Federal Court Steals Obama's Thunder - Orders Gays In The Military Right Now
President Obama missed his chance at progressive history because a federal court just destroyed his Rube Goldberg approach to implementing a law he signed.
A federal appeals court ruled that the military ban on gays is unconstitutional and must be lifted right now - today.
The suit was brought by Log Cabin Republicans (Log Cabin is code for "gay'). The Court was sitting in San Francisco (San Francisco is code for "gay").
But didn't President Obama already sign a law repealing Don't Ask Don't Tell? As with all things Democrat - yes and no.
As a candidate President Obama said he would repeal Don't Ask Don't Tell. Once he became President, it started to feel as though he would wait longer to say the word "GAY" than President Reagan waited to say the word "AIDS" (the difference being that the latter had absolutely no affect on anyone's life).
It wasn't until his January 2010 State of the Union Address that the President committed himself to allowing gays in the military. So strong was his commitment that he refused to touch the issue with a ten foot pole while the Democrats controlled both houses of Congress during an election year.
A few bills and some filibusters later, on December 22, 2010 the President finally signed into law the Don't Ask Don't Tell Repeal Act of 2010, which ended DADT for good.
No it didn't.
The implementation of the law was held in abeyance indefinitely. First a committee had to be formed. Then the committee had to study policy, readiness, unit cohesion and whether camouflage comes in lavender.
But that's not all. Once the committee issued a report, the President would issue a 60 day waiting period, followed by some undefined, incremental implementation of whatever policy the commission comes up with.
For something the President insists won't have a negative effect on the military, on implementation he seemed as hesitant as a Chicago bookie going long on the Cubs winning a World Series. His actions belie his assertion.
Well that's all moot now. If something goes wrong, he can always say the policy wasn't ready and blame it on the Court.
- Comment (27)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments:
Dec '10
Re: Federal Court Steals Obama's Thunder - Orders Gays In The Military Right Now
Douglas Let's be honest though. They were low-key because they had no choice.
What people don't seem to realize is that this really had nothing to do with a desire to serve in the military. This was, from the beginning, all about discrediting and repealing a moral standard because that moral standard condemned what they did. And that's why this isn't over. · Jul 6 at 7:41pm
The lack of choice is what the civilian leaders of the government do not understand. They have never lived in an environment where telling your boss to pack sand is a criminal offense.
As to this not being the end, I agree. To paraphrase some of the old salts, when I joined it was forbidden, now it's accepted, I hope to retire before it becomes mandatory.
Jun '10
Re: Federal Court Steals Obama's Thunder - Orders Gays In The Military Right Now
Steven Drexler: Casey, what's your hurry? ...
Over the history of DADT.... · Jul 6 at 8:59pm
I have two gay Soldiers and know several more, and they're some of the best I've ever served with. The decision's been made, the briefs have been given, let these men and women get on with their lives without this hanging over their heads any longer.
And I beg to differ regarding the percentage of separations. I was a paralegal for the duration of my first enlistment, working in the Military Justice office at HQ, V Corps. A good many Chapter 15 discharges, from all across Germany, came across my desk in those four years, and I don't recall one of them being for a Soldier looking for an 'out'. All were command-directed, which was part of the problem with DADT; too much command discretion.
That's anecdotal, so take it for what it's worth, but this is a significant issue for more than just a small constituency of our servicemembers.
Thank you for your service, by the way. Eight more years until I'm eligible!
Re: Federal Court Steals Obama's Thunder - Orders Gays In The Military Right Now
Please expound, Jerry.
I don't even present an opinion in this post. The only point I make (so I thought - correct me if I'm wrong) was the hypocricy of Obama by insisting there will be no negative effect on the military by accepting gays, while implementing the policy with all the nervousness of working with a bomb.
Is there something anti-Ricochet, pro-Huffington Post about that point?
Oct '10
Re: Federal Court Steals Obama's Thunder - Orders Gays In The Military Right Now
Douglas
"Homosexuality is incompatible with military service. The presence in the military environment of persons who engage in homosexual conduct or who, by their statements demonstrate a propensity to engage in homosexual conduct, seriously impairs the accomplishment of the military mission. The presence of such members adversely affects the ability of the Military Services to maintain discipline, good order, and morale; to foster mutual trust and confidence among servicemembers; to ensure the integrity of the system of rank an command; to facilitate assignment and worldwide deployment of servicemembers who frequently must live and work under close conditions affording minimal privacy; to recruit and retain members of the Military Services; to maintain public acceptability of military service; and to prevent breaches of security." · Jul 6 at 9:36pm
How do we know this to be true? I have often heard it said, but is there any evidence for it? The "breach of security" concern is a red herring, since it implies that someone can be blackmailed for being gay, which is unlikely if they are allowed to serve openly.
May '10
Re: Federal Court Steals Obama's Thunder - Orders Gays In The Military Right Now
Lavender Camouflage, Code for Gay.... There are Australian Army homosexual men and women currently serving in Iraq, Afghanistan with US troops; and throughout the South Pacific. They are as selfless and courageous , (and as cowardly no doubt on occasions) just like their straight fellow soldiers. I will introduce you to some next time at a Ricochet gathering. I suggest you don't besmirch them on the basis of their sexuality, unless you enjoy large dental bills.
Reagan's delays on saying the word AIDS and the delays on sensible medical funding and research in this area, will need to go to another article. I consider that to be one of Reagan's few failures whilst in office.
You can argue the case on disrupting morale of the troops, on the role of judiciary usurping the legislature and Commander in Chief; but please restrain yourself from tiresome caricatures of effeminate men in military gear. unless your are talking about the Village People reunions, and dull ubiquitous Gay Pride marches.
Jul '11
Re: Federal Court Steals Obama's Thunder - Orders Gays In The Military Right Now
Unlike the federal courts, President Obama actually does have to work with our military leadership. Trying to work out a policy that recognizes the rights of service men and women to love whom they wish, while working with the military leadership takes time. The federal appeals court didn't have to consult with or work with anyone. It will be interesting to see if the decision gets appealed.
Re: Federal Court Steals Obama's Thunder - Orders Gays In The Military Right Now
You missed my hat tip to irony. Don't know if that's my fault or yours.
If there will be no effeminate men killing morale in the service, what's all the handwringing by Obama?
That's the point of the post.