"White House Won't Commit to Halting DADT Discharges"

[Pab Sungenis]

Is it too soon to say "I told you so?"

http://metroweekly.com/poliglot/2010/12/white-house-wont-commit-to-hal.html

White House Won't Commit to Halting DADT Discharges -- a Move Urged By Reid, Levin
Posted by Chris Geidner on December 18, 2010 2:37 PM | Permalink

Saying that they had been "focused" on the vote, a senior White House aide intimately familiar with the administration's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" repeal efforts was unwilling to say whether President Obama agrees with Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Senate Armed Services Committee chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.) that DADT-releated investigations and discharges should be halted immediately.

...

Saying that "this vote today was an affirmation of a plan the president laid out in State of the Union address this year," the senior aide, who would not speak on the record as a condition of the interview, said that repeal was a topic of "the very first conversation" Obama had with the Pentagon leadership.

...

As to the White House view of ending discharges and investigations immediately, the senior aide who spoke with Metro Weekly said that the White House would be working the Pentagon "on how to implement this the right way."

So, even when Obama signs the bill, DADT is alive and well, and the fears of some (such as myself) that Obama is going to slow-walk or completely stall the "certification" and "review" process might not be so easy to dismiss in upcoming weeks.

[pearl]

1. Go Crazy!

give it a rest.

[Pab Sungenis]

3. "It's only one prayer."

Remember that? Ever since the transition Obama has gone out of his way to let down his gay supporters.

I congratulate the Senate for breaking the logjam. But let's see some real action out of the White House. Stop the discharges and end the policy quickly if you're serious about it.

[Scurrilous]

9. More like "It's only one song"...

...and "it's just a three minute prayer."

"Fierce Advocate!!1!"


Where are those guys anyway? I miss them.:P

[BlueJac]

2. Obama has to check with the Right Wingers ..........

and Bush for final approval!


Pathetic!

[truth2power]

7. You might think that's sarcasm, but I think it's true. n/t

[madinmaryland]

17. Obama's version of WWB&MD

What would boner and mcconny do?

[jaxx]

4. Stop it.

This is a momentous vote, there is no way it's bad.

[Pab Sungenis]

22. The vote is not bad.

Dragging this out will be.

[David__77]

5. I swear that if this is protracted, it will be devastating to the Democratic Party.

This shit has to be done quickly. Stop discharges immediately is the solution.

[nolabear]

6. So some anonymous person refuses to comment on a speculation and you take that

as proof of something? Honey, you're not helping yourself any with that kind of thing.

[Behind the Aegis]

8. I thought this vote today was a repeal. IT IS NOT.

It is CONDITIONAL. Therefore, it is not really repealed until the conditions are met. DADT IS NOT DEAD!

I was so excited; now, well, now I am just frustrated.

I guess it could be repealed shortly, or it could it dragged out...again. I guess we will have to wait...again.

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-111hr2965eah/pdf/BILLS-111hr2965eah.pdf

[Angry Dragon]

12. What the hell are they voting on then??

[Behind the Aegis]

16. It is basically a vote for an eventual repeal...if all conditions are met.

Here it is (apologies for not cleaning this up):

In the House of Representatives, U. S.,
December 15, 2010.
Resolved, That the House agree to the amendment of the
Senate to the bill (H.R. 2965) entitled ‘‘An Act to amend the
Small Business Act with respect to the Small Business Innovation
Research Program and the Small Business Technology
Transfer Program, and for other purposes.’’, with the following
HOUSE AMENDMENT TO SENATE AMENDMENT:
In lieu of the matter proposed to be inserted by the
amendment of the Senate, insert the following:
1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell
3 Repeal Act of 2010’’.
4 SEC. 2. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE POLICY CONCERNING
5 HOMOSEXUALITY IN THE ARMED FORCES.
6 (a) COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW ON THE IMPLEMENTA7
TION OF A REPEAL OF 10 U.S.C. 654.—
8 (1) IN GENERAL.—On March 2, 2010, the Sec9
retary of Defense issued a memorandum directing the
10 Comprehensive Review on the Implementation of a
11 Repeal of 10 U.S.C. 654 (section 654 of title 10,
12 United States Code).
2
•HR 2965 EAH
1 (2) OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE OF REVIEW.—The
2 Terms of Reference accompanying the Secretary’s
3 memorandum established the following objectives and
4 scope of the ordered review:
5 (A) Determine any impacts to military
6 readiness, military effectiveness and unit cohe7
sion, recruiting/retention, and family readiness
8 that may result from repeal of the law and rec9
ommend any actions that should be taken in
10 light of such impacts.
11 (B) Determine leadership, guidance, and
12 training on standards of conduct and new poli13
cies.
14 (C) Determine appropriate changes to exist15
ing policies and regulations, including but not
16 limited to issues regarding personnel manage17
ment, leadership and training, facilities, inves18
tigations, and benefits.
19 (D) Recommend appropriate changes (if
20 any) to the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
21 (E) Monitor and evaluate existing legisla22
tive proposals to repeal 10 U.S.C. 654 and pro23
posals that may be introduced in the Congress
24 during the period of the review.
3
•HR 2965 EAH
1 (F) Assure appropriate ways to monitor the
2 workforce climate and military effectiveness that
3 support successful follow-through on implementa4
tion.
5 (G) Evaluate the issues raised in ongoing
6 litigation involving 10 U.S.C. 654.
7 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by sub8
section (f) shall take effect 60 days after the date on which
9 the last of the following occurs:
10 (1) The Secretary of Defense has received the re11
port required by the memorandum of the Secretary
12 referred to in subsection (a).
13 (2) The President transmits to the congressional
14 defense committees a written certification, signed by
15 the President, the Secretary of Defense, and the
16 Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, stating each of
17 the following:
18 (A) That the President, the Secretary of De19
fense, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of
20 Staff have considered the recommendations con21
tained in the report and the report’s proposed
22 plan of action.
23 (B) That the Department of Defense has
24 prepared the necessary policies and regulations
4
•HR 2965 EAH
1 to exercise the discretion provided by the amend2
ments made by subsection (f).
3 (C) That the implementation of necessary
4 policies and regulations pursuant to the discre5
tion provided by the amendments made by sub6
section (f) is consistent with the standards of
7 military readiness, military effectiveness, unit
8 cohesion, and recruiting and retention of the
9 Armed Forces.
10 (c) NO IMMEDIATE EFFECT ON CURRENT POLICY.—
11 Section 654 of title 10, United States Code, shall remain
12 in effect until such time that all of the requirements and
13 certifications required by subsection (b) are met. If these
14 requirements and certifications are not met, section 654 of
15 title 10, United States Code, shall remain in effect.
16 (d) BENEFITS.—Nothing in this section, or the amend17
ments made by this section, shall be construed to require
18 the furnishing of benefits in violation of section 7 of title
19 1, United States Code (relating to the definitions of ‘‘mar20
riage’’ and ‘‘spouse’’ and referred to as the ‘‘Defense of Mar21
riage Act’’).
22 (e) NO PRIVATE CAUSE OF ACTION.—Nothing in this
23 section, or the amendments made by this section, shall be
24 construed to create a private cause of action.
25 (f) TREATMENT OF 1993 POLICY.—
5
•HR 2965 EAH
1 (1) TITLE 10.—Upon the effective date estab2
lished by subsection (b), chapter 37 of title 10, United
3 States Code, is amended—
4 (A) by striking section 654; and
5 (B) in the table of sections at the beginning
6 of such chapter, by striking the item relating to
7 section 654.
8 (2) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Upon the effec9
tive date established by subsection (b), section 571 of
10 the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal
11 Year 1994 (10 U.S.C. 654 note) is amended by strik12
ing subsections (b), (c), and (d).
Attest:
Clerk.

[Angry Dragon]

24. Thank you

no apologies needed

[Pirate Smile]

18. It is. The Secretary of Defense (Gates), Head of Joint Chief of Staff (Mullen) and

President Obama will all have to sign off on its implementation - which will happen. All three are for it but the military will get to roll it out how Gates and Mullen want to.

[Behind the Aegis]

25. It isn't. It isn't repealed UNTIL those things you mention HAPPEN.

It appears they will, but as of this moment, DADT HAS NOT been repealed.

[DFab420]

15. I think it's repealed...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/18/dont-ask-dont-tell-repeal_5_n_798636.html

just FYI

[Behind the Aegis]

20. Not just yet. It is one less hoop, though.

10 (c) NO IMMEDIATE EFFECT ON CURRENT POLICY.—
11 Section 654 of title 10, United States Code, shall remain
12 in effect until such time that all of the requirements and
13 certifications required by subsection (b) are met. If these
14 requirements and certifications are not met, section 654 of
15 title 10, United States Code, shall remain in effect.

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Angry Dragon]

11. the senior aide, who would not speak on the record as a condition of the interview

Here is a clear case of secret communications
this person should be arrested and put in jail today
can't have these types of leaks

[phleshdef]

13. The pentagon report describes a plan of action for the policy change. The repeal will be carried out

...in conjunction with those recommendations. These recommendations are mostly common sense stuff that should be expected for this sort of thing.

The fact of the matter is, we have bigots in the military. This is a big change for those bigots. We have to deal with that in a responsible way that protects the safety of gays and lesbians who will now be able to be open with their sexuality.

So new rules and processes for handling all the various situations that could arise from this change will be formulated and implemented. Thats how stuff works.

[Bluerthanblue]

23. voice of reason-

:hi:

[emulatorloo]

32. Don't confuse me with the facts

(THANKS)

[jaxx]

35. I'd guess they've been working on these details and it won't take long.

And Mr. Marine who opposes it might need to move along.

[redirish28]

14. WTF!?! Is this serious?! What the Freak was all this about?! He is no friend of the LGBT

community if this is true.

[Mortos]

29. It's not true

DADT discharges have stopped and haven't been done for months because of President Obama.

Please stop shitting on the President for just one day when he gets DADT repealed.

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[treestar]

30. Talk about letting other people get you to react before finding

out if they are lying! Don't be so easy to manipulate.

[Codeine]

34. Man, you're the perfect audience for this filth, aren't you?

I wish we could manipulate Republicans as easily as you can be led around.

[spanone]

19. the ink isn't dry yet.

jeeeeeeeeeeez

[BlueCheese]

21. I will be extremely disappointed...

... if there is a single soldier discharged for being gay after today.

[ProSense]

26. Here is the President's statement on the cloture vote:

From the WH:

Today, the Senate has taken an historic step toward ending a policy that undermines our national security while violating the very ideals that our brave men and women in uniform risk their lives to defend. By ending “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” no longer will our nation be denied the service of thousands of patriotic Americans forced to leave the military, despite years of exemplary performance, because they happen to be gay. And no longer will many thousands more be asked to live a lie in order to serve the country they love.

As Commander-in-Chief, I am also absolutely convinced that making this change will only underscore the professionalism of our troops as the best led and best trained fighting force the world has ever known. And I join the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, as well as the overwhelming majority of service members asked by the Pentagon, in knowing that we can responsibly transition to a new policy while ensuring our military strength and readiness.

I want to thank Majority Leader Reid, Senators Lieberman and Collins and the countless others who have worked so hard to get this done. It is time to close this chapter in our history. It is time to recognize that sacrifice, valor and integrity are no more defined by sexual orientation than they are by race or gender, religion or creed. It is time to allow gay and lesbian Americans to serve their country openly. I urge the Senate to send this bill to my desk so that I can sign it into law.

DADT is dead.

[Pathwalker]

36. I love it, especially that last paragraph. Thanks.

n/t

[treestar]

27. Still trying?

Can't have anything good ever happen!

[Tx4obama]

28. There haven't been any discharges under DADT since at least October 21st - DADT is dead

See here link here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=570614&mesg_id=570672

[DemocratSinceBirth]

33. Channeling The Ghost Of Jim Sagle

This thread ain't nothing but shit....

[Poll_Blind]

39. Who?

:shrug:

PB

[BzaDem]

37. What just passed today was not immediate repeal. He has to wait 60 days before they can certify.

The bill doesn't allow him to certify prior to 60 days before (and after that he needs the signature of Mullen and Gates).

That being said, they have already slowed discharges to such a crawl (to the extent the law allowed) that they aren't actually happening.

[alcibiades_mystery]

38. Oh, please

This is really starting to look like a litmus test on who has reasonable objections to Obama's policies. Anyone looking for a downside on DADT repeal is certainly bordering on unreasonable at this point.