Probably not noticed by many around here but in military circles Ron Paul bringing a uniformed man up on stage in Iowa is a big topic. Being at a political rally in uniform is a big no-no. Speaking on behalf of a candidate while in uniform is even worse. I will not go into if Ron Paul is a good pick for president. I’ll let others do that elsewhere. What pisses me off to no end is a couple of things about what this soldier did:
Hearing people (mainly military) defending what he did. No matter how many times I try to explain it they don’t seem to understand that the civilian control of the military is a good thing. That a politically neutral military is a good thing. They think that Ron Paul is more important than the laws governing the country or the foundations of the military. Its very cult-like.
The idiots who think that CNN censored the soldier when the feed was lost while they were interviewing him. Do they not see that CNN made the choice to interview him?If they didn’t want what he wanted to say to go out all they had to do was not interview him? The fact that he was a Ron Paul supporter was not a surprise to CNN because he was at a Ron Paul rally. Why go to the bother of interviewing him if they were just going to censor him? Makes no sense.
I’m sick of banging my head against the wall about this.
Some Iowa Reservist Corporal who apparently has a criminal record from Florida. But Ron Paul asked him to come on stage to speak at the rally the night of the caucus. His status is being reviewed. Believe me, anyone who has been in for 10 years like this guy is knows the rules. The rules for active duty are stricter but reserve component soldiers are not allowed to be at rallies in uniform either.
Supporting the “right” of someone to disregard the rules and regulations of the military because he is supporting their great leader is cult-like.
He has the right to vote for who he picks. He has the right to political discussions and debates. Since he is not active duty he has the right to attend political rallies. What he does not have the right to do is do any of that in uniform. There are many things you are not allowed to do in uniform while a member of the military. This is one of them. Doing something while in uniform means you are representing the military. If you say so or not.
ETA: my picking the term cult-like comes specifically from how I have seen people write about it. People who know the regulations unlike yourself. People who would go apeshit if he did it while supporting Obama or probably anyone else.
Seems “while wearing the uniform” is the key part here, Grumman
People don’t lose their political rights in the military, but the military limits their ability to exercise those rights while wearing the uniform.
We don’t have much experience with that here in the United States, but in many countries the military serves as a bastion for whichever political party attempts to drape itself in the flag. Note how the Egyptian protestors of several months ago hated Mubarak, but loved the Egyptian Army (a significantly different situation than now, with the army directly in charge.) The military does not want people using the uniform as a bolstering point for a particular party or political cause.
Who defended him? I haven’t paid much attention to this non-story. The soldier broke the rules and screwed himself. It will all be forgotten soon.
Now you’re just complaining about the lack of quality at CNN. This is among the most minor of examples.
What I’d complain about is the lack of military personnel standing up for Obama. He is easily the best CIC since Eisenhower.
Not understanding what you mean. The OP is about it being totally improper, both ethically and according to military rules, to advocate for a politician while in uniform. Maybe they have stood up for him, but since they are not doing it in uniform…
There is a lot of vocal support on military boards. Not the majority by any means just very vocal.
I am not complaining about the quality of CNN. I am talking about Paul supporters who believe it was a conspiracy by CNN to silence the soldier. After they asked him to be on. I know it makes no sense. Hence the Pit.
There is a lack of support for Obama in the military because the majority or those that join tend to be conservative and mostly republican. By no means not all but I’ve been in 23 years. Liberals are definitely the minority. Obama did get a much higher percentage of the military vote than recent democrats but not the majority. No idea what the next election will show. But that has nothing to do with this thread. And there is an entire section of this board dedicated to discussing how much you like Obama.
Oh about the CNN thing. Can’t do the link right now but go to YouTube and search for the “Blatant censorship” by CNN. Multiple posts and hundreds of thousands of views. For some it may seem like a non-issue. Others are trying to make it a big issue. Which is why I am pitting it.
Exactly. Even if someone in uniform SAYS s/he’s not representing the military with his/her words, that uniform implies otherwise. And every service member knows this. That uniform says “This person is acting on behalf of the military”.
It does? I must admit to not being from the USA but I’ve never understood this idea.
I generally look to the rank some one has achieved before deciding how much weight their opinion carries within the military and then work from the assumption that you need to be pretty highly ranked before you can start assuming they are speaking on behalf of the military. Even then it is only an assumption that really shouldn’t be made unless it is openly stated that they are speaking on behalf of the military because the military is civilian controlled and not the other way around.
Well, it can, and the purpose of the rule is to leave no question in the mind of the voters, many of whom would not know how to tell the rank of a military person.
Well, one part that’s missing is the assumption that the average US citizen isn’t dumber than a bag of bricks.
There are still people who think New Mexico is a different country, rather than a US state. And others who would fail a basic test of US history (including basic knowledge about our electoral process).
Sad as it is, many people know the military is civilian controlled, it is not universal knowledge among Americans. Also, the military, as a whole, tends to be politically conservative, and that attitude does get out to the general public, even if it’s not the ‘official’ stance.