Barbra boxer Tells Gen. Not to call her Ma'am. Tells him "adress me as senator"

03USMC said:
Here's the deal. The General was using a proper military protocol in addressing Boxer as Ma'am. It was the same as if he had been addressing his superior officer as Sir or ma'am. That's how it's done, believe it or not in the military some officers get testy when addressed as General, Colonel, Major or Captain and especially Lieutenant by persons below their paygrade. The wanna be Sirred and Ma'amed and three bags fulled.

So Boxer was being a bit......, witch and doesn't understand that it wasn't a slight at her ohhhhhhh soooooo lofty position.
Click to expand...

Except there is one problem, Boxer isnt in the military, she's a civilian and not only that by a sitting US Senator so the General ought to have remembered that. I dont think he would have liked Sen. Boxer calling him "Mike". Its a common protocol mistake by military people when talking to civilians. It might be normal in military life, Civilians do not like being patronized to, its considered very rude.

I am sure the General meant no disrespect, thats why its not a big issue and Boxer could have used alittle more tact like a "please" instead of getting all witchy. But she is entitled to be called senator, she was fairly elected by the people of California that is her right.

Not that its a big deal, we all have better fish to fry. If I had been in Boxer position I would not have cared at all.
 
mmarsh said:
Except there is one problem, Boxer isnt in the military, she's a civilian and not only that by a sitting US Senator so the General ought to have remembered that. I dont think he would have liked Sen. Boxer calling him "Mike". Its a common protocol mistake by military people when talking to civilians. It might be normal in military life, Civilians do not like being patronized to, its considered very rude.

I am sure the General meant no disrespect, thats why its not a big issue and Boxer could have used alittle more tact like a "please" instead of getting all witchy. But she is entitled to be called senator, she was fairly elected by the people of California that is her right.

Not that its a big deal, we all have better fish to fry. If I had been in Boxer position I would not have cared at all.
Click to expand...
It's more of a mistake made by civilians. It is long established (required) military protocol to address a female superior that way. Some civilians don't know how or don't care to understand that. It's not the same as calling the General "Mike", it's the same as calling him "Sir".
Sure there are bigger issues but, point is that the Senator seemed intent on trying to embarrass the General but it seems to have had the opposite effect.
 
DTop said:
It's more of a mistake made by civilians. It is long established (required) military protocol to address a female superior that way. Some civilians don't know how or don't care to understand that. It's not the same as calling the General "Mike", it's the same as calling him "Sir".
Sure there are bigger issues but, point is that the Senator seemed intent on trying to embarrass the General but it seems to have had the opposite effect.
Click to expand...

Don't you mean the same as calling him Mr Walsh?
Which by the same token would be perfectly ok as "Mr" is a long established civilian protocol and she is after all an elected civilian official.

In the end this is really little more than a storm in a teacup.
 
DTop said:
It's more of a mistake made by civilians. It is long established (required) military protocol to address a female superior that way. Some civilians don't know how or don't care to understand that. It's not the same as calling the General "Mike", it's the same as calling him "Sir".
Sure there are bigger issues but, point is that the Senator seemed intent on trying to embarrass the General but it seems to have had the opposite effect.
Click to expand...

But thats just it, when a soldier talks to a civilian they are not talking to a military person, therefore they should not be using military protocol. Military protocol only applies for people serving people in the military not people who are not. Senator Boxer isn't General Wash's Superior. He doesnt report to her directly, she isn't his commanding officier. He was merely making a report to a senate advisory board, so technically I should have said "Senator Boxer". If she were a superior military officier to then "MA'AM" would be correct.

But as I said, its not a big deal. Boxer could have just please "Please call me Senator Boxer", instead of getting on her podium and grandstanding. But she is a politician and theatrics is part of it I suppose.
 
mmarsh said:
But as I said, its not a big deal. Boxer could have just please "Please call me Senator Boxer", instead of getting on her podium and grandstanding. But she is a politician and theatrics is part of it I suppose.
Click to expand...

Yeah she would have said that but it would have ruined her intent.
 
mmarsh said:
But thats just it, when a soldier talks to a civilian they are not talking to a military person, therefore they should not be using military protocol. Military protocol only applies for people serving people in the military not people who are not. Senator Boxer isn't General Wash's Superior. He doesnt report to her directly, she isn't his commanding officier. He was merely making a report to a senate advisory board, so technically I should have said "Senator Boxer". If she were a superior military officier to then "MA'AM" would be correct.

But as I said, its not a big deal. Boxer could have just please "Please call me Senator Boxer", instead of getting on her podium and grandstanding. But she is a politician and theatrics is part of it I suppose.
Click to expand...
Maybe the General should have said I'll call you Senator when you call me General, ma'am.
In may seem like a tempest in a teapot to some but I see it as a window into the anti-military, ultra left wing San Francisco attitude that Pelosi and her ilk wear like a misplaced merit badge.
 
