07/13/2009
Obama: 'I'd Like to See [DADT Changed] Sooner Rather Than Later'
Anderson Cooper pressed President Obama on his wishes regarding the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy in an interview broadcast over the weekend on CNN.
Said Obama: "Look, I've had conversations with Bob Gates as well as Admiral Mullen about the fact that I want to see this law change. I also want to make sure that we are not simply ignoring a congressional law. If Congress passes a law that is constitutionally valid, then it's not appropriate for the Executive Branch simply to say we will not enforce a law. It is our duty to enforce laws. I do think that there is the possibility that we change how the law is being enforced even as we are pursuing a shift in congressional policy. But look, the bottom line is, I want to see this changed, and we've already contacted congressional allies. I want to make sure that it's changed in a way that ultimately works well for our military and for the outstanding gay and lesbian soldiers that are both currently enlisted or would like to enlist...I'd like to see it done sooner rather than later. And we've begun a process to not only work it through Congress, but also to make sure that the Pentagon has thought through all the ramifications of how this would be most effective."
It was also reported over the weekend that Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) may be close to introducing a bill that would put a moratorium on military discharges under the policy.
Watch it, AFTER THE JUMP...
Posted 7:41 PM EST by Andy Towle in Anderson Cooper, Barack Obama, Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Military, News | Permalink
Like it?
Subscribe to FREE Towleroad daily headlines with our RSS feed!
RECENT STORIES:
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Talk talk, do nothing. Turncoat?
Posted by: Steve M | Jul 13, 2009 7:48:57 PM
"Look, why do you media types keep hounding me with these questions about the gays? I don't really care about them. I called on them for money during my campaign, they foolishly gave, and gave, and gave. What are you going to do right? I have more important things to deal with. Like playing an 18-hole game of golf for four hours after my holiday in Italy and Africa. I'm not going to waste my energy huddling with my advisers discussing LGBT issues.
I mean, they'll always be there for me. In 2010. In 2012. Where else can they go? The GOP? Pfft! ... Now, let me repeat the comments I give every time I'm asked about. Gee, you know, I almost have it memorized to a T. Ok, now let me begin... Listen, I've had conversations with...." [/Obama's thought bubble]
Posted by: Marcel | Jul 13, 2009 8:17:21 PM
Funny how he has to stick to the letter of the law concerning gay issues, but has no problems ignoring the vast amount of laws broken, both actual and in spirit, that languish in limbo, unprosecuted.
Funny how he can ignore the law concerning immigration, or issue signing statements on the IMF issue, but not gay issues.
Awfully selective, Failbama. Try again.
Posted by: Gridlock | Jul 13, 2009 8:23:34 PM
It is NOT the president's duty to enforce UNCONSTITUTIONAL DISCRIMINATORY LAWS. Pathetic.
Posted by: Wayne | Jul 13, 2009 8:33:21 PM
Blah...blah...blahdety blah blah...with whipped cream lies and a cherry picked fact or two on top.
The arbiter of "constitutionally valid"...the US Supreme Court...has never ruled that DADT is.
"changed in a way that ultimately works well for our military"?
"CHANGED"???....Danger, Will Robinson! They're avoiding the "REPEAL" word again....
Will a reporter finally PLEASE ask WHAT THE FUCK "in a way that ultimately works well for our military" and "all the ramifications" MEANS the next time His Holiness...or Gibbs...or Gates...or Mullen...throws up a barrage of shit like this????
All through the Presidential campaign...all the MANY times he promised to fight for REPEAL the moment he took office he never mentioned any "ramifications" blah blah blah.
Despites his slick attempt to dodge, he IS oh so CONVENIENTLY ignoring a law passed by Congress: "10 United States Code § 12305," titled "Authority of THE PRESIDENT to SUSPEND CERTAIN LAWS RELATING TO Promotion, Retirement, AND SEPARATION" which trumps 10 U.S.C. § 654 aka DADT. It says, IN BLACK AND WHITE [annotations mine]:
"Notwithstanding ANY other provision of law [INCLUDING DADT], during any period members of a reserve component are serving on active duty pursuant to an order to active duty under authority of section 12301, 12302, or 12304 of this title, THE PRESIDENT MAY SUSPEND ANY PROVISION OF LAW [INCLUDING DADT] relating to promotion, retirement, OR SEPARATION [AKA DISCHARGES] applicable to ANY MEMBER OF THE ARMED FORCES [INCLUDING GAYS] who THE PRESIDENT DETERMINES is essential to the national security of the United States."
If Congress had MEANT to give a President power to do that EXCEPT FOR GAYS they would have specified that exception IN 12305. They did not.
The left the decision about ALL discharges, overriding ALL other laws, up to the President in a time of "national emergency" which by THEIR definition we are in NOW!
Contrary to the trained seals er Obambots it would NOT be an inappropriate, extra legal "end run"...it is a POWER given him BY CONGRESS to made a decision in the interests of national security...which, recall, he unintentionally indicted himself of "weakening" when he referenced continuing discharges during La Thé Soiree des Gais at the White House.
WHY is he not using that power???
Because the Pentagon tails are wagging the dog and the dog is letting them...and I don't mean Bo.
Posted by: Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com | Jul 13, 2009 8:41:59 PM
To be honest, I won't believe Obama until I actually see something happen. I worked for Obama all the way through the primaries and helped him win Indiana ... but I'm a little miffed at him right now.
Posted by: KFLO | Jul 13, 2009 8:42:46 PM
Remember that song "Politics...the art of the possible..." from "Evita"?
Posted by: JT | Jul 13, 2009 8:58:41 PM
I couldn't agree more. 'La plus ca change..."
Off topic...I just watched an episode of 'Two and a half Men". There were 2 "gay" jokes that sent me over the edge.
The "kid" after hearing a poem, said "gay" (which got a huge fake laugh, and later, he called his uncle a big "mo" (another laugh.)
What the fuck are these people thinking?
I don't watch shit-coms, and now I never will again
Posted by: hank | Jul 13, 2009 9:30:49 PM
President Disappointment does not, well, DISAPPOINT. He sticks to the lines and really is not showing ANY leadership on this issue. At least if McCain had won, we'd know what we were up against (not that I would have voted for him... EVER). Now? Words, words, words and NO ACTION.
Posted by: JWL | Jul 13, 2009 10:06:41 PM
@Wayne
Actually, it is the president's duty to enforce the laws of congress whether he believes them to be unconstitutional or not. The power of judicial review is reserved solely to SCOTUS. I, for one, understand his effort to change the law while congress sets about repealing it. No one in the executive branch has to the power to refuse to enforce the laws of congress. Reagan tried to do that with Iran-Contra and hell ensued. Bush/Cheney potentially tried to do that with the cases of torture and that is still bringing about hell.
Posted by: Koklo | Jul 13, 2009 10:21:40 PM
Koklo:
You're right. And let's not forget the hue and cry that was raised with Bush's liberal use of signing statements... Unilateral presidential overturning of DADT could possibly be more offensive than those signing statements. The only wildcard factor here is POTUS's status as Commander-in-Chief. I haven't thought through exactly how that might play into this scenario. But the key word is thinking...something that the blowhard commentors don't oft indulge in.
Posted by: Jack | Jul 13, 2009 10:56:34 PM
@ STEVE M: politics IS talk, talk talk. That's what he should be doing. Obama likes to push and negotiate behind the scenes to make sure he's a winner in public. That's one reason he's an excellent politician.
I too am frustrated with the seemingly slow pace of change, but let's face it: we're just about through the FIRST HALF OF THE FIRST YEAR of his presidency in a humongous economic CRISIS.
I firmly believe he's an ally, but we must keep his feet to the fire. No free passes.
