"The battle over the military's policies towards gay servicemembers is not over, rather it has been brought to a different stage, one focused heavily on certification and proper implementation. "

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 31, 2010 11:22 AM GMT
    I'm telling ya, O just handed us over to more diddling!

    We can fucking forget O! He is no friend of Gays!

    "NEW HAVEN -- The long-awaited repeal of the military's Don't Ask, Don't Tell policy marked a modern day civil rights milestone. But while activists and like-minded pols at first celebrated an achievement long in the offing, that cheeriness has quickly been replaced by political somberness. ...

    "Anyone with a realistic view realizes we wont get things done legislatively during the next two years," said the top gay rights operative. "And if you look down the road it could be ten years we don't get anything done legislatively if we have to depend on Democrats solely."

    All of which is not to say that the gay rights community is resigned to political inertia. There are other vehicles for progress.

    At the start of the Obama administration, a list of 82 executive actions was put together detailing what the president could get done without the legislative branch. That list has since disappeared , owing, Aravosis explained, to the fact that activists would often point to it as evidence of Obama's shortcomings on their issues. But Obama did tackle some of the 82; for instance, revising hospital visitation rights. The rest of them, such as the creation of better census-styled data on the LGBT community, would quickly become points of contention if it became clear that the White House was simply sitting on its hands.

    There are, in addition, small pieces of legislation that Congress might be more inclined to consider, down to simple, straightforward revisions to the tax code. But the pie-in-the-sky objectives, activists admit, will only come through one avenue: the courts.

    "The legal cases are critical to the movement and I think as we saw with the repeal with Don't Ask Don't Tell you need a multi-prong approach for equality to the gay community," said Stachelberg. "The way the court cases have evolved and unfolded they have driven attention to these issues in an important way."

    There are, currently, two major cases are making their way through the judicial system, one challenging the constitutionality of DOMA, the other challenging the constitutionality of California's gay-marriage ban. Either could end up at the Supreme Court. One, certainly, is expected. ...

    The president's unwillingness to fully embrace marriage equality, for starters, has taken its toll, dividing the gay rights community over the issue of how hard the White House should or can be lobbied.

    "Marriage unfortunately for the president will be a big deal," predicted Aravosis. "People are not letting go of his comments on marriage. People are no longer willing to give them a pass on marriage ... It will be an issue for Obama's reelect with the community."

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/30/after-euphoric-dadt-repea_n_802762.html
  • coolarmydude

    Posts: 9190

    Dec 31, 2010 12:03 PM GMT
    I disagree in that the passage of repeal of DADT in the Senate and the signed law of the repeal by President Obama has completely removed the policy, and therefore the issue (DADT specifically), out of the hands of legislatures.

    It is in Obama's court, so to speak, and I don't think he will renege on his pledge to end DADT. Since his administration and the military brass in charge (i.e. Admiral Mullen) had been so cavalier over the last two years to state that DADT was on it's way out, and before the Senate voted to repeal the law, then I don't see them backtracking.

    DADT is a done deal, regardless of what naysayers are saying.


    But concerning other gay rights issue involving military appropriations, I would agree that it is in a new stage of policy debate. Instead of arguing whether gays have a right to openly serve as GLB (Transgender issues aren't covered under DADT), the debate shifts to marriage recognition (DOMA), and other benefits like housing, family separation pay when deployed, etc.

    I view the whole gay rights issues as a work in progress. DADT put the foot of equality in the door. You can't walk through that door without the foot first, even if it was 17 years in the making. We wouldn't even be talking about gay benefits if that unheard of pledge from Clinton didn't occur.

    Everyone has to give credit where credit is due, even if we remain activist in seeking full equality.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 31, 2010 12:39 PM GMT
    I agree that Obama is no friend of the LGBT community. He's not getting my vote again, that's for sure (I'm going to gladly vote any Republican or Independent into office), but your thread topic is misleading.

    DADT has been repealed. Yes, implementation will be a process, but DADT is dead. So, what's the problem?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 31, 2010 12:59 PM GMT
    RiverRising saidI agree that Obama is no friend of the LGBT community. He's not getting my vote again, that's for sure (I'm going to gladly vote any Republican or Independent into office), but your thread topic is misleading.

    DADT has been repealed. Yes, implementation will be a process, but DADT is dead. So, what's the problem?

    It is not dead. DADT still exists today. Repeal must next go through a "certification" process to Congress which is months away at the earliest. That certification is not a done deal.

    I fully expect Republicans in Congress will try to throw some monkey wrench into it, now that they have full control of the House, and near control of the Senate. And even if they begrudgingly allow DADT to expire, they will try to exact a political penalty on the Democrats as the 2012 election approaches.

    I agree that Obama has not been a very good friend to gays. But a poor friend is better than a sworn enemy, which is what Republicans are to us. Why the Hell would you ever vote for them? Because you're having a gay hissy fit?

    Yeah, vote in more of those bigots who want us gays made illegal -- that'll sure show those Democrats! icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 31, 2010 4:10 PM GMT
    There is a reason Obama was not proactive on DADT. Two major groups whose support he needs are African-Americans and Hispanics. Both groups are conservative in that they favor traditional man-woman marriage. He has the African-American vote locked up, but has to work for the Hispanic vote. His actions on DADT have been to walk the line carefully instead of taking a stand which would be expected from someone else with character. Another example of voting "Present".
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 31, 2010 4:25 PM GMT
    I fully agree that it will take the courts to push legislators to piss or get off the pot. DADT was indication of this. If the Log Cabin Republicans hadn't gone to court and judge Phillips hadn't ruled it unconstitutional, legislators would never have had a reason to discuss it. I see other issues taking the same path, forcing the legislators to make decisions they'd rather ignore.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 31, 2010 4:36 PM GMT
    socalfitness saidThere is a reason Obama was not proactive on DADT. Two major groups whose support he needs are African-Americans and Hispanics. Both groups are conservative in that they favor traditional man-woman marriage. He has the African-American vote locked up, but has to work for the Hispanic vote. His actions on DADT have been to walk the line carefully instead of taking a stand which would be expected from someone else with character. Another example of voting "Present".

    I don't think so. He is just not into gay rights. Like now he is only evoking on gay marriage. He's prolly be advised that he won't hold the gay vote unless he dangles thus carrot out in front of us. I'm not holding my breath. I'd love to get within earshot of hom, so I could boo him!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 31, 2010 4:53 PM GMT
    This is just alarmist nonsense. DADT has been repealed. It is simply a matter of implementation now. Who is in charge of implemeting the lifting of DADT? The Commander-in-Chief, the Secretary of Defence and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, all of whom have publicly expressed their support for the repeal.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 31, 2010 5:07 PM GMT
    Mil8 saidThis is just alarmist nonsense. DADT has been repealed. It is simply a matter of implementation now. Who is in charge of implemeting the lifting of DADT? The Commander-in-Chief, the Secretary of Defence and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, all of whom have publicly expressed their support for the repeal.

    It could be alarmist to some degree, but it does seem presumptuous for a UK citizen living in the UK (I presume) to think he is so much more knowledgeable than those of us who grew up and live here to have a sense of some subtleties in the implementation of our regulations. If the shoe were on the other foot, I could not imagine myself stating your position on some internal UK matter to be "nonsense".
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 31, 2010 5:19 PM GMT
    socalfitness saidIt could be alarmist to some degree, but it does seem presumptuous for a UK citizen living in the UK (I presume) to think he is so much more knowledgeable than those of us who grew up and live here to have a sense of some subtleties in the implementation of our regulations. If the shoe were on the other foot, I could not imagine myself stating your position on some internal UK matter to be "nonsense".


    I am tempted to say your post is xenophobic nonsense, but I will resist. For some people, the gay rights glass is always half empty. Of course we must strive for equality, but we must also celebrate when milestones, such as the repeal of DADT, are reached.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 31, 2010 5:21 PM GMT
    Mil8 saidThis is just alarmist nonsense. DADT has been repealed. It is simply a matter of implementation now. Who is in charge of implemeting the lifting of DADT? The Commander-in-Chief, the Secretary of Defence and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, all of whom have publicly expressed their support for the repeal.

    Not so fast. Are you aware that the Repubs have been still trying to gum up the implementation of the repeal since its passage?

    "According to sources in the repeal movement and confirmed by independent Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman's office, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell was trying to move, without debate, an amendment to the defense authorization bill that would have added the military service chiefs to the certification process. Remember, the repeal of DADT is not official until Obama, Gates and Mullen certify that ending the ban on gay men and lesbians serving openly in the military would not impact readiness, recruitment and retention. Given the retrograde and unhinged comments of Marine Gen. John Amos, it was likely that he'd gum up the works if he had more say.

    Sources at the Pentagon told me this morning that Gates had made his opposition to the amendment known and that the department was working behind the scenes to block the McConnell effort. Lieberman raised objections to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Sen. Carl Levin, chairman of the Senate armed services committee. His appeals succeeded in stopping the effort. Though this likely won't be the last time that opponents of repeal try to stand in the way."

    http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2010/12/mitch_mcconnells_bid_to_kill_d.html

    There are all sorts of ways to fuck up the implementation so that gay service is still unequal and unfair.

    The strike-down by the courts was the cleanest, purest, and fastest way to end this discrimination.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 31, 2010 5:27 PM GMT
    Mil8 said
    socalfitness saidIt could be alarmist to some degree, but it does seem presumptuous for a UK citizen living in the UK (I presume) to think he is so much more knowledgeable than those of us who grew up and live here to have a sense of some subtleties in the implementation of our regulations. If the shoe were on the other foot, I could not imagine myself stating your position on some internal UK matter to be "nonsense".


    I am tempted to say your post is xenophobic nonsense, but I will resist. For some people, the gay rights glass is always half empty. Of course we must strive for equality, but we must also celebrate when milestones, such as the repeal of DADT, are reached.

    Well you did say xenophobic, so I will comment on that. I have close friends in Europe that I stay in touch with very often, travel, speak other languages, get international television from Europe, and read international media. I am the very opposite of xenophobic. I also realize that sometimes there are issues in one country that someone not living there may not understand or grasp some subtleties. Sometimes the opposite can be true as well. My comment dealt not with xenophobia or gay rights, but the stridency of your comment, especially "nonsense" dismissing others' opinions. It was a bit surprising, along with your response, considering I recall your posts to generally be logical and well-thought out.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 31, 2010 5:36 PM GMT
    Personally, I don't think Harry is Charles' child. I would love to see the results of a DNA test.

    And the way William behaves he might not want to be king. So then what if Harry isn't a Windsor? icon_eek.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 31, 2010 5:44 PM GMT
    Mil8 said>Of course we must strive for equality, but we must also celebrate when milestones, such as the repeal of DADT, are reached.


    Come on guys, no name calling in this thread. And I agree with what Mil8 says here.

    DADT is dead. Will there be kicking and screaming, and foot dragging? Yes!

    In 10 years the kicking and screaming and foot dragging will not be remembered. The repeal of DADT will go down as an achievement for the Obama Administration (and the supporters in both parties...kudos to the Republicans who helped this get done).

    I'm gay and fairly strident on issues such as DADT. But, unlike some of my brethern, I did not come to "hate" Bill Clinton because he promised gay people he'd implement changes that would guarantee a right to serve the country, but ended up foisting DADT on us. That was a step....it was a baby step..like sticking your toe in a cold swimming pool, but it was a step for a country so massively mired in homophobia and Christian-rightist nonsense.

    As we saw in the recent election, the forces from the far right can still mass huge forces to sway the middle of the country. It's all right and good for gay people to be up in arms that Obama is "no friend'. But I swear to you, he's the best friend possible who we could have at this time in our country, when the tea party wackos are trying to get control and did in some sections of the country.

    By possible I mean given the stature of the office and the forces that could overturn the policies that office attempts to implement.

    So I agree with Mil8. This is an amazing moment in our history.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 31, 2010 5:50 PM GMT
    Socrates drank poison for corrupting Athenian youth, way before Jesus. He wasn't killed for suggesting they dress or act a different way...He was talking about how to choose a same sex lover, so as to have a functional relationships.
    We're weird. Some people scare easy.
    We make excellent military people. We are good at creating peace.
    These things have always been true...and...always will be.
    The Macro is DADT: the micro is how rational we as individuals, can hold our expectations for a whole society, governed by media interest, and mis-direction, and half asleep from apathy. (whatever: I hate punctuation)
    We can only be patient with wishy washy words. It's not that these people are stupid..they just think of themselves as beyond being able to sort out all the principles, that could bring about some truly 'better' rightness. The fuel for ambiguity.
    We gotta actually remember to actively stay in balance, as we dedicate ourselves to the reality of our surroundings; politically, and privately. We are seeing real movement in our society toward putting down tools that no longer work, and picking up new ones. We are scheduled to get good at it very soon.
    I hold that the military will save billions and billions by becoming genderless in less than fifty years. When the military becomes genderless, society will follow, and we will diffuse the psycho-sexual media hype. Gay parades, and sites like this will disappear, along with the need for Gay ass political groups.
    Now...in a time when we can still whine....Society has realized, at least, that the only way to get rid of us; is to give us our way, if it is at all rational. Conversely they can only hope we apathetically disappear as our issues run short on integrity.
    I am responsible for supporting the idea that an issue is "real". I know that the right education in our schools is the be all end all. We prune about the tendrils and extensions here; quite necessarily indeed, however half measure, in contrast to actual principle centered thinking actually applied. Like we see in a healthy household; the TRUTH is that both Mom, and Dad are Alpha. The trump card here, is genderlessness, as a new western economy; post "when the whip comes down".
    A circuit complete if you will. The reason our victorianisms won't go away is they support the abuses of capitalism, and we are supposed to have a hard time diffusing that, because we're dumb.
    Diddle on; idiots...You have no idea what you're doing....and you're gonna be fine.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 31, 2010 6:19 PM GMT
    nofearpdx said
    We are seeing real movement in our society toward putting down tools that no longer work, and picking up new ones. We are scheduled to get good at it very soon.


    This^
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 31, 2010 7:04 PM GMT
    Art_Deco said
    RiverRising saidI agree that Obama is no friend of the LGBT community. He's not getting my vote again, that's for sure (I'm going to gladly vote any Republican or Independent into office)


    I agree that Obama has not been a very good friend to gays. But a poor friend is better than a sworn enemy, which is what Republicans are to us. Why the Hell would you ever vote for them? Because you're having a gay hissy fit?

    Yeah, vote in more of those bigots who want us gays made illegal -- that'll sure show those Democrats! icon_rolleyes.gif


    I have to agree with Art_Deco on this point. Even though Obama has let us down left and right the absolute worst thing we could do for our causes would be to vote the enemy into office. If the gay community had backed McCain in the last election ending DADT would never have been a realistic option. Period. He would have made his intentions clear that he would veto the bill, and it never would have gotten off the ground.

    Is Obama the "fierce advocate" for the gay community he claimed to be? Hell NO! But Deco said it well: "a poor friend is better than a sworn enemy."

    The truth is we won't need Obama's help much when it comes to the Supreme Court deciding the issues of DOMA and gay marriage. For better or worse the Supreme Court is fairly insulated against the influence of the Executive branch (outside of his power to nominate Justices). All we'll need is his public statement that he supports these causes (which surely he could manage), and his power to appoint liberal, gay friendly Justices should the Court lose another member during Obama's term in office. The rest will be up to the lawyers, the voice of the American people, and of course the Justices themselves.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 31, 2010 8:52 PM GMT
    BlueBlur said

    Is Obama the "fierce advocate" for the gay community he claimed to be? Hell NO! But Deco said it well: "a poor friend is better than a sworn enemy."


    I agree with everything BlueBlur said in his post above. I do want to comment on this, though.

    It's all in point-of-view. To those who are on the far right side of this issue, Obama is evil incarnate. To those folks, he's not only tolerant of gay people, he's encouraging an immoral life style and abomination to God's laws. There are still a huge number of people like this in our country, unfortunately.

    Most do not live in Portland, or San Francisco, New York or Los Angeles, where we live in supportive enclaves wthin which these things are non-issues. So you push only so much to produce some measurable change, and wait for the other side to adjust their views and are pushing back with not too much strength.

    At some point, you push them all the way, as we did in this country, say, with voting rights for women in the beginning of the 20th century.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 01, 2011 1:59 AM GMT
    Another Obama bashing thread, despite the fact that he's done more for our community in 2 years than ANY OTHER president has ever done even in 8 years.

    I have a lot of issues with Obama (civil liberties, fiscal policy, bank bailouts) but this constant whining about what he "hasn't done" and how he "no friend" of the gay community are only hurting us. If I was in the White House now, I would have to wonder why I bothered opening myself up to attacks from the religious right for a bunch of whiny bitches. icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 01, 2011 4:28 AM GMT
    Christian73 saidAnother Obama bashing thread, despite the fact that he's done more for our community in 2 years than ANY OTHER president has ever done even in 8 years.

    I have a lot of issues with Obama (civil liberties, fiscal policy, bank bailouts) but this constant whining about what he "hasn't done" and how he "no friend" of the gay community are only hurting us. If I was in the White House now, I would have to wonder why I bothered opening myself up to attacks from the religious right for a bunch of whiny bitches. icon_rolleyes.gif


    1. ...this constant whining ... IS only hurting us.

    2. If I WERE in the White House now, ...

    3. But you ain't in the White House now, Blanche, but you ain't in the White House.

    4. O isn't wondering why he did it. He knows he did it now bofore he lost control of Congress, because he and the Dems desperately need the gay vote in 2012. And holy shit he almost blew it! This also why his thoughts on gay marriage are evolving. He and the Dems are in a tight spot.

    5. We, as Gays, must not lose sight of the true motivation of O. And not let ourselves be gulled into thinking he is a champion of Gay Rights. We have to use our power of the vote to get O to do anything and not let him think that we still have stars in our eyes concerning his election.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 01, 2011 4:41 AM GMT
    Caslon17000 saidGiven the retrograde and unhinged comments of Marine Gen. John Amos, it was likely that he'd gum up the works if he had more say.


    Comments which he has repudiated by being the first General since the repeal to say that he will work personally to ensure the repeal is successfully implemented.

    Doubtless, when the repeal is fully implemented within the next few months, you will still be attempting to sow doubt over its validity.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 01, 2011 4:43 AM GMT
    Mil8 said
    Caslon17000 saidGiven the retrograde and unhinged comments of Marine Gen. John Amos, it was likely that he'd gum up the works if he had more say.


    Comments which he has repudiated by being the first General since the repeal to say that he will work personally to ensure the repeal is successfully implemented.

    Doubtless, when the repeal is fully implemented within the next few months, you will still be attempting to sow doubt over its validity.

    ummm...in case you haven't gotten the news, you lost. ... icon_wink.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 01, 2011 4:49 AM GMT
    Caslon17000 saidummm...in case you haven't gotten the news, you lost. ... icon_wink.gif


    You've lost me. I haven't a clue what you are talking about (which, admittedly, is not unusual).
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 01, 2011 5:27 AM GMT
    Mil8 said
    Caslon17000 saidummm...in case you haven't gotten the news, you lost. ... icon_wink.gif


    You've lost me. I haven't a clue what you are talking about (which, admittedly, is not unusual).

    You lost. Cornwallis surrendered. You got no business tell us how we can criticize our gov't. If you have an comment germane to the content of the subject itself that can pass. But when you start telling us when, how long and in what manner we may hold our discussion, you've crossed the line.

    Don't you foreigners have countries of your own to discuss. Go start threads about your own crap.

    P.S. I still don't think Harry is Charles'.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 01, 2011 5:48 AM GMT
    Caslon17000 saidYou lost. Cornwallis surrendered. You got no business tell us how we can criticize our gov't. If you have an comment germane to the content of the subject itself that can pass. But when you start telling us when, how long and in what manner we may hold our discussion, you've crossed the line.

    Don't you foreigners have countries of your own to discuss. Go start threads about your own crap.

    P.S. I still don't think Harry is Charles'.


    And the recent antecedents of the British royal family are 'US business' how? Sorry, no deal.