NOVEMBER 22, 2009
   Login or create a new account  ?
Join Washington Blade on FacebookJoin Washingtonblade on MyspaceJoin Washington Blade on Twitter!
SLDN’s Aubrey Sarvis said discussion on repealing ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ would begin with Defense Secretary Robert Gates, not with the Joint Chiefs. (Blade photo by Dustin Lilley)
 
 
RELATED STORIES
What a difference 15 years makes: activists
Gay service members find warm reception on Hill, unlike ‘hostile’1993 hearings

A&E in brief


Military court nixes sodomy law
Ruling may help suits challenging gay ban

 
MOST VIEWED
 
Obama moving slowly on ‘Don’t Ask’ repeal?
Adm. Mullen, Obama had ‘informal’ talk on issue

HOME > NEWS > NATIONAL NEWS

Mar 20, 2009  |  By: Chris Johnson  | COMMENTS      Printer Friendly Version

New statements from administration officials indicate that a repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is moving at a slower pace than some would like.

Media reports earlier this year from the Boston Globe and the Associated Press stated that President Obama is consulting with defense advisers before initiating repeal of the law, which bans open gays from serving in the military.

But statements issued to the Blade this week from officials associated with the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Defense Department are raising questions about the level of consultation that has taken place.

Capt. John Kirby, spokesperson for Adm. Mike Mullen, chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said Obama brought up repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” a couple weeks ago in a discussion with Mullen, but not many details were discussed.

“The chairman has had an informal conversation with the president about this, but there was not a lot of substance to it in terms of detail,” Kirby said. “He was not asked for his recommendation, nor was he tasked to go provide that.”

Kirby said no memoranda were circulating among the Joint Chiefs addressing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

Defense Department spokesperson Cynthia Smith declined to comment on the extent to which DOD is considering repeal and would only discuss DOD’s commitment to the law.

“Our policy implements the law Congress passed after prolonged research and debate,” she said. “The department will continue to follow congressional mandate on homosexual conduct.”

The White House didn’t respond to a request for comment on the remarks.

Although the ban on openly gay people in the U.S. military is statutory and must be repealed through Congress or the courts, Obama made its repeal one of his campaign promises. Encouragement from the White House and alignment among defense officials is seen as important in getting the ball rolling for repeal.

But some experts on the military and “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” say the remarks from administration officials are of minimal importance.

Aubrey Sarvis, executive director of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, said he didn’t think the statement from Kirby represented any lack of urgency from the Obama administration.

“The administration has many things that they’re engaged with DOD on,” Sarvis said. “It does not come as a surprise to me that the president and Adm. Mullen have not had a detailed discussion at this point about ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.’”

Sarvis added that discussion on repealing the ban would begin with Defense Secretary Robert Gates, not with the Joint Chiefs.

Nathaniel Frank, who’s gay and a senior fellow at the Palm Center, a think-tank at the University of California in Santa Barbara, said the civilian population and not uniformed officials would instigate repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

“Obviously if the Joint Chiefs express confidence in their troops’ ability to make this change, it will go more smoothly,” he said. “But in a democracy, civilians control the military, not the other way around. And the Pentagon has already made clear it will follow orders on this.”

Lawrence Korb, a research fellow at the Center for American Progress, said he thought Obama’s discussion with Mullen on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” was noteworthy — even though it was brief — considering other defense issues facing the administration.

“I think that’s important,” Korb said. “You got two wars going on — that would not come up if [Obama] didn’t think it was important.”

Korb has been arguing in favor of lifting the ban since he testified during the 1993 congressional hearings on the issue.

Discussion of repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is happening at a time of increased scrutiny on the issue. Last week, U.S. Rep. Jim Moran (D-Va.) released updated discharge figures for “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” including 11 soldiers expelled by the Army in January for being gay.

In a March 12 statement, Moran said that the armed forces “continue to discharge vital service members” who are gay when operations in Iraq and Afghanistan have compromised the readiness level of the military.

The 11 discharged soldiers include a human intelligence collector, a military police officer, four infantry personnel, a health care specialist, a motor transport operator and a water treatment specialist.
Moran said he plans on releasing monthly reports on discharges as he receives the information.

Sarvis said SLDN has been reaching out to DOD, although the organization has had limited discussions with the department. He said SLDN has yet to hold meetings with Gates or other key officials who would be involved in planning the repeal.

“I think where we are, frankly, is there’s a process going on between the White House and the secretary’s ...

Page 1 Page 2 continue reading


email       password


Please review and follow Washington Blade’s current Comment and Discussion Policy. Guidelines updated as of August 22nd, 2009. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.

jeri .
0
IMHO, there is nothing to discuss. the military has banned sexual orientation, not "homosexual conduct". we are not talking about someone acting improperly, we are talking about people who merely exist. it is government sanctioned discrimination against the men and women who serve, and who have served. it is blatant bigotry, ugly as sin, and a national DISGRACE. this nation should realize by NOW that discrimination and bigotry have served no function other than to keep us divided. this policy needs to go NOW.

Posted 3/20/09 - 2:12 PM


jeri .
1
discrimination in the military should have been part of the ENDA that went before congress. our heroes who serve are just "another" minority that was thrown under the bus.

Posted 3/20/09 - 2:19 PM


Sanchez
Laurel, Md
-3
Of course he's moving slowly - repeal of DADT is improper as I've stated multiple times before. This is, well, the only area, that The Messiah and I agree. jeri.: There's really no hope for you. You, like all your left wing loony friends are genetically predisposed to not understanding facts and logic.

Posted 3/20/09 - 6:28 PM


jeri .
0
it is always the right time to do the right thing. repealing DADT is the right thing. that is the factual reality. what is there left to understand?

Posted 3/21/09 - 2:06 AM


wjf
Arlington, VA
0
Sanchez (aka “Phyllis Schlafly) Part 5: Outside of outright bigotry, there is no reason to continue the ban against gays and lesbians serving openly in the U.S. military. Sanchez (aka “Phyllis Schlafly) , I know that it is a challenge for you, but we make our decisions based on fact and reason, not mindless prejudice. As I have recommended before, Dr. Nathaniel Frank has just authored an excellent book on this important issue titled, “Unfriendly Fire: How the Gay Ban Undermines the Military and Weakens America.”

Posted 3/22/09 - 2:26 PM


wjf
Arlington, VA
0
Sanchez (aka “Phyllis Schlafly) Part 4: Of the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, two (United Kingdom and France) allow gays and lesbians to serve. Countries that do not allow gays to serve openly are China, and Russia; certainly these countries would not be our model for social policy. Israel is the only country in the Middle East that allows gays and lesbians to serve openly. Again, these countries have had no difficulty incorporating gays and lesbians into their military.

Posted 3/22/09 - 2:26 PM


wjf
Arlington, VA
0
Sanchez (aka “Phyllis Schlafly) Part 3: Western military forces have removed policies excluding open gays and lesbians. Of the 26 countries that participate militarily in NATO, more than 20 allow open lesbians and gays. A recent University of California study (i.e., Palm Center, University of California at Santa Barbara) reports that in these 20 NATO countries, unit cohesion, performance and morale did not suffer because of the presence of open gay service members.

Posted 3/22/09 - 2:26 PM


wjf
Arlington, VA
0
Sanchez (aka “Phyllis Schlafly) Part 2: Your arguments against allowing gay and lesbians to serve openly in the military were the very arguments made against admitting blacks and women in the U.S. military. After these bans were lifted, the armed services had no problem incorporating either group. There is no reason to believe that this would not be the case for gays and lesbians. We are fortunate to have excellent comparative data from other countries that support the acceptance of gays and lesbians into the U.S. military.

Posted 3/22/09 - 2:27 PM


wjf
Arlington, VA
1
Sanchez (aka “Phyllis Schlafly) Part 1: Once again, you present neither fact nor logic but simple regurgitate the “unfit to serve” bromide of those who hate us – which combined with so many of your other bizarre posts speaks to substantial internalized homophobia. Therefore, I am repeating my post – based on fact and reason – why the repeal of the ban and its underlying policy is essential for the military and good for America.

Posted 3/22/09 - 2:27 PM


Sanchez
Laurel, Md
-3
wjf: You know, every rant you make proves yourself as fundamentally opposed to free speech - a concept held so dearly by liberal left loonies. Why do you want to silence free speech, which is the essence of a free society? Think about it, please. Your actions condemning my comments and imploring me to stop posting (flaming me) is in direct opposition to what I suspect you hold most dearly and want so desperately for the gay community - equal protection, including free speech, under the law.

Posted 3/22/09 - 6:57 PM


wjf
Arlington, VA
0
Sanchez (aka “Phyllis Schlafly) Part 2: In my audit of your posts just last week, you disparaged women, transgender persons, gays and lesbians serving in the armed forces, gay and lesbians who want to marry, Gay Pride, Ashton Kutcher, President Obama, the appointment of openly gay and lesbian people to the new Administration, and those who contract HIV. And this week, your venom only continues. Therefore, it makes perfect sense for you to stop reading the Blade and post to conservation blogs and sites. Who knows, maybe Fred Phelps has a special place for you in his organization.

Posted 3/23/09 - 3:27 PM


wjf
Arlington, VA
0
Sanchez (aka “Phyllis Schlafly) Part 1: Your cry for free speech is identical to Ann Coulter’s after being criticized for repeatedly calling John Edwards “a faggot!” Given your constant posts, you are the last person to claim surpassed speech. The real issue is what you post. You consistently use the language (e.g., gay rights as “special rights”), and express the opinions of those who hate us. Same *?&@!, different flies! My problem (and that of many others) is your inane opinions, devoid of fact or reason. In this venue, prepare to be criticized!

Posted 3/23/09 - 3:27 PM


wjf
Arlington, VA
1
For the life of me, I can’t understand what there is to support in the Republican Party. You were repudiated in the last election. Yet, you still want to play by the same, failed playbill. The legacy of the past eight years (from both a republican president and congress) is two wars, one of which was illegal; near universal contempt for the U.S. around the world; and a devastated economy impacting the entire world. For all of you republicans who are outraged by the size of the stimulus package and the purchase of toxic debt, get real - this is the cost to cleanup the mess that you left.

Posted 3/23/09 - 4:28 PM


Sanchez
Laurel, Md
-6
wjf: I encourage you to buy a punching bag to rid yourself of your inner demons, hatred, and anger. But, then again, a lot of gay men are in your shoes...

Posted 3/23/09 - 5:33 PM


wjf
Arlington, VA
1
Sanchez: Foolish psychobabble and an inability to respond with fact and reason. If you are going to post, bring something of substance to the table.

Posted 3/23/09 - 6:16 PM


ReasonableDoubt
Washington, DC
4
QuoteSanchez: wjf: I encourage you to buy a punching bag to rid yourself of your inner demons, hatred, and anger. But, then again, a lot of gay men are in your shoes...

The very fact that you are able, with an assumedly straight face, to call anyone else out for being "hateful" is laqughable at best, and patheticly sad at the worst.

Posted 3/24/09 - 2:11 PM


mykelb
0
Obviously, some folks postingn on here have the psychiatry of one brainwashed by religion and abused the public school system. With a high sense of misguided morality and a low ability for critical thinking, we get the self-hating fag.  One of the best reasons for calling for a Constitutional Amendment for the Freedom from Religion (as opposed to the Freedom of Religion).  Critical thinking will never be admired until we get rid of mysticism and mythology from American insitutions including our Constitution.

Posted 3/26/09 - 1:20 PM


mykelb
3
Obviously, some folks posting on here have the psychiatry of one brainwashed by religion and abused the public school system. With a high sense of misguided morality and a low ability for critical thinking, we get the self-hating fag.  One of the best reasons for calling for a Constitutional Amendment for the Freedom from Religion (as opposed to the Freedom of Religion).  Critical thinking will never be admired until we get rid of mysticism and mythology from American insitutions including our Constitution.

Posted 3/26/09 - 1:20 PM


Spacer
Spacer
Spacer

Washington Blade Window Media CONTACT US: E-mail | Masthead | Location and Directions
© 2009 | A Window Media LLC Publication | Privacy Policy
Advertise with us!