Posted by: David R. | Jul 13, 2009 11:29:06 PM
Fine, Mr. President. Then get off your arse and use the law that Congress handed your predecessors at the end of the Vietnam War and stop the discharges while you get Congress to get off its collective arse and repeal DADT. You have the statutory authority to end this crap now. And yet you dither, thumb up your butt, and keep making the same kind of empty promises we continually heard from you during the campaign. "Fierce advocate" my arse!
Posted by: Michael | Jul 13, 2009 11:46:04 PM
Amazing that the majority of Americans agree DADT should be repealed but our President, with a majority in Congress, can't seem to articulate that. He'll have to work awfully hard to regain my vote. And thank God for people like Rep. Patrick Murphy (D-PA) who is on a mission to overturn DADT. Now, THAT'S a show of some leadership and courage. Take note, Mr. President.
Posted by: Bruce | Jul 13, 2009 11:51:30 PM
I've grown so very weary of the lies and attempts at misdirection as well as the discussions on this issue from everyone. It's gotten old, we've been lied to repeatedly and from here on out, I'll do my level best to usurp the governments control in my life and destroy it from within.
Mr. Obama, LEAD, FOLLOW or GET OUT OF THE WAY!
Thomas Paine
Posted by: The Phoenix | Jul 14, 2009 12:03:11 AM
I was surprised to hear, that in regards to DADT, the President has to enforce laws that "are constitutionally valid". Apparently he believes that DADT is constitutional. Sadly I believe this means he will argue for keeping DADT in court. It wouldn't surprise me.
Posted by: Paulesso | Jul 14, 2009 12:13:32 AM
4 hours after this post, and there are 16 comments here, most of them bitching about Obama not doing enough to end DADT.
Meanwhile, 10 hours after Andy posted about the possibility of Senator Gillibrand introducing an amendment that would suspend discharges for 18 months (http://www.towleroad.com/2009/07/gillibrand-to-introduce-moratorium-bill-on-gay-military-discharges.html), and there are only 4 comments on that post.
What does that say about the LGBT community?
We are a lazy, politically unsophisticated bunch more interested in making unreasonable demands of politicians with a limited role to play in the issue at hand than in working to achieve our goals in the arena in which they will be won. Far too many of us do nothing but whine and approach politics like it's a personality-based reality show.
Obama will make overt moves (he's already doing the critical work behind the scenes to line up military and Congressional support for the repeal) to move this issue along within the next year. But Gillibrand's possible amendment could be acted on THIS MONTH. How many of you have called your senators and asked them to support or even cosponsor this amendment?
I've got news for you bitches, Obama's not the one with his thumb up his ass. It's you.
Posted by: 24play | Jul 14, 2009 12:47:55 AM
Regular Towleroadies are sickeningly familiar with the ruthless Obama Excuse Making Machine known here as 24Play.
Proof that Koklo and Jack are also mere Obambots who would throw any Kool Aid they can to try to wash away FACTS is that they either did not read my clear description of the LEGAL BASIS for Obama to issue an executive order freezing discharges or simply choose to ignore it because they have NO rebuttal. They simply keep repeating the same LIES and DISTORTIONS. That's not commenting, that's shilling.
REPEAT: Use of the LAW which CONGRESS PASSED...10 USC 12305...to freeze discharges:
1. is NOT repeat NOT "overturning" DADT ... BUT in 10 USC 12305 Congress repeat CONGRESS GAVE the President/Executive Branch AUTHORITY to temporarily override ANY OTHER LAW. That INCLUDES DADT.
Rather that going against Congress, by refusing to stop the discharges of Arabic linguists like Iraq veteran Lt. Dan Choi when we are so short of linguists as demonstrated by the failure to translate in time a terrorist message intercepted the day BEFORE 9/11 and decorated combat veteran/flight nurse Maj. Margaret Witt when the Air Force has a shortage of flight nurses and experienced fighter pilot Iraq veteran Lt. Col. Victor Fehrenbach the case can be made that HE is guilty of dereliction of his duty as our President and the Commander-in-Chief.
Who made it?...OBAMA did...unintentionally on Monday, June 29th, 2009, when he declared,
"preventing patriotic Americans from serving our country weakens our national security.”
