Connect with us

DADT: President Obama, Your Opinion Matters, Please Clarify.

Published

on

Editor’s note:

This guest post by Scott Wooledge was originally published at Daily Kos today and is published here with his permission. Scott Wooledge writes at the Daily Kos under the handle Clarknt67.

Mr President,

There’s a matter your administration has been asked about many times, but still your position remains unclear. Your Press Secretary Robert Gibbs was asked again yesterday in the White House briefing room. Reporters from The Advocate and the Washington Blade pressed Gibbs on a very specific question.

Does [Defense Secretary Gates’ letter last Friday] mean the president is ruling out an endorsement of repeal this year as part of the defense authorization bill?

Gibbs: Let me get some guidance on that. I don’t know the answer to that.

I’m a little confused why your administration still seems confused. Why is the White House is still not sure of on its feelings about a plan that according to Barney Frank has been on the table since at least November, 2009? Since taking office, your administration has had 15 months to consider legislative strategy for DADT repeal.

[A video of the awkward exchange can be found here.] Why does Gibbs have to check and get back to people still? This wasn’t a new question to the administration. Not even within the time frame of this very week. There was an uproard on Friday that your adminstration was asked to respond to. The Associated Press reported that your Secretary of Defense attempted to shut down Congressional efforts to repeal DADT in this legislative session.

In a strongly worded letter obtained by The Associated Press, Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen told the House Armed Services Committee that forcing policy changes on the military before it’s ready would be a mistake.

So many people appropriately assumed, surely Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates is speaking on behalf of the administration. But then, the White House response that very same evening was confusing, not clarifying:

The President’s commitment to repealing Don’t Ask Don’t Tell is unequivocal. This is not a question of if, but how. That’s why we’ve said that the implementation of any congressional repeal will be delayed until the DOD study of how best to implement that repeal is completed.  The President is committed to getting this done both soon and right.

No one is questioning you want to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” Indeed, we agree, the question is indeed “how,” as in, what legislative strategy do you endorse? The prevailing wisdom is that attaching it to the military spending budget this month is the most efficient plan that ensures its successful passage. But your statement neither confirms not denies your support for this plan. By “soon” do you mean in the month of May? Please clear up what “soon” means.

One reason many people are confused is because there has been much reporting and signs that you are actually opposed to repealing DADT in 2010. At one point, Barney Frank declared outright “That’s because they don’t want it done this year, not because they want it done separately.” Frank later said he “misspoke.” But he’s stood by his assessment that your administration is “ducking” the issue and their message is “muddled about when we should move.”

Some of the mixed messaging we’re receiving:

• Administration Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has sent letters to Congress stating administration opposition to Congress acting in 2010. Source.

• Administration Press Secretary Robert Gibbs spoke from the White House Press podium and was reported as opposing a vote to repeal in 2010. Source.

• White House correspondent Kerry Eleveld has reported, White House Deputy Chief of Staff Jim Messina told repeal advocates in a meeting just four days after the State of the Union address, repeal was not going to happen in 2010. Source.

• White House has not invited Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, the most powerful, credible and vocal lobbying organization on the DADT issue, to talks about repeal for more than a year. Source.

•White House has tasked its Congressional liaisons with telling members of Congress “No vote in 2010.” Source.

You’re the President of the United States, your opinion matters a great deal. You are the leader of our country. You are the leader of the Democratic party.  Your Secretary of Defense has instructed Congress not to attach the repeal language to the Defense Authorization Bill in the month of May. Many others disagree, among them Governor Howard Dean, Senators Carl Levin (MI), Joe Lieberman (CT), Mark Udall (CO), Kirsten Gillibrand (NY), Reps Nancy Pelosi (CA), Patrick Murphy (PA), Barney Frank (MA), Jarod Polis (CO), and all the Veterans and LGBT advocacy groups that would appreciate having a voice in the matter.

And the fact remains, the administration still has never declared definitively, publicly, you do want repeal legislation to move forward in 2010. Barney Frank has said.

“His not being for it will give people an excuse to not vote for it. … the President’s refusal to call for repeal this year is a problem.”

title=

Many people are confused on what to think. Just a few months ago, you stood before Congress and the nation and you said,

“This year, I will work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are.”

Because now—the month of May—is the time to “work with Congress” and the moment is passing very quickly.

