Obama camp reiterates commitment to repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"

[Grendel]

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- In an overlooked YouTube video posted on Friday, a spokesman for Barack Obama said the president-elect is committed to ending the policy that bars openly gay men and women from serving in the U.S. armed forces.

In a response to a question on the Web site Change.gov asking whether Obama would get rid of the "don't ask, don't tell" policy, Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs said: "You don't hear politicians give a one-word answer much. But it's 'Yes.'"

Gibbs on Wednesday expanded on his answer, saying, "There are many challenges facing our nation now and the president-elect is focused first and foremost on jump-starting this economy.

"So not everything will get done in the beginning but he's committed to following through" with ending the policy against being openly gay in the military.

The policy bans military recruiters or authorities from asking someone about his or her sexual preference, but also prohibits a service member from revealing if he or she is gay.

During the presidential campaign, Obama said he would work to end the policy, but because it is dictated by federal law, he can not end it unilaterally.

Congress must pass legislation overturning the policy, which was put into place at the beginning of the Clinton administration. Former President Bill Clinton tried to overturn the "don't ask, don't tell" policy when he took office in 1993, but he was strenuously opposed by the military leadership.

In the last Congress, a bill was introduced in the House by Rep. Martin Meehan, D-Massachusetts, that would have implemented "a policy of nondiscrimination on the basis of sexual orientation."

The bill had 149 co-sponsors, but it never came up for a full vote in the House. It has yet to be re-introduced in the new Congress, which began last week.

"The key here is to get bills that pass the House and the Senate, that we can get to President-elect Obama to sign, and I think that we can do that, certainly, the first year of the administration," one of the co-sponsors, Democratic Rep. Ellen Tauscher of California, told CNN in November.

Public opinion appears to be shifting on the matter. A CNN/Opinion Research Corp. poll conducted December 19-21 found that 81 percent of respondents believe openly gay people should be allowed to serve in the U.S. military, while 17 percent said they shouldn't. The poll's margin of error was plus-or-minus 3 percentage points.

The chairman of the joint chiefs of staff at the time, retired Gen. Colin Powell, also believes it is time to reevaluate the policy -- although he has not said he favors its reversal.

"It's been 15 years and attitudes have changed," Powell told CNN in December. "And, so, I think it is time for the Congress, since it is their law, to have a full review of it. And I'm quite sure that's what President-elect Obama will want to do."Would love to see the dozens of Arabic Linguists (http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/05/23/america/NA-GEN-US-Military-Gays.php) who were discharged under DADT brought before Congress to confront any member arguing against the repeal.

[Elduardo]

Strange that the article mentions that Bill Clinton tried to overturn the policy in 1993 but fails to mention that Bill Clinton originally signed it into law.

[Grendel]

Strange that the article mentions that Bill Clinton tried to overturn the policy in 1993 but fails to mention that Bill Clinton originally signed it into law.

"Congress must pass legislation overturning the policy, which was put into place at the beginning of the Clinton administration."

[slimeisacharacter]

Running out of ex-cons and high-school drop outs to fill in the ranks and the fine-line they are walking with current enlisted contracts extended duty loopholes is getting too much attention these days. Little surprise they are edging out prior regulations to widen the recruiting pool further. Can't stay in several wars without the rank and file, after all.

[Luris Blear]

Do you really mean to state that Obama will continue fighting both wars until absolute victory has been reached? (I hope that he not only does, but finds a shorter and healthier path to victory where others see none.)

There are people who believe the military is doing honest good, and enlisted on that belief. That statement belittles them.

It also associates homosexuals with "ex-cons and high-school drop outs." That's just wrong.

[JerkyPuck]

I never really understood what sexuality had to do with wanting to fight for your country in the first place.

[Luris Blear]

Me neither, Jerky.

Or fighting for a paycheck, fighting to earn a career in security or medicine or electronics, fighting in the name of George Bush.

Individuals fight for their own reasons.

[Officefan]

It's based completely on the prejudiced assumptions that gays are too "sissy" to withstand combat, and straight soldiers will have to guard their buttholes in the foxholes. Or perhaps anything that can isn't outright condemnation of homosexuality will be a point of contention with socially conservative repubs and dems. It's insane to me that such blatant ignorance drives top level policy, even if it was 15 ago.

[Grendel]

There are people who believe the military is doing honest good, and enlisted on that belief. That statement belittles them.

It also associates homosexuals with "ex-cons and high-school drop outs." That's just wrong.Absolutely.

While the "adjustments" that have been made to the recruiting process are certainly discussion-worthy in their own right, "filling the ranks with ex-cons and high school dropouts" is nether particularly accurate description, nor one befitting individuals putting themselves in harms' way.

[slimeisacharacter]

Do you really mean to state that Obama will continue fighting both wars until absolute victory has been reached? (I hope that he not only does, but finds a shorter and healthier path to victory where others see none.)

There are people who believe the military is doing honest good, and enlisted on that belief. That statement belittles them.

It also associates homosexuals with "ex-cons and high-school drop outs." That's just wrong.

Long few days, since my last post. Anyways...

Yep, I honestly believe we are not leaving war any time soon, doesn't matter if he wants to get out or not. We are not exactly at a state were we can simply drop everything and pull out tomarrow. We're stuck in war for at least another year or so. The only thing he can really decide is if we are pulling out in a year or a decade and plan accordingly.

Take the statement as you will. Most of the "better grade" of the recruiting pool was already enlisted or on their way out (and likely being screwed by extended tour loopholes). They needed the numbers and the only way to do that was cut the edges of standards and recruit ex-cons and high-school drop out. No belittling there, thats just what happened.

As for the association, again nothing wrong with stating the facts. Sexual nature was one of the restrictions of recruiting next to released criminals and the unschooled (that a word?), granted a less enforced and a hazier restriction. The only insult or "wrong" thing about it is whoever is making the decisions decided to have "dont ask/dont tell" policy be the LAST restriction to be lifted rather than the first. That can also be taken as the military valuing ex-cons and morons higher than homosexuals.

Any better?

[lunatic]

You guys would dance around and swimming in PC bullcrap instead of analyzing what could be a real problem here:

Straight guys could have a confrontational relationship with the openly gay ones. It's a natural thing - you can't change it with any new policies.

The question of discipline is very important in the military.

[levil666]

Straight guys could have a confrontational relationship with the openly gay ones. It's a natural thing - you can't change it with any new policies.

The question of discipline is very important in the military.

Homophobia is a disease, for one thing, and for another, you aren't going to find many "openly gay men" signing up for the front lines, nor are they going to be open in a hostile environment. In any professional environment, sexuality is side lined, and I don't think you will find soldiers running around with rainbow ribbons anytime soon, due to the hostility bread by homophobia. On a second note, one big department hurting from the Don't ASk Don't Tell policy is our intelligence department. Lots of Farsi and Arabic translators are being discharged due to their homosexuality, and it is not only wrong to them, but also our country. Homosexuals are the final group of PEOPLE that it is legal to discriminate against, and it is time for that to end. I for one am glad that Obama is actually sticking to his guns. It is time for our country to progress through the xenophobia that has plagued it for so long.

[lunatic]

Homophobia is a disease, for one thing, and for another, you aren't going to find many "openly gay men" signing up for the front lines, nor are they going to be open in a hostile environment. In any professional environment, sexuality is side lined, and I don't think you will find soldiers running around with rainbow ribbons anytime soon, due to the hostility bread by homophobia. On a second note, one big department hurting from the Don't ASk Don't Tell policy is our intelligence department. Lots of Farsi and Arabic translators are being discharged due to their homosexuality, and it is not only wrong to them, but also our country. Homosexuals are the final group of PEOPLE that it is legal to discriminate against, and it is time for that to end. I for one am glad that Obama is actually sticking to his guns. It is time for our country to progress through the xenophobia that has plagued it for so long.

My questions:

Why are you 100% sure the gays are ALWAYS the victims? Then what about the permanent excuse the liberals use to justify indifferent majority ruled by aggressive minority (any type or group) in oppressive societies? So, ALWAYS the victims?

All people in your opinion can put duties ahead their feelings and emotions? What about "fools in love" then (I don't want to go as far as love in this context)?

[levil666]

:hmmm: I detect someone is playing devil's advocate... that aside, do you see homosexuals as a majority in our society? It is scorned by our society and its leaders, and therefore, they are a downtrodden minority.

With that said, I understand your argument about an "agressive minority", but when was the last time a reverse hate crime was commited by a gay man/woman upon a straight man/woman? Moreso over, how many straight rape victims have come forward about being sodomized by a gay attacker? You can argue the shame factor into this all you want, but men who are raped in prison are not the victims of a homosexual attack, but of an attack by an individual with power issues, and they need a victim to prey upon.

Onto the military...

1.) Gays are always going to be a minority, and they will more than likely be silenced by intimidation for sometime.
2.) Barrack relationships are strictly forbidden.
3.) On a comical note, aren't our troops still fed a form of salt peeter, to cause impotence, and drive down the sexual urge?

Your thoughts Lunatic?

[Grendel]

You guys would dance around and swimming in PC bullcrap instead of analyzing what could be a real problem here:

Straight guys could have a confrontational relationship with the openly gay ones. It's a natural thing - you can't change it with any new policies.

The question of discipline is very important in the military.First of all the "confrontational relationship" you cite is not a "natural thing." It's a ignorant, highly undisciplined reaction.

Disciplined individuals don't allow "confrontational relationships" to develop, much less become a problem based simply on what a peer does in his/her personal life.

[Luris Blear]

Dancing around, being politically correct?

Two human being who choose to mutually improve each others' lives -- by choice -- should not be punished for making their lives happier. Be it through employment or through their choice of partners, I can not approve of treating someone as less than human for making the most of his time on earth.

Political correctness is a foolish ambition of never offending anyone, whether they deserve it or not. Sanity is saying that a soldier's merit should be based on his ability to engage in conflict and follow orders.

[toxicangel19]

1 st of all I know GAY people currently serving and they are cool "Jerky come join us" and are not afraid and dont whine and complain.

2nd of all IM NOT a high school drop out nor are the majority of military personal I know. A lot of actually have come in with degrees. I cannot count how many Student Naval Aviator candidates come through here every month whom already have a B.A of some kind, also I know for a fact here in the NAVY they constantly encourage you to get an education and better yourself and you can't even advance in certain ranks unless you have at least an associates degree. You can't be a Master Cheif without an B.A and you can't even be an Ensign without an Associates or a B.A.

3rd of all I say the more the merrier, maybe I can get my best friend and her girlfriend to join now! She is one tough chick! :bigthumbup:

[toxicangel19]

Booberry you can come too!!

[slimeisacharacter]

Love these topics...

Some people are putting far too much faith in humanity in general. Not everyone can control their basic nature through discipline. The basic nature I refer to being "fear the unknown and different". There is only the degree in which we control those instincts. Flat out hostility or a simple flinch when a certain person walks by you... degrees of control. *shrug*

We are what we are, no matter how many times we are smacked on the nose with a news paper to be taught differently. :lol:

[JerkyPuck]

I, for one think I could control my sexual urges if I were dodging gunfire....I'm kinda tired of the whole demonizing gay people thing. It's not like we're walking around naked under trenchcoats waiting to attack. And toxic.....I would join you and TOTALLY respect what you do, but I think I'd be more comfortable entertaining the troops at a USO show than joing the ranks. Thanks for the invite though! MUAH!

[ButteredMuffin]

I dont understand what the big deal is. There are A LOT of people in the military who can't talk about many aspects of their life because of the rules and regulations put in place. It's just something I've learned to deal with. I'm not close minded by any means. I believe too that people should be free to be who they are, as long as it's not hurting anyone else and it makes them happy. On the opposite end, I can also understand why they have that rule set in place. Like it or not, many people are "homophobic". Some people have had a negative experience with someone that caused them to be increasingly uncomfortable with a person being gay. The majority of the time, we are split up: Males in male barracks, females in female barracks. Or atleast on different floors. You're living in close proximity to a lot of different kinds of people. As I said before, like it or not, if someone were to be openly gay, and had a roommate that were a homophobe, theres no telling what kind of crazy shit could go on.

I dont think it's ever going to be something that everyone agrees on. Just another one of those things we just kind of deal with.