Ap: Obama has clinched it!

[Carlota69]

According to their numbers, factoring in that he wins 30% of delegates from So dakota primary.:D

WASHINGTON - Barack Obama effectively clinched the Democratic presidential nomination Tuesday, based on an Associated Press tally of convention delegates, ending a grueling marathon to become the first black candidate ever to lead his party into a fall campaign for the White House.

Campaigning on an insistent call for change, Obama outlasted former first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton in a historic race that sparked record turnout in primary after primary, yet exposed deep racial and gender divisions within the party.

The tally was based on public declarations from delegates as well as from another 16 who have confirmed their intentions to the AP. It also included 11 delegates Obama was guaranteed as long as he gained 30 percent of the vote in South Dakota and Montana later in the day. It takes 2,118 delegates to clinch the nomination.

The 46-year-old first-term senator will face John McCain in the fall campaign to become the 44th president. The Arizona senator campaigned in Memphis, Tenn., during the day, and had no immediate reaction to Obama's victory.

Clinton stood ready to concede that her rival had amassed the delegates needed to triumph, according to officials in her campaign. They stressed that the New York senator did not intend to suspend or end her candidacy in a speech Tuesday night in New York. They spoke on condition of anonymity because they had not been authorized to divulge her plans.

[patteeu]

That assumes that super delegates are locked in stone. We've seen several switch once already. It's up to Obama not to lose them. You'd think he'd be up to the task, but who knows. :shrug:

[Carlota69]

That assumes that super delegates are locked in stone. We've seen several switch once already. It's up to Obama not to lose them. You'd think he'd be up to the task, but who knows. :shrug:

Jimmy Carter is apparently endorsing Obama today as well.

[BIG_DADDY]

Jimmy Carter is apparently endorsing Obama today as well.

LMAO

[patteeu]

Jimmy Carter is apparently endorsing Obama today as well.

That ought to be an effective counter to the charge that Obama is poised to give us a 2nd Carter term. :thumb: :p

[BIG_DADDY]

That ought to be an effective counter to the charge that Obama is poised to give us a 2nd Carter term. :thumb: :p

Maybe he can give him some advice on how to be a..............















Peanut farmer.

[SBK]

Jimmy Carter is apparently endorsing Obama today as well.

That'll sure bring in the swing votes. LMAO LMAO LMAO

[Carlota69]

LMAO

I know, the irony...

Gore will be the big prize. Hopefully that will come soon as well.

[BIG_DADDY]

I know, the irony...

Gore will be the big prize. Hopefully that will come soon as well.

Other than hating Hillary which is understandable what is it that you really side with Obama on when it comes to the issues?

His mandatory affirmative action plan for our government, schools and forced into the private sector?

His removal of all firearms from our cities?

Free college for everyone with decent grades?

His religious convictions and those of his church?

[BIG_DADDY]

Carlota, one more thing. Do you really believe the military will listen to this guy?

[InChiefsHell]

Carlota, one more thing. Do you really believe the military will listen to this guy?

Well, for that matter, I don't think they'd listen to Hillary either...

[Carlota69]

Other than hating Hillary which is understandable what is it that you really side with Obama on when it comes to the issues?

His mandatory affirmative action plan for our government, schools and forced into the private sector?

His removal of all firearms from our cities?

Free college for everyone with decent grades?

His religious convictions and those of his church?

LOL--Republican much????

I'm a democrat, and altho I dont hate McCain, I don't want him as our president. Apart from agreeing with Obama on some issues, and disagreeing on others, the Supreme Court is at stake. McCain has already said he would put consrvative judges in. I want a well balanced court, not one that only leans to the right. And after 8 years of Bush appointing, I dont want 4 more years of right-wing appointees.

I dont hate Hillary BTW. Just dont think she can get shit done.

[Adept Havelock]

Carlota, one more thing. Do you really believe the military will listen to this guy?

Yes. I believe the military tradition of respect for the orders of the Civilian Leadership of this nation is deeply ingrained in those who wear the uniform.

To believe anything else is to believe a military coup is possible, or even likely.

Our soldiers oath to the Constitution of the United States precludes that possibility. That oath, and the honor of our soldiers who swear that oath.

It most certainly transcends a dislike of whatever occupant is in office at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. JMO.

[Carlota69]

Carlota, one more thing. Do you really believe the military will listen to this guy?

Well, if he was the President, then he would be their boss, so I would imagine they would have to. Military is pretty good at following orders.

My boyfriend and our roomate, both in the Air Force, are voting for Obama. In fact, quite a few of the military personnel they know, are as well.

[Carlota69]

Yes. I believe the military tradition of respect for the orders of the Civilian Leadership of this nation is deeply ingrained in those who wear the uniform.

To believe anything else is to believe a military coup is possible, or even likely.

Our soldiers oath to the Constitution of the United States precludes that possibility. That oath, and the honor of our soldiers insures they will.

It most certainly transcends a dislike of whatever occupant is in office at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. JMO.

:clap:

[BIG_DADDY]

LOL--Republican much????

I'm a democrat, and altho I dont hate McCain, I don't want him as our president. Apart from agreeing with Obama on some issues, and disagreeing on others, the Supreme Court is at stake. McCain has already said he would put consrvative judges in. I want a well balanced court, not one that only leans to the right. And after 8 years of Bush appointing, I dont want 4 more years of right-wing appointees.

I dont hate Hillary BTW. Just dont think she can get shit done.

Well I hate all 3 of them and am a libertarian NOT a Republican. Anyone who would throw our constitution out and take our very most basic right to defend ourself should be considered an enemy of the state, not a candidate.

I think anyone who wants to see race being the basis for everything is the biggest racist of all and this is going to create HUGE issues.

Free college, are you kidding me? Our educational system is the icon of failure so he wants to expand it include college?

Military will not listen to this guy, period. That's dangerous. You want a military government, vote for Obama.

[frazod]

Yes. I believe the military tradition of respect for the orders of the Civilian Leadership of this nation is deeply ingrained in those who wear the uniform.

To believe anything else is to believe a military coup is possible, or even likely.

Our soldiers oath to the Constitution of the United States precludes that possibility. That oath, and the honor of our soldiers who swear that oath.

It most certainly transcends a dislike of whatever occupant is in office at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. JMO.

Some of them might actually be pleased with a president that's not quite so willing to them whacked.

[Carlota69]

Well I hate all 3 of them and am a libertarian NOT a Republican. I anyone who would throw our constitution out and take our very most basic right to defend ourself should be considered an enemy of the state, not a candidate.

I think anyone who wants to see race being the basis for everything is the biggest racist of all and this is going to create HUGE issues.

Free college, are you kidding me? Our educational system is the icon of failure so he wants to expand it include college?

Military will not listen to this guy, period. That's dangerous. You want a military government, vote for Obama.

Ok, so who are you voting for? I never caught who your candidate was...

[BIG_DADDY]

Yes. I believe the military tradition of respect for the orders of the Civilian Leadership of this nation is deeply ingrained in those who wear the uniform.

To believe anything else is to believe a military coup is possible, or even likely.

Our soldiers oath to the Constitution of the United States precludes that possibility. That oath, and the honor of our soldiers who swear that oath.

It most certainly transcends a dislike of whatever occupant is in office at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. JMO.

The military and the mass majority in it detest Obama. Like I said he should be considered an enemy of the state.

[Adept Havelock]

Military will not listen to this guy, period. That's dangerous. You want a military government, vote for Obama.

:shake:

It saddens me you have so little faith in the honor of those who wear the uniform, and the oath they swore:

"I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God." (Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962).



I believe in their honor and the oath they swore, no matter who is elected.

The military and the mass majority in it detest Obama.

Aside from the fact that is irrelevant (as the oath does not state "obey the President if I like him/her)", do you have anything to back that up? I doubt it, but I'd be curious to see any supporting data.

Any officer who suggested he wouldn't obey his CINC would find his career in peril, not from the Civilian leadership, but from his own fellow officers. I also believe his/her fellow officers would gladly sit on a court martial against any officer who refused the orders of his/her CINC. JMO.

Like I said he should be considered an enemy of the state.
I don't like him, and won't be voting for him. That said, that's as foolish as calling George Bush a terrorist. :rolleyes:

[Carlota69]

The military and the mass majority in it detest Obama. Like I said he should be considered an enemy of the state.

Really? how do you know they detest him?

The ones I know dont.

[BIG_DADDY]

Ok, so who are you voting for? I never caught who your candidate was...

Well I live in California so my vote usually doesn't count. It is probably be a protest vote. If I had to pick between the lesser of two evils I would pick McCain as it sits now. It will be interesting to see who the VP's are.

[BIG_DADDY]

:shake:

It saddens me you have so little faith in the honor of those who wear the uniform, and the oath they swore:

"I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God." (Title 10, US Code; Act of 5 May 1960 replacing the wording first adopted in 1789, with amendment effective 5 October 1962).



I believe in their honor and the oath they swore, no matter who is elected.



Aside from the fact that is irrelevant (as the oath does not state "obey the President if I like him/her), do you have anything to back that up? I doubt it, but I'd be curious to see any supporting data.

I don't like him, and won't be voting for him. That said, that's as foolish as calling George Bush a terrorist. :rolleyes:

Well you never seem to have any faith in anything I ever say so I'm not exactly sure why you even bother posting to me.

Other than the fact that my sister is doing her 4th tour and some friends I have here serve I have nothing other than what they tell me base that opinion on.

[Carlota69]

Well I live in California so my vote usually doesn't count. It is probably be a protest vote. If I had to pick between the lesser of two evils I would pick McCain as it sits now. It will be interesting to see who the VP's are.

The VP situation is key for McCain. I think alot of undecideds are waiting for that info.

[|Zach|]

The military and the mass majority in it detest Obama. Like I said he should be considered an enemy of the state.

Ok.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=3601542

[Carlota69]

Well you never seem to have any faith in anything I ever say so I'm not exactly sure why you even bother posting to me.

Other than the fact that my sister is doing her 4th tour and some friends I have here serve I have nothing other than what they tell me base that opinion on.

And the people I surround myself with say differently. So in essence the soldiers have opinions just like we do...some are for him--some are against. I dont think that means the entire military detests him. It just means we surround ourselves with like-minded people.:)

[|Zach|]

Really? how do you know they detest him?

The ones I know dont.

It is classic BD.

He takes his own experiences and thinks the rest of the country feels the same way he does.

The dude lives in his own little world.

[Adept Havelock]

Well you never seem to have any faith in anything I ever say so I'm not exactly sure why you even bother posting to me.

Well, if you were right once in a while, I'd probably change my opinion. :shrug:

However, the point of that post wasn't my lack of faith in you. It was how it saddens me you have so little faith in the honor of those that wear the uniform. You must not see much in it, otherwise you would believe they will obey their oath of enlistment regardless of their feelings towards the President.

Right now, all I see you doing is no different from those that accuse George Bush of war crimes and being a terrorist. "Enemy of the state"? LMAO Sorry if the truth hurts. Maybe a new tinfoil hat will help you.

Other than the fact that my sister is doing her 4th tour and some friends I have here serve I have nothing other than what they tell me base that opinion on.

I'll take my faith in the honor and oath sworn by those that defend this country over anecdotal evidence every time. I've never met an officer who I believed took his oath so lightly he would disobey his CINC merely because he disagreed with his politics.

Ok.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=3601542

That's just because they want Obama elected so they can institute a coup that will overturn over 200 years of honorable service, and turn America into a third rate banana republic like Myanmar. ;)

[BIG_DADDY]

The VP situation is key for McCain. I think alot of undecideds are waiting for that info.

Don't underestimate the anger of the females that supported Hillary either. They are pissed off at the Democratic party.

IF the media gets Obama elected he will never make it out of office alive IMO.

[|Zach|]

Well you never seem to have any faith in anything I ever say so I'm not exactly sure why you even bother posting to me.


:deevee:

[Carlota69]

Ok.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=3601542

Nice find. My BF and roomate have donated $$ to Obama as well. Seems to fit with what they have said and what they experience around the base.

[BIG_DADDY]

It is classic BD.

He takes his own experiences and thinks the rest of the country feels the same way he does.

The dude lives in his own little world.

I only have the military people I know to make a judgement from Zach. As usual all you do is throw personal rocks and add absolutely nothing to the thread.

[|Zach|]

As usual all you do is throw personal rocks and add absolutely nothing to the thread.
I am flattered you took the time to notice. You get so caught up moving goal posts and being wrong it is admirable that you notice the little things.

[BIG_DADDY]

Make sure you count those military votes

[BIG_DADDY]

I am flattered you took the time to notice. You get so caught up moving goal posts and being wrong it is admirable that you notice the little things.

Congratulations, you actually took the time to find something on ABC news that supported Obama. That must have been really hard to find. LMAO

[Adept Havelock]

Congratulations, you actually took the time to find something on ABC news that supported Obama. That must have been really hard to find. LMAO

It's more than you've offered to support your claim, or your meme-esque "enemy of the state" rhetoric. :shrug:

[|Zach|]

Congratulations, you actually took the time to find something on ABC news that supported Obama. That must have been really hard to find. LMAO
Actully if you had read it the source is USA Today....are they not worthy either? It won't be hard to keep finding sources. The information is empirical.

[Chief Faithful]

I'm a democrat, and altho I dont hate McCain, I don't want him as our president. Apart from agreeing with Obama on some issues, and disagreeing on others, the Supreme Court is at stake. McCain has already said he would put consrvative judges in. I want a well balanced court, not one that only leans to the right. And after 8 years of Bush appointing, I dont want 4 more years of right-wing appointees.



McCain said he wants Judges with an original constitutionalist point of view not Judges who have a conservative political agenda. Obama wants Judges who will view the Constitution as a document that needs to be interpreted differently based on cultural changes.

This idea of applying culture to Constitutional interpretation is dangerous and ultimately results in "legislating from the bench". This is an attractive idea to people who want to see revolutionary change to our laws without having to legislate change to the laws. Thus, I see a strong need to keep Obama out of the White House to keep the integrity of the courts.

[|Zach|]

BD tries to have a political discussion. Hilarity follows.

http://www.exotic-footwear.ru/big_jpg/clown.jpg

[BIG_DADDY]

Actully if you had read it the source is USA Today....are they not worthy either? It won't be hard to keep finding sources. The information is empirical.

THe media LOVES Obama, period. I've been saying that for some time now. I usually prefer asking people I know that are serving. Maybe the group I know is not symbolic of the mass majority but I will take their opinion over the media lovefest for Obama any day. Call me insane and put big floppy shoes on me.

[BIG_DADDY]

For the record the general concensus is that Bush is an idiot when I asked that as well.

[InChiefsHell]

Here is that article:

Obama, Paul net most military workers' campaign donations
By Fredreka Schouten, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON

Democrat Barack Obama and Republican Ron Paul have little in common politically, except their opposition to the Iraq war.
candidates and the military

Both top a new list of presidential candidates receiving campaign contributions from people who work for the four branches of the military and National Guard, according to a study released Thursday by the non-partisan Center for Responsive Politics.

Obama, an Illinois senator, brought in more donations from this group than any White House contender from either party. The Democrat announced Wednesday his plan to withdraw all U.S. troops from Iraq by the end of 2008.

