Barack, his opinion, and free speech

[Soph the vet]

I added the "gatesgate" tag, thought it was catchy;).

I don't think Obama is eloquent in speech without a teleprompter and he is often "lost" when he has to speak off the cuff which rarely happens. It infuriates me that any press conference (not just his) are held by picking on preselected journalists (some called the night before) instead of the President having to answer any reasonable and relevant question that the press may have.

IMO, the question should never have been asked in the first place about Gates given that the press conference was about healthcare. Knowing that Obama is rarely tossed anything but softballs, this question was obviously directed to distract all of us from more important matters at hand...and it has worked hasn't it?

[Debbie in OR]

I think I must be missing something, but I can't figure out what.

 

Nope, not missing a thing...you're right on track! :001_smile:

[KidsHappen]

As this thread is moving from the issue offree speech to that of if a politician should interfere with a possibly ongoing investigation and a case that may come up in the courts.

 

It is worth reading the police report. (I did post this on the thread about the incident but as I said we now appear to have parallel posts).

 

Am I the only one that read this report and at no point saw where the officer said that he entered the home? I read it twice and did not find this but it is possible that I missed it.

[Debbie in OR]

It infuriates me that any press conference (not just his) are held by picking on preselected journalists (some called the night before) instead of the President having to answer any reasonable and relevant question that the press may have.

 

Which is bad for any president but hypocritical for a president who proclaimed he was going to do what hadn't been done before: keep everything open.

[Karen sn]

There is a big difference between someone that says "uuhmmm, uhmmm, yeah" on a regular basis and someone with an actual speech impediment :glare: Bush was laughed at because he had an actual speech impediment, not because he spoke like a teenager.

 

I never noticed an impediment.

And I know plenty of teenagers who speak well.....do not insult them!!!!!

[mommaduck]

I never noticed an impediment.

And I know plenty of teenagers who speak well.....do not insult them!!!!!

So it's okay to insult people who sound as though they have a speech impediment, thereby insulting those that do, but we dare not reference the typical teenager.

[Karen sn]

Mr. Gates broke the law. He was arrested for doing so. Disorderly conduct is in the criminal statutes. Should he not have been because he was an elite or a friend of the president?

 

Even Obama regrets what he said. Would he, if he still thought the cops acted stupidly? He has said that perhaps BOTH sides overreacted, but he has reached out to the cop.

 

Then why were the charges dropped?

I don't think disorderly conduct applies here to this man in his own house.

Oh wait - maybe we can all get cameras installed and big brother can monitor us and make sure we never yell at our kids or get upset.

For wouldn't that be disorderly conduct?

Maybe the old man was out of line in his questioning the cop.But arrest worthy? I think not.

[pqr]

Then why were the charges dropped?

I don't think disorderly conduct applies here to this man in his own house.

Oh wait - maybe we can all get cameras installed and big brother can monitor us and make sure we never yell at our kids or get upset.

For wouldn't that be disorderly conduct?

Maybe the old man was out of line in his questioning the cop.But arrest worthy? I think not.

 

 

Regardless of if you think the arrest was warranted or not, the fact remains that the arresting officer did not arrest Gates because the officer was a racist. The only one who referenced race was Gates, in his (Gates' racist comments).

 

As there was an ongoing investigation when the comments were made and as there may be a lawsuit pending it was wrong for a political figure to comment on the situation.

 

Pulling the race card here was outrageous. Pulling the "I was arrested because I was acting like an a$$" Card ....OK

Edited July 25, 2009 by pqr

[LUV2EDU]

Two of my favorites:

 

"I did not have sex with that woman!" (Clinton, of course)

 

"Rarely is it asked, is our children learning?" (Of course, Bush)

 

 

:D

[LUV2EDU]

Me either! How do you put a tag on a post and how do I read them? I don't see them.

 

Scroll down to the bottom of the page. You will see edit tags. Click on edit tags and type away. Tags can help us find hot topics with similar content. For instance, if you want to find topics on [ducking from flying objects] Michael Jackson, several threads will pop up related to him.

Edited July 25, 2009 by LUV2EDU

[TXMomof4]

:iagree:. Besides, eloquence means nothing if you can't believe what he's saying.

Lisa

 

Yup. (My eloquent speaking for the day.):tongue_smilie:

[Dirtroad]

Then why were the charges dropped?

I don't think disorderly conduct applies here to this man in his own house.

Oh wait - maybe we can all get cameras installed and big brother can monitor us and make sure we never yell at our kids or get upset.

For wouldn't that be disorderly conduct?

Maybe the old man was out of line in his questioning the cop.But arrest worthy? I think not.

 

Several reasons pop to mind. (edited b/c typed mine) My cynical mind jumps on the worst case scenario in this situation. Charges were dropped due to affluency & politics & to keep it from escalating. When you are verbally abusive and aggressive to an officer, you can be arrested & prosecuted for disorderly conduct. However, if you are high profile, you can wiggle out better than the poor black kid running with a gang.

 

Another issue.... the officer follows protocol and arrests him for disorderly. Often it is a measure to calm the street & subdue to chaos that could result. Charges may later be dropped b/c the situation has cooled down.

 

Another reason... the lawyers handle the charges & determine if they want it in court... not the officers. So, cop may have not intended to push for the charge... or a lawyer may have not wanted to be in the mix... or felt it was too weak of a case to pursue.

Edited July 25, 2009 by Dirtroad

[mommaduck]

Several reasons pop to mine. My cynical mind jumps on the worst case scenario in this situation. Charges were dropped due to affluency & politics & to keep it from escalating. When you are verbally abusive and aggressive to an officer, you can be arrested & prosecuted for disorderly conduct. However, if you are high profile, you can wiggle out better than the poor black kid running with a gang.

 

Another issue.... the officer follows protocol and arrests him for disorderly. Often it is a measure to calm the street & subdue to chaos that could result. Charges may later be dropped b/c the situation has cooled down.

 

Another reason... the lawyers handle the charges & determine if they want it in court... not the officers. So, cop may have not intended to push for the charge... or a lawyer may have not wanted to be in the mix... or felt it was too weak of a case to pursue.

 

This is the general case.

[Miss Marple]

I think I must be missing something, but I can't figure out what.

 

Right there with you. Sometimes I feel like the young child in "The Emperor's New Clothes". I just cannot see how anyone can find him "eloquent". He exhibits many of the speech behaviors that we have been taught are to be avoided (ummms, pauses, monotone, etc.). I felt this way the first time I heard him speak...I listened to the media shower his speaking ability with praise, tried to listen again with an open mind...still cannot get it. I just don't get chills running down my legs!!! I think it's all a ruse...just like the Emperor's clothes (and I think, like the Emperor, Obama believes he is eloquent).

[TammyinTN]

Let's look at his statement. He admitted his ignorance and then chose to call the people who put their lives on the line to protect us "stupid" because they arrested his friend.

 

It's pretty obvious to me that you really don't have to speak with truth or knowledge, as long as you say it eloquently.

 

I so whole hearted agree with this...and they think the world isn't laughing at us...maybe they should read some European papers. I'm so ashamed of our President I would love to crawl under a rock and hide until the next 3.5 years are OVER!

[Mommyof4ks]

:iagree:. Besides, eloquence means nothing if you can't believe what he's saying.

Lisa

 

:iagree:

[5kidsforME]

Karen sn deliberately started this thread to get people riled up. A liberal vs. conservative "fight"

 

She was successful.

[Jumping In Puddles]

I so whole hearted agree with this...and they think the world isn't laughing at us...maybe they should read some European papers. I'm so ashamed of our President I would love to crawl under a rock and hide until the next 3.5 years are OVER!

 

I can sympathize. I felt that way for all 8 years Bush was in office and although I am happy (thrilled, in fact!) with Obama, I hope for a leader in the future that ALL Americans can stand behind! I don't know if that can ever happen, are we all just too different? I guess we'll never be able to make everyone happy and just go with the ebb and flow of politics - sometimes your guy wins, sometimes my guy wins. :(

[Dirtroad]

.... Obama is rarely tossed anything but softballs, this question was obviously directed to distract all of us from more important matters at hand...and it has worked hasn't it?

 

:iagree:

It was meant to be a distraction. BUT.... I don't think it was meant to work in the manner that has happened. I think it was meant to make Obama look like a Race Champion defending the underdog (poor black man) against those cops (wicked, profiling system).

 

I think it back-fired. They should have found out who the cop was, how outstanding he has been, what he advocates & teaches.... and WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED!

[Jumping In Puddles]

I think it should have gone like this:

 

Reporter: Mr. Obama, can you comment on the Gates arrest?

 

Obama: I do not know all the facts in the case so I won't comment. Next question...

 

IMHO, Obama was wrong. Wrong in his comments, and wrong to even open his mouth and comment without all the facts.

Edited July 25, 2009 by Jumping In Puddles

[Dirtroad]

I can sympathize. I felt that way for all 8 years Bush was in office and although I am happy (thrilled, in fact!) with Obama, I hope for a leader in the future that ALL Americans can stand behind! I don't know if that can ever happen, are we all just too different? I guess we'll never be able to make everyone happy and just go with the ebb and flow of politics - sometimes your guy wins, sometimes my guy wins. :(

 

Can I pose a statement meant to be though provoking & not rude?

 

The day we have a President that we can ALL stand behind (outside a TRUE war effort against a threat to our liberty) is the day that we not longer have a country based on independant thought and liberty.

 

A true conservative can rarely stand behind a true liberal on a regular basis & should never vote for a liberal candidate. I think of DRONES or robots that do as they should.... but never rock the boat. A libertarian may find it hard to stand with either group. An individualist will regret his vote for a collectivist... even before they knock on his door & take him away.

 

I don't like knit-picking each others placing of commas or spelling of difficult words (typed often in haste).... or even our dialects in speech (which is some of the mudslinging against Bush).... HOWEVER, I love a good healthy discussion about right/wrong... pro/con... and about REAL issues. I love to discuss Obama or healthcare or Patriot act anytime over potato salad and Johnny's first boo-boo. :0)

Edited July 25, 2009 by Dirtroad

[Dirtroad]

.....Sometimes I feel like the young child in "The Emperor's New Clothes".

 

:lol: Holy Smokes! By George, you have hit the nail on the head! I have to find that book! :lol: That was worth reading the entire thread!!!!!

[Jumping In Puddles]

Can I pose a statement meant to be though provoking & not rude?

 

The day we have a President that we can ALL stand behind (outside a TRUE war effort against a threat to our liberty) is the day that we not longer have a country based on independant thought and liberty.

 

A true conservative can rarely stand behind a true liberal on a regular basis & should never vote for a liberal candidate. I think of DRONES or robots that do as they should.... but never rock the boat. A libertarian may find it hard to stand with either group. An individualist will regret his vote for a collectivist... even before they knock on his door & take him away.

 

I don't like knit-picking each others placing of commas or spelling of difficult words (typed often in haste).... or even our dialects in speech (which is some of the mudslinging against Bush).... HOWEVER, I love a good healthy discussion about right/wrong... pro/con... and about REAL issues. I love to discuss Obama or healthcare or Patriot act anytime over potato salad and Johnny's first boo-boo. :0)

 

Good points! Although I think ultimately it is the presidential agenda and policy that is important, it is hard not to pick on the mannerisms of the Presidents. I think that people who support Bush are easily able to look past his mannerisms because they agree with his message. If you don't like Obama or his message, you are likely to be irritated to no end with his speech patterns and mannerisms.

 

I will admit though, watching Bush smirk use to really make my skin crawl. Totally irrational. :lol: Obama, I could listen to all day.

 

Also, I know that a True Conservative or True Liberal could never really vote for each other, I think most Americans are not all liberal or all conservative (I know many on this board are ALL conservative, but in the general population) and I think there could be a candidate that could appeal to most - obviously not Clinton, Bush or Obama.

Edited July 25, 2009 by Jumping In Puddles

[kalanamak]

I'm sorry, but I about spewed my drink due to the original post. Obama is not eloquent and not a great speaker.

 

Long before he ran for president, I heard him on Wait, Wait, Don't Tell Me. I had never heard of him. He was funny, he was surefooted, verbally, he was charming and disarming and very human. I remember thinking: that kid will go places. I didn't know who he was and politics were not mentioned. He joked about the silly hoofarah over kindergarten graduations, e.g.

 

I don't watch TV, and I've only heard him a few times in short clips on NPR, but on that radio quiz show, he was stellar.

Edited July 25, 2009 by kalanamak
By the way, I didn't vote for him.

[Donna T.]

I'm sorry, but I about spewed my drink due to the original post. Obama is not eloquent and not a great speaker. Only if he has a speech written for him and he's reading directly from it. And that eloquence is credited to his speech writer.

 

 

 

I wonder if his book, The Audacity of Hope, was written for him. Because, if not, he writes just like he speaks (very well, in my opinion). But, without the umms, thankfully.

Edited July 25, 2009 by Donna T.

[Dawn E]

Then why were the charges dropped?

I don't think disorderly conduct applies here to this man in his own house.

Oh wait - maybe we can all get cameras installed and big brother can monitor us and make sure we never yell at our kids or get upset.

For wouldn't that be disorderly conduct?

Maybe the old man was out of line in his questioning the cop.But arrest worthy? I think not.

 

Karen,

 

It is very common for the charges to be dropped after such an arrest, as others have already pointed out.

 

If I felt compelled to defend Obama, I would not pick this as a hill to die upon. There will be many bigger hills to come, more worthy to fight over. Defending him for saying something he has already deemed "regrettable" only demeans your credibility to defend him in other areas.

 

So, what you are essentially saying is that this horrible injustice occurred to Gates, the cops acted stupidly and instead of doing the right thing and standing behind his statement that the officers acted stupidly, Obama has caved only to public pressure by stating it was in fact a regrettable statement to make. So, he's turned his back on justice and even invited a wrong-doer, hot-head cop over to the White House for a beer? If that's the case, I would be even more offended by that.

[Jumping In Puddles]

Yes, I did in fact respect Bush. He did what he said he was going to do. I hate people who change their plans mid way through or don't keep their word.

 

 

Oh...I know lots of Europeans have different opinions...it's just keeping that opinion and not wanting things to be better that shocks me...I mean why do so many travel to the US for healthcare if our system is so bad?

I'm just saying...:confused:

 

Come on over...I'll be here for a few more years and we can compare notes.

 

My idea of better and your idea of better are different. Can you respect that? I do respect your opinion and I acknowledge that we are just different. No reason to be shocked! :)

[TammyinTN]

My idea of better and your idea of better are different. Can you respect that? I do respect your opinion and I acknowledge that we are just different. No reason to be shocked! :)

 

Good enough...I'm off to bed...rest well my friends. :001_smile:

[Donna T.]

IMO, the question should never have been asked in the first place about Gates given that the press conference was about healthcare.

 

:iagree: - seems like this whole thing should have never happened.

[Jumping In Puddles]

 

I love political threads...it makes us well-trained minds think, right?

;)

 

I like political discussions IRL but threads? Not so much. I tend to stay away, then get drawn in, then stay away. :lol:

 

It's nice talking politics with people of like minds (all the virtual high five's and 5 "I agree signs" in a row can usually attest to that) and it's also interesting to discuss politics with those who have a different perspective and sometimes each side may actually learn something.

 

It is, however, tiring to discuss something when someone refuses to even try to understand your position (in a "I'm here to CHANGE your opinion, not discuss the issues" kind of way). We've both been on this board for awhile and I'm sure you've seen this too.

[Rhonda in TX]

I like the fact that our president speaks so eloquently and has an opinion of his own, also. However, although I may agree personally with how he felt, as our president, he has to watch what he says and how he says it. I am glad that he apologized. We must remember that he is only human.

 

I can find that he says that his choice of words was unfortunate, but I can't find a report of an actual apology. I'd be very interested in seeing this if it exists.

[Karen sn]

funny astrid...I see me and my family putting our money where our mouth is...you know military serve and all.

 

 

;)

 

Ummm.....I'm only assuming here....but after 27 years I am sure your husband has an awesome salary, retirement, health care, etc........

Not taking any sacrifice you may make for the government lightly, but please tell me that you don't think you have made a financial sacrifice to be serving.

[Laurie4b]

No, he's not dyslexic. That myth often circulates, and he does have a brother (Neil, I believe) who's dyslexic, but GW has repeatedly denied that he himself has dyslexia.

 

His speech patterns--especially his propensity to switch around phonemes and difficulty with word retrieval are common in dyslexics. If he has a brother who is officially dyslexic, he may have dyslexic traits but not the full-blown diagnosis, or he may have evolved coping mechanisms that allowed him to function well despite the dyslexia and it was never diagnosed. Whatever his personal diagnosis, the mockers don't make it any easier on people who have similar problems. It would have been a great opportunity to take some of the stigma away from intelligent people who have the same problems, but it's (sinful) human nature to mock instead

[LUV2EDU]

I can find that he says that his choice of words was unfortunate, but I can't find a report of an actual apology. I'd be very interested in seeing this if it exists.

 

It was implied. Although I agree that the President should have said "I apologize," the police union was happy that Obama recanted his original statement.

 

Quote:

 

Stepping before a surprised White House press corps, he said he regretted his July 22 statement and called Crowley an "outstanding police officer and a good man."

 

"I want to make clear that in my choice of words, I think I unfortunately ... gave an impression that I was maligning the Cambridge Police Department or Sgt. Crowley specifically," the President said.

 

"I could have calibrated those words differently, and I told this to Sgt. Crowley."

 

"It's gone some way toward mending the fence with the patrol officers, even though I haven't spoken with any of them yet," Killion told the Boston Globe after Obama's remarks.

 

"He acknowledges he made a mistake," Killion said.

 

"He wasn't there. None of us have the facts. He didn't have the facts. We don't have the facts. We don't know what Professor Gates said, what Sgt. Crowley said."

 

He said he was "absolutely pleased" with Obama's call to Crowley.

"I think it was a good thing for the President to do. He's the commander in chief, he's in charge," he said.

 

 

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/2009/07/25/2009-07-25_police_unions_mollified_after_prez_reversal.html

 

 

[astrid]

funny astrid...I see me and my family putting our money where our mouth is...you know military serve and all.

 

Hate...no, not at all....disappointed..yes!

 

I love political threads...it makes us well-trained minds think, right?

;)

 

Okay, there's no good way to say this, so I'm just going to be honest about my feelings: I really tire of the "I'm a military family so I"m entitled to make political statements, as opposed to those who make comments but are not in the military." Perhaps that's not the way you meant the comment above, but to me at least, that's the way it came across.

It's part of why Bush's statement that "If you're not in favor of the war, you're a terrorist." was so offensive.

 

Yeah...I get that you're in the military. Or your dh is. I get it. But how do you know that I'm not from a military family, and have not "put my money where my mouth is" as well? Are you alone entitled to wave the flag? Because again, perhaps that's not what you meant, but it's how it came across to me.

 

And YOU were the one who used the word "Hate" as in "I hate people who say one thing and do another" in the midst of a thread about our present Commander in Chief, so the implication was clearly that you hate Obama. Sorry; I think of "hate" as a very, very strong word, one that is not allowed in my house because of its connotations.

 

All Best,

Astrid

[Dirtroad]

Ummm.....I'm only assuming here....but after 27 years I am sure your husband has an awesome salary, retirement, health care, etc........

Not taking any sacrifice you may make for the government lightly, but please tell me that you don't think you have made a financial sacrifice to be serving.

 

I would hope he is paid. He takes more risk that we do running to swim lessons or the supermarket. Thanks for them and others!

 

Keep the conversation going but toss the mean girl stuff to the curb.;)

[unsinkable]

Okay, I've been staying out of this thread (and many, many others), but I feel I need to respond to this one.

 

My Dh has been serving in the military since 1985, and he is currently in Iraq until next year. It's not service to the government - it's service to YOU. It's service to each and every American citizen. It's service to an ideal. It's service for honor and dignity and freedom and everything America holds dear.

 

And not to belittle the military experience, but NO ONE enters the military to get rich. There are no mercenaries in our military. Awesome salary? Ha! My husband holds two Master's Degrees, one in healthcare administration, and he could be making FAR MORE in the civilian sector. But we choose to remain in this path.

 

Retirement? You mean that retirement pay that you can't really retire on? You mean the retirement pay that is constantly under scrutiny and under threat of being toyed with by Congress, even under theat of being revoked? Hardly what I would consider a huge perk.

 

And the health care? Well, let's just say that having been a recipient of socialized medicine for my entire life (first as a military dependent under my father, then of my own device, then as my DH's dependent) --- well, there's a reason I stay out of the healthcare threads. The "free" healthcare that we get in the military is sufficient if you are a young, healthy person. But there are problems - MAJOR problems - with the socialized system of healthcare that we are beneficaries of. (And I know a little more than the average beneficiary. My DH is a healthcare administrator for the US Air Force. It's a seriously messed up system. And that's all I'll say about that...)

 

Yes, we in the military have made, and continue to make, financial sacrifices to be in the military. And if you think otherwise, then you are living under a rock. We serve because we are willing to serve, and you won't normally hear me bemoan the military benefits or the lifestyle, but make no mistake, the financial perks aren't all they're cracked up to be. Like I said, no one serves in the military to get rich. We do it for honor and to preserve an ideal.

 

ETA: I'm completely aware that this is FAR off topic from the OP, but I really needed to get it off my chest.

 

And I thank God (or my lucky stars) for men and women like your dh & for families like yours.

 

:grouphug:

[mommaduck]

Okay, I've been staying out of this thread (and many, many others), but I feel I need to respond to this one.

 

My Dh has been serving in the military since 1985, and he is currently in Iraq until next year. It's not service to the government - it's service to YOU. It's service to each and every American citizen. It's service to an ideal. It's service for honor and dignity and freedom and everything America holds dear.

 

And not to belittle the military experience, but NO ONE enters the military to get rich. There are no mercenaries in our military. Awesome salary? Ha! My husband holds two Master's Degrees, one in healthcare administration, and he could be making FAR MORE in the civilian sector. But we choose to remain in this path.

 

Retirement? You mean that retirement pay that you can't really retire on? You mean the retirement pay that is constantly under scrutiny and under threat of being toyed with by Congress, even under theat of being revoked? Hardly what I would consider a huge perk.

 

And the health care? Well, let's just say that having been a recipient of socialized medicine for my entire life (first as a military dependent under my father, then of my own device, then as my DH's dependent) --- well, there's a reason I stay out of the healthcare threads. The "free" healthcare that we get in the military is sufficient if you are a young, healthy person. But there are problems - MAJOR problems - with the socialized system of healthcare that we are beneficaries of. (And I know a little more than the average beneficiary. My DH is a healthcare administrator for the US Air Force. It's a seriously messed up system. And that's all I'll say about that...)

 

Yes, we in the military have made, and continue to make, financial sacrifices to be in the military. And if you think otherwise, then you are living under a rock. We serve because we are willing to serve, and you won't normally hear me bemoan the military benefits or the lifestyle, but make no mistake, the financial perks aren't all they're cracked up to be. Like I said, no one serves in the military to get rich. We do it for honor and to preserve an ideal.

 

ETA: I'm completely aware that this is FAR off topic from the OP, but I really needed to get it off my chest.

 

:iagree: Yep! Most military qualify for welfare. I was raised in the military, have had three parents in the military, my stepdad retiring in the military. When I was little, we survived off of expired food that the nurses gave my stepdad off the medical planes. My clothes were all yard sale hand me downs and I wore my shoes even when they pinched until the bottoms were flopping off. My stepdad worked side jobs when he could, my mama worked full time, and our cars spent more time with their parts out than in. I have known AF officers that were on welfare! Military medical is the butt of many jokes. My mama would have died if my stepdad hadn't nearly gotten physical with a doctor. You don't want to have a baby on base if you can avoid it. Retirement? What retirement? Every retiree I know, has had to go out and get a job or two after their service is over. Many end up in lower blue collar jobs earning squat. You know why? Because their skills and expertise in the military don't transfer over to the civilian world. They are literally starting over. Oh, and veteran's benefits?! Oh, yeah, let me get going on that one. They have not only cut back the medical benefits of active duty military and retirees, but my husband who is veteran has been denied veteran health care assistance (not that it's worth much, but it would have been something). They cut have trimmed the fat and the meat so much that there is not much left. He's considered "too young", hadn't been "sent over", and is not declared "disabled" yet. I have a feeling they will probably deny him his right to the student assistance for college as well.

 

Uncle Sam promised these men and women a lot. He's turned around and taken nearly all of it away. But that is the way contracts work with the government...you are expected to keep to the contract, but they can break it anytime (yeah, this leads into another rant on the government in regards to the Cherokee Nation).

[zaichiki]

I always did feel bad for W though. He is dyslexic and no one ever seemed to cut him any slack.

 

He has dyslexia? Really??? I never knew that. I honestly just thought he was a few watts short in some areas. Or maybe easily flustered? Dyslexia huh? Good to know.

[blessed2fosteradopt]

Ummm.....I'm only assuming here....but after 27 years I am sure your husband has an awesome salary, retirement, health care, etc........

Not taking any sacrifice you may make for the government lightly, but please tell me that you don't think you have made a financial sacrifice to be serving.

 

Wow, I am speechless. :confused::sad:

[Marylou]

Forgive me if someone already wrote this!

 

"Acting stupidly" is when a person (high profile position or not) says that he/she does NOT HAVE ALL THE FACTS and then MAKES A JUDGEMENT CALL about someone who has MANY MORE FACTS than he/she. JPS

Edited July 26, 2009 by dmmosher

[Karen sn]

n

Edited July 26, 2009 by Karen sn

[EKS]

He has dyslexia? Really??? I never knew that. I honestly just thought he was a few watts short in some areas. Or maybe easily flustered? Dyslexia huh? Good to know.

 

I always thought the same. If I had known he had dyslexia I would have given him a break. I looked up the Bush and dyslexia thing on google and all I could find was that he denied having it. If he had admitted it I would have had much more respect for him (of course, the only direction to go there was *up*, but aside from that...).

[mommaduck]

He sounds like an idiot is all I'm saying.

I have no idea why you are coming up with this.

 

Yes you do. It's already been stated.

[Joy at Home]

Okay, I've been staying out of this thread (and many, many others), but I feel I need to respond to this one.

 

My Dh has been serving in the military since 1985, and he is currently in Iraq until next year. It's not service to the government - it's service to YOU. It's service to each and every American citizen. It's service to an ideal. It's service for honor and dignity and freedom and everything America holds dear.

 

And not to belittle the military experience, but NO ONE enters the military to get rich. There are no mercenaries in our military. Awesome salary? Ha! My husband holds two Master's Degrees, one in healthcare administration, and he could be making FAR MORE in the civilian sector. But we choose to remain in this path.

 

Retirement? You mean that retirement pay that you can't really retire on? You mean the retirement pay that is constantly under scrutiny and under threat of being toyed with by Congress, even under theat of being revoked? Hardly what I would consider a huge perk.

 

And the health care? Well, let's just say that having been a recipient of socialized medicine for my entire life (first as a military dependent under my father, then of my own device, then as my DH's dependent) --- well, there's a reason I stay out of the healthcare threads. The "free" healthcare that we get in the military is sufficient if you are a young, healthy person. But there are problems - MAJOR problems - with the socialized system of healthcare that we are beneficaries of. (And I know a little more than the average beneficiary. My DH is a healthcare administrator for the US Air Force. It's a seriously messed up system. And that's all I'll say about that...)

 

Yes, we in the military have made, and continue to make, financial sacrifices to be in the military. And if you think otherwise, then you are living under a rock. We serve because we are willing to serve, and you won't normally hear me bemoan the military benefits or the lifestyle, but make no mistake, the financial perks aren't all they're cracked up to be. Like I said, no one serves in the military to get rich. We do it for honor and to preserve an ideal.

 

ETA: I'm completely aware that this is FAR off topic from the OP, but I really needed to get it off my chest.

 

Good for you, Karen:001_smile: We are grateful for families like yours and your husband's service, even if others aren't.

 

Bless you,

Lisa

[Rhonda in TX]

It was implied. Although I agree that the President should have said "I apologize," the police union was happy that Obama recanted his original statement.

 

 

I would have preferred an actual apology, and I care more about how the offended police officers feel than the police union, but that's probably as good as it's going to get.

[MeanestMomInMidwest]

:iagree: Yep! Most military qualify for welfare. I was raised in the military, have had three parents in the military, my stepdad retiring in the military. When I was little, we survived off of expired food that the nurses gave my stepdad off the medical planes. My clothes were all yard sale hand me downs and I wore my shoes even when they pinched until the bottoms were flopping off. My stepdad worked side jobs when he could, my mama worked full time, and our cars spent more time with their parts out than in. I have known AF officers that were on welfare! Military medical is the butt of many jokes. My mama would have died if my stepdad hadn't nearly gotten physical with a doctor. You don't want to have a baby on base if you can avoid it. Retirement? What retirement? Every retiree I know, has had to go out and get a job or two after their service is over. Many end up in lower blue collar jobs earning squat. You know why? Because their skills and expertise in the military don't transfer over to the civilian world. They are literally starting over. Oh, and veteran's benefits?! Oh, yeah, let me get going on that one. They have not only cut back the medical benefits of active duty military and retirees, but my husband who is veteran has been denied veteran health care assistance (not that it's worth much, but it would have been something). They cut have trimmed the fat and the meat so much that there is not much left. He's considered "too young", hadn't been "sent over", and is not declared "disabled" yet. I have a feeling they will probably deny him his right to the student assistance for college as well.

 

Uncle Sam promised these men and women a lot. He's turned around and taken nearly all of it away. But that is the way contracts work with the government...you are expected to keep to the contract, but they can break it anytime (yeah, this leads into another rant on the government in regards to the Cherokee Nation).

 

These two statements "Most military qualify for food stamps" and "I have known AF officers that were on welfare" I question.

 

I do know some enlisted personnell qualify for food stamps. Here's a link to military pay grades. Pay grades in the military are no secret. As you can see, the monthly pay rate for an E1 (that's airman, or lowest enlisted personnel) is pretty low ($1,399.50/mo), and if living off base (which E1's don't) would not cover basic needs. Note that an O1 (which would be 2nd Lt - for those not military, that's the lowest officer rank) makes almost $3,000/mo the first year.

 

ETA: Does my post carry more weight if I reference dh's military service?

Edited July 26, 2009 by MeanestMomInMidwest

[Aggie]

Ummm.....I'm only assuming here....but after 27 years I am sure your husband has an awesome salary, retirement, health care, etc........

Not taking any sacrifice you may make for the government lightly, but please tell me that you don't think you have made a financial sacrifice to be serving.

 

Karen....

 

I know you didn't post this out of spite, but out of ignorance and inexperience. :(

 

My dh is retired Navy. After 23 years of deployments, deplorable living conditions, horrible work hours, and loss of his freedom of speech (this is an entire thread in and of itself), I can say, without reserve, that those 23 years included, and continue to include, a tremendous financial sacrifice. On one deployment, he figured he made under 50 CENTS an hour.

 

His health care now is almost non-existent. Cost, and cost alone, has kept his PCP from ordering tests that could significantly improve his life. My PCP ordered the same test the first time I was in the office. What he was promised when he went into the Navy is not being delivered.

 

My dh, like so many others, served because it was the honorable thing to do. Unfortunately, he advises young men to take a different route because of the financial sacrifices. When I think of where we could be financially without those 23 years, I cringe.

 

Despite the sacrifices on many levels, this was a choice we made. No one is responsible for our choice but us. We could have gotten out at 10 or 14 years (and really lost everything!).

 

I'm proud of my sailor.

 

But, you, young lady, have NO right to question motive or sacrifice.

[TXMomof4]

These two statements "Most military qualify for food stamps" and "I have known AF officers that were on welfare" I question.

 

I do know some enlisted personnell qualify for food stamps. Here's a link to military pay grades. Pay grades in the military are no secret. As you can see, the monthly pay rate for an E1 (that's airman, or lowest enlisted personnel) is pretty low ($1,399.50/mo), and if living off base (which E1's don't) would not cover basic needs. Note that an O1 (which would be 2nd Lt - for those not military, that's the lowest officer rank) makes almost $3,000/mo the first year.

 

ETA: Does my post carry more weight if I reference dh's military service?

 

I would guess that any lower enlisted servicemember with a family would automatically qualify for welfare of some sort unless the spouse had an awesome job. My bil is an E-4 and they still qualify for WIC.

 

For us a big part of 'financial sacrifice' is that while dh makes an alright salary with the military, he could make significantly more in the private sector. You aren't eligible for a raise just because you do awesome job -you get paid the same as Joe Blow who does a crappy job. There aren't any bonuses when a project is completed on time and on budget. You get paid according to the tables, period.

 

However, it is a sacrifice we are willing to make because we believe strongly that for us, this is the place we can serve the best.

[A.D.]

But, you, young lady, have NO right to question motive or sacrifice.

 

She certainly does when others imply that only those from military families are entitled to an opinion.

And this comment is way out of line.