Throughout history, a few of those who serve in uniform have often thought that having put themselves in harms way, they have paid a price that can never be repaid nor sufficiently honored. Therefore, they take what they think they have earned--a right to assume a position in society above the rule of law. Whether its Manuel Noriega, Hugo Chavez, Timothy McVeigh or others who commit to disobey the law at the conclusion of their service.
While I will support a veteran's right to politic, speak out, vote, run for office and within the rule of law agitate for his or her position, I would not support a soldiers professed right to first, while on active duty, speak out against the government that enlists him and that he is in fact a servant of, nor to disregard any laws that are passed within our legal system.
What sometimes veterans fail to appreciate and understand is that all the senators, congressional representatives, the federal judiciary and the executive branch are the embodiment of the constitution that veterans have swore allegiance to when they put on the uniform during their service.
We, as a people, elected our representatives. They speak and act for us. That's how our government works. I have listened to Soldier speak ill toward elected officials of both parties as if the elected officials, through some violent or illegal act, appointed themselves, and are acting alone. They do not. If a Soldier disagrees with an elected official and those that stand with them, once out of the service, they need to be leaders, confront those they disagree with through our rule of law, do the hard work that current elected officials did and run for office. But while in service, if the politically motivated soldiers criticize a governmental official--the are criticizing the American People and the constitution--that is why soldiers on active duty cannot legally participate in some political activity.
Don't be Veterans who would make themselves a dictator over one like Timothy McVeigh or a dictator over many like so many third world leaders. There is no honor in disengaging and making oneself an outlaw in a country where all are free to participate in our democracy--this takes greater courage. That is what a patriot does.
We don't live in a democracy because we get everything our way. If you are done with your "service" which is what it was a "service," then accept our gratitude, put away your assumption of many soldiers who have an entitlement to political authority (I'm not talking about your benefits and being taken care of if injured), be a citizen and a patriot, and work to achieve what you think is right within our system--as many have done like: Pres. George Washington, Pres. Grant, Pres. Roosevelt, Pres. Eisenhower, Pres. Kennedy, Pres. Bush, Senator McCaine, Senatory Kerry, etc.
Comment 1: Loren M. Lambert - @All You Constitution scholars--in the end if the Supreme court says something is Constitutional it is. And yes the Supreme Court has been wrong in the past, very wrong. Yet the legislative branch through proper legislation or a constitutional amendment can tell the Supreme Court that it is wrong. Usually, between the two and then the executive branches power to enforce or not enforce, we get it right. But again not always such as with slavery and civil rights. For the record, most of the Bush era overreaching I disagreed with and still do. I'm waiting for the perfect presidential candidate. Maybe next election.
Comment 2: Loren M. Lambert - Revolutions are messy. I prefer the incremental adjustments to the times through a robust democracy/republic.
Loren M. Lambert © January 1, 2012
While I will support a veteran's right to politic, speak out, vote, run for office and within the rule of law agitate for his or her position, I would not support a soldiers professed right to first, while on active duty, speak out against the government that enlists him and that he is in fact a servant of, nor to disregard any laws that are passed within our legal system.
What sometimes veterans fail to appreciate and understand is that all the senators, congressional representatives, the federal judiciary and the executive branch are the embodiment of the constitution that veterans have swore allegiance to when they put on the uniform during their service.
We, as a people, elected our representatives. They speak and act for us. That's how our government works. I have listened to Soldier speak ill toward elected officials of both parties as if the elected officials, through some violent or illegal act, appointed themselves, and are acting alone. They do not. If a Soldier disagrees with an elected official and those that stand with them, once out of the service, they need to be leaders, confront those they disagree with through our rule of law, do the hard work that current elected officials did and run for office. But while in service, if the politically motivated soldiers criticize a governmental official--the are criticizing the American People and the constitution--that is why soldiers on active duty cannot legally participate in some political activity.
Don't be Veterans who would make themselves a dictator over one like Timothy McVeigh or a dictator over many like so many third world leaders. There is no honor in disengaging and making oneself an outlaw in a country where all are free to participate in our democracy--this takes greater courage. That is what a patriot does.
We don't live in a democracy because we get everything our way. If you are done with your "service" which is what it was a "service," then accept our gratitude, put away your assumption of many soldiers who have an entitlement to political authority (I'm not talking about your benefits and being taken care of if injured), be a citizen and a patriot, and work to achieve what you think is right within our system--as many have done like: Pres. George Washington, Pres. Grant, Pres. Roosevelt, Pres. Eisenhower, Pres. Kennedy, Pres. Bush, Senator McCaine, Senatory Kerry, etc.
Comment 1: Loren M. Lambert - @All You Constitution scholars--in the end if the Supreme court says something is Constitutional it is. And yes the Supreme Court has been wrong in the past, very wrong. Yet the legislative branch through proper legislation or a constitutional amendment can tell the Supreme Court that it is wrong. Usually, between the two and then the executive branches power to enforce or not enforce, we get it right. But again not always such as with slavery and civil rights. For the record, most of the Bush era overreaching I disagreed with and still do. I'm waiting for the perfect presidential candidate. Maybe next election.
Comment 2: Loren M. Lambert - Revolutions are messy. I prefer the incremental adjustments to the times through a robust democracy/republic.
Loren M. Lambert © January 1, 2012
No comments:
Post a Comment