»» Columnists

What’s The Story With Obama’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” Promise?

video

by Tommy Christopher | 5:27 pm, October 12th, 2009

» 14 comments

gayobama

I got an excited call from a friend Saturday night telling me that Twitter was abuzz about President Obama’s speech at the Human Rights Campaign dinner. The gist of the call was that the President says he will end Don’t ask/Don’t tell. I was kicking myself for not having written about the rumors I had heard through the gravepine saying that very thing. The implication was that an Executive Order, or some other extra-legislative move, was in the offing.

Then, I actually watched the speech.

We cannot afford to cut from our ranks people with the critical skills we need to fight any more than we can afford — for our military’s integrity — to force those willing to do so into careers encumbered and compromised by having to live a lie. So I’m working with the Pentagon, its leadership, and the members of the House and Senate on ending this policy. Legislation has been introduced in the House to make this happen. I will end Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. That’s my commitment to you.

Can anyone tell me the difference between that, and the answer Robert Gibbs gave me the first time I asked him about repealing DADT, back on May 15?

Since then, we’ve asked the question upmteen different ways, trying to drill down on the specifics of the White House’s promise on Don’t ask/Don’t tell, and gotten the same response every time. You would think, then, that this speech would portend some kind of progress on the legislative front. You’d be wrong.

Back in May, I spoke with the office of the chair of the House subcommittee that currently has the bill repealing DADT, HR 1283:

I contacted the subcommittee’s chair, Rep. Susan Davis (D-Ca), and her spokesman, Aaron Hunter, gave me some rather deflating news.

He said that the committee plans to schedule hearings on the bill. Later this year.

I was flabbergasted. “You mean, the hearings on this bill could literally begin anytime up to December?”

“Yes.”

He also told me, then, that while support was building for the measure, they didn’t even have the votes to get it out of committee.

I spoke to Aaron Hunter again this morning to see if anything had changed with HR 1283. “Nothing has changed, we still plan to begin hearings before the end of the year.”

I asked if there was anything more specific, tentative ballparky dates, anything different at all? “No.”

Now, it is true that the Senate has made noise about holding hearings, but they don’t even have a bill yet. The House Subcommittee on Military Personnel has had HR 1283 since March.

So, what gives? Why roll this out now? A cynic might see this as a naked play to the liberal base, who have been unhappy with the President for a variety of reasons.

I don’t see it that way. He was giving a speech to a gay rights group, so he had to bring it up. I’m not sure he expected it to be such big news, since nothing has changed.

Now that the press has seized on this, though, it could end up hurting the legislative prospects for a repeal of DADT. Until now, the President has managed to avoid making himself a lightning rod on gay issues, while the right gradually eased into more moderate positions on them. Now that the President has weighed in so forcefully on this, has he painted a bullseye on the DADT repeal?

If that happens, will the President move toward a change in enforcement, or some other executive action? So far, the White House hasn’t shown any signs that they’ll go it alone on DADT.

Tommy Christopher

CaptainAmerica

What did you think Obama was going to try and do? He should have never agreed to speak which would have saved him of having to throw them some kind of bone.

So he throws out a fake repeal of DADT which has about as much meaning as getting rid of the Patriot Act or Closing Gitmo. He hoped it would shut up some on the far left fringe for a time being. It doesn’t matter that he’s been a pathological liar and his words mean nothing. It was a little over a year (last July) when he sewed up the nomination and immediately flipped on 7 or 8 major issues.

The Democrats can pay lip service to the gay community just like they do to African Americans. They know they aren’t going anywhere else.
sarainitaly

words…just words.
zebulon

The Emancipation Proclamation was an executive order and only became the 13th ammendment three years later. Regardless of your personal beliefs, there is no clearer evidence of a hypocrite than Obama’s promise to GLAD and his actions in supporting the Marriage Act against lawsuits.

One piece of paper, one pen, one minute.

“I Barack Hussein Obama declare that all citizens of the United States, including Homosexuals, Lesbians and Transgenders have the right to marry, serve in the armed services and receive every right currently provided to heterosexuals from this day forward.”
sarainitaly

I wrote somewhere else that it will happen one day – gay marriage I mean – and I think the republicans should be the first ones to embrace the issue. They are the *family values* party, so they should embrace family values, and allow gay americans to marry and adopt children. nothing says family values more than *family*.

I don’t know why the gay community believed Obama was their champion…
ImNotBlue

Well said, Sara!
http://www.facebook.com/people/Chuck-Steele/1147844375 Chuck Steele

Just a little more talk for a little more hopey-changey from the master salesman.
Say what needs to be said to close the deal.
We will deal with the empty promises later if they don’t just forget. Just close the deal.
ImNotBlue

Although, honestly… I am shocked. Thus far, Obama’s talk has won him a Nobel Peace Prize. Don’t the gay-right activists understand that talk from Obama is all they need? Action, results, tangible things… feh… who needs that?
m

I love that you guys hate Obama so much that you’re willing to flip completely on the issue of gay marriage just because of it.
SFPhoto

Tommy, I don’t think that Obama, a committed Muslim, is going to do jack squat for Gay people or Jews. Voting for Obama might have been one of the bigger mistakes in my life. I also think that Obama is going to sit back and allow Israel to attack Iran which will start the beginning of the end. La, la, la… All before 12, 21, 2012.
ImNotBlue

Actually, I’ve always been pro-gay marriage… but thanks for pretending you know me!
m

Well, you support a party and adhere to an ideology that opposes it. Maybe you’re more liberal than you think.
sarainitaly

m says:
October 13, 2009 at 10:20 am
I love that you guys hate Obama so much that you’re willing to flip completely on the issue of gay marriage just because of it.

Why don’t you stop thinking you know everything about everyone on here. Why don’t you discuss things with the people here, instead of just attacking them or accusing them of things at every turn?

I have always been pro-gay rights and marriage – which is one of the reasons I DIDN’T support Obama.

Dick Cheney supports gay marriage.

As for supporting a party that is against gay marriage, why don’t you look to Obama voters in the last Prop 8 election….
m

I love the spin here. Basically you’re trying to present Obama as anti-gay and Republicans as pro-gay, when the Republican party platform has explicit language arguing against gay equal rights including civil unions, with a large part of the party’s constituency based on the religious south which harbors extreme sentiments towards this issue, and the fact that Bush won in 2004 primarily due stirring up anti-gay sentiment. Just look at the speeches from the 2004 Republican Convention. There’s a reason why the Log Cabin Republicans are such an incredibly marginalized and weak constituency within the Republican party.

There is no better party for gay rights than Democrats in America today. That might change sometime in the future, hopefully both parties will be just as good. But today, you really only have one option: Democrats have an absolutely outstanding record in contrast to Republicans when it comes to equal rights. True that there are some Republicans who are sane on this issue but you’re going to be hard pressed to find them. And I don’t exactly see how Republicans are going to flip on this issue now that its increasingly southern and regional, honing the social conservative aspects of the party.

Nice try though.
ImNotBlue

m says:
October 13, 2009 at 12:34 pm

Well, you support a party and adhere to an ideology that opposes it. Maybe you’re more liberal than you think.

1- I don’t support a party. I purposely declare myself an “independant,” because I don’t like the idea that I have to support, defend, or agree with an idea, purely because it goes a long with “the party.” Now sure, I’m more right then left, so I agree with Republicans more often than Democrats… but not enough to “join the club.”

2- So… No. I’m more liberal than YOU think. I know exactly how liberal I am… this is one of my opinions. There’s at least one more that puts me farther off to the left then the majority of Democrats in congress. Can you guess what it is? (Hint… it’s not drugs, before you waste a guess on that)

There is no better party for gay rights than Democrats in America today.

But Sara is right. Obama is NOT for gay marriage. So the Democrats may be “better”… but they’re not great, either.