Holy Fucking Crap!! Fred Thompson last night gave a decent overview of McCain’s significant military record. He’s a hero, no doubt about it. But for the sake of honesty and reality , that was 40 years ago wasn’t it? There is a legitimate question as to how relevant that service is to him being a candidate now.
What really burns me is that tonight both Huckabee and Gulliani also brought up his great military record again to the cheers of the crowd. It was just four years ago when these same republicans were trashing another Vet’s military record so they could vote in a guy who avoided his military service. So this year it’s McCain’s 40 year old heroism that defines his character and makes him worthy to be president, but four years ago it was fuck that guy and his military service and the fact that he risked his life for this country, we want Bush.
It’s a crock of hypocritical bullshit and the whole cheering crowd is full of it.
This is wonderful - just wonderful. Just shows what short memories some people have - and that they have different expectations of politicians and their tactics just because they are from different parties.
So Kerry downplayed military records when Clinton ran against two decorated veterans, and emphasized his own when he ran. You would expect this sort of thing, frankly, and I’m amazed that you’d fall for it.
The democrats did it too!
The democrats did it too!
The democrats did it too!
The democrats did it too!
The democrats did it too!
The democrats did it too!
The democrats did it too!
The democrats did it too!
The democrats did it too!
The democrats did it too!
The democrats did it too!
The democrats did it too!
Oh, woops. I see Mr. Moto beat me to it.
Ok. How bout this?
Clinton got a blowjob!
Clinton got a blowjob!
Clinton got a blowjob!
Clinton got a blowjob!
Clinton got a blowjob!
Clinton got a blowjob!
Clinton got a blowjob!
Clinton got a blowjob!
(Just saving the Republicans the trouble.)
and didn’t lie to start a war!
and didn’t lie to start a war!
and didn’t lie to start a war!
and didn’t lie to start a war!
and didn’t lie to start a war!
and didn’t lie to start a war!
and didn’t lie to start a war!
and didn’t lie to start a war!
and didn’t lie to start a war!
So the rule is that the first person in with criticism preempts all criticism in the other direction?
Yes, his service was 40 years ago. Perhaps military service should not matter in the grand scheme of things. But it does, and McCain’s record is just as relevant to people now as it was then.
If McCain is as bad as you guys think he is, he should be easy to beat. I’m not voting for him because he’s a Republican and I think it’s time for the Democrats to see what they can do, but I don’t see a lot of the problems with McCain or Palin that you people do. I see a lot of slander, I see a lot of really bizarre personal attacks, but I see little discussion on the merits. Can we stick to that just one time? Obama managed to stay largely above the fray while campaigning, perhaps you could use his example while acting as proxy for him?
“Downplaying” and “Trashing” are two different things.
Military service is not the end-all/be-all for political candidates, though you’d think so the way the Republicans talked.
But when they were up against someone who could actually qualify as a military “hero”, it wasn’t enough to simply to play up the strengths of their non-veteran candidate. They had to actively drag Kerry’s reputation through the mud, too.
Actually, your quotes say no such thing. The first quote you attribute to February of '92 and makes no mention of nor reference to Clinton. But that’s really besides the point. If you bothered to read the quotes you provided, you’d notice that Kerry’s first statement says, in essense “we all have good ideas. Being in the military does not grant that person any more credibility, any more virtue, any more integrity, than someone not in the military.”
The second one says “dude, how dare you question my commitment to this country. You who ducked out of serving yourself.”
Ya see the difference? If not, let me spell it out even plainer: not serving in the military doesn’t make you unqualified to serve in office. Not serving in the military DOES make you unqualified to take cheap potshots at the patriotism of ones who do.
Hardly a lie, simply poor wording on my part. My mistake.
I concede that Bush was honorably discharged from service and qualifies as a veteran. A verifiable fact.
I’m sure, conversely, that you’ll also concede that he exploited political connections to not serve in Vietnam when he very easily could have. Another verifiable fact.
So Bush is no war hero. But again, when Clinton was running and allegations came out about the measures he took to avoid induction, Kerry defended Clinton and said these matters should be off the table.
I’m sorry, but these kinds of arguments are just about the definition of partisanship.
I’ve said just about a million times on these boards that the American people don’t care about a war record or veteran status - it counts for very little looking over races going back an awful long way. Now, I might be impressed with a particular individual or two - same with you. I don’t think that amounts to much in the end.
Military experience used to be a base you had to touch before running for President. Since the advent of the Baby Boomers, this is much less the case.
But don’t you see just a wee bit of a contradiction where Biden and Obama are criticizing Palin because she has little or no military experience - and neither of them have any at all?
They’re not criticizing her for not having any military experience. They’re criticizing her for not only having no foreign policy experience, but for being largely incurious about foreign policy issues throughout her career.
Oh, and as for the whole Alaskan National Guard thing contradicting these assertions? Not all that true.
Except for Hoover. He ordered the military to actively engage WW1 veterans who were peacefully protesting to recieve the bonus that they had been promised by Congress.
Not that that could ever happen to Iraq veterans now… :rolleyes:
Oh, I know what it is. But since now I know that the first criticism always wins I’ll be sure to fire the first shot at all times. That was your intent, to defuse forthcoming criticism, wasn’t it? And what better way to do that than to use hyperbole and absurdity such as your post.