Did the President lie about DADT in his State of the Union?

The President's words during the SOTU:



And yet, mere days later:

http://gay.americablog.com/2010/04/in-early-feb-white-house-backed-away.html

http://gay.americablog.com/2010/04/sen-levin-says-white-house-and-dod-dont.html



The "study" on DADT is not expected to be completed until December at the earliest. So, what does this mean?

We will see in a year.

If you know the analysis won't be completed until nearly the end of the year, that even after it's finished (assuming it will be on time), Congress will still need to debate and vote on it, is the President's rhetoric likely to give a different impression? If so, was it intentional on his part?

"This year, I will work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law..."

Once Congress begins the debate the "I will work with Congress" will come true. President Obama claimed to start working on the repeal within a year, the actual repeal will take longer.

I will try to be understanding if he is a month or two late, but I will also understand if others are not so understanding.

All sources indicate Congress would like to move forward, perhaps even on the defense authorization bill, but that the White House is attempting to actively restrain them until after midterms.

Given the words in the SOTU, would you have reasonably expected this behavior?

Given the words in the SOTU, would you have reasonably expected this behavior?

No, but this does mean he was lying.

this year I will work with congress and the military to finally repeal DADT. He never said it was going to be done by the end of the year.

That may be splitting hairs but I think he is going to end it, not as fast as I'd like to see it ended but he will end it and he will do it with legislation that can't be overturned 3 seconds into the next pukes term like an Executive Order would.

It's political speak.

Personally, I would have been surprised to see it happen this year.

But happen, it will.

He also said that "I will end 'don't ask-don't tell'" at last year's HRC dinner. I believe him.

Look... If it was up to me, I'd overturn DADT sooner rather than later. But it's not and he's in office for another 33 months.

Hopefully, another 81 months.

Or by "year" he meant some period of time in which the earth will be rotating.

Again. Politician speak. They are are working on it this year (with the goal) to finally repeal DADT.

I'm not repeating myself again in this thread.

in politician speak means delaying and shutting down the process for this year.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8198893
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8198344

You don't have to be anywhere in this thread you don't want to be, hun.

:eyes:

don't understand...

Why the CONTINUED intolerance from so many people? First California and propH8 and the myth of repealing DADT. Just f-in do it. WHo's going to disagree with doing it? Only the far right who hate you anyways... this is a winning issue, NOT an issue to run from.

He will indeed work on it. In spirit, yes. People expected it to be gone and it almost certainly will not.

As a politician, and a good one we all agree, he chose his words too carefully to have them ever be accurately called a "lie," regardless of outcome.

It was a statement designed to lead us to believe he was on the job, so to speak. However we do have every right to criticize whatever the results turn out to be, and on whatever timeline we like.

I don't believe we have to wait a year, either, to express impatience.

We probably will not have legislation this year, but he is working. It will happen.

I remember when they had hearing(s) with Gates and the top military leaders on their thoughs. I know they are doing a study. For some reason 18 months sticks in my mind regarding a time frame for the study completion. I believe I heard that the Pres. issued an Ex. Order telling the various military arms to halt dismissals until that study was complete. I wouldnt look for any movement on this issue until then.

However, it certainly seems like something is fishy here. I don't like it.

In particular, his retort to the protesters the other day struck me as unnecessarily defensive and wrong. Basically he said "don't come after us, go after the ones who are against it!". Well, we all know the ones who are against it, but unless he is referring to some stealthy Democrats we haven't heard about the ones who are against it are fairly powerless to stop it IF President Obama and his Congress want to push it through. They can move it through the House and then bring it up in the Senate and let the Republicans filibuster it if they will. And at that point, we can point to them as not only blocking health care but also equal rights. But why it's not already to that point yet is certainly not the doing of the "against" crowd. It's the Democratic Party that seems to be dragging its' heals on this one.

Actions speak louder then words.

Just another great big "fuck you". I stopped pretending he was an ally long ago.

Unless he gets around it by saying he has worked with blah blah blah. It is still the same policy, so how can I say no?

kick.

not so much for what he said and didn't do, but for the consitsnt repots from congress about being told by the WH to quash progress. So far I have heard reports from Levin,B Frank, Lewis . That's enough

It's part of a pattern isn't it?

according to certain folks' timetable.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

At earliest, because that is when the totally unnecessary study will be done. Then Congress will have to read the study and debate the study, and who knows what will be going on then.

And, in your mind, does "working with Congress" include telling Senators and Representatives to stop pushing for DADT repeal until after elections when many of them would like to make it a part of defense authorization?

and I don't count a year as being less than.

He has stated often to remind us that the road would be long,
and the climb would be steep...and yet, folks don't want a long road,
or feel they don't deserve a steep climb,
because in their mind, they have suffered enough.
And yet, we are still only talking about 15 months to date,
no matter if one's personal suffering has been much longer than that.

and so many just sit and wait and threaten while criticizing all the while,
adding their voices to the harmony of discontent of those who don't and never wanted change.
The media counts all of the voices as one; a choir sort of speak....
and so change becomes even harder to do, as the chorus gets louder.

So change becomes a paradox; made harder to get done, helped by those very same voices
who demand it.

