Boxer "worked so hard" for her title

If you don't know the underlying story, this may not be as funny. They do play the original video footage at the end, of Barbara Boxer reprimanding a general for calling her "ma'am" instead of "Senator". A real life instance in which a 'normal' human being would have let it go as being trivial, but an ego-maniac would bring everything to a hault to bring attention to themselves and demand the respect they "deserve".

 

And yet Republicans found this "interruption" perfectly OK?



So the logic here is that it is perfectly acceptable to call the president of the United State a liar during a State of the Union address on national television but if a Senator asks to be addressed as Senator rather than her gender during a hearing she must be an ego-maniac. Hey vess, I have a degree in Psychology and I can tell you that you're no Psychologist.

 

What was that you like to say about false equivalencies?

 

Yeah, pretty much. I didn't have any problem with that. That's what state of the union addresses have become. It's no different than the democrats loudly booing Bush during his. Where was the respect then? Nobody seemed to care.

Obviously, somebody else saw the humor and total absurdness in Boxer's comment enough to make a 2 minute skit about it. In this instance, Boxer interrupted and wasted everyone's time to make sure she was addressed with respect. Normally only kings and queens would do that but who am I to judge? In your argument, somebody was upset enough to call Obama a "liar", because he was lying. Wow. Appalling.

 

You obviously only deserve pity.

 

What an elitist b****. Hopefully all her "hard work" will motivate the people of California to start getting used to calling her ma'am after the election.

 

Meon, your wrong on this. The general wasnt being disrespectful by any means. No way. For her to try to humilate him was way out of line. She wound up looking like an ass. Titles only really mean anything except on stationery. Only an egotistical idiot wound do what she did.

 

Of course Doctor Moen is going to defend Boxer's egotistical demand to be addressed by a title.

 

Using the word ma'am could be considered condescening to an extreme egotistical left wing female Senator but it is a sign of respect in the southern US just as calling a man sir is. To a woman we really respect we call her miss even if she is 100 years old. If I had been the general then I would have called her a crack head.

 

Well, lets see if I'm wrong here. Would it have been wrong for Senator Boxer to call him Mr. Walsh? If so why? If not, why not? It is common practice even in academia for women professors to be addressed by their first names and yet male professors are automatically addressed as Dr. xxxxx. It's something women have tolerated forever and if Barbara Boxer wants to level the playing field for all women by insisting that she be addressed by her title in a formal setting, she has paid her dues and deserves the respect the General takes for granted. Now please tell me if it would have been wrong for Senator Boxer to address the General as Mr. Walsh.

 

A normal general would not be flabbergasted by a civilian calling him Mr. Walsh if that was his name. To insist that he be called General Walsh by a civilian would be the height of narcissism.

 

In the military, it is common practice to refer to male superior officers as "Sir" and female superior officers as "Ma'am". So by calling Boxer "Ma'am" he was actually showing more respect than she deserved since she is nothing more than an elected official and not a superior officer. Generals in the military deserve our respect, politicians do not.

As you stated, you are wrong!

 

Besides not answering the question, the fact is that Senator Boxer isn't in the military thus the military protocol is irrelevant and as a Senator, Boxer is the General's superior. I know and you know that this guy did it out of habit and frankly some stupidity but it is completely within the protocol of a Senate (and they were in a senate chamber after all not a military base) hearing for those testifying to address all Senators with that title.

 

Where did you get the idea that a US Senator is superior to a General in the military? Maybe you need to sit in on a Freshman level government class and learn about the three branches of the US government. The fact is that military officers address the male Senators as "Sir" and female Senators as "Ma'am". Watch a hearing on C-Span if you don't believe. Only Barbara Boxer took offense. And you think she is right.

As you stated before, you are wrong!

 

As usual you let emotion dictate your response rather than the truth. This is the final word on the subject. If you are man enough, just admit that you are wrong and I will not throw it back in your face because I am a big enough person to know how to be an adult.

The Department of the Army Pamphlet 600–60 "A Guide to Protocol and Etiquette for Official Entertainment" (also appropriate for official hearings) published in 2001, specifies titles and forms of address for U.S. officials, as such:

United States Senator

Conversation Senator Doe or Senator
When the senator is a woman: Use Senator

Nowhere is it stated that "sir" or "ma'am" are appropriate ways for military personnel to address Senators.

Bottom line: Senator Boxer was well within her right to request she be referred to as "Senator" just as her male colleagues would be. Here is a link: http://www.usma.edu/protocol/images/p600_60.pdf page 34

 

The military takes orders from the President (Executive Branch) not the Senate (Legislative Branch). It is true that the military serves the directives of the civilian government. The leader of the civilian government is also the President. Show any instance where a member of the legislative branch has given a direct order to a commander in the military (or dodge it).

If your question was the hypothetical one about Boxer addressing the General as Mr. Walsh, then the answer is no, it is not appropriate. As you have stated, each arena has it's own rules regarding protocol. While it may be a minor transgression to use your own protocol in a different arena as the General did when he addressed Boxer as "Ma'am", it is completely inappropriate to ignore the protocols set forth in your own arena. If the Senate has a rule that it's members are to be addressed as "Senator", it stands to reason that there is a similar rule for formally addressing guests of the Senate in committee meetings. It also stands to reason that every member of the military would be addressed using their rank and last name, all the way down to private. It is my hope that you can muster the intelligence to understand the distinction I just made while answering your ridiculous question.

 

I deleted that post for a better one. Read above.

 

Now I get silence!!

 

She has every right to request to be called 'Senator'. She came off as a jackass (to me) the way she went about it. But, she has that right.

As a side note...When I was in (and had made some rank), I always called the lower ranking officers by their rank and saved the Sirs and Ma'ams for Majors and above. For me anyway, the Sir or Ma'am was the greater sign of respect for the position.

 

I apologize for not being able to respond in less than an hour. Some of us have to actually work, not pretend to work in our cushy little academia jobs.

If you read my response prior to that I wrote:

I already admitted that he should have addressed her as Senator. Women in positions of power often overcompensate in situations like these. Proper protocol dictates they be addressed as Senator. You will find that in practice, military personnel who testify often refer to Senators as "Sir" and "Ma'am" because that is how they address their superior officers. Perhaps you can find any incident where a male Senator objected to being called "Sir".

Furthermore, since you claim that Senators are superior to the military, they must be aware of how military personnel address their superior officers. If she was aware that female superior officers are addressed as "Ma'am", and according to you a Senator is superior to a military general, then what is her problem?

Now I agree that nowhere does it state that addressing a Senator as "Sir" or "Ma'am" is appropriate. Do you care to show me where is states that addressing a Senator as "Sir" or "Ma'am" is inappropriate. I don't see it! And this was written in 2001. How did they address Senators prior to 2001?

As you stated, you are wrong!