Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-08-2013, 08:20 PM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,301,193 times
Reputation: 9383

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
Seems that he is no longer here to explain and I cant speak for him. But yes, a military man would not be allowed to put up a sign critical of the president at their private residence.
Actually they are, provided the property they put them on is private property..

For example, they are allowed bumper stickers, and they indeed are allowed signs in their yard provided its privately own and not on government land.

http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/3892523/

Not sure where you heard that from but its wrong.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-08-2013, 08:20 PM
 
Location: Vermont
11,765 posts, read 14,722,465 times
Reputation: 18560
Interesting. I used to appear in front of Steve Servaas all the time when I was practicing law in Grand Rapids. Very conservative guy, but he got this one 100% right.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-08-2013, 08:32 PM
 
79,909 posts, read 44,416,474 times
Reputation: 17214
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
Actually they are, provided the property they put them on is private property..

For example, they are allowed bumper stickers, and they indeed are allowed signs in their yard provided its privately own and not on government land.

Military rules prohibit partisan political activity :: WRAL.com

Not sure where you heard that from but its wrong.
What was done in the article was criticism.

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

Military Board Recommends Dismissal for Marine Who Posted Anti-Obama Comments on Facebook | TheBlaze.com
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-08-2013, 08:43 PM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,301,193 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
What was done in the article was criticism.

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

Military Board Recommends Dismissal for Marine Who Posted Anti-Obama Comments on Facebook | TheBlaze.com
You continue to be wrong, and just so we can get it from an unbiased source, lets go right to the military guidelines. From Fort Knox

http://www.knox.army.mil/sja/documen...t-50-20062.pdf

(1) Express a personal opinion on political candidates and issues as a private citizen, but not as an Army representative

Note they can issue them as private citizens.

(2) Display political signs, banners, or posters in government facilities or large political signs or posters on private automobiles (a political sticker on a POV is authorized).

Note the use of GOVERNMENT FACILITIES.

Heck, your own link states
His attorneys argued that 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.

Btw, he was kicked out for saying that he would not follow orders, not because he said something negative.

Stein found an ally on Capitol Hill in Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.), who is a Marine reservist. Hunter wrote a letter to the Marines asking them to drop the case against Stein because the sergeant was merely expressing personal opinions and was not representing the Marines

Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/defcon-hill...#ixzz2PvlmNGH8
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-08-2013, 09:10 PM
 
Location: CHicago, United States
6,933 posts, read 8,523,898 times
Reputation: 3511
Republicans control the local government there, if I'm recalling correctly. So, if that's true ... what did we have, the GOP refusing to allow a criticism of President Obama? Yea. And pigs can fly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-08-2013, 09:10 PM
 
14,916 posts, read 13,141,682 times
Reputation: 4828
Another win for the ACLU
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-08-2013, 09:34 PM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
78,862 posts, read 46,817,969 times
Reputation: 18523
Quote:
Originally Posted by BringTheContent View Post
Displaying signs that are critical of President Obama should not be allowed, just as posting comments that are critical of him should also not be allowed on this or any other forum. He is the President of the United States of America. Public displays against him should be considered acts of treason. It's unfortunate that the so-called patriots who wave their flags at others have no respect for the president. This should not be allowed. You don't have to vote for the eventual winner of any election, but there should be no reason to ever slander them.


You do realize that a bloody war was fought over that very scenario. The King lost.

It is, We The People. Not, him the President.

Each individual US citizen, is equal to the President and every King, or dictator on the planet. We are no below them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-08-2013, 09:36 PM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
78,862 posts, read 46,817,969 times
Reputation: 18523
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank DeForrest View Post
Joe Stalin felt the same way...

So did Hitler and most recently Chavez.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-08-2013, 09:45 PM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
78,862 posts, read 46,817,969 times
Reputation: 18523
Quote:
Originally Posted by BringTheContent View Post
I am not a liberal. You lose by default. I will read and reply to anything I want. If you can't deal with that, then YOU don't have to read MY comments.


Then why would you express Progressive controlling values, 180º of the very Constitution, we the people placed on the government, to chain them down?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-08-2013, 09:53 PM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,301,193 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by gomexico View Post
Republicans control the local government there, if I'm recalling correctly. So, if that's true ... what did we have, the GOP refusing to allow a criticism of President Obama? Yea. And pigs can fly.
the township would have to respond to any complaint, so yes, if someone complained (as Democrats always do), they would have to take action.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:18 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top