Tweet
Almost the same slop served, different day. You’d think after the President left the strong impression that he was moving on DADT repeal, and along with news that Obama and Sen Joe Lieberman were commiserating on legislation, we’d learn something new. Unfortunately, Press Secretary Robert Gibbs had the rusted key turned in his back to belch out the same tired song, albeit with a tiny ray of light signifying he needs to come up with a better answer to replace the FAILing chip in his back.
Q Senator Lieberman’s office confirmed yesterday that he has had talks with the White House about a “don’t ask, don’t tell” repeal bill. Have you asked him to carry the bill, to take the lead on the bill? And have you been in discussions with any other senators about doing the same?
MR. GIBBS: Let me ask. I meant to do this last week, and I’ll find out that answer today.
Q The President pledged on Saturday night to repeal — or to end “don’t ask, don’t tell” was his exact words. Do you have a — I mean, is there any sense of timing on that? Do you guys have any sense of when you’re going to start moving forward with legislation, et cetera?
MR. GIBBS: I don’t. Let me get a better answer. I should have done this last week. I’ll reiterate again, the President obviously, as he said on Saturday, believes that the policy is unfair. He said that when he was a candidate for the Senate in 2003 and 2004, as well as a candidate for President. He has a strong belief on this. I also think — we talked a little bit about this Friday — I think also Saturday gave the President an opportunity to reiterate another important priority of his that will soon become law, and that’s hate crimes legislation, which is long overdue in ensuring people protection.
Well we can only hope that The Advocate’s Kerry Eleveld, our voice in the press room, will receive that extra information from Gibbs before it ends up at the bottom of his info pile and forgets until he’s asked again.
11 Comments
Oh, so old and tiringPam, thanks so much for keeping the pressure on Obama but I think our efforts will now be better spent elsewhere. Namely, let’s move on to Pelosi and Reid and others. If they don’t listen and act, let’s move on down the line. At the same time, keeping score on who supports us and who, like Obama, just gives us more bs excuses and fluffy campaign speeches, months after November.
Come the end of 2010 we should see some new faces emerging from the crowd who will challenge the status quo with their candidacy for the Presidency, Senate, House and other local ‘lesser’ seats.
It is time to look elsewhere for support as these WH guys are full of Hubris and are not about to change.
I say, lead, follow, or get out of our way. Since they will not lead or follow, that only leaves one last option…get out of our way.
I’ll listen to Obama…and keep the pressure on. I think he was very wise to say that to effect change, you have to keep the pressure on. We have to make a loud case for why this is important NOW. Until we make Obama and other Democrats uncomfortable, nothing will change. Exhibit A: see above.
this isn’t about ObamaIt’s about Gibbs. He’s been a significant problem in the communications chain, even to the point of disbelief – claiming he hadn’t heard either President Clinton’s or Jimmy Carter’s comments about marriage equality. He has no credibility and that’s problematic if he’s the voice of the administration.
Reid and Pelosi deserve equal scrutiny because they are the ones who need to get those bills past; we’ve done plenty of spineless Dems on the Hill posts as well.
Gibbs needs to be schooled by Joe Jervis and Mike SignorileThis dude is either clueless, stupid, retarded, drunk, or suffering from dementia. What is it that he cannot remember something from day to day? Seems to me that he has some kind of homophobic reaction every time someone asks him a question about our legislative priorities.
He knows the various answers to give, as well as the answers to keep quiet on.
Question from a reporter: Mr. Gibbs, what is the President’s Plan on doing away with the sad laws of DADT?
Mr. Gibbs: There is a high pressure system over the Rocky Mountains just north west of Fort Collins which is bringing very cold temperatures all along the foot hills of Colorado.
Reporter: Mr. Gibbs, that tells us a lot of what is going on with the weather in those areas. What does that have to do regarding the repeal of DADT?
Mr. Gibbs: Well, when we can nail down how the weather affects these areas we might have a better system in place to honestly answer questions on DADT.
So for now, plan your week and weekend to enjoy some snow in the Rockies, but also plan for no snow just incase our method is completely wrong.
Say what?
This isn’t about Obama?
This isn’t about Obama???
The only way that could be true is if
1. the subject were not one as frequently in the press as DADT. I’d cut even this pompous puppet some slack for not knowing more about a subject that only the questioner really cares about; Or
2. this was sometime in January when Gibbs appeared at his first press conference; Or
3. if Gibbs were the first Press Secretary to the President of the United States who entirely free to do his job however he would like rather than programmed to the nearest syllable and verbal pause on how to say or NOT say whatever POTUS wants.
The fish rots from the top down and this one stinks to high heaven.
As for whom we should or should not be focusing on, as for imagining that the sole reason DADT repeal is in the ditch and gays are still being kicked after it even as I write is Congress, I respectfully remind that:
1. On November 29, 2007, Candidate Obama released a statement to the LGBT community promising, among other things, that
2. Senate Armed Service Committee Chair Carl Levin, one of the few Senators to have tried to stop DADT before it was even voted on in 1993, said in June that
3. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, as well as 77 members of the House of Representatives, have asked the President for just that leadership to help them overcome their colleagues influenced by their own and/or their constituents’ homophobia, and to freeze discharges under one or more of his LEGAL options until repeal can happen. As have SLDN, HRC, NGLTF, Knights Out, AVER, and Servicemembers United. To the best of my knowledge, Reid has yet to receive even the courtesy of a personal reply, as has Cong. Alcee Hastings and his 76 colleagues.
4. The Obama Administration pressured both Cong. Hastings and Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand into withdrawing their efforts to end discharges through amendments to defense appropriations bills.
5. Though he needs NO action by the US Senate and/or House in order to do it, the President not only refuses to use but pretends he has no unilateral and unequivocal power given to his office by Congress in 1983 in the form of 10 United States Code § 12305 – Authority of the President to Suspend Certain Laws Relating to Promotion, Retirement, and Separation – to, despite ANY law, stop the discharge of ANY servicemember in the name of national security.
6. In June, the ostensible Commander-in-Chief declared,
Oh, the stink, the stink….
Who could have anticipated he’d be asked a question like that after Saturday’s speech?
perhaps..He does seem to get a bit flustered when the question has to do with anything LGBT.
Maybe the infogot buried along with all that “hope” and “change” people voted for.
Its far more likely…that he was prepared to deal with more questions on health care, since that was the most important news item of the day, followed by the continued speculation about Afghanistan.
Given the scope and importance of those items, I’m sure that neither Gibbs nor the communications team are spending a lot of time thinking about that question.
What he should really say, rather authoritatively, is that he has not spoken with the President about the issue given the other issues in play today.
Gibbs and ‘prepared’
should never be in the same sentence. He sucks and is an embarrassment