The Pledge

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
101

[quote]EmilyQ wrote:
On a more serious note, I don’t consider myself a centrist at all. I would probably say, if pushed, that I have mixed political views. I’m strongly anti-union but also deeply committed to caring for the mentally ill. I’m for decriminalizing drugs and strengthening assault-type laws (assault, rape, manslaughter).

My superiority lies in my ability to think for myself rather than wait for someone to tell me how “we” think. I am able to listen to Rush and read Buckley without feeling threatened by their views and I can and do enjoy reading from a wide range of ultra-liberal sources, from which I can take what I want. Or nothing at all.

That I rarely bother with pissing contests does not make my views tepid. It merely indicates that I value my time. I can read your (extreme) views and consider them. Occasionally I’ll even shift (generally that would only be true where I am not well educated on a topic).

Once in a blue moon I’ll argue because it can be fun. But then I’m always sadly reminded that extremists are married to their Ideology Set and cannot be swayed by reason. [/quote]

Great post, Q.

I’ve always felt that destructive and divisive views and “principals” are not inherently “good” because someone holds tightly too them…they simply become more destructive and divisive.

“The Pledge” means nothing.

These “stars” will hop on whatever trend is fashionable for the moment.

On another note; ALL of our Military personnel take a SOLEMN pledge to uphold the constitution AND to support their Commander-in-Chief.

Sorry guys; that’s currently Obama. And if one is taking that pledge and they are lying when they do; then don’t throw moral arrows at the President.

Mufasa

102

[quote]EmilyQ wrote:
But then I’m always sadly reminded that extremists are married to their Ideology Set and cannot be swayed by reason. [/quote]

What is an extremist?

I would venture to say an extremist is committed to his principles. Gandhi was such a person. As long as the principles are morally just and consistent with each other then there is no problem. Far better to be an ethical extremist than a wavering pragmatist. The problem with most extremists is they are neither ethical nor consistent.

Pragmatists on the other hand do not have any principles to follow; and if they did would easily let them slip when it is practical for them to do so.

103

[quote]Mufasa wrote:

On another note; ALL of our Military personnel take a SOLEMN pledge to uphold the constitution AND to support their Commander-in-Chief.

[/quote]

Of course, the Commander-in-Chief takes the same solemn pledge.

Question, Mufasa: do you believe that a military man has a greater duty to uphold the Constitution, or to support the CIC?

What should the conscientious military man do if (unlikely though it may be) the CIC fails in his duty to uphold the Constitution?

104

[quote]TrainerinDC wrote:
Looks like its time to round up some good men and go sheep hunting? Anybody with me?[/quote]

I got your back as long as you have mine, and if we go down we go down together.

105

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Mufasa wrote:

On another note; ALL of our Military personnel take a SOLEMN pledge to uphold the constitution AND to support their Commander-in-Chief.

Of course, the Commander-in-Chief takes the same solemn pledge.

Question, Mufasa: do you believe that a military man has a greater duty to uphold the Constitution, or to support the CIC?

What should the conscientious military man do if (unlikely though it may be) the CIC fails in his duty to uphold the Constitution?[/quote]

  1. His or her oath is to do both.

  2. That’s an EXTERMELY hypothetical question that won’t happen (at least in the time that Obama has as President, however long that is).

  3. I feel that Obama loves this country as much, if not more, than those who may hold contrary views.

Mufasa

107

[quote]Mufasa wrote:
Varqanir wrote:

Question, Mufasa: do you believe that a military man has a greater duty to uphold the Constitution, or to support the CIC?

What should the conscientious military man do if (unlikely though it may be) the CIC fails in his duty to uphold the Constitution?

  1. His or her oath is to do both.

  2. That’s an EXTERMELY hypothetical question that won’t happen (at least in the time that Obama has as President, however long that is).

  3. I feel that Obama loves this country as much, if not more, than those who may hold contrary views.

Mufasa
[/quote]

I expected more from you, Mufasa. You avoided answering both of my questions.

Obviously, a soldier is duty-bound to obey any lawful order, all the way up the chain of command.

If the order contradicts the Constitution (and is therefore unlawful), even if it comes from the mouth of the President himself, must the soldier obey it? He can’t very well fulfill both oaths in this case.

Hypothetical or not, and however likely you may personally think it is, it is a question that I think all military men and women should at least ponder.

And Obama’s love for this country has nothing to do with anything. Nero loved his country. Caligula loved his country. Hell, even George W. Bush loved his country. Love of country does not stay the hand of a man inclined to tyranny.

I’m not necessarily saying Obama is such a man. But neither do I forget what Baron Acton had to say about power.

108

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Mufasa wrote:

  1. I feel that Obama loves this country as much, if not more, than those who may hold contrary views.

Mufasa

Cheap shot. A pathetic cheap shot coming from one who fashions himself as a voice of reason on TN.
[/quote]

You’ve GOT to be kidding, Push…

(Tell me you are?)

After all that’s been said about the current POTUS…what I said approaches being meaningless…

???

Mufasa

109

[quote]Mikeyali wrote:
DrSkeptix wrote:
Mikeyali wrote:
Sloth wrote:
pushharder wrote:
Christine wrote:
EmilyQ wrote:
1000rippedbuff wrote:

…

I agree. But the far right is equally as smug and insufferable as the far left.

As are many so-called centrists who look in both directions with noses held high in the air and say, “Hmmmmmph…I’m so glad I’m better than these kooks. I’m so fuckin reasonable and I can’t for the life of me see why these people don’t appreciate my marked superiority!”

