Marine Sgt. Gary Stein first started a Facebook page called Armed Forces Tea Party Patriots to encourage service members to exercise their free speech rights. Then he declared that he wouldn’t follow orders from the commander in chief, President Barack Obama.
While Stein softened his statement to say he wouldn’t follow “unlawful orders,” military observers say he may have gone too far.
The Marine Corps is now looking into whether he violated the military’s rules prohibiting political statements by those in uniform and broke its guidelines on what troops can and cannot say on social media. Stein said his views are constitutionally protected.
***“Just because I’m a Marine doesn’t mean I don’t have free speech or can’t say my personal opinion about the president or other public official just like anybody else,” Stein said. “The Constitution trumps everything else.”
Actually, no it doesn’t.
“I think that it’s been pretty well established for a long time that freedom of speech is one area in which people do surrender some of their basic rights in entering the armed forces,” said former Navy officer David Glazier, a professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles.
Wonder how long it is before this moron is court-martialed.
TooManyJens
Why do you hate the troops?
KG
Time, Place, Manner restrictions, pretty basic constitutional concept. Not to mention the whole color of law/color of authority issue that comes from speaking on matters while in uniform
EdTheRed
“[M]ilitary observers say he may have gone too far.” MAY have? Um, yeah, that’s a bit of an understatement. Have fun at your court martial, jacknut.
shortstop
It’s not even unique to the military. If a private-sector person announces that he or she has no intention of being subordinate to the boss, that person will shortly be unemployed.
ThatLeftTurnInABQ
Who knew that the Marine Corps was not being run like an Anarcho-Syndicalist commune? Help! Help! I’m being repressed!
David Koch
This guy is too fucking stoopid to be holding a gun.
c u n d gulag
Oy-yoi-yoi, the stupid isn’t just burning – it’s more like a lava flow.
Look, when you sign-up, you give up a lot of rights.
It’s the nature of the military.
You don’t get to form a plebiscite every time there’s something going on, like on whether to take Cemetery Ridge or not – you follow the orders.
Oy, gevalt!
mk3872
See, they’re all about low taxes and small government, that’s all! Nothing at all about hating the black socialist guy in the WH …
BGinCHI
I’m amazed that these free speech purists have remained so by ignoring a gigantic, decades-long debate over the limits of free speech in the US. It gets taught in law schools, political science depts, civics courses, and so on.
Did any of these people go to school??
shortstop
The pee-yew. The loud. This Marine.
Nutella
“I’m allowed to have my opinion as an American but it seems the left becomes very intolerant when you have an opinion other than what they state. My opinions are mine.”
He’s working from the same script as Joe the Plumber. Do they distribute those at wingnut school or what?
Ken
This jackoff is an embarrassment to the Corps.
KG
I know I shouldn’t but I can’t help myself, every so often I click over to Hewitt (in part because I know him from my Chapman Law days and like him on a personal level). I keep trying to figure out what world the right lives in where
I’ll buy that Romney is genial, if only because he seems so boring on TV and I’ve never met a Mormon who wasn’t, more or less, genial. But that characterization of the president seems to be off by about 4-7 years.
Belafon (formerly anonevent)
@shortstop: True, but a company won’t throw your ass in prison for it.
Martin
I see someone has never actually read the first amendment.
shortstop
@Nutella: They do, actually. “Liberals are tolerant except when someone disagrees with them” and “I’m being censored! I’m being censored!” are their mass-distributed talking points. Most of them are unable to make the distinction between freedom of speech and freedom not to be roundly mocked, and that’s just how their masters like it.
Chyron HR
No, kid. You’re really not.
shortstop
@Belafon (formerly anonevent): And I sincerely hope Marines, Inc. throws his in.
It’s not the same; I get that. The chain of command in the military is unique. But I do get tired of the wingnut idea that they can trample roundly all over everyone else’s historically well-established rights while suddenly making up wacky new rights for themselves. “What I want when I want it = good. Everything else = bad” is not a coherent worldview for most people out of preschool.
Zam
I’m starting to become disturbed by how often I just assume anyone who mentions the constitution in debate is a fucking moron. These teaparty jackasses just run around yelling CONSTITUTION, FOUNDING FATHERS, FREEDOM, and have no idea what they are talking about. It has just become easier to disregard the majority of people who drop the constitution into a debate within the first sentence or two. It’s not an argument, they are no better than those who argue using God and the bible, no argument just insistence on a mythical figure/document that can and has been interpreted differently by millions of people over the years. Never mind the fact that documents written before our lifetime have no insight into the problems of the current era.
shortstop
@KG: It’s really just a lot of words for “Black man isn’t submissive!”
Zam
@Nutella: We are required by wingnut law to agree with them, anything less is intolerance.
Martin
@KG:
Sorry, but Obama is no more of those things than any previous President has been, let alone known assholes like Nixon. If they see something different, it’s because they SEE something different.
Schlemizel
Given what my son endured under boy blunder I hope this guy gets fucked up the ass by the ol red and gold until he can’t see straight.
Cargo
the yahoo news comment thread, normally wingnut central, is full of (claimed) Republican veterans who agree the elected President is still the lawful Commander in Chief that all members of the armed services swear an oath to obey, and that the guy’s a jagoff who should be disciplined at best or courtmartialled and drummed out of the marines at worst.
If that opinion ever changes we’re looking at civil war 2.
Martin
@Zam: The one that causes me to reliably lose my temper with my mom:
Mom: “They can’t do it because the ACLU won’t let them!”
Me: “Mom, the ACLU can’t force anyone to do anything. If Republicans can’t do it, it’s because the courts won’t let them. You’re arguing that our laws shouldn’t be followed. Are you sure that’s the argument you want to make?”
About every 3rd conversation we go through that.
General Stuck (Bravo Nope Zero)
He’ll be fine, The
Tea PartyKlan is always looking for new recruits with military experience, and dumb as dirt.ThatLeftTurnInABQ
@Zam:
To these folks, the U.S. Constitution is a fetish, a holy relic which cures diseases, repels evil, and ensures that the crops will grow. But to make sure that its magical powers can have their proper effect you have to haul it out and show it around town periodically, just like they used to do with the relics of some saint back during the Middle Ages.
Zam
@Martin: I thankfully have never, in person, encountered an individual making that argument. Of course on the internet…
New Yorker
Well, at least after his dishonorable discharge, he’ll have his pick of FOX News or Heritage Foundation jobs.
Frankensteinbeck
You have NO rights that are not qualified in some way. Preaching insurrection in the military ranks is a fine example.
@Cargo:
I am not in the military, but I hear from those who were that they truly, truly loves them some chain of command and loyalty. We worked hard to make sure a military coup would never happen in this country.
Zam
@ThatLeftTurnInABQ: I’ve gotten that sense from them too. Though many are outspoken atheists they still hold to this constitutional idolization. To them the myth of America’s founding is creation, the market is god, and Ron Paul is the prophet.
Amir Khalid
It’s a little worrying, isn’t it, that this maroon managed to earn sergeant’s stripes?
russ
what I want to know is?
can he say n’clang for real?
that would be freedom of speech
Cassidy
I wonder if this is the same jackass who posted a video on youtube in his dress blues but with a mask covering his face. He was talking about how he was “forced” to hide his identity and blah,blah, blah…right wing blather….blah, blah, blah. I got about 59 seconds into it before I turned it off. That fucker was a disgrace to NCO’s of all branches. I somehow think this is the same guy.
blondie
PLEASE NO. Please don’t send him here. We have quite enough jack-assery going on in the State of Arizona as it is. Lord knows that if this loop-head moves here, the sun-stroked morons that seem to make up the majority of Arizona’s voting populace are liable to elect him to public office. Please, for the love of all that is holy don’t send him here. Despite all evidence to the contrary, Arizona is not an Austrailia like dumping ground for all your shitty laws and crooked politicians. OK well, maybe it is but . . . . but . . . . UNCLE. OK???? There, I said it, U-N-C-L-E.
(sigh) I know, didn’t work. But it was worth a shot.
New Yorker
Also too, I used to shake my head and laugh whenever some wingnut would get a hard-on while talking about the wonderful Augusto Pinochet. Now I honestly worry a bit sometimes. I have to just hope that the military is as honest and loyal as I think it is and not one Rene Schneider away from a coup.
Cassidy
You’ll be pleasantly surprised. There is a higher percentage of wingnut amongst officers and SOF, but the rank and file are largely apolitical.
kdaug
Uh-huh.
Free speech in the Marines.
Go ahead – try it.
JWL
Sarge reminds me of Wesley Snipes, who presumed to have a firmer grasp of U.S. tax law than does the IRS.
Chris
@ThatLeftTurnInABQ:
The first Star Trek episode I ever watched was the one where they stumble onto a post-nuclear-apocalypse planet where cavemen worship the Constitution and the American flag without having a clue what they actually stand for, just because they need a fetish. I didn’t realize until years later that the episode was actually talking about real people.
Satanicpanic
You liberool hippocrit! Wher is you’re libral talerance now? FREEDOM!
john f
@Zam and @That Left Turn in ABQ “… Constitutionalists look upon law as the word-magic of lawyer-necromancers who draw their wizardly powers from grimoires, from books of magic spells they have selfishly withheld from the people. Constitutionalists have extracted from these books — from judicial opinions, from the Constitution, from legal dictionaries, from the Bible, from what-have-you — white magic with which to confound the dark powers of legislation, equity, and common sense. Never mind what words like “Sovereign Citizen” or “Lawful Money” mean — what does “abacadabra” mean? — it’s what they do that counts. Unfortunately, Constitutionalist words don’t do anything but lose court cases and invite sanctions. Constitutionalism is the white man’s version of the Ghost Dance. But believing you are invulnerable to bullets puts you in more, not less, danger of being shot…”
If four more years of a black Democratic President come to be, these knuckleheads will continue working their “magic.”
Lizzy L
I have some friends in the Marine Corps. I am rather enjoying imagining what they might have to say to this knucklehead.
ThatLeftTurnInABQ
@Zam:
The more I think about it the more it seems to me that this sort thing was baked in to the US as a function of our history, whether we like it or not. All stable nation states have some sort cultural glue which holds them together by giving the citizenry a sense of common identity and purpose. In many states this is a sense of common ethnic origin or religious identity, or some combination thereof, even if the commonality in question is greatly exaggerated. We are dealing with popular myths here, of the sort which are effacious to the extent that they are commonly believed regardless of the messier reality behind them.
So the question is, what is the foundational mythology which binds together the USA as a country and keeps us from splitting apart or breaking down into a state of near civil war every couple of decades? Common ethnic origins and/or religious demonination don’t work so well for us because we are and always have been a diverse nation of immigrants with a plurality of religions. This was the case even back in the day when elite = WASP, much less today. I think American Exceptionalism as a secular civic religion plays a big role in filling this gap. But of course like any other faith this mythology is constantly at risk of being misinterpreted and/or taken to extremes by zealots, scoundrels, the gullible, and idiots more generally, and so here we are.
Chris
@Cassidy:
What’re SOF?
And I agree, also too. I’ve got ex-military wingnut family that I happened to see around the time of the McChrystal controversy, and all of them agreed that he’d been stupid and that “the chain of command comes first.”
