So here is a challenge to gay-conservatives and to their conservative friends and family, why can't POTUS provide the leadership on DADT? He doesn't even have to face the electorate again. It's the least he could do and it wouldn't "cost" anything.
From Dale Capenter's January essay:
"The time has come for Congress to look seriously at lifting the ban. Other former military leaders and supporters of DADT have urged likewise. A study earlier this year showed that DADT has not only cost the country the service of thousands of personnel, but has also wasted hundreds of millions of dollars in lost training and expenses for investigations of soldiers’ private lives. Polls show that a majority of Americans favor lifting the ban.
I’m guessing the new Democratic Congress will be reluctant to revisit the issue just now, however. [oops] Other issues -- like what to do about the mess in Iraq -- are far more pressing. The Democrats’ Achilles’ heel is the perception that they are hostile to the military and weak on defense, a perception that voting to lift the ban might unfairly reinforce. At least that is what they will fear.
Of course, in the unlikely event President Bush were to announce that he favors a reconsideration of DADT, that would give Congress the political cover it needs to move forward. Bush could paint such a move as an effort to strengthen the nation’s defenses in time of war."
link: Bootstrapping Andrew Sullivan
