By Tom Quiner

California Senator Barbara Boxer is not only one of the most liberal Senators in Congress, she is one of the most personality-impaired.

Her insufferable treatment of Brigadier General Michael Walsh is legendary. She has earned the spoof that follows.  Enjoy!

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrpFSfpXD50&feature=player_embedded]

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIHBHYp5Woo&feature=player_embedded]

No Comments

  1. Rhonda Phillips on October 25, 2010 at 5:30 pm

    OMGosh! Rolling on the floor laughing! Thanks Tom. This was great!

    Rhonda Phillips
    Title: Child of God…Defender of the Unborn…because ……It’s my awesome privilege and honor to….. work so hard…..FOR HIS GLORY!

  2. Monte Gray on October 25, 2010 at 6:28 pm

    Funny spoof, and I enjoyed it!

    But, you’re too harsh in calling the Senator ‘insufferable’. I can guarantee you that the General would have referred to Senator Boxer’s male counterparts as “Senator”. What would have been your reaction if he had referred to Senator Grassley, as “Mr Grassley”? Or is sexism applied only one way? Is the line of thinking that when a woman is assertive and powerful, she’s a “B” vs being assertive?

    Plus, he became a general due to being approved by congressmen/women like Senator Boxer. He should show them the respect they are due, as they in effect gave him his promotion. If you asked this General about this sitution, if he was worth a lick, he would have agreed that he was out of order in referring to her as “maam”. He, of all people, should know protocol in regards to titles and when respect should be shown.

    Plus, I can guarantee you that General would have been unforgiving to me if I referred to him as other than General, if I had addressed him as “Mr”, while I was actively serving in the armed forces!
    Lets not forget the military is subject to civilian rule and orders!

    Finally, if a “conservative” female Senator had corrected the General would this posting had made it to this blog? :’)

    • quinersdiner on October 25, 2010 at 6:33 pm

      I see the thought-police have you well-trained! As to the question as to whether I would have run this if it had been a conservative Senator in question, the answer is no. The Mainstream Media already have those bases covered.

    • Paul Sharp on October 25, 2010 at 6:55 pm

      The General could very likely have referred to Senator Boxer’s male counterparts as “Sir” rather than “Senator”. Had he done so I doubt if anyone would have objected, and few would have even noticed.

  3. Tom Maly on October 25, 2010 at 7:02 pm

    Not sure who in this discussion served in the military. i remember using the term “yes sir/yes ma’am/no sir/no ma’am” an awfully lot. i am curious if the general in question answered male senators “yes senator” or yes sir?”

  4. Tom Maly on October 25, 2010 at 7:08 pm

    i am not sure if anyone in this discussion served in the military!? i remember saying “yes sir/no sir….yes ma’am/no ma’am” quite a bit. i am also curious whether the general in question answered male senators as “yes senator” or “yes sir?”
    In the end, given the state of our country/culture, this is a bit of a tempest in a teapot.
    However, comic relief isn’t all bad!
    Write on, brother Tom!

  5. Monte Gray on October 26, 2010 at 5:33 am

    “Not sure who in this discussion served in the military. i remember using the term “yes sir/yes ma’am/no sir/no ma’am” an awfully lot. i am curious if the general in question answered male senators “yes senator” or yes sir?”

    I served in the military for over 24 years, active and retired. I remembered one incident in particular where my NCO was upbraided by a General officer. This NCO was head of Transportation, and the General was upset that the “white” vinyl part of the tires on his car were not spotless. When the NCO was answering his question the General stopped him in his tracks and advised him “are’nt you supposed to come to “attention” when addressing a “General” officer? i.e. making it very clear that this soldier’s job and possibly career was on the line if he did’nt render proper respect that this General expected. This, over something as significant as tires!
    So, no I don’t think that my answer can be attributed to;
    “I see the thought-police have you well-trained!”

    I do’nt know why this General was called in to speak with Senator Boxer, but when Congressional Hearings are called it’s usually to seek the truth. So, if a General can exact that type of fear/respect from an NCO, I fully expect that the General being questioned should be reminded of the gravity of his situation should he not take the Senators seriously, especially in providing truthful answers to the governemt he’s sworn to protect and serve.

Leave a Comment