- Posted January 8, 2014 by
This iReport is part of an assignment:
'Allegiance', 'Betrayal' Misapplied
Ninth grade civics and 11th grade American government - For all affected government employees, military members as well as elected and appointed government officials, the oath of allegiance administered is to the US Constitution, the nation and to we, the people.
It is true that appointed officials serve "at the pleasure of the president". However, their oath and allegiance is to the Constitution, the nation and we, the people. It is not to any president.
OK, sure neither civics nor government is taught in the majority of schools in the US of A these days. I can partly give a pass to those still in elementary and high school, even some college students and recent graduates of our institutions of higher learning for not knowing something about which they have not been schooled. But there are those who have actually served in government that also are clueless it seems.
Van Jones, one of the co-hosts of CNN's Crossfire, as well as other pundits and Democratic loyalists have it wrong when using the term, "betrayal". That implies that former Secretary of Defense Bob Gates' allegiance was to the President. But that is not the oath of office he took and pledged to uphold.
Gates' allegiance is not to the President. Gates did not betray his oath to the Constitution nor to the nation nor to we, the people. He may have not followed conventional protocol, which is ever changing. Gates may not have been the "team player" who ignores his oath in a fawning devotion to whoever happens to reside at 1600 Pennsyslvania Avenue. But Gates should not be accused of betrayal when his allegiance, his oath was to the Constitution, the nation and we, the people, whom he has not betrayed.
I understand the dismay, the angst, the anger that Gates, who served in both the George W. Bush and the Barak Obama administrations, has dared to speak now rather than waiting until the current top elected official in the nation is out of office. But Gates had pledged no oath to preclude him from speaking out now.
Why Gates chose to speak now is anyone's guess. But it is Gates' right of free speech. He is not beholding to keep mum with his revelations.
The only problem with Gates is if what he writes about is false or inaccurate. So far, no one is actually denying what has been leaked and excerpted from the book he wrote is not factual. People are simply upset he spoke now.
From the Cornfield, whether Gates should have waited or not is debatable. What is not debatable is that Gates did not betray his oath of allegiance.