VABills Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 You have way too much time on your hands. Do you really expect anyone to read let alone answer that? 9082[/snapback] Wow, new tactic. Hummm. Why didn't I think of that? Probably because it's a lazy and inane way out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RCow Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 I just love how the lefties are trying to play "innocent victim" here, at the same time they are bashing. I didn't know that it was so easy to talk out of both sides of your mouth. 8947[/snapback] Thanks for the weak non-answer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 Thanks for the weak non-answer. 9094[/snapback] Just thought I would make you feel at home by using your own debating tactics against you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_BiB_ Posted August 27, 2004 Author Share Posted August 27, 2004 Come BIB, you can do better than that. There's no broad stroke, it's at the heart of the issue. Doesn't it seem Republicans get a free ride on military service while Democrats have to get severely wounded in battle and have win the Medal of Honor? Bob Dole, who I HAD a great deal of respect until his "superficial wound" comment this week, was wounded in his first few weeks (days?) in a combat zone. As far as I knew he never fired his weapon or was cited for acts deemed worthy for medals. However, he was universally deemed and respected as "war hero" as he should. No one questioned his service, no one snickered and said he didn't do much, it simply wasn't an issue dispite the fact that the Dole campaign AND the Republicans, veterans, etc. never missed an opportunity to say Dole served and Clinton did not. Let's also assume George, Sr. was a Democrat. There is no doubt the Right would criticize his war record: How was he responsible for lost mission? Was it really a battle? Didn't he screw up, wasn't he a bad pilot, was he somehow responsible for the death of his mates? Why did he jump out of a perfectly good airplane? Didn't his Daddy pull strings to take him out of the combat zone? Again, no questions, no inquires, no slander from Democrats. 9092[/snapback] Not to me, cow. I'm talking specifically about Kerry and his motivations. I haven't mentioned other names other than to say I don't take issue. I've very clearly laid out my thoughts and if you want to call them, arguments. you are-once again-skirting the issue and pulling an equivalent of "But Bush..." This is not the issue to me. I would have probably paid no attention to this issue, personally, until the "Reporting for Duty" moment. Go back and read my original post. Put Bush, Cheney, Cleland and everyone else out of your head and concentrate strictly on what is being said. I have issue with this. I'm not having a Kerry bad-Bush good moment. We are talking about a possible Commander in Chief. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RCow Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 As completely expected the mob mentality rules again. It's a mutual admiration society that can't even examine their hypocracy re: the concepts of patriotism, military service and honor. It's obvious that partisianship has permanently supplanted these ideals. Never let these principles stand in the way if there's Democrat to be beaten no matter that their own Republican candidate can't hold a candle to his opponent. The irony of the "lemmings" comments continue . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 It's a mutual admiration society that can't even examine their hypocracy re: the concepts of patriotism, military service and honor. 9111[/snapback] Never mind that the "mutual admiration society" has seen more years of military service than you've probably been alive... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 As completely expected the mob mentality rules again. It's a mutual admiration society that can't even examine their hypocracy re: the concepts of patriotism, military service and honor. It's obvious that partisianship has permanently supplanted these ideals. Never let these principles stand in the way if there's Democrat to be beaten no matter that their own Republican candidate can't hold a candle to his opponent. The irony of the "lemmings" comments continue . . . 9111[/snapback] Sounds like someone is having a little trouble defending their position. Yup, the military people responding to your posts have no idea about patriotism, military service and honor. Yup, if you don't blindly repeat the DNC talking points, you are un-american. Your hypocrisy knows no bounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 Never mind that the "mutual admiration society" has seen more years of military service than you've probably been alive... 9121[/snapback] Like that would somehow make us qualified in this instance. Oops, never mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_BiB_ Posted August 27, 2004 Author Share Posted August 27, 2004 As completely expected the mob mentality rules again. It's a mutual admiration society that can't even examine their hypocracy re: the concepts of patriotism, military service and honor. It's obvious that partisianship has permanently supplanted these ideals. Never let these principles stand in the way if there's Democrat to be beaten no matter that their own Republican candidate can't hold a candle to his opponent. The irony of the "lemmings" comments continue . . . 9111[/snapback] How the !@#$ did you get that out of what I wrote right above you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RCow Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 Not to me, cow. I'm talking specifically about Kerry and his motivations. I haven't mentioned other names other than to say I don't take issue. I've very clearly laid out my thoughts and if you want to call them, arguments. you are-once again-skirting the issue and pulling an equivalent of "But Bush..." This is not the issue to me. I would have probably paid no attention to this issue, personally, until the "Reporting for Duty" moment. Go back and read my original post. Put Bush, Cheney, Cleland and everyone else out of your head and concentrate strictly on what is being said. I have issue with this. I'm not having a Kerry bad-Bush good moment. We are talking about a possible Commander in Chief. 9109[/snapback] I have read your posts. Though I obviously have a biased view (like everyone), on the question of a possible CinC I believe your standards for Kerry and Democrats are consciously or uncousciously far greater than any Republican. I also believe that if the roles were reversed (Bush served, Kerry did not) you and many others on this board would go nuts on anyone examining every detail of the service record to prove that they are no hero -- or worse -- did not serve honorably. Their exists a double-standard that reflects poorly on veterans and those who claim to be ardently pro-military. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 How the !