
Sgt. Leonard Matlovitch, Sept. 1975. We're STILL waiting...
Obama continues to string gays along with the promise of repealing DADT which would allow gays and lesbians to serve openly in the US military. The United States is one of the very few western industrial powers that doesn’t allow gays and lesbians to serve in the military. Democrats have told us for years that it would be a priority to end discrimination in our armed forces under a Democratic administration. So what gives?
New statements from administration officials indicate that a repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is moving at a slower pace than some would like.
Media reports earlier this year from the Boston Globe and the Associated Press stated that President Obama is consulting with defense advisers before initiating repeal of the law, which bans open gays from serving in the military.
But statements issued to the Blade this week from officials associated with the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Defense Department are raising questions about the level of consultation that has taken place.
Of course Obama’s hordes of homophobic frat boi zombies will tell you that the President has a lot on his plate with the economic situation, and that silly things like civil rights for millions of Americans will have to wait. That’s a hard pill to swallow given that Obama seems to be able to work on other things like reinvigorating stem cell research, reducing energy consumption in federal buildings, funding high speed transit, and subsidizing lenders of student loans. All of those things, which fulfill promises to other Democratic constituencies, seemed to be important enough to get the president’s attention, even with the big bad recession taking up all his time. Why then can he not do ONE THING for the gay community that overwhelmingly voted for him?
And obots, don’t bother mentioning the US signing the UN resolution supporting gay rights. That’s about as empty an action as one could take.

Sgt. Matlovich, R.I.P.
And it is typical of this administration’s continual lip service to the gay community. What has Obama got to lose by signing a document which was a nonbinding resolution presented over 3 months ago, and was signed by less than half of all UN member states? The Obama administration itself concluded that the resolution was basically meaningless.
But Wood said a “careful interagency review” by the Obama administration had concluded that “supporting this statement commits us to no legal obligations.”
But back to DADT, is Obama really consulting with the military about repealing the discriminatory statute?
“The chairman has had an informal conversation with the president about this, but there was not a lot of substance to it in terms of detail,” Kirby said. “He was not asked for his recommendation, nor was he tasked to go provide that.”
Kirby said no memoranda were circulating among the Joint Chiefs addressing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
Defense Department spokesperson Cynthia Smith declined to comment on the extent to which DOD is considering repeal and would only discuss DOD’s commitment to the law.
“Our policy implements the law Congress passed after prolonged research and debate,” she said. “The department will continue to follow congressional mandate on homosexual conduct.”
The White House didn’t respond to a request for comment on the remarks.
That’s not surprising. Obama doesn’t like to talk about gay issues that much. Neither does his Press Secretary Robert Gibbs. Several months ago, gullible gays and lesbians rejoiced over this cryptic, insulting, one-word answer to the question of whether Obama would repeal DADT
Um, some of us would actually like more than one word Mr. Gibbs. We like pesky things like details. You know like when he plans on repealing DADT. Because waiting for a second term is unacceptable. And hiding behind the uniforms of the military brass isn’t either. Obama is the Commander in Chief. He may consult the military on this issue, but hardly needs their endorsement. They are obliged to follow his command. The military implements policy, it doesn’t make it. That’s the job of the civilians.
Nathaniel Frank, who’s gay and a senior fellow at the Palm Center, a think-tank at the University of California in Santa Barbara, said the civilian population and not uniformed officials would instigate repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”
“Obviously if the Joint Chiefs express confidence in their troops’ ability to make this change, it will go more smoothly,” he said. “But in a democracy, civilians control the military, not the other way around. And the Pentagon has already made clear it will follow orders on this.”
Not only that, but with his budget, Obama has the perfect vehicle to set in motion the repeal of DADT.
Sarvis maintains the administration could instigate a “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal by making elimination of the law part of his fiscal year 2010 defense budget.
Sarvis earlier told the Blade that that method of repeal would show alignment from defense officials. It would also place on opponents the burden of attempting to remove the language from the defense budget.
The administration released a summary of Obama’s $3.6 trillion budget request a few weeks ago and is planning to release the full details of the budget in April. No mention of repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” was included in the summary.
Hmmm….I wonder why not? Maybe it’s because Obama doesn’t give a DAMN about gay people. Maybe it’s because he is homophobic and a disgrace to the civil rights movement. But he sure likes their money and their votes, and he’ll do everything he can to kick this can down the road to 2012 so that he can again dangle the promise of repeal in front of gay and lesbian Americans.
In the meantime, gays and lesbians continue to be discharged from the US military, violating their civil rights and making this country less secure.
In a March 12 statement, Moran said that the armed forces “continue to discharge vital service members” who are gay when operations in Iraq and Afghanistan have compromised the readiness level of the military.
The 11 discharged soldiers include a human intelligence collector, a military police officer, four infantry personnel, a health care specialist, a motor transport operator and a water treatment specialist.
Moran said he plans on releasing monthly reports on discharges as he receives the information.
If the president were serious about stopping this outrage, he could at the very least enact a moratorium on discharges. But as things stand, this Commander in Chief is continuing to let his soldiers down. And he continues to show through his actions that he doesn’t believe that civil rights for gay and lesbian Americans matter.
SILENCE=DEATH










March 25, 2009 at 4:32 pm
What a conincidence. I just left this comment at BlogActive. Michael Rogers, who I have respected in the past is still waiting for Obama and the Dems to “do the right thing”.
March 25, 2009 at 5:01 pm
“If the president were serious about stopping this outrage, he could at the very least enact a moratorium on discharges.”
*********
Is that possible? DADT is covered by UCMJ and only Congress can change that. Bill Clinton “stepped in it” when he said he said, (at Harvard?) that he would change the policy. I think he assumed that the he could repeat what Truman did in ordering integration of the military by exec order. The difference was that being Black wasn’t illegal under UCMJ but being gay was. Sam Nunn and Colin Powell then stabbed Clinton in the back when he tried to change the law. DADT was the compromise.
Obama is hopeless..the question is why don’t Pelosi and Reid introduce legislation to change UCMJ?
US Code:Title 10 37 654..Policy concerning homosexuality in the armed forces
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/10/654.html
March 25, 2009 at 5:07 pm
Perhaps Obama is waiting for a different group of advisors than his joint chiefs of staff. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/5028975/Barack-Obama-facing-criticism-for-his-dial-a-pastor-advice-line.html
When I listed the ministers in Obama’s advisory group to a PRIDE student at our university, he just said I was making Obama guilty by association, as if associates don’t matter when you are consulting them! You still hear, he was the lesser of two evils. How long to GLBT people have to go on forwearing their rights just to make straight people’s lives easier and more comfortable? I agree with you Gary that the UN declaration is meaningless. The Vatican may sign it. I mean, it’s an enlightened view that homos should not be executed for being homos, sure, and that is in defiance of some of the religious right in the US, but realing DADT would actually help people who are risking their lives for the US.
March 25, 2009 at 5:19 pm
SHV, I think Obama absolutely has the authority to end the policy with the stroke of a pen. That’s what bill clinton was poised to do in 1993 until he was kneecapped by member of his own party in congress who lobbied him to let them deal with it. That’s how we ended up with DADT. If Obama did want congress to address it, he could have required it in his budget, essentially forcing them to deal with it, but he didn’t, despite having the votes for it to pass. If you read the Blade article, they mention that legislation to repeal DADT was being sponsored by Ellen Tauscher, but she has just been tapped to be undersecretary of state leaving the bill orphaned so to speak. Most sources I’ve read don’t realistically think anything will be done until Obama’s “second term”.
the bottom line is that most Democrats don’t give a rats ass about gay people, and most don’t think we deserve the same rights as other oppressed groups. They have been pandering to us while in the opposition to get our money and our votes, but now that they are in power they don’t want to waste ANY political capital on us.
March 25, 2009 at 5:26 pm
and as far as a moratorium on discharges, I don’t see why the Commander in Chief could not instruct military leaders to suspend investigations until the policy can be revisited as per his promise. That in itself would go a long way to instilling some confidence that he is serious about dealing with the policy.
March 25, 2009 at 6:27 pm
Gary did you see my previous about the big defeat handed to the Right Wing here in Gville….I am still glowing!
Oh and DADT Obama wont do shit until NATO And ANZUS declair that the USA has to come into compliance with their military rules in regard to Homosexuals serving or leave the alliances.
Isreal lets us serve for piss sakes and we cant get am alledged “pro gay” president to step up to the plate?
Again We ask wher is our F*cking Pony?
March 25, 2009 at 7:10 pm
garychapelhill Says:
March 25, 2009 at 5:19 pm
SHV, I think Obama absolutely has the authority to end the policy with the stroke of a pen.
*********
IANAL but (the UCMJ is pretty arcane) from my limited reading, it is unclear what role the CIC has in administration and over sight of the UCMJ.
In Title 10…654 congress seems to give itself the exclusive authority to determine the “Gays in the Military” issue:
“(1) Section 8 of article I of the Constitution of the United States commits exclusively to the Congress the powers to raise and support armies, provide and maintain a Navy, and make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces.
(2) There is no constitutional right to serve in the armed forces.
(3) Pursuant to the powers conferred by section 8 of article I of the Constitution of the United States, it lies within the discretion of the Congress to establish qualifications for and conditions of service in the armed forces.
If you have references to legal opinion that the CIC can change the policy, I would appreciate them..
March 25, 2009 at 8:02 pm
SHV, I am not a lawyer either, but a quick google search found one legal scholar, Vermont Law School professor Jackie Gardina, who is of the opinion that the President has the authority to end the policy:
you can download her entire paper on the subject here
March 25, 2009 at 8:07 pm
Hey Fuzzy!!! I did see your link and read about it. That is great news. I also am glad that Barney Frank is talking tough to the supreme court even if he is otherwise an obot. The marriage amendment that the republicans have been promising to add to the NC constitution appears to be dead at the moment as the Dem legislature leaders have sent it to a committee that hasn’t met in about 12 years
We can’t let our guard down though!
March 25, 2009 at 8:09 pm
you can download her entire paper on the subject here
*********
thanks!!
March 25, 2009 at 8:12 pm
No problem! Let me know if you find out anything interesting…I just read the first couple of pages so far, but I thought it was interesting that she says that Clinton acutally did use exec authority by prohibiting the military from asking about sexual orientation. The statute, apparently, only prohibits gay service members from “telling” that they are gay.
March 25, 2009 at 10:17 pm
Maybe we should start a gay basketball league so Obama will give us some attention. That’s another thing he seems to have time for. On the other hand, I don’t think I want to hear the “jokes” he’d tell about it on talk shows.
March 26, 2009 at 1:05 am
Mawm: you got that right.
Gary: Another wonderful post.
He’ll never fucking get rid of it. This man is a lying fucking hypocrite. We need to march on Washington and pull his funky ass outta the White House. Fuck him.
March 26, 2009 at 7:52 am
The Obama Doctrine – “Say one thing, do another”
March 26, 2009 at 3:31 pm
Apologies for slopping typing, my name has no “o” at the end.
March 26, 2009 at 3:32 pm
Thank you, Gary, for opening this discussion with reference to my late friend Leonard Matlovich having first battled the military’s ban 34 years ago when Barack Obama was only 13.
While I still have much to add, particularly to the DADT section, anyone interested in learning more about him can go to leonardmatlovich.com which includes vintage videos from 1975 through his death 13 years later.
And thanks, too, for the reference to Prof. Gardina’s analysis which I am eager to read in its entirety. Until then, one thing I’m certain of from my other reading is that “DADT” [by which I mean the law passed by Congress and the implementing regulations drawn up by the branches] does NOT fall under the UCMJ per se, while they both fall under USC 10.
As before DADT poured old wine into new bottles with a catchy label, one can still be prosecuted within the military for homosexual sodomy under the UCMJ, and, I believe, there have been instances in the past when its vague prohibition on “conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman” has been used against gay servicemembers. But, for the most part, it covers “crimes” in the same way that civilian law does, and “being gay” still, even in the military, is not a crime but a violation of policy.
HOWEVER, too few realize that in order for military gays to be entirely out of jeopardy of the mischief of homophobic mental midgets in the Pentagon and the field, “sodomy” will have to be removed from the list of crimes under the UCMJ. [For what it's worth...or not...Obama endorsed this during the campaign.]
At SLDN’s recent annual dinner in DC, I passed out buttons which included Leonard’s famous epitaph from his gravestone and this:
“Mr. President, it’s time to tell Congress: IF ‘DON’T ASK, DON’T TELL’ IS NOT WRONG, NOTHING IS WRONG!”
March 26, 2009 at 4:32 pm
Thank you for your comment Michael. I didn’t know about the sodomy prohibition in the UCMJ. I guess that would have to be eliminated before gays and lesbians can really openly serve in the military. thanks again for the insight.
March 27, 2009 at 3:20 am
Gary: Isn’t it interesting that “sodomy” is okay but “fisting” lands you in the slammer?
May 8, 2009 at 7:04 am
[...] wrote in a post almost a month and a half ago that if Obama really believed that he didn’t have the authority [...]