Colin Powell Tells GLBT Activists Not to Press Congress on DADT

Colin Powell warns GLBT activists not to press Congress to repeal Don't Ask, Don't Tell. Even though President Obama and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates oppose the ban, Powell says that he wants the "study" of this issue to continue. He also opposes litigation challenging the ban. Unless Congress repeals the statute before Republicans take over the House, the discriminatory measure will likely remain in place for a long period of time, absent a judicial ruling enjoining its enforcement.

Ironically, Powell himself has embraced changing course on this issue in extremely measured comments. Powell, however, played a great role in crafting DADT. President Clinton promised to lift the ban, but military leaders -- including Powell -- opposed the decision. When Democrats cheered Powell's endorsement of President Obama, I questioned this stance, given his role in President Bush's unnecessary invasion of Iraq and his support for DADT. Powell's current stance would virtually ensure that the ban remain in place.

Dining With Rivals: Obama to Honor McCain, Biden and Powell at Pre-Inauguration Event

According to the Associated Press, President-elect Barack Obama will host three dinners during the week of his inauguration in order to honor "leaders who worked across party lines." On the night before the inauguration ceremony Obama will recognize John McCain, Joe Biden and Colin Powell as individuals who put "their country ahead of their political party."

Cynicism Overload Alert: Isn't this the exact same campaign message upon which McCain ran, but which Democrats and Obama blasted and contested almost to the point of overkill?

Also, aside from saying he believes in affirmative action and endorsing Obama, how has Powell challenged his party? Depending upon your political ideology, you might not even agree that he put country first during these discrete moments of "rebellion." And when has Biden ever contested the Democrats on substantial issues? I do not recall him ever disagreeing with the Democrats in a very public way that mattered. Perhaps a reader could fill in this blank.

This news of the dinners comes directly from the inaugural committee, according to the article. So, it looks official.

I accept the fact that Obama apparently wants to go down in history as the president who loves his election opponents once he can do so safely. But at some point, the reconciliation movement will begin to look too peculiar. The nomination of Hillary Clinton, whom he said lacked judgment, as Secretary of State has already tested the limits of my cynicism. But honoring McCain, whom Obama called erratic and out of touch seems a bit much, especially using the "country first" theme. But perhaps I'm too critical. What do you think?

Don't Ask, Don't Tell, Don't Hold Your Breath

During a recent interview with CNN, Colin Powell responded to a question concerning the military's discriminatory policy against gays and lesbians. Powell said that he hoped military leaders would "review" the policy, but he refused to state whether or not he wanted the policy lifted, maintained or replaced with something else.

Powell, as Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff during the Clinton administration, had a central role, along with Senator Sam Nunn (then Chair of the Senate Committee on Armed Services), in derailing Clinton's effort to overturn the military's antigay policy. As a result, military leaders, Congress, and Clinton accepted "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" as a compromise position. Interestingly, both Powell and Nunn have recently called for a "review" of the current policy, but neither will take a public opinion on the substance of the policy. Powell and Nunn endorsed Obama, and Nunn's name appeared on some initial lists of Obama's potential running mates.

Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, who will retain that role in the Obama administration, has also addressed Don't Ask, Don't Tell. During an interview, Gates said he was too busy conducting wars to worry about the policy (see Robert Gates as Obama's Secretary of Defense: "More of the Same" for Gay Rights?).

Obama's website, by contrast, states that the president-elect "agrees with former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff John Shalikashvili and other military experts that we need to repeal the "don't ask, don't tell" policy." The website also states that Obama "will work with military leaders to repeal the current policy and ensure it helps accomplish our national defense goals." The Washington Times, however, released a story last month reporting that Obama will delay acting on the policy until 2010. An anonymous spokesperson from Obama's transition team denied this report.

Readers might find Shalikashvili's New York Times essay interesting, given Obama's endorsement of his position and the dispute over whether his administration would delay acting on the policy. Shalikashvili agreed with Don't Ask, Don't Tell in 1993 when he sat on the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Today, however, he has "second thoughts," but he supports a "measured" response. Like Gates, he also says that priorities such as fighting the war should preclude immediate action on the policy. He argues that "[b]y taking a measured, prudent approach to change, political and military leaders can focus on solving the nation’s most pressing problems while remaining genuinely open to the eventual and inevitable lifting of the ban" (italics added). No, Annie, this does not sound like "tomorrow."

My take: Shalikashvili's statement probably most closely represents Obama's position. "Studying" the issue will take a substantial amount of time, and dealing with the economy, Iraq, Afghanistan and healthcare will take priority in public discourse. Through it all, however, Obama will "remain genuinely open to the eventual and inevitable lifting of the ban." In other words, if this is "your" issue, take on a lot of other projects and wait and see what actually happens. Having lived through the anti-gay backlash against Clinton, I agree with a measured approach, but this does not change the fact that "measured" responses often mean footdragging and delayed justice.

_____________________________

Powell's Comments on Don't Ask, Don't Tell

We definitely should reevaluate it. It's been 15 years since we put in
"don't ask, don't tell," which was a policy that became a law. I didn't want it
to become a law, but it became a law. Congress felt that strongly about it.

But it's been 15 years, and attitudes have changed. And so, I think it is
time for the Congress, since it is their law, to have a full review of it. And
I'm quite sure that's what President-elect Obama will want to do.

But people have said to me, well, then, what do you think? I said, well,
what I think is, let's review it, but I'm not going to make a judgment as to
whether it should be overturned or not until I hear from the chairman of the
Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the commanders who are
responsible for our armed forces in a time of war.

And so, I have to hear what they think and what the secretary of defense
thinks before I would come down on one side or the other.

Because I've always felt that the military is a unique institution. It is
not like any other institution in our system. You are told who you will live
with. You are told who you will share your most intimate accommodations with.
You are told whether you will live or die.

And for that reason, the courts have always upheld the ability of the armed
forces of the United States to put in procedures and rules that would not be
acceptable in any other institution.

So, the Congress, I think, has an obligation to review the law, and I hope
that it's a very spirited review. And I hope that President-elect Obama, in one
of his first actions, will ask the Joint Chiefs of Staff to take a look at the
policy and the law and to get their recommendations before he makes a judgment
with respect to the administration position.

But times have changed. This is not 1993. It is 2008. And we should review
the law.

The Powell Endorsement: A Good Thing?

Yesterday, former Secretary of State Colin Powell endorsed Senator Barack Obama in his presidential bid. Speculation of the endorsement percolated on the Internet for days prior to the official announcement. In a prepared statement, Powell's said that he was upset with the "tone" of McCain's campaign, specifically mentioning its reference to Ayers. Similarly, during the Democratic primaries, many of the people who endorsed Obama over Clinton condemned her "tone." I assume the Obama campaign prepares these statements. They are great political narratives, because they allow others to say that Obama's opponent is, basically, nasty.

Powell's endorsement also comes while some voters debate Obama's recent statement to Joe the Plumber that he wanted to "spread the wealth around." Conservatives have officially gone into "red scare" mode, while Ayers continues to receive attention as well. Recent polls show Obama with a commanding, yet shrinking lead, perhaps due to Joe and taxes. Powell's endorsement could potentially move the public discourse away from these matters. Obama's campaign employed a similar strategy during the Democratic primaries, when it often announced endorsements and superdelegate support for Obama during soft moments for the candidate (including Wright and various primary defeats).

Although it remains unclear whether Powell's endorsement will influence voters, it does present some interesting points of analysis. The endorsement cannot harm Obama politically, but for some progressives, it could raises questions about where Obama will govern as president (center, right, or left).

Powell's Endorsement: The Upside

The endorsement has a lot of potential upside. Powell has even higher approval ratings than McCain and Obama. He is well regarded by persons across the political spectrum. He has great foreign policy and military experience. Because he is a Republican who served in the Bush administration, his endorsement looks like a huge slam to McCain. Powell's endorsement might help comfort moderate voters who doubt that Obama possesses sufficient experience to serve as president. Because of the potential upside, the endorsement serves a lot of strategic purposes.

Powell's Endorsement: The Downside

Although Powell comes with a lot of positives, I think that if people actually probed all of the issues it presents, they could come up with some downsides too. Powell's endorsement -- or Obama's acceptance of Powell's endorsement -- could undermine Obama's credibility regarding his opposition to the war. During the primaries, Obama said that Clinton "lacked judgment" because she voted for the war. He said the same about McCain during the presidential debates. But Powell actually sold the war to a skeptical public and in the process, mislead Americans and the international community about Saddam Hussein's danger to the United States. Powell was in the center of the Bush administration -- a regime that Democrats have long wanted to change.

Obama's antiwar message excited many left-leaning and solidly left Democrats, who thought that Clinton was either too hawkish or a dove who voted for the war due to political expedience. But since the conclusion of the primaries, Obama has picked Biden as a running mate and has humbly accepted Powell's endorsement (presumably after negotiating it). Biden voted for the war, and Powell gave credibility to Bush's demand for authorization to use force against Iraq.

This will not harm Obama politically, because Obama is not Powell, and most people are not focusing on the war at the moment. Also, outside of leftwing blogs, I imagine this aspect of Powell's endorsement will receive very little attention. Nevertheless, it still contradicts Obama's very powerful antiwar/anti-Bush narrative and gives another layer of complexity to Obama as a political figure.

A Final Thought: Powell and Gay Rights

Powell, as Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, played a very large -- if not the largest -- role in defeating Bill Clinton's plan to lift the ban on discrimination against gays and lesbians in the military. Powell said that the military could not maintain troop cohesion and order with gay soldiers, and he singlehandedly rebuked activists who analogized the military's homophobia to racism. The debacle over the anti-gay policy emboldened conservatives to attack Clinton almost neurotically, and it probably made Clinton even more committed to centrist positions than he already was. Because the military question came so early in his presidency and caused such a tremendous amount of outrage, Clinton accepted the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" compromise, which perpetuates the silencing of gays and lesbians. Although some recent journalistic accounts suggest that Powell has softened on this issue over time, many gays and lesbians who engaged in advocacy on the military issue might view his endorsement less enthusiastically than other Democrats. Obama, however, does not intend to use Powell's endorsement to secure gay and lesbian and other liberal voters; instead, it is designed to attract uncommitted and undecided moderate-to-conservative voters.