Is the Republican Party fomenting rebellion among the armed forces

[TheSarge]

Alan Keyes' rant that soldiers should refuse orders given by President Obama has produced at least one tangible example. World Net Daily reports that Scott Easterling a U.S. soldier on active duty in Iraq has called President Obama an "impostor" in a statement in which he affirmed plans to join as plaintiff in a challenge to Obama's eligibility to be commander in chief.

The statement was publicized by California attorney Orly Taitz who, along with her Defend Our Freedom Foundation, is working on a series of legal cases seeking to uncover Obama's birth records and other documents that would reveal whether he meets the requirements of the U.S. Constitution.
 
"As an active-duty officer in the United States Army, I have grave concerns about the constitutional eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama to hold the office of president of the United States," wrote Scott Easterling in a "to-whom-it-may-concern" letter.
 
"Until Mr. Obama releases a 'vault copy' of his original birth certificate for public review, I will consider him neither my Commander in Chief nor my President, but rather, a usurper to the Office – an impostor," his statement said.
 
WND reported yesterday that U.S. Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala., said during a meeting with constituents in Cullman County he has never seen proof the new president was born in Hawaii.
 
"Well, his father was Kenyan and they said he was born in Hawaii, but I haven't seen any birth certificate," Shelby said. "You have to be born in America to be president."
 
Recently President Obama’s picture was removed from a base commissary in Peterson Air Force Base in Colorado Springs, prompting a challenge by employees as it was allegedly removed after one customer complained noting Obama’s race.
 
While this may not be a trend, it is noteworthy that the hostility is so openly practiced by those sworn to uphold the Constitution. As President, Ronald Reagan started the practice of treating the military as an adjunct to the Republican Party. Senator Jesse Helms warned President Clinton that if he visited a military base in North Carolina he may be shot and President George W. Bush routinely used members of the military as props during public relations tours.

http://www.examiner.com/x-2071-DC-Special-Interests-Examiner~y2009m2d25-Is-the-Republican-Party-fomenting-rebellion-among-the-armed-forces-as-a-political-tactic


 

[TheSarge]

I sent this jackass an e-mail  feel free to do the same.

ron_e_moore@yahoo.com

Sir,
 
First off let me state wthat what I'm about to say is my opinion and mine only.  I do not speak for the Army.
 
That being said...
 
  Just curious on how you could write such an uninformed piece so devoid of fact?  You take two random incidents and make the giant leap of imagination that it's happening in the entire military.
 
Those two soldiers were wrong for opening their mouth.  They should know better.
 
99.9% of us don't serve based on who is currently occupying the Oval Office.  It's a more important job than that.
 
Perhaps if you'd actually asked a couple of us BEFORE writing your fear mongering piece of tripe, you'd have known that.
 
V/r
SSG XXXX X. XXXXXXXXX
"I May Be Changed By War, But I Will Not Be Defeated By It" - Audie Murphy

I guess I just gave the DUmmies more material for their wall but oh well.

[franksolich]

Well, I dunno, Sarge.

In case of a national catastrophe--financial meltdown or terrorist attack--I have all the confidence that the military will act in our best interests, being utterly impartial and unbiased in upholding the U.S. Constitution, which they are sworn to defend and protect.

Me?

As an individual, I don't think so, not having the calibre of integrity of military personnel.

I'd be standing at the gates to this place--probably with a few others--but offering haven only to the weak, the vulnerable, and those with proof that they took the war on terrorism seriously (i.e., something like an identification card showing them to be Republican).

If they're Democrats, liberals, 0bamaites, and primitives, I'd turn them away.

But people in our military are better people than I am.

[TheSarge]

As an individual, I don't think so, not having the calibre of integrity of military personnel.

It has nothing to do with your integrity frank.  You're 24K gold in that department IMHO.

The fact of the matter is...that as a civilian living in this great country you have the right not to be nice or civil to someone you don't agree with.

Just like...though they don't realize it...the DUmmies have the right in this country to say all of the disparaging things about the military that they do. 

And that right is what is protected by people wearing the uniform.

Like I said...we do this for a more important reason than who is warming the chair at 1600 Pennsylvania AVenue.

[Eupher]

Here's my email to that lipsmacking liberal turd:

Mr. Moore:

I had the misfortune of reading your ill-thought, poorly-timed, and completely baseless article just a few minutes ago. Let me point out how wrong you are:

The United States Military is sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States, against all enemies foreign and domestic, and to obey the orders of the officers appointed over them.

As you certainly must know, at the top of the pile of people is the Commander in Chief. Currently, the person holding that title is Barack Obama.

There has been, and continues to be some doubt about the validity of Mr. Obama's eligibility as president. While the Supreme Court has not fully acted on at least one case, that question as to Obama's eligibility is still in question, despite furtive efforts by the mainstream media to ignore those questions.

The point of this message is, Mr. Moore, that the U.S. military is not in a position to overtly campaign against or otherwise refuse lawful orders posed by Obama or any other officer. Any attempt to discredit the Republican Party (of which I am not a member, by the way) is in itself fear mongering and completely baseless absent specific proof you might be in possession of.

Should you have such proof, I suggest you stop hiding behind it and present it.

As to the officer who recently referred to Obama as "an imposter", you can believe that his chain of command will institute appropriate disciplinary action against him. If memory serves, Article 88 of the Uniformed Code of Military Justice prohibits such behavior by a member of the military. You might do well to research that statute.

Mr. Moore, if you call yourself some sort of journalist, you're doing a poor job of it. You took two isolated incidents and painted a picture that the entire military is slathered with people who practice that kind of illegal behavior. That is disingenuous at best and reckless and ludicrous at worst.

I suggest you check your own political leanings before you put pen to paper next time. If I recall from my own journalism training, it's the media's job to report the news - not be a part of it.

Trust me on this: The United States military doesn't care who is sitting in the office of President of the United States.

It has much more to concern itself with, and a great deal of that is to how best to accomplish its mission and to stay alive in the process.

Sincerely,


XXXXX.X.XXXXXXX
Sergeant First Class, U.S. Army, Retired