They were only following orders
Jul. 6th, 2010 06:14 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
pecuniumLieutenant Dan Choi and Captain James Pietrangelo have subpoenaed the president (pdf).
They aver that, as he has encouraged the LGBT community to make noise, and hold him accountable, in the matter of Don't Ask Don't Tell, the civil protest in which they were engaged, and during which they were arrested was something they were compelled to do; because it was a lawful order of the president, as commander in chief.
I am not a big fan of the "President as CiC" fetish so many have (though I do notice the slavish devotion to buffering the holder of the Oval Office from the slings and arrows of a scornful populace have changed. Where Limbaugh used to say it was treason to not support the President, in his military adventures, now he says he wants him to fail, but I digress), but I think this is a good use of that distinction.
Why?
Because DADT is completely in his purview. It's an executive order on how to interpret a statute. The Dems are all pissed off about the people (like me) who are pissed off. Why? Because they say it will all be over in a year; when they change the statute. Why a year? I think it's because they want two years to have it fade from the pressing news as they run for re-elections.
Screw that. I repealing it is right... it's right. Justice delayed is worse than justice denied. How many soldiers, seamen, Marines and airmen are going to be kicked out in the next year? How many are going to have to live in fear of being outed, and so kicked out? How many who want to serve now, will have to wait; because they don't want to get kicked out?
As political theater goes, this is dead on target.
They aver that, as he has encouraged the LGBT community to make noise, and hold him accountable, in the matter of Don't Ask Don't Tell, the civil protest in which they were engaged, and during which they were arrested was something they were compelled to do; because it was a lawful order of the president, as commander in chief.
I am not a big fan of the "President as CiC" fetish so many have (though I do notice the slavish devotion to buffering the holder of the Oval Office from the slings and arrows of a scornful populace have changed. Where Limbaugh used to say it was treason to not support the President, in his military adventures, now he says he wants him to fail, but I digress), but I think this is a good use of that distinction.
Why?
Because DADT is completely in his purview. It's an executive order on how to interpret a statute. The Dems are all pissed off about the people (like me) who are pissed off. Why? Because they say it will all be over in a year; when they change the statute. Why a year? I think it's because they want two years to have it fade from the pressing news as they run for re-elections.
Screw that. I repealing it is right... it's right. Justice delayed is worse than justice denied. How many soldiers, seamen, Marines and airmen are going to be kicked out in the next year? How many are going to have to live in fear of being outed, and so kicked out? How many who want to serve now, will have to wait; because they don't want to get kicked out?
As political theater goes, this is dead on target.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2010-07-07 02:54 am (UTC)No one is being killed here ... wait, that's not right. I'm sure people are being killed here because the folks they're supposed to rely on to save their asses (one way or another) are being given the boot for being gay.