Obama to address 'Don't ask, don't tell' in State of Union speech

by Susan Marie Kovalinsky | January 27, 2010 at 01:22 pm

472 views | 38 Recommendations | 13 comments

Quote

"It is going to happen," said a source in the gay-rights community. "And it is going to be brought up in a somewhat significant way. But what that significance is we don't know." A Hill aide confirmed that the White House communications department told congressional press colleagues that the president would discuss the policy during his prime-time speech.

HuffPost

Update: Here is the section in which he speaks on the repeal of DADT (NY Times)

. . . We must continually renew this promise. My Administration has a Civil Rights Division that is once again prosecuting civil rights violations and employment discrimination. We finally strengthened our laws to protect against crimes driven by hate. This year, I will work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are. We are going to crack down on violations of equal pay laws – so that women get equal pay for an equal day's work. And we should continue the work of fixing our broken immigration system – to secure our borders, enforce our laws, and ensure that everyone who plays by the rules can contribute to our economy and enrich our nations.

According to Huffington Post, President Barack Obama intends to directly address the military's "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy in tonight's State of the Union address .

Huffington Post claims sources on Capitol Hill and in the gay-rights community revealed this to them.

Gay advocacy groups have long been frustrated with Obama, because they believe he should use his Presidential power to call for its repeal.

Whether he will assert this tonight in his State of the Union address remains to be seen.

The pressure on Obama to address DADT during the speech has been mounting for several weeks now, as congressional negotiators discuss overturning the law, which allows gay members to serve in the military but only with their sexuality hidden, in the upcoming defense budget.
During his presidential campaign, Obama vowed to end the policy. Once in office, he outraged the gay rights community by putting it off.

On Wednesday morning, another effort was made to preemptively move Obama's hand. General John Shalikashvili, who helped implemente "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff during the Clinton presidency, released a statement calling for a full repeal.

0 See all footage | View Slideshow

Share: email story | add to any | | facebook | stumbleupon

recommend Sign In or Join to post comments

Karl Gotthardt - albertacowpoke

at 13:33 on January 27th, 2010

My bet is that his priority tonight is jobs. But who knows? What does it take to get rid of a stupid policy.

Grace H

at 14:05 on January 27th, 2010

I never will understand the reasoning for this policy in the first place, but being young i probably missed a majority of the sentiment resulting for such a stance.

Susan Marie Kovalinsky

at 16:16 on January 27th, 2010

Glad to see you back, with your "wiser than your years" manner of speaking, once more, Grace. : )

Hugh Askew

at 14:15 on January 27th, 2010

There aren't enough homosexuals in this country to fill the recruiting void that will be left to fill, if/when the policy is removed.

Rory Cripps

at 14:35 on January 27th, 2010

Grace: The policy probably had something to do with the fact that many years ago most military personnel wouldn't accept a gay in their ranks. Could you imagine a guy in a platoon being called a faggot and being the victim of repeated blanket parties? And then can you imagine the humiliation of those that did the name calling and the beating if the "faggot" risked his life under enemy fire to pull their sorry asses to safety?

Karl Gotthardt - albertacowpoke

at 16:13 on January 27th, 2010

I understand what you.re saying Rory. That DADT policy came in under Clinton though in 1993. Supposedly it was a compromise. New revelations gays served in the military before Clinton's policy and didn't tell. Basically to me the policy was ludicrous.

Clinton established the policy through Executive Order in December 1993.[1]

Sexual orientation will not be a bar to service unless manifested by homosexual conduct. The military will discharge members who engage in homosexual conduct, which is defined as a homosexual act, a statement that the member is homosexual or bisexual, or a marriage or attempted marriage to someone of the same gender.

– quoted in "The Pentagon's New Policy Guidelines on Homosexuals in the Military", The New York Times (July 20, 1993), p.A14.

At about the time Clinton came out with that policy or at the least within a couple of years we removed all obstacles to homosexuals in the Canadian Forces. While there was some resistance by Senior NCOs and older Officers, the younger crowd really had no problem with it.

The biggest concern, which was a non-concern, was what would happen if a gay put the makes on another soldier. We already had rules against sexual harassment, which would apply to gays as it also would to females being harassed.

I'm sure there were probably some problems initially, but during my remaining time in the service from the introduction of this policy (about 4 years) I never saw any in the units I served.

To the credit of most soldiers, they are focused on the job at hand and not the sexual orientation of gender of the other soldiers.

So since Clinton brought this in with an Executive Order according to the reference above, what is the hold up to scrap it with an executive order.

158

at 16:31 on January 27th, 2010

This should be something for the military to decide.

Karl Gotthardt - albertacowpoke

at 17:20 on January 27th, 2010

The military is a part of society. If it is wrong to discriminate in civilian society it should also be wrong for the military. The Military answers to its civilian masters.

Rory Cripps

at 17:32 on January 27th, 2010

ACP: In your expert opinion, wouldn't you say that when soldiers bleed they bleed? And the blood that flows from one soldier is not much different from that which flows from the other soldier?

Karl Gotthardt - albertacowpoke

at 17:36 on January 27th, 2010

Rory it wouldn't take much of an expert to figure that out, unless we all wanna go scientific. Quite frankly a grunt doesn.t care what sexual orientation you are as long as u do your job and cover him. If society decided to send women into combat, why is this sexual orientation such a big deal.