A military coup in the U.S. isn’t something I’m at all worried about. Even at its worst, the country seems to follow the Hazzard County model: guy in the suit gives the orders, guy in the uniform carries them out.
john f
Quote at entry #42 fromCONSTITUTIONALISM: THE WHITE MAN’S GHOST DANCE
Nutella
@Cassidy:
He wouldn’t have been forced to hide his identity if he remembered the rule about no politicking in uniform. He could have made pretty much any youtube he wanted in his civilian clothes. For some crazy reason the armed services have this idea that a person wearing their uniform is representing the service, not himself.
Cassidy
@Chris: Special Operations Forces
Enhanced Voting Techniques
The Onion nailed the rights view of the Constitution with Joad Sressbeckler reading the Second Amendment like it was a magical ritual or a cop doing Miranda every time Joad pulls a gun on someone.
urizon
Likely he’ll get hit with non-judicial punishment rather than a court martial. I think they call it “Article 15” in the Marine Corps.
D. Mason
Wow it takes a frothing psychopath to think someone should be courts-martialed for popping off their mouth on facebook. I understand you don’t like what he said but how about a little perspective? This is right up there with calling for treason charges against people who spoke out against Bush. In-sane.
Maus
@JWL:
Or any Ron Paulogist “constitutional expert”.
Soonergrunt
@Amir Khalid: Not overly so. In some cases, especially as manpower has been strained recently, some people have gotten promotions just by being around long enough.
That said, there’s a very easy way to get rid of the turds that floated to the top.
I don’t know what the Marines call it, but in the Army we called it the Non-Commissioned Officer’s Evaluation Report. There’s one section where, before all the ratings on Competence, Physical Fitness and Military Bearing, Leadership, Training, Responsibility and Accountability wherein the Soldier is rated on The Army Values.
L Loyalty -Bears true faith and allegiance to the U.S. Constitution, the Army, the unit, and other soldiers.
D Duty -Fulfills their obligations.
R Respect/EO/EEO -Treats people as they should be treated.
S Selfless Service -Puts the welfare of the nation, the Army, and subordinates before their own.
H Honor -Lives up to all the Army values.
I Integrity -Does what is right – legally and morally.
P Personal Courage -Faces fear, danger, or adversity (physical and moral).
If I were this guy’s supervisor, I know I could hit him with a career ending Relief For Cause NCOER for violating the Loyalty, Honor, and Integrity codes, and I wouldn’t even break a sweat.
That doesn’t even get to the Article 134, UCMJ violation (Conduct that is prejudicial to good order and discipline or conduct of a nature to bring the service into disrepute.)
agorabum
His CO is going to ream his ass in private (keep it in the Corps); an Article 15 hearing at worst. Because no matter what his commanding officer thinks politically, I have no doubt that he (or possibly she) is furious that this guy is making the Corps look bad.
Obviously no one at the top of the chain of command is going to do anything; this is no drama Obama we’re talking about. Exposure is like Oxygen for the flames of idiots.
shortstop
Meh. They may not be publicly insubordinate, but very, very many rank-and-file guys are vehemently Republican. This guy doesn’t think he’s out of line because he’s surrounded with people who share his political beliefs.
Soonergrunt
@Cassidy: Most the SF guys I’ve known were relatively chilled about politics.
The Moar You Know
Sooooooooo. He’s stateside, enlisted. Most likely working procurement, contracts, or some similar desk job. Look at him. He hasn’t been overseas and knows he isn’t going to be.
Chickenhawk breeding ground. Most of the troops don’t have to go to the bad places, you know, so they can ram their heads up their own asses all too easily. They still get the bragging rights, though. Such bullshit.
At any rate, his little Facebook group will be gone by Monday. Bank it.
Soonergrunt
@D. Mason: Article 134, UCMJ
shortstop
The FB group was gone the minute this hit the national news.
MobiusKlein
@D. Mason: Psychopath is a specifically different mental illnees.
I think you meant Psychotic.
As for getting court martialed; it is pretty close to insubordination.
And the replacement – he won’t follow an unlawful order from Obama – does that mean he would follow such an order from somebody else?
