Meeting under way at White House discussing emerging deal on repealing DADT

[Pirate Smile]

TALK UNDER WAY: Congressional leaders, gay rights advocates and Pentagon officials are meeting at the White House Monday morning to discuss an emerging deal on repealing the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" ban on gays in the military, sources say.
– Jen DiMascio (10:25 a.m.)

http://www.politico.com/politico44/wbarchive/whiteboard05242010.html

[jenmito]

1. K&R. PLEASE let them realize they don't need the rest of the year to "study" the issue.

That's bull.

[donco6]

2. "Deal"? What deal is there to be made?

Repeal it. That's the deal. What are they bartering away?

[jenmito]

3. Maybe it's a "deal" to repeal it WITHOUT the "study" that would last 'til Dec. n/t

[Pirate Smile]

5. I think it has to do with time. Pentagon agreed to not fight it but wanted time. I think they are

trying to get an agreement to move up the time frame.

[donco6]

6. In return for what, though?

A deal has give and take on both sides? What could we be offering the bigots?

[jenmito]

7. How 'bout the deal is the people promise NOT to keep "bothering" them?! n/t

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

8. Something not directly related to DADT, probably.

Like keeping bases open or something like that.

[donco6]

9. Oh, that could be.

It's too bad we should have to "deal" when our position is just doing the right thing. But I guess that's the way it all works.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

16. That's definitely the way it works.

Heck, people even work to cut deals when they know they'll go along with something in the first place. Politics is about getting every last bit that you can. If I were in a position where it was in no way obvious that I'd vote to repeal DADT (ie. it wasn't a campaign promise or I came from a swing district), you can bet your sweet ass I'd say, "I'll vote for it if you give $4 million to cancer research at a university in my district." Why not get both things you want at the same time?

[ComtesseDeSpair]

4. Deal?

Wasn't DADT a "deal" in the first place? I see no room for negotiation here - get rid of the damned thing. It's simple!

[greencharlie]

10. all POLITICS...

they're AFRAID to do it before November.

cowards.

[Arkana]

11. Well, let's hope it becomes more than just a talk.

Pelosi has promised that DADT will be a bad memory by Christmas--I hope she's right.

This is one of the things that I take issue with Obama for--it's an unpopular policy, he has majorities in both houses, and repeal has the added benefit of being the right thing to do. All the conditions are there.

[Jennicut]

12. I don't care what the deal is, just do it. Soon, please.

[Arkana]

13. Exactly.

I really don't understand what's taken so long (and if anyone tells me it's because Obama hates gay people then you can just go to hell. That's not the reason.)

Majorities in both houses have said they would back repeal.

[Jennicut]

14. Obama is trying not to piss anyone off but that is impossible.

Some in the military will be pissed off no matter what. Gates said he wanted to hear what service members felt about repealing DADT and that is what party of the study is for. But we have studied members before. I know they want to repeal it in a way that does not cause an uproar in the military but you just cannot avoid some being upset.

[Tailormyst]

15. WHY do we need a deal?

Obama keeps saying he is a "fierce advocate" and he is in charge of the fucking military. There should only have to be a deal if The groups are NOT on the same side.

[Political Tiger]

21. Maybe because only Congress can repeal DADT? n/t

[Hippo_Tron]

24. Because the President never served in the military

And the public perception of a President who never served forcing a policy on those who are serving is not a good one. Like it or not, we have a first amendment and military officers can grab the nearest microphone and trash the President and the worst he can do to them is fire them for insubordination.

[Tailormyst]

27. So that is his cover? He is afraid those under him will get mad?

Good thing they didn't wait for the military to be on board for integration of races huh?

Coaward or Bigot, one or the other, it really is that simple.

[Hippo_Tron]

28. It's not a question of the people under him getting mad

It's a question of the people under him getting mad and waging a PR campaign against him. Harry Truman was a World War I combat veteran and the Democratic Party was not widely perceived by the American people to be "weak on defense" and unsympathetic toward the military back then as they are today (although that started right about as Truman's term was ending). Furthermore, Truman integrated the military by executive order. Obama has to get a law overturned and that requires convincing enough people in congress to vote to overturn it and that means getting the messaging right.

If this is widely perceived by the American people to be a culturally liberal President who knows nothing about the military because he never served forcing a radical agenda on our brave men and women in uniform then it may not pass congress at all.

If it is perceived by the American people as a vital policy shift that is in the best interest of our national security then it will almost certainly pass congress. In order to create this perception, it helps drastically if the Pentagon is on board.

[Tailormyst]

29. Good thing Truman wasn't afraid of pissing people off

People get pretty cavalier about things when it isn't THEIR rights being shat all over.

[Hippo_Tron]

30. Truman issued the executive order in 1948 (three years after taking office)

De-segregation of the military was completed about 6 years after that. So yea, I think he was a bit concerned about the politics of the situation and who he might piss off.

[totodeinhere]

17. No deals. Just repeal it now. n/t

[Cha]

18. KR..thank you Pirate Smile.

:)

[Drunken Irishman]

19. Why? Obama should be spending every waking hour at the Gulf...

Not dealing with other trivial domestic crap.

:sarcasm:

[backscatter712]

20. If the result is a full repeal of DADT, take the deal! n/t

[treestar]

22. How dare they talk about that, the Gulf is DYING!

:sarcasm:

[cali]

23. fuck that. just repeal the odious thing

[terrya]

25. Read the fine print

"Further, completion of repeal would require certification from President Barack Obama, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, and Joint Chiefs chair Adm. Mike Mullen that the new law will not have a negative impact on readiness, recruitment, retention, and other key factors affecting the military.

The language would not include a nondiscrimination policy but rather will return authority for open service by gays and lesbians to the Pentagon."

http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2010/05/24/Deal_on_DADT/

Seriously, what the fuck is this? Certification by the President, Secretary Gates and Admiral Mullen about any "negative impact" on readiness and other factors? Then what the hell is this year long study by the Pentagon we're supposed to wait for?

And the second part is REALLY sounding off alarm bells. Hell, if there isn't any kind of non-discrimination policy, they could go back to pre-1993.

I'm VERY much interested in what SLDN and others...like, for instance, Dan Choi, thinks about this deal. I'm detecting a rather unpleasant smell. I wish I was wrong.

[Thrill]

26. They have to find away to hide Democrats who don't want to vote for it

.