Until recently, I had been quite critical of President Obama’s apparent inaction on his campaign promise to repeal Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell (DADT), but now I’m beginning to see evidence that the way he may well be handling this issue better than he’s handled any other policy issue since taking office. And that’s not hyperbole.
Shortly after his inauguration now more than seventeen years ago, the then-new President Bill Clinton rushed to repeal the ban on gays serving in the military, something he could (then) have done with the stroke of a pen. But, he barely consulted the military brass, if at all nor did he secure the support of key Democrats in Congress, like Sam Nunn, then-Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee. Controversy ensued and DADT was the result.
The incumbent has taken a different tack. Instead of rushing ahead, as if speed were needed to fulfill a promise to an interest group, Obama has instructed his top defense officials to develop a plan to repeal the ban while preserving the morale and readiness of our armed forces:
“We have received our orders from the commander in chief, and we are moving out accordingly,” [Defense Secretary Robert M]. Gates told the committee. “However, we can also take this process only so far, as the ultimate decision rests with you, the Congress.”
Any change in the policy would not come any time soon, the two officials made clear. Both Admiral Mullen and Mr. Gates told the committee that there would be a Pentagon review, taking up to a year, to study how to implement any change before they expected Congress to act on a repeal.
Look, I wish the Administration had set the process in motion last year. But, the key thing is that he is doing it now and going about it the right way. He’s showing that he understands it’s not just an issue of gay rights, but more importantly one involving national security. You can just ask our armed forces to change a policy, no matter how wrong-headed that policy is, willy-nilly.
As Commander in Chief, as Chief Executive, he tells the officials responsible for administering a policy that he’d like to change it and asks them to implement the change so as not to impede the smooth operation of their organization. A very conservative method of promoting change.
Let’s hope we see it in other departments.
Can you imagine if a REALLY gay guy (flamer) decides to join the military. Let the hilarity ensue! I can type “flamer” without insult because I am gay and right (o)
Daniel, ole buddy, ole pal, ole friend of mine……. you give the president too much credit. Let’s think about this for a minute. Mr Obama hasn’t changed the way he’s operating, especially now that he’s got us all looking at the Generals & DADT rather than the Commander and Chief. If anything, I think the president is being even more Obama-like, but at a slower pace….. you know, spinning at 33RPM instead of his usual 78RPM. What better way to get the problem off his desk and toss a bone to the 10% of the country the other 90% doesn’t really care about. It’s gonna take at least a year for a study to kick in… God knows how many years to “observe” our boys in foxholes and barracks around the world… followed up by panel discussions ad infinitum. By the time the Generals are ready to submit a report, it will 2013 and Obama will be out of office; now that’s something to look forward to.
I’m with you Spartann. This Administration hasn’t given Americans any reason to anticipate that this issue will be handled competently, expeditiously, or professionally because every other issue or task that Obama has undertaken has led inevitably to betrayal and/or unmitigated disaster.
I have a theory about what’s behind Obama’s purported renewed vigor and the pedestrian rhetoric about how he’s going to “keep fighting.” I think he’s just super-jazzed that one year into the job as President, he’s finally figured out the executive equivalent to voting “present”–CREATING COMMISSIONS. Now that he’s got the military brass spinning their wheels on some busywork committee for a year or more, he can move on to creating a bipartisan commission to study the deficit and make recommendations for cuts. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/20/us/politics/20commission.html
Funny, I thought being fiscally prudent with the taxpayers’ money was ALREADY the job of Congress (and the President’s as well). But clearly they delegated that responsibility a long time ago and have no intention to revisit it.
No wonder Obama seems so bizarrely disconnected from the reality of what’s happening–he’s reciting over and over in his head, “Legislators vote ‘present.’ Executives form commissions. Legislators vote ‘present.’ Executives form commissions.” Now that he’s got this job wired, it would be perfectly consistent with his employment history for him to start considering other, better jobs than this tedious presidency.
So, I think that’s the new plan. Obama’s answer to every question and troublesome issue will be create a commission to study it, weigh the options, and report back…eh…whenever. Within a couple of years we’re going to have commissions that are set up solely to monitor and report on the performance of other commissions. And the Left and the MSM will lap it up and call it things like “prudent,” “cautious,” “responsible,” and “pragmatic.”
Obama is a fu*king joke.
I’ll beleive it when I see it.
Just curious, is this a two step process? One step to repeal DADT (executive order) and then another step to have the UCMJ changed? That’s my understanding.
Along those lines, can’t the CNC just say “Stop procecuting the cases”?
No. It’s damning with faint praise. 😉
You know if it is hyperbole if you hyperventilate while writing or saying it.
I hope the President´s commission would give weight to the observation made by the late Senator Barry Goldwater, who was also a Major General in the Air Force Reserve, that, ¨you don´t have to be straight to shoot straight.¨
Senator McCain is opposed to the repeal. There’s no indication from Obama that he is working with McCain on this issue. Any resolution requires bipartisan support. Not sure Obama has changed his tune.
Considering Sen. McCain’s own wife and daughter disagree with him on gay issues, and he has two sons serving in the military who probably with their mother and sister, I’m starting to wonder if there’s something in Sen. McCain’s own past experience that blinds him to society’s changing views. Something that happened to him, to a friend, or to a comrade that’s burned-deep in his psyche that’s fixed his perspective on this.
No, Ted. John McCain will face JD Hayworth in the Republican primary this year. Hayworth is a super social conservative who as a radio talk show host has been painting McCain as a “liberal” for two years. I believe McCain has taken his position to survive the primary. He has previously supported gays in the military.
I repeat my point from the other recent thread on this:
Obama isn’t repealing DADT. America’s “defense establishment” is repealing DADT. The Pentagon is moving at its own pace – but moving, nonetheless – and Obama is merely along for the ride.
The latest intriguing tidbit is Colin Powell coming out in favor of DADT repeal:
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/02/03/powell-favors-repeal-of-dont-ask-dont-tell/?hp
to ILoveCapitalism….
After experiencing an epiphany prior to him endorsing Obama, did you think Powell wouldn’t have another one before voicing an opinion of this issue now?
12: Powell’s comments are interesting but I’m still not buying it. I’ll be happy to be proven wrong once the president signs MREA into law and not before then.
Considering that Powell was a major force behind DADT at the time, his turning against it is significant.
As for what I expected of Powell: I don’t think about him often enough to have expectations of him. In either direction.
Poofterjoe,
“Flamers” can already join the military–and occasionally they do. Nothing in the current code of conduct prevents flamboyant or effeminate men from enlisting.
I hope the President means what he says and really works to end DADT. Log Cabin Republicans will continue to keep the fire burning on the legal challenge side. Our five year effort to overturn the failed policy on the basis of free speech goes to trial in June 2010. Some have wondered (NYT article) if this call is motivated by our action. Others are saying that it could take a year for the military to come up with the plan. That gives the dems a lot of cover in an election year.