| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Culture Wars |
| Tea Party Movement Spreads To Military |
| 2010-04-13 |
| The Tea Party movement has gained a foothold in the armed forces. A new Tea Party group, Armed Forces Tea Party Patriots, has grown quickly since being launched last month by an active duty Marine Corps sergeant. The group, which vows to "stand up on the very soil we defended to preserve common sense conservatism and defend our Constitution that is threatened by a tyrannical government," currently has over 400 members, who have signed up through its Facebook page, though many are not active duty military. And it has close ties to the broader Tea Party movement. "People in the military need to be heard," the group's prime organizer, Gary Stein -- a Marine Corps sergeant stationed at Camp Pendleton in southern California -- told TPMmuckraker in an interview. "Our opinions do count." Many people in the military "feel like they can't speak out against Obama or Congress," said Stein. "The armed forces should have a little bit more say than we think we do," he said. Stein said he had served in the Marine Corps for seven years, including service in Iraq. He described himself as a "strong conservative" who had found himself disillusioned with the GOP. Stein formed the new group, he said, after finding like-minded cohorts on his base, then co-ordinating with a friend who's active in a local southern California Tea Party chapter. The Armed Forces Tea Party Patriots have quickly gained a profile in the larger Tea Party movement. Stein was among Tea Party leaders quoted in a statement sent out by the Tea Party Patriots today, responding to the formation of a Tea Party federation. "In the Armed Forces we wear the same uniform, have the same haircut, and swore the same oath, but have different thoughts," Stein said in the statement. "We have come together as a band of brothers and sisters in uniform to stand for what is right. We share a life that unique only to us, we share a Tea Party that unique to us. We are the Armed Forces Tea Party Patriots and our voice will be heard!" Indeed, the Tea Party Patriots appear to have sought out the Armed Forces group, perhaps to imbue the broader movement with a military seal of approval. Yesterday, Greg Holloway, who co-ordinated the Tea Party Patriots' statement in response to the federation, posted a message on the Armed Forces group's Facebook page saying, "We have a tea party press release and would like to include you," and asking for a contact person. In promoting the Armed Forces Tea Party Patriots, Stein has raised the possibility of disobeying presidential orders. In one recent online posting, he wrote: My oath was to the Constitution, not to the politicians, and that oath will be kept. I won't "Just follow" orders. There is at this time a debate within the ranks of the military regarding their oath. Some mistakenly believe they must follow any order the President issues. But many others do understand that their loyalty is to the Constitution and to the people... That declaration echoes one made by the Oath Keepers, a group of current and former military and law enforcement personnel who have vowed not to follow orders deemed to be unconstitutional -- including any orders to disarm Americans. Stein agreed that the two groups are kindred spirits. "I think we're very like-minded with the Oathkeepers," he said. "I strongly support the Oathkeepers." Stein's political activism seems to have raised some concern among his superiors. Late last month, he wrote online: "Was just told by a Marine Corps Officer to watch what I say about Obama... I think not..." And later that same day: "I was just told to keep my opinons (sic) to myself about Obama, by my Officer-in-Charge (OIC)." Indeed, Stein may be violating military policies that restrict political statements and activities by active duty personnel. "I've seen military command go against people on a lot less," Mike Lebowitz, a former JAG lawyer who's an expert on issues of military expression, told TPMmuckraker. Lebowitz said one key question is whether the activity is judged to be "partisan." Though the Tea Party movement has formed political parties in a few states, and has endorsed and supported candidates in some races, there's no evidence that Stein's group has done so. Still, Richard Rosen, an expert on military law at Texas Tech School of Law, said Stein's activities sound borderline. "At some point it becomes very close to crossing the line of partisanship," he said. And Eugene Fidell, who teaches military law at Yale Law School, told TPMmuckraker that taking a leadership role with any political group is "problematic." But Fidell added that the military is usually loath to prosecute such acts, for fear of creating political martyrs. This isn't the first time that anti-Obama sentiment has surfaced within the military. Several active duty service members have challenged their orders to deploy overseas, on the grounds that President Obama was not born in the U.S. and his orders are therefore illegitimate. For Stein, Tea Party activism is a natural offshoot of the military's main mission. "The U.S. military has been around for over 200 years," serving America by deploying to war-zones around the world, he said. "Now its time to do what we need to do to get this country moving in the right direction." Late Update (4/13/10): Stein says in a statement that his group doesn't support a military uprising, views President Obama as the legitimate commander-in-chief, and will follow all constitutional orders. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose |
| #12 Uh, make that AR 340-15. Too bad I can't type. :-( |
| Posted by: Barbara Skolaut 2010-04-13 22:58 |
