Jump to content

Romney and Vietnam


TCPeppyTc

Recommended Posts

incidentally, Ronald Reagan was the guy who "gave free healthcare to illegal immigrants" ('cuz i'm sure you're in favor of letting some illegal immigrant's kid with TB just spread it all to everyone because damn those brown people) and you're going to have to cite where the Affordable Care Act "denies cancer treatments to people" (lol death panels) or "takes money out of Medicare" or whatever

is the Romney campaign paying you for this bullshit? i hear Romney likes to fire people so he might want to start with you

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys common, He's been chewed out enough, I come from a conservative base, and i'm not evil or dumb. He's young, imprresionable, and a little mis informed as all young people are. Its the same for all parties. I once had a kid who's parents were democrats tell me i was white suppremisit homophobe.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey let's keep discussing completely irrelevent anecdotes about how democrats are totally mean, that'll distract from what the topic was actually about!

(Disclaimer: No one was arguing that Peter was wrong because he was a Republican, it was that he was wrong because the "facts" he stated were untrue. The fact that he got butthurt after being called on it does not negate the fact that he was only called on it because he was lying to begin with.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys common, He's been chewed out enough, I come from a conservative base, and i'm not evil or dumb. He's young, imprresionable, and a little mis informed as all young people are. Its the same for all parties. I once had a kid who's parents were democrats tell me i was white suppremisit homophobe.....

I gotta agree a bit with Ajc, I mean even I made some incendiary remarks in my post that are pseudo-conspiracy worthy - no flak there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The difference is, Sroberson, you were giving your opinion. Not flat-out lying and insulting people for their "liberal rants".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey let's keep discussing completely irrelevent anecdotes about how democrats are totally mean, that'll distract from what the topic was actually about!

(Disclaimer: No one was arguing that Peter was wrong because he was a Republican, it was that he was wrong because the "facts" he stated were untrue)

I'm deffending him becuase he is young, and i felt bad for him. You guys might have hurt his feelings, weather it was intended for not. I'm not saying don't disagree, but when you guys pull out you sarcasim, despite its brilliance, its a little hurtful. And you all know he is 14, don't take things so legit. And my point was that such "facts" (assumptions) are not uncommen for either party.

lol countinue the orginal topic! ( becuase that was so fanatastic.... XD)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Realizing you can't run around lying and insulting people without ramification" is a good life lesson, and he has to learn it sooner or later.

Anyways, I do agree with Sroberson, Uno and anyone else who've said that Romney's lack of involvement in a war that I could understand not wanting to be involved with anyways is not as relevant or important to whatever he's currently doing and plans to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And this is why I try my best to stay in the middle (meaning, between conservative and liberal/republican and democrat) or out of politics whatsoever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And this is why I try my best to stay in the middle (meaning, between conservative and liberal/republican and democrat) or out of politics whatsoever.

Thank you for your lack of input.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alright I was originally going to keep my mouth shut here, but I will say I agree with Waffles here that the subject matter being discussed is very.. well, how should I put it? Well, stupid to be honest. Sure, military service is great to have if you're going to be the commander in chief and all, but it shouldn't really be a dealbreaker. Especially when you're considering service in Vietnam alone. If that were the case here, and presidents had the upper hand because they served in Vietnam, we'd have some really really old people for president, and in a few cycles, we wouldn't have very many options would we? Wars come and go, should they really make or break someone as president?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

military service isn't really necessary to be commander in chief. it's not like the president personally commands forces in the field or something; he's just the commander in chief because someone needs to make the big decisions about strategy, policy, and goals, and because we're into that whole civilian-control-of-the-military thing.

even then, bringing up Vietnam would be politically stupid for both sides. the election is about the economy so foreign policy would just be a distraction (and, between bin Laden, the New START treaty, the ending of the Iraq war, the passel of terrorists the Obama administration has killed, and Romney's assorted foreign policy fuckups, it would play to Obama's benefit anyways, so it's in Romney's interest to keep the electorate's attention away from there); Obama attacking Romney for not serving in Vietnam would be stupid (Romney's not running on military credentials and it's not like Obama served and nobody fuckin' cares); Romney attacking Obama for not serving in Vietnam would be stupid (Obama was like 14 when the war ended). there's no reason for anyone to go there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...