Skip Navigation

The Daily Dish - 2006-2011 archives for The Daily Dish, featuring Andrew Sullivan

Was DADT Better Than The Status Quo?

By The Daily Dish
Dec 29 2010, 10:05 AM ET

by Patrick Appel

Jonathan Bernstein asks:

[D]id the shift from the ban to DADT help the fight to achieve the original goal of ending the ban?  Putting aside the issue of implementation (for which I don't think those affected can forgive Bill Clinton, unless I have the facts of the situation wrong), and assuming that the votes just weren't there in 1993 for Clinton to win on the issue, was accepting DADT better than just continuing the status quo?  I think there's a case to be made, but I'm really not sure...I can see a case that it made no difference, or a case that it was worse than nothing.  Anyone have an argument one way or another?



Presented by

More at The Atlantic

A False Photo From a Real Massacre A False Photo of a Real Massacre
'Men in Black 3': A Could-See 'Men in Black 3': A Could-See
The Brash Hypocrisy of Lanny Davis This Man Represents Everything Wrong in Washington
Does the Supreme Court Believe in Double Jeopardy Protections? Does the Supreme Court Believe in Double Jeopardy Protections?
The Controversial German Book Linking the Euro to Holocaust Guilt Holocaust Guilt Is to Blame for the Euro
View All Correspondents

The Biggest Story in Photos

Where in the World? Part 3: A Google Earth Puzzle

May 25, 2012

Subscribe Now

SAVE 59%! 10 issues JUST $2.45 PER COPY

Facebook

Newsletters

Sign up to receive our free newsletters

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)