by Matt Comer December 28, 2010

CHARLOTTE — Anti-gay, Republican Mecklenburg County Commissioner Bill James on Monday said gays are “sexual predators” in an email to his colleagues on the board.

James’ remarks were made in response to County Commissioner Chair Jennifer Roberts’ request to send a letter thanking some members of the Charlotte-area congressional delegation for their “yes” votes on “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT) repeal this month. Roberts was to send the letter to U.S. Reps. Larry Kissell and Mel Watt and U.S. Sens. Richard Burr and Kay Hagan. President Barack Obama last week signed the repeal act into law.

“Homosexuals are sexual predators,” James wrote in one email from a string of several between county board members, Roberts and County Manager Harry Jones, and provided by James to qnotes. “Allowing homosexuals to serve in the US military with the endorsement of the Mecklenburg County Commission ignores a host of serious problems related to maintaining US military readiness and effectiveness not the least of which is the current Democrat plan to allow homosexuals (male and female) to share showers with those they are attracted to.”

James added, “The US Government would not allow Hetero men and women to share showers and other personal facilities yet the leading homosexual in Congress (Barney Frank) thinks it is OK for homosexuals to do so allowing enlisted men and women to fall prey to higher ranking or more powerful homosexuals who ogle them (or worse).”

Other county commissioners also objected to sending the letter, according to other emails also received by James. In one, Republican Vice Chair Jim Pendergraph says he is against the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and relates a story of his encounter with a gay servicemember following his enlistmen in 1969.

“I don’t think the timing is right for this,” Pendergraph wrote, “and as a 19 year old enlistee from Steele Creek in the U.S. Army in 1969, the first homosexual I ever encountered was in basic training. He was the company clerk. It was a bad scene and this individual exerted his authority on young impressionable recruits.”

Pendergraph added, “Whatever you send, don’t put my name on it. I don’t see this as anything to be proud of.”

This month’s DADT repeal came after a months-long Pentagon report found there would be minimal unit cohesion or disruption problems resulting from an orderly policy repeal and implementation. Of the thousands of servicemembers surveyed during the Pentagon’s report, 70 percent said DADT repeal would have no or very little impact on troop morale or readiness.

Roberts, a Democrat, also specifically asked Republicans on the board about their thoughts on the letter, as DADT was not an issue on the county’s legislative agenda. Roberts especially sought to thank Burr, the only Republican senator in the Southeast to vote for repeal and the first such senator ever to vote positively on pro-LGBT legislation.

James said he would not congratulate Burr: “I suspect Richard Burr will pay a high electoral price for his actions but whether it boots him from office next time is unknown,” James wrote. “I know I won’t be supporting him even if he does have an R after his name.”

Fellow GOP Commissioner Karen Bentley also objected to the letter and voiced her opposition to “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” repeal, saying she was “highly disappointed” by Republican Burr’s affirmative vote on the issue on Dec. 18.

Burr won’t face another election until 2016.

Commissioner Harold Cogdell, Jr., a Democrat, also opposed the letter though he did so because matter was not an item on the county’s legislative agenda.

James also said he’d undertaken his own communication to the new Republican leaders of North Carolinas state legislature. He says he’s asked them to take up a variety of anti-gay social cause, like banning gay adoptions, prohibiting domestic partner benefits and placing on the ballot an anti-LGBT, anti-family marriage amendment to the state constitution.

James’ anti-gay comments following the Christmas holiday are not the first time the public official has spoken out strongly on LGBT issues. He often uses derogatory language or slurs to describe LGBT people in debates or communication with fellow public officials and constituents. During debate last December on domestic partner benefits for county employees, James leaned over to his Democratic colleague, Vilma Leake, and called her son a “homo.” Leake’s son died from AIDS in the 1990s.

James has been in office for nearly two decades and was one of the “Gang of Five” who voted to strip public arts funding in the 1990s during the county’s “Angels in America” controversy.

by: Pam Spaulding
Wed Dec 22, 2010 at 16:18:00 PM EST

For more on this story, please visit:

http://www.pamshouseblend.com/diary/18293/photo-sen-reid-returns-west-point-ring-back-to-lt-dan-choi?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed

Update From Autumn: Video from Senate Democrats that folows a timeline: From Dan Choi giving Sen. Harry Reid his West Point class ring at Netroots Nation to keep until DADT was repealed — to video from today when the ring was returned to Lt. Choi.

From Servicemembers Legal Defense Network:

***SLDN WARNING TO SERVICE MEMBERS – DADT is STILL in EFFECT***

The bottom line is DADT is still in effect and it is NOT safe to come out.

Rapidly changing events regarding the legal status of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT) may be confusing for service members and recruits.

•In Congress: On Saturday, December 18, 2010, the Senate voted to authorize the repeal of DADT, which the House of Representatives voted to support on December 15, 2010. There are still, however, many more steps in this process before the law can be fully repealed. Until that time, DADT remains the law and it is unsafe to come out. Even after the successful votes in Congress and even after the President signs the bill, the President, the Secretary of Defense, and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff must certify that the Defense Department is prepared to implement repeal. “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” will still be the law until 60 days after the President, Secretary of Defense, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs certify repeal can happen. Continue to visit www.sldn.org/stillatrisk for the latest updates on the status of the law.
•In the Courts: A U.S. District Court Judge ruled in October that DADT is unconstitutional and issued a worldwide injunction barring the military from investigating or discharging service members under DADT. After issuing a temporary stay of the injunction, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals issued a stay pending appeal on November 1, meaning DADT is still in effect. Service members can and still will be investigated and they will continue to be discharged.
•In the Pentagon: Earlier this year, DoD made changes to how “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” is implemented, including new protections for lesbian, gay, and bisexual service members. Those changes remain in effect. More recently, the Pentagon announced that all proposed DADT discharges, regardless of grade and rank, will be reviewed at the highest civilian levels. These are all important changes, but they do NOT end DADT. DADT remains the law and it is unsafe to come out.
SLDN’S LEGAL DEPARTMENT IS HERE TO HELP YOU

•SLDN provides free legal counseling to service members with legal issues stemming from or relating to the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” law banning military service by lesbian, gay, and bisexual persons, the regulations governing military service by HIV+ people, and the regulations addressing military service by transgender persons.
FREE LEGAL HOTLINE

•Contact our legal hotline (202-328-3244 x 100 or leg...@sldn.org).
•Given the latest “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (DADT) legal and political developments, SLDN has been hearing from many lesbian, gay, and bisexual service members who have questions about the status of the law as well as from veterans and others who wish to serve.
•If you’re still serving, and you have any questions about the status of DADT or anything else related to DADT, HIV status, or transgender issues, we want you to know you can contact our legal hotline at any time for free, confidential legal advice.
•If you are interested in going back into the military or joining for the first time, we strongly encourage you to contact SLDN’s legal hotline to set up a free, confidential call with an attorney to discuss your options.
REMEMBER

•Do NOT come out.
•”Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” remains the law until there is finality in Congress or the courts.
•Lesbian, gay, and bisexual service members are still being discharged under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and they will continue to be discharged until the courts or Congress end the law or stop its enforcement.
•Transgender service members remain at risk.
•Continue to check with SLDN to learn about how the latest legal and political developments impact your ability to serve openly.
If you have questions about how the latest legal or political developments may impact you, or about “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” in general, contact our legal hotline (202-328-3244 x100 or leg...@sldn.org) to schedule an appointment with an SLDN attorney.
By Aaron Tax, SLDN Legal Director

Read more: http://miamiherald.typepad.com/gaysouthflorida/2010/12/despite-repeal-of-dont-ask-dont-tell-its-still-not-safe-for-gay-soldiers-to-come-out-warns-sldn.html#ixzz18mOE1VpG

Brian Beutler | December 20, 2010 www.tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com

The Senate will ratify new START this week, say the White House and top Senate Democrats. But Republican leaders — and many of their influential members — are doing all they can to create the opposite impression.

Somebody’s clearly wrong. But we may not know whom until the last moment, when the arms reduction treaty gets a final vote on the Senate floor, and either does — or does not — win the two-thirds majority required for ratification.

That, in turn, will depend on whether Republicans are prepared to sink a big-deal treaty over a series of complaints about process. In the last several days, a number of Republicans — even those who profess to support new START on the merits — have risen to claim that the treaty will have to wait because they’re angry about the success of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell repeal and other Democratic priorities.

“If you want to have a chance of passing START, you better start over and do it in the next Congress, because this lame duck has been poisoned,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) on CBS yesterday morning.

Some Republicans, led by Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ), have raised a handful of substantive objections, as well: They say they can’t support a plan to reduce the U.S. nuclear stockpile unless it’s accompanied by a proposal to modernize the country’s nuclear weapons infrastructure. He and others complain, too, that the treaty is silent on tactical nuclear weapons (which you might expect from a treaty called the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) and they cite a small portion of the non-binding preamble to argue that Russia might back out of the treaty if the U.S. builds a missile defense system.

