Hearings in January on "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" military policy

[AnnInLa]

Will Dem Congress Overturn "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" Policy?
By Matt Corley | bio

Will the new Democratic-controlled House overturn the military's "Don't ask, don't tell" policy towards homosexuals in the military? According to the Boston Globe, Massachusetts Dem Reps. Barney Frank and Martin Meehan plan to hold hearings come January with the eventual goal of overturning it. The Globe observes that the move could send Dems into a "political minefield," noting that Bill Clinton's early Presidency was badly damaged by a push for openly gays to serve.

Meehan introduced the bill last year with 121 co-sponsors, but the GOP majority blocked hearings. Meehan's bill was backed by Nancy Pelosi — who will now be House Speaker. It will be interesting to see how she plays it this time around, when she's both under intense scrutiny and actually in a position to help make such a thing happen.

http://www.tpmcafe.com/blog/electioncentral/2006/nov/20/dems_meehan_and_frank_to_challenge_dont_ask_dont_tell


(my opinion is that don't-ask-don't-tell is ridiculous, but am finding myself wishing that that, for the first year, Dems would just concentrate on getting us out of Iraq, and keeping us out of Iran. Doing SO much the first year will give the electorate OVERLOAD, and they may regret voting for Dems...hope I'm wrong, just getting uneasy.)

[cali]

1. No.

The House is organized into committees that deal with different issues. Of course they need to deal with other issues.

[lancdem]

2. I know what you mean

but hearings may not be a big deal. I think our legislative agenda will overshadow this.

[ThomCat]

3. It's not a big deal with different committees address

different things simultaneously.

Are we supposed to have committees sitting doing nothing just because some other committee is trying to end the war?
:shrug:

This is a good move, and necessary. DADT has got to go.

[EFerrari]

4. It's NOT ridiculous; it's dangerous. If you are gay and you are

raped or harassed, you have NO recourse to the justice system.

Think about that for fifteen seconds.

[ThomCat]

5. That is so true.

Somehow we deserved it. x(

Police don't take it seriously, prosecutors don't want to pursue it, and juries believe that we somehow caused it or asked for it. There have been high profile gay bashings outside of gay bars that the cops refused to investigate. They wrote a report and did nothing else.

People get tormented, hurt, and sometimes killed and we don't get equal justice because we don't have equal rights.
:grr:

[EFerrari]

6. Like there's not enough RISK in being in the military in the first place?

Man. :mad:

[AnnInLa]

11. that's what I meant by ridiculous

[EFerrari]

27. Ah. Then, my reading is ridiculous. lol

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

7. This is the perfect time to pass MREA and repeal DADT.

We are at war. We are currently discharging highly valued soldiers in the name of DADT. During a time of war in the Mid East, the last thing we should be doing is discharging Arabic & Farsi translators and medical personnel. The Democrats can play this right and make the Republicans look weak on defense with this.

Our soldiers are already serving with openly gay soldiers, so the unit cohesion argument is out the window. The only other NATO country that bars openly GLB soldiers from serving is Turkey.

This is a policy that has cost us approximately $364 million dollars since it was implemented in 1993 and has resulted in the discharge of over 10,000 troops. Our country is more enlightened than it was 13 years ago, and we are at war, which we weren't then.

There are plenty of committees and hearings. Thank God our government can tackle multiple subjects, even if some people think no one has the ability to walk and chew gum at the same time.

What the Democrats need to do is finally start taking a fucking stand. Enough of this wussy pandering and let's start doing something. Putting something off because there's an election coming up in a year or two is an absurd way of handling things, because there will ALWAYS be an election coming up in a year or two.

This is a policy that results in our troops having absolutely no protection from discrimination based on their perceived sexual orientation. Yes, even straight soldiers suffer under this policy. Actually, it's often used to rape female troops ("if you say no, I'll say that you're a lesbian"). And in addition to the heterosexual troops who suffer under DADT, we have approximately 65,000 GLB soldiers serving, who could lose their livelihood at any moment.

[ThomCat]

8. The military doesn't take rape seriously anyway

So DADT just makes women even MORE vulnerable. x(

[riderinthestorm]

23. Small persnickety point: we are not at war

(unless you buy into this Admin's bogus WAT bullshit), we are occupiers in Iraq.

Otherwise great post.

[ThomWV]

9. With All The Shit Going On In The World Is That All They Have To Do

Who gives a good god dam?

Of all the shit concerning our military at this time that is the very least important thing out there. Are we as bad as the Republicans wasting time on bullshit while the contry rots?

[ThomCat]

10. Spoken like a true straight person who never pays the cost

of bigotry and homophobia.

[JackBeck]

13. You are aware that Arabic translators were fired because

they are gay? At a time when we needed them the most, they were fired because of DADT.

[Beelzebud]

14. Actually those were civilian pentagon contractors, but I get your point.

[JackBeck]

16. Here's the story I'm talking about:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/11/14/attack/main529418.shtml

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

18. Actually, they were soldiers, not civilian pentagon contractors.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6824206

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A29683-2003Dec2.html

And, if you really want to educate yourself, check out Servicemembers' Legal Defense Network.

[Beelzebud]

20. I stand corrected. Apologies for getting it wrong.

[JackBeck]

22. No problem.

:toast:

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

21. It's a matter of national security, which is hardly bullshit. nt

[Beelzebud]

12. I'm in the Bill Hicks school of thought regarding gays in the military.

"You want to know how I feel about gays in the military? Alright I'll tell you. Get ready to take notes because here it comes. Anyone dumb enough to want to be in the military, should be allowed in."

[UrbScotty]

15. One of Clinton's bigger mistakes

...up there with NAFTA and Lewinsky.

[JackBeck]

17. Don't forget DOMA! n/t

[Big Sky Boy]

25. His mistake was

In not understanding how to act presidential.

His Joint Chiefs threw a little hissy fit and threatened to resign if he followed through.

How different would the outcome have been if Clinton, in a very Trumanesque move, said very publicly:

"Fine. I am the Commander in Chief. My job is to set policy. Your job is to advise on how best to carry that out. If you will not or cannot do that, I will be happy to see all of your resignations on my desk tomorrow morning. Pronto."

If they had resigned, he could have appointed someone who agreed with him. But I don't think they would have. I think they would have come to the table with their tails between their legs and been willing to negotiate in good faith.

Trouble is that (1) Clinton doesn't lead that way and (2) The gay community really wasn't that important to him. He was too concerned about upsetting the people who hate us to go out on a limb.

[ThomCat]

26. Very true.

But Clinton rarely took a hard stance on anything. Even his biggest fans admit that he was the master of triangulation.

[cboy4]

19. Issues regarding equal human rights should never be delayed for

the sake of politics.

Not for one day, not for one hour.

[Big Sky Boy]

24. Agreed. There is never an "optimal time" to fight for your rights

DADT was a disaster on so many levels. Not the least of which were political.

Opposed by the Joint Chiefs, led by Colin Powell--a man with political aspirations of his own.

Lambasted by Senator Sam Nunn (D) from Georgia--a man with political aspirations of his own--rumored to be bitter about the fact that he was NOT selected for SECDEF.

No doubt if Frank & Pelosi pick it up again, there will be loud spoken ney sayers who (you guessed it) have political aspirations of their own.

That should not discourage us.

[Zhade]

28. Good. It's time to end this policy.

NT!