

Marine who ripped Obama on Facebook faces discharge - seminatore
http://www.bendbulletin.com/article/20120407/NEWS0107/204070345/

======
geoffsanders
As a former member of the US Air Force, I can say that no matter how the press
or anyone tries to spin this, this is NOT a first amendment issue, it is an
insubordination issue.

Every US military installation in the world displays the current upper echelon
of the chain-of-command in their offices, buildings, and headquarters, and I
can assure you that every US base in the world presently shows President Obama
on top of that command. The POTUS is the Commander-in-Chief, and for a Marine
to insult the POTUS is just as insubordinate as insulting the Commandant of
the Marines (technically it's worse). Furthermore, every active duty soldier
is told to keep their political opinions to themselves - it's common knowledge
in the military, and this soldier clearly thought those rules didn't apply to
him. The military handles soldiers who don't follow rules in a very
predictable fashion...

Tough titties, Sergeant.

~~~
RollAHardSix
Thanks for reminding me why I don't re-enlist in the Corps. This is a first
amendment issue, or rather a matter for the Services to straighten out how
they strip rights from GI's.

A Marine/Sailor/Soldier/Airman/Coastie still retains their rights to freedom
of speech and most importantly, political opinion. You can't possibly put this
case of voicing political opinion on the same level as insubordination.
Perhaps, PERHAPS if he had refused deployment due to a lack of belief that
President Obama wasn't a citizen (the birther issue from a few years back);
however even that has its' political backing.

Insubordination is refusing to pick up your pack and keep trudging, not
expressing your political opinions.

~~~
geoffsanders
I'm glad you didn't re-enlist either, especially since you are patently wrong.
I suppose you think you can insult your boss at work in the civilian world
without discipline either? I encourage you to take a look at DOD Directive
1344.10 and consider the Sergeants comments such as (among others): "As an
active duty Marine, I say screw Obama" or the fact that he sold anti-Obama
bumper stickers - all of which are in clear violation of DOD Directive
1344.10. Additionally this Marine was told by superior officers previously to
not engage in such activity and did so anyway, yet you think none of this
constitutes insubordination? Not only was he insubordinate, he was contempt.

Whether you like the rule or not, military law is very clear and concise about
the types of comments and actions that can be made towards the commander-in-
chief. Bare in mind, this is an ACTIVE duty soldier criticizing the CURRENT
sitting president - not just a comment about the institution as a whole or a
politician outside his direct chain of command.

All things considered, this Marine is lucky he isn't facing court martial.

~~~
RollAHardSix
His being told by his superior officers to not engage in his political opinion
is very near an illegal order in and of-itself. The Tea Party website holds a
disclaimer that all posts are made by individuals and are not representation
of opinion of the military as a whole. It doesn't matter that he sold anti-
Obama bumper bumper stickers, that's voicing your opinion for the next
candidate of the next election. The comment "As an active duty Marine, I say
screw Obama" may be grounds for reprimand but being forcibly separated?
PLEASE.

If you want to pull out the directive knock yourself out, I recommend starting
with:

4.1.1.1. Register, vote, and express a personal opinion on political
candidates and issues, but not as a representative of the Armed Forces.

4.1.1.8. Display a political bumper sticker on the member’s private vehicle.

Comparing political dissent to contempt is a joke argument. The lines are
shades of grey when it comes to speaking about the Presidency. Contempt would
apply when it would come to one's _direct_ chain-of-command not when it covers
a political official, elected, into a public office. Everyone has a right to
democracy even those who restricted their rights by joining the military.

~~~
geoffsanders
Ok okay, you're right - I, the US military, the Marines, his commanding
officers, and all of the legal reviews to date are all just wrong. Laugh.

~~~
RollAHardSix
I suppose we'll find out soon enough. Sgt. Gary Stein has has filed in Federal
Court that the Separation Board ignored the law. Given that they offered no
explanation for why they cast their votes in the manner they did added with
the legal precedent of US vs Wilcox, it's a bit hard to disagree with him.
After a proper review of the board, and the law, in a civilian court we'll
find out.

