LGF

more options

  

Advertisement

Video: YearlyKos Military Panel Moderator Shouts Down Soldier

Fri, Aug 3, 2007 at 2:16:02 pm PDT

Here’s the video — the section in question begins at around 41:00, and they apparently turned off the recording while the soldier was speaking.

(Hat tip: Killgore.)

Earlier at LGF:
Serviceman Shouted Down at YearlyKos

UPDATE at 8/3/07 2:41:00 pm:

I want to thank YearlyKos for thoughtfully providing this video in a form that can be easily embedded in anyone’s blog.

UPDATE at 8/3/07 2:44:40 pm:

When the moderator (who seems to be Jon Soltz) yells “HEY! You want me to come down there?” you can faintly hear Wesley Clark in the background saying, “oh... no...”

Advertisement

359 comments

  • Comments are open and unmoderated, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Little Green Footballs.
  • Obscene, abusive, silly, or annoying remarks may be deleted, but the fact that particular comments remain on the site in no way constitutes an endorsement of their views by Little Green Footballs.
  • Posts that contain phone numbers, street addresses, email addresses or other personal information will also be deleted, as will posts that consist only of a variation on the word, "First!"
  • Comments that advocate violence will be cause for immediate banning with no appeal.
  • Disagreement and debate are welcome, but insults and abuse are not, and may cause your account to be blocked.
  • REMEMBER: posting comments at LGF is a privilege, not a right. Abuse that privilege, and your account will be blocked.

Hide comments | Jump to bottom

1 cbinflux  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:16:32pm

In America...

2 Render  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:18:22pm

Turned off, or selectively edited after the fact?

BETCHYA,
R

3 Honorary Yooper  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:18:44pm

There's a reason for calling them Krazy Kos Kidz. They simply hate America, can I say more?

4 JammieWearingFool  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:19:36pm

Nine of 10 vets against the war?

Not buying it.

5 ornery elephant  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:22:10pm

I'm confused. What is a "Kos Military Panel" ? Wouldn't that be like a "Hamas Bacon Festival" ? or a "Democratic Party Ethics Panel"? or a "Ms. Iran Bikini Pageant" ?

6 rappmandu  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:23:41pm

Killgore Trout will do anything for a Scooby Snack Klondike Bar hat tip.

/good find KT

Seriously, though, Charles, ever thought of keeping a sidebar link "lgf Hat Tip Hall of Fame"?

7 AnotherRightWingConspirator  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:26:12pm

Can we question their patriotism yet?

8 JammieWearingFool  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:26:19pm

He came off very smug.

9 jwbaumann  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:26:28pm

OT - House "debating" funds for 35W reconstruction in Minneapolis (we all know it will pass by a wide margin).

Did anyone take note that this collapse occurred in Keith Hakim X. Ellison's district?

10 JammieWearingFool  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:26:56pm

I had a comment disappear...

11 vxbush  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:27:18pm

re: #9 jwbaumann

No, I hadn't! Did he submit the legislation, or did someone else from Minnesota do it?

12 NoSubmission  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:27:33pm

Is it just me or is the video not working now? I had it before but refreshed the page so I could read the comments..

13 MysticSmoke (from finger tips)  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:27:44pm

That retard panelist simply twists his pen and raises his eyebrows at the questioner for a whole minute while the audio is cut off. Wonder what the questioner actually said.
Must've been pretty persuasive, since the panelist completely disregarded it.
Then Weasely Clark says a whole lot of nothing, just to hear himself talk?

14 MamaGeph  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:27:47pm

I hate to say it though - if the soldier was in uniform, he was against regs to be speaking in a political manner. That is a big no-no.

15 Paul  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:27:58pm

The soldier becomes a non-person, lefties are good at doing that, comes from long practice.

16 Atman  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:27:58pm

Shout down this Soldier you left-wing slime........

17 NoSubmission  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:28:00pm

OK it's working now!

18 Honorary Yooper  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:28:20pm

re: #7 AnotherRightWingConspirator

Can we question their patriotism yet?

Of course not. We can't question their partriotism, they can only question us. It's the wonderful Leftist mindset.

Remember, this is being held in McCormick Place, on the LEFT side of Lake Michigan. ;-)

19 D'kian_  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:28:48pm

re: #5 ornery elephant

I'm confused. What is a "Kos Military Panel" ?

It's like a Saudi sponsored Peace Konference

Bomb Iran

20 Honorary Yooper  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:28:52pm

re: #10 JammieWearingFool

I had a comment disappear...

LGF burped. I had one stall in hamster hell.

21 FrogMarch  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:29:17pm

Brown shirts.

22 uptight  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:30:47pm

The Kos military panelist hears an opinion from someone in the military, throws a hissy and leaves the room crying.

Why do they bother? Why not just pretend they had this meeting and everyone agreed with each other?

It would save time & money and embarrassing encounters with reality.

23 MandyManners  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:30:48pm

re: #7 AnotherRightWingConspirator

Can we question their patriotism yet?

WHAT patriotism?

/drive-by

24 DVol  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:31:03pm

Has anybody identified the moderator? Do we know if he is military or ex-military?

25 bosforus  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:31:16pm

re: #14 MamaGeph

I hate to say it though - if the soldier was in uniform, he was against regs to be speaking in a political manner. That is a big no-no.

We've had a thread talking about that already. Check out the updates on this. ;)

26 JammieWearingFool  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:32:26pm

re: #20 Honorary Yooper

re: #10 JammieWearingFool

I had a comment disappear...

LGF burped. I had one stall in hamster hell.

There's a 2:31 gap in comments. I question the timing.

27 rappmandu  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:32:36pm

re: #14 MamaGeph

Which reg, specifically?

28 Charles  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:32:40pm

Notice: when the moderator yells, "Hey! You want me to come down there?" in the background you can hear Wes Clark going, "oh... no..."

29 zmdavid  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:33:33pm

re: #14 MamaGeph

I hate to say it though - if the soldier was in uniform, he was against regs to be speaking in a political manner. That is a big no-no.

It's sad that saying the surge is working is considered political.

30 rappmandu  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:33:36pm

Does it make a difference whether YearlyKos is a public/private event, held on public/private property?

31 JammieWearingFool  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:34:47pm

For shits and giggles, some of you Chicago-area Lizardoids ought to go down and wander around with some snarky signage.

I know this is a very creative bunch.

Oh, and record all activities.

32 ploome hineni[deleted]  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:34:49pm
33 alegrias  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:34:56pm

Thank you Charles for these threads that give us an inside look at HOW the left supports the troops (NOT).

34 WrathofG-d  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:34:57pm

What I do not understand is the duplicity of the "Progressive" "community".

At the same time that they claim that the Troops are nothing but poor, uneducated saps....they hold them up as foreign policy experts!

So which one is it Progressives? Are they moronic saps without education that are not able to know they are getting "stuck" and "tricked" into joining the Armed Forces....or are they the smartest, most knowledgeable, foreign policy experts?

35 Honorary Yooper  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:34:59pm

re: #26 JammieWearingFool

re: #20 Honorary Yooper


re: #10 JammieWearingFool

I had a comment disappear...

LGF burped. I had one stall in hamster hell.

There's a 2:31 gap in comments. I question the timing.

You know fire can't melt steel hamster cages.

/guinea pig troofer

36 Honorary Yooper  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:36:08pm

re: #31 JammieWearingFool

For shits and giggles, some of you Chicago-area Lizardoids ought to go down and wander around with some snarky signage.

I know this is a very creative bunch.

Oh, and record all activities.

I've thought about it. Might be fun, even get some pics for Zombie's gallery of bumper stickers. If I have time.

37 MamaGeph  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:36:11pm

#25 bosforus

Rats! There I go, popping off before I read all the way down!

This whole issue really struck me, since Mr. MG won't even let me borrow his pea coat to run to the store. He's a stickler for the letter of the law. Even when he owns the warmest jacket in the house. Big meanie.

38 Minion  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:36:16pm

This shit is hard to watch without destroying something i own.

39 Sponge  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:36:25pm

Well, I think that if the sergeant did make a blatant political statement while wearing the uniform and violated military regulations, then he should be reprimanded appropriately.

That being said....who was that douchebag that told him to stand down? Is he acting military? Asking a Sergeant to 'step outside'? Hope he gets an asswhipin when he gets there. HIs response was completely unwarranted and uncalled for. Pompus ass, but what do you expect from a kos function.

40 bulwrk  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:37:21pm

re: #32 ploome hineni


I hate to say it but I believe he is an army officer.

41 Killgore Trout  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:38:01pm

Anyone else get the impression they knew he wasn't progressive?

42 rappmandu  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:38:16pm

Y'know, Wesley Clark could've taken the serviceman aside in private to express his views on the serviceman's comments.

But then he wouldn't be Wesley Clark.

43 JammieWearingFool  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:38:17pm

re: #36 Honorary Yooper

Byron York attended last year, and some blog had photos.

I imagine someone has infiltrated and will be reporting. Honestly, I don't think I could take more than a couple hours of this idiocy.

44 pegcity  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:38:19pm

is there any wonder that if it were 1933 50+% of koslings would have been loyal nazis.

45 eastvillageinfidel  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:38:31pm

This smug prick joined the military for the same reason beauchamp did. What really galls me is that he turns around and hides behind a code of conduct that he doesn't really respect and makes a mockery of every day of his miserable life.

46 ornery elephant  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:39:31pm

re: #35 Honorary Yooper

You know fire can't melt steel hamster cages.

hahaha Yoop! now THAT's funny!

47 rappmandu  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:39:40pm

re: #41 Killgore Trout

Anyone else get the impression they knew he wasn't progressive?


Any chance this was a setup? Then again, they're not know for their dramatics.

48 WrathofG-d  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:40:15pm

re: #44 pegcity


I do not think they would have been nazis. T

They wouldnt' have joined the Nazi party but they would have been more than happy to explain to you why the Nazis have a "point" and why it probably WAS "partially" the Jews fault for the economic problems of Germany & that the Nazis have a legitamate cause, etc., etc., blah, blah, blah...

49 bluegrass boy  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:41:00pm

you can just feel the love they have for the military, cant you...

50 MamaGeph  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:41:03pm

#27 rappmandu

I'd have to ask the hubby what the exact wording is - or you could read the previous post on all this that Charles wrote. Like I neglected to do at first. ;)

Essentially, if you are in uniform, you represent your entire branch of service. So it's ixnay on the public speaking unless you are in your civvies.

51 markx  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:41:13pm

re: #21 FrogMarch

Brown shirts.

My thoughts exactly.

52 186kps  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:41:15pm

Moderator is Jon Soltz of votevets.org.
A Huffpo regular and former soldier.
No vet who cared would speak like that to another service menber. The guy is a joke.

And Wes Clark says NOTHING....What leadership skills!
perhaps he had swedish meatball from the brunch buffet stuck in his throat while Soltz proceeded to threaten and make sure the soldier asking the question "would never wear the uniform again"

53 alegrias  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:41:24pm

Remember how Democrats ran several exmilitary folks for office last November--but ONLY if they were the right kind of exmilitary folks: Bush-bashing, get out of Iraq the quagmire, never use US force against bad guys, etc.

That's how Virginia ended up with Senator Jim Webb who used his military son's boots and his son's being in Iraq to bash President Bush and snubb the President himself. Classless trash & spawn of Djhimmi Carter, another exmilitary who hated the military and what the US military could do in defense of our country.

54 Render  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:41:47pm

Selectively edited by the Captain, flipping his mic button on and off.

"His uniform?"

Mofo. That uniform belongs to the United States Army, not Captain whathisname, or retired General Clarke.

Tell ya what Captain Whathisname, how about I ask you the exact same questions that Sargent did, you gonna censor me? Tell me to "stand down?"

I'll tell you to fuck off and onstantly find a thousand of your peers to indirectly back me up.

Captain, your career advancement opportunities are now on the line. That pen twirling display of yours speaks volumes about how you treat the men and women under your command. No wonder Clarke likes you.

Oh, and Captain...The Surge is working, how's it feel to be so very wrong about that?

NOW,
R

55 Charles  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:41:53pm

re: #41 Killgore Trout

I got the impression the moderator knew who it was.

56 JammieWearingFool  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:42:12pm
57 bosforus  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:42:23pm

re: #37 MamaGeph

come to phoenix, you'll never need a jacket again.

58 Killgore Trout  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:42:41pm

re: #47 rappmandu

The whole thing is kind of odd.

59 savage_nation[deleted]  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:43:05pm
60 Logan  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:43:14pm

The moderator seemed VERY threatening.

61 dcbatlle  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:43:36pm

Notice they didn't clap when he said 9 out of 10 vets opposed the war, because even the Krazy Kos Kids knew he was bullshitin.

62 ornery elephant  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:43:44pm

re: #50 MamaGeph

#27 rappmandu

I'd have to ask the hubby what the exact wording is - or you could read the previous post on all this that Charles wrote. Like I neglected to do at first. ;)

Essentially, if you are in uniform, you represent your entire branch of service. So it's ixnay on the public speaking unless you are in your civvies.

I think this is the precise language regarding regs on uniformed conduct:

3.1. The wearing of the uniform by members of the Armed Forces (including retired members and members of Reserve components) is prohibited under any of the following circumstances:...
3.1.2. During or in connection with furthering political activities, private employment or commercial interests, when an inference of official sponsorship for the activity or interest may be drawn.
3.1.3. Except when authorized by the approval authorities in subparagraph 4.1.1., when participating in activities such as unofficial public speeches, interviews, picket lines, marches, rallies or any public demonstration, which may imply Service sanction of the cause for which the demonstration or activity is conducted

63 bosforus  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:44:03pm

is that a sigh of relief that i hear coming from the jetblue HQ?

64 JammieWearingFool  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:44:31pm

re: #54 Render

That pen twirling display of yours speaks volumes about how you treat the men and women under your command. No wonder Clarke likes you.


Touche!

65 rappmandu  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:44:37pm

I can't see YearlyKos allowing anyone in uniform in the door without first knowing (planning?) in advance exactly what that serviceman will say.

66 Logan  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:44:46pm

Wesley Clark what're you doing at this sort of nutfest- Have some dignity for G-d's sake man!

67 WrathofG-d  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:45:32pm

re: #61 dcbatlle

I'm not a vet, so maybe a LGF'r who was one could correct me if I am wrong here, BUT....isn't it pretty standard for "grunt" soldiers to "hate their war", want to go home, complain about the leadership, etc?

You don't fight wars because you like it....you fight wars because you have to.

Such selfish arrogance of my generation!

68 jamgarr  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:46:03pm

re: #28 Charles

Clark was obviously trying to cover for the moderator's snippy attitude - and I'm sure he did it well enough for the gathered Koslings.

69 bluegrass boy  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:46:12pm

re: #66 Logan

he left his dignity by the way side long ago.....

70 Logan  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:46:16pm

re: #67 WrathofG-d

It reminds me of when people are labeled pro-war.
That's a misnomer if I've ever seen one.

71 markx  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:46:38pm

re: #14 MamaGeph

I hate to say it though - if the soldier was in uniform, he was against regs to be speaking in a political manner. That is a big no-no.

Yeah, but it was smokescreen. If he went negative on the military, in uniform, they would have given him the floor for hours.

Instead, his speech was not what they wanted to hear, so they start quoting the regs.

I call BS.

72 MamaGeph  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:46:59pm

re: #57 bosforus
Nope nope nope. Spent a year in San Diego, and it was way too hot there. I would perish in AZ. Plus, Mr. MG would have a hard time finding a duty station there - Phoenix is sadly lacking in ships...

