This isn't leadership

by: Adam Bink

Fri Jan 15, 2010 at 17:15


Kerry Eleveld with the Advocate reports, and John Aravosis confirms, that 20-25 LGBT donors and organizational leaders called an emergency meeting in private on Wednesday to discuss Don't Ask, Don't Tell repeal and the shaky ground on which it appears to be. There was no consenus at this meeting on what to do. This comes as the leaked Pentagon "now is not the time" memo came to light.

There are two major points John makes, which is (a) there is no plan (b) it is stunning that people at this meeting could not decide whether to come out full-on with pressure for a repeal or wait to see what the Administration does first.

I agree with both of these, and want to add (c), which is, where is the pushback? First the Administration asks for a study. Then Obama's National Security Adviser says Obama won't lift the ban until Iraq and Afghanistan are done. Then Harry Reid actually has to ask the Administration, in a letter, for its views. Then the Pentagon leaks a memo on Wednesday outlining that it will advise the President that "now is not the time". Then the New York Times reports yesterday that the military is actually considering whether it would be necessary to separate shower facilities or ban public displays of affection. Today, Kerry Eleveld asks Robert Gibbs today whether the Administration will push for repeal in 2010, and Gibbs demurs.

And in response to all this, LGBT donors and organizational leaders get together and- wait for it- wring their hands over whether to push the Administration or not. I have no doubt that there are people in the White House reading Kerry's piece and laughing at us right now.

Here's John:

Both the meeting and the Times article confirm that the White House has not even decided if it will push for the repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell, let alone what exactly it will push for for, if anything (as noted in the Times article, the Pentagon is even considering whether a "separate but equal" policy should be adopted). The hope is that the White House will come to a decision and announce what, if anything, it is going to do about moving forward on the repeal of DADT sometime in the next month or two. But the groups have no idea what the White House is going to decide, or when it will decide, and therefore cannot and will not endorse an all-out campaign to support the repeal of DADT until the White House makes up its mind.

WTF? When the White House makes up its mind?! You push before, not after the White House makes up its mind! Where is the pressure? Where is the pushback? I talked about this on Monday- Where are the op-eds, the interviews, the threats, the members of Congress threatening to not accept anything less than full repeal, the public demands for a meeting with the President, the flooding of the White House with calls from angry gays?

Congressional Progressive Caucus gets this. When the Secretary of HHS talked last year about a public option not being critical, they immediately pushed back, along with allies in the netroots, and forced her to walk the statement back. Labor unions get this. They met with the President this week over the excise tax. Members of Congress are threatening to vote against the bill unless the tax is changed. I was even e-mailed an ask to join a phonebank on the issue. On our side, SLDN is the only one doing this. This "wait and see what the President does" argument is insane. You pressure people before, not after, the fact.

In November, I asked Rea Carey about this issue. Here's what she said:

Q: On Don't Ask, Don't Tell, the administration has suggested there will be movement, but possibly less than a full repeal. Is NGLTF willing to support segregation of troops, or a pilot program?

Rea: Absolutely not. We need a full repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell. Period.

Simple, direct, to the point. Every single LGBT donor, prominent advocate, organizational leader should be doing this, right now, in every single outlet they can find. Also, why does there have to be "consensus" on this? Why aren't more groups individually doing what SLDN is doing and putting calls through to the White House switchboard? I have not heard or read a single word in response to the Pentagon memo, NYTimes story, or the Gibbs statement. Why that is is beyond me. Instead, what I see is people afraid of the White House.

This isn't leadership.

Adam Bink :: This isn't leadership

Tags: , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

People need to stop asking other people about what they should do (4.00 / 5)
These groups should push for it now, publicly and privately - not wait to see whether the WH wants them to. Harry Reid asked the WH about their views, but ultimately the decision is up to Congress. Congress needs to hold hearings now, whether the WH is ready or not.  The President is the commander in chief of the armed forces - it's one thing to get the Pentagon's views on how to implement it, but it's not their job to make policy like this.  

All of these people are failing to do their own job.

Politics is the art of the possible, but that means you have to think about changing what is possible, not that you have to accept it in perpetuity.


Well, don't flame me pls, but is this a gay problem? (0.00 / 0)
This indiciseveness, the dragging of feet (no pun intended)? I mean, if some organisation leaders have problems with acting swiftly and determinedly on this, ok, that's only human. But almost the whole movement? Really, what 's holding those folks back?

No (4.00 / 2)
The mistakes of LGBT donors and organizational leaders have been almost exactly the same as the mistakes of other Democratic constituency donors and organizational leaders.  They are quite similar to the problems we see among Democratic office holders. These are institutional problems.

Politics is the art of the possible, but that means you have to think about changing what is possible, not that you have to accept it in perpetuity.

[ Parent ]
But what institutional problems? (0.00 / 0)
Such kinds of inherent failures have to be identified and corrected. Institutions can be changed. And this lame performance is unacceptable.

[ Parent ]
Pam Spaulding, too, is asking if there's a structural problem (0.00 / 0)
OK. I have to ask a question here. Where has Brian Bond, the Deputy Director of the White House Office of Public Engagement (aka the LGBT liaison) been during all of this? He's nowhere in this piece and he's supposed to be the Obama administration's primary contact with our orgs all this time. (BTW, Brian never did get back to me about any further WH plans to interact with LGBT New Media/citizen journalists, as the WH has with other interest-group media. Take what you want from that. )

This does raise a broader, more structural problem about our connections to the White House, since there are allegedly so many pro-LGBT people on staff - what is has been done to facilitate action so that it didn't come to this point?


http://www.pamshouseblend.com/... (via th A-Blog)

[ Parent ]
"Levin Says He'll Hold DADT Hearings This Month" (0.00 / 0)
This news is mixed (0.00 / 0)
Levin has been slow playing this - hopefully the hearings will go forward without delay.  Their impact depends on who the witnesses are - the story notes Mullen will testify, and he seems to be actively campaigning in favor of DADT.  It would be good to have Democratic Senators loudly announce their readiness to end this policy prior to the hearings.  

Politics is the art of the possible, but that means you have to think about changing what is possible, not that you have to accept it in perpetuity.

[ Parent ]
Obama needs to show some guts (4.00 / 2)
In the 1940s, there were probably as many white soldiers horrified at the idea of sharing a shower with a black man as there are are modern soldiers worrying about gays.  But Harry Truman didn't sit around asking for studies or waiting for consensus or allowing the military to leak memos undermining his stated policy (he fired one of the major heroes of World War 2, Douglas McArthur, for insubordination).  He ordered the military desegregated.  This was not popular in many parts of the country, but it was right.

It's true that, because Congress put DADT into law, Congressional action is needed, but it can be attached to the DoD appropriations bill, so there's no way the Republicans can filibuster it without cutting off money for the troops.  In the meantime, Obama does have some ability to delay dismissals; he's the commander-in-chief after all.

The current situation with DADT represents a security risk, in that closeted gays can be blackmailed, threatened with exposure and loss of career.  This risk goes away if all qualified soldiers can serve openly.


So long as too many Dems don't have the guts and sense (4.00 / 2)
to push those in power to do the right thing, they will continue to be disappointed and have no one to blame but themselves. Whether it's because they're cowardly, foolish, indifferent, lazy or on the take, the "Let's just wait and see/Let's not rock the boat/If we fight amongst ourselves then it only helps the other side" wing of the party continues to enable bad policy and prevent good policy from replacing it. Although I'm convinced that part of this is due to the willful efforts of planted shills whose job it is to divide and neutralize progressives, there are all too many Dems who are doing this out of genuine fear, stupidity and cowardice, preferring the safe surety of the shitty situation that we have today to and unsure future that can only be obtained through hard work, sacrifice and risk. We have become soft, stupid and selfish.

There is no positive change without outside agitation.

"Those who stand for nothing fall for anything...Mankind are forever destined to be the dupes of bold & cunning imposture" -- Alexander Hamilton


Get what they ask for. (0.00 / 0)
My frustration with so called party activists is as great as my frustrations with so called Democrats.  Another good example of "fool me as many times as you want because I won't do anything about it" are the unions.  They got screwed by Clinton with NAFTA.  Obama is screwing them with EFCA and health care, and they come out of a meeting with him telling us how great he is cause he gave them an inch after they took a mile.  Liberals/progressives never learn.  When they finally decide to play hardball, they'll be worth supporting.  Until then, it is simply great theater cheap entertainment.


USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS
Powered by: SoapBlox