Paul, a Texas congressman and the only GOP presidential hopeful who supports an immediate troop withdrawal, comes in second.

"Paul and Obama are talking straight to soldiers, and what they are saying is resonating," said Larnell Exum, a retired Army lieutenant colonel, who gave $500 to Obama. Exum, who works for the Army as a congressional liaison, is a Democrat but voted for George Bush in 1992.

The center tallied money from donors who list the Air Force, Army, Marines, Navy and National Guard as an employer. Overall, these donations are miniscule: Obama got 44 contributions worth about $27,000 and Paul 23 for about $19,300. Republican John McCain, an Iraq war supporter and Vietnam prisoner of war, was third with about $18,500 from 32 donors.

In 2004, military personnel contributed $1.2 million to presidential and congressional candidates, the center said. This year, those donations are about $200,000.

The analysis also found that military personnel have shifted their donations. In 2002, the center said Democrats received 23% of contributions from military workers; Republicans got 77%. This year, 40% of their donations have gone to Democrats running for Congress and president. The GOP got 59%.

The donation patterns "would suggest that those who wear the uniform want change," said Joe Davis, spokesman for the Veterans of Foreign Wars.

Bruce Altschuler, a political scientist at the State University of New York at Oswego and a Vietnam veteran, said, "The whole country has been shifting to Democrats, and the military, in some ways, is a microcosm of society."
Spokeswoman Jen Psaki said Obama is pleased to have the support of those "who have sacrificed so much."

Paul spokesman Jesse Benton said the military support makes sense. The congressman "wants to get (troops) out of playing the world's policemen and get them home," he said.

Altschuler cautioned against reading too much into the early contributions, particularly in such small amounts. "These figures could look very different in a few months."

A couple of things I just find interesting, and I'm not saying it means anything...

1) Why the hell do they keep referring to the doners as "Military Workers"...that just sounds odd...don't we usually call them soldiers? And when was the last time joe grunt was sending money to a political campaign...In short, I don't know what the hell a "Military Worker" is , but the fact that they don't call them soldiers makes me think that's because these people who are supporting Obama are not soldiers...again, it's just written oddly...

2) The numbers are kinda funny...44 people gave to Obama, 23 for Paul and 32 for McCain...wowser...what the hell are we even talking about here??

[Brock]

For the record the general concensus is that Bush is an idiot when I asked that as well.

Who are you going to vote for?

[Ultra Peanut]

Some of them might actually be pleased with a president that's not quite so willing to them whacked.And when comparing him to McCain, Obama is probably viewed favorably as a president who would support giving them the chance to be better supported once they've finished their commitment rather than hoping to keep them in the military due to lack of other options.

Honestly, his position on the 21st century GI Bill is one of the most disgusting things I've seen from McCain and the people who share his views. For all of the talk of supporting our troops, they refuse to actually act on those words.

[BIG_DADDY]

Here is that article:


A couple of things I just find interesting, and I'm not saying it means anything...

1) Why the hell do they keep referring to the doners as "Military Workers"...that just sounds odd...don't we usually call them soldiers? And when was the last time joe grunt was sending money to a political campaign...In short, I don't know what the hell a "Military Worker" is , but the fact that they don't call them soldiers makes me think that's because these people who are supporting Obama are not soldiers...again, it's just written oddly...

2) The numbers are kinda funny...44 people gave to Obama, 23 for Paul and 32 for McCain...wowser...what the hell are we even talking about here??

That was Zachs proof that I am an idiot for not believing the Military will follow Obama. Wish we had some more actual military people here to weigh in on this thread instead of cut and pasting from the media/Obama lovefest. I know I'm crazy but I'm just not buying what the media is selling at face value as proof like Zach is.

[Carlota69]

Here is that article:


A couple of things I just find interesting, and I'm not saying it means anything...

1) Why the hell do they keep referring to the doners as "Military Workers"...that just sounds odd...don't we usually call them soldiers? And when was the last time joe grunt was sending money to a political campaign...In short, I don't know what the hell a "Military Worker" is , but the fact that they don't call them soldiers makes me think that's because these people who are supporting Obama are not soldiers...again, it's just written oddly...

2) The numbers are kinda funny...44 people gave to Obama, 23 for Paul and 32 for McCain...wowser...what the hell are we even talking about here??

I'm not sure what they mean by Military workers, but..when they aren't overseas they do hold somewhat 'regular" jobs on base. My roomate is a leadership teacher and my BF is an IT tech and a Chaplins (sp?) asst. So he does computer work in the church. They hold normal 9-5 hours.
Or maybe they mean civilans who work on the bases?

[BIG_DADDY]

Who are you going to vote for?

Most likely write in a libertarian or Ron Paul as a protest vote. Unfortunately living in California my vote doesn't count.

[Ultra Peanut]

That was Zachs proof that I am an idiot for not believing the Military will follow Obama. Wish we had some more actual military people here to weigh in on this thread instead of cut and pasting from the media/Obama lovefest. I know I'm crazy but I'm just not buying what the media is selling at face value as proof like Zach is.Even if they dislike the guy as much as you think they do, what are the ramifications you're suggesting? A ****ing coup?

[Adept Havelock]

THe media LOVES Obama, period. I've been saying that for some time now. I usually prefer asking people I know that are serving. Maybe the group I know is not symbolic of the mass majority but I will take their opinion over the media lovefest for Obama any day. Call me insane and put big floppy shoes on me.

OK, you're insane, and watched "Seven Days in May" and "Dr. Strangelove" a few times too many.

That said, I do agree with you about the media-love fest.

Even if they dislike the guy as much as you think they do, what are the ramifications you're suggesting? A ****ing coup?


Apparently BD believes most military people don't (or won't) honor their oath of enlistment. The logical ramification of which is a repudiation of two centuries of civilian control of this nations military. In short, yes, a coup against the elected civilian leadership. :rolleyes:

I've been around officers and enlisted men and women all my life, and I've never met one that I believe held their oath in such little respect they would repudiate it merely because they disagreed with the politics of their Commander in Chief.

[BIG_DADDY]

Even if they dislike the guy as much as you think they do, what are the ramifications you're suggesting? A ****ing coup?

Lets just say I don't think he will finish his term.

[|Zach|]

Lets just say I don't think he will finish his term.
Another BD prediction. File it folks.

http://thejiveman.files.wordpress.com/2007/08/tinfoil-hat.jpg

[HolmeZz]

THe media LOVES Obama, period. I've been saying that for some time now. I usually prefer asking people I know that are serving. Maybe the group I know is not symbolic of the mass majority but I will take their opinion over the media lovefest for Obama any day.

And you hate Obama, which is why you're dismissing facts in stating your ill-informed opinion.

Barack's quite clearly received the most money from the military of anyone in the race and is going to receive a bigger chunk of the military vote than the Democrats traditionally get.

But please, keep trotting out the same tired talking points that get brought out every four years. You're only embarrassing yourself.

[Ultra Peanut]

Lets just say I don't think he will finish his term.If presidents were assassinated for ideological reasons, rather than because some crazy person wanted to impress some celebrity they're obsessed with, why is GWB still kicking?

If your argument is "he could be assassinated," guess what? That applies for anyone in that position.

[HolmeZz]

Lets just say I don't think he will finish his term.

lol

[frazod]

Enlistment in the armed forces is down, despite the poor economy.

Enlistment standards are so low right now that all manner of scum (including hard core gang members who are enlisting solely for the purpose of receiving combat training and experience that they can use against the police after they get out) are being accepted.

Retention of existing service members is down.

Combat tours are being extended - less people means more work for those who remain. The army is so overextended right now that members from other branches are being tasked with army missions.

Funds are so tight that at the end of fiscal year, unit commanders have to pay for things like toilet paper and sheets for their troops out of their own salaries.

As a result of all this, morale among our military members is horrible.

My source for much of this? A gung-ho ex-enlisted career air force major that been one of my best friends for over 25 years, who commands a security detachment at an Air Force base, who is as true blue all-American as they come and has a chest full of medals, including a bronze star. He's already done one tour in Iraq, and will in all probability being going back. And while he is forbidden from criticizing his commander in chief, seriously, he really doesn't have to.

I really don't think there will be much love lost for Bush among our service members when he finally goes away.

[BIG_DADDY]

Another BD prediction. File it folks.

http://thejiveman.files.wordpress.com/2007/08/tinfoil-hat.jpg

I still don't think he will win. It's just an opinion, I never claimed to be Notradamus.

You know what's funny about this is I predicted the last 2 elections accurately and the reasons why they would lose. I went on and on about how the Dems had blown it with Kerry and should have brought a moderate to the table. I flat out said that Gore's position on gun control would probably cost him the election and it did. You never give me any credit for being right and can only pull out the one time in the primaries when I was barely wrong and act like that's all par for the course.

[Adept Havelock]

Enlistment in the armed forces is down, despite the poor economy.

Enlistment standards are so low right now that all manner of scum (including hard core gang members who are enlisting solely for the purpose of receiving combat training and experience that they can use against the police after they get out) are being accepted.

Retention of existing service members is down.

Combat tours are being extended - less people means more work for those who remain. The army is so overextended right now that members from other branches are being tasked with army missions.

Funds are so tight that at the end of fiscal year, unit commanders have to pay for things like toilet paper and sheets for their troops out of their own salaries.

As a result of all this, morale among our military members is horrible.

My source for much of this? A gung-ho ex-enlisted career air force major that been one of my best friends for over 25 years, who commands a security detachment at an Air Force base, who is as true blue all-American as they come and has a chest full of medals, including a bronze star. He's already done one tour in Iraq, and will in all probability being going back. And while he is forbidden from criticizing his commander in chief, seriously, he really doesn't have to.

I really don't think there will be much love lost for Bush among our service members when he finally goes away.

I can sympathize with his feelings.

Do you think your friend would ever betray his oath and refuse to obey the orders of his lawfully elected Commander in Chief, as BD has suggested?

The fact he stuck out the Clinton years suggests to me he respects his oath more than that, but I'd be curious to hear your perspective.

[Carlota69]

Enlistment in the armed forces is down, despite the poor economy.

Enlistment standards are so low right now that all manner of scum (including hard core gang members who are enlisting solely for the purpose of receiving combat training and experience that they can use against the police after they get out) are being accepted.

Retention of existing service members is down.

Combat tours are being extended - less people means more work for those who remain. The army is so overextended right now that members from other branches are being tasked with army missions.

Funds are so tight that at the end of fiscal year, unit commanders have to pay for things like toilet paper and sheets for their troops out of their own salaries.

As a result of all this, morale among our military members is horrible.

My source for much of this? A gung-ho ex-enlisted career air force major that been one of my best friends for over 25 years, who commands a security detachment at an Air Force base, who is as true blue all-American as they come and has a chest full of medals, including a bronze star. He's already done one tour in Iraq, and will in all probability being going back. And while he is forbidden from criticizing his commander in chief, seriously, he really doesn't have to.

I really don't think there will be much love lost for Bush among our service members when he finally goes away.

Yep. the morale I see from the peeps I live with, and their fellow soldiers/co-workers/friends, isn't real high.

[frazod]

I can sympathize with his feelings.

Do you think your friend would ever betray his oath and refuse to obey the orders of his lawfully elected Commander in Chief, as BD has suggested?

The fact he stuck out the Clinton years suggests to me he respects his oath more than that, but I'd be curious to hear your perspective.

Of course not.

[Carlota69]

I still don't think he will win. It's just an opinion, I never claimed to be Notradamus.

You know what's funny about this is I predicted the last 2 elections accurately and the reasons why they would lose. I went on and on about how the Dems had blown it with Kerry and should have brought a moderate to the table. I flat out said that Gore's position on gun control would probably cost him the election and it did. You never give me any credit for being right and can only pull out the one time in the primaries when I was barely wrong and act like that's all par for the course.


That may be true--not sure he lost but thats another thread--but I wonder with the way things are now, as opposed ot then, if gun control is a top issue with voters. I think they may be low on the list of concerns.

The economy, Iraq, health care seem to be the main issues and I think the next President will be so overwhelmed with the cleanup process and what the hell to do with Iraq, that gun control wont make the list of things to do today...JMO

[BIG_DADDY]

I can sympathize with his feelings.

Do you think your friend would ever betray his oath and refuse to obey the orders of his lawfully elected Commander in Chief, as BD has suggested?

The fact he stuck out the Clinton years suggests to me he respects his oath more than that, but I'd be curious to hear your perspective.

It's going to come from the very top of the military. We are like one major terrorist act away from having a military government as it is.

[|Zach|]

I can sympathize with his feelings.

Do you think your friend would ever betray his oath and refuse to obey the orders of his lawfully elected Commander in Chief, as BD has suggested?

The fact he stuck out the Clinton years suggests to me he respects his oath more than that, but I'd be curious to hear your perspective.

Hey, McCain did a great job stepping up to the plate on this one.

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=185057

[BIG_DADDY]

That may be true--not sure he lost but thats another thread--but I wonder with the way things are now, as opposed ot then, if gun control is a top issue with voters. I think they may be low on the list of concerns.

The economy, Iraq, health care seem to be the main issues and I think the next President will be so overwhelmed with the cleanup process and what the hell to do with Iraq, that gun control wont make the list of things to do today...JMO

Obama's sight won't even talk about his position on gun control. His voting record speaks for itself. Is it the top issue for most people, no. Is it a very big issue, yes. Are the people he alienates dangerous people, yes. Is he taking away the very most basic right we have, yes. Is he tossing out our constitution, yes. Then he wants to legalize descrimination against whitey in government, school and the private sector? It isn't going to fly IMO. I don't care how much the media creams themself over the guy or how much people hate GW

[Adept Havelock]

Of course not.

That's what I figured. Thank you.

Hey, McCain did a great job stepping up to the plate on this one.

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=185057

Indeed. I'm sure it will be remembered as well, thanks to the VFW, American Legion, etc. Cornyn in TX is already in the fight of his life, and I expect that vote will drag him under.

It's going to come from the very top of the military. We are like one major terrorist act away from having a military government as it is.

A massive (and IMO deeply disturbing) increase in the "security state"? Certainly.

A military government ala Myanmar? Not a chance.

Again, I find it sad you have so little respect for the rank and file and senior leadership of our military. I have no reason to believe they would not continue to honor their oath even in the face of a WMD attack on a major city.

[HolmeZz]

Then he wants to legalize descrimination against whitey in government, school and the private sector?

Stop posting. You're just pulling shit out of your ass now and it's truly an embarrassing display on your part.

-------------

Stephanopoulos: You've been a strong supporter of affirmative action.

Obama: Yes.

Stephanopoulos: And you're a constitutional law professor so let's go back in the classroom.....I'm your student. I say Professor, you and your wife went to Harvard Law School. Got plenty of money, you're running for president. Why should your daughters when they go to college get affirmative action?