Kinda stupid
The Moar You Know
@shortstop: Please. Give some credit. The guys I work with, who are usually enlisted, run about 50/50. None seem too extremist. The “rank and file” (the military term for that is ‘enlisted’) are sure as shit not “vehemently Republican”. They’re not really too political, frankly.
The few Paultards, as in civilian life, seem to attract nothing but derision, and will not shut up about the guy.
Officers are a whole other ballgame. Pretty much “vehemently Republican”.
D. Mason
@Soonergrunt: Yes and the law also say you can throw a kid in jail for having a few flakes of pot, that doesn’t make it the right thing to do. What we’re talking about here, at it’s essence, is eradicating someones livelihood for running their mouth in a way that has no consequence for anyone. A marine at that, a subset of soldiers known for running their mouths. As I said, some perspective is in order.
brantl
@D. Mason: They weren’t in the service, dumbass, mouthing off in uniform, were they?
MobiusKlein
@shortstop: gone or private?
Groups can be open (anybody can join) closed ( by approval of group admin) or secret ( not visible to folks outside group.)
Probably just fixed the privacy better.
shortstop
“Rank and file” was a direct quote from this thread, Moar.
Jo
If he hadn’t made it into the pages of Yahoo news, he’d have likely gotten “Office Hours” (Article 15) Non-Judicial Punishment (NJP) for his transgression, but now that he’s rubbed the Corps nose in his wingfuckery I’m betting a Summary Court. Doubt they’ll go the Special or General Court route, too expensive and time-consuming and a Summary Court can hand him his ass with far less hoopla.
I guess he didn’t remember that part when they told him that he surrendered some of his rights at the door of the Corps when he put on the uniform. Sucks to be him. I guess the Snowbilly Grifter will get herself another martyr for the cause after his Courts-Martial.
Cassidy
@D. Mason: Um no. This is a Non-Commissioned Officer, someone who leads troops, blantantly stating (in uniform) that he will not follow the orders of the lawfully elected Comander in Chief. That is not okay. That is not “popping off the mouth on facebook”. That’s a serious crime.
Soonergrunt
@D. Mason: You don’t seem to understand how the military in this country works. The moment he tied his military status to his political beliefs and said that he wouldn’t obey orders of the elected Commander in Chief, he broke the law.
Now, he could get non-judicial punishment under Article 15, UCMJ, but that ends his career just as effectively, but a little bit slower.
This is one of the very few offenses where a zero-tolerance policy is absolutely appropriate.
Cassidy
@Soonergrunt: Most of the ones I knew weren’t very political, but they held wingnut beliefs.
Chris
@The Moar You Know:
@The Moar You Know:
It’s my impression that the farther they are from combat zones, the likelier they are to be wingnut assholes. Is that right at all?
Mostly got the impression by comparing my one uncle (went in enlisted and served in Korea => as liberal or even radical as me) with my other uncle (went in an officer and never got any closer to a war zone than West Germany => orthodox Republican in every way and just can’t shut up about it). It’s anecdotal, but it makes sense to me.
MobiusKlein
@Chris: My dad is a retired AF Doctor – never been in or near combat zone. Closest was England in Gulf War One.
not wingnut, not asshole.
Soonergrunt
@MobiusKlein: But for the purposes of the UCMJ and military regulations, it doesn’t matter if it was public or private or if the only other person who heard was someone not his wife.
If only one other person heard or read his words, that completes the crime.
They could also get him for Article 91, Failure to Obey an Order or Regulation, specifically DoD Directive 1344.10 and the Dept. Navy regulations that support same.
Depending on the specifics, if he was ever ordered not to make public comments as a member of the armed forces disparaging of the CinC (I got that training yearly, delivered by my Commanding Officer) then he may also be looking at a charge of Article 91, Willfully Disobeying a Commissioned Officer.
This is serious shit. There’s a reason why the US isn’t some banana republic run by a military junta.
Of course, they could just (and probably will) just give him a bad NCOER or the USMC equivalent, and then bar him to reenlistment. They can do that and it’s damn near impossible to fight that since so much of the NCOER is subjective on the part of the rater and senior rater.
smelter rat
One child who apparently was left behind.
D. Mason
@Soonergrunt: Being aware that they can punish him very harshly for certain actions under their rules and agreeing with it aren’t the same thing. I think it’s lunacy to put someone on trial for trash talk, which is what I see this as. Granted, I am good at my job in a way that protects me from reprimand so insubordination is like a hobby while I’m at work, but I think courts-martial is a bit over the top. He should probably be punished in some minor way I’ll agree but what’s being discussed here is far beyond reasonable in my mind.
MobiusKlein
@Soonergrunt: The open / closed / secret distinction was not to excuse anything.
Just pointing out to shortstop that the group may very well still exist.
Cacti
Oath of Enlistment for U.S. Armed Forces:
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.
So basically, Sgt. Stein publicly broadcast his intent to violate his Oath of Enlistment.
Yeah, he’s not coming out of this unscathed.
shortstop
Mobius, sure, it might, but I very much doubt he and his buds want that kind of evidence around now.
gwangung
@D. Mason: I think you’re trying to apply civilian standards to a military matter.
Not sure that’s appropriate.
Odie Hugh Manatee
@The Moar You Know:
He might want out and sees this as a way to do it. All he has to do is blame Obama and BAM!, instant wingnut martyr!
What, he’s a luaP noR supporter? Ok, forget what I said above.
He’s an idiot.
D. Mason
@gwangung: No doubt, I’m not a soldier. I only have civilian standards. I just see a frothing lynch mob and I’m calling it out. I agree that what he did was completely fucked, but an over the top response doesn’t fix it and that’s all I can see here.
Arclite
While I can understand that the soldier could be court-martialed for announcing he will refuse an order from the CnC, I don’t understand the restriction on not being able to air one’s political views in the military, and how this is not a violation of civil rights? Is there case law or something passed by congress?
Cassidy
_
_
And in real life, we call this ignorance. Plenty of information has been given in a short period of time to show that this is a very serious crime. Your refusal to process it is not our problem.
Cacti
@D. Mason:
Because comments on a blog are sure to be determinative of this Marine’s fate.
What a hero you are. A virtual combination of Gandhi, MLK, and Jesus H. Christ.
Rita R.
@Chris:
That would be “The Omega Glory,” with the “Yangs” and the “Kohms” (subtle, huh?), one of the worst of the Original Series episodes. However, William Shatner is in full, glorious overacting ham mode as Kirk explains the meaning of the Constitution at the end.
@The Moar You Know:
Why do you think this is?
Cassidy
@Arclite: There are no prohibitions on having political views or participating in political movements, unless they are recognized as inconsistent with military values, i.e. skinheads, militias, gangs, etc.
He could very easily have started a blog or FB group stating that the POTUS is illegitimate, etc. but the moment he identified himself as a service member and an NCO and stated that he wouldn’t follow the orders of the POTUS he committed a crime. It’s no different from a SM back in the early days of Iraq refusing to deploy because the war was “unjust”. You don’t get to defy the boss because you have different beliefs.
Cassidy
@Rita R.: It’s not institutional. They come in that way.
Cacti
Turns out Sgt. Stein was already warned about this by his superiors in 2010.
A word to the wise obviously wasn’t sufficient.
He’s going to get the heavy hand this time around.
Shalimar
@D. Mason: If it is far beyond reasonable in your mind, then you obviously have never been a member of the US military. You don’t disobey orders when you’re in the military. This isn’t debatable for any veteran. You just don’t do what this idiot did. If a liberal had said the same sort of thing under President Bush, they would have and should have faced the same punishment.
Soonergrunt
@D. Mason: Could people die if you disobeyed your boss?
Because that’s the stakes of the game.
We have to take orders, and sometimes give orders that have a high probability of resulting in our own deaths or the deaths of our subordinates. An example might be for me and my cavalry platoon to hold a critical bridge as long as possible to delay the enemy’s attack so that our forces can regroup and then counterattack across that bridge. The only way that can work, the only way I can relay that order to my men is if I, and in turn, they believe in a unified chain of command. If my Commanders can’t count on me and my men following our lawful orders to the best of our abilities and without hesitation, then they can’t count on anything, and hundreds or even thousands of men could die.
Conversely, if I can’t count on my Commanders to weigh my life and my men’s lives carefully against operational need and to do everything in their power to protect us and not risk us unnecessarily, then I can’t honestly ask my men to lay down their lives for some greater good in any context.
If I’m Sergeant Stein’s new Platoon Sergeant, I can’t trust him to obey my orders and carry out his missions. That puts his life, his Marines’ lives, and the lives of the other Marines under my responsibility in danger unnecessarily.
General Stuck (Bravo Nope Zero)
@Rita R.:
I left the army in 1974 and everyone was pretty much insane, officers, everyone. But from what I can gather, with the Air Force, it seems to be scarily tightened around Christian evangelism, with a streak of male supremacy that usually comes from that. Some of our craziest paranoid generals were Air Force guys, going back to Curtis Lemay, and likely before that. With recently a Fox News neo con retired general Thomas G McInerney. Maybe it’s because the Air Force Academy is in Colorado Springs, which is a big evangelical hub out west.
The Army and Marines, I suspect have some of the same characteristics for officers, at least younger ones, mixed in with some hyper patriotism/nationalism. But when I was in, everyone was just burnt out on those kinds of things in the wake of Vietnam and all the bullshit pain and misery that caused, and from a distance, I have generally been impressed by the general officers that began as ground pounders at company level in Vietnam. I think that experience sobered them to the limits of US power, and why so many current and recently retired ones were against Iraq. Maybe as some kind of serendipitous fortune, the young officers from the Iraq debacle will gain some of the same thoughtfullness and restraint of those that came before them in Vietnam. And make some sane generals into the future. I’m just rambling, and the recent vets on this thread know much more than me on the topic.
I don’t worry much about the military not kow towing to their civilian leaders in this country, as I think that sublimation of authority is pretty deeply ingrained. With the possible exception of the Air Force.
brantl
There are several reasons that I haven’t gone into the military, not the least of which being that when an officer gets to say jump and all you get to ask is how high?, even if it’s off a cliff. Not going to happen to me, without a damn good reason. That’s the only way militaries can work, period. And way too many of them are as dumb as stumps for me to give them that kind of control and sway over my life.
sherparick
Apparently our young Marine is about to get an education, probably just an Article 15, but it will be an education about not discrediting his uniform or the Marine Corps. And yep, we give up a lot of our free speech rights when we join the military.,
Speech limits and the UCMJ
My favorite UCMJ provision is Article 88, which makes it a crime for an officer to use contemptuous words against the president, the vice president, Congress, the secretary of defense, the secretary of a military department, the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, or the governor or legislature of any state, territory, commonwealth, or possession in which he is on duty or present
In 1999, Army Lieutenant Colonel Michael Davidson explained in a law review article that contemptuous “means insulting, rude, disdainful or otherwise disrespectfully attributing to another qualities of meanness, disreputableness, or worthlessness.” (Read the full article, which is very instructive on Article 88).
This article of the UCMJ is relatively new (about 60 years old) but it can trace itself back to colonial times. If you think nobody gets prosecuted under it, think again. Numerous officers have been disciplined for criticizing the president. Two Marine Corps officers were administratively punished for published letters to newspapers that were disrespectful to the president in the 1990s. Ltc. Davidson points out, “Since the UCMJ was enacted in 1950 only a single known court-martial has occurred pursuant to Article 88. In United States v. Howe, an Army Lieutenant was convicted for carrying a sign during an antiwar demonstration that read ‘Let’s Have More Than A Choice Between Petty Ignorant Fascists In 1968’ on one side and ‘End Johnson’s Fascist Aggression In Vietnam’ on the other side. Lieutenant Howe did not participate in organizing the demonstration, but merely joined it after it began. During the half-hour demonstration, Howe was off duty, in civilian clothes, and no one at the demonstration knew of his military affiliation. Howe came to the Army’s attention only because a gas station attendant, who Howe had asked for directions, spotted the lieutenant’s sign and an Army sticker on his vehicle and subsequently notified the local military police.”
Lt. Howe was sentenced to dismissal, total forfeitures, and confinement at hard labor for two years. The convening authority reduced the period of confinement to one year and otherwise approved the sentence. Three months and two days after his trial he was released from confinement under commandant’s parole.
Article 134, known as the catch-all article, makes criminal those acts of speech that are prejudicial to good order and discipline or that could bring discredit upon the Armed Forces. This is pretty broad and explains why it is often called the catch-all article. If your chain of command thinks your political involvement has affected your unit or the military, you could be punished under this article.
The UCMJ is not the only thing you need to worry about. If you are a noncommissioned officer, warrant officer or an officer, and attempt to influence other members of the military to vote because of your military authority, then you will be facing five years in prison under 18 USC 609.
Now that you have brushed up on some key laws, you could also run afoul of some very restrictive regulations. DoD Directive 1344.10 bans active-duty service members from running for office, participating in partisan political management, or campaigns (many exceptions are applicable).
Uncle Ebeneezer
@Zam: We are required by wingnut law to agree with them, anything less is
intolerancetyranny.Shoe
@D.Mason etc.:
Because the military occupies a priviledged position as the monopoly of force, it’s vital to a free nation that they not get involved in politics. I suspect you would agree with that statement in general terms. Draconian rules, restrictions of rights, and the kind of social pressure that results in the ‘virtual lynch mob’ (sigh) are entirely appropriate and necessary enforcement mechanisms to prevent this. The military propaganda arm and the military-industrial complex is bad enough without active duty service members getting involved in politics. On that note, I wonder if there any restrictions whatsoever on military contractors…? Another reason to hate the mercenaries trend.
P.S. I would like to throw ‘lynch mob’ under the bus.
Mnemosyne
@D. Mason:
So, just to be clear, you think that people serving in the military should be allowed to refuse to carry out their duties because they have political disagreements with their elected officials?
I must assume you also think that pharmacists should be allowed to refuse to fill birth control prescriptions for women they think are sinners since, after all, they’re just expressing their political beliefs.
Thor Heyerdahl
Douglas C. Niedermeyer has an illegitimate grandson?
Scott
Just about everything has been said but let me add this. “Armed Forces Tea Party” Anybody see a huge cognitive dissonance there? The Armed Forces are the greatest socialist organization ever created. Our ignorant Sgt Stein received government supplied medical care (damn good care by the way), subsidized housing (bigger housing if you have children), government run grocery and department stores, child care, extra cash for being married, clothing allowances, tax benefits, etc. Yeesh, these people are just stupid.
Paul in KY
@Amir Khalid: Yes, that is worrying to me. Hopefully he soon will not have them.
Paul in KY
@D. Mason: I’m going to assume you are not in the military.
kerFuFFler
@john f: Thanks for the link! What an interesting and funny read!
Rafer Janders
@D. Mason:
A marine at that, a subset of soldiers known for running their mouths.
A marine is not “a subset of soldiers”. Marines are not soldiers — they are marines, an entirely separate branch of the service. (Though it would be accurate to say that in the Marine Corps is a subset of the Department of the Navy in terms of the civilian leadership structure of the US military. That’s why, for example, the agents in the TV show NCIS investigate cases involving Marines as well as naval personnel).
A handy, though simplified, guide as to who’s who:
Army: soldiers
Marine Corps: marines
Navy: sailors
Air Force: airmen