@#$ did you get that out of what I wrote right above you? 9128[/snapback] You'll have to excuse him. He pulls pretty much the same act everytime he shows up here. He'll accuse everyone on the other side of the aisle of something that he does as standard practice - then leaves in a huff. Then he'll come back in a month or two for more of the same. Nothing more than stevestojan covered in epidermis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_BiB_ Posted August 27, 2004 Author Share Posted August 27, 2004 I have read your posts. Though I obviously have a biased view (like everyone), on the question of a possible CinC I believe your standards for Kerry and Democrats are consciously or uncousciously far greater than any Republican. I also believe that if the roles were reversed (Bush served, Kerry did not) you and many others on this board would go nuts on anyone examining every detail of the service record to prove that they are no hero -- or worse -- did not serve honorably. Their exists a double-standard that reflects poorly on veterans and those who claim to be ardently pro-military. 9135[/snapback] Well, you're wrong. About me at least. I take this stuff with more than a grain of salt. I'm not nor do I need to examine every detail of a service record to add to 3 (PH) and four months. I also understand the system, and what is expected from a leader, especially in combat. I can also put 2 and 2 together. Has anyone wondered why Kerry was the only one getting wounded in a Boston whaler with four people in it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RCow Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 Never mind that the "mutual admiration society" has seen more years of military service than you've probably been alive... 9121[/snapback] Geez louise, that's the fuggin point. This group should be the very folks who should hold everyone to the same standard -- yet they continually let partisanship and ideology supplant their principles. Criticize a Republican on a military matter and it's "shut up, you didn't serve." Scream foul on criticsm of Democrat's decorated and thrice wounded in combat record and it's a pile on effect. I saw another of AD's lame "well, the Democrats do it on race" and if that's true has do it make OK on military matters? Yeah, good response AD. So, is he saying "yeah, that's how it works?" That would hit smack dab at the heart of the credibility issue. Bush, Cheney and Chamblis get a free ride that would send most veterans into a rage if they were Democrats. At least McCain and a few others keep hope alive that these issues can be treated fairly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RCow Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 Well, you're wrong. About me at least. I take this stuff with more than a grain of salt. I'm not nor do I need to examine every detail of a service record to add to 3 (PH) and four months. I also understand the system, and what is expected from a leader, especially in combat. I can also put 2 and 2 together. Has anyone wondered why Kerry was the only one getting wounded in a Boston whaler with four people in it? 9145[/snapback] I will respect your answer but I can't help thinking that the question would not pass your lips or get typed on a message board if Kerry were a Republican. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavin in Va Beach Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 Bush, Cheney and Chamblis get a free ride that would send most veterans into a rage if they were Democrats. At least McCain and a few others keep hope alive that these issues can be treated fairly. 9153[/snapback] What flavor is that koolaid? Must be really good. HOW exactly do Bush, Cheney, and Chamblis get a free ride? What hope exactly is it that McCain is keeping alive? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
_BiB_ Posted August 27, 2004 Author Share Posted August 27, 2004 I will respect your answer but I can't help thinking that the question would not pass your lips or get typed on a message board if Kerry were a Republican. 9157[/snapback] Well, I'm sorry that you find me that shallow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 Yo, Cow did you even read my response a couple of pages back? You keep wondering why your candidate is getting asswhipped on the Vietnam issue while everyone else has a free reign...I give you a perfectly good answer, and you ignore it. Did I not answer you issue well enough? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 Geez louise, that's the fuggin point. This group should be the very folks who should hold everyone to the same standard -- yet they continually let partisanship and ideology supplant their principles. Criticize a Republican on a military matter and it's "shut up, you didn't serve." Scream foul on criticsm of Democrat's decorated and thrice wounded in combat record and it's a pile on effect. I saw another of AD's lame "well, the Democrats do it on race" and if that's true has do it make OK on military matters? Yeah, good response AD. So, is he saying "yeah, that's how it works?" That would hit smack dab at the heart of the credibility issue. Bush, Cheney and Chamblis get a free ride that would send most veterans into a rage if they were Democrats. At least McCain and a few others keep hope alive that these issues can be treated fairly. 9153[/snapback] Well, except the fact that I've said probably 5 times on this board that Kerry's military record isn't an issue with me. That kind of throws your whole premise on that subject out the window where I'm concerned. Your hypocrisy is as blatant as always. You've defended the racist scumbags your party parades around on this board simply because they vote with you. No difference from the argument you are attempting to make now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RCow Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 Yo, Cow did you even read my response a couple of pages back? You keep wondering why your candidate is getting asswhipped on the Vietnam issue while everyone else has a free reign...I give you a perfectly good answer, and you ignore it. Did I not answer you issue well enough? 9191[/snapback] If I remember correctly: I ignored it because I disagreed with the notion that Kerry highlights his distiguished service in Vietnam, his record is smeared and he's supposed to ignore it and stop talking about a defining moment in his life? That makes no sense. Shouldn't the issue be the GOP smear campaign? What about the next issue to come along? Ignore that, too? Actually, you never said why exactly Kerry is "getting asswhipped on the Vietnam issue?" Is it the Republican smear campaigns are effective? Shouldn't the story be: why are veterans condoning the attacks? Would they do the same for a Republican candidate vs. a Democrat with a poor service record? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RCow Posted August 27, 2004 Share Posted August 27, 2004 Well, except the fact that I've said probably 5 times on this board that Kerry's military record isn't an issue with me. That kind of throws your whole premise on that subject out the window where I'm concerned. Your hypocrisy is as blatant as always. You've defended the racist scumbags your party parades around on this board simply because they vote with you. No difference from the argument you are attempting to make now. 9226[/snapback] Your "indifference" to the smear campaign against Kerry is defeaning. You make accusations about defending racist scumbags but your no better than the GOP smear team since you can back that up. So, I guess your saying you're no better than someone who defends racists -- nice job, AD. I suppose it would be too much for you to take a principled stand on this issue. Figure out who you're voting for yet? Didn't think so, that would mean taking a stand for something or someone you may have to defend. It's so much easier to take pot shots, claim indifference and call people lemmings. Why don't you start leading instead of remaining a useless complainer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts