Idea: a focused, concerted effort on DADT repeal activism leading up to and running through lame duck
Focus: The White House, Democratic Leadership, and elected Democrats
Goal: finally passing a repeal of DADT by end of lame duck
Setting the stage:
- Movement on DADT repeal has been slow, if existent at all
- DADT repeal is rumored to be dead, if it ever was alive
- The best chance to repeal DADT legislatively is in lame duck
- Lame duck begins on November 15th, 2010
- That gives US (forget sweet nothings whispered by the White House) 6 says to turn up the heat in advance of lame duck
And then...
- We turn it up to a full boil for the week or so of lame duck session before Turkey Day
This is Day. One.
Today's target: The White House.
I propose a calling/emailing/faxing effort aimed at making the White House aware of our strident support for a DADT repeal... and our strident opposition to removing it from the defense bill.
Let them hear it:
By website contact.
.
By email
President: president@whitehouse.gov
Vice President: vice_president@whitehouse.gov
By fax
FAX: 202-456-2461
By phone
Phone Numbers
Comments: 202-456-1111
Switchboard: 202-456-1414
TTY/TDD
Comments: 202-456-6213
Visitors Office: 202-456-2121
It's beginning to become clear that the chances to end DADT legislatively are quickly (thanks, elected Democrats!) coming to an end. Failure to act previously has put the repeal in jeopardy. And those failures only seem to be ready to be doubled-down on by elected Democrats.
That cannot stand.
I'd like to say I'm hoping for a veto threat from this President as it relates to the defense appropriations bill should it not include a repeal of DADT.
Needless to say: the events of the past two years have done little but dwindled my hope.
Plus, we've seen veto threats are for F-22 funding in defense bills:
July 15, 2009
Today was supposed to be a critical day for the Obama administration’s efforts to kill the troubled F-22 fighter jet.
It goes like this: the Senate is taking up the fiscal 2010 defense authorization, which 13 pro-F-22 Senators on the Armed Services Committee last month used as a vehicle to overturn Defense Secretary Bob Gates’ attempt to cap the program at 187 planes.
President Obama says he won’t sign the defense authorization if it has the F-22 in it.
And the committee’s leadership, Sens. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) and John McCain (R-Ariz.), are both F-22 foes, and they’ve been working to strip out the funding for the planes from the bill in a floor vote scheduled for today.
But just now, Levin pulled an amendment that would kill the plane from floor consideration. That probably means he doesn’t have the votes.
At the same time, the White House put out a statement reiterating Obama’s veto threat over the F-22.
[...]
Veto threats for equality? Not so much.
Nevermind that the failure to provide that equality ends up resulting in our national security being put in jeopardy:
"As I said before -- I'll say it again -- I believe "don't ask, don't tell" doesn't contribute to our national security. In fact, I believe preventing patriotic Americans from serving their country weakens our national security."
Those are the President's own words. And from them, I draw one of two unfortunate conclusions.
Either:
a) he's full of shit and does not believe that
OR
b) he does believe that and, in the face of not preventing it with a simple stay on discharges by way of Executive Order or failing to fight tooth and nail to end it outright (including veto threats), indicts himself as GUILTY on the charge of jeopardizing our national security
Much as he might like to, he cannot have it both ways.
I'd sure like to see an intrepid reporter pose that question and framing to this Fierce Advocate, for the simple sake of watching him try to weasel his way out of the deep, dark corner he's painted himself into.
Shades of cognitive dissonance a la the marriage question in the blogger meeting about a week ago?
Q So I have another gay question.
[...]
Q And this one is on the issue of marriage. Since you’ve become President, a lot has changed. More states have passed marriage equality laws. This summer a federal judge declared DOMA unconstitutional in two different cases. A judge in San Francisco declared Prop 8 was unconstitutional. And I know during the campaign you often said you thought marriage was the union between a man and a woman, and there -- like I said, when you look at public opinion polling, it’s heading in the right direction. We’ve actually got Republicans like Ted Olson and even Ken Mehlman on our side now. So I just really want to know what is your position on same-sex marriage?
THE PRESIDENT: Joe, I do not intend to make big news sitting here with the five of you, as wonderful as you guys are. But I’ll say this --
Q I just want to say, I would be remiss if I didn’t ask you this question.
THE PRESIDENT: Of course.
Q People in our community are really desperate to know.
THE PRESIDENT: I think it’s a fair question to ask. I think that -- I am a strong supporter of civil unions. As you say, I have been to this point unwilling to sign on to same-sex marriage primarily because of my understandings of the traditional definitions of marriage.
But I also think you’re right that attitudes evolve, including mine. And I think that it is an issue that I wrestle with and think about because I have a whole host of friends who are in gay partnerships. I have staff members who are in committed, monogamous relationships, who are raising children, who are wonderful parents.
And I care about them deeply. And so while I’m not prepared to reverse myself here, sitting in the Roosevelt Room at 3:30 in the afternoon, I think it’s fair to say that it’s something that I think a lot about. That’s probably the best you’ll do out of me today.
It's almost painful... watching someone so deft twist in the wind in that way.
But, I digress.
Maybe he's just not sure how to get it done?
"And you know, when you're campaigning, I think you're liberated to say things without thinking about, 'Okay, how am I gonna actually practically implement this.'"
Well, then, if you don't know how to get it done, you don't say those things and make those promises on the fuckin' campaign trail or as President.
As it is; you did say them. Thus...
You made your bed full of promises. Now, sleep tight in it.
And, NO. I will NOT judge you only on the promises you've kept:
"And I want you to know that I expect and hope to be judged not by words, not by promises I've made, but by the promises that my administration keeps."
Seriously? Were you even able to hear how stupid that sounded coming from your lips?
Now, I'm sure you'd like us to forget all about those promises you haven't kept.
But, I won't.
Instead, I'll remind everyone of them wherever I can. Say, like THIS ONE:
January 27, 2010
"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."
- That's THIS year. The clock is ticking, Mr. President.
And you seem almost intent on letting it run out.
How else to explain you whispering sweet nothings in our ears while Democratic leadership plots with the guy who lost the election to derail what you "say" you "support"?
Sweet nothings. That's all they are.
You "oppose stripping the DADT repeal from the defense bill"?
Lemme guess...
Sorta the way you "supported including the public option in the health insurance bill"?
Yeah. How that work out for us?
Absent an F-22-type veto threat, that's what I deduce.
You think you can just get away with mealy-mouthed words of support? And then blame it on others when it fails, because... well... you tried!
Fuck. All. THAT.
I'll not sit idly by for that weasel-word donkeyshit.
And I suggest others do not sit idly by either. It's time to push back in earnest.
This is Day. One.
Today's target: The White House.
I propose a calling/emailing/faxing effort aimed at making the White House aware of our strident support for a DADT repeal... and our strident opposition to removing it from the defense bill.
Let them hear it:
By website contact.
.
By email.
President: president@whitehouse.gov
Vice President: vice_president@whitehouse.gov
By fax
FAX: 202-456-2461
By phone
Phone Numbers
Comments: 202-456-1111
Switchboard: 202-456-1414
TTY/TDD
Comments: 202-456-6213
Visitors Office: 202-456-2121
But, let's not stop there.
Another target of these efforts should be Senator Levin, rumored to be working with Teh Loser! to strip the DADT repeal from the defense bill.
Save that for tomorrow? Next week? I don't know.
I'm hoping the idea for these days (weeks?) of activism will be picked up on by others, tweaked here and there for focus, and run with until a repeal of DADT is finally done.
What say you?