“a 2005 Navy Times article which reported that Sestak was removed from his Pentagon command because of a “poor command climate.” The ad, which primarily focuses on Sestak’s missed votes in Washington, does nothing more than cite that report, which has been substantiated by other news outlets in the years since. And Sestak has made his long military service a cornerstone of his campaign, seemingly making examination of that record fair game for electoral politics. ”

Joe’s got Gavin from the Army and Kelly from the Air Force. Neither of them served in the Navy and on Sestak’s staff in Deep Blue.

Hmm, what prominent Sestak supporter do we have from the Navy who could shed some light? Oh, yeah.. Eric Massa.

I agree.

Sestak is a self-important, conceited, self-admiring egomaniac who cannot brook or tolerate any adverse criticism of any kind. His self-regard and self-worship are astonishing, even for a politician! He believes he totally above reproach, and has no failings, faults or foibles of any sort. Has he EVER acknowledged any shortcomings or mistakes? His vanity, his preocuupation with self, is something PA voters simply cannot stomach. Unemployment is widespread, our debts are mounting, our infrastructure is crumbling – and Sestak is whimpering about his already tarnished reputation. This man is a self-absorbed narcissist, not a public servant. He is inward-looking and self-involved, and is unconcerned about the well-being of either his constituents or the populace. The common man is struggling at present – but Sestak’s chief priority is safeguarding his inflated ego. Truly a wretched, pitiable man. His vanity and self-love were on display today – and it was nauseating.

Sestak may not be able to win this primary election; but Specter still could lose it by being over-the-top negative and turning off the voters (who don’t love him anyway). He’s got a couple of over-the-toppers helping him do just that right here.

I just think it’s odd, given the attendance and staff issues, Specter would even mention anything about the Navy in his first attack. Seems like a softball for Sestak to pounce on.

Also, Dan, it’s sad, but this is my first comment in probably a month and will probably be the last until after the primary. With HateSestak and Diano still going on and on about the same things, I feel like its a waste of anyone’s time to try to have a decent, rational discussion here. It’s unfortunate because this used to be a great forum, even with Diano, for it.

It was so bad…. they fired him. I love this stuff. Its fair game… its a fact. Sestak seems like hes being a wimp doesnt it?

Jake-

its not the forum… its sestak… hes gotten progressively worse as the campaign has gone on.

Now that the Specter campaign has made this claim:

“…It was so bad, they fired him.”

I say simply: back it up. Put up or shut up. Don’t use some unsourced article that’s been called a hatchet job.

If you want to make this claim, find somebody who will go on the record and counter what Vern Clark had to say, proudly and on the record:

“People can say what they want to say, but he challenged people who didn’t want to be challenged. This guy is courageous, a patriot’s patriot.”

Mr. Diano: I’m still flabbergasted. In the midst of a severe economic recession, Sestak calls upon PA voters to cast aside their own pressing concerns and rally to defend HIS precious reputation. Never mind your expiring unemployment benefits, we must protect Sestak’s image from any further damage! Never mind your late mortgage payments, write your congressman and complain about these ads! Never mind your staggering health care costs, the exalted Sestak is being attacked! Common people are doing their utmost to survive, and Sestak expects them to discard everything, and shield HIM from criticism. This man is so wrapped up in himself, it is beyond belief. Such vanity, such vainglory.

Levan: Senator Specter, who commands an overwhelming fundraising advantage (almost twice the resources of Representative Sestak) and a sizable lead in public opinion polls, is obviously in no danger of being defeated. And voters have far more urgent issues to grapple with than ludicrous “swiftboating” allegations. Don’t YOU think Representative Sestak should be addressing those issues, rather than whimpering like an adolescent about his image? Or perhaps you think Sestak’s ego and image should be our overriding concern at present.

And Mr. Diano was merely furnishing others with the empirical facts. Unlike Representative Sestak.

Jake: Mr. Diano has a right to voice his opinion, and so do I. Neither of us attempt to deprive others of their rights in this or any other forum. If you do not share his perspective or mine, so be it. But you have no right to deprive him or I of our rights as citizens.

