Berger admitted wrongdoing. Presumably (follow me here, Nate), at some pointhe admitted wrongdoing to his boss, Kerry. When did that happen? Did it happen right before Kerry said "Er, yeah, go away please", or did it happen a long time ago? If it happened long ago, and Kerry only told him to take a hike once the wrongdoing became public, then I have a problem with that.
Aha, so you _are_ seeing the tactic I'm referring to. Shoe on the other foot and all that, how's it feel?
Berger admitted he did wrong. Kerry now knows about it, so he learned about it at some time. Nothing thinly veiled here, by the way, I'm asking if Kerry just found out and kicked him out (which would be OK), or found out a while ago and only kicked him out once it became public (which would be Clinton-esque).
Do they? How long ago did _Berger_ know he did this stuff?
Yeah, because they're completely different tactics, right.
I follow you just fine. Your logic just stinks. You are trying to draw a parallel between Berger-Kerry and Rumsfield-Rice-Tenet-Cheney-Bush. Berger is an unpaid adviser to Kerry, and resigned at the first sign of flap. The 9/11 commission thinks this is a matter that had no effect on their report.
Tenet, Cheney, Rumsfield, Rice, etc are all subordinates to Bush. Bush directly approved (and advocated) their findings. They screwed up on a matter of dire importance (WMDs) that led to the US starting a preemptive war that costs hundreds of billions and at least a thousand American lives.
For you to continue to try to draw such a weak analogy is just silly. Rumors of underwear stuffing do not go in the same league as international wars.
It makes me feel like I'm discussing a topic with a guy who desperately wants to draw false and exaggerated analogies.
Who knows? Who cares? What difference does it make except that you want to sling some mud that you hope will stick to Kerry? Yeah, Kerry and Berger are both Democrats. Yeah, Berger provides free advice to the Kerry campaign. So what? Do you really want to engage in some kind of Kerry vs Bush comparison of guild by third-degree association? I think Bush would lose.
Yeah, they are completely different tactics.
One is presuming guilt beyond the evidence, assuming subordinate relationships that don't exist, and exaggerating rumors to create a minor scandal -- which is what you have done.
The other is questioning the judgement of our elected leaders and their direct subordinates on matters that have been directly proven to be false and have directly observable consequences to American life.
Drawing strained analogies between Sandy Berger's socks or underwear or whatever and Bush's performance in Iraq is not likely to be helpful to your cause.
See, this here is our fundamental difference. If Kerry knew about it and didn't care until the press found out, that shows a trait which I do not welcome in a President. Document-stealing aside, ignoring an adviser's problems until the press finds out isn't the way things should be done.
Is this going anywhere, Nate, or should we just agree to disagree?
If he was in civies it would have been a bad joke. With him in uniform, on duty, and carrying arms, it becomes an extremely unprofessional remark stated in public and subject to scrutiny. If this is how they act here, how must they be in foreign countries where they think they can get away with crap like that. If this is typical action/acceptance by "the new Army", we're in trouble.
Overreacting would have been to go to his CO and report his remark and demand his apology/arrest, etc.
------------------------------------------------- - Clinton never - * Wondrous Website Design - EXhaled.- *
Okay, well let's say that hypothetically Berger's error was actually intentional, and hypothetically that Kerry was responsible for Berger, and that hypothetically that Kerry knew about it. I guess that hypothetically then Berger should resign or be fired. Of course he did resign.
Hypothetically, if you want to blame Kerry then you have to show that Kerry was responsible for Berger and that he knew about wrongdoing.
Of course if you want to belive that all of the evil liberals are crooks, then it's easy to imagine the conclusion you want regardless of any available information.
Well, I think it's pretty pointless. Even the congressional Republicans only grandstanded on this for one day.
First, ANG is close to Army, but not quite. Second, most of those youngsters do behave quite differently overseas than they do here, especially when in hazardous situations. They usually behave very well.
Unprofessional remarks from someone making 1200 bucks a month and you want to crucify the guy?
You're not overreacting, you're blowing your gaskets to no good purpose. And the odds are his CO would have snickered when you left, turned the situation over the first sergeant, who might have talked to the guy, but probably wouldn't. He did nothing illegal, whether you like it or not.
Charlie Self "I think the most un-American thing you can say is, 'You can't say that.'" Garrison Keillor
According to another guard I was talking with (a friendlier one) they report to the Army bases now. Evidently they're closer now than they were pre-9/11.
So you think I shouldn't get angry with anyone making less than $50k/yr, eh? Really now, Charlie. ;) And I'm not crucifying the little sh*t. I made the comment that I was angry and saddened by his actions. (If I'd wanted to crucify him, I'd have gotten his name and told a TV crew, perhaps after his CO snickered at me. But none of that happened.)
If a bigwig was in the can and heard that, they could have pressed for "unprofessional conduct", though that is worse for officers (conduct unbecoming).
Excuse me for thinking that our military (all forms of it) should be on good behavior AT LEAST during their duty hours.
------------------------------------------------- - Clinton never - * Wondrous Website Design - EXhaled.- *
Larry Jaques wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:
Why does his behavior upset you so much? People are people and soldiers aren't exempt from questionable conduct. If he was a security guard, would his actions have upset you as much? I must admit that I just don't understand your vehement reaction to an offhand joke by a soldier. The TV crew wouldn't have given a damn about what he said because it was not worthy of note other than in passing.
On what grounds?
What is so bad about the behavior? The soldier might have made an error in judgement by making his comment so that it was audible to more people than just his companion(s), but regardless, this is a non-issue.
You have no idea what he has gone through or what his future holds and I, for one, get sick and tired of people holding soldiers up to a standard that they wouldn't think of adhering to themselves.
Being a soldier (sailor, marine, airman) is one of the toughest jobs that a young man or woman can have and this particular career currently carries enough stress w/out petty complaints coming from the peanut gallery.
If it bothered you so much, why /didn't/ you complain to the 1SG or the Commander instead of whining about it to this newsgroup?
What does in uniform, on duty and carrying arms have to do with anything? What makes you think you are empowered to scrutinize them just because they're on duty? Just because you're a citizen does not empower you with that authority. If you don't care for his sense of humor in such a trivial matter, then shake your head and walk away and don't complain in a public forum about it. I find the arbitrary and subjective standards that people like to apply to situations which are no more critical than having offended their delicate sensibilities to be unprofessional and out of order.
We're in more trouble when people with no real complaint resort to making such big deals out of such trivial matters and attempt to cast an importance on their claims with such statements as "with him in uniform, on duty, and carrying arms". Go ahead and be personally insulted if you feel you must, but why in the world would you think this is a big enough and important enough issue to ostrasize this fellow in a public forum?
Closer, but do a little research on the difference between the ANG and Regular Army. Huge difference, no matter how closely they work together. Not that it matters to the point of the rant.
The TV crew would have probably gotten a good laugh at both his joke and your reaction Larry. I mean, for Pete's sake - it was a joke, and not such a horrible one at that. You'd think from your reaction that the fellow had rocked and shaken the porta-john you were in to the point that you feared he would actually tip it over.
"Unprofessional conduct"??? And by what standard are you so certain that either enlisted staff or officers "could" be prosecuted for this simple act? Because you're upset with it and are reaching way out too far in order to try to argue a point?
Your error is in thinking that they must adhere to your definition of good behavior.
When you're in the particular porta-potty they're talking about toppling, you have a very different perspective about what's humorous, knowwhatImean,Vern?
You guys are giving this topic a lot more air time than it would have received from me, so how does it feel to be a part of the media circus?
So you think that soldiers, cops, security people should all make really bad, threatening jokes in front of people, further diminishing the respect they get from everyone? Buy a Clue!
Being a civilian surrounded by armed guards making offhand comments like that isn't exactly stressless, old chap. The kid was bored stiff and wanted to do something destructive as an outlet. The object of his frustration just happened to be occupied by yours truly at that precise moment, too. I wasn't the slightest bit uncomfortable around the guards until that comment was made.
I commented. You whined. ;) And had you read my replies, you'd realize that it didn't bother me as much as this thread implies; not even enough to report him at the time. I probably would have forgotten about it if it didn't keep coming up in this thread.
------------------------------------------------- - Clinton never - * Wondrous Website Design - EXhaled.- *
Only if you leave your sense of humor and complete common sense at home.
What a joke Larry. You plop your little tantrum here as if this guy had spread-eagled you in the parking lot with his M16 at your head and then you reply like this to people who tell you that you've made a mountain out of a mole hill? You brought the issue here.
Ohhhhhhhhhh.... really *bad*, *threatening* jokes. Hyperbole does not earn extra points.
Oh stop, for pete's sake. You're whining like a woman. "Armed guards making offhand comments like that isn't exactly stressless"? If you're really all that stressed over a simple joke, then you really need some help. The kid was bored and wanted to do something destructive? My god man, you are paranoid. You need to get out more around people.
No - you brought this here as a whine. An exaggerated whine that you've continued to try to justify with hyperbole. Guess if you didn't want to hear how foolish you sounded by complaining about your little incident, then you should not have plopped it on the floor here.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.