Skip to content

ObaMao thinks his styrofoam cup is more important than our military

Political Discussion
83 13 1.8k
  • I would have thought the bigger problem would be the military being forced to salute a "present" commie scum marxist vacuum of a president. On a serious note, the guy has much more important things to worry about. I mean really, think of a list of the responsibility of a president and see where you put "saluting the guy at the bottom of the stairs when he gets off a plane"

  • I found this article on the topic to be an interesting read: http://taskandpurpose.com/sorry-presidential-salute-isnt-real-thing/

    Some key quotes from the article.

    On where the salute came from, and how no president did it until Reagan:

    There’s no regulation that stipulates presidents must salute the troops. In fact, for the first 192 years of our republic, it didn’t happen. None of the first 38 commanders in chief did it. And some of those dudes had some serious military experience. Eisenhower? Grant? I mean, Teddy Roosevelt was a war hero. Surely he felt compelled to click his heels together and cut a perfect knife-handed salute when he passed a uniform service member, right? Wrong. It was literally something that Ronald Reagan made up one day.

    On how a Republican advisor and Marine told Reagan he thought it might be inappropriate for the President to salute a soldier.

    upon entering the White House in 1981, Reagan began saluting every uniformed service member he saw. One of his military aides, a Marine officer named Joe Klein, who is now a Republican congressman from Minnesota, worried that Reagan’s new ritual was inappropriate. He voiced his concerns directly with the president. Maddow writes:
    “Soldiers were supposed to salute their president; the president was not supposed to salute the soldiers. No modern president, not even old General Eisenhower, had saluted military personnel. It might even be, well, sort of, improper.

    On how there was no uproar about Bush's "Barney salute":

    In the summer of 2001, George W. Bush saluted the Marine One crew chief with his Scottish Terrier Barney under his arm. It looked absolutely ridiculous. No one, however, questioned Bush’s patriotism. No one said that his dog salute meant that he lacked respect for the Marines or hated the troops in his heart.

    Anyone care to guess why there was no uproar in response to Bush's "Barney Salute"?

  • Because Bush is a god fearing American and Obama is a Kenyan commie muslim who drinks the blood from aborted fetuses?

  • Never saw a dog pic about that.

    However, the president, for better or worse, worse as in Carter, Clinton and this pig of a pres -

    is the Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces. Therefore, it is appropriate, and indeed, required,

    for the lower-ranking military member to salute, and for the higher ranking member to salute in return.

    It is the UCMJ. And, btw, you don't salute the person in uniform, Chris who knows not much, you salute

    the uniform. It's a matter of respect and discipline, military bearing, whatever you want to call it.

  • Never saw a dog pic about that.

    However, the president, for better or worse, worse as in Carter, Clinton and this pig of a pres -

    is the Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces. Therefore, it is appropriate, and indeed, required,

    for the lower-ranking military member to salute, and for the higher ranking member to salute in return.

    It is the UCMJ. And, btw, you don't salute the person in uniform, Chris who knows not much, you salute

    the uniform. It's a matter of respect and discipline, military bearing, whatever you want to call it.

    @calfoxwc said:

    Never saw a dog pic about that.

    However, the president, for better or worse, worse as in Carter, Clinton and this pig of a pres -

    is the Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces. Therefore, it is appropriate, and indeed, required,

    for the lower-ranking military member to salute, and for the higher ranking member to salute in return.

    It is the UCMJ. And, btw, you don't salute the person in uniform, Chris who knows not much, you salute

    the uniform. It's a matter of respect and discipline, military bearing, whatever you want to call it.

    Are you saying you don't see the dog that Bush is hugging in the picture Logic posted?

  • @calfoxwc said:

    Never saw a dog pic about that.

    However, the president, for better or worse, worse as in Carter, Clinton and this pig of a pres -

    is the Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces. Therefore, it is appropriate, and indeed, required,

    for the lower-ranking military member to salute, and for the higher ranking member to salute in return.

    It is the UCMJ. And, btw, you don't salute the person in uniform, Chris who knows not much, you salute

    the uniform. It's a matter of respect and discipline, military bearing, whatever you want to call it.

    Are you saying you don't see the dog that Bush is hugging in the picture Logic posted?

    @osiris said:

    Are you saying you don't see the dog that Bush is hugging in the picture Logic posted?

    He definitely saw it because I never mentioned Bush in my comments prior to his response. So take from that what you will.

  • Ridiculous subject. But it is interesting that anything posted about Obama, Bush is automatically brought into the subject.

  • No, Os, lol, I actually didn't. I thought the dog was the black coat of the woman,

    who is past his right shoulder.

    Ah. too fast, eh? oops. But regardless, what is the context? The dog is his? or the dog

    is the one whose master was killed?

    Hell, you still bash Bush? I suppose you can wonder about the context of the coffee cup.

    Idiots.

  • The lack of respect for our military is very much profoundly trended with Obama.

    There is no comparison, except for maybe Carter, who was another pig.

    Meanwhile, Obamao ordered, way, way too late, the bombing of isil in Syria.

    In the nightime, when nobody was in the buildings. Meaning, he didn't want to kill

    any terrorists, since so many Muslims still consider terrorists Muslim brothers.

    And since, Obamao himself referred to his Muslim faith.

  • remember this one, Obamao groupies?

  • Ridiculous subject. But it is interesting that anything posted about Obama, Bush is automatically brought into the subject.

    @diehardbrownsfan said:

    Ridiculous subject. But it is interesting that anything posted about Obama, Bush is automatically brought into the subject.

    Bush is just usually the hero of anyone who gets butthurt over all things Obama. I don't like either guy all that much.

  • It isn't so much being a groupie as it is I don't get upset over meaningless bullshit. If the guy just outright refused to salute every time I could see the gripe. When there are tons of other things to dislike the guy over, a coffee cup raise doesn't register very highly for me on the outrage-meter.

  • Logic loves Obamao, despite all his faults. Too bad.

    Did Bush ever say he needed his own security/military force? Nope.

    Obamao did.

    This is interesting:

    BwPso03IcAAIdL3.jpg

  • Yet, Logic, you show why we've been right all along -

    you libs feign "outrage" at anything about Bush.

    And your outrage meter goes still about anything about ObaMao.

    That is the biggest problem with all the problems in our country today.

    Based on political expediency alone, you and your lib sorts don't really give

    a damn, depending on party to be dissed.

  • I guess your reading comprehension is as accurate as your vision.

  • Yet, Logic, you show why we've been right all along -

    you libs feign "outrage" at anything about Bush.

    And your outrage meter goes still about anything about ObaMao.

    That is the biggest problem with all the problems in our country today.

    Based on political expediency alone, you and your lib sorts don't really give

    a damn, depending on party to be dissed.

    @calfoxwc said:

    Yet, Logic, you show why we've been right all along -

    you libs feign "outrage" at anything about Bush.

    And your outrage meter goes still about anything about ObaMao.

    That is the biggest problem with all the problems in our country today.

    Based on political expediency alone, you and your lib sorts don't really give

    a damn, depending on party to be dissed.

    Oh cool. We return to your inability to read.

  • I read very well, always did. Looked at the pic too fast, like an opitical illusion.

    Here's some good points about Obamao trending hugely in the disrespect dept:

    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2601912/posts

  • I read very well, always did. Looked at the pic too fast, like an opitical illusion.

    Here's some good points about Obamao trending hugely in the disrespect dept:

    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2601912/posts

    @calfoxwc said:

    I read very well, always did. Looked at the pic too fast, like an opitical illusion.

    Here's some good points about Obamao trending hugely in the disrespect dept:

    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2601912/posts

    So you read very well and derived from my posts about disliking the president that I somehow love him? I feel sorry for anyone who has to take your order at a restaurant.

  • It isn't about me. or Bush. It's about Obamao and his complete lack of respect for

    America, our Constitution, our military, our country.

    You can't post one post about showing that about Bush.

    http://www.bizpacreview.com/2014/08/16/respect-youre-doing-it-wrong-obama-bucks-tradition-skips-funeral-139127