Posted on Jul 31, 2016
Why is it so important for retired leaders to stay out of politics?
15.1K
184
104
9
9
0
With the recent bold public statements by retired generals in support of political candidates, I think it is good to discuss why this is a bad idea. They should know better. But I'm interested in why more junior folks think it is wrong, or perhaps why they think it's ok.
Politics
Election 2016
Ethics
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 70
1
1
0
Sir
I respectfully disagree. In my opinion a retired General's perspective is exactly what is needed. In it's purest form the General's view is unique because they were subservient to the same elected official, a trusted advisor. An advocate for the soldier and veteran..................Who the hell am I trying to fool! You know as well as I do it's self serving, motivated by money, political gain or future contracts. But, it is their right, they are just capitalizing on an opportunity.
I respectfully disagree. In my opinion a retired General's perspective is exactly what is needed. In it's purest form the General's view is unique because they were subservient to the same elected official, a trusted advisor. An advocate for the soldier and veteran..................Who the hell am I trying to fool! You know as well as I do it's self serving, motivated by money, political gain or future contracts. But, it is their right, they are just capitalizing on an opportunity.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
1
1
0
As long as they are expressing their opinions and beliefs as an individual I have no problem with any retiree sharing their thoughts. I become very cautious when people want to express their opinions based on rank they held while in service. If the topic is their experience and area of expertise then great. On the other hand none of us, in theory, are expert politicians while serving in the military. Based on our service experience what makes any service member qualified to say any candidate is the best?
(1)
(0)
1SG Joe Messier
Dave, as long as that title says retired they can represent it anyway they want. It's up to the viewer to wade through the BS. They earned the title.
I agree with your caution.
I agree with your caution.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Do they give up their Freedom of Speech because they wore the boots at one time?
I think not.
That is like asking if a church has a right to side with a Candidate without losing lost their Tax Free Status?
Absolutely Not!
The Democrats have been doing it for years and have never lost their Tax Free Status;
Yet if a Conservative Church wishes to express their favor for a Candidate they are threatened with Loss of Tax Free Status!
I think not.
That is like asking if a church has a right to side with a Candidate without losing lost their Tax Free Status?
Absolutely Not!
The Democrats have been doing it for years and have never lost their Tax Free Status;
Yet if a Conservative Church wishes to express their favor for a Candidate they are threatened with Loss of Tax Free Status!
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
I don't think they should, but here is a reason why they might want to...This is a country fueled by an ever-increasingly powerful and partisan media. We are no longer an educated, balanced public. We are now a public who laps up whatever media garbage we most align our personal beliefs to. There is no truth in that approach. So when a respected military leader starts spouting off about his/her political views, that leader immediately becomes an trophy for whatever side he/she chooses. Then that view somehow now has more validity because Gen so-and-so agreed with it. It shouldn't be that way. Citizens should strive to be more than lemmings blindly following what General so-and-so supported. We have become really lazy thanks to the media I think.
(1)
(0)
SSgt John U Miller Sr.
I will agree to disagree! The Media is far left wing Communist Progressive Liberals. I have zero confidence in their opinions. If you became really lazy thanks to the media It's time to man up Airman! Surely you have not become a far left wing Communist Progressive Liberal?
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
I actually am in favor of retired and honorably discharged prior service persons serving in politics. Their perspectives are generally wider than many civilians, and they don't fear a confrontation in order to maintain their principles most of the time. Standing up is something military folk are used to doing.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Sp4 Byron Skinner…I see nothing wrong with RETIRED military going into politics. Its a natural. I do see a problem of politics in the ranks and offices trying to influence how their troopers vote each unfortunately ha happened in recent years since the military got the right to vote…I do have a problem for RETIRED military going to work for corporations that bid on government contracts and procure single source work for the Federal Government, often doing business with a former subordinate who they mentored.
(0)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
SPC Byron Skinner you hit on the main problem - using one's office to peddle influence. It's become very acceptable, apparently, to sell one's experience and position for profit. Like prostitution, it's as old as time. Difference is our profession was nearly immune from it, but it seems to be almost expected now. I don't have an issue with our retired military entering politics. Hell, I would have voted for U.S. Grant and Eisenhower, I'd vote for Flynn. What I do have an issue with retired military using their rank and former position to influence us on behalf of a politician. I'm just disappointed in the behavior of our recently retired folks and sincerely wish more of them would follow GEN Dempsey's lead. And, for the record, I completely concur with your assessment that too many of these guys go to work in the military industrial complex. The foxes are all over the hen house...
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
George Washington, Ulysses s Grant, Eisenhower, Theodore Rosevelt, John f Kennedy all had political opinions and talked about their politics and were president when did this notion of military personell staying out of politics come about? I remember being told some mularky about it being unprofessional when I was in. Maybe it was just meant while you are active duty to stay out of politics that way it doesnt seem like there is a conflict between active personell and the administration.
(0)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
Leland, the difference, in my humble opinion, is that they left their military careers and became politicians, they didn't serve as mouth pieces of other politicians. While officers they did their jobs and stayed out of politics. I have no issue with them having political careers. The point of my observation was that we have a job to do no matter our political feelings. I'm not saying we aren't entitled to them, I'm saying while in uniform or using our titles in retirement is a foul and, yes, unprofessional.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
It is only a bad idea if you consider the spineless careerists who pander to who they think might win the election, instead of living up to their oath to protect and defend the Constitution.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
I can fully understand while on duty it's a conflict of interest and against UCMJ to get involved in politics. We (on duty) are not here to do that.
After one retires, it's a whole different deal. In someways I feel it is good that some former military leaders speak up and voice their opinions.
After one retires, it's a whole different deal. In someways I feel it is good that some former military leaders speak up and voice their opinions.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google