Of course, you and others will think as you will.....and so will I.
I'm sure once DADT is repealed, it will be the next thing that he was too slow
at getting done. That's how it is; that's how it will be,
and I have accepted that, and I must believe...so has he.

Because whenever a Democrat promises us we're almost there, we clear a hill only to discover there is yet another previously unknown hill to be climbed.

On LGBT issues, there is always another hill to be climbed, it seems. Is it too much to ask that our Democratic politicians stop actively placing them? Because the President tamping down on Congress is actively creating another roadblock. Actively. Not "Well, it's tough, but we'll get there." He told them to cut it out for another year after he gave quite a different impression in his SOTU. You yourself are always telling us we need to pressure Congress on this rather than the President. Well, what happens when we pressure Congress to move on it and the President actively pressures them to leave it alone for now? What then? Is it now allowable for us to get on the President's ass, or do we have to sit idly by while our "powerless to do anything about it!" President suddenly finds the power to stymie our efforts?

I'm sorry, but the sentiment of your post is that criticism isn't acceptable, that the President's actions can never be wrong, and that any pressure brought to bear in favor of equality is corrosive to this President's well being.

He is the most powerful man in the world actively working against second class citizens. You're on the wrong side on this.

If this was your equality, I don't think you'd be so cavalier about a long road. I think you'd be asking what the hold up is. I think you'd find a President's active blocking of movement forward puzzling and frustrating.

If this was your equality at stake.

Yes. today. still.

Notice the barrage of insults aimed at Black folks, especially as of late...it's all the style.
You think it makes me feel good to have to read the word niggardly on these boards?
You think that reading about the rich Brits who didn't want to be served by
folks of color makes me feel as though I'm equal? Do you think knowing that
folks seem to have real problems respecting an African-American who is supposed to be
the most powerful man in the world that is questioned
as being illegitimate means that I truly believe we are there yet?
You think seeing folks due to their race being spat on still is being on top of the world?
When my daughter walks around Missouri with her White Husband, you think those stares
are all admiration, or are some just the same stares my Mom used to get with my Dad?
An entire race being blamed for a proposition passing that I made sure my entire family
voted against is neato? You think that multiple stories about Black folks being ordered from a store as practical jokes, Frat parties where White Folks should come looking and talking and eating like Black folks makes me laugh? You think that seeing my President with a bone through his nose means I've arrived?
Don't think so.

And so I'm saddened, and I wait, and I write,
and I tried once or twice to state here that I was
sick of reading about the Tea party folks
as though they were really all that interesting
as they are given credence day in, day out.....
to where only no less than 100 posts would do them justice.

But's it's not one person's fault; that I know better.
It didn't just start 15 months ago, that I am sure of.

So yeah....I have patience, and then some.

The road to equality has been and will be long.
The thing is, you ain't the only one traveling on it.

And therein is the great difference with this administration.

I'm certainly not going to be arguing we live in some kind of post-racial wonderland. Racism exists, it's horrid, it needs to be addressed and combated at all times.

But your inequality is not explicitly enshrined in the law. You do not have constitutional amendments and legislation banning your equality. We do. And as long as we do, we need politicians to act.

This is not 1993. This is 2010, when 75% of Americans are for the repeal of DADT. The politicians have just about all the cover they're likely to get. We've done the work. We've helped get Democratic majorities. We've gotten the people behind us on this issue. We have generals calling for repeal.

There is no time better than this period, 2008-10, to get this done. The President has failed to act, when Congress, generals, and the public have urged him to do so.

What is the excuse? I want to hear a sound excuse for the President's active obstruction on this issue. Because every single one I've heard to date has rung absolutely hollow when compared to the hurricane pushing for change on this issue that we have provided this President.

That's the chorus I care about. And it happens to be the voice that might actually get something done.

But if you sit on the sidelines, you might as well play for the opposing team.

:patriot: and :loveya:

Staff from the white house to go and tell the senate
to stop, slow it down, put it aside, neglect it --
then yes - he didn't lie.

Ours are no better than theirs

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Show of hands...how many think it will done by December?

For the millionth time this week. Repealing DADT has BROAD support - from republicans, too - and the generals. There is simply NO REASON to keep pushing it further down the road.

People here seem to think gay people only started suffering when Obama took office. It's only been 15 months!!11!! No, it's been their whole lives. It's been since this country was founded. When this nonsense is posited by other minorities here, it's even more disgusting. Gay folks have suffered discrimination as long as anyone else in this country. How would you like to still be fighting the GOVERNMENT for your right to marry? Serve your country?

McClurkin, Warren, and of course his "faith" trumping civil right with marriage in a country he as a Constitutional scholar knows is secular.

Why is anyone debating this. I'd drop a log in my pants if he does ANYTHING close to repealing DADT in 8 years. Forget 1.

Something must have happened after the SOTU.

There was not benefit to him to even bring the topic up in the SOTU if it wasn't on the radar.

When he said it, he believed it.

:shrug:

It's the one part of this that doesn't make any sense: saying he was going to repeal it only made his eventual effective refusal to do so more costly, and the silence on the topic came nearly immediately after the address.

Wow. That was easy!