73 rappmandu  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:47:07pm

I suspect a plant. Wonder what the cue was, if any.

74 Logan  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:47:28pm

re: #71 markx

Who are they kidding,
I'd bet all I own that it would've been a standing ovation had he gotten up to criticize the war or the Bush administration.

75 SeafoodGumbo  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:47:48pm

re: #43 JammieWearingFool

re: #36 Honorary Yooper

Byron York attended last year, and some blog had photos.

I imagine someone has infiltrated and will be reporting. Honestly, I don't think I could take more than a couple hours of this idiocy.

Wasn't that when they had their party to make tin foil hats? Seriously.

76 meMarc  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:48:02pm

Where are they getting this 35% of veterans support the war.
What bogus poll is that from?

77 JammieWearingFool  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:48:07pm

Beyond parody.

On the road with journalist Spicoli

"I'm going to write. I'm here as a journalist," Penn told The Associated Press. "So I'm not going to give quotes to anyone. But I'm having a great trip, very interesting.
78 Killgore Trout  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:48:16pm

re: #52 186kps

I'm pretty sure I've seen Vote Vets in uniform giving speeches in uniform with Cindy Sheehan at a rally in DC early this spring.

79 JohnDakota  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:48:19pm

The Sargent shouldn't have made any political comments. It's against military regulations.

At the same time the Military panel moderator shouldn't have been so aggressive right off the start. He went from 0 to 100 on the pissy cry baby scale in 1 second.

But ya, does anyone know who the moderator is?

80 buzzsawmonkey[deleted]  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:48:25pm
81 Killgore Trout  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:48:32pm

re: #55 Charles

Interesting theory.

82 eastvillageinfidel  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:48:36pm

If the dissenter was a plant, would the purpose be to illustrate their respect for military regulations?

83 g3n3r1c  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:48:56pm

I just can't get over the moderator just utter distain having to listen to someone with an opposite view then his- just watch his face and body language when the combat Vet is muted out

84 bosforus  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:48:57pm

re: #72 MamaGeph

we have plenty of friendships! awwww

85 Logan  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:49:34pm

Did he just tell Wesley Clark to "stand down"?

86 JammieWearingFool  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:49:41pm

re: #75 SeafoodGumbo

Wasn't that when they had their party to make tin foil hats? Seriously.

Yes. Come to think of it, I think Malkin was either getting reports and photos from someone, or was linking another site.

87 Geepers  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:49:46pm

Someone's suggesting that the surge is working?!

OMG! Shut off his mike. SHUT OFF HIS MIKE NOW!

88 markx  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:50:34pm

re: #85 Logan

Did he just tell Wesley Clark to "stand down"?

I don't think so, I think he was talking to the speaker.

89 WrathofG-d  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:50:44pm

re: #70 Logan

Interesting that you say that. This exactly topic has been a huge problem for me for a while. As you stated, by labeling themselves "Anti-War" (which they aren't as they advocate for the Islamists, Che, Chavez, and Castro and armed revolution within the U.S.), those that support our country (ie: patriots maybe?) are automatically labeled "pro-war" as if we are all war mongering, violence loving, blood drinking animals.

I support our troops, love my country, support my countries decision to liberate Iraq from Saddam...but I am by no means "Pro-War". War sucks! Its horrible. People die, are mamed, or worse!

I would much prefer if we never had a war again. But I'm also not a kool-aid drinking, willingly raped pacifist! If one decides to threaten me, my family, my country, or my people, you are darn sure that I support my self-defense, etc.

Like I said....Americans don't fight wars because they like them....they fight wars because they have to.

90 savage_nation[deleted]  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:50:58pm
91 Charles  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:51:26pm

re: #81 Killgore Trout

The way he just cops an attitude instantly, seems like maybe he's been challenged by this soldier before.

92 markx  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:51:31pm

re: #87 Geepers

Someone's suggesting that the surge is working?!

OMG! Shut off his mike. SHUT OFF HIS MIKE NOW!

Don't forget, only KOS-think speech is free.

93 MamaGeph  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:51:47pm

re: #71 markx
True, total BS.

But the rules are still the rules. Even when they're coming out of the south end of a baboon. The soldier should have left his uniform at home...perhaps he's a young'un who doesn't know any better.

94 Shiplord Kirel  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:51:56pm

Duke faculty should be shunned by students

He means the "gang of 88," who signed an outrageous manifesto supporting the presumed guilt of the Lacrosse players, not the entire faculty.

This is a wake-up call, graphically illustrating the totalitarian standards of evidence and due process that would prevail if the far-left ever achieves real power.

95 Logan  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:52:03pm

re: #88 markx

What a condescending prick.
Can I say that?

96 SeafoodGumbo  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:52:07pm

re: #75 SeafoodGumbo

re: #43 JammieWearingFool

re: #36 Honorary Yooper

Byron York attended last year, and some blog had photos.

I imagine someone has infiltrated and will be reporting. Honestly, I don't think I could take more than a couple hours of this idiocy.

Wasn't that when they had their party to make tin foil hats? Seriously.

Here's the tinfoil hat crowd from when AllahPundit infiltrated YearlyKos last year.

97 meMarc  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:52:30pm

SeafoodGumbo,

I laughed when Dennis Prager asked incredulously, "You're name is SeafoodGumbo"?

Really glad I was there to hear it.

98 opnion  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:52:37pm

Jerks!

99 JammieWearingFool  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:52:37pm

Hot Air dispatch from 2006.

100 pegcity  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:53:34pm

Did Welsey Clark regale the crowd with tales of jewish money men and other zionist conspiracies?

101 Logan  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:54:01pm

re: #89 WrathofG-d

Agreed.
The implication is that we want war, we prefer war, and that we want war to continue. Which is absolutely not the case.
We're all anti-war, the same way we're all anti-murder.

Reminds me of the label "pro-choice" which I disagree with, but that's a whole 'nother can of worms..

102 markx  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:54:02pm

re: #93 MamaGeph

re: #71 markx
True, total BS.

But the rules are still the rules. Even when they're coming out of the south end of a baboon. The soldier should have left his uniform at home...perhaps he's a young'un who doesn't know any better.

Yeah, I know.

Just sayin'.

(His heart was in the right place, even if his head wasn't.)
*sigh*

103 MamaGeph  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:54:07pm

re: #84 bosforus

re: #72 MamaGeph

we have plenty of friendships! awwww


Guffaw!

104 JammieWearingFool  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:54:07pm
105 WrathofG-d  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:54:11pm

So the same people that carry signs saying that they only support their troops when they are "fragging their officers" and those that encourage the troops to disobey orders are now the guardians of the MCOJ & DOD regulations?

/ h e a d is s p i n n i n g!

106 rappmandu  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:54:12pm

Which would have more sizzle: yet another serviceman in uniform speaking against the war, or a "pro-surge" serviceman ambushing the proceedings, followed by a moderator freak-out and shout-down?

Absent followup with the serviceman himself, I remain skeptical. And, if Koslings haven't already identified him and posted everything they can find/think up on him so they can go after him, then said followup would be difficult.

107 Killgore Trout  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:54:22pm

re: #91 Charles

Also note that the moderator says "I want the name of your unit and your First Sargent." It might be safe to assume he already knows the soldier's name because he doesn't ask for it.

108 Q-Burn  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:54:38pm

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but the problem seems to be that the soldier was in uniform and the event was political in nature. If the soldier was not in uniform, no problem.

In the area where I live, I have seen officers in uniform address the Rotary Club or some such about the war. No problem because they are addressing a non-political gathering. If an oficer in uniform was to make the same speech at a Republican Party gathering, big problem.

Am I wrong here?

109 usmc1968  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:54:51pm

Hell yea, I want you to come down here--PLEASE COME!

If this has been posted--SORRY

110 ornery elephant  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:54:59pm

re: #93 MamaGeph

Another angle to look at this...the rules suggest it is against policy to speak at a PUBLIC gathering while in uniform. Now, considering this is a crowd of Koslings who are more closely related to the flying monkeys in Wizard of Oz than human beings, this technically could be viewed as not "public" speaking, yes?

111 alegrias  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:55:04pm

OT in good news today, the UN is going to step up to the plate in Iraq...moonbats heads will explode, or another UN Food for Oil scandal will happen.

Our UN Ambassador Zal Khalilzad's working on this, and just doing his part to make liberal America feel better by sending in the UN now that the surge is working.

That's right, the US Military making the world safe for the UNniks to help Iraq.

112 Son Of The Godfather  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:55:26pm

Non-political: "The surge is working."

Wait! If the surge is working... If things are looking better... then... then...Bushitler was right!

Now-Political: "The surge is working."

113 WrathofG-d  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:55:31pm

re: #101 Logan

Well you know what they say: Those that control the terminology control the debate.

114 markx  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:55:34pm

re: #95 Logan

re: #88 markx

What a condescending prick.
Can I say that?

Yes, be my guest.

(I'd like to say worst, but I'm in a self-censor mode)

115 buzzsawmonkey[deleted]  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:55:50pm
116 Charles  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:56:08pm

He wasn't making a speech. He was at an open panel, asking a question like any other member of the audience.

117 spikester  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:56:59pm

Lizards! These are the Butterfly's logic we face!

118 Render  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:57:28pm

re: #91 Charles

Odds that there was a confrontation prior to the panel starting?

Perhaps the Captain, (is that Stoltz? He is retired, isn't he?), and/or Clarke, saw the uniform prior to the panel and went right to it, like a moth to a flame.

BZRAAP,
R

119 savage_nation[deleted]  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:57:44pm
120 Geepers  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:57:53pm

markx (#71),


Yeah, but it was smokescreen. If he went negative on the military, in uniform, they would have given him the floor for hours.

Instead, his speech was not what they wanted to hear, so they start quoting the regs.

I call BS.

What?! You don't remember all the LLLs who after the Scott Beauchamp story broke immediately started saying: "Well if these things did happen the way you said they did it was your duty under the UCMJ to report them?

121 rappmandu  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:58:26pm

I vote plant, hoping I'm wrong.

122 Know Your Enemy  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:58:52pm

re: #97 meMarc

SeafoodGumbo,

I laughed when Dennis Prager asked incredulously, "You're name is SeafoodGumbo"?

Really glad I was there to hear it.

That was indeed a great moment. I knew by Prager's breif hesitation that he was about to announce a lizardoid name. Well done, Gumbo.

123 new2thezoo  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:58:58pm

For a minute there, I thought the Congress had reconvened.

124 alegrias  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:59:32pm

addendum to #111 for moonbats to read & weep or jump for joy: The UN is Coming, the UN is Coming

[Link: www.washingtontimes.com...]

UN Set to take Heavy Hand in Iraq

125 MamaGeph  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:59:37pm

re: #110 ornery elephantAha! You have found the loophole!

Regs don't say anything about speaking amongst inferior, half-witted, moonshine-swilling Hun-creatures from Oz. Wonder if that'll stand up in court?

126 FrogMarch  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:59:44pm

It is excruciating having to listen to these "progressives".

127 Son Of The Godfather  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:59:58pm

I'm just guessing here, but I'm thinking they would have let that lying S-O-B, Beuchamp spew his fiction, and it would have been argued that his speech wasn't a "political", but a "moral" issue.

128 zmdavid  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 2:59:58pm

Is it possible that he received proper permission to attend in uniform from his superiors?

129 PeaceBeUponHim  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 3:00:04pm

re: #16 Atman

Shout down this Soldier you left-wing slime........

That video was awesome.

130 Aubreyhouse  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 3:00:25pm

I got the impression the moderator was an arrogant p@#*!...probably trying to impress Wesley Clark. What a jerk!

re: #91 Charles

re: #81 Killgore Trout

The way he just cops an attitude instantly, seems like maybe he's been challenged by this soldier before.

131 Killgore Trout  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 3:02:14pm

Here's a Marine protesting in Uniform Anti-War Rally in Washington D.C.

No leftist complaints.

132 ornery elephant  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 3:02:14pm

I don't know if anyone else has noticed but every bloody General or Admiral that retires from the Army, Navy, Marines or Air Force all of a sudden undergoes this metamorphisis from being a dedicated soldier or leader intent on getting things accomplished to some sort of a philosopher and individual think tank. Why is it that all of them seem to have this "need" to be an expert on thought? I mean, it would be like a President, you know...like Jimmy Carter...lingering on and on and on after his service, pretending to be an expert on the Middle East and sticking his nose into it all and claiming to be an expert on things like Hamas and....oh wait.....ummm...... nevermind.

133 MarkX  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 3:57:43pm

Charles...


WTF?

134 bosforus  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 3:59:03pm

had to bring out the hamster defibrillator for that one

135 Ginn  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 3:59:08pm

CHARLES

OT!

[Link: www.msnbc.msn.com...]

Police raid bakery investigated by slain editor

Officials nab 19; operation reportedly connected to Oakland killing

MSNBC video
Bakery raid connected to journalist's murder
Aug. 3: Police in Oakland, Calif., say a bakery they raided Friday morning is connected to the brazen assassination of a local newspaper editor.

OAKLAND, Calif. - Police conducted a series of raids early Friday, including one on a bakery that was the subject of coverage by a journalist slain in a brazen shooting a day earlier.

136 MarkX  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 3:59:10pm

Hello...
...hello
.....hello.
Anybody home?

137 Cicero05  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 3:59:51pm

If dissent is the greatest form of patriotism in the bizarro world inhabited by the Left, then slandering a soldier is the greatest form of supporting the troops.

138 MarkX  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:00:13pm

The lost hour?

139 Thanos  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:00:41pm

Yeah, we are back :)

Semi-related -- Beauchampian Prose

140 vxbush  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:00:45pm

re: #134 bosforus

had to bring out the hamster defibrillator for that one

Really!

141 Ginn  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:00:46pm

Aug. 3: Police in Oakland, Calif., say a bakery they raided Friday morning is connected to the brazen assassination of a local newspaper editor.

142 song_and_dance_man[deleted]  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:00:56pm
143 Killian Bundy  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:01:10pm

re: #135 Ginn

It's already a thread.

/scroll down

144 jcm  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:01:32pm
145 MamaGeph  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:02:24pm

Who drop-kicked the hampster cage?

146 Kirly  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:02:38pm

re: #57 bosforus

re: #37 MamaGeph

come to phoenix, you'll never need a jacket again.

yeah MamaGeph, come to phoenix. It's wonderful here. We've been having a great monsoon season this year.

bosforus - we might be neighbors! you should visit the lounge and we can discuss.

as i was watching the kook convention on the live stream after the soldier dustup, i heard someone allege that because the Bush administration was actually investigating complaints of white voter disenfranchisement, that this was quite a change in priorities or some such bullshiite. They might as well have come right out and said the Bush admin is racist. Wouldn't be the first time.

147 Ginn  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:03:38pm

re: #143 Killian Bundy

re: #135 Ginn

It's already a thread.

/scroll down

Killian.. I know

But now they're connecting the murder of an investigative journalist and editor who was "shot down" yesterday.

148 Atman  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:03:48pm

re: #129 PeaceBeUponHim
It's a good one to pass on.......
Here's one on soldier atrocities.........

149 Ma Sands  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:05:13pm

OT

Update from Minneapolis:

Getting worse........the injured toll now is recalculated at 111 instead of 79; there have been sighted 60 or more cars in the water; the divers are going down two at a time, tied to the recovery boat.....30 minutes for each team of two; the debris is still falling into the water; the whirlpools are increasing in wildness.

They have seen at least 9 bodies in the vehicles that they are trying, futilely so far, to reach.

That canoe builder I met at the river last night, the co-worker with the trucker whose UPI semi fell off the bridge, was giving me all the exact measurements of water, obstacles, and up and down force....then he made the description of what sounded like air being disturbed by an airplane wing, and I told him I was a pilot, and he said then I knew more than he, on why the water is so disturbed....and THAT helped put it in perspective for me....

150 Sizzlack  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:08:12pm

Stand down...dont make me come over there and take you outside and make you watch loose change 3 times in a row dammit

151 MamaGeph  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:08:45pm

re: #146 Kirly

re: #57 bosforusyeah MamaGeph, come to phoenix. It's wonderful here. We've been having a great monsoon season this year.

Naw, I've got enough rain up here in WA. And it rarely gets above the 80's. My mossy self wouldn't know how to function in the furnace that is AZ.

152 William  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:12:54pm

Sheesh the Kos Kidz Fascists muted the soldier's question.

They'll never in a million years comprehend the irony...

153 bosforus  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:16:29pm

re: #151 MamaGeph

to be honest with you, i'm not much of a fan of the heat myself.

154 Dustyvet  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:17:27pm

re: #5 ornery elephant

I'm confused. What is a "Kos Military Panel" ? Wouldn't that be like a "Hamas Bacon Festival" ? or a "Democratic Party Ethics Panel"? or a "Ms. Iran Bikini Pageant" ?


How many of this Kos Military panel have DD-214's, Hanoi John Kerry pulled that one, most of his so called VVAW vets never set foot in Vietnam. It was disclosed that Al Hubbard head of VVAW claimed to have been an Air Force Officer and a pilot. After a records check on Al Hubbard, USAF records showed that he was not an officer, nor was he ever in Vietnam.

155 ploome hineni[deleted]  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:18:42pm
156 Mardukhai  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:19:12pm

I looked at the video -- it looked to me more like a former captain pulling rank on a former sergeant than an ideological-fascist thing.

But still, what is Wesley Clark, a former general, doing with the KOS jerks?

157 ploome hineni[deleted]  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:21:11pm
158 Atman  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:21:32pm

re: #156 Mardukhai
He's a jerk too.....
/...birds of a feather....

159 Catttt  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:22:07pm
When the moderator (who seems to be Jon Soltz) yells “HEY! You want me to come down there?” you can faintly hear Wesley Clark in the background saying, “oh... no...”

I can sympathize with General Clark's sentiment but at the same time must smile to myself at his quandary.

Plus the Irish in me always wants to rise to a challenge like that "Hey"
malarkey - especially when it's totally uncalled for. I'm glad the serviceman in the audience was focused on what he wanted to say.

160 Mardukhai  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:22:12pm

re: #155 ploome hineni

prepare the pigs for takeoff...

Not really -- there are no sanctions, it's just a finger-wagging so the UN can maintain a posture of "we're taking action" when they intend to do absolutely nothing.

161 formercorpsman  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:24:28pm

I respect the fact this guy was in the fray, in Iraq, hence I support his ability to decide his position now that I suspect he is out of the military.

What irks the living hell out of me, is the fact him, and groups like his who carry the high and mighty banner of legitimacy via veteran status do not get this vocal for the posers who have no right to use the uniform, are in uniform under pseudonyms acting as reporters, and the rest.

First question?

Is he still in the military?

If so, why is he there?

If not, WHO THE FUCK IS HE TO SAY HE WILL COME DOWN AND DISCUSS THIS WITH SOMEONE WHO IS, ACTING AS IF HE IS STILL HOLDING RANK OVER THIS GUY?

I WANT SOME FUCKING ANSWERS.

162 Jinx McHue  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:24:54pm

I don't know if anyone's brought this up yet, but I found it via Michelle Malkin:

[Link: www.dailykos.com...]

Kos' double-standard is unsurprising.

163 Mardukhai  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:25:10pm

re: #158 Atman

I just wish that the soldier had worn civilian clothes and simply identified himself by name, rank, and unit. It would have been more suitable to a political setting. Soldiers shouldn't politik in any way while in uniform.

164 Occam's Beard  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:26:13pm

Judgment Day must be nigh, and I hate to differ with others here, but I have to defend the Kos moderator, who I thought acted in a surprisingly professional and even patriotic manner. (Never thought I'd type those words.) Even Clark came off favorably, I think.

The moderator made clear that he didn't want opinions from someone in uniform, whether for or against the war. The military takes a dim view of political activity by its members generally, and especially those in uniform. It's also important to maintain a firewall between the military and political activity (to avoid the banana republic effect), and any politicization of the military undermines that firewall.

Clark's point re MacArthur was also appropriate. So, much to my astonishment, I think the Kos panel came off well.

165 formercorpsman  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:29:30pm

re: #164 Occam's Beard

You have to be kidding.

This will not bode well for them.

Again, is the Smoltz guy still connected with the service?

166 Occam's Beard  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:31:53pm

re: #165 formercorpsman

Nope. I don't mean the panel discussion (which frankly I skipped), but rather the bit with the soldier in the audience.

167 Lynn B.  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:32:42pm

Someone may have posted this on the other thread already, but...

Jon Soltz is a leader of the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans community and is originally from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. From May to September 2003, Soltz served as a Captain during Operation Iraqi Freedom, deploying logistics convoys with the 1st Armored Division. During 2005, Soltz was mobilized for 365 days at Fort Dix New Jersey, training soldiers for combat in Afghanistan and Iraq. He also served his country with distinction in the Kosovo Campaign as a Tank Platoon Leader between June and December 2000. Soltz is a graduate of Washington & Jefferson College with dual degree in Political Science and History. He has completed graduate work at the University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public and International Affairs.

Jon Soltz has quickly become one of the most authoritative voices on veterans issues and military issues. He has been interviewed by national outlets such as the Associated Press, Washington Post, New York Times, Los Angeles Times, TIME, Newsweek, among others, and in dozens of local outlets. He has made numerous media appearances including Jim Lehrer’s Newshour on PBS, CNN. MSNBC, FOX News and ABC News and Nightline, and national radio programs including Air America Radio, the Ed Schultz Show, the Bill Press Show, Alan Colmes Show, and Mancow in the Morning. Jon is a frequent contributor to Countdown with Keith Olbermann.

[Link: www.votevets.org...]

168 -=@$$=-  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:33:11pm

the ass speaking at the beginning is none other than josh lansdale, famous for telling lies about being cast aside by the va on behalf of claire mccaskill.

[Link: gatewaypundit.blogspot.com...]

the republlican congressman he's talking about is mark kirk: a navy vet and combat veteran of kosovo aand the first gulf war. though we know this doesn't matter to the screeching diet-maoists at dkos, he's a pro-gay-marriage, pro-gun-control, abortion moderate who voted against the suurge and supports a phased withdrawl.

so, the bs is hip deep from the first moments of the video. and get's about a mile deep as clark admonishes us that politics are something military folk should stay out of.

169 jdawg  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:34:57pm

re: #23 MandyManners

re: #7 AnotherRightWingConspirator


Can we question their patriotism yet?

WHAT patriotism?

/drive-by

Why, to America's enemies, of course. The left has been against America for many years. That soldier was simply following his oath to protect the Constitution from all enemies, foriegn and DOMESTIC.

170 daughter of patriots  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:35:44pm

I guess this is why the Democrats don't want members of the military to VOTE, too.

171 Sunlight  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:36:39pm

Thomas Scott Beauchamp is ok to these Kos people when he smears the troops (false but true), not only while in uniform, but while deployed. But this retired capt and Gen. Clark (who led the chucking of bombs from 15k feet onto civilians) does have a problem with a man in uniform simply saying that he thinks the surge is working and asking a question?

Please note that people who chuck bombs from 15k feet care *only* about avoiding U.S. casualties, not about civilians. God bless the U.S. military (and IDF, for that matter) for their focus on ground pounding work to try to sort the chaff from the wheat and better the lives of the civilian populations.

172 HDrepub  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:37:18pm

re: #156 Mardukhai

Wes Clark is one of the sorriest excuses for an officer and a gentleman who ever crapped between a pair of Army boots, and is becoming the Jimmah of retired generals. Condescending a$$hole.

*spit*

173 jdawg  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:37:49pm

re: #39 Sponge

Well, I think that if the sergeant did make a blatant political statement while wearing the uniform and violated military regulations, then he should be reprimanded appropriately.

That being said....who was that douchebag that told him to stand down? Is he acting military? Asking a Sergeant to 'step outside'? Hope he gets an asswhipin when he gets there. HIs response was completely unwarranted and uncalled for. Pompus ass, but what do you expect from a kos function.

Is stating that the surge is working now considered a political statement, now? If that's so, then doesn't that mean that Kos has to follow campaign finance regs?

174 Ghengis was a wuss  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:39:12pm

Charles

Thanks for doing all you do so that we can be informed.

I don't think we say that often enough.

175 SouthTexas  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:40:35pm

re: #28 Charles

They may have killed the mic to save themselves.

176 HDrepub  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:42:36pm

Just my opinion, but I feel if the soldier in question had stood up and railed against the war, he could still be talking if he wanted to hold the floor, and would be lauded as a brave young man speaking truth to power.

177 Atman  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:42:51pm

re: #163 Mardukhai
I tend to agree. The follow-up will be interesting.....

178 Hucbald  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:42:54pm

What a bunch of predictable morons those Kos kids are. My crap has a higher IQ than that collective. "Screw them" says I.

179 formercorpsman  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:43:42pm

re: #166 Occam's Beard

The problem, as I already know it, is the fact this soldier might have been in the audience, and the potential ramifications of violating conduct.

Whether he is in real violation, I don't know, but I am comfortable with the military deciding this.

What this will do, is place someone who is at the table of a ferociously anti-war group, who now have a reputation of being labeled with Screw-em, and pandering for the photo-op with vets, Iraq status or not, in order to boost the legitimacy of their position. By contrast, he is now threatening the very same person, be it, if they had a difference of opinion, he would be pimping for his organization.

Let's get real, he is with votevets, I don't think he is looking for anti-war rotary club, bridge playing grandmothers for his cause.

I never heard of this guy before, but after watching that exchange, he surely reminds of the very few smug, pomp ass bastards that anyone who wore a uniform has come in contact with.

Trust me. When you are in it together, you will die for each other. Now that this guy is on my radar, I have looked at some of what he has been involved with. He has aligned himself with some very dirty players, and this is going to bite him on the ass.

Double fucking standers. Again, don't take this as me not seeing the guy in uniform as possibly violating standing orders.

This was a gross display of arrogance.

180 dcbatlle  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:44:24pm

you can faintly hear Wesley Clark in the background saying, “oh... no...”

He was thinking "Oh..no. This twit sitting next to me is going to blow our cover."

181 Dustyvet  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:45:07pm

re: #161 formercorpsman

I respect the fact this guy was in the fray, in Iraq, hence I support his ability to decide his position now that I suspect he is out of the military.

What irks the living hell out of me, is the fact him, and groups like his who carry the high and mighty banner of legitimacy via veteran status do not get this vocal for the posers who have no right to use the uniform, are in uniform under pseudonyms acting as reporters, and the rest.

First question?

Is he still in the military?

If so, why is he there?

If not, WHO THE FUCK IS HE TO SAY HE WILL COME DOWN AND DISCUSS THIS WITH SOMEONE WHO IS, ACTING AS IF HE IS STILL HOLDING RANK OVER THIS GUY?

I WANT SOME FUCKING ANSWERS.


Same here, a Vietnam/Desert Shield/Desert Storm Veteran

182 MadHamster  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:47:00pm

I'm just curious about something. What are the odd that ol' John Soltz was showing a lil' bit o' rhoid rage up there? Oh wait. Sorry. I meant 'Roid Rage. Hmm. On second thought, that guy was such as ass that I think my first diagnosis was more correct.

Oh...and for what it's worth, I kind of hope that once they got 'outside'...the military guy asking the questions was able to give ol' Solzy a super colonic with that pen he was twirling so mightily.

183 formercorpsman  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:47:00pm

re: #176 HDrepub

Just my opinion, but I feel if the soldier in question had stood up and railed against the war, he could still be talking if he wanted to hold the floor, and would be lauded as a brave young man speaking truth to power.

They would have hailed him as a hero, and everyone would have wanted a photograph with him.

Cocksuckers.

I think you can tell, this is the shit that gets me hot.

184 HDrepub  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:48:30pm

re: #183 formercorpsman

Ditto for me.

185 lowandslow  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:52:55pm

Military policy and the fracas between the soldier and Soltz has been discussed thoroughly so I won't comment on that.

What I'd like to point is the self-importance of the whole panel. Here you have 5 people address a crowd, all very presentable, serious and thoughtful for 45 minutes about what must be done. When the fact of the matter is the whole thing is nothing but a dog and pony show. Nobody that has any impact on national policy listened or even cares what they say. It was just 45 minutes of digressive talk to make themselves feel important and accomplished absolutely nothing.

186 formercorpsman  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:54:46pm

Now correct me if I'm wrong, but from what I am reading, this guy worked on both Clark's and Kerry's campaigns for Pennsylvania.

Was he still in the Reserves at this time?

187 wanumba  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:55:03pm
#164 Occam's Beard
It's also important to maintain a firewall between the military and political activity (to avoid the banana republic effect), and any politicization of the military undermines that firewall.


Totally disagree with the logic and assumptions of that statement. Particularly with the reality of the US military structure and civilian leadership of it.
Coups occur in countries because there is no stable mechanism in place for an orderly transfer of power through elections or hereditary itary transfers. The dictator sets himself up for life - all elections become closed or simply theatre so there is simply no legal means by which the political desires/needs are dealt with. The tensions become enormous.
Free speech curbs during war so that the enemy not gain valuable information or to undermine the troops' morale is sensible. Not allowing a soldier to rise to challenge a number of statements that in fact aid the enemy and destroy troop morale is politically motivated muzzling of that man.

188 formercorpsman  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:56:28pm

Yes but these assholes are the first to pimp anyone in the military who agrees with their point of view, and then expect the rules should apply to them.

189 goodbye_natalie  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:56:41pm

Looks to me like KKKos and our "brave" moderator are disciples of that good old Joe McCarthy gospel religion. I guess they decided he was a hero after all?

No wonder John Edwards is so popular with the libs - they share a common bond called hypocrisy.

190 formercorpsman  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:57:20pm

It also appears this guy is behind pushing the Tillman stuff we are hearing about now.

191 Suzette  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 4:59:22pm

re: #175 SouthTexas

re: #175 SouthTexas

re: #28 Charles

They may have killed the mic to save themselves.

Exactly! Because if they could have used whatever the soldier said against him they would have....but they didn't. I do not think the soldier was in violation. He was making a statement from the audience; not the platform. He probably asked a question too...which means; someone in uniform can't ask a question and state the surge is working.

192 formercorpsman  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:02:31pm

[Link: profile.myspace.com...]

His myspace page.


To the right, in the about me section:

Jon VoteVets.org's Blurbs
About me:
Hi, my name is Jon Soltz. I'm in the Army and served in Iraq. Now I'm in NYC, working to help get Troops and Veterans the help they need.
I think most people would describe me as energetic, a doer, and friendly to pretty much anyone I meet. I love to listen to different people and learn from them.

193 Jimash  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:02:44pm

Boy they are really putting the C**t back in "Our Country", there.

194 carbon footprint  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:02:46pm

Unbelievable, that Captain Smug came across as a real bona fide tool. Body language experts would have a field day deciphering him during those few minutes. I love how they simply erased the soldier's voice. Wow, I just hate that Captain Smug guy and I respect the military.

