7
7
0
This discussion about Vladimir Putin being manly kind of reminds me of the Reagan Era. How we present ourselves is actually a layer of security. Meaning the withering criticism is unfair, in the respect that International and National security rely on respect.
Today we have the perfect storm where individual freedom and common sense had collided. On one hand the respect for the office or rather the lack thereof. That is becoming a big problem.
Here is my take. I served at the very end of the Vietnam-era and Cold War. I worked at Ramstein and let's just say the place was political. In otherwords, what we said had value insofar as the public's perception of me and the Military.
It is one thing to publicly disgrace the president and quite another to generally criticize him, especially as a Veteran or Retired member of the services.
OPSEC matters and public perception is critical to getting anything done. I can assure you that both President Obama and to some extent President Bush like all presidents are under terrible stress.
Pictures of Obama with his kids, I say leave that ALONE. Having fun with his kids are cool, so leave them and then their personal life out of it.
The President has made mistakes and according to some of us, maybe too many. The problem with a pervasive disrespect is the role it has on the international community. So, we get back to that and besides it is stepping on toes.
The government has it's checks and balances and the Administration and supporters have caviled at past presidents and without mentioning names of those presidents, this happens on both sides.
I was irritated by a sense of censorship over something relatively benign. Partisan hackery is an an affront to all of us when it compromises a mission.
And for many the idea of grass-laden aircraft with the President's name was in fun, but the Soviet-minded Putin uses this like a politically correct tool and now the shoe is on the other foot. I suggest that we mind our words regardless of the POTUS. Calling President Bush a war criminal, a monkey and thinking it funny when people throw shoes at him need to just shut-up.
Today we have the perfect storm where individual freedom and common sense had collided. On one hand the respect for the office or rather the lack thereof. That is becoming a big problem.
Here is my take. I served at the very end of the Vietnam-era and Cold War. I worked at Ramstein and let's just say the place was political. In otherwords, what we said had value insofar as the public's perception of me and the Military.
It is one thing to publicly disgrace the president and quite another to generally criticize him, especially as a Veteran or Retired member of the services.
OPSEC matters and public perception is critical to getting anything done. I can assure you that both President Obama and to some extent President Bush like all presidents are under terrible stress.
Pictures of Obama with his kids, I say leave that ALONE. Having fun with his kids are cool, so leave them and then their personal life out of it.
The President has made mistakes and according to some of us, maybe too many. The problem with a pervasive disrespect is the role it has on the international community. So, we get back to that and besides it is stepping on toes.
The government has it's checks and balances and the Administration and supporters have caviled at past presidents and without mentioning names of those presidents, this happens on both sides.
I was irritated by a sense of censorship over something relatively benign. Partisan hackery is an an affront to all of us when it compromises a mission.
And for many the idea of grass-laden aircraft with the President's name was in fun, but the Soviet-minded Putin uses this like a politically correct tool and now the shoe is on the other foot. I suggest that we mind our words regardless of the POTUS. Calling President Bush a war criminal, a monkey and thinking it funny when people throw shoes at him need to just shut-up.
Respect
Office of the President (POTUS)
Barack Obama
Family
George W. Bush
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 11
11
11
0
I kind of see both sides. While I agree that we have to be respectful of the office, we also shouldn't take that to mean that the office is above criticism....but it should be honest, performance based criticism, not name calling, cajoling, etc.
(11)
(0)
PO1 (Join to see)
Uneducated masses. Whom can you blame? In a sense, everyone to a degree, but shouldn't. Just understand and be kind with ignorant. Remember, forgive them for they know not what they're doing
(1)
(0)
LTC Stephen C.
SGT Richard H., here are President Theodore Roosevelt's thoughts on the need for truth in regards to the presidency:
"The President is merely the most important among a large number of public servants. He should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able, and disinterested service to the Nation as a whole. Therefore it is absolutely necessary that there should be full liberty to tell the truth about his acts, and this means that it is exactly necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when he does right. Any other attitude in an American citizen is both base and servile. To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. Nothing but the truth should be spoken about him or any one else. But it is even more important to tell the truth, pleasant or unpleasant, about him than about any one else."
SSgt (Join to see)
"The President is merely the most important among a large number of public servants. He should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able, and disinterested service to the Nation as a whole. Therefore it is absolutely necessary that there should be full liberty to tell the truth about his acts, and this means that it is exactly necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when he does right. Any other attitude in an American citizen is both base and servile. To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. Nothing but the truth should be spoken about him or any one else. But it is even more important to tell the truth, pleasant or unpleasant, about him than about any one else."
SSgt (Join to see)
(1)
(0)
SGT Richard H.
LTC Stephen C. That's exactly what I was saying, but much better stated by President Roosevelt. I hadn't read that particular quote before, so thanks for sharing!
(1)
(0)
LTC Stephen C.
SGT Richard H., you said it well enough, but I thought the words of one president articulating his thoughts on all presidents were weighty! I should also add that he made this statement to the Kansas City Star newspaper in the last year of his life, so his comments, in my opinion, were directed to the general public, a civilian population. They are nonetheless, timeless in their application.
(2)
(0)
Although I am not a fan of this administration I do not like some of the nasty comments made. Didn't care for them when they where throwing them at Mr. Bush either. That part of politics really needs to stop, there is no reason to be nasty. But one thing that continues to bother me is the defense of this administration by blaming and attacking former President Bush. Cant this administration stand on its own merits. What happens on your watch regardless of what you may or may not have inherited is on you. A new commander of a unit can not blame poor performance on the previous commander. Its his/her job to correct what might be perceived to be wrong. To make the unit better in his/her vision. Nobody is ever going to completely agree on the ideas of your visions. That is human nature to disagree. But as mom use to say. "If you only have nasty words to say shut your mouth".
(8)
(0)
SGT Anthony Bussing
Capt Jeff S. - oh boo fuckin hoo...it took you five months to come up with a reply? yeah, obama is SUCH a loser...wrong...best president we have had in past 15 years...oh yeah...I can down vote also...
(0)
(1)
MSgt (Join to see)
SGT Anthony Bussing
Best President, sorry that would be a matter of opinion! Glad you believe that with such conviction but others do not.
Best President, sorry that would be a matter of opinion! Glad you believe that with such conviction but others do not.
(3)
(0)
SGM (Join to see)
SGT Anthony Bussing, I can't think of ANY other job in the world where SIX FULL YEARS after you got the job, you are still blaming the previous holder. And if you are going to claim, "smoking ruin", and, "destroyed", you should at least give CONCRETE, VERIFIABLE EXAMPLES, other than the standard liberal whine, "If everyone would just shut up and let us run the country how we want to, everything will be roses and rainbows."
I call BS (and I'll spell it out, if you want me to.) The problem with liberal theory remains that sooner or later you run out of other people's money to spend.
I call BS (and I'll spell it out, if you want me to.) The problem with liberal theory remains that sooner or later you run out of other people's money to spend.
(1)
(0)
7
7
0
An interesting discussion and I'm pleased that the rhetoric one usually finds on Internet discussion threads concerning this topic is missing. Anyone who has the temerity to attack the President or defend him is subject to ad hominem attacks. Not here. That says a lot for the members of Rally Point.
So, allow me to respectfully submit the following for your consideration...
(1) We have the government and elected officials we deserve. Indeed, I would argue that every nation must admit the same. I subscribe whole-heartedly to the principles enunciated in the Declaration of Independence, especially that portion which states that people have the right to alter or abolish any government that does not serve them well. In many nations suffering tyranny, the people must take up arms. If they don't, they deserve tyranny. We are fortunate in that we can revolt with our ballots. Sadly, we don't. We reelect the same people time and again regardless of their malfeasance, misfeasance, or nonfeasance. In all case, we deserve what we get.
(2) There are many well-founded and well-reasoned arguments for criticizing this President and we have every right to express them. Most of those who attack the critics as racists or partisans, simply can't come up with their own well-founded and well-reasoned counter-arguments.
(3) If we were to all lock arms and stand behind our President regardless of his performance, would that make his performance acceptable? Would other nations ignore his missteps and say, gee, he must be a great President. All the Americans seem to think so. Or, would they look past the smoke screen and see that the emperor has no clothes? Would the bullies of the world behave themselves if We the People stop complaining that the President's words of appeasement are only tempting the bullies to misbehave?
(4) This is a mixed venue of active duty service members and veterans. Is it possible that veterans are more vocal than the average citizen because they lived with a muzzle while on active duty? (Note to those on active duty: Don't risk your careers. Just sit back and enjoy the show while we veterans speak out on your behalf.)
Best to all
So, allow me to respectfully submit the following for your consideration...
(1) We have the government and elected officials we deserve. Indeed, I would argue that every nation must admit the same. I subscribe whole-heartedly to the principles enunciated in the Declaration of Independence, especially that portion which states that people have the right to alter or abolish any government that does not serve them well. In many nations suffering tyranny, the people must take up arms. If they don't, they deserve tyranny. We are fortunate in that we can revolt with our ballots. Sadly, we don't. We reelect the same people time and again regardless of their malfeasance, misfeasance, or nonfeasance. In all case, we deserve what we get.
(2) There are many well-founded and well-reasoned arguments for criticizing this President and we have every right to express them. Most of those who attack the critics as racists or partisans, simply can't come up with their own well-founded and well-reasoned counter-arguments.
(3) If we were to all lock arms and stand behind our President regardless of his performance, would that make his performance acceptable? Would other nations ignore his missteps and say, gee, he must be a great President. All the Americans seem to think so. Or, would they look past the smoke screen and see that the emperor has no clothes? Would the bullies of the world behave themselves if We the People stop complaining that the President's words of appeasement are only tempting the bullies to misbehave?
(4) This is a mixed venue of active duty service members and veterans. Is it possible that veterans are more vocal than the average citizen because they lived with a muzzle while on active duty? (Note to those on active duty: Don't risk your careers. Just sit back and enjoy the show while we veterans speak out on your behalf.)
Best to all
(7)
(0)
SSgt (Join to see)
Very sensible and the truth! I have often used this analogy of the Emperor's lack of clothing and time and again, throughout history we see blind allegiance and very little substance. However the bad guys see this and there is no gray area with them at all. They want the USA to suffer.
(2)
(0)
SGT Anthony Bussing
"(2) There are many well-founded and well-reasoned arguments for criticizing this President and we have every right to express them. Most of those who attack the critics as racists or partisans, simply can't come up with their own well-founded and well-reasoned counter-arguments."
and then...there are those who attack the president....based on his skin color, but arent man enough to admit it...Obama has not any more mis-steps then Reagan, Bush I Bush II, Clinton, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon etc...Bush II couldnt even put a simple sentence together for a constructive thought...and that isnt me hating on him...its the truth...go back and google "bush misspeaks" "bushisms"....
and then...there are those who attack the president....based on his skin color, but arent man enough to admit it...Obama has not any more mis-steps then Reagan, Bush I Bush II, Clinton, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon etc...Bush II couldnt even put a simple sentence together for a constructive thought...and that isnt me hating on him...its the truth...go back and google "bush misspeaks" "bushisms"....
(0)
(0)
6
6
0
I think it all starts on the fundamental level: EDUCATION and PARENTHOOD. What we're witnessing is the former 'future' in the now, worldwide, catching up to us at unprecedented pace.
I can say that we need to 'brace ourselves', but it's probably not good enough. But instilling a sense of patriotism and respect into ones around us, military or not, is a start. So help us God
I can say that we need to 'brace ourselves', but it's probably not good enough. But instilling a sense of patriotism and respect into ones around us, military or not, is a start. So help us God
(6)
(0)
PO1 (Join to see)
SGT Anthony Bussing and TSgt Hunter Logan, I think we should step back from 'liberalism gone wild' and somewhat regain the country's solidarity, focus on rebuilding its economic base and fundamental values.
With that said, republican candidate would be more appropriate, someone who can gracefully project country's values without causing mass stir. Not going to name any candidate in particular, but there are several republican ones amongst which I think would make great pick. Now you be the judge.
With that said, republican candidate would be more appropriate, someone who can gracefully project country's values without causing mass stir. Not going to name any candidate in particular, but there are several republican ones amongst which I think would make great pick. Now you be the judge.
(1)
(0)
SGT Anthony Bussing
hunter...I see...well, your opinion, to me, ranks right up there where im sure MY opinion means to you...so keep swinging for the fences....
dronzin...I agree that we need to "take back our country" however there is not a viable candidate on EITHER side of the fence right now...so, it looks like we are stuck with Hillary...there is not one gop candidate who has a chance against her...I know it...you know it...everyone knows it...too bad too...
dronzin...I agree that we need to "take back our country" however there is not a viable candidate on EITHER side of the fence right now...so, it looks like we are stuck with Hillary...there is not one gop candidate who has a chance against her...I know it...you know it...everyone knows it...too bad too...
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
Honestly, I disagreed with quite a bit of the shit that Bush did. With that being said, I'm so glad that I separated before the current administration took office. In my short 30 years of life I've never seen such dumb ass stuff. Obama has done some things that I agree with but damn stop blaming the previous administration for everything. Truman said it best, " The buck stops here".
(3)
(0)
3
3
0
You make some very good points, Staff Sergeant, but you've opened up a can of worms that's both complex and controversial.
Has respect for the OFFICE of the U.S presidency declined in the last several years, if not couple of decades? It definitely has. The shoe-throwing incident, the shout-down in Congress during the State of the Union, the rise of info-taining "news" outlets, the equally obnoxious menace of social media, you name it. To that potent brew, I'd add the phenomenon of what I'd call "baby-boomer/amateurism". (Since when did being an elder statesman become uncouth??!!)
But that being said, is the decline in respect for the office of POTUS the problem, or is it simply symptomatic of a larger problem: perhaps a decline in respect and, let's call it what it is, in fear, of the United States? Ever since the Cold War, our nation has struggled with an identity crisis. We're not sure what we are, what we represent or how we're going to go forward in what was, until just this year, warmly referred to as the post-Cold War Era.
Hell, I'm not even sure we're a superpower any more, and I'd argue that there are those who would claim that even if it is still true, the word 'superpower' has a negative connotation attached to it, which would've been unthinkable even 25 years ago. So when Obama said sardonically during the debate, "Hey, it's the 1980s calling; they want their foreign policy back", he may have been heralding something even he is loathe to admit: we're in decline.
But I digress. You're spot on about laying off the guy's family. Leave those kids alone.
Has respect for the OFFICE of the U.S presidency declined in the last several years, if not couple of decades? It definitely has. The shoe-throwing incident, the shout-down in Congress during the State of the Union, the rise of info-taining "news" outlets, the equally obnoxious menace of social media, you name it. To that potent brew, I'd add the phenomenon of what I'd call "baby-boomer/amateurism". (Since when did being an elder statesman become uncouth??!!)
But that being said, is the decline in respect for the office of POTUS the problem, or is it simply symptomatic of a larger problem: perhaps a decline in respect and, let's call it what it is, in fear, of the United States? Ever since the Cold War, our nation has struggled with an identity crisis. We're not sure what we are, what we represent or how we're going to go forward in what was, until just this year, warmly referred to as the post-Cold War Era.
Hell, I'm not even sure we're a superpower any more, and I'd argue that there are those who would claim that even if it is still true, the word 'superpower' has a negative connotation attached to it, which would've been unthinkable even 25 years ago. So when Obama said sardonically during the debate, "Hey, it's the 1980s calling; they want their foreign policy back", he may have been heralding something even he is loathe to admit: we're in decline.
But I digress. You're spot on about laying off the guy's family. Leave those kids alone.
(3)
(0)
Capt Jeff S.
Perhaps it is a public reaction to the disrespectful behavior exhibited by those whom the public entrusted with their votes. The public has a right to be upset -- especially when the gov't they elected doesn't listen to them, gets caught up in scandal after scandal, and pursues its own agenda -- one that runs contrary to the popular will of the people.
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
1
1
0
The only problem about leaving the president and his family alone, SSgt (Join to see) is the following, president Obama got in, and he knew it, during a pretty bad recession, now, for the most part it was due to the housing bubble, that was bound to burst. There are no innocent victims, as there were many people trying to buy homes they knew they could not afford, nevertheless, this bad economy, has lingered, to this day.
In the meantime, other presidents have been more frugal on where they take vacations, most, used to go to their own places, or camp David, which the Obama's seem not quite able or willing to do.
When you send your pet (dog) in a transport by itself, to catch up with you, spending thousands to make it happen, it borders to irresponsible spending. Why not go to Chicago and visit family? why do we have to spend over 100 million every time they choose to go on vacations, lavish for the most part?
Meanwhile, us, in the service, must control our spending if they send us on orders, 2 very different standards, the only thing similar is that our choices for careers were not compulsory.
The president and his family should have respect for the people, and not same idiotic statements such as " the first time I was proud of my country is when my husband got elected".
Any way, carry on, and have a great day!
In the meantime, other presidents have been more frugal on where they take vacations, most, used to go to their own places, or camp David, which the Obama's seem not quite able or willing to do.
When you send your pet (dog) in a transport by itself, to catch up with you, spending thousands to make it happen, it borders to irresponsible spending. Why not go to Chicago and visit family? why do we have to spend over 100 million every time they choose to go on vacations, lavish for the most part?
Meanwhile, us, in the service, must control our spending if they send us on orders, 2 very different standards, the only thing similar is that our choices for careers were not compulsory.
The president and his family should have respect for the people, and not same idiotic statements such as " the first time I was proud of my country is when my husband got elected".
Any way, carry on, and have a great day!
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
HOOAH, well said. Respectful political debate and discourse is necessary for a healthy democracy, but this has not been not respectful. I think respect for the office ended with the cold war, and since then politicians have been using citizen infighting, slight of hand and playing both sides against the middle to gain more and more power at the cost of personal liberty.
I don't think this is a purposeful conspiracy, I just think it's a case of the political climate digressing to the point where an honest person with a true spirit of public service avoids the cesspool like a plague, leaving only candidates who's motivation is a thirst for power... and once they gain that power, it's natural for them to seek more.
In the end, this leads to a slow decline from a Democracy to a Dictatorship.
I don't think this is a purposeful conspiracy, I just think it's a case of the political climate digressing to the point where an honest person with a true spirit of public service avoids the cesspool like a plague, leaving only candidates who's motivation is a thirst for power... and once they gain that power, it's natural for them to seek more.
In the end, this leads to a slow decline from a Democracy to a Dictatorship.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Let's say we get a defense bill, but to get this done we have to bargain with democrats who do not like us and rather we just go away. So a rider is attached that is largely pork barrel or a political giveaway and in trying to get this done, voters get caught. If you cannot get the Bill through the DOD doesn't get the money they need. People do not get paid and the services are substantially weakened.
So this nauseating rhetoric that Republicans hate kids is B.S. When Rep. Vitter wanted to slash Food Stamps, that was unethical. Not the waste and abuse that invariably occurs but the shape-shifters who make it hard on others where billions go to study the sex of a particular animal.
So this nauseating rhetoric that Republicans hate kids is B.S. When Rep. Vitter wanted to slash Food Stamps, that was unethical. Not the waste and abuse that invariably occurs but the shape-shifters who make it hard on others where billions go to study the sex of a particular animal.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google