Obama's Statement on DADT

Source: The Advocate

The White House of the Press Secretary issued the following statement from President Barack Obama regarding the failed vote on the defense authorization bill that included "don't ask, don't tell" repeal.

I am extremely disappointed that yet another filibuster has prevented the Senate from moving forward with the National Defense Authorization Act. Despite having the bipartisan support of a clear majority of Senators, a minority of Senators are standing in the way of the funding upon which our troops, veterans and military families depend. This annual bill has been enacted each of the past 48 years, and our armed forces deserve nothing less this year.

A minority of Senators were willing to block this important legislation largely because they oppose the repeal of "Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell." As Commander in Chief, I have pledged to repeal this discriminatory law, a step supported by the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and informed by a comprehensive study that shows overwhelming majorities of our armed forces are prepared to serve with Americans who are openly gay or lesbian. A great majority of the American people agree. This law weakens our national security, diminishes our military readiness, and violates fundamental American principles of fairness, integrity and equality.

I want to thank Majority Leader Reid, Armed Services Committee Chairman Levin, and Senators Lieberman and Collins for all the work they have done on this bill. While today’s vote was disappointing, it must not be the end of our efforts. I urge the Senate to revisit these important issues during the lame duck session.



Read more: http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2010/12/09/Obamas_Statement_On_DADT/

And you already knew that.

... woooooosssshhh?

people, including many in the military, were opposed.

So before you go accusing me half cocked perhaps you should count to ten and try to express yourself in a civil manner.

Thanks.

.

inherited the on the face of it cowardly policy instituted by his previous Democratic president but does he have to continue the legacy?

I bet that's a fight Obama could win. He could make a finding that it's in the best interests of the military to have access to people to serve who also happen to be gay.

It might result in some political push back, it sure did for Truman, but that's why we think of him as a great President.


I mean, attempting to force his lame duck Dem congress to knuckle under to an obscene giveaway to the uber wealthy and to enable the destruction of Social Security by taking it off it's pay as you go structure is insane


The President is fighting the wrong battle for the wrong people?

So I'll do it for you.

No. Truman didn't have an act of Congress standing in the way of his ordering the desegregation of the military.

Of course words are just words until DADT is repealed. I've little doubt that if it fails to be repealed he will blame Congress again instead of himself for not simply removing it as Commander and Chief.

that he can't simply 'remove' it by fiat

I'm as disappointed as anyone at DADT. I'm as disappointed at the fact that this president has not really fought for its repeal (http://thinkprogress.org/2009/07/30/hastings-dadt-white-house/). However, the notion that he can just "end the practice" is only half right. Yes, he could issue a stop loss, etc. However, then what? The next president to come along could start enforcement all over again. It needs to end from Congress. The issue is that the President has not worked very hard for its repeal.

And doing that would make it harder to put back in.

Doing nothing is not better than that.

Obama has had Gates basically end the discharges - see link below
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9671042\

a ridiculous study (when there were plenty of them already, like another one was even needed) to run out the clock.

Do you seriously think that restricting who can initiate discharges changes any of that?

Please.

Since there hasn't been any discharges since October 21 (and last year, the Defense Department discharged an average of eight troops a week) - that IS a change.

that doesn't recognize them, that doesn't protect them from assault or discrimination, that doesn't recognize their families, let alone extend benefits to them.

Disgusting.

Yet, knowing Dems would lose midterms, Obama and Congress planned to drag this out until after mid terms (along with so much else).*

Meanwhile, our hetero and closeted troops are falling apart from being sent back again and again on stop loss orders that prevent THEIR discharges.

Shameful.


*"Key Democrats — even openly gay lawmakers — are quietly conceding to letting another two years go by before trying to overturn "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," the controversial 1993 law banning openly gay people from serving in the military. Most fear that moving too quickly on such a divisive issue could backfire, and most would rather tread lightly, at least in the early months of President-elect Barack Obama's administration."



http://www.queerty.com/dems-say-itll-be-two-years-before-they-take-up-dont-ask-dont-tell-20081224/ (2008 article)

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Servicemembers United, the nation’s largest organization of gay and lesbian troops and veterans, announced today that the total official number of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” discharges for Fiscal Year 2009 now stands at 443. The annual fiscal year “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” discharge statistic combines the total number of discharges reported by the Department of Defense, which was 428, with the total number of discharges reported by the Department of Homeland Security for the Coast Guard, which was 15. This brings the official 17-year total, according to the Department of Defense and the Department of Homeland Security, to 13,425 discharges under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
http://servicemembersunited.org/?p=2419

-----
13,425 discharges over 17 YEARS.
Obama has only been in office since January 2009.
So, you saying that there have been 14,000 discharges SINCE Obama took office is completely FALSE, the majority were BEFORE he took office.

Edited to add:
(Newser) – Despite the continued reign of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, the military has lately been discharging far fewer people under the rule, the Los Angeles Times reports. Thanks largely to changes in enforcement under President Obama, the number of discharges has fallen off this year after a continuous decline since 2002. Not one service member has been discharged under DADT since (*Oct 2010) the administration announced the changes.

The shift in enforcement now requires top Pentagon civilian officials’ approval before the removal of military personnel under the law. “There's a signal being sent by that requirement that the Defense Department just doesn't want to deal with discharges,” says an analyst. Meanwhile, commanders may be keeping removals to a minimum amid two wars. Still, the decline could be reversed under a new administration, which could change the rules.
http://www.newser.com/story/106863/dadt-repeal-or-no-military-discharges-drop-off.html

thing about a law of Congress--the next Congress could change it.

14,000 DADT discharges since Obama's inauguration. Meanwhile, our remaining troops are faling apart from being sent back again and again and again under stop loss.

Besides, stop loss is not his only option. He could rescind Reagan's order.

Last year, 2009, there was an average of 8 discharges per week - which comes to around under 500 for 2009.

If DADT is not repealed by Congress, I honestly don't think he will do a thing about it. He will want the issue to fade from the spotlight so that us Democrats will not remember his lack of leadership, his cowardice and his bigotry towards issues important to the LGBT community.

And also I don't see where you see bigotry, it's true that Obama has not been able to get DADT repealed by Congress 'yet' but he has done other things for the LGBT community that shows that he is NOT a bigot http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x485790

He can't repeal a law. He could stop the military discharging of gays though.

I am constantly hearing double speak from Obama.

gays to serve openly not merely stopping discharges. Truman ended discrimination based on race. Obama can end discrimination based on sexual preference.

It was easier for Truman to end discrimination based on race because there was NOT a law passed by the Congress regarding that.
Regarding DADT though, DADT was a bill that Congress voted on, passed, and enacted into law.
So there is a big difference.

Obama cannot overrule standing public law by fiat. And you should be damn glad that that's not a a "privilege" of the office.

By the way, "executive privilege" has nothing to do with declaring X or Y the new policy. It is about the privacy of communications between the executive branch and various advisors.

Repeating something on DU does not make it so.

It is TRADITION, not law, that Congress will not act is a vis the military after the CIC has spoken on a topic and vice versa.

And not even a tradition that is observed 100%.

For example, Reagan signed an EO banning gays from the military and DADT itself broke the tradition by overriding Reagan's EO as CIC. So, saying Obama can't return the favor doesn't make it so.

I should have said executive power. Thanks for pointing out my failings!

of the usual Rethug obstructionism on a key item, Obama wrings his hands, puts on a sad face and tells us "I did the best I could". No, he didn't. While it's true that his outlawing DADT by Executive Order runs the theoretical risk of being overturned by a succeeding President, it's also true that you can't un-ring a bell. Once DADT is de-legitimized, regardless of whether by action of the Legislature or Executive Order (an action with which the Sec of Defense, the Joint Chiefs and a majority of the American people are in agreement), the military will proceed with all due haste to do away with all vestiges of DADT. Once that happens there isn't a President made, Rethug or Democrat who would risk the blow back trying to reestablish it. Obama knows that as well or better than anyone. But he's content to continue to hand-wring, and will not even take the mild step of having the DOJ stop appealing the existing court decision which makes DADT illegal. He will not put his money where is mouth is.

