By Nan Hunter-
What a day it has been... The Justice Department sought a stay of Judge Phillips' injunction against enforcement of Don't Ask Don't Tell, after a somewhat puzzling two days of delay, during which the status of the policy seemed strangely in limbo. The Defense Department first said that local commanders are in charge, but then sent a communique telling them not to proceed with any discharges. This was a good move, since a general in Afghanistan told the press that no one there had heard about the injunction, implying that they weren't too worried about disobeying it. This is not what lawyers want their client to say. Meanwhile, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs revealed that the President was "very involved" in the discussions about what the next litigation moves should be.
Run that by me again...
Does this muddle mean that the Administration was actually seriously considering the possibility of not seeking a stay of the injunction? That's hard to believe, but the Associated Press says it's true. Is that why they made such a hash of the situation, alienating pretty much everyone on any side of the issue? If POTUS was personally engaged with this, why was it so bungled? Or was the Oval Office engagement the reason why this deer-in-the-headlights moment happened?
And just to polish off the messaging debacle, the Senate leadership said today that they aren't so sure that there will be a vote on DADT repeal in the lame duck session after all. The promise of this vote has been the Administration's primary offering of the strategy by which the President is going to make good on his promise that DADT will end "on my watch."
Do we laugh or cry?
for more visit Hunter for Justice.
-end-
Run that by me again...
Does this muddle mean that the Administration was actually seriously considering the possibility of not seeking a stay of the injunction? That's hard to believe, but the Associated Press says it's true. Is that why they made such a hash of the situation, alienating pretty much everyone on any side of the issue? If POTUS was personally engaged with this, why was it so bungled? Or was the Oval Office engagement the reason why this deer-in-the-headlights moment happened?
And just to polish off the messaging debacle, the Senate leadership said today that they aren't so sure that there will be a vote on DADT repeal in the lame duck session after all. The promise of this vote has been the Administration's primary offering of the strategy by which the President is going to make good on his promise that DADT will end "on my watch."
Do we laugh or cry?
for more visit Hunter for Justice.
-end-
No comments:
Post a Comment