As Governor Howard Dean said, appearing on MSNBC’s the Rundown on May 4, “There’s no reason not to do this” and attaching it to the Defense Authorization Act—this month—is the way to go. The video is below, the segment begins at the 4:15 mark.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32545640

“There’s no reason not to do this. And we have a vehicle. Carl Levin thinks he’s got the votes for this on the Defense Authorization Act, and the Defense Authorization Act has to pass. The Republicans are not going to filibuster the Defense Authorization Act, so I think now is the time. We may not have the votes for this in six months, so we have to do this now.”

Can you please help change Carl Levin’s assessment from “he thinks he has the votes” into “”he KNOWS he has the votes?”  Frankly, we don’t see any evidence of you doing any work with Congress.

Can you please tell us if you’ve called Jim Webb and asked him, personally, for his support? You were not shy about asking the LGBT community for their support 2007 and 2008. Can you tell us if you’ve called Evan Bayh and told him he’d have the party’s eternal gratitude for helping out? Can you tell us if you’ve appealed to Robert Byrd that he can help usher in a new era of diversity and inclusiveness? Have you made a bipartisan appeal to Scott Brown?

Have you called Ike Skelton and asked him what the party can do to for him ifhe’d please stop fighting Patrick Murphy’s attempts to attach repeal in the House Military Spending Budget?

If you are, indeed, supportive of repeal in 2010, I call upon you to state so clearly in public from the bully pulpit you command and without any ambiguity or confusion. If you oppose it, your honesty would also be appreciated, and your friends and allies in fighting for repeal would like to hear an alternate plan articulated that we can consider.

Thank you.

title=

To raise awareness to the need for Presidential leadership, DADT repeal activists have launched “Stories from the Frontlines: Letters to President Barack Obama.”The new media campaign launched in partnership with Servicemember’s Legal Defense Network,is intended to underscore the urgent need for congressional action and presidential leadership at this critical point in the fight to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT).

Every weekday morning as we approach the markup of the Defense Authorization bill in the Senate and House Armed Services Committees, SLDN and a coalition of voices supporting repeal, will share an open letter to the President from a person impacted by this discriminatory law.  We are urging the President to include repeal in the Administration’s defense budget recommendations, but also to voice his support as we work to muster the 15 critical votes needed on the Senate Armed Services Committee to include repeal.  The Defense Authorization bill represents the best legislative vehicle to bring repeal to the president’s desk.  It also was the same vehicle used to pass DADT in 1993.  By working together, we can help build momentum to get the votes!  We ask that you forward and post these personal stories.

Participating blogs: 365 Gay, The Advocate, AfterElton, AmericaBlog , Ameriqueer, AKAWilliam, The Bilerico Project, BoxTurtleBulletin, BrandFabulousness, The Daily Kos, David In Manhattan, David Mixner, Fired Up Missouri, GoodAsYou, HRCBackStory, Kenneth In The 212, Lez Get Real, LGBTPOV, Michael in Norfolk, Mike Gets Real, Mile High Gay Guy, Open Left, Page One Q, Pam’s House Blend, RepealNow, SayenCroWolf, Seattle PI Stepforward, Signorile’s The Gist, The New Civil Rights Movement, The Queer Times, Towleroad, We Give A Damn.

Today’s Letter: 9/11 Patriot: “The Army taught me honesty and integrity, then forced me to lie.”

title=

May 6, 2010

President Barack H. Obama

The White House

1600 Pennsylvania Avenue Northwest

Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President,

My name is Anthony Moll and I am a bisexual veteran.

I served for eight years under the discriminatory “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law that has failed our nation.   I left the service just 10 weeks ago, and I can now say: this is the time, Mr. President, to push ahead and end this law.

The Senate Armed Services Committee is just a couple weeks away from holding a key vote on including repeal in the Defense budget.  The vote will be close.  Please, do whatever you can.

I have been proud to serve my country since joining the Army shortly after the attacks on September 11, 2001.  My proudest moment was raising my hand and volunteering to serve our country in its time of need.

When I enlisted in 2002, I knew what DADT said, but nothing could prepare me for what it meant.

I had never been closeted about my sexual orientation so joining meant not only keeping quiet, but also being asked to lie to those whom already knew.  While my leaders were instilling the values of honesty and integrity in me, the law in place was forcing me to do the opposite.

I knew that despite serving with distinction as a military police officer protecting fellow soldiers and their families from harm, I could face expulsion.  During my service I was hand-picked as a Phoenix Raven, an Air Force program in which only a handful of soldiers are asked to participate.