The Other Guy said:
She earned the position. The American people voted for her, didn't they? She may not be serving her nation in a combat environment, but she is still serving her nation.

If she wants to be called Senator, by all means I'll do it.
Click to expand...


Please ......she won a freakin popularity contenst called an election. She just had a better line of BS than the opposition. No politician earns anything.
 
MontyB said:
Fine replace "earned" with "entitled to"
Click to expand...

While the Harpy may be entitled to being called Senator by virtue of winning an election that still does not absolve her from being a b1tch and not under standing protocol. Whether or not she is in the military the General was following his protocol as follows.

President-Mr. President

Vice President- Mr Vice President

Secretaries- Mr/Madame Secretary

Congressman/Senator- Sir and Ma'am

She was being a *****.
 
Yes she was being a ***** but that still doesn't make her request wrong now does it.

In this case no one was in the wrong he addressed her correctly and she point out (badly) that she wanted to be called Senator which she is entitled to do.

If the argument here is that the Senator acted like a ***** then I don't think there is an argument, we can all agree on that but if it is that she was wrong to want to be addressed as Senator then she wasn't wrong, seems pretty simple to me.
 
MontyB said:
Yes she was being a ***** but that still doesn't make her request wrong now does it.

In this case no one was in the wrong he addressed her correctly and she point out (badly) that she wanted to be called Senator which she is entitled to do.

If the argument here is that the Senator acted like a ***** then I don't think there is an argument, we can all agree on that but if it is that she was wrong to want to be addressed as Senator then she wasn't wrong, seems pretty simple to me.
Click to expand...


The way she did it was wrong as is the way she treats the military in general. That's my beef. I'm damned sure that a PFC has earned a hell of alot more than she has. So yeah I'll defend the General. Who I'm sure has earned more than this attention *****.
 
03USMC said:
The way she did it was wrong as is the way she treats the military in general. That's my beef. I'm damned sure that a PFC has earned a hell of alot more than she has. So yeah I'll defend the General. Who I'm sure has earned more than this attention *****.
Click to expand...

Yes well the neat thing is that if enough people don't like her then she gets to lose her job however if more people like her than dislike her then she gets to keep it, its a nifty invention the Greeks came up with a while back and if she does get to keep the job those who dislike her get to "suck it up" until the next election (to coin a phrase so often used on these boards).

Interestingly enough though you say you are "sure" General Walsh has "earned" his credentials and I am certainly not saying he hasn't but even if he had won the rank in a poker game the day before he would be "entitled" to use any salutations that came with the rank just as the Senator has.
 
MontyB said:
Yes well the neat thing is that if enough people don't like her then she gets to lose her job however if more people like her than dislike her then she gets to keep it, its a nifty invention the Greeks came up with a while back and if she does get to keep the job those who dislike her get to "suck it up" until the next election (to coin a phrase so often used on these boards).

Interestingly enough though you say you are "sure" General Walsh has "earned" his credentials and I am certainly not saying he hasn't but even if he had won the rank in a poker game the day before he would be "entitled" to use any salutations that came with the rank just as the Senator has.
Click to expand...


And fortunately I can hold whatever freakin opinion of this Harpy I like and say whatever I like within reason with out having to "Suck it Up." If she is entitled to treat a General Officer that way then I am By God entitled to talk about her anyway I wish...within reason.

But thanks ever so much for your advice and concern......discarded.
 
Freedom of thought and expression. She's a civilian, so I guess civilian rules apply. She's a f*cking cvnt.

Things I won't do over this:
- Engage in some candlelight vigil.
- Start or sign a petition to get her to resign (except legal voting).

Unfortunately, many folks in the US have no say over whether or not she gets elected because they're not from California, but her actions affect the rest of the country and certainly affects the military which is not confined to California.
All those folks can do is rant. So be it.
 
the_13th_redneck said:
Freedom of thought and expression. She's a civilian, so I guess civilian rules apply. She's a f*cking cvnt.

Things I won't do over this:
- Engage in some candlelight vigil.
- Start or sign a petition to get her to resign (except legal voting).

Unfortunately, many folks in the US have no say over whether or not she gets elected because they're not from California, but her actions affect the rest of the country and certainly affects the military which is not confined to California.
All those folks can do is rant. So be it.
Click to expand...

Once again its a case of "too bad so sad", the nation has its rules which include those for electoral systems and the titles of elected officials if you (as in any individual) want to change that there are also rules and systems in place for that to happen you just have to get off your arses and go get the support needed to change things (of course you don't want to bring that petition to these forums or you will automatically become a adulterating chain smoker if another thread is to be believed).

I mean seriously folks why are you people getting all emo over this?

I strongly suspect that both parties involved have probably forgotten this issue and moved on by now.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top