ON TUESDAY A FEDERAL judge found that the "don't ask, don't tell" policy put in place as a political compromise during the Clinton administration, is unconstitutional.
As I write this the Justice Department has not announced whether it will appeal the decision.
It should not, for the following reasons:
- The policy was a mistake from the beginning.
It was the equivalent of Truman merely issuing an executive order requiring all black servicemen to pretend to be white, as a solution to the problem of integrating the military.
It was, at best, a weak, ineffective, and dishonest attempt to sweep a very real issue under the carpet.
As such, its very existence is a disgrace in our great nation, and should be dispensed with as soon as possible. - It required gay soldiers to lie to their comrades and their officers on a daily basis—passing as straight in order to remain in their jobs.
Silence itself is a lie, if the effect of that silence is to mislead others.
But anyone with half a brain (which seems to exclude much of congress under the Clinton administration, and much of the Senate today) would know that to effectively hide ones personal life from the people one works with daily will require other, more explicit lies sooner or later.
"Hey, why don't you take Suzy out?"
"What did you do last weekend?"
And every lie makes the situation more complicated, until it could lead to serious mistrust, which could damage unit cohesion. - It was never implemented.
While many soldiers followed the "don't tell" part of the equation to the letter, one after another has been investigated, and outed, anyway.
The military chain of command, itself, has been grossly negligent at best, if not criminally defiant, when it comes to enforcing the spirit of this law.
Had they, from the beginning, actually done everything in their power to "not ask"—which would have meant doing everything in their power to keep people who weren't telling from being outed, then maybe, just maybe, this silly and dishonest policy might have halfway worked.
They didn't.
It has, from the first, been a lopsided policy, which did not provide the protection it was meant to provide.
The Clinton administration made the mistake of compromising with bigots, and the result was a law that the bigots used to their own advantage. - The idea that there is some need for more investigation, or some complex plan to implement this change in an orderly fashion is nonsense.
Either what we are told about the American soldier is true, or it isn't.
We are told—and I, for one, believe—that our troops are serious, committed professionals, who can follow orders, who do their duty, and who don't allow personal prejudices to get in the way of important things like unit cohesion.
Yet suddenly, when it's a question of simply bringing the American military into the twenty-first century, which has already happened with militaries in other countries without any problems, we are being told that our troops are a bunch of bigots who can't control themselves, and so must be pampered and led by the hand.
Its an insult to our troops, to think that they couldn't handle this. - There is no administrative reason for continuing the policy.
It doesn't take a complicated set of policy changes to simply do what the judge has ordered: stop investigating and prosecuting anyone under DADT.
Simple enough.
Worst outcome: lots of officers will have fewer cases on their desk, and more time to do other, important, things. - The country is behind the judge.
We all know where this is going.
Sooner or later we will have a military that doesn't discriminate against gays.
Everyone understands, even the brass, that this policy weakens, rather than strengthens, security.
Everyone understands that it's wrong.
There is no political reason to continue it.
Its only supporters are those who would like to go back to the days before it—a handful of bigots and hate-mongers. - This is a golden opportunity for the Obama administration to reach across the aisle.
The suit was brought by Log Cabin Republicans.
For perhaps the first time in his administration, Obama actually has Republicans officially on his side.
He should not pass up this opportunity. - Finally, this is not about policy in the end—it's about people and about fairness.
Every day that goes by causes brave men and women who have dedicated themselves to the defense of our country to live in anxiety over being outed, to deal with investigations that should not be taking place, or to have their hard-earned careers yanked out from under them because of bigotry.
So, here's what I think Obama should do.
Before the Justice Department makes any public announcement Obama should issue an executive order, as Commander in Chief, simply saying that the military will obey the court order until such time as this case is completely resolved.
At that point, DADT will be dead.
Any effort to appeal by the justice department, or any argument for an appeal by Republicans, will have to meet the following objections:
- Are we really going to cause more havoc in the military by reinstituting a policy that has already been changed?
- Are Republicans really going to fight other Republicans, just to enforce bigotry and small mindedness?
- And, if the above two objections don't carry the day, shouldn't there be a long and careful study of the effects of reversing the new policy before any further changes are made?
In a single stroke, Obama will have demonstrated that:
- He really is interested in working with reasonable Republicans.
- That, unlike his predecessor, he does not believe that the President is above the law.
- That he keeps his campaign promises.
- That congress can't continue to block his every move.
- That he knows when to do the right thing, and is capable of doing it if he gets pushed too far.
At least, that's what I think today.
