Tuesday, February 2, 2010

Pentagon begins process to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"

It's about time. The United States of America has no business whatsoever in the discrimination arena. But for some reason, we've allowed "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" to be active since 1993. When will we learn that discrimination is not right, that it is looked upon by future generations as narrowminded bigotry? And since 1993, we've been open about our close-mindedness, and allowed it to affect National Security (as we did when we allowed two Arabic translators to be fired when it came out that they had come out).

But finally, some sense has come. Obama, in his State of the Union address last week, called on the Pentagon to begin the process to end DADT.

This week, the Pentagon began that long and arduous process:

The Pentagon has taken the first steps toward repealing the military's
controversial "don't ask, don't tell" policy regarding gay and lesbian service
members, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Tuesday.
Laying the groundwork
for a repeal of the policy will take more than a year, Gates said...

Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen also endorsed a repeal
Tuesday, telling the committee it is his "personal belief" that "allowing gays
and lesbians to serve openly [in the military] would be the right thing to do."
"For me, personally, it comes down to integrity," he said.
"The question
before us is not whether the military prepares to make this change, but how we
best prepare for it," Gates told members of the Senate Armed Services Committee.
"We have received our orders from the commander in chief and we are moving out
accordingly."

Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen also
endorsed a repeal Tuesday, telling the committee it is his "personal belief"
that "allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly [in the military] would be the
right thing to do."
"For me, personally, it comes down to integrity," he
said.

"The question before us is not whether the military prepares to
make this change, but how we best prepare for it," Gates told members of the
Senate Armed Services Committee. "We have received our orders from the commander
in chief and we are moving out accordingly."
Read the rest of the article at CNN

This should be something both sides of the aisle can agree on, Republican and Democrat. Progressive and Moderate Republicans should really be at the forefront of this, much like the log cabin Republicans are doing. We need to show the world that our party can change and be at the forefront of civil rights again, as when Lincoln issued the Emanipation Proclamation. "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" has no place in the US, and therefore, no place for support within the Republican party.

Crossposted to Republicans United

20 comments:

Sandy said...

Agreed!

bluepitbull said...

Repealing the don't ask, don't tell policy is long overdue for two reasons:

1. It forces homosexuals to hide their behavior, which you wouldn't wish on any heterosexual, making them unhappy which can lead to all sorts of emotional problems and even physical ones.

2. It prohibits them from "coming out" right before a deployment which decreases readiness, morale, and manpower. And, yes, it happens.

I've often wondered why Clinton was so wishy-washy and waffley on this subject. I doubt that any repealing of this policy will come as soon as people think. If you look at the trends of this administration, they wet their finger and stick it in the air to see which way the country leans on the issue. If he finds that enough people disagree with him, it might take awhile.

Clearly, gays have a right to serve their country as do any of our citizenry. I'm sure there is enough empirical evidence saying that they should be aloud to serve, but they claim they need to do another study....spend more....spend more....spend.

Dave Miller said...

Blue, Clinton was soft on this for the same reasons Obama will be. The GOP is going to rip him alive as being immoral and not able to understand the military culture.

Unless we can get GOP buy in, I do not think this will be changing any time soon.

Just my two cents worth...

James' Muse said...

As I said in the post, I think the GOP could score MAJOR points if they would come forward on this and join the fight to end DADT. It doesn't work, it discriminates, and it actually hurts the country as blue showed.

bluepitbull said...

Dave,

Last time I looked the dems own both houses. If they really want to do something, what's stopping them? If you say re-election, then you admit that they really don't care about the "general welfare" that they pull out of their nether region anytime they can't think of an answer for expansion of some new scheme.

I think much more of the GOP are pro repealing the policy.

Dave Miller said...

Blue, you know there are always political considerations in play.

If it was as simple as having a majority, then shouldn't the GOP have been able to pass a balanced budget during the first 6 years of the Bush Admin?

Neither side really wants to do what's right and are far more worried about their reelection chances than just about anything else.

Sad, but true.

bluepitbull said...

So, Dave, what you are saying is that the democrat majority won't pass all of these social justice legislations because they are worried about their careers instead of the country? Thank you for admitting that.

James' Muse said...

They are already doing it, Blue. They are pulling away from Obama right now because they want re-election this year. If they get re-elected, they'll be behind him, but after his budget talk the other day, many Dems in moderate areas are trying to play up their conservative side-i.e. shifting center and paying lip service to fiscal responsibility...

Dave Miller said...

Blue, I am not admitting anything, because I am not there. What I believe is happening is what happens, no matter what party controls congress.

They have to factor into their wants and desires for legislation the political reality of the day.

If it was just as simple as having a majority, we'd have term limits, an amendment outlawing abortion, and another making a balanced budget a requirement.

As you may recall, all of these ideas were put forward when the GOP was in control of both houses of congress, and in some cases, when we also had a GOP President.

It seems as if you are trying to say this is just a problem of the democratic party. I am saying it is, and has been a problem of both parties.

As for the particular focus of James' post, the DADT policy, I find it particularly odd that now that the Dems control congress and the White House, Senator John McCain, who a few years back said in response to this that he would rely on the advice of the military leaders as to which way he would vote, now says he opposes any change, even though the military leadership strongly supports the repeal of DADT.

Doesn't that seem like a pretty political turn around?

Does that mean he was for it, before he was against it?

As you can see, this is not about one party or the other. They are both guilty of the same type of behavior.

For anyone to claim, and I am not saying you are doing so, is just not being honest with the facts.

bluepitbull said...

I won't be baited. The facts are extremely simple. They have a majority. Obama came in and essentially said, "We won, you lost, and you can either get on board or not." Yet they've accomplished nothing.

Assuming that I even like half of the GOP is outrageous. The other piece is that while political parties might shift ideology from time to time, there is a majority of the country that has come forward and said, "This is what we believe." and put their backing with the GOP and the Tea Party. You can think what you want, certainly my sometimes foolish polysci professors make light of them, but the writing is on the wall. If the GOP shifts ideology, they will lose. If the democrats fail to accomplish anything in their four years due to their cowardice over what should be a temporary job representing people, not a career, they will lose their base as well, and I believe that has already started to happen despite the propaganda being floated by liberal pundits.

My point still stands. Saying everybody does it doesn't excuse the behavior of the majority party, and you know it. If anything, they should be above this and try and accomplish their lofty goals, yet they are unable to do anything but throw money around and do studies as to whether dadt should be abolished. Cowardice.

TRUTH 101 said...

Bluepitbull said:

"So, Dave, what you are saying is that the democrat majority won't pass all of these social justice legislations because they are worried about their careers instead of the country? Thank you for admitting that."


He also said:

"Repealing the don't ask, don't tell policy is long overdue for two reasons:"


I agree, admit, to both of BPB's statements.

James' Muse said...

Blue, I don't think Dave is excusing it. He is just pointing out that both sides of the aisle do it, and both sides are wrong for it.

But the GOP does need to change its idealogy-or at least parts of it, such as DADT and gay rights. The GOP also needs to go back to some of its core idealogies, albeit in an updated fashion-i.e. fiscal responsibility, civil rights, big tent, etc. Scott Brown because he was a moderate/progressive Republican. Not that his model will work countrywide-far from it. But we need to become a big tent again-get the GOP to win in traditionally liberal areas with fiscally responsible, small government, but progressive-socially Republicans, while letting other areas, like the Bible Belt, keep their more conservative counterparts.

On DADT, people like McCain are showing why we've earned the "party of no" distinction-and why we must work to lose it. We must be the party of small government and better choices.

bluepitbull said...

It doesn't matter if both sides of the aisle do it, James. That's not really a good excuse when the finger pointing starts.

Again, the people have spoken. The lib pundits can make all of the teabagger jokes they want, but they know the truth (no pun intended). People are starting to get actively involved in politics at all levels including federal and they are starting to hold these representatives responsible, as they should.

For all of the democrats proclamations of repealing dadt, they haven't done a damn thing about it. They've proposed another study, as if there aren't year of empirical evidence to support one side or the other. It's smoke and mirrors and yet another diversionary tactic to cover for unemployment, a failing economy, foreign countries not buying our debt and the healthcare diversion which failed.

In the future, I think we will see a different congress. More like what the forefathers intended: Government by the people and for the people. Not a few with unbridled power.

bluepitbull said...

Also, the GOP will only shift philosophy and ideology if the country demands it. I'm not hearing alot of talk to back up your claim that they need to do anything.

James' Muse said...

Blue-there is plenty of talk within the GOP of changing. Check out RepublicansUnited.US and the Frum Forum, for instance.

The country DID speak, in 2008 when they voted us out and put the Dems in.

Sure, the filibuster-proof majority has been broken-but not the majority itself. And Scott Brown is a moderate/progressive republican.

The Country has spoken, blue. It just did. And, as much as the GOP has been trying to shift hard right, there aren't people flocking to and signing up with the GOP-there is still a lot of people frustrated with both sides of the aisle. Hard right GOPers aren't winning right now-it's the center-right ones like Brown.

bluepitbull said...

The country voted out the corruption. Unfortunately, they voted in more corruption. Don't try to mix facts. Far right means nothing.

James' Muse said...

I'm not mixing facts. The country voted out the GOP because it wasn't working...and even though the Dems aren't working either, they aren't exactly flocking to the GOP right now because people still remember who was just in power.

Hard right does mean something...there are more rightwing politicians, and they usually always win the same states, the same areas.

But to win, we need more Scott Browns, more progressive Repubs, to win in areas traditionally dem controlled. Repubs who will stand for (responsible) change, like repealing DADT.

bluepitbull said...

You're wrong about Brown, and you're wrong about the need for progressives. Progressivism spends money, and creates problems. You know, I'm done with this. You simply don't understand that most Americans don't want what you and you're liberal pundit friends are espousing.

Enjoy the burn. It's comin.

bluepitbull said...

I wrote about this, also. And I think both the conservatives and the liberal got it wrong. Just like the obama election, Brown was voted in not because of his party alignment, but due to punishment of the democrat party. Also, MA didn't want their giant social healthcare system overhauled by big brother.

James' Muse said...

Blue, Progressive is different than liberal. I'm talking about progressive republicans-republicans that believe in the core principles of smaller government and fiscal responsibility-but aren't necessarily chained down by uber conservatives that just want to throw old solutions at new problems.

Brown is a moderate Republican-that's why he won in a traditionally liberal area. If he would have been a more conservative republican, he would not have won. People still remember Bush-and don't want his type back.

Like I said, progressive republicans are different than liberal.

There is a huge need for the GOP to keep its principles, yet change with the times-DADT being a prime example. Those Republicans not wanting to change it-they are being "hard-right"-confusing conservatism with conservation of old traditions. Those that want to change things, like DADT, are being socially "progressive", meaning to move forward. That isn't a liberal idea-it's a human one.