Like one more study showing the same result was really needed to do anything but CYA.

President Obama is not a King or Dictator - he is trying to get folks to work with him so he can reach the end results that he wants.

And if you need to commission a bogus study that takes months and millions to muster your troops, maybe that's not the right job for you.

more accurate reflection of reality than this. Obama did not "go along" with the study. Obama ORDERED the study.*


Gates works for Obama, not the other way round. Ditto the joint chiefs.


"President Obama is not a King or Dictator"


Oh, please, Louise. He is POTUS AND Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces per our very own Conatitution--and he is also head of the Democratic Party. Nothing about using those roles is illegal, or even unseemly.

Pretending Obama is legally impotent when we don't like the result of his choices, then giving him credit for legislation or whatevver when we do like them doesn't cut it.



*"The Obama administration ordered a study to be conducted examining the effects of repealing DADT. The report on the study was expected to be made available by Dec. 1.

http://www.wistv.com/global/story.asp?s=13584540


IOW, after midterms Dems were expected to lose, just as planned from the start. (See Reply 37.)

heads of the military to jump on board with his decision to repeal DADT.

Btw, your silence on Obama's deliberately leaving this for after mid terms speaks volumes.

and senior military officials.

Ultimately, Obama's responsibility as Commander in Chief is to ensure a properly functioning military. That means consulting with those who are more directly involved with military operations than the CIC. That means seeking their advice and obtaining the best information possible. That of course is what Truman did -- he did not issue his excecutive order establishing integration as the policy of the military until he had received a report on civil rights recommending that policy be implemented. And having declared the policy, he did not expect it to be implemented overnight. Instead, he appointed a Committee on Equality of Treatment and Opportunity in the Armed Services (the Fahy Committee) to oversee the implementation, a process that took between one and two years, depending on the branch of service. That Committee specifically acknowledged that "the services, though subject to civilian control, are old institutions with long established customs and habits. The Committee believed that reforms would be more readily accepted and make headway faster if they represented decisions mutually agreed upon. Imposed decisions can be enforced by discipline but joint decisions engage the loyalty of those who have concerted them. Therefore the Committee decided that it would confer with the services at each step of the way, confident that its recommendations would win support as the services became convinced they were sound in principle and would improve the efficiency of the military establishment.


In other words, the process of desegregating the military under Truman's watch was built around a cooperative effort with the military, not merely dictating a result. It is because of the same sorts of issues that concerned the Fahy Committee with respect to ensuring that the implementation of the desegregation order was coordinated to avoid disruption that the Obama administration is wary of having DADT abolished by court order rather than by the repeal of DADT by COngress.

I still hold out hope that Congress will get it done. Maybe I'm dreaming, but I think it can still happen.

Also, there was way more resistance to racial integration then than there is to orientation integration now.

How long did Reagan consult before issuing his EO banning gays from the military?

Obama can put it to bed today and deal with the legislation. He can call off his DoJ and instruct his DoD. DADT is patently unconstitutional.

But he won't. And while he does nothing, people will continue to defend that nothing.

May people just prefer to swallow Obama's excuse without subjecting it to examination.

Bubba CHOSE to have Congress amend Reagan's EO as CIC via a statute bc Bubba did not want the political heat to fall on him alone. For the same Obama claims his hands are tied.

And Obama has never offered even a lame explanation as to his refusal to use his Constitutional AND statutory stop loss power.

and a capital gains tax reduction...

One thing the Republicans never want to be seen doing is stopping their precious tax cuts. That would actually work.

FROM: Santa




K&R

That's hilarious! :rofl:

Words {{{{{ C H A S M }}}}} Action



Such nice words, though.

Unless something drastic happens, he's done.

I think it is beyond obvious.

And DADT continues. Awful.