While serving as a handler in the military’s working dog program, I worked with the Secret Service in detecting explosives – working to protect you.

In 2008, I was recognized as my installation’s Non-Commissioned Officer of the Year and Joint Service Member of the Year.  Despite this distinction, the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law treated me as a second-class citizen.

While I excelled at every turn, this law forced me to be dishonest with my peers, my friends and my community.  Our nation’s heroes should not be forced to carry the burden of serving in silence when we need our troops keenly focused on their missions.

In the meantime, I’m not sitting on the sidelines.  I am now working at the Human Rights Campaign on its efforts to repeal DADT now.  But advocacy alone won’t change the status quo.

Mr. President, tell Congress to move on repeal.  Please allow my brothers and sisters-in-arms to live up to the Army values of respect, honor and integrity.  Don’t let another life be ruined by a failed policy that hurts our nation as well as our heroes.

Mr. President, lift the ban.

Respectfully,

Former Staff Sergeant Anthony Moll

United States Army

CALL TO ACTION!

Fate of repeal will be decided in the next 30 days. As time grows short, repeal advocates have multiple strategies are in place. One thing they all share is a need to hear from the public the time is now. Now is the time for LGBT allies to get off the fence and call for equality for their fellow Americans.

• Contact the White House: The Servicemember’s Legal Defense Network has put out an action item: Not Another Year. They are asking people to call the White House and tell our Commander in Chief to call for repeal in 2010, repeal can’t wait until 2011. The moment is now. They say: “Our Congressional allies are not giving up. SLDN isn’t giving up. Tell President Obama not to give up either. Call the White House today. (202) 456-1414”

• Contact your Senators: Tell them to support adding repeal to the Senate Defense Spending Budget: these Senators are most key: Bill Nelson, Ben Nelson, Evan Bayh, Jim Webb, Robert Byrd and Scott Brown. But call them all. Show them there’s a grassroots movement to vote now. SLDN contact tool here.

• Contact your House Representatives: Tell them to support Representative Patrick Murphy’s plan to offer DADT repeal legislation as a floor amendment to the military bill. SLDN contact tool here.

• Contact Senate Armed Services Committee Chairmain Carl Levin (D-MI) and tell him Military Budget Attachment is the way to go. His office in Washington can be reached at: (202) 224-6221

• Become a citizen co-sponsor of repeal at Senator Udall’s site.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

OPINION

‘Stop Bringing Up Nazis and Hitler’: Marjorie Taylor Greene Smacked Down by Democrats

Published

11 hours ago

on

April 17, 2024

By

U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene was strongly criticized by two Democratic Congressmen after the Georgia Republican’s remarks about “Ukrainian Nazis” and her attempts to paint Ukrainians as Nazis.

“Stop bringing up Nazis and Hitler,” U.S. Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) urged, after Greene’s remarks suggesting there is a large Nazi problem in Ukraine, during a House Oversight Committee hearing. “The only people who know about Nazis and Hitler are the 10 million people and their families who lost their loved ones, generations of people who were wiped out. It is enough of this disgusting behavior, using Nazis as propaganda. You want to talk about Nazis, get yourself over to the Holocaust Museum. You go see what Nazis did. It’s despicable that we use that and we allow it and we sit here like somehow it’s regular.”

Moskowitz began by telling the Committee his “grandparents escaped the Holocaust.”

“So my grandmother was part of the Kindertransport out of Germany. Her parents were killed in Auschwitz. My grandfather, her husband escaped Poland, from the pogroms,” he continued.

READ MORE: ‘Used by the Russians’: Moskowitz Mocks Comer’s Biden Impeachment Failure

“There are no concentration camps in Ukraine. They’re not taking babies and shooting them in the air ’cause they’re Jewish. There’s no gas chambers. There’s no ovens. They’re not railing people in, they’re not ripping gold out of people’s mouth. They’re not taking stuff out of their home. They’re not trying to erase a people. They’re Ukrainians.”

Greene’s remarks over the weekend had caused anger.

“It’s antisemitic to make Israeli aid contingent on funding Ukrainian Nazis,” Congresswoman Greene declared Sunday from her official government social media account, as legislation to support Israel, Ukraine, and Taiwan moved to the top of Speaker Mike Johnson’s priority list in the wake of Iran’s attack on Israel. Her implication appeared to be Ukrainians are Nazis – a Putin talking point.

Greene on Wednesday spent several minutes again implying there are many Nazis in Ukraine, as she was refuted by a top scholar, Yale professor of history Timothy Snyder. Dr. Snyder is the author of a dozen books, including two on Nazis and the Holocaust, and is an expert on the Holocaust, Central and Eastern Europe, the Soviet Union, and serves on the Council on Foreign Relations.

Responding to Greene’s remarks, Snyder told the lawmakers, “no far-right party has ever crossed three percent” in a Ukrainian election.

READ MORE: ‘Scared to Death’: GOP Ex-Congressman Brings Hammer Down on ‘Weak’ Trump

Greene was also criticized by U.S. Rep. Maxwell Frost (D-FL), who called her out for her “hypocrisy” and reminded her that in 2022 she “spoke at event led by white supremacists.”

That event was hosted by white supremacist Nick Fuentes:

Watch the videos above or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Big Journalism Fail’: Mainstream Media Blasted Over Coverage of Historic Trump Trial

Continue Reading

News

‘Used by the Russians’: Moskowitz Mocks Comer’s Biden Impeachment Failure

Published

13 hours ago

on

April 17, 2024

By

After Democratic House Oversight Committee Ranking Member Jamie Raskin blasted Republican Chairman Jim Comer, declaring “somebody needs therapy here” during a heated verbal brawl Wednesday afternoon, U.S. Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL) mockingly urged committee members to come together to “begin Comer’s therapy session.”

In a viral three-minute walkthrough of the discredited far-right wing chairman’s efforts, including making false claims and use, as Moskowitz noted, Russian disinformation to try to build a case against President Joe Biden, the Florida Democrat appeared to put the final nail in the impeachment coffin.

Moskowitz told the committee members Chairman Comer has to “face the fact that he was taken by the Russians,” and “was used by the Russians.” He also noted the committee has “already lost” Comer “to Russian propaganda.”

“I mean, we got to build a forcefield around the Chairman to make sure we don’t lose him to Chinese propaganda as well.”

READ MORE: ‘Big Journalism Fail’: Mainstream Media Blasted Over Coverage of Historic Trump Trial

Moskowitz made clear, through his well-known wit, that Comer “no longer has impeachment” as an option to use against President Biden.

The video has gone viral, with over 175,000 views in just over one hour.

Read the transcript of Moskowitz’s remarks and watch the video below or at this link.

“Let me start by saying, obviously Chairman Comer’s not here, but I think in light of what we witnessed earlier, I think it’s important that together as a committee that we begin, Chairman Comer’s therapy session, right. You know, a member of the other side wanted to confirm what the title of the hearing was, right, Chinese propaganda. Well, we know the title of the hearing certainly isn’t about impeachment anymore. And Chairman Comer has suffered tremendous loss, and we all know in our life, what it’s like to suffer tremendous loss. There’s all sorts of different stages of grief and that’s the loss obviously, of his of his impeachment hearing. And everyone deals with that in different ways and sometimes it takes time to grieve and struggle and and fill that hole that void that now exists now that he no longer has impeachment.”

“The only way we as a committee are going to help Chairman Comer get better is we have to get to the root cause. Right? So for today’s therapy session, okay, I want to talk about denial. Right? The denial that the impeachment hearings are over, and the denial, obviously, that he started with the 1023 form, which was Russian disinformation. And so, you know, Chairman Comer’s psychology teaches us that, you know, someone might be like him, using denial as a defense mechanism. And signs include that you refuse to talk about the problem. You find ways to justify your behavior, you blame other people or outside forces for causing the problem. You persist in your behavior by consequences. You promise to address the problem, maybe in the future, or you avoid thinking about the problem. And so in addition to these signs that Chairman comer has been displaying, as we saw at the beginning, he also might be feeling hopeless or helpless.”

READ MORE: ‘Scared to Death’: GOP Ex-Congressman Brings Hammer Down on ‘Weak’ Trump

“I just want the chairman to know that we’re pulling for him. We really we really are. I know, I know. It’s been hard to become someone who was used by the Russians. But the good news is, is that he’s this hearing today on Chinese propaganda, because we’ve already lost him to Russian propaganda. I mean, we got to build a forcefield around the chairman to make sure we don’t lose him to Chinese propaganda, as well.”

“In fact, you can see behind me, these are quotes from the chairman, Chairman Comer. Every single solitary time and there are hundreds more that he went on TV in interviews and talked about this 1023 form, which was all Russian disinformation. But we gotta make the Chairman understand that it’s going to be okay. We will get him through this, but he’s got to recognize, gotta recognize that denial is not just a river in Egypt. He’s gonna have to face the fact that he was taken by the Russians.”

Continue Reading

OPINION

‘Big Journalism Fail’: Mainstream Media Blasted Over Coverage of Historic Trump Trial

Published

16 hours ago

on

April 17, 2024

By

The media’s ability to shape public opinion is well-documented, and by the end of the second day of the first criminal trial in history of a former U.S. president critics are slamming the content, framing, and focus of mainstream media organizations. The biggest concerns: refusing to cover the former president’s apparent inability to stay awake in court, too much identifying information of potential and chosen jurors, and even subtle descriptions that can be used to feed into false perceptions the trial is “unfair” or, as the ex-president likes to say, a “scam.”

Overnight, CNN’s Oliver Darcy’s “Reliable Sources” newsletter blasted mainstream media outlets that “strangely show little interest in reporting on Donald Trump’s courtroom naps.”

“Imagine, for a moment, if President Joe Biden were to be caught openly sleeping at an important hearing,” Darcy posits. Trump was caught “nodding” off repeatedly several times over the first two days of trial (there is not trial Wednesdays). “Then imagine it were to occur at another important hearing the next day. Not only would right-wing media outlets like Fox News run wild with coverage questioning his fitness for office, mainstream news organizations would no doubt also treat the snooze fest as a serious news story. But, for some unknown reason, Donald Trump falling asleep at his historic criminal trial in New York (as he apparently did, again, on Tuesday) has been met with a rather muted response.”

READ MORE: SCOTUS Justices Appear to Want to Toss Obstruction Charges Against Some J6 Defendants: Experts

Noting, “It’s important,” Darcy asks, “why has much of the press fallen asleep at the wheel?” and serves up some examples – or lack thereof.

“ABC News and NBC News didn’t even bother mentioning it on their evening newscasts and many major outlets haven’t even filed straight stories on it. To be frank, if not for The NYT’s Maggie Haberman reporting on the matter Tuesday, it’s unclear whether the public — which is relying on news organizations to be its eyes and ears in the courtroom, given cameras are barred — would know about it.”

“It’s all the more bizarre given that Trump has made attacking ‘sleepy Joe’ a central tenet of his campaign, framing the president as lacking the stamina to serve in the nation’s highest office. Which is to say, the fact that Trump is the one apparently unable to stay awake in his own criminal trial isn’t a trivial story.”

Jennifer Schulze, a media critic who was a Chicago Sun-Times executive producer, WGN news director, and adjunct college professor of journalism, pointing to Darcy’s criticism, calls it “a big journalism fail.”

READ MORE: ‘Scared to Death’: GOP Ex-Congressman Brings Hammer Down on ‘Weak’ Trump

The ex-president is facing 34 felony counts for falsification of business records when he paid hush money to an adult film actress then allegedly tried to cover it up, which some say is election interference.

New York State Supreme Court Judge Juan Merchan is overseeing the Trump trial, and ordered the identities of all jurors and prospective jurors to remain anonymous. Trump has a proven track record of alleged attempts to intimidate witnesses, judges, prosecutors, and others involved in his trials.

Some are concerned the media went too far in posting and publishing some possibly identifying information internet sleuths could use to piece together their names.

“There is seriously far, far too much identifying information about prospective jurors, several of whom are now empaneled, coming out in the press,” warned attorney and author Luppe B. Luppen.

Here’s how Fox News host Jesse Watters used that information to target one empaneled juror, while attempting to discredit the trial.

Fox News’ Sean Hannity went after “Juror Number One,” who is the foreperson.

It is not just Fox News targeting jurors.

Even The New York Times’ coverage of jurors drew the ire of critics.

READ MORE: ‘Your Client Is a Criminal Defendant’: Judge Denies Trump Request to Skip Trial for SCOTUS

Here’s how The Times’ Jonah Bromwich reported on the jury foreperson:

“The foreperson who was just selected — that’s juror one, the de facto leader of the group who will likely help steer deliberations — works in sales and enjoys the outdoors. He is originally from Ireland, but will help decide the former American president’s fate.”

University of Wisconsin—Madison professor of political science, who has a Ph.D. in Government, criticized the Times’ reporting.

“100% certain if the foreperson were native born, they would not have written this sentence and used the formulation of ‘former president’ subtly implying the foreperson from Ireland is somehow not a real American.”

Watch the videos above or at this link.

 

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.