Government

Marine Speaks Out About Inquiry Into His Tea Party Facebook Comments: ‘Constitution Trumps Everything’

Marine Sgt. Gary Stein Defends His Tea Party Facebook Page

Marine Sgt. Gary Stein (AP)

SAN DIEGO (The Blaze/AP) — 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.

While troops have always expressed their views in private, Stein’s case highlights the potential for their opinions to go global as tech-savvy service members post personal details, videos and pictures that can hurt the military’s image at home and abroad. His page, which is immensely popular and active, currently has 13,884 “likes.”

Marine Sgt. Gary Stein Defends His Tea Party Facebook Page

Screen shot from the Armed Forces Tea Party Patriots Facebook page

“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.

“Good order and discipline require the military maintain respect for the chain of command,” Glazier said. “That includes prohibiting speech critical of the senior officers in that chain of command – up to and including the commander in chief.”

According to Pentagon directives, military personnel in uniform can’t sponsor a political club; participate in any TV or radio program or group discussion that advocates for or against a political party, candidate or cause; or speak at any event promoting a political movement.

Commissioned officers also may not use contemptuous words against senior officials, including the defense secretary or the president.

In January, an Army reservist wearing camouflaged fatigues got into trouble for taking the stage during a rally in Iowa with Republican presidential candidate and Texas congressman Ron Paul.

Marine Sgt. Gary Stein Defends His Tea Party Facebook Page

Stein was first cautioned by his superiors at Camp Pendleton, north of San Diego, in 2010 after he launched his Facebook page, criticizing Obama’s health care overhaul. Stein volunteered to take down the page while he reviewed the rules at the request of his superiors.

He said he determined he was not in violation and relaunched the page under the shortened account name Armed Forces Tea Party. Last week, he said his superiors told him he couldn’t use social media sites on government computers after he posted the message stating he would not follow unlawful orders of the president.

Stein said his statement was part of an online debate about NATO allowing U.S. troops to be tried for the Quran burnings in Afghanistan.

In that context, he said, he was stating that he would not follow orders from the president if those orders included detaining U.S. citizens, disarming them or doing anything else that he believes would violate their constitutional rights.

Another Marine alerted his command about the statement, Stein said.

Stein said he respects the office of the president, but he does not agree with Obama’s policies. He said he is within his rights to speak up.

“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.”

Marine Sgt. Gary Stein Defends His Tea Party Facebook Page

Stein said it’s positive when service members are well-versed on the Constitution and what’s going on in government.

“When we know what we’re fighting for, we fight harder,” he said.

The Marine Corps said Stein is allowed to express his personal opinions as long as they do not give the impression he is speaking in his official capacity as a Marine. Spokesman Maj. Michael Armistead said the Corps is taking a closer look to ensure Stein has not crossed that line.

“At this time, he has not been asked to take down the statement on his page,” he said.

Stein appears in a dress shirt and tie on his Facebook page but he also describes himself as “a conservative blogger, speaker, the founder of the Armed Forces Tea Party and active-duty, eight-year Marine Corps veteran.”

Marine Sgt. Jerret Wright, who liked Stein’s page, said Stein “probably skirted the line a little bit” with his latest message about not following Obama’s orders, but his boldness in expressing his views has been refreshing in a community that often feels silenced.

“People assume that we’re zombies with an on-and-off switch, and that we listen to orders and do nothing else,” Wright said.

Military observers say it’s not that simple. They say it is bad form to lash out at the commander in chief. Experts also say his Facebook postings appear to link his professional standing with his political views.

They also point out that the Pentagon policy is necessary in preventing political and religious debates that could divide a unit and disrupt the strong working relationship that is needed to carry out missions, Glazier said.

“There are plenty of examples in the world of militaries heavily involved in influencing political events that have shown that is not conducive to civilian rule of law,” he said.

Comments (187)

1 2 3 4
  • Lumbar Spine
    Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:51am

    So what if the members of Navy Seals Team 6 had gotten to Osama bib Laden but refused to shoot him because they thought it was unlawful to do so…?

    Report Post »  
    • Lumbar Spine
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:51am

      Osama “bin” Laden (sorry)

      Report Post »  
    • smithclar3nc3
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:58am

      If they could have gotten him out a live they should have. They should have then reoprted killing him and handed him over to a third party that could torture every piece of info. they could get out of him then drowned him in pigs blood.
      Who knows maybe they did…..hmmmmm

      Report Post »  
    • RJJinGadsden
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:59am

      They would likely have suffered several wounded or killed and taken him captive. That was the mission and they are after all SEALS.

      Report Post » RJJinGadsden  
    • smithclar3nc3
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 11:06am

      They would likely have suffered several wounded or killed and taken him captive. That was the mission and they are after all SEALS
      How carrying an unconsious body is no different than carrying a dead one.

      Report Post »  
    • afishfarted
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 11:09am

      I think you’ve missed the point Lumbar. Our troops know that going into Lybia was not a declared war and skirted the Constitution. But these are not the orders the marine was talking about. His concern is that we have nearly completed the transition to socialism, and he will not act against the American people. Nothing in the Constitution speciffically says that we can not go into foreign land. But the Constitution does say that they are not to interfere with civilian activities–such as martial law. Regretably, our military does indeed have a history of enforcing unlawful acts. Google Hoover town, and you’ll see what I mean

      Report Post »  
    • afishfarted
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 11:16am

      this is a HOT topic
      GOOGLE Armed Forces tea party patriots and check out the hits

      Report Post »  
    • JP4JOY
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 11:26am

      I swear this SPINELESS ONE must be an “offshore” poster from some non-english speaking country. George Soros should doc the pay of his trolls that can’t write in english.

      Report Post » JP4JOY  
    • HuskerDave
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 11:41am

      It WAS unlawful, unless the SEALs were defending themselves. He should have been put on a plan to Guantanamo Bay for trial by military tribunal, and then hanged. This was an assasination, prohibited under U.S. law by Executive Order 12333, signed by President Reagan in 1981 and codified at 3 CFR, 1981 Comp., p. 200.

      Report Post »  
    • jahern26
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 2:40pm

      Even though they didn’t know their target until they were in the air, they had trained for months in a mock compound and knew they would likely have to kill their target. If they were opposed to doing it, they had plenty of time to speak out and be replaced.

      Report Post »  
    • burnteye86
      Posted on April 25, 2012 at 6:16pm

      You can misspell his name. He don’t care no more.

      Report Post » burnteye86  
  • justangry
    Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:51am

    For the most part I agree, but I‘ve never seen anything like we’re seeing today to complicate things. Did you catch that Penetta and Dempsey testified that basically the international community trumps the Constitution the other day? We‘re getting close to a point where everyone in the military is going to have to chose to side with the Commie in chief or our Constitution I’m afraid, but Facebook isn’t the appropriate place to do it.

    Report Post » justangry  
    • smithclar3nc3
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:59am

      Washington is so corrupted by the NWO progressives that it should be torn down and removed as our nation’s capital.

      Report Post »  
    • randy
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 11:48am

      Yeah, and our new Capital of the US should be somewhere in Texas, preferably no where near Austin!

      Report Post » randy  
  • Nevermind
    Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:50am

    RJJinGadsden
    NEVERMIND, I got my classes regarding the military chain of command and how the president is the top dog and Commander In Chief too. A little over 35 years ago. Not only were we taught how to follow orders, we were also taught to question and NOT follow unlawful orders. We were then taught that unlawful orders where those that violated the UCMJ, Geneva Convention, STANAGs, The ABCA Agreements, or The Posse Comitatus Act. The latter can be suspended if necessary and we would be alerted if it was. We were further taught that following orders would not be a viable defense if those orders were deemed unlawful even after the fact. This was a direct result of the Nurnberg Trials (Nuremberg for those of you who have not been there). If this president gives unlawful orders it is my hope that most commanders will have enough guts to fall on their own swords if necessary and stand up for what is lawful and right.

    *************

    You are correct but what unlawful order did this MArine refuse? None. What unlawful order has Obama given? None. He doesnt liek the president and that is fine if he were a private citizen. He isnt though and enlishted to have the President be his boss which is his choice, he must now face the consuquences of failure to the rules that are established. You dont have a D or an R in fornt of your rank, you are a soldier and you follow orders or faces punishement. There is no wiggle room or any poin tot debate, it is cut and dry

    Report Post »  
    • RJJinGadsden
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 11:02am

      Sorry, I should have pointed out what I mentioned later. I was simply responding to the classes that I received, and that I had to teach later as an NCO myself. This Marine merely pointed out later that he would not follow an unlawful order. Frankly, he was backtracking in my humble opinion. Because of this he will likely have the full weight of the UCMJ fall right on him. I’m sure the media will never let this go until that happens.

      Report Post » RJJinGadsden  
    • smithclar3nc3
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 11:04am

      Obama sent U.S. military to lybia without Congressional approval…..THAT UNLAWFUL
      tHE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENCY WAS NEVER GIVEN THE CONSTITUTIONAL POWER TO ARBITRARILY DECLARE WAR. Unless there is an immediate threat that most be adressed and theres no time to conviene Congress for a vote.
      More over he used U.S. military in as if it were the U.N ‘ S MILITARY.
      That an unconstitutional order

      Report Post »  
    • Vet with Vendetta
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 11:12am

      My only concern is that he is being scrutinized for simply stating a fact that he is allowed under the UCMJ to lawfully refuse an unlawful order. This is not a political “thing”, it’s mere fact. Attaching a political party to the FB page (Tea-Party) in connection to the USMC on the other-hand, may have crossed those lines. That I can’t necessary agree with.

      Report Post » Vet with Vendetta  
    • Clubber1
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 11:39am

      Check out Oath Keepers. There are MANY current and former Military and Law Enforcement who see what is coming and will refuse to act against Americans in violation of the constitution.

      Report Post »  
    • rose-ellen
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 4:26pm

      major hasan was harrassed for publicaly claiming afghanistan and iraq were illigal and unjust wars.They punished him for his outspokenness by ordering him to go to afghanistan and 3 days prior to being deployed he retaliated against their retaliation.he was no sleeper cell but like mcveigh a loyal american till he was politicied by the US army.[he asked his spiritual advisor if he could before God be said to have acted in defense of the victims of the amercan invasions].like a soldier praying with a chaplain.

      Report Post »  
  • Sumrknght
    Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:49am

    My high school history teacher, when covering “natural born citizens” picked ME out of our class to use as an example. My Dad emigrated (legally! and no, he never fought, he was too young) from Germany after WWII. So my history teacher tells the class that I can never be President, due to the fact that my father was not born here in the US. (My father did become a United States Citizen before any children were born to my parents marriage.)

    Barry’s father NEVER became a US Citizen. He even had DUAL citizenship (pretty good disqualification for any President I would think!). Someone want to tell me how on Earth this man can occupy the White House? I’d say this Marine has a pretty good case that each and every thing that Barack Hussein Obama has EVER done under the guise of being President – is unlawful.

    Report Post »  
    • TiredinAZ
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 11:54am

      It’s simple really. Your teacher was wrong. ANYONE born here has ALL the rights of citizenship, including being eligible to run for President. It has NOTHING to do with the citizenship status of your parents. Your parents status only comes into play if you were born outside of The United States of America. This is the question about Barack Obama. Was he really born here? Maybe, maybe not.

      Report Post » TiredinAZ  
    • COFemale
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 11:57am

      I am sorry, but your teacher is WRONG. You can be President.

      Report Post » COFemale  
  • davetrav
    Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:49am

    LOCK and LOAD–MARINE—America is behind you. –help get these commie SOB’S out of our country.

    Report Post »  
    • G-WHIZ
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 12:16pm

      My dad was in the infintry lastyear of ww1, and a civil-defence officer for our area in ww2 along with my mother(civildef)–I have their “cards”. When I hear truth/news about our marines, I get happy-chills. I never served becaues of too many birth defects(most have been repaired in the last 50-some years), but I still have the utmost praise and reverance for All our military! In watching and listening to my dad while he was alive, I very-quickly gained respect for what he was taught. I could sense his respect for me, even as a kid, as I gave him my respect and attention. If I was wrong…I found out quickly…if I was right…I also found out quickly…not much “baby-talk”, just straight-up. This made me feel that I was worth somthing!..not “oh he’s just a kid”.

      Report Post »  
  • Locked
    Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:48am

    Agreed!

    Report Post »  
  • Vet with Vendetta
    Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:47am

    At least the current generation of warriors. I’m not so confident in this up-and-coming generation. My children’s generation, they’re ones that I worry about.

    Report Post » Vet with Vendetta  
  • Locked
    Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:44am

    For a moment, take away the fact that he’s a soldier, and that his boss (ultimately) is the president.

    At ANY place of employment, if you get caught bashing your boss, his policies, or the organization on Facebook, you can be fired at will. That’s what this guy did; he said in no uncertain terms that he will not comply with his orders and that‘s he’s actively against his boss and not afraid to be vocal about it (shown by the “NObama” banner).

    Is it a shame that what we do outside the workplace affects our job security? Yes. But that doesn’t change the fact that when he chose to take his views public, and those views could get him fired in any employment, that he’ll have to face the consequences.

    I agree with most of his views, but it’s a fact that it was his choice to post them to facebook knowing they could endanger his career. He’s a martyr if he decided to do it as a protest. But he‘s an idiot if he didn’t think it would come back to bite him. First rule of the internet: if you don’t want something to come back to you, don’t post it. It’s there forever.

    Report Post »  
    • smithclar3nc3
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:55am

      He said he wouldn’t comply with unlawful or Unconstitutional orders…..As a soldier he swore to protect and defend the constitution first and foremost. That makes him an excellent soldier. What we don’t need is soldiers who blindly follow orders.
      You know what every Nazi soldier said when caught in contration camps “ I was just following orders”
      We don’t need nazi soldiers we need citizen soldiers.

      Report Post »  
    • Locked
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 11:03am

      @Smith

      “He said he wouldn’t comply with unlawful or Unconstitutional orders”

      Not quite. Re-read the article’s first few sentences:

      “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.”

      He softened it after receiving criticism, but he did indeed at first refuse to follow orders. He’s also likely breaking military policy by actively starting a political group.

      Report Post »  
  • B-Neil
    Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:44am

    That young Marine failed to pay attenchen. When you sign on the dotted line you become Government property. There is no democracy in the military. If you want to excersize your free speach, get out. Then you will be like every one else. You volunteered, don’t bit*h. GOD BLESS AMERICA and INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM

    Report Post »  
    • RJJinGadsden
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:54am

      You don’t become government property to the point that you become an airheaded drone incapable of self thought. But, this young Marine made some serious mistakes and back tracking attempting to restate that he meant ‘unlawful’ orders will likely not hold water. What all services should do when teaching Chain of Command Orders at the beginning of all basic training is to suggest that personnel should not get involved in social media if they know what is good for them. Such political statements can and will land them in hot water eventually, and there is no real privacy or anonymity on the internet. If anything the services can save money by not loosing personnel for essentially shooting their mouths off in a certain heated moment. I had my personal politics while in the Army, but knew that I could not openly express them and even within a private setting knew that I had to be careful.

      Report Post » RJJinGadsden  
  • BSdetector
    Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:43am

    Which is why he’s doing everything he can to weaken them.
    Evil doesn’t mean stupid. O knows the military is a big obstacle to his power.

    Report Post » BSdetector  
  • Nemo13
    Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:42am

    This is the only line you need to know before all else as an enlisted:

    “I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic..”

    This means that the Constitution comes before all else, so if the president is a dometic enemy (as we see in Obama, than your job is to protect the Constitution and the people from this man and all under him. Do you job, throw Obama in federal prison for being a domestic enemy.

    Report Post »  
  • Nemo13
    Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:37am

    On the oath, the Constitution is mentioned first, thus, its gets first consideration over the president.

    Report Post »  
    • smithclar3nc3
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 11:08am

      Exactly, an if this soldier would have been saying this when Bush was President the left would call him a HERO and would be using that very defense.

      Report Post »  
  • Mateytwo Barreett
    Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:37am

    How confusing it must be to be a member of the armed services in this country today. Bound by tradition, constrained by obsolete regulations, commanded by politicians, and undermined by the comander in cheif!

    Report Post » Mateytwo Barreett  
    • ChiefGeorge
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:59am

      Yes sometimes it can be very confusing, but most understand by their second tour of duty as a careerist that these are serious matters and you are not in a democracy but more of a dictatorship within the walls of military service. I can write my congress person but I first must submit my letter to the chain of command even though that letter may be about my situation within that unit. It makes for retribution later that the military can always deny was the case. The military can be forgiving of those who make mistakes but who are also hard chargers and team players, but make a mistake when outside this circle then you always will find yourself with no friends in high places to vouch for you. Just how it is.

      Report Post » ChiefGeorge  
    • SquidVetOhio
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 11:17am

      CHIEFGEORGE
      is right on (as usual). If Navy Chiefs ran the world, it would be a more effecient place but, I digress. Sorry Devil Dog but, you’re out of line on this one. Clinton was my CIC. Didn’t like but, had to deal with it. It’s a volunteer service and you know what you are getting into. I don’t mind him publicaly advocating Tea Party principles (especially since sodomites are given freedom of speech now in the military) but don‘t do it in uniform and don’t bad mouth the President until he is voted out this November.

      Report Post » SquidVetOhio  
    • BrutalTruth
      Posted on March 10, 2012 at 11:07am

      Chief, I’m afraid you have described the problem very clearly by your own words. Yes, you are very correct, that there are consequences to those decisions. BUT, there is no honor in acting in such a way to violate your Oath (Constitution) in order to have comfort, friends, etc.

      When someone is controlled by the opinions of others, they are no longer a free person, but a slave to others. The real questions are “just what do you stand for?“ and ”what are you prepared to sacrifice for those positions?”

      Report Post »  
  • Lumbar Spine
    Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:35am

    And this biased, partisan guy gets to decide what he considers to be a lawful or unlawful order from the Commander in Chief…? Give him a freakin’ desk job…I wouldn’t want this guy on the battle field defending my country.

    Report Post »  
    • RJJinGadsden
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:46am

      Yes, LUMBAR SPINE, he is required to see through the BS and refuse to follow unlawful and illegal orders. Should he follow an unlawful order and commit acts that are deemed afterwards to be illegal he WILL be held responsible for his actions. Following orders is not a defense in such instances by law.

      Report Post » RJJinGadsden  
    • candcantiques
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:52am

      Anyone in any branch of military service has a duty to the Constitution FIRST. They have a duty to NOT follow orders that are against Constitutional law.

      The Oath of Enlistment

      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. 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.

      The CONSTITUTION is FIRST, It is to be defended against ALL enemies foreign OR DOMESTIC. If a Marine is given an order to shoot unarmed United States civilians that Marine has a duty to DISOBEY those orders. ANY order that is given that is unlawfull MUST BE DISOBEYED. If you dont understand that you dont deserve the protection the Constitution guarantees you.

      Report Post »  
    • Lumbar Spine
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:53am

      And when, exactly, has President Obama ever given an unlawful miliotary order as Commander in Chief? Specifically…

      Report Post »  
    • RJJinGadsden
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:55am

      LUMBAR SPINE, –Libya!

      Report Post » RJJinGadsden  
    • candcantiques
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:57am

      The moment he started sending United States military pilots into Libya to bomb them. He did not have Congressional Approval. The order was unlawfull.

      Report Post »  
    • candcantiques
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 11:01am

      Jeh C. Johnson, the Pentagon general counsel, and Caroline D. Krass, the acting head of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, had told the White House that they believed that the United States military’s activities in the NATO-led air war amounted to “hostilities.” Under the War Powers Resolution, that would have required Mr. Obama to terminate or scale back the mission after May 20.
      But Mr. Obama decided instead to adopt the legal analysis of several other senior members of his legal team — including the White House counsel, Robert Bauer, and the State Department legal adviser, Harold H. Koh — who argued that the United States military’s activities fell short of “hostilities.” Under that view, Mr. Obama needed no permission from Congress to continue the mission unchanged.

      Thus far, the United States has provided 93 percent of the cruise missiles, 66 percent of the personnel, 50 percent of the ships and 50 percent of the planes in this Libyan mission, but we are not being hostile in Libya. Yea right.

      Report Post »  
    • Lumbar Spine
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 11:22am

      CANDCANTIQUES…where were you when Bush and Cheney had to hunt for someone in the Justice Department to sign off on the torture memo that everyone else said was illegal. Where were you then, huh…?

      Report Post »  
  • Nevermind
    Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:18am

    Ghost,

    You may have your own opinion but if you served you would know that all these violations are gone over to every one who enlists , its covered in your 2nd week of basic. The president is the commander in chief and you take orders form him and respect the chain of command. If not you will case consuquences and that is just how the military operates. If you wan tot be a private citizen and voice your opinion that is fine, but if you enlist you are government property . he knew what he did was wrong evven after he was warned and did it anyway.

    Report Post »  
    • RJJinGadsden
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:34am

      NEVERMIND, I got my classes regarding the military chain of command and how the president is the top dog and Commander In Chief too. A little over 35 years ago. Not only were we taught how to follow orders, we were also taught to question and NOT follow unlawful orders. We were then taught that unlawful orders where those that violated the UCMJ, Geneva Convention, STANAGs, The ABCA Agreements, or The Posse Comitatus Act. The latter can be suspended if necessary and we would be alerted if it was. We were further taught that following orders would not be a viable defense if those orders were deemed unlawful even after the fact. This was a direct result of the Nurnberg Trials (Nuremberg for those of you who have not been there). If this president gives unlawful orders it is my hope that most commanders will have enough guts to fall on their own swords if necessary and stand up for what is lawful and right.

      Report Post » RJJinGadsden  
    • Lumbar Spine
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:37am

      Bingo…and it strikes me that this guy is more concerned about the attention he’s getting than serving his country.

      Report Post »  
    • Vet with Vendetta
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:45am

      Nevermind,

      I too am a veteran. I remember the classes teaching us about not “acting as a spokesperson” and “making political statements” and such during boot-camp and afterwards. However, it is perfectly acceptable under the UCMJ to refuse an order that is considered unlawful. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT MUST BE REMINDED TO EVERYONE, INCLUDING OUR OWN TROOPS. In order for us to keep our country from falling into the hands of tyrannical leaders or communists, we have the constitution we are sworn to uphold. Any orders contradictory to that Constitution and our God-given bill of rights are UNLAWFUL and can therefore be refused. I’m sure several people in powerful positions (no names mentioned but I think it’s obvious) would love a military to blindly follow orders. One could get so much more (unconstitutional agenda) accomplished this way.

      Report Post » Vet with Vendetta  
    • RJJinGadsden
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:57am

      Getting that old timers disease. Left out the most important part above. The Constitution!

      Report Post » RJJinGadsden  
  • John 3:16
    Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:16am

    I agree the Constitution deserves more respect than ANY one man, especially, a man-child like Barak Hussain Obama, who himself is a seditionist and a trader to the Constitution. Who has broken more rules than our loser of a president and his cabinet of thugs? I salute this Marine who loves this country.

    Report Post » John 3:16  
  • 11:11
    Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:13am

    i was just thinking about if the “commander in chief” were to give orders that were ridiculously wrong would the military follow them and should they, i honestly believe our military’s got our backs, and anyway our potus has shown to be anti-american and said many treasonous things,

    Report Post » 11:11  
    • teamarcheson
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:16am

      I hope that when the time comes, Marines like this one will offer to train and lead us in the killing war that is coming. Congress declared war on Americans and made America a War Zone. We have the arms and will but as yet we lack the leadership and training.

      Report Post »  
    • Lumbar Spine
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:43am

      TEA…I hope you freakin’ get arrested for your treasonous talk about taking up arms against your government. If you hate America that much then get your butt out…!

      Report Post »  
    • candcantiques
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 11:20am

      TO LUMBAR SPINE…….. READ THIS

      What country before ever existed a century & a half without a rebellion? & what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon & pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is it’s natural manure.

      THOMAS JEFFERSON WROTE THAT

      Report Post »  
    • Lumbar Spine
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 11:23am

      And you are are a freakin’ drama queen…

      Report Post »  
    • candcantiques
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 11:23am

      TO LUMBAR SPINE
      Until you gather som intelligence SHUT UP. It is better to be silent and thought a fool than to open ones mouth and prove it !

      Report Post »  
  • momrules
    Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:12am

    I don’t know how much trouble this Marine may be in but I love him. Only a CinC like Obama would make someone wary of following him.

    Report Post »  
    • Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:18am

      @Momrules – I have heard many officers in the armed forces, reserves and active, that have debated their responses when the time comes to stand against Obama. Many of them realized even back then, after the first month of him in office, he had the potential to become a dictator. The main part they discussed was what they would do WHEN (not if) called on to take down the American people who oppose Obama.

      Most of them said they will die first before turning their guns on the American people in cold blood; yet they also accounted that enough remain who would gladly and willingly bathe their arms in the blood of the “hypocritical and worthless of America.”

      We’re getting closer and closer to that day.

      Report Post » Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}  
    • momrules
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:27am

      SNOW……….I think we are close too. I never thought that I would ever have to worry about American military members becoming my enemy. Chilling and sobering thought isn’t it?

      Report Post »  
    • RJJinGadsden
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:43am

      SNOW, I have been in touch with many of my old Army buddies, as well as a number of servicemen in all of the armed forces today. According to them, they are more concerned with 0bama than any declared enemy. Most are enlisted and have expressed concern about some, and I do say again “some” of the officers leading them. They are ticket punchers and ring knockers who are trying to advance themselves and may well attempt to follow such orders. Mind you, not all of the officers. Many are valiant young to old veterans who do the right thing.

      Report Post » RJJinGadsden  
    • Lumbar Spine
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:46am

      SNOWLEOPARD…are you saying that after Obama had only been in office one month that members of the military were discussing armed resistance against their government. Please tell them for me what traitorous nutjobs they are…I just wish I had their names.

      Report Post »  
    • momprayn
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:58am

      Yes, add me to the list (SNOW, MOM). Feel the same – VERY worried about the military re this issue. RJJING – yes – thanks. I’ve been thinking what would be going through my mind if I were in the military now – knowing the truth about Obama? HE is our ENEMY – the whole Obama regime have invaded via fraud – they are constantly pushing it, doing unconstitutional things – just daring us to do something about it in an election year to our first “black President”. His Communish handlers knew all that before they chose him. They calculated correctly the Repubs are cowards if not also clueless. Obama himself has not kept his oath to uphold the Constitution – yet no one calls him out for it. They’ll just mouth their feeble “objections” and that’s it. And I fear what evil plans they have for the fall elections – either create a crisis in order not to have them or something. They will not give up their power w/o trying every evil thing they can imagine.

      Report Post »  
    • kitchenjoe
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 11:22am

      I am amazed at how the left needs to take things out of context, or twist things. If you will notice, Lumbar, Snow says that they were ‘aware’ a month into BHO presidency, of the danger they perceived he is to the country. I do not read anything about discussing, plotting, a month in his presidency. Oh, but we dare not let a little things like facts get in the way. If you must distort or mislead to get your point across, maybe you do not have a firm basis for your thoughts. Let me ask you this Lumbar, do you think that the military should take you out if BHO ordered it? Do you have that kind of implicit trust in him?

      Report Post » kitchenjoe  
  • lukerw
    Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:07am

    In reality… a President who violates the Constitution (as Wilson & FDR)… must be cited… and have the Supreme Court rule… which can take years… and depends upon who are the members of the Court!

    So, if a Congress will not Impeach a President… he becomes a Dictator, even if only for a Limited Time!

    Report Post » lukerw  
    • teamarcheson
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:14am

      An Army, Air Force, or Navy pilot knows if he has been given orders to attack a nation that we are not at war with. They know that only Congress can declare war and if not then they no longer represent the American people who they swore to protect and defend. Obama would love nothing better than to create a situation where the US Military can be accused of war crimes.

      Report Post »  
  • sem042004
    Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:05am

    The Oath of Enlistment (for enlistees):

    “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.”

    Pretty simple, they are defending the Constitution of the United States. They obey the orders of the President in the furtherance of that, but not if it is not in the furtherance of defending the Constitution.

    Report Post »  
    • Smokey_Bojangles
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:11am

      Kind of hard to serve the Constitution and Obama.Considering that Eric holder says we are all terrorist now….

      Report Post » Smokey_Bojangles  
    • Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:14am

      I have to side with Stein in this matter – when Obama gives the armed forces unlawful orders – such as when Obama becomes a true dictator – then said orders should be ignored. But any LAWFUL order as defined by the Military Code of Justice, Constitution and established laws of the nation are to be obeyed.

      The time is coming soon when many of the armed forces will have to make a choice, do they follow orders that are blatantly unlawful; or do they stand for the Constitution and the people of the land.

      Obama is the domestic enemy of the nation.

      Where will they stand?

      Report Post » Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}  
    • MidWestMom
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:45am

      “…In January, an Army reservist wearing camouflaged fatigues got into trouble for taking the stage during a rally in Iowa with Republican presidential candidate and Texas congressman Ron Paul…”

      Why is it OK for troops in uniform to be on the stage behind Obama when he makes speeches at military bases? Doesn’t that imply those soldiers are supporting a political opinion/agenda? And does the military and/or the president have the right to “order” the troops to participate? I suppose one could argue that the president’s speeches are “the commander in chief” addressing the troops. But those speeches always contain remarks about his political platform/agenda. Sometimes direct, sometimes a little vague..but they are there.

      And if it’s ok for Obama to have troops on the stage behind him, then why is it not ok for a soldier to express his political views on a private FB page? Note: I haven’t visited the page.

      Not trying to argue one way or the other… but I’ve wondered about this for some time.

      Report Post »  
    • TIME_2_END_THE_PAUL_CAMPAIGN_IN_12
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 12:50pm

      Obama is the Military’s CIC. He is at the top of the Chain-of-Command. The Military carries out his orders… even if that means standing behind him, next to him, smiling and grinning (or fingers crossed behind their backs). The Military (when the CIC is talking/politicing) are a captive audience and at his beckon call.

      Report Post » TIME_2_END_THE_PAUL_CAMPAIGN_IN_12  
  • GhostOfJefferson
    Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:04am

    ““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.

    “Good order and discipline require the military maintain respect for the chain of command,” Glazier said. “That includes prohibiting speech critical of the senior officers in that chain of command – up to and including the commander in chief.””

    Oh? What article of the Constitution is that “well established” thing listed under, precisely?

    I get that they cannot act as official spokespersons of the military, but that‘s where any restrictions end when they’re on their own time, no matter what “well established” rules say otherwise. He’s right of course, the Constitution does trump everything else.

    Report Post » GhostOfJefferson  
    • SoupSandwich
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:33am

      Very unPC of him. Usually only the members of a rainbow issue or cair types have any extracuricular voice. Need more like him but he will end up in the korean dmz or doing an antartic tour.

      Report Post »  
    • justangry
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:35am

      That’s the way I see it.

      Report Post » justangry  
  • Nevermind
    Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:04am

    As someone who has served this Marine messed up and knew it. You have a chain of command and it is to be respected as well as orders given by the commander in chief. We was warned in 2010 about the page and didnt listen and now he is in trouble. Sounds like a poor soldier with no real miliraty bearing.

    Report Post »  
    • teamarcheson
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:09am

      When will the Joint Chiefs Of Staff Tell Congress That They Will Not Follow Unlawful Orders From The President.

      The Nuremberg War Crime Trials affirmed the concept that officers must not follow or give illegal orders.

      The UCMJ affirms that American soldiers must not obey unlawful orders.

      Report Post »  
    • dukeofpaducah
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:22am

      @ Nevermind – You are correct.
      Once the chain of command is broken, we will have the armed forces of a third world country. Congress needs to decide what unlawful orders the obamination should be accused. Unfortunately, no one has the balls. Oops, maybe pelosi does literally.

      All we need now is for our service men and women to start disobeying orders. Next thing you know we’ll have our military unionized. If our military discipline goes down, we are screwed.

      Report Post » dukeofpaducah  
    • Gonzo
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:34am

      I think you are correct Nevermind. I’m sure the military rules are not ambiguous in this area. We can’t have a Republican or a Democrat military. A lot (not all) of the opinions being stated here would be quite the opposite if it was a liberal serviceman and a conservative POTUS.

      Report Post » Gonzo  
    • Lumbar Spine
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:40am

      A soldier is supposed to keep his political views separate from his military duties. And this is such absolute bull***t about the President giving unlawful orders…this guy just hates Obama, plain and simple. He is not fit to serve…

      Report Post »  
  • skiz
    Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:01am

    I thank God for Sgt.Stein and the many other warrior for the truth in our military!
    They are in my prayers daily. The quote from Washington is priceless.

    Report Post » skiz  
    • teamarcheson
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:05am

      The New Obama Flag Has A Hammer And Sickle With Words

      We tread on you.

      Report Post »  
  • EqualJustice
    Posted on March 9, 2012 at 9:58am

    This make me sick to my stomach! How can the FEDS intrude on someone’s “OPINIONS” and “BELIEFS” like that? It feels more and more like IRAN around here… scary stuff, when you consider these same people did NOTHING to stop the Ft. Hood shooter and even protected his beliefs and opinions. Hell, they even gave him an EXCUSE.. “workplace stress.” hahahaha We’re in DEEP DO DO people.

    Report Post » EqualJustice  
    • JRook
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:05am

      No question he should and will have plenty of opportunity to exercise his first amendment rights and express his political views after he is dishonorably discharged.

      Report Post »  
    • cosette
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 11:32am

      Any President who receives an endorsement, accolades and campaign contributions from the Communist Party U.S.A.. is an enemy of the people and should be impeached and imprisoned.

      Report Post »  
  • jungle J
    Posted on March 9, 2012 at 9:57am

    only the sane understand what the progressive have in store for the sane.

    Report Post »  
    • Mateytwo Barreett
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:07am

      True that!!

      Report Post » Mateytwo Barreett  
    • Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:14am

      Understood.

      Report Post » Snowleopard {gallery of cat folks}  
    • 79USMC83
      Posted on March 9, 2012 at 10:35am

      We take an OATH to defend the “Constitution of The United Staes Of America”, Not to the President or “The Government Stupid” NOT to “NATO” or to the “UN”, against ALL enemies Foreign and DOMESTIC !!!

      TRAITOR : One who betrays anothers TRUST and is false to a DUTY and or OBLIGATION !!!
      Many people are really wondering . How many in “WE THE PEOPLE’S” Government are TRAITORS !!!! ???????

      We are being Governed by an OLIGARCY !!! and facing complete and total TYRANNY !! AGAIN !!

      Semper Fi !! Sgt Stein !!

      Report Post »  
1 2 3 4

Sign In To Post Comments! Sign In

Sign Up For Our Newsletter!

Glenn Beck Radio

Listen to Glenn Beck 24/7 Listen Now
Restoring Love