Count me in?

Well damn, you beat me to it. Lol. There is truly nothing as extreme as a dead center wing nut. The far middle of the political spectrum worries me.

Agreed. I again contend that centrists simply lack principles, but they also create extremists. If the bulk of the people are going to take a centrist route, then the more extreme you are, the better off you’ll be because they’ll side more in your direction than your opposition.

mike

Hmmm…I never thought I would find myself defending here prudence, pragmatism and moderation against the tyranny of ideology.

Not enough time or typeface to defend American Pluralism. But I can’t resist re-cycling this quotation:

“There are many who lust for the simple answers of doctrine or decree. They are on the left and right. They are not confined to a single part of the society. They are terrorists of the mind.”
–A. Barltett Giammatti, then President of Yale, 1986.

“I would rather be governed by the first 2,000 people in the Boston phone book than by the 2,000 people on the faculty of Yale.” -William Buckley.

mike[/quote]

True, true! No argument there. Goddam Yalees.

But at least Bart Giammatii redeemed himself by becoming the Commissioner of Baseball. (On his firm anti-union position at Yale, if that means something.)

110

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
Mufasa wrote:
Varqanir wrote:

Question, Mufasa: do you believe that a military man has a greater duty to uphold the Constitution, or to support the CIC?

What should the conscientious military man do if (unlikely though it may be) the CIC fails in his duty to uphold the Constitution?

  1. His or her oath is to do both.

  2. That’s an EXTERMELY hypothetical question that won’t happen (at least in the time that Obama has as President, however long that is).

  3. I feel that Obama loves this country as much, if not more, than those who may hold contrary views.

Mufasa

I expected more from you, Mufasa. You avoided answering both of my questions.

Obviously, a soldier is duty-bound to obey any lawful order, all the way up the chain of command.

If the order contradicts the Constitution (and is therefore unlawful), even if it comes from the mouth of the President himself, must the soldier obey it? He can’t very well fulfill both oaths in this case.

Hypothetical or not, and however likely you may personally think it is, it is a question that I think all military men and women should at least ponder.

And Obama’s love for this country has nothing to do with anything. Nero loved his country. Caligula loved his country. Hell, even George W. Bush loved his country. Love of country does not stay the hand of a man inclined to tyranny.

I’m not necessarily saying Obama is such a man. But neither do I forget what Baron Acton had to say about power.[/quote]

EVERY person in uniform has to follow the dictates of their own moral compass (as we all do).

IF they feel an order is so “Unconstitutional” that they are prepared for the consequences, then they SHOULDN’T follow it.

If that’s not what you want…sorry…that’s all I’ve got for you.

Mufasa

112

Fair enough, Push…

I’ll do that when some of you guys admit that Obama has no desire to take this Country to Hell-in-the-Proverbial-Handbasket.

Until then, we’ll agree to disagree.

Mufasa

117

[quote]pushharder wrote:
BTW, George Bush also failed miserably in that he allowed unbridled growth of government. The government led by him also squatted and shitted in people’s business.

So I aint jes pickin’ on Bam Bam.[/quote]

I apologize.

My statement was NOT meant to imply that those who disagree with Obama’s policies do not love this country.

Far from it. We HAVE to have debate and differing ideas or our Country suffers.

But you HAVE to conceed, Push, that there are MANY who feel that Obama doesn’t; or that he wants to take away our guns; rape our women; and plunge us into some bizarre Socialist Hell Hole.

I just don’t believe that.

Mufasa.

119

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Mufasa wrote:
pushharder wrote:
BTW, George Bush also failed miserably in that he allowed unbridled growth of government. The government led by him also squatted and shitted in people’s business.

So I aint jes pickin’ on Bam Bam.

I apologize.

My statement was NOT meant to imply that those who disagree with Obama’s policies do not love this country.

Far from it. We HAVE to have debate and differing ideas or our Country suffers.

But you HAVE to conceed, Push, that there are MANY who feel that Obama doesn’t; or that he wants to take away our guns; rape our women; and plunge us into some bizarre Socialist Hell Hole.

I just don’t believe that.

Mufasa.

I’m not sure that I’ve seen posters here on TN insist Bam doesn’t love his country.

He DOES want to take away our guns however. That has been clearly stated. Not in so many words, of course, but let’s face it, he aint about to start loosening oppressive gun laws anywhere.

If he wants to prove your point then I have an idea. Let’s see him turn the BATF into the BAT. Let’s see him seek for the repeal of the GCA of 1968.

He doesn’t want “to plunge us into some bizarre Socialist Hell Hole” but he will if his Ideas for an American Utopia are implemented.

Here’s the thing, Muf. We can go beyond mere speculation when it comes to whether or not Bam’s socialist theories will work. Why? Because every single time in history they have been used they fail. Every single time. Current most prominent example? Britain.

[/quote]

This level of discussion I appreciate, Push…but thread after thread of personal attacks on the POTUS; clear wishes that he fall flat on his face; and all the “Oh, YAWAH! The Anti-Christ Emporer is in our midst! And the emporer will fall!” crap gets REAL old.

So…what I do support/not support:

I DO NOT feel throwing money at things solves ANYTHING. (Surprised?). I can see some benefit to the Public Works part (God knows our infrastructure is falling apart, and working people do buy things)…but Billions to non-profitable companies makes no sense.

From Health Care to Taxes…I’d love to discuss it…

(We can start other threads! This one was about “The Pledge”.

Mufasa