I don’t see his strategy here, unless he’s waiting for Minnesota to finally get their act together, so he’s sure to have a strong majority?
42
The problem is that Congress is completely unwilling to take any political risks while simultaneously demanding that Obama take every political risk. And then they get pissy and write letters like this when he won't play ball.
It's really easy to get rid of DADT - The Democratically controlled Congress passes a bill and the President signs it. Obama's willing to sign it; why is Congress unwilling to pass it?
Force your ire in the right location folks.
It's really easy to get rid of DADT - The Democratically controlled Congress passes a bill and the President signs it. Obama's willing to sign it; why is Congress unwilling to pass it?
Force your ire in the right location folks.
44
Jesus H Christ, the stupid fuck known as Information Travels Faster needs his/her ass kicked...so far in this thread he's implied that only stupid people enter the military, gay people shouldn't go where they are not wanted, and that ending DADT would somehow destroy the Democrats.
Not only is he stupidly and insultingly wrong on the first count, naive on the second (uh, gays really aren't welcome anywhere except maybe show business, the media and fashion and even then it's not exactly universal) and as to the third, poll after poll shows that the public is ready to end DADT by a large majority.
I'd say ITF was as stupid as a box of rocks, but that would be insulting to both rocks and the boxes they came in...
Not only is he stupidly and insultingly wrong on the first count, naive on the second (uh, gays really aren't welcome anywhere except maybe show business, the media and fashion and even then it's not exactly universal) and as to the third, poll after poll shows that the public is ready to end DADT by a large majority.
I'd say ITF was as stupid as a box of rocks, but that would be insulting to both rocks and the boxes they came in...
46
#15/31,
Thank you for your commitment to this country. That is true honor. I grew up next to a military family and have the utmost respect for anyone who joins the military, especially someone like you.
Thank you for your commitment to this country. That is true honor. I grew up next to a military family and have the utmost respect for anyone who joins the military, especially someone like you.
47
I am a gay submarine vet (SSN-663). I can't speak for everyone of course but I guess that most gay men and lesbians share the same experience that I did. I was 17 when I entered the NAVY, long before I had come to terms with my sexuality. I don't think my experience is unique in that regard. I came out very privately while in the service and led a double life of lies and secrecy. Now I suppose I could have done the "honorable" thing as @20 so nicely suggested and outed myself, but I liked my job and had great pride in serving and I wanted to stay. So I lied as long as I could stomach it then I finally got out. I would have stayed if I could have served openly. End of my sob story. I guess what I'm trying to impart is that it IS a voluntary Armed Service. Those men and women are there because they want to serve their country and it is the duty of the civilians to protect their rights. It's true, some may be there because it was the only option but not all, I can assure you. They should be allowed to do so. This is a civil rights issue, not just a military issue. And as so it affects ALL of us. When the military needed troops for IRAQ they were happy to suspend DADT discharges to maintain troop levels. Now that there is a drawdown, the DADT discharges are back on the rise. 265 on Obama's watch. According to all polling data, the military and the people are ready. It is time for the Administration and Congress to catch up. Obama has the power to issue a stop-loss on gay investigations and discharges while the poilcy is under review. He needs to do it now. I gather on this blog there is not a lot of support for military issues, I respect that.However, There should be a common support for civil rights, even for military members. And by the way 20, after the NAVY I went to Purdue and then to Law school. Thanks.
More...
48
I'm from a family with a proud military tradition. I had a full ROTC scholarship. In the summer of 1980 I attended ROTC summer training camp at 19. I placed in the top 0.2 percentile of cadets from the entire summer. I also came to the realization that I was gay and that there was no way that I'd be able to live the lie necessary to have my military career and not at some point bring shame and disgrace upon both me and my family.
So with a heavy heart and great reluctance I forfeited my scholarship and paid for the rest of my college education. These are not inconsequential decisions for many people. It's just a fundamental issue of fairness. If a young gay man or woman wants to be one of the few and the proud, to aim high, to be an army of one, etc, than that should be an option open to them.
We are the only western nation to still ban gays openly serving. The arguments against gays openly serving (will hurt unit cohesion, morale, etc.) are the same arguments that were used to try to prevent the integration of the armed forces. The fact is that soldiers are supposed to do as they're told without question. That's why they're called ORDERS, not requests. (In fact, being southern, one of the hardest habits I had to break was saying "please" and "thank you". My drill sergeant had to drill it into my head that they aren't requests.)
People are saying that Pres. Obama has too much on his plate ate the moment to tackle this particular issue. Actually, this might be the exact time to do just that. There are so many other problems in the country at the moment, most people wouldn't have the time and/or energy to worry about this issue.
So with a heavy heart and great reluctance I forfeited my scholarship and paid for the rest of my college education. These are not inconsequential decisions for many people. It's just a fundamental issue of fairness. If a young gay man or woman wants to be one of the few and the proud, to aim high, to be an army of one, etc, than that should be an option open to them.
We are the only western nation to still ban gays openly serving. The arguments against gays openly serving (will hurt unit cohesion, morale, etc.) are the same arguments that were used to try to prevent the integration of the armed forces. The fact is that soldiers are supposed to do as they're told without question. That's why they're called ORDERS, not requests. (In fact, being southern, one of the hardest habits I had to break was saying "please" and "thank you". My drill sergeant had to drill it into my head that they aren't requests.)
People are saying that Pres. Obama has too much on his plate ate the moment to tackle this particular issue. Actually, this might be the exact time to do just that. There are so many other problems in the country at the moment, most people wouldn't have the time and/or energy to worry about this issue.
Most Commented on Slog
-
Life and Death in a Recliner in South Carolina by Dan Savage
-
Pit Bulls! by Dan Savage
-
Becoming a Man by Dan Savage
-
SL Letter of the Day: Hot & Drunk by Dan Savage
-
Your Wife Died Alone... by Dan Savage
-
Meanwhile in Vancouver by Dan Savage
-
Precious: Brutal New Classic or African-American Bruno? by David Schmader
-
WTF? by Dan Savage
-
The Democrats Have 60 Votes in the Senate for Health Care Reform by Jonathan Golob
-
Health at Every Size by Dan Savage
RSS
Facebook
Twitter
Comments (48) RSS