The military MUST follow a stringent set of rules and guidelines. This is how order is maintained. This is one of the reasons our military is the best on earth. Even though he may not have committed a crime against property or a violent crime against another member or the military or a civilian, he still willfully violated an order that is in place. There are known consequences of violations. I have enough faith in the military that they will make the right decision for what is in their best long-term interest.

I agree 100%. Thanks for saying it much clearer than I could. It is the same reason that Gen. MacArthur was dismissed.

"His attorneys argued service members have a right to voice their opinions as long as they do not appear to be presenting their views as being endorsed by the military."

I also served for 8 years, and this is the crux of how I always understood our First Amendment rights. In other words, had he put on his uniform, and gone to a public rally, and made these statements, he could be kicked out, but not for posting them to a private Facebook page.

Dee, your assertion that your First Amendment right are suspended when you enlist is not correct...and unconstitutional. They are definitely narrowed, but hardly suspended.

P.S. MacArthur made his comments publicly, and were more about making policy, thus that would fall into the parameters I just outlined, and not be the same as the case of this Marine.

Here is a link as to why MacArthur was dismissed:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Douglas_MacArthur#Relief

It is apples and oranges to this case.

If the Marine is dismissed for violating his oath to uphold and defend the constitution, then all of our elected officials and the president should also be dismissed for the same grevious offense.

There are two Department of Defense directives (DODD) that govern political speech in the military DOD Directive 1325.6 and DOD Directive 1344.10. The DOD Directive 1344.10 specifies the types of appropriate political activities for active-duty service members while DOD Directive 1325.6 counsels commanders to preserve the service member's right of expression while cautioning not to ignore conduct that could destroy the effectiveness of their units. Before you comment understand what exist for tmilitary service members. He gave himself bad advice and now he is being used as a football.



If the Marine is dismissed for violating his oath to uphold and defend the constitution

,

He's being dismissed for violating military policy, ie failing to obey the orders of his superiors. Let's see you go on facebook and start superimposing your boss's face over movie posters saying "Jackass" and "Horribles". See how long it takes for you to be fired, then we can all tune into your futile struggle as you cry "Free Speech!".

Sure, you're free to speak that way, you're also free to lose your job for being an idiot. He's not being imprisoned or jailed - he's being discharged (aka fired).

Kevin C. has it right. No matter whether you love Obama or not, this is clearly a First Amendment violation. You do not sign away your Constitutional rights upon joining the military, and for those saying he violated orders and his oath, you are wrong. He said he would not follow any unlawful orders from Obama, which is a requirement of all service members. He can be punished and dishonorably discharged for following unlawful orders. it is alright that some of you defend Obama in spite of any of his transgressions, but this soldier should not be punished for having a different point of view than you. If he had said this about Bush, you would be defending him. We call that hypocrisy

myspellcheckerisbroken,

You've obviously never been in the military. You do give up constitutional rights.

As for the Marine, he needs to go. What he did was wrong. There is no difference between what he did to Obama on his facebook page than if he did the same thing to his company commander. He showed major disrespect for someone in his chain of command. Chain of command is everything.

Kevin C, myspellcheckerisbroken,

Your claims might be true if, in fact, Facebook is private. Anybody who doesn't realize that Facebook is not private is either delusional or a fool. Regardless of the privacy issue, anyone who has served in the military knows that military justice is to justice what military music is to music.

Out with the guy! He violated his oath, even AFTER being given the courtesy of a warning.

And we have heard the Tea Party birther line that Obama is not legally elected. We know the very high percent of that group that truly believes that line. So it's a logical step for someone like Stein to rationalize that, since Obama isn't "legally" elected President, ANY order he gives would not be legal.

In fact, it's been done already ala Captain Rhodes/Major Cook and Orly Taitz!

Out with the scum! He's NOT a real Marine.

Free speech? Try going to work and criticizing your boss in the same manner and see how long you will hang around.

This man is too stupid to be a Marine. He continued even after being warned. Most people in the military complain about something. It used to be no or little food in combat, now it is more like the ac broke and wasn't fixed fast enough in a combat zone. He was just too loud with his complaints.

Come on people----get serious. If anyone has the right to speak out when they see something wrong, it's our armed service people. Do you seriously believe that just because he is a member of the Marine Corp. that he doesn't have the same rights that the rest of us do? If you allow him to be dismissed because he voiced his opinion, then what's next for the rest of us? Before you realize it, it will be a crime for any American to voice their opinion. We, as Americans, had better beware of what we do. It will come back to bite us. I believe this Marine has the same rights as the people he protects. He should not be punished for speaking his opinion on Facebook, or anywhere else for that matter. What? We should punish him for being a Marine?

He is not being punished for his different point of view, he is being fired from his job because he couldn't keep his different point of view to himself and those who think like him.

I would be fired from my government job if I did anything like that so why should he be special.

It's called accountability I know they teach that to Marines.

Also did you look at his picture? The only thing missing is a skin head tattoo or a swastika somewhere.

You've obviously never been in the military. You do give up constitutional rights.

Going on that Premise, The military should not be allowed to vote, either. A secret vote against the Commander in Chief would be subversion. The JERK he was criticising never served a second in the Armed Forces, at least Bush was in the reserves which the Liberal Media commented on many occasions that he was worthy of being Commander in Chief. Liberals thought it perfectly fine for a draft dodger to be Prez. because that was a war they objected to. This Sgt. has every right to speak out against this Terrorist in Chief.

This is just another left wing effort to silence the public. Gays in the Military, was also a violation that was conviently overlooked to further the leftist agenda.

Lee Cassidy Munique,

Read the Uniform Code of Military Justice and then tell me if you still believe this Marine has the same rights as the people he protects. Sorry to change your beliefs, but you can still keep your desires.

Sorry gang... Facebook is not a private social media outlet. Set all the securities you want, but if you put something in writing, it's now in the public eye. Plain and simple. We have all read, seen stories, and some have actually witnessed losing their jobs because something they have said, gave their place of an employment a reason to fire them. This Marine should have praticed better judgement in my book.

I also wonder if the roles were reversed and this was a Democrat Marine, would it get the same type of media coverage and support?

Regardless, this is pathetic. I can't even begin to think about how many $$$ we as the American taxpayer are going to be billed on this one. I think we could use our $$$ a little bit better and things that will make a bigger difference than this one.

What is the most pathetic is.. How many $$$ are we the American Taxpayer being billed on this issue. I think we have more important things to deal with than this. The military should resolve this quietly and take it out of the public eye.

@Lee Cassidy: you are wrong. Military servicemen do not have the right to speak out. That's the first thing you forfeit by joining. It may not be "right" in the moral sense of the word, but that is how it is and how it has been for many decades. When you are told to jump, your response is "how high?" not "but i think my commander in chief is an idiot."

Funny, Americans 'defending' America have no American rights. More like, sign this contract, go fight illegal 'wars', shut your beak and stay off-line because we do not want you to be a witness and speak to the World about our crimes. I like Obama, but I like the American Constitution more.

He needs to be dismissed. It's embarrassing to see him get this much attention. Once he's out he can speak his mind to his heart's content. And for those who are saying it's a liberal thing you are totally wrong. When I wore the uniform the CIC was the CIC. PERIOD! It didn't matter to me what party they came from. Their picture was at the top, which meant America made it's choice of who my boss would be. Insubordination in any form cannot be tolerated in the military. We have the greatest military in the world for a reason, and he's not one of those reasons.

The board also recommended that Stein be given an other-then-honorable discharge. That would mean Stein would lose his benefits and would not be allowed on any military base.

Sounds like a plan to me!

Signed:

US Army, Infantry
Retired, 34+ Years

Thank you. As a soldier, you can't badmouth the Commander In Chief and expect no reprimand. Additionally, Facebook is not, never has been, and never will be "private".

Funny, Americans 'defending' America have no American rights. More like, sign this contract, go fight illegal 'wars', shut your beak and stay off-line because we do not want you to be a witness and speak to the World about our crimes.

Basically. Do all that for a few years and we pay for your college. It's the military, it's not civilian life plus camoflague. Once you get out, you can go nuts .... while you're in, do your job - follow the rules - and respect your chain of command or you're out. If you can't hack it, don't volunteer.

Facebook is not a private venue; its very public. His statements and positngs there are the same as making them at a political rally.

Duty to your country will always outweigh allegiance to a political party. The Marines don't need scum like this tarnishing the service. Semper Fi.

Do you seriously believe that just because he is a member of the Marine Corp. that he doesn't have the same rights that the rest of us do?

Sure he does. He has the right to NOT be jailed for his opinion. He also has the right to accept the consequences of his speech, just like the rest of us do.

Just because speech is "free" does not mean there is not consequences to it. As others have pointed out, had they slammed their boss on FB and it gotten out, they would have been fired. That's what is happening to this Marine. But, unlike most (especially those who are in "right to work" states), he has had lots of warnings plus a great amount of due process where, at any time, this could still be overturned.

There is also the point that yes, SOME Constitutional rights are curtailed with military service, but when you raise your hand and take the oath, this has been explained.

I wonder what his opinions were on Don't ask Don't Tell....?

"We're truly surprised and disappointed but it was an honor to fight for a hero like Sgt. Stein and every other Marine's right to speak freely," Stein's defense attorney Marine Capt. James Baehr said.

Defense attorney Marine Capt. James Baehr's pants immediately burst into flames and were subsequently thrown over a telephone wire while they continued to burn.......

1. Facebook is never private. 2. He posted them all over facebook, not just his own page. He made a page "Armed Forces Tea Party" which sounds quite political and related to his service, if you ask anyone who can read.

The guy was an idiot. He was warned, he was told of the consequences. Safire said "the right to do something does not always mean it is the right thing to do." He has freedom of speech all day long, he won't go to jail for this kind of talk, but his employers also have the right to fire him if he breaks the oath/contract of his employment.

If I went on facebook and blasted my boss, you better believe she'd have grounds for firing me.

Don't you just LOVE the two Republican Congressmen giving their support??? Wonder if the same thing had happened under Bush , how supportive they would be?

See you, nutjob Marine. Let the BOOT hit you on the way out!

Between this guy and Manning (obviously, what Manning did was far, far worse), someone needs to smash more education into Basic.

Facebook is inherently a place to voice personal opinions-- that's essentially what it's created to do. If his security settings were set to "Private" then I can fully understand the argument that this is a first amendment issue and he should be free to state whatever opinion he wants in that setting. If he left the page "Public" then he's a moron and ought to be punished for an obvious transgression of the aforementioned Pentagon rule violations.

So, for me at least, the question is ultimately about whether or not the postings were private or public. That is the crux of the issue.

I also understand, however, the importance of chain of command and the even greater importance of respect for that chain of command and there was certainly a breach of that. But I have to say that private communications ought to be treated as such. My brother, while serving in the air force, often sent me emails critical of various segments of government, their decisions, etc. Should he be kicked out as well? I don't think so-- as his opinions do not directly effect his ability to perform the job at hand. He is critical of Obama too-- and openly voices that opinion-- just not in public forums. I can tell you that there are a TON of service members who privately are critical of Obama and the majority of them probably have, at one time or another, voiced that opinion-- what are you going to do? Fire them all?

So again, for me it all comes down to whether or not his facebook page was publicly accessible. If it was private, then it should be treated as such. If it wasn't? Well, then he f*cked with the wrong bull, I guess, and he'll get the horns.

I served in Iraq 3 times- those of you who have never served have no clue about the military or the UCMJ. As many of my brothers on here have said, you learn quickly that many of your "rights" are curtailed- that's what you accept when you put on the uniform. Stein's behavior was clearly insubordinate, and as others have noted, he could have been courtmartialed and gone to jail for his "free speech"... he's getting away lucky. The UCMJ is the soldier's book of laws and it is NOT the same as state and federal law- for example, adultery is a criminal offense under the UCMJ, unlike the case in almost all of the 50 states. You commit a crime overseas, depending on what you did, the U.S. may not have jurisdiction- as a soldier, you are always under the jursidiction of the UCMJ.

This guy was warned, given opportunities to shut up and he failed to do so- actions have consequences- he's lucky not to be behind bars. Good riddance to a muddleheaded teabagger (an oxymoron, I know).

@ WMG-21 - What do you think would have happened if he were caught by a superior officer speaking this stuff to other soldiers?

Saying this stuff out loud is dangerous if you want to stay in the military. Writing it down is more so and pasting it online is just nuts.

As a former soldier, I can say this guy knew he was wrong and repeatedly wrong. He ignored his chain of command because he felt like it, and because of his personal politics. People must have liked him, because he was given opportunities to correct himself, and act like a professional soldier. However, He repeatedly brushed off warnings, and publicly disrespected the president (the top of his chain of command). Actions have consequences.

As a non-commissioned officer, he is supposed to be a leader. He knew what those consequences meant, and now he is going to experience them. Following directives of the chain of command is not optional, it is critical for maintaining order and cohesiveness in life-threatening situations. If his subordinates had chosen not to follow his orders because they didn’t like his politics how would he have viewed that? His behavior is other than honorable.

I am tossed on this one.

In one way, the military needs discipline. It is that that has made ours the greatest in the world.

In another, I believe there should be a discussion within the military of the lawfulness of what some orders could entail, and if such orders violated the constitutional rights of Americans, we don't want one service member following them.

Two very critical points:

1.) most importantly, for those who are serving and have served, a heart felt THANK YOU !

2.) while I agree that this Marine should not continue serve (his inability to respect the Commander in Chief makes continued service impossible) I believe that the punishment exceeds the "crime." Give him a general discharge, no reduction in rank. The Marines and this clown part ways, never to speak again.

Just to clarify one point - all elected officials, including the President, are civilians. The Constitution forbids active duty personnel to have higher elected office, because the military must be under civilian control. Therefore, trying to apply military standards to civilians, even elected civilians, is stupid.

I'm gladdened to see that other ex-military personnel all are speaking up about Sgt. Stein's stupidity. I'm sorry that so few serve. They just don't get the concept of being in the military.

Interestingly, Congressman DUNCAN HUNTER (Rep) was championing this guy's rights yesterday on the news, which was fascinating, as he has served in the Marine Corp himself. No wonder people get annoyed with Congress - they seem to think there is a different set of rules for everyone.
This persons thoughts are his own, but everything else belongs to the military. Can you imagine what the Corps would look like if those serving ran around spouting their political opinions publicly?
Political thoughts should be kept private for another reason too. A marine, so obviously disenchanted with the current administration, would be an easy subject for manipulation and could become a security threat if they fell under the influence of the wrong sort of people. Thank goodness he's on the way out, because he's a ticking time bomb.

For all of you bleating about this "poor" Marine who's getting discharged for publicly expressing his disdain for his boss and shouting about "free" speech and then not liking the consequences ... welcome to the realities of the Right to Work legislation so many of you support.

In a Right to Work state, you can be fired for ANY reason, including something as stupid as the fact you wore the color orange to work in concert with several fellow employees. In a Right to Work state an employer can fire you for any reason or no reason, unless the business has written company policy, that both you and the company sign, about conduct, procedures, discipline, etc., That will offer some protection for being fired regarding those things. Other than that, you're on your own and S**T out of luck.

I live in Indiana which just passed Right to Work and I am waiting for the wailing and gnashing of teeth to begin as employers start to flex their newly-strengthened muscles and people who thought this was such a great idea because it was anti-those evil, nasty, unnecessary unions find themselves being put out of work for no substantive reason. Wanna put up a funny poster with the boss' face over a pig's body or something as benign as that? Kiss your job goodbye if he doesn't find it as funny as you did.

Right to Work is like employees and bosses facing off with equal weapons of defense, then the employees drop and smash their weapons, lay on the ground at the boss' feet, put his boot on their neck and say, "I know you'll always do what's best for me boss, because you're just that great kind of guy."

Look up the old fable about the scorpion and the frog... Working people who support Right to Work policies are nothing but croaking frogs who will eventually feel the scorpion's sting.

dirp... I think the point here is to make an example. We've had a breakdown in military discipline over the last 10 years (people disobeying direct legal orders) and it's become ridiculously noticeable since Obama was elected. This is not possible for the military to ignore. And yes, lessons sometimes need to be made. Stein disobeyed orders and violated several elements of the UCMJ. He probably could have gotten jail. So, I think he's lucky.

The first thing you are told when you join the military is that you have lost some of your constitutional rights.. If you are sunburned, you are disciplined for damaging government property.. no joke guys... You are under the UCMJ and no longer under the constitution while in the military.. Not only that, the Marine Corps is an employer, and they have the right to FIRE whoever they want to... He doen't have the RIGHT to have a job with them... It's a privledge. And an HONOR to serve.. Even a civilian employer would have fired him, and no one would question it. Its ludicrous to somehow think that the military shouldn't have the same rights to fire insubordinate employees..

John, there is no place in the military for discussion of the legality of orders, in the ranks, How could you do anything if every grunt in the unit was parsing the meaning of orders.

This marine broke the faith. What if instead of the CIC in these disparaging images, it was his unit CO with the grunts yucking it up in the ranks.The UCMJ is explicit on actions detrimental to good order and discipline, and this falls under those regs.

BlackHillsLaura

I don't think this thread is about right to work, but since you went there.

My father was a lifelong union member and it did him a lot of good. The problem I have is that unions have morphed from getting better wages and benefits for good skilled workers to protecting bad workers from getting fired. If unions want to have any sway in the future they need to be more proactive in removing bad workers for the sake of both the employers and the unions.

I do concrete work in Minnesota. The redi-mix drivers in the city are protected by the unions, while outlying areas are non-union. The non-union workers get better pay and better benefits and are quite honestly better workers because the companies can pick and choose the best employees rather than taking what the hall gives them.

So, while unions have done a great good over the years, they need to change their policies if they are going to survive.

When in the military, you don't get to pick and choose which regulations and orders you obey and which you ignore. This guy tried to get cute and it bit him in the asz.

Not to mention that this guy flat out said he wouldn't obey the orders of his commander in chief. This stuff about he wouldn't obey "unlawful" orders is an after the fact modification: he initially said he wouldn't obey any orders, period. Only when the hammer was already starting to fall down did he start squirming and scrambling to add shyte like: "oh, I meant *unlawful* orders"

He ain't no hero, just some loudmouth dumbass who put his foot in his mouth. Screw him.

AAJJ

A scenario. A mass protest went to Washington, and all the protesters were armed, whether they had intention of using them or not. Unless shots are fired, they are not violating the Constitution. Do we really want some to follow orders if that order is to shoot the protesters?

I am not specifically writing about this man. I am writing about a discussion that should take place, especially considering some legislation that has recently been passed.

Once you enter the military the rules and some laws change. In a way he is no longer just a citizen but a member of the military.

This man disobeyed orders and should thus be dismissed. Can we trust him to protect this country when he breaches laws and orders. Would he protect President Obama while publicly disrespecting him?

What he did may not be against civilian laws, but it may be against Military Laws

Oh the irony of a teabagger being defended by the ACLU after all the criticism of them by teabaggers.

What's hypocritical of those supporting Stein is the outrage they had when anyone said something they didn't like about Bush. People were called traitors, appeasers, and just about any other derogatory name yet now it's his "freedom of speech now because it's Obama he is talking about.

I don't have to use much imagination to know what this Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif. would be saying if McCain had been elected president and a Marine was saying the things this Stein is saying. Would a court martial be a reach? I know he would be outraged and would be demanding him dishonorably discharged for disrespect for the Commander-in-Chief. Talk about hypocrisy.

This Stein is a member of the armed forces and as such is required to honor those who are higher in rank than he is whether he agrees with them or not. The military cannot function under any other rules. Court martial and firing squad has been used in the past for those disobeying their commanding officer. Why would this be any different.

Realist pondering....

By your logic obama is also culpable for libya for not seeking congressional approval. Why didn't you include him in your argument?

Any official that has been elected by the people especially the president has to be respected.

Back during the Clinton years I was assigned to an Air Force base (I was Navy, still in therapy because of it). I was kind of shocked when I saw t-shirts with "I didn't vote for him or her" at the exchange.

I'll second what everyone else has said, once you put on that uniform you do not have the same rights as a civilian. You can be incarcerated for things a civilian would laugh at. The military is a world within a world.

@ john-737278

A union does not protect a bad worker from being fired. They protect a "bad worker" from being fired without just cause. Any company can fire a union worker if they have a case but they cannot fire a union worker just because the boss doesn't like him. Your dad would know that. Ask him.

His First Amendment rights weren't exactly suspended when he signed up, but they were curtailed temporarily. You aren't allowed to publicly undermine the chain of command and the concept of civilian leadership of the military. To do so puts the lives of fellow servicemembers at risk.

This guy is just a politician making a name for himself. He knew what he was doing and exactly what would happen. If the military condones his behavior the US military could fall apart. Imagine a Republican General whose troops are Democrats. The would question every order he gives. It would be a nightmare.

Larry-2260635
Tell that to well qualified teachers who get cut because of the seniority of teachers that are not qualified. I was talking to my brother-in-law this last weekend about this subject. He has been asked to be steward and refuses because he has a moral problem protecting employees from being fired for being bad employees. Where he works, employees have to be late for work five times before they can be written up. They have to be written up five times before they can be fired. I can see why companies wouldn't want unions, because they can't do their jobs with this kind of employee.

Sorry, devildog, but you didn't know to stay within your left and right lateral limits. You made your bed, now you gotta sleep in it. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.... BOHICA

IDK, I don't think that his lawyer was too smart, anyways. He called his public facebook page "private" during the post court interview... ""Think about how dangerous this could be if the U.S. government can prosecute you for something you say on your private Facebook page," Baehr said."

The bottom line is that this marine put his fellow serivicemembers at risk by publicly undermining the chain of command. This isn't politics, it's the lives of our armed forces, and that to me is unforgivable and intolerable.

john, by your own statement the teacher can be fired. They just have to build a case. If otherwise they would fire a teacher so a friend of the city council (or some other big wheel) could take their place. Believe me I know about local politics and what they do. I also know about union politics and some of their underhanded dealings but the overall idea of the union is a good thing. Ask people that have been working for a company for 20 years and is suddenly let go for no valid reason except he "doesn't fit" anymore.

I do not disagree with anything this guy said, as an old soldier I think he must be pretty stupid to think he will be allowed to remain

Correct decision

Larry-2260635

I totally agree, unions have done a lot of good. My only comment was that if they want to survive, they need to change their mindset to one of guaranteeing only the best workers will be supplied, and weed out the bad.

A field commander needs trained and focused troops not a bunch of crybaby political activists. Tossing him out of the service is no loss.

The Marine Corps has said it decided to take administrative action after Stein declared on Facebook that he would not follow orders from Obama and later clarified that statement saying he would not follow unlawful orders.

How convenient. A serving Marine makes a very foolish and career ending statement. After getting caught, he "clarifies" his statement by amendments that change the entire meaning.

As a free nation, we have a powerful military that must answer to civilian leadership for critical purposes. Civilian leadership that answers to a powerful military is not a free nation. This marine is treading very dangerous waters by stating that he would refuse orders from his civilian command. I believe he exposes himself to charges of treason and dishonors the many brave heroes (both present and past) of the Marine Corps.

A very foolish, but equally serious, mistake by a young man that spent nine years to achieve the rank of sergeant disappoints but does not surprise me. What does surprise me is that seemingly intelligent and loyal Americans support his actions for purely partisan reasons. What floors me is that two U.S. Congressmen put their own oaths to the United States of America in jeopardy by supporting such actions for the very same partisan reasons.

Yes, a few on the left would do the same thing if the shoe were on the foot. I refuse to be included in that group and so should you. I'm a registered Democrat. If my elected Representative defended such actions from a member of the military, no matter which side of the aisle he or the President sat, I would do everything possible to remove him or her from office. Our first priority is being loyal to The United States of America, not to a united political party(red or blue).

There are way too many clueless posts in this thread. Those yelling free speech violation obviously know nothing about the military. This is a voluntary enlistment. This idiot knew what he was signing up for and what rights he gives up while in service.

The argument that facebook is private is really bogus. He wanted to spread the hate and influence others with his maligned viewpoints. He deserves to be thrown out on his ear. He is a disgrace to those that serve in honor.

Those that argue free speech (and I am an extreme advocate) have no clue in this case. Also, in civilian life you have the right to free speech but there are natural consequences as someone else pointed out.

Kevin C-752389

"His attorneys argued service members have a right to voice their opinions as long as they do not appear to be presenting their views as being endorsed by the military."

I also served for 8 years, and this is the crux of how I always understood our First Amendment rights. In other words, had he put on his uniform, and gone to a public rally, and made these statements, he could be kicked out, but not for posting them to a private Facebook page

It was NOT a private Facebook page. It is a public forum that Stein created, called the Armed Forces Tea Party. You don't have to be a member, or "like" the page to view its contents. Sgt Stein is not being kicked out of the service for saying he would not follow unlawful orders of the President. He is being given the boot for refusing to obey orders given to him to stop posting on that page. He is not being discharged for expressing his political views, he is being discharged for displaying and posting disrespectful messages about his CnC. If you don't believe me, go look at the Armed Forces Tea Party page on Facebook, then come back here and argue that you wouldn't be fired, if you posted images like the ones on that page of your boss.

Lee Cassidy Munique - Again we hear words of vast experience from someone who has obviously never spent a day in uniform. Lee, here's the deal; He is obligated to speak out or disobey an illegal order. That being said, He better damn sure be right...be able to prove he's right...and have a hell of a lawyer. In this case, he was speaking his opinion. As a member of the United States Armed Forces, in regard to your superiors and in public, you don't have an opinion. This Marine stuck his middle finger in the faces of his entire chain of command and expected to get away with it. Then he tried to walk back his posted comments. Please, next time you decide to post your opinion make sure your opinion has something to do with reality.

For all of you who diagreed with my comment and even collapsed it, I respect your opinion and there is no ill will. For those of you who say I know nothing about the military and have never served, I will reserve my opinion about you. This will be the only time I mention this and I should never have to, but I spent 20 years in the Army and shed blood for the country I love. I do not appreciate your insults. You know nothing about anyone on these boards, so I ask that you please be respectful. Can we all at least agree on that?

Having served in the military and taking my oath more than once, I can understand where this Marine is coming from. I'm no longer in the military, but if you look at what the oath says it can paint a completely different picture. Our oath says to defend and support the constitution against all threats foreign and domestic. Well what if the government isn't following the constitution and is letting the rich and powerful running the country. And before anyone complains about having to follows orders, you only have to follow lawful orders.

So if a supervisior tells you to do something thats against the law or morally wrong, you can't get into trouble if you choose not to follow that order. The constitution was created so there would be a government for the people by the people. The Bush and Gore election obviously showed that the government doesn't run like that and hasn't run like that in quite some tiime. Look at what's going on. Everything is on the raise, with the exception of everyone's paycheck, more and more illegal immigrants are coming into this country by the hour, and Obama keeps printing money like it's going out of style.

It's about time for someone to stand up for America and when someone does he or she gets shot down. We can't let the country continue on this course. It won't be long before the rich and powerful are the only ones who will ab able to eat travel and feed themselves. People have to understand that the government doesn't listen to the people and the country will not get better over night.

Marine oath of enlistment:

"I, XXXXXXXXXX, 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."

Long story short, he violated his oath.

Some people don't get it, but this is the real oath. This guy violated it because his political views are those of the Tea Party, which appear to be "Hate Obama and Everything He Does for no other reason than it's Obama!". No room for compromise, no room to talk about real issues. Just hatred.

7.62x39mm:

As expected you post your typical garbage in your never ending attempt to come across as intelligent. The NDAA is not something that President Obama created. It has existed for years before Obama was elected. Issue number two:

Hats off to this Marine for supporting we the people, and our constitutional right to NOT be locked up with no charges or any legal representation FOREVER!!!!.

Just exactly what do you think the: Patriot Act 2001,The internal security act of 1950, Espionage act of 1917, etc. are/were about? and finally this Marine just like many before him are suffering the consequences of their actions as military members who speak/act out against the President. You do remember those General Officers that were forced to resign after bashing George Bush Jr. don't you? Of course you don't because you only chime in when someone is bashing President Obama. Do everyone a huge favor and educate yourself.

JoeB - Stein obeyed all his orders??? How about the order to quit posting disparaging remarks about his CIC on FB? He deserves the boot.

JoeB-460595

This solider followed ALL of HIS Orders. At no time did his opinion of the President have anyy effect on his performance as a Solider. He followed his oath at all times. There is nothing in the Military Oath that says you HAVE TO AGREE WITH YOUR ORDERS, ONLY THAT YOU COMPLETE THOSE ORDERS TO THE BEST OF YOUR ABILITIES AND THIS SOLIDER DID JUST THAT. His opinion is his own and the Military does not "OWN" his opinions. He at no time connected his personal opinion to any branch of the Military. A majority of the Legal U.S. Citizens think our current Socialist President is destroying our country. O'Bama has ruined our Economy, destroyed our standing in the World (which leads to more military causalities) is attacking the Legal System in our Country and ignores the U.S. Constitution when his wishes do not receive the support expected by this demigod.

No, Joe, this MARINE did not follow ALL of HIS Orders. He was ordered to stop running the page on Facebook and he failed to comply.

john-737278

AAJJ

A scenario. A mass protest went to Washington, and all the protesters were armed, whether they had intention of using them or not. Unless shots are fired, they are not violating the Constitution. Do we really want some to follow orders if that order is to shoot the protesters?

I am not specifically writing about this man. I am writing about a discussion that should take place, especially considering some legislation that has recently been passed.

Your scenario doesn't give us enough information. Obviously situations have occured in our history where US Troops fired upon protesters who were not armed. So as to your question regarding firing on armed protesters that really depends. Are the protesters in a security zone? Were the protesters informed they are in a restricted area and what is they're response? If they begin moving out of the area then obviously they are demonstrating they are not a threat to civilian authority or the military. If they refuse or push forward...they are a threat and likely they are toast...end of story. If you refused orders to fire on a threat to national security you better have a hell of a lawyer.

Kent4659

The only idiot is you.

You are a very bigoted person that knows nothing about our constitution or the laws of the land. It seems his track record with the military is quite good. However, you seem too steeped in hate to recognize that. Name how many presidents have actually been in combat? It does not matter; what matters is how he surrounds himself with people that can proved the necessary military intel. Unlike the previous administration that trumped up a war. This president has helped guide more military successes then any in recent memory.

Anyone that calls our duly and DEMOCRATICALLY elected president an @ss is not a patriot in my book. You spoke too much hate and vitriol to be a patriot. You sound like a skin head patriot to me. A very thinly veiled cover for a "patriot".

You and your posts make me ill to think someone like you would dare callk themselves a patriot. The best thing you could do for our country is leave! It scares me to think what an example you represent of the failings in our educational system. Next time pass the 3rd grad.

I am sure I will be censored for my comments on you but it is worth it.

bigginaf

Having served in the military and taking my oath more than once, I can understand where this Marine is coming from. I'm no longer in the military, but if you look at what the oath says it can paint a completely different picture. Our oath says to defend and support the constitution against all threats foreign and domestic. Well what if the government isn't following the constitution and is letting the rich and powerful running the country. And before anyone complains about having to follows orders, you only have to follow lawful orders.

So if a supervisior tells you to do something thats against the law or morally wrong, you can't get into trouble if you choose not to follow that order.

"Morality" plays no part in the legality of an order. And, you can get in trouble for not obeying an order you find Morally wrong. During Desert Storm, my Battalion's Chaplain's Assistant refused to transport a Catholic Chaplin because he felt that the Catholic Church was immoral. He was given a field grade and was chaptered out of the Army.

He's being @!$%# canned for dissing his boss. He's not being sent to jail! If he didn't LIKE his boss, he had the right to quit, too; instead, he's acting like he should be allowed to stay in the military even though he blatantly posted on a PUBLICLY VIEWED medium his utter disdain for his superiors' advice to NOT continue to bash the POTUS. Now, he wants us to treat him like he's a victim?

So much for the honor of his uniform.

With two republican congressman supporting this military insubordination we might begin to rethink just how much of our hard-earned tax dollars we want to allow the republicans in congress to keep throwing at our military.

Remember, we are all paying with our hard-earned tax dollars for this moron's right to fight the consequences of his insubordination.

It's clear he didn't remember his oath when he enlisted. This is more like, in civillian terms, slandering your boss behind his back. And like in the civillian world if said immediate boss or higher found out that employee can and would most likely fired. Still has free speach but fired. When in ANY military the chain of command is a major component to having a fluid and succesful force. Having even one not on the same page can have a horrible result at the wrong time.

What's more appalling is that you have a military service person who's more concerned with who's in the white house then his military career. Heck I HATED daddy bush but doesn't mean i bashed him while i was in the military...i just did my damn job.

All i see is another example of people not respecting our president and making it public. This guy is just another Obama basher who got caught going too far, trying to lean on the first ammedment to get away with it but realise that he's not in the private sector but under military law...which is stronger than civillian law. He deserves the boot and should be happy he's not getting a dishonorable discharge.

7.62x39mm

By opposing the NDAA the Marine WAS supporting the constitution unlike obama and the political hacks that wrote the damm bill!. Hats off to this Marine for supporting we the people, and our constitutional right to NOT be locked up with no charges or any legal representation FOREVER!!!!

The amendment in the NDAA was written by a republiCON, not by the President. It was an extension of an amendment in the Authorization to use Force in iraq, which was written by a republiCON and signed by a republiCON President.

OMG really people?!!

7.62x39

that is my thoughts exactly!
this president has targeted killed a natural born amercian citizen, which is against the constutition.
and the only explination given was, cause we can and he was an enemy of the state.

That "natural born citizen" was not the the U.S. and not under protection of the Constitution. He was in a foreign country and was a terrorist. Are you now defending terrorists in Yemen?

Nothing is more admirable than the Marine code of honor. I'd bet anything this guy slammed his Commander-in-Chief because he couldn't cut the Marines tough rules and regulations. Seems like all that's left of respect and honor in this country belongs to our guys and gals in the military. When we need inspiration on this, the military is the best place to look for it.

Bottom line is nothing is free not even your words, there are and always will be consequences for a persons actions rather it be speech or actions, there is no free lunch people, you're adults act like one ....

EXACTLY!!

It's like publicly disrespecting his commanding officer, only WORSE!!!!

If he wanted to do this crap he should have joined some NUTBAG MILITIA instead of the United States Military. Then he would have ended up in jail without embarrassing our armed forces..

He was probably home-schooled in the south or something. It's hard to believe though that nobody told him, after induction and basic training, that the President is the Commander in Chief, higher than the highest General!!

Reporting to a civilian Commander in Chief is what makes us different from a military dictatorship, btw...

raddave

You might want to know that NDAA was cowritten by Carl Levin A Democrat. And here is a video of Carl Levin on the House floor refusing to take the blame for the President demanding the language that allowed Indefinite Detention.

http://www.infowars.com/obama-administration-demanded-power-to-indefinitely-detain-u-s-citizens/

General Patton learned this the hard way too! Like Mr. Obama or not, he is the Cammander In Chief of the United States. Period, end of story!

it's an open and shut case, guilty as charged, dishonorable discharge.

John-737278. I have a scenario for you.

There is a tent city set up in Washington D.C. with ex-soldiers demanding a bonus promised them after a war. They are ordered to disperse, don't, and an Army major sent in on horseback with other cavalry men and ground troops ordered to make them disperse with other orders to shoot to kill those who don't obey. The major follows orders, along with his men. The tent city is destroyed and the protesters dispersed. Some are killed with others wounded,

What if the major and his men don't like the order and disobey it.

The major and his men follow the orders. regardless of feelings about them.

This happened after WW1. The major was Dwight Eisenhower, later to become a five-star general and President of the United States.

Orders in the military are orders. Disobey them and either get drummed out, sent to Leavenworth or given the death sentence.

When I was in the military during Vietnam I didn't like many of the things I was ordered to do. However, I knew what my rights were, what to do and so on. I followed orders. Had I not, I would have been given a court martial and drummed out.

This Marine, a non-commissioned officer with nine years service, is a disgrace to the Marines and all other services. He knew that when he joined he gave up certain rights, or had them severely curtailed. He's basically getting off lightly. I firmly believe he should go to Leavenworth for at least five years and probably longer.

Kevin, if you check you wiil find MacArthur was fired once for opening his big mouth too.

The world is full of military dictators taking over the spots of elected officials. This is why as any person in the U.S. military is not allowed to speak against, or for our President and any elected official.

Elected officials are put into office by the "majority" of the people. By extension, the military is "required" to follow orders regardless of their political views. We have this wall between political speech and the military for this reason: If they were allowed their political views to be aired, its not a stretch for them to remove from power whom "they" feel not worthy.

If you don't like that, don't join the military.

I think it amounts to sedition rather than treason. A Dishonorable discharge is getting off lightly in this case.

His actions were less treasonous than the actions of Ronald Reagan and Oliver North who gave arms and comfort to America's enemies, ignored American law, and who negotiated with the Iranian student revolutional council in 1979-1980 to prolong the embassy hostage crisis to embarass President Carter, for political gains.

Ronald Reagan negotiated with the Ayatollah Kohlemeni (not sure of the correct spelling, but look it up) and the student revolutionary council and caused American citizens to be held hostage longer than they would have been if the Republicans had not negotiated with terrorists.

Thats is the exact definition of treason. The whole crew should have been subject to military justice for treason against America, including President Reagan.

If he doesn't respect his CIC, I can only wonder what he thinks about those in lower rank.

bigginaf

Having served in the military and taking my oath more than once, I can understand where this Marine is coming from. I'm no longer in the military, but if you look at what the oath says it can paint a completely different picture. Our oath says to defend and support the constitution against all threats foreign and domestic. Well what if the government isn't following the constitution and is letting the rich and powerful running the country. And before anyone complains about having to follows orders, you only have to follow lawful orders.

So if a supervisior tells you to do something thats against the law or morally wrong, you can't get into trouble if you choose not to follow that order. The constitution was created so there would be a government for the people by the people. The Bush and Gore election obviously showed that the government doesn't run like that and hasn't run like that in quite some tiime. Look at what's going on. Everything is on the raise, with the exception of everyone's paycheck, more and more illegal immigrants are coming into this country by the hour, and Obama keeps printing money like it's going out of style.

It's about time for someone to stand up for America and when someone does he or she gets shot down. We can't let the country continue on this course. It won't be long before the rich and powerful are the only ones who will ab able to eat travel and feed themselves. People have to understand that the government doesn't listen to the people and the country will not get better over night.

I have a hard time believing that you served in the Military. Your comment that you "can't get into trouble" if an order is immorally wrong is particularly ignorant. Morality doesn't come into it at all. Whoever taught you that did you no service. The key phrase is "illegal order", and if you refuse to obey an order you better be able to prove it was illegal. Anyway, you have a nice day.

I feel sorry for the young man for making the mistake of placing his complaint on face book. The old soldiers who have all condemned him are unfortunately correct. He may not respect the man but he has sworn an oath to respect and obey officers and the commander in chief. Although it is a soldiers prerogative to complain about the military he can not do so on a public forum as long as he wears the uniform. We presently as citizens of this country can still make political commentary regarding our politician's, laws passed, foreign policy and judicial system, BUT, considering the past 3.33 years and what has occurred in Washington; I fear that our right of free speech may be taken from us in the very, very near future.

And for all those people acting like he's such a deep thinker for proposing that illegal orders shouldn't be obeyed--guess what--it's been a focus of military thought since the Nuremberg trials, and was reinforced after Abu Ghraib. Every soldier has a DUTY not to follow an illegal order. However, this Class A-1 BOZO crossed the line by taking it out of the theoretical realm and into the SPECIFIC realm, trash-talking his SPECIFIC commander-in-chief, and fostering an environment of fundamental disrespect. This causes disruption in the corps, and cannot be tolerated.

All those people up in arms about gays in the military should perk up and take notice: THIS behavior is truly disruptive to unit cohesion and morale. This guy has no free speech rights--he's a soldier. That's one reason they wear those cute little uniforms--UNIFORM conduct, get it?

And the notion that some E-5 has the right to question policy? Not while he's getting a government paycheck and wearing the uniform. He's no better than the traitor Bradley Manning, a know-nothing head case.

Good luck getting a job, a**wipe.

jackieboy

Like I wrote, it should be a discussion about laws enacted by politicians that directly affect the people of the US not about what this man did. Which part of the oath takes precedence, defending the Constitution and the people, or following orders of the President when they conflict?

I don't know if you are interested, but this is what politicians do. And had it been acted on, it could have saved many American lives. In my view, politicians don't have the best track record of doing what is right. Ho Chi Minh asking for help from the US to stabilize Vietnam and help them create a democracy.

http://rationalrevolution.net/war/collection_of_letters_by_ho_chi_.htm

@Truth-3385425 and other traitors,

Other than your vote, you DON'T get to choose which Commander in Chief you'll support ONCE YOU"RE IN THE MILITARY. If you do, then you are correctly prosecuted as a traitor and/or spy!

Start your own damn revolt you traitors. We'll just CRUSH you again just like in Civil War 1. Although these billbobs would only amount to a few skirmishes with ignorant nutbags....and require minimal effort...

I seems to me that setting up your face book page with the name Armed Forces Tea Party sure sounds like a political party with political views set up to imply that it was supported by or associated with the military. Look at the name. I obviously have never been in the military let alone the Marines, but it seems to me that the title alone violate the military code about politics.

I also thought that the deal was that military people can comment on anything publically as long as there is no indication of their affiliation with the service. This seems to me to have obviously been violated.

Finally, the president of the united states doesnt have to have been in the military. Thats the whole point. He could have been. But its not a requirement. It is part of the concept of civillian control or oversight of the military.

For all of you here who have served in the military protecting me and my liberal views I thank you for your service your commitment and your sacrifice for my freedoms. I mean that with all sincereity. I may not agree with all of you but I respect your service and the honor that you showed while doing so.

This is really sad....and quite honestly a big bunch of BS......

Had he worn his uniform.....understandeable.....However, his facebook page is his....not the military's.....his opinions are his own, not the miltary's. He is allowed to voice his opinion.....he is not a manequin....he is a soldier, and human being. He has thoughts.....and he is allowed to voice them (under certain restrictions) and by only voicing his "opinion" he did not break any laws...

Now if the Military has something to hide, for example, if they dont want the public to know that their soldiers know that all these military actions are un-constitutional, and that they are trying to make false wars, and let these soldiers die, so that Obama and his "friends" can make billions at the expense (lives) of the soldiers, then this would be understandeable as the why the military would try to make this soldier an example, so they can scare any other soldeirs to "NOT" voice their opinion.

This is pathetic on the military side. Guess what you dont know wont hurt is their attitude!

I hope this soldier wins the courts, and retains his benefits, he served for eight years, had 4 months to go....and the military wasnts to screw him out of his benefits???? What a way to support our troops!!!!

He broke the oath he took when he joined. That's the end of the story.

People who are on here arguing with emotions are missing the point. You are free to speak your mind in America regarding anything you want in this world but you are not free from dealing with the consequences. Do you really think that a person in corporate America who went around at work telling people his personal views would last very long? The first amendment protects your right to say whatever you'd like and not be prosecuted or persecuted by the Government. It does not stop your employer from firing you over what you said.

I think that everyone is missing the point here--this soldier knew perfectly well that he was getting out of the Marines soon, or he'd already made that decision. He also knows that there is probably no job for which he will be hired, as his politics run towards the skinhead, and his former Marine skinhead friends have already told him that there are no jobs.

This young man is lucky that he is not getting a prison sentence--as he deserves one. But, he is getting what he wants: press, notoriety, and a reputation as a Tea Party Marine.

Give it a month or two, and this young man will be on the lecture circuit making tons more money than the Marines who actually served in combat and are now PTSD or TBI. Give it a few years, and he'll be a political candidate.

The only thing I have for this young man is contempt. This is a deliberate ploy on his part to get attention--and attention he has gotten. As I say, I'd like to see this young man tossed in jail for a few years--otherwise, we will see more young men and women taking this route.

What do you say we pay slightly more attention to the young men and women with PTSD and TBI? Why not do what we can for the young men and women who are suicidal over the psychological warfare practiced in Iraq and Afghanistan--and see to it that they get proper treatment? What do you say that we get some job training for these people--and give them homestead rights so that they can have free land, training on how to build affordable housing, training on how to live sustainably, and then training on raising organic food and organic eggs/milk so that they can be off-the-grid and independent of the ups and downs of our economy? Or, what do you say you hire a veteran or two?

I'm tired of talking about Mr. Skinhead, I'm-going-to-make-a-fortune-off-the-Teaparty-morons; let's talk about some former military who deserve a bit more attention, eh?

Some of the stupid crap this idiot did is really questionable. Very juvenile behaviour. He needs to grow up.

If this would have happened to Bush, that soldier would have been thrown out in a heartbeat.

Does anyone have the email address to the two fine Congressional representatives: Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif. and Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif.? I would like them, especially the former marine, to explaing to me what part of the militray shall be under civilian control and that no military member can involve themselves in political matters while in uniform, nor present any semblance of such while identifying themselves as military, they don't understand? I would also like Mr Hunter to provide evidence regarding his assertion that Stein's vies is shared by the mojority of marines.

If anyone can post the email or actual post office address of these congressional representatives, I would be very much appreciative.

Hey WARNOUT4024611

Obama is a sham? Ha George Bush flying on to that carrier with a flak jacket on and announcing "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED". Now that man is a shameless sham. And Georgie boy was the moron who said he really didn't care where Bin Laden was. That's because the pathetic jerk failed at everything he did. The only thing I guess he did not fail at was (and Cheney) is completely robbing this country blind and leaving the mess for somebody else (that would be Obama) to clean up. Get real WARNOUT.

Based on his actions, He's lucky they only want to go for dismissal with other than honorable discharge. The article reads of insubordination and other violations of the UCMJ that could put him in prison.

1st freedom of speech after reading the only way to get him is if they can prove he was in uniform when he posted.......FEEDOM OF SPEECH....

I would also like Mr Hunter to provide evidence regarding his assertion that Stein's vies is shared by the majority of marines.

Thanks, Yo-Ho. I was wondering this myself.

This is laughable.. People slam Obama on facebook everyday!! That is his 1st amendment right! And dont say he gives up his constitutional rights when he joins the service. If this is the case, it's criminal for your country to strip away the rights that you are risking your life to protect!!! This country is slowly becoming a communist replublic. The government does NOT need to control every aspect of our lives!!

i was gonna come on here and say i hate how much the gov. is trampling on our constitutional rights lately(not just the first ammendment) but after i read all the postings by ex-military servicemen/women, i have to say my mind has changed in THIS ONE CASE. Just one question though.... If he had waited till after obama was no longer in office, could he then get away with posting his opinion for the world to see? Or does he have to agree with him forever? Does an inlisted mans/womans obligatory loyalty to his commander in chief continue after they are no longer in office? How far does this go? can someone with experience with the oath please clarify this for me? thanx in advance.

Well I understand somewhat about what a serviceman can or can't do regarding politics. What I really wonder is wwhy was General McChrystal not FIRED for what he said while commanding the troops in Afghanistan. What he did and said could have cased far more damage(so they say) than what Sgt. Gary Stein had said. So what happens to McChrystal? He gets removed from command be does not get tossed from the Military. I call BULLSHlT, any of the rich or people with power all get away with their wrongs. McChrystal should be bound by the same rules. I don't care your rank everyone should be treated on the same playing field as they all took the same oath

i was gonna come on here and say i hate how much the gov. is trampling on our constitutional rights lately(not just the first ammendment) but after i read all the postings by ex-military servicemen/women, i have to say my mind has changed in THIS ONE CASE. Just one question though.... If he had waited till after obama was no longer in office, could he then get away with posting his opinion for the world to see? Or does he have to agree with him forever? Does an inlisted mans/womans obligatory loyalty to his commander in chief continue after they are no longer in office? How far does this go? can someone with experience with the oath please clarify this for me? thanx in advance.

Hello only,

In reference to your question; no, he does not suffer any punitive action for expressing his views once the president leaves office, as he is no longer in the position as head of state. Once he leaves office, he is in effect a civilian and said Marine is free to express his opinion. Hope that answers your question

@Bob-429579

Thats the oath I took. He should get a dishonorable discharge after his court martial

And for those questioning the decision by the military board (who according to Rep. Hunter, also share the same views), this regulation applies not just to the CIC, but also to any of the House of Representatives, Senators, Congress, Governors, officers... basically anyone that holds a pay grade above his. He couldn't open a facebook group bashing his unit commander, or he would have suffered the same fate. This really has nothing to do with President Obama.

The Supremes said that you have the right to say what you want and your employer has the right to fire you anytime for any reason!

thanx jesus

UMCJ Art. 89, 90, 91, If you are an Officer Art 88. Oh what the hell! Throw the old stand by Art 134. Remember the President of the United States is the Commander of Chief which is the highest position in the military. Another point what the hell is a tea party member. That is a sub group of the GOP. What is he Palin lover or a Marine. Which is it? Remember this person went public! You can feel anything that you want in the Military as long it is private. Once you go public you are in big trouble. It is called the good of the order.

wow this all blows my mind.

This is just an article to get people talking about our military. If you Join the service you take an oath to follow orders. If you have a question as to weather an order is lawful (especially while stateside go to your legal office they can and will help you). This man was warned and probably advised and given copies of the regulations he obviously decided to disregard them. The military doesn't have the luxury of accepting political views of everyone in service. Put him out he is a menace to the Corps.

To all of you using the term Illegal or unlawful war please get yourselves to an attorney and have them criminally charge the President with your claims it isn't happening. Presidents may send our men to battle but within a specified amount of time Congress must make the deceleration of war. So quit blaming Bush, Chenney and Obama for something that your Congress and Senate had to do.

20 US Navy Retired... Put him out thats my vote do as suggested by the board

Unfortunately I have to agree with those saying he should be dismissed. It sucks for him that he can't speak his mind completely on Facebook but he shouldn't have joined the military if that's how he wanted to act. And really its not any different than if I said and did those things about the owner of the company I work for-- he would not hesitate to fire me the second he found out. People need to realize that things you say on Facebook can and will affect your life in a negative manner if you aren't careful. People have deluded themselves into thinking the internet and especially social network sites are untouchable, so they do and say stupid things and expect the government to protect them. Well, Sgt. Stein, welcome to personal and professional responsibility-- or in this case, lack of.

WHat really depresses me in these debates is how many of you post comments about the 1st Amendment and think that it applies to your employment status. It doesn't. If you shoot your mouth off at work or continuously bash the company you work for in a public setting, they WILL fire you. If you violate the policies of the organization you work for by the things you say they WILL fire you. The military is no exception. In fact, there are more policies you have to follow because of the fact that the Pentagon makes the decisions for the military so they have that much more power than a normal employer.

The military has had a policy since the Civil War of limiting the free speech of service members, including criticism of the commander in chief.

That says it all. If you don't want to deal with the exceptional policy of the military then don't join. If you willingly become part of an organization with priviledges and benefits above that of a normal civilian then you cannot be expected to behave like a normal civilian, ESPECIALLY if you are employed by the military at the time. YOu cannot have your cake and eat it too.

Ultimately what most of you with a suicidal grip on the constitution need to understand is that most freedoms only protect you from being prosecuted, not from being unemployed. And no one is arresting this guy, So let it go!

JK from PA, or should I say leftwing loser. You have got some nerve. People like YOU sicken me. You have the nerve to come on some blog and bash members of the military all the while riding on their backs using the very freedom that THEY provide you to do so. Perhaps you should pick up a gun and fight for something and then you can come on blogs and bash them. Until then, you ought to get down on your knees and kiss the feet of the next service member you see. Although I doubt that many of them run in the same little leftie, pretentious circles that you do.

john-737278

I am tossed on this one.

In one way, the military needs discipline. It is that that has made ours the greatest in the world.

In another, I believe there should be a discussion within the military of the lawfulness of what some orders could entail, and if such orders violated the constitutional rights of Americans, we don't want one service member following them.

John, to begin with discussion within the military of what constitutes a lawful order happens all the time. It starts in Basic Training and progresses throughout your career. Having said that, it is the job of the US Military to defend the Constitution, not your Constitutional rights. That's the job of the US Attorney General's office. Two things you don't want to happen, whether you recognize it our not:
1. Allowing service members to interpret the Constitution and implement that interpretation.
2. Disobey orders based on their personal ideological or religious beliefs.
The results would likely be chaos and probably insurrection.

Yo - Ho

Contact Rep. Hunter @ Phone # (202) 225-5672 or hunter.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=53&Itemid=58

and Rep. Issa @ issa.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=597&Itemid=73

Rep. Issa's phone# 202-225-3906

Enjoy

Ol_Doc

If you view the Constitution as a piece of paper, then you are right. In my view the Constitution is and has always been the Constitutional rights of us the citizens. And that is what they are defending. I don't think you can separate the two. And when the military ie the Commander in Chief is given the Authority over the Constitution and our rights guaranteed by it, it is no longer the US Attorney General who makes the decisions.

And I agree, Military needs order. The problem I have is that many of our rights are no longer guaranteed by the Constitution. They have been relegated to one man by Congress and that should scare everyone.

Navy vet here...I love all those who feel it's cool for this guy to bash the President because the President didn't serve! Wow! I didn't know that was part of the requirements to serve as President. All military know you can not bash the CIC and the chain of command! Most people wouldn't have received a warning to cease, but he was the lucky one! You don't like Obama, then remove yourself from the military, and you can bash away until your heart is content. But until then, you must follow your UCMJ! Four months left....Doesn't seem like the brightest bulb in the socket! BTW, Facebook is a publicly traded entity. Where is that private?

john-737278

What if it was argued that he was actually doing his best to uphold his oath of service by defending the American people from what he perceived as a domestic enemy?

That make absolutely no difference, unless he is pleading insanity. An insanity plea can only happen during a Court Marshall. Members of the Unites States Armed Forces do not have the prerogative of naming their enemies. That is done by civilian authority. Since no articles of impeachment for high crimes and misdemeanors have been submitted against the President, he cannot be considered as a domestic enemy by a subordinate member of the military. In the military, that's the kind of talk that will get you a transfer to Fort Leavenworth, KS. Do you get it?

Against Union Thievery

I wouldn't want to serve under someone who is dismantling our Constitution and acting more like a dictator everyday. That would not be why I would enlist in the military and I couldn't support him.

So AUT, you wouldn't have served under bush/cheney either. Well, from your post it is obvious you have NEVER served period. I served under Nixon and though I didn't agree with his policies/politics I did support him. He was my CiC.

Ol_Doc

Yes I do know it makes no difference. It was a moral argument., I only threw that out there to rile up the troops. And actually there is a bill in Congress for impeachment due to the President going into libya without approval.

And don't get me wrong, i don't hold only the President responsible for recent legislation undermining our rights. Congress is equally guilty of abuse of authority and perjury of oath. Anyone who signed it. I have already contacted my reps and told them they will never have my vote again. I also contacted the one who voted against, even though I do not share a lot of his views, and told him he will.

I do see them as domestic enemies at the moment.

john-737278

Ol_Doc

If you view the Constitution as a piece of paper, then you are right. In my view the Constitution is and has always been the Constitutional rights of us the citizens. And that is what they are defending. I don't think you can separate the two. And when the military ie the Commander in Chief is given the Authority over the Constitution and our rights guaranteed by it, it is no longer the US Attorney General who makes the decisions.

And I agree, Military needs order. The problem I have is that many of our rights are no longer guaranteed by the Constitution. They have been relegated to one man by Congress and that should scare everyone.

I'm sorry John but you are wrong. The duty of the military is to defend the Constitution not Constitutional Rights. At no time during oath taking (a number of times over 20+ years) did I swear to defend anyone's rights. How has the Commander in Chief been given authority over the Constitution? The only power the Commander in Chief has is defined in the Constitution? The US Attorney General does not make the decisions. The US Attorney General enforces the the law.

If you are truly concerned about the rights you feel you have lost; I would like to remind you that it was George W. Bush that signed the Patriot Act and a Republican Congress that pushed it through. I am not a fan of the Patriot Act and believe it should be repealed .

Comment author avatarjohn-737278
Ol_Doc

Yes I do know it makes no difference. It was a moral argument., I only threw that out there to rile up the troops. And actually there is a bill in Congress for impeachment due to the President going into libya without approval.

And don't get me wrong, i don't hold only the President responsible for recent legislation undermining our rights. Congress is equally guilty of abuse of authority and perjury of oath. Anyone who signed it. I have already contacted my reps and told them they will never have my vote again. I also contacted the one who voted against, even though I do not share a lot of his views, and told him he will.

There is no bill in Congress to Impeach the President. There may be a proposal by far-right Congressional members but if so, it has not been introduced (if you believe it has, please provide the HR number).

As to the legislation you are citing, the actual version that was passed by both houses is quite a bit different from the Senate version that went to Conference. The Conference version that was signed into law has the offending language either removed or the stipulation: "does not apply to American Citizens or legal residents of the United States". The new language also stipulated that the FBI and not the military would lead the enforcement of anti-terrorism laws in the United States. The Senate version was so egregious it was changed in the Conference version. The problem is that that story isn't nearly as sexy as the original so the media pretty much overlooked it.

As to how you see the current administration, that's your own business. I personally see the last administration as war criminals...so I guess we all have our own opinions.

Ol_Doc

Then, may I ask, what is your view of what the Constitution is? When you read it, it lays out the rights of American citizens. Like I wrote, you can't separate the two. You can't swear an oath to defend it unless you defend what is in it.

Patriot Act Should be repealed.

Indefinite Detention authority given to the President should be repealed.

HR 347 making it a felony to even unknowingly protest against the government at the whim of where the secret service sees as in the interest of national security should be repealed.

HR 3166 an old law with a new twist. Promoting overthrow of the government will get your citizenship revoked. Just like I have done here.

The Supreme Court decision that you can be strip searched even for minor crimes should be overridden. That one was pathetically political.

Well, there goes the bill of rights. Like I wrote, I hold them all responsible. Even Bush.

And actually, the language that is in question in NDAA is that it states that the military is not required to hold, or do what you will to American citizens, but that doesn't mean they can't. That authority now rests with the President and whether he deems it necessary.

John,

Why do you have a issue with congress looking for passing impeachment powers against the president, have you read the constitution or do you find that only congress has the right to declare war as a insignificant fact. So are they violating their duties by putting up legislation to start impeachment? No, in fact they are doing exactly what our founding fathers wanted. And do not throw Bush out their because Congress passed a bill giving him the right after 9/11, I never recall of any such vote passed for Obama.

You want us to do what is right, then throw him and the rest of the members of congress and the senate out that ignored the constituents that they were representing and went ahead despite over a 75% disapproval of Obama care and passed it anyway. Then lets repeal the two amendments passed without all the states signing on as is stated by the constitution and start having our senators sent from the states and not elected, last do away with the IRS because this was never signed on by all the states. So do you believe the constitution is the law of the land or do you just find it a hindrance?

As far as the military man in the marines, I too was in the military and went in when Carter was President and even though I thought he was a waste and inept I kept my mouth shut because I pledged a oath to follow his commands (as long as they are legal as is stated in the military code of justice), so I never stated my stance because I gave up that right, but I was more then ready to express it when Reagan came into office because Carter was no longer my commander in chief. Maybe this marine should have kept his comments to himself for a couple more months and this would have been OK because their is no way Obama can run on his record he only has a terrible one, and then he would have the same right that I do to speak out against him.

I will have to admit that I do agree with what you state should be appealed. The problem is that today the checks and balances put forth in the constitution has slowly been eroded by the president and congress. Sadly, as I stated before; if Washington, Jefferson, Adams or any of the founding fathers would come back today and see what the government has become they would be the first to rise up and start a revolution to overthrow this government that has become nothing but a travesty and is nothing like what our founders wanted.

John, I think you need to read the Constitution. It doesn't lay out our rights, it defines the rolls of the various branches of government and limits their authority. All power not defined or implied by the Constitution is presumed to be held by the various States. How they define and limit their authority is reflected in their State Constitution. To give you an example look at the First Amendment which is the addresses free speech. The Amendment prevents the Federal Government, and because of it's authority over States; the State, County and City governments from denying your free speech rights. It does not prevent an employer from firing you for speaking your mind in the workplace. Do you see? The Constitution does not define our freedom, it limits government from taking our freedom.

Tbenton

Actually, I am on the other side of the argument. I think he should be impeached for violating his oath of office, which is to uphold the Constitution, which does not allow him the powers to delegate what our rights should be.

I think you mistook me.

Our COUNTRY is a democracy.

Our Armed FORCES, are not.

He knew the rules. He disparaged his Commander-in-Chief.

He lost the right...the HONOR to wear the uniform.

Ol_Doc

I have read it several times, and you are kind of making my point. If the Constitution guarantees due process to all Americans and the President gives an order to take that away, he would be in violation of the Constitution and so would everyone who followed it.

john-737278

Tbenton

Actually, I am on the other side of the argument. I think he should be impeached for violating his oath of office, which is to uphold the Constitution, which does not allow him the powers to delegate what our rights should be.

I think you mistook me.

So if I understand you correctly; Congress did not grant the President that authority by law...he just took it? Congress passed the law. This is not a similar situation as the Supreme Court granting themselves the authority to strike down a law passed by the Congress (Marbury vs Madison).

Ol_Doc

How many times do I have to state that they are all responsible? He knew what he was signing and what powers it granted him. He said as much in his bs signing statement. He is just as guilty.

Folks, The UCMJ covers every aspect of Justice in the Military. From allowing 18 year olds to drink while on base, even if they are not allowed to in their state, to high treason. If you have never been in the military please refrain from insulting the Military.

For those that are spouting off about Obama never being in the military. Go back and count the number of presidents that have been in the military. The number will shock you. Another thing to consider, If you posted those kinds of comments about your boss, would you be allowed to remain employed by the same boss after being told to stop it. While I doubt that you would be told to stop, you would just be fired plain and simple, you have to understand that if this man was so flagrant in his insults, it could actually be pushed up to treason, and get him time in a military prison.

Britt Carter

I own my own business, and I know the boss is an @!$%#.

As a retired vet I would have said sorry guy in the past. However since several of our more recent Generals have had some criticism of our in place Presidents I would say he may have taken this a little far but I wouldn't deny his service and would NOT discharge him on less then honerable conditions. In addition we have now had sitting presidents who have bold faced lied to the public, who is the commander in chief, and we didn't seem overly concerned about that so why would we be overly concerned about Sgt Stein?

This artilcle fails to mention that the SGT. made these comments from a military computer while on duty and that the Sgt. was warned several times to remove the FB postings by his CO, he even removed them and then reposted it, which is insubordination.

imwhitewolf

No I haven't served in the military but my child's father was born in Cuba and his parents heard Castro say that 'he was going to spread the wealth'. And when they heard Prez B.O. say those exact same words they KNEW what he was all about and what his agenda was and didn't vote for him. It's too bad that the rest of America weren't smart enough to figure it all out based on the facts of Obama's rise to power. All the facts were there before he was elected and those who voted for him kept ignoring the facts. He hung around with radicals, his preacher was a radical he was going to spread the wealth and fundamentally change America, his past is a mystery and he supported union communist thugs...... What more did they all need? I wouldn't want to serve under Obama let alone my child or anyone else.

If you worked at a company, and that company found out that you were posting hate messages against the CEO on the internet, you would be fired in a heartbeat. When you join the military the President is your CEO.

If you are going to exercise your freedom of speech, you are going to be held accountable for your words. Freedom of Speech isn't a license to be a douche-bag with no consequences.

Unless your CEO is a communist. Then all bets are off.

Where was this board and these people in 1969??? With all the stuff I heard spoken against LBJ & Nixon we would have all been thrown out and there would have been no vietnam war....HAHA

This "gentleman" knew he was violating his oath and now should deal with the consequences of his behavior. If he wants to criticize the President and the office of the President then he should have held his tongue until he was out of the military THEN he could exercise freedom of speech. He had already been warned which I don't think they should have done but then he even had the nerve to defie even that---it's past time for him to leave the military.

Even freedom of speach and expression has its limits. You cannot slander a person without evidence or you are subject to legal action. You cannot yell "fire" in a theater. This former marine could vote against the president. Would the soldier have had the courage to draw his military commanders with such insulting disregard, and post them in public? He probably still wouldn't do it out of fear.

I am certain that the low tones of reasonable debate about policy and politics would never have caught the attention of his commanders. However, the blatant disregard for decorum and the un-necessary photoshop inclusion of his commander in a "Jackass" poster is beyond free speech for a military position. It is not political debate, it is an 'Ad Hominem' attack of his commander. If I did the same facebook stunt to my boss in the private sector I'd lose my job instantaneously. Stein was a Marine and he didn't die for his act, he simply was fired from his job for disrespecting the boss. If I debated with my boss about hard evidence, policy, economics and vision, he would listen and decide.

I agree with the Marines. As I've grown older and wiser I am amazed at their fidelity to the directives of serving the country and the elected president. Bravo for upholding the virtues I also value. I realize that many of the Marines are Republicans, and some are Liberals. Many may sympathize with Stein. But the Marines are not a monolithic political structure, nor can they be predjudiced by political sway. HOWEVER, they can certainly vote at the appropriate time!

Go Marines!

Haven't served but many in my family have. Don't need to serve to know that with four months left he should have kept his big fat mouth closed. Nothing spoils a duck but its bill.

Once out of the service go crazy, write a book, Go on Geraldo who cares. Now, he will never be able to step on a base again, he serve 9 years and no pension or benefits, idiot. I'd expect my boss to fire me to if I said half of the things this idiot said. This is also the military it isn't a feel good social experiment this is a disicipline in order to save your life and those around you. If he loved the marines so much then he should have listen when his superior officers gave him the rare bird, a couple of warnings. If you are in military you follow orders if you can't follow those orders then get out. Don't expect a soft landing however.

I'm not even pro-military, I do blame the military for lying to my father about his health which lead to early death. Somehow, I know that even he is turning over in his grave to hear about idiots like this. Keep it silent stupid, KISS would have been prudent. You may not like your boss but the whole world doesn't have to know about it while you are still working for him.

P.S. MacArthur made his comments publicly

Oh yes, we all know how private Facebook is.

Any official that has been elected by the people especially the president has to be respected

Yes, even Pelosi...............................................and that orange looking fellow...........

That is seriously messed up. So once he joins the military he's not allowed to have an opinion? I'm sure if Obama was standing beside him he would protect him that doesn't mean he has to agree with him. Surely there were military personnel that disagreed with Bush. Were they given an "other than honorable discharge"?

Edna, I obviously don't know what job you have, but if you did the same to your boss on Facebook, do you think you'd still be working there?

sic-n-tired , you are 1000% correct, Reagan did negotiate with terrorists and committed treason.

Anyone notice the irony that none of the Right Wingers are complaining the ACLU is defending the Sgt. ---

It should be a dishonorable discharge, he should be busted as far down in rank as possible (corporal?, no way!), and he should lose all benefits.

Duncan should also lose his benefits.

AZRancher... the BS associated with the Vietnam war (body counts, the lies revealed in The Pentagon Papers, etc.) are some of the reasons why our modern military is all volunteer. The ability of the military command to curtail people talking against the civilian leadership is a lot stronger when each and every person in the military WANTS TO BE THERE.

The current UCMJ is based on the fact that the military is all volunteer and has been for over 30 years. Should we ever get into a war which requires a draft, there will be a greater allowance for those in the lower ranks to "bitch about their bosses."

In this case, this soon to be former Marine was not on his first stint. He was well aware of that who the President was could change. For that matter, it was guaranteed that the CIC would change. While he did not express any overt racial comments, the level of hate comments from the right are much higher than they have been for any previous President. There is no doubt that there would have been an equal degree of hatred if Hillary Clinton had been elected, simply because she is a woman.

I take back the earlier comment. I did not realize that he had also been commenting on a Marine Corp. weather site, after being told not to do that. His failure to curtail his actions to purely private (and Facebook is NEVER private, unless you post and NO ONE ever is able to get to your post except you) personal bitch sessions with his close buddies & family, means that he deserves to get kicked out and lose what he had earned.

He will also lose the right to call himself a Marine, which probably sucks more than anything else.

Violation of any of the "punative articles" of the UCMJ, in this case article 92, Failure to obey order or regulation, is criminal. Art 92 is punishable as a court martial may direct. By itself, this does on include the death penalty.

The fact that this is in the news should make the intelligent people open their eyes about how anything and everything you say online (including on here) can be monitored. Your phone calls can/will be monitored as well. Go ahead and say some "key words" and see how fast you get tracked.

As far as this soldier, he should be reprimanded for not using good sense and decoram(sp?) but that is as far as it goes. He should not be discharged for it and if anything, should make Obama look like a huge fail because of it. I was in for many years and you do not lose your rights when you are in, you still have constitutional rights but you have to use good sense (I wont say common becuase that is not so common any more) and decisions. He made a poor judgement decision and should be reprimanded for it but not discharged.

By the way, if you have never served, you probably cannot make any comments of value ABOUT being in the service. Unless you have been in, you do not have an educated view of the subject and NO hearing stories from your son/daughter/cousin/uncle/father does not make you a military expert.

actually, he did. failure to obey a direct order in a combat zone during wartime is punishable by firing squad. Obviously, I'm not suggesting he should be killed. I just wonder why he joined the military, if not to follow orders.

Stirring up dissent in the military ranks is not something they usually treat so lightly.

Violation of any of the "punative articles" of the UCMJ, in this case article 92, Failure to obey order or regulation, is criminal. Art 92 is punishable as a court martial may direct. By itself, this does on include the death penalty.

Violation of any of the "punative articles" of the UCMJ, in this case article 92, Failure to obey order or regulation, is criminal. Art 92 is punishable as a court martial may direct. By itself, this does on include the death penalty.

I have one question: What has the military done with these situations in the past. This can't possibly be the first time a member of the military has criticized the President on the internet. Common sense tells me that he is pushing the envelope as he was warned by his superiors. Dumb not to take their "advice." Once again, a total failure of the investigative reporter to put this incident in context.

While I agree with his sentiments, I also agree with the decision of the Military board. I know a number of active service military who feel the same way, but are not foolish enough to make it public.

This Marine took an oath to uphold the Constitution and obey the President.

People need to understand that when you proclaim your beliefs online they are NOT private. If you want to speak your mind, speak it privately to a few friends. A few "Friends" does not include your facebook page.

The punishment recomended is a joke. I had a brother that won a dishonorable discharge. In short order it was changed to an Othe than, and all he had to do was wait about a year to change it into an honorable discharge and get his benefits. He never did it but he could have.

They chose not to court martial him.

Other Than Honorable (OTH)

An OTH is the most severe form of administrative discharge. This type of discharge represents
a serious departure from the conduct and performance expected of all military
members. OTH discharges are typically given to service members convicted by a
civilian court in which a sentence of confinement has been adjudged or in which
the conduct leading to the conviction brings discredit upon the service. OTH discharges can be accepted in-lieu of court-martial proceedings at the service-member's request. Persons facing OTH
are guaranteed, by the Uniform Code of Military Justice,
the right to have their discharge heard by an administrative discharge board,
which is similar to a court-martial but is not a public forum.

Jibaro

The punishment recomended is a joke. I had a brother that won a dishonorable discharge. In short order it was changed to an Othe than, and all he had to do was wait about a year to change it into an honorable discharge and get his benefits. He never did it but he could have.

First of all, he was not punished. This was an administrative action. He could have been given a court martial for his offense and be given a Bad Conduct Discharge. He wasn't . Also, in the 25 years I spent in the Army, I have never heard of an other than honorable discharge being changed to an honorable one. Yes, there is a process to request this be done, but like I said, I have never heard of it actually happening. And, certainly a "dishonorable" discharge will never be changed to an other than honorable.

If I went on facebook and started a smear campaign against my boss I would not only be terminated but probably sued and would have trouble ever finding a job again. The Sgt. states he was not going to follow unlawful orders but obviously did not make that clear in his posts so in other words is bending the truth to suit his needs he also said he wanted to re enlist which is baffling. Why would you do that after stating publicly you would disobey the commander and chief? Nope this guy is a lying little punk who deserves to account for his actions. In his defense though I wonder should other government members account for theirs? I think so though I doubt we would agree on who and what. Sounds to me like the punishment suits the offense. He shouldn't be court marshaled but he should get a clue about opening his big mouth. Wait until you are done with the service and then you can talk all the sh@ you want. Dumb dumb dumb!

Jibaro

The punishment recomended is a joke. I had a brother that won a dishonorable discharge. In short order it was changed to an Othe than, and all he had to do was wait about a year to change it into an honorable discharge and get his benefits. He never did it but he could have.

I'm calling BS on your story. I'd love to see the paperwork on that one. Let's start with the fact that a Dishonorable Discharge is the result of judicial punishment as opposed to non-judicial punishment. That means your brother received a Court Marshall. In order to change a dishonorable discharge to a General under other than honorable conditions it would require that the Board for Correction of Military Records overturn the decision of a Court Marshall...not likely. That would rely on new and compelling evidence and the finding would have to be based on a clear and unmistakable error resulting in an injustice. That my friend is rare indeed. I could buy off on an upgrade to General under other than honorable if all the criteria I mentioned were met, but i seriously doubt honorable. By the way, the Boards are currently backlogged at least 18-24 months so I find your timeframe doubtful...NEXT.

raddave - I have never heard of an other than honorable discharge being changed to an honorable one. Yes, there is a process to request this be done, but like I said, I have never heard of it actually happening.

You are right, after 20 years in the Air Force I never heard this either, maybe he ment General Under Honorable Conditions. I've seen an dishonorable go to general before. A lot of people who never served or no anything about he military understand the rights we give up for the United States can maintain their Constitution.

We give up most of the:

First Amendment, Second Amendment (can own, but must keep in armory most of the time) , Fourth Amendment, at least the UCMJ as Article 31 which is about the same as the Fifth Amendment, so on so forth.

I would enlist again today and do it all over again today because I don't have a problem with giving up some of my rights for the greater cause.

UMCJ Art. 89, 90, 91, If you are an Officer Art 88. Oh what the hell! Throw the old stand by Art 134. Remember the President of the United States is the Commander of Chief which is the highest position in the military. Another point what the hell is a tea party member. That is a sub group of the GOP. What is he Palin lover or a Marine. Which is it? Remember this person went public! You can feel anything that you want in the Military as long it is private. Once you go public you are in big trouble. It is called the good of the order.

There is no Republican or Democrat for the UCMJ or for Standards of Military Conduct, but there's plenty of black and white. Sgt. Stein violated both (the UCMJ and Military Regulations) with his actions, and as such, it's time for him to go, as determined by a board of his military peers (more correctly, his military superiors)!! If he hadn't educated himself on the UCMJ and Marine Regulations at the rank of Sergeant, then it's very unlikely he was going to become a great senior NCO.

Because I'm currently a civilian, I can say I'm not a fan of many of the economic and especially the energy policies of the Obama administration and that it's highly unlikely I'll vote for him. I can also say that I think the current state of partisan politics stinks and that the "leadership" of BOTH PARTIES SUCKS A$$ !! But if I ever take the oath of service again, what I can say about our elected "representatives" will change, something I will have no problem with, but I will also only cross that bridge when I come to it !!

Dual Service (U.S. Navy, U.S. Army), combat (OIF 05-06, 08-09) veteran.

So you say he should be dishonorably discharged. Well why should he when General McChrystal did the same thing and he was not. Yeah the General lost his command of Afgan. but then In April 2011, he was invited back to public service by the Obama administration to help oversee a high-profile initiative in support of military families. A higher paying job. McChrystal was also cleared by the Defense Department inspector general. Boy it must really be nice to be in such power. General McChrystal retired in July 2010 with the full pageantry of a 17-gun salute, an Army marching band and an emotional send-off from the secretary of defense.

There have been atleast 2 extremely high ranking generals that have spoke out about Obama along with this war in Afghanistan.

Yet all we have gotten from the Pres that promised to end the war is a troop build up.

so what we have now is a military that wants to hang this guy out to dry for less than what two Generals(Fuller and McChrytal) have done.

Yet we also have the Obamanation CIC pushing this war forward and giving billions to Afgan and Pakis each. Even after Karzai stated he would goto war against the US if we attacked Pakistan. I'm so glad the Islam Bari Shabazz is getting his way(sarcasm)

I didn't say he should be dishonorably anything. I actually disagree with that part of the board's findings (I believe he should receive a General discharge under honorable conditions, even if that "honorable" is somewhat debatable), but I have no issue with Sgt. Stein getting the hook. There's also little comparison with Gen. McChrystal because he was a flag ranked commissioned officer, not an enlisted service member.

I was paying attention in 2007 and 2008 and what then candidate Obama said was he was going to end the Iraq conflict and move our focus to Afghanistan, which, like him or not, is what he has done. I have far fewer issues with the Obama administration's foreign policies (other than some rookie mistakes like bowing to the Saudi King, failing to speak out for the Iranian protestors until it was too late and apologizing for all kinds of things we have no reason to apologize for) than I do their domestic energy and economic policies !!

I personally feel the time is long past that we can get a satisfactory outcome in Afghanistan, and it is time to call it a day, before more flag draped HR (that's Human Remains) containers bring young adults whose lives should just be starting, instead of over, home.

Correct, he's not being sent to prison or fined. He's being discharged ( fired) for not following the rules and policies of his employer (the gov't) even after being warned.

Pretty cut and dry.

Only 4 months to go. Couldn't keep his hateful trap shut for that long. Typical skin-headed TeaBagger.

Exactly. He's now completely free to express his views as much as he wants.

Clearly you don't understand what a Dishonorable discharge is. It's akin to a Felony conviction. It would bar him from many jobs, services even deny him some of his rights. His actions do, in my opinion justify a bar to reenlistment, they may even justify a other than honorable discharge. However in no way do they justify a dishonorable.

John-362791 read the story again. He's facing an Other than Honorable discharge, not a Dishonorable discharge.

The article does not say "dishonorable." It says "other than honorable."

He will likely get an OTH discharge, which is an administrative discharge. It is NOT a "Dishonorable" discharge. He represented himself on Facebook as military and representing other military members.

Stein's postings on one Facebook page he created called Armed Forces Tea Party

Can't do that.

Actually, yes, he did commit a crime by failing to obey a lawful order. He apparently decided the order to desist did not apply to him. This is not a "free speech" issue, this is a case where he was given a lawful order and he willingly and willfully disobeyed it. Had he stopped doing the things he was doing (such as making the Obama "jackass" pictures) he probably would have been allowed to serve out his term of enlistment (and probably discouraged from reenlisting.) The military does not offer the option of refusing lawful orders.

He is a disgrace to the uniform and he's darn lucky they aren't prosecuting him. Getting fired with a less than honorable discharge is a gift.

I have a feeling before he leaves, he'll answer to his peers. What's with these hateful people anyway? Did someone feed them vinegar as babies instead of milk? The hatred shown toward this president is rabid and aggressive and sickening.

If Americans don't respect their president, what message does that send to terrorists? That it's open season on our country?

Comment author avatarJohn-362791

Clearly you don't understand what a Dishonorable discharge is. It's akin to a Felony conviction. It would bar him from many jobs, services even deny him some of his rights. His actions do, in my opinion justify a bar to reenlistment, they may even justify a other than honorable discharge. However in no way do they justify a dishonorable.

First of all, he did not get a "Dishonorable" discharge. For one thing, there is no such a thing as a "Dishonorable" discharge. There is a Bad Conduct Discharge, that can only be given for being court martialed (a Federal conviction). He was recommended for a Less than honorable discharge, and he is not being denied any of his "rights." He will be denied his benefits, which one obtains by serving HONORABLY.

dudogger....just curious....do you see your own hypocrisy? Calls omeone else "hatefull" and yet your statement is also hateful. At least this guy was trgeting ONE person based on the actions and decisions he has made that this INDIVIDUAL does not agree with. You lump people you do not know ll together and call them names.

And no, I do not agree with what he did, and agree that he is getting what he had coming to him.

What do you mean if Americans don't respect the President? I haven't seen a President in 20 years do anything that is worthy of my respect towards them. To tell an individual that they are worthy to die in battle, but not worthy to express their opinions is the very essence of hypocrisy. I voted for Obama, and I think he sucks almost as much as Republicans do. He has carried the same plans that Bush has. The only difference I've seen between Bush and Obama is one is black, the other isn't. They are both evil SOB's that need a visit to the Hague and defend themselves against crimes of humanity for Iraqi and Afghan atrocities in the name of "Free Market" rape of other countries resources and murdering of civilians.

Trust2112 you obviously have your own set agenda that has nothing to do with defense of our country. You are outright saying to the world that you have clear convincing evidence that or country's leaders have intentionally and willfully broke these laws you refer to please take them to the Hauge and have your charges proven or please rephrase them.

This article is about someone who outright refused to follow orders and was making a mockery of his boss. I realize it's hard but please stay on track.

What this soilder did was wrong. I wouldn't think it was bad enough to warrant a bad conduct discharge. That remains to be seen. I didn't like George Bush, but the people commenting in here are the same ones that were bashing him endlessly during his presidency, but I guess that was ok.

dan: the creation of the "Armed Forces Tea Party" Facebook page was probabably enough to make sure he would not be asked to stick around. When he added specific postings where he photoshopped the President of the United States into various posters, putting the CIC in a bad light (to say the least), it was pretty much guaranteed he would be asked to leave. When he refused to take down the site and further spread his views against the President to a site used genrally by the Corp. for weather, and stated that he would not follow orders of the president (later changed to read unlawful orders) that pretty much sealed this clown's fate.

You can "bitch about your boss" to your wife and friends. Just don't go putting big signs on your front lawn saying how much you don't like your boss. The internet and Facebook have only been around for two generations (wow, that long already) too bad the first generation to use it is the one that is SOOOOO dumb on how not to use it.

He'll be campaigning with Romney, or Palin, or Santorum, or any one one of the neo-con idiots who believe disrespecting the Office of the President is their constitutional right.

He'll be campaigning with Romney, or Palin, or Santorum, or any one one of the neo-con idiots who believe disrespecting the Office of the President is their constitutional right.

Of course. That is until a Republican is President (as we saw with Bush), then criticizing him/her will be "giving aid and comfort to the enemy" and tantamount to treason...

He'll be campaigning with Romney, or Palin, or Santorum, or any one one of the neo-con idiots who believe disrespecting the Office of the President is their constitutional right.

So all those that disrespected the president/ Bush while he was in office were not practicing their constitutional rights? Of is it just OK to disrespect Republican presidents and not Democrat presidents?

You Guys mentioned the US Constitution but you didn't mention the marine's Freedom of Speech under Bills of Rights. According to Thomas Jefferson, say what the @!$%# you want to say.

When you sign that contract, you sign away some of your expressive liberties. You still have a limited freedom of speech, but it is curtailed due to the nature of the mission of the armed forces.

@Battleon - The marine operations under the UCMJ. There are certain things that he can't do that the rest of us can enjoy. This is one of those things. He can't up and quit (Desert his post.) any time he wants. He can't go on strike.

This is really no different than getting fired at work for bad mouthing your boss. Don't tell me you expect to be able to tell your boss off and keep your job?

When some politician disrespects the President, it is free speach, and it is part of American Politics. When a member of the military does it, it is against regulations, and it is disrespecting your most senior officer possible. Very bad idea.

Truman...What he showed the world was that his politics was more important than his duty to his country. Prediction: This loony will end up in some shoot out holding innocent people hostage to show his outrage for being turned out of the Marines.

Battleon

You Guys mentioned the US Constitution but you didn't mention the marine's Freedom of Speech under Bills of Rights. According to Thomas Jefferson, say what the @!$%# you want to say.

Never served did you? I thought not.

Same attitude as our current administration. What he did is not prudent, but the libs have thrown away the constitution. Is the president exempt from the words in his oath?

Maybe their copy wasn't in the White House after Bush and Cheney wiped their feet on it.

@Richard

Just exactly how is the President "throwing away the Constitution"? I have had it up to my eyeballs with you rightwing haters throwing out any hateful lie imaginable about this President and then expecting the rest of us to accept it. I do NOT accept the blatant lies and hypocrisy coming from the right. There are alot of things you may not agree with but NO ONE IN THE ADMINISTRATION IS THROWING AWAY THE CONSTITUTION-or restricting our freedom,or fighting a war against religion or pretty much any of the other stuff ya'll like to accuse the opposition of. Face it, there is alot of fear and loathing coming from the right and as far as I can tell-for NO GOOD REASON. Educate yourself, man! Both of my sons serve their country and absolutely agree that Sgt. Stein has disobeyed a direct order and needs to be discharged. He was NOT just expressing an opinion, he was being disrespectful of his CIC and he disobeyed his direct command by not stopping after he was warned. If I did that, I would be fired immediately and that is just what is happening to him.

Richard, apparently they have a totally different Constitution down there in Nut-Job Capital of the World Florida.

I don't see any of you tea-bagging blowhards complaining about the unconstitutionality of the so-called "Patriot Act" that America's Alfred E. Neumann of a president rammed through Congress by publicly proclaiming that anyone who opposed it was a traitor. That was the single biggest loss of Constitutional rights in US History, and Shrub Dubya was responsible. What about Corporations being declared to be "citizens" That was part of your right-wing agenda, and it's an erosion of Constitutional rights as well. You demand preferential treatment when your guy is in office, and call everyone a traitor when the other party's guy is in office. You're a Class-1 hypocrite.

You obviously don't remember Natalie Mains. She was publicly vilified, called a traitor, and had calls for her citizenship to be revoked made from the floor of the House of Representatives, along with other politicians demanding her deportation. All she said was that she was "embarrassed" to be from the same state as the President. She was burned in effigy! She did not commit a treason, she did not disobey her commanders. She exercised her rights. The fact is, you don't have to like what someone else says. You have to defend their right to say it, even when and especially if you disagree with it. The only way it is or should be actionable is if it is false. What this disgrace of a Marine did was. And a disobedience on top of it. When your legal commander tells you to shut up, and you don't, it's wrong.

You give us ONE example of where the sitting President has willfully violated the Constitution. Just one. Not an opinion, but an example. You can't do it, because he would have been impeached for it. So it's just GOP rhetoric. And it's traitorous. If you don't like America or her President, then GET OUT. There are plenty of Airlines that fly overseas. Put your sorry treasonous, disrespectful, anti-American butt on one and don't come back.

How the Greedy Obstructionist Party can claim to love America when they clearly hate Americans is a total mystery to me.

The libs have thrown away the Constitution? Heck, even many conservatives agree that Bush/Cheney did more to tear that document apart than Obama has even thought of. Then again, those conservatives are being honest, and aren't being featured on Fox News. And where are you getting your talking points?

This isn't a Constitutional issue. It's a military issue. This guy created a Facebook page called "Armed Forces Tea Party." According to Pentagon directives, military personnel in uniform cannot 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.

I don't know enough about USCMJ but seems pretty clear he disobeyed Pentagon directives: Facebook is public, he was self-identified as a member of the military, and his page says "Tea Party" -- a political movement. Even if he put a "disclaimer" on his Facebook page, labeling his page "Armed Forces" is giving the appearance that his views are endorsed by the military.

He was also told to knock it off by his military superiors. He chose not to. He was acting like a little kid, waggling his fingers right in his brother's face, then telling his mother "But I'm not touching him."

This guy wanted to push the limit and he lost. He made his bed, he can lay in it.

Let the commander and chief, aka "boss" decide if he should be fired. Let him decide if he adds one more individual to the unemployed. I would be really interested in knowing what the president's decision would be. A recommendation from "Human Resources", his coworkers, and "assistant managers" may not necessarily be the same opinion of the "CEO". This obviously will go to court. A lawful policy or its interpretation will later be determined. My opinion is that he should keep his job. I have no problem with my tax payments being applied to acknowledge the good service he has provide my country. Too much petty bickering overclouds his good works. I've been discharched, but received unemployement benefits because it was later determined to be without just cause. Too many bosses find any excuse to get rid of any employee they do not like. They will conjure up some sort of reason, when the underlying reason may be something different like sexual orientation, gender, color of skin, religeon etc. The final test should be the constitution and bill of rights upon which all other subordinate laws are created. The "golden rule" goes both ways. As a parent, I try to show compassion and kindness towards my own children despite all the disrespectful things they sometimes do.

srj500, Compassion has no place in military discipline, military discipline must be stringent. It has always been this way.

We shouldn't change because we live in a, Give everybody a ribbon and still call it a race, age. Or attaboys all around, we wouln't want to hurt little johnnie's feelings.

Actions have consequences, He screwed up, he has to face the consequences.

No response, Richard?

Please, no matter how you shake this, it does not roll out as a freedom of speech issue. This man has a country and a mission to represent and clearly he has done a very poor job of doing both. He has over stepped the boundries as many zealous activists do. He needs to be taught that if you are a US Marine act as a US Marine. He had a much bigger responsibility than that of a mere activist. Poor decision, poor performance and poor representation of his country.

I have two sons in the military. One is a Democrat and one is a Republican. Both have refrained from discussing the Presdents (Bush and Obama) even at the dinner table among only family. Both have stated that they have made an oath not to speak negatively about the Commander in Chief.

Thus this is not and should not be a political matter. This is about military discipline and chain of command. So those of you who are making this political are, to say the least, off base.

God Bless America and those who serve.

This is not dissimilar from a Non-Military situation. I work for a fortune 50 corporation, which has a Social Media policy. If I were to disparage my company, it's officers or executives on facebook or other social media, I would be subject to disciplinary action up to and including dismissal. I have the right to freedom of speech, but my company has the right to sever employmnet.

The Marine's comments undermined his chain of command and both up and down, and place moral at risk particularly for his subordinates. His comments and actions were disruptive to the maintenance of order and discipline. He is lucky that he did not receive a Courts Marshal under section 134 of the UCMJ, where he could have been jailed for up to 6 months.

In case all you American's haven't seen the President do just the same thing to the American people. For our President to out and out show disrespect to the American Flag & for which it stands, to purposely put not only his hand, but his wifes hand on the opposite side of the heart when giving into the Plege of Allegiance to the Flag-Our Flag, its this type of "disrespect" that doesn't make him right and as for the marine's behavior he is well within his 1st rights. When the president wants to comply with the rules & regs of running our government and pull his head out of the dark, then by all means let the marine stay in active duty and complete his assignment.

So you crazies want to blame Bush for the Patriot Act, well quess who resigned that same act on May 26,2011 along with also signing the NDAA on Dec. 31, 2011 and many other acts/laws that take away our rights . Not only that who in this day would spend 10 million dollars or more to hide their identity all the way back to their birth even what the scar on his head is. You would think someone might be proud of what they have accomplished, but no. I will tell you who, someone that has something to hide or maybe someone that want to hide who they really are. So glad he held his promise of addressing the budget...NOT so glad he has got us out of the wars...NOT. All he does is complain and blame congress or sign bills that he says I;m not happy with this so I'll sign it with auto pen(NDAA), How about growing a spine and veto it to prove your so called dislike. O Boy wouldn't it be nice if we had a CIC that had a back bone and you idiots just keep eating his crap and thinking its filet mignon. Wake up Bari and let the world know who you really are., give credit to your mother Jo Ann Newman and stop the masquerading.

The Uniform Code of Military Justice is not a part of the United States Constitution. It is the Law that each service man and woman follows to the letter. My Constitutional rights as a citizen US are suspended temp. but, my rights as a seviceman (women included) are taken over under the UCMJ. The militarys job of defending the Constitution and the people of the United States are made easier with the Articles of War, during wartime covered by the Geniva Convention. All officers and NCO's know this. So, in case there are any infractions the servicemember is not covered as a citizen of ther US but a service member or combative in the armed forces. And that is the end of UCMJ 101

Yeah, it's part of the U.S. Code.

It all goes back to "you have to give respect to get respect" and it starts at the top!

No, the people at the top have earned respect.

The Repuicks (aka Repubics ) when are they going to get a brain I am soooo sick of these republicans spouting their nothings about nothings They are SICK Lets get them out of office NOW

First we got some SKIN HEAD melitia out of Arizona trying to Kill Gabby and no this SKINN HEAD wanting to Kill the President when is it going to stop

Repuicks SHUT UUUUPUUUUUUUUUUUPPPPPP

fyrboss - Johnson didn't run for another term ,not because he was not allowed, but because he didn't want to send more boys to die in Vietnam. MacNamara was a joke, simply a bean counter. But Johnson made a hard decision and stuck to it.

Semper Fi,,he should have kept his mouth shut and followed his oath to his service upon enlisting.

This man joined the military of his own free will, so he knew and agreed to the standing policy of the organization. He willfully violated that policy and continued to do so after being warned to desist . Period.

nol did you not read the oath quoted above. You cannot have members of the military commenting on a public forum against their superiors it is called discpline. It has nothing to do with free speech or voting it has to do with discpline and keeping a well ordered military. You evidently have never been in the military. It is the uninformed like yourself that is always screaming about the constitution that has no clue whatsoever about that which you speak.

Spoken like a true non-vetreran

I always found it cute when the sh!tbag eternal E1's and E2's whined about "Free Speech" and their "Rights" when they are cleaning the head or whatever.....

What do people think the military is? Civilian life with camo?

Shuklack, well said. He is nine years in with multiple combat deployments and only and E-5. Most worthwhile Marines would have made another stripe by this time, especially infantrymen. I always did my level best to discourage such whiners from reenlisting. I always counseled them that they would be much happier as civilians. Keep your mouth shut, do your time, get the Honorable Discharge, get out, go to school and become something. He should have listened to his superiors and done the same. The military does not answer just to Republican Presidents. The oath is to obey the orders of the President of the United States, not the Republican President fo the United States.

What the heck is with these people who keep saying this guy is being punished for speaking against Obama? Do you all hate Obama so much that you have to turn everything into being about him? Gas prices are up - must be Obama's fault. I'm behind in my mortgage - must be Obama's fault. They're all out of Peeps for my Easter basket - must be Obama's fault since everyone knows he's Muslim. For people who don't like the guy, you all sure go to great lengths to make everything about him!

For crying out loud, this isn't about Obama. Stein doesn't have to like Obama, vote for Obama, or clean up after his dog. It's about Stein disobeying orders (which Obama didn't give him), pushing the limit, and losing. Now, go find something else to blame on Obama because this isn't it.

Old Sarge....As a Marine Corp vet from the Viet Nam era, I totally agree with your assessment of the situation. I served under the Nixon administration and really did not care for the man...but he was my Commander In Chief and as a Marine I would not say anything against my boss.

For everyone taking the side of this Palin wannabe, please be aware that this is a military issue and will be dealth with under the UCMJ. Politics and civilian courts will not prevail. He violated military law and will be treated accodingly.

I agree with Old Sarge. This is a military matter and at the least he disobeyed his superiors who warned him about this behavior. He will get what the military court feel he deserves.

Exactly. Maybe they could all go on the "Armed Forces Tea Party" facebook page and talk about which orders are "lawful". This guy is a ridiculous and disgusting excuse for a Marine.

Honestly, the case looks pretty clear-cut, at least to this lay observer. But even if he somehow doesn't get discharged, I can't imagine his career being anything but manning a weather station in Alaska from here on out.

This marine is an NCO with leadership responsibilities. He should know better. Generals and others have been booted out as well. An undesireable discharge is way too harsh. He should face an Article 15 adjudication. As usual the press provides only a snipet of detail. But if his superiors told him stop, and he continued, his ass should be nailed. Garry Owen.

Thrill, congratulations for injecting Hitler into the conversation. I was wondering when someone would do it. Here's a little tidbit for you: Soldiers (nor Marines) receive orders from the President. They receive them from their immediate supervisors. Stein was told by his C.O. to stop administering the facebook page "Armed Forces Tea Party." He refused and is now facing the music.

Mike B 1st cav vietnam

This marine is an NCO with leadership responsibilities. He should know better. Generals and others have been booted out as well. An undesireable discharge is way too harsh. He should face an Article 15 adjudication.  As usual the press provides only a snipet of detail. But if his superiors told him stop, and he continued, his ass should be nailed.  Garry Owen.

Mike I have to disagree. This Marine got off eaisy. Had the issue go to Court Marshall rather than Article 15, he could have found himself with a Dishonorable Discharge after doing time at Fortt Leavenworth.

thrill22

Mike B, u need to wake up. Obama trashes the constitution on a daily basis. U sound like a german soldier taking orders from hitler.

Congratulations! You have just won the "Idiotic Comment of the Day" award.
You will be happy to hear your prize is an all expenses paid 3 day vacation to Wasilla, Alaska where you will receive continues lectures on the "Socialist/Communist threat to the American People" by none other than Sarah Palin herself with recorded statements by the one and only (late) Senator Joseph McCarthy.
Again, congratulations and thank you for your participation.

Just saying what exactly?

Tea1959:

You mean, just braying, like the jackass you are. Bush went AWOL, Cheney was a draft-dodger and both approved of, and allowed, torture. All three, including the sergeant who will be rightfully discharged, have no respect for their oaths. Just saying

Self-removed

No , but the debt would be 50 trillion , instead of only 17 trillion , and we'd be at war with Iran now , in addition to Iraq and Afghanistan .

Hey Mr, stick to the topic or shut up.

Mr. Accountability, who passed the "Patriot Act" a Republican House, a Republican Senate, and a Republican President signed it. You want Freedom, STOP VOTING for THEM!!!!!

Good Friday 4/6/12 The President "Fired" a 5 Star General during the Korean War. What makes You think that a USMC Sgt E-5 should not be Fired ? The expression "Dumb & Dumber" comes to mind.

He was given direct Orders to Stop Posting on FaceBook He then chose to ignore those orders.

Believe me He is going to regret that decision. Many G I Benefits are now History & Gone Forever.

SPW "Airborne" Drafted July 1969

SteveMW-do you put on camos and play with your friends and guns on weekends? That would make you a possible domestic enemy. Do you meet with and email others of a like ilk about the need to take back your country from legally elected officials? That would make you a possible domestic enemy. Fill in the blank-you might be a domestic enemy. You could be the new comic-instead of here's your sign or you might be a redneck your punchline would be - you might be a domestic enemy. Their is a market for this paranoid comedy-start with your family and friends.

SteveMW obviously never served in any branch of military. He's allowed to not like the President of the United States. He just can't publicly voice his opinion, which he did on his Facebook page. He was warned by his superiors to stop and he continued. He not only failed to follow his oath, but he also failed to follow a direct order from his superiors which is insubordination. He deserves his punishment.

SteveMW,

Would you want to be in a trench next to someone who continuously disparages his commander in chief?

Would you trust if an order comes from the CIC that would put all of you in harms way, that he would have your back, or would you think he's going to follow his own believes and disregard the order?

Soldiers have to be able to believe in the chain of command or it puts everyone's life at risk.

It is not about who the Pesident is, it is about the regulations that he repeatedly violated.There are two Department of Defense directives (DODD) that govern political speech in the military DOD Directive 1325.6 and DOD Directive 1344.10. The DOD Directive 1344.10 specifies the types of appropriate political activities for active-duty service members while DOD Directive 1325.6 counsels commanders to preserve the service member's right of expression while cautioning not to ignore conduct that could destroy the effectiveness of their units.

Flivver90,

Agreed. He was obviously participating in a political movement and in actuality trying to pull the rug out from underneath his Commander in Chief. There are several other ways he could have handled his political feelings, opinions & leanings but he chose to continue along a line that the USMC considered a violation of regulations, and that after several non-punitive warnings to cease and desist doing so. The USMC has to draw a line somewhere, even if a CIC is unpopular amongst them.

You are wrong about one thing though. He can voice his opinion, be on TV, whatever- but he CANNOT bring the USMC into the matter. He can go on TV as a private citizen, but is not allowed to present himself as a US Marine while doing so or give the impression that the USMC concurs with his personal opinion. Every Veteran's organization has the same type of regulation. It is obvious that he has involved the USMC and his membership in it in his little publicity campaign in spite of warnings from on high. He was given more than one chance to change his behavior and come into compliance with USMC regulations & policies with no punishment whatsoever. Like many fools, he misinterpreted his kind treatment as weakness and continued pushing. Well, now the USMC is playing hardball with him since he wouldn't take a gentle warning. He has earned a Bad Conduct Discharge (BCD) and punishment under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Tough titties to him! It was his own doing.

Steve, really good post, don't understand why it was collapsed. And yes, the military is to protect from foreign and domestic threats, even if it includes a "president".

Patricia,

It's common to see censorship here by the viners. They can't stand to see a differing opinion so they collapse it. Hardly "fair and balanced," but then it's a very liberal news organization we're posting on and they love nothing better than to stir the poop in the pot.

SteveMWRestored

Yeah yeah yeah.....and the president is a freakin saint! Grow up people! How petty can we get...stay tuned! So the guy doesn't like the prez...big deal. Oh my! He hurt someones little feelings for expressing his own...grow a spine and get a life. We've really become very petty in this country about petty things but everyone ignores the really important stuff. I guess it's much easier and safer to be petty.

"I, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic"

Hey Hero...put up or shut up...Enlist Today! No BS excuses...Enlist (if you have a pair)
If you have served...you know better. If you are serving...you're probably next.

Patricia Larsen

Steve, really good post, don't understand why it was collapsed. And yes, the military is to protect from foreign and domestic threats, even if it includes a "president".

So does that mean if a soldier considers you a domestic threat...he can come for you?

We're not dead , huckleberry

just on life support

We're quite dead actually

If you aren't you are going to kill the rest of us (U.S.)

Well, the docs are finally gonna pull the feeding tube in November.

Sounds like you speak from experience as a tea bagger.

Just a random question from someone who is not associated with any political party. Why is it anyone who has any republican-leaning views is automatically assumed to be a tea-party member or a skinhead/racist? As a former Marine I find Stein's actions a disgrace to the uniform he put on every day. Not to say he doesn't have a right to his opinion, but he was instructed to discontinue the use of his FB page, while using his work computer, I might add. In my opinion, and if you disagree so be it, Sgt. Stein is getting what he deserves. As a lot of people have already stated, if you were to use your work provided computer and posted pictures of your boss' head on a poster saying Jackass, you'd be fired in a heartbeat, and guess what, you'd probably lose any unemployment benefits you may have been entitled to because the firing would have been "with cause". Oh and just a quick FYI for everyone that thinks Sgt. Stein was an infantryman in the Corps, he wasn't/isn't. He is a meteorologist (weatherman) for the Marine Corps. That's the irony I see in all of this, the odds of him, as a meteorologist having to sling a rifle and and go hunt down these indiviuals that burned the Qaran and arrest them is basically non-existent. Just may opinion of the entire situation. Semper Fi!

He sounds like a nut. Now he is a nut with a chip on his shoulder. God only knows what this nut will grow into.

What policies you mindless little Nazi stooge???

I am so glad you drones were not in my military. I would not trust you beyond rifle range!

If you believe you gave up your rights, think again...nothing in regs about this. Now we have a perfect military for a dictator to exploit, as well as, a LAW to arrest and detain indeifnitely American citizens that Virginia is voting to oppose.

Are you all so blind and ignorant - what did they teach you in school?

My 25 years of service through the ranks never negated my rights - in fact it made those rights seem more precious and worth fighting for.

Anyone willing to give up a single right deserves no right at all -a warning from one of our founding fathers you all seemingly have forgotten.

By the way, you kiss up to a vehement draft didger, Slick Willy disgracing our White House and now this poor example for leadership - and defend them (never a mackground check on the czars either with a felon thrown in)?

4/6/12 From a former "DRAFTEE" Draftee or Regular Volunteer Army Your Freedom of Speech does NOT apply to DisObeying a Direct Order from your Commanding Officer. He was ordered to Stop Posting on FaceBook then He chose to ignore that direct order. Case Closed.

SPW "Airborne" Drafted July 1969

Unless you feel that order is unlawful, then it is your duty to disobey it.....that is in the UCMJ read it!

Retired MSG USAR

I'm sure you meant to back up your claim with citations, but you mysteriously lost all your sources...

Toasty....do you outright lie or just dont know anything? The person was a lt. from my state and his case went on for yrs. Why do you nuts on the left advertise that everything said is a lie if sources and links are not given?? You just promoted a lie...And, I am sure that you are proud....

The Military operates by the Code of Conduct, he violated it, he needs to go.end of subject no matters who's President. In the Military you follow your orders and keep your mouth shut. if you can't do that, get out

Toasty....That officer was Lt. Watada from Ft Lewis Washington....2006.....If you are done calling people liars....you could look it up......But you will not.....And, FC was right. He was idolized by the leftists....I assume that you may have been in that group....

J.A-522495

Toasty....That officer was Lt. Watada from Ft Lewis Washington....2006.....If you are done calling people liars....you could look it up......But you will not.....And, FC was right. He was idolized by the leftists....I assume that you may have been in that group....

Nice spin...but not accurate. I'm a "leftist", but I'm also a retired Sergeant First Class. While I understood his reasoning, he had to go...period. Must like this Marine. If you worn't so damn partisan right-wing, you might realize that there are folks on the left who understand the need for "good military order". So rather than shooting your mouth off why don't you look around you a little and STFU!

JA, asking that you back up your assertions like a grown up is just a basic part of being an adult. This is something you should have been taught a long time ago.

And since you still didn't produce a citation, do I get to tall you a liar?

Toasty....No, it is your tactic to put everything that you dont agree with in question. You could look it up yourself, but you would rather suggest that people are lying. People do have facts and memories and dont have to put up with demands to provide links and phony articles to back up what they remember....It is just your effort to put normal people on the defense....And that is your leftist tactic....and childish at best...Any first grader could take the information that I gave and do a search....except you of course....

If he was told to stop posting anything political, but continued to do so therefore he could expect to be brought to cour-Martial and be discharged not honorably. He shouldn't expect to reenlist when he can't follow orders.

Yo, folks. I'm a "leftist" whatever the F that means. My attack was towards the so-called righties on here that try to dismiss this f***ers failures. He was a scumbag, if you think he was brave for speaking his mind, hooray. But he failed his oath and deserves to be fired.

You do not seem to have the intellectual capability to be a "leftist." I believe the word you were looking for is ignorant. You sir are ignorant.

The lefties seem to understand little....Lt Watadas case was much dif than this situation....Watada had no troubles until he was ordered to Iraq....and then he suddenly decided that he was too religious to participate in war(or too scared). He demanded an honorable discharge. He was court martialed for not carrying out an order and there was the fact that he had accepted a lot of expensive training that he just wanted to skip out on....As was stated earlier, the libs treated him like a hero....

Old Doc...I am not that impressed with you being a retired sergeant first class...I was a sergeant but left after three yrs realizing that the Army was not my best fit.....and you can go to hell before I will follow your stupid instructions to shut up....

You have poo-poo potty language bro

wretched and dishonest? Oh, you must be talking about Bush/Cheney and the WMD in Iraq-or maybe it was the torture-oh, I know, it must be the way they never put the war in the budget leaving us with a huge deficit after their huge tax cuts.

Juneau, Alaska: a book deal? You must be joking. The market for a book deal to an extreme faction of the GOP is minuscule at best. If this marine posted this foolishness about his platoon commander, a Lieutenant, he's out. Semper Fi, see you later ex-Marine.

The market for a book deal to an extreme faction of the GOP is minuscule at best.

Beg to differ on that score; O.J. sold a lot of books with "If I had Done It" or whatever that crap was he had written. Don't underestimate people's curiosity - extreme right, or left.

I don't know , Hitobito , this country is full of numnuts who have $29.95 to blow on nothing . Look at Limbaugh's books ; 20 million dittoheads made those tomes of sprurious rhetoric and non-factual facts best sellers .

Just to update you, at any given time, there are a lot more republican mouth-piece bestsellers in print. Try having a book collection with "balance". It's practically impossible. For every James Carville, there's a couple of Cheney, Lindbaugh, and Palin's on the shelves. I guess the democrats are too busy to spend time writing, or haven't the cash for the ghostwriters. Or maybe explained themselves first go around, and don't need to rewrite history. Some days, I just miss Bill and Al..... :-)

First of all the military code says you will obey orders given to you by the president. The SGT. did not disobey any orders given by the president because he wasn't given any to disobey! Therefore he did not violate the code. Secondly, freedom of speech is every one's God given right thru the Constitution of the United States, bar nothing. The military needs to look into their own at the very top if you know what I mean. Trying to intimidate the US Supreme Court. Well, what do we do, dishonorably discharge the big #1. Yes, the commander in chief did this as per the media's reports. If you are talking about disrespect in a big way, lets start at the top. Then we can work our way down, with many casualties on the way, to this lowly Sgt. I was taught that you have to give respect to get respect and I think #1 needs to start the ball rolling with that one and work through the rest of the cronies and throw them all out. If this Sgt. goes, then the rest of #1's command should go too! Could we get that lucky!!!!

@Kitty*309440

You obviously have never been in the service. You cant openly talk against your commanding officer. He is getting what he deserves here

Kitty, I really don't know where to begin. He violated both the Pentegon Directives and the UCMJ. If you are a member of the military, the USMJ trumps your Constitutional rights as a citizen. How? Because it's authorized by the Constitution. Freedom of speech is not God given. Anyone with a gun can take it away in a heart beat. God did not write the Constitution, man wrote the Constitution. President Obama did not "try to intimidate the Supreme Court. He has not authority over the Supreme Court therefore can not intimidate them. Besides that, he gave an opinion. Obviously you know absolutely nothing about the Military. You are not required to respect anyone, but you must demonstrate respect for the uniform and the rank. As to your last comment...it's to idiotic to even address.

If the military were a ship and the president were the captain, then this marine would be considered to be spreading mutiny. He is being thrown overboard, as he deserves.

The thing that is really in question here is regarding everybody's rights when it comes to social media and what "free speech" truly means. Is Facebook private or not? Well, it can be if you set it up so only a few people get to view your posts, but you can make posts that everyone can view whether they're a FB friend or not.

The fact is that not all speech is actually what we like to think of as "free." Anyone that would walk up to a police officer and start voicing obscenity's and threats would soon learn that lesson.

The way I look at it is, Facebook is not private as long as you use it as such. If that is the case, then anything you post on FB can be viewed according to all the laws regarding limited speech.

Here's a good article that outlines this for those interested:

Yes he should be punished. He violated regulations and policy. Yes he should be punished. It seen that soldier/sailors have forgotten that they have taken an oath and have signed a contract. And he has violated both. But maybe he figures since obama has done it, he can do it. The military give up their constutional rights when they sign the contract and take the oath. And people need to realize that the military is help to a higher standard than your typical bleeding hear civilian.

Ol_Doc: part of what you said was true. But obama did try to "try to intimidate the Supreme Court", by putting the blame on them if they find his health care non constutional.

By the way I agree with alot of what Sgt. Gary Stein said. ANd he should have kept his mouth shut.

the thing of it is he may of violated his oath but thats not the issue here, whats really happening here is the consitution is slowly begining written out of exsistence. and soon no one will have rights, as soon as they get rid of are second amendment,they wont stop they will keep going and get rid of them all!

Well if he wasn't such a sorry president I could understand. but, I can't find one good thing he has done for this country... didn't vote for him then won't vote for him now.. Can't stand him and wish they could impeach him... Republican blood runs through these veins!!!!!!