2. is NOT repeat NOT in ANY WAY equivalent to abuse of signing authorities.
3. Obama's Solicitor General has ALREADY DEFENDED DADT in a brief to the Supreme Court using the same dishonest, homophobic language Sam Nunn used to pass it in the first place.
No "thinking"??? "Blowhard commentors"???
Unless you have a position equal to or higher than Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid who supports such an executive order, or credentials superior to
Dr. Aaron Belkin, Ph.D, Associate Professor of Political Science and Director of the Palm
Center, University of California Santa, Barbara, and
Dr. Nathaniel Frank, Ph.D, Senior Research Fellow at the Palm Center, University of
California Santa Barbara & adjunct professor of history at New York University, and
Dr. Gregory M. Herek, Professor of Psychology at the University of California, Davis, and
Dr. Elizabeth L. Hillman, J.D., Professor of Law at the University of California
Hastings College of the Law and a veteran of the U.S. Air Force, and
Diane H. Mazur, J.D., Professor of Law at the University of Florida College of Law
and a veteran of the U.S. Air Force.
Bridget J. Wilson, J.D., Rosenstein Wilson & Dean, attorneys at law, and veteran of the U.S. Army Reserve
...who jointly researched and wrote the Palm Center's legal determination on the President's stop-loss authority under 10 USC 12305....
you don't know jack, Jack, and it is YOU who is the "blowhard commentor."
Posted by: Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com | Jul 14, 2009 1:47:25 AM
Jesus, Michael, will it ever hit you that brevity is appreciated?
24Play, I'm with you. We've had six months of an administration facing the greatest economic challenges in 80 years. The US economy, in real terms, isn't even 150 years old. Good luck finding any other politician who would even give lip service to this issue. Sure, "civil rights can't wait until the best time," but political capital is rapidly expended. Is DADT affecting your life, seriously?
Everyone I know in the military is straight, and they hate it. All just waiting to hit 20 years and suck off the benefits for the rest of their days. There are so many bigger gay issues.
Posted by: Geronimo | Jul 14, 2009 3:04:36 AM
Jeez, I get that he has a lot to do and that maybe DADT is not on the top of his agenda. Which I get. I mean, of all the problems in the world he deals with, DADT seems to be rather minor in the grand scheme of things.
But can he please, please, please shut up about it then then? Either do something - or shut up.
Posted by: Jeanne | Jul 14, 2009 3:54:49 AM
Geronimo, that's pathetic. You only know straight people in the army, so you don't care about the gay people in the military and what they are going through? PATHETIC.
Posted by: Wayne | Jul 14, 2009 6:15:38 AM
Of course there excuse making machines here- the gay people might stop paying for disrespect! As of now, officially, everyone in the military is straight, that's what DADT was for, dearies.
O is not what you thought. Read up on him and the chicago pals he did not leave behind.
BTW, Gay people don't seem to be around him anywhere, ( unlike bush, mccain, and most dems and reps. ) Why is that?
Posted by: Ted | Jul 14, 2009 7:43:08 AM
260 people have been dismissed in the six months this guy has been President. He can issue a moratorium on DADT. He chooses not to. He ran on a platform of repealing DADT, and is now slinking back into the corner and saying he'll change it, not repeal it. I've been following this, and the ideas floating around are crap.
And oh, yeah, we just had a gay soldier killed out in CA. Gee, if DADT hadn't been in place, he probably would have had somewhere to go for help. Instead he's DEAD.
Obama needs to get up off his waffling butt and do something.
Posted by: DR | Jul 14, 2009 8:48:16 AM
We can never have a gay president. That is because the president is the commander-in-chief of the military. DADT says that gays cannot be open in the military so the president would have to excuse himself from his active duty.
Posted by: Aiden Raccoon | Jul 14, 2009 8:57:20 AM
Gay people ahould stay out of the military.
Why fight and die for a country that considers you second-verging-on-third class?
Posted by: David Ehrenstein | Jul 14, 2009 9:21:23 AM