Tweet
UPDATE (8 PM): A response just in from a White House official (unnamed):
“These rumors are blatantly false. The President has been clear in his desire to see Congress repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, and the Department of Defense is already moving forward with its own review. The Office of Legislative Affairs continues to engage lawmakers, and at no time has the White House asked any Member to take this issue off the table.”
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. (Wed Jan 27, 2010)
“And finally, finally this year we are going to bring down the discriminatory policy known as ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’…once and for all.“
Joe and I were just informed that the White House congressional liaison office is telling US House members not to include the repeal of “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” in the Defense Authorization bill, and not to have a vote on DADT on the House floor, this year. This would be at odds with the promise the President made in the State of the Union to repeal DADT this year, but it would be consistent with all other signs coming from the White House.…President Obama is now actually hurting the effort to get DADT repealed. He is costing us votes. And remember, we are in serious danger of losing the House to the Republicans this November. If that happens, we won’t see DADT repealed, ENDA, DOMA, or any other part of our civil rights agenda move forward for years to come. Last time it took 14 years to win the Congress back from the GOP, and even then, we had to wait for a Democratic president before we could move forward – and even then, it isn’t moving forward.
Our number one gay rights lobby, the Human Rights Campaign, told us that DADT would be repealed this year. You heard it directly from the mouth of HRC’s President Joe Solmonese. Is HRC even talking to the White House? It’s hard to believe that we were able to find out that the White House is undercutting DADT on the Hill, that Barney Frank knows it, but HRC doesn’t. So what exactly is HRC doing about it? We don’t need HRC going through the motions, holding ineffective “lobby days.” We need HRC to tell the White House and the Hill to pass the damn repeal this year. From what we hear, that isn’t happening.
28 Comments
The White House could end this storyWith the release of a single sentence press statement
I’m not holding my breath. I think it might help our cause to press the White House to either confirm or deny this reporting. Is the White House Congressional Liason, in fact, really encouraging Congress to table the vote to a later date? Some reports are saying so.
When is enough enough?
Any objective person would have to admit that we have reached a critical mass of White House/DNC political chicanery and moral bankruptcy in relation to DADT. With this story comes revelation that Obama’s DOJ has declared in a court brief that their boss is wrong about DADT.
http://www.boxturtlebulletin.c…
I realize that to naturally gentler, and certainly many younger, souls my posts often seem disproportionately angry and uncompromising.
That’s because I have underwear older than DADT. That’s because I first became involved in fighting the ban seven Presidents ago. That’s because I learned from the 1992-93 lift the ban nightmare that words, regardless of by whom or the sincerity with which they’re spoken, are meaningless, play money in the currency of politics.
That’s because I was first called Queer in the 4th grade; graduated to “faggot” during college; and was fired for, later clubbed to the ground for simply being gay shortly thereafter. It’s because most of my friends died from governmental neglect of AIDS. It’s because, contrary to what Barack Obama perceives, we are not “issues about which good people can disagree.” It’s because, as Dan Choi says now, and LGBT rights/AIDS activist/composer Michael Callen wrote years ago, from DADT to ENDA to DOMA to whatever: “This is our love we’re fighting for. These are our lives we’re fighting for.”
And, brothers and sisters, I’m tired.
Screw him, and screw the Democratic PartyThe more things Change We Can Believe In, the more it is the same shit.
The only surprise I feel is that it took this long for the White House get so blatant about it.
Informed by whom? Has this been corroborated?
Metro Weekly is reporting the WHis calling this report “blatantly false.” It’s worth noting their denial only says they are working on it, with nothing concrete about timeline or strategy. The Senate Armed Services will need to vote on this in May or June for it to be reality by the next spending budget. Tic toc, folks!
true or not, I’ll probably vote third party, Green most likely.
I’m pissed at the dems, and would chop off an arm before i vote repug.
“We don’t need HRC going through the motions, holding ineffective “lobby days.”"Is he nuts? We live in a representative democracy. If you don’t lobby, you don’t get the vote you want from your representative. That’s how it works. Certainly we should keep up other forms of pressure besides constituents lobbying their members of Congress, but saying that lobbying is ‘ineffective’ is just silly.
And we all know what a reputation for credibility “the WH” has….
Are they also saying that Democratic House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer’s assertion yesterday was “blatantly false”?
Are they calling Barney Frank a liar for saying the President has been “ducking” the issue, that he is “not for repeal this year”?
Today’s official denial’s reference to:
1. the DOD “moving forward with its own review,” and
2. “at no time has the White House asked any Member to take this issue off the table”
is another example of the Cirque du Soleil-level ability of the Obama Nostra to talk out of both sides of their mouth at the same time because with the annoucement of that phony “review” came the warning to a Congress frightened to death of accusations that they aren’t listening to the military to table repeal until December 1st … a week after midterms…which will result in repeal crib death.
That IS FUNCTIONALLY THE SAME AS telling Congress “not to include the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell in the Defense Authorization bill” because DEFAUTH must be written and voted on and signed weeks before Dec. 1.
AREN’T YOU PEOPLE TIRED OF HAVING YOUR INTELLIGENCE INSULTED BY THESE CHITOWN SNAKE OIL SALESMEN?
WHERE IS YOUR OUTRAGE????????????
well, *ahem*THe minute that Solomonese “promised” it, I knew it was toast.
But then, I’m admittedly biased, and, worse, an optimist that hoped he might not be a consistent sort of speaker of questionable things (thinking back a few years here…)
Ah well…
I’m mainly tired..of histrionic queers thinking that shit like this gets done overnight.
Get a fucking grip.
I think what he is referring to hereIs not that lobbying is not effective, but that the artifice of “lobby days” on the Hill are not effective, because they are well planned in advance and groups are shuffled in and out of offices, with the members usually not there, only aides.
I’ve heard this multiple times while I was in DC last go-round; the most effective lobbying, and I said this in a prior post, is individuals meeting their lawmaker when they are home in their district. A personal contact there, along with letters and calls to the local office are much more focused and effective.
“Histrionic queer” back at you…
Since you have your head so far up ObamaRahm’s ass that you can probably see Russia from his mouth: what was the weather like in Moscow today?
NEW RULE:When Barack Obama promises something, assume he will do the exact opposite.
He promised he would not sign a health care bill that did not include a public option. He signed one (and even pushed for its passage).
He said on the campaign trail that he opposed offshore drilling. He sanctioned it.
He promised he would defend a woman’s right to choose. He signed the anti-choice executive order Stupak demanded.
He promised he would end DADT. He…well, you know.
Given that all politicians lie, about all sorts of things, Obama was the candidate who was going to change the way things are done in Washington. He sure hasn’t changed political lying; he’s taken it to new heights of refinement. Maybe he’s changed the coffee creamer they use at White House receptions, but he sure as hell hasn’t changed anything else.
So I repeat: When Obama says he’ll change this or that, or do this or that, assume he won’t. It will help preserve your sanity in his Orwellian world.
Question: would it be better for the White HouseTo just confess they don’t want it to go to a vote untill 2011? It seems they are straining their creditbility on LGBT and our community’s patience with the ambiguity game.
If that is what he is saying, I still disagree.Sure it’s great to visit your legislator in-district, but I find it shocking that anyone would undermine the value of showing up in the DC office. Does he understand what it takes for most of us to get to DC? I can assure you that legislators do. Also, it is common to meet with aides because legislators don’t have all day to sit in their offices receiving petitioners. Aides often have a lot of power with their legislator. I would never snub the opportunity to meet with a legislative aide, nor would I consider the effort a failure if I “only” got to talk to an aide. Unless, of course, I’d been promised a meeting with the legislator and there was no valid reason why they transferred me to an aide.
Make that….
…don’t want it to go to a vote period as there is no reason to believe it ever could in 2011 or 2012 after midterm losses, and, yes, it would be “better” of a kind.
If he simply admitted: “I’m tabling this because I believe Dems will lose more votes from repeal” or “because I need to in order to get more cooperation from the Pentagon about other things”…. [After losing his nerve in January 1993 over lifting the ban, Clinton's subsequent cave was logical in terms of the rest of his agenda. If he'd issued an Executive Order immediately, things could, and I believe would, have been different.]
I think Obama would be wrong for both theoretical reasons about….IF his testicles descended and he became the leader he CONTRACTED with us to be….but a rationale would better than the perpetual pie-in-the-sky game he’s playing.
Same thing is true re a freeze. Instead of pretending he doesn’t know he has the legal authority, if he’d just said why he’s CHOSEN not to use it, I might still be able to respect him.
In fact, it wasn’t any LGBT issue for which I chose him over McShame. They could have had the exact positions on LGBT legislation and I still would have supported Obama because I believed he would be better on Iraq and Afghanistan. That has turned out to be only marginally true.
How the fuck would you know where my head is?You just automatically assume that anyone who doesn’t have their head up your ass while simultaneously applauding your little tantrums is an Obamabot. Grow the fuck up. You’re just as bad as O’Reilly and Beck and any teabagger who thinks that yelling REAL LOUD and A LOT is going to get you anywhere. Stop name-calling and DO SOMETHING about it if it bothers you so fucking much!
Ruby and Michael, take it elsewhere
I’m right there with you Michael, my dear brother and friend.
As far as I’m concerned, you’re tone and passion are always SPOT ON.
We did have that little Hillary/Obama disagreement but I don’t think we ever questioned each others’ respect for each other or our dedication to the cause.
I’m so proud and honored to call you “friend” and “brother”.
I’ll ALWAYS have your back bubba!
you’re = your
I just ask the question because I wonderIf Obama is unnecessarily stoking anxiety and frustration in our community with all the two steps forward, two steps back action.
Certainly it’s creating a lot of tension within our community, evidenced even on this thread.
I wonder what would be the effect, hypothetically, of the Democrats leveling with our community that Repeal of DADT is off the table until after mid-terms?
Personally, I’m feeling a little played. I think many are. I wonder if that feeling is more detremental to our support in the mid-terms than leveling with us with a firm promise to deliver in 2011?
I don’t have the answer. I don’t know if the community would as a whole feel more betrayed by the current strategy of a goal without a leader or a leader with a different goal?
Don’t Ask, Don’t Give, Don’t Vote Obama…I think it is time to add the later.
Obama has been a fairly decent Republican President, but I won’t vote for a Republican. I doubt he’ll even run for a second term, his cover is blown.
Regardless, Obama personalli has until primary season in 2012Can anyone say “one term wonder?”
I suggest that the community should evaluate whgo’s out there in the field of possible Democratic contenders for the Presidential nomination in 2012.
Of course, if Obama and Congress deliver complete legislative reform by early 2012 – DADT repeal, DOMA repeal, ENDA (we have Matthew Shepard Act already), and Immigration Reform (including our community), he gets my support for re-election.
By delaying any of this until after the 2010 elections, Obama runs the very real risk of 1994-like losses in Congress – and if he is faced with Republicans in control or a less cooperative Congress in any way with the 2010 elections, he should resign himself to the single term so we can elect someone with more backbone.
President Obama has to a great extent squandered the first year-and-a-half of his presidency. He may have time to recover if there are not huge mid-term losses in Congress.
If not, he must be replaced, and hopefully not with that demagogue Sarah Palin.
Screwed by Rome on the HillIs it not time that we stopped hailing HRC as Ceasar the great – its time to bring BRUTUS into the picture… that is us all of us… heck with HRC – heck with immigration equality who screwed us on UAFA with a major wrong turn. I am just sick of Ceasar Caligula and the whole lot of them,…
Thought I would save that outburst far away from my lezgetreal home- town because I am mustering up for a big doozy… melanie nathan.
Thank you, Zeke…
Much, much appreciated; and the feeling is mutual!
fierce advocacy watch, cont’dThere’s more.
Nothing on Obama’s “blueprint for [education] reform” regarding anti-gay bullying.
http://www.365gay.com/news/whe…
No visible DOMA repeal, and in fact Obama’s DOJ is trying to throw us for a loss.
http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/pap…
and
http://blawgsearch.justia.com/…
Oh, and here’s a fun fact on DADT repeal: Obama seems to be to the right of the Tea Party on this issue.
http://gay.americablog.com/201…
He’s revving his engine, but he’s firmly in neutral.
Speaking for myself, yesCan we have a little more candidness and honesty from the White House as opposed to Clintonian triangulation and bullshit.
Right now, it’s even more difficult to believe anything coming out of the White House and the President’s mouth.
…but that’s just me.
Gays are just a Political Pawn…We are not enough of a constituentcy to really demand consideration. Obama is playing politics. Standing up for Gays might be detrimental to his re-election effort. He gives in on issues of “lesser importance” and goes for larger meat.
This goes along with Fred Karger now aligning himself with the Republican Party again. This is about whichever party can pay the most.