White House "considers" compromise on gays in the military

Fierce!

WASHINGTON – A proposal to step up the repeal of the ban on gays and lesbians serving openly in the military but still allow the Pentagon time — perhaps even years — to implement new policies was being discussed Monday by administration officials and gay rights activists.

The White House had hoped lawmakers would delay action until Pentagon officials had completed their study so fellow Democrats would not face criticism that they moved too quickly or too far ahead of public opinion in this election year. Instead, administration officials now expect Congress to move ahead this week even though advocates on both sides say it's not clear there are enough votes to lift the 1993 ban.

Under the proposal emerging from talks at the White House, Congress would remove the Clinton-era "don't ask, don't tell" law even as the Pentagon continues an ongoing review of the system. Implementation of policy for gays serving openly would still require the approval of President Barack Obama, Defense Secretary Robert Gates and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Mike Mullen. How long implementation might take was not known...

Obama has taken a slow and incremental approach to the politically charged issues. He has expanded some federal benefits to same-sex partners, but not health benefits or pension guarantees. He has allowed State Department employees to include their same-sex partners in certain embassy programs already available to opposite-sex spouses.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100524/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_gays_military

Any servicemember who has a beef with the new policy should be encouraged to leave, and their discharge papers will say that he left because he was not man enough to serve with gays in the military. Then they can explain that to future employers. And then gradually you will have also achieved the effect of weaning the homophobes--and I believe that they are a minority within the ranks--out of the military too.

I recced your post because it's you, my rec was not for the WH content.

"The White House had hoped lawmakers would delay action until Pentagon officials had completed their study so fellow Democrats would not face criticism that they moved too quickly or too far ahead of public opinion in this election year. Instead, administration officials now expect Congress to move ahead this week even though advocates on both sides say it's not clear there are enough votes to lift the 1993 ban."

Too quickly or too far ahead of public opinion? Not face criticism? Total BS. Obama could regain huge amounts of his credibility by halting investigations and prohibiting discharges right now. Then maybe a "Review" of the policies would be tolerable. Until then, all the "Proposals" in the world mean nothing.

I rec'd for visibility of the issue and scrutiny of these new developments. A moratorium on investigations/enforcement is an absolute necessity if they want to go forward as suggested. Without that, there's no change in the status quo.

The more people to see it the better.

Per the article linked in the OP:


No, Mr. President, I don't think there is any chance that you or your fellow Democrats in Congress will be ahead of public opinion on this one...

:eyes:

there is no such thing as gay rights. Its human rights.

So, we're going to compromise on a compromise. Screw Obama and his corporatist handlers.

:scared:

:shrug:

We needed a Churchill, but got a Chamberlain.

That should shut us whiny homos up for awhile.

Seriously, what the fuck does it take to do this? Overwhelming support from the American people to repeal DADT. Just looking at 22 other countries who allow gay men and lesbians to serve openly in their militaries...without ANY problems. Scores of former officers, including 2 former JCS chairmen...who say we should repeal DADT, period.

Of course, when you never had the intention to act for GLBT equality, you can come up with a myriad of delaying tactics.

backbone- something our party has been lacking for some time

If they didn't want it to be an election year issue then why didn't he just sign an executive order that prevented any investigation into suspected or admitted gays within a few months of getting into office?

It would have accomplished the same thing as this stupid compromise.

Trial balloons, considerations, and compromises?

(Other than their own careers, of course.)

The Great Leader knows what's best for us at all times.

but to trust and obey.

and, come to think of it, pretty much any other situation involving the current administration.

I'm usually pretty sympathetic to political considerations in policy-making, but this legislation makes good sense on both grounds: it gets the legislative aspect of the DADT repeal done, now, while still being able to plausibly escape the charge of evading the military's (ridiculous and homophobic, but I digress) review--which is, after all, supposed to be about "how", not "whether."

If they are too cowardly to take even this compromise, they have no excuse. None at all.

There's no need for a compromise. Public support is overwhelmingly behind getting rid of DADT. I have to say, for the first time, that I think Obama is just a fucking liar.

to "dispute" this.

Talking about how everyone else around here is a doodoohead.

And the timetable shall NOT be interfered with.

except that that was seventeen years ago.

I guess "Profiles in Courage" is just non-fiction to these guys.

Many of them are still running and politicking like it is 1994.

There just isn't.

K & R for keeping us informed