MyDD :: What happens when Obama repeals "Don't Ask, Don't Tell?"

What happens when Obama repeals "Don't Ask, Don't Tell?"

by SoCalVet, Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 06:55:06 PM EST

There is an article on MSNBC that quotes Sen. Obama as saying that he would repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell."

This MSNBC article is based upon an article from The Advocate.

I wonder what would happen should that be repealed.

If "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" were repealed, we would be right back where we were before it was inacted. We would be back in the same situation that was in effect before "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" was inacted.

As I had to do in 1987, new recruits would have to initial and sign a one sheet questionaire that contains about 6 questions.

Two of them, as I remember, had to do with homosexuality. Something like, "Have you ever had a homosexual encounter?" and "Are you a homosexual?"

When I joined, I lied and answered and initialed each, "No."

Not only is BO not detailing how he has a better plan than "Don't Ask Don't Tell", he is specifically saying that he will allow the military to make its own rules:

He said his priority for the Joint Chiefs will be that they make decisions to strengthen the military and keep the country safe, not their position on the policy.

"I would never make this a litmus test for the Joint Chiefs of Staff," Obama said in an interview with The Advocate, a gay newsmagazine."

I've got news for you Sen. Obama: If you repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell", there will be a litmus test in place...as I detailed above.

Obama does state that he would like to end workplace discrimination against gays and lesbians, but the military is not the "workplace"...employment law doesn't necessarily cover the military.

He does mention not wanting to lose military personnel such as Arabic translators...but unfortunately, under the pre-"Don't Ask, Don't Tell" situation, gays and lesbians wouldn't be allowed into the military in the first place, unless they are willing to lie up front.

Obama seems to choose his words carefully to seem as if he is being inclusive...but if he would like to allow gays and lesbians in the military, why doesn't he just say so?

Tags: glbt, military, don't ask don't tell, Obama (all tags)

Permalink :: 38 Comments :: Post a Comment

Sorry to break it to you (2.00 / 1)

but the military has changed. Except for a few "Hooah" combat arms Battalions . . . homosexuals are doing fine in my experiences. Many of my closest comrades were homosexuals, and it wasn't a problem to the "morale" of the unit.

Obama WOULD NOT ALLOW the old policy to come back . . . are you kidding me?

It will either stay in place, but I hope that he reforms UCMJ . . . so the silly old sodomy laws (oral sex is still against UCMJ, LOL) are removed.

Where you trying to scare somebody into thinking that Obama would not allow gays to serve??

NO 100 year WAR, NO McConnell run Senate, & NO GOP-led Supreme Court!!!

by Veteran75 on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 07:01:47 PM EST

Yes, I was in a medical unit (none / 0)

I know there are plenty of gays and lesbians in the military...problem is, unless Obama has something he can pass in congress, a repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" will indeed let the old system resume. It is not something that he can stop, if he stops the law that doesn't allow them to ask. Because they will ask. They did before, and we will revert to that.

I am sick of the disrespect shown to Sen.Clinton by many on Dailykos, and now, too often, here. You aren't winning hearts and minds.

by SoCalVet on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 07:09:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Yes, I was in a medical unit (2.00 / 1)

I can guarantee you that we won't revert to that. recruiters and guidance counselors simply WILL NOT ask the question.

Right now if a recruit says they are gay, then a recruiter "by the book" is supposed to deny them enlistment. MOST recruiters will say "I didn't hear that" and continue processing.

If your "fear" became reality . . . they would continue to look the other way . . . but your "fear" WILL NEVER become reality.

Some things have left the station to NEVER return.

NO 100 year WAR, NO McConnell run Senate, & NO GOP-led Supreme Court!!!

by Veteran75 on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 07:14:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

When you don't read between the lines, he sounds good, but he is a lawyer in the worst way and when you start reading between the lines of how he plans to 'lower costs' Obama actually legitimizes some of the worst practices that are leaving people bankrupt. And the result will be that more people may be on the books as 'insured' but their insurance won't 'ensure' it wont ensure peace of mid because it will lower costs by covering less....Knowing that, people will avoid care, they STILL wont be able to afford care.

He makes healthcare 'affordable' for employers by shifting more costs to people.

Uncovered costs to families will stay the same or more probably, go up. The very worst practices like insurance rescission will continue, because companies will want an out of their contracts when people get sick.

Thats the ugly underside of Obama's 'hope'.

Hillary's mandate is the only way to cover everybody..and avoid the cost shifting that is getting worse and worse. She has put a lot of thought into it and its the only way.

Its a bargain..

Obama's plan plays on the fears of the poor, and in the end it betrays them by offering false hope. It is set up to fail them.

http://www.thisamericanlife.org/Radio_Ep isode.aspx?sched=1242
Confused by the 'Bailout' Lies?
Listen to NPR's The Giant Pool of Money

by architek on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 07:23:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Do you know anything about modern day UCMJ?

I expect both candidates to advocate for gays in the military.

HRC is the one that has hedged on DOMA, not Obama.

NO 100 year WAR, NO McConnell run Senate, & NO GOP-led Supreme Court!!!

by Veteran75 on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 07:30:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You're not making any sense. The only difference between Clinton's health (insurance) plan and Obama's, is the mandate that individuals have to buy it. How is that NOT shifting the burden of cost onto the individual????

by Zoey on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 10:44:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Wow! That's quite some spin there, and so little fact.

Hillary's plan is tightly integrated with the insurance companies. Think they are complaining about having more people paying on? No.

Her plan also pays too little attention to keeping the costs down. She will end up with the same situation as MA, her program is a Xerox of that plan. Right now, people are not paying in, choosing to the an expensive penalty instead. And, costs are ridiculously expensive.

Because they didn't fix the real problem....universal coverage does not fix healthcare.

Obama wants to fix healthcare, and he provides steps to bring the costs down. This is really what we need to focus on in the first place.

by Kiku on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 11:02:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

They won't ask. (2.00 / 1)

They will interrogate, just like they used to. Don't ask, don't tell is far from perfect, but it's a hell of a lot better than the way it was before. I saw a lot of the witch-hunt for gays in the military first-hand during the early 80's, and a lot of good people got booted because of it. I hope Obama isn't serious about repealing this law.

by georgiapeach on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 11:37:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What happens when Obama (2.00 / 1)

Yeah, right. 1987 is a world away from today. I ran recruit battalions through Great Lakes in 2003, and "Don't ask, Don't tell" nonwithstanding, you'd never get away with such a thing today. The uproar would be instant and deafening.

Serious question- Is This Snark?

by ragekage on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 07:02:06 PM EST

Re: What happens when Obama (2.00 / 1)

. . . and I worked USAREC in the midwest for many years.

The majority of Recruiters could care less about anyone's sexual orientation today.

I do admit that there are rogue combat arms Battalions that need some help . . . BUT THERE IS NO WAY that the old policy WILL EVER come back. It either stays . . . ore hopefully it is totally erased with a modern update to UCMJ!

NO 100 year WAR, NO McConnell run Senate, & NO GOP-led Supreme Court!!!

by Veteran75 on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 07:07:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

What are you basing that on? (none / 0)

"No way..."? uh-huh...it doesn't matter what the recruiters want, they don't make the laws, they follow procedures. Sure, they don't care who they recruit....but they HAVE to ask if "Don't Ask..." is repealed. Unless you have heard of something else Obama is pushing to get enacted?????

I am sick of the disrespect shown to Sen.Clinton by many on Dailykos, and now, too often, here. You aren't winning hearts and minds.

by SoCalVet on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 07:11:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What are you basing that on? (2.00 / 1)

Recruiters following procedures . . . LOL

Have you worked in USAREC?

Most recruiters know their recruits well enough to know if they are homosexual. Most recruiters don't care anymore about someone's sexual orientation.

We are both DEMS on the same team . . . I understand your "concern" BUT there is nothing to worry about.

BTW - what is your take on HRC's stance on DOMA compared to Obama?

NO 100 year WAR, NO McConnell run Senate, & NO GOP-led Supreme Court!!!

by Veteran75 on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 07:17:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Nothing to worry about? (none / 0)

He wants to repeal the law that keeps the military out of your bedroom.....but obviously that isn't important to Obama supporters.

Yeah, "don't worry about it"....that got gays and lesbians a long way in the past, huh?

I am sick of the disrespect shown to Sen.Clinton by many on Dailykos, and now, too often, here. You aren't winning hearts and minds.

by SoCalVet on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 07:51:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Nothing to worry about? (2.00 / 1)

You totally are reading this the wrong way!

He wants gays to serve openly!

He does NOT want to roll back the clock . . . he wants to do the EXACT opposite.

I don't think you are deliberately smearing Obama, but I do think you are misunderstanding him.

NO 100 year WAR, NO McConnell run Senate, & NO GOP-led Supreme Court!!!

by Veteran75 on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 07:58:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Nothing to worry about? (1.00 / 3)

You are the most uninformed person I've read on this site. You obviously have no idea what Obama has stated, on the record, to The Advocate:
"I reasonably can see "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" eliminated,'' Obama told the magazine, though he wouldn't make the issue "a litmus test'' for the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
On top of this, you have the nerve to state "but the military has changed....homosexuals are doing fine..."
Just plain dumb! If you can't contribute to the discourse, please refrain from polluting it.

Purity! Or else!

by ChitownDenny on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 09:39:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Nothing to worry about? (2.00 / 1)

"I reasonably can see "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" eliminated,'' Obama told the magazine, though he wouldn't make the issue "a litmus test'' for the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Where do you pull out of that quote that he is going to banish gays?

On top of this, you have the nerve to state "but the military has changed....homosexuals are doing fine..."

YES I HAVE THE NERVE TO SAY THAT!! I still am responsible for my Soldiers on ACTIVE-DUTY. WHERE THE HELL DO YOU get the nerve to assume that I don't know what I am talking about!

NO 100 year WAR, NO McConnell run Senate, & NO GOP-led Supreme Court!!!

by Veteran75 on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 10:29:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Nothing to worry about? (2.00 / 1)

Either I'm misreading what you're saying, or you're misreading what Erick is saying. Erick is saying that Obama wants to get rid of the "Don't ask, don't tell" policy, which is true. Obama is very supportive of equal rights for the LGBT community.

by Zoey on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 10:41:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Nothing to worry about? (2.00 / 1)

Zoey . . . they really think that Obama is going to roll back the clock to the old days of gay hating in the military!?

SAD

:o(

NO 100 year WAR, NO McConnell run Senate, & NO GOP-led Supreme Court!!!

by Veteran75 on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 10:44:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Nothing to worry about? (2.00 / 2)

Chitown . . . that was very low.

If HRC is sooo much better, than why does she not go all the way on DOMA?!

by FOB92 on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 10:46:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Nothing to worry about? (2.00 / 1)

Freaking disgusting.

Way to go twisting people's words to suit your agenda - whatever that may be?!

by McTrollop on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 10:55:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Nothing to worry about? (none / 0)

Wow, you sound like an elitist!

by Obamanaut on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 10:59:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Nothing to worry about? (2.00 / 1)

Obama has commented that he thinks it's a waste of money to prosecute gays in the military. The money and the focus can be put to better use.

He does not want to go back to the way things were. Your points are completely fanciful.

by Kiku on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 11:05:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What are you basing that on? (none / 0)

What do you mean they have to ask if don't-ask is repealed? This is not a dichotomous choice. We don't have to keep don't-ask or revert to the old ways of discrimination. If Obama is president, there will be a third way -- a new way, a way of NOT discriminating against gays in the military.

by Zoey on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 10:46:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

WTF? (2.00 / 1)

This is simple reading comprehension.

Obama would love to allow gays to serve openly . . . he isn't going to ask his choice for Chairman of the JCS that question as a litmus test.

His JCS will follow the orders of the Commander-in-chief, and Obama will let the JCS know that he doesn't have a problem with gays serving in the military.

Obama would not allow those old policies to go into effect.

by FOB92 on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 07:22:48 PM EST

He can't stop the "old policies" (none / 0)

the only thing that did stop that procedure was the "Don't Ask" law.

You just don't get it.

It's like taking a drug test to get in the military...it is a requirement, and not something up to the descretion of a recruiter. If the recruiters had their way, they would take everyone.

I am sick of the disrespect shown to Sen.Clinton by many on Dailykos, and now, too often, here. You aren't winning hearts and minds.

by SoCalVet on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 07:49:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: He can't stop the "old policies" (none / 0)

You don't get it!

This is like GOP scare tactics over Social Security!

Obama wants gays to serve openly!

BTW - did you ever answer that question on Obama and HRC re: DOMA?!

NO 100 year WAR, NO McConnell run Senate, & NO GOP-led Supreme Court!!!

by Veteran75 on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 08:01:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: He can't stop the "old policies" (none / 0)

Sigh :o(

by FOB92 on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 10:41:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: He can't stop the "old policies" (none / 0)

Ok, maybe you don't understand the chain of command. See, this is what your 6th grade social studies teacher should have taught you...

The President (that will be Obama) is in charge of the military. He makes their policies. He ensures that the people in charge of the military enforce the policies. He is in control. So, yes, he absolutely can keep the military from going back to the old ways. That's, quite simply, how it works.

by Zoey on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 10:54:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: He can't stop the "old policies" (none / 0)

I think that Obama is smart enough to figure out he needs a different solution, other than falling back on old policy.

This argument doesn't even make sense. Obama has said he wants to change the current process so that gays can serve openly. I'm sure he can figure out a process to get there.

by Kiku on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 11:13:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

This is MONTHS too late (2.00 / 1)

after the McClurkin incident, after he threw gays under the bus, after he purged his california delegates and then changed his mind, after he insulted millions of blue collar Americans, you think he can repeal DADT?

Nothing will happen because he's not going to do it. He can say all he wants, but this is not something he will do. I wouldn't count on it.

by 4justice on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 07:51:00 PM EST

Re: This is MONTHS too late (none / 0)

He'll certainly make more progress than Hillary.

Obama is good at bringing people together. He's good at listening and inviting all people together. That's his strength. That means that he's not going to knee jerk someone just because they have a different opinion. Listening to someone is not the same as throwing someone under the bus. We need to stop these divisive calls and start working together.

But, if you want to go there, Hillary has offended women, men, blacks, the Middle East, the entire military, and every American who believes in truth. If that is the criterion for solving problems, Obama is still far ahead of Hillary.

Thankfully, we have better criterion. Look at the legislation passed.

http://obamarecord.blogspot.com

He has been far more successful than Hillary. There is every indication that he will do so as president too.

by Kiku on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 11:21:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Sorry if this isn't clear: (2.00 / 1)

I believe that we need to repeal the "Don't Ask,
Don't Tell" policy. The key test for military service should be patriotism, a sense of duty, and a
willingness to serve. We also have evidence that Don't Ask, Don't Tell is not working. A 2005 GAO
report found that the policy has resulted in a significant loss of service members in critical occupations
and with important language skills like Arabic and Korean. Former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of
Staff General John Shalikashvili said times have changed and that, "I now believe that if gay men and
lesbians served openly in the United States military, they would not undermine the efficacy of the
armed forces."

http://a4.g.akamai.net/f/4/19675/0/newmi ll.download.akamai.com/19677/anon.newmed iamill/pdfs/obama.pdf

NO 100 year WAR, NO McConnell run Senate, & NO GOP-led Supreme Court!!!

by Veteran75 on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 08:06:36 PM EST

Re: What happens when Obama repeals (2.00 / 1)

Don't Ask Don't Tell was needed in the 1990's - there are polls out there that state that back then (in the not so distant past), that many Americans were very much against gays in the military. A few years ago, the same poll was taken about gays in the military and Americans are much more supportive of it.

Bill Clinton may not have had that watershed bill for gay rights, but considering that America's perception of gays in the military today is positive, compared to back in the 1990's, I think that Don't Ask, Don't Tell was a much needed bill.

However, I agree that it should be repealed - and that gays should be protected from pre-don't ask don't tell rules.

by colebiancardi on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 08:13:48 PM EST

Re: What happens when Obama repeals (2.00 / 1)

Bill Clinton did not know what he was doing when he was elected in 1992. Without conferring with any gay civil rights groups, he naively thought that he could just repeal the military's ban on gays and lesbians (this was one of his campaign promises). Because he was unable to anticipate the huge outcry, because he did not properly manage his own move to repeal this ban (and, shockingly, was "out of touch" with the homophobic electorate that didn't want to go there), and because he was no real progressive leader, because he didn't even fight for what he had campaigned on and what he knew was right, we got stuck with "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," an Apartheid policy (which is completely UNDEMOCRATIC).

Now, tell me again why we should elect this person's spouse?

This diary is the worst kind of political spin.

by DrPolitics on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 08:41:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

intellectually dishonest (1.66 / 3)

The fact that you could think Obama meant he wanted to screw over homosexuals by repealing "Don't ask..." is absurd. You are trying to misrepresent the truth and doing it in a disgusting fashion.

ENOUGH!

by JDF on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 08:24:02 PM EST

Re: intellectually dishonest (2.00 / 1)

They either don't get it . . . or like GOP smear-tactics.

I am hoping that they are just misguided!

How can someone extrapolate that Obama is against gays in the military?!

I have worked with Obama on veteran issues . . . I know where his heart is, and am deeply offended by the claims in this diary.

NO 100 year WAR, NO McConnell run Senate, & NO GOP-led Supreme Court!!!

by Veteran75 on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 10:36:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: intellectually dishonest (2.00 / 1)

I think there are two points that need to be separated here.

First, is the idea that if DADT is repealed, the old laws will stand. That's a valid point to be considered. If an open policy is desired, another solution is needed.

The second idea that got muddled into this is the idea of what Obama wants. The focus here has been on Obama talking about ending DADT. But, it misses the bigger picture, Obama's bigger goal of openness in the military. The original argument is too narrow.

by Kiku on Sat Apr 12, 2008 at 11:29:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: intellectually dishonest (none / 0)

You obviously aren't aware of what the "Don't ask Don't tell" STOPPED.

What it stopped will no longer be stopped. Therefore, you will be asked, along with questions like, "have you ever been charged or convicted of a crime", "are you a homosexual".

You think this is unbelievable? I know, I signed it when I went in the Army in 87.

You people are consiously misinformed.

I am sick of the disrespect shown to Sen.Clinton by many on Dailykos, and now, too often, here. You aren't winning hearts and minds.

by SoCalVet on Sun Apr 13, 2008 at 12:51:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.