Slog

News & Arts

The Stranger Suggests

Critics' Best Bets
Music Arts & Food


Line Out

Music & the City
at Night

Tuesday, October 13, 2009

What He Said

Posted by on Tue, Oct 13, 2009 at 9:36 AM

Nate Silver at FiveThirtyEight:

Where I can "endorse" the frustration of many on the left, however, is on issues where popular sentiment seems to be on their side, such as on the public option or gays-in-the-military. Now, popular sentiment isn't everything—it may only go so far when competing against powerful institutions like the health care lobby. The status quo is usually the status quo for a reason, in other words. But what's been irking is the White House's lack of backbone when confronting these institutions. Take an issue like the military's ban on avowed gay and lesbian soldiers, for example, which polls suggest is unpopular by about a 3:2 margin. The received wisdom on this issue is that, although overturning the ban might be nominally popular, the "nays" are liable to be far more vocal than the "ayes".

And you know what? The received wisdom might well be right. But I don't think those who elected Obama expected him to give deference to the received wisdom; on the contary, it was his rhetoric of transformation that distinguished him from Hillary Clinton. Since roughly the time of the Jeremiah Wright incident, however, virtually every time the Obama campaign/administration has had a choice between a bold action and a cautious one, it has taken the more cautious path.

 

Comments (14) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
gloomy gus 1
DADT is unpopular, but not as unpopular as the generals can make Obama if he doesn't continue doing their bidding. We're trumped unless the generals throw us a bone here.
Posted by gloomy gus on October 13, 2009 at 9:41 AM
2
That captures exactly why I voted for Obama over Clinton: I wanted bold, moral action over cautious inaction.

I was duped into thinking there was a difference.
Posted by RDM on October 13, 2009 at 9:43 AM
3
wha ha ha, Pilgrim

we tried to tell you.

if I had endorsed Obama I don't think I would spend my every waking hour bitching like a little girl and cataloging my disappointments and betrayals.
some in that position might ManUp and STFU and lick their wounds in private.
Posted by Dancing Queen on October 13, 2009 at 9:47 AM
4
The White House quietly gave up this past week on revoking corporate tax breaks for offshoring jobs. Yay?
Posted by SoSea Resident on October 13, 2009 at 9:54 AM
Packeteer 5
Don't forget how many bigoted rednecks there are in the military. Also don't discount the rapidly growing percentage of soldiers coming from latino (often catholic) backgrounds. There is huge homophobia in the military and although DADT needs to be repealed it certainly will cause moral issues initially.

Just like integrating blacks into the military the worries will eventually go away but there will be a short term outcry from the generals about being hamstrung in their efforts to win the war on terror. This will just fuel the fires of bigotry and swell the ranks of the tea baggers.

I am trying to make a pragmatic argument here because the "right" thing to do is obviously to stop enforcing DADT. I just worry that if we liberals push too hard to end DADT we may be winning battles while losing the war. This is a classic mistake to move for the coup de grace too soon and score a pyrrhic victory.

Then again maybe I am wrong and every single soldier in our military are professional and courteous of others but I don't think we are there yet.
Posted by Packeteer on October 13, 2009 at 10:00 AM
Fifty-Two-Eighty 6
Don't forget that the military is absolutely overflowing with Bible-thumping Jesus freaks, too. Especially at the top, which is something that was actively encouraged by our friend Bush. And to use what has unfortunately become an "Obamaism," that's not going to change overnight.
Posted by Fifty-Two-Eighty http://www.nra.org on October 13, 2009 at 10:08 AM
givesgoodemail 7
@6: Yeah, look what's happening with the fundie wingnuts over at the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs.
Our president somehow got through the rough-and-tumble school of Illinois politics, and made us all think he was all rough-and-tough.
And as @3 says: we tried to tell you.
Cue Roger Daltrey...
Posted by givesgoodemail http://www.givesgoodemail.com on October 13, 2009 at 10:21 AM
8
okay, okay, you guys are right, we should give up. let's cede power to the red necks and not fight.

now, where is my partner's murse, I think I left my balls in it....
Posted by you're just being a scaredy cat on October 13, 2009 at 10:22 AM
Max Solomon 9
are we bitching that we didn't pick hillary or that we didn't elect mccain/palin?

"it's always a choice between a shit sandwich and a giant douche". though in this case america needed a giant douching.
Posted by Max Solomon on October 13, 2009 at 10:45 AM
10
Err... I thought we hated a Unitary Executive Branch.

Given that DADT is a law, shouldn't this be resolved in the Legislature or Judicial branches?

Seriously, instead of putting all this energy into clapping for Obama to get up and wave his fairy wand and magic away DADT and perhaps throw in marriage equality while he's at it, shouldn't that energy be put into swaying the people who actually are supposed to have the authority?

Last I checked, Obama might not doing everything he can consistituationally, but he's not doing nothing and he's certainly not working against us. Perhaps it's time to push where there is the most resistance?
Posted by Gerry Mander for House of Representatives on October 13, 2009 at 10:48 AM
11
"Vote for Obama, he'll do more than nothing and he won't work against us!" = brilliant strategy!

This is how blacks and women got their civil rights of course, the more patient and understanding they were, the less ruckus they raised, the more progress they had. Oh same with expanding the vote in Britain, it was when the middle and working class DIDN'T YELL AND SCREAM that the aristo expanded the franchise.

Totally.

hahahahahahahahahahaahahah
Posted by 5000 years of history of struggle for human rights on October 13, 2009 at 10:57 AM
12
Or: Political decisions aren't only made by what's popular, but by how popular the Pols think the results will be. In the case of the public option for health care, I think they're right to be cautious, since they don't seem to have a handle on how such a plan would operate without costing a whole hell of a lot.

In the case of DADT, they're dumb chickenshits. Period.
Posted by Schorschi on October 13, 2009 at 11:01 AM
Chris in Vancouver WA 13
@ 5, 6, & 7 - You might be surprised; there might be more support than you think. I suspect a lot of generals feel plenty "hamstrung" when they have no choice but to dismiss hard-working, quality personnel because they happen to be gay or lesbian.

If Obama is sincere in his desire to end DADT, he'll seek out those generals who agree with him. They're there.

Check out this eye-opening article in The Advocate:

http://www.advocate.com/article.aspx?id=…

It's about a guy who kinda-sorta sneaks onto a military base (Ft. Lewis!) and anonamously asks regular soldiers what they think about DADT. The vast majority think it needs to go.
Posted by Chris in Vancouver WA on October 13, 2009 at 11:23 AM
14
Dan's Enemies List is getting kind of long: Obama, the HRC, Sunday's protest organizers... If I were a Republican, I would be loving this.

Also, Sec. Rumsfeld used to say "I serve at the pleasure of the President," but it would have been just as accurate to say "the President serves at the pleasure of the military." Keep that in mind.

Obama has promised - without qualification - that he will end DADT. He is implicitly inviting us to stay home in 2012 if he fails. Why isn't that good enough, for now.
Posted by jared on October 13, 2009 at 5:01 PM

Add a comment

Advertisement
 

All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact Info | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy