Poltics Moment
Don't Ask, Don't Tell (DADT) seems to be moving to become the way of the dinosaurs. Albeit slowly.
The Senate Armed Services Committee and the House of Representatives both passed the amendment which calls for a "measured" stance on repeal efforts. It's a really great step in the right direction, but the fight is nowhere near done.
The amendment, now put into the Defense Authorization bill for 2011, now has to be passed by the Senate in full. Republicans have threatened to outright block all funding for the military by giving a Nay vote if the bill contains any DADT repeal language. It serves as a hurdle, but we're seeing a Democratic Party right now which has learned how to lead (if in increments) and also how to say "eff off" to a party which doesn't want to compromise, but just piss-and-moan to get its own way.
The amendment itself is definitely not perfect. It does not immediately stop DADT discharges and it certainly doesn't cause any sort of push on the matter. It deftly defers the repeal effort to the Executive Branch (which I think is a bit of legal genius. It's an escape pod and holds Obama accountable for being a "fierce advocate*"). Three members of the cabinet -- POTUS, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and (I think) the DOD Chair -- all have to sign off on the effort for it to go forward. Again, amazing escape hatch and an accountability switch for LGBT advocates who expect "fierce advocacy".
Additionally, nothing can happen until the DADT related study is completed -- expected by December 1. So, unless an Executive Order is given (which it most assuredly would not), discharges will continue under this policy, even if it has been softened.
I have mixed feelings on this course of action. I think it's an awesome step in right direction, but I think it's a bit soft around the edges. I think Congress should have called for findings from the study to become known immediately upon completion of the study. For Congress to call for an immediate end to DADT would cause a power struggle between Executive and Legislative branches the likes of which would be beyond the scope of what we've seen in recent memory.
That said, since Obama insisted on having "an act of Congress" repeal the law, and then swept in to take some credit for the repeal effort, I'd have liked to see him get socked with the responsibility of a full repeal RIGHT NOW.
In addition, it does nothing to stop those in the process of being discharged at this very moment. Service members will still be discharged from the military for conduct unbecoming of a solider, even though the law itself says that it will soon not be unbecoming of an officer. I find that really fucked up, to break into cursing.
So, while I'm happy it's a step in the right direction, it's not nearly enough to satiate my need to see a fierce advocacy develop. Telling me continually to wait, and then ridiculing the very people you've also told to "keep on the pressure" is not leadership. It's antagonistic, arrogant and elitist behavior.
Oh shit! I've just called POTUS an elitist. Well, damn.
The Senate Armed Services Committee and the House of Representatives both passed the amendment which calls for a "measured" stance on repeal efforts. It's a really great step in the right direction, but the fight is nowhere near done.
The amendment, now put into the Defense Authorization bill for 2011, now has to be passed by the Senate in full. Republicans have threatened to outright block all funding for the military by giving a Nay vote if the bill contains any DADT repeal language. It serves as a hurdle, but we're seeing a Democratic Party right now which has learned how to lead (if in increments) and also how to say "eff off" to a party which doesn't want to compromise, but just piss-and-moan to get its own way.
The amendment itself is definitely not perfect. It does not immediately stop DADT discharges and it certainly doesn't cause any sort of push on the matter. It deftly defers the repeal effort to the Executive Branch (which I think is a bit of legal genius. It's an escape pod and holds Obama accountable for being a "fierce advocate*"). Three members of the cabinet -- POTUS, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and (I think) the DOD Chair -- all have to sign off on the effort for it to go forward. Again, amazing escape hatch and an accountability switch for LGBT advocates who expect "fierce advocacy".
Additionally, nothing can happen until the DADT related study is completed -- expected by December 1. So, unless an Executive Order is given (which it most assuredly would not), discharges will continue under this policy, even if it has been softened.
I have mixed feelings on this course of action. I think it's an awesome step in right direction, but I think it's a bit soft around the edges. I think Congress should have called for findings from the study to become known immediately upon completion of the study. For Congress to call for an immediate end to DADT would cause a power struggle between Executive and Legislative branches the likes of which would be beyond the scope of what we've seen in recent memory.
That said, since Obama insisted on having "an act of Congress" repeal the law, and then swept in to take some credit for the repeal effort, I'd have liked to see him get socked with the responsibility of a full repeal RIGHT NOW.
In addition, it does nothing to stop those in the process of being discharged at this very moment. Service members will still be discharged from the military for conduct unbecoming of a solider, even though the law itself says that it will soon not be unbecoming of an officer. I find that really fucked up, to break into cursing.
So, while I'm happy it's a step in the right direction, it's not nearly enough to satiate my need to see a fierce advocacy develop. Telling me continually to wait, and then ridiculing the very people you've also told to "keep on the pressure" is not leadership. It's antagonistic, arrogant and elitist behavior.
Oh shit! I've just called POTUS an elitist. Well, damn.