Greetings from Flyover Country Thoughts from the American Midwest

Press This: “Time To ‘Tear Down’” Don’t Ask Don’t Tell

“Press This” is the feature in WordPress that lets me share links from the internet to my blog. Think of it as the “Share Link” aspect of Facebook, but without those pesky character limits that inhibit my ranting.

The Plum Line over at WhoRunsGov.com has a story today about Representative Ellen Tauscher (D, CA-10)’s plans to introduce the Military Readiness Enhancement Act (at the time of this writing, the day’s activity doesn’t seem to be on the web yet) that would, effectively, end the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy of the United States Armed Services. (A similar bill, under the same title, was put forth by Rep. Marty Meehan (D, MA) in 2007.)

This presents a bit of an issue for President Obama, who has stated that he is for repealing the policy and even lists it on the official WhiteHouse.gov page on civil rights. The issue comes from needing to garner support from the GOP, and not just for passing this current bill (it would need the same 60-vote threshold in the Senate as the Stimulus Package needed to prevent a filibuster) but for anything in the near future. While there was this idea of a “post-partisan” or bi-partisan era after the election, that hasn’t come to be the reality in Washington, and both parties blame each other. Obama just got the largest spending bill in the history of this country passed and signed into law. Now he’s working on a budget that faces harsh criticism from Republicans and fiscally-conservative Democrats. On top of that there is the push for health care reform and drawing down “combat troops” (aren’t all troops effectively combat troops?) in Iraq while making a push for changing course in Afghanistan. That’s a lot of projects to fit on one plate this early in the game.

But being on record in favor of “eventually” dealing with this issue and actually dealing with it are two very different things. The first is nothing more than consoling the groups lobbying for this change, while the latter is putting aside the political sensitivity and doing what is right. Other nations have done away with this discriminatory practice, and more and more Americans (upwards of 60 and 70 percent) approve of letting gays and lesbians serve openly. Military service should not be based on your sexual orientation, because just not asking or talking about it has worked so well. These men and women are willing to serve, fight, and die for their country. How dare we ask them to hide who they are, or to give up their willingness to serve because they’re not willing to compromise their own being. Those against overturning the ban will cite polling of the military that results in a much smaller favorability to overturning DADT. True, it’s not very popular among service men and woman, but neither was racial integration or allowing women to serve. But both of those happened, and those who couldn’t get over themselves were welcome to turn in their uniform. As soldiers, you are not black or white, man or woman, gay or straight. You are an American and you are serving your country and honoring the traditions that those that wore the uniform before you fought to defend.

One comment from the original article stood out at me:

This is just selfish. I’m tired of this [shit]. The [gays]-in-the-military thing will be dealt with LATER. We WILL NOT lose the once-in-a-lifetime momentum we currently have on health care, energy, economy, education, etc. over this — CAPICE??? Say you’ll address it down the road (which he will), President Obama, and get on with the business at hand. NO DETOURS, NO ROADBLOCKS, NO NEW TALKING POINTS FOR THE WINGNUT IMBECILES!!! (“Obscenities” added as the original site’s comment system filtered them out. I’m assuming from context the words are correct. –RZH)

How many times has this issue (along with gay marriage or civil unions) been passed off to be “dealt with later”? All of those other big issues aren’t going away anytime soon nor will they ever be perfected. Civil Rights in the middle of the last century weren’t put on hold because something else was a bigger deal to the people who harbored bigotry. This is a very real and very important issue to many Americas, gay or otherwise. “Change we can believe in” and “hope” are not exclusive to the majority or the pertinent crisis. These are small, relatively inexpensive changes to our laws that will benefit the nation in the long run. (In fact, I’ll argue that gay marriage or civil unions or whatnot actually help the economy. Who throws a better party than the gays? But that’s another topic for another time.) Let’s stop tiptoeing around political land mines and take a stand against the status quo and against an unpopular policy of discrimination. “Liberty and justice for all” sounds much less hypocritical to the other modern nations in the world when we live by those rules.