Democrats have a majority in the Senate.
Democrat Barack Obama has a polling advantage exceeding 13% in some polls against his Republican rival -- an incredible lead by political standards.
And as long ago as 2004, almost 2/3 of Americans supported an end to the military's anti-gay policy.
So what do Democrats do?
The same thing that gay Americans have come to expect them to do, time and again, on our issues -- absolutely nothing other than talk:
Democrats say the nation should be ashamed of its ban on gays serving openly in the military. It discourages qualified people from joining the ranks at a time when the armed forces are stretched by two wars, they say, and is degrading to those willing to serve their country.
So what have the Democrats done about it? Nothing, really.
Since taking control of Congress in January 2007, Democrats have not convened hearings on the matter or taken up legislation that would let gays serve openly, although most party members favor repealing the prohibition.
But surely, Barack Obama, the "hope and change" candidate, is leading the way to transform the Democrats' "old politics" into the "new politics of hope and empowerment," right?
Doesn't appear to be so:
In a recent interview with The Advocate, a gay newsmagazine, Democrat Barack Obama stopped short of promising to lead the way for change, saying only that he can "reasonably see" a repeal of the current ban if elected president.
So let's get this, ehrmmmm, straight.
The Democratic Party has a majority of both houses of Congress -- a majority that's expected to grow in November. The Democrats have a presidential candidate who is almost certain to win the election -- by double-digit margins against his rivals.
That Democrat claims to be in favor of "real change" and worked to court gay voters.
The policy in question actively harms the US military's ability to recruit and retain skilled workers at a time when there's a severe shortage of them.
A repeal of the policy in question is supported by at least 2/3rds of the public -- probably even more today -- eliminating even the most wimpy inside-the-beltway spineless "we need to avoid backlash" argument against taking action.
And the best the Democrats can do is "reasonably see" if eliminating this law is "possible?"
No wonder Democratic homophobe Sam Nunn is a favorite for Obama VP.
PS, for comparison's sake, Libertarian candidate Bob Barr -- himself no stranger to controversy in the LGBT community -- issued a clear call to end the policy in 2007 -- a call to action that Barack Obama and the Democrat leadership still won't make.
How much more of this will LGBT voters put up with before demanding some accountability from the party that claims a near-monopoly on their support?