White House bars gay groups from military families event

[Viva_La_Revolution]

Source: cbs

Today marks the launch of Michelle Obama and Jill Biden's "Joining Forces" initiative to "support and honor America's service members and their families." The two women, along with President Obama and Vice President Biden, will make remarks at the White House in conjunction with the kickoff.

Shortly before the event began at noon, Servicemembers United, which represents gay and lesbian troops and veterans, complained that the White House had barred civilian representatives of gay and lesbian military families from the event.

"It is rather unfortunate that both East Wing and West Wing staff have refused to allow a representative of gay military families to even be in the room at an event that is supposed to honor their commitment and sacrifice," said Alexander Nicholson, Executive Director of Servicemembers United.

Kristina Schake, Communications Director for the First Lady, explained the decision this way in an email to CBS News.




Read more: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20053120-503544.html

[DFab420]

1. The reason being that Don't Ask Don't Tell

is still not repealed due to the certification process and those members of our military would be opening themselves up to political pot shots from the right, looking to hurt Obama, would go after them and there service. Thanks for posting such a one sided view of the situation though, sure did make a better story.

[RainDog]

2. well, Obama HAS continually failed to stand up to right wing bigots and homophobes

so it is important to know that it's okay in so many people's pov if it's politically expedient for him to treat others as second class citizens because some right winger might criticize him for doing the right thing.

...since they never would otherwise.

It's a good thing Obama wasn't leading the civil rights movement in the 60s - otherwise it's doubtful someone of his skin tone would be president today.

[SoapBox]

7. Ditto....

...I try and try to be 100% supportive of President Obama but...

he makes it difficult.

[JTFrog]

13. I guess I just don't get it.

In just two years, DADT has been struck down; He signed the Matthew Shepard Act into law; He extended the Ryan White Care Act; He lifted the HIV travel ban; He ordered hospitals to give same sex partners visiting rights and the right to make medical decisions for their partners; He extended benefits to same sex partners of federal workers; He appointed the first openly gay cabinet member and he has hired more openly gay staff members than Clinton and Bush combined. He has also called on congress to repeal DOMA. And he's held an anti-bullying conference.

There is probably stuff I've forgotten or missed here.

Yes, there is much more work to do to ensure equality for all, but I do believe that this President is moving in the right direction. Day by day one day at a time.

:shrug:

[EFerrari]

23. Well, DADT hasn't been struck down if Michelle Obama is still

honoring it.

[Name removed]

29. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Ignis]

38. Your subject line, at least, is accurate.

[JTFrog]

41. Ain't that the truth. n/t

[Betty Karlson]

62. I miss the days when Obama could still disappoint me.

I'm not even suprised anymore. He is a weak, two-faced politician when GLBT people are involved. And he is surrounded by disgusting bigots like Jarrett. Whatever his other qualities, gay people have nothing to expect from this man (nor from his Republican opponents).

[Fearless]

34. +10000

[The Philosopher]

4. But the President still taking credit

for repealing DADT, right? Or is he waiting until after the certification?

[Renew Deal]

43. I don't know if he's taking credit or not

But he sure deserves it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KGOWYT8NatM

[atreides1]

5. Got some new for you

1.The Gay members,not "those members" of the US military are already taking political pot shots from the right.
2.The right has so many other issues to hurt Obama with, this one is just a drop in the bucket.
3.The right has already gone after Gays in the military and their service and still are.

Instead of this:
"Joining Forces" initiative to "support and honor America's service members and their families."

Maybe it would have been more honest to put it this way:

"Joining Forces" initiative to "support and honor America's service members and their families,who aren't Gay."




:donut:

[Viva_La_Revolution]

6. I just posted the article, I didn't write it.

:shrug:

[EFerrari]

19. It's much more important to protect Obama than to include

a representative for gay families at this event?

Got it.

[FLAprogressive]

42. Remember, Obama is more important than anything else, he appoints SCOTUS justices you know.

:eyes:

[DRoseDARs]

33. That'd be true if it weren't complete bullshit...

It was suggested, and the White House flatly refused, that they invite out individuals who had already retired from military service thus rendering concerns of DADT moot since it would be non-applicable.

[Zhade]

72. Total fucking fail, since A MAJORITY OF AMERICANS FAVOR REPEALING DADT.

So how exactly could republicans being bigoted douches on this issue hurt him if he SIDES WITH THE AMERICAN PEOPLE by letting GLBT service members attend?

He's a bigot toward GLBTers. You just don't want to face it.

[Tarheel_Dem]

3. Nice selection of quotes. NOT!

Kristina Schake, Communications Director for the First Lady, explained the decision this way in an email to CBS News.

"The President has been crystal clear that the Administration is moving forward with the repeal of 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' quickly and efficiently," she said. "However, it still remains the law. The White House, including the First Lady and Dr. Biden, look forward to working with the families of gay and lesbian service members after certification occurs and repeal goes into effect."

Sounds like the Log Cabin is still at it. :eyes:

[zipplewrath]

9. And this helps how?

Really, I read that part. It made it worse. "You won, but you didn't win".

[Tarheel_Dem]

12. If you're prone to outrage, purely for the sake of outrage, then have at it.

And for the other respondent, "propoganda" works both ways. This crap article is proof of that. :eyes:

[EFerrari]

17. I can't think of any group of military families that needs more support

than gay families, can you?

[MikeW]

44. you cant? Unbelievable ... think before you speak

How about spouses and children that have lost loved ones.

Children left without one or more parents due to war(s).

How about families left with a sever ly disabled veteran's care.

Please go right ahead push your agenda ahead of these people who have lost their lives.

Never seen such a selfish statement on DU before.

Let me tell you ... THOSE THAT DO AND HAVE SERVED GAY OR STRAIGHT DONT AGREE WITH YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[EFerrari]

45. And how do any of those groups you name exclude gay families.

Who have had to deal with all those losses AND discrimination?

Maybe you should take your own advice on this one.

[Name removed]

46. Deleted message

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

[EFerrari]

47. And it's difficult to understand why you believe

that gay families haven't lost loved ones in combat

that gay families don't deal with disability

that gay families don't struggle with absence, poverty or lack of resources or opportunity

that gay families don't deal with the entire complement of problems all military families deal with plus the extra special bonus of discrimination.

Thank you for the illustration.

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

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

[EFerrari]

50. So, it's all right to discriminate against a group if it's a small one?

Really?

[Name removed]

54. Deleted message

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

[EFerrari]

55. Because I am absolutely clear on what I wrote

and you apparently are still not clear on the role or status of gay families in the military.

[Name removed]

56. Deleted message

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

[EFerrari]

57. My position is that discrimination is wrong.

And, you're very welcome. Any time.

[MikeW]

58. thats NOT what you said

You said YOU "can't think of any group of military families that needs more support"

that implies they are MORE important than anyone else.

Go ahead though ... try to backtrack the statement. It stands as is and means EXACTLY what it says.

Normally on DU most posters have enough consideration for others and would have posted "all families deserve our support" but not YOU.

[EFerrari]

59. I'm not backtracking in any way.

Maybe the third time will be the charm for you.

Gay military families deal with all the stresses and losses of any other military family AND they deal with virulent discrimination that seeks to make their sacrifices invisible.

Again, thank you for the illustration.

[Cherchez la Femme]

71. Yes, his "outrage" and "agenda"

that you made sure you worked in -- you've got your talking points
--and insults--
down pat. Congrats.
But you're missing out on the "gay lifestyle"! (Hey, there's always room for improvement!)

Even so, heck, YOU deserve a medal! F* those stupid gays & their families who merely want equal benefits and equal rights! :patriot:

[Cherchez la Femme]

11. Nothin' a little propaganda can't fix

Win!

[freshwest]

36. You mean the Log Cabin Republicans, don't you? Or is there a Democratic branch? You confuse me.

That's not hard to do without hearing the voice in your head.

Talking to the voice in my head, that is.

Peace.

:hi:

[Altoid_Cyclist]

8. This is yet another tepid response from the current administration.

They are all so afraid of the mere possibility of landing in hot water with the RW nuts that they seem to always choose the CYA middle of the road option.

Not very much in the way of "change" comes about by always ducking the issue in order to play it safe.

[catgirl]

21. Read the article

There is no tepid response, just a statement on the reality of the situation. This attack is totally unfair.

[EFerrari]

30. This protest is completely fair.

The WH statement is some alternate reality where Michelle Obama can be discharged for violating DADT.

[Cherchez la Femme]

10. That's our Fierce Advocate

fiercely advocating away! :patriot:

[catgirl]

14. A little misleading, huh?

You could have posted the statement from the White House instead of these misleading words. Until DADT goes into effect, their
hands are tied.


"The President has been crystal clear that the Administration is moving forward with the repeal of 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' quickly and efficiently," she said. "However, it still remains the law. The White House, including the First Lady and Dr. Biden, look forward to working with the families of gay and lesbian service members after certification occurs and repeal goes into effect."

[EFerrari]

16. Baloney. There are plenty of retired people who could have represented

without negative consequences to anyone. Had anyone been serious about inclusiveness.

[catgirl]

18. I guess you must have the inside scoop then

They seemed to want a specific representative there. I just don't get the "outrage" when the explanation is clear and makes total sense.

[EFerrari]

20. The explanation makes no sense whatsoever.

Had the WH been serious about inclusion, they invite a gay retiree. It's that simple.

[catgirl]

22. They CAN'T be inclusive until the law comes into effect

What is so difficult to understand about that?

[EFerrari]

24. LOL. It's not difficult to understand, it's bs.

:)

There's nothing in DADT that prevents Michelle Obama from reaching out into the community and finding someone who is retired and therefore, has no risk of "telling" by their attendance.

[catgirl]

25. I'm not going to have a pointless argument with you

This is cut and dry and you just want to be hostile. Have a nice day.

[EFerrari]

27. Yes, it is cut and dried. Gay families were excluded from this event

for no reason whatsoever.

Epic fail for what should have been a non-contrversial, community building event.

[catgirl]

31. except for the reason stated in the article

but you are obviously pretending that you don't see it and that you don't see it when someone
has to point it out to you, so one can only wonder what your agenda really is.

It will be thrilling when everyone is included. Will you be happy then???????

Btw, I'm done with this "conversation".

[EFerrari]

32. The reason stated in the article is B.S.

And yes, I have an anti-BS agenda, you bet.

[Zhade]

73. You're wrong. The other poster is correct -- a retiree CAN'T BE PUNISHED UNDER DADT.

All the WH had to do was invite one. Period.

You lost the argument.

[zipplewrath]

61. Elanor Roosevelt

Who ignored segregation laws, in public buildings, while it was still "the law", when she was First Lady.

It's called taking a stand.

The Obama's took one, with the wrong side.

[Betty Karlson]

63. Good for her.

Michelle Obama has a lot to learn from Mrs Roosevelt. There's more to life than "culticating your garden" (whatever Voltaire says).

[ceile]

37. Doesn't make sense when you look at who else was there.

Business people with no connection to military families...? They could have easily let an administrative/non-military person attend to represent the families, but they didn't allow that either.

[Bluebear]

67. "outrage" in quotation marks, so you're mocking people now?

[Ignis]

39. Just like his "hands were tied" on Donnie McClurkin, right?

:eyes:

[Bluebear]

65. +

[Name removed]

40. Deleted message

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

[Bluebear]

66. Any excuse for discrimination, huh?

[Corruption Winz]

15. This feels like a cheap attempt at making the president look bad...

The law is still in place. He plans on changing the law. However, he can't speed up time. If the law was certified within 2 months, and this gathering took place in three, I doubt this article would have been written.

[Amonester]

26. May have to emphasize the sentence, like:

The law is still in place.

Yep. Either DUers want "a return to" the rule of law, or they don't.

Sometimes, it's really confusing...

[EFerrari]

28. The law that is still in place doesn't prevent the first lady

from inviting a representative from the gay families community to the White House that is no longer in uniform.

So, the sentence should be

The BS is still in place.

[democrank]

35. This discussion is rich.

I can hardly believe my eyes. Democrats making excuses for discrimination. What`s next? Closing down clinics so we can have enough money for oil company tax breaks? Secret US prisons in Afghanistan?

[Melinda]

48. "Democrats making excuses for discrimination"

Doesn't that just make you feel as if you are living in another dimension, or perhaps, BIZARRO WORLD:

In the Bizarro world of "Htrae" ("Earth" spelled backwards), society is ruled by the Bizarro Code which states "Us do opposite of all Earthly things! Us hate beauty! Us love ugliness! Is big crime to make anything perfect on Bizarro World!". In one episode, for example, a salesman is doing a brisk trade selling Bizarro bonds: "Guaranteed to lose money for you". Later, the mayor appoints Bizarro No. 1 to investigate a crime, "Because you are stupider than the entire Bizarro police force put together". This is intended and taken as a great compliment. :crazy:

Watching EFerrari getting chastized by Dems for speaking out about the WHITE HOUSE EXCLUDING GAYS AND THEIR FAMILES? :wtf:

Too fucking unreal indeed.

[EFerrari]

52. I guess I don't care very much about being chastised.

It's more like resentment about not being able to feel good that someone is finally doing something for military families. After 8 years of Bush, it would have been such a relief for our president to finally lead on that. Or our first lady. Or, anyone.

Not this time.

[bemildred]

51. Yet another stupid move. nt

[Zorra]

53. How ineffably sad. Not long ago, black folks would have been barred from a similar event.

My, how some things never change.
:cry:

[DeSwiss]

60. "The good 'ol American Double-Standard."

"It's the old American double-standard -- you know: 'say one thing, do something different.' And of course the country is founded on the double standard, that's our history. We were founded on a very basic double-standard. This country was founded by slave-owners who wanted to be free." ~ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Rlqjxst6xU">George Carlin

- K&R

[Solly Mack]

64. K&R

[ReggieVeggie]

68. kick and rec

[_ed_]

69. This stems from his personal bigotry against gay people

From the man himself: In an interview with the Chicago Daily Tribune, Obama said, "I'm a Christian. And so, although I try not to have my religious beliefs dominate or determine my political views on this issue, I do believe that tradition, and my religious beliefs say that marriage is something sanctified between a man and a woman."

I wonder if, as a Christian, he also wants to prevent the divorced from remarrying?

He's far to the right of even Alan Simpson.

[Betty Karlson]

70. Mr Obama confuses tradition with discrimination.

And he confuses Jesus' message with bigotry. I dislike the president more every day. I hope the GOP gets trounced in 2012, but Obama... needs to get a hold of himself, and stop hurting GLBT people. This is disgusting.

[Zorra]

74. Oh, boy. We're in deep shit. Our President believes in Fractured Fairytales.

Lucky for him he's not a Mormon; he'd be forced to hate himself.