Ever had to run a country? Actually, ever had to run an errand? Tell me the difference and I'll grant you your opinion.

It's the truth, but, it's why we serve, to protect that very right. We don't serve to take rights away or enforce our own code of ethics on an entire population, our country.

So, he can or cannot be trusted to lead a theater of war? If he voted for Obama his reasoning abilities are questionable, but if he speaks to Fox news he's more apt to run an army?
Here's your argument re-worded (and tell me if I get this wrong) He voted for Obama and blocked Fox news, therefore, he cannot be trusted. Conversely, you are angry that he has been told to step down and that makes you angry since an all-American uniform wearing person has been reprimanded?
Where do you stand on this? Do you hate him for voting for Obama and blocking Fox news or do you hate the fact that he was asked to step down? My head is going to explode with this circular reasoning!

Not so interesting take on things, this blog, that is.
Chas_Martel tells it from a soldiers perspective and he is right on all accounts. It's painfully obvious that the author of this blog post has never served in the U.S. military. You learn early on, in basic, where you stand in the grand scheme of things (i.e. chain of command). One of my favorite memories of boot camp was my D.I. telling our company that "even if you're having the worst day of your life, if a senior officer asks you how you're doing you shout 'outstanding sir!'" Every military "expert" who's chimed in has said this was the inevitable decision, only because if you serve or have served, you know the score in this game.
This is not to say that dissent or disobeying orders is never called for. This is to say mismanagement of personal judgement at that level is shocking and sad. It's a totally different way of life and different set of rules you choose to live by if you make the military a career. Only those who've experienced it first hand know.
The article also states "First of all, if Obama is so “brilliant”, why did it take him months to finally send General McChrystal the troops that he requested?" Again, a civilian's mindset is at it's simplistic best here. As a commander at any level, you can't just "point and click" your way through a war. It's not like Obama could just raise a finger, point to a battalion and ship them overnight to the hot-zone most in need. It takes time to mobilize and politicize any situation during a war. Getting approval, setting time lines, securing funding, these are all things that slow the process down. It's how the real world and real war work.
Let me also ad that overwhelming force (i.e. adding more troops) has never won a war, just won battles. The war can't be won by force alone. Read the book by J. Collins on military strategy. It will give you a historical perspective if you have never served, as the title implies.
Finally, I will say that it takes no gumption to shout from a desktop, to lay down the law of your own opinion and blast it out to the world, for the masses, from the safety of the web.
Those with the will and spirit are out here doing it, while those without are blogging about it.