Jake: By the way, there was an individual here recently who was voicing overtly racist sentiments. Did you call upon Dan to bar this individual? I didn’t. I simply commented on his remarks. If a bigot has a right to voice his opinion, then certainly Diano and I possess that right.

You do have a voice.And I have eyes, which I will continue not using to read anything you (or anyone else here coincidentally) write.

Bruce-
As Dan points out, the reasons for Sestak’s removal have substantiated by reporting over the years. It’s certainly consistent with how he’s treated both his Congressional and Campaign staffs.

Why not ask Sestak to release his service record and put the matter to rest?

Vern Clark was the one who had been protecting Sestak all those years (like the Pope covered for pedophile priests). So, Vern Clark is hardly the best authority, since he was part of the problem.

Aside from asking Admiral Mullen himself, how about asking all 100 of the staffers that served under Sestak’s in 2005? I wonder what percentage would characterize him as an unreasonable slave driver and damaging to morale?

@Jake- I have been a long time reader of this blog, however I was moved to speak up by the seemingly endless attacks that flowed forth from a few bloggers that ignored the substance of any article in favor of ad hominem attacks against one candidate. I know its sad that it takes negativity to prompt me to action, but I suppose its better than remaining quiet.

@Bruce Bailey- This is exactly the sort of thing I hope to see people challenge Mr. Diano and HateSestak with in the future. Instead of citing unnamed sources, lets ask to see on the record statements which for which someone can be held accountable. When Mr. Diano and HateSestak are hard pressed to come up with actual hard quotes from people or the record, and they revert back to anecdotes and hyperbole, call them out on it.

@David Diano- Its really quite amazing how you can interpret anything you want from what Dan says here. Nowhere in this article does Dan ever say that the claims are substantiated against Sestak. Dan merely states that such claims have been explored by several articles that mostly all cite anonymous sources.

As for your claims against his congressional staffers, I would ask that you contact all 100 of the staffers that served under Sestak and ask them their opinions of Mr. Sestak. When you record your data, please organize it into a convenient table that notes the responses, and allows for statistical analysis. Then we can TRULY know what percentage of them characterize him as anything, let alone a “slave driver”. While you do this, please also compile a report with the same criteria for former Specter staffers. Then true statistical comparisons can be made with hard data instead of the opinions of one observer who has already admitted his bias against the subject of a particular data subset. Until we can objectively compare data, rather than subjectively comparing the two based on rumors and limited experiences, the point is rather moot.

As for HateSestak, well there’s not much to be said. He would rather heap every negative epithet he can think up on Sestak rather than actually dealing with real concrete issues. Rather than elucidate the reasons why Specter is a superior candidate, HateSestak would rather sling mud and rely upon rumor, conjecture, and illusions.

The greatest trick David Diano, HateSestak, Lana, Mr. Wiggles, and Chesco Dem ever pulled was convincing Pennsylvanians that Arlen Specter didnt exist… and that Sestak was instead the devil.

FH – I did not start posting here in earnest until I saw the non-stop, nonsensical attacks on Joe Sestak from David & the fake names. Even the fake name used by one, HateSestak, is toxic and almost laughable in its intensity. In a race that is this important to the future of the PA Democratic Party, I think it’s hugely important to inject some reality into the comments on this site. Thanks for your contributations.

FH-
Please learn to read:
“In the 30-second spot that began airing statewide on Tuesday, Specter’s campaign highlights a 2005 Navy Times article which reported that Sestak was removed from his Pentagon command because of a “poor command climate.” The ad, which primarily focuses on Sestak’s missed votes in Washington, does nothing more than cite that report, which has been substantiated by other news outlets in the years since.”

You see, Dan does state that the report has been substantiated. The use of anonymous sources does not invalidate the claims. A source isn’t anonymous to the reporter citing it. The source “Deep Throat” was anonymous, but was in a position to know things and deemed a credible source, enough to take down Nixon.

For fun, let’s pretend for a moment that Admiral Mullen himself was one of the sources about Sestak, but preferred to remain anonymous for the story. A reporter would consider this a reliable source and cite the reasons, without revealing the identity.

For the Post-Gazette story, we don’t have the name of the Admiral (and, no, I don’t think it’s Mullen), but he was certainly known to the reporter who quoted him.

As for interviewing the 100 staffers, that should be done by a reporter who can protect their identities against retributions from Sestak’s friends that could torpedo their careers. However, interviews by The Hill and other organizations of Sestak’s former Congressional and Campaign staffers ALL show a consistent set of complaints about Sestak for these reasons discussed.

I know a former Sestak congressional staffer who explained to me that she quit because she was told that she was “hired for her looks, not her opinions” and that her job was to “look good for Joe” to help his public image. Other former Sestak supporters know this story and this woman, and are disgusted by Sestak and how he runs his office. However, it’s not our place to publish her name if she doesn’t want to come forward publicly (though I hope see her quoted as an anonymous or named source someday).

I’ve elucidated the biggest reason that makes Specter the superior candidate: he is our best chance of defeating Toomey.

The “illusion” here is that Sestak is a “real Democrat” or cares about anybody but himself. He’s already trashed Obama and the House Democratic caucus and seems to be fueling GOP talking points like he’s interviewing for a job on Fox News.

The Specter ad is factually correct, and quoted the Navy Times article accurately. Sestak can hide behind all the Veterans he can did up, who weren’t there and never met him before 2006, as “character witnesses”, but it doesn’t change the reason Sestak’s career ended. Sestak can pretend it was because he was advocating for a smaller military, but plenty of other high ranking officials have called for the same thing, without getting sacked. Admiral Mullen got rid of Sestak the first day he could, because removing Sestak was long overdue. It sounds a lot like how Captain Queeg treated his men in the “Caine Mutiny” movie.

So, Mr. FH, I’m calling YOU out. I’ve quoted the record not only of what Dan posted, but I consistent quote the record in published articles. I’d love to see more named sources, but there are reasons that journalist protect their sources’ identities. The question becomes a matter of whether or not you trust the journalist, who is named.

Bruce-
I understand that you are a true, blue, Democrat. I understand that you’ve been trained to hate Specter. But, Specter is clearly the enemy of the GOP right-wing that controls their party. This is a case of: “The enemy of my enemy is now my friend.”
I understand that you think Joe is a “real Dem” (and you do realize he is not a progressive liberal). I understand that you think Sestak can beat Specter in May and Toomey in November.
Many of my friends suffer under the same fevered delusion. But, after May 18th your fever will break, and you can join me back in reality.

Once Sestak is out of power, I hope that some of my sources will be more willing to tell you their first hand accounts of Sestak. Then you can pull away the curtain to see that he’s not the Wizard of Oz.

I got a phone call Tuesday asking me to come in and take part in a TV spot protesting Specter’s attack. I begged off because I’m not for Sestak. But the bunch of veterans they rounded up is clearly not some organized “veterans’ group.” It isn’t the American Legion or VFW. It’s a bunch of old retired guys with nothing to do.

David, I repeat my request to you or any Specter supporter or the campaign itself: please produce one on-the-record source who will substantiate the claims against Sestak. Otherwise, this is complete bunk. And no, pulling a line from Dan Hirshhorn saying that the report had been substantiated doesn’t cut it.

Here is my take on Joe Sestak’s career: He had been a protege of Vern Clark, associated with the Clinton administration. Clark was able to protect Sestak from a hostile Bush administration; however, once Clark was gone, Sestak was a dead duck. And Mullen (or Mullen’s staff), as the survivor, was left to feed his version to the Navy Times reporter.

Meanwhile, the one on-the-record source we have for this is Vern Clark: “People can say what they want to say, but he challenged people who didn’t want to be challenged. This guy is courageous, a patriot’s patriot.”

That’s what stands, unless and until you find somebody to back up the Specter smear.

Just one more point: if “multiple news reports” all hark back to one source — the original Navy Times article — then we are still talking about just one point of origin, an article that used some unknown and unattributed source for its reporting.

Basically, this is just Specter falling back on his Republican ways: a good, old-fashioned Bush-Cheney smear job.

You can always count on Arlen to be true to his roots. Reason #1 to get a real Democrat to do the job.

This press conference seems like a very wimpy response to Sen Specter’s ad. It was full of platitudes like the rest of Rep Sestak’s rhetoric. A stronger response would be for Rep Sestak to release his military service record. Wouldn’t that resolve or clarify the issue? If it wasn’t “poor command climate” the record should show that.

Also, did anyone in this press conference claim to have first hand knowledge of the event? If not, they had no business appearing there.

In order to refute the “poor command climate” claim, Sestak would need either a comment from Adm Mullen or to simply release his service record. I don’t think there is an alternative.

Until that time, I believe Sen Specter’s ad to be truthful.

You really shouldn’t politicize military officers like that (unless you’re talking about someone like Gen Richard Myers or Gen Peter Pace, who were clearly yes-men to Sec. Rumsfeld). ADM Clark and ADM Mullen both strike me as straight shooters — in fact, the reason why ADM Mullen was chosen as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs in 2007 was because he was NOT thought of as a toady to Sec. Rumsfeld and was not associated with the war in Iraq.

I really don’t think you should be blaming the Bush administration for the end of Rep. Sestak’s Navy career — that seems just a little too convenient.

Forget about Specter and Sestak and Write in a True Hero Joe Vod Varka

Rep Sestak could have avoided all this by being the first candidate to air his ads. He made a fatal mistake by waiting too long.

Sen Specter aired positive ads about what he’s accomplished for the people of this state. Rep Sestak merely gave a resume and exploited his daughter’s tragic illness. Where are his ads explaining exactly what he’s accomplished for the people. Or ads about what he plans on accomplishing?

By waiting too long, Rep Sestak presented Sen Specter with a golden opportunity – NO ONE is listening to or talking about Rep Sestak’s ad. EVERYONE is talking about Sen Specter’s ad. Sen Specter has masterfully blocked any Rep Sestak ad.

Also, the more Rep Sestak and camp decry the ad…the more attention they draw to it.

Dem Voter: Very astute observations on your part. An advertising blitz(as I have repeatedly stressed) would ordinarily be launched earlier in a primary struggle. And as you noted (and as I have noted), Sestak’s ad is little more than a televised curriculum vitae – and an immodest one at that. Most importantly, as you emphasized, calling attention to the Specter ad is a grave mistake. Other candidates have whimpered about alleged “swiftboating” in the past – and all of them were defeated.

FH: Odd – neither you nor any other captious critic of Mr. Diano or myself have cited any empirical evidence which demonstrates that Specter’s ad is false or spurious. Instead, you continually make (remarkably feeble) attempts to deter Sestak’s many, many detractors from voicing their sentiments. If the ad in question is wholly inaccurate, it is incumbent upon Sestak and his few remaining supporters to explain exactly why. Thus far neither have done so. They have merely clamored.

Of course, the larger issue is why Representative Sestak is devoting more energy to salvaging his questionable reputation than he is to the problems plaguing PA voters. His actions suggest that his inflated ego, and not his constituents, are his principal concern.

Bruce-
Here’s my take:
Multiple off-the-record sources have confirmed to multiple reporters how Sestak behaved and treated his men. Every report is consistent that Sestak was a smart/sharp/hard-working guy, but that he was unreasonable in the demands he made of his staff, to the point where he was doing more harm than good overall. Many reports “harken back” to that Navy Times story for background, but there are also reporters who validate and reaffirm it with new interviews, like the Post-Gazette.

There is not the slightest indication that Sestak ran afoul of the Bush Administration or that their were any politics involved. Rumsfeld had long been and advocate of downsizing the military. No one was blaming Sestak for performing an analysis that Vern Clark requested. Sestak would have ruffled a lot more feathers if he had refused to do an analysis. Since Vern Clark is often cited as part of the problem, his defense of Joe is really a defense of his own mistakes in protecting Sestak for so long.

The model here matches the corporate example of a really bad and abusive department head who has high turn over and no one wants to transfer into his department, but is buddies with someone on the board that shields him from reprimand. Once that patron leaves, the department head is reassigned where he can’t do any harm, and to a job he doesn’t like in hopes he quits on his own.

Sestak was fired/relieved of duty from that Deep Blue position, but not dismissed from the Navy itself. The reasons were essentially a career killer and Sestak faced no hope of further advancement. So, he quit the Navy, lost one of his three stars due to duration, looked at his options, changed his registration to Democrat, and ran for Congress.

Since he got elected, similar “multiples” have reported his mistreatment of campaign and congressional staffs. I personally know former members of both whose story match. I’ve also seen Sestak ranting and raving like a lunatic first hand. It’s not a pretty sight. Characterizations of Joe as a bully and tyrant are dead-on.

Occam’s Razor smell test: what makes more sense?
1) Sestak was a wonderful, kindhearted boss in the Navy who treated his men well, but then suddenly became the boss from Hell when he entered civilian life.

2) Sestak has always been the boss from Hell, and Admiral finally did something about it as soon as he got the chance. When Sestak entered civilian life, he stayed the same kind of boss he’d always been.

Seems to me that #2 is the far more likely explanation.
If you can’t see that he currently is a rotten boss, then you have no hope of understanding what is going on.

Dem Voter-
You hit the nail on the head. People are asking “Was Sestak relieved of duty?” and “Why?”. Some will believe Sestak’s explanation. Others won’t.
But as “mean” as Specter comes off, he also comes off as tough. Sestak’s getting the kid-glove treatment compared to what Toomey will get. And Dems DO want an fighter, not a p*ssy in a campaign.

Bailey: The ads in question continue to run. If the allegations are entirely baseless, as you contend, do you really think that a longtime public official like Senator Specter would continue to disseminate this information? Would he really incur such a risk? It is highly improbable. You claim the ad constitutes a “smear job.” What empirical evidence can you cite? What irrefutable, incontestable evidence can you produce? None has been put forward thus far. Mr. Diano and others, by contrast, have repeatedly furnished us with info buttressing Specter’s assertions. If you believe the ad is not factual, corroborate this claim. But as Sestak is discovering, whimpering about the ad is not going to make it go away.

Mr. Diano: As Dem Voter observed, calling attention to this issue is a grave mistake on Sestak’s part. The more evidence you and others cite, the more apparent it becomes that this is an issue Sestak should avoid altogether.

David, Specter doesn’t come off “mean.” He comes off ugly, defensive and utterly frightened of facing a real challenge.

He has responded in typical Republican fashion. With mudslinging and smears. A real candidate for Democrats to love.

Bruce-
Typical “Republican” fashion? Have you never seen one of John Corzine’s ads or any ads in the Philly primaries?

Calling it a Republican ad is “defensive” and shows Sestak is “utterly frightened of facing” the facts about why he left the Navy under a dark cloud. Back in 2006, we didn’t know enough about Sestak to realize the underside of his background. He fooled a lot of people.

I would love to see the Specter campaign have an ad with a crowded room of people, and have it be all the staffers that left Sestak over the past few years. LOL!

One of Joe’s response to the ad is that he has a 95% voting record. However, he’s missed 13% of his votes. So, once again Sestak is playing fast and loose with the numbers.
Sestak probably means he votes with the Dems 95% of the time, which would be 95% of the 87% of the time he votes, which would be less than 83%.

I relly don’t like getting into the middle of this, but I have known Bruce for five years. He is an independent minded citizen, not a ‘trained’ anything.

Thanks Colleen. My wife’s been trying to train me on household chores for nearly 30 years and she’ll attest to the fact that it’s just about impossible.

I don’t hate Specter. But I don’t accept him as a reliable Democrat or my choice for Senator, either.

And as a general side note, I find this whole notion of “hating” kind of repugnant. It’s a road I don’t think we need to travel.

With all doe respect to the vet’s in Clifton U beg to differ with you on NO Show Joe. Avery good try but you can’t dispute the Naxy times and I saw it with mt own eyes, No Show Joe has once again lied to each of you. He was removed from his command at the pentagon since he had “A POOR COMMAND climate”. Their words not mine but many who know him would agree .
Sad to it but my NEPHEW served under him and hates each moment of it. He is what he is but not a good commander or a congressman. Just what and when was the last time that he did anything for the folks in the 7th CD. Easy answer, NEVER ! Just took us for all the money he could getfrom us ! Never thought I would vote for Sen Specter but I and my family and friends are doing so gladly. By the way Specter was also in the military or have you just forgotten that. After being removed from his command, NO Show Joe only had the Clinton’s to hook on to and because of them we got stuck with the Little Admiral that will wind up on K street where he really belongs !
Sorry guys, you are so wrong and more than that I don’t care to say at all.
Did you have the guts to come to the defense of Sen Kerry, I don’t think you did and he deserved to have him defend him. Band of Brothers, Huh

Bruce Baily:
I think it’s Rep sestak who is “utterly frightened of facing a real challenge” – not Sen Specter.

Let’s face facts: Rep Sestak was never truly challenged in 2006 or 2008 elections. Now he’s facing an experienced respected opponent – who really is challenging him – and he can’t take it.

Rep Sestak’s response to Sen Specter’s attack ad is wimpy. Where’s the expected strong rebuttal ad?

Hey guys, what kind of Democrats are you to stick up for such a bad seed and go against your President and every other Democratic elected official. He must have promised you something but he has no chance of winning. Sadly you just don’t see that and it is very clear. When was the last time you spoke to the people across the Commonwealth ? If you did you would know that the Little Admiral only has a very short time to not represent us, thank God
Do any of you really want my nephew and friends that served under this man to come out against him. They are biting their lips right now but if you give the word they would be very happy to set the record straight and expose the little Admiral for what he really is. Just dive them the okay and they will make a commercial that will curl your eyebrows.

Dave, I agree with you, only with a caveat. Sestak should release his Military Record on the same day the leader of the regime occupying Washinton D. C. releases his birth certificate and his college records and his thesis.

The one of the first and improtant thing you work on as a combat soilder is enemy idefication. At least Admiral Joe held off on the ultra personal slash and burn and his resposes to the sleeze is more measured than I would have.
Arlene shoudl stop ‘fragging[‘ his own party members and talk substance.

Hey lana what kind of democrat supports a 30+ year republican. really sad, you better get back on those phones he’s slipping badly. rank andfile Democrats do not support him,and many like myself will not be able to cast a vote if he is the candidate in Nov. I have a hard and fast rule that I only vote for real democrats.

I also think bloggers should use their real names, post their bio and subscribe to professonal jurnalism standards for reporting “facts.
We all shoud vote aginst anyone in any party that uses these vile negative ads

I have been a long time Sestak supporter for (4.5years)….
I and everyone else believed as Joe always put it, in his literature, commercials, ads and political signs, e-mails, you name it, that he was a Three Star Admiral!

Now I have confirmation from the Chris Mathews show that not only was he actually a Vice Admiral but a Two Star Vice Admiral at that!

This is not Swift Boating, this is the truth! I had checked and he was relieved of duty in the Navy for creating a poor command climate. Joe never answered that remark on the Chris Mathews Show and just danced all around the question of him being fired and talked about everything else!

Joe let me and the democrat party down the moment he decided to take on DEMOCRAT Arlen Specter in the US Senate race.

The only thing Joe will succeed at in this race is dent the armor of Democrat SENATOR Arlen Specter, the Democrat party and himself!

I was very upset knowing Joe Sestak, some time ago, had planned to run for President in 2016. He put the “political cart far ahead of the horse” and because his future plan was being delayed, he decided to run roughshod through this Senate race that will and already has harmed his future!

Joe Sestak is SCUTTLING the Democratic Party ship, the question is why?
I’ll let you know the next time and you will all understand why Joe must go!!!

“Get It Right”: Now gasbag infotainment hall of fame founding member Chris Matthews is what we’re to consider reliable source?

Please allow me “get it right” for you on the Two/Three star admiral issue. Sestak was indeed promoted to Three Star Vice Admiral. The US Navy has a policy that if an officer retires before putting in a certain period of time at that rank, they retire at their previous rank. Sestak did not have enough time as a Three-Star Admiral to keep that rank when he chose to retire in 2005 after Admiral Clark was replaced as Chief of Naval Operations by the Bush Administration and Admiral Mullen replaced Sestak and others with his chosen subordinates. Anyone who has worked in a hierarchical organization knows that bringing in one’s personal associates is standard practice tied to fundamental human nature. Fair or not, people are most comfortable with those they are most familiar with.

Another thing that hasn’t been noted is that this all happened at the height of Sestak’s daughter’s illness. So for several reasons, Sestak decided to retire, honorably, toward the end of 2005. He had not put in the requisite time of service as a Three-Star Admiral, so his rank reverted to Two-Star upon retirement.

Sestak did indeed serve as a Three-Star Admiral, but retired as a Two-Star Admiral. Not very complicated to understand for those who can stop and think for a minute, look at the facts, and make a sensible judgment.

This is a serious and well-written blog, so I’m confident that the haters aside, most people reading here will understand what actually occurred.

Mario Cimino
D – Morton Borough Council

Mario, it seems the haters (in their various personas) have pretty much crowded out serious comments here. Thanks for yours.

TheMortonMagician
They call them puppets or parrots, but right is still right!
• Military rank is a title, just as is Mister, Master, Madam, or Miss. An officer’s rank is in fact a commission given by the US Congress. Once a military person has retired, their rank is a permanent title. As anyone who a fifth grade education should know, the title comes first.
Ex: Dr. Physician B. Medicine, MD.
Or: ex. RAdmL. Phineas L. Richards, USN (ret.)
The affiliation comes last, MD for Medical Doctor or USN for United States Navy.
Rank Given Surname
Branch, Retired
Where:
*Rank = Last rank held
Given = First name
Surname = Last name
Branch = Branch of service (US Army, US Navy, US Marine Corps, US Air Force, US Coast Guard)
Retired = self-explanatory
For example:
RDML. Phineas L. Richards
United States Navy, Retired
The error lies in the abbreviated version which is only partly incorrect as it should be for the above example:
RAdmL. Phineas L. Richards, USN (ret.)
Abbreviation for Rear Admiral, in fact RADM or RAdm are both acceptable, as is RAdmL (indicating 2 star admiral lower half – the USN has no 1 star rank, but has two, 2 star ranks, upper and lower half of Rear Admiral. A one star Admiral is called a Commodore, and this is only used in time of war.)
However, in using the formal method, neither the rank, nor the service should be abbreviated. So the example is most correct for the formal method as example:
Rear Admiral Phineas L. Richards
United States Navy, Retired

95 South-

Says Sestak should release his Military Record on the same day the leader of the regime occupying Washinton D. C. releases his birth certificate and his college records and his thesis.

95 South is clearly another GOP Gun Toting Teabagger hunting Arlen Specter!

Hey Got it WRONG, I was a KENNEDY and REAGAN Democrat until the Leftist Lunatic Fringe took total control of the Democratic Party. When they refused to let the great Governor Robert Patrick Casey speak at the Convention, that was it for me.

You speak of guns as if they are illegal, although you would probably like only the government to have guns, American Citizens are still free to own them.

It is fascinating that the sexual innuendo that you folks drip with the word Teabagger. I have never partaken, being a hetero male, but, you seem to be on the verge of exploring it, not that there is anything wrong with that. It would seem to me that perhaps you better make sure you shave first, North and South. Enjoy!