A Final Verdict on the Presidential Salute

[alsame]

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/01/opinion/01winfrey.html?th&emc=th


President Obama at Dover Air Force Base in Delaware, Oct. 29, 2009.

Op-Ed Columnist
A Final Verdict on the Presidential Salute
By CAREY WINFREY

FOR nearly three decades, I’ve felt conflicted about presidential salutes. After all, my United States Marine Corps instructors drilled into me the idea that “you never salute without a cover” which, in civilian, meant without a hat.

My fellow Marines and I were also informed, in no uncertain terms, that we weren’t to salute out of uniform. (I don’t think that presidential blue suits, white shirts and red ties quite qualify.) So whenever I saw a president stepping off a helicopter and bringing hand to brow, my drill instructor’s unambiguous words came back to me with much of their original force.

Then there were the salutes themselves, which ranged from halfhearted to jaunty. None of them fulfilled the characteristically succinct prescription that Capt. Jack O’Donnell of the Marine Corps delivered, in 1963, to my platoon of freshly minted second lieutenants at basic school in Quantico, Va.: “Your salute,” he pronounced, “must be impeccable,” by which we took him to mean like his: a straight line running from elbow to fingertips, the fingers and thumb forming a seamless whole, the arm brought swiftly to the brim of the cap, no palm showing, and then lowered smartly to the side.

Presidents have long been saluted, but they began returning salutes relatively recently. Ronald Reagan was thought to be the first, in 1981. He had sought advice on the matter from Gen. Robert Barrow, commandant of the Marine Corps. According to John Kline, then Mr. Reagan’s military aide and today a member of Congress from Minnesota, General Barrow told the president that as commander in chief he could salute anybody he wished. And so it began.

Mr. Reagan’s successors continued the practice, and I continued to be conflicted — believing that when it comes to salutes (and one or two other matters), presidents deserved to be cut some slack, but also feeling a little uneasy about the whole thing.

My ambivalence came to an end last week, when I saw a videotape of the president’s midnight trip to Dover Air Force Base in Delaware, where he had participated, very early that morning, in the “dignified transfer” of 15 Army soldiers and three Drug Enforcement Administration agents killed that week in Afghanistan. Mr. Obama stood ramrod straight and saluted as six soldiers carried the coffin bearing the body of Sgt. Dale Griffin of Indiana off a C-17 transport aircraft and into a waiting van. His salute, it struck me, was impeccable in every way.

[Ian David]

1. Contrast and Compare

Bush's Iraq WMDs joke backfires
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3570845.stm

[proud2BlibKansan]

17. +1

[Bucky]

53. Actual Bush salutes

smirking salute

bored with the job salute

utter class

legacy salute

[Onlooker]

2. Yet another Obama photo op

While credit card rates skyrocket, Wall Street gains and workers lose, record numbers of Americans die in Afghanistan, if Obama isn't posing for Holloween, he's posing for dead soldiers. He looks more and more like an idiot, and I supported him all along.

[Windy]

5. your post is offensive to this veteran! This was no photo op.

It was a dignified tribute to the fallen. What is wrong with you? Seriously?

[Onlooker]

9. He should bring the troops home

Sending them off to die, moving at a snails pace to figure out an alternative plan, and then honoring them to me seemed like just another one of his myriad photo ops. When he brings them home, then I'll respect his attitude towards are troops. If he wasn't using every moment for a photo op, even Holloween (with his wife dressed in a costume), I might have believed his sincerity. To me, he's starting to look narcissistic.

[Adsos Letter]

16. "moving at a snails pace to figure out an alternative plan"

How absolutely irresponsible of him that he might actually be taking the time to consider the result of the Afghan election fiasco to determine whether or not to pursue the course prescribed by McChrystal.
I would much prefer a well thought out plan, well executed, to a decision to simply give the ground commander everything he asks for, without other consideration.
If the ground commander's vision actually proves to be the wisest in the broader strategic sense, then by all means, proceed with alacrity.

[phleshdef]

20. Good points, also, its stupid to use the term "snails pace" when its been less than a year.

Anyone that sais something like that is just revealing themself to be extremely unknowledgable on the work and time that goes into such decisions in the first place. The person that made that statement has no clue what they are even talking about and definately no clue on what the job of the President actually entails.

[emilyg]

44. +1

[Name removed]

45. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[madmax]

54. Well said, baby!

Gotta love the Durken Irishman :hug:

[polmaven]

47. This is sarcasm, right?

Please tell me it is....How I know is that you spell more like those people at another place....It is "his attitude towards OUR troops", not "are" troops, and the holiday is Halloween!

I am not the least bit upset that the President showed respect the fallen soldiers. He is, with regard to both Iraq and Afghanistan, doing exactly as he said he would do. I am also not disappointed in him for taking the time to make sure he makes the proper decision on the troop levels in Afghanistan.

[demwing]

77. Yes, he should bring the troops home, AND he should honor the dead

The first takes time to do intelligently, the second can be done immediately.

I'm glad we have a President who understand how to accomplish both. Encourage the Pres to bring home the troops faster, if you wish, but why mock him for standing up where Bush failed? Why mock him for having respect?

It makes you look smaller than you should.

[Name removed]

81. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jonnyblitz]

46. I am a vet who thinks it IS a photo op, sorry to offend you.

Obama is a POLITICIAN. if he really gave a fuck he wouldn't be escalating this MESS.

[phleshdef]

61. How is it a photo op when the families requested the cameras and he did not?

The FACTS prove that this had nothing to do with photo opportunities. You don't GET to have an opinion on it. Its not an issue that lends itself to opinions.

[Name removed]

72. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[HughMoran]

74. Yes, some are 0% supporters and their posts must be taken with a grain of salt

I wonder why some think what they say doesn't affect their credibility on certain topics?

[Number23]

62. Trust, we're all SHOCKED that you and one other agreed with Onlooker

SHOCKED. No one would have EVER guessed that you, jonnyblitz, and the "+1" to Onlooker in this thread would have agreed that this was a photo op.

[geek tragedy]

71. Two of the biggest Obama-hating trollz on the site. nt

[geek tragedy]

70. You have HATED Obama since the primaries.

Doubtlessly you would be bashing him if he didn't do this.

You're no better than Liz Cheney.

[StopTheNeoCons]

56. +1

[Name removed]

73. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Bobbie Jo]

80. +1

No words.

[stray cat]

6. So practically how would you have fixed the world this year?

assuming you are not god and have to work with the same legislature and rules and constitution Obama has to work with?

AND more practically what have you productively done to help the economy, Iraqi's, Afghans, the homeless, the poor, our soldiers (and ranting on DU clearly doesn't count)

[Mz Pip]

7. I don't see "idiot"

in this picture. I see someone who is taking his position as CIC very seriously. Unlike the former occupant in the White House.

Yes, we have a lot of problems in the country but a president must address all of them and that includes his duties as CIC. This isn't someone mugging the camera to score points. It is someone who is confronting the full impact of a war he inherited and now must make decisions on how to proceed.

[smiley_glad_hands]

8. Even with your star you are very transparent.

On edit: Nice repug talking points you have their. Second post of yours I've seen pushing those memes.

[Justitia]

12. Yeah, there's an idiot alright, but it's not Obama.

[phleshdef]

15. What a disgraceful and factually ignorant statement to make. You sound like a right wing blow hard.

First off, its disgusting that you begrudge our commander in chief taking the time to honor fallen soldiers. I don't care what party the President is, there can be no wrong found in such an act.

Secondly, he never asked for the cameras, the families of the veterans were given the choice to have cameras there or not have cameras there and they made that choice way before Obama ever made the choice to be present for the event.

Third, considering that he is in the position now of making some tough decisions on Afghanistan, its extremely admirable that he would go face the consequences of further engagement in the war, its admirable that he has the courage to go look at the coffins that are a result of the decisions to continue a war and not run from the fact that he may make a decision that creates more coffins just like that. It means that he is willing to risk facing the guilt and the consequences of such decisions and thus may guide him to decide more wisely as a result.

So sit there and BLATHER on more unpatriotic, right wing bullshit and pretend that you are some sort of activist actually doing something meaningful. Meanwhile the commander in chief, Barack Obama, whos jock you aren't even fit to attempt to hold up, is actually facing down real problems and trying to bring about real solutions.

Pathetic.

[proud2BlibKansan]

18. Yes! McCain would have been so much better!!

:sarcasm:

[firedupdem]

19. Trashy ass statement, not worthy of further comment. n/t

[tblue]

22. Yes. He really should ignore our war dead just like B/C. NOT.

This president can chew gum and walk at the same time, ya know.

[AndyA]

23. I agree with your comments regarding credit card rates, Wall Street, etc.,

but I disagree with the posing comments. I don't believe that is true at all.

It's important to remember that Obama didn't start this war; he didn't ignore Wall Street and allow the collapse, nor did he implement the strategy to deal with it.

What Obama did was to inherit a country that could best be described as a steaming pile of shit from George Bush and the Republicans. The economy was in the toilet. Major industries were failing. We were fighting two wars based on lies. The Justice Department had become politicized and wasn't doing it's job. Budget cuts in every consumer protection division placed the American people in danger. Instead of a surplus, we had huge debt.

So Obama had everything going against him, and the one thing he did have on his side was the support of the American people. Now I realize all of these things can't be taken care of immediately, it's like turning around a huge ship in the ocean. It takes time.

Obama has lost some of the support of the people, perhaps it's because we're impatient or perhaps it's due to the fact we don't realize how long some of these things truly take. We know the GOP is fighting him every step of the way, which no doubt adds to the time frame.

Unlike George Bush, I think few of Obama's photos are staged purely for the consumption of the people. Whereas Bush orchestrated events for the PR it would create, I believe Obama does these things out of a sense of duty and respect. The right wing doesn't like it because it reminds us we're fighting a war, and it reminds us that some of our soldiers aren't returning home to their families because of that war. And when that happens, we remember who started the war, and who was in charge while everything was falling apart.

And that's the reason for most of the objections. Obama has already kept us safe longer than Bush did, and he's taken major strides toward turning things around. It took eight long, difficult, hard years to get to this point. It's going to take longer than 10 months to repair things.

If Obama looks like an idiot to you, I can only imagine how you must feel about the Republicans, who created this mess and have offered no solutions, just criticism.

[FrenchieCat]

27. More like you were highly skeptical all along that Obama could even win the election.....

which is not the same as "I supported him all along".

You needed constant reassurance that he "could" win, and the only thing
you admired was his campaign apparatus, as you considered him an empty suit,
with a majority of supporters who were "Zealots".

A Skeptic is not a supporter (because all skeptics do is ask questions to get answers to reassure themselves, as opposed to working actively to support a candidate that they actually believe in)....and now you are attempting to rewrite your history, for you own personal reasons, I suppose.

Most likely because criticism from someone who supported the one he/she is criticizing sounds more potent and credible than criticism from someone who never really believed that this person could even be President.

You have a game, but some of us who have long memories aren't gonna play with you.

Here are some of your comments while you "supported him all along"; The ops you started:

Onlooker (1000+ posts) Mon Feb-04-08 07:50 AM
Original message
If Clinton wins and Obama concedes
I think this scenario is highly unlikely anytime soon, but I don't think Clinton is out of the hunt, and things could turn around for her. But, if she manages to eke out a win, I think she should get rid of her campaign operation and hire Obama's. Is that feasible? Is that plausible?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=4382216

Onlooker (1000+ posts) Sun Feb-03-08 03:16 PM
Original message
Obama might fine people who refuse to buy health insurance
Fine are worse than garnishing in that they are on top of the monies owed.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080203/ap_on_el_pr/campaig...

"Obama has said he would require parents to buy health insurance for children, and possibly fine them if they refused, but he would not insist that all adults buy insurance." http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=4371940

Onlooker (1000+ posts) Fri Feb-01-08 05:31 AM
Original message
The thing that worries me about Obama
There are plenty of things that worry me about Hillary Clinton, mostly the tons of baggage that will be dragged with her into the election and the fact that her campaign has managed to squander what should have been an insurmountable lead.

The one thing that worries me about Obama is that he's wooden, sort of like Gore and Kerry were. While he is terrific at rallies and even at intimate campaign events, he comes off in debates and on tv talk shows as Johnny one note. A lot of people found that a turnoff with Kerry and Gore, and I wonder if that would happen again.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=4330480

This was your response to an op that accuses Obama of having messianic qualities.....

