HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » About CORKER's crack re: ...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 04:39 PM

About CORKER's crack re: HAGEL's "temperament." This is *anecdotal* - O.K.?!1

After STEPANOUPOULIS was shook up by CORKER's remark, CORKER added what might be called gossip "from staffers about how they were treated." George went on to contrast this with repeating about how HAGEL was "an enlisted man" and asked RADDITZ what her extensive contacts with military personnel garnered about how they must be proud to have "an enlisted man" raised up to be their (administrative) boss.

In my first year as a lowly enlisted dude, we absorbed the distinction between the "upper class" of officers (college; Naval Academy) and us enlisted. The officers varied in personality as all other humans, meaning some were friendlier than others, but there was a veneer of noblesse oblige or (sometimes beneficent) paternalism that was supposed to be a sign of their class.

The captain of my first ship was a crusty officer, certainly maintained his personal distance, fine. The arrangement was sort of accepted, "normal," that we had Sundays off, called "holiday routine," where we lounged around in our sleeping compartment or played cards or guitar in the common area, wrote letters, napped, get it?

So about seven months into my year aboard, the captain was due to complete his own tour and be transferred, and the scuttlebutt (news) was that his replacement was going to be "one of us," A FORMER ENLISTED MAN, a "black shoe" meaning somebody who had crossed over (various ways) from being "enlisted" to being an officer. The anticipation was positive and happy.

Well, when he arrived, he had us busting our u-no-what working on Sundays. Old(er) Salts told us that "one of our own" who had worked themselves up were tougher on us than the to-the-manner-born officers, something about pulling up by bootstraps and having to prove things to the powers that be or something something.

Please, no flaming based on lack of scientific data. I said this was ANECDOTAL.

11 replies, 1121 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread

Response to UTUSN (Original post)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 04:42 PM

1. Jeez, after years of Bush, Cheney, McCain and countless

monomaniacal jerks in the GOP, he picks this guy to get upset about.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Original post)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 04:52 PM

2. It is probably more about Hagel and Obama relationship than anything else.

I am not sure they have any solid reason to dislike Hagel but still have un their talking points. I think Hagel is a good selection and will prove to be a great selection. He might even be a model for Congressional members to follow, live and learn, just might get their party out of the land fill they have sunk into..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Original post)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 04:52 PM

3. My Dad, a career Naval Aviator, taught me that "brown shoe" referred to aviators and ...

"black shoe" referred to all other Naval officers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 11 Bravo (Reply #3)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 09:36 PM

5. Allow me to anecdotally differ but "BLACK shoe" refers to ENLISTED (roots) n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Original post)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 05:01 PM

4. Corker's comments are based on this:

http://freebeacon.com/rejecting-chuck-hagel/

The Free Beacon is run by Bill Kristol's son-in-law.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TwilightGardener (Reply #4)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 09:39 PM

6. a slimy hit-piece

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to spanone (Reply #6)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 09:46 PM

7. I think "temperament" issues with past employees are what damaged

the John Bolton nomination, so it's not surprising that they would try it with Hagel. Get some former Senate aides to write letters stating he yelled at them or "rifled through their desks" or whatever. We'll see if it works--the neocons have been planning to use this since his name was floated, and the man quoted in the Free Beacon article (Michael Rubin) is an American Enterprise Institute lackey who doesn't appear to have much connection to the Senate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TwilightGardener (Reply #4)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 09:57 PM

8. Yip, sounds like some direct quote/talking points n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Original post)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 11:29 PM

9. If the comments were from the private sector they would have more weight

Hagel has been involved in a number of businesses, most of which have been successful.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FarCenter (Reply #9)

Sun Jan 13, 2013, 11:50 PM

10. Well, in business employees toe the owner's line, my way/highway, no? n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UTUSN (Reply #10)

Mon Jan 14, 2013, 10:02 AM

11. Not middle managers and technical people in a fast growing business like cellular telecom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread