Olbermann and Gates talk DADT

July 1, 2009

As I said Monday, this is a busy couple days for Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. Following yesterday’s hearing and the recommendation that 1Lt. Dan Choi be fired for being gay, Dan Savage appeared on Countdown with Keith Olbermann to talk about the policy.

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

Earlier in the day, Defense Secretary Robert Gates spoke briefly about DADT.

SEC. GATES: There was some discussion of [Don't Ask Don't Tell] among the senior military during our Defense Senior Leadership Conference last week, and I think my last discussion with the president was probably last week as well.

Q And what was the level of that discussion? Was it just the same — his desire or is it –

SEC. GATES: We were talking about how do we move forward on this to achieve his objective which is changing the policy and the issue that we face is that how do we begin to do preparations and simultaneously the administration move forward in terms of asking the Congress to change the law.

What we have is a law — be it a policy or a regulation — and as I discovered when I got into it, it’s a very prescriptive law. It doesn’t leave much to the imagination for a lot of flexibility.

And so one of the things we’re looking at is is there flexibility in how we apply this law in terms of — well, let me give you an example. Do we need to be driven when the information, to take action on somebody if we get that information from somebody who may have vengeance in mind or blackmail or somebody who has been jilted.

Q Somebody was outed without –

(Cross talk.)

SEC. GATES: Yeah. In other words, if somebody is outed by a third party, we have to — does that force us to take an action? And I don’t know the answer to that and I don’t want to pretend to. But that’s the kind of thing we’re looking at to see if there’s at least a more humane way to apply the law until the law gets changed.

This is a far cry from the Secretary Gates we saw just three months ago who said that they had “a lot on their plates” and they were going to “push that one down the road”.

It’s important to understand what Gates is talking about with the third party outings. 2Lt. Amy Brian’s firing earlier this year is a prime example. A non-military coworker (Brian was a Reservist) had a problem with her and informed them that she saw Amy kiss her girlfriend in Wal-Mart. Maj. Margaret Witt‘s and Lt. Col. Victor Fehrenbach‘s cases were also begun by a non-military third party.

Is it a perfect solution? No. Is it as good as an executive order? No. But given that President Obama still resists signing an executive order, this is a reasonable transition measure.


  • Larry Ohio

    “…given that President Obama still resists signing an executive order, this is a reasonable transition measure.”

    It seems like another baby step along the path to achieving our civil rights. But could this be a little more than a baby step?

    I wonder how many discharges come as a result of 3rd party outing? I doubt if they keep statistics on this, but I suspect the number could be quite large. If the military starts disregarding these outings rather than commencing with an investigation, a lot of gay service members would be able to keep their jobs.

    I think if this new interpretation is implemented, we'll see a striking reduction in the number of DADT-related discharges over the next few years.

  • http://blog.mattalgren.com Matt Algren

    With the exception of Lt. Choi, I can't remember the last DADT discharge
    that wasn't started by a third party. I'd bet money that you're right and
    the vast majority of discharges are third party related. The third principle
    of Don't Ask Don't Tell is Don't Pursue, but they seem to have trouble
    executing that part.

  • Larry Ohio

    “…given that President Obama still resists signing an executive order, this is a reasonable transition measure.”

    It seems like another baby step along the path to achieving our civil rights. But could this be a little more than a baby step?

    I wonder how many discharges come as a result of 3rd party outing? I doubt if they keep statistics on this, but I suspect the number could be quite large. If the military starts disregarding these outings rather than commencing with an investigation, a lot of gay service members would be able to keep their jobs.

    I think if this new interpretation is implemented, we'll see a striking reduction in the number of DADT-related discharges over the next few years.

  • http://blog.mattalgren.com Matt Algren

    With the exception of Lt. Choi, I can't remember the last DADT discharge
    that wasn't started by a third party. I'd bet money that you're right and
    the vast majority of discharges are third party related. The third principle
    of Don't Ask Don't Tell is Don't Pursue, but they seem to have trouble
    executing that part.

  • Larry Ohio

    “…given that President Obama still resists signing an executive order, this is a reasonable transition measure.”

    It seems like another baby step along the path to achieving our civil rights. But could this be a little more than a baby step?

    I wonder how many discharges come as a result of 3rd party outing? I doubt if they keep statistics on this, but I suspect the number could be quite large. If the military starts disregarding these outings rather than commencing with an investigation, a lot of gay service members would be able to keep their jobs.

    I think if this new interpretation is implemented, we'll see a striking reduction in the number of DADT-related discharges over the next few years.

  • http://blog.mattalgren.com Matt Algren

    With the exception of Lt. Choi, I can't remember the last DADT discharge
    that wasn't started by a third party. I'd bet money that you're right and
    the vast majority of discharges are third party related. The third principle
    of Don't Ask Don't Tell is Don't Pursue, but they seem to have trouble
    executing that part.

  • Larry Ohio

    “…given that President Obama still resists signing an executive order, this is a reasonable transition measure.”

    It seems like another baby step along the path to achieving our civil rights. But could this be a little more than a baby step?

    I wonder how many discharges come as a result of 3rd party outing? I doubt if they keep statistics on this, but I suspect the number could be quite large. If the military starts disregarding these outings rather than commencing with an investigation, a lot of gay service members would be able to keep their jobs.

    I think if this new interpretation is implemented, we'll see a striking reduction in the number of DADT-related discharges over the next few years.

  • http://blog.mattalgren.com Matt Algren

    With the exception of Lt. Choi, I can't remember the last DADT discharge
    that wasn't started by a third party. I'd bet money that you're right and
    the vast majority of discharges are third party related. The third principle
    of Don't Ask Don't Tell is Don't Pursue, but they seem to have trouble
    executing that part.