Gibbs: McHugh and Obama ‘both don’t think [DADT] is working for this country right now.’
Gibbs: McHugh and Obama ‘both don’t think [DADT] is working for this country right now.’
Today, President Obama named Rep. John McHugh (R-NY) as his nominee to be Secretary of the Army. Though neither Obama nor McHugh discussed the military’s Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy today, Press Secretary Robert Gibbs today said McHugh shares Obama’s commitment to repealing the ban, which isn’t “working for this country right now”:
It’s obvious from those statements and other statements that Congressman McHugh has made that he and the president are in agreement on changing the policy they both don’t think is working for this country right now. And it’s a priority of the president’s.
It’s not clear to which statements Gibbs is referring. McHugh has kept his personal views on the issue rather quiet, though he criticized the military and the Defense Department for refusing to testify on the issue. Watch it:
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
I know its not happening fast enough, but mark my words… by this time next year, DADT will be a thing of the past.
June 2nd, 2009 at 2:03 pmI sure hope you’re right ray
June 2nd, 2009 at 2:05 pmraynman Says:
I know its not happening fast enough
If thought and planning does not go into this, I fear there may be safety issues.
June 2nd, 2009 at 2:08 pmI’ll believe it when I see it.
So far President Obama isn’t keeping the campaign promises of candidate Obama.
June 2nd, 2009 at 2:25 pmThere is a lot of bigotry to overcome to get rid of DADT
Just ending DADT will mean a total ban on homosexuals in the military
The underlying policy that made DADT a necessary compromise must be fixed first.
June 2nd, 2009 at 2:26 pmThose that were unfairly discharged because of orientation defiantly should have that over turned and be paid retroactively.
Safety issues need thought and time to work out. As it stands now, women are not always safe as you still hear of rape and harassment.
I am not comfortable with a quick change due to the mob mentality some still have in the military.
June 2nd, 2009 at 2:27 pmamish, the issue is more complicated than you want it to be
Obama cannot get rid of DADT without causing more problems for homosexuals in the military
The underlying policy of banning gays must be dealt with first, and that will require an act of congress, not just a signing statement
The USA is not run by a dictator anymore.
June 2nd, 2009 at 2:28 pmIf President Obama truly is committed to repealing DADT, then he needs to issue an immediate directive to the military telling them to cease and desist in kicking gays out.
June 2nd, 2009 at 2:35 pmhad enough Says:
raynman Says:
I know its not happening fast enough
If thought and planning does not go into this, I fear there may be safety issues.
And what “safety issues” would those be?
June 2nd, 2009 at 2:36 pmamish_edison Says:
I’ll believe it when I see it.
So far President Obama isn’t keeping the campaign promises of candidate Obama.
So perhaps you can show us where candidate Obama said he would repeal DADT within the first 5 months of his presidency?
June 2nd, 2009 at 2:37 pmhad enough Says:
As it stands now, women are not always safe as you still hear of rape and harassment.
And this has what to do with DADT?
June 2nd, 2009 at 2:38 pmIt’s a bit of a leap based just on that reporters question, but I am now hopeful that there will be someone in the Admin that will actually want to remove DADT. And I can;t imagine that he aims to do that to move further to the right as the above commenter speculate.
Our military is the lone outlier among “western” democratic militaries on this issue already. Repealing DADT to go to a full ban would be nutso.
June 2nd, 2009 at 2:39 pmThat would cause an uproar that Obama is a) usurping Congress and b) moving way too fast for the chain of command.
I’m frustrated that it is taking this long to start the research and reporting phase, but that has to be done to politically execute the change and avoid a Clinton redux.
I’m impatient as hell, and unhappy about Lt. Choi and others.
June 2nd, 2009 at 2:43 pmBut now Gibbs is on record. He better not walk this back (he sounded unprepared for this question IMO, which increases the risk of a walk-back).
I agree with raynman in that a year from now, we will see legislation repealing DADT. It has to start in the congress — we’ve seen what dumbya did in passing over the congress with his executive orders.
June 2nd, 2009 at 2:48 pmObama could put a temporary halt to the practice now, but that could stir up premature controversy, while he’s aligning the steps toward accomplishing this repeal – he needs time. He’s done a lot in 5 months, considering the problems he inherited – this, too, will get done.
And what “safety issues” would those be?
The group mob mentality some still have would be a danger.
Issues in combat… you still hear of stories of ‘offing off’ one for various reasons.
For those past basic training and occupational training, there is absolutely no reason, with the exception of combat, why anyone of any gender or orientation could safely do their job as in most cases they have the option of living off quarters.
June 2nd, 2009 at 2:58 pmBilbo Hussein Baggins Says:
had enough Says:
As it stands now, women are not always safe as you still hear of rape and harassment.
And this has what to do with DADT?
It has everything to do with violence towards another group of people.
June 2nd, 2009 at 3:04 pmdealing with safety issues:
I would like to see time and energy put towards working out a set of new rules and strict guidelines against those harassing or causing violence towards others due to orientation before the openly gay can enter basic training.
June 2nd, 2009 at 3:18 pmIf President Obama truly is committed to repealing DADT, then he needs to issue an immediate directive to the military telling them to cease and desist in kicking gays out.
With all due respect Bil, please read Tommy’s post. He cannot make them cease. We didn’t elect Bush again. I mentioned before but I am not prepared to go back to a period of time where the President can override any law he pleases.
This is an issue for Congress though I do think Obama should push them on it but given the things on their plate and the party of NO, this might take a while.
June 2nd, 2009 at 3:54 pmMaybe a simple solution would be:
Don’t ask, don’t tell because we don’t care. Then retroactively with pay reinstate those unfairly discharged due to orientation.
Can we co that Congress?
June 2nd, 2009 at 4:18 pmUnlike many, many other things that Obama says he’s for changing, DADT can be altered with a single executive order. There’s no legal casework to prepare, nor any legislative acts necessary. Obama has it completely in his power to fix this, so the foot-dragging on this one is inexcusable.
I’m unconcerned with any “safety issues” had enough is talking about. In all past cases of servicepeople outing themselves, they have been subject to no harrassment or intimidation from their peers whatsoever prior to discharge.
In fact, that degree of concern reminds me of similar concerns cited in the past to keep women out of the military, as well as opposing racial integration of combat units.
June 2nd, 2009 at 4:36 pmUnlike many, many other things that Obama says he’s for changing, DADT can be altered with a single executive order. There’s no legal casework to prepare, nor any legislative acts necessary. Obama has it completely in his power to fix this, so the foot-dragging on this one is inexcusable.
Again, with all due respect… military law needs to be repealed by Congress. We cannot have Obama repealing anything he pleases. He does not have the power. Should he repeal it and not deal with the underlying laws, being gay in the military will be illegal.
June 2nd, 2009 at 4:43 pmI’m unconcerned with any “safety issues” had enough is talking about. In all past cases of servicepeople outing themselves, they have been subject to no harrassment or intimidation from their peers whatsoever prior to discharge.
A few Years back, I worked in a military hospital. I will never forget the enlisted girl that was raped on her way to work. She went to the Military Police and they literally laughed at her. She went to her first Sgt. and commanding officer and found these people to be powerless. Also, a trail the enlisted girls had to walk on and where this girl was raped, to get to work from the barracks was long and dark… and nothing was ever done to remedy that situation. In the mindset of too many of the enlisted men back then, enlisted women were either a whore or a lesbian, especially a lesbian if you turned them down… so this may have been a violent act against one with an assumed orientation. Still, today you hear of these stories.
But on second thought a Don’t ask don’t tell because we don’t care, gays in the military could remain safe by being discrete until able to live off base.
June 2nd, 2009 at 5:17 pmDADT will be a priority for President George W. Obama – it will be a priority this year, next year, and seven years from now. Like transparency in government, state secrects privilege, warrentless wiretapping and holding prisoners without a hearing.
June 2nd, 2009 at 5:57 pmadded to #22 my few years back post-
Women in the military, few lesbians, most not lived together without incidence. No one cared, another thing they got used to, no one changed orientation and each seemed to respect each others orientation. You hear Randi Rhodes talk about this also as she was in the military.
But are the men capable of this? Will there be more crimes, like the one I mentioned in #22, the MP’s laugh at and the CO and 1st Sgt have no control over and nothing gets done?
June 2nd, 2009 at 6:25 pm(Reuters) – U.S. combat forces will vacate all Iraqi cities on schedule by the end of this month, the commander of U.S. forces in Iraq said on Tuesday, including the still violent insurgent holdout of Mosul.
U.S. combat troops are scheduled to leave Iraq’s towns and cities by June 30 and redeploy to bases outside, according to a security pact that took effect in January.
June 2nd, 2009 at 6:55 pmhad enough Says:
But are the men capable of this? Will there be more crimes, like the one I mentioned in #22, the MP’s laugh at and the CO and 1st Sgt have no control over and nothing gets done?
Probably. But that’s not a good enough reason not to do it.
June 2nd, 2009 at 8:37 pmHey Kevin. I just saw the YouTube video about web 3.0 and I have had this idea about our future economy.
June 6th, 2009 at 5:24 amIt’s a bit in tune with the Zeitgeist film. See, if all of our knowledge was shared, we couldn’t make money of it. Siki?
porno
Porno izle
sex videolar?
I’m a musician and I kinda have the feeling that in the future people will pay for live performances, because we have computer software that is very close to sounding like a musical instrument, with a modelled human touch. So, if a person that has never played the guitar, can click a button and sound like Jimi Hendrix, than what is the coolness about all this digital music really? Infact, I think that the more advanced this gets, the less interesting it becomes. We are still in awe over a youngster that can make the violin cry and we will definately be in even more awe when a person can actually do with their fingers that what we can do in an iPhone application.
hey whomen is the military
June 7th, 2009 at 4:17 amSesli Sohbet
Sesli Chat
Görüntülü chat