Don't Ask, Don't Tell

 The spin against Obama is starting to get pretty thick. We know the Obama administration has been trying to get rid of the 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' policy that has been in the US Military regarding the LGBT Community and their contribution to the US Armed Forces. He wants the policy ended.

 Granted, Obama spin doctored the same sex marriage thing in California - it really didn't matter what position he took, that was a state constitutionality issue there. He didn't really have a say in the process there anyway. You could say that was a low moment for him in terms of LGBT community relations.

 But he's never  opposed  the LGBT and his position here was sound. So why, then is a CNN Article written that states it is a setback to his administration, that a Federal Judge upheld the unconstitutionality of the policy. Here's the quote, before they edit it in place and online - and the source

 From CNN:

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/09/24/military.gay.reinstatement/index.html?hpt=C1

A federal judge has ordered the reinstatement of an openly lesbian former Air Force major who was dismissed from the military under the government's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy.

Judge Ronald Leighton of Tacoma, Washington, made his ruling Friday. It is the latest legal and political setback for the Obama administration

 

And then, a few para's later the same article states :

 President Barack Obama is pushing for a repeal of the controversial policy.

How then, is it a setback for the Obama administration that the policy he opposes, is being ruled unconstitutional?   I would argue this is far from a setback for a president and a country that is getting tired of the staid , conservative policies that take war heroes out of the service just before their retirement is due. 

It doesn't make sense, to me.  A president that clearly respects the LGBT and is working to establish a broader basis of respect and recognition for them, within our Armed Forces - should not be seen as having been dealt a setback, when that policy is ruled  unconstitutional.  Did I miss something?

 

 

Tags: (all tags)

Comments

1 Comment

I think you can blame Axelrod a bit for this one

He said something like this: the President opposes the California ballot initiative but at the same time he also opposes same sex marriage. Logically it makes no sense, since the ballot initiative is to prevent same sex marriage. Setting that aside, if he was really serious about suspending DADT, he could do it through a executive order pending the findings of the joint chief's commission report. What really irked many of his LGBT supporters is the kabuki votes that are being held in congress when they know it won't pass.Of course the Republicans are to blame for the obstruction and it comes as no suprise.

But why the equivocation on this? Again for political expediency. The administration doesn't want to fight on this issue, just like any other issue. Which basically glosses over the fact that the majority opinion in the US are for giving the LGBT community equal rights. Thus whenever you have an adminstration equivocating or pussy-footing on a hot-button issue, you will see these kinds of manufactured outrage in news articles.

by tarheel74 2010-09-25 09:23AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads