Hillary Clinton’s Coded Message to Repeal Don’t Ask Don’t Tell


Although I feel that the US government is bullying those gay and lesbian men and women who are serving in the armed services and deployed to take risks for the national security interests of the United States under the restrictions of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, this is a compelling and powerful message from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in the wake of several suicides by promising young gay people.
Her message refers to foreign service officers and civil servants in the Department of State who couldn’t until recently serve openly. She’s right — and progress has been made.
And in my view she’s giving a powerful nudge for this government to do all that it takes to finally end the legally fortified bigotry of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell at the Department of Defense.
There’s a rumor afloat that Hillary could very well be the next Secretary of Defense (see future blog post on that in the next day or two) — and if that happens, one can’t help but imagine the different posture she’d take on this issue from that of Robert Gates and some of the military command staff.
— Steve Clemons


12 comments on “Hillary Clinton’s Coded Message to Repeal Don’t Ask Don’t Tell

  1. questions says:

    A nice essay, in part….
    “The Likely Voter Thing: We have been told for years that pollsters use “likely voters” because it provides a more accurate landscape for taking a snapshot of the electorate. After all, what is the use of recording the preferences of voters who aren’t, in all probability, going to vote on Election Day, anyway?”
    “The Pollster Hegemony Thing: Around two months ago, I noted that a majority of the polls in my database for this cycle either emanated from Republican private polling or from Rasmussen (which, of course, could easily be described as Republican public polling). As the trickle became a flood of data (what was, at that time, around 1000 polls is now 2040 and counting), those numbers have changed, but only slightly. Even at this point, 47% of the polls released in this cycle have come from GOP or GOP-sympathetic (read: Rasmussen) sources. By contrast, just 8.5% of the polls have come from Democratic sources.”
    ” * In California, site of a critical gubernatorial and Senate election, a study by the Atlas Project shows that the early/absentee vote in 2010 has slightly favored Democrats (43-40). In 2006, it was split almost evenly.
    * In Colorado, where Dems are seeking to hold onto a very vulnerable Senate seat and a trio of House seats that are in some semblance of danger, the absentee statistics are similar to where they were in 2008, which was a very good year for the Democrats in Colorado. While Republicans have requested more absentee ballots, the percentage of ballots requested by the Democrats (37%) is actually fractionally better than the percentage sought by Democrats in 2008.
    * In Nevada, the voice of Nevada politics (Jon Ralston) tweeted on Saturday that the GOP edge in early voting thus far amounts to less than 150 votes. This is notable, because this is one of the states where the RV/LV gaps were the most immense. If there is a huge enthusiasm gap in Nevada, it has not shown up in early voting. Dem-friendly Clark County cast 67% of the early vote in 2006. In 2010, it is 65%. A gap, but not a big one.
    * In Ohio, an analysis (in the name of full disclosure, one done by the Ohio Democratic Party) showed that Democrats have cast 44% of the votes in early and absentee voting, compared to 34% cast by Republicans. Ohio has a toss-up race for Governor, to say nothing of close to a half-dozen potentially perilous House seats for the Democrats.”
    No one knows if the Dem early turn out is indicative of Tues turnout, or unusual.
    No one knows if the Rasmussen effect is an issue or not.
    No one knows if the dems are hiding bad polls or good polls.
    No one knows if the cell phone effect is HUGE or teensy.
    No one knows if there really is big MO towards dems and if that big MO will continue or is a blip.
    In short, don’t predict. Hope. GOTV.


  2. nadine says:

    Wigwag, here are the current polls for your three significant races:
    Rick Scott (R) v Alex Sink (D) RCP average: Scott +1%
    Marco Rubio (R) v Kendrick Meek (D) v Charlie Crist (?) RCP average: Rubio +12%
    Rob Portman (R) v Lee Fisher (D) RCP average: Portman +19.5%
    Ted Strickland (D-Incumbent) v John Kasich (R) RCP average: Kasich +4.2%
    Tom Corbett (R) v Daniel Onorato (D) RCP average: Corbetter +5.3%
    Pat Toomey (R) v Joe Sestak (D) RCP average: Toomey +2%
    So the Republicans are polling ahead in all six races; in three it’s not even close. If Sean Trende’s thinking in
    “Who’s Going to Vote This Year?”
    is near the mark, the pollsters are still being too cautious about the extent of the GOP wave in their turnout models. You should take the current polls and turn the dial about 4% more Republican.
    Remember also that all these new Republican governors and congressmen will have a hand in redistricting.
    “I would bet the house that the Tea Party turns out to be just about as consequential as the progressive blogosphere and the ravaging hordes of young Obama fans who were convinced in 2008 that Obama’s arrival was akin to the second coming. Both movements will almost certainly turn out to be flashes in the proverbial pan. One of the main reasons for this is that both movements are in large part media created.”
    I fundamentally disagree with you on this. The Tea Parties are anything but “media created” — just the opposite, the media spent months denying and badmouthing them! The Tea Parties are that rara avis, a true popular groundswell motivated by rage and fear at the wrong direction of this country. Ever been to one? I have. Full of small businessmen, industrious taxpaying types who never went to any political demonstration before. Something like 9% of likely voters, according to a Rasmussen poll, say that they have been to a Tea Party rally and 24% support the movement. This is for real.
    Now maybe if they think the country is returned to adult supervision, or at least safely gridlocked, the Tea Party movement may dissipate.
    But I wouldn’t bet on it. The Tea Partiers aren’t at all pleased with establishment Republicans, whose follies, they feel, left the door open for Obama and his merry band of socialists. They intend to replace those establishment Republicans with true fiscal conservatives. Their model is the Reagan takeover of the party, which took several election cycles.
    Meantime, I think PJ O’Rourke sized up the popular mood well when he said, “This is not an election on November 2. This is a restraining order.”


