Liberal Forum

Huey » 26 Aug 2026, 7:04 am » wrote: ↑

26 Aug 2026, 7:04 am

No, you don't.

I found your other stand...


Whenever you're ready..

 

Squatchman » 26 Aug 2026, 5:33 am » wrote: ↑

26 Aug 2026, 5:33 am

  Rebrand the USA as South Canada sounds much better.

Only in your wettest of wet dreams. Too bad Canadians don't have arms to overthrow another country. Lol
 

Blackvegetable » 26 Aug 2026, 6:28 am » wrote: ↑

26 Aug 2026, 6:28 am

C) be a good Nazi

I wonder what this ***-clowns reaction would be had a commissioned officer stood up in the Biden era and did the same exact thing. I guarantee you would be calling for his head.

Blackvegetable » 26 Aug 2026, 7:10 am » wrote: ↑

26 Aug 2026, 7:10 am

I found your other stand...


Whenever you're ready..

 

 

I have one stand.  Military members may be subject to disciplinary actions if they participate in political activism.  

We used to get classes on that annually.  You have those same classes?

AI Overview
The Hatch Act is a 1939 federal law that limits the partisan political activities of executive branch federal employees and certain state, D.C., and local government workers.

Huey » 26 Aug 2026, 7:23 am » wrote: ↑

26 Aug 2026, 7:23 am

I have one stand.  Military members may be subject to disciplinary actions if they participate in political activism.  

We used to get classes on that annually.  You have those same classes?

AI Overview
The Hatch Act is a 1939 federal law that limits the partisan political activities of executive branch federal employees and certain state, D.C., and local government workers.

That is not how you put it with respect to Mark Kelly...

Blackvegetable » 26 Aug 2026, 6:28 am » wrote: ↑

26 Aug 2026, 6:28 am

 

Tell everyone about that Les Aspin ditty you sang while sashaying on my dime..

Donald Trump SHOULD be impeached..

The two current leaders of the services are rapists, under USMJ.

The PRESIDENT isn't a member of the military, ****!!!

The FOUNDERS of this nation made SURE the Commander in Chief was a CIVILIAN!!

Damn, you are really a STUPID **** PIECE OF MORON ****!!!

Run!!

Chase me too!!         

Blackvegetable » 26 Aug 2026, 7:24 am » wrote: ↑

26 Aug 2026, 7:24 am

That is not how you put it with respect to Mark Kelly...

Post his WORDS, ****!!!

Or run. It's what you do BEST, cupcake!!

     

Blackvegetable » 26 Aug 2026, 7:24 am » wrote: ↑

26 Aug 2026, 7:24 am

That is not how you put it with respect to Mark Kelly...

 

As a retired officer Kelly is still subject to the UCMJ.

AI Overview
Yes, retired military officers from a regular component who are entitled to retired pay remain subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) under Article 2(a)(4), meaning they can theoretically be recalled to active duty and face a court-martial for certain offenses. [1, 2, 3]

As for the yahoo from Obama era to this point I have not stated whether he deserved it or not.  I was pointing out your hypocrisy.  The yahoo deserved it.  

Huey » 26 Aug 2026, 8:07 am » wrote: ↑

26 Aug 2026, 8:07 am

As a retired officer Kelly is still subject to the UCMJ.

AI Overview
Yes, retired military officers from a regular component who are entitled to retired pay remain subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) under Article 2(a)(4), meaning they can theoretically be recalled to active duty and face a court-martial for certain offenses. [1, 2, 3]

As for the yahoo from Obama era to this point I have not stated whether he deserved it or not.  I was pointing out your hypocrisy.  The yahoo deserved it.

You were a bit more emphatic..


 

I was pointing out your hypocrisy.

How does something of which I'm entirely unaware accomplish that? 


[quote)The yahoo deserved it.[/quote]

So why insist that I was spinning, by posting facts?

Blackvegetable » 26 Aug 2026, 8:15 am » wrote: ↑

26 Aug 2026, 8:15 am

Huey » 26 Aug 2026, 8:07 am » wrote: ↑

26 Aug 2026, 8:07 am

As a retired officer Kelly is still subject to the UCMJ.

AI Overview
Yes, retired military officers from a regular component who are entitled to retired pay remain subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) under Article 2(a)(4), meaning they can theoretically be recalled to active duty and face a court-martial for certain offenses. [1, 2, 3]

As for the yahoo from Obama era to this point I have not stated whether he deserved it or not.  I was pointing out your hypocrisy.  The yahoo deserved it.

You were a bit more emphatic..


 

I was pointing out your hypocrisy.

How does something of which I'm entirely unaware accomplish that? 


[quote)The yahoo deserved it.

So why insist that I was spinning, by posting facts?
[/quote]


You were trying to defend him. From a position of ignorance.

Huey » 26 Aug 2026, 8:32 am » wrote: ↑

26 Aug 2026, 8:32 am

So why insist that I was spinning, by posting facts?

You were trying to defend him. From a position of ignorance.[/quote]

Whom was I defending?

From a position of ignorance

I am not "always righr" by accident, Tiny.

Blackvegetable » 26 Aug 2026, 8:41 am » wrote: ↑

26 Aug 2026, 8:41 am

Huey » 26 Aug 2026, 8:32 am » wrote: ↑

26 Aug 2026, 8:32 am

So why insist that I was spinning, by posting facts?

You were trying to defend him. From a position of ignorance.

Whom was I defending?

From a position of ignorance

I am not "always righr" by accident, Tiny.
[/quote]

The marine under Obama.

There is really nothing else to discuss.

Huey » 26 Aug 2026, 9:52 am » wrote: ↑

26 Aug 2026, 9:52 am

Whom was I defending?

I am not "always righr" by accident, Tiny.

The marine under Obama.

There is really nothing else to discuss.[/quote]

I was "defending" the Marine under Obama?

He later clarified that he meant he would not follow unlawful orders that violated citizens' constitutional rights"

@Blackvegetable   how many times did you post that?

Also, you whine and cry and bitch about others taking a stand.  By all means, take your stand. 

ROG62 » 26 Aug 2026, 5:53 am » wrote: ↑

26 Aug 2026, 5:53 am

Watson, 40, a father of two who has served 17 years and is about three years from retirement, could be dismissed from the service and lose his pay and benefits if convicted, his attorney has said. He also faces the possibility of confinement.

A) don’t protest in uniform…or
B) use chain of command thingy…

His wife is red hot and raging.
His marriage bed is ice cold and uninviting. 
His in laws are divided, with one camp alarmed and the other delighted.
His friends are rolling their eyes, and his enemies are laughing.

The only thing that I can think regarding motive is that he is playing the long game - looking to be a talking head some day, after he has paid whatever the price turns out to be. 

Oliver North had the decency to drag Fawn Hall before us, providing us with endless jack hours and a real improvement to our spank banks. But Major North was a Marine. I'll wager this airforce *** is gonna have some skinny slacker as his co-fall guy.
 

Blackvegetable » 26 Aug 2026, 6:28 am » wrote: ↑

26 Aug 2026, 6:28 am

 

Tell everyone about that Les Aspin ditty you sang while sashaying on my dime..

Donald Trump SHOULD be impeached..

The two current leaders of the services are rapists, under USMJ.

My God man. Uniform Soda of Mayberry Jurisprudence?

It's UCMJ. Get it right.   
 

Huey » 26 Aug 2026, 6:32 am » wrote: ↑

26 Aug 2026, 6:32 am

Members of the military don't have the same 1st amendmets rights to say whatever as do political activists, particularly when in uniform.

Not while I'M buying their panties and pastries, by gum.  
 

Cannonpointer » 26 Aug 2026, 11:30 am » wrote: ↑

26 Aug 2026, 11:30 am

My God man. Uniform Soda of Mayberry Jurisprudence?

It's UCMJ. Get it right.   
 

 

He still struggles with the PK, (PX), C5, (C4), and the CV gas (CS gas).  Hell, even posted USMJ a few times on this thread.
 

Huey » 26 Aug 2026, 6:42 am » wrote: ↑

26 Aug 2026, 6:42 am

I am offering perspective from one who was subject to the UCMJ, not the perspective of one who was ready to ROTC, civilian.

BeeVee calls it the USMJ.
 

Blackvegetable » 26 Aug 2026, 6:52 am » wrote: ↑

26 Aug 2026, 6:52 am

What "spin"?

I believe that's pretty much cut & dried..

I'm reasonably certain that a trip through the archives will reveal where you stand on such comments from VETERAN OFFICERS...

Shall we look, or would you.prefer an opportunity to retell it?

He won't "retell" it and you are too lazy to look.

You'll beg someone else to do it, and that is as far as the matter will go.