Front page of today's Stars & Stripes newspaper (and webpage)

http://www.stripes.com/




An interesting write-up by a Stripes reporter on the scene:

Crowd started gathering early for speech at Tiergarten park

BERLIN — Ann Barocto packed up the kids and her mother and drove seven hours from Spangdahlem Air Base to see Sen. Barack Obama up close and personal.

"Giant Barack Obama supporter," said Barocto of herself, a 36-year-old major in Air Force Reserve whose husband is serving at Spangdahlem since October. "It’s been hard for me not to be in the States during the campaign. When I heard he was coming to Germany, I was ecstatic."

She arrived more than three hours early for a prime spot in Berlin’s Tiergarten park, in front of the Victory column — with the angel atop the column facing the other way — where Obama was soon to speak on the trans-Atlantic relationship. She was joined by hundreds more international early birds who stood or sat on the pavement in front of a podium flanked by potted palms, and, to the left, a bandstand that caused a great deal of speculation.

http://www.stripes.com/article.asp?article=56352


Another Stripes story is here, a review of Obama's speech:

http://www.stripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=56351

...over another.

I thought military personnel weren't supposed to do that.

In civvies there is a lot more leeway (but not limitless).

:thumbsup:

practicing her democratic right to hear who she wants to hear and express a viewpoint. She's not in uniform.

On base, she can't preach to co-workers using government equipment, which is what RWers have been very bad about since Bush has been in office (and one reason why so many RWers think Obama is Muslim), nor can she use her position to preach to subordinates or use subordinates' supposed political viewpoints against them. RW Bushy employers have also been very bad about understanding this rule, known as the Hatch Act.

In fact, the State Dept. and the US Ambassador to Germany need to be briefed on the Hatch Act, which they do not understand. If I were prevented from attending Obama's speech, I'd file an EEO complaint the next day. I hope somebody in the State Dept. does so, or else gets the ACLU involved.

On post and in uniform, my coworkers and I frequently discuss political topics which are often very polarized. We sometimes even use government-provided email to send articles, etc.

It gets sticky when a servicemember's opinion starts looking like political activity, which is verboten.

you can't send your personal viewpoints base-wide and beyond.

On the other hand, you need to be careful about how you use government Outlook on a personal level. Your Outlook is monitored, and if someone higher up wants to nail you on mis-use of government computers, they may do so snce there is a record of your correspondence. If it is deemed that you are plotting against anyone higher in rank or in any way sending material that is not work related, you could be royally screwed.

I've known higher-ups to send x-rated material to all their "buds," but as long as they remain in the good ole boy system, they're good to go.

It's very subjective in terms of how the law is applied.

Since I know my Outlook is heavily monitored, naturally it's as clean as a whistle. I get very few e-mails and I send few because everyone knows I'm monitored.

Once Bush leaves office, the spying should fall by the way-side.

Unless you work for the govt right now, it's difficult to understand how severe this issue has become.

...I doubt there are enough GOPhers who can make that distinction.

:-(

It's an issue I've had personal experience with, especially with employers, both on-site and at headquarters, my bottom line being, either follow the law and get off my back or get sued. They had not even heard of the Hatch Act before I told them about it, even though it is something employees have to sign off on at the beginning of employment. US govt. employers need to read the laws they are supposedly hired to uphold. RWer employers are especially egregious at being dense about the rule of law. Fortunately, most serve at the pleasure of the Sec. of Defense or President. Therefore, there's a lot of "clean-up" to be done after the election...many govt. job openings will be on the horizon (apply if you need one). Nearly all in current positions must be fired...none of this trying to be conciliatory like Clinton was--and got bit by it later.

Employers in my arena have decided to follow the law and get off my back, but not after a good degree of prior harassment on their part. I do not promote my political viewpoint to colleagues, and I don't wish colleagues to promote theirs to me. Nor should employers hold that which they presume my politics to be against me. It's against the law.

Just because I wear a uniform does not mean I've surrendered my rights.

Did you see the edict in Stars & Stripes about mass mailings on Outlook that were not allowed, to include chainmail etc., especially inre: Obama being Muslim?

There's a spam file you can send any unwanted e-mail to. If you mass mailed your political viewpoint to everyone in your office, there will likely be someone who doesn't appreciate your viewpoint and will send it to "spam." Those at "spam" will then get in touch with you about the rules of Outlook.

In my case, I mass mailed a FACT to everyone in my division after receiving an e-mail from a high-up employer who expressed a political viewpoint, or rather "truism", which is against the Hatch Act. The higher up was expressing an opinion. I was expressing a fact, plus I sent a letter to the higher up explaining that employers' political views were not allowed by law on govt. Outlook. I got my computer impounded (only briefly....scare tactic) and a letter stating that I should either tow the party line or get out of a job with the DoD.

I'm still here (but Rummy is gone).

Be safe and use codes in your e-mails with your friends. For example, VI in my neck of the woods means "village idiot."

ck out this thread of the DUers that went to Berlin yesterday!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=6538542&mesg_id=6538542