About
Learn More about our progressive online community for the Granite State.

Create an account today (it's free and easy) and get started!
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Search




Advanced Search


The Masthead
Managing Editors


Jennifer Daler

Contributing Writers
elwood
Mike Hoefer
susanthe
William Tucker

ActBlue Hampshire

The Roll, Etc.
Prog Blogs, Orgs & Alumni
Bank Slate
Betsy Devine
birch, finch, beech
Democracy for NH
Live Free or Die
Mike Caulfield
Miscellany Blue
Granite State Progress
Seacoast for Change
Still No Going Back
Susan the Bruce
Tomorrow's Progressives

Politicos & Punditry
The Burt Cohen Show
John Gregg
Krauss
Landrigan
Lawson
Pindell
Primary Monitor
Primary Wire
Scala
Schoenberg
Spiliotes
Welch

Campaigns, Et Alia.
Paul Hodes
Carol Shea-Porter
Ann McLane Kuster
John Lynch
Jennifer Daler

ActBlue Hampshire
NHDP
DCCC
DSCC
DNC

National
Balloon Juice
billmon
Congress Matters
DailyKos
Digby
Hold Fast
Eschaton
FiveThirtyEight
MyDD
The Next Hurrah
Open Left
Senate Guru
Swing State Project
Talking Points Memo

50 State Blog Network
Alabama
Arizona
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin

Obama and Generals on DADT: Cowardice and games.

by: Thomas Simmons

Tue Feb 02, 2010 at 09:13:02 AM EST


According to this morning's Washington Post:

In testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Michael Mullen also are expected to announce the creation of a group to assess how to carry out a full repeal of the decades-old "don't ask, don't tell" policy, which requires gay soldiers to keep their sexual orientation secret.

But Gates and Mullen are also expected to tell senators that it could take years to integrate gay men and lesbians fully into the military, defense officials said. Two appointees will be named to oversee a group that will draw up plans for integrating the armed forces, according to sources familiar with the Pentagon's deliberations on the subject. The planning effort is expected to take up to a year.

Among the issues to be addressed by the group: whether gay soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines will face any restrictions on exhibiting their sexual orientation on the job; whether the Pentagon will be obligated to provide for their domestic partners; and whether straight military personnel could be compelled to share quarters with gays

What a foot-dragging, anemic, crock of shit.

"Years to implement?"   It's really very easy:  Just end it.  

The military already has MANY gay and lesbian members SERVING AND FIGHTING AND DIEING.  It is NOT a question of figuring out "how to let them in."  THEY ARE IN ALREADY. Straight soldiers are ALREADY COMPELLED to share quarters with gay soldiers, just as white soldiers are COMPELLED to share quarters with black sodiers (gasp!)...and military preparedness and unit cohesion does not suffer.  

But individual soldiers do suffer.

A group of soldiers are on leave or having a little down time at a local watering hole.  Many of them comment on the tail they hope they get, or wolf-whistle at the waitress they call 'sweetheart,' and comment among themselves as to how hot she is.  This of course, is normal, red-blooded American Boy-talk, right?

But one of the soldiers in their midst has to pretend.  He has to force a smile, or force a stupid comment or become 'suspect' by the others. He can't be who he is, or say what or how he feels.  Because if he does, he loses his job, his health insurance, his honor, his pension.

Elsewhere, a group of soldiers are talking about how they miss their wives and children, and sharing stories of Christmas and breakfasts and vacations, and how they can't wait to see them again.  But another soldier is forced to lie, saying there is no one in his life, no one to go back to.  If he admits to having a partner, he avoids or invents that partner's name...becasue if he shares his longing, too, he loses his job, his health insurance, his honor, his pension.

Oh, he's good enough to shoot and fight and die.  He's good enough to serve, and receive medals and honors - As long as he lives in a closet of denial, as long as he shares nothing, as long as he avoids friendship with others in his platoon, as long as he holds everything so close to his chest that no one gets in.

President Obama, as Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces and as the Head of the Executive Branch, with one penstroke you can end DADT dismissals just as Harry Truman integrated the military.  It's time to do it NOW, before another American hero loses his or her lifetime contribution to our nation because of your cowardice.

Thomas Simmons :: Obama and Generals on DADT: Cowardice and games.
Tags: , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Here we go again (4.00 / 2)
Why is it that whenever there is a policy, a proposal, a time frame or whatever proposed by an elected official, someone who disagrees or is frustrated will play the "coward" card?  I disagreed with a lot of things Republicans did when they held the majorities in NH and DC, but I never thought their opinion differed from mine because they wee cowards. There are some thing Democratic office holders have done or haven't done that I disagree with, but again, I don't attribute that to their cowardice.  



"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    


Because, Kathy... (0.00 / 0)
as Martin Luther King Jr said,

"Justice delayed is Justice denied."

We all know that the Executive branch is not a puppet of the legislature: it is a co-equal branch and the tension is intentional.  Just as the Mayor and Police Chief of NYC can exercise their Executive powers and choose not to arrest someone smoking pot on the Central Park Lawn during a concert (in spite of Legislation authorizing it), the Commander-in-Chief and head of the Executive Branch can cease all prosecutions with one order. Further, he can pull back on the homophobic propaganda that his own Justice Department is using to fight the concurent DADT court case.

But he doesn't.  Because he knows that in the end, he can count on GLBT votes and dollars (as the better of two evils), all the while not upsetting any more conservative constituencies.

We've waited long enough.  Lives, careers, and futures hang in the balance NOW.  It doesnt do Lt. Col. Dan Choi or Victor Fehrenbach any good to study this for another few years.  Our elected leaders need to have their feet held to the fire, not be enabled by excuses and a cushy place to land when they avoid the tough decisions.


Doesn't answer my point (4.00 / 1)
You did not say anything that supports your cowardice accusation. If the President was going to have GLBT votes anyway, then why being the issue up at all in the State of the Union if, as you seem to be indicating, he didn't really mean to do anything about it?

I'm not disagreeing with you that DADT should be ended, but I disagree with you and others who think people who disagree with them, whatever the issue, are cowards. I've seen it with respect to a state income tax, medical marijuana, marriage equality, now you and DADT, and other issues.

If Barack Obama was a coward, he would not be the president of the United States.  



"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    


[ Parent ]
King also said (4.00 / 1)
"The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards justice."

This is a process.  He needs to get the Pentagon out in front on this or it doesn't work.  Gates said today that the Pentagon is raising the bar significantly to discharge members for DADT.  If you are a fan of MLK, you know that he would approve of continuing to move the toward the objective while working to maintain momentum.  You don't maintain momentum by calling people cowards, especially when they're not.


[ Parent ]
Wow.... (0.00 / 0)
One of the charges against King George in the Declaration was that he attempted "to render the military superior" to civil authorities.

The President doesnt have to beg the Pentagon to get on board.  HE IS THEIR BOSS AND THEY SERVE AT HIS WILL and under HIS command.  DADT can be ended in 24 hours...in the meantime, Victor Fehrenbach and Dan Choi and thousands like them are having their LIVES RUINED.

You can bet that Dr. King would not slough that off with a "hey, that's OK, we're making progress."

Political Cowardice is is the deadweight on this issue, and i dont care which party is responsible - i calls 'em as I sees 'em.


[ Parent ]
We all make compromises (0.00 / 0)
in life, Thomas.  Do you drive a car?  Eat bananas?  Are you a carnivore?  Do you use electricity?  Oil?  Do you drive on paved roads, use the highway system, or watch television?  Each of these, and many other comforts of daily life in the US cause someone's life somewhere on the planet to be "RUINED"...are cowards responsible for all these issues?

DADT is discrimination, plain and simple, and it needs to end as soon as is possible.  But it is the law of the land, and there is a process for repeal that makes an executive order difficult to enforce (right now, at least) and impossible to sustain long term.

Please re-read transcripts from yesterday's testimony and pay particular attention to SecDef's comments about raising the standards for discharge for DADT.  Then let's give them some time to maneuver politically and see what type of impact this has...if it makes no difference, I'll take to the streets with you, but if it does, maybe we can simply stop calling people cowards because they see a different path to the same goal.

I admire your passion, but not your methods.


[ Parent ]
"All deliberate Speed?" I believe that used to be an important concept. (4.00 / 1)
Here's how it went in Canada: on October 27, 1992, the Federal Court ruled that policies banning gays from serving openly were a violation of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and ordered the Armed Forces to cease discrimination immediately.  On October 28, the Chief of Defence Staff issued statement confirming that "Canadians, regardless of their sexual orientation, will now be able to serve their country in the Canadian Forces without restriction."    

That's right.  It took less than 24 hours.  

Here are a few of the key findings of a study from about 10 years ago completed roughly 10 years after Canada began allowing gays to serve openly in its military:  

* Lifting of restrictions on gay and lesbian service in the Canadian Forces has not led to any change in military performance, unit cohesion, or discipline.  
* Self-identified gay, lesbian, and transsexual members of the Canadian Forces contacted for the study describe good working relationships with peers.  
* The percent of military women who experienced sexual harassment dropped 46% after the ban was lifted. While there were several reasons why harassment declined, one factor was that after the ban was lifted women were free to report assaults without fear that they would be accused of being a lesbian.  
* Before Canada lifted its gay ban, a 1985 survey of 6,500 male soldiers found that 62% said that they would refuse to share showers, undress or sleep in the same room as a gay soldier. After the ban was lifted, follow-up studies found no increase in disciplinary, performance, recruitment, sexual misconduct, or resignation problems.  

I have no patience for Rights Denied. Sorry.


[ Parent ]
Canada has universal health (0.00 / 0)
care. We don't. Access to health care is also a right denied.

And look at the process for that.

I agree that this is frustrating, but under a McCain/Palin administration, ending DADT would not even be a possibility.


[ Parent ]
which is precisely why... (4.00 / 2)
..I didn't vote for McCain-Palin. :-)

[ Parent ]
There is zero reasons for further delays (0.00 / 0)
Didn't Truman desegregate the military with a simple order, without any years-long planning?

Gays and lesbians are already in the service.

There will not be 'coming out' parties the day after they rescind the rule.

There is simply no excuse for the delay of one year or longer.

The delay is harming our armed services. As Tom so correctly points out, we can't affort lose the skills that a Dan Choi or Victor Fehrenbach would give to the military.

What is there to study? How to continue discrimination for several more years?


[ Parent ]
Truman's EO (0.00 / 0)
took over four years to fully implement.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What...

Gates testified yesterday that the Pentagon is immediately implementing administrative changes that will drastically reduce the discharges from DADT.  Gates and Mullen are on board...they agree with us.  This is a done deal, it just needs time to get the legislative fix.  

Biden promised that it happens this year.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-...


[ Parent ]
That was then this was now (4.00 / 1)
Gays and lesbians blend in - no one knows who we are unless we tell them.

So what is there to integrate?

As I said previously, there will not be any coming out parties when they rescind the rule.


[ Parent ]
AP: Many younger members of the military just don't care if someone in their ranks is gay (0.00 / 0)
So why do we need years of planning?

"Analysis: The American cultural shift on gays in the military" http://www.365gay.com/news/ana...


[ Parent ]
Petrhaps, my friend... (4.00 / 1)
...all those older officers who have played on both sides of the fence through the years fear that a more open policy, with no ramifications basd on orientation, could result in their outing...

[ Parent ]
Olly Olly Out Come Free (0.00 / 0)
This is a good point. Will the be pressure to come out?


Whack-a-mole, anyone?

[ Parent ]
The only way I can support NOT (4.00 / 1)
quickly ending DADT by an Executive Order from the Commander in Chief is if, by moving more slowly, Obama really is able to bring the leadership of the military into active support, rather than passive-aggressive footdragging.

We don't need the active support of the generals. We have civilian command of the military. But it could, I think, make for a better result for everyone.

Mullen's words today make me hope that is really possible. So I'm cutting the President some slack on this.

Disclaimer: I'm not gay; it's a bit easier for me to make these hypothetical tradeoffs.


"Years to implement?" (0.00 / 0)
How many more careers and lives are going to be shattered because of this policy?

We are in a war, in case you have forgotten. How many highly qualified gay and lesbian members of our military (like the Arabic interpreters) will not be able to serve our country? We cannot afford to lose them. McCain among other seems to have forgotten this.

"Years to implement" is clearly unacceptable.


The Politico: 'Don't Ask' on slow road to repeal? (0.00 / 0)
Read the story here: http://www.politico.com/news/s...


Connect with BH
     
Blue Hampshire Blog on Facebook
Powered by: SoapBlox