195 Jimash  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:03:36pm

re: #192 formercorpsman

Somehow he didn't seem that friendly .

196 formercorpsman  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:04:18pm

From what I can tell, he was a Captain.

Did he resign his commission?

197 carbon footprint  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:05:47pm

re: #192 formercorpsman

[Link: profile.myspace.com...]

His myspace page.


To the right, in the about me section:

Jon VoteVets.org's Blurbs
About me:
Hi, my name is Jon Soltz. I'm in the Army and served in Iraq. Now I'm in NYC, working to help get Troops and Veterans the help they need.
I think most people would describe me as energetic, a doer, and friendly to pretty much anyone I meet. I love to listen to different those people and learn from them.who agree with me and my ideals.

198 SouthTexas  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:05:48pm

re: #191 Suzette

Whether it's a violation or not is not up to some KosKid to decide anyway.

The military has our backs overseas, I, for one, will have their backs when they are home.

199 One_American  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:07:36pm

As usual, it's always the liberals who try to limit free speech.

I'd like to take that knucklehead behind the table outside and box his ears...

200 Suzette  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:08:14pm

re: #198 SouthTexas

I agree South Texas with you.
BTW South Louisana here! :)

201 Atman  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:08:18pm

For those who missed this link; this is what it's all about....
/...screw Kos....

202 RTO Trainer  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:08:34pm

The more I think about this, the angrier I get.

Had I been consulted, I would have suggested to the SGT he not go in uniform, it was a matter of poor judgment, to walk into a storm carrying a lightning rod, that said;

CPT Soltz wouldn't know if the question were political or not until it had been asked. Instead, he sat up on his stage and used his commission to bully prior restraint on a Soldier.

And even if the question were political, that is not "engaging in politics, which has generally been interpreted to mean running for office or campaigning. Attending a political event is not included and if it were, the CPT would have been setting the SGT up for failure by not turning him out when he first showed up at the event.

The CPT is welcome to come have a "CPT to SGT" talk with me anytime he likes. If the SGT here didn't teach him what a real NCO is like, I think I can manage.

He's out of line and is misusing the regs for his own political purposes.

The CPT is a partisan hack using his military service as a shield from criticism. Period.

203 formercorpsman  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:08:42pm

I am dead serious.

I respect he served, and he has a right to his opinion, but his treatment of that soldier, and his conduct in the room, amongst other people is pretty unbecoming.

I really want to know if this guy is still in the reserves.

If so, what the heel is he doing, running around with Wesley Clark?

I stinks of impropriety to me.

204 Jimash  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:09:56pm

re: #201 Atman

That's beautiful.

205 SouthTexas  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:10:05pm

re: #200 Suzette

Probably a good thing we are a long way from Kosville, eh neighbor?

206 Suzette  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:12:02pm

re: #203 formercorpsman


Again agree ....why did he treat a soldier so badly?
Maybe his true colors were showing?
As for free speech again agree he can say whatever he wants.
His poor treatment of the soldier must show what type of
Capt. he was......

207 Suzette  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:13:29pm

re: #205 SouthTexas


No kidding! That kind of crap doesn't float here!
I have no patience with it and not many people I know
do either.

208 HDrepub  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:13:48pm

re: #203 formercorpsman

If so, what the heel is he doing, running around with Wesley Clark?

I stinks of impropriety to me.

Let me see, trying to emulate one of his heroes, like John Kerry winter soldiering?

209 EE  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:13:55pm

That YearlyKos moderator seemed to be completely infuriated, and instead of being polite and thanking the sergeant for his service, as is usually done when somebody in the service is in an interview, he began threatening him. Very poor manners. I think that it showed his basic hostility toward somebody in military service, and his basic hostility toward anybody who wishes to present some good news when the moderator only wanted to hear bad news about the war.

Too bad that the Dems want to be associated with such a rude, intolerant, hateful, anti-service, threatening and undemocratic person as that YearlyKos moderator.

210 justadot  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:15:36pm

re: #203 formercorpsman

I'm assuming that he's in IRR now but don't know. No sign of a resignation, so far. Don't know when he did his grad work, either, but it might've been last couple of years.

211 Atman  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:16:09pm

re: #204 JimAsh
Sometimes the threads are so fast, folks miss a good link.....

212 jcbunga  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:16:55pm

Once again the lunacy of the cowards around us requires us to remind the libs just how far they've fallen. Here's an excerpt from a radio address FDR made just a few months after Pearl Harbor, in the darkest days of WW2:

"...This is war. The American people want to know, and will be told, the general trend of how the war is going. But they do not wish to help the enemy any more than our fighting forces do, and they will pay little attention to the rumor-mongers and the poison peddlers in our midst.

We have most certainly suffered losses -- and we shall suffer more of them before the turn of the tide. But, speaking for the United States of America, let me say once and for all to the people of the world: We Americans have been compelled to yield ground, but we will regain it. ...Soon, we and not our enemies, will have the offensive; we, not they, will win the final battles; and we, not they, will make the final peace.

...we have been described as a nation of weaklings -- "playboys" -- who would hire British soldiers, or Russian soldiers, or Chinese soldiers to do our fighting for us.

Let them repeat that now!
Let them tell that to General MacArthur and his men.
Let them tell that to the sailors who today are hitting hard in the far waters of the Pacific.
Let them tell that to the boys in the Flying Fortresses.
Let them tell that to the Marines!

Quoting Tom Paine, FDR said,
"The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman...
So spoke Americans in the year 1776.
So speak Americans today! "

How long would these cowards have survived on the beach at Jamestown with winter coming and the wilderness closing in? How long would they have been tolerated?

How long would they survive under the ROP?

God Bless the Troops, we need you.

213 6pat6  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:16:55pm

The moderator is a prick. If he can't tell the difference between a Captain and an NCO uniform, well, if this jerkoff actually IS a veteran, there is probably a reason why he's not active-duty these days. If that swarmy jackass ever acted that way in any squadron I was ever in, he'd be taken out back and had his little attitude changed in a minute!

More power to the (presumably Army) Captain in the audience!

214 HDrepub  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:16:57pm

re: #209 EE

Too bad that the Dems want to be associated with such a rude, intolerant, hateful, anti-service, threatening and undemocratic person as that YearlyKos moderator.

The Dems will associate with anyone who has BDS. It's all about getting Bush and the Republicans, and to hell with our security.

215 Outrider  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:18:34pm

re: #202 RTO Trainer

He's out of line and is misusing the regs for his own political purposes.

The CPT is a partisan hack using his military service as a shield from criticism. Period.


And that constitutes an A val. The Captain (Reserve, I assume) was way out of line with his remarks and pseudo-threats. If he is still in the Reserves, he needs a little footlocker counseling himself.

216 29Victor  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:20:04pm

So the lefties want the rules to be that you can protest the war in uniform (weather or not you're still serving) but you can't ask political questions that they disagree with while in uniform?

Kind of like how you they can accuse the president of lying and killing thousands but we can't question their patriotism.

Yeah....um....I don't like these rules.

217 HDrepub  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:20:40pm

re: #215 Outrider


If he is still in the Reserves, he needs a little footlocker counseling himself.

He needs a good blanket party, and then sing him a hymn, "him, him, f*ck him"

218 pjcomix  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:21:21pm

I hit the video link a few times but still not working.

219 Suzette  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:23:09pm

re: #216 29Victor

Oh I question and have come to the conclusion the only thing
they are patriotic to is there own selves. Narcisstic. Think of no
one but their own opinions ...and how dare anyone refute that!

220 VMI84  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:24:17pm

The KO's apparently did not initially seem concerned that he was there in uniform; giving his presence provided them with a sense of legitimacy and support for their views. (Yet on their website they complain about service members being shown with their Commander in Chief and call it a political statement). AHHH but let him ask pointed questions " and since it has been edited out we do not know if it was political," then he is making a political statement because they do not agree.

The "Captain" was trying to intimidate the Soldier. In my opinion abusing his commission as an officer because of his interpretation of the soldiers question or statement that the surge was working and cutting casualties.

If he did make a political statement then he was wrong to do so but it is NOT his call as to the disciplinary action to soldier. It is the soldiers Commanding Officer. I for one would rip the "Captain" a new a&%^& for using his rank in a political function to quell what may have been a legitimate question he just did not like once I had all the facts. He needs to remember the Constitution he took an oath to is the same one the SGT and I did.

My two cents from a US ARMY LTC (Ret)

221 formercorpsman  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:25:13pm

Well, as I am posting, I am searching as well.

A common theme I keep seeing with my querie, is between, Clark, Body Armor, Pennsylvania, Murtha, Votevets, etc.

222 Outrider  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:27:03pm

re: #187 wanumba

Free speech curbs during war so that the enemy not gain valuable information or to undermine the troops' morale is sensible. Not allowing a soldier to rise to challenge a number of statements that in fact aid the enemy and destroy troop morale is politically motivated muzzling of that man.


The soldier absolutely has that right. Just not in uniform.
I see no problem with that.

I know of no civilian companies that would want their company uniform worn by speakers during any and all political events.

223 RTO Trainer  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:27:12pm

CPT Soltz, based on the AKO White Pages, appears to be a Reservist, 2-312th TSB, which means he get to inflict misery on Guardsmen training at Ft. Dix to go overseas.

224 Catttt  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:29:48pm

The Military and Progressives: Are They That Different?
Type:
Panel
Location:
100a-c
Session Date:
Aug 3 2007 - 9:15am - Aug 3 2007 - 10:15am
Speakers:
Brandon Friedman
Capt. Jonathan Powers
Ilona Meagher
Jon Soltz
Joshua Landsdale

This panel will examine the military, and how it embodies progressive values. We'll also examine why conservatives gained the military vote, and how progressives can get it back.



I know! Let's shout them down and treat them like dirt when they try to ask us a question!

225 Atman  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:30:40pm

re: #212 jcbunga
Have you seen this?
/...if he was here, it would be a helluva speech....

226 NeoKong  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:30:48pm

That was absolutely disgusting to watch.I hope that panelist got a punch in the head outside.
I can't believe the utter contempt that man showed the soldier and that Wesley Clark that sat there quiet.What a jerk.
The thing that really burns me is if that soldier was condemning the war or George Bush he would have been a hero there and allowed to speak on stage.
You know that's true.

227 RTO Trainer  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:31:10pm
The soldier absolutely has that right. Just not in uniform.

In uniform was poor judgment, given that the CPT's reaction was predicatable, but being in uniofrm did not make the SGT wrong. That's not the bright line here.

228 stuck-in-ca  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:32:30pm

On Hannity's radio show today, he threatened to go down to the YearlyKos. That would cause another stir, I'm sure.

229 jcbunga  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:32:32pm
This panel will examine the military, and how it embodies progressive values. We'll also examine why conservatives gained the military vote, and how progressives can get it back.

Ha! FDR splains that in #212 above!

230 Outrider  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:32:47pm

re: #220 VMI84

"...but it is NOT his call as to the disciplinary action to soldier. It is the soldiers Commanding Officer..."


I'm afraid I am going the pedantic route here. It is his call to make an on the spot correction, if you will. Not in that forum. Not in that public manner. Any officer or NCO, to include retirees can make an on the spot correction. Diplomatically. I have seen vets make uniform and behavioral corrections. But, you are correct in regards to the manner that correction took as well as the inappropriateness of using his rank to do so in a public forum. By using his rank, he automatically placed himself in the same category as he had placed the soldier.

231 jcbunga  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:34:09pm

re: #225 Atman


I tried to find that after Mark Levin played it....outstanding!

232 Outrider  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:35:19pm

re: #227 RTO Trainer

In uniform was poor judgment, given that the CPT's reaction was predictable, but being in uniofrm did not make the SGT wrong. That's not the bright line here.


Bad judgment perhaps. But you have to admit, the man had a pair large enough to cart around in a wheelbarrow. Going into a Kos convention and supporting the war?

....or he was just being contrary. ;-)>

233 wanumba  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:35:38pm

So just how much have the legal eagles at the military coached the troops in order that the Left has COMPLETE control of the presentation of information?

It would be VERY WORTHWHILE for a FULL legal and Consitutional review of the regs AND how these regs are currently being presented to the soldiers to see if soldiers are being informed they have fewer rights than they actually do. Happens all the time, and gets smacked down by the courts - misinforming, omitting, misleading, poorly formed explanations of the legal boundries. With what's at stake, it'd be worth investigating this.
This soldier was attending as a listener, a member of an audience - NOT as a panel member or organizer, didn't lend his cachet to the event - he was present as part of the audience. Where do the regs say a man can't stand up and ask and then offer information that is extremely germane to the discussion, as long as it doesn't give away security for the war effort? That this moderator jumped on the soldier so fast, using that argument means they are acutely aware of the usefulness of shutting up one side to their political cause.
Now, by unilaterally announcing that the soldier was in some sort of violation - the moderator, aided and abetted by Clark, have tried to set the terms of debate as the soldier was being political so that they could instantly then accuse him of violating regs - to deflect attention AWAY from what THEY were doing and to brush off scrutiny that THEY were the ones who stepped out of bounds. THEY had NO right to label his questions and comments as "political." They used that as the gimmick to throw regs at him that didn't apply. Since when does their "say-so" trump all? Just as Clark jumped in fast to buttress a flimsy charge, the media will run with their "terms of debate" to intimidate the soldier and cover up the crap that was being dumped at that seminar.

234 Dustyvet  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:36:39pm

St. Crispen's Day Speech
William Shakespeare, 1599
Enter the KING
WESTMORELAND. O that we now had here
But one ten thousand of those men in England
That do no work to-day!

KING. What's he that wishes so?
My cousin Westmoreland? No, my fair cousin;
If we are mark'd to die, we are enow
To do our country loss; and if to live,
The fewer men, the greater share of honour.
God's will! I pray thee, wish not one man more.
By Jove, I am not covetous for gold,
Nor care I who doth feed upon my cost;
It yearns me not if men my garments wear;
Such outward things dwell not in my desires.
But if it be a sin to covet honour,
I am the most offending soul alive.
No, faith, my coz, wish not a man from England.
God's peace! I would not lose so great an honour
As one man more methinks would share from me
For the best hope I have. O, do not wish one more!
Rather proclaim it, Westmoreland, through my host,
That he which hath no stomach to this fight,
Let him depart; his passport shall be made,
And crowns for convoy put into his purse;
We would not die in that man's company
That fears his fellowship to die with us.
This day is call'd the feast of Crispian.
He that outlives this day, and comes safe home,
Will stand a tip-toe when this day is nam'd,
And rouse him at the name of Crispian.
He that shall live this day, and see old age,
Will yearly on the vigil feast his neighbours,
And say 'To-morrow is Saint Crispian.'
Then will he strip his sleeve and show his scars,
And say 'These wounds I had on Crispian's day.'
Old men forget; yet all shall be forgot,
But he'll remember, with advantages,
What feats he did that day. Then shall our names,
Familiar in his mouth as household words-
Harry the King, Bedford and Exeter,
Warwick and Talbot, Salisbury and Gloucester-
Be in their flowing cups freshly rememb'red.
This story shall the good man teach his son;
And Crispin Crispian shall ne'er go by,
From this day to the ending of the world,
But we in it shall be remembered-
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile,
This day shall gentle his condition;
And gentlemen in England now-a-bed
Shall think themselves accurs'd they were not here,
And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks
That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day.

235 Suzette  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:36:59pm

re: #230 Outrider

So in truth he put himself in the same boat. How brilliant!
Hope it bites the Capt in the rear!

236 Render  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:39:44pm

Stoltz - The operative term is...REMF.

Sometimes I really wish my old man was still around. The ol DI/RSM would have eaten that guy for breakfast, regurgitated, and eaten him for lunch too. Just way too much salad bar to argue with.

I seem to remember the term "glorified 2nd Louie with a map and compass" being used in reference to that type of officer.

If Stoltz is active, even reserves, he's every bit as guilty of the same exact regs as that Sargent. Moreso, he's sitting on the dais, with control of the mic.

===

Anybody got the name of Stoltz's commanding officer? I got something to say about his effect on unit morale.

MFER,
R

237 Suzette  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:45:57pm

Render:
Information about him from #167 Lynn B.

re: #167 Lynn B.

Someone may have posted this on the other thread already, but...


Jon Soltz is a leader of the Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans community and is originally from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. From May to September 2003, Soltz served as a Captain during Operation Iraqi Freedom, deploying logistics convoys with the 1st Armored Division. During 2005, Soltz was mobilized for 365 days at Fort Dix New Jersey, training soldiers for combat in Afghanistan and Iraq. He also served his country with distinction in the Kosovo Campaign as a Tank Platoon Leader between June and December 2000. Soltz is a graduate of Washington & Jefferson College with dual degree in Political Science and History. He has completed graduate work at the University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public and International Affairs.

Jon Soltz has quickly become one of the most authoritative voices on veterans issues and military issues. He has been interviewed by national outlets such as the Associated Press, Washington Post, New York Times, Los Angeles Times, TIME, Newsweek, among others, and in dozens of local outlets. He has made numerous media appearances including Jim Lehrer’s Newshour on PBS, CNN. MSNBC, FOX News and ABC News and Nightline, and national radio programs including Air America Radio, the Ed Schultz Show, the Bill Press Show, Alan Colmes Show, and Mancow in the Morning. Jon is a frequent contributor to Countdown with Keith Olbermann.

238 lowandslow  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:46:13pm
By using his rank, he automatically placed himself in the same category as he had placed the soldier.

I was thinking the same thing.

239 Stuck-in-CA  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:48:32pm

re: #185 lowandslow

It was just 45 minutes of digressive talk to make themselves feel important and accomplished absolutely nothing.

you mean it was just "mental(case) masturbation"?

240 wanumba  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:49:42pm
#222 outrider
I know of no civilian companies that would want their company uniform worn by speakers during any and all political events.


What's the fudge for?
The soldier was NOT an official speaker in any capacity or came as a sponsor of the event in any way. He did not wear his uniform to promote the political cause of said event. Isn't it just heresay that he was being political? Since when has an audience member EVER been considered part of an event of any kind?
Now we get to the interesting part:
Yearly Kos Military Panel -
That banner reads like a debate, a discussion of issues. But you are saying that NO, the panel was a political speechy thing. Hmm. You're saying that it was never intended to be an actual debate, just a political speech arrangement? And the entire audience is knowingly in on it? That's rather enlightening isn't it?

241 Outrider  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:49:46pm

re: #235 Suzette

So in truth he put himself in the same boat. How brilliant!


In effect? Yes. Brilliant.
My observation of him, via writings and video clips over the last few months, is that he is like every bad staff officer I have ever encountered.

242 Suzette  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:51:31pm

Render:
And here from RTO Trainer.
Plus up in the thread someone has his myspace page link....
Hope that helps. But it came from others in the thread.


re: #223 RTO Trainer

CPT Soltz, based on the AKO White Pages, appears to be a Reservist, 2-312th TSB, which means he get to inflict misery on Guardsmen training at Ft. Dix to go overseas.

243 Suzette  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:53:16pm

re: #241 Outrider

He must have been well loved by the people who served
under him!
/

244 Outrider  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:54:34pm

re: #240 wanumba
What's the fudge for?

The soldier was NOT an official speaker in any capacity or came as a sponsor of the event in any way. He did not wear his uniform to promote the political cause of said event. Isn't it just heresay that he was being political? Since when has an audience member EVER been considered part of an event of any kind?
Now we get to the interesting part:
Yearly Kos Military Panel -
That banner reads like a debate, a discussion of issues. But you are saying that NO, the panel was a political speechy thing. Hmm. You're saying that it was never intended to be an actual debate, just a political speech arrangement? And the entire audience is knowingly in on it? That's rather enlightening isn't it?


He doesn't have to do anything but attend the political rally. He doesn't have to be a speaker.
They can advertise it as a panel or discussion of issues all they want. Were there any opposing viewpoints discussed? Of course not, nor would I expect there to be. But, it was a liberal Democrat discussion rally.

245 ishabibble  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:58:03pm

re: #18 Honorary Yooper


What question? Wesley Clark is this century's Benedict Arnold, and the sissyboy moderator got in his cheap shots and then ran away like a little girl. There is not too much to overthink here. They are scum, treasonous scum, and the soldier stood up and defended his country. That is what he is supposed to do while wearing his uniform, correct? I don't care about the nitpicking or the nuance, the Kos people put on a full display of their empty, tired, and treasonous tactics and this soldier called them on it.

That moderator has some nerve talking about "his" uniform. Which uniform did he wear to serve this country in a time of war? Pansy Nancyboy Loser ran away. That is right there for all to see.

246 RTO Trainer  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 5:59:59pm

In lieu of trackback:

Not 1LT Reickhoff this time.

The more I think about this, the angrier I get.

247 Atman  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 6:00:08pm

re: #236 Render
Try this.....

248 vmi84  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 6:00:42pm

Ref 230 Outrider
You are correct and made a good point about the on the spot correction; having done it myself on occasion, my issue is with his statement as to what he was going to do to the soldier. Any punishment is up to the Chain of Command and not that "Captain." What I would like to know is what is the comments of the soldier?

As to his soldier wearing his uniform to the event " Good Initiative. Poor Judgment" :)

249 Fasternu426  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 6:05:58pm

Had that been me and I heard:
"HEY! You want me to come down there?"

I would have been all "Hell Yeah! Bring it on!"

I ain't ever run from a fight!
I'd be on that fool like a swarm of flies on Cindy Sheehan!

250 Sharmuta  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 6:09:29pm

How progressive of them to cut the audio on this soldier's comments. What a bunch of d*mned hypocrites- constantly whining about "free speech" and this is how they repay a man who defends their right to engage in that "free speech"? By silencing him?

You koslings make me sick.

251 Fasternu426  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 6:11:38pm

BTW, who is Jon Soltz?
Some pogey bait eating, rear echelon mofo? Won three Silver Stars handing out mail. He was the guy sitting next to Wesley Clarke with his hand on ole Wes' leg, right?

252 Outrider  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 6:12:07pm

re: #248 vmi84

Ref 230 Outrider
You are correct and made a good point about the on the spot correction; having done it myself on occasion, my issue is with his statement as to what he was going to do to the soldier. Any punishment is up to the Chain of Command and not that "Captain." What I would like to know is what is the comments of the soldier?

As to his soldier wearing his uniform to the event " Good Initiative. Poor Judgment" :)


True. He can actually do nothing to the soldier aside from a verbal correction and possibly a written letter to his command (like that would have an impact in this case)

Personally I would really like to see a transcript of the comments and just what was said or attempted to be said. Actually, I would like to know who the soldier is and what kind of units he served in.

253 Fernandez  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 6:15:33pm

The scroll at the bottom said it was being covered by C-SPAN, so maybe well get an unedited version.

Very disappointed in Wes Clarke. (Alright, I have been for a while)

254 THX-42  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 6:17:10pm

Quite honestly, I no longer find the terms "liberal" or "progressive" accurate in describing the people at Daily Kos, or for that matter, the Democratic Party. The daily examples of their contempt for our military and their trampling of open meeting protocols are unnervingly reminiscent of an ascendant Communist Party attempting to silence and eventually criminalize any opposition.

This isn't an idle observation. My family fled a former Soviet country that had been taken over by the communists. The tactics and the projected sense of righteous dominance is very real. This country is in great, great danger.

255 Atman  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 6:22:39pm

re: #203 FormerCorpsman
Vote Vets Organization:
Staff and advisors:
Jon Soltz, Iraq War Veteran, Co-Founder and Chairman, VoteVets.org[1]
Jeremy Broussard, Iraq War Veteran, Co-Founder and Senior Advisor, VoteVets.org[2]
* Sam Schultz, Senior Advisor[3]
* General Wesley Kanne Clark (US Army, ret), Board of Advisors
* Bob Kerrey, Board of Advisors
* Leslie H. Gelb, Board of Advisors
* Bill Belding, Board of Advisors[4]
* Ed Vick, Board of Advisors[5]
* Richard Beattie, Board of Advisors[6]
* Elaine Kamarck, Board of Advisors[7]
/.....mystery solved....

256 wanumba  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 6:26:54pm

#244 Outrider
The legalities of this are going to come into play. If a political rally, then certain fundraising and political regs come into play, don't they? Hypothetically, if KOS didn't write the entire event down as a political rally, but promoted it as an open debate, then can the soldier be criticised for not knowing it was a rally? What happens when the man isn't part of the event, but came to hear the arguments, not planning in anyway to participate in anything, including an open audience mike? How does objecting to what was being presented be labelled as acting in a political manner to promote one political agenda? Since when does being part of an audience automatically determine support for a political event? It might, but it's not a given, especially in this case when the man brought in information that contradicted the panel's statements.
It just appears that the Left is demanding to be the sole arbitrators of what is deemed political, simply to shut up inconvenient input. They really threatened him. How is it that can he have no protection?

257 quixote  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 6:27:36pm

I especially like the belch at 47:28. It captures the atmosphere quite well.

258 Fish-Man  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 6:51:41pm

After all, we wouldn't want people who are willing to put their lives on the line for our coiuntry to participare in the political process.

259 Dartmouth  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 6:53:34pm

DOOOOOOOSHBAG! See that guy's body language when he's listening to the question?! Psh, what an idiot. This is why officers who skip the enlisted rout are hated.

260 DaMav  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 7:00:16pm

Sorry, but if the sargeant was in uniform he was out of line making a political speech.

I do wonder if the KOS military anti-military wing or whatever the panel was called doesn't do the same thing at times, and whether there might not be pictures lurking about the internet showing that.

261 swhitebull  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 7:03:34pm

Just an aside-

Wes Clarke makes the comment that the 1st and 3rd armored divisions clash against the Iraqi republican Guard was the greatest tank battle in history. It was big and deadly - to the Iraqis.


But for a military man, he sure doesnt know his history. It was just the on July 12th, 1943 that the germans fought the soviets (with the Waffen SS tank corps against several Soviet Tank Armies (corps-sized) at the climatic battle of Kursk.

1000s of tanks, slaughter on both sides, the germans won a tactical victory, the Russians won the campaign and sent the Germans retreating. teh shear magnitude of the forces involved dwarfed GW 1.

CLarke spoke to a naive crowd that ate up his every word - even the incorrect ones, since they just dont know their military history, as apparently, Clarke seems to have forgotten his. He also seems to have forgotten The battles between the Israel forces and the Arabs in 1973 - huge combined-armed tank battles.


swhitebull

262 Outrider  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 7:04:39pm

re: #256 wanumba

#244 Outrider
The legalities of this are going to come into play. If a political rally, then certain fundraising and political regs come into play, don't they? Hypothetically, if KOS didn't write the entire event down as a political rally, but promoted it as an open debate, then can the soldier be criticised for not knowing it was a rally? What happens when the man isn't part of the event, but came to hear the arguments, not planning in anyway to participate in anything, including an open audience mike? How does objecting to what was being presented be labelled as acting in a political manner to promote one political agenda? Since when does being part of an audience automatically determine support for a political event? It might, but it's not a given, especially in this case when the man brought in information that contradicted the panel's statements.
It just appears that the Left is demanding to be the sole arbitrators of what is deemed political, simply to shut up inconvenient input. They really threatened him. How is it that can he have no protection?


This ~was~ a Kos event. The fact that it was going to be a liberal event was implicit given the mission statement of Kos.
You don't go to a life insurance sales convention and start discussing the best way to commit suicide and collect policies. Strangely enough, the libs do tend to show up and disrupt the proceedings of most Republican and conservative conferences/debates/conventions/meetings/rallys, etc... But then, apparently they sem to want to disrupt their fellow liberals also. To wit; Breasts Not Bombs and Code Pink disrupting Sen Clintons grand opening of a new office in California.

The entire hoopla is just that. Even though there are regulations pertaining to the soldiers conduct in this type of situation, I have never seen anyone punished with anything more than a counseling statement for so doing, unless their conduct was such to warrant separate offenses.

263 andymacop  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 7:06:47pm

What a joke. I am ashamed to be in Chicago right now. This is classic leftist BS: Silence anyone who holds an opposing opinion. I wonder i f these KrazyKosKidz are going to be suprised when they are crushed by Dougie Hooper, CAIR and the Islamic horde.

264 canadianally  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 7:09:03pm

Surely an event with the greatest general ever, Wes, would have been taped by mulitple parties. These lefty swarms are notorious for loving to see themselves on tape. My guess is that there should be at least six or seven videotapes of this segment of the event; and it only takes one non-McCarthyite to release a non-edited version.

265 grumpy old codger  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 7:09:09pm

re: #132 ornery elephant
I believe that attitudes like this (I'm a good soldier while i'm in, but once I'm out) are very reflective of today's professional army. All of the officer corps seems to be more concerned with their career, their promotion path and their own little career, than they are with the Army, their country or their countrymen. It seems to me that these people will join the army and once in, will put their own personal advancement above the needs of their country. I'm not saying that these guys are patriots, rather nost of them would pu laval or quisling to shame, but having sold out for their pension, like Wesley Clark, they're now determined to punish the army for every perceived insult as well as for personal revenge.
I believe that the Army, both commissioned an senior nocomissioned, cared more for their troops and their country when we had a draft. Unfortunately, I don't think a draft would work now due to the egocentric and self gratification of the younger people today.

266 canadianally  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 7:10:17pm

Surely there must have been a list of "invited" media. They would have unaltered tapes of the event.

267 Intestinal Fortitude  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 7:15:34pm

re: #203 formercorpsman

Stolz still has an army.mil adress as a CPT in the Reserves. Clark is still labeled as a Gen with a .mil address since he is retired. What gives these two the right to belittle anybody in uniform when by all rights, for at least GEN Clark anyhow, they keep their titles? Expecting the bennies of retirement while not in uniform but still can carry a title, and still protest administrative policy. They can't have it both ways, especially when one is a pogue Captain shouting down the "Backbone of the Army"...an NCO.

/rant off

268 Intestinal Fortitude  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 7:17:41pm

re: #260 DaMav


Those in the panel still carrying their military title like a badge on their sleeve are no better by the way.

269 SeafoodGumbo  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 7:30:58pm

re: #97 meMarc

SeafoodGumbo,

I laughed when Dennis Prager asked incredulously, "You're name is SeafoodGumbo"?

Really glad I was there to hear it.

Dennis should blame my mom for giving me such an unusual name. :)

270 formercorpsman  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 7:31:56pm

re: #223 RTO Trainer

Does this allow him, with that authority, to be sitting a table with kos, and put himself in the partisan political arena the way he has?

271 SeafoodGumbo  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 7:32:39pm

re: #122 Know Your Enemy

That was indeed a great moment. I knew by Prager's breif hesitation that he was about to announce a lizardoid name. Well done, Gumbo.


Many thanks!

272 Intestinal Fortitude  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 7:33:08pm

I'm coming in late but Clark and Stolz look and act like they don't care, twirling pens and yawning. They are disconnected and unprofessional.

273 spynverzyon  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 7:33:29pm

The soldier was wrong to show up in uniform.

But it was the height of hypocrisy at that point for the moderator to invoke what he called "my uniform" to enhance the authority of his statements in a political forum. It seems the civvies were just a pose.

Not to mention that if the moderator was acting as a civilian, his verbal commands and associated threats constitute assault.

But if he was acting as a soldier, then his conduct was grossly out of line on many levels.

Either way, he was the worst man there - quite a feat, given the soldier's misconduct .

274 Intestinal Fortitude  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 7:35:14pm

AARs go on after every mission Clark. AARs get ran up the chain on a daily basis. Your chain didn't care about AARs Clark.

275 Aardvark  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 7:35:21pm

The uniformed man in the audience should not have come in uniform and should have known better.

However, Cpt. Soltz completely lost the moral high ground when he allowed the Sgt. to ask the question or make his point before not only dressing him down but trying to get the man into serious trouble. If Soltz had an ounce of honor, he would have first warned the Sgt. that he should remove his shirt or take some other action that would cause him to be "out of uniform" for the duration of the question. Instead, Soltz let him go on for a minute (?!), allowed the Sgt. to violate the codes, which Soltz was certainly aware of -- although it's a serious question if the Sgt knew about it -- and only then took action.

It was the act of a small man who likely despises his own profession, another Scott Thomas if you will, or hates those who challenge them. I was in the Army for six years and never ran into an officer who would screw somebody over so casually. I think even Wesley Clark was shocked by it

What a jerk/weasel/corn hole Soltz is.

276 formercorpsman  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 7:39:46pm

re: #267 Intestinal Fortitude

re: #203 formercorpsman

Stolz still has an army.mil adress as a CPT in the Reserves. Clark is still labeled as a Gen with a .mil address since he is retired. What gives these two the right to belittle anybody in uniform when by all rights, for at least GEN Clark anyhow, they keep their titles? Expecting the bennies of retirement while not in uniform but still can carry a title, and still protest administrative policy. They can't have it both ways, especially when one is a pogue Captain shouting down the "Backbone of the Army"...an NCO.

/rant off

That is exactly my sentiment.

I am trying to find out if Stolz is in violation of his commission.

277 Intestinal Fortitude  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 7:43:09pm

re: #275 Aardvark

It's not as simple as the NCO just taking off his blouse. He's there in in his Class A's or ACUs, whichever. Soltz lost the high ground when he became a stooge for Clark IMHO.

278 Intestinal Fortitude  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 7:49:50pm

re: #276 formercorpsman


I honestly think Stolz is out, but still has the .mil address. It takes some time, up to a couple of years to not be under a mil address anymore. It would be scrumptious if he was still affiliated with a US Army component or division though being an Officer...(wink, wink, nudge, nudge,)

279 wanumba  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 7:53:02pm

#262 Outrider
So, you read it as no soldier can be anywhere near any political rally or venue in uniform, even if it isn't his own politics? If he stops in to listen and has a question they like, he can stay and no one complains about him being in uniform, thus tacitly promoting the politics, but if he raises a counter argument, he's liable for misusing his uniform?

This ~was~ a Kos event. The fact that it was going to be a liberal event was implicit given the mission statement of Kos.


So, even if he disagreed and did not subscribe to any of the political views, he was not supposed to say a word solely because he was in uniform, even if he heard falsehoods? To him, he wasn't promoting the KOS agenda in any way - so how does his objection to their talk count so strictly as "political" activity in any way? Just do not see it. Can see clearly why he would be hit over the head with it as an "offensively defensive" action.

You don't go to a life insurance sales convention and start discussing the best way to commit suicide and collect policies.

This is not the equivalent situation at all.
Honestly, the intent of the regs here seems to be quite different than how they are being threatened to be applied in this case, that's all.
And previous history of wrist-slapping for violation of said regs may have no reliability in this case, with Clark and the media in the mix now.
Just sayin'. Guess we'll find out.

280 Intestinal Fortitude  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 7:57:21pm

Charles,

Can we have an open military thread relating to Soltz? Topic: tell us about your military experience with your Battalion or Company XO as it relates to CPT Soltz.

281 formercorpsman  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 8:00:16pm

re: #278 Intestinal Fortitude

That would mean that he resigned his commission.

If he is still in possession of that address, and uses it for any of his political activity, I think creates a problem.

282 Intestinal Fortitude  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 8:06:10pm

I heard FM 22-100 Army Leadership from the NCO in the audience. Be, Know, Do.

No wonder Soltz got pissy and started throwing the "I want your chain of command" card down.

283 formercorpsman  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 8:10:25pm

re: #282 Intestinal Fortitude

Brain fart.

FM 22-110?

284 Geepers  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 8:11:51pm
Bailing on Kos
We are officially listing Senator Harry Reid, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Congressman Rahm Emanuel as cancelled and are still hopfeul that Senator Chuck Schumer will be able to join us. Reid and Pelosi will have to remain in Washington because the Senate and the House are voting through the weekend.

Hat tip: JammieWearingFool

285 wanumba  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 8:12:55pm

Took a look at the older thread and according to the basic list of regs, the soldier did nothing wrong, unless KOS is listed as a radical lunatic organization, then he shouldn't have attended at all, even as audience. It'd be fun to watch the Left WANT to nail the guy and having only THAT to work with - what a dilemma!

The crux of the accusation that the soldier was being political was his defense of the surge. He was not being accused of being political as an audience member. No one told him to take off his uniform so that he couldn't give any implicit stamp of approval as he sat as a silent audience member.
Essentially, the Left tactic was to label the information the soldier was giving as "Political" and by this make him open to a charge that he violated regs by wearing his uniform when he commented.
We all know that for the Left EVERYTHING is politics. Normal people would not automatically label a correct description of an actual situation as "political." FACTS are by nature apolitical. The Left dismisses entry of any FACTS that counter their political points, in this case the comment from an actual soldier who would know that the surge is working, as a "political statement rather than a FACTUAL statement. If the man is right, then he didn't state anything political, he stated facts. Then he was not promoting ANY political agenda whatsoever.
It would be interesting to hear this out in a court of law - with the arguments of a top notch defense attorney. (Dont' want to put any soldier thru that, tho').
The Left is twisting this.

286 Son Of The Godfather  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 8:15:39pm

Dustyvet 8/03/2007 4:45:07 pm
Same here, a Vietnam/Desert Shield/Desert Storm Veteran

I sure hope this doesn't come off as corny or flippant, but I can't express my sincerest thanks to you for your service.

287 Intestinal Fortitude  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 8:22:08pm

re: #283 formercorpsman

Not sure about 22-110 but I'm actually incorrect. FM 22-100 was superceded by FM 6-22 and it is Competent, Confident and Agile.

I wonder if the guy in the audience was still in the service? Lord knows I'm a bit rusty.

288 Aardvark  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 8:24:07pm

re: #277 Intestinal Fortitude

It's not as simple as the NCO just taking off his blouse. He's there in in his Class A's or ACUs, whichever. Soltz lost the high ground when he became a stooge for Clark IMHO.

Hmm. I think that if he took off his blouse and appeared in a white T-shirt over class A pants, that would arguably have been a clear statement that he was not appearing in as a representative of the armed forces, but I won't argue the point.

The basic point is still valid, I think: Soltz didn't even try to warn him of his looming breach of the regs; instead, the jerk waited for him to violate the regs and then pounced, jumping into legal mode. It demonstrates rather well the type of man Soltz is. I can only wish one of the news programs would ask him face to face why he didn't say something to the Sgt. beforehand.

289 Intestinal Fortitude  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 8:29:11pm

re: #288 Aardvark

I'm beginning to wonder if the guy in the audience was still serving.

290 Dustyvet  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 8:38:59pm

re: #286 Son Of The Godfather

Dustyvet 8/03/2007 4:45:07 pm
Same here, a Vietnam/Desert Shield/Desert Storm Veteran

I sure hope this doesn't come off as corny or flippant, but I can't express my sincerest thanks to you for your service.

Thank you very much for your kind words, it helps alot with the current situation I am going through with the Veterans Administration. Thanks again!

Best regards,

Dustyvet

291 Babydoc97  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 8:41:09pm

Everyone appears to be missing the point - whoever this unidentified "sergeant" was, I couldn't hear anything of his remarks, since the Kossacks shut off the microphone to avoid recording whatever he was saying. If he was simply arguing facts as someone who may have been recently on the ground in Iraq, that doesn't qualify as a political statement, so whether or not he was wearing his uniform is mute. If the sergeant was participating as an official part of the Kos organization, then he broke regs in wearing his uniform. If he was not supposed to be at his military duty station at the time of the panel discussion; if he was there simply as an observer - and all he did was question the demonstrably false propaganda of Stoltz, et al, then he did not violate DoD policy.

The blatant hypocrisy of 'Weasley' and Stoltz trying to use their former military positions (laughlingly worthless as they are in the case of these two Dhimmwits) to bolster their defeatocrat leftist claptrap while simultaneously telling an active duty sergeant to 'stand down' while he is wearing a uniform - makes this regular army lieutenant colonel want to vomit. Unless Stoltz currently has a commission in the military, (and that does not include the inactive reserve unless he has been activated) he doesn't have an iota of authority whatsoever to tell the sergeant to do anything! Stoltz displayed the classic nimrod lower ranking officer behavior seen in those 'frag targets' frustrated over their delusions of personal grandeur and self-importance getting regularly delfated by their personal piss poor leadership performance. And anybody who knows anything about 'Weasley' knows he was an incompetent, arrogant ass promoted purely for political reasons during the Clinton years then relieved for cause and allowed to retire under a black cloud.

Stoltz and Clark are exactly like people who go to medical school solely to gain false credibility as medical malpractice attorneys. Nothing but bilious, self-serving crybabies who never EVER understood the meaning of "Duty, Honor, Country."

292 Bayonet  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 8:44:45pm

Wesley and Soltz:

They could be post-children for the
Comintern. They wouldn't know
Republican Democracy or Patriotism if it ran over them.

Stalinist pigs.

293 mrcaniac  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 8:48:18pm

re: #53 alegrias

Remember how Democrats ran several exmilitary folks for office last November--but ONLY if they were the right kind of exmilitary folks: Bush-bashing, get out of Iraq the quagmire, never use US force against bad guys, etc.

That's how Virginia ended up with Senator Jim Webb who used his military son's boots and his son's being in Iraq to bash President Bush and snubb the President himself. Classless trash & spawn of Djhimmi Carter, another exmilitary who hated the military and what the US military could do in defense of our country.


Thanks for reminding me of this. I know several people who actually thought he was a conservative because he was "in the Reagan Administration". To leave a post like Sec of Navy after only 6 months, makes me believe he was told it might be a good idea to resign before being fired.

294 Babydoc97  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 8:52:10pm

re: #265 grumpy old codger

re: #132 ornery elephant
I believe that attitudes like this (I'm a good soldier while i'm in, but once I'm out) are very reflective of today's professional army. All of the officer corps seems to be more concerned with their career, their promotion path and their own little career, than they are with the Army, their country or their countrymen.

No sir, please don't paint all of us with that brush. It is unfortunate, but with the media bias, it is the "what's in it fer me", anti-American, anti-war former military types (like Stoltz and Weasley) who get all the media attention. Those of us who love our country, believe in our current wartime mission, and don't mind the sacrifices for our families and fellow Americans....we are too busy to get onto fancy-schmantzy leftist panels to spew bogus sanctimonious pig-slop for personal gain.

295 Babydoc97  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 9:01:28pm

re: #288 Aardvark

If he had taken off his Class A jacket and Class B shirt, remaining only in his white T shirt while wearing Army issue Class A pants and official issue black "low quarter" shoes, he would have been "out of uniform" - which IS a violation of Army regulations.

No self-respecting NCO would do that in a public forum.

296 Outrider  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 9:10:44pm

I'll try again. The soldier was in violation of Army Regulation 670-1.

The applicable reference for Army personnel is para 1-10, AR 670-1:
j. Wearing Army uniforms is prohibited in the following situations:
(1) In connection with the furtherance of any political or commercial interests, or when engaged in off-duty civilian employment.
(2) When participating in public speeches, interviews, picket lines, marches, rallies, or public demonstrations, except as authorized by competent authority.
(3) When attending any meeting or event that is a function of, or is sponsored by, an extremist organization.
(4) When wearing the uniform would bring discredit upon the Army.
(5) When specifically prohibited by Army regulations.

This is self explanatory.
No one of a reasonable mind could possibly argue that DKos was anything but political. The soldier could not have wandered in off the street accidentally, as tickets were "sold out" awhile back according to Kos site. Even press passes were gone.

Again. I will also say that that Sergeant had a huge pair to walk into that mess. I would like to meet that young man.

297 Boxy_brown  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 9:18:19pm

There is a BBC Have your say debate on "How influential are US political bloggers?"

Seven of the Democratic candidates for US president are expected to attend a political blogging convention in the city of Chicago.
More than 1,500 bloggers and 250 journalists are registered to attend the YearlyKos gathering, now in its second year.
Democratic big-hitters like Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards have all said they will take part in Saturday's candidate forum.

BBC Kos is our buddy thread

Just in case anyone else wants to Ron Paul it.

298 Babydoc97  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 9:34:41pm

re: #296 Outrider

If you are referring to sub paragraph (1), that has been interpreted as prohibition of the soldier being a part of the group or organization, and using his uniform in an attempt to make it look like the military was in support of the political or commercial interests. Unless you believe the sergeant was part of the YearlyKos organization and appeared in his uniform as part of his activities on behalf of Kos, then this sub paragraph does not apply.

If you are referring to sub-paragraph (2), unless the sergeant was an official member of the panel, asking a question in refutation of one of the panelists public remarks/speeches does not meet the criteria for sub paragraph (2).

I can easily be persuaded that Kos can arguably be considered an extremist organization - in which case our heroic sergeant might be in violation of sub paragraph (3) - but unless Kos wants to admit to his group being fascist/communist/extremist, any JAG defense attorney worth his salt would be able to argue against UCMJ charges against the NCO for this, should any commander be stupid enough to draw up such charges.

299 Outrider  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 9:45:02pm

re: #298 Babydoc97

If you are referring to sub paragraph (1), that has been interpreted as prohibition of the soldier being a part of the group or organization, and using his uniform in an attempt to make it look like the military was in support of the political or commercial interests. Unless you believe the sergeant was part of the YearlyKos organization and appeared in his uniform as part of his activities on behalf of Kos, then this sub paragraph does not apply

The regulation can certainly have changed since I retired in 1993, as can the application of it.
Using your interpretation of the reg, any number of soldiers can wander into a rally, in uniform, and take part in the proceedings as long as they are not members of the organization? As I understand you are saying, an soldier can wear his uniform and attend the political affairs as long as he isn't a member? That is the new order?
When I served, a soldier was not allowed to partake in ANY political affair while in uniform. If he wandered into a rally, he was to depart the AO. Clear and simple rule.

300 wanumba  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 9:59:07pm

#296 Outrider
When people start using phrases like "Nobody in their right mind" as the basis for a debating point, well, what's going on?

I was about to reply, but #298 Babydoc made the exactly the points - all of them.
I go back to the forensics point which is a dangerous precedent to establish: It was Clark & co. who made the subjective determination that a factual assessment of the surge must be a political point of view, not just a statement of fact. If that pervails, and certainly the Left uses it a lot, there is no truth, only political positions. Very dangerous.

