Subject: RE President Clinton vs B-52 Pilot (fwd)
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 054112 -0500 (CDT)
From: "Roy L. Beavers" <rbeavers@llion.org>
To: emfguru@hotmail.com
--------------------------------------------------
---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 01:54:24 -0500
To: "'Roy L. Beavers'"
Subject: RE: President Clinton vs B-52 Pilot (fwd)
I disagree - the two situations are not comparable. Perhaps the B-52
pilot was treated differently than a male officer in the same situation,
but this was the air force doing it, not the President. If a male
officer has an affair with an enlisted man's wife it is a definite
no-no. If problems occur as a result he would probably not be court
marshaled but as a practical matter, his career would stall out. If he
has an affair with an unmarried civillian or an unmarried officer of
equal rank, there probably would be no action taken unless it became
publicized - then he would be ordered to break it off and if he didn't
he would be disciplined. It is my understanding that the B-52 pilot
disobeyed a direct order to break off the affair and that is the reason
she was court marshaled - the same as a man in the same position. The
president is not subject to the UCMJ. He did not disobey a direct
command. The principles of discipline which are essential to the armed
forces do not apply to the president. He rarely (if ever) gives direct
commands to military officers - he works through civilians or military
department heads and generally deals in terms of trying to accomplish an
end result but leaves the details up to the military commanders. While
he is guilty of bad taste and bad judgment, Clinton's conduct does not
disqualify him from being commander in chief. Incidentally, neither
Abraham Lincoln or Franklin Roosevelt were in the military but both
served as commanders in chief during significant times of war.
Archive provided courtesy of WaveGuide, http://www.wave-guide.org
Reprinted with permission of Roy Beavers, http://www.feb.se/EMF-L/EMF-L.html