Obama: Well, first of all, I think that my daughters should probably be treated by any admissions officer as folks who are pretty advantaged, and I think that there's nothing wrong with us taking that into account as we consider admissions policies at universities. I think that we should take into account white kids who have been disadvantaged and have grown up in poverty and shown themselves to have what it takes to succeed. So I don't think those concepts are mutually exclusive. I think what we can say is that in our society race and class still intersect, that there are a lot of African American kids who are still struggling, that even those who are in the middle class may be first generation as opposed to fifth or sixth generation college attendees, and that we all have an interest in bringing as many people together to help build this country.

[Carlota69]

Obama's sight won't even talk about his position on gun control. His voting record speaks for itself. Is it the top issue for most people, no. Is it a very big issue, yes. Are the people he alienates dangerous people, yes. Is he taking away the very most basic right we have, yes. Is he tossing out our constitution, yes. Then he wants to legalize descrimination against whitey in government, school and the private sector? It isn't going to fly IMO. I don't care how much the media creams themself over the guy or how much people hate GW

Well, I can only speak for myself, and its not a pressing issue when it comes to this election--for me. I have way more things I'm concerned about.

[BIG_DADDY]

Stop posting. You're just pulling shit out of your ass now and it's truly an embarrassing display on your part.

-------------

Stephanopoulos: You've been a strong supporter of affirmative action.

Obama: Yes.

Stephanopoulos: And you're a constitutional law professor so let's go back in the classroom.....I'm your student. I say Professor, you and your wife went to Harvard Law School. Got plenty of money, you're running for president. Why should your daughters when they go to college get affirmative action?

Obama: Well, first of all, I think that my daughters should probably be treated by any admissions officer as folks who are pretty advantaged, and I think that there's nothing wrong with us taking that into account as we consider admissions policies at universities. I think that we should take into account white kids who have been disadvantaged and have grown up in poverty and shown themselves to have what it takes to succeed. So I don't think those concepts are mutually exclusive. I think what we can say is that in our society race and class still intersect, that there are a lot of African American kids who are still struggling, that even those who are in the middle class may be first generation as opposed to fifth or sixth generation college attendees, and that we all have an interest in bringing as many people together to help build this country.

Nice speach. Nobody ever said the man couldn't speak. Gee how convenient for him to come out with that last month after a long voting history of voting for AA. LMAO It was a good follow up to the end of last year. Bottom line is the guy wants AA applied at all levels of employment, schools and government.

Sure are a lot of personal insults aimed at me in this thread. :shrug:

[Adept Havelock]

Sure are a lot of personal insults aimed at me in this thread. :shrug:

No more so than your repeated insinuations about our Men and Women in uniform and their lack of honor and willingness to uphold their sworn oath.

IMNSHO, that is what is truly insulting.

[BIG_DADDY]

Well, I can only speak for myself, and its not a pressing issue when it comes to this election--for me. I have way more things I'm concerned about.

It's only your most basic right, if you want to toss it away so be it.

[BIG_DADDY]

No more so than your repeated insinuations about our Men and Women in uniform and their lack of honor and willingness to uphold their sworn oath.

IMNSHO, that is what is truly insulting.

Whatever, I have explained that in detail.

[HolmeZz]

Gee how convenient for him to come out with that last month after a long voting history of voting for AA. LMAO

The quote is from May of 2007. :spock:

Are you going to eventually post something factually accurate in this thread? You're certainly long overdue.

[Adept Havelock]

Whatever, I have explained that in detail.

No, you've said that you believe your sister and a few associates would dishonor themselves like that.

They might, but I doubt it. In my experience, people who swear that oath take it very seriously.

As for a coup "coming from the top", if you truly believe we will have a military junta ruling this nation after the next massive terrorist attack, all I can say is try lithium. The tinfoil isn't cutting it. Sure, we'd have a massive (and highly disturbing) increase in the "Security State", but a military government? Not.A.Chance.

Aside from the fact the Civilian Leadership would never abdicate to the military, our senior military leadership would never accept such a role. It would violate everything our military and Constitution (which every one of them swore an oath to defend with their life) stands for.

When it comes to Sen. Obama, from your "enemy of the state" rhetoric it's pretty clear you're no different than meme is regarding Pres. Bush.

[Carlota69]

It's only your most basic right, if you want to toss it away so be it.

Its not MY most basic right. It may be YOURS, but not mine. I have other basic rights I am concerned with--which are none of your business, but to assume that I should vote based on your basic needs/rights is arrogant at best. And again, I'm not sure gun control is tops of Obamas list, but then again...

I have nothing against you BD, but dont assume what my basic rights are just becasue they are yours.

[BIG_DADDY]

The quote is from May of 2007. :spock:

Are you going to eventually post something factually accurate in this thread? You're certainly long overdue.

From on the issues

http://www.ontheissues.org/Barack_Obama.htm

Affirmative Action
Apply affirmative action to poor white college applicants. (Apr 2008)
Fight job discrimination to give women equal footing at jobs. (Feb 2008)
Remove discriminatory barriers to the right to vote. (Feb 2008)
Benefited from affirmative action but overcame via merit. (Dec 2007)
Include class-based affirmative action with race-based. (Oct 2007)
Better enforce women's pay equity via Equal Pay Act. (Aug 2007)
Blacks should infiltrate mainstream to affect change. (Aug 2007)
African-Americans vote Democratic because of issue stances. (Jul 2004)
Supports affirmative action in colleges and government. (Jul 1998)

What part am I inaccurate about? He has backed AA at every level.

Maybe the guns?

Ok for states & cities to determine local gun laws. (Apr 2008)
FactCheck: Yes, Obama endorsed Illinois handgun ban. (Apr 2008)
Respect 2nd Amendment, but local gun bans ok. (Feb 2008)
Provide some common-sense enforcement on gun licensing. (Jan 2008)
2000: cosponsored bill to limit purchases to 1 gun per month. (Oct 2007)
Concealed carry OK for retired police officers. (Aug 2007)
Stop unscrupulous gun dealers dumping guns in cities. (Jul 2007)
Keep guns out of inner cities--but also problem of morality. (Oct 2006)
Bush erred in failing to renew assault weapons ban. (Oct 2004)
Ban semi-automatics, and more possession restrictions. (Jul 1998)
Voted NO on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers. (Jul 2005)

No that can't be it.

Sorry to bring out the voting record of your great messiah.

[BIG_DADDY]

Its not MY most basic right. It may be YOURS, but not mine. I have other basic rights I am concerned with--which are none of your business, but to assume that I should vote based on your basic needs/rights is arrogant at best. And again, I'm not sure gun control is tops of Obamas list, but then again...

I have nothing against you BD, but dont assume what my basic rights are just becasue they are yours.

I think the most basic right in life is the ability to defend it, silly me.

[Carlota69]

From on the issues

http://www.ontheissues.org/Barack_Obama.htm

Affirmative Action
Apply affirmative action to poor white college applicants. (Apr 2008)
Fight job discrimination to give women equal footing at jobs. (Feb 2008)
Remove discriminatory barriers to the right to vote. (Feb 2008)
Benefited from affirmative action but overcame via merit. (Dec 2007)
Include class-based affirmative action with race-based. (Oct 2007)
Better enforce women's pay equity via Equal Pay Act. (Aug 2007)
Blacks should infiltrate mainstream to affect change. (Aug 2007)
African-Americans vote Democratic because of issue stances. (Jul 2004)
Supports affirmative action in colleges and government. (Jul 1998) What part am I inaccurate about? He has backed AA at every level.

Maybe the guns?

Ok for states & cities to determine local gun laws. (Apr 2008)
FactCheck: Yes, Obama endorsed Illinois handgun ban. (Apr 2008)
Respect 2nd Amendment, but local gun bans ok. (Feb 2008)
Provide some common-sense enforcement on gun licensing. (Jan 2008)
2000: cosponsored bill to limit purchases to 1 gun per month. (Oct 2007)
Concealed carry OK for retired police officers. (Aug 2007)
Stop unscrupulous gun dealers dumping guns in cities. (Jul 2007)
Keep guns out of inner cities--but also problem of morality. (Oct 2006)
Bush erred in failing to renew assault weapons ban. (Oct 2004)
Ban semi-automatics, and more possession restrictions. (Jul 1998)
Voted NO on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers. (Jul 2005)

No that can't be it.

Sorry to bring out the voting record of your great messiah.

I dont have much info on what the paticulars are on these votes but I dont see whats wrong with the examples you have given.

[Brock]

Most likely write in a libertarian or Ron Paul as a protest vote. Unfortunately living in California my vote doesn't count.

So you're going to piss your vote away in any case.

[Carlota69]

I think the most basic right in life is the ability to defend it, silly me.

Dont take it personal BD. I dont own a gun and I've lived a very fine happy life. You feel the need to own one, get down. Good for you. But I have other things I worry about. Silly me for not agreeing with you....

You really need to stop getting angry with someone just cuz they have a different agenda my friend.

[BIG_DADDY]

No, you've said that you believe your sister and a few associates would dishonor themselves like that.

They might, but I doubt it. In my experience, people who swear that oath take it very seriously.

As for a coup "coming from the top", if you truly believe we will have a military junta ruling this nation after the next massive terrorist attack, all I can say is try lithium. The tinfoil isn't cutting it. Sure, we'd have a massive (and highly disturbing) increase in the "Security State", but a military government? Not.A.Chance.

Aside from the fact the Civilian Leadership would never abdicate to the military, our senior military leadership would never accept such a role. It would violate everything our military and Constitution (which every one of them swore an oath to defend with their life) stands for.

When it comes to Sen. Obama, from your "enemy of the state" rhetoric it's pretty clear you're no different than meme is regarding Pres. Bush.

Not only is this inaccurate big time but it's becoming a waste of time. Tehre are many people who believe a military government is very possible for a period of time maybe even an extended period of time after a major terrorist attack say a nuclear one. If you want to just keep making fun of me then there is not point for me to continue addressing you.

I never said my sister, or a few, or some of our soldiers. MOF I have twice clarified my position that it would come from the top.

As far as the enemy of the state thing goes that is my opinion. If you are going to take away one the top two right our constitution is supposed to insure we have as human beings

1. right to free speech
2. right to protect yourself (bear arms)

then you should be considered and enemy of the state. If that makes me Denise in your eyes then so be it.

[BIG_DADDY]

Dont take it personal BD. I dont own a gun and I've lived a very fine happy life. You feel the need to own one, get down. Good for you. But I have other things I worry about. Silly me for not agreeing with you....

You really need to stop getting angry with someone just cuz they have a different agenda my friend.

I am not angry at all girl. The two most very most basic rights we have as human beings are the right to free speech and right to defend ourself. History has shown the massive importance of this that why it is in our constitution. You don't have a gun and have never needed one, god bless you I hope you never need one. If you do you will suddenly understand the importance of this most basic and primitive right as nothing else will matter at that point.

[Carlota69]

I am not angry at all girl. The two most very most basic rights we have as human beings are the right to free speech and right to defend ourself. History has shown the massive importance of this that why it is in our constitution. You don't have a gun and have never needed one, god bless you I hope you never need one. If you do you will suddenly understand the importance of this most basic and primitive right as nothing else will matter at that point.

Well, again, I dont see him taking away your right to carry a gun (an oozie maybe..). But we see it differently. However, for me, the most basic right aside from free speech is the right to my own body, mind, home, bedroom etc... These are the basic rights that are driving me to the booth and punching the Obama ticket.

[penguinz]

I am not angry at all girl. The two most very most basic rights we have as human beings are the right to free speech and right to defend ourself. History has shown the massive importance of this that why it is in our constitution. You don't have a gun and have never needed one, god bless you I hope you never need one. If you do you will suddenly understand the importance of this most basic and primitive right as nothing else will matter at that point.
First let me say that I support the right to own/carry a gun.

Second... The second amendment had nothing to do with carrying a gun for self defense.

[Adept Havelock]

Not only is this inaccurate big time but it's becoming a waste of time.
You're the one who said you believed that the Military would not follow the orders of Obama.

You're the one who said you based that belief on the statements of your sister and other associates.

Therefore, it's logical that infer you believe your sister and associates (and apparently many others) would not obey their oath to the Constitution to obey the orders of the President of the United States. :shrug:

Only when confronted with the fact your broad statement (IMO) is a slander on the honor of every person who wears the uniform and swore an oath to defend the Constitution, did you move the goalposts to:


There are many people who believe a military government is very possible for a period of time maybe even an extended period of time after a major terrorist attack say a nuclear one.

Many people believe that George Bush is a terrorist and an enemy of the state. I'll take your claim as seriously as I do theirs. It's the same paranoia, just with a different target. I'm sure we would end up with a very scary "security state", but an outright military government? Sorry, the civilian leadership would never abdicate, and the military leadership would never accept it. Sure, there would be martial law in the affected reason, but a military junta ruling the whole country? That's utterly absurd.

If you want to just keep making fun of me then there is not point for me to continue addressing you.
You're right, and I shouldn't have resorted to a personal attack. My apologies. I have a short fuse when people suggest our soldiers and their leadership don't respect their oath to the Constitution and the orders of their Commander in Chief. I've never met an enlisted or officer with so little respect for their oath. Even one who literally hated Clinton told me directly "he's a #&###*!@$! , but as long as he's my Commander in Chief, I'll obey him".

I never said my sister, or a few, or some of our soldiers. You mentioned her directly, and several other associates when pressed on why you believed the military would not obey the orders of their CINC if Sen. Obama is elected as President. :rolleyes:

MOF I have twice clarified my position that it would come from the top.
And I've explained repeatedly why that is an absurd suggestion. :shrug:

As far as the enemy of the state thing goes that is my opinion. If you are going to take away one the top two right our constitution is supposed to insure we have as human beings
1. right to free speech
2. right to protect yourself (bear arms)
then you should be considered and enemy of the state. If that makes me Denise in your eyes then so be it.
Sorry, I don't like him, but I'm not paranoid enough to believe either of those freedoms are at any more risk than they were from Bush and Co. Welcome to meme-dom.



We're going to have to agree to disagree because I simpy don't believe your positions that:

1) The military will not follow the orders of Sen. Obama if he is elected to the Presidency.

2) The military will assume control of the government in the event of a WMD terrorist attack, with a military coup launched "from the highest levels".

3) The First and Second Amendments are gravely threatened by the possibility of an Obama presidency.

[BIG_DADDY]

Well, again, I dont see him taking away your right to carry a gun (an oozie maybe..). But we see it differently. However, for me, the most basic right aside from free speech is the right to my own body, mind, home, bedroom etc... These are the basic rights that are driving me to the booth and punching the Obama ticket.

Well if you can't defend the right to stay alive or keep our government a government by the people and for the people then none of that will matter. I understand what you are saying though. I can't stand McCain or his agenda. I can't stand the Republicans and their BIG GOVERNMENT, BIG SPENDING money grab or the loss of privacy we have got through with the last administration. I absolutley detest Bush. That's a different subject though. This being the case they are still not going to drive me to vote for someone that is willing to burn the constitution. As far as guns go you're wrong. He is for local bans meaning the complete removal of cuns from cities. He is for outlawing simple handguns. He is also for suing those that manufacture guns right out of business,

Ok for states & cities to determine local gun laws. (Apr 2008)
FactCheck: Yes, Obama endorsed Illinois handgun ban. (Apr 2008)
Respect 2nd Amendment, but local gun bans ok. (Feb 2008)
Provide some common-sense enforcement on gun licensing. (Jan 2008)
2000: cosponsored bill to limit purchases to 1 gun per month. (Oct 2007)
Concealed carry OK for retired police officers. (Aug 2007)
Stop unscrupulous gun dealers dumping guns in cities. (Jul 2007)
Keep guns out of inner cities--but also problem of morality. (Oct 2006)
Bush erred in failing to renew assault weapons ban. (Oct 2004)
Ban semi-automatics, and more possession restrictions. (Jul 1998)
Voted NO on prohibiting lawsuits against gun manufacturers. (Jul 2005)

As I best recall never in our history has a president been against guns even remotely close to this level.

[BIG_DADDY]

You're the one who said you believed that the Military would not follow the orders of Obama.

You're the one who said you based that belief on the statements of your sister and other associates.

Therefore, it's logical that infer you believe your sister and associates (and apparently many others) would not obey their oath to the Constitution to obey the orders of the President of the United States. :shrug:

Only when confronted with the fact your broad statement (IMO) is a slander on the honor of every person who wears the uniform and swore an oath to defend the Constitution, did you move the goalposts to:



Many people believe that George Bush is a terrorist and an enemy of the state. I'll take your claim as seriously as I do theirs. It's the same paranoia, just with a different target. I'm sure we would end up with a very scary "security state", but an outright military government? Sorry, the civilian leadership would never abdicate, and the military leadership would never accept it. Sure, there would be martial law in the affected reason, but a military junta ruling the whole country? That's utterly absurd.

You're right, and I shouldn't have resorted to a personal attack. My apologies. I have a short fuse when people suggest our soldiers and their leadership don't respect their oath to the Constitution and the orders of their Commander in Chief. I've never met an enlisted or officer with so little respect for their oath. Even one who literally hated Clinton told me directly "he's a #&###*!@$! , but as long as he's my Commander in Chief, I'll obey him".
You mentioned her directly, and several other associates when pressed on why you believed the military would not obey the orders of their CINC if Sen. Obama is elected as President. :rolleyes:

And I've explained repeatedly why that is an absurd suggestion. :shrug:

Sorry, I don't like him, but I'm not paranoid enough to believe either of those freedoms are at any more risk than they were from Bush and Co. Welcome to meme-dom.



We're going to have to agree to disagree because I simpy don't believe your positions that:

1) The military will not follow the orders of Sen. Obama if he is elected to the Presidency.

2) The military will assume control of the government in the event of a WMD terrorist attack, with a military coup launched "from the highest levels".

3) The First and Second Amendments are gravely threatened by the possibility of an Obama presidency.

The only thing I said about my sister and a few friends that I know in the military was that they didn't like Obama and they said that was the popular opinion amoungnst their friends serving. How you ever got to the point where they wouldn't obey the commander and chief is beyond me. Goal posts? LMAO OK Zach.

You can believe what you want all I can do is post what his positon and voting record are.

[Adept Havelock]

The only thing I said about my sister and a few friends that I know in the military was that they didn't like Obama and they said that was the popular opinion amoungnst their friends serving. How you ever got to the point where they wouldn't obey the commander and chief is beyond me.
:rolleyes: :hmmm:
Carlota, one more thing. Do you really believe the military will listen to this guy?

Military will not listen to this guy, period. That's dangerous. You want a military government, vote for Obama.

Aside from the fact that is irrelevant (as the oath does not state "obey the President if I like him/her)", do you have anything to back that up? I doubt it, but I'd be curious to see any supporting data.

Other than the fact that my sister is doing her 4th tour and some friends I have here serve I have nothing other than what they tell me base that opinion on.
Yeah, where did I get an idea like that from? Your own words. :harumph:

Or did you mean "won't listen to this guy" in a way that doesn't mean they won't obey his orders? If so, how?

Goal posts?
Yes. Moving from "If you want a military government, vote for Obama" to claiming a WMD terrorist attack will lead to a military coup from the highest levels is "moving the goalposts".

You can believe what you want all I can do is post what his positon and voting record are.
Thanks. While that's magnanimous of you, I don't require your permission to believe what I want.

That said, I do appreciate you bringing that data on his voting record to the board.

[BIG_DADDY]

:hmmm:





Yeah, where did I get an idea like that from? :rolleyes:

Yes. Moving from "If you want a military government, vote for Obama" to claiming a WMD terrorist attack will lead to a military coup from the highest levels is "moving the goalposts".

Thanks. While that's magnanimous of you, I don't require your permission to believe what I want.

That said, I do appreciate you bringing that data to the board.

You are unbelievable dude. You tie all kinds of things together that were independent statements. The military has all kinds of ways of not following a commander and yes for the bizzillionth time it comes from the top once again. The military can make a commander and chief look like a bumbling idiot really fast and it becomes pretty apparent they have no intention of ever really following him.

My conversations with you go nowhere dude. Lets both save some time and just move on.

[Brock]

You are unbelievable dude. You tie all kinds of things together that were independent statements. The military has all kinds of ways of not following a commander and yes for the bizzillionth time it comes from the top once again. The military can make a commander and chief look like a bumbling idiot really fast and it becomes pretty apparent they have no intention of ever really following him.

My conversations with you go nowhere dude. Lets both save some time and just move on.

Can you point out an example of a US military unit not following a CiC?

[Adept Havelock]

You are unbelievable dude. You tie all kinds of things together that were independent statements. The military has all kinds of ways of not following a commander and yes for the bizzillionth time it comes from the top once again. The military can make a commander and chief look like a bumbling idiot really fast and it becomes pretty apparent they have no intention of ever really following him.

My conversations with you go nowhere dude. Lets both save some time and just move on.

Fine by me.

I tie things together that were part of the back-and-forth of a conversation. Sorry that offends you.

Can you point out an example of a US military unit not following a CiC?

The only ones that come to mind immediately are Gen. MacArthur and Gen. LeMay.

Mac forgot that he was outranked by the CinC, and was appropriately and immediately shitcanned.

LeMay was forced out after trying to provoke the USSR during the Cuban Missile Crisis.

[BIG_DADDY]

Fine by me.

I tie things together that were part of the back-and-forth of a conversation. Sorry that offends you.



.

I don't have an agenda here. I can't stand McCain. MOF I have been asking for a decent moderate Democrat on this BB since I have been posting here.

I don't know how many times in this thread I have to say the sister/friends statement had nothing to do with the top of the military not following the Commander and Chief yet you kept quoting it like I said that over an over as if it made some point other than tryintg to make me look foolish. That is just one example. There is no point in arguing for the sake of arguing. I was trying to have a constructive conversation with you. We have been able to in the past up until now. I am not sure why you chose to do that.

As far as what the citizenry will allow the fact that the citizens are actually in charge is just an illusion. Furthermore we are scared of our own shadow in this country. Teh selling of fear is sooooo easy in this country it's unfriggenbelievable. How else would have the Bush administration been able to stay in power? If we had something really, really bad actually happen like a nuke taking out NYC and some of our major water supplies got hit the average American would be shitting their pants and the military would be running this country. We may actually get a chance to see this in our lifetime. For you to think the citizens wouldn't stand for this is well............ ridiculous.

[Adept Havelock]

I don't know how many times in this thread I have to say the sister/friends statement had nothing to do with the top of the military not following the Commander and Chief yet you kept quoting it like I said that over an over as if it made some point other than tryintg to make me look foolish. That is just one example. There is no point in arguing for the sake of arguing. I was trying to have a constructive conversation with you. We have been able to in the past up until now. I am not sure why you chose to do that.


Because that's not how you initially presented it. You began with "The Military Won't Listen to Obama". When I stated in my post my belief this meant they wouldn't follow the orders of an appointed CinC, you only responded to my question about what led you to that belief. You said what led you to that belief was statements from your sister and your other associates. Then in a later post you brought up "a coup from the top levels of the military", which appeared to me to be "moving the goalposts".

That's why I responded as I did.

For you to think the citizens wouldn't stand for this is well............ ridiculous.

As I've said, I'm sure it would lead to a disturbing increase in the apparatus of the "security state", but I don't see an outright military government as even a remote possibility (outside of the affected area).

It appears I have more faith in our Constitution, our military, and my fellow citizens than you do. :shrug:

That said, I can always agree to disagree. Sorry if I gave offense.

[BIG_DADDY]

Because that's not how you initially presented it. You began with "The Military Won't Listen to Obama". When I stated in my post my belief this meant they wouldn't follow the orders of an appointed CinC, you only responded to my question about what led you to that belief. You said what led you to that belief was statements from your sister and your other associates. Then in a later post you brought up "a coup from the top levels of the military", which appeared to me to be "moving the goalposts".

That's why I responded as I did.



As I've said, I'm sure it would lead to a disturbing increase in the apparatus of the "security state", but I don't see an outright military government as even a remote possibility (outside of the affected area).

It appears I have more faith in our Constitution, our military, and my fellow citizens than you do. :shrug:

That said, I can always agree to disagree. Sorry if I gave offense.

No problem. HEY how come my casino cash went down. :cuss: I just won a G from Deberg.

[patteeu]

And when comparing him to McCain, Obama is probably viewed favorably as a president who would support giving them the chance to be better supported once they've finished their commitment rather than hoping to keep them in the military due to lack of other options.

Honestly, his position on the 21st century GI Bill is one of the most disgusting things I've seen from McCain and the people who share his views. For all of the talk of supporting our troops, they refuse to actually act on those words.

If someone introduced a 21st century GI Bill V2 that was $1 billion larger than the original, would you be disgusted by anyone who chose to support the smaller of the two? What do you really know about this? The job of a responsible legislator is to draw reasonable lines, not to pander with the people's money. Do you really expect anyone to take you seriously when you criticize McCain's support-the-troops sincerity?

And, btw, when can we dispense with the myth that democrats aren't the bigger spenders by far?

[patteeu]

Enlistment in the armed forces is down, despite the poor economy.

Enlistment standards are so low right now that all manner of scum (including hard core gang members who are enlisting solely for the purpose of receiving combat training and experience that they can use against the police after they get out) are being accepted.

Retention of existing service members is down.

Combat tours are being extended - less people means more work for those who remain. The army is so overextended right now that members from other branches are being tasked with army missions.

Funds are so tight that at the end of fiscal year, unit commanders have to pay for things like toilet paper and sheets for their troops out of their own salaries.

As a result of all this, morale among our military members is horrible.

My source for much of this? A gung-ho ex-enlisted career air force major that been one of my best friends for over 25 years, who commands a security detachment at an Air Force base, who is as true blue all-American as they come and has a chest full of medals, including a bronze star. He's already done one tour in Iraq, and will in all probability being going back. And while he is forbidden from criticizing his commander in chief, seriously, he really doesn't have to.

I really don't think there will be much love lost for Bush among our service members when he finally goes away.

I don't know what the actual enlistment numbers are and I don't argue with your contention that qualifications have been broadened to some degree (e.g. maximum age has been increased), but why do you say enlistment is down when the size of the military is actually growing? Re-enlistment is apparently pretty high so I suppose it's possible that reinlistment gains are outpacing enlistment shortcomings, but I find that somewhat hard to believe.

[Ultra Peanut]

If someone introduced a 21st century GI Bill V2 that was $1 billion larger than the original, would you be disgusted by anyone who chose to support the smaller of the two? What do you really know about this? The job of a responsible legislator is to draw reasonable lines, not to pander with the people's money. Do you really expect anyone to take you seriously when you criticize McCain's support-the-troops sincerity?I think he sincerely wants to support the troops, but espousing the belief that giving them fewer benefits upon leaving will keep them in the military longer, and that this is a net positive for our veterans, is at the very least incredibly misguided.

"Less money" does not equal "better than," in this case, and even after trotting out a line about how our troops deserve "the best education benefits we're able to give them," McCain decided that a marginal bump is better than covering their costs fully. This is presumably because we can spend an insane amount of money risking their lives trying to pull out some sort of pyrrhic "victory" against an opponent that doesn't exist in Iraq, but we can't put some of that money towards educating the same people who are in the line of fire once they're out of that hellhole.

And, btw, when can we dispense with the myth that democrats aren't the bigger spenders by far?I'm not aware of the existence of that myth, but the "small-government Republicans" myth is looking pretty ****ing hilarious these days.

[frazod]

I don't know what the actual enlistment numbers are and I don't argue with your contention that qualifications have been broadened to some degree (e.g. maximum age has been increased), but why do you say enlistment is down when the size of the military is actually growing? Re-enlistment is apparently pretty high so I suppose it's possible that reinlistment gains are outpacing enlistment shortcomings, but I find that somewhat hard to believe.

I didn't check the figures this afternoon, either, but as far as the military growing, the only way that could be happening is because recruiting standards are so low right now that they'll basically take anybody. Personally, I wouldn't want the guy backing my play in combat to be some f#cking dirtbag that couldn't get a job at convenience store.

As for reenlistments, there will always be a good number of people who re-up; especially senior people who have already over the hump to retirement. The people they're having a hell of a time getting to stay in are the troops who are completing their first hitches; low rank, low pay, and nothing to look forward to but another tour in the 120 degree desert with a bunch of imbred cavemen trying to blow them up. Does that sound like fun to you?

[patteeu]

I think he sincerely wants to support the troops, but espousing the belief that giving them fewer benefits upon leaving will keep them in the military longer, and that this is a net positive for our veterans, is at the very least incredibly misguided.

"Less money" does not equal "better than," in this case, and even after trotting out a line about how our troops deserve "the best education benefits we're able to give them," McCain decided that a marginal bump is better than covering their costs fully. This is presumably because we can spend an insane amount of money risking their lives trying to pull out some sort of pyrrhic "victory" against an opponent that doesn't exist in Iraq, but we can't put some of that money towards educating the same people who are in the line of fire once they're out of that hellhole.

I'm not aware of the existence of that myth, but the "small-government Republicans" myth is looking pretty ****ing hilarious these days.

There's no extra dollar that you guys won't spend. As much excessive spending as the Republicans are responsible for, democrats have favored spending more at almost every turn and continue to do so.

[patteeu]

I didn't check the figures this afternoon, either, but as far as the military growing, the only way that could be happening is because recruiting standards are so low right now that they'll basically take anybody. Personally, I wouldn't want the guy backing my play in combat to be some f#cking dirtbag that couldn't get a job at convenience store.

As for reenlistments, there will always be a good number of people who re-up; especially senior people who have already over the hump to retirement. The people they're having a hell of a time getting to stay in are the troops who are completing their first hitches; low rank, low pay, and nothing to look forward to but another tour in the 120 degree desert with a bunch of imbred cavemen trying to blow them up. Does that sound like fun to you?

It's not just a case of always being a good number of people who re-up, it's a case of historically high reenlistment.

[frazod]

It's not just a case of always being a good number of people who re-up, it's a case of historically high reenlistment.

I find that very hard to believe.

[InChiefsHell]

I find that very hard to believe.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,339296,00.html

[frazod]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,339296,00.html

And I still find it very hard to believe.

[InChiefsHell]

And I still find it very hard to believe.

Allll-righty then...

:spock: