Whoa, deep meta-irony! No, wait, its stupid. Easy mistake to make.
Military equipment specification uses a noun-before-modifier, general-before-particular, syntax in order that the supply people may catalogue huge inventory lists more efficiently. It becomes a running gag for anyone who has served. (It does make the descriptions sound like a stilted translation from a Romance Language, come to think of it).
Mine too. And I’ll give long odds.
[Moderating]
Doggo, threatening violence against other posters is against the board rules. Don’t do this again.
[/Moderating]
It’s gonna smell like mildew, you know. Everything I was ever issued in the military smelled like mildew.
I’m curious. Has anyone asked the Marine in question what he thinks? Did he go back to his barracks (or whatever) bitching about having to hold an umbrella for his royal highness?
Also, who else is going to stand next to the president in public? Are they just going to grab some random guy and let them really close to him? Maybe one of the secret service can hold it, instead of his normal protecting the president thing. Does anyone think they have screened umbrella holders at the ready in case it rains?
Every single person at that press conference had been screened like crazy. Anybody they grabbed would therefore have been cleared by SS before they ever got into the Rose Garden. Agents can’t hold umbrellas because it would interfere with their mobility and response time. Staffers can’t do it because they would look stupid and not do it right. Marines were used because they would do the job correctly, precisely, and look hella good doing it.
UMBRELLA, MAN’S, NSN 8465-66-022-4486
lowercase text so I can have caps
If holding an umbrella for the POTUS is “humiliating”, imagine how horrific it is for them to have to dig pit latrines and clean their restrooms! Oh, the horror! How can we treat our military so poorly! Obviously we should be hiring [del]illegal immigrants[/del] minimum wage lackeys to do such scutt work!
The President leads an administration that routinely kills people without trial or oversight, raids journalists’ records to find “leaks,” and is curiously dishonest about any number of things of national import, and you’re worried about umbrellas.
I don’t know that you’re what’s wrong with America, but this is definitely the reason the Republicans lost the 2012 Presidential election.
Well, and Republicans are in favor of killing people without trial or oversight (as long as someone uses the word ‘terror’ in some form once a briefing), and ‘intelligence gathering’ without warrants.
As was pointed out upthread, Mr. Obama must be doing a pretty good job if THIS is the best that the opposition has to bring to the table.
Anyone remember Iraq or Vietnam? Has this POTUS committed troops in such a reckless manner? No, he hasn’t. Those Marines were there at that press conference to serve the country and that means among many other things being a trusted adjunct to their military superior. And there is nobody who is superior to the CiC. (That is one of the curious things about our republic. The leader of the military is a civilian.)
So, this is truly a tempest in a teapot.
Is Fox still ginning this up?
He’s not doing a good job. Liberals like me and conservatives of all stripes have bipartisan agreement on the bottom line. Obama sux. But Umbrellagate isn’t the reason.
Here is the reason:
The problem with the Republican opposition is that they are fully in favor of Obama’s riding roughshod over our civil rights and just loves it when he drops a drone bomb overseas with insufficient reason. They invent Benghazi as a scandal when they were the ones to stand down on overseas security, and by the way, had more than 10 times as many such attacks with far more casualties. They want to launch a Congressional inquiry about Benghazi, but opposed one about 9/11 or the banking meltdown. They want to launch an investigation when some Koch bros front organizations are not granted tax exempt status by the IRS when it is pretty much the job of the IRS to not grant tax exempt status to all political organizations because they had “tea party” in the name, not quite understanding that such a name suggests a taxable political purpose. Under their logic, the IRS couldn’t use “Al Queda” as a red flag in organization names for higher scrutiny. They object to the DOJ trying to find out who helped AP blow the cover of an intelligence operation (you know, what they are trying Bradley Manning for right now) designed to find terrorists. But we all know that it is okay to expose billion dollar intelligence operations like the one Valerie Plame headed to reduce nuclear proliferation as long as it serves the short term political purpose of the right wing.
Republicans suck as opposition. The only real opposition on important, non-bullshit matters is coming from Independent Bernie Sanders.
Here is a picture of Bush showing his deep respect for the military. http://pinterest.com/pin/41517627786996646/
To be fair, all administrations and, for that matter countries, kill people without trial or oversight.
That of course does not excuse what happened to poor Abdullah Al-Mujahir(AKA Jose Padilla) and thankfully the President didn’t repeat this with the Boston bomber.
There’s no law against organizations not being allowed tax exempt status if they have a political purpose. Lots of groups that have “political purposes” such as the ACLU, NARAL, the NRA, the NAACP, MADD, and countless other political groups are tax exempt.
How many right wing groups were denied tax-exempt status as a result of this tyranny?
This.
Somebody needs to get real. :rolleyes:
Zero.
You know, it the midst of the liberal juggernaut crushing the Tea Party, all the excitement, did anyone remember to put some flower’s on ACORN’s grave?