Onlooker (1000+ posts) Thu Feb-07-08 09:46 PM
Response to Original message
62. If Obama can maintain his messianic qualities ...
... through the primaries and through November, then we have a Democratic White House. The danger is that eventually people will see through him, mock him, and expose him. But, so far so good.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=4456220#4472610

Onlooker (1000+ posts) Wed Feb-06-08 04:38 PM
Original message
Obama's the perfect candidate for a stupid electorate ....
He is all style, like Reagan. There's not a lot of substance. The things you remember about Obama are idiotic sayings like Fired Up! and Yes we can! or meaningless ideals like hope and change. His slogans are so meaningless that they could be used by Hitler or Jesus. It's truly brilliant, and it lights a fire under a lot of people.

Obama will win. Clinton supporters might not like that, but she's an intellectual candidate, in the mold of JFK, Gore, Kerry, and her husband. Even though Bill Clinton got elected two times, he had a lot of difficulty. What the country likes are people who say nothing that makes them think. Obama has managed to stay vague enough that people don't have to think. Obama is getting the lions share of the disinterested and uninterested voters, the people who make their decision based on style and easily remembered slogans. Obama's slogans are even easier to remember than the equally meaningless Republican "family values."

You don't have to be stupid to support Obama. I support him because he's running a great campaign, drawing lots of new people into the process, and his views are certainly no worse than Clinton's. Also, while is campaign has made him appear lightweight, it's pretty obvious he's not. He's a very bright guy who understands the chess game he's playing against Clintons and the Republican machine.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=4444238

Onlooker (1000+ posts) Tue Feb-12-08 08:22 AM
Original message
The Republicans have the advantage in the General Election
Edited on Tue Feb-12-08 08:40 AM by Onlooker
If it's Clinton, they'll play on her gender, promote salacious rumors (like her "lesbianism"), recall her husband's scandals, rehash her old scandals, and play up her health insurance plan as a huge government program that will cost everybody lots of money in a bad economy. They will find ways to foster a rift between Clinton and Obama supporters in the hope of suppressing turnout.

If it's Obama, they'll play up any attacks that kill Americans in Iraq, and use that to prey on his inexperience. In this context, they will also raise questions about whether Obama can be trusted given that he grew up in foreign countries. They'll reinforce the question of trust by bringing up his liberal voting record; they'll find some way to make it a race issue and try to divide Latinos and Blacks, especially given that McCain has a moderate on illegal immigration. They'll call Obama a Muslim.

They will mock both of them, finding ways to mimic Clinton's laugh and Obama's oratory. Against Clinton, they'll agree to very few debates. Against Obama, they'll want more.

Whichever one of them wins the Democratic nomination will face an equally tough challenge. The Republicans are so good at framing our candidates in the worst way, and Republican political machine has no ethics. I recall in the Kerry campaign how feeble MoveOn's aggressive efforts were compared to the efforts of the SwiftBoat Liars. I don't think Clinton or Obama have an advantage against McCain. In fact, I think it will be an uphill battle not only for the above reasons, but also because our country still has an enormous amount of unconscious sexism and racism.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=4550701

Onlooker (1000+ posts) Fri Mar-21-08 04:41 AM
Original message
The Wright matter is largely settled, but ...
Edited on Fri Mar-21-08 04:57 AM by Onlooker
I think by and large guilt by association doesn't work that well, especially since Republicans have routinely associated themselves with religious leaders who have made offensive remarks. Scheuer (who called for the violent overthrow of the US), Falwell, and Robertson, have been courted by Republican Presidents and candidates in the past, and Hagee (who called Catholicism "a godless religion of hate") endorsed McCain. Wright has said many wonderful things over the years, and his worst comments were mild compared to the many gross remarks by right-wing fundies (e.g., ""I want you to just let a wave of intolerance wash over you." Randall Terry; gays are "part of a vile and satanic system will be utterly annihilated," Jerry Falwell; etc.)

But, I saw on a right-wing blog that Obama "threw his grandmother under the bus," and then I did a search for a comment he made about his grandmother being a "typical white person." It is being promoted on every right wing blog in a big way, and a search on Google news shows it is getting considerable play. While most of us understand what Obama meant, he certainly spoke carelessly, and it's easy to see how his comment was insulting to some.

Now, let's not run away from this mistake like we ran away from the Wright issue months ago when Clinton supporters (and some Obama supporters) were expressing concern about Obama's church and minister. Had we confronted the issue then, Wright might not have been an issue in the last two weeks. Do you think Obama's comments about his grandmother pose a serious political problem for him in that they allow the right to play the race card by using Obama's own words? How can Obama put this issue to rest?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=5188592

Onlooker (1000+ posts) Sun Mar-16-08 12:12 PM
Original message
How some Obama supporters hurt him
Edited on Sun Mar-16-08 12:12 PM by Onlooker
Months ago, several Obama supporters (including me) and Clinton supporters, expressed concerns about his church based on articles then appearing in the NYT. We were shouted down by the Obama zealots who seem unable to handle the possibility that their candidate has any flaws. We were accused of racism, of being right-wing lurkers, and called all sorts of names in an effort to bury the issue. As a result, the issue was buried for a time, but now it's risen to the surface with far more energy than it might have at that time. In this slow election news period, talking about Wright is a great way for the MSM to fill the airwaves. I think if you support Obama, you should stop lying about him and recognize that he too has his foibles and has made his mistakes. He does not have to be perfect to be better than Clinton or McCain. Compared with Clinton or McCain, he'll still be squeaky clean, though he may not be the saint that some Obama supporters try to make him out to be. To help Obama win, own up to truth; to try to bury it by calling people names is simply a form of coverup.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=5109516

Onlooker (1000+ posts) Wed Apr-30-08 04:08 AM
Original message
DU didn't help Obama any
Early on, when people posted questions about Wright and the Trinity Church, they were attacked mercilessly by the Obama disciples. Too bad, instead, there was not intelligent discussion -- had there been, maybe we could have brought pressure on Obama to leave his church.

When people raise questions about Obama and Ayers, they are attacked mercilessly. Instead, we should think about how to respond to issue. The same goes for Rezko.

Recently, moderators closed a thread of mine because I extremely discretely asked about some crap floating around on right-wing sites that one of Obama's supporters was also accused of contributing to terrorist organizations. Do the moderators believe that by suppressing information, the right wing won't know about it? Are they really that naive?

If this forum operated as sort of a think tank, it probably could help brainstorm solutions for candidates. Instead, it seems like it's designed to cover-up and lie on behalf of our candidates. Too bad.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=5748273

I could go on and on....and anyone with a star can certainly find you questioning every step of the campaign throughout the campaign (an official nervous nelly)....from start to finish.....

In otherwords, you're full of shit.....and if all supporters would have been like you,
Obama would not have won the election.

Obama is not the idiot here.....

[PopSixSquish]

29. Well Gosh, if That's the Poster's Definition of "I've Supported Him All Along"

then I'd hate to see what the flip side was...


It would probably read like a combination of FR, RedState and Glenn Beck on a three day nitrous oxide bender...

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jbnow]

48. Oh those have to take you back One of those reminded me of a funny moment!

on Hardball. Matthews must have gotten as weary as 'Obama's problem with white voters' we always heard about.
Someone was talking about his white working class voter problem and why they wouldn't vote for him. Matthews asked in disgust why people always asked that. He went on to say we always put that as Obama having a problem but why didn't any body ask "What is Hillary Clinton's problem with educated voters? Why won't they vote for her?"

Really a good question...cable just obsessed over black and white and Hispanics won't vote for a black, pat buchanan constantly lied about the stats (always saying Obama has never gotten more than 24% of white vote in a primary. no idea where he got that number) and god knows what they were saying on fox. I got so tired of hearing about race!

But back to that poster trying to make it sound like the unthinking was Obama's base. The right always makes the same kind of insult.
The college educated voter made a hugs difference in 2008. One I remember numbers for was PA where Obama did worse than Kerry with white working class but 17% win with white college graduates that more than made up for it.

I've heard republicans say stupid things about how if you don't count black votes or women votes republicans would always win. Guess they can add if you don't count the educated votes they would win to.

Thanks for the review of the posters prior...support.

[madmax]

55. Can't pull any bullshit over Frenchie n/t

[skorpo]

63. I Guess he forgot that we can search past posts.

The truth is there if we suspect a poster's sincerity.

[grace0418]

66. +1 Onlooker calling anyone else an idiot is especially rich in my book.

:eyes:

[HughMoran]

75. Thank you

There are others who need to have this sort of research done on to show that they never have and never will support the President. There are many many others who never have and never will support a Democrat - it's crazy!

[Hekate]

78. Oh, SNAP! Frenchie has a long memory, and a good one. Thank you, Frenchie.

:hi:

Hekate

[euphoria12leo]

79. Well I guess that sums it all up.

At least a newbie like me can understand the hateful comments made by some on this site. Disagreeing with the President is one thing.
Calling him an idiot had me puzzled. Thanks


:shrug:

[rhett o rick]

28. You think he is an idiot but you "supported him all along". Yeah right.

I can understand your disappointment that he hasnt cleaned up the mess of the bush* years, but I feel that's not why you are calling him and idiot.

Please tell us your real motive.

[Warren Stupidity]

30. So you would prefer that, like bush, he just pretended there were no dead?

I hate the Afghanistan War and think that our soldiers are dying there for nothing, but I welcome a president who does not hide from the choices he has made.

[Flying Dream Blues]

31. I'm real sure Obama is not the idiot here. nt

[TwilightGardener]

33. What a sad human being you are, to read malice or selfish intent

into everything this good man does. Just like a Freeper, really. As the wife of a serviceman, I am glad to have a President who shows respect to uniformed personnel, even if he has to make some unpopular and difficult decisions about their mission.

[lunatica]

35. I'd say you're one of the Hatriots

[alsame]

41. No, THIS is a photo op from an idiot:

[27inCali]

49. god you people need to fuck off

like we could spend 30 years letting the corporations run this country into the ground and then expect this poor guy to fix it all in a few months?

that's just stupid.

if you are angry about how shitty this country is, take a look in the mirror. Defeatist assholes like you are a big part of the problem.

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Jennicut]

52. So paying respect to fallen soilders is a photo op?

I learn something new every day...

[Brigid]

58. I am a former Marine.

Obama's salute was done correctly, and at the correct position of attention. I certainly see no problem with the CIC using it. He's shown more understanding of what is he asking of the troops -- until he can fix this mess -- than * ever did.

[Arkana]

59. Free Republic's thataway.

[Zoeisright]

64. This thread is great for updating my ignore list!

And you're number one!

[grace0418]

65. "...more and more like an idiot." Kettle, I have the pot on line one.

Yes, all that honoring the dead and making some children happy really needs to STOP, IMMEDIATELY. Because respect and small moments of joy need to fly out the window during hard times. I mean, for chrissakes, I bet the guy eats, plays with his kids, spends time with his wife, goes to the bathroom and sleeps too. Who does he think he is, wasting all that time?

You should really be careful about calling others idiots, seriously.

[mopinko]

67. you supported him? seriously?

got a link for that?

[Dawgs]

68. Holy shit!!! Are you fucking serious?

"Posing for dead soldiers"

He went that after midnight. The only reason the press was there was because he went. He's the President for fucks sake. Was the press supposed to ignore this?

OMG!!

[Name removed]

69. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

76. Well, at least he can spell "Halloween".

[jwirr]

3. Thank you. About the idea of in uniform - that is a presidents "uniform"

and what came to mind when you wrote that was vision of boosh in front of the Mission Accomplished sign with is costume for the event. Thank God, President Obama was sincere about this event - you can see the mourning on his face. At the very least we can say that he may increase troops but it will not be without knowing what he is asking of them.

[alsame]

10. Just to be clear - I didn't write that, it's from the NY Times and was

written by a former Marine. (Link is on top of the post ):)

[Captain Hilts]

4. Goes back, at least, to FDR. I don't really like to see prez's salute.

FDR can be seen doing it in film of him reviewing the troops in North Africa.

[Justitia]

25. as a civilian, w/close ties to the military, I know it is a gesture of respect

It is obvious, as well, that he made an effort to be very precise. That is no sloppy salute.

I understand military protocol, but I also understand that civilians w/military interaction (esp the CIC), would want some way to express respect & honor, especially at such a somber event.

I see it as respectful recognition and deferential to the sacrifice made.

[Captain Hilts]

38. As a civilian with VERY close ties to the military, I just don't like to see any prez do it. One

reason is the same reason it has been noted that FDR made a point of NOT wearing military kit as both Churchill and Stalin did. We're a Democracy, not a military-ruled country.

[Justitia]

39. I totally agree on the uniform bit, that would be "crossing the Rubicon" in my book for sure.

But, I guess we will just have to disagree on the salute, I recognize the intent and categorize it much differently.

[Captain Hilts]

40. I think his iintentions were complately honorable. I just don't go for it. And in the Navy/Marines

you NEVER salute without your hat on. So, I guess that's another reason presidential salutes have always looked weird to me.

Keep the faith.

[phleshdef]

60. Since when does a friggin' hand gesture make us a military ruled country?

What a petty thing to even care about...

[wolfgirl]

11. He may not have worn a uniform

but it was obvious he takes his role as CIC very seriously. His salute was more regulation than some of the actual soldiers standing with him. It was impressive; however, the line of his jaw & set of his eyes said more than just that salute.

[cherokeeprogressive]

13. Not that my opinion is worthy in any way other than it comes from a veteran...

I don't like to see anyone in civilian clothes render a salute. I consider it to be a military honor.

That said, President Obama's salute was perfect in form, and his demeanor was even more perfect. His arm was parallel to the ground from shoulder to elbow, and his arm was straight as an arrow from his elbow to his fingertips. His fingertips came to the corner of his brow.

His salute was MUCH sharper than those of the men he was standing with. Most of them rendered lazy salutes, with cupped hands, bent wrists, and slouched shoulders. I respect him for that. His salute WAS impeccable.

[jbnow]

43. I've read those comments about his salute since he first saluted

as president (about how impeccable his form)

As someone not connected to the military I had no idea what made for a proper salute and have started paying more attention to pictures now.

I guess if any civilian has right to salute it would be the commander in chief. I am very glad President Obama took the time and cared to learn to do it so properly. A sign of respect.

[tblue]

14. Beautifully said! I think what the President did was a class act.

I'm sure it gave some families a kind of closure that they never got from W or Rummy, with his computer-generated signature on letters of condolensce.

[Aristus]

21. I still oppose the Presidential salute, no matter who is doing it. But at least with President Obama

one can see that he offers it with respect and dignity. With the Clown Prince, I always got this feeling, bolstered by his creepy and inappropriate joy in being a "war President", that he was always thinking: "Hey! Looky at ME, everbody! Ah'm salutin' 'n' stuff! Jes' like a reg'lar Army-type guy! Bang-Bang! Hoo-Haw! War's COOL, 'n' stuff!"

[Cha]

24. His salute and the

look on his face made me cry just now..it's a very powerful message.

[wroberts189]

26. There was never any need for a hat when saluting in the Army or Air Force.

I spent a total of 13 years in active duty between them both.

[hileeopnyn8d]

34. Thank you for the article!

And I'm sorry someone decided to take a dump on your thread. :(

I'm a veteran who has no problem with the Presidential salute, if, as is the case with President Obama it is rendered in a respectful fashion. With Bush it looked like some sort of frat-boy high five alternative.

It was absolutely appropriate for this occasion.

As for other times, when he salutes after stepping off of Marine or Air Force One, I see it as an acknowledgement and a greeting. Since the military member must stay at attention, it is his only way of returning their salutation. If they were at ease, he would no doubt shake their hand, but they aren't, so he can't.

And I was in the AF where we could salute, in certain circumstances, without a hat/lid. I think it's now acceptable under any circumstance in the AF & Army.

[alsame]

42. You're very welcome. I'm not a veteran myself, but there are

several in my circle of family and friends and they were all very positive about the President's trip to Dover and his overall respect for the military.

And thank you for your service. :patriot:

[lillypaddle]

36. His face

says it all. Anguish, pure anguish.

[Hutzpa]

37. There is no verdict

but a red herring, people should find important things to discussed rather than a lame
attempt at brandishing the President for doing what is civil, by the way;
he is THE COMMANDER IN CHIEF people should remember that before going on some mental
stupor.

[woofless]

50. My first thought was that President Obama's

salute was by far superior to that rendered by the uniformed individual to his right. That person had his hand tilted at the wrist and just looked sloppy. I think he needs a senior NCO to chew on his ass a little.

[Clio the Leo]

57. .....

:cry: and :patriot: