THOUGHTS ON OUR PRESIDENT

An interesting topic -- lots of hot stuff and I'm frankly glad that Blacksmithn' posted the Snopes link or I would have believed this, but here's a cut from the link... from an interview with a Marine:

"With the new Presidency comes a changing of the Presidential Detail. The new command of the Presidential Detail may have chosen to add a facing movement to the protocol. This is at the complete discretion of the command. A Marine does not have the luxury of choosing whether or not he follows proper protocol. He is given an order and he follows it to the letter. If the order does not include a facing movement, the facing movement will not occur. If the order includes a facing movent, the facing movement occurs. It is that simple. Whether or not this movement becomes a standard part of protocol remains to be seen."

Obviously, Marines are now facing the President because they were told to do so... quite probably by the same partisan PR guy who now points out, "Look, they love and respect him (unlike that last jerk)!" It seems.... well, it seems partisan in the worst way.

< But I still love ya Misti! >

Misti wrote "Someone else's truth is the source of your distaste?"

No, someone's repetition of a readily ascertainable and vicious falsehood is the source of my distaste.

Misti goes on to state "I can assure you, my moral standards are far beyond your comprehension, period."

If your moral compass allows for the posting of obvious untruths presented as fact and further allows you to take umbrage when called to account, then yes, happily I cannot fathom your morality at all.

Misti calls it this someone else's truth... not hers and possibly distasteful while Blacksmithn says it is a vicious falsehood, which it is not, I don't think. It does seem to be insidious and obviously partisan. WE should all be for our president, many of you are saying. I don't agree. Civil disobedience and questioning authority are the hallmarks of a free society.

The fact of this salute is only readily ascertainable if you remember about Snopes and at the same time recognize the possibility that you are being bamboozled. You have to read through all of the military + president urban legends in Snopes to find out.

Do we know that Snopes is correct? Who will vouch for it?

... If the President's Marine Detachment have been told to salute even facing his rear unless and until he salutes back, otherwise staying in that salute position, then what is that supposed to show?

It is certainly a humbling pose -- the essence of a humbling pose in a society that does not bow or curtsy. What's the point except to show executive power? ... or to make political hay about it afterwards, pointing it out as though it shows extra love and attention?

Once again:


Was all that necessary? Couldn't you have politely pointed out to Misti that this isn't a true story and given her the link? I know Misti can speak for herself, but your response was unnecessarily rude.

Craven, I didn't say a person should unconditionally support whoever is President. The President has a tough job and the people who constantly bash him just because he doesn't belong to their political party or for any other narrow-minded reason make it harder for him to lead effectively, and for the whole world to look at this country with respect. Those who are always digging into his past (and I'm talking about any President here) to see if they can find out if he ever had a drink or smoked a joint or was unfaithful to his wife, etc., etc., are wasting their time, unless the past actions are things that could compromise the safety and security of our country.

If we disagree with the President, we should say so, and then try to find a constructive way to help make this country a better place so that we can continue to enjoy the freedoms we are blessed with.

Piffka, I think the word you are looking for may be "nobilis" - aristocratic, lofty

chatoyant,

I do not think political affiliation is a reason to bash a person, but it's long been a part of politics and rarely are the calls against it bipartisan. It usually means one side is asking the other to lay off.

A consensus will never be reached on this, such bashing will continue. It's impossible to define what exactly is contructive.

To me what Bush's daughters do or what Clinton's penis did is irrelevant. To others it reflects on their character etc.

We are on similar positions but I think we differ in one area. I do not think ANYONE deserves support. I support actions, measures & policies. I never support any person regardless of their rank or character.

Craven, those are good points. It gives me some food for thought.

And brings it full circle!

Pro- or anti- Bush, GOP, or politics in general is not my concern in this matter.

Tell me this:
When there is a joke on a Joke thread, or a poem submitted by one of our friends.... if we don't like the content, are we now to take the lead of those who bashed the 'reflections' here, and start snapping like a pack of wild dogs?

This will quickly ruin this friendly neighborhood.

I stand by my assertion that this was not the place for the responses to the header.

When I come upon a poem that I don't like, a joke that I don't agree with, or a Human Interest story, that has NO interest for me....I move on without saying anything.

Politics board is the place to debate. Human Interest is not. Nor is Jokes, Poetry, or Religion unless debate is asked for. I think what happened here sets a bad precedent, and encourages mob rule and poor citizenship on this Board.

Additionally, there ARE many Americans, who are apolitical, but think the sitting president deserves a certain level of respect, for no other reason than he holds the office. Its not so much respect for the man, as respect for the office. It may be a generational thing, or a matter of upbringing. Certainly, this 'feeling' can't be forced upon others--not should it's existence be challenged.

THOUGHTS ON OUR PRESIDENT - seems a little self serving Lash! Until I move to a dictatorship, I don't expect to be force feed. Sorry, I couldn't disagree more! BTW, I do tell people they have made an offensive joke!

I was curious why this had not been moved to politics - other threads have been moved to more appropriate forums by the moderators. Given that this was about the current American president, it would seem to be about 'politics' vs. 'human interest stories'.

Behave, Snidely Whiplash!


I don't care what you say about GW. (Although I do have to call Rove, and tell him his #1 Propagandist, misti, has been found out!)

I agree fully ehBeth!

Rove will know who your talking about Lash when you tell him about me!

You are not kidding BillW.
We have been messengered a fat dossier on your anti-gov activities!

Your 'puter is feeding me info at this very moment!
PS--Bill, It is time to dust your TV and empty your ashtray.

Don't need to Lash, see I got the Constitution on my side - and you can't get past my boys!

Lash,
...Don't hurt me now , but posting one's poem is a bit different than erroneously posting fiction as fact. When you do the latter, someone is going to challenge it. Some people are a little more heavv-footed than others in their challenges, but this is to be expected, especially, in politics,and religion. Things really escalated when so many, vehemently, came to Misti's defense. I don't think anyone meant to be vicious, but it's about time for someone to say "Hey let's back off, before it gets ugly."

It's like drawing a line in the sand and saying everyone on my side is a patriot. Ya'll are the root for them.

CDK: I purposefully didn't post this in the political forum because I saw it as strictly "Human Interest" ... but I was wrong.

I will try not to make that same mistake again.

Deb, as I stated above, I saw it as more "Human Interest" than politics, but now in retrospect, ahemmmmmmmmmmm......