Does anyone else get the Twilight Zone feeling that JustMyView has just appeared?

301 Wendya  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 10:02:45pm

The Kos conferences remind me of Conyers holding his hearings in the basement. Kooky and irrelevant.

302 Outrider  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 10:07:19pm

re: #300 wanumba

303 jayaye  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 10:10:16pm

Folks, this is the beginning of the end of the Dems. Cheer up - again, and this has been reiterated numerous times here. The "Yearly Kos" debacle is just another indication of the (preventable, in my opinion) demise of the Democratic Party. Sorry I have nothing new, except that all the candidates should bow down and say they are behind FRED!

304 jayaye  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 10:15:15pm

Sorry for the sentence fragment/butcherism. Hell, is butcherism even a word?

305 Outrider  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 10:18:22pm

re: #300 wanumba

#296 Outrider
When people start using phrases like "Nobody in their right mind" as the basis for a debating point, well, what's going on?

I was about to reply, but #298 Babydoc made the exactly the points - all of them.
I go back to the forensics point which is a dangerous precedent to establish: It was Clark & co. who made the subjective determination that a factual assessment of the surge must be a political point of view, not just a statement of fact. If that pervails, and certainly the Left uses it a lot, there is no truth, only political positions. Very dangerous.

Does anyone else get the Twilight Zone feeling that JustmyView has just appeared?


Point one. The correct phrase was, "No one of a reasonable mind could possibly argue that DKos was anything but political...". There is a difference between the two phrases. Dkos is certainly not a gardening club or cooking forum.

I am not debating the veracity of the Sergeants comments. They were censored out and I've not heard them.

The Army has this regulation in place for a reason. Soldiers are not to participate in political affairs IN UNIFORM. They can do it in civilian clothing with no problems. This applies to Democrat functions, Republican functions, communist functions, peace rallies, etc...

One of the lines of reasoning deriving from the 60s is these affairs go wrong quite often and people are carted off by the Police. The Army does not like it's soldiers being hauled off in cuffs. There are many historical reasons the military has historically stood off from political affairs, but they have been discussed upthread.

And don't even try that Twilight Zone and JustmyView line of crap. I'm me. Period.

306 Outrider  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 10:18:57pm

post #302 was eaten somewhere.

307 RoP_RIP  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 10:20:58pm

#296 Outrider

So, VoteVets guy gets to take the place of the military and subjectively decide that the audience member was in violation of Army regs? Even if so, he isn't in a position to enforce them off-base in Chicago!

What-fucking-ever man. That panelist prick didn't like the dissent, and played a factual assessment off as a political opinion.

Examine your moral compass; if the word 'truthiness' is on the dial -- you are already lost...

308 Outrider  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 10:26:31pm

re: #307 RoP_RIP

#296 Outrider

So, VoteVets guy gets to take the place of the military and subjectively decide that the audience member was in violation of Army regs? Even if so, he isn't in a position to enforce them off-base in Chicago!

What-fucking-ever man. That panelist prick didn't like the dissent, and played a factual assessment off as a political opinion.

Examine your moral compass; if the word 'truthiness' is on the dial -- you are already lost...


Wrong. My post further up stated that the Captain himself was wrong in a couple of ways. And yes. He is in a position to enforce regulations. On base. Off base. Any member of the armed forces can make on the spot corrections in a discrete manner. No, he has no disciplinary authority over that soldier.
The Captain was wrong in his manner, his set up of the Sergeant, his execution of the correction, as well as identifying himself as a Captain sitting on that panel.
My moral compass is spot on. I am speaking from decades of military experience. You?

309 RoP_RIP  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 10:35:51pm

#308 Outrider

Maybe Wesley Clark should have rebuked him. He has more experience than you or I.

He didn't. He played it down the middle, did not judge the audience member, and defended the panelists' selective moral outrage because he supports leftist positions.

Why are you siding with the VoteVets self righteous approach to avoiding a statement that contradicts his position?

All that has been reported is that the uniformed audience member stated that the surge is working... Is that politics now? Lay your life on the line for your country, but never speak matter of factly in public? Truth < Politics?

Explain please.

310 Outrider  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 10:42:45pm

re: #309 RoP_RIP

#308 Outrider
Maybe Wesley Clark should have rebuked him. He has more experience than you or I.

He didn't. He played it down the middle, did not judge the audience member, and defended the panelists' selective moral outrage because he supports leftist positions.

Why are you siding with the VoteVets self righteous approach to avoiding a statement that contradicts his position?

All that has been reported is that the uniformed audience member stated that the surge is working... Is that politics now? Lay your life on the line for your country, but never speak matter of factly in public? Truth < Politics?

Explain please.


The only point I have attempted to make is the one of Army regulations which state the soldier was not to be present at that conference while in uniform.
I despise VoteVets, Gen Clarke, and in particular Cpt Soltz. Might as well add DKos to that list. Cpt Soltz, as a Captain had the right to make a discrete correction. He didn't. He let the soldier start, then nailed him publicly. Wrong on two counts. The Captain, by identifying himself as a Captain, while sitting on that panel placed himself in violation the same as the Sergeant did. The Generals are retired.

The soldier can speak freely all he wants. Out of uniform. It has always been that way. And should remain so.

I have tried to explain my position and will be glad to add if needed.

311 RoP_RIP  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 10:57:14pm

#310 Outrider

Thanks for clarifying. I can see now that the presence of the uniform at all bothered you, let alone any statements.

It could be argued that is a political statement in itself, especially amongst anti-war loons. He was in the presence of Senators/Presidential candidates. Anyways lots of hypotheticals.

See: [Link: ace.mu.nu...]

Maybe some Administrative Punishment is due the both of them at YearlyKos (and others there I'm sure).

I'd like to think our military isn't completely rigid and robotic, and the leadership can tell the difference between self aggrandizing pricks and people with an honest sense of duty. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe we disagree.

'night

312 Outrider  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 11:05:33pm

To further clarify.

If permitting this Sergeant to wear a uniform at DKos speaking in favor of the surge is legal, then why wouldn't the leftists carry that thought forward and just infiltrate the anti-war soldiers into the conservative demonstrations? Or all of their anti-war demonstrations? This forum has always decried the soldiers that speak out while in uniform or using their rank/position.
It about tore me up when Kerry and his ilk wore their uniforms and demonstrated against the Vietnam war as well as testified in Congress with their lies.
I doubt if administrative punishment awaits either of them.

313 Tazzerman  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 11:32:51pm

#261 swhitebull

Thank you! I was going to respond with this aside as well.

Clark is an idiot and always has been.. Just ask the people who served under him in NATO.. They'll give ya an earful about him...

His lack of knowledge regarding military history OR even worse, his willful twisting and invention of so called 'facts' is mind-numbing...

What was the purpose of his 'history lesson' anyway? There were no reporters with those tankers during Desert Storm? Big fucking whoop! I've got news for Clark, I don't know very many 'news reporters' who would WANT to be riding along with tank battalions entering a hostile engagement...

Clark always has been a total, 100% disgrace to the uniform of this country...

314 Devil_Dog  Fri, Aug 3, 2007 11:40:07pm

Here's the email I just sent to Captain Courageous, the intrepid moderator:

"Hey, Jon-Jon...

I just saw the video of your "shouting down" of the Sergeant at the anti-American fools covention.

Bravo Zulu to you for looking so tough. Your mother must be very proud.

I tried very hard to imagine what could make someone like you tick... what could make you turn on the rest of us as you have. What I came away with, though, was nothing more than a realization that you are nothing more than another POS liberal who wants America to lose.

"Your uniform?" Give me a freaking break... what kind of B.S. was that? Were you implying that only you can use your military service to support your agenda? You wear your military "service" like some sick badge of honor as you spit on our active forces and the rest of us veterans... and you have the nerve to attempt to chastise this Sergeant for daring to say the truth-- the truth that the surge is working?

You should truly consider yourself fortunate that I or any other of the countless active and veteran military members who know the truth were not present at your anti-American hate-fest. Any one of us would have gladly-- and very enthusiastically-- taken you up on the theatrical "go outside" challenge you issued to the Sergeant.

Listen, Jonny: we have people in harm's way-- people who are fighting the good fight... and winning. They need and deserve our support as they fight for our lives and our future. They deserve better than someone like you sniping their six to get kudos from the freak crowd at kos-land.

How does a back-stabbing "patriot" like you sleep at night?


Cordially,

Kurt G.,

United States Marine Corps, Retired"

315 yankee_mikey  Sat, Aug 4, 2007 4:13:02am

Considering that the camera was not pointed at the audience. The only reason anyone knows that the questioner was in the military was because the pompous douchebag made a big deal of it. Typical leftist behavior, ignore the question and attack the questioner.

Dear Captain Douchebag;
Please answer the question.

316 Render  Sat, Aug 4, 2007 5:23:51am

[Link: www.blackfive.net...]

This is what a good officer sounds like. Cpt. Coulson (Badger Six), courtesy of Blackfive TV.

Lemme know if you here anything "political" in that interview...

CLEAN
AND
JERK,
R

317 RobCon  Sat, Aug 4, 2007 5:40:04am

What a prick that moderator was!
If your not in uniform they call you a Chicken Hawk. If your in uniform, they tell you to shut the hell up.
That is typical. They hate the military. They see the military as dumb kids who are to be seen and not heard. They will tell you when to put on the UN blue helmet and they will call you a loser for the rest of your life when THEY pull out of a war.
This was the perfect end to the Kos Konvention Kavlecade.
I hope Wes Clark was ashamed to be on that dais.

318 Jeewhiz  Sat, Aug 4, 2007 5:43:42am

Cutting to the chase, was anyone on that panel that cut the guy off in command of him? Hold any real authority over him?

If they do not, then they have no right to silence him.

You can quote regs all day long, but those regs are only enforced by the United States Armed Forces, not by a bunch of guys on a political panel.

Consequences, if any, are between him and his commanding officers. As far as I know, if you're retired, you're not in command of bupkis and have no more authority than a civilian.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, please.

319 sandrine  Sat, Aug 4, 2007 8:18:24am

Thanks for posting this. It gives everybody here a better idea of the informative discussions being had elsewhere and the great contribution DailyKos has made to the dialog so desperately needed. This is democracy in action for all of us. And we should applaud it and show more of it. Thanks again Charles.

320 sandrine  Sat, Aug 4, 2007 8:35:12am

There seem to be a lot of hypocrites here. It is strange. This was a reasoned, logical, informative debate. How could anyone not like it? And yet, the stupids here choose to remain stupid. It is a choice. Clearly, the panel was trying to clarify to the speaker the rules of the game when in uniform. And there are rules. Something people here usually are very adept at pointing that out.

I repeat...anyone with half brain could only be impressed with this discussion. If not, you don't want to be informed...you don't want any information coming in...i.e. you want to remain stupid. If so, don't think for a moment your opinions will be respected. Either you debate intelligently or offer yourselves as stupid automatons eager for propaganda you don't have to think about. So I repeat...either you misunderstood the issue....or you refuse to actually hear anything that doesn't fit in with your stuck in cement ideology. Clearly this was not a case of restricting debate...it was an issue of military protocol and rules. And it had been explained earlier...if you bothered to listen to this from the beginning.

321 sandrine  Sat, Aug 4, 2007 8:40:19am

Further, my perspective is that they didn't want the soldier to put himself in a position where there could be consequences for inappropriate behavior. I saw it as being protective, not restrictive. They assumed the soldier did not understand the consequences of his behavior and were concerned. At any rate, in the beginning they made of point of stating who could talk about the issues and who could not in the military.

322 sandrine  Sat, Aug 4, 2007 8:52:07am

#314 Someone to be pitied. Clearly, he did not listen to the 40 minutes of discussion that came before. Stupids don't like to take in new information. And they have a hard time digesting it when they've been conditioned to do otherwise. Brainwashing is a terrible thing. As I've always said, intelligent debate...informed debate is what makes this country great. Rants like #314 should make us sad....Shouting out epithets is a sign of weakness, as the "racist dictionary comment" earlier pointed out. There was nothing leftist about the discussion. So why are people here angry? Are they angry that someone is making sense and it is not a REpublican? Does it force them to reconsider some of their positions? I don't quite understand the rants and the anger. It's like they hate facts or anything that does not mesh with what they've been told. I am appalled at this rampant behavior on right wing blogs. And I want to reemphasize the damage you are doing to legitimate debate on the danger of Islam. If you sound like idiots, no one intelligent will want to engage with you, let alone give anything you say any credence. WE cannot win the debate on the threat of Islam unless we can debate intelligently. Looking stupid is not an option. Keep that in mind. You weaken those of us who are against Islam with your stupid rants.

323 Devil_Dog  Sat, Aug 4, 2007 9:01:45am

Oooohhh... they were trying to protect the soldier...

Damn... I feel so stupid! Thanks for clearing that up, sandrine... and thanks for setting us straight on the "great contribution DailyKos has made..." You are right: anyone who disagrees with you and dailykos is clearly a "stupid," "half-brained" "automaton." (By the way, that is a great debating style you have... insults are far better than actual cogent arguments.)

Now that you have cleared all this up for us, maybe we can finally get beyond these primitive notions of patriotism and honor, and get on with the important business of surrendering.

Perspective is everything, I suppose.

324 Devil_Dog  Sat, Aug 4, 2007 9:06:50am

...is calling someone "stupid" and "idiot" over and over considered an "epithet?"

If so, can we then discuss the definition of "hypocrite?"

...just wondering.

325 sandrine  Sat, Aug 4, 2007 9:07:23am

#323 Before you reveal more of your stupidity...listen to the entire piece...40 minutes of it...and tell me what you disagreed with. Because I bet you didn't listen to it. And if you did, I am curious as to what was said that you think is inaccurate. Here's your chance to be specific as to your allegations. Listen first. Then respond point by point. This last part was really inconsequential compared to the substantive discussion for 40 minutes.

326 Devil_Dog  Sat, Aug 4, 2007 9:09:44am

BTW, thanks for the pity. I shall treasure it always.

327 sandrine  Sat, Aug 4, 2007 9:09:56am

#324 I define my terms. Listen to the full 40 minutes and then engage with me on the points you disagree with.

328 sandrine  Sat, Aug 4, 2007 9:17:26am

#326 Good word for you I think. Probably the last thing you would ever want...so be careful before you mouth off ignorantly...you will be pitied.
But i doubt any of that is necessary. You only need to be informed. There are two sides to many arguments, and you may have something legitimately interesting to add to the debate. But you need to listen first to information before you jump to a conclusion. Of course, to be clear, ..the Republicans never get to that point...they prefer an electorate that is stupid and easily led. They see them as impressionable and easily brainwashed by their propaganda.They could care less about pity given how arrogant they are. They just laugh at your group and take you for granted as in the bag.

329 sandrine  Sat, Aug 4, 2007 9:27:38am

Is it really in dispute that the Bush Administration and the corporate Republicans did not take the concerns of the right seriously regarding immigration? They laughed you guys off and stuck it in your face. No fully funded fence ever built...remember Duncan Hunter? That's what the right wingers running this country think of you....dummies in the bag. They sh*t on you regarding immigration and you're still lapping it up...their lies...they sell arms to enemies and empower Iran...and you guys say give me more...They force Israel into dangerous compromises and appease terrorist states...and what do you guys say... You call the Democats out as leftists. You displace your anger and project it on to Democrats. Now how weak is that? Stand up for yourselves for a change and see that you've been played. Get mad at the people who have betrayed you. Be brave.

330 Charles  Sat, Aug 4, 2007 9:37:47am

This is some of the most pathetically desperate spinning we've ever seen at LGF. You should be embarrassed.

But I know you aren't.

331 sandrine  Sat, Aug 4, 2007 9:39:36am

#305 Good job clarifying things for people here.

332 sandrine  Sat, Aug 4, 2007 9:54:32am

#330 Actually you've done your owning spinning with this piece...You headline it as being about silencing legitimate debate from a soldier. In fact, there are 40 minutes of substantive discussion that go before that is quite informative and open. The part you highlight occupies one minute and has a good explanation. That is a form of spinning. I applaud it nevertheless because you did include the entire debate. And that is relatively honest. However, in light of the broad generalizatons posted here, I hardly think that I should be embarrassed for making very broad points that I believe. It stands out because it is generally not in agreement with most here. But unless you are willing to identify the points specifically, I don't see what I should be embarrassed about. If we both agree that the fight against Islam is important, then do we agree that the people waging this fight must be able to make intelligent arguments? That means being able to question what is put in front of you. If you want to identify some standards in this regard, fine. But those standards should apply to everyone. I try to be an independent voice. However, I would not bother unless I agreed wholeheartedly with Ayaan Hirsi Ali on the danger of Islam.

333 sandrine  Sat, Aug 4, 2007 10:02:36am

But I have read considerable nastiness here directed at Hillary and Democrats in general. The fact that I choose to use Stupid as my adjective of choice is deliberate. I've previously explained that I did not invent this...it came from a children's book series, called The Stupids. But I do think it is apropros in describing the conduct of the Republican administation. It is legitimate for you to be angry when CAIR representatives use propaganda to characterize themselves as other than what they are. You expose it. Isn't it legitimate to expose the hypocrisy of those who project their anger onto DailyKos?

334 sandrine  Sat, Aug 4, 2007 10:07:21am

But for clarification, Charles, I do not put you in that bag at all. I would not be here if I didn't think you offer another point of view that is legitimate. Obviously, I agree with you on the threat of Islam and I am very right wing where Israel is concerned. And by and large, I do think you bring to attention important issues. But those feelings of respect, which I have for you, do not extend to all the commenters here.

335 Devil_Dog  Sat, Aug 4, 2007 10:09:33am

For the record, I did listen to/watch the entire thing. That being said, whenever anyone-- and I mean anyone-- aligns themselves with dailykos, they suffer an immediate and total loss of credibility.

As Charles has documented here dozens of times, that site is a cesspool of hard, hard leftists who routinely root for America to lose.

Nice trolling, sandrine... but you will probably have to sell it somewhere else. The people here are actually informed.

Finally, re your comments about directing anger at Republicans who "betray" us... in case you weren't paying attention, I'll remind you about the amnesty thing and how that turned out. Just ask Senator McCain how Conservatives feel about it.

336 sandrine  Sat, Aug 4, 2007 10:17:50am

And I also think it is important to have another point of view discussed to enrich the debate. But surely you must agree, not everyone is interested in a full debate. And when others resort to rant, I find myself inexorably drawn to the fight using similar tactics. Fight fire with fire kind of motto. But my interest is nevertheless in expanding the debate and bringing another point of view to the table.

337 Jeewhiz  Sat, Aug 4, 2007 10:18:34am

"Clearly this was not a case of restricting debate...it was an issue of military protocol and rules. And it had been explained earlier...if you bothered to listen to this from the beginning."

LMAO!

So tell me where this panel, the moderator or anyone in that room has the authority to enforce the rules of military code? For those are not regulations that apply to civilians, nor are they enforced by civilians.

One would have to be 'stupid' not to see that is was a complete case of restricting debate. That retired cptn had a spaz, threatened the guy's job, cut his mike and walked off the panel. Doesn't look like he had his listening ears on, eh?

This wasn't a debate, it was a performace by people of like minds, for the public. A debate has more than one side to it. The young sgt offerred another side and the whole thing shut down. It was a monologue, not a dialogue.

338 sandrine  Sat, Aug 4, 2007 10:30:56am

#335 Ok I'll try something less combative for the moment. Your statement is factually false. OK. I read DailyKos all the time and there are a variety of opinions from the commenters there. I am a fervent Hillary supporter...and as you must know, Hillary is not the favorite at DailyKos. But there are many points of view and it is reckless to assert that the community of people at DailyKos root for America to lose. And it is false. More important, you spout a familiar propaganda line dished out by this very dishonest and culpable Republican administration. Their policies have done more to assure our loss than anything else. Listen to the full 40 minute debate and you will understand that. Read Fiasco by thomas ricks, and you will understand that. Look at their policies vis a vis Israel and you will understand that. But unless you can debate honestly, your patently false statements will confine you to the margins. There are extremists everywhere. They exist here on the right...and they exist on the left. The surprising thing is how much they have in common. Both spurn honest debate. So either engage in it or assume your proper moniker.

339 Jeewhiz  Sat, Aug 4, 2007 10:32:13am

Who are you speaking to in particular?

340 sandrine  Sat, Aug 4, 2007 10:36:36am

#337 So your position is that the panel, members or former members of the military, should not have respected the rules of the military regarding the rendering of political opinions? Is that your position? They should have ignored those rules that apply to military personnel in public forums?

341 wanumba  Sat, Aug 4, 2007 10:51:12am

Yep. The Lefties argue "uniform!" But the man wasn't part of KOS, so he wasn't endorsing ANYTHING they said. He did not wear his uniform to endorse the Left political show - which was billed as a bloggers convention.
That point about Kerry showing up in front of Congress was indeed a Left dodge - he wasn't active anymore and indeed used his uniform as a political statement. The Left plays this game so much, it's well past time to call them on it.
The uniform regs was used as an intimidation of the audience member, designed to shut him up. Every time this is mentioned, the meme is to repeat it louder, with insults as to the lack of brainpower of the doubters.
More proof that the soldier is on firmer ground than his detractors.

Once ya'll start calling the opposing side in a debate "stupid" you've conceded that you have no other grounds on which to argue.
See zombie's recent "racist" definition posted at LGF. A corollary.

342 sandrine  Sat, Aug 4, 2007 10:51:23am

#330 For instance, and this is far off topic, but what you did here during the Lebanon War was significant. You were bringing in information, digesting it, and exposing what was false after you independently reviewed it. It is that which we need more of. Independent thought and analysis. We don't need people to regurgitate the propaganda they've been fed, whether on the right or the left.

343 Jeewhiz  Sat, Aug 4, 2007 10:56:40am

re: #340 sandrine

#337 So your position is that the panel, members or former members of the military, should not have respected the rules of the military regarding the rendering of political opinions? Is that your position? They should have ignored those rules that apply to military personnel in public forums?


Retired military have no authority to enforce military code as they are now considered civilians. If an active duty member of the military was on that panel, then he/she would have the authority to do that. Those 'rules' do not apply to civilians, and it's not their place to address or enforce them, so it's really none of the panelist's concern.

HOWEVER, I would also say that considering that people in uniform are allowed to attend political functions but not be the 'speaker' (as in, person on that panel), I don't see where he violated those rules in the first place. Military folks are allowed to speak their opinions in this country, unless something dramatic has changed that I'm unaware of.

If I'm incorrect in my assumption, I'm sure that there is an active duty or retired forum member that can correct me.

And personally, I find it amusing as hell that the Captain acted like such an ass with regards to that topic in particular, considering that he blogs on the Huffington Post and has his own website with regards to political matters.

It's painfully obvious that the only voice that he was interested in was his own or that of the other panel members. Sure messed up the works to have someone else stand up and say that they disagreed with him.

344 sandrine  Sat, Aug 4, 2007 11:05:09am

#341 Bringing up Kerry about his actions over 30 years ago is what is weak. It has nothing to do with YearlyKos, let alone the military debate in question. Again, if you have not listened to the entire debate, you are in no position to debate it. Finally, if your implied answer to my question is that those rules should have been ignored, then you are supporting disrespecting military protocol...However, I imagine if this soldier was subsequently arrested by military authorities for violating the rules, you would blame who?

Read what Outsider has posted. It sounds like he understands the rules. I may disagree with him about Kos, but sounds like he is being honest here about what he knows. At any rate, you can't have it both ways. You are suggesting that military rules should have been disrespected so your point of view could be voiced. Period. It is not more complicated. Of course, it is hypocritical.

345 sandrine  Sat, Aug 4, 2007 11:49:00am

#237 Suzette

We may disagree on ideology but i appreciate you illuminating the debate with information on the Captain. He sounds pretty impressive. And in light of his credibility, I doubt he was pushing ideology. He appeared committed to the military, first and foremost. I can't imagine anyone here not wanting someone such as this man devoting himself to the military and its issues. Finally, no one here knows what the Captain's motivation was in terms of how he handled a sticky situation. He could have been trying to protect the sergeant from sanctions, reminding him of his obligatons while in uniform. Again, he did mention this at the beginning of the forum...so this is not inconsistent. Or he could have been demonstrating that he would follow the rules of the military he loves. None of us know. So why do the people here immediately draw a conclusion that they believe impugns Daily Kos. Is that pre set thinking?
Automatic program?

346 sandrine  Sat, Aug 4, 2007 11:53:19am

#28 What this highlights for me is that Wes Clark would be and always was the wrong person for the nomination. He did not take control of the situation. But the Captain did. Interesting From any point of view. And impressive....but certainly not wishy washy from the Captains point of view.

347 Babydoc97  Sat, Aug 4, 2007 1:08:23pm

re: #299 Outrider

Sir,

No disrespect intended in any of my responses to you, and I greatly appreciate your acknowledgement of the Sergeant's courage in refuting the assinine comments of the morons on the panel. Sincere thanks to you for your military service as well - and yes, I realize we are splitting hairs here...but hopefully in a friendly manner.

With regard to interpretations of DoD policy, I'm sure you remember the old "mission creep" phenomenon, whereby the LD time written in the Brigade OPORD would get moved up by 5 minutes in the battalion OPORD, then 5 more minutes by the company OPORD, then another 5-10 minutes by the platoon leader, right? In similar fashion, local commanders have a natural tendency to interpret DoD policies more stringently than the policy is actually written - for the understandable reason that by doing so, they hope to reduce the amount of time they spend on UCMJ activities by keeping tighter behavioral reigns on their troops. I have no idea what the courageous sergeant's local commander's policy is, but unless he has written or provided an express order forbidding the wearing of the uniform at activities that the YearlyKos convention could be classified as, there is no way this sergeant could be punished under the UCMJ. Counselling statement by 1SG or CO? Yeah, that would likely happen if the CO really felt like wasting time on it. But I can't imagine any commander having any interest whatsoever in wasting time trying to prosecute this.

348 Bayonet  Sat, Aug 4, 2007 1:59:29pm

Sandrine? I'll bet.

The "Captain" is not only a sanctimonious bully, he is wrong about the parameters of speech for service personnel. A soldier in uniform MAY give support to the CIC and the MISSION in any forum.
and may address any question that calls for unclassified information. A soldier in uniform MAY NOT "go political", demonstrate or actively support candidates. So KOS, Stoltz, Clark and SANDRINE are the worst kind of political tools, they are the quash debate types, the silence the opposition types, take unfair advantage of supposed rank types, and, because they pervert the open exchange of information and subvert the troops in the field, they are tantamount to traitors.

SCREW EM'

349 Tosprops  Sat, Aug 4, 2007 2:17:00pm

So, the moderator was a captain? That means he was promoted twice and then passed over. No wonder he hates the miitary. He has a bone to pick.

350 kevinmumaw  Sat, Aug 4, 2007 4:43:20pm

At the risk of commenting on something before reading all of the comments (there are 349 right now and I'm lazy) the soldier in uniform was most likely wrong...I want to say it is in AR 670-1 which is the reg that covers wear and appearance of the uniform. Still, it is interesting that an officer had to threaten an NCO and the officer was the one making the leftist shitbag argument. The leftists are usually backing up the enlisted (working class) against the officers (management). Still, I'd like to smack that alleged captain in the eyeball. All that was required was for him to have the soldier removed for being at a political event in uniform, not berate him and threaten him. That's what we call a definite lack of leadership skills. Probably just pinned on last week. I'd also like to know his unit. Reservist or IRR, I'm guessing.

351 kevinmumaw  Sat, Aug 4, 2007 5:07:05pm

re: #131 Killgore Trout

Looking at the Marine in the link you referenced, he is most definitely wrong. What is worse, judging by the medals on his uniform, he has only recently graduated from Marine Basic training...and absolutely nothing else. One medal is usually the result of completing initial training. He may not even be assigned to an actual unit yet, that's how new he is. I'm sure his buddies in his unit welcomed him warmly, as only Marines can.

352 kevinmumaw  Sat, Aug 4, 2007 5:11:00pm

re: #237 Suzette

How does one get away with a 6 month deployment in Iraq? I was there between February 2003 and February 2004, and again from September 2005 to August 2006.

353 kevinmumaw  Sat, Aug 4, 2007 5:15:58pm

OK last post and on to the next thread. Jon Soltz no longer has any affiliation with the US Army. At least he has no profile with AKO, which means he is not even in an IRR status. What this means is he is not a Captain in the US Army. He may have been at one time, but if he identified himself as such, he commited fraud at best, and impersonation of an officer at worst. My video was extremely choppy and I couldn't quite make out what he said. I really don't care, but I knew something really sit right with me when he started talking. And if Wesley Clarke knew this poser wasn't a captain, shame on him.

354 kevinmumaw  Sat, Aug 4, 2007 5:22:42pm

Correction: He is listed as Jonathan, he is a reservist (shocker), and he is a Transporter.

355 BabbaZee  Sat, Aug 4, 2007 6:23:28pm

man ....
sandrine sure loves the sound of its own voice.

356 Jack Burton  Sun, Aug 5, 2007 8:48:50am

What an arrogant turd. I'm sure he's quite the hit with his soldiers.

357 OliveMe  Sun, Aug 5, 2007 2:19:39pm

#348, yes, that's what I was thinking. The soldier did not endorse a candidate or political party. He merely stated support of the mission and said the surge was working (of course I couldn't HEAR him because the progressives literally silence debate).

358 vestalmiss  Sun, Aug 5, 2007 4:52:14pm

Anyone who attended or spoke at this conference is not getting my vote. I was considering voting for one dem. That went out the door when I saw that this person was attending the KOS convention. The dems have to come back to the center some time then there will be hell to pay. They just lost this independent's vote.

Do they even care?

359 uisguex  Tue, Aug 7, 2007 7:44:32am

Wow that is one hell of a video. That's why I read this blog. I'd like to have a chat with the moderator myself..... nice long chat!


This entry has been archived.
Comments are closed.

^ back to top ^

log in
Name:
Pass:

Register Forgot Your Password? My Account Re-send Confirmation (To log in, cookies must be enabled in your browser!)

► LGF Headlines

► Top 10 Comments

► Bottom Comments

► Recent Comments

► Tools/Info

► LGF Hits

► Slideshows

► Resources

► Never Forget

► Statistics

► Tag Cloud

► Contact

You must have Javascript enabled to use the contact form.
Your email:

Subject:

Message:


Messages may be published in our weblog, unless you request otherwise.
Tech Note:
Using the Contact Form

► News/Opinion

Discover the World's largest E-Book Store! Save big on bestsellers!
More Partners

Compare Electricity Prices in your area. Texas Electricity is deregulated; you have the right to choose Texas Electric Rates from among many Texas Electric Companies.

Who can foretell the dire consequences?