  3. WigWag says:

    “But on election night in 2012 watch these races:” WigWag
    I meant to say towards the end of my last comment,
    “But on election night in 2010 watch these races:”
    Sorry about the error.


  4. WigWag says:

    “The Clintons can see what a disaster Obama is proving as President. I would think it more likely that if the Democratic midterm rout is as large as the polls now predict that Hillary would resign and prepare a primary challenge against Obama in 2012.” (Nadine)
    The six races to watch, Nadine are all in three states, Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida; each of these states has a gubernatorial and senatorial race. In Florida and Ohio both the Senate and Governor’s seats are open; in Ohio, there’s an incumbent in the Governor’s race (the Democrat, Strickland) but the Senate seat is open.
    If the Democrats go 3 and 3 in these races (or better), Obama emerges relatively unscathed and he has a reasonable chance to be reelected. If the Democrats win only 2 of these 6 races, Obama is in serious trouble. If the Democrats win less than 2 of these races, one would almost be tempted to count Obama out.
    Obama beat McCain by taking every single traditionally Democratic state except West Virginia and by winning every state typically considered to be a toss up in Presidential elections (e.g. Iowa). He even won several traditionally Republican states like Virginia and North Carolina.
    In the next Presidential election, no matter what happens between now and 2012 the traditionally Republican states that he won last time are almost surely gone for Obama. It’s virtually impossible to conceive of how he could win Virginia and North Carolina again.
    It’s also very hard to see how he can run the table on the toss-up states like Nevada, Colorado, Iowa and New Mexico; Obama is sure to lose at least some of these states.
    If my projection is right, that takes us back to a very traditional Presidential election; to win 270+ electoral votes, Obama can’t amass enough electoral votes unless he wins 2 out of 3 of Ohio, Pennsylvania and Florida.
    Frankly, Obama is so hated in Florida that it


  5. nadine says:

    The Clintons can see what a disaster Obama is proving as President. I would think it more likely that if the Democratic midterm rout is as large as the polls now predict, that Hillary would resign and prepare a primary challenge against Obama in 2012.


  6. Dan Kervick says:

    “And it’s also a reason why she won’t accept the appointment.”
    Oh I don’t know. She can be the first female defense secretary in US history, win a big crusade against the Muslim Hordes, and still be young enough (68) to run in 2016.


  7. Don Bacon says:

    And it’s also a reason why she won’t accept the appointment.


  8. Dan Kervick says:

    And of course, that’s the other reason Obama might fee pressured to appoint Clinton as Secretary of Defense.


  9. Laura says:

    Hillary is extraordinary! The best leader the USA has produced!Smart, warm and beautiful!
    HILLARY 2012!


  10. Dan Kervick says:

    “There’s a rumor afloat that Hillary could very well be the next Secretary of Defense.”
    Given what we know of Clinton’s track record and preferences, this rumor comports with my theory that Obama has a war planned for the second half of his term.
    He apparently doesn’t know how to sell the classic case for more Keynesian stimulus and deficit spending on pure public policy grounds, and he consigned all the good Keynesians who could have helped him with this sales job, like Stiglitz and Krugman, to the wilderness when he staffed his administration.
    But given that more Keynesian stimulus is precisely what needs to happen, Obama will probably go for the tried and true approach of organizing a mass murder expedition abroad as the only way to get Congress to spend more money and back off on the deficit hysteria.


  11. PissedOffAmerican says:

    “There’s a rumor afloat that Hillary could very well be the next Secretary of Defense”
    You just gave Netanyahu and his merry band of racist fascists raging hard-ons. Perhaps he’ll have the IDF shoot a few American peace activists in the head to celebrate such an appointment. The collective of global arms merchants are also ecstatically orgasmic over such a prospect as well.
    You ever notice that when the State Department issues its tepid condemnations of Israeli behaviour, its always through a “State Department” spokeperson??? But when Hillary takes to the stage, its to tell us things like “The Goldstone Report is seriously flawed”, or to praise our relationship with Israel, and laud the “concessions” that Netanyahu claims yet never delivers?


  12. PissedOffAmerican says:

    This morning on CNN I watched some “Whitehouse spokesperson” tell us that this sack of shit Obama had to “follow the letter of the law”, which is why he is pressing to ignore the recent court decision declaring DADT illegal.
    So, interesting that the fuckin’ fraud doesn’t have the same concern for the “letter of the law” when it comes to prosecuting the war criminals, torturers, perjurers, bank fraudsters, and scumbags that have brought this nation to its knees.
    He is also obviously unconcerned with Israeli assassins popping a cap in the head of a defenseless anmerican citizen lying prone on the deck of a ship.
    But sue Arizona? Fight the judge that decides DADT is illegal??? Allow FBI raids on the homes of anti-wear activists? Continue rendition? Expand the powers of government to evesdrop on citizens??? You bet!!
    Obama is a joke. What a HUUUUUUGE disappointment he is. Its a toss-up who is the most despicable, Bush or this asshole Obama. Are these embarrassing jackasses really the best we can come up with? The world’s people are laughing at us. Those we aren’t murdering, torturing, or demonizing, that is.


Add your comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *