OATHS OF OFFICE

 

OATHS,
SIMILAR, BUT NOT ALL
EXACTLY THE SAME!
By Jim “Gymbeaux” Brown, November 28, 2023 

The following are the oaths required to be taken by both the military and members of the Executive Branch, the Legislative Branch and the Judicial Branch of the Federal Government:

Military Oath for Enlisted Members

"I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So, help me God."

Military Oath for Officer Members

"I, _____ (SSAN), having been appointed an officer in the _____ (Military Branch) of the United States, as indicated above in the grade of _____ do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign or domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am about to enter; So help me God."

Oath of Office given to the Executive Branch of the Federal Government

"I do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same: that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion, and I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So, help me God."

Oath of Office given to the Legislative Branch of the Federal Government

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So, help me God."

Oath of Office given to the Judicial Branch of the Federal Government

"I, [NAME], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as [TITLE] under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So, help me God.''  NOTE:  The next time you see a Supreme Court Decision that falls totally upon political party lines, you tell me if they have faithfully and impartially carried out their duties.  NOT!  Occasionally maybe, consistently, NEVER!

Note:  I find it odd that the Supreme Court Justices do not take an oath to:  support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic!

I served for 20 years in the U. S. Coast Guard and I initially took the first oath listed above for enlisted members signing on for the first time or each time they reenlist.  I then took the second oath when I first made Chief Warrant Officer and again when I was promoted to Limited Duty Officer, Lieutenant.  The ONE THING, that to the casual observer may go unnoticed on all of the oaths listed above, is that there are no expiration dates on any of them. 

What DON’T these oaths ask of the person taking them?  In the case of the military oaths the one very obvious missing fact is that when you sign on to serve in the military, it goes without saying that you are agreeing that you may be asked to sacrifice your life during the performance of performing your duties.  Why is that not included in the oath.

I was once interviewed for a unique position within the Coast Guard and the interview panel asked me point blank, “Are you willing to sacrifice your life for your Country?”  I was not prepared for that question and my answer to the question obviously didn’t hurt my chances of being selected because I was even though my orders were later cancelled.  I told the Board, “I believe that anyone who says without reservation that they are, is not being truthful because until that instant when you have to make a decision to live or die, I don’t think anyone really knows for sure what they will do.  I would like to believe that I would, otherwise I would have never joined a military branch.” To this day I still believe that!

What else is missing from all of the various oaths listed above?  The requirement to tell the truth at all times!  What good is any oath you take if you are NOT required to be honest? 

What prompted me to write this Nugget at this point in time, November 28, 2023?  I have witnessed members of the current Presidential Cabinet and a spokesperson for the President who have all taken several of the oaths above, look into the television cameras and into the eyes of members of Congress and lie through their teeth at the questions being asked.  More specifically, James R. Clapper Jr. was a Lieutenant General in the U. S. Marine Corps Reserve and later he transferred to the Air Force Reserves.  He took the Officer’s Oath.  Department of Defense Spokesman John Kirby, he’s a Real Admiral in the U. S. Navy.  He too took the Officer’s Oath.  Both have been caught in lies and half-truths, not something you would or should expect to come from the mouths of enlisted or officer members of the military, let alone such senior officers but that is exactly what they have done.  Their penalty for telling lies and half-truths?  NOTHING!  REPEAT NOTHING!

None of the oaths taken by anyone refer to sacrificing their lives if needed in the performance of their duties.  It is a silent agreement among military members that the possibility definitely exists.  But what about the politicians?  What have they got to lose by using their positions within the Federal Government to further their personal agendas, use their positions to enhance their personal wealth, lie to the people of America and the World and completely ignore the wishes and desires of the people that elected them to office which is their primary mission for taking the position in the first place?  NOTHING!  THEY LOSE NOTHING!  THERE IS NO ACCOUNTABILITY FOR THESE CHARLATANS OF WASHINGTON D.C.!  NONE WHATSOEVER!

So how does this happen?  We are all born into this world, with very few exceptions, pure of heart and mind.  Somewhere along the line people become compromised either by what they have said and/or done or from outside sources such as the case with the names contained in the heretofore unseen “Black Book” of Jeffrey Epstein.  In other words, they have been compromised by their illicit actions caught on video tapes and then used against them to force them to act in a way that would otherwise be contrary to the way they were probably raised by their parents.  This is how and why the corruption runs so rampant within those individuals who hold office in Washington, D.C.  They fear exposure of the truth and therefore they do what they are told to do.  How else can you just write off the fact that they continually spend more money than they take in?  How can you explain that from the President on down, they have left the Southern Border, open to massive illegal immigrant penetration that runs in the millions and millions of mostly fighting age men from all parts of the world?

Regarding this last issue, I refer you to the following Article 4; Section 4 of the U. S. Constitution; made larger and emboldened for emphasis and clarity:

Article 4 Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution states: The United States (I’ll add the President and Congress) shall guarantee to every State in this Union a republican form of government, and shall protect each of them against invasion; and on application of the legislature, or of the executive (when the legislature cannot be convened) against domestic violence.

How much clearer could their official duties be declared?  But have they protected each State against invasion and from the domestic violence that runs rampant in so many of our larger cites?  On D-Day, on the Normandy Beaches during WWII, 150,000 men stormed the beaches on that one day.  It has been estimated that as many as 15 MILLION PEOPLE have stormed our Southern Border with not only immunity,  but our Government has also been providing them with food, shelter, healthcare, education and even spending money and cell phones all at U. S. Taxpayer expense.  I am a Disabled Veteran and I receive no such benefits for having served my country and have become significantly injured in the process. 

Where is the Justice Department, where is the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), where are the State and Local Police and Sheriffs?  Who is enforcing the terms of office all these people took when they said they agreed to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic!”  THEY ARE NOWHERE TO BE FOUND!  THEY ARE ALL IN VIOLATION OF THEIR OATHS OF OFFICE.  If the oaths mean that little, we have become a rudderless nation and are prime to be taken over by any number of powerful nations or organizations like the morons that comprise the unelected World Economic Forum and the United Nations! 

THERE CAN BE ONLY ONE CONCLUSION!  THE ELECTED POLITICIANS IN WASHINGTON, D.C. HAVE BEEN SO CORRUPTED BY THEIR OWN ACTIONS AND DEEDS THAT THEY ARE INCAPABLE OF DOING THE RIGHT THING!  YOU WOULD HAVE TO HAVE YOUR HEAD SO DEEPLY BURIED IN THE SAND AS NOT TO BE ABLE TO SEE WHAT IS HAPPENING!  IF THAT IS THE CASE, YOU ARE MORE A PART OF THE PROBLEM THAN YOU COULD EVER IMAGINE!  IF THE COUNTRY THAT WE ARE BECOMING IS THE COUNTRY YOU WANT TO LEAVE TO YOUR CHILDREN, YOU ARE ONE SICK BASTARD FOR NOT ONLY DOING NOTHING ABOUT IT, BUT TO ALSO REELECTING THE VERY EVIL PEOPLE IN WASHINGTON, D.C. DOING THIS TO ALL OF US!!!!!

To Like or Not to Like

 

To LIKE or NOT to LIKE
THAT IS THE QUESTION!
By Jim “Gymbeaux” Brown, November 23, 2023

There is no easy way to discuss this without hurting the “feelings” of those who this Nugget may be referring to or who might think it refers to them.  In almost all things, honesty is the best policy except when as when Tucker Carlson described honesty should probably be withheld in favor of what is best for social behavior. Tucker went on to further describe lying to someone about being overweight when they ask, “do I look fat in this dress?”  Are you going to be honest with the person or are you going to formulate a reply to avoid directly answering the question?  As dumb as the following may sound to you, I attended a class while serving in the Coast Guard and the class was designed to help all the men in the Coast Guard adapt to the new policy of allowing women to serve on active duty.  One of the examples as I remember it (the class was given in the 1970s) was that you were never supposed to say, “you look beautiful in that dress.”  Instead, you were supposed to say, “you do wonders for that dress.”  It all comes down to what is acceptable and what is not acceptable.  But like the quote, “beauty is in the eye of the beholder”, trying to define what IS and what IS NOT acceptable is left to the “eye of the beholder”.  Good luck with that one.  In 2023, nothing seems to be acceptable to anyone! 

What prompted me to write this Nugget?  It’s simple, but first let me describe who I am.  I am a 78-year-old white male who, except for the age, might be the type of person, male or female, a much younger person might come face to face with on a job interview.  I have my beliefs just as everyone else, including you, the reader has.  The problem is that when a younger person violates what I believe in, it could cost that younger person the job they are interviewing for.  As an example, I have very limited tolerance for anyone that comes to me with a question or as stated above, a job interview, who DOES NOT TURN THEIR PHONE OFF BEFORE WE ENGAGE IN OUR CONVERSATION.  Maybe it’s an age thing, but just maybe it is the right thing to do.  

Back to the title of this Nugget, to LIKE or NOT to LIKE.  I’ll ask a very simple question.  Have you engaged in a conversation with a young person who interjects into their every sentence the word “like?”  I have, and to me, after the third or fourth “like” in just one sentence, it is similar to someone scratching their fingernails on the old fashioned blackboards that we once had in every classroom as I grew up.  Constantly hearing the word “like” WAS AGGRAVATING AT FIRST, THEN GREW INTO A TOTAL ANNOYANCE!  I mentally began to count the number of times “like” was used. 

The same applies to beginning a sentence with the word “so.”  The words, “like” and “so”,  add nothing,  zero, to the conversation.  In fact. using such words to start a sentence such as “so” and interjecting “like” every so often, or the phrase, “you know” or constantly seeking agreement by using the words “right” or “ok”, throughout your conversation is a total turn off, at least for me it is.  Maybe you have different feelings about this than I do but I can assure you that whenever you are engaged in a conversation or interview where YOU are looking to gain some type of agreement with the person you are talking to, YOU DO NOT want to have strike one called on you before you even begin.  If you were interviewing with me or someone like me, or seeking my agreement on a project, using such useless words in your spoken language is definitely “strike one” against you.  Repeating the process could easily turn into strike two or even strike three – you’re out!  You will either have failed at the job interview or failed at getting me to accept your idea or project.  Your idea or your project may have been a good one but I would have been so distracted at how you presented your idea, your project or you, that I lost interest in the conversation.  Is that what you want?  Of course not!  Here’s a better question.  If you sat down at your computer to write a letter, would you begin your sentences with “so” or would you insert “like”, “you know”, “right” or “ok?” several times in your typed or handwritten letter?  NO, you wouldn’t, therefore why do you do in when you speak? 

From the Internet:  None other than George Orwell. Sixty years ago, George Orwell wrote, “A bad usage can spread by tradition and imitation, even among people who should and do know better.” Although he was taking aim at writers, his saying bears more harshly on orators, whose real-timeliness makes crutch-words (I add, such as “so”, "like", “you know” and "right") futile and cannot fluster the tucked-away typist. One must always be on guard against these catchy habits of speech. After all, what else could the use of a verbal crutch signify other than a limping tongue?  You can read the entire discussion of this on the Yale News on the internet at:  https://yaledailynews.com/blog/2011/01/25/moretti-whats-wrong-with-right/ 

While on the subject, have you ever attended a class or had a discussion with someone who looks down at their watch?   Maybe you just ignored the look but a lot of people, me included, would have first thought that this person has somewhere else they need to be and they were not interested in maintaining our conversation/class.  I would teach my real estate agents that whenever meeting with a probable buyer or seller, they should leave their watch on their desk or in their car, leave it somewhere where they would never be tempted to look at an incoming call or message so as not to send a disinterested signal to the buyers or sellers.  This same principle applies to job interviews or anytime you are presenting an idea or project to your supervisor or employer.   NEVER LOOK AT YOUR WATCH DURING IMPORTANT DISCUSSIONS OR PRESENTATIONS – EVER! 

Using this same principle, LEAVE YOUR PHONE IN YOUR CAR OR ON YOUR DESK for all the same reasons!  If you don’t have your phone with you, you can’t possibly be distracted by looking at it or worse, answering it.  And for God’s sake, take the ear buds out of your ears.  Have you ever started to talk to someone who you thought was talking to you only to discover they were talking to someone on their phone via their ear buds?  Rude does not do this justice!

FOUL LANGUAGE!  Contrary to what you might think, I am NOT going to say that vulgarity is never acceptable.  On the contrary, there are times when I believe that vulgar language is the only language that may actually get through to the person you are conversing with.  However, those times should be few and far between.  In everyday conversations, foul language should be avoided at all costs because once it becomes customary, it is impossible to keep it from sneaking into a conversation where its used could prove to be disastrous to your desired outcome. 

I have conducted a lot of job interviews where I was the potential employer.  I would ask the candidate the obvious questions such as “how did you hear about our company?”  Or, “what do you know about our company?”  Such questions are pretty routine and most interviewers ask them to every candidate.  People who conduct in depth interviews want to know more about the personal side of the job candidate and may ask some of the questions that I often times asked, just to get the candidate talking. Just like in a sales call, you can conclude far more success in selling IF you (1) get the customer to talk and (2), YOU actually listen to what they say!  If the candidate included the useless words described above, I had to ask the question as to whether this was a person who would advance our brand or detract from it?  What kind of questions did I ask?  Here they are including the “killer question” which is the last question on the list.  

As you begin to read these questions, think about what I have written above.  If you are like most people, you will probably be formulating answers to the questions as you read them.  When you format your “mental” response, are you inserting “so”, “like”, “you know”, “right?” or any of the other needless words including vulgarity?  I seriously doubt it.  Here’s the rule!  

IF YOU WON’T USE THE LANGUAGE IN ANYTHING YOU WRITE ABOUT,
DON’T USE IT IN ANYTHING YOU TALK ABOUT! 

Tell me the funniest thing that has ever happened to you.  I doubt that I would want anyone without a sense of humor, on the other hand if the funniest thing involves drugs, alcohol or breaking the law, those things would work against them for sure. 

What was the last book you read?  What made you read it?  If the statistics are correct, 95% of the population do not read any books.  If you want people on your team or in your company who are “learning based”, you want people who read, especially who read material on self-improvement or improvement of job-related skills. 

What are some of your hobbies?  You want well-rounded team members who have a life beyond the workplace.  It’s just good for the team member to have diversified interests outside of the workplace. 

Did you graduate from High School or did you graduate from College or attend college?  If you attended college, what did you major in?  This goes back to wanting “learning based” individuals on your team or in your company. 

You get the idea; you want the job applicant to talk about themselves as much as possible AND YOU LISTEN TO THEIR ANSWERS.  

Then I would ask the killer question:  What one thing aside from an income do you want for this company to be able to solve for you or help you reach a personal goal?  The answers say a lot about motivation, goals and ambitions.

 THE THREE COMMAS CLUB
A book written by Jack Watt
A review by Jim “Gymbeaux” Brown, November 14, 2023

There are a lot of books and most are interesting even though a lot of books that people begin to read are never read to the end; or, it takes forever for them to get to the end of the book.  This is NOT one of those books! 

As a form of disclaimer, I have no firsthand knowledge of underage sex trafficking or spousal abuse so when I tell you this, it may help explain why I consider this book both a “must read” as well as a “page turner” and I don’t classify books as page turners very often.  This book is definitely a page turner, especially if you are like me and are naive to sex trafficking and/or spousal abuse. 

We have all most likely asked why an abused spouse simply didn’t leave the situation and instead chose to remain in the relationship.  I know I have.  This book explains why someone probably stays in such a relationship and it makes perfect sense. 

The problem with this book is not in its writing or the story it conveys, the problem is that it has no ending.  To give away the ending of the book would do it an injustice; the book needs to be read.  

If you know of someone who has a family member that has gone missing, either a boy or a girl, you definitely need to read the book and also share the book or encourage others to read it.  If you have young daughters or granddaughters, you also need to read the book but in more like you would read a medical preventative medicine book. 

More importantly, the author points out the distrust level that people justly have in our law enforcement officials, local, state and federal for good reason and why.
 

Who should read the book?  I have already addressed that above.

Would I read it again?  Probably not because the message was received loud and clear!

Would I give it as a gift?  DEFINITELY!