OMG, OMG-- WOW-- That was terrible!!! There are some really mean people on this site... I am sure HRC is very proud of them... Wish she could read their responses...
Actually, I have nothing against Hillary Clinton -why would I want to cause her the embarrassment and disgust of showing her what some of her nutbag fans write?
Someone in the active military was posting lots of comments (very negative toward Hillary Clinton) very heated arguments ensued, someone else threatened it was illegal for the Military personnel to post political opinions.. Something like that.....
Why would it be illegal for someone in the military to post on a political blog-- They should be able to say what they want... I asked my brother a JAG attorney and he didn't know anything about that type of law...???
I don't know, I though everyone had freedom of speak, I guess if you are representing the military you are supposed to stay out of it. Seems like there are better things to chase down than people on political blogs.
they actively voluntell military personal, that political activism while on active duty is strictly limited if not forbidden.
According to military public relations officers from various uniformed military services, that they do not support it because a person in the military is on duty 24/7. There is no such thing as Im off duty. That in the military yoiu are on duty for as long as your enlistment is active.
They do allow them to register and to vote if and when they have time. It is a touchy subject. As to the circumstances about being in uniform or not is a matter of discression. Few people even in Jag would know much about it unless they were expert in military law. The points that were touched in the program covered a whole range of reasons from the militaty, they did point out that charges had never been brought up on anyone that they knew of as far as precedent set, but that all the lAWS ON THE BOOKS OF THE MILITARY ARE FOLLOWED TO THE LETTER OF THE LAW. IT IS KIND OF A WIERD SUBJECT. SOME ONE HAS TO HAVE AN AWFUL MEAN STREAK TO TRY AND SET PRECEDENT'S IN THAT PARTICULAR AREA. BUT AS IS WELL KNOWN SOME PEOPLE WILL GO TO MANY LENGHTS TO GET BACK AT WHOMEVER WITH OUT RTEGARD TO INNOCENT BYSTANDERS AS SCAPEGOAT TO CARRY OUT THEIR PLAN.
WE DO NOT SUPPORT OBAMA, BUT WE WOULD NEVER STOOP SO LOW AS TO ATTACK A HERO THAT SERVED IN THE FIELD OF HONOR, JUST TO GET BACK AT OBAMA.
THAT IS BEING WORSE THAN LOW. THAT IS EVIL.
I DO NOT KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THIS OTHER THAN WHAT I SAW ON THAT PROGRAM AND WHAT I SAW ON THE BLOG FROM SANDI'S THREAT'S MAYBE SANDI SAW THE SAME PROGRAM, ON CABLE. MANY PEOPLE SAW THE SAME PROGRAM, MAYBE THEY WILL NOTICE THIS ON PB AND GIVE THEIR IMPUT..
lOBO.
Re: editing/ there was a CNN special report not long ago on that
I didn't catch that special (wish I would have). I have very limited experience in this - but I'll tell you what I know.
In 2004 I was campaigning for Wesley Clark. I wanted to distribute buttons and bumper stickers on bases, but was prohibited by law. I could, however, get together with interested active duty service people off the bases and give them literature and goodies.
Although it is true that active duty military personnel cannot go out and actually campaign for a certain candidate, I think blogging in defence of a candidate, party or certain positions associated with a candidate or party is a grey area.
My bigger question is, if FedUp was seriously injured, would she be considered to still be in active duty? She will not be returned to combat, certainly.
Lastly, I read FedUp's posts (not all of them, of course, but many) and I viewed her actions not as campaigning, but of supporting a position of "what's good for the goose...", i.e. if people are going to devote their energy to attacking one Democrat politician, then they should not complain when someone else attacks another Democrat politician. No one is immune to criticism, yet some people believe it is OK to disparage one and not OK to disparage another. The really sad part is, both these Democrat candidates are on the same side - and their policies are practically identical.
Who is Fed up???
Actually, I have nothing against Hillary Clinton -why would I want to cause her the embarrassment and disgust of showing her what some of her nutbag fans write?
According to military public relations officers from various uniformed military services, that they do not support it because a person in the military is on duty 24/7. There is no such thing as Im off duty. That in the military yoiu are on duty for as long as your enlistment is active.
They do allow them to register and to vote if and when they have time. It is a touchy subject. As to the circumstances about being in uniform or not is a matter of discression. Few people even in Jag would know much about it unless they were expert in military law. The points that were touched in the program covered a whole range of reasons from the militaty, they did point out that charges had never been brought up on anyone that they knew of as far as precedent set, but that all the lAWS ON THE BOOKS OF THE MILITARY ARE FOLLOWED TO THE LETTER OF THE LAW. IT IS KIND OF A WIERD SUBJECT. SOME ONE HAS TO HAVE AN AWFUL MEAN STREAK TO TRY AND SET PRECEDENT'S IN THAT PARTICULAR AREA. BUT AS IS WELL KNOWN SOME PEOPLE WILL GO TO MANY LENGHTS TO GET BACK AT WHOMEVER WITH OUT RTEGARD TO INNOCENT BYSTANDERS AS SCAPEGOAT TO CARRY OUT THEIR PLAN.
WE DO NOT SUPPORT OBAMA, BUT WE WOULD NEVER STOOP SO LOW AS TO ATTACK A HERO THAT SERVED IN THE FIELD OF HONOR, JUST TO GET BACK AT OBAMA.
THAT IS BEING WORSE THAN LOW. THAT IS EVIL.
I DO NOT KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THIS OTHER THAN WHAT I SAW ON THAT PROGRAM AND WHAT I SAW ON THE BLOG FROM SANDI'S THREAT'S MAYBE SANDI SAW THE SAME PROGRAM, ON CABLE. MANY PEOPLE SAW THE SAME PROGRAM, MAYBE THEY WILL NOTICE THIS ON PB AND GIVE THEIR IMPUT..
lOBO.
In 2004 I was campaigning for Wesley Clark. I wanted to distribute buttons and bumper stickers on bases, but was prohibited by law. I could, however, get together with interested active duty service people off the bases and give them literature and goodies.
Although it is true that active duty military personnel cannot go out and actually campaign for a certain candidate, I think blogging in defence of a candidate, party or certain positions associated with a candidate or party is a grey area.
My bigger question is, if FedUp was seriously injured, would she be considered to still be in active duty? She will not be returned to combat, certainly.
Lastly, I read FedUp's posts (not all of them, of course, but many) and I viewed her actions not as campaigning, but of supporting a position of "what's good for the goose...", i.e. if people are going to devote their energy to attacking one Democrat politician, then they should not complain when someone else attacks another Democrat politician. No one is immune to criticism, yet some people believe it is OK to disparage one and not OK to disparage another. The really sad part is, both these Democrat candidates are on the same side - and their policies are practically identical.
Lobo