| #11 Oh, I understood what it said, Pappy - after all, I spend part of my year reading state (and some federal) legislation, and read a lot of regs too. I'd just forgotten how dry, pain-in-the-ass it is to read. I'm still trying to get over AR 304-15. ;-p |
| Posted by: Barbara Skolaut 2010-04-13 22:55 |
| #10 To make it even simpler - if it looks like the military is getting dragged into partisan politics - don't do it. Again, it has to be proven that the Tea Party is a partisan political organization. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2010-04-13 22:09 |
| #9 Basically, what it sez is that a service member on active duty may register, vote, and express a personal opinion on political candidates and issues, join a partisan or nonpartisan political club and attend its meetings when not in uniform, subject to some restrictions, sign a petition for a specific legislative action or a petition to place a candidateÂ’s name on an official election ballot, if the signing does not obligate the member to engage in partisan political activity and is done as a private citizen, make monetary contributions to a political organization, display a political bumper sticker on the memberÂ’s private vehicle, attend partisan and nonpartisan political fundraising activities, meetings, rallies, debates, conventions, or activities as a spectator when not in uniform and when no inference or appearance of official sponsorship, approval, or endorsement can reasonably be drawn. What they can't do is participate in politics beyond that of a 'spectator role', publish political tracts and news releases (letters to the editor excepted - as long as they state they're doing it as a private citizen), serve in any official capacity with or be listed as a sponsor of a partisan political club or political campaign, or speak before a partisan political gathering, including any gathering that promotes a partisan political party, candidate, or cause. That means that, unless someone can prove the Tea Party is a partisan political organization, they're relatively safe, as long as they state they're not doing it in an official capacity that implies military or government approval. Still, if I was them I'd be looking for either a non-retiree vet or a military-related civilian to head up the group. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2010-04-13 21:59 |
| #8 Pappy - would seem that politically coordinating for principles: small government, less debt, etc., would fit within acceptable activities if not referencing nor favoring a political party? |
| Posted by: Frank G 2010-04-13 21:57 |
| #7 Sorry, Barbara. Perhaps excerpts this 2008 article might help. A revised Defense Department directive provides sharper definition of what service-members may and may not do within the political realm, particularly running for political office, a senior U.S. military officer said here yesterday. The new version of Directive 1344.10, titled, “Political Activities by Members of the Armed Forces,” became effective Feb. 19 and replaces the previous version issued in August 2004. Active-duty servicemembers are strictly prohibited from campaigning for political office or actively taking part in a political campaign — even behind the scenes — The revised directive also specifies what active duty members may or may not do regarding political activities. In addition, military chiefs are expected to provide unvarnished advice, without political slant or motive, to senior civilian government leaders. However, under certain circumstances, some reserve-component members can run for or hold elective political office. Yet, there is “a right way and a wrong way to do that”. The directive outlines specific rules pertaining to cases of regular, retired and reserve-component service-members holding elective or appointed office within the U.S. government, including elected positions with state, territorial, county or municipal governments. In addition, the revised directive requires military members holding such positions to apply for and secure the approval of their individual service secretaries. The requirement for service secretarial approval depends on the length of the service-member’s call or order to active duty. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2010-04-13 21:47 |
| #6 I clicked on your link, Pappy. Gawd, it's been a loooong time since I had to read DOD bureaucratese! My head hurts. :-( |
| Posted by: Barbara Skolaut 2010-04-13 21:32 |
| #5 I suspect the pentagon will be acting soon to prohibit this type of activity. It'd run up against DOD Directive 1344.10, which covers service members participation in political activities. Then again, you've been out of the Army a long time... |
| Posted by: Pappy 2010-04-13 21:28 |
| #4 If individuals want to support the Tea Party or even the President they should do so. However they should leave any affiliations with the military at home. As it is we can barely trust the US Government. If we loose faith in the military we are lost of if the military becomes divided we are lost.. |
| Posted by: Kelly 2010-04-13 20:57 |
| #3 I suspect the pentagon will be acting soon to prohibit this type of activity. ahhh yes, the Napolitano boot of tolerance. Sounds like these gentleman and ladies are smart enough to make it less - partisan and more principles. Should stand up to scrutiny |
| Posted by: Frank G 2010-04-13 20:39 |
| #2 Interesting it was initiated by an NCO. Might say something about our officer... 'corpse.' I suspect the pentagon will be acting soon to prohibit this type of activity. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2010-04-13 19:03 |
| #1 I'm guessing someone at Talking Points Memo, being a left blog, might have needed a change of pants after hearing the news. |
| Posted by: eLarson 2010-04-13 18:59 |