However all attempts to amend the Treaty will fail because any changes would require the U.S. to renegotiate START with Russia. One such proposal, authored by Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), to amend the preamble went down 37-59 in the Senate on Saturday. That too, has Republicans pouting.

Finally, Republicans claim that they have not had enough time to review new START, and fault Democrats for putting it on the floor at the last minute and hopscotching back and forth between debating the treaty and considering other issues.

Democrats laugh at this last claim. The treaty, they note, was signed by the President on April 8, 2010. Yesterday, they issued a press release highlighting “a few things that happened while Republicans failed to read the START Treaty,” including:

“Chilean Miners trapped and released.”

“Lindsay Lohan returned to rehab, was released, and went back in again.”

Democrats will need nine Republicans to vote with them reach a two-thirds majority required for passage of the treaty. They’ll hold a key test vote on that tomorrow when they attempt to break the filibuster. That will only require 60 votes, but will say a lot about how likely they are to get the thing ratified.

By Ed O’Keefe and Craig Whitlock
Updated 2:24 p.m. ET
President Obama will sign the repeal of “don’t ask, don’t tell” on Wednesday, according to the White House.

The Obama administration hasn’t said how long that process might take, but White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said Monday he didn’t expect the process to be “overly burdensome.”

As military leaders prepare for the full integration of gay and lesbian troops into their services following the repeal of the “don’t ask, don’t tell law,” they plan to draw on the detailed conclusions of a Pentagon study that outlines the tricky scenarios that might arise.

Among the hypothetical scenarios in the report: A chaplain’s sermon includes several direct statements calling homosexuality a sin. A junior officer complains she was denied entry into a school because she is a lesbian. An applicant informs recruiters that he is gay. Troops are heard making jokes about using the same showers as gay colleagues.

Some commanders opposed to the repeal have warned that such incidents are the sort of unwanted dangerous, if not deadly distractions that could hamper the military’s ability to fight two wars. But the more than 300-page report provides potential solutions to each, and reminds commanders that such issues should be treated no differently than other incidents of harassment, racism, sexism or discrimination.

The sermons and teachings of the concerned chaplain could not be restricted, unless he publicly maligns military leaders, the report said. The junior officer should work her complaints up the chain of command. The applicant who shares his sexual orientation should be handled like any other recruit. Commanders should remind the joking troops that discrimination or harassment against gay colleagues is inappropriate, but could grant a service member’s request not to shower among them.

Full repeal of “don’t ask, don’t tell,” “will not happen immediately,” Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Norton A. Schwartz warned airmen Sunday.

“The standards of conduct we expect of all Airmen will not change,” Schwartz said in an e-mail sent Sunday night. “Moreover, we will continue to treat each other, as members of the Air Force family, with dignity and respect.”

Successfully implementing the changes “will depend upon strong leadership, a clear message and proactive education throughout the force,” Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said after Saturday’s historic Senate vote. “With a continued and sustained commitment to core values of leadership, professionalism and respect for all, I am convinced that the U.S. military can successfully accommodate and implement this change, as it has others in history.”

The change in policy will not occur until President Obama, Gates and Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen inform Congress in writing that the military is prepared to do and has drafted the necessary policies and regulations. Those changes must not impact troop readiness, cohesion or military recruitment and retention, according to the law passed last weekend. Once the written notice is submitted, 60 days must elapse before “don’t ask, don’t tell” is officially repealed.

White House and Pentagon officials would not set a specific timetable and stressed the change will occur only after Gates and Mullen believe the military is ready to end enforcement. Clifford L. Stanley, the undersecretary of defense for personnel, will lead the policy overhaul, Gates said.

Gay-rights leaders who pushed to end “don’t ask, don’t tell” believe the military could end full enforcement of the law in a matter of weeks.

“The troops already know how to interact with gays because they do so every day,” said Aaron Belkin, executive director of the Palm Center, a University of California Santa Barbara think tank devoted to the study of gays in the military.

The Pentagon’s report on implementing the change “can be boiled down to just two things: strong leadership and simple rules,” Belkin said. “This really isn’t rocket science.”

Frank Barrett, a professor of management and organizational behavior at the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, Calif., predicted that the military will move quickly to implement the new law, but that the ease of doing so will vary widely among the different branches.

“The real challenge of repealing ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ is that it challenges the warrior ethos, what it means to be a warrior,” Barrett said. Warriors, he said, forge a “bonding love” during combat and preparation for war. The question that arises, he said: Can individuals who are personally uncomfortable with gays continue to form those close warrior bonds with openly gay troops?

“The Marines are going to have the hardest time, and the Air Force is going to have the easiest time,” he said. “The Air Force doesn’t do eye-to-eye combat. But Marines, they are close knit in close quarters, and the identity of hyper-masculinity is so core to their mission.”

According to the Pentagon study, about 40 percent of the Marine Corps opposed to or concerned with the possibility of serving alongside openly gay colleagues. Gen. James F. Amos, the Marine Corps commandant, has suggested that allowing gays to serve openly in the military could result in deadly distractions.

Despite his concerns, Amos said Sunday that Marines “will step out smartly to faithfully implement this new policy.”

“Fidelity is the essence of the United States Marine Corps. Above all else, we are loyal to the Constitution, our Commander in Chief, Congress, our Chain of Command, and the American people,” Amos said.

The more difficult issue may be the full acceptance of gays and lesbians across the forces, Barrett said, noting that women still face a gender bias on Naval combat ships, 17 years after Congress repealed the ban on women doing so.

“There will be plenty more skirmishes on this issue. This issue has been full of them,” said Fred Sainz, vice president of the Human Rights Campaign, a gay rights group close to the Obama administration and congressional Democrats. ” We won’t agree with everything the Pentagon has to say, as well we shouldn’t.”

Among many Army officers the news of the law’s repeal yielded more of a shrug than celebration or outrage.

“The talk among most of my soldiers is, ‘We don’t care,’” said one Army officer at Fort Stewart, Ga. “The perception has been for a while that this is a done deal and is going to happen sooner or later.”

Most officers said that the repeal of the law would at least bring some clarity to the murky situation surrounding the law, which since the fall has been the subject of both legal court rulings and legislative battles. One officer who recently went through a pre-command course to prepare him to lead a combat arms battalion said the possibility of ending the law barely came up during his several weeks of courses.

“Culturally it will be okay — especially with the younger soldiers,” the officer said. His and many others biggest worry was that the Pentagon would overreact if there are perceived problems in a unit and institute some form of military-wide training. “My biggest concern is how stupid the bureaucracy gets if something happens,” the officer said. He and other officers were granted anonymity because they are not authorized to speak for the record.

Staff writer Greg Jaffe contributed to this report

2010
12
20
10
45
By Ed O’Keefe and Craig Whitlock | December 20, 2010

“This case could result in the next major court ruling on the constitutionality of DOMA”

(San Francisco, December 17, 2010)—The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California heard oral arguments on Friday in a Lambda Legal lawsuit against the Obama Administration that may have major implications for the federal so-called Defense of Marriage Act, or DOMA.

Lambda Legal and Morrison & Foerster LLP filed suit against the federal government earlier this year on behalf of Karen Golinski, a 19-year employee of the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Golinski seeks the same spousal health insurance for her wife, Amy Cunninghis, that heterosexual employees receive for their spouses. Golinski and Cunninghis have been together for 21 years. Golinski v. U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) requests an order directing the agency to obey prior rulings by the Chief Judge of the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals awarding the equal insurance benefits to Golinski. OPM should rescind its instruction to Golinski’s insurer, Blue Cross/Blue Shield, not to enroll Golinski’s wife in the family health insurance plan.

“This case could result in the next major court ruling on the constitutionality of DOMA,” said Jennifer C. Pizer, Senior Counsel for Lambda Legal. “This began as a simple internal personnel matter; the irony is that the Obama Administration, through the decisions of OPM and the Department of Justice to assert DOMA as an excuse for the discriminatory treatment of Karen Golinski, has turned this into a challenge to DOMA itself.”

The judge previously asked both sides to file additional legal briefs addressing, among other topics, whether or not DOMA violates the U.S. Constitution. Lambda Legal has explained that the law indeed is unconstitutional because it discriminates based on sex and sexual orientation and infringes on the fundamental right to privacy and respect for one’s family relationships recognized by the Supreme Court in Lambda Legal’s landmark case, Lawrence v. Texas.

“Judge White, both through his request for supplementary information during the briefing process and his questioning at today’s hearing, seems keenly interested in how the Obama Administration now is defending DOMA, after having reached out to block benefits for Karen and Amy,” said Pizer. “He seemed rightly skeptical of the government’s argument that DOMA maintains ‘consistency’ in how the federal government allocates federal rights and benefits. Before DOMA, the federal government—consistently—respected all legal marriages, no matter what state issued the license or who married whom. Now, for the first time under DOMA, the government inconsistently distinguishes among legally married people, favoring heterosexuals and ignoring lesbians and gay men, and for no reasons other than ignorance, prejudice and anti-gay religious condemnation.”

“Judge White also skewered another piece of twisted logic on OPM’s part: that the Executive Branch agency’s duty to negotiate contracts with insurance plans to cover federal workers somehow authorizes it to meddle in and to thwart individual enrollment decisions ordered by top managers of a different branch of the federal government. OPM’s facilitation and support functions go nowhere that far.”

Lambda Legal’s Pizer represents Golinski together with Rita Lin, James McGuire, Gregory Dresser and Aaron Jones of Morrison & Foerster LLP.

The case is Golinski v. United States Office of Personnel Management and John Berry, Director of the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, in his official capacity.

###

Contact: Jason Pérez Howe; 213-382-7600 x 247; jho...@lambdalegal.org

by David Badash on December 16, 2010

Eric Alva is the first Marine injured in the Iraq War, the first American for that matter, and he’s gay. Alva won a purple heart but lost his leg. He calls General Amos’ comments, that gays in the military are a distraction to straight soldiers and could cost lives, or limbs, “conduct unbecoming.”

Alva continues,

“I was just really taken aback on how disrespectful someone who is the leader of the United States Marine Corps can talk about, you know, members in the armed forces who is aware of that there are gay service members serving in the Marine Corps, and all branches of service. But what he did was totally, what we call in the military, conduct unbecoming. I mean, he literally took my Purple Heart and threw it in my face. I mean, to say that there are distractions and could cause deaths or even loss of limbs for people because of knowing that there are openly gay men and women serving in the military, I mean, this is just unbelievable, how someone can really act in a leadership role.”

“I mean, this is someone who I’m waiting for to get that call from the Commander in Chief himself, like General McCrystal, and maybe taken into that Oval Office and walk out not in charge of the Marines anymore.”

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

ABC News’ Matthew Jaffe reports December 15, 2010:

Not only do supporters of the repeal have reason to celebrate today because of the House of Representatives’ vote in favor of a stand-alone bill to repeal the military’s Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy, but also because the chances of the bill passing the Senate improved when Republican Olympia Snowe of Maine said she will support it.

“After careful analysis of the comprehensive report compiled by the Department of Defense and thorough consideration of the testimony provided by the Secretary of Defense, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the service chiefs, I support repeal of the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell law,” Snowe said in a statement. “However, as was stated in the letter I signed along with all of my Republican colleagues to the Majority Leader on Dec. 1, we must first fund the government beyond Dec. 18, and prevent the largest tax increase in our nation’s history from affecting all Americans on New Year’s Day before addressing other legislation.”

Sens. Joe Lieberman, I-CT, and Sen. Susan Collins, R-ME, who are leading the push in the Senate for the stand-alone bill repealing the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy, believe they have the 60 votes needed to overcome the Senate threshold.

At last week’s Senate vote when the repeal was attached to the annual defense authorization bill, the measure fell only three votes short.

56 Democrats voted for repeal at that time. Sen. Blanche Lincoln, D-Ark., missed the vote due to a dentist’s appointment, while Sen. Joe Manchin, D-WV, opposed repeal, arguing that the policy “probably should be repealed in the near future,” but not now because of “the effect implementation would have on our front line combat troops at this time.”

With Lincoln’s vote, that would mean 57 Democrats are in favor of repeal. Then come the Republicans. Collins brings the tally to 58 and Snowe brings it to 59.

Two other Republicans – Scott Brown of Massachusetts and Lisa Murkowski – have also voiced support for repeal, but both of them voted against repeal last week on procedural grounds. If the repeal is to pass – and to do so it must overcome a packed Senate lame-duck calendar – Democrats need to secure the support of Brown or Murkowski.

–UPDATE–

Murkowski will support the stand-alone bill, her spokesman says, so Democrats appear to have lined up the 60 votes they will need in the Senate to pass the repeal.

“Sen. Murkowski will support a stand-alone repeal of the DADT law,” said Murkowski spokesman Michael Brumas. “With the tax package out of the way, and legislation to fund the government on a glide path to passage, Sen. Murkowski will vote to move to DADT when it is brought to the floor.”

- Posted by Chris Geidner on December 13, 2010 www.metroweekly.com
Original Story

This morning, lawyers for Servicemembers Legal Defense Network filed a lawsuit in federal court seeking the reinstatement of three servicemembers ousted under “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” including former Air Force Major Mike Almy.

The lawsuit claims that the DADT-related discharges of the Almy, former Air Force Staff Sgt. Anthony Loverde and former Navy Petty Officer 2nd Class Jason D. Knight were unconstituational violations of both due process and equal protection, as well as the First Amendment. These claims are the same, generally, as those raised in the Log Cabin Republicans v. United States case.

Read the rest of this article »