- BIG NEWS:
- Supreme Court
- |
- Barack Obama
- |
- GOP
- |
- Eric Holder
- |
 |
||
You did not have to be paying much attention during last night's Republican response to President Obama's State of the Union address to notice a young Army Staff Sergeant in full dress uniform seated prominently right behind Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell and enthusiastically applauding and cheering at the Governor's attacks on Democrats.
Slight problem, you see. That is probably against the law.
Look it up for yourself right here in the Department of Defense (DoD) Directive entitled "Political Activities by Members of the Armed Forces." The purpose of this DoD Directive is to mirror the Hatch Act, which prohibits government employees from engaging in partisan political activity in an official capacity. Since a DoD Directive is considered to be in the same category as an order or regulation, and military personnel violating its provisions can be considered in violation of Article 92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, our Republican friends may have just caused this brave young soldier to break the law. Thank you for that, Governor McDonnell.
Now, my point is not to single out this young soldier for punishment, but rather to highlight the continued use of members of our armed forces as stage props for Republicans. "Mission Accomplished?" Remember that one! Or just consider Sarah Palin's latest attempt to hold a rally (aka "book tour") on Fort Bragg this past November. Well, you can now add "Republican Response 2010" to what is a rather endless list, actually.
It was a Republican administration and Republican-led Congress that sent our military into two wars (Iraq and Afghanistan) that were woefully under-planned, under-funded and under-equipped. We all know that story. It was a Republican administration and Republican-led Congress that left my generation of servicemen and women with a Department of Veterans Affairs unable to meet the demands of millions of new Veterans.
It has taken a Democratic President and a Democratic-led Congress to end the war in Iraq as well as finally commit the troops, resources and strategy necessary to win in Afghanistan. And yes, it has been President Obama and a Democratic Congress that has given the VA the largest budget increase in its history ($15 billion dollars in 2010) and is working tirelessly to create a 21st Century VA to care for our newest generation of Veterans.
I know many of you to my ideological right are already leaping out of your seats and shouting "well then why were there men and women in uniform at the State of the Union address?" Pretty simple answer, actually. The State of the Union is not a partisan political gathering (as the Republican response clearly is). The State of the Union is mandated in the Constitution, and the entire government--Republicans, Democrats, Independents--as well the Cabinet, members of the Supreme Court and the Joint Chiefs of Staff all gather to hear the President address the nation. The State of the Union is the exact opposite of a partisan political gathering. It is the heart and soul of our government coming together "from time to time" to address the entire nation on the state of our union.
My point is this--Republicans love to stand in front of the military; it is about time they try and stand behind us as well.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Good thing the Governor did not refer to the Staff Sergeant as a "good photo op" like the President has been known to say.
So it's against the law, you say, for a veteran and a serviceman in uniform to applaud a governor's speech? In North Korea, perhaps. (Can you visualize those consequences?)
This is Not North Korea.
And we are still under that most troublesome document, the Constitution of The United States of America.
When a soldier is given a command which violates a higher command or law, where does his duty lie?
Forget this incident for a second, and consider the governing principles. An argument can be made for either case. Witness Generals and servicemen throughout our history, from Grant to McChrystal.
You have entirely missed the point, and consequently tried to re-direct the discussion to take some blame off republicans, a well-known tactic of the right when it is in the wrong. The state of the union address is not a political event. The response to the state of the union address *is* a political event. The soldier is not allowed to participate in that event in uniform. Period. It was wrong to stage it that way, and it put the soldier into the position of violating orders in order to score political points for repubs. Everything else you have to say is more appropriately addressed elsewhere.
Each and every character in the republican response was straight out of central casting.
It is against the law in the US and it should be. The military is the servant of ALL of the people, not one political view or another. And I don't know if you've ever been in the military, but upon joining, you specifically sign away many of the rights in the constitution.
Have we determined that the Staff Sergeant is an Active Duty member of the Army or a member of the National Guard?
Additionally, it seems a bit disingenuous for the author and many of the commenters here to get their panties in a wad over this when it has been going on for decades and when both parties are guilty of using the military as a prop.
Excellent article. My husband, who has served two tours in Iraq, noticed the young soldier immediately. I hope something is done and made public to all Americans the wrongness of what Gov. McDonnell attempted.
Believe it or not, he is NOT the President's opposite in stature.
Did you notice the makeup of the 4 people behind the Governor? Like that is an accurate cross section of the Republican party.....
Yes- it looked like an old Coke commercial!
it's bad lighting I'm sure!
On a related note, how did they manage to stage this on the floor of the Virginia legislature? One would think that site would be off-limits to partisan events. What did the Virginia state Dems think of this?
They weren't even invited until 2 hours before.
It appears that neither the poor soldier, nor the rethugs, know very much about military law. That particular article is mandatory reading, learning, for ALL service personel.
So is the "Non proselytizing" statutes and the ban on wearing your uniform at religious or partisan political functions.
Yet we have Officer's preaching in civilian gatherings, soldiers proselytizing and distributing Pasto language Bibles in Afghanistan.
The rules are no longer the rules in Republican Bizzaro World....
so is it no ok anymore to have Chaplains in the military? What would you have Afghans read? The Koran? or latest issue of Wall Street Journal?
Sorry, but I have a major issue with this one sentence in your article:
"It has taken a Democratic President and a Democratic-led Congress to end the war in Iraq as well as finally commit the troops, resources and strategy necessary to win in Afghanistan"
Refresh my memory on when we ended the war in Iraq again? Also last I checked, the US was talking about making a deal with Taliban because we are *finally* starting to realize the war in Afghanistan is not winnable by the means we are currently using.
These massive laps in fact aside, nice article.
It looks to me like war is still escalating, they are just avoiding telling us about it by spinning a fantasy alternative narrative.
The draw down in Iraq has begun, by March, they will be removing a combat brigade a month....
Our combat operations are effectively over, our support operation is beginning.
Ut-oh, you weren't paying attention. The war in Iraq is over, and all that is left is the orderly return of our soldiers. The last combat troops are scheduled to leave at the end of August 2010. Any remaining "troops" will be serving in an advisory and training capacity until the prescribed schedule sends them home as well. There will be no remaining U.S. troops in Iraq. The U.S. will be doing many things to carry out the Afghanistan war, including many things that worked in Iraq. A win in Afghanistan is all in how one defines it. It has been said all along that a military strategy alone is not going to be successful. As long as the troops manage to curtail the activities of al Qaeda, then they will have done the most important job for our national security. Go U.S.A.!!!!
I think many will agree with me that a war isn't over as long as we have soldiers stationed on a battlefield in harms way. The drawdown hasn't even begun yet, so why the rhetoric essentially giving congress and the administration credit for ending the war? The war is not over! A draw down is not the end, the last soldier leaving is the end. War was never officially declared by Congress anyways, so throw that tidbit into the equation and the mess becomes even more unclear.
Terms like "support operation" are simply labels meant to give people like you and me a positive outlook on what it really is.. a military operation. Do not be confused by political word play.
As for the war if Afghanistan, it has only just begun. 12 American fatalities in that nation in 2001. 317 in 2009. 26 so far this year. Afghanistan is the new Iraq as far as I'm concerned. We will not see true peace in this decade, my .02.
Rob, good post. It is always important to stay vigilant and ensure that we all back up our rhetoric with resources. Seems like the military regs are there for a reason - to ensure that when in uniform, all servicemembers refrain from politicking or disrespecting the commander in chief.
and you don't think the contingent sitting up front for the SOTUS wasn't a calculated photo op by Axelrod and Plouffe?
That's entirely different. Those were the Joint Chiefs. They attend every SOTU whether it's a Republican or a Democratic President. They also do not react to anything that is said because they are to be seen as being politically neutral.
It seems that the Repubs were attempting to put on a pretend SOTU.
Try reading the article instead of mindless posting. Of course you're known here at HP for not letting facts get in the way of your misinformed rants. Get a clue.
Go back and look at previous state of the union addresses. The Chiefs of Staff are always there, and pretty much sitting in the same place. They are attending a government function where their boss is the speaker. White House political advisors do not control seating in the house chamber.
The list of Obama using military as a photo op and prop seems to quickly escape the brain housing groups of those with the FEVAH....
No churches or preachers were sanctioned for supporting the cheerleaders campaign from the pulpit either. Freaking america, if it's illegal that's what we'll do.
Some of us, not all.
"My point is this--Republicans love to stand in front of the military; it is about time they try and stand behind us as well." This is all we need say. Why is it that they so often can only talk the talk but never walk the walk?
Hi Hal. I completely agree with you, the GOP should be standing behind the people. They created this terrible mess the world is in and they haven't lifted a finger to help in the recovery. They've done nothing in the last year for the people except obstruct any forward movement. They couldn't even read a 2000 page bill that is so important to the American people. Isn't that their job?
Republican's constant barrage of accusations against Democrats and Mr. Obama for one thing or another is making matter worse and they don't care. Whatever happened to the loyal opposition?
The GOP has dragged out and stalled any kind of recovery and we move 2 steps ahead and 4 back with their obstruction.
Republicans have not even tried to help the American people out of the catastrophic mess they left behind. And they make no apologies for it.
Have to agree. There is a huge difference between Having the job, and Doing the job, and they damnsure ain't.
Republicans Do stand behind the military. Waaaaaaaaaaaay behind them. See that little dot on the horizon?
You mean at the point where they are collecting money for what is being done?
More likely making lots of money from poorly-performing military contracts
It's difficult to see that dot you describe from my barracks. Care to meet at the mess hall to discuss those evil republicans? Oh wait, you must unable being deployed and all....
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
